The Meso-World: Tiny Publics and Political Action
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.15.2.02Keywords:
Meso-Level of Analysis, Interaction Order, Tiny Publics, Political OrderAbstract
In recent decades, sociologists have too often ignored the group level—the meso-level of analysis—in their emphasis on either the individual or the institution. This unfortunate absence misses much of what is central to a sociological analysis of community based on “action.” I draw upon Erving Goffman’s (1983) concept of the interaction order as I argue that a rigorous political sociology requires a focus on group cultures and tiny publics. Group dynamics, idiocultures, and interaction routines are central in creating social order. This approach to civic life draws from the pragmatism of John Dewey, as well as the broad tradition of symbolic interactionist theorists. Ultimately, I argue that a commitment to local action constitutes a commitment to a more extended social system.
Downloads
References
Anderson, Benedict O’G. 1991. Imagined Communities. London: Verso.
Google Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2014. “Social Movements, Experiments in Living, and Moral Progress: Case Studies from Britain’s Abolition of Slavery.” Lindley Lecture, University of Kansas.
Google Scholar
Retrieved March 04, 2015 (http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/handle/1808/14787).
Google Scholar
Back, Kurt and Donna Polisar. 1983. “Salons und Kaffeehäuser.” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 25:276-286.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-01510-9_14
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo et al. 2014. The Civic Imagination: Making a Difference in American Political Life. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
Google Scholar
Bellah, Robert N. et al. 1991. The Good Society. New York: Knopf.
Google Scholar
Blee, Kathleen. 2012. Democracy in the Making: How Activist Groups Form. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199842766.001.0001
Burke, Edmund. 1790. Reflections on the Revolution in France. London: J. Dodsley.
Google Scholar
Cohen, Jean and Andrew Arato. 1992. Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Collins, Randall. 1981. “On the Microfoundations of Macrosociology.” American Journal of Sociology 86(5):984-1014.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/227351
Dawson, Michael. 1995. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691212982
Dewey, John. 1954. The Public and Its Problems. Chicago: Swallow Press.
Google Scholar
Duck, Waverly. 2015. No Way Out: Precarious Living in the Shadow of Poverty and Drug Dealing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226298238.001.0001
Ehrenberg, John. 1999. Civil Society: The Critical History of an Idea. New York: New York University Press.
Google Scholar
Eliasoph, Nina. 2012. Making Volunteers: Civic Life after Welfare’s End. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691147093.001.0001
Feigenbaum, Kenneth. 1959. “Sociable Groups as Pre-Political Behavior.” American Behavioral Scientist 2(3):29-31.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000276425900200309
Fine, Gary Alan. 1987. With the Boys: Little League Baseball and Preadolescent Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226223544.001.0001
Fine, Gary Alan. 2007. Authors of the Storm: Meteorology and the Culture of Prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
Fine, Gary Alan. 2012. Tiny Publics: A Theory of Group Culture and Group Action. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Google Scholar
Fine, Gary Alan. 2014. “The Hinge: Civil Society, Group Culture, and the Interaction Order.” Social Psychology Quarterly 77(1):5-26.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272514522769
Fine, Gary Alan and Brooke Harrington. 2004. “Tiny Publics: Small Groups and Civil Society.” Sociological Theory 22(3):341-356.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2004.00223.x
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1961. Asylums. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1983. “The Interaction Order.” American Sociological Review 48(1):1-17.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2095141
Goldfarb, Jeffrey. 2006. The Politics of Small Things: The Power of the Powerless in Dark Times. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226301112.001.0001
Hallett, Tim. 2010. “The Myth Incarnate: Recoupling Processes, Turmoil, and Inhabited Institutions in an Urban Elementary School.” American Sociological Review 75(1):52-74.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122409357044
Hallett, Tim and Marc Ventresca. 2006. “Inhabited Institutions: Social Interaction and Organizational Forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy.” Theory and Society 35:213-236.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-006-9003-z
Hobbes, Thomas. 1651. Leviathan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Homans, George. 1946. “The Small Warship.” American Sociological Review 11(3):294-300.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2087113
Kjølsrød, Lise. 2013. “Mediated Activism: Contingent Democracy in Leisure Worlds.” Sociology 46(6):1207-1223.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038512466970
Lichterman, Paul and Nina Eliasoph. 2014. “Civic Action.” American Journal of Sociology 120(3):798-863.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/679189
Maines, David. 1977. “Social Organization and Social Structure in Symbolic Interactionist Thought.” Annual Review of Sociology 3:235-259.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.03.080177.001315
Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond Adversary Democracy. New York: Basic Books.
Google Scholar
McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and Matthew Brashears. 2006. “Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks over Two Decades.” American Sociological Review 71(3):353-375.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100301
Merton, Robert and Elinor Barber. 2004. The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity: A Study in Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
Misztal, Barbara. 2001. “Normality and Trust in Goffman’s Theory of Interaction Order.” Sociological Theory 19(3):312-224.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0735-2751.00143
Olick, Jeffrey and Joyce Robbins. 1998. “Social Memory Studies: From ‘Collective Memory’ to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 105-140.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.105
Parsons, Talcott and Edward Shils. 1951. Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674863507
Rawls, Anne. 1987. “Interaction Sui Generis.” Sociological Theory 5:136-149.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/201935
Sampson, Robert, J. 2012. Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226733883.001.0001
Schütz, Alfred. 1967. The Phenomenology of the Social World. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Google Scholar
Sennett, Richard. 1977. The Fall of Public Man. New York: Knopf.
Google Scholar
Sennett, Richard. 2012. Together: The Rituals, Pleasures, and Politics of Cooperation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Google Scholar
Sherif, Muzafer et al. 1961. Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange.
Google Scholar
Silver, Daniel, Terry Nichols Clark, and Clemente Jesus Navarro Yanez. 2010. “Scenes: Social Context in an Age of Contingency.” Social Forces 88(5):2293-2324.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0041
Simmel, George. 1971. On Individuality and Social Forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
Strauss, Anselm. 1978. Negotiations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes and Social Order. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Google Scholar
Swidler, Ann. 1986. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.” American Sociological Review 51(2):273-286.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2095521
Tavory, Iddo and Nina Eliasoph. 2013. “Coordinating Futures: Toward a Theory of Anticipation.” American Journal of Sociology 118(4):908-942.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/668646
Tönnies, Ferdinand. 2001. Community and Civil Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816260
Turner, Jonathan. 2012. Theoretical Principles of Sociology. Volume Three: Mesodynamics. New York: Springer.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6221-8
Vargas, Robert. 2016. Wounded City: Violent Turf Wars in a Chicago Barrio. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190245900.001.0001
Walzer, Michael. 1992. “The Civil Society Argument.” Pp. 89-107 in Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community, edited by Chantal Mouffe. London: Verso.
Google Scholar
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Weeks, John. 2004. Unpopular Culture: The Ritual of Complaint in a British Bank. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
Zerubavel, Eviatar. 1997. Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.