2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

ElectronicJournalofSociology(1996)
ISSN:11983655
GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:
AVisualSociologyClassic
GregSmith
DepartmentofSociology
UniversityofSalford

MythankstoJimChriss,CarolBrooksGardner,BrianLonghurst,AndrewTravers,CandaceWestandtwo
EJSrefereeswhocommentedonanearlierdraftofthispapertomyadvantage.

Abstract
ThefateofGoffman'sGenderAdvertisementsinthesociologicalliteratureisreviewednearlytwodecades
afteritsoriginalpublication.ThepaperunderlinesGoffman'sconsistentsocialconstructionistapproachto
genderdifferentiation,anapproachwhichstillcontainsmuchofrelevancetoarangeoffeminisms.Its
singularityresidesinitscarefullycraftedtextandartfullysequencedarraysofpictureswhichtogetheryielda
distinctiveperceptiononthepartofthereader.Asurveyofitsapplicationsispresentedindicatinghowand
whyithasbeenunderexploitedsociologicallyaswellaspointingtopotentialdirectionsforfutureresearch.

Introduction
Theattributionofclassicstatustoanysociologicaltheoryisneversettled,neverfinal.IntheEnglish
speakingworldintheearlydecadesofthiscentury,forexample,thetheoriesofDurkheimwerereadily
dismissedforsupposedlyexemplifyingthe"groupmindfallacy."Thisinterpretationwasafamiliaroneat
leastuntilthesubstantialreassessmentsofParsons(1937)andAlpert(1939).Thusclassicstatusisoften
hardwonandrarelysecure.Moreoverthequalifyingcriteria,inamultiparadigmaticdiscipline,are
enormouslyvariable.Somecommonalities,however,canbesuggested.AccordingtoMurrayS.Davis(1986)
whatmakesasociologicaltheory"classic"isthatitseductivelydeniesaspectsofitsaudience'scommonplace
assumptionsabouttheworld(foranihilistversionofthisdefinitionseeTravers1989).Davisidentifies
featuresoftherhetoricofMarx,Weber,Durkheim,SimmelandFreudwhichservetosubvertaudience
assumptionsandthusearnthemclassicstatus1butheemphasisesthatthisrhetoricmaynotendureandthat
other(andnolessvalid)rhetoricstojustifyclassicstatusmaybeextractedfromtheanalysisofmore
contemporarytheories.InthispaperIwishtakeupthislattersuggestionandconsiderthoseaspectsof
Goffman'sGenderAdvertisements(henceforthGA)thatmightqualifyitasavisualsociologyclassic2.This
affordstheopportunitytoreviewthebookanditsfatetwodecadesonfromitspublication.

GAisperhapsGoffman'smostsingularwork.WithinthecontextofGoffman'soeuvre,the11booksand
numerouspaperswhichGoffmanpublishedbetween1951andhisprematuredeathin1982,itisdistinctivein
thatitistheonlyplacewhereheaddressesasinglebodyofdata:acollectionofsome500advertisingand
newsphotographs.Withinthecontextofthedisciplineofsociology,itrepresentsarareandexemplary
instanceofanempiricalstudywhichtreatsphotographicmaterialsasdata,worthyofanalysisintheirown
right,andnotmerelyahandyillustrativeresourceintendedonlytovivifytheseriousbusinessofanalysis
https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 1/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

accomplishedbythewrittentext(Ball&Smith,1992).Albumsized,GAsimplylooksdifferentfromany
otherbookreadilydescribableasaworkofsociology.Exactlytwothirds(56)ofits84pagesconsistof
arraysofphotographs.Thepicturesarearrangedinsetsandeachsetisaccompaniedbyabriefcommentary.
Thepicturesaresetoutincolumnsandmeanttobelookedatinthesamemannerinwhichnewspaper
columnsareread.ItisalsosignificantthatGAisaloneamongGoffman'sbookspublishedinhisownlifetime
thatisprefacedbyacommentaryauthoredbyanotherwriter3.TheUSeditionfeaturesan"Introduction"by
VivianGornick("WhatErvingGoffmanshareswithcontemporaryfeministsisthefeltconvictionthat
beneaththesurfaceofordinarysocialbehaviourinnumerablesmallmurdersofthemindandspirittakeplace
daily"[Gornick,1979:ix]seealsoWest1994)whilsttheearlyBritishimprintscontaina"Foreword"by
RichardHoggart("thisbrilliant,suggestivebook"[Hoggart1979:viii]).Theprovisionofsuchprefatory
materialseemstosignalapublishing"event."

