Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Federica]

Are you attracted to Gergen's suggestion that we should deliberately play more roles (or wear more masks) in order to combat the burdensome and restrictive 'code of coherence' to which we are each subject?

[Bubu]

Gergen's argument suggesting that wearing masks and playing different roles to become a healthier person is somehow liberating to hear. We are all taught to act a certain way, dress a certain way and stay the same or else we are considered "problematic" or even "bipolar". However the article's title "The Healthy, Happy Human Being Wears Many Masks" is a convincing start to arguing that having many masks is being happy. He states on page 139 "we should not be anxious, depressed or disgusted when we find a multitude of interests, potentials and selves" arguing that it is normal and healthy to somehow consider ourselves a puzzle and each piece a different side of ourselves that doesn't change us but instead comes together to form the final puzzle. Gergen argues that having these different pieces allows us to experience new experiences and understand ourselves in ways that we did not know existed and ultimately realize our potential in the world.

[Molly Ko]

I think instead of suggesting we as human 'should play on different roles or put on different masks', I belief that every human being somehow carries different potential selves in them, which are capable of being revealed in different social settings and are distinct to different groups of people. However, these masks may not be apparent. One who is constantly changing masks as well as personal identity may not be aware that the behaviors and social status of people around them might boost the potential of self-change. For instance, in a company, a manager would act strictly, professional, and practices his leadership personality more firmly in order to control the well-going of the company. However, at home, the manager might act totally the opposite side as a soft, obeying and loving husband to his wife. Different settings and different person whom he cares changes his masks markedly. Hence, we are not only putting on masks, but we are becoming the mask, making the mask becomes our reality, our potential identities. However, it is also important to have a unified sense of self according to Gergen. Lacking a firm sense of self would lead to crisis of identity, being unable to develop and maintain a strong  and integrated personal identity. This would make people having difficulties to recognize and predict his actions.

[HSB]

I believe that we shift our masks in order to adapt to the situation that we are in. The shift in masks does not always necessarily need to be conscious. Sometimes the masks are shifted unconsciously, an individual can shift their mask to conform to what society expects of them. For example, in a job interview an individual behaves in a certain way in order to impress their interviewer. This is an active decision that we are consciously aware of. However, I do believe that the shift in masks is not always a conscious decision; we have multiple masks which are displayed around particular individuals.

[09071540]

"we should not be anxious, depressed or disgusted when we find a multitude of interests, potentials and selves" arguing that it is normal and healthy to somehow consider ourselves a puzzle and each piece a different side of ourselves that doesn't change us but instead comes together to form the final puzzle. Gergen argues that having these different pieces allows us to experience new experiences and understand ourselves in ways that we did not know existed and ultimately realize our potential in the world.

Bubu, from experience I can say that I completely agree with you. It is so life-giving to be able to discover and embrace different faces of our identity as we journey through life and realise different interests, potentials and selves that we inhabit.

Nevertheless, addressing Federica's opening question, I would not go to the extreme of saying that we must consciously rebel against the masks we have to try out different masks and identities because I believe that we naturally and unconsciously shift masks depending on the context we find ourselves in. If we choose to just wear a different mask for fun, we're going against the grain of our souls. As is seen in the case of gays and lesbians, they are wearing that "counter-cultural" mask not because they are forcing themselves to do so, to be "counter-cultural" and different, but because wearing the mask goes with the grain of their souls, making it believable to them and causing them to interiorise that mask as it complements their being.

More likely is that gays and lesbians who feel outcast will,

deliberately ... combat the burdensome and restrictive 'code of coherence' to which we are each subject

by wearing a heterosexual mask, because they feel that they must adhere to that "normal" and accepted 'code of coherence'.

[jaffacake]

 The notion of defining 'an individual as being made up of soft plastic and diffirent environments as the molding agent' is rather intriguing! However, having said that, the characteristics of the individual also comes into question. Some of us are more adaptive than others; as in some might be more flexible and versatile whilst others being more rigid and stiff, concerning donning different masks.

 Even though, to an extent, we do play various roles in different environments and settings. For instance, a prison warden may act more benevolently around his home, rather than at work in a prison. He may be more jovial at his local pub with his mates, in contrary to setting out rules for new inmates at the prison, where he works. All of us don masks from time to time, which reminds me of the film, "Mask", starring Jim Carrey. We all reflect on the masks we choose to don to an extent, whilst preserving certain qualities that make us who we are...and in doing so, it does not make us fake, rather distinguishes us from others in defining how we are in different environments, and in the process further outlining the characteristics that we all possess.

 As I am writing, at this very instant, I have chosen a particular manner of writing and somewhat articulate way of expressing myself, in getting the point across. In an informal email to a mate, I would not have chosen this particular way to express myself, rather it would have been full of contractions, colloquial expressions and an array of political incorrectness among other qualities. However, I would still be me albeit the variations in syntax and vocabulary...
 

[scary fairy]

I totally disagree with Gegern's theory as the research I have done for my dissertation has shown that we need a certain level of coherency, especially in uncertain periods in our lives. Holstein and Gubrium (2000) argue that the narrated self, otherwise known as our internal dialogue, needs coherence to find meaning in the otherwise isolated experiences in life. Goya (2007) goes as far as saying that by externalising this narrative by use of diaries or blogs we can strengthen and maintain our life narratives, she describes this technique as therapeutic and of particular need during transition periods of our lives. This completely goes against Gergen's theory of complete spontaneity.

Additionally, research shows that people with various mental illnesses need a highly structured way of living; something to get up for in the morning, something to keep an individual busy and distracted from detrimental thoughts and something to feel satisfied with at the end of the day. Especially during times of crisis, monotonous routine can mean the difference between life and death - LITERALLY!!

