UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Adolescent socialization : some problems of incumbency Cleaves, Deanna Pauline 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 C54.pdf [ 5.76MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093495.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093495-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093495-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093495-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093495-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093495-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093495-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093495-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093495.ris

Full Text

ADOLESCENT SOCIALIZATION: SOMB PROBLEMS OF IHCUKBEUCY by DEANNA PAULTIT?. CLEANS B.A., University of C a l i f o r n i a Irvine, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Anthropology and Sociology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1975 n presenting t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r n advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that he L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f or reference and study. agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s re p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten pe rm i ss i on . The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ^ ^ y . / ? . Department of i i ABSTRACT 'T'he following t h e s i s takes as i t s data t r a n s c r i p t s that were made from tape-recordings of several group therapy sessions between a t h e r a p i s t and f i v e "problem" students. Por-t i o n s of the t r a n s c r i p t s are analysed with reference t o the properties of s p e c i f i c u n i t s of speech, such as the pr o p e r t i e s of l i s t s or the properties of categories, with a major emphasis on examining the s o c i a l and orga n i z a t i o n a l features that surround the i n t e r a c t i o n , and upon which the utterances are b u i l t , i n an e f f o r t to discover the f a c i l i t i e s that persons have a v a i l a b l e t o them f o r making sense out of those utterances. An attempt i s made to show that (a) by reference to such u n i t s of speech, conversations betvreen adolescents can be made i n t e l l i g i b l e and that (b) an a n a l y s i s of such things i s capable of explaining the i n t e r a c t i o n a l resources that adolescents must r e l y on when speaking with one another and with adults, without the use of c l a s s i c a l childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n notions. The major issues given s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n are ( 1 ) occupa-t i o n a l subclasses and the importance that they have with respect to the s o c i a l i z a t i o n process and, (2) the incumbency problems that adolescents have as a r e s u l t of adult s o c i a l i z a t i o n notions. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I Introduction 1 Footnotes 13 CHAPTER II Methodology and Materials 15 Footnotes 23 CHAPTER III Adolescent Incumbency: A Problem of Having to be Something 25 Footnotes 50 CHAPTER IV Children's Occupational Dreams: Some Formal Q u a l i t i e s 52 Footnotes 73 CHAPTER V Occupations: A Retrospective View 78 Footnotes 95 CHAPTER VI Conclusion 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY 114 APPENDIX Conventions Used i n T r a n s c r i p t s 116 T r a n s c r i p t 121 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I am deeply indebted to Roy Turner f o r the many hours of encouragement, suggestions, and h e l p f u l c r i t i c i s m s that he gave to me while t h i s t h e s i s was i n the making, I am al s o indebted to Harvey Sacks and G a i l J e f f e r s o n f o r having introduced me to t h i s method of inves-t i g a t i o n and to conversational a n a l y s i s i n p a r t i c u l a r while I was a student at the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a at Irv i n e , 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The following t h e s i s s h a l l be concerned with examining occupations as they r e l a t e to the process of s o c i a l i z a t i o n from adolescence i n t o adulthood, by means of a body of conversational resources taken from group therapy sessions between a t h e r a p i s t and s e v e r a l teenage boys. There w i l l be an attempt to l i n k the attainment of an occupation with the attainment of adulthood i n such a way as to disp l a y that adulthood, which i s seen to be the l a s t of a s e r i e s of b i o l o g i c a l stages, i s not merely a t t a i n e d by l e t t i n g persons grow up or by permitting things to take t h e i r course but a d u l t -hood involves o r i e n t i n g to things and experiencing and l e a r n i n g others i n a way that w i l l enable one to be recognized as responsible. That i s , adulthood w i l l be seen to involve various p r i v i l e g e s and freedoms that can only be achieved i f one takes the proper t r a i n i n g to become a responsible a d u l t such as by or i e n t i n g t o an occupation. So, f o r example, i t w i l l become apparent that although there i s no semantic reason why the question "What are you going to be when you grow up?" ought to be answered with an occupational 2 term, i t i s a request f o r such a terra that categories such as teenagers are vulnerable to since those persons are expected to be doing the things now that w i l l get them into occupations a t a l a t e r date. That i s to say, they are expected to be preparing to be adults by making serious decisions about an occupation, attending high school, and taking the proper courses that w i l l enable them to achieve that occupation. Thus, adolescents know that they are held responsible f o r occupations and f o r l e a r n i n g the things that w i l l get them to be seen as responsible adults, and those things are a source of problems f o r them i n that they may e i t h e r have d i f f i c u l t y i n making a d e c i s i o n on an acceptable occupation, where they are expected to make a d e c i s i o n a t that stage, or they may f i n d that, having made a d e c i s i o n about an occupation, they are now commit-ted to doing the things that w i l l get them i n t o that occupation and subsequently are subject to being monitored by adults f o r t h e i r f a i l u r e or progress. I t i s hoped that the presentation and a n a l y s i s of t h i s m a t e r i a l w i l l r e v e a l a complex process of s o c i a l i z a t i o n t h a t i s both mutual to adolescents, as category members of a s o c i e t y , and i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y achieved among a l l of i t s members. The in t e n t i o n i s that the reader w i l l gain a d d i t i o n a l i n s i g h t i n t o the process of s o c i a l i z a t i o n as an i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y achieved 3 phenomenon and a l s o , perhaps, enable the reader to view the process as a system of problem-solving f o r i n s i d e r s who are expec-ted to allow themselves to be s o c i a l i z e d and, therefore, are expected to be d i s p l a y i n g signs that they are but who f i n d that, nevertheless, they do not e n t i r e l y accept those s o c i a l notions and who f i n d that they are not looked upon as f u l l - f l e d g e d members of t h e i r s o c i e t y . I t may be h e l p f u l to present here a few concepts about the terms adolescence and adulthood i n order to c l a r i f y the above. The stages of childhood, adolescence, and adulthood and the expectations that each c a l l s f o r t h , appear to be a recent c u l t u r a l invention of the seventeenth century. Apparently, p r i o r t o that time there were only two such stages, those of c h i l d and adult. For example, A r i e s s t a t e s t h a t : In the course of the seventeenth century a change took place by which the o l d usage was maintained i n the more dependent c l a s s e s of s o c i e t y , while a d i f f e r e n t usage appeared i n the middle c l a s s , where the word ' c h i l d ' was r e s t r i c t e d t o i t s modern meaning. The long duration of childhood as i t appeared i n the common idiom was due to the i n d i f f e r e n c e with which s t r i c t l y b i o l o g i c a l phenomena were regarded at the time; nobody would have thought of seeing the end of childhood i n puberty. The idea of childhood was bound up with the idea of dependence. The words •sons', ' v a r l e t s ' and 'boys' were a l s o words i n the vocabulary of f e u d a l subordination.,, I t was above a l l with Port-Royal and with a l l 4 the moral and pedagogic literature which drew i t s inspiration from Port-Royal ( or which gave more general expression to a need for moral discipline which was widely f e l t and to which Port-Royal too bore witness ), that the terms used to denote childhood became common and above a l l modem. Children were frequently viewed as incompetent adults since, in actuality, they were required to begin work in the factories and on farms at an early age, to be f i t for war, and to take on numerous other adult tasks and responsibilities. Thus, i n terms of an adult, they were often incompetent due to inexperience and size, and the passing from one stage to another was less marked by age and biological changes as i t was marked by the so c i a l class that one was in, the competence with which one performed the duties of that class, and the educational background one had. With the invention of adolescence, which focused heavily on biological changes, the stages became clearly marked by age and each came to have i t s own set of expectations. Children were no longer viewed as incompetent adults since they, by definition, encompassed a much younger age bracket and a more helpless one and they were biologically incapable of being adults, and an increasing number of laws prohibited them from being given the responsibilities of their elders. Adolescence came to be viewed as both a physical and 5 s o c i a l t r a n s i t i o n from childhood to adulthood and with the mark-ing of the three stages came a complex sta n d a r d i z a t i o n of c u l t u r a l b e l i e f s surrounding them. These b e l i e f s commonly include such notions as that the development of the c h i l d occurs through a progression of stages and parents are considered to be important influences on that development. Consider the f o l l o w i n g statement by Whiting: The c e n t r a l concept of the c h i l d as a poten-t i a l involves b e l i e f s about the inheritance of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , b e l i e f s about the influence of p a r e n t a l t r a i n i n g on the c h i l d , b e l i e f s about the influence of the s o c i a l environment and education, and b e l i e f s about stages and norms.3 Therefore, i t i s taken f o r granted by members of the s o c i e t y that the duty of the elders i s to help the c h i l d t o r e a l i z e h i s good aspects and t o curb h i s bad aspects, where bad aspects such as spoiledness, l a z i n e s s , nervousness, r e b e l l i o u s -ness, and d i s c i p l i n e problems are r e f l e c t i v e of the parent and put him a t f a u l t . Whiting accepts the view that the d i s p l a y of bad aspects by c h i l d r e n casts a poor r e f l e c t i o n on the parent when she speaks about a t y p i c a l American community i n the fo l l o w i n g : S o c i a l c o n t r o l i s i n d i r e c t , i n the form of gossip, avoidance, or exclusion. No adults p u b l i c l y c r i t i c i z e another to h i s fa c e . C r i t i c i s m of someone to one of h i s f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s i s with the expectation that i t w i l l be passed on. Children do not have the h e s i t a -t i o n of adults t o use d i r e c t c r i t i c i s m . Lack of industriousness i s one concern of gossip, c r i t i c i s m , or informal s o c i a l c o n t r o l . Pressure i s exerted against parents of c h i l d r e n who are d i s r e s p e c t f u l t o a d u l t s , deviate from community values, or d e s t r u c t i v e of property. I t i s a l s o a widely accepted b e l i e f that the p o t e n t i a l of the c h i l d w i l l not be r e a l i z e d i f the c h i l d does not acquire the r e q u i s i t e s k i l l s through education, so various means are employed by the parent and other adults as the c h i l d moves from one stage t o another to check out h i s progress i n that d i r e c t i o n . However, although persons continue to l e a r n u n t i l they die, i t i s believed that the p o t e n t i a l becomes gradually a c t u a l i z e d or " s e t " as the c h i l d grows so that eventually he w i l l become a "type",-* Therefore, i t i s advocated that the c h i l d ' s p o t e n t i a l ought t o be discovered as e a r l y as p o s s i b l e i n order t o determine the proper mode of education as w e l l as t o discourage undesirable t r a i t s . T h i s perspective i s n i c e l y summarized i n the f o l l o w i n g statement: The b e l i e f that the p o t e n t i a l i s i n part concealed leads to great emphasis on tech-niques f o r the discovery and d i s c l o s u r e of the c h i l d ' s p o t e n t i a l , . . D i v i n i n g f o r the p o t e n t i a l i s highly developed i n the community. There are, of course, the formal t e s t s f o r i n t e l -l i gence, p e r s o n a l i t y and achievement, but there are a l s o more subtle techniques, such as informal questioning of the c h i l d or observing h i s behavior f o r clues. Clues include such things as the c h i l d showing a s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t i n something, or doing something p a r t i c u l a r