You are on page 1of 23

Crossing the Great Divide: Anthropological Theories of the Western Self

Author(s): Adrie Suzanne Kusserow


Source: Journal of Anthropological Research, Vol. 55, No. 4 (Winter, 1999), pp. 541-562
Published by: University of New Mexico
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3631614
Accessed: 11-04-2015 17:12 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of New Mexico is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Anthropological
Research.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CROSSINGTHE GREAT DIVIDE:


ANTHROPOLOGICALTHEORIES OF THE
WESTERN SELF
Kusserow
AdrieSuzanne
SaintMichael's
andAnthropology,
ofSociology
Park,
College,Winooski
Department
VT05438
Colchester,
in self conceptshas led to an
Recenttheoristshavenotedthatthediscoveryof differences
selves "versus"Westernindividualistic
viewof Easternsociocentric
overlydichotomized
selves. Whilemostanthropologists
understanding
agreeon theneedfor a richertheoretical
the
the
model,few theoristshavesuggestedwaysin
of self beyond bipolarego/sociocentric
sideof thedichotomy.
on the Western
whichthismodelcouldbe improved
upon,especially
constructs
arebeginningto breakdownthehomogenous
of
Althoughmanyanthropologists
thesociocentric
self in Easternsocietiestheystudy,2this has notyet beenrigorouslyatwith
in theWest.In thisarticle,Ifocusonsomeof theproblemswiththedichotomy,
tempted
indithat
the
on
the
Western
"side
on
particularemphasis problems
"--namely, assumption
thetendencyto equatethe WestwithAmerica,themisvidualismprecludessociocentrism,
tradition,thehomogenization
of Westernindiphilosophical
representation
of the Western
withintheWestalonggender
vidualism,andthere-creation
dichotomy
oftheego/sociocentric
and classlines.Finally,questionsposedbysocialpsychologists
engagedin theindividualon childrearingin
own
research
as
as
well
ism/collectivism
debate,
examplesfrom my
Manhattanand Queens(Kusserow
1999),suggestwaysin whichconceptions
of the Westernselfmustbecomplexified.

EGOCENTRIC/SOCIOCENTRIC
of models of the
HAVENOTED
TWOTYPES
ANTHROPOLOGISTS

self: the more interde-

way of experiencingthe self (e.g., in termsof one's


pendent,or "sociocentric,"
socialrole,the group,community,land,familyor tribe,deities,predecessors,or
psychologized,independentego strucposterity)andthe more individualistic,
ture of the "West"(also sometimesreferredto as the modern,industrial,or
of the self describe,on the one
Euro-American
self). Bipolarcharacterizations
a
self
self:
or
perceivedas separatefromthe
side,the individualistic, egocentric,
inautonomyandindepenan
entails
increase
of
this
self
socialunit.Development
is
a
self
dencefromthe group. Onthe otherside
perceivedas indistinguishable
fromthe group,withthe notionthat"aperson'scode (intrinsicworth)andconandactioninonegroup"
areisomorphic
duct(performance)
throughmembership
(Rosenberger1989:89).These theoreticalmodels (individualistic/egocentric
versuscollectivist/sociocentric)
rightlypointto verygeneraldifferencesin conceptionsof the self, andyet manyhave noted the need to move beyondthis
bipolardichotomy.Forinstance,in responseto Dumont,WhiteandKirkpatrick
vol.55, 1999
Research,
Journal
ofAnthropological
Copyright? by The Universityof New Mexico
541

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

542

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

(1985:12)statethat"hewritesat timesas if a simpledichotomyexists between


individualistic
Westernideologyandall otherworldviews, in whichthe social
is the focusofvalue.... Thisis to treatHindu,Zapotec,
whole,notthe individual,
Foxandmanyotherculturesas allalike...." KleinmanandKleinman(1991:19)
arguethattheoristswho use this kindof bipolardichotomycome up withconceptsofthepersoninwhich"[w]hatevidenceis adducedmust(1)portrayhomogenous,unidimensional
stereotypes,notrealpeople,(2) it mustdiscountexamples
to the opposite... and(3) aboveallit mustleaveoutanysharedhumanqualities
thatsuggestthereis an obdurately
panhuman
grainto humanconditions."
Considerthe factthatall of Asia,Africa,andthe Pacificare fit into a single
"sociocentric"
characterization.4
Writingon the conceptof self in the Netherlands,Stephenson(1991:227)speakscriticallyof this dividewith its assumed
homogeneityon either side:
In the sizeableliteratureon the notionof the "person"in anthropology
there is, typically,a contrastdrawnbetweenthe detailsof some rather
exoticcultural"other"... anda moreprosaicandrathertoo amorphous
referentfor"ourselves"....[The]declaration
ofwhatis "Westcategorical
ern"serves in Geertz'essay not onlyas the foilfor "others"but also as
the workingdefinitionof perhapsone fifthof the world'spopulation....
Excursionsintoexoticformsof personshouldnot assumethata uniform
type of personexists in the "West"in orderto advancetheirexploration
of othercultures.To do so one must,perforce,constructa falsecontrast,
whicheffectivelydistortsthe valueof the entireenterprise.
Inhis critiqueofMarkusandKitayma'sCulture
andtheSelf,Lindholm
(1997:410)
also notes thatthe interdependent
self is saidto be characteristic
of Japanese,
Chineseand SouthAsians,LatinAmericans,Africans,SouthernEuropeans,
andMiddleEasterners:"Theinterdependence
foundinthe complexandstatusconscioussocialworldof Japanand Chinais also takento be parallelto the
interdependenceof small-scale,premodern,and egalitariancommunitiesof
Africaand elsewhere and to the historicalexperiencesof the West priorto
andcapitalism."
industrialization
Whittaker
(1992)writesof the "neo-Romantic,
NorthAmerican-European-Christian
self' withoutany mentionthat this term
mighthidesome of the subtledifferencesbetween,forexample,the Dutchand
the Italiansor differencesbetweenthose fromdifferentsocialclassesin Italy.
Hence, a great dividehas been placedbetween the two models as if the
orientationsof eachside necessarilyprecludethe other:individualism
is often
seen as precludingsociocentrismandvice versa.Thiskindof divisionhasbeen
relativisticparadigm
(see Lutz
especiallypronouncedin the ethnopsychological
1988;ShwederandBourne1984;Rosaldo1984;Solomon1983;Geertz1973;
Marriott1976),where an "exotic"culture'sradicallydifferentconceptionof
self often is presented as a kind of mutual exclusivity and untranslatability
between "us and them." For example, Lutz (1988:178) describes differences in
conceptions of emotions and self among Americans and the Ifaluk:

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERNSELF

543

The Americanusageof "anger"expressesoursense ofindividuals'


rights
andhow extensive they are. The Ifalukuses of song express a sense of
the claimsof socialnormsto universaladherenceanda view of the individualnot as a nexus of rightsbut as a componentof relationships.In
onIfaluk,rights
perhapstoosimpleoutline,offensesthreatenrelationships
in the UnitedStates.
Thisbipolardichotomyis nowbeingcriticizedas overdrawn
andunrealisticby
some anthropologists
writingon the "Eastern"self (see Lindholm1997;Ortner
1995;Parish1994;Mathews1996;Elvin1985;Tada1991;Ewing1990;Myers
1979;Derne 1992;McHugh1988;Lin 1988;Rosenberger1989, 1992;Hollan
1992;Kleinman1986;Oxfeld1992;Mines 1988; Khare1984). For example,
of conceptualizing
Rosenberger(1989,1992),writingon the inappropriateness
the Japaneseself in solelysociocentricterms,claimsthatthis egocentric/sociocentricpolarmodelof the self canbe foundwithinthe sameJapaneseperson.By
movementthroughdiversecontexts,the selfbecomesa wholethatis integrated
in oppositesociocentricandegocentriccategories.She suggests
by participation
a dialecticmodelthatmovesbetweenoppositionsthatare culturespecific,but
similarto the egocentric/sociocentric
opposition:"InJapan,althoughthe sociocentric-likepoles are given priority,the egocentric-likepoles are considered
As Westernideasof affluenceandindividualnecessaryto maturefunctioning.
izedexpressionbecomemorepervasiveinJapan,the egocentric-like
side of the
more
self
is
Japanese
becoming
significant"
(Rosenberger1989:109).
INDIVIDUALISMAND COLLECTIVISMWITHIN
SOCIALPSYCHOLOGY
Forsome time now,socialpsychologistshaveworkedon improvingthe individualism/collectivism
HarryC. Triandis(1987,1989)has explored
dichotomy.5
the waysself-conceptinfluencesbehaviorandnotesthatindividualism/collectivism researchis stillat an earlystage.Bothsocialpsychologistsandanthropologists need to proceedwith a carefulexaminationof the empirical,conceptual,
andmethodological
research.Thusfar,there
groundsofindividualism/collectivism
is no agreementwhetherindividualism/collectivism
orientationsfallon a single
bipolardimensionor are independentof one another.Noris it clearhow these
self-conceptsor orientations,depictedseparatelyat the cultural,occupational,
andindividual
levels of analysis,relateto one another(Triandis1987).
as less ofa staticdichotomyowned
Triandisviews collectivism/individualism
the
or
East
and
more
of
a
West
continuum,a spectrum,with some societies
by
in
the
He
of
middle.
writes
the variationwithincollectivisticandindisitting
vidualisticcultures:
Many cultures are close to the middle of the dimension and other variables are also relevant. Urban samples tend to be individualisticand traditional-ruralsamples tend toward collectivism within the same culture.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

