Cell Phones and their Technosocial Sites of Engagement - Amber Case Thesis

[email protected] http://oakhazelnut.com

TheCellPhone

AndItsTechnosocialSitesofEngagement

AmberCase@caseorganic

AThesisSubmittedinPartialFulfillmentofaDegreein

Sociology/Anthropology,Lewis&ClarkCollege

December17,2007

Advisor:Prof.DeborahHeath


Acknowledgements:

I’dliketothankmyparentsforsupportingmyeducation,artistic

work,andgenerallife.Iwanttothankmymomforteachingmehowto

read,andmydadforintroducingmetocomputingtechnologyatayoung

age.

IwouldalsoliketothankmythesisadvisorDeborahHeathfor

awakeningmetoaworldoftheoreticalresourcesthatlogarithmically

expandedmyhorizons.IwasfirstintroducedtoDr.Heathwhenshegavea

speechonCyborgAnthropologyduringtheLewis&ClarkCollege’sSpring

2005PhilosophyExtravaganza.AtthattimeIhadnoideathatthestudy

ofcyborgsexisted,butIrememberreadingalotofsciencefictionbooks

whenIwasyounger,andCyborgAnthropologywastherealworld

manifestationofthequestionsthatsciencefictionposed.DeborahHeath

helpedmetorealizethateveryfuturistideaIhadwasprobablydiscussed

byDonnaHaraway,SandyStone,orsomepostmodernanalystexamining

thephenomenologyoflivingwithindustryandtechnological

development.

AMBERCASE©2008 3


TableofContents

I. Abstract 4

II. Introduction 5

III. TheActorNetworkandtheTechnosocialHybrid 8

IV. ConstructionsofLiminality 9

1. ‘PutthatDogonHold!’CanineCompanionsandRCF 11

V. ConstructionsofthePublicandthePrivate 13

1. TheLandscapeoftheLandline 13

2. FaceSavingandCellPhoneUse 16

3. PrivacyandBoundaryMaintenance 19

4. NegotiatingTemporaryPrivateSpace 22

VI. PlaceandNonPlace 25

1. Time/SpaceCompression 25

2. AuditorySpaceasaPlace 27

3. ConnectinginNonPlaces 29

VII. TheTechnosocialWomb 36

1. TheAllureoftheMobileAuditoryPlace 38

2. FaceMaintenanceandPersonalEthnomethodologies 40

VIII. ConclusionsonCellPhonesandModernity 43

IX. References 49

AMBERCASE©2008 4


Abstract

Thispaperprovidesexaminationoftheeffectsofwidespread

mobiletelephonyonthesocialandspatialrelationsofindividualsinthe

postmodernstate.Thisistherealmofcyborganthropology,which,

accordingtoco‐developerDonnaHaraway,“explorestheproductionof

humannessthroughmachines”(Gray1993:342).Thewidespread

adoptionofthecellphonehasmorphedfiveaspectsthatZygmunt

Bauman(2000)consideredtobethebasisofsharehumanlife:

emancipation,individuality,time/space,community,andwork.Changes

toindividualityandcommunitycanbedescribedthroughananalysisof

theconstructionsofpublicandprivatespace.Whenthepublicsphere

becomescompletelyprivatethesocialspherewillbecomepublicagain,

butthefieldofinteractionwillbeglobalinsteadoflocal.The

conclusionsgatheredfromananalysisofthesespaceswillbeusedto

showhowcellphoneshavechangedtheconstructiontime/spaceand

emancipationofthehumaninthepostmodernstate.Thispaper

discussestheeffectsofmobiletelephonyonemancipation,individuality,

time/spaceandcommunitythroughthetheoreticallensesofErving

Goffman,VictorTurner,MarcAugé,DonnaHaraway,andBrunoLatour.

AMBERCASE©2008 5


Introduction

Neverbeforeinthehistoryofhumanityhavehumanbeingsbeen

interruptedbystrangenoisescomingoutoflittleboxesthatlivein

people'spockets.Thereachoftechnologyintopersonallifeusedtobe

limitedbysize;earlytechnologieswerebulkyandnon‐mobile.Itwas

thecellphonegavethathumanvoicereal‐timemobility.

Mobilephonesarepartofagreatnetworkofsimilarcreatures

thathaveevolvedsidebysidewithhumanitysinceitsinception.They

cry,andmustbesoothedbackintosilence.Theymustbefedwith

electricity,andtheylooksillyiftheyarenotupgraded.Theyalsocost

theirownersasignificantamountofmoneyeverymonth.Theymightas

wellbeinfants.MobilePhonesarerelatedtothefirsttools,becausethey

areextensionsofthehand,andlikethatfirsttool,theycanalsobe

changedandupgradedasneeded.Inthepast,humanshadprimitive

hammersandbowsandarrows.Today,theyhavecellphones.

Theface‐to‐facenuancesofeverydaylifearenowinterruptedby

thecriesoftechnology.Theapparatusmakesperfectstrangersspewout

privateinformationtheywouldnevernormallydiscloseinpublic,and

somecellphonesaren'tevenanextensionofthehandanymore,but

AMBERCASE©2008 6


havebeencompressedintotinyobjectscapableoffittingintotheear

canal.Smallerdevicesmakeuserscapableofcommunicatingwithout

lookingasiftheyareusingadeviceatall.

Mobiletelephonyhasusheredinsocialgeographiesthatareno

longerentirelypublicorentirelyprivate.Themobilephoneallowsplace

toexistinnon‐place,andprivacytoexistinpublic.Neverbeforehave

peoplebeenabletodisembodytheirvoicesandtalkacrossanydistance,

inalmostanyplace.Cellphonetechnologyhasthuschangedthe

dichotomiesofplaceandnon‐placeaswellastheprivateandpublic

dichotomiesintoatechnological‐humanhybrid.

Thispaperprovidesanexaminationoftheeffectsofwidespread

mobiletelephonyonthesocialandspatialrelationsofindividualsinthe

postmodernstate.ThisistherealmofCyborgAnthropology,which,

accordingtoco‐developerDonnaHaraway,“explorestheproductionof

humannessthroughmachines”(Gray1993:342).Thewidespread

adoptionofthecellphonehasmorphedfiveaspectsthatZygmunt

Bauman(2000)considerstobethebasisofsharehumanlife:

emancipation,individuality,time/space,community,andwork.This

paperwilldiscussthemobile'seffectonemancipation,individuality,

time/spaceandcommunitythroughthetheoreticallensesofErving

AMBERCASE©2008 7


Goffman,VictorTurner,MarcAugé,DonnaHaraway,andBrunoLatour.

Changestoindividualityandcommunitycanbedescribedthroughan

analysisoftheconstructionsofpublicandprivatespace.The

conclusionsgatheredfromananalysisofthesespaceswillbeusedto

showhowcellphoneshavechangedtheconstructiontime,spaceand

theemancipationofthehumaninthemodernstate.

TheprimaryresearchwasbasedinandaroundRedwoodCityand

SanFrancisco,California,andPortland,Oregon.Fieldstudiesofthese

areasnettedhundredsofobservedinstancesofcellphoneuse.These

sitesincludedbothopenandclosedspacessuchasbusses,airports,

conferences,hotels,classrooms,libraries,personalvehicles,parks,

restaurantsandcoffeeshops.Inaddition,fortyformalinterviewsand

approximatelyonehundredinformaldiscussionswereconductedwith

collegestudents,workingprofessionals,andbusinesspeople.E‐mail

interviewswerealsoconductedthroughFacebook,theworld’scurrent

socialnetworkingsite.Allofthecontributorswerecellphoneusers,

exceptafemalecollegestudentwhosaidshecouldfunctionperfectly

wellwithoutone.Inmanyinstancesacellphoneuserwouldbecome

selfreferentialinmypresenceandwouldelaborateontheirowncell

phoneuse.

AMBERCASE©2008 8


Manyresearchershavediscussedtheeffectsofcellphoneuseon

humaninteraction.FinnishresearcherRichardLing(2002)isperhaps

themostprolificauthorinthesubjectarea.Hisdiscussionsofcellphone

useandhumaninteractionareheavilystructuredbythetheoretical

argumentsofErvingGoffman.HebuildsuponGoffman'sideasto

analyzethenonverbalwaysthatuserssignifythebeginningsandending

ofcellphonesconversations.Healsoinvestigatesthesociological

reasonswhycellphonesaresoannoying,theuseofcellphonesin

inappropriatesituations,andconstructionsofprivacyinpublicspaces.

NexttoLing,SadiePlant(2001),ananthropologisthiredby

Motorola,developedanextensiveethnographyonthetypesofcell

phoneusersandtheirrituals.MizukoIto(2002)discussesJapan’s

modernstateandhowcellphonesreconnectJapanesestudentsto

communityinanincreasinglyisolatedurbanenvironment.Oulasvirtaet

al.(2005)developedthetheoryofthe‘ResourceCompetition

Framework’(RCF)todescribehowindividualsprioritizerealworldand

virtualtasksincompetiion.ChristianLicoppeandJean‐PhillipeHeurtin

(2005)ofOsloaswellasKirstenSadler,ToniRobertson,MelanieKan,

andPennyHagen(2005),ofSydneydiscussthemanagementof

availabilityofcommunicationthroughmobilephoneuse.AnneSofie

AMBERCASE©2008 9


Lægran(2004)discussestheuseoftechnologyincafes.GenevieveBell

(2006)discussestheuseoftextmessagesinAsia.RaulPertierra(2005)

discussesthesocioculturaleffectsofmobilephonesinPhilippine

society,andLeslieHaddon(2000)ofOslo,Norwaydiscussesthesocial

consequencesofmobiletelephony,includingparent‐childrelationships

andcellphoneuse.

Muchhasbeenwrittenabouttheeffectsoftechnologyon

humanity.BrunoLatour(2005)describestherelationshipbetween

humansandtechnologythroughhistheoryofActorsandNetworks.

DonnaHaraway(1991)helpedtodeveloptheintellectualframeworkof

CyborgAnthropology,whichcanbeappliedtotherelationshipofcell

phonesandhumans.SandyStone(1991)discussesthedevelopmentof

technologicalnetworksofcommunicationfromtheirgenesisastexts.

TheActorNetworkandtheTechnosocialHybrid

Cellphoneuseisaritualeventthatchangesparticipantsfrom

merehumansintocompoundbeingsthatarebothsocialand

technological.Thecompoundhumanthatresultsfromtheparticipation

intheritualofmobilecommunicationcanbetermedatechnosocial

being.Thewordtechnosocialisawordusedbymanyresearchersto

AMBERCASE©2008 10


describetheconceptthatalltechnologyissocialinitsmanifestation.

Earlyhumanoidsusedpainttocolorthewallsoftheirhomesand

developedthefirstformoftool‐mediatedsocialcommunication.Itwas

thatearlyhybridinterplaybetweenhumanandtoolthatbeganthefirst

technosocialhumanoidlegacy.

DonnaHarawayandBrunoLatourhavecarvedoutthesubsection

ofAnthropologicalstudythatdealswithhumanity’sbestnon‐human

ally.DonnaHarawaywritesthat,“acyborgisahybridcreature,

composedoforganismandmachine”(Haraway1991:1).Thestudyof

humanco‐productionoftheorganismandthemachineliesintherealm

ofCyborgAnthropology.