l y 7 w e l l . A f t e r the p o t e n t i a l has been d i v i n e d parents and teachers f e e l more secure i n taking a p a r t i c u l a r course of a c t i o n i n the t r a i n i n g of the c h i l d , . , I t i s f e l t that strong influences must be exerted against t r a i t s which do not go we l l together. According t o many childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n researchers a parent, i n an e f f o r t t o guide the c h i l d i n the proper d i r e c -t i o n and e s t a b l i s h a degree of s e c u r i t y within himself, seeks the p o t e n t i a l of the c h i l d by informal questioning and observa-t i o n of the c h i l d ' s behavior. The parent t r e a t s childhood and adolescence as stages of l i f e that w i l l prepare the c h i l d with behavior mechanisms so that he w i l l be competent to i n t e r a c t i n day t o day s i t u a t i o n s with h i s peers and which w i l l eventually enable him t o i n t e r a c t as a f u l l - f l e d g e d adult member. Such guidance from the adult i s frequently met with opposition from 7 adolescents who n e i t h e r r e a d i l y agree t o the kinds of influence t h a t they are r e c e i v i n g nor agree t o the point at which they are bel i e v e d t o become ad u l t s . Consider the fol l o w i n g statement by Whiting: The age which seems t o produce the most anxiety i n parents i s that of e a r l y puberty. At t h i s time the c h i l d has to cope more a c t i v e l y with h i s s e x u a l i t y and from various reports he i s r a r e l y able to get the approval of h i s parents i n t h i s respect. In most f a m i l i e s a b a r r i e r to free speech grows up at t h i s time between parents and c h i l d r e n . Parents have t o r e l i n q u i s h a good deal of 8 c o n t r o l over t h e i r c h i l d r e n and they usu-a l l y do so with anxiety. Therefore, the period of adolescence i s often viewed as a troublesome stage i n so much as there are c o n f l i c t s between the adolescent and h i s parents and, while the parent has a f e e l i n g of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the adolescent, he i s faced with the worry of whether he i s properly d i r e c t i n g h i s developmental process. I t i s advocated that: Parents often react t o having c h i l d r e n as they would to any r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . Parents come t o f e e l they are v i c t i m i z i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n , being uncertain about whether they are doing the best f o r the c h i l d . A n xieties are a l l e v i a t e d by f i n d i n g out what the c h i l d ' s p o t e n t i a l i s i n s o f a r as t h i s i s p o s s i b l e . A f e e l i n g of responsi-b i l i t y and a c e r t a i n amount of lack of success i n t r a i n i n g a c h i l d may lead t o a n x i e t i e s about t h e i r own inadequacies which leads them t o for c e the c h i l d i n t o c e r t a i n channels of development. Stage notions allow comfortable explanations f o r the behavior of the child,9 Thus, b i o l o g i c a l f a c t s served t o h i s t o r i c a l l y separate the stages of development but, alongside the recog-n i t i o n of those f a c t s came a set of c u l t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n s which could, i n turn, change h i s t o r i c a l l y again. Where today psychologists would have us recognize the developmental stages as a product of h i s t o r i c a l b i o l o g i c a l 9 changes within the organism, the society i t s e l f has imposed c u l -t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n s on that knowledge so that the b i o l o g i c a l f a c t s have become secondary to the c u l t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n s that serve everyday l i f e and are taken-for-granted. In essence, every s o c i e t y member i s under the g r i p of that knowledge and though, perhaps, some of i t i s well-founded the r e s u l t i s that c h i l d r e n and adolescents f i n d themselves to be i n an adult world which recognizes them as h a l f - f l e d g e d members who are not taken too s e r i o u s l y since they are beli e v e d to be incapable of speaking f o r themselves as they are not yet adults and are not yet able t o make good judgements. Children are labe l e d as " j u s t going through a stage" or as "having a bad day" when they do not conform t o adult expectations of common norms and they f i n d themselves t o be heard unseriously when they propose things beyond those that are defined f o r t h e i r developmental stage such as occupational i n t e n -t i o n s or l i f e s t y l e preferences. Adolescents discover that they are not seen by adults as i n d i v i d u a l s but that they must l i v e with the so c i e t y ' s d e f i n i t i o n s of what they must be l i k e . They are c u l t u r a l l y viewed as going through an anxious and problem-a t i c p e r i o d and i f they have unusual or no occupational ambitions or see an a l t e r n a t i v e route t o observe t h e i r goals, they are assumed t o be experiencing those problems r a t h e r than having in s i g h t i n t o themselves and t h e i r l i v e s and being able to competently make decisions f o r themselves. The p l i g h t of the adolescent and c h i l d i s i n some ways, perhaps, t o be compared t o that of the former mental pa-t i e n t who, upon returning t o the s o c i e t y with p o s s i b l y a l l of h i s f a c u l t i e s i n t a c t , f i n d s that he must l i v e with the s o c i e t y ' s d e f i n i t i o n s of what he must be l i k e . That i s , h i s utterances and actions are constantly monitored f o r defectiveness according t o the norm and, therefore, he becomes incompetent t o decide what i s best f o r himself since any unusual whim or preference w i l l be observed by others as a mental defect. Statements that he makes about h i s previous problems such as that he could not f i n d a job that he l i k e d or could not get along with h i s family, which f o r adolescents would be observed as normal occurances of t h e i r developmental stage, yet as problems t o be overcome are, f o r the ex-mental p a t i e n t , diagnosed as a l l a part of h i s i l l c o n d i t i o n , * ^ Adolescents p o s s i b l y are not unlike former mental patients i n one respect i n that they see t h e i r problems not n e c e s s a r i l y as p s y c h o l ogical but, instead, as a r e s u l t of how they are pushed, molded, guided, and h a r a s s e d by the s o c i e t y around them. Accordingly, they see themselves as l i k e normal persons who have problems but problems that w i l l l a t e r on get turned into things such as that rents are too high, jobs are hard to get, cars are expensive, and other problems of the world that are nothing s p e c i a l or unique but merely are prob-lems of t h e i r s t a t i o n s i n l i f e , occupations, and so on. That i s , they are proposing t h e i r problems as being normal f o r persons i n t h e i r age grade. It i n c r e a s i n g l y becomes apparent that adolescence can be t a l k e d about with reference t o biology, physiology, maturation and development with a t o t a l disregard t o the exper-ience of that status by i t s incumbents where, perhaps, i t would be equally as i n t e r e s t i n g t o assume the perspective of how, f o r incumbents of some age status, incumbency f o r them i s t h e i r problem and not the t y p i c a l notions that the standard l i t e r a t u r e would have us be l i e v e . To b r i e f l y return to an i n i t i a l l y made comment of t h i s t h e s i s , i t w i l l be the perspective taken t o view the process of s o c i a l i z a t i o n f o r adolescents, not as i t i s perceived by adults as 'general knowledge', but as i t i s perceived by the incumbents themselves as a dilemma i n terms of problems of management and dealing with adults. That i s , i n so much as adolescents are not heard t o complain that they need l i m i t s set by t h e i r elders or 12 That they are b i o l o g i c a l l y or p h y s i o l o g i c a l l y immature but, instead, complain that they are being bothered by parents, teachers, and the p o l i c e , and that t h e i r l i f e s t y l e preferences are t r e a t e d i n such a way as t o lead them t o mask them, then s o c i a l i z a t i o n f o r adolescents can be seen t o be a system of problem-solving f o r i n s i d e r s who are expected t o go through the s o c i a l i z a t i o n process but who, nevertheless, f a i l to accept many of the notions that the process e n t a i l s . The focus w i l l be on examining the ways i n which the c l a s s i c a l and widely held views toward childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n that I have been mentioning have turned out t o be a problem f o r those who are the incumbents of a category to which those views are d i r e c t e d . By i n v e s t i g a t i n g utterances taken from a n a t u r a l l y occurring conversation, various utterance parts w i l l be seen t o have the character of capturing a s p e c i f i c theme i n the t a l k as w e l l as be seen t o stand f o r s e v e r a l issues. Those issues w i l l be discussed and, i n s o f a r as the utterance parts are responded t o as l o g i c a l , ordinary, and unproblematic by the par-t i c i p a n t s , we w i l l ask how i t i s that those utterances get generated by an adolescent, what provides f o r the sense of those utterances, and what do the utterances amount to . 13 FOOTNOTES 1. P h i l i p p e A r i e s , Centuries of Childhood, Khopf, New York, 1962, p. 26. 2. What i s meant by the "invention of adolescence" i n the h i s t o r y of childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n i s a p t l y discussed by P h i l i p p e A r i e s i n Centuries of Childhood, Khopf, New York, 1962, Chapter 1. 3. B e a t r i c e B. Whiting, "A New England Culture", S i x Cultures-Studies of C h i l d Rearing, Wiley Press, New York, 1963, P. 921. 4. I b i d , p. 902. 5. Here, Whiting i s r e f e r r i n g to a "type" as a set p e r s o n a l i t y that has l i t t l e f u r t h e r hope of change or development, and which can enable persons to c l a s s i f y another person. For example, Whiting states that types can be c l a s s i f i e d as such by being dominated by a c e r t a i n t r a i t e.g. "He i s a hard worker", "He's the sneaky type, quiet about everything and a trouble-maker", and "He won't harbor a grudge, he's very open". 6. B e a t r i c e B. Whiting, "A New England Culture", Six C u l t u r e s -Studies of C h i l d Rearing, Wiley Press, New York, 1963, P. 923. 7. This p o i n t i s n i c e l y summarized i n the f o l l o w i n g quote to be found i n Michael Banton's book, Roles- An Introduction to the Study of S o c i a l Relations, T r a v i s t o k P u b l i c a t i o n s , London, I965, p. 99: This v a r i a t i o n i n the age at which childhood gives place to adulthood i s the source of some of the s t r a i n s that accompany adoles-cence i n i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t i e s . Young people i n s i s t that they are p h y s i c a l l y mature and w e l l able to look a f t e r themselves, and that at work as i n other s i t u a t i o n s outside the home they are already t r e a t e d as a d u l t s . Why, 1 4 they ask, should not t h e i r parents t r e a t them as adults? Often t h e i r parents have d i f f e r e n t ideas about the stage at which i t i s appropri-ate to t r e a t someone as f u l l y adult, and they are subject to pressures p u l l i n g i n the oppo-s i t e d i r e c t i o n . Emotional stresses may make i t d i f f i c u l t f o r a woman to accept that her r o l e of mother i s to be c u r t a i l e d , and older people often f e e l morally obliged to combat what seems to them the l a x i t y of the new generation, 8 , Beatrice B, Whiting, "A New England Culture", Six Cultures-Studies of C h i l d Rearing, Wiley Press, New York, 1 9 6 3 , P. 930. 9. Ibi d , p. 9 3 0 . 