544

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

... Withinthe UnitedStates, one can finda good deal of rangeon this
variablewith Hispanicsamplesmuchmore collectivistthansamplesof
NorthernandWesternEuropeanbackgrounds.
(Triandis1989:510)
Triandis(1989)also breaksdownthe homogeneityof collectivism/individualinism by writingof culture-specific
collectivistelementsandculture-specific
dividualisticelements. Interestinglyenough, he cites thirty authorswhose
works pointto culture-specificcollectivistelements withindifferentEastern
countriesandonly five authorswhose studies,all done in the UnitedStates,
elements for the Westpoint to culture-specificcollectivistor individualistic
ern conceptionof the self. This suggests thata greatdealmoreresearchcould
be donein the West to questionits presumedhomogeneity.
Ina paperonallocentricversusidiocentric(individualistic)
tendenciesamong
et
thatnot only
of
Illinois
Triandis
al.
found
(1985)
University
undergraduates,
Americansbut
were allocentrictendenciespresentamongthese individualistic
that allocentrismwas not a unitaryconstruct.Rather,they discoveredthree
of personalto groupgoals,the ingroupas exseparatethemes:subordination
tension of the self, and ingroupidentity.Triandiset al. also state that complexities developinsofaras allocentrismor collectivismappearsto be "both
setting specificandgroupspecific":
Dependingon the setting(home,workplace,religion,politics,esthetics,
scientificwork,the courts,schools,shops)andthe specificgroup(family, friends,colleagues,co-workers,neighbors),individualandcollective
goalsmayor maynotbe intercorrelated....Personsfroma givenculture
appearto emphasizeindividualor collectivegoals in differentsettings
andwith differentgroups.(Triandiset al. 1985:397)
dichotomyin light
Kagitcibasi(1987)looksat the individualism/collectivism
of researchwhichpointsto the coexistenceof individualandgrouployalties.
She questionssome of the assumptionsunderlyingthe constructionof this
where
dichotomy,the mainone being the assumptionof unidimensionality,
individualism
is at one end of the scale and collectivismis at the other end,
eachin bipolaropposition.Withinthis assumptionis the notionthatanincrease
in one side (individualistic
orientations)necessitatesa decreasein the other
(collectivisticorientations)andvice versa.Kagitcibasi(1987:96)writes of the
issue thatmightbe relevanthere:
methodological
Researchdone in this area often forces the subjectsto make a choice
betweenindividualistic/competitive
responsesandcollectivistic/cooperative responses. This is the case whetherforcedchoice or preferential
self-reporttechniquesor behavioraltasks are used.... the two orientationsareoftenexperimentally
to be alternativechoices.Such
manipulated
an approachtendsto elicitonlyone of the orientationsin behaviorandis
not conduciveto the expressionof bothsimultaneously.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERNSELF

545

Kagitcibasi(1987:94)also questionsthe generalityassumption,in whichindividualisticand collectivisticorientationsare treatedas "trait-likeentities


havinggeneralityand stabilityover time and situations."The dangerousassumptionunderlyingthis notionof generalityis that a subjectusing an individualisticorientationin one situationis presumedto adoptthis same orientationin all othersituations.Here perhapssome of Goffman's(1959)insight
into the differingdemandsandrules of particularsituationsmightbe helpful.
Kagitcibasi(1987:96)notes that
Furtherevidencefor situationaldeterminationof behaviorcomes from
the commonobservationthat the same persons demonstratecompetitive behaviortoward outgroupswhile being cooperativewithin the
ingroup,for examplethe family.Suchvariationin behavioris seen to be
especiallywidespreadin traditionalcollectivisticsociety (Triandiset al.
1985)but it is probablyuniversal.
WhileHofstede(1980)was one of the firstto use the termsindividualist/colversuscollectivismcontinuumas replectivist,he diddescribethe individualism
of
national
cultures
and later pointedto the need for a
dimensions
resenting
distinctionbetweenlevels of analysisinsofaras the individualism
versuscollectivism dimensionexistingat the culturallevel mightnot necessarilyexist at
otherlevels. Thus, the individualism/collectivism
presentat the culturallevel
fromindividualism/collectivism
shouldbe distinguished
as an individual
characteristicof persons(personalitydifferenceswithina culture).His studyon meaand collectivismat occupationallevels also showedthat
suringindividualism
"correlation
patternsof the same variablesdiffernot only betweenindividual
dataand aggregateddata,but that the level or type of aggregationis equally
(Hofstede1980:120).Hence,evenwithinaggregateddata,he stresses
important"
andorganizational
the need to distinguishbetweenoccupational
levels.
Thus, socialpsychologistsare attemptingto refineandquestionthe collectivism/individualism
dichotomyandthe empirical,conceptual,andmethodologiresearch.As Triandis(1987)hasnoted,
calgroundsofindividualism/collectivism
thus farthere is still no agreementwhetherindividualism/collectivism
orientationsfall on a single bipolardimensionor are independentof one another.
Nor is it clearhow these self-conceptsor orientations,depictedseparatelyat
the cultural,occupationaland individuallevels of analysis,relate to one another.Nonetheless,this bodyof work representsan attemptto improvethe
stereotypicaldichotomystill too often mentionedwithoutcaveat.
TheWest:Individualism
DoesNotPrecludeSociocentrism
Whilemore and more anthropologistsare notingthat sociocentrismdoes
not necessarily preclude individualismin the Eastern societies they study, with
the exception of Spiro (1993), Lindholm (1997), Stephenson (1991), Hahn and
Gaines (1985), Hollandand Kipnis (1994), Hollan (1992), and Kusserow (1999),
anthropologicalconceptions of the Western self have yet to be treated with the

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

546

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

same rigor.6How manymoretimes canwe readGeertz's(1975)hoarywords


describingthe self "asa bounded,unique,moreor less integratedmotivational
andcognitiveuniverse"(stillused in articlesdatedas recentlyas 1997)?Thus,
many anthropologistshave committeda kind of reverse Orientalism(an
so to speak),flatteningthe Westernself intoa simple,homogOccidentalism,
enous, neat packagewhichignoresthe heterogeneityandcomplexityof this
self. Needless to say, as Stephensonsuggests,to remaincontentwithwhatis
perhapsa false and overly generalcontrastreduces the value of the whole
distinctionthus lendsa dichotoenterprise.The wholeegocentric/sociocentric
mous taintto a multidimensional
problem.
ThroughoutWhittaker's(1992)historyof the self, the factthatthe construction of Easternconceptionsof selves is based on an embarrassingly
generic
Westernstrawman is never once questioned.Hence the blandfoil that has
acted as a comparativemirrorto these other exotic selves for decadesgoes
unquestioned.Whittakerwrites of one very valuableadditionto anthropologicaldiscourseon self thathasrecentlysurfaced,namely,a commitmentto "self
as process."Andyet, afterpointingto a largenumberof studiesdoneon self in
Japan,SoutheastAsia,andOceania,he is not ableto cite one similaranthropologicalworkon the Westernself whichreflectsthis commitmentto process.
In his article"Isthe WesternConceptof Self 'Peculiar'withinthe Contextof
the World'sCultures?"Spiro(1993) devotes a section to the WesternSelf:
StudiesandTheories.Andyet whenhe turnsto certainrepresentativefigures
thatstress the socialembeddednessandinterdependence
of the Westernself,
Erik
he cites theoristsWilliamJames,
Erikson,and variousrepresentatives
from psychoanalyticself-psychology.Before bringinghis review to a close,
Spirodoes cite one team of anthropologists,
Wellenkampand Hollan,whose
who hadrecentlyexperienceda deathin the family
study of undergraduates
pointedtowarda folkmodelthatin some ways deniedthe actualidealcultural
model:"experienc[ing]
themselvesto be more intertwinedwith one another
andso less impermeable,... the deathof a significantotherinvolveda partial
'death'of one's own self' (Hollan1992).
Othertheoristshave suggestedthatthis genericdepictiondoes not dojustice to the complexitiesandheterogeneityof the Westernor even the American self.' Since de Tocqueville's(1841)firstwritingon the importanceof individualismin America,the questionof individualism
has been a centraltheme
in writingson Americancultureandcharacter.Recentscholarswhohavewritten on the topicof self andidentityin Americanote sociocentricandconformist strainsin ourmidst,sas well as in ourpast.9As Wilkinson(1988)andHewitt
(1989)havenoted,for the last fiftyyears,studieson Americancharacterhave
focusedon the Americanattractionto bothindividualism
(see Bellahet al. 1985;
Slater 1976;Sennett 1976;Lasch 1979) anda sense of connectionto others
(see Lindholm1990, 1988; Varenne 1977; Goffman1959; Riesman 1950, 1964;
Wellenkampand Hollan 1981; Lifton 1970; Potter 1973).
Goffman(1959), questioning whether there is any solid, immutable,bounded
core to the self at all, suggests that the self is multifacetedand exists as a series