Thecompoundselfthatthehumanandtechnologycreatesis

describedbyBrunoLatour's(1987)ActorNetworkTheory.Actor

Networktheorygrantsasocialroletonon‐humans,inthattheycanalso

beActorsinNetworksofsocialinteraction(Latour2005:10).Priorto

theadventofActorNetworkTheory,humansandnon‐humansweren’t

linkedtogetherintorelationshipsthatcouldbetraced.

AhumanalonecanperformasActorintheNetworkofface‐to‐

facerelationships,butwhenthehumaninteractswithtechnologya

compoundActoremergescapableofperformingaspartofalarger

AMBERCASE©2008 11


technosocialNetwork.SandyStone(1991)identifiedRobertBoyle's

1669earlyletterwritingsociety,asoneofthefirstexamplesof‘textas

apparatus’(Stone1993:95).Thisletterwritingsocietywasoneofthe

firsttechnosocialActorNetworks.Writersthatwerepartofthesociety

interactedwithpaperandpentoproducewordsthatwerepreserved

andcapableofbeingcommentedonafterthey'dtraveledthousandsof

miles.Inessence,thiswasoneofthefirsttechnology‐basedpublic

forums,orInternets.Cellphoneusediffersfromletterwritingonlyin

thatitofferstheuseramoreinstantaneouswaytoengagewithand

respondtotheActantsontheActorNetwork.Thus,cellphoneuseisa

higherorderActorNetworkonlybecauseofitsspeed.AllActorsonthe

cellphoneActorNetworkarehybridtechnosocialusers,bothhuman

andtechnological.

ConstructionsofLiminality

Theritualofpickingupthecellphoneandtransitioningtoa

conversationthatexistsonanothertime/spaceplaneisaliminalone.In

1967VictorTurnerdefinedliminalityasastatebetweenstates,a

‘betwixtandbetween’,abeginningstateandafinalstate(Turner

1967:97).Hedevelopedtheideaofliminalityfromobservingritualsof

AMBERCASE©2008 12


theNdembutribeofcentralAfrica.Hewrites,"aritual,especiallyarite

ofpassage,involvessomechangetotheparticipants,especiallytheir

socialstatus"(Turner,1967:93).Turnerusedthetermliminality

originallytotalkaboutthetransitionalstatethatritualsrepresent.It

involvesstagestransitioningoutofandbackintoordinarylife:pre‐

liminal,liminal(duringtheritual),andpost‐liminal,orreintegration

intoeverydaylife.Anadolescentcanbeconsideredasexistingin

liminalstate,sincetheadolescentisnolongerfullyachildandnotyet

anadult.

Theintersectionbetweenface‐to‐faceinteractionandcellphone

conversationsisa'betwixtandbetween'socialspace,inwhichacaller

isneitherfullyengagedwiththosewhoarephysicallyco‐present,not

fullymentallyco‐present(exceptforthetechnicallymediatedauditory

connection)withthepersonontheotherendoftheline.SadiePlant

callsita'bi‐psyche',andpointsoutthat“inawaythemobilehascreated

anewmodeinwhichthehumanmindcanoperate”,orthatthecell

phoneuserisoperatingasthoughintwoworldsinthepsychological

sense”(Plant2005:50).

Thedifferencebetweencellphoneuseandthetraditionalrituals

Turnerhadinmindwhenusingtheconceptisthatthecallerisnot

AMBERCASE©2008 13


joiningwithothers.Insteadofgoingthrougharitualtransformationlike

apubertyriteorweddingwhichaccomplishesastateofspecial

connectionTurnercalled'communitas',thecallerisbothconnectedand

detached;asolosituation,sincethecall‐eeisnotinthesamephysical

spaceasthecaller.Thepre‐liminalphaseofthecellphoneuserisface‐

to‐faceinteraction,andtheluminalphaseisthetransformativeperiod

thatmakesthehumanintoatechnosocialhybrid.

Additionally,“thetransitional‐beingor‘liminalpersona’isdefined

byanameandasetofsymbols”(Turner1967:95).The‘cellphoneuser’

isthenameofthetransitional‐being,andtheuserisdefinedbyasetof

symbolsthatdesignatethecellphoneuserasacellphoneusers.The

phoneisasymbol,aswellashowthedeviceisplacedagainsttheear.

Thenon‐verbalactionsperformedbythecellphoneuserarealso

symbols.

Thecellphoneitselfaliminalspacebecauseitisaspacethatexists

asauditorysignalsintransit.Itexistsinbetweenlivedrealities,andisa

transitionalcommunicationmedium.Thesignalsconstantlytransition

fromothercallertothecall‐eeandbackagain.

AMBERCASE©2008 14


‘PutthatDogonHold!’CanineCompanionsandRCF

Amongthosewhoregularlyusethecellphone,newnormsof

hybridtechnosocialbehaviorhavebeguntoemerge.Thesenormsof

behaviorhavetodowithconstructionsofprivatespaceinpublic

spheres.

AnttiOulasvirtaandherFinishcollaboratorsdiscussmobile

devicesaspartofthe'ResourceCompetitionFramework(RCF)”

(Oulasvirta,etal.2005:2).Cellphoneuserscannotfocusbothonthe

socialsettingathandandthesocialsettingprovidedbyvirtual

conversation.AsOulasvirtastates,“Onemustswitchbackandforth

betweentasksandexternalsources,temporarilyleavingtheswitched‐

fromtasksonholdorslowingthemdown”(Oulasvirta,etal.2005:2).

TheRCFcanbeappliedtoindividualswhoaremanagingmultipletasks

whileintransit.WhenIaskedcollegestudentsiftheycouldwalkand

textatthesametime,afewtoldme'yes,allthetime'.Theirenthusiasm

signifiedthatthesestudentswereveryversedintheirabilitytotext.

Otherstoldmestoriesofhowtheyalmostfelldownthestairsbecause

theirmindswerepreoccupiedwithtexting,ratherthanwalking.I

observedthemanifestationsofthis'technosocialtaskjuggling'most

oftenwhenIwatchednumerousdogwalkersinbothPortlandandSan

AMBERCASE©2008 15


Franciscopauseintheirtravelstoeithertakeacallorcomposeatext

message.

Observation1:DogWalkingandRCF

IwatchedamanwalkinghisdogthroughthePearldistrictof

Portland,Oregon.Iwatchedhimtrytotextmessageashewalked,butas

hebecamemoreseriousaboutsendinghistextmessagehehadtostop

inthemiddleofthesidewalk.Hecouldnottextmessageandwalkhis

dogatthesametime.Inordertofullyconcentrateonhistextmessage

hemovedofftothesideofthestreetandsatdownonanearby

outcroppingtocompilehismessage.Hesatdowncasuallyatfirstand

thenuprightinapositionofutmostconcentration.Duringthistimehis

dogactedcompletelyconfusedastowhyhisownerwasactingso

strange.Inanyothercasetheman’sactionswouldhavesignaledthat

somethingbadwashappening.Allthewhilehisdogsatbewilderedasto

whyhisownerstoppedmovinganddecidedtositdown.Thedog

watchedhisownerinsurprise,andtriedtonudgehimintomoving

again.

Iwatchedfivemoreinstancesofthesamesituation.Dogwalkers

AMBERCASE©2008 16


managingtechnosocialinteractionswhilewalkingwouldgenerallystop

whencomposingatextmessage,andwouldsometimesstopwhenan

importantphonecallcamethroughthatdemandedalloftheir

technosocialattention.

Ineachinstancethedogwalkersputtheirexternalreality(the

dog)onholdtoperformtasksincyberspace.EachtimeIsawthis

happen,Iwatchedthedogsbegandtrytogettheirowner'sattention.

Noneofthenudgingworked;theownerwaspreoccupiedwiththe

technosocialcyberneticrealmandwasnolongerconnectedtothedog.

Thedogwasforcedintoaliminalspacebetweenwalkingandtruly

stoppingbecauseitcouldnotgettheattentionofitsfrozen,occupied

owner.Thedoghadbeenput‘onhold’likeanofficetelephone.

ConstructionsofPublicandPrivateSpace

Thecellphonehashelpedtorestructurethepublic/private

dichotomybyallowingtheprivatetobleedintothepublicsphere.To

investigatehowthecellphoneachievesthis,itisessentialtoanalyzethe

evolutionofthecellphonefromthelandlinetelephone.Itispossibleto

showtheeffectofthecellphoneonthethreemaintypesofmodern

socialcommunications:theinteractionsofpublic,theprivate,andthe

AMBERCASE©2008 17


group.

Thepublicinteractionconsistsofface‐to‐faceortechnosocial

interactionsconductedinthepublicsphere,ortheareaofasociety

accessibletopublicuse.Theprivateinteractionconsistsofface‐to‐face

orapparatusmediateddiscoursedealingwithspacesthatarenot

accessibletoawiderpublicsphere,ortherealmofthemodern

anonymousstranger.Thethirdtypedealswithface‐to‐faceorcyborgian

dialogueamongmorethanoneparticipant.ThethirdtypeIwilluseto

explorehowgroupscanbefragmentedbytheringofacellphone,and

howthoseinamobileuser'sproximitywillreacttoacellphone

conversation.

TheLandscapeoftheLandline

Theprivatespacethatthecellphoneisabletocarrywithitbegan

withthecellphone'spredecessor–thelandlinetelephone.The

structureofthecellphoneasopposedtothelandlinetelephoneiswhat

allowstheprivatetocarryintothepublic.Tenyearsago,thering‐tone

andthecellphoneconversationwerehardlyapartofmodernsociety's

everydaysocialgeography.Now,mobiletelephonyhasmadeits

“presencefeltinalmosteveryregionoftheworld”(Plant2000:26).

AMBERCASE©2008 18


Itismobilitythatmakesthecellphonecapableofrestructuring

socialinteractionandimpressionmanagement.Tounderstandwhythe

cellphoneiscapableofthis,itisimportanttolookatthebeginningsof

thecellphone,andthegenesisofcellphoneuse.

Thedifferencebetweenthecellphoneandthelandlinetelephone

isthatthelandlinetelephoneistetheredbyitscordtoasingleplace.

Thetelephoneislimitedbythelengthofitscordanditsproximitytoa

phonejack.Tothosewhohadneverexperiencedatelephone,thedevice

wasasforeignastheInternetoncewasin1993.Thefactthatahuman

couldspeakintoamachineandhearanother’svoiceontheotherside

givestheappearanceofpersonalschizophrenia.

Overtime,thestrangenessofthenewdissolvedintoformal

societyandthelandlinetelephonebecameveryimportantforthe

modernsocietyitcametosupport.Thoselivinginsuburban

communitieswerelesscapableofreachingactualmembersofsociety

onadailybasis.Thetelephonehelpedthemtosocializeintheisolated

spacesofmodernsociety.