Butcoffeetablesociologyitmostassuredlyisnot.Thefirsttwowrittensectionsofthebookcontainasdense
(inbothsenses)andasextensiveanexpositionofEG'sanalyticpreoccupationsandmethodological
reasoningasistobefoundinanyofhiswritings.ChapterOneestablishestheprincipalfeaturesofhis"
specialconcern",namelygenderdisplay,theculturallyconventionalportrayalsofsexclassmembership
ordinarilyavailableandnoticeabletosocietymembersataglance.ChapterTwooffersalengthydisquisition
onthevaryingsensesinwhichpicturescanbesaidto"really"depicttheirreferent4.Thebookversionsof
GAwerepublishedsimultaneouslyintheUKandUSAin1979anddifferlittlefromtheoriginaljournal
versionof19765.Itisworthremarkingthatthepaperqualityispoorerinthebook,whichcompromisesthe
reproductionofsomeofthedarkerimages.Theglossypaperofthe1976journalpublicationreproduces
blackandwhitetonesmoreeffectivelyimportantwhenoneremembersthatmanyoftheadvertising
imagesinGAwillhaveappearedincolourintheiroriginaltextualsites.

ThepublicationofthebookintheUKoccasionedsomecontroversy.ThefirstimprintoftheUKeditionused
acoverphotographfeaturingtwofemalemodelsposedinamannercontrivedtobealluringtothemalegaze.
ItprovokedoneBritishreviewertospeakofthe"offensivelymisleadingcoverofGenderAdvertisements"
(Kuhn,1980:316).Another(Hunt1980)observedthatthephotographwasaglaringexampleof"theuseof
womenassexobjectstopromotethesale"ofthebook.Shecontinued:"Whatarewetomakeofit?Has
Goffmanorhispublisherpickedupsomeusefulhintsinthisstudyoftheadvertiser'strade?"(Hunt,1980:
443).Goffmanapparentlydidrecognisethatthepictureexploitedtheverymatterthetextwasmeantto
criticise.HeinsistedthatGAwasconcernedwithanalysingthemerchandisingofculture,notaidingand
abettingtheprocess.Ofcourse,abookcannotbejudgedbyitscover,butarawnerveinthepoliticsof
representationhadevidentlybeentouchedandsubsequentprintingsoftheUKeditionusedthemore
innocuousUSjacket.

GENDERDIFFERENTIATIONANDTHEINTERACTION
ORDER
InGAthesociologistoftheinteractionorderthatdomainofsociallifegeneratedbythecopresenceof
persons(Goffman,1983Rawls,1987)investigatesinteractionalmanifestationsofgenderdifference.The
book'sfocusongenderdisplaysextendsandparticularisestheearlierandcontroversial"institutional
reflexivity"6theoryofgenderdifferentiation(Goffman,1977Wedel,1978).Briefly,Goffman'sclaimisthat
thedifferentialtreatmentofmalesandfemalesisoftenjustifiedbyfolkbeliefswhichpresumesomeessential
biologicaldifferencesbetweenthesexes.ButforGoffmanbiologycannotdeterminesocialpracticeswhich
havetobetreatedassuigenerisforsociologicalpurposes.Thereforemanysocialpractices,frequently
presentedandexcusedasnaturalconsequencesofthedifferencesbetweenthesexes,areactuallythemeans
throughwhichthoseselfsamedifferencesarehonouredandproduced.Biologyisnotanexternalconstraint
uponsocialorganisation.Genderdifferentiation,atleastinmodernindustrialsocieties,isproducedand
reproducedininteraction.Further,theseinteractionalpracticesholddefiniteimplicationsforthepresumed
humannaturesofgenderedpersons.Sopracticeswhichostensiblyreflectconsequentialbiologicallybased
differencesinourhumannatures,everythingfromtheengenderingofpronounsandfirstnamesinEuropean
languagestothesegregationoftoiletfacilitiesinpublicplaces,comeinGoffman'sviewtoconstitutethe
differencesbetweenthepresumednaturesofthesexes.Goffman'sinstitutionalreflexivitytheoryisthus
primarilyconcernedwithgenderdifferentiationratherthanstratification,approachedfromasocial
constructioniststandpoint.
https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 2/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