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERNSELF

547

of socialpresentations.
Usingthe analogyof the stage,he submitsthatthe self is
nota stableentity,witha boundedcore,buthardlymorethana seriesofrolesput
on for any numberof differentsocialsituations.Bock (1988:7)writes thatthe
of Selfin Everyday
Life, is its
importanceof Goffman'swork,ThePresentation
one
of
the
of
most
frequent,yet problematic,
assumptionsin psychochallenge
notion
that
all
or
most
members
of a society... must
"The
logicalanthropology:
sharea common,typical,'basic'or 'modal'personality... the errorof neglecting
andof assuminga highdegreeof psychological
intrasocietal
variability
sharing."
situationalism
Bock(1988:7)notesthatGoffman's
suggeststhat"ifourbehavior
as changesinourpositionwithin
andself-conceptrespondas rapidlyandradically
interactionsituationsas Goffman
indicates,... it is nonsenseto generalizeabout
of membersof any socialgroup."Major
the sharedpersonalitycharacteristics
similaritiesin behaviorof groupsare thus morelikelyto be a resultof shared
socialpositionratherthangrouppersonalityor nationalcharacter.
In a recent paperon two kindsof indigenouspsychologiesof individualism
(self-containedand ensembledindividualism),
Sampson(1988) cites Lykes's
(1985) and Tuan's(1982) works as evidencefor the fact that an indigenous
exists withinthe UnitedStates.Tuan
psychologyof "ensembledindividualism"
(1982) suggests how even in the midst of cities of atomisticstrangers,enclavesexistinwhichpersons'indigenouspsychologyis closestto the ensembled
saidto characterize
type as opposedto the self-containedtype of individualism
Americans."Groupselves emergewithinthese enclaves;the householdrather
thanthe individualis the key unit;personshavedifficultyconceivingof themselves as detachedand entirelyindependentof their neighborhoodcommunity"(Sampson1988:18).Lykes'sresearchfoundthatpersonsfromlowersocialclasses were morelikelythanpersonsfromupperclasses to havewhatshe
called"socialindividuality."
of the independentself is Holland
Onegoodexampleof sucha reexamination
Selfin AmericanCulture,"
article
on
the
andKipnis's(1994)
"Not-So-Egocentric
in whichthey pointto the heterogeneityin Westernconceptsof the person.
They effectivelyhighlightsome of the ways in which,in storiesof embarrassment,Americansinvokea modelof the personthatis sociocentricandthe self is
definedin terms of relationshipsandotherpeople.They also discusshow the
manifestsitselfin models
sociocentrismimplicitin the modelof embarrassment
as well.HollandandKipnis(1994:337)
ofpride,respect,insults,andcompliments
concludethat "theconceptsof egocentricandsociocentricare bothpresentin
... the glossingof ourselvesas egocentric
ourownculturalself-understandings.
is as mystifyingas the glossingof othersas sociocentric."
Like the socialtheoristsabove,sociologistRalphTurner(1976) sees both
and sociocentricelementswithinWesternsociety.He explores
individualistic
this ideaby focusingon differencesin whatpeopleclaimas their"realself' and
notes the tendencyin folkpsychologyto distinguishbetweenthose expressions
of one's real self and those which seem foreign. Turner claims that there is a
distinctionbetween people who subjectivelyexperience the real self as anchored
in institutions and those who experience it as anchoredin impulse. To one per-

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

548

OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

of the realself "breaking


son,anangryoutburstis anindication
througha deceptive crustof institutionalbehavior.... true self consistsof deep,unsocialized,
innerimpulses";to anotherperson,this outburstthreatensor confusesthe real
self, whichis recognizedin "actsof volition,in the pursuitof institutionalized
goals"(Turner1976:991).Turner(1976:992)continuesthat "[c]onscientious
acceptanceof groupobligationsandunswervingloyaltycan meanthatthe real
self has assumedfirmcontrolandovercomethe alienforces.Butforthose who
findoutwhotheyreallyarebylisteningto the voiceof impulse,the samebehavior is a meaninglesssubmissionto institutional
regimensandauthoritarianism."
feelthattheyareachievingthese
Nonetheless,Turnernotesthat"institutionals"
externalgoals, as individuals.In other words,becausethe institutionalgoals
havebeen internalized,
they experiencethe fulfillmentof these goalsas being
guidedby their own personalconscience:"Althoughwe understandachievement, ethicalconformity,andaltruismas rootedin institutions,the patternis
so thereneedbe no sense ofanexternalcause"(Turner1976:1012).
internalized,
I cite TurnerbecauseI feel he rightlypointsto coexistingandyet different
"Western"subjectiveconceptionsof what constitutesthe true self foundin
the West. Althoughhis argumentis that we are graduallyshiftingfromthe
institutionalto the impulsive,he does recognizethe currentcoexistence of
more individualisticor more social anchoragesin what people claimas the
domainof theirrealself. Turnerdoes admitthatthe institutionalandimpulsive
selves he describesarepolartypes.Mostoftenthese selves coexistpeacefully
in the sameperson,butcertainsubcultures(thoughhe does not specifywhich)
mayhighlighta particular
anchorage.Turner(1976:997)writesthat"polartypes
suchas these aremerelya wayto startthinkingaboutvariationin the sense of
self. Except on the fringesof society, we are unlikelyto findthe extremes.
Elementsof bothanchoragesprobablycoexist comfortably
in the averageperson."Andyet he also writes that "differencesamonggroupsof peoplein key
facetsof self maybe of sufficientimportancethattheirexperienceof eachother
is noncongruent"
(Turner1976:997).
InEthnicOptions:ChoosingIdentitiesin America,Waters(1990)showshow
Americansuse ethnicityto fulfilltwo equallyimportantneeds of community
andindividualuniqueness,pointingto the presenceof bothindividualistic
and
sociocentricstrainsin America.She writesof the wayin whichethnicityis able
to accommodateAmericans'need to feel unique,as well as their need to belong to somethinglargerthanthemselves.Symbolicethnicitycombinesindividualitywith feelingsof communityandconformity:
Havingan ethnicidentityis somethingthatmakesyou bothspecialand
simultaneouslypartof a community.It is somethingthatcomes to you
involuntarily
throughheredity,andatthe sametimeit is a personalchoice.
And it allows you to express your individuality
in a way that does not
make you stand out as in any way differentfrom all kinds of other people.
In short, symbolic ethnic identity is the answer to a dilemma that has
deep roots in American culture. (Waters 1990:150)