1 0 , E r v i n g Goffman makes some i n t e r e s t i n g comparisons between adolescents and mental patients when he casts doubt on the degree to which some psychotic symptoms can be considered as evidence of i l l n e s s i n the f o l l o w i n g quote which comes from h i s book, I n t e r a c t i o n R i t u a l - Essays on Face to Face  Behavior, "Mental Symptoms and P u b l i c Order", Anchor Books, Garden C i t y , New York, 1 9 6 7 , p. 1 4 1 : Given that many psychotic symptoms are i n s t a n -ces of s i t u a t i o n a l impropriety, we must ask . whether a l l s i t u a t i o n a l improprieties are i n -stances of psychotic symptoms. I f t h i s were the case we would have a s o c i o l o g i c a l l y groun-ded way of d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g psychotics from other people, But, obviously, there are many s i t u a t i o n a l improprieties apparently unconnec-ted with mental disorder. There i s the unman-nerly conduct of the c u l t u r a l a l i e n , the arrogant, the e c c e n t r i c , the i n s o l e n t , the v i c i o u s , the celebrant, the i n t o x i c a t e d , the aged and the youthful. CHAPTER I I METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS Although the world of adolescents and c h i l d r e n i s t y p i c a l l y studied from the adult's perspective which tends t o construe the adolescent's language and actions as not yet sen-s i c a l and as something which must be dropped i n order t o enter the l o g i c a l , r e a l world of adu l t s , that i s , r e l y i n g on the adolescents' i n t e r p r e t i v e competencies but t r e a t i n g them as incompetent and even crea t i n g s i t u a t i o n s f o r the di s c l o s u r e of that incompetency, i t w i l l be the i n t e n t i o n here t o perceive adolescents not as devious or p a r t l y s o c i a l i z e d or as l e a r n i n g t o be complete, r a t i o n a l , s o c i a l , mature, competent and s e l f -governing adults, unless they are "acting l i k e c h i l d r e n " , but as c u l t u r a l strangers who, perhaps i n some ways, are not unlike p o l i t i c a l prisoners o r inmates of mental h o s p i t a l s i n that they are s o c i a l i z e d i n v o l u n t a r i l y and must learn t o orient t o the adult world, which has i n t e r e s t s i n sus t a i n i n g , sanctioning, and imparting e t h i c s upon i t s i n t e r e s t s i n the adolescent world. In so much as communication r e s t s on the i n t e r p r e t i v e a b i l i t i e s of the p a r t i c i p a n t s , then the dilemma that adolescents face i n terms of dea l i n g with adults and problems of management 16 can a l s o hold as a dilemma f o r some a d u l t s , not because l i k e adolescents they discover that they are expected t o become soc-i a l i z e d or f i n d that they f a i l t o accept the notions that the process e n t a i l s , but because they sometimes must r e l a t e t o ado-lescents as persons who understand the adolescent dilemma and as adults who have already absorbed the system, such as the t h e r a p i s t must i n group therapy among teenagers. The analyses presented i n t h i s paper deal s p e c i f i c a l l y with group therapy t r a n s c r i p t s ^ a n d attempt t o f i n d a n a t u r a l o r d e r l i n e s s t o some everyday s o c i a l a c t i o n s . These t r a n s c r i p t s were made from tape recorded group therapy sessions and a l l recordings took place with the consent of the pat i e n t s involved 2 and i n as n a t u r a l a s i t u a t i o n as p o s s i b l e . Each t r a n s c r i p t c o n s t i t u t e s a period of one therapy session and dup l i c a t e s what was s a i d i n as near a verbatim and timed account as was tech-n i c a l l y p o s s i b l e t o produce. That i s , a l l pauses, speech over-l a p s , extraneous sounds, and word stresses are included as part of the complete t r a n s c r i p t and, i n i t s production, no para-phrasing, condensing or coding procedures were employed. Now, i t i s a b a s i c but important premise of t h i s t h e s i s that by analysing the utterances of the t r a n s c r i p t s as instances of n a t u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n that occurred during a conversational 1 ? encounter, i t i s possible t o le a r n both about the organization of language and about the s o c i a l organization of s p e c i f i c s e t t i n g s and encounters while a l s o enabling the discovery of the more general and unchanging features of the conversational resources that members must r e l y upon i n order t o understand one another and conduct t h e i r d a i l y a f f a i r s . J That i s , members of the s o c i e t y solve problems by way of accomplishing a c t i v i t i e s through t h e i r conversations such tha t , i f those a c t i v i t i e s are t r e a t e d by analysts as the methods that members use when b u i l d i n g t a l k around one another, a great d e a l can be learned about the s o c i a l organ-i z a t i o n of that s o c i e t y and about the structure of language i n i t s e l f . Consider the f o l l o w i n g remark by Turner which emphasizes the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a l l a c t i v i t i e s as data but which suggests that language has long been a neglected t o p i c : I t i s i n c r e a s i n g l y recognized as an issue f o r sociology that the equipment that enables the "ordinary" member of s o c i e t y t o make h i s d a i l y way through the world i s the equipment a v a i l a b l e f o r those who would wish t o do a "science" of that world. T h i s might be f o r -mulated as the s o c i o l o g i s t ' s "dilemma", but only so long as a notion of science i s em-ployed that f a i l s t o recognize the s o c i a l l y organized character of any e n t e r p r i s e , i n -cludi n g the ente r p r i s e of doing science, A science of s o c i e t y that f a i l s t o t r e a t speech as both t o p i c and resource i s doomed t o f a i l -ure. And yet, although speech informs the d a i l y world and i s the s o c i o l o g i s t ' s b a s i c resource, i t s properties continue t o go almost unexamined. L i n g u i s t i c models have had some recent influence on the development of s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s , but i t i s s t i l l not at a l l c l e a r that any s p e c i f i c a l l y l i n g u i s -t i c properties of t a l k can be r e l a t e d t o c e n t r a l s o c i o l o g i c a l concerns. I f we take sociology t o be, i n e f f e c t , "a n a t u r a l h i s t o r y of the s o c i a l world", then s o c i o l -o g i s t s are committed t o a study of the a c t i -v i t i e s such a world provides f o r and of the methodical achievement of those a c t i v i t i e s by s o c i a l i z e d members. The n a t u r a l l y occurring i n t e r a c t i o n s and a c t i v i t i e s that w i l l be the subject of inquir y i n t h i s t h e s i s are not t y p i -c a l l y the data used i n the research of adolescent s o c i a l i z a t i o n . In general, researchers of adolescent s o c i a l i z a t i o n have analyzed the conversations of c u l t u r a l members i n an e f f o r t t o develop information about stages and norms, c h i l d r e a r i n g p r a c t i c e s , and family counseling while f a i l i n g t o take notice of the prop e r t i e s of organized speech which underlie the everyday, c o n d i t i o n a l actions that take place between adolescents and ad u l t s . The almost t o t a l disregard of analyses that d e a l with the problems that adolescents have when t a l k i n g with adults or other adoles-cents i s n i c e l y stated by Speier i n the f o l l o w i n g : The reader accustomed t o the conventional paradigm i n childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n w i l l not f i n d h y p o t h e t i c a l i n q u i r i e s about " s o c i a l i z a t i o n influences and aims," nor problems i n the s o c i a l - s t r u c t u r a l b a s i s f o r the c h i l d ' s " i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of norms," et c . He w i l l f i n d , instead, that the i n t e r a c t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n t o childhood organization w i l l supply a frame of r e f e r -ence that precludes the posing of such abstract problems, and that i n f a c t such problems as are found In the c l a s s i c a l formulations w i l l be d i s s o l v e d and r e -placed by a whole new set of a n a l y t i c con-s i d e r a t i o n s . In searching out the proced-u r a l properties of children's conversational i n t e r a c t i o n s , a vast v a r i e t y of studies i n childhood s o c i a l organization could be attempted, encompassing p a r e n t - c h i l d i n t e r a c t i o n s i n everyday household a c t i v i t y , a d u l t - c h i l d i n t e r a c t i o n s i n other f a m i l i e s ' homes, i n p u b l i c places, i n schools, or i n t e r a c t i o n s e x c l u s i v e l y among ch i l d r e n themselves. Children's e x c l u s i v e contacts c o n s t i t u t e problems of study i n what might be c a l l e d the organization of "children's c u l t u r e , " and as such open up a wholly new s o c i o l o g i c a l domain. -5 With t h i s perspective as an approach t o the data i t becomes evident that what I previously r e f e r r e d t o as c l a s s i c a l notions about s o c i a l i z a t i o n i n terms of stages of development w i l l be disregarded as a p o s s i b l e method of study i n f a v o r of a study of occasioned and s i t u a t e d a c t i v i t i e s i . e . the ways i n which adolescents manage a conversation and create a s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n , that w i l l revolve around the very problem of t h e i r incumbency as adolescents. I t i s hoped that such a study w i l l cast doubt on the notion of stages as a sole means f o r under-standing the adolescent and h i s problems as w e l l as r e f u t e the notion that adolescents are l e s s than competent t o make sound 20 interactional decisions. Needless to say, although the materials are conver-sational and organized around group therapy sessions, the data can be treated as displaying a more general conversational competency that adolescents and other "partly unsocialized per-sons" depend upon both to create and identify their joint membership within the culture and use to deal with the problems of having that membership. In so much as the data can be a means for depicting the pursuits and interests of everyday conversationalists and the procedures that they must rely upon to get through the course of t h e i r conversations, the analyses can be treated as descript-ions of the ways by which conversationalists display that they are being socialized for a l l practical purposes while also maintaining a distinct membership among themselves, A general assumption here has been that the materials bear out a social and conversational orderliness and, i f that Is so, i t i s because they are orderly to the conversational society and enable i t s members to make analyses of their own and act upon a common understanding. It i s advocated that: In indefinitely many ways members' inquiries are constituent features of the settings they analyze. In the same ways, their i n q u i r i e s are made recognizable to members as adequate-for-all-practical-purposes,..In the a c t u a l occasions of i n t e r a c t i o n that accom-plishment i s f o r members omnipresent, un-problematic, and commonplace. F o r members doing sociology, to make that accomplishment a t o p i c of p r a c t i c a l s o c i o l o g i c a l inquiry seems unavoidably t o require that they t r e a t the r a t i o n a l p r o p e r t i e s of p r a c t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s as " a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l l y strange," By t h i s I mean t o c a l l a t t e n t i o n t o " r e f l e x i v e " p r a c t i c e s such as the f o l l o w i n g : that by h i s accounting p r a c t i c e s the member makes f a m i l i a r , common-place a c t i v i t i e s of everyday l i f e recognizable as f a m i l i a r , commonplace a c t i v i t i e s ; that on each occasion that an account of common a c t i v i t i e s i s used, that they be recognized f o r "another f i r s t time"; that the member t r e a t the processes and attainments of "imagin-a t i o n " as continuous with the other observable features of the s e t t i n g s i n which they occur; and of proceeding i n such a way that at the same time that the member " i n the midst" of witnessed a c t u a l s e t t i n g s recognizes that witnessed s e t t i n g s have an accomplished sense, an accomplished f a c t i c i t y , an accomplished o b j e c t i v i t y , an accomplished f a m i l i a r i t y , an accomplished a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , f o r the member the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l hows of these accomplish-ments are unproblematic, are known vaguely, and are known only i n the doing which i s done s k i l l -f u l l y , r e l i a b l y , uniformly, with enormous ^ standardization and as an unaccountable matter. While I have only b r i e f l y discussed the manner i n which t h i s t h e s i s has been conducted, g i v i n g background information i n t o both the data employed and the perspective with which i t has been analyzed, I admit that t h i s study i s f a r from encompassing the multitude of issues that surround an inquiry i n t o adolescent s o c i a l i z a t i o n and an inquiry i n t o the methods that members of a s o c i e t y use when speaking with one another, I have chosen t o analyse the data as an analyst and as a c u l t u r a l member r a t h e r than t o provide a formal methodology upon which those analyses are b u i l t . I t i s p r i m a r i l y my i n t e n t i o n t o propose an a l t e r -native t o the t y p i c a l notions of childhood s o c i a l i z a t i o n . In t h i s respect I would l i k e t o agree with Speier when he says that " s o c i a l i z a t i o n i s the a c q u i s i t i o n of i n t e r a c t i o n a l compe-7 tences". 23 FOOTNOTES 1, These t r a n s c r i p t s were recorded i n the n i n t e e n - s i x t i e s i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a and are used under the permission of Harvey Sacks, The recordings took place over a s e r i e s of f i v e Saturday morning sessions and involve a student t h e r a p i s t and f i v e high school problem students. The ther-a p i s t was known to the adolescents as a student who was working on h i s doctorate i n psychology, The various s t u -dents have been sent to the therapy sessions by a u t h o r i t i e s r a t h e r than by personal choice f o r one of the f o l l o w i n g reasons: a. Being an underachiever i n terms of grades i n school but having the p o t e n t i a l to get passing marks or b e t t e r i n terms of t e s t materials, b. Having been expelled from school one or more times, c. Having parental or teacher problems, e.g. t a l k i n g back, d. Missing or leaving classes at school, e. Delinquency, e.g. smoking, drinking, d r i v -ing cars f a s t , breaking the law by robbing, speeding, etcetera, f . Being involved i n schoolground or other f i g h t s . 