Essay Questions

Part I
Question 2:
Weber and Marx have fundamentally dissimilar ideologies on the process by which power is legit-

imized.Weber believed power was achieved through rational or non rational methods and saw no direct

correlation between money and power. Moreover, Weber considered power to be the probability that a

social actor is able to execute an action in spite of resistance (Class Notes 10/03/18). Marx, on the oth-

er hand, emphasized the direct correlation between economic status and the level of power. He argued

that both the political and economic institutions were dominated and controlled by bourgeoisie, the

property owners.

Weber labeled the power that was legitimized at the state level or through formal organizations as

rational power. He explained that rational powers gained and maintained power through consistency,

organization, tradition, and strategy. At the state level, power is enforced through legally forceful and

violent measures. “The state uses physical violence to defend itself (and society) against threats to its se-

curity that come both from within the state and from other states and other entities.” (Dillon 136) The

state also utilizes these techniques to maintain social order within their society. Weber believed that the

state expresses their legal authority through bureaucracy, otherwise known as formal organizations. The

purpose of these organizations are to regulate and enforce behavioral regulations. In other words, they

dictate how they believe individuals need to behave.

Weber also believed in a less traditional form of power, the charismatic leader. He describes

charismatic leaders as individuals possessing personality qualities parallel to exceptional power.

Often considered extraordinary or even treated as superhuman, the qualities these leaders have

aren’t obtainable but instead bestowed. Thus, the power a charismatic leader possesses is legit-

imized through their mere existence. Their power is unique and organic, which inspires strong
loyalty and obedience from followers. Their process of social action is the exact opposite to that

of at the state-level and formal organizational level. True charismatic leaders are unstable and

unpredictable, constantly generating new ideas and movements. Despite the vast differences be-

tween the legitimization of non rational and rational power, one aspect remains true: power is not

connected to money. “ ‘Economically conditioned’ power is not, of course, identical with ‘pow-

er’ as such. On the contrary, the emergence of economic power may be the consequence of pow-

er existing on other grounds… Power, including economic power, may be valued ‘for its own

sake’ ”(Kivisto 98).

Marx believed that all aspects of society were run by the people who possessed the most money

and thus would challenge Weber’s idea by which power is legitimized. Marx believed that the bourgeoisie

dominated the economic institution in that they controlled product and labour, and thus held power over

the lives of the the proletariat. Because the bourgeoisie provide the proletariate with a means to survive

they hold the right to control the product being made and the price by which the product be sold. “Thus

in these two ways the worker becomes a slave to his object: firstly, he receives an object of labour, that is

he receives his labour, and secondly, he receives the means of subsistence”(Kivisto, 5). The proletariate

not only loses the ability to connect to the product through creativity but they are also alienated from the

product in that they are unable to purchase it. They cannot leave this labour because without it they will

not be able to afford the necessities to live nor will they have a purpose in life. “The climax of this slavery

is that only as a worker can he maintain himself as a physical subject and it is only as a physical subject

that he is a worker” (Kivisto 5).

Marx also argues the power of the bourgeoise is legitimatized throughout the support of the po-

litical system. He goes on to explain that the money possessed by the bourgeoisie stretches beyond the

economic institution and reaches far enough to cover the political system as well. Money is needed to
fund political campaigns thus politicians don’t look to the proletariat for funding but rather to the bour-

geoisie but in return the politician feels obliged to support their lifestyles and political agendas. This is

the idea: I scratch your back you scratch mine. This cycle legitimizes the power of the bourgeoisie and

carries on the slavery of proletariat. Thus, while Weber argues that power exists where resistance lies,

Marx would challenge this ideology by explaining the power money possesses.
Part II
Question 6:
I observed face-to-face interactions within Brewed Awakenings, a local coffee shop in Wakefield.

The place was quite busy and the line was filled with both impatient and leisure customers. The waitstaff

had both young and lively employees as well as the one older gentleman who clearly was struggling with

the technological side of the job. There were diligent, serious business men, runners, professors, and

students. All these role performances depending the others. The roles of the waitstaff were broken into

greeters/ order takers, cooks, and baristas. The greeters were kind, understanding, and helpful while the

cooks and baristas had no time to build relationships with the customers and merely unenthusiastically

yelling the names of each order then quickly and reluctantly returning to their position. While ordering,

the business men played the role of busy and disconnected customer. In comparison, their role within the

conversation held with their associates was interested, patient, and listening. The professors were dili-

gently working on their laptops, surrounded by paperwork and paying little attention to the world around

them. The students held the role of disinterested and preoccupied students in that for the most part they

ignored the work they had laid out on the table and instead conversed about their halloweekend plans.

Beyond the roles within the individuals in the coffee shop, it is important to explain in further

detail the performance of how each social role was executed. According to Goffman, “the most effective

way to ensure a convincing role performance is to influence the definition of the situation that others

come to have of a given interaction. How things (a setting or a situation) get defined matters enormously

to what can subsequently occur in the situation and what is subsequently evaluated as appropriate or con-

vincing behavior” (Dillon 284). Essentially, he believed that the props, and the setting itself shape and

determine the roles of the individuals within the performance. In terms of the coffee shop I observed, ta-

bles, chairs, signs, and the counter were used as props to establish the roles of customer versus employ-

ee. When you arrive you are immediately directed to the counter with a sign labeled ‘Order here’ as well
as rug which points directly to the counter. These props indicates that the roles of the individuals enter-

ing are proactive customer. Rather than a sit down restaurant where a customer is waited on, here the

customer is expected to walk up to the counter, order, pay, and then return when their name is called.