[confused.com]

Gergen suggests within his argument that an individual seeks approval from their peers, or the people around them for the multiple personalities that they portray. (P138) I am in two minds as to whether i agree with this comment- as if we are to assume that this is true, we are readily accepting that we as humans have multiple personalities.

Although i agree that you do display different 'sides' of your personality towards different people (you may speak differently to your mum, than with your friends or boyfriends)- i struggle to find agreement with the idea that this is a completely different identity.

McLuhan (1967) similarly suggests that identities are lost through technology, which is something i may be more inclined to agree with. Technology enables people to distance themselves to an extend where people may purposely take on completely different identities to the point whereby they may lie about who they are to get closer to other people.

[georgiea]

I feel one is able to be different without change who they are. Everyone wears different masks, one plays up to the social situation one is confronted with. This I think links back to Bulter's theory of gender being performative. We not only wear different masks but we also perform in different situations. The people we surround ourself inspsire change in ourselves. We are constently changing and developing ourselves. These different masks change with us. I think one can also link this back to cultivated subject, and looking at ourselves as a project and bettering ourselves.

[mouse90]

Reading many of the above posts it seems a as though there is a shared consensus about the mask and what it means for our identity.
 I believe the wearing of different masks simply comes into play due to this fixed expectations of how people should behave in society. We therefore adapt ourselves or wear certain masks to fit certain situations in order to be seen as ‘normal’, to ‘conform’ and to gain approval of others e.g. in the work place, in an interview, with family and with friends. If a person considered themselves funny for example, it would be inappropriate to start cracking jokes at a funeral. 
The mask you decide to wear consciously/unconsciously at any moment do not however define you or change your inner core; you still have the same personality traits, only you learn when it is appropriate to show them.  Like ‘Gerorgeia’ says, it is similar to performativity which is discussed in the gender reading; you perform these masks in accordance of your ‘audience’ or social setting.
I also agree with Gergen in suggesting that we should not be restricted to a certain code of coherence:
 ‘If a man can see himself only as powerful, he will feel pain in moments of weakness. If a woman thinks of herself as active and lively, moments of quiet will be unbearable; if we define ourselves as weak and compliment we will cringe ineptly when we are challenged to lead.’
 It is therefore important to have various aspects of the self as it helps us gain new experiences understand ourselves and realize our potential.

[maryjane]

In today's society we are expected to act a certain way, dress a certain way etc in order to be accepted by others. I agree with Gregen's argument that wearing masks and playing with different roles and identities can aware you as a person. However even though we know how to act and being fully aware of what roles that are acceptable or not in a certain situation we also subconsciously shift between our masks. This is because of the awareness one individual has about our society. No one would want to be judged or humiliated in front of other people therefore we put on our masks in order to be accepted and defined as 'normal'

[dietcokeaddict91]

I'm in two minds into what my thoughts are with Gergen's theory. Although I feel a bit of a sheep to admit it, I do believe he is correct in stating that the individual seeks approval from their peers of the people around them and this is what helps shape their different personalities/masks. When I am around different friends I act in different ways, and I know how to act within these different social groups. Many people do seek approval from their peers, this is not necessarily a negative thing, as long as the individual does not adapt their identity too much. But saying this, I do believe that my personality is mainly still the same, I just adapt certain aspects of myself to suit different groups.

[media2011]

When reading Gergen’s work (1972, 1991 and 2009) I found it interesting the ways in which Goffman’s ideas about the representation of the self are similar. Goffman has a dramaturgical approach to identity, in which he principally views social interaction as a theatrical performance.
Gergen (2009: 91) summarises Goffman’s approach, ‘… it paints a picture of social life as a stage, where we all perform for each other, knowing at the same time that what we seem is never quite who we are”. Gergen in a sense believes Goffman is implying we are con artists trying to con others into believing we are who we present ourselves to be.
I identify similarities between both theorists, as they are both concerned with the everyday performance of life. Goffman believes we are all actors on a giant stage acting out different roles accordingly and we change behaviour depending on who is watching us. Similarly Gergen believes we wear different masks/perform different personalities around different people.
I like dietcokeaddict91’s idea that we don’t change our identity altogether, but rather we change and adapt parts of our personality to suit our environment.

[star21]

There seems to be a general consensus that whilst we do not ‘deliberately play more roles’ we alter ourselves in terms of specific situations. I believe the ways in which we behave in certain instances have been learnt from a young age whereby we incorporate information (of what is ‘socially acceptable’) from varying environments into everyday life. What is interesting is the phrase ‘being yourself’ because what is ‘yourself’? An individual is made up of so many different identities or as Gergen would term ‘masks’. If anything, ‘the self’ can be argued to be a mere illusion, something that we create in our mind and is a product of our identification with experience in each moment.

[iglu]

The idea of adapting to ones environment seems quite natural to me. If I go on holiday to a climate that is considerably hotter than what I am use to, then I adapt, whether I am conscious of the fact or not. In like manner when I enter different social environments a similar process takes place. Not to take part in the process, I feel, goes against our natural instinct. Do I adorn masks of identity? Most definitely. However am I always aware of the masks I adorn? No. Many of the masks are cultural reflexes, mental programmes inculcated over the course of my life, and whilst they are reflexive it does not necessarily mean they are conducive to social interaction.

Problems of coherence are a further cause for concern, not only in relation to my self but also in relation to other. Furthermore I think Gergen is too concern with the influence of social circumstances on an individual and with all respect over looks an individuals autonomy.