Thesaurus Rex (virtuistic) wrote,
Thesaurus Rex

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Presentation of Sociopath Psychology. Wait, I mean "Self"...

Ok. So, earlier this week I dangled the possibility of me tearing the hell out of recapping the evil that is Presentation of Self in Everyday Life by Erving Goffman. Honestly, if ya'll could have seen me while reading this you'd either be too terrified to speak to me again or laughing yourself straight into a ruptured spleen. At any rate, it has been haunting my existence so in order to exorcise these demons, here is yon recap.

See? Here it is. I am, after all, a woman of my word.

To begin, I'm going to need to give a little bit of background. See, the entire premise of this work is that people behave in certain ways to acquire and send information when in the presence of others. To that, I have one thing to say: "Duh!" However, it really jumps off the deep end, stating that humans tend to strategically plan every single action in order to control the responses and perceptions of others, regardless of truth. To that, I have a few things to say. However, I think I sum it up pretty well when I say:


And granted, he was Canadian, but in his writings it becomes increasingly self evident that the man doesn't believe that people can ever behave in a natural fashion when in the presence of "others". There is no self identification, or self-projection when being introduced to strangers - we are all liars and we are shallow and we manipulate everyone to make them see what we want them to see! Eeeehhehehehheheeeeee!!! I mean uh...

Anyway, if you are feeling particularly masochistic want more detail ... just check out the book from your local library and read the introduction. That's all I read, and that's all you'll be able to tolerate need. On with the quotes!!!


Similarly, if the individual offers the others a product or service, they will often find that during the interaction there will be no time and place immediately available for eating the pudding that the proof can be found in.

OH EM GEE!! Proof pudding! My favorite! Seriously, this makes my life so much easier. If I ever need proof I know exactly where to go now! Just locate the Jello products in my local grocery store and I'll be set! Y'know, maybe I should market my own brand of proof pudding! Make pudding for specific occasions! Just think! Proof of Fidelity Pudding! Proof of Correctness pudding - a perfect antidote when on the losing end of an argument! Proof that You're NOT a Raging Idiot Pudding! The possibilities are endless!

In Ichheiser's terms, the individual will have to act so that he intentionally or unintentionally expresses himself, and the others will in turn have to be impressed in some way by him.

*whines* attention to meeeeeeeee!!! Ichheiser obviously feels the need to be the life of the party and apparently doesn't believe in apathy. What can we gather from this? That's right, someone didn't get enough love in their childhood. Also, lets have some wordplay, shall we? Ahem, "have to act so that he ... unintentionally... expresses himself"? Um... sorry mate, I don't speak pathetic bastard. Come again?

Two radically different kinds of sign activity: the expression that he gives, and the expression that he gives off. The first involves verbal symbols and their substitutes which he uses admittedly and solely to convey the information that he and the others are known to attach to these symbols. This is communication in the traditional and narrow sense. DUHOMG*headdesk*! The second involves a wide range of action that the others can treat as symptomatic of the actor, the expectation being that the action was performed for reasons other than the information conveyed in this way.

0_o ... I am almost unable. I understand that the basic jist is referring to the potential for body language to dictate contradictions or affirmations, but seriously... what the fuck? Additionally, he goes on to say "This distinction has only an initial validity." Seriously... just stop. You just admitted to subjecting my eyes to undue wear and tear, as well as subjecting my psyche to an unnecessary amount of torment and despair because of your horrible sentences and jibberish, you horrible bastard.

The individual does of course intentionally convey misinformation by means of both of these types of communication, the first involving deceit, the second feigning.

Say it with me: "I do believe in commas! I do, I do!" Also, how many times can we use the word "of" within a space of an two inches? Oh, and let's not forget that we're all duplicitous, traitorous whores and posers that will not hesitate to mislead and/or falsify whenever we need... or if we're just bored. Y'know, whatev.

It has been reported by many observers that a girl who is called to the telephone in the dormitories will often allow herself to be called several times, in order to give all the other girls ample opportunity to hear her paged.

