Goffman's Deference and Demeanor - a summary

Just a warning: this post is reallllllly really dull, and stupidly long for something thats only meant to be a summary. However, Alexandra will probably appreciate seeing what I'm planning on sticking in our presentation, so on the blog it goes :)

Goffman states in his article "The Nature of Deference and Demeanor" that human behaviour in social interactions is determined by what he calls Rules of Conduct. These rules guide our actions in almost every area of life, and are usually followed unthinkingly by actors in social interactions, only becoming apparent to us when we are, for some reason or other, prohibited or blocked from acting in accordance with them. These rules affect us both directly and indirectly. In the direct sense they create obligations for our own behaviour and actions, dictating how we should conduct ourselves, and in the indirect sense they give us expectations in regards to how others are morally obliged to act, both generally and in regard to ourselves.

Goffman writes that these rules of conduct fall into one of two categories: ‘substantive’ or ‘ceremonial’. Substantive rules determine actions that are significant in their own right, with only secondary concerns about the presentation of self for the actor. Ceremonial rules of conduct are primarily concerned with presentation of self, although the action/inaction itself is of little consequence – they are only relevant to expression of character.
It is through either following or not following these rules that we create a particular image of ourselves for others to perceive.

Problems ensue when these rules are broken. The impacts of such rule-breaking depends on the severity and persistence of such an infraction. They can range from general but short-term feelings of uneasiness among those who are involved in social interaction with the rule-breaker for a minor indiscretion, to institutionalisation for more persistent and severe rule-breakers. It was this second group of rule-breakers that became the focus of Goffmans study of social interaction within a mental institution. Here, Goffman found that the rules of conduct unthinkingly followed by the majority of citizens and interactants on the 'outside' became extremely obvious within the confines of a mental institution due to the frequency and severity with which they were broken.

In the article, Goffman claims that there are two kinds of acts that rules of conduct fall into: Deference acts and Demeanor acts. Deference acts are used to convey appreciation and respect, and establish or re-establish interpersonal relationships. Such acts demonstrate a sense of regard for the recipient of the act, as well as showing that the actor has made a positive assessment of the recipient.

Avoidance rituals (a form of Deference act) specify what is not to be done, and convey appreciation of the recipient by respecting their personal space and privacy (what Simmel refers to as the 'ideal sphere'). This personal space need not just be physical, but can also be emotional space (an individuals need to keep certain thoughts or feelings to themselves and not be pressured into sharing them) and can even refer to more abstract 'space', such as avoidance of the use of the first name of superiors. The other form of Deference acts, Presentational rituals, specify what should be done and how recipients should be treated in an interactions. For example in terms of greetings, presentational rituals would dictate that an actor might hug a close relative, shake the hand of their boss, or perhaps bow/curtsey to a monarch.

Avoidance rituals and Presentational rituals may sometimes come into conflict with each other, leaving the actor unsure of which action to pursue. For example, an inquiry about an individual’s well-being may be seen as a friendly greeting, but may also be seen as an invasion of privacy and an unwelcome level of concern or intrigue. Usually this depends on the relationship between actor and recipient, the status differences between them, and the context of the recipient’s current life.

Demeanor refers to ceremonial behaviour conveyed by appearance, how an individual carries themself (i.e are they stooped or do they stand tall and straight),  and the nature of their movements, their self-control, and many other forms of outwardly visible presentation. Individuals can construct their own demeanor depending on how they wish to be viewed by others. However an individual can only construct part of the way they are viewed by others through demeanor, and to a certrain extent has to rely on the way others interpret them to complete their portrait of 'self''; that is to say that Demeanor is subjective, and cannot be self-avowed.

There is a certain amount of crossover and conflict between deference and demeanor. To carry out many acts of deference an actor must also convey an image of themself through their demeanor. This is particularly relevant if an act of deference involves a physical or speech component, where unintentional clumsiness or stuttering can directly conflict with the actors intended presentation, and grace and assuredness can compliment it. 

Acts of deference and demeanor often differ across cultures, and these differences can sometimes result in the opposite effect to the intended one in terms of the type of self displayed. For example, in Chinese culture a host will defer to their guests by offering things to show how welcome they are and it is expected that the guest will refuse several times to show through their demeanor that they are not greedy or presumptuous, before eventually accepting the offer. However if the guest were, for example, British, and did not know of Chinese customs, they would be likely to accept an offer of, for example, food or drink, the first time. In the guests culture they would be showing through their demeanor that they are appreciative of the hosts hospitality, however the host may see the guest as being over-eager and greedy.