2, I t could be argued by some that when a t h e r a p i s t records a group therapy session with the consent and knowledge of h i s pat i e n t s , an a r t i f i c i a l s i t u a t i o n has been created, since both patient and t h e r a p i s t are aware of the taping and be-cause the therapeutic s i t u a t i o n i s conducted with various int e n t i o n s and procedures. To those persons, I suggest a reference to Roy Turner, "The Ethnography of Experiment", The American Behavioral S c i e n t i s t , A p r i l 19&7> 3. I am indebted t o Harvey Sacks and G a i l J e f f e r s o n f o r i n t r o -ducing me to t h i s perspective while I was a student at the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a at Irvine. Any m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of i t i s purely my own. Such a perspective can be contrasted with what Douglas c a l l s the " a b s o l u t i s t perspective on so-c i e t y " which, as a c l a s s i c a l s o c i o l o g i c a l perspective, suggests that the actions of persons are independent of the s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n s i n which they occur because they are determined by something outside of the person's committing the actions and outside of the s i t u a t i o n . This concept can be found and more ela b o r a t e l y explained i n Jack Douglas', Understanding  Everyday L i f e - Toward the Reconstruction of S o c i o l o g i c a l Knowledge, Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company, 1970, London, Routledge, and K, Paul, 4. Roy Turner, "Words, Utterances and A c t i v i t i e s " , prepared f o r Jack Douglas ( ed, ), Understanding Everyday L i f e - Toward the Reconstruction of S o c i o l o g i c a l Knowledge, Chicago, Aldine Pu b l i s h i n g Company, 1970, London, Routledge, and K. Paul. 5. Matthew Speier, "The Everyday World of the C h i l d " a New Look at the E m p i r i c a l Content of Childhood S o c i a l i z a t i o n , prepared f o r Jack Douglas ( ed, ), Understanding Everyday L i f e - Toward the Reconstruction of S o c i o l o g i c a l Knowledge, Chicago, Aldine Pub-l i s h i n g Company, 1970* London, Routledge, and K, Paul, p. 191, 6. Harold G a r f i n k e l , "What i s Ethnomethodology?", Studies i n  Ethnomethodology, Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey, P r e n t i s s H a l l , 1967, P. 9. 7. Matthew Speier, "The Everyday World of the C h i l d " A New Look at the E m p i r i c a l Content of Childhood S o c i a l i z a t i o n , prepared f o r Jack Douglas ( ed, ), Understanding Everyday L i f e - Toward the Reconstruction of S o c i o l o g i c a l Knowledge, Chicago, Aldine Publishing Company, 1970, London, Routledge, and K, Paul, p. 189. CHAPTER I I I ADOLESCENT INCUMBENCY; A PROBLEM OF HAVING TO BE SOMETHING The following chapter w i l l include a po r t i o n of the t r a n s c r i p t that we ought t o pay c a r e f u l a t t e n t i o n t o i n that i t has some features that are both problematic and i n t e r e s t i n g . I f we look c a r e f u l l y at the t r a n s c r i p t we w i l l d i s -cover a few utterance parts that appear t o have a cognitive connection and that presumably sound both mundane and l o g i c a l t o the reader as w e l l as t o the speakers involved. That i s f over the course of the conversation i t i s po s s i b l e t o make sense of the utterance parts as w e l l as t o determine the reasons f o r t h e i r generation. These utterance parts include the f o l l o w -ing fragments: ,,,"1 don' wanna be nothin." He says, ( u t t e r -ance #5 )» ...He says that he wants t o be something he knows what he wants t o be... ( utterance #7 ), and 0-oh I just wanna be a bum out i n the- out i n the f o r e s t . , , ( utterance #9 ). We w i l l want t o ask how i t i s that a teenager can propose t o another teenager that another says that he does not want t o be anything when, i n f a c t , he wants t o be something. 26 That as an i n i t i a l problem w i l l r a i s e a few a d d i t i o n a l questions i n that f i r s t , that utterance i s treated by i t s r e c i p i -ent as both l o g i c a l and commonplace and second, since that utterance has cognitive connections with other utterances, presumably we w i l l want to know how i t gets r a i s e d on t h i s occa-si o n . That i s , what provides f o r the sense of those pieces of t a l k such that they sound reasonable and are unproblematic to the persons involved and to us as readers of those utterances when we could just as e a s i l y dismiss the l o g i c of such statements t o the f a c t that these teenagers are, a f t e r a l l , only teenagers who might perhaps be i l l o g i c a l at times or to the f a c t that i n another s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n those utterances would not make sense?^ What i s the occasion on which the t a l k gets r a i s e d such that don' wanna be nothin." i s both a r r i v e d at and captures a s p e c i f i c theme i n the t a l k and what kinds of i n t e r a c t i o n a l resources stand behind the utterances of the t a l k so as t o pro-vide f o r t h e i r reasonableness? These are some of the problems and issues that I hope to draw a t t e n t i o n t o and solve i n the 2 course of t h i s t h e s i s . T h i s w i l l become l u c i d i f we proceed by taking a look at the t r a n s c r i p t i t s e l f . Keeping these questions i n mind, l e t us now look at the fo l l o w i n g s e v e r a l utterances taken from a session that has already begun. Roger, Ken, and Jim are three students who, p r i o r to t h i s exchange, have been t a l k i n g about being pushed by t h e i r parents t o enter c e r t a i n occupations, 3 Dan, the t h e r a p i s t , i s p r e s i d i n g : ^ 1, Roger: You're not i n t e r e s t e d i n cars, you're not i n t e r e s t e d i n sports, you're not in t e r e s t e d i n mechanics, // you're not-2, Jim: Well I'm in t e r e s t e d i n i t , but I don't f e e l that I sh'd-that I wanna go i n t o the f i e l d , ( /) 3, Roger: Are you scared to go i n t o something? 4, Jim: No, ( //// ) 5, Roger: That's the way my brother f e e l s y'know I had t'push him y'know h-he ( wasn't r e a l l y ) whole-hearted, "I don' wanna be nothin," He says, ( //A) 6, Jim: (( c l e a r s throat )) ( // ) 7, Roger: Well y'see, i t ' s not a very r e a l i s t i c approach r e a l l y . He says that he wants to be something he knows what he wants t o be, but i t ' s not a very r e a l i s t i c t h i n g . ( / ) 8, Roger: So he ju s t doesn't t e l l people about i t . Well I uh I d i d that too, y'know, ( // ) 9, Roger: 0-oh I ju s t wanna be a bum out i n the-out i n the f o r e s t y'know i n other words, he's gotta- an i n t e r e s t - n a t u r a l , y'know, i n - i n nature i n other words, but he doesn't wanna be a f(hh)orest ranger. An' he doesn't wanna be categorized, ( /) 28 1 0 , Roger: I'm t h i s . I'm that, ( /// ) 1 1 , Ken: In some ways I wouldn't mind bein a f o r e s t // ranger, 1 2 , Roger: He probably j u s t doesn't wanna t e l l people what he r e a l l y wants t o be, you know, — s o l d i e r of fortune o r some other ( ), ( ///// ) 1 3 , Dan: Why not? ( //) 1 4 , Roger: Maybe he-he f e e l s that i t won't be accepted y'know, an* people'11 laugh at him, ( / ) 1 5 , Roger: Y'know-I thi n k a l o t t a people don't wanna be categorized, ( // ) 1 6 , Roger: He i s gonna be an engineer. He's gonna be a f o r e s t ranger. I f we focus on the utterances mentioned, keeping i n mind the questions that we previously posed, an i n i t i a l l y p l a u s i b l e view w i l l be t o consider that 'being something* i s s p e c i f i c a l l y a reference t o an occupation and an incumbency, where that incumbency i s something that none of the boys has yet attained. In so much as these teenagers ( o r any teenagers ) can t a l k about occupations i n other s e t t i n g s and with other persons that would not at a l l resemble the t a l k about occupations here, the utterances above are occasioned and ought not to be char-a c t e r i z e d or analyzed without reference t o the occasion of t h e i r 29 production, that i s , how the t a l k i s done that way on t h i s occasion. Now, each one of them can f i n d with respect t o the others that he i s designated an "underachiever" and a "problem k i d " by various school, parental, and law a u t h o r i t i e s and t h a t he i s now i n therapy by v i r t u e of having done or not done s i m i l a r things to what the others have or have not done. Each of them can a l s o f i n d with respect t o the others that there are t o p i c s that are much on t h e i r minds, of which occupations i s one such t o p i c ; that they are t o p i c s which engage them i n thoughts and quarrels with r e l a t e d others and that those r e l a t e d others are r e l a t e d i n the same way as each one of them i s to h i s parents and that to one another, now, they can t a l k about these matters v i s a v i s the troublesome character that they have with those things when t a l k i n g about them t o t h e i r parents and to s i m i l a r a u t h o r i t i e s . I t could be argued, then, that here these teenagers are not merely t a l k i n g about occupations, but occupations have become t o p i c t a l k i n so f a r as occupations are troublesome matters between each of them and h i s parents. Thus, they can see each other as ' i n s i d e r s ' i n so much as they can formulate f o r each other how they stand with respect t o occupations and other t o p i c s 30 i n ways that are s p e c i f i c a l l y not the ways that they would formulate those matters f o r r e l a t e d others, as f o r t h e i r parents; and they can formulate those f o r each other i n ways that are s p e c i f i c a l l y i n contrast to the ways those matters would be treated, formulated, and honored by those r e l a t e d others. That i s , were they even t o t r y to formulate these notions with the r e l a t e d others, they could see that they would not be honored and what they would meet with would be contrastive notions t h a t vrould make t h e i r own formulations out t o be a source of trouble. In t h i s degree, at l e a s t i n part, they are problem kids and underachievers by v i r t u e of holding these views which, were they t o expose them t o a d u l t s , would lead them t o be seen as deviants who are immature, u n r e a l i s t i c , underachieving, and so on. Therefore, i t i s not simply that I can now propose, as an outsider and an analyst, that here are s e v e r a l teenagers and t h i s i s the way that teenagers t a l k since the f a c t that they are teenagers can be documented, but that f o r them t h i s part of the t r a n s c r i p t i s an enactment of that kind of f e l l o w incumbency v i s a v i s others who are co-members as being members of that category and, s p e c i f i c a l l y , co-members as having i n a strong way a group of problems that can be seen to be s p e c i f i c to that stage of 31 l i f e , i . e . they are not problems that they had when they were f i v e years o l d , although i n a l a t e r s e c t i o n of the data they t a l k about them with regard to when they were f i v e years o l d , but they are bounded by whether t o be an engineer or other occupations that they are expected t o be preparing f o r now. Those issues are s p e c i f i c a l l y problems f o r members who are co-category members so that f o r them that i s what being a teenager amounts to i . e . having those kinds of problems. That i s , they are speaking as teenagers and on behalf of teenagers about being teenagers, with regard to others who get formulated as adults, So f a r , I have been r e f e r r i n g t o the previous u t t e r -ances as a whole i n an e f f o r t t o give the reader both a perspec-t i v e with which to read them and i n order to b r i e f l y discuss how the t a l k i s produced on t h i s occasion v i s a v i s the co-category membership that the p a r t i c i p a n t s can i d e n t i f y themselves as having. Let us now look at a p a r t i c u l a r utterance i n order to make some more d e t a i l e d observations, the utterance where Roger says that h i s brother j u s t wants to be a bum out i n the f o r e s t , Roger's comment f o r h i s brother, "0-oh I ju s t wanna be a bum out i n the- out i n the f o r e s t . . . " ( utterance #9 ), i s an i n t e r e s t i n g quote because i t says something on behalf of h i s brother that at f i r s t i t appears h i s brother would not say about himself. That i s , although one may c a l l others a bum i t i s s p e c i f i c a l l y not the k i n d of term that one i s l i k e l y t o c a l l oneself. Now, such a comment i s made from the perspective of people not yet i n occupations, but i n the making, and not yet o l d enough to be i n any occupations but o l d enough to be expected to have plans, expectations, and thoughts. I f those persons were to f i n d themselves turned o f f at that stage to the standard occupations and p o s s i b l y had an e n t i r e philosophy of not being i n t e r e s t e d i n money-making, marriage, and having a family, but simply wanted t o j u s t get by and handle things as they came up from day to day, then they could perhaps see that although f o r them that kind of a l i f e s t y l e was d e s i r a b l e and represented a serious a l t e r n a t i v e , f o r those who were addres-si n g such questions to them, what i t amounted to was being a bum. What i s i r o n i c about that statement i s that Roger's brother i s using the l i s t e n e r ' s perspective to describe h i s plans, although i t i s not a way that he would t a l k about them when he was t a l k i n g s e r i o u s l y about what he wanted to be. That 33 i s , one could f e e l that the e n t i r e a d u l t occupational world was a deception, and that he wanted to do otherwise by not becoming involved with i t , but when t a l k i n g to school teachers, parents, probation o f f i