Article
Article name Ethnicality as Self-Presentation: Experience of Application of Erving Goffman’s Methodology to Analysis of Ethnic Relations in Modern Urban Environment
Authors Chistanov M.N. Doctor of Philosophy, Associate Professor, maratc@mail.ru
Bibliographic description Chistanov M. N. Ethnicality as Self-Presentation: Experience of Application of Erving Goffman’s Methodology to Analysis of Ethnic Relations in Modern Urban Environment // Humanitarian Vector. 2020. Vol. 15, No. 4. PP. 75–81. DOI: 10.21209/1996-7853-2020-15-4-75-81.
Section AXIOLOGY OF CULTURE
UDK 130.2+ 316.334.56+ 394.014
DOI 10.21209/1996-7853-2020-15-4-75-81
Article type
Annotation The globalization processes of our time seem to lead to the erosion of ethnic boundaries and the prevalence of cosmopolitan identity. However, ethnic identification and self-identification remain one important parameter that determines the human being’s own value and place in life. The author thinks that in post-industrial society ethnic boundaries are more of a mental nature. Erving Goffman’s frame methodology is used to analyze ethnic processes. Intra-ethnic and inter-ethnic relationships within this approach are interpreted as specific frame interactions. The loss of ethnic identity becomes an indicator of the loss of an important part of our own personality, an indicator that we cease to be ourselves, an indication of own insignificance. But today the way of urban life, education, professional activities, and the household acquire standardized forms. Therefore, the realization of our needs for ethnic identification is further moving away from ethnographic grounds and is increasingly taking the form of the execution of some standard scenarios.Obviously, external, visual forms are the easiest to stage interpretation and ritualization. Visual markers of our own ethnicity (language, clothing, accessories, cuisine, etc.) in our minds are idealized and absolutized, they become necessary elements of self-identity. Any person, who attacks sacred entities in reality, or in perception of this reality, automatically becomes an enemy or renegade. According to the author, the identification of a set of standard scenarios of ethnic behavior and their integration into social interactions will explain and resolve existing ethnic conflicts and minimize the possibility of their occurrence in the future.
Key words post-industrial urbanism, ethnourbanistic, ethnocultural identity, cultural landscape, “new ethnicity”, markers of ethnicity
Article information
References 1. Aksyutin, Yu. M. Transformation of personal identity structure in the regions of post-Soviet Russia and its impact on interethnic relations: the cases of the republics of Tuva, Khakassia and Altai. The new research of Tuva, no. 2, pp. 162–174, 2016. (In Rus.) 2. Anzhiganova, L. V., Topoeva, M. V. Khakasses under the conditions of globalization: mental deformations. The New Research of Tuva, no. 3, pp. 100–111, 2017. DOI: http://doi.org/10.25178/nit.2017.3.6. (In Rus.) 3. Goffman, Erving. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. M: ISRAS, 2004. (In Rus.) 4. Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Moscow: Canon Press, 2000. (In Rus.) 5. Gromov, D. V. Ethnic youth studies: Is Interdisciplinary Always Justified? Interdisciplinarity phenomenon in Russian Ethnology. M: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS, 2016: 397–404. (In Rus.) 6. Simmel, Georg. The Metropolis and Mental Life. Logos, no. 3, pp. 1–12, 2002. (In Rus.) 7. Kudashkin, V. A., Ivanchenko, E. V. Role of national intelligentsia in preserving the ethnic identity among small indigenous peoples of the Russian North and Siberia in 1985–2011. Economic Development of Siberia, no. 1, pp. 109–113, 2016. (In Rus.) 8. Said, Ed. W. Orientalism. Saint Petersburg: Russian world, 2016. (In Rus.) 9. Topoeva, M. V. Ethnical Fashion: Theoretical Aspects of Research. Vestnik of the Khakass State University, no. 25, pp. 121–124, 2018. (In Rus.) 10. Fernández, Iraide Aragón; Khogyani, Farid Bassina; Shershneva, Julia. Residential Segregation of the Foreign Population: the Case of Bilbao. Urban Studies and Practices, no. 1, pp. 64–84, 2017. https://doi.org/10.17323/usp21201764–84. (In Rus.) 11. Khamidulin, V. S., Theoretical perspectives in immigrant incorporation research. Humanities Research in the Russian Far East, no. 1, pp. 49–60, 2016. (In Rus.) 12. Holler, E. V. Tourism: from commercial industry to systems research facility. In: Interdisciplinarity phenomenon in Russian Ethnology. M: Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS, 2016: 405–414. (In Rus.) 13. Chistanov, M. N., Chistanova, S. S. About Problem of Extracting ethnicality markers in the Posturbanism Paradigm. Vestnik of the Khakass State University, no. 1, pp. 109–113, 2020. (In Rus.) 14. Anzhiganova, L., Asochakova, V., Topoeva, M. Ethno-confessional neotraditionalism in a globalized world: Search for basis of identification. Revista de Humanidades, vol. 30, pp. 141–151, 2017. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5944/rdh.30.2017.18206. (In Engl.) 15. Chakrabarty, D. Provincializing Europe: postcolonial thought and historical difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000. (In Engl.) 16. Goffman, Erving. Relations in public: microstudies of the public order. New York: Basic Books, 1971. (In Engl.)
Full articleEthnicality as Self-Presentation: Experience of Application of Erving Goffman’s Methodology to Analysis of Ethnic Relations in Modern Urban Environment
0
7