While the conception of law as a constructive and constitutive force is often stated, we have relatively few concrete and grounded case studies showing precisely where and how social actors construct the meaning of their engagements through the invocation of legality. Drawing on Erving Goffman's Frame Analysis (1974), I use the concept of “keying” to articulate how basketball players in informal “pick‐up” games transform the meaning of their activity through disputing. By playing in a legalistic way, players constitute the game as “real” and “serious” rather than “mere play.” The analysis tracks basketball players in the heat of action as they perceive the game, call rule violations, contest those violations, and ultimately give up. Players organize each phase of the dispute's natural history in the “key of law” by constructing and comparing cases, invoking and interpreting rules, setting precedent, arguing over procedure, and proposing solutions. Through these practices, players infuse the game with rich meaning and generate the motivational context demanding that the game be treated as significant. This analysis contributes to an understanding of legal ontology that envisions law's essence as potentiating rather than repairing normative social life.

In this article we propose a framework for description and analysis of public life by treating "outings" as a unit of sociological analysis. Studying outings requires bracketing a concern with bounded places and isolated encounters. Instead, descriptions of outings track people as they organize trips "out," including their preparations, turning points, and post hoc reflections. We emphasize how people understand and contextualize their time in public by linking situated moments of public life to the outing's unfolding trajectory and to people's biographical circumstances. We treat outings in and through public parks as a strategic site to show the utility of studying public outings more generally. A sociology of outings has broad theoretical and methodological implications for how we understand the collective patterning of public life and inequality in everyday encounters.

This article investigates the production and re-production of a recurring pickup basketball game at a public park in Santa Monica, California. I argue that it is best understood as a recurring "scene"-an ecologically shaped, biographically significant, interactionally accomplished, and narratively organized pattern of social life-colloquially known as the "Ocean Run." Drawing on Kenneth Burke's dramatism, I suggest that the scene is constituted by the interrelation of the park's socioecological landscape ("stage"), the diverse personal meanings that players construct through their participation ("cast"), and the practical work of re-creating the scene through situated interactions ("performance"). The park stage facilitates a sense of intimacy for players with very different personal relationships to each other and to the scene. Those players then actively mix themselves up, re-creating the scene through an "improvisational" style of team formation. Place, people, and action are dialectically related in the patterning of public life. This method of analysis is replicable in a wide variety of public scenes and sets up concrete grounds for comparison and theoretical generalizability.

Both conversation-analytic and ethnographic studies of interaction tend to isolate situated conduct from the full biographical context that is meaningful to actors. This article argues that there are good analytic reasons to recover some of that biographical context by incorporating character-driven ethnographic representation within interactionist research. I make this case in reference to a rule dispute captured on video during an ethnography of a public park basketball game. Through a biographically contextualized analysis of players’ situated conduct, I show how character representation allows unspoken threads of actors’ lives to become analytic resources. Incorporating biographical context also opens a methodological path for interactionists to leverage the close-up study of situated encounters for empirical claims about broader forms of social organization. In this case, I argue that character-driven representation allows for an analysis that identifies rule disputes as an interactional mechanism of socially integrative park use.