c e r s and the l i k e , one could propose one wanted to be a hum because he knows that that i s what i t amounts to f o r them, which can be a way of di s t a n c i n g himself from them since he does not want to t e l l what i t i s that he r e a l l y wants to be. Fi n d i n g that one cannot t e l l adults t h a t he wants to be an engineer or a policeman, et c e t e r a , one can use one of those terms f o r them which i s not to say that one s e r i o u s l y thinks about being a bum, but that that i s a joking way of saying t h a t f o r a c e r t a i n hearer what i t would amount to being i s a bum; which i s a l s o not t o say t h a t there i s not something serious there but that i t i s not being t o l d s e r i o u s l y and i t i s not being t o l d s e r i o u s l y on some systematic basis i . e . they would not understand. Since "bum" i s not a le g i t i m a t e occupational term, i t i s not something that one can s e r i o u s l y propose tha t that i s what he wants to be and, therefore, i t could be reasoned that when a person says that he wants to be a bum he cannot help but know that i t i s a provocative answer to the question of what i s he going to be. That i s , i n a normal adult's perspective some people end up being bums but only by p l a i n l y not making i t , being l a z y , i d l e , 34 stupid, or by not being s u f f i c i e n t l y aggressive or mature. Thus, being a bum i s what a person ends up being by f a i l i n g . So, f o r a person to propose that he wants to be a bum he i s s p e c i f i c a l l y seen as being provocative since he i s making out as a goal something which i s not seen as being a r r i v e d a t as a goal by those who occupy that category, and since he i s using a term that f o r adults has one kin d of incumbency that should be generated i n one way but which gets to be generated i n another way. Therefore, i t i s not that Roger's brother says that he wants t o be a plumber to h i s parents, receives a negative r e a c t i o n , and then discovers that a plumber i s not a good thin g f o r him to be, but i t i s s p e c i f i c a l l y knowable ahead of time as something that he cannot propose that he wants t o be unless he wants to be heard as provoking, being s e c r e t i v e , i n s u l t i n g , and so on, since i t s very use implicates him i n some kin d of i n t e n t i o n a l i t y . Now, the term "bum" i s t y p i c a l l y an a l t e r n a t i v e to a l l of the occupational terms, i . e . f o r some purposes the a d u l t world i s f u l l of the g a i n f u l l y employed, who have various occupations, on the one hand and bums on the other hand. So, f o r a teenager to say that he i s going to be a bum can perhaps be heard as a 35 serious r e j e c t i o n of both occupations and of the things that teenagers ought to be doing now i n order to get them i n t o an occupation l a t e r , r a ther than be heard as humorous. That i s , the term has various r e j e c t i o n s b u i l t i n t o i t so that when one says that he i s going to be a bum, he i s a l s o suggesting that he w i l l be something that h i s parents w i l l be ashamed of and, s p e c i f i c a l l y , that they cannot now use to t e l l others about him, since adults are able to t e l l about t h e i r grown up c h i l d -ren by way of g i v i n g t h e i r occupations. Although any occupation i s a leg i t i m a t e answer t o the question of what one i s going to be, not a l l occupational terms are acceptable though only an occupation i s acceptable. That i s , i f one i s a middle c l a s s teenager whose f a t h e r i s an engineer or a doctor, to propose that he i s going to be a plumber may i n f u r i a t e or disappoint h i s parents because, although a plumber i s a legitimate occupation that might warrant respect, as a son of an engineer to only want to be a plumber may be a source of family trouble because i t does not follow the same kinds of educational preparation, i t i s f a i l i n g t o assume the fath e r ' s l i n e of business, i t f a l l s i n t o a lower wage-earning bracket, e t c e t e r a . In a d d i t i o n , he can f i n d that he i s only to t e l l people what he i s going to be i n occupational terms because i f he t e l l s them h i s l i f e s t y l e preferences he w i l l be categor-ized , where categorized means being assessed and disposed of i n a serious evaluative way that one can get by t e l l i n g people things that they w i l l not understand e.g. he may be assessed as being crazy, romantic, u n r e a l i s t i c , immature, e t c e t e r a . So what teenagers r e a l l y want to be and an occupation are maybe not very close to one another, but that f o r a s o c i a l -i z e d person i n the culture they become close and, therefore, i t i s not the occupational terms that categorize a teenager, but the other things that he does not t e l l a dults such as what he r e a l l y wants t o be which, perhaps, i s not an occupational term at a l l as i s the case f o r Roger's brother. In other words, adolescents may have some notion of how they want t o l i v e t h e i r l i v e s and what they want t o be and an occupation i s something that gets superimposed on that or i s something that represents a compromise or represents the best way of g e t t i n g what they r e a l l y want to be, which i s not the occupation but what the occupation allows them to do. In t h i s manner, i f one wants to be close to nature he can be a f o r e s t ranger, where what he r e a l l y wants to be i s close to nature and not a f o r e s t ranger but, i f he t o l d people the former, he would get categorized as being u n r e a l i s t i c , romantic, or out of touch 37 with r e a l i t y since that i s not the way that adults t a l k about what they are or want t o be. I t i s the g i v i n g of something other than an occupa-t i o n that gets one categorized, where occupations are acceptable but what one r e a l l y wants to be may not be. Finding that to be the case, one only t e l l s others h a l f of the s i t u a t i o n , the occupational h a l f . One could construct a category of occupations that are not s o c i a l l y acceptable, but the choice f o r them i s not between being an engineer or a s t r e e t sweeper ( which may not be a soc-i a l l y acceptable occupation ), but i t i s a choice between one occupation and another where, f o r a l l i n t e n s i v e purposes, they are both acceptable although what a teenager r e a l l y wants to be behind the occupation perhaps i s not s o c i a l l y acceptable. Now, categorized i s what happens to a person i f he t e l l s people what he r e a l l y wants to be ( he i s laughed at and so on ) and to avoid that he f i n d s that he ought to give others an occupational term but, ra t h e r than name an occupation that he knows i s going to get a negative r e a c t i o n , he may f i n d that he i s b e t t e r o f f opting out of the occupational categories a l t o -gether and o f f e r i n g the one thing that i s an a l t e r n a t i v e and which di s p l a y s that he i s not i n t e r e s t e d In the kinds of things that h i s parents or others are looking f o r . That i s , to say that one wants to be a bum i s to choose trouble that terminates a d i s c u s s i o n on the matter, where the other a l t e r n a t i v e i s a l s o trouble, but trouble that opens one up to being undercut and t o continuing the d i s c u s s i o n . The former i n d i c a t e s that one has already thought through what he wants to be, r e a l i z i n g how h i s parents would receive i t . For them h i s choice would amount to being a bum and, since he has already made a d e c i s i o n on the matter, they can now leave him alone and give him no trouble. Thus, i t i s not that there w i l l not be trouble but that he i s encountering h i s parents as a f i g h t i n g partner by saying that, r a t h e r than encountering them as a c h i l d who says something naive and then gets the treatment of a c h i l d who says something naive. Perhaps i t could be argued, then, th a t there are very s p e c i f i c and p r e f e r r e d ways of g e t t i n g trouble that do not open persons up to being undercut or bare t h e i r souls and which might be chosen i f one knows that he i s already i n bad with h i s parents or other adults, such as choosing to say that he wants to be a bum instead of that he wants to be a plumber. That i s , he can f i n d that he i s to contend with trouble as a r e s u l t of being unable to give h i s parents an acceptable occupation, knowing that an occupational terra i s the only acceptable an-swer because i f he t e l l s them h i s l i f e s t y l e preferences he w i l l be categorized. A few utterances p r i o r t o t h i s utterance, Roger says: 5. Roger: That's the way my brother f e e l s y'know I had t'push him y'know h-he ( wasn't r e a l l y ) whole-hearted. "I don' wanna be nothin." He says. In l i g h t of the d i s c u s s i o n so f a r , we can perhaps see that i t i s not as though we ought to take i t l i t e r a l l y that a person discovers that he cannot think of an occupational category that he wants to belong to and then decides that he wants t o be nothing, but that i f he knows what i t i s that he i s going to be w i l l not be received w e l l he can say that he i s j u s t going to be a bum and put an end to the argument q u i c k l y by s t a r t i n g o f f at a l a t e r stage; and i n the utterance above, t h i s i s what Roger i s suggesting that h i s brother i n f a c t does. That i s , Roger's use of "He says,", here, has the character of not proposing that what follows or precedes i t i s to be taken as being so, since i t i s a l t o g e t h e r d i f f e r e n t t o 4 0 say "I don' wanna be nothin." He says, instead of He says, "I don' wanna be nothin." Moreover, Roger goes on to explain why we are not to believe what h i s brother says to adults by g i v i n g us an explanation f o r why he says i t which turns out to be that h i s brother knows what he wants t o be but, since i t i s not very r e a l i s t i c , he says that he wants to be nothing i n order to avoid being categorized or laughed a t . Now, Roger's brother knows what he wants to be but, i n the eyes of h i s parents and other a d u l t s , i t i s seen as u n r e a l i s t i c and he knows that too, since he favors a l i f e s t y l e t h a t would be termed by h i s parents as being a bum. So, r a t h e r than t e l l people that he chooses not to t e l l by saying "I don' wanna be nothin" which i s another way of saying that he wants to be a bum, since being nothing and being a bum are perhaps the same i n the eyes of the person f o r whom one i s saying i t , i . e . f o r the persons who are not that but not the same f o r a person whose l i f e choice that i s ; and that i s a way of doing an adult's view of what one i s turning out to be. That i s , these teenagers can perhaps be seen as i d e a l -i s t i c and Utopian from an adult point of view and can be seen by some adults as persons who amount t o nothing, have no d r i v e , ambition, or pride while the kids perceive themselves as looking f o r the good l i f e i n a serious and intense way, where doing nothing may be the achievement of that instead of being lazy or a bum. Thus, even though when an adolescent says that he jus t wants to be a bum he i s doing an adult's view of what he i s turning out to be, i t has altogether d i f f e r e n t meanings f o r him, as a teenager, to say that than i t would have f o r an adult to say the same thin g . For an adult to say that he wants to be a bum i t can perhaps be funny, since adults generally have already achieved t h e i r occupational goals and being a bum could only be seen as a side preoccupation i n i t s most serious sense, but f o r a seventeen year o l d t o say the same thing, i t can be heard by a f a t h e r as not humorous but as h i s son's way of seeing the world that i s not ne c e s s a r i l y h i s own. So f a r , we have been looking a t the a l t e r n a t i v e s that persons have when answering the question of what are they going t o be, f i n d i n g that they cannot provide an occupational answer e i t h e r because they have none or because the one that they have w i l l not be received favorably, where an occupational answer i s the appropriate one. There i s another reason why adolescents might f i n d that they cannot give adults an occupa-t i o n a l response, even i f they have an acceptable occupation t o o f f e r . F o r an adolescent to express an occupational i n t e n -t i o n i s i n some ways to make a promise to adults that he can then be seen to e i t h e r come through on or breach, and which enables them t o monitor h i s a c t i o n s . That i s , at that point i n l i f e , a teenager can be seen to be making a p o t e n t i a l l y s e rious occupational preference and to announce i t can then be s i m i l a r to promising i n that he can be f a u l t e d f o r going back on h i s word as w e l l as that i t provides f o r adults the c r i t e r i a t o assess him as to whether he i s c a r r y i n g out h i s plans and tak-in g the proper steps t o reach that goal. I f the choice that a teenager makes i s an occupation that means that he w i l l have to go to a u n i v e r s i t y i n order to be prepared, then adults already have a l e v e r on him i n high school i n that they can see whether or not he i s doing the things i n high school that w i l l get him i n t o the u n i v e r s i t y . In t h i s manner, i f one says that he i s going to be a doctor but he i s not doing w e l l i n high school, then he i s p o t e n t i a l l y i n trouble with h i s parents v i a the f a c t that what he i s doing now w i l l