*STAB* OK. For starters, not all girls are obsessed with winning popularity contests, thank you kindly. Secondly, barring telepathy, who "allows" themself to be called? Last time I checked, it's pretty damn impossible to stop someone from calling you, let alone trigger their calling. You might ask them to call you repeatedly (which, for the record, is horribly pathetic) but it's not a courtesy action that can be stopped on a whim.

We do not as a matter of fact lead our lives, make our decisions, and reach our goals in everyday life either statistically or scientifically. We live by inferences. - William I Thomas's "suggestion" (If by "suggestion" you mean "statement", and he does.)

Whaddaya mean "we", white man? I can't help what you live by, but shut the hell up or I'll show you an inference, and you ain't gonna be pretty.

Regardless of the particular objective which the individual has in mind and of his motive for having this objective, it will be in his interests to control the conduct of the others, especially their responsive treatment of him.

Alright, if I could control other people my life would be a lot easier. Fortunately, no one can control other people. It's been attempted several times, and failed horribly. See History of US Slavery, the Spanish Inquisition, Les Miserables, and the current war in Iraq for details. Also, see definition of sociopath, call a psychiatrist, and get a labotomy, plzkthnx.

*Ok, I'm not going to recap the entire "Preedy" story. Still, it needs to be mentioned. Goffman inserts about a little over a page from a novel in which Preedy, an Englishman vacationing in Spain, is spending his first day with his fellow travelers and how he is viewing himself, considering his courses of action, and his concerns regarding projecting his personality traits whilst on the beach. He then proceeds to analyze Preedy on the grounds that Preedy is manipulating all of those surrounding him by presenting himself in ways that will be most beneficial to him, instead of simply projecting his personality because it's who he is. Thus reiterating the idea that there is no natural state of human social existance. Everything is a front so that we can successfully achieve our personal objectives. I mean, heaven forbid people be socially conscious and self aware - especially in regards to making first impressions on total strangers. Fuck that shit. Wheee sociopatholgy! ...or not. Back to quotes!

The novelist means us to see that Preedy is improperly concerned with the extensive impressions he feels his sheer bodily action is giving off to those around him.

Does the novelist really mean that? I'd like proof. Furthermore, Is Preedy really improperly concerned with his first impressions? Or does he just not want to make an ass of himself in a foreign country? Maybe I'm jumping out on a limb here, but I'm gonna go with the latter.

We can malign Preedy further...

... but why? I mean really....

But the important point for us here is that the kind of impression Preedy thinks he is making is in fact the kind of impression that others correctly and incorrectly glean from someone in their midst.

Worst. Sentence. EVAR! I just... I mean... *facepalm* I am unable. In the sense that I can't even.

This Shetlander, in short, would observe the unobserved observer.

OH. MY. GAWD! I withdraw my previous statement. This is the worst sentence ever. Right when I thought it couldn't get any worse... I may go blind. Not before I assault Goffman's ghost with a thesaurus, though. Because, OWWWWWWW! I really can't do anything other than weep.

"calculated unintentionality" ...*dies*

Harmony is an optimistic ideal and in any case not necessary for the smooth working of society.

*KILLS* I hate you! HATE HATE HATE! *fumes* RAGE! ANGST! I can't even tell you! Goffman is so lucky he's dead, I tell you what.

Real agreement will also exist concerning the desirability of avoiding an open conflict of definitions of the situation.

Or, y'know, when people agree. Hey, I'm just sayin'.

Thus, between two friends at lunch, a reciprocal show of affection, respect, and concern for the other is maintained.

Or, y'know, felt. ....hatehatehatehatehateomg.

First impressions are important.

*gasp* REALLY? What a novel concept! Maybe you should introduce it to poor 'ol Preedy back there.

...attendants in mental institutions... YOUR MOM!!1!!one!! Sorry, it couldn't be avoided.

Seamen, whose home away from home is rigorously he-man, tell stories of coming back home and inadvertently asking mother to "pass the fucking butter."

...yeah. "Rigorously He-Man." Case closed.
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened