Vince Marotta

The hybrid self and the ambivalence of boundaries

The paper outlines the main features of the contemporary discourse on hybrid subjectivity, a discourse which is internally differentiated along ‘organic’, ‘intentional’, and critical social theory lines. It then examines how these discourses can be applied to our understanding of hybrid cultures and identities. The article focuses on two central claims underlying the intentional approach: one, that cultural boundaries are theoretically and empirically problematic; and secondly, that a hybrid position provides the potential for an enlightened and critical world-view. In response, two contentions are articulated that will provide a more nuanced understanding of the hybrid self. Drawing on the work of Simmel and Park, the paper, in contrast to the intentional account, highlights the ambivalence of boundaries; secondly, a critical investigation of the enlightened hybrid consciousness is offered which suggests that this new form of consciousness underplays the role of prejudice and ambivalence. As a result of these discussions, the article demonstrates that the discourse on hybrid identity raises key theoretical issues either ignored or insufficiently addressed by existing scholarship.

Intercultural Hermeneutics and the Cross-cultural Subject

The paper critically engages with contemporary theories of cross-cultural understanding and cross-cultural subjectivity found in the areas of intercultural hermeneutics, intercultural social theory and the discourse on the stranger. Drawing on Gadamerian hermeneutics the paper takes some preliminary steps in formulating an alternative conception of the in-between subject and cross-cultural interpretation that incorporates the ambivalence of boundaries, the enabling dimension of essentialism and acknowledges the role that fore-meanings and fore-structures have on cross-cultural understanding. In contrast to existing theories I conclude that the cross-cultural subject is situated within the intercultural encounter rather than dwelling above it.

Bauman, strangerhood and attitudes towards immigrants among the Australian population

Through an investigation of the idea of the stranger, this article seeks to blend theory with empirical research. It does this in three ways. First, it engages with a social theory of the stranger articulated in the work of Zygmunt Bauman. Second, it examines data from the Australian Election Study surveys between 1996 and 2007 in order to explore attitudinal changes towards groups of immigrants. The findings from this survey suggests that attitudes towards immigrants in general have fluctuated in Australia, despite the negative effects of economic globalization, the growth in neoliberal economic reforms and terrorist attacks in the West. Third, drawing on Baumans theory of the stranger we provide an interpretation of these fluctuating attitudes through the idea of the hybrid stranger. Finally, we argue that a more nuanced understanding of these attitudes towards immigrants in Australia is possible when a theory of the stranger is informed by a discussion on the constitution of host self, the influence of the media, the role of government policy, and the impact of class and geography.

The Stranger and Social Theory

The literature on ‘the stranger’ usually recognizes Simmel’s authority in formulating a sociology of strangerhood. Occasionally this literature provides a reformulation of the stranger through specific types of actors. For example, the Simmelian stranger has been the basis for Park’s ‘marginal man’ (1928), Wood’s (1934) and Schutz’s (1944) ‘the newcomer’, Siu’s ‘the sojourner’ (1952) and Stonequist’s notion of ‘the cosmopolitan individual’ or ‘the international mind’ (1937).1 Recent revisionist literature draws on, but moves beyond, the Simmelian stranger and its presuppositions. The category of the stranger has thus experienced a renaissance in contemporary social theory (Dessewffy, 1996; Harman, 1988; Stichweh, 1997; Tabboni, 1995). In particular, Zygmunt Bauman has been at the forefront in developing a social theory of strangerhood and his recent publications have contributed further to this intellectual project. In Work, Consumerism and the New Poor (1998a) and Globalization: The Human Consequences (1998b) Bauman is concerned with the constitution and treatment of the social and cultural Other in the west, especially those who have been excluded from an increasingly globalized and mass consumer society. Bulent Diken, in Strangers, Ambivalence and Social Theory (1998), draws on Bauman’s theory of strangerhood and its relationship to modernity and formulates an ‘ambivalent social theory’. In devising such an ambivalent social theory, Diken utilizes ethnographic data on Turkish immigrants in Denmark to reveal the exclusionary and oppressive practices latent in the public discourse of immigration. In their explication of the phenomenon of strangeness, Bauman and Diken highlight some of the recurrent themes in contemporary social theory: identity politics;

