The Rising Salience of the Absent: An Interactionist Analysis

• Authors: Sam Hillyard
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper uses examples from rural studies to demonstrate the relevance of symbolic interactionism for unlocking the complexity of contemporary society. It does so by making a case for a nonprescriptive theory-method dialectic. Case examples are drawn upon in support of the argumentation, including early interactionism and ethnographic work in the United Kingdom, and, in the second half of the paper, rural sociology and fieldwork. The main argument presented is that the traditional remit of interactionism should be extended to recognize how absence is increasingly influential. It concludes that interactionism is in tune with other new trajectories in the social sciences that take into consideration co-presence proximity both on and off-line.

Keywords

EN

Rural; Interactionism; Ethnography; Absence; Definition of the Situation; New Social Media

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Qualitative Sociology Review
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 15
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 56-72

Dates

published

2019-05-23

Contributors

author

Sam Hillyard

• Durham University, UK

References

• Atkinson, Paul. 1990. The Ethnographic Imagination. London: outledge.
• Atkinson, Paul. 2012. “An Accidental Anthropologist, a Skeptical Sociologist, a Reluctant Methodologist.” Pp. 33-50 in Blue-Ribbon Papers: Behind the Professional Mask: The Autobiographies of Leading Symbolic Interactionists, edited by N. K. Denzin. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, vol. 38. Bingley: Emerald.
• Atkinson, Paul. 2015. For Ethnography. London: Sage.
• Atkinson, Paul and William Housley. 2003. Interactionism. London: Sage.
• Bagley, Carl and Sam Hillyard. 2011. “Village Schools in England: At the Heart of the Community?” Australian Journal of Education 55(1):37-49.
• Ball, Stephen J. 1981. Beachside Comprehensive: A Case-Study of Secondary Schooling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Beaulieu, Anne. 2010. “Research Note: From Co-Location to Co-Presence: Shifts in the Use of Ethnography for the Study of Knowledge.” Social Studies of Science 40(3):453-470.
• Bell, Colin and Howard Newby. 1971. Community Studies: An Introduction to the Sociology of the Local Community. London: Allen and Unwin.
• Bonner, Tim. 2018. “Animal Rights Petitions Shrink.” Countryside Alliance News. Retrieved February 20, 2019 (https://www.countryside-alliance.org/news/animal-rights-petitions-shrinkwhen-subject-to-public-scrutiny-test).
• Burgess, Robert G. 1982. Field Research: A Sourcebook and Field Manual. London: Allen and Unwin.
• Burgess, Robert G. 1983. Experiencing Comprehensive Education A Study of Bishop McGregor School. London: Taylor and Francis.
• Burgess, Robert G. 1984. In the Field. London: Routledge.
• Burns, Tom. 1992. Erving Goffman. London: Routledge.
• Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble. London: Routledge.
• Cox, Hugo. 2016. “Scottish Highlands in Buyers’ Sights.” The Financial Times, June 10th, 2016, p. 19.
• Craib, Ian. 1992. Modern Social Theory from Parsons to Habermas. London: Routledge.
• Crow, Graham. 2016. What Are Community Studies? London: Bloomsbury.
• Crow, Graham and Alice Mah. 2012. Research Report: Conceptualisations and Meanings of “Community”: The Theory and Operationalisation of a Contested Concept. Retrieved May 22, 2017 (http://www.community-methods.soton.ac.uk/resources/CC%20Final%20Report_30%20March%20GC.pdf).
• Delamont, Sara. 2012. “Milkshakes and Convertibles: An Autobiographical Reflection.” Pp. 51-69 in Studies in Symbolic Interaction, edited by N. K. Denzin. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, vol. 39. Bingley: Emerald.
• Delamont, Sara. 2016. Fieldwork in Educational Settings. London: Routledge.
• Dikeç, Mustafa. 2015. Space, Politics and Aesthetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Dingwall, Robert. 2001. “Notes Toward an Intellectual History of Symbolic Interactionism.” Symbolic Interaction 24(2):237-242.
• Dowling, Tim. 2017. “Dumbphone! Can I Survive Modern Life with the Original Nokia 3310?” The Guardian. Retrieved May 30, 2017 (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/30/dumbphone-can-i-survive-modern-life-with-the-original-nokia-3310).
• Drew, Paul and Anthony Wootton. 1988. Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Edensor, Tim. 2006. “Performing Rurality.” Pp. 484-495 in Handbook of Rural Studies, edited by P. Cloke, T. Marsden, and P. Mooney. London: Sage.
• Epstein, Debbie. 1998. “‘Are You a Girl or Are You a Teacher?’ The ‘Least Adult’ Role in Research about Gender and Sexuality in a Primary School.” Pp. 27-41 in Doing Research about Education, edited by G. Walford. London: Falmer Press.
• Giddens, Anthony and Paul Sutton. 2009. Sociology, 6th ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Goffman, Erving. 1983. “The Interaction Order.”American Sociological Review 48(1):1-17.
