Thursday, February 22, 2007

Thoughts on Social Construction - Reading Takaki

In “A Different Mirror,” Ronald Takaki explores how America, with its multicultural roots, has come to be represented through a Eurocentric view of history. Ronald discusses many significant ways in which this happens – one of them is the concept of social construction. The object of this essay is to discuss how social construction functions through examining its various aspects, discussing different social constructs, and evaluating effects of these constructs.

First we must examine into how social construction works, the means by which we are situated within it, and the pitfalls of this social construction, this will be followed by a discussion about the social construction of race and gender and examining the way it works so we can better understand the social constructions of different aspects of our reality.

Each detail that a person takes in is processed through analogical interpretation, an interpretation driven through simile. These similes, needing association, are fueled by other experiences, which help create meaning for the individual taking in these details. This is the basic way in which we create meaning of the world.However, the meaning that we create “for ourselves” is always imbued with other experience and interpretations that are not wholly ours, if at all. Our perceived reality is one that is socially constructed, created by many. This doesn’t mean, of course, that people have prenatal implantations of experiences and interpretations, but that during our tutelage as humans (being raised in whatever epoch in which were brought into this world) we absorb experience and understanding without prejudice, free of filters and open to those impressive experiences.

For this reason we often do not think of “why” certain things are (and definitely why they should not be) because they just “are.” Our experiences, and therefore the ways in which we create meaning, are formed before we are fully self aware in a way in which we can discriminate between the experiences. We can understand the experiences that we took in as constructed externally from us and fed to us as truth. This pre-packaged understanding which we are fed prescribes before being confronted with the experience and, for better or worse, creates meaning and understanding out of new experience for those whom have been immersed in that culture. Therefore, the general consensus of whatever culture you are born into is typically the architect of your reality, and not you yourself.As individuals, we do not control our experiences and therefore are subject to the formative experiences which shape our reality; we are merely unwitting participants in whatever culture that we find ourselves in. We are, as Heidegger put it, “thrown” into life and with it we are assigned certain rules and regulations, beliefs, and have expectations thrust upon us that we have no choice but to oblige by. Usually, the world comes to us “fully known” from the understandings we have taken in, creating the answers to decisions before they appear. Social construction is the process under which participants in that society, that culture, formulate the understood interpretations.We all have perspectives that are unfounded. Our “reality” is constructed socially, not necessarily truthfully. We often hold beliefs in things that we have no factual evidence to support, and if questioned probably do not know why we have these beliefs. Social construction imbues us with a set of values, a set of understandings that we can utilize to help make sense of the world; social normalizations help us group together and create bonds between members of that culture. Understandings and values are important in helping us make sense, but when these understandings and values are not available for questioning the consequences can be horrific.

It usually takes hindsight to realize faults, especially ones on a system-wide level. For example, the persecution of the Japanese during World War II by sending them to internment camps was a very sad moment in our nation’s history. One of the most upsetting aspects of this terrible chapter in history was that most people were not outraged by the actions taken by our government; many actually agreed with the internment camps. Germans were not interred, even though we were fighting with them as well. Many of these Japanese families had been in America for generations, and were not recent immigrants. Many were American born citizens. We imprisoned them for looking differently. This also was not an isolated incident, there are many other examples both the past and present.

This is just one example of socially constructed perceptions remaining unchecked by reason. Our perceptions are so normalized that it becomes part of the landscape, and never shows up as abnormal, like an animal living in a cage all its life never knowing anything but. These invisible bars limit our ability to see an other way. America didn’t see the Japanese as American citizens being held, they saw potential enemies. Not too many people gave it much thought, much like many things that are going on now people don’t give too much thought too either.The example of the Japanese interred during World War II is an example of the social construction of perception, but more specifically it is an example of the effects of the social construction of race. Takaki outlines an incredible history of multiculturalism in America, from its “founding” days onward, and shows through history how race has been socially constructed through fear, politics, greed, and otherness. Although it might have not been a “conspiracy” of sorts – that is, the instigators of the atrocities towards the native people of this land and the African people brought here against their will might not have thought their actions malicious – it was an effort enacted by a vast amount of people, ones that thought they were acting justly.

Race is, of course, a construct – it is assigned meaning. Any perception about race is socially constructed, constructed by those who dominate that social arena. In America’s case, this was the “white” man, the foreign settlers from Europe. Their numbers, their weapons, and the belief that their actions were just asserted power over those who were not “them,” those who were “other.” In short, the social construction of race was one which was socially constructed by those which held the power. Through an intricate series of events, the group holding the power maintained that power by relegating anything but that group to a position of inferiority, or worse. This has also been the case with the concept we of gender.The social construction of gender is an equally interesting topic as the social construction of race, although arguably more complicated and hidden than that of race. The construction of gender is one that has relegated each and every one of us in ways that we may or may not know, and possibly won’t ever fully realize.A prime example of a piece of this construction was that of the Women’s Suffrage movement, where women finally realized that they should have the right to vote. Imagine, roughly 51% of the population had been convinced previously that they did not deserve the same rights as 49%. This was not about where the person was from, what language they spoke, or their cultural practices (not that any of those are excuses for racism, merely observations of how they are constructed as “other”). A majority of our population in America was relegated to second class citizens for the mere reason that they were not male. Somewhere back in that culture’s forming days, something must have happened that posited the male of the culture as the dominant force within that culture, and maintained itself through the social construction of gender, specifically the construction of female as inferior. This, of course, isn’t even a shard of the tip of an iceberg that is the social construction of gender.

I mean to illustrate the social construction of race and gender as the dominant view asserting power because this is how social construction of all types happens. More than often unchecked, the conceptions become structured in a way to posit themselves as the accepted norm. These conceptions, or should I say preconceptions, are judgments which happen before any initial experience with the subject matter for which the preconception has been formulated. In short – we already have interpreted and assigned meaning to things before we first encounter them. The bars in front of our eyes are so invisible that we do not even know what we cannot see.

The social constructions of race and gender are not isolated incidents, instead they are just some of the more obvious examples of social construction. The general position that many people take is that their viewpoint, that being one guided by the already constructed meanings, is not only their own but the correct viewpoint. This can run into trouble when it comes across a differing viewpoint that doesn’t quite agree.
Hopefully by this day and age we have brought the subject of race and gender enough to the forefront that it doesn’t go unnoticed like it did before. But there are many other constructions which we do not freely acknowledge, or even know about. Every aspect of perceived reality is also an aspect of social construction. As one can imagine, there are infinite constructions of reality in which infinite possibilities of perception exist. Therefore there are infinite versions of reality, as far as it is socially constructed, and they all believe themselves to be “the” reality. This is quite baffling to the reality that butts up against another reality, many times frustrating.

The closing-off of realities, the exclusionary devices that some of these constructions seem to implement are limiting (at best) the human experience. This is not to say that all versions of reality are “wrong,” but nearly the opposite – the relegation of reality as singular is limiting the possibility of realities. The singular focus of a limiting construction of reality denies us the beauty of other ways of seeing; the only “wrong” way of seeing is one that doesn’t allow other ways of seeing to exist. Sadly, there are many ways of seeing that wish for the destruction of other ways of seeing (and vice versa). These ways of seeing believe in “the” reality rather than “a” reality, a very important distinction when speaking about reality.

In this discussion of social construction we have looked into how social construction works; the means by which we are situated within it, and the pitfalls of this social construction. We have seen how the concepts of race and gender have been constructed, and how social construction is a systemic device that is constantly creating reality for those within the culture. From examining the way it works we better understand the social constructions of different aspects of our reality, and how it limits ways of seeing, and ways of being in the world.


Technorati Tags: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home