Astechnologyprogressed,cordlesstelephonesarrivedonthe

communicationlandscape.Theyhadaslightlylargerreach,butthe

rangeofmovementallottedtotheuserseldommadeitoutsidethe

AMBERCASE©2008 19


house.Thephonehadtobeplacedbackinitschargingreceptacleorit

wouldrunoutofpowerandwouldnotring.Thosewhoneededaphone

while'on‐the‐go'orinthecityhadtofindaphonebooth.Besides

costingmoney,theywerepublicphones,notprivateones.The

telephoneuserhadtopayfor‘borrowed’time.Becauseofthis,public

phoneswerenotconducivetolongconversations.Unlikethecellphone,

thephoneboothandthepersonalhousehold/businesstelephonedid

offersomesortofprivacy.Theywereconstrainedtolocation,andusers

couldonlycarrythemsofarasthecordreached.Wirelesstelephones

offeredmobility,butwerelargeandunwieldy,anduserscouldnot

travelwiththemintheirpockets.

Althoughthefirstcellphoneswereheavyandawkward,they

allowedthefirstadopters(generallybusinesspeople)theabilitytotalk

freelywhilewalkingordoingmobiletasks.Whenun‐tetheredfrom

location,themobiletelephonewasfreetoenterintothepublicsocial

geography.Cellphoneuserswerecapableofhavingmobile

conversations;conversationsthatcouldoccuratanytimeinanyplace

thatcarriedacellphonesignal.

Today,computationdevicesarenolongerheldtothegroundby

cordsbuthavebecomewirelessandmobile.Telephonesarenolonger

AMBERCASE©2008 20


confinedtoroadsideboothsortheofficeofthedomestichome.Thecell

phoneisthewirelessdevicethattiescomputingandtelephony

together.In1990itwasproposedthatitwasmorelikelythat“the

futureinthefirstdecadesofthe21stcenturywouldn'tbeavirtual

realityinwhichpeopleputthemselvesintovirtualworlds,butthe

opposite,inwhichtinymicrochipsineverythingfrompencilstochairs

andwallswillliterallybuildcomputationintophysicalfabricofthe

world”(Weiser,1990).Hecalledthis"UbiquitousComputing".

Now,computinghasbecomeubiquitous,andcontinuesto

colonizeandstructurethecommunicationsofanincreasinglylarge

numberofpeople.ThecoffeeshopIamcurrentlysittingatisfilledwith

thesoundsofcellphoneringtonesandconversations,andwhenI

observethetablesofthecoffeeshoppatrons,Icannotfindonethat

doesn'thaveatleastonecellphonepresent.Ithasbecomeimpossibleto

haveamodernlifestylethatisnotinterruptedbythering‐tone.

FaceSavingandCellPhoneUse

Communicationmobilitycomeswithequalandoppositesocial

costs.Thewidespreadadoptionofthecellphonedidawaywiththe

formerprivacyofthephonebooth/household.Thechunkofprivate

AMBERCASE©2008 21


spaceformallyattachedtothepersonallandlinetelephoneenteredinto

publicspacebecausethewallsofthecontainedprivatespacewereno

longertheretocontainthesound.

Oncethemobilephonewasun‐tetheredfromitscorditwasfree

tocolonizetherealmofthemobile,orthosesituationsoutsideofthe

officeorhome(Rheingold2004).Thedisembodiedchunkofprivate

spaceisresponsibleformakingpubliccellphoneusesoannoying.This

colonizationofpersonaltimeandspacehasmajorsocialconsequences;

cellphoneusersthatclashwiththeprivacyofothersoftendonotnotice

theyaredoingso.Thecellphoneblockstheabilityoftheuserto

understandwhatothersinreal‐lifeareexperiencingwhentheyare

nearby.Cellphoneusealsocrowdssocialspacebyenlargingthesocial

sphereoftheuser.Auserintroducesavirtualpersonintothenearby

socialsphere.Thoughthispersonisreallyadisembodiedvoicethatthe

individualrespondsto,theresponseofthecallertothecall‐eeisnot

compressed,andthedecompresseddialoguetakesupmorespacethan

asimpleface‐to‐faceinteraction.Aface‐to‐faceinteractiontakesuptwo

seatsinasocialsetting,insteadofone.Thesocialinteractionofacell

phoneusertakesuponeandahalfseats.

Asociety’sculturalnormsdefinethesocialforcesthatpush

AMBERCASE©2008 22


humanstointeractinawaythatiscongruentwithacceptedsocialrules.

Else,theindividualmayencounterwhatErvingGoffman(1982)

describesas'losingface'.Goffmandescribestheadherencetothese

normsofbehaviorandtosocietallyinstatedrulessuchas'face‐

maintenanceor'face‐saving'.Themodernindividualmustpracticethe

techniquesof'face‐saving'everyday,especiallyinthepublicsphere,

wheretheindividualissurroundedbystrangers.Ordinarily,face

maintenanceisatechniquethatmakespublicspaceslivableandsafe,

becauseitkeepsuncertaintyinsocialinteractionstoaminimumandin

doingsoreducesthestressofthemodernindividual.Face‐management

isaconditionofinteraction,notanobjective(Goffman,1982:12).Ifthe

rulesof'face‐saving'arenotfollowed,theindividualmayrisk'losing‐

face',whichcouldmaketheindividualdislikedorsocietallyrejected.

'Face‐saving'isessentialtomaintainingorderinmodernsociety.It

keepsindividualmovementsflowingsmoothlyandregularly,anditalso

keepsnegativealtercationsamongindividualstoaminimum.Tostudy

face‐savingistostudythetrafficrulesofsocialinteraction.Onelearns

aboutthecodeofsocialadherenceasonemovesacrossthesocial

landscape.Butastheindividualtravelshedoesnotlearnwhereheis

going,orwhyhewantstogetthere(Goffman,1982:12).Apointedlook

AMBERCASE©2008 23


atamotherwithacryingchildisenoughtoletthemotherknowexactly

whatsocietythinksofher.Asharplookatastaringstrangerworksin

thesameway.Non‐verbalcueshelpindividualswastelesstimein

lettingothersunderstandwhatcorrectandincorrectbehaviorsare.

Therulesof'face‐saving'workinasocietythatisnotinterrupted

bytheprivatespacethatthecellphonebringstothepublicspace.The

cellphoneuserisnotclosedofftotheconsiderationsofothers,but

occupiedinavirtualconversation.Userswhotalkloudlyoncellphones

dosobecauseoftheirinabilitytoperceivehowtheirwordsaffecteach

other.RichardLingdescribedsocialsettingsasaweboffrontandback

channelinteractions.Heexplainsthattheuseofamobiletelephonein

thesespacesbreaksinonthe“complexofintendedandunintended

frontandbackchannelcommunicationsthatmakeupsocialinteraction”

(Ling2002:5).

EarlierIappliedOulasvirta'sconceptoftheRCFtoissuesoftask

managementwhiledogwalking.TheRCFcanalsobeusedtodiscuss

howmobiletechnologyuserscannotunderstandwhytheybother

others.Thecellphonedoesnotdisregardfacemanagementinthesocial

setting,butthepreoccupationwithvirtualtasksoverexternalsources

createsanarenaofdisconnectforthecellphoneuser.Theuserdoesnot

AMBERCASE©2008 24


understandhowfaceispresentedonthephoneandhowitappearsto

thesocialsetting.Thecellphoneuserstillfollowstherulesofface,but

prioritizessavingfaceforthepersonontheotherendofthephoneover

othersinreallifeproximity.Thispredicationofsavingfacetothecall‐ee

isaleftoverremnantoftheprivacythatthelandlinetelephoneprovides.

Unlikethelandlinetelephone,thecellphonenolongerresidesina

privateroom,butthenormsofbehaviortowardsthetelephonestill

prioritizethecall‐eeoverthoseinthevicinity.Thispredicationcan

causecommunicationissuesingroupface‐to‐facecommunication

situations.Iwastoldbyanumerouscollegestudentsthattheyhad

difficultieswithcellphoneuserswhowouldinterrupttheircallsby

holdingface‐to‐faceconversationsduringtheircall.WhenIaskeda

studenttotellmesomethingthatannoyedheraboutcellphoneusers,

shetoldmeastoryaboutherfriendwhomsheoftencalledwhenshe

wasbored.

SomethingBeccadoeswheneversheanswersher

phone,whethershe'sansweringitorcallingsomeone,

isthatshe'salwaystalkingtosomeoneelsesowhen

sheanswersshe'llbelike'hey',butshe'llbetalkingto

AMBERCASE©2008 25


someoneelseinreallifewhileshe'sansweringher

cellphone.Soittakeslikefiveminutesforherto

actuallyanswer,sothatannoysmemorethan

anythingelseinmylife.

RichardLingdevelopedanexperimenttodeterminewhetherthe

attentionofcellphoneuserscouldbeaccessedbynonverbalcues.While

walkingdownthestreethewouldtrytolookintotheeyesofcellphone

users,andmanydidnotmeethisgaze.Lingstates,“Isimplytriedto

catchtheeyeofpeoplewhowerewalkingtowardsmeonthestreet

whilemakingamobiletelephonecall”(Ling2002:3).Theabsenceof

visualcontactsupportstheideasoftheRCFdistractingthecallerfrom

participatinginthesocialsetting.Thisuserdistractiondistortsthe

streamlinedsystemofface‐workthathascarriedmodernsocietyso

smoothlyalong.Nowthemodernsphereisfragmentedbyringtones

andthesoundsofcellphoneuserswhodonotunderstandhow

annoyingtheyarebeingtoothers.Ifthenonverbalsignalsofannoyance

werenotblockedbythestructureofthemobiledevice,cellphoneusers

wouldbeabletounderstandtheirface‐projectionsintothesocial

setting.Otherwise,cellphoneusersareliabletoactinawaytheywould

AMBERCASE©2008 26


neveractinface‐to‐faceinteractions.

PrivacyandBoundaryMaintenance

Toretainprivacy,acellphoneusermustperformsomesortof

boundarymaintenance.Usersthatrejectperformingboundary‐

maintenancearemoreannoyingtoindividualsincloseproximity,

becausetheydonotpreventtheirownprivateconversationsfrom

runningintotheprivatespaceofthosewithintheirvicinity.

Ifoundthatboundary‐maintenanceisbestexpressednon‐

verbally.Plantfoundthatcellphonebehaviorgenerallymanifestsin

twoways.Shecalledthefirsttypeofcellphoneusertheextrovert,or

'speakeasy'.Thistypeofcellphoneuserspeakswithnon‐verbalself‐

confidence.Theyholdtheirheadhighandtheirneckstraight,asifto

assureothersthattheywillnotlettheirconversationbeinterruptedfor

anyoneoranything(Plant2005:51).Secondly,SadiePlantgavetheterm

'spacemaker'tothecellphoneuserwhoseekstoconserveprivatespace

byturninginwardandspeakingwithasoftvoice(Plant2005:52).The

'spacemaker'betterconservesboundariesofprivatespacebyturning

inward,“perhapstowardsacorner,orawall...asthoughtoprotectthe

conversation”whilethe'speakeasy's'constructionofpersonalspaceis

AMBERCASE©2008 27


unbounded,andismorelikelytointerruptanother'spersonalspace

(Plant2005:53).TheBluetoothdeviceisanexampleofacellphone

devicethatallowscellphoneusewithoutnon‐verbalcues.

