Monday, March 11, 2013

Do be do be do...

I'll be honest, the last time I was at Angela's house I left Glenita (that's what the little monster has been named) there, and I haven't been back to pick her up. So there hasn't been much progression on that front! Glenita is just sitting there, legless. Hopefully I'll be able to finish that part this week. 

So how does crocheting shape my identity? Kind of a funny question. But since what we do defines who we are, it goes a little deeper than we might realize. Christiansen proposes that identities are closely related to what we do and our interpretations of those actions, as well as other's interpretations of those actions. One point he makes is that when people are being introduced, it is common for the question to be asked, "What do you do?" This is how our identities shape and are shaped by our relationships with others. Now, I'm probably not going to say, "I crochet," when asked what I do. I'll say I'm a full-time student and I work in a bakery. Why? Why not say that I crochet? I think it stems back to my goals. Christiansen also says that as adults, our identities are oriented towards goals. Why do we do what we do? 

I crochet for pleasure, for this class, and so that I can make cute baby booties and hats for my children someday. 

I go to school so that I can get a good education and, by the worlds standard, be successful. I want to learn and be a competent individual. 

I work so that I can make money to get through school and pay my rent.

All of these are occupations worthy of my time, but when I'm being introduced to someone, what is my goal? I'm trying to become a certain kind of person here, and I want people to know that. From my point of view, being a crochet expert doesn't sit very high on the totem pole as far as competency goes. And depending on who I'm talking to (usually other students and teachers), it's not very high on their totem pole either. Going to school and being a hard worker is. That's an identity I want to uphold. That's a goal I want to achieve. This is where the "looking glass theory," developed by Cooley, comes in. This means that "the reactions of others reflect their approval and disapproval and thus constitute a primary means of developing an awareness of ourselves." We seek to present images of ourselves to those around us. While I'm not a big fan of this theory because I would like to believe that I do the things I do for their intrinsic value and not for some social approval, it tends to ring true in so many ways. 

Because, would anything you do... anything at all... matter if  you were the only person on earth? 

So either everything we do is purely for other people and has nothing to do with having an approved identity, or it's to gain their approval and achieve our own self-serving goals. I'd like to believe the first, but something tells me the latter is more prevalent. It's human nature, I guess. But in my opinion, it is often a mixture of the two.

Sinatra knew what was up.
So how do I feel about all this? Christiansen talks about this whole "I" and "me" concept and how they're different. The way I understand it, the "I" does stuff, and the result is the "me." So how do I see myself? That's a really hard question, to be honest. I see myself as someone trying to do the right things, be competent, be cooperative, and just get somewhere. Maybe that "somewhere" is graduation, or feeling valued by my roommates, or getting married... and maybe some days it's just getting to my bed at the end of the day. The things "I" do definitely effect "me," and I think they effect where that "somewhere" is each day, because it does change. I think that's the beautiful thing about an identity. It's an evolving narrative, not written in stone. By changing what we do we can change who we are, and who we are determines where we want to be, and that determines what we do. See how that cycle works?

The "I" in crocheting hasn't really effected the "me" yet... at least I don't think it has. Who knows, maybe one day I'll look back and say, "Hey, that little Glenita monster sure did give me a different perspective on myself!" You just never know how what you do may effect who you are. 

Yours Truly

References
Christiansen, C. H. (1999). Defining lives: Occupation as identity: An essay on competence, coherence, and the creation of meaning. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53, 547-548.

2 comments:

  1. Hey Hannah! It sounds to me like if you named your little monster, she must have some meaning in your life! That is pretty nifty. You mentioned how that telling people you crochet is not necessarily a top priority for you because it is not socially accepted as important in terms of competency. Do you think a person's identity can still be formed around such occupations that are not deemed socially important or accepted as influencing competence? If so, how?

    ReplyDelete
  2. If I understood the article right, I think that things we do which don't have as much social significance, but are still important to us, are more of our self-concept than our identity. Identity seems to be the more socially constructed way we describe ourselves and how others see us. So, yes, I think they can still contribute to our identity, but only if we let them. But they most definitely become part of our self-concept.

    ReplyDelete