not be seen t o be coming through on the commitment that he made when he s a i d that he was going to be a 43 doctor. Moreover, he may end up being termed an underachiever simply by not l i v i n g up t o h i s stated ambitions, where an occupational choice i s one means f o r determining one's ambi-t i o n s , or he may be seen to have made an unserious commitment that may then be a problem by encouraging questions from adults with regard t o whether he can or w i l l make a serious commitment and whether he i s maturing as he should, since he does not r e a l i z e that i n order to be a doctor he has to begin preparing today. So there are a s e r i e s of connections between where one i s today and where he might be ten years from now occupa-t i o n a l l y , and that knowledge provides adults with ammunition to do measurement assessing as to one's seriousness, capacity, progress, f i c k l e n e s s , maturity, s t a b i l i t y , and so on, v i a one's occupational choices and what he i s then doing once he has made those choices, both s o c i a l l y and academically, i n order to determine whether those things are consistent with the intended outcome, Thus, when Roger says that h i s brother does not want to be categorized, he i s proposing t h a t i t can be problematic f o r h i s brother t o propose what i t i s that he i s going to be, whether an engineer or a f o r e s t ranger, because then he has provided adults with ways of checking him out that they would not have i f he simply, d i d not t e l l them or, o p p o s i t i o n a l l y , i f he s a i d that he wanted to be a bum, where the problem i s not avoided but merely s h i f t e d . In accordance with t h i s , s t a t i n g one's occupational intentions can be problematic i n so much as once they are p u b l i c , others can then f i n d themselves i n a p o s i t i o n to notice that the person i s making u n s a t i s f a c t o r y progress toward that goal, i s a c t i n g out of character f o r the r o l e that the occupation c a l l s f o r , or i s s t r i v i n g f o r an unacceptable occu-pation, which enables them to make other g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s about the l i f e s t y l e and character of t h a t person. Now, Roger's brother can do one of three things. He can t e l l adults what he " r e a l l y wants t o be" such as a s o l d i e r of fortune and they w i l l laugh at him or l a b e l him as immature or u n r e a l i s t i c , or he can give them an occupational term i n order to disguise h i s r e a l f e e l i n g s , and then they w i l l categor-ize him and begin to monitor h i s progress to see whether he i s moving toward that goal properly. As a l a s t a l t e r n a t i v e , he can propose that he i s going to be a bum which w i l l avoid both being categorized and laughed a t , since i t i s an a l t e r n a t i v e h5 to both occupational categories and the g i v i n g of a l i f e s t y l e . I t i s not as though Roger's brother r e a l l y wanted to be a f o r e s t ranger and d i d not want to t e l l a d u l ts that he d i d because he would be categorized, but he d i d not want to be a f o r e s t ranger. That i s , a l l of these teenagers, i n c l u d i n g Roger's brother, have l i f e s t y l e preferences t h a t they would rather not t a l k about with adults because they get them i n t o trouble, not simply by permitting them to be categorized but because they are not seen as serious i n that the adolescents do not pay a t t e n t i o n to how they are going to be able to l i v e those l i f e s t y l e s v i a an occupation. They a l l have preferences f o r a l i f e s t y l e but they may f i n d i t hard to come up with an occupation that they have any commitment t o and so, i t i s not so much that i f they give the occupational term t h a t stands f o r what they want to be there w i l l be trouble, but perhaps they do not even have an occupation to give. F o r e i t h e r s e t , "bum" i s a term that they can come up with which w i l l get them out of e i t h e r having no occupation to o f f e r or a bad occupation, where simply g i v i n g a l i f e s t y l e would be a bad choice as w e l l and get them laughed at and seen as uncommitted since, f o r adults, l i f e s t y l e s are not choices but concomitants of occupations so that by choosing an occupa-t i o n one a t t a i n s a l i f e s t y l e . In other words, f o r a d u l t s , occupations are things that they b u i l d i d e n t i t i e s around so that some jobs to them are j u s t jobs while other jobs are occupations. Thus, i f one i s going to be a bum or a lawyer then there may be an e n t i r e l i f e s t y l e , set of hab i t s , and manner of dress that would go along with each of those whereas, i f one i s j u s t i n the occupational world to pay the b i l l s , earn money, and keep going, he perhaps does not accept so many of those things and make them a part of himself. Therefore, garbage c o l l e c t o r s are often not expected to have strong i n t e r n a l commitments to c o l l e c t i n g garbage i n the way that doctors are expected to have those commitments to medicine because the former i s seen as being j u s t a job that earns -one money, while the l a t t e r i s seen as an occupational career due to the preliminary work that i s involved i n order to achieve that occupation. This chapter has been concerned with examining the t a l k about a taken-for-granted, commonplace occurrence among adolescents: that they are asked what they are going t o be. We have seen that such a question i s tr e a t e d as unproblematic and reasonable by i t s incumbents i n that they are vulnerable t o that question and they have the i n t e r a c t i o n a l devices th a t are required to answer i t i n a s p e c i f i e d way. Moreover, we have t r e a t e d the t a l k about that ques-t i o n as problematic, not because i t need be a problem f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s although f o r these teenagers answering the question does pose a problem^but because, by t r e a t i n g the process of answering that question as "problematic", an attempt has been made to el u c i d a t e those things that are i n t e r a c t i o n -a l l y required t o both i n t e r p r e t and respond t o i t . While the encounter between the t h e r a p i s t and the teenagers i n group therapy has been generated methodically as a r e s u l t of each of the teenagers being l a b e l e d a "problem" by. a u t h o r i t i e s , the t o p i c s that they engage i n need not be as r i g i d l y arranged beforehand. Although t h i s i s the case, i t has been suggested that many t o p i c s emerge as a r e s u l t of there being various s i m i l a r t o p i c s on the minds of each of them that are t o p i c s which engage them i n thoughts and quarrels with t h e i r parents and with other adults. Occupations have been shown to constitute one such t o p i c . Through an examination of occupations as a t o p i c we 4 3 have seen that the utterances produced are produced by ' i n s i d e r s ' who recognize themselves as such by making c a t e g o r i c a l i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n s ^ and who, by having that membership, can formulate f o r each other how they stand with respect t o occupations i n ways that are d i f f e r e n t than the formulations that they would give t o others. That i s , these teenagers i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y a r r i v e at various t o p i c s as a r e s u l t of having a j o i n t membership i n a s p e c i f i c category. In a d d i t i o n t o the above, i t has been reasoned that a reference to 'being something' i s s p e c i f i c a l l y a reference to an occupation that, f o r adolescents, has not yet been a t t a i n e d and which poses a problem f o r adolescents as a r e s u l t of there being a demand placed upon them t o o f f e r an occupation as one that they are i n the process of a t t a i n i n g . I t i s f o r t h i s reason that we have noted various a l t e r n a t i v e answers t o that demand, answers which have t h e i r meaning dependent upon the contextual s i t u a t i o n and upon the c a t e g o r i c a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s that can be made, and that we have noted the consequences of g i v i n g any one s p e c i f i c response. The following chapter w i l l be concerned with e l u c i d a -t i n g some of these issues as w e l l as concerned with posing other kinds of i n t e r a c t i o n a l devices that stand behind the utterances of the t a l k . Thus, we w i l l n t i l l be asking what the utterances amount t o and what are the ways by which they are made unprob-lematic and reasonable f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s involved. In part, t h i s w i l l mean examining tha ways i n which occupations can be di v i d e d i n t o various subclasses and i n q u i r i n g i n t o the appeal that p a r t i c u l a r occupations | 1 a v e f o r f i v e year olds as opposed to the occupations that adolescents are i n t e r e s t e d i n . 50 FOOTNOTES 1, T h i s perspective i s a t y p i c a l one taken by c l a s s i c a l c h i l d -hood s o c i a l i z a t i o n t h e o r i s t s and adults a l i k e . 2, What i s meant by t r e a t i n g the data as problematic can best be described by f i r s t examining a quote from Harold G a r f i n -k e l i n Studies i n Ethnomethodology, Englevrood C l i f f s , New Jersey, P r e n t i s s H a l l , 196?, p. jh: In exactly the ways that a s e t t i n g i s organized, i t consists of members• methods f o r making e v i -dent that s e t t i n g s ' ways as c l e a r , coherent, p l a n -f u l , consistent, chosen, knovrable, uniform, r e -producible connections,-i,e., r a t i o n a l connect-ions. In exactly the way that persons are members to organized a f f a i r s , they are engaged i n serious and p r a c t i c a l work of detecting, demonstrating, persuading through d i s p l a y s i n the ordinary occa-sions of t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s the appearances of consistent, coherent, c l e a r , chosen, p l a n f u l arrangements. In exactly the ways i n which a s e t -t i n g i s organized, i t consists of methods whereby i t s members are provided with accounts of the s e t t i n g as countable, storyable, p r o v e r b i a l , com-parable, p i c t u r a b l e , representable-i.e., accoun-table events, The above accomplishments f o r members are unproblematic, mun-dane, and constantly present during the everyday s i t u a t i o n s of i n t e r a c t i o n but the s o c i o l o g i s t , i n making those accomplish-ments a p a r t i c u l a r subject of study, must t r e a t those accom-plishments as an outsider would and as i f they were strange. That i s , the s o c i o l o g i s t must ask how the member makes his world accountable, f a m i l i a r , and o b j e c t i v e , 3, For a presentation of the utterances of the t r a n s c r i p t that are used within t h i s t h e s i s i n sequential order, consult the appendix, A complete l i s t of the conventions that are used w i t h i n the t r a n s c r i p t can a l s o be found i n the appendix. 4, I t i s important to note here that Roger i s using both a l a y -man's d e f i n i t i o n of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n , as opposed to the s o c i o -l o g i c a l d e f i n i t i o n of c a t e g o r i z a t i o n that Sacks employs i n hi s w r i t i n g s , as w<»ll as using the term i n a double sense f o r h i s own purposes. That i s , Roger i s using categorized to mean what happens to a person i f he gives an occupa-t i o n a l term to adults i . e . , he i s monitored f o r h i s progress and put i n t o a clans as someone who i s going to be that occupation. Roger i s a l s o using categorized i n another f r a g -ment of the t r a n s c r i p t to mean what happens to a person i f he gives adults a l i f e s t y l e instead of an occupation i . e . , he i s laughed at n/nd thought to be immature, strange, uncon-forming, and so on, Thus, Roger has two separate sets i n mind f o r which he i s using the term " c a t e g o r i z a t i o n " . That i s , the question "What are you going t o be?" i s unprob-lematic f o r these teenagers with regard to i n t e r p r e t i n g the question and to the ways i n which they can answer i t , but i t poses a problem with regard to which way that they w i l l answer, since none of the boys have or want to give an accep-table occupation. In other words, they are making i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s of one another as teenagers, problem kid s , therapy pa t i e n t s , underachievers, boys, and so on. 52 CHAPTER IV CHILDREN'S OCCUPATIONAL DREAMS; SOME FORMAL QUALITIES In t h i s chapter I w i l l be d i s c u s s i n g some of the issues and concepts that were previously mentioned with regard t o how a teenager can a r r i v e at making a p a r t i c u l a r utterance about an occupation and the things that are e s s e n t i a l t o i t s being heard as reasonable, although these issues w i l l be presented i n a new l i g h t . The focus w i l l be upon examining some of the more formal and generalizable features of another piece of the t r a n s c r i p t i n the hope of comparing i t to the data presented i n chapter three, A large p o r t i o n of the utterances that we w i l l be looking at involve t a l k about the occupational choices of c h i l d -ren, namely these teenagers when they were younger. R e c a l l that i t was mentioned e a r l i e r that the adole-scents produced t a l k i n therapy about occupations because occupa-t i o n s c o n s t i t u t e d a t o p i c that was on the minds of each of them as a r