Thecritiqueofcommonsensebiologicalthinkingaboutgender(aswellaspopularethology)istakenfurther
inGA.Genderdisplaysaremostemphaticallynottoberegardedasresiduesorremnantsoftheevolutionary
developmentofthehumanspecies,norarethey"naturalexpressions"ofoursupposedly"essential"natureas
menandwomen.Instead,Goffmancontendsthat"thereisonlyaschedulefortheportrayalofgender...only
evidenceofthepracticebetweenthesexesofchoreographingbehaviourallyaportraitofrelationship"(1979:
8seealsoClough,1992:102107).Personsasgenderedagentsenactanappropriatescheduleofgender
displays.Norarethedisplaystobetreatedsimplyaspartofthefrothofsocialexistence:inthehierarchical
relationsbetweenthesexestheyare"theshadowandthesubstance"(Goffman,1979:6)ofgenderedsocial
life.Genderdisplaysservetoaffirmbasicsocialarrangements(keepingwomenintheirplace)andthey
presentultimateconceptionsofthenatureofpersons(our"essential"genderidentity).Thesedisplaysare
suffusedwithabehaviouralvocabularytypicalofparentchildrelationships.The"orientationlicense",
"protectiveintercession","benigncontrol"and"nonpersontreatment"whichparentsideallyextendto
childrenalsoservesasamodelwhichcharacterisesthesociallysituatedtreatmentofadultwomenbymen.
Thus,"rituallyspeaking,femalesareequivalenttosubordinatemalesandbothareequivalenttochildren"
(1979:5).

ThelargestandinmanywaysmostsignificantpartofGAisdevotedtoa"pictorialpatternanalysis"(1979:
25)ofthepresentationofgender(andfemininityinparticular)inadvertisements.Goffmanundertakesto
describesomeprinciplesofgenderdisplayincontemporaryAngloAmericansociety:relativesize,the
femininetouch,functionranking,thefamily,theritualizationofsubordination,licensedwithdrawal.Theuse
ofcollectionsofphotographshastheconsiderableadvantageofallowingsubtlefeaturesofgenderdisplaysto
beexhibited,notmerelydescribed.Thepersuasiveforceofthisanalyticalstrategyisconsideredfurther
below.Itdependsonthewayempiricalmaterialsfunctionasillustrationsofananalytictheme.Atfirstsight
thepicturesinGAappeartohaveabroadlyequivalentfunctiontotranscriptsinconversationanalysis.They
seem,liketranscripts,toallowreaderstheopportunitytoassesstheadequacyoftheinterpretationspresented
byGoffman,toseehowfarhisreadingofthepicturesworksforus.Butinfacttheprocedureismuchmore
onesided.

PictorialPatternAnalysis:HowITWorks
AuniquefeatureofGAistheformatofthelongpictorialsection.Arraysofnumberedpicturesare
accompaniedbyanunderstatedinterpretivecommentarywhichgiveseachpageadistinctivelook.Goffman's
procedureistofirstpresentuswithhiswrittenobservationsaboutaparticulargenderdisplay.These
observationsarethenfollowedbyaseriesofadvertisingimageswhich"illustrate"thethemesearlier
articulatedinwords.Thepicturesare"arrangedtobe'read'fromtoptobottom,columntocolumn,acrossthe
page"(Goffman,1979:26).Sometimestheseriesisconcludedwithexceptions("sexrolereversals")which
presumablyprovetherule.Theseexceptionsareidentifiedbyblackedgingsurroundingthepicture7.

Thereaderthushastoengageinakindofsearchprocedure,visuallyscrutinisingeachseriesforevidenceof
thegenderdisplayGoffmanhasjustdescribedinwords.Thereaderscanstheseriesofpictureslookingfora
familyresemblanceinthecollectionand,totheextentthatthereaderfindstheresemblanceGoffmanhas
indicated,thewrittendescriptioniscorroboratedvisually.Theprocessinvolvessomethingmorethanjust
givingempiricalreferencetothewrittenobservation.AsreadersweseemtoemploywhatGarfinkel(1967)
callsthedocumentarymethodofinterpretation.Makingsenseisatwotieredprocess.Theuppertierconsists
ofsurfaceparticulars,thelowertierthepresumedunderlyingstructureorpatternindexedanddevelopedby
surfaceparticulars.InthecaseofGA,surfaceparticularsareprovidedbythewordsandpicturesof
Goffman'stext.Theunderlyingpatternisthesensewearriveatabout"mockassaultgames"or"body
clowning"fromreadingGoffman'swordsandlookingathiscollectionsofpicturesinthatway.(Seepictures
224243[Goffman,1979:5253]for"mockassaultgames"andpictures207216[Goffman,1979:50]for"
bodyclowning"8).Ourunderstandingofthefeaturesofanygivengenderdisplayisthusbuiltupthrough
thistoandfroprocessofmutualelaborationofsurfaceparticularsandunderlyingpattern.

