While searching about fragmentation of modern people's lives and identities, I came across this article. The author considers whether our fragmentations in social relationships and identity are destructive to us or not. In our daily lives, we meet different groups of people, and often these groups only know a facet of our personality or character. As the article points out, Georg Simmel, who was a German sociologist, describes our fragmentation of social relationships well:
"The modern type of feeling inclines more to differentiated friendships; that is, to those which have their territory only upon one side of the personality at a time, and in which the rest of the personality plays no part. ... These differentiated friendships ... bind us to one man from the side fo sympathy, to another from the side of intellectual community, to a third on account of religious impulses, to a fourth because of common experiences."
Some sociologists have argued that this modern fragmentation extends to our own consciousness, that is, we construct multiple internal identities due to the various social/cultural worlds we live in, and this identity fragmentation causes modern man to be "afflicted with a permanent identity crisis." But the article also provides a different perspective that says we only fragment our social identities without causing a crisis for the inner self. We hold on to our own integrated sense of self and splinter our identity only when we have to present ourselves in different social contexts.
So is modern man's fragmentation of relationships and identities that big of a deal? In T. S. Eliot's time and in the period following WWI, I certainly think that finding an integrated identity was crucial for European society to rehabilitate—both culturally and socially. But in our time, is it not inevitable for us to have multiple identities considering the lifestyle we live and the numerous social/cultural worlds that we are a part of? Additionally, do our identity fragmentations necessarily mean that we are more disconnected than ever before? Personally, I do not feel the need to describe modern fragmentation as negatively as some sociologists do. Lifestyle changes, society changes, and we must adapt to the complex world we live in. Having several identities to associate with is not that bad either; in today's world, uniqueness and the ability to embrace different perspectives are qualities that are valued.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Adding on to this, I think we can also wonder whether this crisis of identity and fragmentation is a truly modern phenomenon. While people might more openly question accepted ideas now and in the past century than they did previously, but perhaps these experiences are not as uniquely modern as we might think, even if this wasn't expressed in the past. Perhaps with the advent of social and technological changes, this crisis has become more acute, but I think in literature from centuries ago that we have read (such as Hamlet), we see that crises of identity aren't uniquely modern.
Great post, Jun! When I read this, I immediately thought of "No Exit." I wrote a post a couple of weeks ago about the line: "Hell is other people." I think this relates to identity fragmentation because Estelle, Inez, and Garcin all felt that they could only reveal parts of themselves to each other. For instance, Estelle wanted to appear beautiful, and Garcin wanted to appear courageous. They were afraid to unveil their entire personalities to each other; thus, the pain of constantly needing to impress others and holding back their true personalities created a form of eternal damnation for them. In a way, I think this post can be related to every piece we've read; it's a common theme in literature and life.
Post a Comment