The Social Nature of Demeanor

Abstract

Goffman argues that individuals offer themselves to the group through well demeanored appearance for which they are granted deference. In this paper, I try to expand Goffman's insights by focusing directly on demeanor itself. From observations in Intensive Care Units, I find that demeanor is an achievement, a cooperative social accomplishment, and a form of deference. It is normatively a working ideal by which individuals gain acceptance as competent group members. A well demeanored appearance makes interaction more pleasant; it permits others to anticipate that one will try to conform to interactional norms; it facilitates whatever task is at hand; it validates the deference that an individual grants; and it is itself a form of deference. It does not remain the responsibility of the individual, and we must therefore examine how groups constitute individuals. From the analysis, I derive explanations of the level of demeanor in a given setting, and propositions predicting the behavior of individuals within a setting.

Between Deference and Distinction: Interaction Ritual Through Symbolic Power in an Educational Institution

“…Though audiences and presentational preferences vary across settings, the basic process is general. Deference and demeanor have been used to describe interactions in many settings, ranging from medical care (Rushing 1962;Telles 1980) and domestic labor (Rollins 1985) to urban ghettos (Anderson 1976(Anderson , 1999 and feminist enclaves (Cassell 1974).…”

The moral work of subversion

“…For Rapport (2009) As such we are pointing to the role of subversion in not only making sensible but also accomplishing an organizational moral order. Drawing on Goffman's (1956) earlier account of a hospital ward, Telles (1980), for example, noted the different expectations of 'demeanour' between two hospital wards. Telles (1980) likewise observed in his own experiences at a hospital the ordering of subversion to certain sites.…”

“…Drawing on Goffman's (1956) earlier account of a hospital ward, Telles (1980), for example, noted the different expectations of 'demeanour' between two hospital wards. Telles (1980) likewise observed, in his own experiences at a hospital, the ordering of subversion to certain sites. He was able to distinguish the 'more demeanored' Coronary Care Unit (CCU) and its less 'demeanoured' Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU) counterpart.…”

“…He attributes this appearance or absence of ‘demeanour’ to a range of ‘ecological supports’ found in these separate environments. Noise absorbing carpeting, for example, better facilitates the doctor’s treatment of patients with dignity by reducing the noise, and therefore chaos, underlying this interaction (Telles, 1980: 330). This, in turn, set the expectations for whether or not one was ‘allowed’ to transgress established organizational mores within these spaces.…”

“…He recalls: ‘When I became involved in an animated discussion with an intern shortly after arriving in CCU, the nurse clinician chastised me by saying, “Shhh. You’re not in MICU now, Joel” (Telles, 1980: 330)’.…”