• Halfacree, Keith and Maria Rivera. 2012. “Moving to the Countryside... and Staying: Lives Beyond Representations.” Sociologia Ruralis 52(1):92-114.
• Hammersley, Martyn. 1989. The Dilemma of Qualitative Method: Herbert Blumer and the Chicago School. London: Routledge.
• Hammersley, Martyn. 1992. What’s Wrong with Ethnography?Methodological Explorations. London: Routledge.
• Hammersley, Martyn. 2012. “Am I Now, or Have I Ever Been, a Symbolic Interactionist? Autobiographical Reflections.” Pp. 153-173 in Blue-Ribbon Papers: Behind the Professional Mask: The Autobiographies of Leading Symbolic Interactionists, edited by N. K. Denzin. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, vol. 38. Bingley: Emerald.
• Hammersley, Martyn and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
• Hand, Martin. 2014. “From Cyberspace to the Dataverse: Trajectories in Digital Social Research.” Pp. 1-27 in Big Data? Qualitative Approaches to Digital Research, edited by M. Hand and S. Hillyard. Bingley: Emerald.
• Hargreaves, David. 1967. Social Relations in a Secondary School. London: Routledge.
• Hart, Simon. 2017. “Opinion.” The Field, April, p.7.
• Hillyard, Sam H. 2001. “Pupils at Transition: The Impact of Institution and Peer-Group Pressures on Pupils’ Negotiation of Change: A UK Case Study.” Pp. 157-176 in Ethnography and Education Policy, edited by G. Walford. Bingley: Emerald.
• Hillyard, Sam. 2003. “An Exploration of Theory Method Dialectic in Ethnography.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, Warwick University, Coventry.
• Hillyard, Sam. 2007. The Sociology of Rural Life. Oxford: Berg.
• Hillyard, Sam. 2010. “Ethnography’s Capacity to Contribute to the Cumulation of Theory: A Case Study of Differentiation–Polarisation Theory.” Oxford Review of Education 36(6): 767-784.
• Hillyard, Sam. 2011. “Ethnography’s Capacity to Contribute to the Cumulation of Theory: A Response to Hammersley.” Oxford Review of Education 37(6):811-814.
• Hillyard, Sam. 2015. “Rural Putsch: Power, Class, Social Relations and Change in the English Rural Village.” Sociological Research Online 20(1):5.
• Hillyard, Sam and Carl Bagley. 2014. “Community Strikes Back? Belonging and Exclusion in Rural English Villages in Networked Times.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 19(7):748-758.
• Hillyard, Sam and Joseph Burridge. 2012. “Shotguns and Firearms in the UK: A Call for a Distinctively Sociological Contribution to the Debate.” Sociology 46(3):395-410.
• Hunter, James et al. 2013. 432:50:Towards a Comprehensive Land Reform Agenda for Scotland. London: The Commons Scottish Affairs Committee. Briefing paper.
• Lacey, Colin. 1971. Hightown Grammar: The School as a Social System. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Lambart, A. M. 1970. The Sociology of an Unstreamed Urban Grammar School for Girls. MA Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Manchester.
• Murphy, Elizabeth et al. 1998. “Qualitative Research Methods in Health Technology Assessment: A Review of the Literature.” Health Technology Assessment 2(16):iii-ix, 1-274.
• Newby, Howard. 1977. The Deferential Worker: A Study of Farm Workers in East Anglia. London: Allen Lane.
• Newby, Howard. 1980. Green and Pleasant Land: Social Change in Rural Britain. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Newby, Howard. 2008. “Reflections on Colin Bell and the Past and Future of Community Studies.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11(2):93-96.
• Pole, Christopher J. and Sam H. Hillyard. 2016. Doing Fieldwork. London: Sage.
• Rojek, Chris. 2007. Brit-Myth: Who Do the British Think They Are? London: Reaktion.
• Stronach, Ian and Maggie MacLure. 1997. Educational Research Undone: The Postmodern Embrace. Buckingham: Open University Press.
• Stronach, Ian and Elizabeth Smears. 2010. “Dual Ontologies and New Ecologies of Knowledge: Rethinking the Politics and Poetics of ‘Touch.’” Pp. 81-99 in New Frontiers in Ethnography, edited by S. Hillyard. Bingley: Emerald.
• Thomas, William I. and Dorothy S. Thomas. 1927. The Child in America. New York: Knopf.
• Thrift, Nigel. 2005. Knowing Capitalism. London: Sage.
• Thrift, Nigel. 2012. “The Insubstantial Pageant: Producing an Untoward Land.” Cultural Geographies 19(2):141-168.
• Uprichard, Emma. 2013. “Focus: Big Data, Little Questions?” Discover Society 1 (unpaginated).
• West, Candace. 1984. “When the Doctor Is a ‘Lady’: Power, Status and Gender in Physician-Patient Encounters.”Symbolic Interaction 7(1):87-106.
• West, Candace and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender and Society 1(2):125-151.
• Williams, W. 2008. “Rural Community Studies: ‘From Continuing Tradition to Continuous Change.’” W. M. Williams interviewed by Paul Thompson. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 11(2):97-102.
• Wolcott, Harry F. 2003.The Man in the Principal’s Office: An Ethnography. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1733-8077.15.2.05