Theprocedureisapowerfulpersuasivedevicewhichmakesitdifficultforthereadertoresistthe
interpretationwhichGoffmanseekstoobtainfromthearrays.Inanexaminationoftheuseofethnographic
andothercasematerialsinGoffman'searlierwritings,Watson(1987,1989)arguesthatheprovidesan
"instructedreading"whichveryeffectivelytransformsthereader'sendogenousunderstandingsofthese
illustrationstosecurehisanalyticpoints.Akindofgestaltswitchistherebyachievedinwhichthereader's
https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 3/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

understandingofanillustrationisalteredinthedirectionindicatedbyGoffman'sanalyticschema.Abroadly
similarprocedureappearstobeatworkinGAwecouldsaythatthereaderengagesin"instructedviewing."
Thedifferenceisthattheillustrationsarepresentedvisuallyratherthanverballyanditisthevisualstatusof
theillustrationswhichmakestheprocedureevenmoreeffective.Goffmanissosuccessfulinexploitingthe
connotativepenumbrasurroundingthevisualdatapreciselybecausethelaconictextandconcatenations(cf.
Barthes,1977)ofpicturesactivelyrequirereaders'andlookers'workfortheanalysistoemerge.ForWatson,
likeotherethnomethodologists(e.g.Schegloff,1988),theoverlookingofendogenousunderstandings
representsaregrettablelossofasignificanttopicforsociologicalinquiry.HoweverforGoffmanitis
preciselythedevelopmentofanewperception,generatedbythealignmentofthewrittentextandthe
concatenationofpictures,thatyieldsafreshunderstandingoftheunderlying,takenforgrantedfeaturesof
gendercodes.

ACandidateClassic?
CitationcountsalonecannotadequatelyconveytheclassicpotentialofGA9(seealsoWinkin1990).
Furthermore,afullassessmentofGAwouldneedtoaddressthelargerissueoftheoverallworthof
Goffman'ssociology,andithastoberecognisedthatsomearesceptical10.IfGAhasanyclaimonclassic
statusthenanestimationofitsfertilityandnoveltymustbeessayed.Atleastthreequestionsneedtobe
addressedinordertoprovidesuchanassessment:

1.cantheideasofGAbeincorporatedintosystematicinvestigationsofcommunicationcontent?
2.cantheanalyticframeworkofGAitselfbeextended?
3.whataretheprospectsfordevelopingGoffman'sworkongenderdisplaybeyondthenonvocalrealm?

ContentAnalysisAndGA
Contentanalysisistheforemostsystematicmethodfortheinvestigationofcommunicativedatainthehuman
sciences(Ball&Smith,1992:2031).OneverysimpleuseofGAbycontentanalystshasbeentosensitize
researchers(andevenbeginningstudentsJones,1991)toeverydayformsofgenderdominanceand
subordination,asinProvenzo's(1991)analysisofvideogamecharacters.Howeveramajordifficultyin
adoptingGoffman'sgenderdisplaycategoriesisthattheydonotmeettwooftheessentialcoding
requirementsofstandardformsofcontentanalysis:thatcategoriesaremutuallyexclusive,andthatthe
systemofcategoriesisdesignedtobeexhaustiveofallthecontentunderinvestigation.Itseemsthatagiven
advertisementcanreadilysupporttwoormoreofthegenderismsGoffmanidentifies.Taketheexampleof
picture343inGA(1979:64):Goffmanclassifiesitasanexampleoflicensedwithdrawalviathewithdrawal
ofgazebutitcouldjustasreadilyexemplifythebashfulkneebend,atypeofritualizationofsubordination
(Moore,1990:12).Onesolutionisforthecontentanalystistoseektoidentifythe"dominant"(Moore,
1990:11)genderdisplaytosatisfythemutuallyexclusivecategorizationrequirement.Anotherisforthe
researchertocountasmanygenderismsasarereadilyidentifiableinagivencorpusofdocuments(Belknap
andLeonard,1991).Thelatterprocedurebreachesthecanonsofconventionalcontentanalysis(Berelson,
1952)butitdoesgivearoughindicationoftheprevalencesixmaingenderismsidentifiedbyGoffman.
Moreover,adoptingthisprocedureleadsBelknapandLeonard(1991:115)tothecounterintuitivefinding
thatGoffman'sgenderismsarenowadaysmoreprevalentinadvertisementsin"modern"magazines(Ms,
Gentlemen'sQuarterly,RollingStone)thanin"traditional"ones(GoodHousekeeping,SportsIllustrated,
Time).Berelsonwouldnothaveendorsedthisprocedure,andGoffman(whowastaughtcontentanalysisby
Berelson)iswiseenoughtoconcedethepoint(Goffman1979:2425).