Observation2:BluetoothandtheReductionofTransformative

Signals

IwaswaitinginlinetopurchaseabusticketatastationinSan

Francisco.AsIstoodthere,themaninfrontofmebegantotalkvery

loudly,sayingthingslike"ohbaby,youaresohot.”Apangofhorror

wentthroughme,becauseIfelthewastalkingtome.Ittookmefully

fifteensecondstorealizethathewasnottalkingtomeatall,butwas

talkingtoawomanonhiscellphone.Icouldn'tseethecellphone,butas

heturnedawayInoticedthathewasusingaBluetoothdevicethat

allowedhimtoaccesshiscellphonewirelessly.TheBluetoothdevice

waslodgedintohisrightear,andthelittlebluelightembeddedintoit

blinkedatmeashelefttheticket‐purchasingplatform.

WhatdifferentiatestheBluetoothuserfromthenormalcellphone

useristhereductionoftheliminalstatethatsignalsthetransition

betweenface‐to‐faceinteractionandcellphoneusetoanalmost

AMBERCASE©2008 28


instantaneousmoment.Theabsenceofliminalitycatchesobserversoff

guard,becausetheydon'tseethenormaltransitionperiodthat

characterizesthehybridizationofthehumantoatechnosocialactor.

Bluetoothusersexperienceshorterdistancesbetweenpuretechnology

andpure'humanness'whentheyacceptacall.

NorwegiancellphoneresearcherRichardLing(2002)usedErving

Goffman’stheoriesofgesturetostudythenonverbalcuesthatsignaled

acellphoneuser'stransitionintotechnosocialconversation.Goffman

pointsoutthat"asetofsignificantgesturesisalsoemployedbywhich

oneormorenewparticipantscanofficiallyjointhetalk,bywhichoneor

moreaccreditedparticipantscanofficiallywithdraw,andbywhichthe

stateoftalkcanbeterminated"(Goffman,1982:34).Withnormalcell

phoneuse,theactionsofwithdrawingandterminationofthestatesof

talkingcaneasilybeseen.Whenanormalcellphoneuserengageswith

thedevice,achangeinposturesignalstheentranceintotheliminal

state.Thesubjectmustfirstgrabthecellphone,openitorpressa

buttontoacceptthecall,andthenpressthephonetotheear.Once

placed,subjectstendtoturninward,leantheheadtowardsthecell

phone,andlookawayfromthepublic.Thesenonverbalactionssignalto

theonlookerthatasubjectisabouttobeginacellphoneconversation.

AMBERCASE©2008 29


TheBluetoothusedoesnotrequireanyoftheseactionsinorder

toenterintoahybridtechnosocialstate.TheBluetoothdeviceisalready

attachedtotheear.Thereisnoneedfortheusertoholdanythingor

pressanybuttons.Thus,aBluetoothusercansimplyspeakintothe

devicewithoutturningawayortouchinganything.Thisdifferenceis

whatcausescellphoneuserstoseemmoreintrovertedandtakemore

‘spacemaker’poses,whileBluetoothusersaremorelikelytobeseenin

‘speakeasy’poses,sincetheyareabletocarryhands‐freeconversations

whilewalkingdownthestreet.Theyfaceforward,theirshouldersand

headsup.Theycanparticipateinothermovementswhilestill

maintainingaconversation.

NegotiatingTemporaryPrivateSpace

Iaskedtwentycollegestudentsiftheyheldprivatediscussionsin

thepublicsphere.Moststudentsrespondedthatwhentheyneededto

makeaprivatephonecalltheywouldtrytofindprivateplaces.One

femalestudentsaid,“Igointomyroom,orI'llwalkaroundcampusand

findasecludedarea.LastyearIusedthemusicrooms,becauseIlike

musicandwasinthemusicbuildingalotpracticingandthings”.

Anotherstudenttoldme“Idon'treallyliketalkingonmyphonearound

AMBERCASE©2008 30


people.Idon'tknowwhy.Ialwaysliketostandaway”.RarelydidI

encounterastudentthatdidn'ttalkoutsideinasecludedareaor'away

frompeople'whentheyneededtohaveaprivateconversation.This

meantthatpublicspaces,whensparselypopulated,weresometimes

madeintoprivatespacesforcellphoneusers.

Theshapeofspaceforcespeopletoactinacertainway.Ifthe

spaceistoosmall,thepersonsinthespacemightactnegativelytowards

anotherwhoisloudlyusingacellphone.Ifaspaceislargeandnoisy,

thevoiceofacellphoneusercanmoreeasilyblendintoabackground.

Mannersarebeginningtoemergewithrespecttocellphoneuse,mostly

duetothesetwoissues.Theshapeofrealspaceimpactshowannoyinga

cellphoneusercanbetoothersinthevicinity.

HalfofthetwentycollegestudentsIinterviewedrealizedthat

loudcellphoneusebotheredothers.Theytoldmetheytriednottousea

cellphoneinaloudwayinapublicsocialsetting.Theyalsotoldmethat

sensitivitytocellphoneusewasgreatestinthepubliclibraryon

campus.

Librariesarequietlandscapeswheretheringofcellphonesis

veryeasilynoticed.Theyarehighlystructuredplacesintermsof

auditory‐basedsocialregulations.Face‐savingtechniquesarevery

AMBERCASE©2008 31


importantinlibraries,becauseofthesocialneedtostayquietinorder

torespecttheprivatestudyspaceofothers.Iwascurioustounderstand

whereindividualswereforcedtotakeimportantprivatephonecallsin

thelibrary.TodothisIwatchedstudentsinthelibrarytakephonecalls

andthenfollowedthemtoseewheretheywenttotakethecalls.Ifound

thatstudentswentemptystairwellsbetweenthedifferentfloorsofthe

library.Thesespaceswerepublicspaces,butcouldbeconsidered

privatespacesifuninhabitedbythepublic.Iwillcallthesetypesof

spacestemporarilynegotiatedprivatespaces,ortemporaryprivate

spaces(TPS),becauseoftheirtransientspatialnature.

Observation3:InterruptingTemporarilyNegotiatedPrivateSpace

WhenIenteredintostairwellsoccupiedbystudentsinprivate

conversations,theirtoneofvoicegenerallydecreased,andlooksthat

resembledembarrassmentcrossedtheirfaces.Theirconversations

generallyceaseduntilIleftthestairwell.

Irepeatedthisobservationmanytimes,andbegantousedifferent

staircasesatthelibrarytoseehowoftentheywerefilledwithcell

phoneusers.Ialsoexperimentedwithcheckingastairwelltoseeifa

AMBERCASE©2008 32


callerwasoccupyingit,andthenenteringthespaceasifIwascasually

passingthroughit.Iwantedtodeterminewhetherthecaller's

nonverbalcuesandauditorylevelswouldbeaffectedbymyintrusion

intotheirtemporarilynegotiatedprivatespace.

Whenacellphoneuserfreelytalksinanenclosedprivatespace

occupiedbymanyothers,thecellphoneusermustperformboundary

maintenanceinordertorespecttheprivateboundariesofthosesharing

publicspace.Inatemporarilynegotiatedprivatespace,boundary

maintenancebecomesveryimportanttothecellphoneuser.Whenever

Ienteredastairwellspaceoccupiedbyacellphoneuser,Iheardthecell

phoneuser’svoicegodownandwatchedtheirbodyturninwards,a

moredefinedexampleofhowPlant's'spacemaker'cellphoneuseracts

whenliminallytransitioningintomobileuse.Intheseinstances“the

bodymaybeturnedawayfromtheworld,perhapstowardsacorner...as

thoughtoprotecttheconversation”(Plant2005:52).Sincetheuserdoes

notneedtobeinsuchaseverestancewhennooneelseisaround,my

presenceinthestairwellscausedthemtoperformface‐savingactions

towardsme,suchasthenonverbalactionofprotectingtheprivacyof

theselfwhilesavingface.

AMBERCASE©2008 33


Observation4:ProblemsinNegotiatingTemporarySpace

Igotaphonecallwhilestudyinginthelibrary,butitwasimportant

andIcouldnotrunallthewayoutsidetoanswerit.Irantothenearest

stairwell,whereitseemedsafetotalkquietly,butIonlyfoundthat

therewasalreadyagirltherehavingaserioustalkwithherboyfriend

onherphone.Irantoanotherstairwellonlytofindthesamething.I

hadtogoallthewayoutsideofthelibraryandloiterinfrontofitin

ordertosecureenoughspacetotakethecall.

Intheabovesituation,Iwasforcedtotravelaveryfardistancein

ordertonegotiateadequatetemporarilyprivatespacethatwouldfulfill

theface‐savingsocialrequirementsofthelibrarysettingaswellasmy

ownneedforprivatespaceinthepublicsphere.Temporarilyprivate

spacesareliketheparkingspotsofthemodernworld.Inthisinstance,

alloftheclosestprivatespacestomylocationweretaken,andIhadto

takeaspacefarawayfrommylocationoforigin.Theuseofunoccupied

socialspacesforcellphoneuseisbecomingamoreprevalent

occurrence.Thistransitionfromtheunexpectedinterruptionofthe

socialsettingbythecellphonetothenegotiationofmorepoliteprivate

spaceinwhichtoconversesymbolizeshowtheindividualisbeginning

AMBERCASE©2008 34


tounderstandthedifferenttypesofspacesandwhattypesofcellphone

useareacceptablewithinthem.

PlaceandNonPlace

Thephenomenologyofthecellphoneliesintheauditorydomain.

Thelandlinecellphonewasconnectedtoplace,butthemobile

telephoneisdetachedfromplace.Thequestionthatremainsisifthecell

phoneisitsownplace.

Time/SpaceCompression

Withavirtualdelaythatdoesnotinhibittheflowof

communication,thecellphoneisthemostcompressedreal‐timeformof

technosocialexistence.Itisthenewestkindofcommunicationinwhat

SandyStonecalls“EpochFour”intechnosocialcommunication.Epoch

Fourexistsasthemostadvancedstageoftechnosocialcommunication,

inwhichanewcommunityoftechnosocialabilityisformed.“Epoch

One”beganwithRobertBoyle's1669literarycorrespondencenetwork,

oneofthefirstexamplesof‘textasapparatus’(Stone1993:95).Modern

E‐mailandtextmessagecapabilitiesupgradethespeedatwhichtext

canfunctionasanapparatus,butthecellphoneiscapableofdigitizing

AMBERCASE©2008 35


voiceandcompressingitsoeffectivelythatitcantravelalmost

instantaneouslyacrosstheworldwithminutelag.

Amobilephoneisatimecompressiondevicebecauseit

compressesthesocialcommunicationofthecallertothecall‐ee.Itisa

boxthattranscendsspaceandtimetoconnectusersacrossgreat

distanceswithminimallagtime.Itisadevicethatcompressestime

morereadilythanacomputerbecauseitissmallerandmoremobile.

