The Glass Castle' Symbolism Essay

Introduction

Symbolic interaction theory is a sociological theory that explains the importance of the meaning we attach to our communications with others. The theory describes the ways people interact with each other, the meaning people attach to those interactions, and furthermore, how those meanings shape our individual selves and society (Rogers, 2016). The theory’s focus on the meanings that a client places on their experiences help explain and predict their behavior. Applying the symbolic interaction theory to analyze Jeanette’s behavior in her memoir The Glass Castle allows us to explain to a certain degree, how Jeanette uses the meanings she attaches to her experiences based on her interactions with others to form her reality.

Literature Review

The symbolic interaction theory was pioneered by George Herbert Mead. Mead asserted the core concept of social interactionism in his work Mind, Self, and Society, published posthumously by his students. Mead defined the main concept of social interaction as the differentiation of I and me: “I” as the self, an active subject, and “me” as the acceptance of the self as perceived (Kuhn, 1964).

In 1937 Herbert Blumer, a student of Mead’s termed the theory “symbolic interactionism” and further developed Mead’s assertions. Blumer based symbolic interaction theory on three premises: we act on our world based on the meaning we construct through our experiences; the meanings we construct through our experiences are based on our interactions with others; and, these meanings are affected by our interpretations of our interactions with others (Aksan, Kisac, Aydin, & Demirbuken, 2009).

The symbolic interaction theory indicates that the interaction of people takes place with various symbols and is centered on the meaning they attribute to those symbols (Rogers, 2016). Wood (1992) asserts that symbolic interaction theory pertains to how people assign meaning and interpret various events or circumstances through the comprehensive arrangements of symbols. Subsequently, it is through varied and continuous social interactions of humans, the symbols meaning emanate and evolve.

Symbolic interaction is a longstanding theory. While the basis of the theory stood, it was differences in the conceptualization of the theory that lead to different methods of its application. These methods became known by the universities of groups of similar-minded scholars. For example, the Chicago School focused on the macro level in the human development of the social world, while the Iowa school focused on the micro level of human interactions (Shalin, 2015).

More recently, researchers have further expanded the concept of symbolic interaction to include interactions made possible through social media. Researchers have been exploring the complex human interactions that have become possible through technological change. They are expanding the historical meaning of individual speaking and social interactions from easily identified and isolated to an ongoing dialogue of interactions. Furthermore, they have expanded Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical approach, which likens everyday life interactions to a classical theater, whereby we go through our lives acting and projecting images that are important to us, to the interactions of social media as well (Richey, Gonibeed, & Ravishankar, 2018).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

The social work profession involves interacting with a wide variety of people and assisting them in solving their problems. Social workers apply theories in understanding the basis of these problems and formulating solutions as appropriate. The symbolic interaction theory provides useful skills in developing understanding from the client’s standpoint incorporating conscience, and recognizing the importance of the client’s experiences (Lishman, 2015).

Application

Symbolic interaction theory can be used to understand the various experiences that Jeanette Walls faces in The Glass Castle. In the story, Jeanette experiences a sad adventure that characterizes her life. In her youth, Jeanette had low self-esteem and considered herself unattractive, as she was extremely tall, thin, and frail, with big protruding teeth (Walls, 2005). From a symbolic interaction perspective, these feelings stem from Jeanette’s interaction with her peers. Her twisted reality and assumption about her looks originate from a common understanding of the world around her. In school, classmates criticized her looks, making her even more worried about a scar she picked from a burn at the age of three. The joint nature of symbolic interaction is seen in the fact that both Jeanette and her classmates disapprove of her looks. Both of them are social agents, and their views affect each other.

The reciprocal and ongoing nature of symbolic interaction is further seen when Jeanette’s view changes as soon as she meets her second husband. According to Jeanette (2005), he regarded her as an interesting and fine-textured person whose scars were a sign of massive strength. Unlike her mean classmates and anyone else who used her appearance against her before, she has found someone who accepts and embraces all her flaws. Owing to this newly constructed view of herself, her spirits are lifted. She becomes more self-conscious and even loves herself more. She drastically changes from self-hating to a self-loving woman as a result of her second husband’s attitude.