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

OFTHEWESTERNSELF
THEORIES

549

andcommitmentinAmeriFinally,in theirsociologicalstudyof individualism


Bellah
et
al.
noticed
thatin talkingwith
can(upper-middle-class)
(1985:80)
life,
their informants,"anabsolutelyautonomousself anda self determinedcompletelyby the socialsituationdo not, then, turnout to be opposites.Manyof
those to whomwe talkedcan switchfromone vocabularyto the other,hardly
noticingthe difference."
TheWestEqualsAmerica
Anotherproblemwith accuratelydepictingthe Westernself is that most
who write on the self,10while claimingthata morererecent anthropologists
of the Westernself is needed,continueto referto a gefinedunderstanding
neric Westernindividualisticself based on the upper-middleclass. Whatwe
need, at the most generallevel, is whatMarcusandFischer(1986)referto as
culturaljuxtapositioning:
"equalethnographybetween us andthem."
theoriesof the Westernself is
Oneof the mainproblemswithanthropological
whoclaimto describethe selfofthe Westarereallydescribthatanthropologists
ingAmerica,as if it were representativeof the rest of the West.The problemof
but
using the imprecisecategoryof "theWest"is sometimesacknowledged,
to
limited
a
footnote.
Becker
like
be
others
(1995:2), many
(forexmay simply
Lutz
and
Danforth
White
1989;
1988;
1985;Abu-Lughod
1986;
Kirkpatrick
ample,
I couldoftensubstituteAmerican
Erchak1992),writesin a footnote:"Although
[i.e., U.S.] society,for conveniencesake, I use 'West'as a generalcategoryto
referto developednationswithshareddemocratic,
valuesin Europe
capitalistic
andNorthAmerica."In anotherfootnote,she writes:"Myuse of this category
forcomparison
is hencesomewhatimprecise,andI drawheavilyfromliterature
whichfocuseson the UnitedStates"(Becker1995:64).WhiteandKirkpatrick
of the Westernself, andyet every
(1985)describesome of the characteristics
referencemadeto substantiateanyclaimsaboutthe Westernself
ethnographic
is basedon researchon Americans,such as Quinn's(1982)studyof American
aboutmarriageandSchachterandSinger's(1962)studyof deunderstandings
terminantsof emotionalstates amongAmericans.
Lutz(1988)comparesIfalukandAmericanconceptionsof self andemotions
but in the conclusionswitchesto speakingof Ifalukversus "theWesternperspectiveon emotion,""Westernculturaldiscourse,""Westerntheoriesof humannatureandemotionbothacademicandlay,""theideologicalandobjective
conditionsof life in the contemporaryWest," "Westernthinking,"and the
"Westernapproachto language."Thus she extrapolatesfromAmericato the
West, as if Americais a miniatureWest.
THE "WESTERN"SELF: MISREPRESENTINGTHE
PHILOSOPHICALTRADITIONAND RELYINGON TEXTS
Withinanthropologicaltheory on the Western self, references are often made
to Western philosophers' descriptions of the self. These references serve as a
way of substantiatingone's descriptions of an individualistic,independent, and

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

550

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

boundedWesternself, andyet they are often quite superficialandare mento a chapter


tionedin passingor in a footnote.Forexample,in her introduction
titled "Emotion,Thought,and Estrangement:WesternDiscourseson Feeling,"Lutz (1988:53)covers "the extensive discussionsof the conceptof the
emotionsthat have occurredin the West forat least the past 2,000 years"in
one paragraph:
...

this discourse includes Plato's concern with the relation between

pleasureandthe good;the Stoicdoctrinethatpassionsare naturallyevil;


earlyChristianattemptsto distinguishthe emotionsofhumanfrailtyfrom
the emotionsof God;Hobbes'sview that the passionsare the primary
sourceof action... the argumentof Rousseauthatnaturalfeelingsareof
greatvalue.... Oneof the notableaspectsof this discourseis its concern
withemotionas essence.... they remainto varyingdegrees,thingsthat
have an inherentandunchangingnature.
Such relianceon philosophicalandtheologicaltexts has its own problems
but, nonetheless, wouldnot be so problematicif the philosophicaltradition
were accuratelyrepresented.However,as Murray(1993:9)notes, the philosophicalandtheologicaltraditionof accountingfor the Westernself has been
andmadeto seem moreunitarythanit actuallyis: "Thepurmischaracterized
portedphilosophicaland theologicalinheritanceof a stable self, tracedfrom
is oftenpresentedas
Plato,Descartes,Kantandthe teachingsof Christianity,
if it had not only unbrokencontinuityin the Westerntradition,but unchallenged dominanceas well."The West's dominantphilosophyof the self is in
realitya complex,heterogenous,andcontestedtraditionof thoughtwhose descriptionsof the self are not limitedto the notionof the self as bounded,individualistic,unitary,and essentialistic.In fact, Murray(1993:11)claims several differentaccountingsof the traditionsof Westernselfhoodcouldequally
have been constructed.He cites numerousphilosophersandtheologianswho
havepresentedalternativedepictionsof the self moreakinto the sociocentric,
exotic,relational,andfluidselves thatwe standin contrastto:
one couldturnto Heraclitusforfluidityof being.... Hobbes'smaterialandfinally,the Darwinism, Spinoza'smonism,Mill'sassociationalism,
ian-inspiredpragmatismof James have all presentedtheories of mind
alternativeto Cartesianrationaldualism.... the workof G.H.Meadand
that of both Sartreand Merleau-Pontyimplicatedselves that contrast
with Kantian,Cartesian,andChristianassumptions.(Murray1993:9)
Spiro (1993) also notes that the putativeWesternautonomous,bounded,
self is "astrawman."Viewingthe self in sucha fashionis held
individualistic
neither by "WilliamJames, G.H. Mead or Charles Cooley; neither by Freud,
Erik Erikson, or Heinz Kohut; neither by GordonAllport, Piaget, or Gardner
Murphy;neither by KarlPopper, IsaiahBerlin, or MarciaCavell... all of whom

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERNSELF

551

... stress the social embeddednessand interdependenceof the self' (Spiro


1993:137).
On the other side of the East/Westdichotomy,Elvin(1985),in a historical
reviewofphilosophical
Chineseconceptionsofthe self,alsorefusesto lockChina
into completesociocentrism.FromMenciusto Taoiststo otherneo-Confucian
thinkers,thereis fartoo muchvarietyto warrantsucha stale description.
Ratherthansystematicallygatheringphenomenological
descriptionsof the
self andengagingin ethnographiesthatwouldilluminatethe self, it seems that
in orderto gaininsightintothe Westernself, haveoften
manyanthropologists,
relied on texts writtenby selected philosophersand theologianswho stress
Westernindividualism
(or Easternsociocentrism),thus assumingwhatneeds
to be proven.
TheHomogenization
of Individualism
A relatedproblemwith the notionof a "Western"conceptionof self is the
is treatedas if it hadthe same meaningsanduses
way in whichindividualism
forallAmericans.Andyet, as we know,individualism
hasmanydifferentstrands,
meanings,definitions,and forms,which are taken up differentlyby various
subcultures.It is a largeenoughpublicsymbolthatit containsa multitudeof
meanings.Its powerlies preciselyin its ambiguity,in the waysin whichdifferent groupscan espouse anduse differentelements andmeaningsto fit their
local context. As Bellah et al. (1985:142)state, "individualism
has come to
mean so manythings and to containsuch contradictionsand paradoxesthat
even to defendit requiresthatwe analyzeit critically."Bellahet al. (1985:334)
write of the several strandsof individualism.
They claimthat this is a term
"used in numerous,sometimes contradictory,senses" and stress two main
is
expressiveandutilitarian.Expressiveindividualism
types of individualism:
the beliefthat"eachpersonhasa uniquecoreof feelingandintuitionthatshould
unfoldor be expressedif individuality
is to be realized."They relate expresto the phenomenonof romanticismin eighteenth-andninesive individualism
teenth-centuryEuropeanand Americancultureand to psychotherapyin the
views society as arisingfrom"a
twentiethcentury.Utilitarianindividualism
in
contractthatindividualsenterinto only orderto advancetheirself-interest.
of humanexist... [It] has an affinityto a basicallyeconomicunderstanding
ence" (Bellahet al. 1985:336).In describingsome of the people they interviewed,Bellahet al. writeof howthere are "differentmodes[ofindividualism]
even withinthe vocabulariesof each individual."
in the twentiethcentury,DavidPotter
In writingof Americanindividualism
(1973:143)notes the assumptionmanytheoristshave that all of the different
conceptswe placeunderindividualism
go together.He pointsout two differandthe fallacyof using one
ent emphasesof self-relianceandnonconformity
term, "individualism,"to express both these ideas. Potter (1973:143) notes
differences between an individualismof personal self-reliance, hardihood,and
stamina and one of intellectual independence and personal self-expression: "in
our historical experience, the believers in self-reliance, in the sense of taking

