?

Log in

No account? Create an account
ENTRIES FRIENDS CALENDAR INFO PREVIOUS PREVIOUS NEXT NEXT
In Betweens - De File
Does Collecting Make You Feel Dirty?
cbertsch
cbertsch
In Betweens
I'm thinking a lot about neglected territory these days. The space between a sexually intimate relationship and an ordinary friendship is one preoccupation, for example. It's in my work, however, that I'm pushing hardest to consider what gets left out. Social theory tends toward a level of generalization that prioritizes collective action over individual agency. That's the biggest problem with sociology and anthropology, historically, the fact that they do a better job of accounting for rules than exceptions. Certainly, it's why those who wish to fortify the will of actually existing individuals caution against ceding too much ground to those disciplines. Psychology, by contrast, typically does a better job with individuals, whether in theory or practice. But it is inclined towards crude over-simplification when applied to society as a whole, as even its most storied exponents demonstrate.

What is needed, yet all too often lacking, is a way of thinking about parts that are complex, but fall far short of constituting the sort of wholes that social theory posits. When Sigmund Freud tackled the idea of "group psychology," he may have had this goal in mind, but I find his collectives to be suspiciously similar to his conception of individuals. Sociologists and anthropologists show a similar failing, only coming from the opposite direction, writing of sub-categories that seem like their categories rewritten without a sense that in becoming "sub" they undergo qualitative as well as quantitative change. I don't think it should be that hard to conceive of groups that are distinct from both individuals and society as a whole. The challenge is to find a way of setting limits to our all-too-human impulse to convert the flesh of particularity into the air of abstraction.

This is where reflection on relationships proves handy. As is often the case, the way we live complexity is more complex than the way we think it. If we can manage to navigate our way through social networks in which the contrast between points of dense erotic and emotional investment and the diffuse cloud of acquaintance is richly textured, we should be able to conjure that in-between space conceptually through what social theorists, following Kant, term "rational reconstruction." That is, in describing what we already do, we have the potential to restrain our tendency to focus excessively, either on the individual or society as a whole. Perhaps musing on the practice of social networking in the New Media sense might help to advance this project along.

Tags: , , ,
Current Location: 85720

3 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
tommix From: tommix Date: August 22nd, 2008 07:40 pm (UTC) (LINK TO SPECIFIC ENTRY)
My flesh is abstract and sub at the same time.
cbertsch From: cbertsch Date: August 22nd, 2008 10:47 pm (UTC) (LINK TO SPECIFIC ENTRY)
Wait till winter and that formulation may come back to haunt you. Remember not to breathe through your mouth when out at night.
From: marcegoodman Date: August 23rd, 2008 10:58 am (UTC) (LINK TO SPECIFIC ENTRY)
This would be the "Unified Field Theory" of social relations, no? - and as worthy a project as one could conceivably imagine these days.

Here's Jameson (of course!) from his contribution to Critical Inquiry's "The Future of Criticism" symposium:

...I therefore want to forecast yet a fourth moment for theory, as yet on the other side of the horizon. This one has to do with the theorizing of collective subjectivities, although, because it does not yet theoretically exist, all the words I can find for it are still the old-fashioned and discredited ones, such as the project of a social psychology. One wants to think of formulations (and indeed diagrams) for collectivities that are at least as complex and stimulating as those of Lacan for the individual unconscious.

http://www.uchicago.edu/research/jnl-crit-inq/issues/v30/30n2.Jameson.html

I find myself thinking about all this in very nearly the same terms you lay out above. I've recently been wading in waters nearly unimaginable even a short time ago - philosophy of mind, cognitive science, moral psychology, etc - although less surprisingly, at the farther-from-the-normative reaches of these endeavors.

I'm eager to hear (and read!) more.
3 comments or Leave a comment