Unlikeacomputer,thecellphoneprovidesaconnectionunmitigatedby

image.Withoutimagetodistractthecellphoneuser,thespaceandtime

oftheconnectionismorecompressedandpure.Insteadofpuremedia

suchasimages,soundfiles,andmovies,thecellphonepresents

communicationinitsmostunfilteredstate.Notonlyisitunfilteredand

pure,butitismobile.Theindividualcanaccesscommunicationwhile

"onthego"sincethecompressionoftime/spaceexistsonaphoneas

muchasacomputer(Weiser1993:71).

ZygmuntBaumansuggeststhat“modernsocietyischaracterizedby

powerthathasbecometrulyexterritorial,nolongerbound,noteven

sloweddown,bytheresistanceofspace(Bauman2000:11).Thecell

phoneisuniquebecauseitisasocialnetworkthatisnotboundedbythe

confinesofspace.Thetraditionalnetworkofsocializationisboundedby

AMBERCASE©2008 36


theconfinesoftimeandspace.Aface‐to‐facesocialinteractionentails

thatthetwosocialinteractantsareincloseproximitytooneanother.

Letterwritingsavesthissocialinteractionandcompressesitintowords

tobereadlater,butitdoesnotprovideareal‐timesocialtransaction.E‐

mailisasocialinteractionthatmovesmorequicklythanaletter,butis

stillnotreal‐time.Thetraditionalnetworkisboundedbytheconfinesof

space,becausetexttakesupspaceonpaper,ande‐mailcannotbe

accessedinreallife.

Thecellphoneistheultimatecompressorofsocialspacebecauseit

allowsreal‐timecommunicationfromanyplacewithreceptiontoany

otherplacewithreception.Thecompressionoftimeandspacethatthe

cellphonecanhandleisakintoawormhole.Thecallergoesintoa

partialblackholeofperceptionasaphonecallistaken,whenthecaller

connectstothecall‐ee,awormholeformsintime/space,allowing

communicationtohappenthroughthetwoindividuals.

AuditorySpaceasaPlace

Theairportterminalisasignofmasstransitinthemodernage.Itis

aplacethatisbyitsverynatureliminal,becauseitisneither‘herenor

there’andservesasatransitionpointfromvisitorsthatjustcamefrom

AMBERCASE©2008 37


‘here’,andaregoingto‘there’.“Ifaplacecanbedefinedasrelational,or

historical,orconcernedwithidentity,thenaspacewhichcannotbe

definedasrelational,orhistorical,orconcernedwithidentitywillbea

non‐place”(Augé,1995:77‐78).Theairportterminalisaplacethatis

notconcernedwithidentityorthehistoricalortherelational,andthus

MarcAugéwouldcallitanon‐space.

Anairportisanon‐placethathastangibleweightandspace,butthe

cellphone’sspaceiscompressedandunseen.Ifthespaceinwhichthe

cellphoneexistsisaplace,thenwheredoesthatplacelie?Ifthecell

phone'stechnosocialmanifestationliesontherealmoftheunseen,the

auditoryextra‐terrain,itwouldstandtoreasonthatinMarcAugé's

perspective,thecellphoneexistsasanon‐place.However,thecell

phone,whilenotseen,canbeheard,andthecellphone'stechnosocial

manifestationconcernsarealsocialconnectionthat,whileneither'here

northere',hashistoricalandrelationalaspects.Thecellphone,in

providingalinktothehistoricalandrelationalaspectsofasocial

existence,alsoprovidesalinktoidentity.Theauditoryrealmofthecell

phoneisaplace.

Augédefinesanon‐placeasoneofsolitarycontractuality(oroneof

socialisolation),andaplaceasanorganicallysocialone.Althoughcell

AMBERCASE©2008 38


phonesarenotorganicinthemselves,theyaccessorganicforms

throughtheActorNetwork,andarethussomewhatorganic.Thoughthe

extraterrestrialspacethatcellphonesinhibitdoesnothavehistorical

roots,theuseofthespacecreatesidentitythatbuildsuponanauditory

'presentationofself'.Acellphoneisaplaceinthatitconnectsthe

organicallysocialtotheorganicallysocialthroughatechnosocialdevice.

ItisbecausethecellphoneisaplacethatRichardLingcanapply

Goffman'sargumentofbackchannelinterference.

Sincethecellphoneisaplacethatisheardandcannotbeseen,it

providesaplacethatisbothaplaceandanon‐place.Unlikethegraphics

userinterface(GUI)ofthecomputermonitortheGUIofthecellphone

servesasameansofauditory‐basedcommunicationandnotanend.

PluggingintotheActorNetworkgeneratesatemporaryhalf‐space

or“bi‐psyche'ononeeitherendoftheuser'sline,andthesameauditory

half‐spaceforthecall‐e=etothecellphonenetwork.Themeetingofthe

twotemporarilynegotiatedhalf‐spacescreatesatemporarily

negotiatedwhole‐space,orauditory‘place’.Thisplacerequiresthe

unionofatleasttwoactorsonthetechnosocialActorNetworkto

function,orelsetheconnectiondoesnotqualifyasafullplace.For

instance,anansweringmachine,whilehistorical,andconcernedwith

AMBERCASE©2008 39


identity,doesnotallowreal‐timeaspectofrelation.Theadditionof

thesetwohalf‐spacestogethercreatesawholespace,orauditory

'place',thattakestwoactorsonthetechnosocialactornetworkto

create.Apersonneedstoconcentratehalfofhisattentionphysicallyto

the"half‐space",andallofhisauditoryattentiontothe"half‐space’.

ConnectinginNonPlaces

Foucault'sPanopticonimmobilizessubordinatesofthemanagersof

spacethroughdenyingthemtherighttomove(Bauman2000:10).

Modernityconfineshumanstocars,houses,hospitalbeds,office

cubiclesanddesks.Tomoverandomlyandfornopurposeisconsidered

a‘vacation’,andisstillconfinedtonegotiatingtimeoutsideoftheneed

toexistwithinthosespaces.Random‘free’movementisalsocontingent

uponexistingwellenoughwithinthePanopticontobeabletotakea

vacation.Thevacationexistsinaliminalandconstructedplacethatis

'betwixtandbetween'thetraditionalstructuresofthePanopticonand

theactualityofrealnature.Itiscreatednaturethatcanbevisitedonly

aftercertainrulesofthelivinginthePanopticonhavebeenfollowed,

likeajobwiththebenefitsofapaidvacation,anall‐terrainvehicle,and

sportinggear.Thisisalsodomesticatednature,or'predictablenature'.

AMBERCASE©2008 40


EvenonanAfricansafarivisitorsaretoldexactlywhatkindofanimals

toexpectandwhattobring.Modernityallowsfornosuchthingas

unpredictablespace.

Thevehicleintransitexistsinaliminalstateoftime/space

compression.Theinnerspaceofthemachineisanareawherethe

experienceoftimeandspaceisaltered.Theoutsideexistenceofthree

dimensionalrealitysceneryor'reality'iscompressedintotwo

dimensionsasitwhizzesbytheobserver.Inwalking,theoriginalform

ofhumantransit,sceneryisnotcompressedatall,butdirectly

experienced.Naturalphenomenasuchasthesunandtherainareall

experienced.Acar,incontrast,blocksoutallofthesethingsand

substitutesaregulatedenvironmentinitsplace.Itisamanufacturerof

virtual‘nature’,virtual‘space’.

Thiscompressionofspaceandtimeallowsthesubjecttotravel

morequickly,buttheactualityoftimeandspaceissacrificedtospeed.

Whenthesubject,unaccompanied,utilizesthevehicle,theexperienceof

themotorizedjourneyisoneofisolation(Bauman2000:37).

Thevehicleandthevehicularcommuteisoneofthemostisolated

momentstheurbansubjectcanexperience.Thespaceisamodern

anomie:nowhereisfamily,orconnectednessestablished.AsDurkheim

AMBERCASE©2008 41


stated“ateverymomentofhistorythereisadimperception…orthe

respectivevalueofdifferentsocialservices”(Durkheim1951:249)With

thesesocialservicesonecitizengivestotheother,thepublicsphere

becomesfilledwithstrangersintentonindividualendsovertheendsof

thecommunity.

Trafficputsisolatedpeopleinsteelpodsintoabloodstreamof

liminality.Thoughindividualsareconnectedintraffic,thisconnectionis

generallyoneofmutualfrustration.Theannoyance,whilecommunal,

pitseachvehicledriveragainstoneanother’sirregularitiesanddriving

styles.Contactbetweendriversonthehighwayisgenerallyoneof

misfortuneoranger.

Thecellphoneallowsanorganicallysocialnetwork.Throughthe

subjectandthetechnologycombined,thesubjectcanbecomeanActor

onthelargerActorNetwork."Theprimetechniqueofpowerisnow

escape,slippage,elisionandavoidance,theeffectiverejectionofany

territorialconfinementwithitscumbersomecorollariesoforder‐

building,order‐maintenance(Bauman2000:11).Toescapefrom

modernityforalittlewhilegivesthehumanatinybitofpowerover

theirincarceratedstate.Ifthehumanspendstimeinanon‐place,then

theadditionofanon‐placeaccessedthroughthetelephonetears

AMBERCASE©2008 42


throughthesolitarycontractuallycharacterizedbythenon‐place.The

trafficjamwarrantsacellphoneforthehumantoescapethephysical

constraintsthatthePanopticonholdsonthehumanbody.(Bauman

2000:11).Acellphoneprovidesavirtual‘vacation’fromtheisolationof

modernity.

Thetensionofexistinginanisolatedmodernstatecanbe

transcendedbytheuseofacellphone,becausecellphonesaresocial

devicesandcanhelpuserstoreconnectinanincreasinglyisolated

modernreality.Modernindividualscantranscendnon‐placeslike

highwaysorairportterminalsbytheuseofmobiletelephony.

CommutersintrafficcanconnecttoanotheronthetechnosocialActor

Networkwhileresidingphysicallywithinanon‐space.Thismeansthat

boththeplaceandthenon‐placecanexistatonce.

Japancouldbeconsideredtobetheepitomeofthemodernstateof

isolation.Itisahighlyindustrializedislandwithapopulousthatis

confinedtosmall,domestically‐controlledspaces.Tohavemobileaccess

tovirtualpeerspacebymeansofagreatertechnosocialActorNetwork

istohaveacommunityinanotherwisesociallyisolatedurban

experience."Tonothaveakeitai(cellphone)istobewalkingblind,

disconnectedfromjust‐in‐timeinformationonwhereandwhenyouare

AMBERCASE©2008 43


inthesocialnetworksoftimeandplace"(Ito2003:1).Tonothaveacell

phoneinaculturefilledwithcellphonesisanewformofanomieworse

thanexistingasanindividualinapublicspherefilledwithstrangers.

Cellphonesareessentialforindividualstoescapetheeffectsofmodern

isolation.

Theescapeofthesubjectinaliminalnon‐placeintoatechnosocial

liminalspacecanbeconsideredasecond‐orderliminalstate,wherethe

liminalityofplacecanbeeradicatedbytheadditionalliminalityofthe

communicationdevice.Tousealiminaldevicesuchasacellphoneina

liminal'in‐between'placecancelstheliminalityofthesituation.A

businesspersonthatusesacellphoneattheairportcanescapeintoa

higherorderliminalstatethatallowsconnectiontoanon‐liminalreality

thatisbothauditoryandprofitable.