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

552

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

in the sense of encouragcare of oneself,andthe believersin nonconformity,


ingdissent,haveoftenbeenfar,farapart.In fact,these two types of individualists seem to be almostnaturalantagonists... ."
An exampleof such conflationis foundin Markusand Kitayama'srecent
book,EmotionandCulture:
EmpiricalStudiesofMutualInfluence(1994),where
the authorswrite of the independentself of NorthAmericaandmuchof Euthatare discussedat varioustimes
rope.The differentaspectsof individualism
book
include
from
this
self-reliance,a preferencefor
everything
throughout
an
inner
sense of owningopinions,
alone,
self-advertisement,
being
boasting,
andassertiveness,to, finally,the ideathatthe self shouldbe consistentacross
cultures.However,the notionthat some groupsmightespouse one of these
aspectsandnone of the rest andthatthis mightconstitutea different"brand"
of individualism
is not explored.Questionsto be consideredare to whatextent
onestrainof individualism
more
differentindividuals
andsubcultures"practice"
andwhy.
thananother(e.g., self-reliancemorethanself-advertisement)
theDichotomyWithin
Re-creating
One of the challengesin lookingfor sociocentrismwithinan individualistic
society is to avoidthe temptationto begin stereotypingagain,re-creatingthe
East/Westbipolarhomogeneity,onlyon a smallerscale,withinthe West.Kohn
(1969)wasamongthe firstto writeofdifferencesbetweenworking-andmiddleclass parentalvalues (see also Bernstein1971;Hochschild1979). He noted
that the highertheir class position,the more highlyparentsvalue self-directionandthe less highlythey valueconformityto externallyimposedstandards
(Kohn1969:71).Manysocialtheoristsstill shoehornsocialclasses intobipolar
procrusteanbeds of conformityversus self-direction,whichhardlyilluminate
the varyingindividualistic
andconformiststyles presentin all groups.n
In comparisonsof a genericWest to the morerelationalEasternconception
of self, effortsto dehomogenizeAmericanindividualism
oftenconsist of very
in
out
sociocentric
our
midst
(as opposedto actions,
brieflypointing
groups
that
or
all
and
discourses
Americans
share
concepts,
practiceatvarioustimes).
There is usuallya perfunctorysentence or two, or perhapsa footnote,referringto women(mostoften Gilligan1982is cited)or the workingclass as representingmore sociocentric,relational,or conformistcomponentsof American culture (Lutz 1988; McHugh1988; Derne 1992; Becker 1995). These
attemptsusuallyconstitutelittlemorethana few stereotypicalreferencesto a
relationalwomen.Forexample,
conformingworkingclassor to other-oriented,
Derne (1992:285)writes that "As recent feministscholars(Chodorow1978;
Gilligan1982)have argued,the focus on a modernself that emphasizesindividualautonomydoes not adequatelydescribethe self-conceptionsof American women,whichfocus more on connectednessto others thanthe self-conceptions of American men do."
Hence, one domain in which sociocentrism has been described by anthropologists is amongwomen. For example, of the Western self, McHugh (1988:83)
states that "the belief in the inherent value of the individualand the primacyof

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERNSELF

553

individualrights looms large in the West, but if one looks closely at ... the
discourse of women-the emphasis on the individualmay seem less prowhatGilliganmeanswhenshe talksaboutwomen's
nounced.. ."Furthermore,
relatednessand what anthropologistsmean when they talk aboutsociocentrismareperhapstwo differentphenomena.Onerecentstudyof self-construal
in five culturesby socialpsychologists(Kashimaet al. 1995)showedthatdifferencesbetween these culturesare capturedmostlyby the extent to which
peoplesee themselvesas actingas independentagents,"whereasgenderdifferences are best summarizedby the extent to whichpeople regardthemselves as emotionallyrelatedto others"(Kashimaet al. 1995:925).Hence,
Kashimaet al. (1995:935)state thattheirstudy"hasshownthatthere is little
overlapbetweenculturalandgenderdifferences."
Whilethe attemptto finda certainsociocentrismin the Westis muchneeded,
movingbeyondstereotypical,essentialistdepictionsof the workingclass and
women is vital. The continuedglossing of certaingroupsas "conformist"
or
"connected"onlybringsus backto the bipolarrealitywe were tryingto avoid
in the firstplace.Wheninitiallymakingbriefreferencesto sociocentricstrains
in ourmidst,perhapswe shouldfurtherexplorewhetherit is womenas a catandwhetherit is
egorywho are necessarilyacrossthe board"other-oriented"
the conformistworkingclass that providesthe sociocentricelement in our
culture.Perhapsit is time to acknowledgethatin all groups,as in all individuandsociocentricorientationsexist,butin differingstyles
als,bothindividualistic
andratios,pendingon the localworldsthey inhabit.
EXPLORINGTHE GAP BETWEENCULTURALMODELAND
SUBJECTIVEEXPERIENCE
Progresswith the East/Westdichotomycan begin only when we question
the stereotypeson bothsides. Improvementof anthropological
theoryon the
Westernself also dependsupona reexaminationof a very fundamental
question: namely,how closely parallelare sharedculturalmodels and subjective
experience?Canwe assume a very tight fit betweenculturallysharedmeanings andbody/selfprocesses?Weber(1949:42)definedcultureas "the finite
segmentof the meaninglessinfinityof the world-process,a segmenton which
We are allbornintomeaninghumanbeingsconfermeaningandsignificance."
filledlifeworlds,yet this immersiondoes not implya passivityon the partof
who mayactivelymanipulateanduse culturalmodels,investing
the individual,
themwithidiosyncraticmeaning.Hencethere is alwaysa certainvariabilityin
the degree of personalor subculturalinternalizationof culturalmeanings.
Obeyesekere(1981:104)writes of the variationsin the way humansrelateto
suchculturalmeanings:"Thevery notionof subcultureimpliessuchvariation.
Also, thoughindividualsmay orderthe worldthrougha set of ideas or meanings, their significance for individualand collective life may show qualitative
differences. One does not relate to all segments of culture in the same way."
Some of the main methodological problems with the anthropologicaldepic-

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

554

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

tion of Westernselves havebeen notedby Hollan(1992),Spiro(1993, 1984),


Howard(1985),Wellenkamp
(1988),Strauss(1992),andLindholm
(1997).These
authorsnote the dangersof takingidealWesternculturalmodelsas synonymouswith subjectiveexperienceandusingthem as the sole basis for a comparisonof the self. Spiro(1984)hasnotedthe problemswithrelyingon written
texts andphilosophicaltheories,privilegingidealdiscoursesratherthansubjective experience.Assuminga one-to-onecorrespondencefails to acknowledge the extent to whichidealculturallylegitimatedself-images"maynot coincide neatly with personalexperienceand may ignore, obscure,and even
misrepresentaspectsof experience"(Wellenkamp
1988:488;see alsoLindholm
Hollan
This
often
the relatedassumption
includes
1997;
1992).
assumption
that people are actuallylivingby these culturalpremises (Spiro1984).The
possibilityexists thatnotallof subjectiveexperienceswillbe neatly"covered"
or subsumedby the culturalmodelat handandthatculturalmodelsmaycover,
hide, and even distortaspects of personalexperience.Furthermore,not all
culturalmodelsfitindividuals
orsubculturesinthe sameway.Strauss(1992:217)
makesthe pointthatculturalmodelsdifferin not onlythe extent but also the
kindof directiveforcethey give: "Americansuccess values,thoughendorsed
by fourof the workingmen I talkedto, motivatedthe actionsof onlyone of the
men who statedthem."
AN EXAMPLEOF "WHERETO GO FROMHERE":CHILD
REARINGIN MANHATTANAND QUEENS
My ownresearchon childrearingamongpreschool-agechildrenin Manhattan andQueensis relevanthere insofaras it triedto resist some of the above
assumptionsby exploringthe differentways the culturalmodelof individualism was takenup,talkedabout,andpracticedby parentsandteachersin three
communities.'2
(Fora fulldescriptionof this study,see Kusserow1999.)Disciand
talk
about
the child'sself and nonverbalandverbalparent/teacher
pline
andchildinteractionsrevealedvaryingtypes of moreidiosyncraticindividualism(s) thatfit each communityin a way thatthe genericculturalmodelcould
not. Individualism
wrappeditself aroundthe particularneeds andconcernsof
eachcommunity:SouthRockaway(lower-working-class),
BeachChannel(upand CarterHill (upper-middle-class).
per-working-class),
By listeningto the
metaphors,adjectives,images,and nonverbalgestures used in parentaland
teacherdisciplineandtalk aboutthe child'sself, I noted three types of individualism:harddefensive,hard offensive,and soft offensive(Table 1). Individual-

ism was differentiallywoven into metaphorsof openingor tighteningup, of


or the emotionallycomplexartist,of densityor fluidity.One of
"Superman"
the maindifferencesbetweenthese typesof individualism
was in whetherthey

saw the child's self as a singular unit against the world (e.g., South Rockaway
hard defensive individualism)or as a singular unit opening out into the world
(Carter Hill and Beach Channel offensive individualisms).
I also discovered that I was not able to re-create the East/West dichotomy

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TABLE 1
Types of Individualism