AnimportantstepforwardistakenbyMooney,BrabantandMoran's(1993)contentanalysisofbirthday
cards.Apparentlyinsignificant,birthdaycardsserveaspersonallyconsequential"ceremonialtokens"which
aredifferentiatedalongageandgenderlines.Mooney,BrabantandMoranrecognisethatGoffman'sgender
displaycategoriesthemselvesrequireoperationalizationiftheyaretobeeffectivelyusedincontentanalysis,
andthestudyinventivelydevisesindicatorswhichdrawuponboththevisualimageryandverbalcontentof
birthdaycards.InsoproceedingthestudyfindsmuchevidenceofthreeofGoffman'scategories,the
femininetouch,theritualizationofsubordinationandlicensedwithdrawal,leadingtheauthorstoconclude
that"birthdaycardsconveymessagesofthesubordinationanddevaluationofwomenandchildrenin
ceremonialactivities"(Mooney,BrabantandMoran,1993:626).Theunderstatedmethodologicalmessageof
https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 4/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

thisstudyisthattheGoffman'sgenderdisplaycategoriesareprimarilyanalyticcategorieswhichmayneedto
befurtheroperationalizediftheyaretoretaintheircogency.

ThesedifficultiesunderlineageneralfeatureofGoffman'swork:itisstrongeronconceptualinspirationthan
methodologicalguidance.ThiscanbeseenclearlyinAlexander's(1994)carefulplottingofchangesinthe
portrayalofchildrenintwentiethcenturyUSmagazineadvertisements.Alexander'sacknowledgedpointof
departureisGoffman'ssuggestionabouthistoricalshiftsinconventionsfordepictingdominanceinfamily
groups.Heranalysisofthesechanges,however,employstheestablishedmethodsofcontentanalysisand
categoriesunconnectedtoGoffman's.DinesLevy(1990)takesabroadlysimilarline.DinesLevyfinds
Goffman'sthinkingaboutthegenderedpropertiesofthe"glimpsedworld"helpfulintheconstructionofan
analyticframeworkforinterpretingcartoonimagery,butthecontentanalysisofcartoonsoweslittleto
Goffman.Fortheseresearchers,unconcernedwithGoffman'sowncircumscribedpreoccupationwiththe
interactionorder,hisanalysisofgenderdisplayisaplacetobegininquirieswhichthenextendbeyondthe
confinesoffacetofaceinteraction(Tseelon,1995).

ExtendingTheAnalyticFramework
AsconceptualinnovationissocentraltoGoffman'ssociologyoftheinteractionorder,anothermeansof
developingtheanalysisinitiatedbyGAistoidentifynewformsofgenderdisplay.Chadwick(1988:6263)
hasastabatthiswithhis"womanasenigma"proposal:inaheadandshoulderspicturethefemaleisposed
fullyfrontalorslightlyprofiled,gazealignedtotheviewer,andlipsclosedorslightlyparted.Thisgenderism
isexpressedprimarilythroughtheeyeswhichweara"mysterious"or"inviting"look,suggestingdepths
behindtheoutwardvisage.Itisaconventionalisedexpression,Chadwicksuggests,whichisinfrequently
enactedbymalemodels.Justhowdurableandwidespreadthisgenderdisplayisawaitsfurtherinvestigation,
asdoestheexplorationofadvertisingrepresentationsofmasculinitywhichwouldrectifythebiastowards
feminineimageryinGoffman'sstudy.Fewresearchersseemtohavetakenupthesechallengesintheterms
outlinedbyGoffmanhemaywellberegardedasahardacttofollow.

DEVELOPINGGOFFMAN'SWORKONGENDERBEYOND
THENONVOCALREALM
SomeofthetheoreticalideasofGAhavebeenappliedwithprofitoutsidethedomainofnonvocalconduct.
The"parentchildcomplex"hasbeenusedbyWestandZimmerman(1977)toshedlightonthegender
patterningofinterruptionsinconversation.Hochschild(1990)echoesWedel's(1978)earliercritiqueof
Goffman'sconceptionoffeminityasarchaicandmonolithic,butusesthatcritiqueproductivelytoidentify
twogendercodes("traditional"and"modern")inwomen'sadvicemanuals.Anddespitethepredominately
empiricaldirectionofGoffman'ssociologicalinterests,GAhasalsoservedasaresourceforfurther
theoreticaldisquisition.IntheDerrideanglosssuppliedbyClough(1992:107),genderdisplaysaresuffused
with"anoedipallogicofrealistnarrativity"thatisconsonantwithpatriarchalcapitalism'sdisavowalof
desireandwhichportendstheendofethnographyaswehavecometoknowit.

InanumberofworksGardner(19801988198919901995)hasexploredthegenderedcharacterof
experienceofpublicplacesusingananalyticframeworkoriginatinginGoffman'ssociologybutwhich
critiques,revisesanddevelopsitinsignificantways.Thisbodyofworkprovidesvividillustrationof
Hochschild's(1990:278)observationthat"inhisanalysisofgenderGoffmandidnotuseallof'Goffman'"but
italsoleavesGoffmanexposedtothechargethathefailedtoexaminetheinteractionallyrealfeaturesof
women'sdisadvantagethatthesubstanceescapedwhileheanalyzedtheshadow.