Civilisation, Culture and the Hybrid Self in the work of Robert Ezra Park

Contemporary discussions on hybridity in cultural and ethnic studies have overlooked the work of the Chicago sociologist Robert E. Park. Parks idea of the “marginal man” and his work on cultural and racial hybridity can shed further light on the construction and representation of the hybrid self. The contribution that Park has made to a social theory of hybridity has been overshadowed by research conducted within post-colonial and cultural studies. I do not suggest that recent conceptualisations of hybridity are inadequate; rather that Park has something to contribute to contemporary accounts and in some cases anticipates some of the themes and issues surrounding the concept of hybridity. The following examination connects Parks work on hybridity with ideas such as civilisation, culture and modernity and argues that a mild form of primitivism underlines his notion of the “marginal man”.

Multicultural and Multiethnic Cities in Australia

Discourse among the media and general public has associated the term ‘multicultural’ with multiculturalism; however, Tiryakian (2003, p. 22) argues that the two should be seen as analytically distinct but empirically complementary. In its demographic-descriptive meaning, the term multicultural refers to cultural or ethnic diversity or the coexistence of different cultural groups within a particular locality; in this sense it represents heterogeneity over homogeneity. This descriptive approach, adopted by governments and public officials in Australia, describes those spaces shared by a variety of groups as ‘multicultural’. I want to confine this particular construction of multicultural to the category of ‘multiethnic’. On the other hand, the word ‘multiculturalism’ alludes to a normative category and refers to philosophical arguments regarding the legitimacy of claims surrounding the recognition of particular identity groups. The normative view accepts that pluralism and diversity are good in themselves and assumes that all difference should be valued and given a voice in the public realm. This version of multiculturalism has been evident in the United States, but has come under increasing attack by neo-conservatives. In its programmatic-political dimension, couched in liberal terms in Australia, multiculturalism pertains to policies designed to respond to the problems posed by diversity. Advocates of such policies believe that they foster toleration and equal opportunity. Another category entails an attitude towards the cultural ‘other’ and refers to an inter-subjective mode of being. The typology constructed here is based on a continuum consisting of monocultural, multiethnic, multiculturalism, and multicultural and will be used to interpret a citys relationship to its diverse population. This typology also raises some interesting questions. How many different cultural groups need to exist within a designated urban space before a city can legitimately or authentically represent itself as ‘multicultural’? Can one judge to what extent a city is multicultural based on the type of social interaction that exists among culturally-diverse groups? If multiculturalism extends beyond a demographic phenomenon, then it is possible to distinguish multiethnic cities from multicultural cities. These questions and issues can also shed light on the politics of representation.

New Online Ethnicities and the Politics of Representation

The paper interrogates the literature on online cultural and religious identities through a critical engagement of Stuart Halls work on new ethnicity and regimes of representation. It suggests that this literature conflates Halls notion of ‘new ethnicity’ with one that argues that online cultural and religious identities are ‘new’ because of transnational and global processes, the pervasiveness of computer-mediated communication and the global mobility of immigrants. Thus, current research on online ethnic and religious identities underestimates the complexity of Halls concept and to highlight this complexity we ponder the extent to which new online ethnicities – as expressed in the current literature – reflect, construct or renegotiate so-called offline ethnicities. The paper concludes that online ethnic subjectivities, while providing alternative representations to counteract the dominant racist discourse within host societies, still reflect mimic essentialist voices.

