Bu çalışma Erving Goffman’ın benlik ve insan doğası kavrayışlarına; en çok alıntıla- nan metinlerinden The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1956) ile On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction (1967) çalışmaları özelinde derinleme- sine bir bakış sunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İlk olarak Goffman’ın temel kuramsal çerçevesi tanıtılmış ve kavramlarının birbirileriyle olan ilişkileri açıklanmıştır. İkinci aşamada Goffman’ın düşünsel gelişimi; öncülleri olarak Freud, Cooley, Mead ve ardılları olarak Debord, Baudrillard, Jameson gibi 1980 sonrası öne çıkan kuramcılar ile tamamlayıcı ve açıklayıcı ilişkisine değinilmiştir. Son aşamada Goffman’ın literatürde kapladığı alan ve sosyal psikolojik açıdan kimlik çalışmalarında araladığı yeni çalışma alanlarına dair örnek çalışmalar aracılığıyla bir tartışma yürütülmüştür.
Biçer, S. (2014). Goffman metodolojisinden hareketle Facebook üzerinde akademisyenlerin kedini sunma davranışı. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bi- limler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 65-100.
Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and society, 29(1), 1-47.
Eriksen, T. H. (2000). Kültür Terörizmi: Kültürel Arınma Düşüncesi Üzerine Bir Deneme. Çev. A. Ö. Otçu. Diyarbakır: Avesta Basın Yayın
Farberman, H. A. (1985). The foundations of symbolic interaction: James, Cooley, and Mead. Studies in Symbolic Interaction. 1, 13-27.
Giddens, A. (2009). On the reading the presentation of self: Some reflection. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72(4), 290-295.
Gleason, P. (1983). Identifying identity: A semantic history. The journal of American history, 69(4), 910-931.
Goffman, E. (2009). Günlük Yaşamda Benliğin Sunumu (B. Cezar, Çev.). Metis Yayınları, İstanbul. (Orjinal çalışma basım tarihi 1956).
Goffman, E. (1967). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Reflections, 4(3),7-13.
Hancock, B. H., & Garner, R. (2014). Erving Goffman: Theorizing the Self in the Age of Advanced Consumer Capitalism. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45 (2), 163-187.
Mascheroni, G., Vincent, J., & Jimenez, E. (2015). “Girls are addicted to likes so they post semi-naked selfies”: Peer mediation, normativity and the construction of identity online. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 9(1), 5.
Menand, L. (2009). Some frames for Goffman. Social Psychology Quar- terly, 72(4), 296-299.
Heritage, J. (2001).Goffman, Garfinkel And Conversation Analysis. M. Wetherall, S. Taylor & S.J. Yates (Ed.). Discourse Theory and Practice, Chap. 4,. London: Sage.
Renshaw, S. W. (2006). Postmodern swing dance and secondary adjustment: Identity as process. Symbolic interaction, 29(1), 83-94.
Scheff, T. J. (2005). Looking‐Glass Self: Goffman as Symbolic Interactionist. Symbolic Interaction, 28(2), 147-166.
Schudson, M. (1984). Embarrassment and Erving Goffman’s idea of human nature. Theory and Society, 13(5), 633-648.
Sütlüoğlu, T. (2015). Sosyal paylaşım ağlarında gençlerin sosyalleşme ve kimlik inşası süreçleri: Facebook örneği. Folklor/Edebiyat, 21(83), 125-147.
Tseëlon, E., & Tseëlon, E. (1992). What is beautiful is bad: Physical attrac- tiveness as stigma. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22(3), 295-309.
Weigert, A. J. (2003). Terrorism, identity, and public order: A perspective from Goffman. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research. 3(2), 93-113.
Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature
Year 2016,
Volume: 36 Issue: 1, 81 - 93, 13.10.2016
The aim of this study is to present a reflection on Erving Goffman’s concept of self and
human nature through his most effective studies; The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life
(1956) and On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction (1967).