Community

Class
Lower-Working
SouthRockaway

Class
Upper-Working
BeachChannel

Type of Individualism

HardDefensive

HardOffensive

Strandsof individualism
espousedby parents/teachers

Perseverance,self-pride,
independence

Independence,self-confidence
self-determination,
perseverance

Words/images/metaphors/
phraseswoveninto
individualistic
talk/discipline
of child

ThickeningImages:be tough,
standyourground,shield,tighten,
stayput,mindyourownbusiness,
don'tmess withme, alertness,
"Lovemanybut trustfew, always
paddleyourowncanoe,""Lookout
for yourself'

FootballMetaphors:breakthrought
frontline, toughnessneededto brea
intohighergrounds
Nike Ads:just do it, go forit, tough
Imagesof UpwardMovementand
Momentum:Superman,rockets
blasting,"Putyourbest footforwar
"Trysteppingout,""Testthe water

SocialClass

Sociocentricemphasesandpracticesdo not impedethe child'sdevelopmen


between
Relationship
Parentsengagein frequentnonchalantswitchingbetwee
individualism
andsociocentrism hardindividualism.
individualist
modeandsociocentricmodein child-rearing
practices,talkto an
aboutchild.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

556

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL

on a smaller scale along class lines. Even among those whom Kohn (1969)
would describe as the most self-directed, there was a fair amount of sociocentric socialization,just as there was a great deal of individualistictalk among the
working-class parents in Queens. In all communities, parents socialized both
sociocentric and individualisticorientations-the difference lay in how the parents and teachers seemed to feel the coaxing of one (sociocentric) would affect
the other (growth as an individual). For example, in the upper-middle-class
community of Carter Hill, talk about the importance of sociocentric qualities
was quite prevalent ("Be polite, don't interrupt"),but parents worried that this
might stifle the development, expression, and opening of the individualistic
self they were also fostering. This was not the case among the working-class
communities, where parents engaged in frequentnonchalantswitching between
the two modes in their talk about the child and did not seem to feel that encouragement of conformity ("You'restill my kid and you'll do what I say") was a
threat to the child's independence.
My own research represents merely one way in which the gap between cultural model and subjective experience may perhaps be lessened. The refining
of the generic cultural model to the "harddefensive" individualismspoken of
by lower-working-class South Rockaway parents is certainly not identical to
parents' and teachers' subjective experiences of the self, but it is perhaps one
step closer than relying on philosophicaltexts on Western individualismwhich
speak for the Dutch, Italians,Americans, and so on. It also points to the ways in
which sociocentric and individualisticmodes coexistamong parents and teachers in the same socioeconomic community, thereby avoiding a re-creation of
the bipolar dichotomies that only freeze groups (as of late, women and the
working class) into highly simplistic, single modes of orientation.

NOTES
1. Forexamplesofthisover-dichotomization,
see ShwederandBourne1984;Marriott
1976, 1990;and Dumont1980.Recentreferencesto this dichotomyand/orproblems
withit canbe foundin Lamb1997;Lindholm1997;ConklinandMorgan1996;Markus
andKitayama1994;HollandandKipnis1994;Levy1973,1984;Spiro1993;Ewing1990;
Marsella,DeVos, and Hsu 1985;Dumont1965;Howard1985;Shwederand Bourne
1984;Stigler,Shweder,andHerdt1990;Shweder1991;Geertz1973;Lutz1988;Abu1985;Kleinman1986,1988;Danforth1989;Rosaldo
Lughod1986;WhiteandKirkpatrick
1984;Hsu 1983;Kondo1990;HeelasandLock1981;MarcusandFischer1986;Lock
andGordon1988;Carrithers,Collins,andLukes1985;Erchak1992;Johnson1985.
2. For examplesof this, see Ewing1990, 1991;McHugh1988;Mines 1994;Ortner
of the
1995;Parish1994;Bachnik1992.Forexamplesof this sortof dehomogenization
Westernconceptof self, see Battaglia1995;Hollandand Kipnis1994;Murray1993;
andHollan1981;Hollan1992.
Spiro1993;Wellenkamp
3. See WhiteandKirkpatrick
1985;ShwederandBourne1984.
4. See, forexample,WhiteandKirkpatrick
1985.
5. Kashima1987;Kagitcibasi1987;Hofstede1980;Sampson1988;Waterman1981;
Rotenberg1977;Triandiset al. 1985;Triandis1987,1989.
6. However,thereis a verythoroughcriticalhistoryof the philosophical
background

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SELF
THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERN

557

self in CharlesTaylor'sSourcesof theSelf (1989).Also,


of this Westernindividualized
Stephenson(1991)distinguishesthe conceptionof self in the Netherlandsfromthe generalindividualistic
modelof the "Westernself."He attemptsto showhow"Dutchsociety
variantson some
is not a simplecloneof America,norare Dutchpeople'homogenized'
Hahn
and
Gaines(1985)
summarized
'Western'
theme"
1991:245).
(Stephenson
easily
writeon differencesbetweenNorthernandSouthernEuropeanconceptionsof the self.
Lindholm
(1988)writesofthe Americanemphasison romanticlove(inwhicha loss of the
in a culturewhichplacesso
boundariesof the self is experienced)as the counterbalance
muchemphasison individualism.
Considerthe waytalkaboutthe authenticself in psyoftenhas to do withthe longingof Americansformoreenrichingsocialrelachotherapy
tionships,suchthatan egocentricidiommayactuallyexpressa sociocentricsentiment.
7. See Battaglia1995;HollandandKipnis1994;Murray1993;Spiro1993;Kusserow
1999.
8. See Riesman1950;Varenne1977;Hochschild1979;Gilligan1982;Lykes 1985;
Wilkinson1988;Hewitt1989;Sampson1988.
9. See Sennett1976;MacIntyre1984;Turner1976;Trilling1972.
10. See Geertz 1973; Levy 1973;Marsella,DeVos, and Hsu 1985;Rosaldo1984;
Lutz 1988;Whiteand Kirkpatrick
1985;Danforth1989;Markusand Kitayama1994;
Kondo1990;Johnson1985; Stigler, Shweder,and Herdt 1990; Abu-Lughod1986;
Whittaker1992;ConklinandMorgan1996.
11. Socialpsychologistssuch as Triandiset al. (1985)and Kagitcibasi(1987)also
focuson the coexistenceof individual
andgrouployaltiesandthe problemswithplacing
them in bipolarpositions.
12. I beganfieldworkin ManhattanandQueensin 1993with the hope that I could
contributeto the dehomogenization
of the Westernconceptof self by exploringthe
complexitiesand subtletiesof conceptionsof the child'sself amongwhite American
parentsandteachersof preschool-agechildrenfromdifferentcommunities.Halfof my
researchinvolvedstudyingtheverbalandnonverbalsocialization
ofself-conceptsamong
in preschools.The otherhalfof my fieldworkinvolvedextensive
white four-year-olds
semistructuredinterviewswiththe parentsof these children.I livedin the New York
areafrom1993 to 1995, spendingapproximately
three monthsin fourpreschools,observingone preschoolat a time. I interviewedthirtyparentsin the Queensareaand
area.The three communitiesI studiedwere CarterHill,a
thirty-onein the Manhattan
whiteupper-to upper-middle-class
predominantly
communityon the uppereast side of
in Queens;
SouthRockaway,
a raciallymixedlower-working-class
Manhattan;
community
andBeachChannel,a predominantly
comwhite,IrishandGermanupper-working-class
were chosenas the age of childrento observe
munityalso in Queens.Four-year-olds
insofaras dialogueof a more advancedandcomplexnaturecouldtake place,thus enablingthe researcherto studythe culturalandclass valuesembeddedin teachers'explanationsandtheirresponsesto whenchildrenmadea comment,respondedto a question, talkedback,talkedto themselves,etc. Withchildrenfouryears old,parentsstill
feel theyhavea tremendousinfluenceoverthe developmentofthe self,andtheirwishes
anddesiresforappropriate
behaviortendto be moreobviousthanwith infants.