ThesestudiesindicatetheconsiderablefertilityofGoffman'sthinkingongender,evenfromthosewhomay
regretthatamoreovertlyfeministmessagewasnotdrawnfromdatathatwouldsupportit.ButGAisalsoa
novelworkofcontemporarysociology.Itsprincipalclaimtoclassicstatusresidesinthewaythepictorial
patternanalysisinducesthereadertoseetheworldasGoffmandescribesit.ThesingularcontributionofGA
toasociologicalunderstandingofgenderdifferencecentresontheeffectproducedbytheinteraction
betweentextascaptionandartfullysequencedarraysofphotographswhichcooptthereaderinavividand
compellingway.Thisisauniqueachievement,sofarwithoutsubstantialsociologicalissue,butonthebasis
ofGoffman'sincreasingsalienceasasocialtheorist(Burns,1992Manning,1992Smith,forthcoming
https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 5/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

Smith[ed]forthcoming)itislikelytoinspiresociologiststobecomemoreadeptatanalysingthevast
repositoriesofvisualdatainpostmodernculture.

References
Alexander,V.D.(1994)"TheImageofChildreninMagazineAdvertisementsfrom1905to1990."
CommunicationResearch21:74265.

Alpert,H.(1939)EmileDurkheimandHisSociology.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

Ball,M.andSmith,G.(1992)AnalyzingVisualData.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.

Barthes,R.(1977)ImageMusicText.London:Fontana.

Belknap,P.andLeonard,W.M.,II,(1991)"AConceptualReplicationandExtensionofErvingGoffman's
StudyofGenderAdvertisements."SexRoles25:103118.

Berelson,B.(1952)ContentAnalysisinCommunicationResearch.NewYork:FreePress.

Berger,B.M.(1986)"Foreword"inErvingGoffman,FrameAnalysis.Boston:NortheasternUniversity
Press:xixviii.

Burns,T.(1992)ErvingGoffman.London:Routledge.

Chadwick,M.(1988)"GenderandSymbolinAdvertisingImagery:AComparisonofGoffmanand
Williamson."SalfordPapersinSociologyandAnthropology,No.5.

Cioffi,F.(1992)"Statingtheobvious."TimesLiterarySupplement4638:34.

Clough,P.T.(1992)TheEnd(s)ofEthnography:FromRealismtoSocialCriticism.NewburyPark,CA:
Sage.

DinesLevy,G.(1990)"TowardsaSociologyofCartoons:AFrameworkforSociologicalInvestigationwith
SpecialReferencetoPlayboySexCartoons."PhDThesis,DepartmentofSociology,UniversityofSalford.

Dyer,G.(1982)AdvertisingasCommunication.London:Methuen.

Garfinkel,H.(1967)StudiesinEthnomethodology.EnglewoodCliffs,NewJersey:PrenticeHall.

Gardner,C.B.(1980)"PassingBy:StreetRemarks,AddressRights,andtheUrbanFemale."Sociological
Inquiry50:32856.

(1988)"AccessInformation:PublicLiesandPrivatePeril."SocialProblems35:38497.

(1989)"AnalyzingGenderinPublicPlaces:RethinkingGoffman'sVisionofEverydayLife."The
AmericanSociologist20:4256.

(1990)"SafeConduct:Women,Crime,andSelfinPublicPlaces."SocialProblems37:31129.

(1995)PassingBy:GenderandPublicHarassment.BerkeleyandLosAngeles:Universityof
CaliforniaPress.

Giddens,Anthony(1991)ModernityandSelfIdentity:SelfandSocietyintheLateModernAge.Cambridge:
Polity.

Giddens,Anthony(1992)TransformationsofIntimacy.Cambridge:Polity.

https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 6/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

Goffman,E.(1976)"GenderAdvertisements."StudiesintheAnthropologyofVisualCommunication3:69
l54.

(1977)"TheArrangementBetweentheSexes."TheoryandSociety4:3Ol332.

(1979)GenderAdvertisements.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress[hardback]NewYork:
HarperandRow[paperback].

(1981)FormsofTalk.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,l98lOxford:Basil
Blackwell,l98l.

(1983)"TheInteractionOrder."AmericanSociologicalReview48:ll7.

Gornick,V.(1979)"Introduction"toGenderAdvertisements.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress
[hardback]NewYork:HarperandRow[paperback].

Henny,L.M.(1986)"TheoryandPracticeofVisualSociology."CurrentSociology34:176.

Hochschild,A.R.(1990)"GenderCodesinWomen'sAdviceBooks,"inS.H.Riggins(Ed.),Beyond
Goffman:StudiesonCommunication,Institution,andSocialInteraction.Berlin,NewYork:Moutonde
Gruyter:27794.