Thetransitionofthespatiallyliminalsubjecttoasecondorder

liminalstatedoesnotallowtheuserapathwaybackintolivedreality.

Livedrealitiesareonlyaccessibletothoseatnon‐liminalpoints.The

airplanetravelerexitslivedrealityuponenteringtheairportterminal,

andre‐entersitaftersteppingoutoftheairportterminalatthe

destination.

TheBluetoothallowstheisolatedsubjecttohybridizetheir

AMBERCASE©2008 44


experience,todoawaywiththeliminalstateofexperiencinglifeasa

individualdisconnectedfromrelation,history,andidentityandenter

intoatechnosocialliminalstate.Itisliminalitywithinliminalitythat

createsconnectednessinaplacewiththeleastconnectedness.Similarly,

makingaphonecallinaliminalplaceallowstheuserfreedomfromthe

liminalstateandfreedomthattheconstraintsofthespacethatthetime‐

routineofmodernityhasforcedtheminto.

Observation5:ConnectinginNonPlaces

DuringmyresearchIbabysatthetwodaughtersofafamilywho

liveinSellwood,aresidentialsuburbofPortland,Oregon.Onemorning,

themotherdovemefromcampustoherhouse.Duringtraveltime,I

watchedhowsheusedhercellphoneduringmomentsoftransit.WhenI

enteredthevehicle,shetookherBluetoothoutofthegloveboxand

attachedittoherear.Shetoldmethatshedidn'treallyuseBluetooth

exceptwhenshewasusingavehicle.Shetoldmethatiswasnicetobe

abletoconnectifshewasstuckinrushhour,orwouldbelategetting

home,orifsheneededtopickupanythingforthekidsonthewayhome.

IfsheusedtheBluetooth,she'dsafelybeabletomakeandreceive

phonecallfromherhusband.Duringthetrip,shecommunicatedthree

AMBERCASE©2008 45


timeswithherhusbandthroughBluetooth,eachinteractionlastinga

matterofminutes.

Theuseofthecellphonewhileintransithelpedthemotherto

escapetheconfinementofthetransitspace,andalsoallowedherfuture

informationthatallowedhertosavefuturespaceandtimeinher

interactionsinhermodernenvironment.InmyhometownofDenver,

Colorado,IobservedalotofindividualshappilytalkingonBluetooth

phoneswhileinlonginstancesofrushhourtraffic.Thosewhowerenot

oncellphoneswerelonelyandisolatedintheirtravelpods.Theyhad

seriousorstressedexpressionsontheirfaceswhiletheywaited.Those

whousedcellphoneslookedmuchhappierandoccupied.Itseemedthat

they'ddefeatedtheconfinesofthespaceinwhichtheywereforcedto

exist.

Bauman'sanalysisofheavyandlightmodernitycanbeusedto

explaintheallureofthecellphone.Theoldmodernityisrootedtoplace

andsize,whilethenewmodernityisrootedto'lightness'andthe

transcendenceoftimeandspace,orthephysicalself.Cellphoneusers

areabletotranscendthephysicalboundariesofheavymodernity

becausethey'veleftpartoftheirbodiesbehindandtransferredto'light

AMBERCASE©2008 46


modernity'whilein'heavymodernity'(Bauman2000:114).Thelight

modernstateofthecellphonehelpsthemtotranscendtheheaviness

thattheirbodyhadtakenonwhenintroducedtothe'heavilymodern'

state.

Moderninformation,or‘lightinformation’isonlyaccessibleby

hybrids,orthosewhoarecapableofliminallytransforminginto

technosocialhybridsor‘lightindustrial’objects.Itisnotenoughto

simplyliminallytransition.Anentiresetofnewsocialroleshave

developedaroundtheuseoftechnology.Whereastechnologyusedtobe

onlyfor'nerds',itisnowubiquitous,andmobilephoneshavemade

theirpresencefeltinalmosteverregionoftheworld”(Plant2005:26).

Businesspeoplearesomeofthemostliminally‐burdened

individuals.Theyareaspeciesfrequentlyintransitbetweenspacesand

livedrealities.Theirliminalityisnotonlycharacterizedbythehotels

andairportsthatservicetheirfluctuatingspatiallocalities,buttheyare

alsofrequentlyliminallyconnectedviacellphones,palmpilots,laptops,

andBluetooth.

DuringmyresearchIattendedatwo‐daybusinessconferenceon

alternativeenergyinRedwoodCity,California.Duringthistime,Iwas

abletoobservetherelationshipbetweenbusinesspeopleandcellphone

AMBERCASE©2008 47


use.Thehotelwasaliminalspaceforbusinesspeoplebecauseitexisted

withinahotel,whichactedasaliminalholdingspaceinsteadofa

destination.Theconferenceactedasaliminalspacebecauseitwasa

placebetweenthebusinessworldandtheworldofleisure.The

conferencewasalsoaliminalspacewithinaliminalspace.Whenthe

conferencewasnotinsession,thebusinesspeoplewereallowedtogo

backtoordinary‘hotelreality’.

MaureenMcHughthat"soon,perhaps,itwillbeimpossibletotell

wherehumanendsandmachinesbegin,”Mosttechnologicalformscan

onlybeaccessedthroughtheliminaltransitionalperiod.Whenacell

phoneuserleavestheirearpieceinmorethantheyleaveitout,they

existinaconstantstateofpotentialliminality.Iobservedmany

instancesofthisatthebusinessconference.

Observation6:TechnologicalAdaptation

IspoketoMartyMetro,CEOofUsedCardboardBoxes.com.We

werebothgettingsnacksfromthefoodstandattheconference,andI

begantotalktohimabouthowhestartedhiscompany.Ashetoldhis

story,hesuddenlystopped,embarrassed,andpulledaBluetoothoutof

hisear.Iwassomewhatbewildered;thiswasthefirsttimeI'd

AMBERCASE©2008 48


experiencedtheremovalofaBluetoothdevice.Martytoldmethathe

alwaysforgothewaswearingit,and,afterfurthercontemplation,he

toldmethatitwasprettycreepythathekeptforgettingaboutit.Then

hetoldmeitwasessentialtohiscompany,becausehecouldgetcalls

anytimeabouthisdistributionplants,andhehadtobeinstantly

availabletonewinformation.

Thestockmarketisitselfinavolatilestatethatconstantly

transitionsandupdates,andthusthebusinesspeoplewouldbeata

disadvantageiftheyweretoleaveaconnectedstateinordertolistento

theslowlyflowingface‐to‐faceinformationpresentedbythepanelistsat

theconference.

ThepotentialliminalityofaBluetooth‐wearingbusinessperson

reflectstheliminalityofthesysteminwhichabusinessperson

functions.Intheconferenceballroom,mostbusinesspeopleweresitting

attheirtables,constantlymovinginandoutofstateoftemporarilyand

liminaltyandattention.Blackberriesandlaptopsnotifybusinesspeople

aboutstocksandhowtheirowncompaniesaredoing.Thebusiness

conferencewaspackedwithhybridbusinessmen.Inadditionto

listeningtothepresentationsinfrontofthem,allwereattachedtoa

AMBERCASE©2008 49


greatertechnosocialActorNetworkofinformation.

TheneedforinformationhadcolonizedMartyMetro'sexistence.

Hehadgrownaccustomedtowearingthemobiledeviceatalltimes,

becauseifhedidnot,hemightlosetheabilitytomonitorhissupply

chainadequately.MartyMetro'scompanywasfundedbyventure

capitalists,andventurecapitalistsdemandprofitmargins.Ifhemissed

beingconnectedfortoolong,itcouldcosthiscompanymoney.Toavoid

liability,itwasinMartyMetro'sinteresttokeeptheBluetoothinatall

times,andthusbesociallyaccessibleinallsituations.

TheTechnosocialWomb

To‘govirtual’istofreetheselffromtheweightoftheflesh

incarceratedby‘heavymodernity’.CyberEthnologistSandyStone

discussesthetheoreticalbenefitsofjoiningvirtualcommunities:

Electronicvirtualcommunitiesrepresentflexible,lively,and

practicaladaptationstotherealcircumstancesthat

confrontpersonsseekingcommunityinwhatHaraway

(1987)referstoas‘themythictimecalledthelatetwentieth

century.”Theyarepartofarangeofinnovativesolutionsto

AMBERCASE©2008 50


thedriveforsociality—adrivethatcanbefrequently

thwartedbythegeographicalandculturalrealitiesofcities

increasinglystructuredaccordingtotheneedsofpowerful

economicinterestsratherthaninwaysthatencourageand

facilitatehabitationandsocialinteractionintheurban

context.[Benedikt1991:111]

Thefetishismto'meld'withtechnologygiveslifelessbodiesmore

power,andgivesawayforthehumanselvestofinallycompetewiththe

industryaroundthem.Thereisalsofearthatifhumansdon'tjointhe

foldoftechnology,technologywilleclipseorreplacethem,similarto

howhumanfactoryworkerswerereplacedbymachinerythroughthe

manystagesoftheindustrialrevolution.Aslongasthetechnologycan

beupgraded,humanshavecontroloverit.Insteadofthrowingoutthe

human,thetechnologycanbethrownout.Thehumanissafe,whilethe

technologyisnot.

Thedesiretoupgradethecellphoneisalsoadesiretoupgrade

one'sbodytothenextbeststateinevolution.Itisameansofpurchasing

powerintheformofbetter,fastercommunication.Itiswhat

AnthropologistDonnaHarawaycallsasymbioticrelationship:aco‐

AMBERCASE©2008 51


productionofexistence.“Inthiscontext,electronicvirtualcommunities

arecomplexandingeniousstrategiesforsurvival”(Benedikt1991:

111).Withouthumansupport,technologycouldnotsurvive,but

withouttechnologicalsupport,aglobalizedsocietywouldnotbeableto

sustainitself.

Enteringintoanetworkbybecomingpartcyborgcreatesthe

abilityforthesubjecttoaugmentsocialandphysicalcapabilities.The

cellphoneallowspeopletobemoreomniscientandomnipresent.

Technologyallowsonetotranscendmorereadilytheconfinesofthe

flesh‐burdenedhumanbody.Informationstoredonthecomputercan

beseenasaccessedbymanyatonce,allowingcopiesofaperson's

essencetobepresentinmanyplacesatonce.

Upgradingsignifiesafeelingofhumanpowerovertechnology.The

technologycanbedetachedfromthenetworkandupgradedseparately

fromthehuman.Humans,fearfulofbecomingobsoletetotechnology,

canthrowouttechnologyandupgradetheirpowerbypurchasinga

betterobject.Purchasingacellphoneisakintopurchasingabetter

lookingearandabetterlookinghand.Aslongasthetechnologycanbe

upgraded,humanshavecontroloverit.Thehumanfeelssafe,whilethe

technologyisnot.

AMBERCASE©2008 52


Themoderntechnosocialstatedoesnotsavethehumanfrom

decaying.Sincetechnologyandhumaninteractionisco‐produced,the

humanwhodoesnotupgradeisactuallyobsoleteinthemodernsense.

Thoughthehumancanfeelsecurefromthetouchoftechnology,status

istiedrightintotechnology,andwilldecreaseunlessthetechnologyis

upgraded.

