Early Goffman and the Analysis of Face-to-Face Interaction in Strategic Interaction
Goffman (1969, p. ix) has told us that his ‘ultimate interest [is] … to develop the study of face-to-face interaction as a naturally bounded analytically coherent field — a sub-area of sociology.’ Given this ultimate interest and acknowledging that the concepts he has presented have been widely used and cited by others in the discipline, I wish to consider how and in what ways his studies develop the field of face-to-face interaction.1
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 6.See, for example, Herbert Blumer’s review of Goffman’s Relations in Public, [cited as ( 1971, R5) in the section entitled A Sampler of Reviews, (in the Editor’s Introduction)]; and also John O’Neill’s essay, ‘Self-Prescription and Social Machiavellianism’, in his Sociology as a Skin Trade, ( New York; Harper Torchbooks, 1972 ).Google Scholar
- 7.On this point, compare the remarks made by Egon Bittner in his essay, ‘Objectivity and Realism in Sociology’, pp. 109–125, in G. Psathas (ed), Phenomenological Sociology, ( New York; Wiley-Interscience, 1973 )Google Scholar
- 8.See, Alfred Schutz, The Phenomenology of the Social World, (Mouton; The Hague, 1967); and G. Psathas and F. Waksler, ‘The Essential Features of Face-to-Face Interaction’, pp. 159–183, in G. Psathas (ed), op. cit.Google Scholar