​Why Like?

During the second and third session of “Qualitative Thinking”, Dr. Geraldine Horan focused on the role of language in the perception of reality and its relationship with ideologies. According to her, language is at the basis of human distinction since it constitutes a form of human communication that allows individuals to describe the world that surrounds them, express their ideas and emotions and thus relate to others.  Blommaert described language as being “a specific set of symbolic representations- discourses, terms, arguments, images, stereotypes- serving a specific purpose” (2005: 158). However, as Saussure and Jacques Lacan argued, language is a form of social practice and thus acquires meaning only when considered in relation to the social structure as a whole. The notion of discourse is of particular importance, underlying a “system of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, and courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak” (Foucault). These two notions made us consider Facebook profile pictures as a form of visual discourse, through which users communicate their identities within the online space. However, it is also implied that Facebook profile pictures only gain significance in their social context, since the latter determines the properties of this visual discourse and thus shapes the identities that are being presented.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thus, these two implications set the bases of our directive guidelines on the subject of our digital object. Indeed, when thinking about a Facebook profile picture, one thinks of self-presentation, since that image is seen as the representation of the user’s identity.  Dan Mc Adams (1988) and Anthony Giddens (2008) argued that identity is “self-made” through the construction of “biographical narratives” or “life-stories”. This implies that the narration of our past contributes to confirm our current identity through the integration of life events into an “ongoing biography”. This theory seemed of particular relevance for our topic since the process of constructing one’s identity in Facebook is largely done through the use of pictures which give an account for the user’s history. It is curious to notice that it is indeed possible to go through the “biographical line” of a Facebook user and see the different things they have done throughout the years. In this sense, it would seem that the continual uploading of Facebook images contributes to narrate the life of an individual and then construct its identity.  However, the fact that, individuals carefully select and edit pictures, particularly their Facebook profile picture lead us to think that Facebook biography represents only a subjective and fragmented “life-story” and that the identity portrayed is much more self-constructed and self-controlled than in the physical world. Such a thought made us question the factors and mechanisms that influenced a particular choice of picture.

 

Numerous authors, such as Kathryin Woodward and Stuart Hall (1997) argue that identities are constructed through a process of representation and exhibition of various symbols such as clothing or language, in which individuals interpret, produce and exchange meaning between members of a culture. However, what is important about their theory is that through this process of symbolic interaction relating individuals to a cultural group, one’s identity is intrinsically linked and shaped by cultural identities.  Thus, the construction of identity is not “fixed” but is on the contrary a continuous process of production and exchange between a person’s self-conception and the interaction and responses from the other members of a social group. As Stone defended, the construction of an identity is the result of a “coincidence of placements and announcements” between the individual’s “identity announcement” and the societies’ reception known as “identity placement” (1981: 188). If applied to our project, this theory would imply that the value and identity portrayed through Facebook profile pictures is intrinsically linked with the cultural identity of the user’s “friends”.  Thus, through a constant interaction and exchange of implicit visual values, Facebook users would portray an individual identity which is in return shaped by the social response. 

 

Following this line of thought, we came across Erving Goffman’s theory of identity as “social performance” (1959).  According to his theory of the self, “one cannot “perform” identity without an audience, as the individual is automatically influenced by the structures of society”. According to him, people perform different roles according to the audience and scenarios in which they are present (He makes the distinction between “front stage” scenarios in which the individual is publically exposed; and  “backstage” performances reserved to private spaces). This theory implies that individuals constantly seek to influence the audience through emphasizing on certain characteristics (such as speech, postures, hairstyle…), which implies that identity, rather than being pre-existing is established by performing in a given situation. As a result, identity is created through performance rather than performance being a result of identity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Smock’s definition of self-representation seems to back-up Goffman’s theory. For him, self-representation is a “set of processes employed by people, for the purpose of convincing others that they are a particular type of person or have specific characteristics” (2010:8).  These theories have important implications since they infer that individuals are actors who voluntarily portray identities according to the social public that is viewing them. However, it is not to be misled and think that individuals are above the “social rules” of performance. On the contrary, Goffman points out that the shape of the performance is “socially molded” in order to “fit into the understanding and expectations of the society in which it is presented”(p. 35). This means that (i) individuals incorporate social values which are adapted in their performance, (ii) they are likely to accentuate traits that are in line with society’s expectations, and (iii) they modify their identities depending on these social values and on the social audience they are performing in. Thus, Facebook users would use their profile picture as a mean to convince their audience of their “real” identity but at the same time the choice of their profile picture would reflect an image that is “socially valued”. However, the fact that Facebook presents both “front and back stage” environments, seem to suggest that the construction of identity in Facebook is more complex than one had initially thought.