In application, symbolic interaction is critical in transforming people, helping them draw meaning from their experiences and formulate better-coping mechanisms for every situation. By learning from the behavior of others, Jeanette develops her own set of characteristics and takes responsibility. Rose Mary, her mother, is a painter who spends most of her time painting while ignoring the welfare of her children, including Jeanette. Rose Mary is so selfish that she sometimes eats in secret despite her children going hungry for days. Raised in comfort, Rose Mary thinks she is encouraging her children to be self-sufficient and strong. Her husband, Rex, is a manipulative thief with a passion for gambling. The two parents are utterly negligent and absent. In response to their undesirable ways of being, Jeanette becomes an agent of change in her world. Unlike her parents, she loves and cares for her siblings, thus acting as a parental figure. Notably, in an attempt to cultivate opposite characters from her parents, she is committed, works hard, and brings home money for food. In fact, at the age of seventeen, she becomes independent by taking her sister Lori from home and making life for them elsewhere. From a symbolic interaction perspective, her desirable characteristics are an unconscious campaign to make her current world better than the previous one.

Critique

Though symbolic interaction theory explains, to no small extent, the reasons Jeanette differentiated herself from the ways of her parents including selfishness, alcoholism, gambling, and negligence there are some drawbacks. For instance, the objectivity of the ideas formed cannot be ascertained. It is not possible to gauge the degree to which Jeanette’s experiences as a child contributed to her outlook on life. It is hard to determine whether the socially constructed knowledge Jeanette gathered over the course of her life is reliable. This doubt is further compounded by the fact that Jeannette’s siblings have entirely different outlooks on life despite being raised under similar conditions. Social construction, therefore, offers only a partial explanation of the outcome of Jeanette’s life.

However, Erik Erikson’s theory could help explain Jeanette’s actions and behavior better. Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development postulates that human beings undergo distinct transitions physically, cognitively, and mentally as they grow up. According to Erikson, human beings undergo eight stages from birth through old age, dealing with developmental tasks and resolving crises particular to each stage (Rogers, 2016). Based on this definition, Jeanette’s behavior in The Glass Castle can be better explained using Erikson's theory than by symbolic interactionism. This is evidenced through Jeanette’s changing behavior as she grows, which is consistent with the provisions of Erikson’s theory, whereas symbolic interactionism only explains the meanings attached to the interaction between individuals in society. While Jeanette with age comes to detest her father’s behavior of excessive drinking and her mother’s irresponsibility and selfishness, the rest of her siblings do not seem concerned by those problems. Consequently, Jeanette quits the family and heads to New York in search of a new life. Jeanette’s attempt at rediscovering life is better explained by Erikson’s theory which purports that human beings move through the stages of psychosocial development despite unresolved crises experienced at earlier stages. This helps us understand that Jeanette was more successful than her siblings at negotiating the crises of each stage, enabling her to maintain better control over her emotional state and better adapt to her environment.

Conclusion

Symbolic interaction theory gives an explanation of how individuals relate with each other and in society based on the meaning that they attach to their interactions. In the memoir The Glass Castle, symbolic interaction theory explains how Jeanette uses the meaning she attaches to her experiences to form her reality through her childhood, adolescence, and eventually her adulthood.

References

1. Aksan, N., Kısac, B., Aydın, M., & Demirbuken, S. (2009). Symbolic interaction theory. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 902-904. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.160
2. Kuhn, M. (1964). Major Trends in Symbolic Interaction Theory in the Past Twenty-Five Years. The Sociological Quarterly, 5(1), 61-84. Retrieved February 24, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/4105182
3. Lishman, J. (2015). Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Care, Third Richey, M., Gonibeed, A., & Ravishankar, M. N. (2018). The perils and promises of self-disclosure on social media. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(3), 425-437. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.daemen.edu/10.1007/s10796-017-9806-7
4. Edition : Knowledge and Theory: Vol. 3rd ed. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
5. Rogers, A. T. (2016). Human behavior in the social environment. New York, NY: Routledge.
6. Shalin, D. N. (2015). Making the sociological canon: The battle over George herbert mead's legacy. The American Sociologist, 46(3), 313-340. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.daemen.edu/10.1007/s12108-015-9259-8
7. Walls, J. (2005). The glass castle: A Memoir. New York: Scribner.
8. Wood, J. (1992). Spinning the symbolic web: human communication as symbolic interaction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.