TheAllureoftheMobileAuditoryPlace

MicheldeCerteauwrites,thatto“visitthegleefulandsilent

experienceofinfancy:tobeanother,andgoovertotheother,inaplace”

(Augé1995:83).Thecellphoneisaspacethatisaplaceexistingin

extraterrestrialspace,yetisaplacethatonecanfrequentagainand

again.Thoughthepersonontheotherlinemaybedifferent,theplacein

whichthetwopeoplemeetisthesame.Thespaceofacellphonehelps

toreducetheisolationthatexistsinthemodernstate,andcanthusbe

consideredawombofsocialconnection.

Starobinski'sdefinitionofmodernityisthat:

Movementaddstheparticularexperienceofaformofsolitude,

and,intheliteralsense,of'takingupaposition':the

experienceofsomeonewho,confrontedwithalandscapehe

AMBERCASE©2008 53


oughttocontemplate,cannotavoidcontemplating,'strikesthe

pose'andderivesfromthisawarenessofthisattitudearare

andsometimesmelancholypleasure.[Augé2000:87]

Thereconnectionoftheindividualtosomethinggreater,toreal

socialinteraction,isthewombstate,theGardenofEden,theutopia.The

babyinthewomb,likeatree,onlyneedstobeinoneplacetogrow.In

thesameway,thepostmodernindividualcantravelwithawomb

throughwhichsocialsustenancemaybedelivered,becausenosocial

sustenancecanbedeliveredbyindividualsinthemodernpublicsphere.

Asanthropologicalplacescreatetheorganicallysocial,sonon‐

placescreatesolitarycontractility(Augé1995:94).Non‐placesarethe

sourcesofmodernanomie.InEmelieDurkheim’sperspective,a

malnourishedpublicspheredeprivesindividualsofrealsocial

connections.Inthefaceofthisanomie,thecellphoneallowsanorganic

socialnetwork.Throughthesubjectandthetechnologycombined,the

subjectcanbecomeanActoronthelargerActorNetwork.Ifthehuman

spendstimeinanon‐place,thentheadditionofanon‐placeaccessed

throughthetelephonetearsthroughthesolitarycontractuality

characterizedbythenon‐place.Boththeplaceandthenon‐placecan

AMBERCASE©2008 54


existatonce,becauseinthesupermodernperspectivealldichotomies

blurintooneanother.

DonnaHarawaydiscussesthecompressionofdichotomiesasa

resultoftechnology.“thecyborgmythisabouttransgressedboundaries

[and]deepeneddualismsofmindandbody,animalandmachine”

(Haraway1991:154).Insteadofdelineationsbetweenplaceandnon‐

place,ordelineationsbetweenpublicandprivate,thehybridstate

decaysthedelineationbetweendichotomiesandreducesittoastate

theisneitherpublicnorprivate,placeornon‐place,or'herenorthere'.

Thus,non‐placeisnotseparatefromplace,butisbothaplaceanda

non‐placeatonce.Therealmofthecellphoneisaplacethatmaybe

heard,andonlyliminallylivedin.Augédefinestheideaofthe

communicationnetworkasonethatliesontheplaneofextraterrestrial

space(Augé,1995:79).Thusthecellphoneisaliminalextra‐terrestrial

space,oraspacethatisactuallyaplaceremovedfromplace(the

isolationofurbanreality)thatcanbeaccessedsimplybyloggingonto

theActorNetworkofcellphoneusers.Itisnaturalthatsomany

disconnectedindividualswouldsoquicklyadoptatechnologythat

allowsthemsomesemblanceofformersociety,eventhoughitis

mediatedbytechnologyandapaymentplan.

AMBERCASE©2008 55


FaceMaintenanceandModernEthnomethodologies

MuchoftheallureofpubliccellphoneuseconcernsGoffman's

conceptofimpressionmanagement.Thecellphoneactsasallyofsocial

riskreductionagainstsituationsofmodernisolation.Impression

managementiseasilyaccomplishedwhentheappearanceoftheperson

ontheothersideofthelinecanbecompletelyconstructed/construed.

Oftenthispersonisconstructedtobemoreimportantthantheyalready

aretotheuser.Inthiscase,thecellphoneusersharesinformation

specificallyforthebenefitforofthesocialsettingratherthanthecall‐ee.

Correctcellphoneusagemaintainsabalancebetweenmitigatingface‐

managementofthecall‐eeandthesocialsettingatthesametime.

Whatemergesfromthefadingsocialnormsisnaked,

frightened,aggressiveegoinsearchofloveandhelp.Inthe

searchforitselfandanaffectionatesociality,iteasilygets

lostinthejungleoftheself...Someonewhoispokingaround

inthefogofhisofhisorherownselfisnolongercapableof

noticingthatthisisolation,this'solitary‐confinementofthe

ego'isamasssentence.[UlrichBeck,40inBauman

AMBERCASE©2008 56


2000:37]

Themodernstateisamasscommunitasofindividualisolation

withnoabilityfortheindividualtopersonallymitigateisolation.The

isolatedhumaninthenon‐placeseekstoreconnectwiththosein

proximity,butcannot.Thecellphoneisusedasasubstitutefor

interaction,butthecellphoneuserreallywishesforface‐to‐face

interactionovervirtualinteraction,andthusmanagesfacetofeign

importance.Thecellphoneuserhopestoimpressothersthisway,and

thussecurereallifeacceptance,butthedisconnectbetweenface

managingfortheselfandfacemanagingforthesocialsituation,thecell

phoneuserbecomesaturn‐offforthoseinproximity,especiallythose

forcedtoexistcoincidentallyinnon‐placewiththecellphoneuser.

Observation6:DisconnectedBragginginthePublicSphere

AsIshoppedatWholeFoodsMarketdowntownIencountereda

middle‐agedmanwhowasconstructinganidealselftothederisive

looksofthosewhowereinhisproximity.Hespokeloudlywhilepushing

hiswaythroughthecrowd.Thecustomersofthestoreweretalkingand

staringathimbehindhisbackashetalkedthroughhisBluetooth

AMBERCASE©2008 57


earpiece.Hisconversationconsistedmostlyofprivilegedmiddle‐class

phrasesblownwayoutofproportion,suchas"InEuropeIwenttoplace

‘x’,andinSpainIwenttoplace‘y’"whileonhishands‐freephone.

Inadisplayofinsecureconfidence,themanhadadoptedthe

'speakeasy'poseandhadthrownhisheadback,braggingabouttheself.

Hisattempttoprovideaperfecthalfoftheconversationwasmetwith

derisionatthesupermarket.Thisisanexampleoftheuser'sown

ethnomethodology.Anethnomethodologyisasociologicaldiscipline

thatinvestigates“therationalpropertiesofindexicalexpressionsand

otherpracticalactions…ofeverydaylife”(Garfinkel1967;11).Each

individualhasapersonalethnomethodologythatordersrationalaction

andhowtheworldisexperienced.Inthisobservation,theman’sown

ethnomethodologymadehimbelievethatspeakingloudlyabouthis

experiencesinEuropeinamiddleclasscrowdmightgainhimmore

respect,buthisownethnomethodologywasdisconnectedfromthe

ethnomethodologyoftheothersaroundhim.Hisownabilitytosave

facewasalteredbyhisattemptforattention,somethingwhichdidnot

resonatewiththeface‐savingmeasuresoftheshoppersaroundhim.

Instead,heinterruptedtheirmodernshoppingexperiencesomuchthat

AMBERCASE©2008 58


theywerefreetostareinordertodisrupthisflowofcommunication.

Amuchmorematureconversationisconductedintheclosed

sense,or'spacemaker'pose.The‘spacemaker’businesspersonisoften

seatedinalocationwithminimalfoottraffic.Iobservedmore

businesspeoplediscusstherealintricaciesofbusiness‐like

administrativedutiesandprinciplesinthe'spacemaker'poserather

thanthe'speakeasy'pose.

Thebusinesspersonwhoseekstoappearmoresuccessfulthan

thecurrentrealityprovidescanutilizetheplaceofthecellphoneto

transmitanappearanceofsuccessthroughdisplayandexaggeration.I

experiencedthesetypesofbusinesspeopleinnon‐placessuchas

airportsorcitybussesratherthanthebusinessconferenceIattendedin

California.Attheairport,Isawmanyofthesetypesofcellphoneusers

pacingbackandforthinareasofhighvisibility,suchasagainstpubic

windowsfacingpublicseats.Thesebusinesspeopleusuallydiscussed

businessdealsbutremainedphysicallycompletely‘offlimits’tothosein

theproximalsocialsetting,ineffect,placinghimselfonafalselyengaged

socialplatformthatleftothersnoroomtointerjectwiththeirown

commentsandinteractions.Justasthepresentationofselfcanbeso

easilyfalsifiedonline,sothecellphoneuserbelieveshecanfalsifyhis

AMBERCASE©2008 59


ownimpression,butthedisconnecthappenswhenacellphoneuser's

personalethnomethodologyisnotpubliclyheld.

ConclusionsonCellPhonesandModernity

Thecellphoneisananthropomorphicbecause,unlikeother

materialgoods,ithasahumanvoice.Thecellphoneisadevicethat

allowsahumantobepresentwithanotherhuman,thougheachhuman

isdisembodied,compressed,andrestructuredoverwirelesswavesthat

permeatetheEarth'sairfields.Perfumemaybeasignthatpointstoan

emotion,butthecellphonecanactuallycarrythatemotion,actually

speakwithanauthentichumanvoice.

Thereisevidencetosuggestafunctionalrelationshipbetweenthe

"structureoftheselfandthestructureofspokeninteraction"(Goffman,

1982,36).Thus,peoplehavemuchmoreconfidenceinacellphonethan

withanotherstrangerorbythemselves.Acellphoneinteraction

providesonehalfofaconversationequation.

Todiscoverhowconventionsofsocialguidancearemaintained,

theuseofcellphonesandindividualsocialinteractionsmustbe

examined.Withtheadditionofatechnosocialapparatus,theindividual

canstructuretheirfacethroughtheuseofthecellphone.Thecellphone

AMBERCASE©2008 60


addsagreaterdimensionoffacemanagementbecauseitisanobject

thatcanbecontrolledoutsideoftheself.Itisasocialprosthetic.

Confidencemaybegainedthroughthissocialprostheticbecausethe

conversationontheothersideofthelineisunseen.Amobileusercan

respondtoaconversationinanywaytheywish.

Socialcuesareturnedonthroughactiveorinactiveshiftsinverbal

ornon‐verbalcues.Intermsofcellphoneuse,thesesocialcuessignify

thatthepersonis"engaged"ornotinsocialinteractionitisnotpossible

fortheindividualtobebotheredbytheother"freesocialradicals"while

insocialspace.Thecellphone‘engages’theusersothattheirabilityto

interactwithothersisseverelydiminished.“Wemayexpecttofinda

varietyofbarrierstoperceptionusedasinvolvementshields,behind

whichindividualscansafelydothekindofthingsthatordinarilyresult

innegativesanctions...involvementcanbeshieldedbyblocking

perceptionofeitherbodilysignsofinvolvementorobjectsof

involvement,orboth(Goffman1963:39).Ifcellphoneuserswerelike

molecules,theadditionofacellphonetoanindividual’stechnosocial

electronshellwouldmaketheelectronvalencecomplete.Auserwitha

completetechnosocialvalenceshellwouldnotbeabletointeractwith

socialentitieswithemptyspacesintheirvalenceshells.Neithercan

AMBERCASE©2008 61


theyinteractwithentitiesthathavecompletetechnosocialvalence

shells.

