The Rising Salience of the Absent: An Interactionist Analysis

Sam Hillyard

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.15.2.05

Authors

Sam Hillyard Durham University, UK

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.15.2.05

Keywords:

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

Abstract

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.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Sam Hillyard, Durham University, UK

Sam Hillyard is a Reader in Sociology at Durham University. She is series editor of Studies in Qualitative Methodology (Emerald) and a member of the editorial board of Qualitative Research. Her research interests lie with the synergies between theoretical ideas and empirical ethnographic research. This has been applied across a variety of research settings, with recent projects including game shooting in the United Kingdom and access to elite higher education. These interests are also reflected in a series of funding awards from the ESRC, the Rural Economy and Land Use program (ESRC, NERC, BBSRC), and Natural Resources Wales. Books include Doing Fieldwork (2016), co-authored with Professor Christopher Pole, and Approaches to Fieldwork (2014), a four-volume collection on fieldwork for Sage. Social life… is not particularly amenable to deep systematic analysis… Indeed I have heard it said that we should be glad to trade what we’ve so far produced for a few really good conceptual distinctions and a cold beer. But there’s nothing in the world that we should trade for what we do have: the bent to sustain in regard to all elements of social life a spirit of unfettered, unsponsored inquiry and the wisdom not to look elsewhere but ourselves and our discipline for that mandate. [Goffman 1983:17] [B]ecause theory is so obviously difficult, the theorist takes on an aura that sets her apart from others… puffing out their theoretical feathers. [Craib 1992:4-5]

References

Atkinson, Paul. 1990. The Ethnographic Imagination. London: outledge.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396(2012)0000038005

Atkinson, Paul. 2015. For Ethnography. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Atkinson, Paul and William Housley. 2003. Interactionism. London: Sage.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209274

Bagley, Carl and Sam Hillyard. 2011. “Village Schools in England: At the Heart of the Community?” Australian Journal of Education 55(1):37-49.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000494411105500105

Ball, Stephen J. 1981. Beachside Comprehensive: A Case-Study of Secondary Schooling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709359219

Bell, Colin and Howard Newby. 1971. Community Studies: An Introduction to the Sociology of the Local Community. London: Allen and Unwin.
Google Scholar

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).
Google Scholar

Burgess, Robert G. 1982. Field Research: A Sourcebook and Field Manual. London: Allen and Unwin.
Google Scholar

Burgess, Robert G. 1983. Experiencing Comprehensive Education A Study of Bishop McGregor School. London: Taylor and Francis.
Google Scholar

Burgess, Robert G. 1984. In the Field. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Burns, Tom. 1992. Erving Goffman. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Cox, Hugo. 2016. “Scottish Highlands in Buyers’ Sights.” The Financial Times, June 10th, 2016, p. 19.
Google Scholar

Craib, Ian. 1992. Modern Social Theory from Parsons to Habermas. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Crow, Graham. 2016. What Are Community Studies? London: Bloomsbury.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781849665964

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).
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396(2012)0000039004

Delamont, Sara. 2016. Fieldwork in Educational Settings. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315758831

Dikeç, Mustafa. 2015. Space, Politics and Aesthetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748685974.001.0001

Dingwall, Robert. 2001. “Notes Toward an Intellectual History of Symbolic Interactionism.” Symbolic Interaction 24(2):237-242.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2001.24.2.237

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).
Google Scholar

Drew, Paul and Anthony Wootton. 1988. Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Edensor, Tim. 2006. “Performing Rurality.” Pp. 484-495 in Handbook of Rural Studies, edited by P. Cloke, T. Marsden, and P. Mooney. London: Sage.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608016.n35

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.
Google Scholar

Giddens, Anthony and Paul Sutton. 2009. Sociology, 6th ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Google Scholar

Goffman, Erving. 1983. “The Interaction Order.”American Sociological Review 48(1):1-17.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2095141

Halfacree, Keith and Maria Rivera. 2012. “Moving to the Countryside... and Staying: Lives Beyond Representations.” Sociologia Ruralis 52(1):92-114.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2011.00556.x

Hammersley, Martyn. 1989. The Dilemma of Qualitative Method: Herbert Blumer and the Chicago School. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Hammersley, Martyn. 1992. What’s Wrong with Ethnography?Methodological Explorations. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396(2012)0000038010

Hammersley, Martyn and Paul Atkinson. 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1042-319220140000013002

Hargreaves, David. 1967. Social Relations in a Secondary School. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Hart, Simon. 2017. “Opinion.” The Field, April, p.7.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-210X(01)80021-8

Hillyard, Sam. 2003. “An Exploration of Theory Method Dialectic in Ethnography.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, Warwick University, Coventry.
Google Scholar

Hillyard, Sam. 2007. The Sociology of Rural Life. Oxford: Berg.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_390771

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2010.503688

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2011.636967

Hillyard, Sam. 2015. “Rural Putsch: Power, Class, Social Relations and Change in the English Rural Village.” Sociological Research Online 20(1):5.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3556

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.964569

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511428753

Hunter, James et al. 2013. 432:50:Towards a Comprehensive Land Reform Agenda for Scotland. London: The Commons Scottish Affairs Committee. Briefing paper.
Google Scholar

Lacey, Colin. 1971. Hightown Grammar: The School as a Social System. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Google Scholar

Lambart, A. M. 1970. The Sociology of an Unstreamed Urban Grammar School for Girls. MA Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Manchester.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/hta2160

Newby, Howard. 1977. The Deferential Worker: A Study of Farm Workers in East Anglia. London: Allen Lane.
Google Scholar

Newby, Howard. 1980. Green and Pleasant Land: Social Change in Rural Britain. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570801940731

Pole, Christopher J. and Sam H. Hillyard. 2016. Doing Fieldwork. London: Sage.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473966383

Rojek, Chris. 2007. Brit-Myth: Who Do the British Think They Are? London: Reaktion.
Google Scholar

Stronach, Ian and Maggie MacLure. 1997. Educational Research Undone: The Postmodern Embrace. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1042-3192(2010)0000011008

Thomas, William I. and Dorothy S. Thomas. 1927. The Child in America. New York: Knopf.
Google Scholar

Thrift, Nigel. 2005. Knowing Capitalism. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Thrift, Nigel. 2012. “The Insubstantial Pageant: Producing an Untoward Land.” Cultural Geographies 19(2):141-168.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474011427268

Uprichard, Emma. 2013. “Focus: Big Data, Little Questions?” Discover Society 1 (unpaginated).
Google Scholar

West, Candace. 1984. “When the Doctor Is a ‘Lady’: Power, Status and Gender in Physician-Patient Encounters.”Symbolic Interaction 7(1):87-106.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1984.7.1.87

West, Candace and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender and Society 1(2):125-151.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002

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.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570801940756

Wolcott, Harry F. 2003.The Man in the Principal’s Office: An Ethnography. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
Google Scholar