Theories of Strangers: Introduction

This special issue on theories of strangers demonstrates the different conceptual and theoretical approaches underlying the category of the stranger. It attempts to provide a systematic and rigorous approach that has been absent in the social sciences. As some of the papers in this volume illustrate, the stranger signifies both a figure and a social and spatial relation; it represents both an internal and external other, and it overlaps but is sometimes distinct from other categories such as marginality and otherness. These nuances suggest that the idea of the stranger and the theoretical approaches underlying it are multidimensional and multi-layered. The sociological discourse on the stranger adds to this complexity. This approach has a long history in sociology from its origin at the turn of the twentieth century in the work of Simmel to more recent accounts of how the stranger can shed light on social interaction in cyberspace (Feldman 2012). The sociological stranger has come to be associated with those who do not belong to the ‘established group’; in its more radical manifestation this ‘established’ group usually consists of Western, white males. The stranger in this case is the racial and cultural other who is excluded and marginalised from this ‘in-group’ or ‘host society’. The sociological literature on ‘the stranger’ usually recognises Simmel’s authority and many of the papers in this issue continue this tradition. Another central figure in formulating a theory of the stranger is Alfred Schutz. He adopts a phenomenological lens to grasp the experiences of the stranger in the mundane sphere of everyday life. The stranger, for Schutz, is the cultural other who attempts to assimilate into the host group; however, strangers find it difficult to assimilate because they do not share the taken-for-granted basic assumptions or world-view of host members. As a consequence, the stranger ‘becomes essentially the man who has to place in question nearly everything that seems to be unquestionable to members of the approached group’ (Schutz 1944: 502). As a result of this discrepancy a hermeneutical problem arises where ‘the stranger cannot assume that his interpretation of the new cultural pattern coincides with that current with the members of the in-group’ (Schutz 1944: 504). This places the stranger in a position in which the cultural and language code of the host is inaccessible to the newcomer. For Schutz, the problem of the stranger needs to be approached in terms of the ‘constitutive phenomenology of the natural attitude’ (Nasu 2006: 388). While members can be said to be in the ‘natural attitude’, in the sense that they do not

Georg Simmel, the stranger and the sociology of knowledge

The Simmelian stranger has been extensively studied and critiqued. This paper suggests that although this body of literature has contributed to a conceptual refinement of the category, its analysis confines itself to Simmels seminal essay on the stranger. A broader and deeper analysis of Simmels stranger is possible when we contextualise it within Simmels broader intellectual project and link it to his conception of historical knowledge, his reflections on the third element, the cosmopolitan aesthetic sensibility and the genius. It is suggested that the affinities between the stranger and other ideas within his work allow us to ponder the contribution that Simmel can make to the debate on standpoint epistemologies.

Is the Virtual Ethnic Subject Real

Globalisation, in its various manifestations, has contributed to the pervasiveness of new information and communication technologies and these have changed our understanding of what constitutes human interaction in everyday life. Online forms of social interaction and communication have also led to a rethinking of traditional social science concepts such as community (Rheingold 1999, Driskell and Lyon 2002, Hornsby 2005), place (Meyrowitz 1985, Wellman 2001), social interaction, social bonds and cognitive experience (Cerulo 1997, 1998). The use of the Internet has also led some scholars to call for a re-theorising of the nature of boundaries and the notion of the stranger (Meyrowitz 1997), while others have argued that the prevalence of online social interaction has meant that we need to reconceptualise the notion of anonymity (Nissenbaum 1999, Kennedy 2006), identity and subjectivity (Castells 1996, Turkle 1997a, 1997b, Katelyn et al. 2002). This rethinking and retheorisation has been particularly evident in how meaning is constructed in the intersubjective online encounter. The work of symbolic interactionists such as Mead, Cooley and Goffman and their respective ideas of the I vs. Me, the Looking-Glass Self and the Presentation of Self have been pivotal in re-imagining the self/other relationship in cyberspace (Sannicolas 1997, Zhao 2005). Although the body and its visual cues have been important to how symbolic interactionism comprehends the construction of meaning in an intersubjective encounter (Swingewood 2000), the symbolic interactionist approach has been, until recently, confined to the interpretation and study of text-based computer-mediated communication (CMC). The enthusiasm over text-based CMC has been over how the body in the digital world has become obsolete in the presentation of the online self (Lupton 1996, Seoh 2007). This has been over-exaggerated in the CMC literature and rather than the body being transcended, its role in signifying, re-inscribing and reinforcing stereotypes has continued in cyberspace (Ajana 2005, Boler 2007: 140). The ideas of symbolic interactionists have now been extended to an analysis of visual CMC that occurs on social media sites such as MySpace and Facebook (Davis 2010, Gottschalk 2010, Mod 2010). In these sites, visual cues and thus the body become re-embodied in the online world. The use of webcams and the increasing popularity of Skype for online interaction has re-inscribed the body as a factor in online encounters and become a key factor in presentation of the digital self. The anonymity of the body has become difficult with the use of such new video technologies. A re-focusing of the