Thepublicspacehasbeencolonizedbytheprivate,individual

space.ThishasforcedanurbanPanopticstateinwhichparanoid,

consumeraddictedindividualsseldomspeaktooneanother,and

concernthemselveswithindividualissuesoverthegoodofthewhole.

“Theadventofcellulartelephonesmaywellserveasasymbolic'last

blow'deliveredtothedependencyonspace:eventheaccesstoa

telephonesocketisunnecessaryforacommandtobegivenandseen

throughtoitseffect(Bauman2000:11).

Baumanpointsoutthatindividualismisoverrulingcitizenship,

andquotesAlexisdeTocquevilleinsayingthatthe"individualisthe

citizen'sworstenemy."Thedifferenceisthatthetechnosocialobjectis

onestepabovethe‘mallexperience’ofpurchasingsymbolsasa

substituteforsocialacceptance.Itisarelationshipwithaproductthat

leadstogreatersocialconnection.Whentheproductbecomesoutdated,

isolationreturns,andtheindividualmustpurchaseagain.

Baumancitesthatagaphas'emergedandgrownprecisely

becauseoftheemptyingofpublicspace..."The'citizen'isaperson

inclinedtoseekherorhisownwelfarethroughthewell‐beingofthe

AMBERCASE©2008 62


city‐whiletheindividualtendstobelukewarm,skeptical,orwary

about'commoncause','commongood','goodsociety',or'justsociety'.

Whatisthesenseof'commoninterests'exceptlettingeachindividual

satisfyherorhisown?(Bauman2000:36).

Baumanconteststhat,"Itistheprivatethatcolonizesthepublic

space,squeezingoutandchasingawayeverythingwhichcannotbe

fully,withoutresidue,expressedinthevernacularofprivateconcerns,

worriesandpursuits(Bauman2000:39).Applyingthistheoryturnsthe

cellphoneintobothastatussymbolandasubstitutionforwhatis

missedinsociety.Ithasbecomeaninstitutionforthesocial,justasthe

educationalsystemisaninstitutionthatreplacesthefamily,orthe

healthsystemforfamilydoctor.AsBaumancontinues"theescapeof

realpowerintotheterritorywhich,forallthattheextantdemocratic

institutionsareabletoaccomplish,canonlybedescribedasan'outer

space'(Bauman2000:39).Theouterspaceintowhichpowerhasflown

iswhatindividualsseektorecapture.Iftheyhavetoventureintoouter

spacetorecapturewhathasbeenlostbythevacationofthepublic

spheretotheindividual,bythecitizentotheparanoidshopper,then

this'outerspace'hasbecomeanewplace.If,accordingtoAugé,non‐

spacesdiscourage"settlingin",thennon‐spacesareopentothe

AMBERCASE©2008 63


colonizationofthetechnosocialdeviceoneverystagethathasbeen

rippedawayfromitssocialroots.Everyplacethathasseenits

citizenshipfalltoindividualconcernsisopentoreconnectionofthe

socialbymeansofthecellphone.

RichardSennett'sdefinitionofacityisa'humansettlementin

whichstrangersarelikelytomeet’.Baumanaddstothisinsayingthatin

acitystrangersarelikelytomeetintheircapacityofstrangers,and

likelytoemergeasstrangersfromthechanceencounterwhichendsas

abruptlyasitbegan(Sennet1978:264,citedinBauman2000:94)and

that"Itislikely,bycomparison,amis‐meeting"(Bauman2000:95).The

cellphonegivestheindividualbackthepowertocreatepositivesocial

interactioninthefaceofnegativesocialconsequences.Thecellphone

increasesthechanceofa‘positivemeeting’inpublicspace,becausethe

mobileusercontrolsthemeeting.

Technologycarriesthesocial,insteadofthesocialcarrying

technology.Publicspacesarebecomingincreasinglyprivatized.The

worldisundergoingsomethingmorethanmodernityorpostmodernity,

itisahypermodernity,orsupermodernity,thatincreasinglytiesthe

worldtogetherinshortersections.

MaxWeber'snotionof'instrumentalrationality'(Bauman2000:4)

AMBERCASE©2008 64


isstillatplay,buttoday’smodernityplaysthisinstrumentalrationality

athyper‐speed.ModernitytodayfollowsMarcAugé'snotionof

Supermodernity,andgivestechnosocialrelationsasingulargoal:the

continualcompressionofspaceandtime.Nopieceoftechnologyis

immunetoinstrumentalrationality.

In1965Intelco‐founderGordonMoorepredictedthatthe

numberoftransistoronachipwoulddoubleeverytwoyears(Moore

1965:2).IfcellphonetechnologycontinuestofollowMoore'slaw,then

technosocialnetworksandcapabilitieswillonlybecomelesstetheredto

place.Ascommunicationtechnologyprogresses,thetechnosocial

relationshipsbetweenhumansandtechnologytootherhumansand

technology,orthespeedofActorNetworksincreases.Ahigh‐

functioningtechnosocialassemblagewouldbeonethatwouldallowfor

theoptimumspeedofsocialcommunicationanddevelopmentoffaster

waystoreceivecommunication.Theonlinesocialnetworkingsite

Facebookisone.Cellphonesareanother.Insteadofinterruptingand

fragmentingsocialspaces,cellphonesandothertechnosocial

assemblageswillconnectthemtogether.Mobiletechnologyistheinitial

technologythatwillallowallothertechnosocialassemblagestogo

wirelessanddetachedfromplace.Astechnologyandhumanitycontinue

AMBERCASE©2008 65


toproduceeachother,thedichotomaldifferencesbetweenhumansand

technologieswillcontinuetoblur.

Theeraofglobalizationisonecharacterizedbytheshrinkingof

timeandspace.AspartofthegreaterActorNetworkofhuman

communications,eachcellphoneupgradereinforcesglobalization,and

hypermodernity.Ifthecurrenttrendsoftechnosocialco‐production

continue,thefuturerelationshipofhumansandtechnologywill

resembleamassivetechnosocialassemblagethattakesthemattersof

time/spacecompressionintoitsownhands,colonizingeverypublic

spaceandmakingitpubliconaprivatenetwork.Insteadofthe

paradigmofold,‘heavy’,modernity,ortherushofcivilizationsto

developlargerandlargertechnology,cellphonesarepartofthenew,or

'light’modernity,inwhichcomputersthatusedtobethesizeof

basketballcourtsarenowbeingcompressedintosmallerandsmaller

devices.Inthisnewmodernitytechnologieswillshrinksosmallthat

theywillbeabletointegrateintoeveryaspectoftherealworld,sothat

therealworldwillbeinterconnectedateverypoint,andeverythingfelt

intherealworldwillalsobetalliedvirtually.

Humansarebecomingonebloatingorganismwithatechnosocial

heartbeat,constantlyupdatinginordertocompresstimeandspace

AMBERCASE©2008 66


closerandclosertogether.Theworlditselfisexistsinaliminalstate

'betwixtandbetween'humanityandtechnology.Anewliminal

'communitas'isemergingwithtechnologyastheframeworkforall

socialinteractionandcommunication.Whenthisliminalityisresolved

technologywillbefreetocolonizeallhumaninteraction.Withthespace

andtimeoftheworldshrinking,thedistancebetweenhumansand

technologywilldecreaseuntiltheyarecannolongerbeunderstood

separatelyfromoneanother.Whenthepublicspherebecomes

completelyprivatethesocialspherewillbecomepublicagain,butthe

fieldofinteractionwillbeglobalinsteadoflocal.

AMBERCASE©2008 67


References

Augé,Marc1995Non‐Places:IntroductiontoanAnthropologyof

Supermodernity.NewYork:Verso.

Bauman,Zygmunt2000LiquidModernity.Malden,MA:Blackwell.

Beck,Ulrich1995EcologicalEnlightenment:EssaysonthePoliticsof

theRiskSociety.

Benedikt,Michael,ed.1991Cyberspace:FirstSteps.Cambridge,Mass.:

MITPress.

deCerteau,Michel,LuceGiard,andPierreMayol1998ThePracticeof

EverydayLife.

Durkheim,Emile,ed.1951Suicide,aStudyinSociology.Glencoe,Ill.:

FreePress.

Goffman,Erving1982InteractionRitual:EssaysonFace‐to‐Face

Behavior.1stPantheonBooksed.NewYork:PantheonBooks.

Goffman,Erving1963BehaviorinPublicPlaces;NotesontheSocial

OrganizationofGatherings.[NewYork]:FreePressofGlencoe.

AMBERCASE©2008 68


Gray,Chris,ed.1995TheCyborgHandbook.NewYork:Routledge.

Haraway,Donna1987DonnaHarawayReadsNationalGeographic.

Video.

Haraway,Donna,JorgeHankamer,andGaryLease1999Between

Nature&CultureCyborgs,Simians,Dogs,Genes&Us.

Horst,Heather,andDanielMiller2006TheCellPhone:AnAnthropology

ofCommunication.NewYork:Berg.

Ito,Mizuko2004ANewSetofSocialRulesforaNewlyWirelessSociety.

JapanMediaReview2(4).

Latour,Bruno2005ReassemblingtheSocial:AnIntroductiontoActor‐

Network‐Theory.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Moore,GordonE.1965CrammingMoreComponentsOntoIntegrated

Circuits.ElectronicsMagazine.

Oulasvirta,Antti,SakariTamminen,VirpiRoto,andJaana

Kuorelahti2005Interactionin4‐SecondBursts:TheFragmented

NatureofAttentionalResourcesinMobileHCI.

Plant,Sadie2004OntheMobile;theEffectsofMobileTelephoneson

AMBERCASE©2008 69


SocialandIndividualLife.Motorola.

Schivelbusch,Wolfgang1986TheRailwayJourney:The

IndustrializationofTimeandSpaceinthe19thCentury.Berkeley,

Calif.:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Sennet,Richard1978FallofPublicMan:OntheSocialPsychologyof

Capitalism..

Turner,Victor1967TheForestofSymbols;AspectsofNdembuRitual.

Ithaca,N.Y.:CornellUniversityPress.

Weiser,Mark1993UbiquitousComputing.Computer26(10).

AMBERCASE©2008 70


Notes:

AcademicUse:

Ifyou’dliketousethisintheclassroom,pleaseE‐mailmeatcaseorganic

{at}gmail{dot}com.Ihavemoreresearch,resources,andpapers

available.

BusinessUse:

Ifyou’redoingastudyoncellphonesorwouldlikemoreinformation

regardingmyresearch,pleasefeelfreetocontactmeatcaseorganic{at}

gmail{dot}com.

Documents

Cell Phones and their Technosocial Sites of Engagement - Amber Case Thesis