BackStage

In response to Anomie’s question found in response to this post, and a discussion between Belle and I in the comments on her post here, I wanted to clarify how I am utilizing the term backstage. Basically, I’m going to offer a synopsis of Goffman from Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. So, for those that you have read this, skip to the last paragraph.

Goffman’s main concern is to explain what occurs when individuals “co-operate in staging a single routine” through teamwork (1959: 79). A team has special characteristics in that they rely upon one another not to disrupt the performance. Team members also have “the privilege of familiarity” in that team members cannot keep up all aspects of a front when not in the presence of the audience (ibid: 83). Furthermore, as all team members need to agree upon the same definition of the situation, the definition developed will necessarily be less complex and full (to gain more agreement) and, even so, dissent will often occur over the definition chosen. Finally, being in a team requires different roles (such as a director who can act to sanction members who are not upholding the agreed upon definition) and a more complex environment. For example, because of the increase in complexity there will be a need for an area where the team can practice their act, sanction members, and voice dissent. None of these activities can take place in the front because it may again strike an “off note key” (ibid: 52).

The need for a more complex environment introduces the concept of regions, which are “any place that is bounded to some degree by barriers to perception” (ibid: 106). There is a front region (front stage), the place where the actual performance occurs, and a back region (backstage), where planning occurs. Behaviors in these regions are constrained by the motivation of actors to maintain the definition of the situation. When in the front region (co-present with the audience), the team members need to comport themselves with politeness (how the team member treats the audience during interaction) and with decorum (how they act when in the “visual or aural range of the audience” but are not actually interacting with the audience (ibid: 107)). When in the back region (or backstage) the team members “knowingly contradict” the “impression fostered by the performance” (ibid: 112).

Although team members are more relaxed about impression management in the backstage, they are still concerned with maintaining a different definition of the situation. In this case, they are attempting to convince their team members that they are capable of upholding the definition of the situation while in the front region. At the same time, it is possible that front stage performance becomes so embedded within the individual that they will maintain front stage behavior when backstage. This is “the cycle of disbelief-to-belief” which acts to convince a person they are who they pretend to be (ibid: 20).

In general, I am utilizing the term backstage to refer to anywhere that we (I) are not actively trying to manage impressions. Or, at very least, are attempting to give others a more balanced view of who we believe we are (as, even in these “teams” you still try to manage some impressions, says Goffman). When you are on stage, you want someone to love you (or accept you as presented) for your perfection (in the role or act). When you are not, you want someone to love you for your perfection and how perfect your flaws are (says me, not Goffman). I do think that when we are in our backstages (and those others we let in with us), do get more glimpses into an unguarded self–what Goffman would call sincere. How true this unguarded self is, I do not know. I am truly caught by the idea that we may have a stage even for ourselves, and think that’s generally true. But, I also believe that even if this is the case, in general we have an idea of who we are (as erroneous as this maybe) and want to let certain others in to this (to some degree). This is the idea of the authentic self.