REFERENCESCITED
L., 1986,VeiledSentiments:HonorandPoetryin a BedouinSociety.
Abu-Lughod,
Press.
Berkeley:Universityof California
Bachnik,J.M.,1992,The Two Facesof Self andSocietyin Japan.Ethos20:3-32.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

558

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL
the Self:A ThematicIntroduction.
Battaglia,D., 1995, Problematizing
Pp. 1-15 in
Rhetoricsof SelfMaking(ed.by D. Battaglia).Berkeley:Universityof California
Press.
Becker,A.E.,1995,Body,Self,Society:The ViewfromFiji.Philadelphia:
University
of PennsylvaniaPress.
Bellah,R.N.,R. Madsen,W. Sullivan,A. Swidler,andS. Tipton,1985,Habitsof the
Heart:Individualism
andCommitment
in AmericanLife.New York:HarperandRow.
Bernstein,B., 1971,Class,CodesandControl:TheoreticalStudiestowarda Sociology of Language.London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul.
Bock, P., 1988, RethinkingPsychologicalAnthropology:
Continuityand Changein
HumanAction.New York:W.H.FreemanandCompany.
Carrithers,M., S. Collins,and S. Lukes,eds., 1985, The Categoryof the Person:
Anthropology,
Philosophy,History.Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
of Mothering:Psychoanalysis
andthe SociolChodorow,
N., 1978,The Reproduction
of
of
Gender.
California
Press.
ogy
Berkeley:University
ofPersonhood
Conklin,B.,andL.M.Morgan,1996,Babies,Bodies,andthe Production
in NorthAmericaanda NativeAmazonian
Society.Ethos24(4):657-94.
Danforth,L., 1989, FirewalkingandReligiousHealing:The Anastenariaof Greece
andthe AmericanFirewalking
Movement.Princeton,NJ.: PrincetonUniversityPress.
of Self:FamilyStrucandImpulsiveConceptions
Derne,S., 1992,BeyondInstitutional
tureandthe SociallyAnchoredRealSelf. Ethos20:259-88.
de Tocqueville,A. 1841,Democracyin America(trans.by H. Reeve,withan original
prefaceandnotes byJ.C.Spencer).4th ed., rev. andcorr.from8th Parised. New York:
J. andH.G.Langley.
Dumont,L., 1965, The FunctionalEquivalentsof the Individualin Caste Society.
Contributions
to IndianSociety7:85-99.
Dumont,L., 1980,HomoHierarchicus.
Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
Elvin,M., 1985,BetweenEarthandHeaven:Conceptionsof the Self in China.Pp.
S. Collins,andS. Lukes).
156-89 in The Categoryof the Person(ed.by M. Carrithers,
Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Erchak,G., 1992, The Anthropologyof Self and Behavior.New Brunswick,N.J.:
RutgersUniversityPress.
Ewing,K.P., 1990,The Illusionof Wholeness:Culture,Self andthe Experienceof
Inconsistency.Ethos 18:251-78.
TheoriesExplainthe PakistaniWoman?IntraEwing,K.P.,1991,CanPsychoanalytic
intheExtendedFamily.Ethos19:131and
psychicAutonomy Interpersonal
Engagement
60.
of Cultures:SelectedEssays.New York:Basic
Geertz,C., 1973,The Interpretation
Books.
Geertz,C., 1975,Fromthe Native'sPointof View:Onthe Natureof Anthropological
AmericanScientist63:47-53.
Understanding.
Gilligan,C., 1982,Ina DifferentVoice:Psychological
TheoryandWomen'sDevelopment.Cambridge,
Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
Goffman,E., 1959, The Presentationof Self in EverydayLife. GardenCity,N.Y.:
Doubleday.
Hahn,R.A.,andA.D.Gaines,eds.,1985,PhysiciansofWesternMedicine:AnthropologicalApproaches
to TheoryandPractice.Hingham,Mass.:KluwerAcademicPublishers.
of
Heelas,P., andA. Lock,eds., 1981,IndigenousPsychologies:The Anthropology
Self. London:AcademicPress.
Press.
Self.Philadelphia:
Hewitt,J.P.,1989,DilemmasoftheAmerican
TempleUniversity

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SELF
THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERN

559

Hochschild,A., 1979,EmotionWork,FeelingRules,andSocialStructure.American
Journalof Sociology85(3):551-75.
Differencesin Work-ReHofstede,G., 1980,Culture'sConsequences:International
latedValues.BeverlyHills,Calif.:Sage.
Differencesin the Self.Journalof Anthropological
Hollan,D., 1992, Cross-Cultural
Research48(4):283-300.
andStoriesof ExpoHolland,D., andA. Kipnis,1994,MetaphorsforEmbarrassment
Self in AmericanCulture.Ethos22:316-42.
sure:The Not-So-Egocentric
andthe Prospectsfora CulturalPsychology.Pp.
Howard,A., 1985,Ethnopsychology
401-20 in Person,Self andExperience:ExploringPacificEthno-Psychologies
(ed. by
Press.
G.M.WhiteandJ. Kirkpatrick).
Berkeley:Universityof California
Reconsidered:
AnHsu, F.L.K.,1983,RuggedIndividualism
Essaysin Psychological
thropology.Knoxville:Universityof Tennessee Press.
Johnson,F., 1985,The WesternConceptof Self.Pp.57-82 in CultureandSelf (ed.by
A. Marsella,G. DeVos,andA. Hsu).London:Tavistock.
Kagitcibasi,C., ed., 1987, Growthand Progressin Cross-Cultural
Psychology:SeConferenceof the International
Association
lectedPapersfromthe EighthInternational
for Cross-Cultural
Psychologyheld at Istanbul,Turkey,July6-10, 1986.Berwyn,Ill.:
Swets NorthAmerica.
in Individualism/Collectivism
Kashima,Y., 1987,Conceptionsof Person:Implication
Research.Pp. 23-47 in GrowthandProgressin Cross-Cultural
Psychology:Selected
Conferenceof the International
Associationfor
Papersfromthe EighthInternational
Cross-CulturalPsychology held at Istanbul,Turkey, July 6-10, 1986 (ed. by C.
Berwyn,Ill.:Swets NorthAmerica.
Kagitcibasi).
U. Kim,S. Choi,M. Gelfand,andM. Yuki,1995,Culture,
Kashima,Y.,S. Yamaguchi,
GenderandSelf:A PerspectivefromIndividualism-Collectivism
Research.Journalof
PersonalityandSocialPsychology.65(5):925-37.
Khare,R.S.,1984,The Untouchableas Himself:Ideology,Identity,andPragmatism
Eng.:Cambridge
amongthe LucknowChamars.Cambridge,
UniversityPress.
of
and
andPainin
Social
Distress
Disease:
Neurasthenia
Kleinman,A., 1986,
Origins
ModernChina.New Haven,Conn.:YaleUniversityPress.
Kleinman,A., 1988,RethinkingPsychiatry:FromCulturalCategoryto PersonalExperience.New York:Free Press;London:CollierMacmillan.
Kleinman,A., andJ. Kleinman,1991,SufferingandIts ProfessionalTransformation:
of Interpersonal
Towardan Ethnography
Experience.Culture,MedicineandPsychiatry 15(3):275-301.
A Studyin Values.Homewood,Ill.:Dorsey
Kohn,M., 1969,ClassandConformity:
Press.
Kondo,D., 1990, CraftingSelves: Power, Genderand Discoursesof Identityin a
JapaneseWorkplace.
Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
AmericanIndividualism:
Kusserow,A., 1999,De-Homogenizing
SocializingHardand
in Manhattan
andQueens.Ethos27. In press.
SoftIndividualism
Lamb,S., 1997,The MakingandUnmakingof Persons:Notes on AgingandGender
in NorthIndia.Ethos25(3):279-302.
Lasch,C., 1979,Cultureof Narcissism:AmericanLifein an Age of DiminishingExpectations.New York:W.W.Norton.
Levy, R.I., 1973, Tahitians:Mindand Experiencein the Society Islands.Chicago:
Universityof ChicagoPress.
Levy, R.I., 1984, Emotion,Knowing,and Culture.Pp. 214-37 in CultureTheory:

