Kemper, Theodore D., Status, Power and Ritual Interaction: A Relational Reading of Durkheim, Goffman and Collins. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011, 305 pp. $104.95 hardcover (978-1-4094-2736-0) The question of what influences our behaviours most, individual factors, social and structural conditions of environment, or interaction of both, is still a current sociological debate. Kemper proposes a theoretical model from a radical standpoint: our behaviours, choices, and motives are status-power relational products and self is irrelevant for sociological analyses. This book has potential to ignite passionate and constructive theoretical debates in fields of social psychology and social inequality. Kemper considers that ritual as conceptualized by Durkheim, Goffman, and Collins, is incomplete since status-power dynamics are neglected. Using an axiomatic theoretical model, he suggests that all our actions, including altruistic and compassionate ones, aim to enhance status and/or power. Our status and/or power motivated behavioural patterns are mediated through reference groups that determine our values, beliefs, and decisions. A reference group is defined as any individual or group with whom we have a real or imagined (p. 34.). By abiding to values, norms and expectations of a reference group, we aim 1) to claim, confer, or consume status and/or, 2) to acquire and manage power for others or ourselves while avoiding sanctions or negative consequences from this reference group. The reference group seeks to civilize what Kemper calls organism: locus of our drives, passions, and desires (p. 49), but this organism is not self as defined by previous social scientists. Indeed, Kemper suggests that theoretical concept of self is superfluous to understand human behaviours sociologically. Our motives, beliefs, and thoughts result from our relationships, not self. We do not mobilize in conflicts because of our ideas and we do not bind together because of our beliefs. Rather, we strive to remain loyal to reference groups to which we identify. When we behave, reference group to which we identify influences our behaviour, not self with its thoughts, beliefs, emotions, or cognitive processes. To illustrate accuracy of his model, Kemper revisits Durkheim, Goffman, and Collins' definitions of ritual to demonstrate shortcomings of their sociological theoretical appraisals and versatility of his theory. According to Kemper, Durkheim erred with assumption that collective effervescence reinforced solidarity through collective consciousness; instead he contends that participants experience collective effervescence to enhance their status-power standing. Goffman reified situations and his understanding of ritual presented everyday interactions as sacred, whereas he should have recognized that rules and rituals confirm status and/or power. Collins described conversations as synchronized interactions when in fact they are geared towards status-power claims. In addition, Kemper contends that Collins failed to recognize that emotional entrainment is a consequence of status-power struggle and confused ritual success with status-power success. Kemper proposes that ritual should be defined as: the enactment of a type of relationship and wishes to convince us that analyzing ritual through status and power dimensions is more fruitful for study of social interaction than study of a conception of self (p. 173). Kemper navigates with great ability classical and contemporary theories showcasing his vast knowledge of a wide range of sociological oeuvres. …
Read full abstract