The counter establishes the boarder between customer and employee. Thus, when the customer reaches

the counter they know the individual on the other side is someone there to take their order. The

Goffman also asserted that appearance and manner help to distinguish the roles as well as the

scripts within each performance. “Appearance” may be taken to refer to those stimuli which function at

the time to tell us the performer’s social statuses…..”Manner” may be taken to refer to those stimuli

which function at the time to warn us of the interaction role the performer will expect to play in the on-

coming situation”(Kivisto 260). Appearance and manner within in this scenario seemed matter more on

the customer actor. In other words, the script the greeter/order taker chose to use changed based on the

appearance of the customer. For example, when the businessmen walked up in full suits and expensive

watches the greeter took on a more professional script. Where as when the students, who were around

the same age as the greeter, dressed in sweatpants and sweatshirts the greeter took on a more laid back

and joking script. Furthermore, the scripts between the customers themselves were much different than

the scripts which had occurred between them and the employees.

I would argue the performances showed elements of both “front stage” and “back stage” in both

the customers as well as the employees. Similar to most coffee shops, Brewed Awakenings has an open

kitchen meaning the customers are able to see their coffees and food being made. This means that unless

the employees are in the office or storage room, they are always in front stage. However, the counter, ma-

chines, and piled ingredients provide somewhat coverage. Thus, there is an overlap of front stage and

back stage. The front stage is when they know they are being watched and thus they are interacting with

the customers as well as with one another at a level which maintain professionalism. Thereby, the interac-
tions they have with customers as well as when they are completing orders would be considered front

stage. However, at one point while I was observing the baristas I overheard their conversation complaint

about customers as well as discussing their personal lives. This would be considered “back stage” per-

formance. In terms of customer front stage and backstage performances, most of the customers were per-

forming “front stage” as they maintained a similar level of performance throughout their stay thus indi-

cating the entire scene was a front stage. That being said, the business men were prime examples of both

front stage and back. While conversing with their clients, they spoke professionally, and maintained a

manner and appearance of high class. This was their front stage. After the meeting, the clients and all of

the business men except for one exited the coffee shop. Once the last man was left alone, I observed him

call someone and immediately begin complaining and insulting both his clients and his business compan-

ions. This interaction was a back stage performance.

Part III
 If I were to conduct research on internet communication from a sociological imaginative per-

spective, I would focus on the effects of technology on the individual identity as well as how these

changed identities transform social interactions within society. Sociological Imagination is the relation-

ship between self and society thus my research cannot be at the micro or the macro level, it must be at

both. Meaning the research must look into both the individual and the society while maintaining the un-

derstanding that both effect each other. I believe the best way to conduct this study would be to approach

it from the theories that Erving Goffman presents about performance and identity. Specifically, I would

focus on his ideas of “front stage” and “back stage” as well as his theory that “our conception of our role

become second nature and an integral part of our personality”(Kivisto 258).

Because my research does not just focus on societal technological use, I believe that it would be

pertinent to study the different personas and self presentations which individuals use within their online

social interactions. I believe that while the internet world is vastly different to that of reality, it is impor-

tant to think of this world as just another setting. In other words, researchers are constantly attempting to

understand why people interact differently in different settings and to do so they look at all of the differ-

ent levels of face-to-face communication (ie non-verbals, symbols, etc.). Thereby, in order to truly un-

derstand the different level of communication through technology the research study relies on the infor-

mation collected on all sections (emails, texts, social media, etc.). Moreover, these different domains of

interaction may shed light on both the construction of identity as well as understanding the effects of

Goffman’s stages. If we looked a emails versus texts we might see difference in the script and the manner

or appearance and moreover we might see a clear difference between the persona of the same individual’s

social media. Furthermore, those texts, emails, and social media would differ from person to person de-

pending on their role within each domain.

 I believe that face-to-face interactions have more probability of an over lap with internet interac-

tions in terms of the roles of social actors while the scripts would more likely greatly differ. For example,

a professor’s face-to-face interactions would remain the same as internet interactions while the tone of

the role may change slightly. I believe the change of tone would be directly correlated to the script. Fur-

thermore, the scripts change because there is more time to edit and reedit a script on the internet versus

a face-to-face interaction where the script is more organic.

Personally, my self presentation changes quite drastically from internet setting to internet set-

ting. Firstly, my texts are never full sentences and usually brief updates where as my emails are more pro-

fessional and well written. My social media also changes: instagram I post mostly only the ‘perfect’ pho-

tos, facebook is all about political videos and random updates for family, and snapchat is random noth-

ings of my day to day life.

Establishing trust through face-to-face interactions is much different than the establishment of

trust through the technological interaction. I believe there is no truism in the trust that can be established

through internet interactions. Internet interactions are like the fusion of front and back stage. In other

words, the actor can easily present themselves in the way in which they know their audience wishes to see

while never acting in that manner within the domain of reality. As “Goffman primarily emphasizes that

the presentation of self in everyday life – the individual’s execution of multiple social roles – is an ongo-

ing task of symbolic exchange, inference, and interaction; we control (or try to control) the cues we emit

to others so that we can manage our audiences’ impressions of us” (Dillon 283). Thereby, when an actor

performs online they can manage their performance without ever being seen.