e s u l t of i t being a t o p i c which engaged them i n thoughts and troublesome matters with s p e c i f i c a d u l t s . Furthermore, they 53 could t a l k about those matters In therapy with regard to the troublesome character that they had with them when t a l k i n g about them t o adults, one such trouble being that they were anxious about what adults expected and asked of them occupation-a l l y . Now, part of the concern that these teenagers have with occupations i s not only that they are anxious and harassed about what adults expect and ask of them but that they can look back on t h e i r own e a r l i e r selves and f i n d that they have always had some kind of stake i n the occupational world, although that stake has not always made problematic the kinds of answers that they could give t o the question of what they are going t o be, that we r e f e r r e d t o i n chapter three. That i s , i t may be that now, as teenagers, they are f i n d i n g that they have to conceal t h e i r occupational choices while perhaps they are a l s o f i n d i n g that they previously had a h i s t o r y of voiced occupational choices. There-f o r e , they are at a stage where the occupational world has gone sour on them. The romantic, glamorous occupational choices have disappeared and yet they are not prepared to make the commitments to the occupational world that t h e i r a d u l t s want of them f o r reasons such as that they get categorized or that they are not i n t e r e s t e d i n occupations as occupations but, instead, they are i n t e r e s t e d i n l i f e s t y l e s , where the p o s s i b i l i t y of converting those l i f e s t y l e s or i n t e r e s t s i n t o occupations might be very d i f f i c u l t . Let us now turn to s e v e r a l other utterances i n order t o develop t h i s p o i n t : 17. Dan: C e r t a i n l y I do t h i n k th a t t h i s i s true, I mean any kind of uh ( / ) c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of an occupation i s j u s t you know, w e l l what are you gonna be? w e l l I'm gonna be t h i s , and so on. C e r t a i n l y . Yer r i g h t . T7) 18. Dan: I t i s -19. Ken: Sure but-20. Ken: Yet- When // you were f i v e years ol d , w:::-waitaminute, 21. Dan: P a r t i c u l a r l y a ten year o l d c h i l d ? 22. Ken: When you were f i v e years o l d d i n * you have- didn* you have dreams of bein a- a-a- a- fireman? 23. Jim: ( .// ) 24. Ken: A puhliceman? Uhh 25. Roger: That's just a search f o r adventure, 26. Ken: An ambulance d r i v e r , or some such — horseshit, W e l l every time I had t h i s imagination i t was blanked out. Y' know by, "Oh no, you don'wanna be tha t , that-there's no money i n tha t , there's 55 no t h i s , there's no that, uh you wanna be an engineer," ( / ) 27, Roger: But that's j u s t c'se every boy wants adventure, y'know an' he sees i t as a fireman or a policeman, ( /) 28, Ken: So some boys-29, Roger: C d al s o see i t as-30, Ken: So some boys gr//ow up bein a f i r e -31, Roger: Why d'they play with guns. 32, Ken: -fireman or a policeman. 33, Roger: N-bu'i-but i t ' s d - d i f f e r e n t y'know they come about i t under d i f f e r e n t circumstances. No boy sees adventure i n bein a cop, an' then a l l of h i s l i f e wants to be a cop, and then be-comes a cop. That's very rare, ( / ) 34, Ken: I don'know, 35, Roger: Just circumstances lead up to i t , 36, Ken: But I know there's a // l o t t a guys i n college // who st a r t e d out-37, Roger: I mean-38, Roger: I mean he sees the t r u t h of i t before he becomes old enough to be a cop, 39, Ken: There's a l o t t a guys i n college who s t a r t e d - s t a r t e d out saying they wanted to be a, a-a-40, Jim: ( ) 41, Ken: a-a- whaddyacallit a — not a mathema-t i c i a n , a see-not a secreta-you know, j! a-a- s p e c i a l - a s p e c i a l i z e d // man, // he's-42. Roger: ( ) 43. Roger: Technician, 44, Roger: ( 's'at whatchu mean? ) 45. Ken: A t e c h n i c i a n yeah, a secretary l i k e , y'know only he does a l l kinds of bookkeeping and things l i k e t h i s ? 46, Roger: An accountant? 47, Dan: A ccountant, 48, Ken: Yeah. I f we focus on Ken's utterance, "When you were f i v e years o l d d i n ' you have- didn' you have dreams of bein a- a-a-a- fireman?" ( utterance #22 ), we can see that he has come up with an occupational term and that t h i s has been chosen from among hundreds of occupations i n the world. Furthermore, i t belongs to a subclass of occupational terms so that when he adds to the l i s t we can see that the occupations are a l l of the same subclass; and that that i s a v a i l a b l e to them i s of the essence i n order that the meaning be understood such that, i f they were to suppose Ken could j u s t as e a s i l y have s a i d " i n s u r -ance salesman", then they could not have understood the point that Ken i s making. So, oriented t o the maintenance and con-s t r u c t i o n of the t a l k i s a common knowledge about occupational categories. Ken's comment i s i n a l i s t construction, meaning one 57 of the occupations or a l l of them, ending with "or some such-hor s e s h i t " ( utterance #26 ), which i s a re t r o s p e c t i v e char-a c t e r i z a t i o n of the items i n the c l a s s , not a c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n that a p p l i e d at the time that the clas s was i n use. Therefore, a t the time when Ken wanted to be a p o l i c e -man or a fireman, i t was not "some such h o r s e s h i t " and not even n e c e s s a r i l y at the time when the utterance was begun since Roger's comment about i t being a search f o r adventure may have a l t e r e d the o r i g i n a l l y intended utterance. Thus, Ken on t h i s occasion may be r e v i s i n g the categorizations that he i s w i l l i n g to propose of that subclass of occupations as a r e s u l t of the i n t e r a c t i o n a l work with Roger although, at a minimum, i t i n -volves a r e t r o s p e c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of a subclass that was constructed i n a s p e c i a l way and i s bound to a p a r t i c u l a r k i n d of membership which i s f i v e year o l d boys. That i s to say that, although boys are not talke d about s p e c i f i c a l l y by Ken, they are understood to be and r e f e r r e d to as boys by Roger and are part of what that membership i s a l l about so that Louise, who i s another group member, would not nec e s s a r i l y be expected to have wanted to be a fireman or policeman a t age f i v e . So here we see a subclass of occupations with a cate-gory bound character, a retr o s p e c t i v e viewing of i t both through Ken's use of "dreams" and "horseshit", and a rechar-a c t e r i z a t i o n of i t which provide not only f o r the world of f i v e year olds but f o r the world of f i f t e e n year olds who r e t r o -s p e c t i v e l y can see themselves as f i v e year olds as a r e s u l t of having once been there. Thus, as i t looks now, these teenagers are f i n d i n g themselves to be s u f f e r i n g the r e s u l t s of some induced f a l s e -hoods since they r e t r o s p e c t i v e l y are f i n d i n g the notions t h a t they had of the occupational world have turned out to be horse-s h i t . That i s , i t i s not being proposed that as one grows o l d e r he changes views or- gets d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t s but, rather, that there i s a determinate c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n placed upon a f i v e year old's view of the world that i s i n opposition to possible a l t e r -native ones, where that r e t r o s p e c t i v e viewing of i t could be evaluated i n another s i t u a t i o n n o s t a l g i c a l l y , perhaps. I f we look at the subclass of occupations and see that i t i s a subclass and notice some of i t s features and how i t i s constructed such that I t i s category bound so that small boys are involved, then we can see the power of the complaint made by Ken when he proposes, as against that, that he was t o l d t h a t he 5 9 wanted to be an engineer, since engineer i s p l a i n l y not a member of that subclass but a member of quite another subclass of occupations that i s bound to d i f f e r e n t category members and notions. One can see that, although under some notion occupa-t i o n a l terms are merely occupational terms, i t would be hard to see one being proposed to another as an a l t e r n a t i v e when, i n f a c t , there i s a great deal of s o c i a l l y organized knowledge t i e d to those subclasses of occupations that makes that a power-f u l r e t r o s p e c t i v e complaint by Ken,* Now, i n order f o r Ken's utterance t o have been under-stood by the others i t had t o have been given a l i s t - l i k e character such t h a t a l l of the occupations could be seen to be category bound, which would require that occupations not always be seen as equal. That i s , although there could be a world where adults expected that by the time a teenager was f i f t e e n he would have chosen an occupation, i n a c t u a l i t y that i s not the way things are and these teenagers can see that the occupational world i s shot through with i m p l i c a t i o n s with respect to whether they are l i v i n g up to "Mommy and Daddy's" expectations, whether they are d i s p l a y i n g that they have ambitions, or whether they 60 are underachievers. So when they t a l k about occupations, that t a l k i s constrained by the sense that they have of the occupational world having an enormous amount of i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e . Thus, when they look back on when they were f i v e years o l d , they can see that there were many occupations that they might have s e l e c -ted that r a t e d because of what Roger characterizes as a "boy's search f o r adventure" and that that i s not now a way to be s e l e c t i v e of occupations any more than i t i s a way t o s e l e c t the kinds of occupations that appeal t o them when they are f i f t e e n . The kinds of occupations that they have to consider when they are f i f t e e n are quite d i f f e r e n t than the occupations that they have to consider when they are f i v e but, nevertheless, these adolescents s t i l l have a sense of there being kinds of occupations instead of j u s t occupations and they can see t h a t there are constraints on them to o r i e n t to occupations as kinds of occupations. That i s to say, i f one proposes that he wants to be something i n occupational terms, h i s parents w i l l hear i t not j u s t f o r i t s i n t r i n s i c s a t i s f a c t i o n s but f o r what that means i n terms of whether he w i l l b r i n g shame on the family or whether t h e i r c h i l d w i l l t u r n out to be lazy, unambitious, or an under-achiever. So occupations get l i s t e n e d to i n t e n s i v e l y f o r s e v e r a l things and thus, they have a l i s t - l i k e character. I t i s not that Ken can choose between being an engineer or a gar-bage c o l l e c t o r and, i n f a c t , there are jokes about that kind of contrast throughout the t r a n s c r i p t : 49. Dan: Cause i t hasta go through the school system. 50. Roger: Mh//hm 51. Dan: Otherwise you // won't be h i r e d as an engineer. Y o u ' l l be / / " h i r e d as a uh- as a // maintenance engineer,-* 52, Ken: I dunno i f I'm t e s t i n g myself, but u h - h e l l , i - i f i t means t e s t i n g myself, ok I'm t e s t i n g myself. But yet when I get outta college i t ' s gonna say •engineer' on that t h i n g i f i t - i f i t takes me t i l I'm f o u r hundred'n ten years o l d . * • •» 53. Jim: Heh g- gonna end up bein i c e cream man e r sump'n. 54. Ken: Well, uh a l o t t a people- you c'n get a job as a-as a salesman, 55. Roger: Oh Je//sus 56, Ken: As a-uh no I mean- f e r a b i g comp'ny. In the l a s t example above, salesman gets an i n t e r e s t -ing treatment since when Ken says that he could get a job as a salesman, Roger t r e a t s i t as i f that i s a naive and misinformed idea that Ken has i f he thinks that he w i l l get somewhere occu-p a t i o n a l l y by being a salesman. Ken attempts t o counter Roger's remark by suggesting th a t I t would be f o r a b i g company and then by going on to give the case of a neighbor who made i t s u c c e s s f u l l y as a salesman but, i t i s not as though Ken can say that he does not know whether to be a salesman or an engineer since, i f he says that he wants to be a salesman, he w i l l get those kinds of responses as a r e s u l t of salesman not belonging to the same occupational category that engineer belongs to. That i s , someone who does not want to be an engineer may want to be something e l s e but that something e l s e had b e t t e r look l i k e the kinds of things that a p o t e n t i a l engineer might be and not be l i k e a salesman. There are c o l l e c t i o n s of occupational terms such th a t i f one was p o t e n t i a l l y a member of one occupation but passed i t up, then he ought to s e l e c t another occupation from that same 63 c o l l e c t i o n and not move to another c o l l e c t i o n . Therefore, a person who was p o t e n t i a l l y an engineer might decide to become an accountant but not an ice cream man, since i c e cream man i s not merely another occupation but i t i s from another c o l -l e c t i o n that belongs with u n s k i l l e d occupations such as a garbage man or a j a n i t o r . In t h i s manner, i f one of the other group members heard Ken's comment about f i v e year o l d dreams and then pro-posed the occupation of insurance salesman as one more member of the l i s t , then i t would not be cor r e c t because i t would not be generated out of the notion of what f i