Hoggart,R.(1979)"Introduction"toGenderAdvertisements.London:Macmillan.

Hunt,P.(1980)ReviewofGA,TheSociologicalReview28:442444.

Jones,M.(1991)"GenderStereotypinginAdvertising."TeachingofPsychology18:231233.

Kuhn,A.(1980)ReviewofGA,Sociology14:315316.

Manning,P.(1992)ErvingGoffmanandModernSociology,Oxford:Polity.

Mooney,L.A.,Brabant,S.andMoran,S.(1993)"GenderandAgeDisplaysinCeremonialTokens."Sex
Roles29(910):617627.

Moore,C.M.(1990)"GoffmanRevisited:GenderDisplayinBritishAdvertisementsof1989."MA
dissertation,UniversityofSalford.

Parsons,T.(1937)TheStructureofSocialAction.NewYork:McGrawHill.

Provenzo,E.F.(1991)VideoKids:MakingSenseofNintendo.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Rawls,A.W.(1987)"TheInteractionOrderSuiGeneris:Goffman'sContributiontoSocialTheory."
SociologicalTheory5:136149.

Schegloff,E.A.(1988)"GoffmanandtheAnalysisofConversation,"inP.DrewandA.Wootton(Eds.)
ErvingGoffman:ExploringtheInteractionOrder.Cambridge:Polity:89135.

Smith,G.(forthcoming)Interaction'sOrderliness:TheSociologyofErvingGoffman.London:Routledge.

,Ed.,(forthcoming)Goffman'sPatrimony:StudiesinaSociologicalLegacy.London:Routledge.

,&Travers,A(1995)"Goffman'sProjectandProgramme:AReview,anAppraisalandaNew
Direction."UnpublishedpaperavailablefromGregSmith,Dept.ofSociology,UniversityofSalford,Salford
M54WT,UKorAndrewTravers,DepartmentofSocialWork,UniversityofExeter,ExeterEX44RJ,UK.

Travers,A.(1989)"ShelflifeZero:AClassicPostmodernistPaper."PhilosophyoftheSocialSciences19:
291320.

https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 7/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

Travers,A.(1996)"NonpersonandGoffman:SociologyundertheInfluenceofLiterature"toappearinG.
Smith(Ed.)Goffman'sPatrimony.London:Routledge.

Tseelon,E.(1995)TheMasqueofFemininity.London:Sage.

Watson,R.(1987)"ReadingGoffmanonInteraction."PaperpresentedattheconferenceLecturesde
GoffmanenFrance,CentreCulturelInternationaldeCerisylaSalle,France.Reprintedas"Letravailde
l'incongruite",inI.Joseph(ed),LeParlerFraisd'ErvingGoffman.Paris:LesEditionsdeMinuit,1989:83
99.

Wedel,J.M.(l978)"Ladies,We'veBeenFramed!ObservationsonErvingGoffman's'TheArrangement
betweentheSexes.'"TheoryandSociety5:ll325.

West,C.andZimmerman,D.H.(1977)"Women'sPlaceinEverydayTalk:ReflectionsonParentchild
Interaction."SocialProblems24:521529.

West,C.(1994)"GoffmaninFeministPerspective."PaperpresentedtotheAnnualMeetingoftheAmerican
SociologicalAssociation,LosAngeles,59August1994.

Williamson,J.(1978)DecodingAdvertisements.London:MarionBoyars.

Winkin,Y(1990)"GoffmanetlesFemmes."ActesdelaRechercheenSciencesSociales,83:5761.

Endnotes
1.Therhetoricdeployedbytheseauthors,saysDavis,isambiguousandincompletewhichallowssimpleand
subtlevariantstoemerge.Therhetoricusesstriking(premodern/modern)comparativearticulationswhich
characteriseapresentintermsofdisintegratedindividualsanddevitalisedsocieties,aswellasafuturein
whichtheevilcanonlyspread.

2.Ofcourse,ameasuredassessmentwouldinvolvecomparingGoffman'sbooktootherstudiesinthesub
areaofvisualsociologywhichmightvieforthisstatus.InthespaceallottedmehereIintendsimplytobe
suggestiveandassertive,notcomparativeordefinitive.

3.TheUSpaperbackreprintofFrameAnalysis,publishedfouryearsafterGoffman'sdeath,appearedwitha
newpreface(seeBerger,1986).

4.Thelengthanddetailofthewrittensectionsmayowesomethingtorefereeingprocessesassociatedwith
thebook'soriginalpublicationinanacademicjournal(seenote5below).

5.Fall1976issueofStudiesintheAnthropologyofVisualCommunication,ajournalthatis,sadly,now
defunct.

