It is possible to analyze our interaction with others as if we were playing in a room, as if social life were a succession of role-playing games. We call social dramaturgy the microsociological approach focused on the study of the relationships between human behavior and the social rules that control our daily interactions.
“Life is a theatrical performance. ” Socrates debated, in the dialogue of the play “The Banquet”, what theatrical genre, comedy or tragedy, is closer to real life. I was betting on tragedy. However, the previous sentence is not yours. The line is from Erving Goffman and its argument is quite different. Goffman is the creator of the chain of symbolic interacting. This theory argued that with every social interaction we make, we try to project, consciously or even unconsciously, a specific image of ourselves, manipulating how others will perceive us.
- For Goffman.
- Our personality is not an internal phenomenon.
- But the sum of the different masks we wear throughout life: a social dramaturgy.
The main objective of theatrical and social actors is to maintain consistency in their interactions with their environment and with the environment. To give a positive impression, we must have dramatic and social skills, in addition to the necessary clothing and accessories. But all this does. It doesn’t matter if the other actors present on stage fail to agree on the subject and definition of the situation, expectations and limits of interpretation that implicitly tell us how to act in a particular context, a specific social environment.
Achieving the development of this social dramaturgy? that is, knowing how to move between scenarios and moments when we project an image to others and behind the scenes (our private life, which is often also a mask that we only use to look at ourselves in the mirror), as well as being ingenious in moving from one role to another and having the right accessories and clothes for each moment are essential conditions for success in social life. When performing a play, who does not know how to act is a danger to the cast and ends up being eliminated from the group.
As we act, our comments and expressions of surprise, approval, irony, or disgust shape others’ opinion of us, we are aware of it, and that is precisely why we handle our discourse, ponder our actions, and monitor our reactions. . We all act at all times and define our roles according to the context in which we find ourselves, seeking to integrate into it at that time.
This personal adjustment to one role, this personal definition to others, is something that happens all the time, being an effort present in all social interactions. Like the actors in a film, it is possible that one begins the work (a work, a relationship or a course at a university) with an indefinite character, still little explored, but open to change according to the orientation that is presented and with the reaction of the audience, from then on we will dedicate our life to adapting to the character, at least until the end of the film and we have to remove this mask to look for others (we are thrown out of the we ask for divorce, college courses end, etc. ).
For Goffman, in the context of this social dramaturgy, people try to present an idealized image every time they interact or act, it is for the simple reason that we are convinced that it is advantageous to hide certain parts from others or ourselves:
As Erving Goffman himself said, in our role as actors, individuals are concerned with maintaining the impression that they are following the rules applicable to any trial, but that same individual is not interested as an actor in the moral problem of compliance with these rules. . What matters is only the amoral problem of giving a convincing impression that you are fulfilling your role. Our activity is largely based on a moral appearance, but in reality we have no moral interest in our social activities. We are mercenaries of morality as actors. It’s not like that?