Firstly, Goffman’s basic theoretical frame is demonstrated and interrelations of the con-
cepts are explained. Second, Goffman’s intellectual development is discussed according to
his positioning with Freud, Cooley and Mead as precursors and Debord, Baudrillard and
Jameson as successors. Finally, Goffman’s footprint on the literature and his stimulating
perspective on social psychological identity research is exemplify.
Biçer, S. (2014). Goffman metodolojisinden hareketle Facebook üzerinde akademisyenlerin kedini sunma davranışı. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bi- limler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 65-100.
Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and society, 29(1), 1-47.
Eriksen, T. H. (2000). Kültür Terörizmi: Kültürel Arınma Düşüncesi Üzerine Bir Deneme. Çev. A. Ö. Otçu. Diyarbakır: Avesta Basın Yayın
Farberman, H. A. (1985). The foundations of symbolic interaction: James, Cooley, and Mead. Studies in Symbolic Interaction. 1, 13-27.
Giddens, A. (2009). On the reading the presentation of self: Some reflection. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72(4), 290-295.
Gleason, P. (1983). Identifying identity: A semantic history. The journal of American history, 69(4), 910-931.
Goffman, E. (2009). Günlük Yaşamda Benliğin Sunumu (B. Cezar, Çev.). Metis Yayınları, İstanbul. (Orjinal çalışma basım tarihi 1956).
Goffman, E. (1967). On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Reflections, 4(3),7-13.
Hancock, B. H., & Garner, R. (2014). Erving Goffman: Theorizing the Self in the Age of Advanced Consumer Capitalism. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45 (2), 163-187.
Mascheroni, G., Vincent, J., & Jimenez, E. (2015). “Girls are addicted to likes so they post semi-naked selfies”: Peer mediation, normativity and the construction of identity online. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 9(1), 5.
Menand, L. (2009). Some frames for Goffman. Social Psychology Quar- terly, 72(4), 296-299.
Heritage, J. (2001).Goffman, Garfinkel And Conversation Analysis. M. Wetherall, S. Taylor & S.J. Yates (Ed.). Discourse Theory and Practice, Chap. 4,. London: Sage.
Renshaw, S. W. (2006). Postmodern swing dance and secondary adjustment: Identity as process. Symbolic interaction, 29(1), 83-94.
Scheff, T. J. (2005). Looking‐Glass Self: Goffman as Symbolic Interactionist. Symbolic Interaction, 28(2), 147-166.
Schudson, M. (1984). Embarrassment and Erving Goffman’s idea of human nature. Theory and Society, 13(5), 633-648.
Sütlüoğlu, T. (2015). Sosyal paylaşım ağlarında gençlerin sosyalleşme ve kimlik inşası süreçleri: Facebook örneği. Folklor/Edebiyat, 21(83), 125-147.
Tseëlon, E., & Tseëlon, E. (1992). What is beautiful is bad: Physical attrac- tiveness as stigma. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22(3), 295-309.
Weigert, A. J. (2003). Terrorism, identity, and public order: A perspective from Goffman. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research. 3(2), 93-113.
Bayad, A. (2016). Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature. Studies in Psychology, 36(1), 81-93.
AMA
Bayad A. Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature. Studies in Psychology. June 2016;36(1):81-93.
Chicago
Bayad, Aydın. “Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature”. Studies in Psychology 36, no. 1 (June 2016): 81-93.
EndNote
Bayad A (June 1, 2016) Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature. Studies in Psychology 36 1 81–93.
IEEE
A. Bayad, “Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature”, Studies in Psychology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 81–93, 2016.
ISNAD
Bayad, Aydın. “Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature”. Studies in Psychology 36/1 (June 2016), 81-93.
JAMA
Bayad A. Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature. Studies in Psychology. 2016;36:81–93.
MLA
Bayad, Aydın. “Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature”. Studies in Psychology, vol. 36, no. 1, 2016, pp. 81-93.
Vancouver
Bayad A. Reflections on Erving Goffman’s Concept of Self and Assumption of Human Nature. Studies in Psychology. 2016;36(1):81-93.