6.ThetermhasresurfacedinGiddens'(1991,1992)recentwritingsonmodernityandidentitybutthe
conceptsodenotedappearstosharelittleincommonwithGoffman'sownusage.

7.Chadwick's(1988:6569)tabulationofreversalsshowsthattheyplayaquantitativelyminorrolein
Goffman'sanalysis:only17ofthe62categoriesandsubcategoriesofgenderdisplayareconcludedwitha
reversal,andoftheseonly3categoriescontainmorethantwoexamplesofreversals.

8.Icoulddescribeeachofthesepicturesforyoubutthatwouldbedoublyunsatisfactorybecauseofthe
deficienciesofmyverbalgloss,andbecausethepointofGAistolookandread,notsimplyread..

9.WhilstGAiswidelyknownandoftenreferenced,muchofthecitationtendstobeperfunctoryincharacter.
OnepopularuseofGAistoevidencefeaturesofcurrentgenderrolestereotypinginadvertising(e.g.Dyer,
1982:97ff).Thisusedrawsattentiontoanambiguityinthebook'stitleandcontent.

https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 8/9
2/18/2017 GenderAdvertisementsRevisited:<br>AVisualSociologyClassic

AmoreappropriatetitlemighthavebeenGenderDisplayssincethebookonlydealswithadvertisementsin
theNormanMailer[AdvertisementsforMyself]sense.Whatisadvertisedaretheexpressivefeaturesof
masculinityandfemininity.JimChriss(inpersonalcommunication)hassuggestedthatthisalternativetitle
maynothaveappealedtoGoffmanbecauseofitsoverlyethologicalconnotations.MoreoverGAdoesnot
examinehowadvertisementsworkasadvertisementsinthewaythatsay,JudithWilliamson's(1978)widely
admiredstudyendeavourssotodo.AdvertisementsaresimplyacriticalsourceofdatafortheGoffman'sreal
analyticpreoccupationwiththecodesandformsofgenderdisplay.ThusifmanyofthereferencestoGAin
mediastudiestextsareperfunctory,thenthatisbecauseitscontentislargelytangentialtotheirinterestsin
themechanicsofadvertisingasacommunicativeprocess..

10.InanissueoftheaninfluentialBritishliteraryperiodicalthephilosopherFrankCioffi(1992)has
reiteratedhiscomplaintthatGoffman'ssociologytellsusnothingthatwedon'tknowalreadythathiswork
merelyrecyclestheselfevidentandbelabourstheobviousinanobfuscatingterminology.

ForCioffiGoffman'sworkisdismissedasjustanotherformofstorytelling.Anopportunityisthusmissedto
reviewsuchfascinatingissuesastherelationshipofthehumansciencestothesocialworldthattheyareboth
embeddedinandseektoinvestigate,theimplicationsofthehumansciencesdependenceuponcommonsense
understandings,thenatureofdiscoveriesinthehumansciences,etc.Goffman'spopularity,Ciofficoncludes,
restsuponnothingmorethanour"primalappetiteforrehearsal,reminiscenceandkindredcontemplative
transactionswiththeexigenciesandvicissitudesofsociallife"(1992:4).

PerhapsthatisonebasisofGoffman'senduringpopularity.Certainlynowhereinsociologyarethese
exigenciesandvicissitudessoarrestinglyandcompellinglydescribedandanalysedasinGoffman'swritings.
ButCioffi'scharacterisationofGoffmanasamanoflettersdenudedofanyrealsociologicalsignificancejust
willnotdo(seeTravers[forthcoming]foronedemonstrationofGoffman'sproductiveuseofaliterary
resource).Goffman'scentralachievementwastoprovidetheconceptualresourcesforexaminingthe
sociologicallyunexaminedterritoryoffacetofaceinteraction.Inhismanybooksandpapershemadeit
clearthathisideasweretoberegardedasprovisionalandexploratoryincharacter,toolswhichmightprove
usefulintheconstructionofmorerigoroussociologicaldescriptionsandexplanations.Thepointofhis
taxonomieswastoprovidethetentativemarkersandsignpostswouldpermitmoredetailedsociological
mappingsofthenewterrain.Someoftheseconcepts,hereadilyadmitted,mighthavenofutureatall
(Goffman,1981:1).Butmanyhaveprovedfruitfulinsociologicalandrelatedinquiries,mostnotablythose
dealingwithfacework,fatefulaction,impressionmanagementandselfpresentation,stigma,total
institutionsandthelike(seeSmith&Travers,1995).ThisisonesimplesenseinwhichCioffiiswrongwhen
heassertsthatGoffman'swritingsare"propaedeutictonothing"(1992:4).

Copyright1996ElectronicJournalofSociology

https://www.sociology.org/content/vol002.001/smith.html 9/9