Unit 10 - Symbolic Interaction Perspectives

Introduction

Linking SI [symbolic interaction] concepts of ambivalence, symbolic ambiguity and negotiation, we have worked to develop a theory of fashion that synthesizes macro- and micro-level processes. In short, we are proposing that ambivalence is an integral human condition that finds an outlet in the capItalist marketplace, in the form of appearance-modifying commodities.
--- Susan B. Kaiser, Richard H. Nagasawa, and Sandra S. Hutton, 1995.

Unit 10 will examine the content and construction of an SI (symbolic interaction) theory of fashion. Before continuing with this section of the course, you should complete the readings and questions for Units 1-9.

To get us started, let's first explore the basic premises of Symbolic Interaction Theory. In general, Symbolic Interaction Theory, describes the dynamic process by which individuals create, assess, and revise their actions in terms of the objects and individuals they encounter in their environment and in terms of their own assessments of themselves. Sociologist, George Mead (1934) in his book Mind, self, and society, outlined the following propositions associated with Symbolic Interaction Theory:

1. Human behavior and interaction are carried on through the medium of symbols and their meanings.
2. The individual becomes humanized through interactions with other persons.
3. Human society is most usefully conceived as consisting of people in interaction.
4. Humans are active in shaping their own behavior.
5. Consiousness or thinking involves interaction with oneself.
6. Human beings construct their behavior in the course of its execution.
7. An understanding of human conduct requires study of covert behavior.

Although most symbols are communicated verbally, some are transmitted through sight (e.g., gestures, motions), objects, and smell.

Fashion objects carry symbolic meaning to the observer. These symbolic meanings are socially constructed and communicated through social interaction.

In 1980, Turner and Holman (Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 610-614) noted that the Symbolic Interactionist approach to human behavior is based on six propositions:

1. Humans are planning animals continuously formulating alternative courses or plans of actions for themselves.
2. "Things" in the environment take on meaning in relation to their implications for individuals' plans.
3. The execution of plans is contingent upon the meaning of waht is encountered.
4. Before carrying out plans, individuals must identify and determine the meaning for waht is in the environment.
5. For social plans of action, there mus tbe consensus about the meaning of objects and other people among those interacting.
6. The basic and most important "thing" to be identified in the situation is the individual him/herself.

The three articles included in this unit apply the basic premises and propositions of Symbolic Interaction to further our understanding of the fashion process. These articles describe not only the SI Theory of Fashion, but also how the theory was developed. Thus, these articles provide a unique opportunity for us to gain insight into theory development as well as premises that form the theory itself.

In 1991, the International Textile and Apparel Association sponsored a post-conference workshop on fashion theory where Susan Kaiser, Richard Nagasawa, and Sandra Hutton presented their Construction of a Symbolic Interactionism (SI) Theory of Fashion. As part of this conference several individuals were invited to provide responses to the theory from a variety of perspectives. Versions of these reaction papers were later published in the Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. You will find these reaction papers to be a useful addition to your understanding of the SI Theory of Fashion.

Reaction papers to the SI Theory of Fashion

The macro-micro interface in the construction of individual fashion forms and meanings

Hamilton, J. (1997). The macro-micro interface in the construction of individual fashion forms and meanings. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15 (3), 164-171.

The role of the fashion system in fashion change

Kean, R. C. (1997). A response to the Kaiser, Nagasawa and Hutton model: The role of the fashion system in fashion change. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15 (3), 172-177.

Fashioning theory: A critical discussion of the symbolic interactionist theory of fashion

Pannabecker, R. K. (1997). Fashioning theory: A critical discussion of the symbolic interactionist theory of fashion. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15 (3), 178-183.

Truth, knowledge, and new clothes: Responses to Hamilton, Kean, and Pannabecker

Kaiser, S. B., Nagasawa, R. H., Hutton, S. S. (1997). Truth, knowledge, and new clothes: Responses to Hamilton, Kean, and Pannabecker. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15 (3), 184-191.