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

560

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL
Essays on Mind,Self andEmotion(ed.by R.A.ShwederandR.A.LeVine)Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Lifton,R.J.,1970, Boundaries:PsychologicalManin Revolution.New York:Simon
andSchuster.
Lin,N., 1988,ChineseFamilyStructureandChineseSociety.Bulletinof Instituteof
Ethnology,AcademiaSinica65(Spring):59-129.
of SocialandPsychological
Lindholm,C., 1988,LoversandLeaders:A Comparison
Modelsof RomanceandCharisma.SocialScienceInformation
27(1):3-35.
Lindholm,C., 1990,Charisma.Oxford:BasilBlackwell.
Lindholm,C., 1997, Does the SociocentricSelf Exist? Reflectionson Markusand
Research53:405-22.
Kitayama's"CultureandSelf."Journalof Anthropological
Lock,M.,andD. Gordon,eds., 1988,BiomedicineExamined.Norwell,Mass.:Kluwer
AcademicPublishers.
Lutz,C., 1988, UnnaturalEmotions:EverydaySentimentson a MicronesianAtoll
andTheirChallengeto WesternTheory.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
vs. CollectivistBases for Notionsabut
Lykes,M.B., 1985,GenderandIndividualist
the Self.Journalof Personality53:356-83.
MacIntyre,A., 1984,AfterVirtue:A Studyin MoralTheory.NotreDame,Ind.:Universityof NotreDamePress.
as CulturalCritique.Chicago:UniMarcus,G.,andM.J.Fischer,1986,Anthropology
versityof ChicagoPress.
Markus,H., andS. Kitayama,eds., 1994,EmotionandCulture:EmpiricalStudiesof
D.C.:AmericanPsychologicalAssociation.
MutualInfluence.Washington,
Transactions:
Hindu
Marriott,McK.,1976,
DiversityWithoutDualism.Pp. 109-42
Instituteforthe Studyof
in Transaction
andMeaning(ed.by B. Kapferer).
Philadelphia:
HumanIssues.
to InMarriott,McK.,1990, Constructingan IndianEthnosociology.Contributions
dianSociology23:1-40.
Marsella,A., G. DeVos,andF. Hsu,eds., 1985,CultureandSelf.London:Tavistock.
Mathews,G.,1996,The StuffofDreams,Fading:Ikigaiand"theJapaneseSelf."Ethos
24(4):718-47.
McHugh,E., 1988,Conceptsof the Personamongthe Gurungsof Nepal.American
Ethnologist15:75-87.
the Person:HierarchicalSociety and Individual
Mines, M., 1988, Conceptualizing
90(3):568-79.
Autonomyin India.AmericanAnthropologist
in South
andIndividuality
Mines,M., 1994,PublicFaces,PrivateVoices:Community
India.Berkeley:Universityof California
Press.
Murray,D.W.,1993,WhatIs the WesternConceptof the Self?OnForgettingDavid
Hume.Ethos21(1):3-23.
Myers,F.R.,1979,Emotionsandthe Self:A Theoryof PersonhoodandPoliticalOrder amongPintupiAborigines.Ethos 7:343-70.
Obeyesekere,G., 1981,Medusa'sHair:AnEssayon PersonalSymbolsandReligious
Experience.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.
No
Ortner,S., 1995,The Case of the Disappearing
Shamans,or No Individualism,
Relationalism.
Ethos23:355-90.
Oxfeld,E., 1992,Individualism,
Holism,andthe MarketMentality:Noteson the Recollectionsof a ChineseEntrepreneur.
CulturalAnthropology
7(3):267-300.
of Mind,
Parish,S.M.,1994,MoralKnowingin a HinduSacredCity:An Exploration
EmotionandSelf.New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SELF
THEORIES
OFTHEWESTERN

561

Potter,D.M.,1973,HistoryandAmericanSociety:Essaysof DavidM. Potter(ed.by


D.E. Fehrenbacher).
New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
in AmericanMarriage:A CulturalAnalysis.AmeriQuinn,N., 1982,"Commitment"
can Ethnologist9:775-98.
Riesman,D., 1950,The LonelyCrowd:A Studyof the ChangingAmericanCharacter
with R. DenneyandN. Glazer).New Haven,Conn.:YaleUniversity
(in collaboration
Press.
Reconsidered.New York:Free Press.
Riesman,D., 1964,Individualism
Toward
an
of Self andFeeling.Pp. 137-57 in CulRosaldo,M., 1984,
Anthropology
tureTheory:Essayson Mind,SelfandEmotion(ed.by R.AShwederandR.A.LeVine).
Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Rosenberger,N., 1989,DialecticBalancein the PolarModelof Self:TheJapanCase.
Ethos 17:88-113.
UniverRosenberger,N., 1992,JapaneseSense of Self.Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
sity Press.
andReciprocal
A CrossIndividualism:
Rotenberg,M., 1977,AlienatingIndividualism
CulturalConceptualization.
Journalof HumanisticPsychology17:3-17.
Sampson,E.E., 1988,The Debateon Individualism:
IndigenousPsychologiesof the
Individual
andTheirRolein PersonalandSocietalFunctioning.
AmericanPsychologist
43(1):15-22.
Schachter,S., andJ.E. Singer, 1962, Cognitive,Socialand PhysiologicalDeterminantsof EmotionalState.PsychologicalReview69:379-99.
Sennett,R., 1976,The Fallof PublicMan.New York:W.W.Norton.
Shweder,R.A.,1991, ThinkingthroughCultures:Expeditionsin CulturalPsycholMass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
ogy. Cambridge,
Shweder,R.A.,andE.J.Bourne,1984,Does the Conceptof the PersonVaryCrossPp. 158-99 in CultureTheory:Essays on Mind,Self andEmotion(ed. by
Culturally?
R.A.ShwederandR.A.LeVine).Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
The
Pursuit
of
Loneliness:
American
Culture
atthe BreakingPoint.
Slater,P.E.,1976,
Boston:BeaconPress.
Solomon,R.C., 1983, The Passions.Notre Dame,Ind.:Universityof Notre Dame
Press.
Spiro,M., 1984,SomeReflectionson CulturalDeterminismandRelativismwithSpecialReferenceto EmotionandReason.Pp.323-46 in CultureTheory:Essayson Mind,
Self,andEmotion(ed.by R.A.ShwederandR.A.LeVine).Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
withinthe Context
Spiro,M., 1993,Is the WesternConceptionof the Self "Peculiar"
of the WorldCultures?Ethos21:107-53.
Stephenson,P.H., 1991,Goingto McDonald'sin Leiden:Reflectionson the Concept
of Self in Societyin the Netherlands.Ethos 17:226-47.
Stigler,J.W.,R.A.Shweder,andG.Herdt,eds., 1990,CulturalPsychology:Essayson
HumanDevelopment.Cambridge,
Comparative
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Strauss,C., 1992,WhatMakesTony Run?Schemasas MotivesReconsidered.Pp.
andC.Strauss).
191-224inHumanMotivesandCulturalModels(ed.byR.G.D'Andrade
Cambridge,
Eng.:Cambridge
UniversityPress.
in
a Balancebetweenhito("person")
andkojin("individual")
Tada,1991,Maintaining
a JapaneseFarmingCommunity.Ph.D.diss.,Universityof California
at SanDiego.
Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress.
Taylor,C., 1989,Sourcesof the Self. Cambridge,
andSocialPsychologicalTheory.In Growthand
Triandis,H.C.,1987,Individualism

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

562

OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
JOURNAL
Psychology:SelectedPapersfromthe EighthInternational
Progressin Cross-Cultural
Conferenceof the InternationalAssociationfor Cross-CulturalPsychologyheld at
Istanbul,Turkey,July 6-10, 1986 (ed. By C. Kagitcibasi).Berwyn,Ill.: Swets North
America.
Triandis,H.C., 1989, The Self andSocialBehaviorin DifferingCulturalContexts.
PsychologicalReview96:506-20.
Triandis,H.C., K. Leung,M. J. Villareal,and F. Clack,1985, Allocentricversus
IdiocentricTendencies:ConvergentandDiscriminantValidation.
Journalof Research
in Personality19:395-415.
Mass.:HarvardUniversity
Trilling,L., 1972,SincerityandAuthenticity.Cambridge,
Press.
Tuan,Yi-F.,1982,SegmentedWorldsandSelf.Minneapolis:
Universityof Minnesota
Press.
Turner,R., 1976, The RealSelf: FromInstitutionto Impulse.AmericanJournalof
Sociology81:989-1016.
Varenne,H., 1977,AmericansTogether:StructuredDiversityina MidwesternTown.
New York:TeachersCollegePress.
AmericanPsychologist
and Interdependence.
Waterman,A.S., 1981, Individualism
36(7):762-73.
Waters,M., 1990,EthnicOptions:ChoosingIdentitiesin America.Berkeley:UniverPress.
sity of California
Weber,M., 1949, The Methodologyof the SocialSciences (ed. and trans.by E.A.
ShilsandH.A.Finch.New York:Free Press.
J.C.,1988,Notionsof GriefandCatharsisamongthe Toraja.American
Wellenkamp,
15:486-500.
Ethnologist
J.C.,andD. Hollan,1981,The Influenceof AmericanConceptsof the
Wellenkamp,
Self on the Experienceof Bereavement.Paperpresentedat the KroeberAnthropological Society,Spring1981,Berkeley,California.
White,G., andJ. Kirkpatrick,
eds., 1985, Person, Self and Experience:Exploring
PacificEthno-Psychologies.
Press.
Berkeley:Universityof California
SelfandItsCareer.Ethos20:191E., 1992,TheBirthoftheAnthropological
Whittaker,
219.
NewYork:HarperandRow.
Wilkinson,R., 1988,The Pursuitof AmericanCharacter.

This content downloaded from 138.251.14.35 on Sat, 11 Apr 2015 17:12:43 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

You might also like