Table of Contents
- The Foundations of Dramaturgical Theory
- Dialogical Interaction
- Self and Identity
- Language and Symbols
- Power and Resistance
- Conclusion
The study of human interaction has long been a central concern of sociology, and one of the key frameworks for understanding these interactions is dramaturgical theory. Developed by sociologists like Erving Goffman, this theory likens social interaction to a theatrical performance. While Goffman’s contributions are the most well-known, other scholars have expanded and refined this framework. One such scholar is Robert S. Perinbanayagam, whose work offers a significant extension and deepening of dramaturgical theory. This essay aims to outline and explain Perinbanayagam’s contributions to dramaturgical theory, situating his ideas within the broader context of sociological thought.
The Foundations of Dramaturgical Theory
Goffman’s Original Framework
Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory is predicated on the idea that social life is akin to a theatrical performance, where individuals are actors who play roles, follow scripts, and present themselves to an audience. Goffman introduced key concepts such as “front stage” and “back stage,” where the front stage represents the social space where actors perform and adhere to social norms, while the back stage is a private area where individuals can relax and drop their societal roles. This dichotomy highlights the distinction between public behavior and private self.
Goffman also emphasized the importance of “impression management,” which refers to the strategies individuals use to control how they are perceived by others. This involves not only verbal communication but also non-verbal cues such as gestures, facial expressions, and attire. Through impression management, individuals strive to present a favorable image and maintain social harmony.
Perinbanayagam’s Extension of Dramaturgical Theory
Robert S. Perinbanayagam, building on Goffman’s foundation, introduced nuanced insights that enrich our understanding of social interaction. Perinbanayagam’s work, while rooted in dramaturgical principles, extends beyond the metaphor of theater to incorporate a more dynamic and interactive view of social life. He emphasizes the dialogic nature of human interaction, where communication is seen as a continuous, reciprocal process of meaning-making.
Dialogical Interaction
The Concept of Dialogue
Perinbanayagam’s dramaturgical theory is deeply influenced by the concept of dialogue, drawing on the philosophical ideas of Mikhail Bakhtin. Dialogue, in this context, refers to the ongoing, interactive exchange between individuals, where meaning is co-constructed through communication. Unlike Goffman’s relatively static view of roles and scripts, Perinbanayagam views social interaction as a fluid and emergent process.
In Perinbanayagam’s framework, dialogue is not merely a matter of exchanging information; it is a fundamental process through which individuals negotiate identities, relationships, and social realities. This perspective shifts the focus from individual performance to the relational dynamics of interaction.
Interactional Frames
One of Perinbanayagam’s key contributions is the notion of “interactional frames.” These frames are the contextual structures within which social interactions occur, providing the background and rules for communication. Interactional frames are dynamic and can shift depending on the participants, the setting, and the purpose of the interaction. For instance, a conversation between colleagues at a business meeting operates within a different frame than a casual chat between friends.
Interactional frames help individuals interpret each other’s actions and responses. They provide the shared understanding necessary for coherent and meaningful interaction. Perinbanayagam argues that these frames are co-constructed by the participants through dialogue, rather than being imposed by societal norms alone.