v e year o l d kids have dreams of being occupationally. In other words, they do not merely choose any occupations but there are kinds of occupations that are s p e c i f i c a l l y seen to be the kinds of things that f i v e year olds are i n t e r e s t e d i n . Thus, out of an e n t i r e domain of occupational terms, on any occasion when occupations get t a l k e d about, there are i n force and i n use notions about how those things are c o l l e c t e d and organized with respect t o p r o p e r t i e s that they have such that, i f a person was to say that he was going to the Northwest T e r r i -t o r i e s to work, that would invoke various things that he could be doing as things that one does when he goes to the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , where those things would include mining, f i s h i n g , or work on the P i p e l i n e and when he could, a f t e r a l l , be going there as a p s y c h i a t r i s t . Going to the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s to work w i l l invoke a set of occupations that are seen to be the kinds of occupations that people go to the Northwest T e r r i -t o r i e s to do. So, i f one was going to propose a job to another he would not propose u n s k i l l e d manual l a b o r as a s u i t a b l e , equiva-l e n t job i f that person had been applying f o r jobs as a corpor-a t i o n executive because he would take i t that occupations have that kind of r e l a t i o n a l character to one another. Now, one can propose that he can come up with an occupation t h a t has relevant p r o p e r t i e s t o whatever c r i t e r i a by which another i s assessing h i s a n a l y s i s , although those proper-t i e s have not been t o l d to him. Thus, a l l of t h i s i s not simply r e s t r i c t e d to occupations, teenager's t a l k about occupations, or teenager's t a l k about ki d s versus the occupations but Ken's utterance i s a prevalent way of d i s p l a y i n g that the domains of items that people propose large l i s t s of have an i n t e r n a l structure and organization that i s not composed of a si n g l e i n -t e r n a l structure or organization, but which i s composed of many such structures f o r agents or persons of given i n t e r e s t s , t a s t e s , and occupations.-Therefore, to r e t u r n to Ken's utterance, i f someone had. heard Ken say fireman or policeman or ambulance d r i v e r , but then proposed salesman as another co-category member, i t would be apparent that he had not understood how Ken was put-t i n g h i s l i s t together and, i n f a c t , part of the problem that thea© teenagers have i s coming to terms with j u s t those notion!, That i s , f o r a d u l t s , i f one of the kids i s not going to be. an engineer whtn he, i s expected to be, then he had b e t t e r be. semfthing that i s i n the same c o l l e c t i o n as an engineer and he had b e t t e r be. able to grasp what that c o l l e c t i o n i s , where salesman surely would not be i n that c o l l e c t i o n but, perhaps, one. of the. problems that these adolescents have i s l e a r n i n g thai©. Qolleetiona, So, i n Ken's utterance, he has put fireman, policeman, and arabulanee d r i v e r s p e c i f i c a l l y i n a l i s t so that the others can s§e that they are r e l a t e d occupations and determine what that r e l a t i o n s h i p i s whereas engineer, which i s a l s o an occupa-t i o n , i s set apart from the l i s t . That i s , fireman, policeman, and ambulanee d r i v e r are seen to be co-members of one subset of occupations where what they have i n common can be found by the 6 6 others to be occupational i n t e r e s t s of f i v e year o l d boys but, since engineer i s d i s t i n c t l y set apart from that l i s t and can be seen to belong to an altogether d i f f e r e n t subset of occupa-t i o n s , where that subset cannot be independently found because no other co-members are given, the category that i t belongs to i s provided as being a money-making profession. Thus, i f Ken had simply s a i d i n utterance twenty s i x that h i s f a t h e r had s a i d "...Oh no, you don'wanna be that, uh you wanna be an engineer.", we might not be able to see with the c l a r i t y that we do see j u s t what i t i s that Ken i s going to presume because, having only engineer a v a i l a b l e to us, we perhaps cannot be c l e a r about the category of the subclass that he i s r e f e r r i n g t o since there are a l t e r n a t i v e categories such as those that involve money-making, an educational l e v e l , or a s p e c i f i e d l e v e l of p r e s t i g e . What we do get, however, i s a subclass with the category b u i l t i n so that one occupation i s enough. Furthermore, Ken has a nice way of g e t t i n g the others to see that he i s not proposing that they, as f i v e year olds, ought t o have s p e c i f i c a l l y been i n t e r e s t e d i n being firemen, policemen, or ambulance d r i v e r s but, rather, that they ought to have been in t e r e s t e d i n being things that f i v e year o l d boys are 6? occupationally i n t e r e s t e d i n , of which firemen, policemen, and ambulance d r i v e r s are only three such examples. In other words, Ken i s able to d i s p l a y that h i s l i s t i s not yet complete and, since the category that the l i s t e d items belong to can be found, a d d i t i o n a l occupations belonging to the same category are r e t r i e v a b l e by the others. Ken i s able to do t h i s by using the format "or some such ", which l i k e "or something" and "and s t u f f " suggest that what precedes them i s at l e a s t one item of a l i s t and that the r e l a t i o n s h i p to one another that those items have can be found by others by examining what has already been given. F o r example: 45, Ken: A t e c h n i c i a n yeah, a secretary l i k e , y'know only he does a l l kinds of bookkeeping and things l i k e t h i s ? 46, Roger: An accountant? 47, Dan: Accountant, 48, Ken: Yeah, In the above example, Ken attempts to describe an occupation f o r which he as yet does not have a formal name. He has begun two l i s t s : a l i s t of occupations that are s i m i l a r to the occupation that he i s attempting to name, and a l i s t of 6 8 duties of that occupation, although h i s l i s t has ended with only one item which i s "bookkeeping. Now, Ken has indicated t h a t bookkeeping i s part of an unfinished l i s t and he has provided, both i n that l i s t and p r i o r to i t , information that can enable Roger to come up with a d d i t i o n a l duties of that occupation and, i n so doing, then be able to name the occupation as an accountant. That i s , Roger can f i n d other duties that are r e l a t e d to bookkeeping such as working with mathematical f i g u r e s , recording f i n a n c i a l t r a n s -actions, posting, and f i l i n g i n order to a i d him i n determining that occupation, and he has been i n v i t e d t o look f o r those duties, i n part, as a r e s u l t of Ken saying "...and things l i k e t h i s ? " ( utterance #45 ) which has t o l d Roger that there are other such duties. Thus, Ken's utterance i s ela b o r a t e l y organized i n such a way as to provide both a r e t r o s p e c t i v e view of f i v e year old occupational i n t e r e s t s and a present view of the same i n t e r e s t s , where those occupations are given as belonging to one category and contrasted with occupations of another category, such as an engineer, and that have ideas of commitment, prepar-a t i o n , t r a i n i n g , and e a r l y choice t i e d to them. Therefore, a 69 garbage c o l l e c t o r would not be a su i t a b l e contrast since i t i s not expected to have been chosen e a r l y i n l i f e , to express an occupational i n t e r e s t , to be prepared and t r a i n e d f o r , or to provide f o r a l i f e s t y l e . One way of looking at occupations, apart from other ways, i s as being d i v i d e d i n t o two large subsets: those which persons are expected t o choose, o r i e n t t o , prepare f o r , and commit themselves to, and those that are j u s t jobs, where each one of these teenagers i s expected to be i n t e r e s t e d i n the f o r -mer by adults but f i n d s himself to be i n t e r e s t e d i n the l a t t e r . That i s a problem that turns on the categories of occupations and t h e i r respective compositions and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , where the grounds on which these adolescents s e l e c t t h e i r occupa-t i o n s may not be the grounds on which those c o l l e c t i o n s t h a t t h e i r a d u lts use are constructed as w e l l as that, even i f they are constructed on the same grounds, the adolescents have to lear n the categories that each occupation belongs to and that may, i n i t s e l f , be problematic. In other words, each one of them has to l e a r n the way i n which the domain of occupations i s s t r u c t u r e d i n t o subclasses and c o l l e c t i o n s , each having properties that are not i n and among 70 themselves i n t r i n s i c t o the occupations but which are relevant t o the ways i n which one can get seen to be achievement or white c o l l a r oriented, l i v i n g up to family expectations, and properly preparing f o r those occupations. In t h i s manner, Ken's utterance i s e l a b o r a t e l y organ-ize d not because i t t e l l s us that f i v e year olds want to be firemen, policemen, or ambulance d r i v e r s but because i t d i s p l a y s the t r u s t t h a t these teenagers have i n the s t r u c t u r e of the occupational world. Th i s chapter has been concerned with presenting the more formal and generalizable i n t e r a c t i o n a l devices that stand behind adolescent's t a l k about occupations. By examining a d i f f e r e n t p o r t i o n of the t r a n s c r i p t that involved t a l k about the occupational choices of c h i l d r e n , i t was demonstrated that the occupational terms mentioned by the adolescents were d i v i d e d i n such a way as t o provide various sub-classes of occupational terms, and that the l i s t - l i k e character that some utterances possessed was p r i m a r i l y a means by which those subclasses of occupations could be i d e n t i f i e d and recog-nized by the others, a point which was c r u c i a l to understanding those utterances. Furthermore, i t was found that there are 71 c o l l e c t i o n s of occupations that govern the ways i n which a per-son might choose another occupation, given that he has decided not t o be what he has t o l d others he w i l l be. When these issues were compared to the data i n chapter three, i t was discovered that, because of the subclass charac-t e r that occupations have, they get l i s t e n e d to i n t e n s i v e l y f o r a v a r i e t y of things such that i f one proposed t o h i s parents that he wanted to be a s p e c i f i c occupation, they would hear that not only f o r i t s i n t r i n s i c s a t i s f a c t i o n s but, a l s o , f o r what that would mean i n terms of whether he would be an underachiever or bring shame on the family; and that hearing would, i n part, be based upon whether the occupation was one that persons o r i e n t t o and commit themselves t o or whether i t was t o be considered as j u s t a job. In a d d i t i o n , i t was noted that the occupational choices of the adolescents were problematic not only because they were anxious about what adults expected of them but a l s o because, by examining t h e i r f i v e year old occupational choices, they could determine that they were mislead i n t o having f a l s e notions about the occupational world. While they could not now voice t h e i r occupational choices, they found that they had a h i s t o r y of voiced occupational choices; and while nearly a l l occupations known to 72 them were acceptable to o f f e r at f i v e years o l d , only s p e c i f i c subclasses of those occupations that persons o r i e n t to and commit themselves to are acceptable now. 73 FOOTNOTES 1, The s o c i a l l y organized knowledge that i s t i e d to occupations i s evidenced by the very s p e c i f i c and widely agreed upon pres-t i g e r a t i n g s that are given various occupations. A l b e r t J, Reiss n i c e l y discusses t h i s point i n the f o l l o w i n g quote that i s taken from h i s book, Occupations and S o c i a l Status, New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1962, p. 195: The high c o r r e l a t i o n s among the r a t i n g s f o r occu-pations by i n d i v i d u a l s with ostensibly d i f f e r e n t evaluative c r i t e r i a strongly suggests the existence of an underlying and agreed upon structure of occupational p r e s t i g e , 2. Ken's use of "Mommy and daddy" can be compared to Roger's use of "Play b i g people", both of which are not t y p i c a l ways of r e f e r r i n g to adults by adolescents but, instead, are c h i l d -ren's ways. Therefore, e i t h e r i s a way of doing a d i s t a n c i n g from adults that i s i r o n i c since the teenagers do not see themselves as c h i l d r e n but are suggesting that adults see them as such. In Roger's example, b i g people and adults are one and the same, which i s a t t e s t e d t o by a f o l l o w i n g comment by Ken that speaks of having a t a l k with h i s f a t h e r and that i s perhaps a way of p l a y i n g a b i g person since i t was an i n t e l -l e c t u a l t a l k . That i s , Roger i s suggesting that, f o r them, being an adult or a b i g person i s something that they are aware of as having not yet a t t a i n e d i n the eyes of adults and so i t i s s t i l l a matter of play. A f t e r Ken states that h i s t a l k with h i s f a t h e r turned out very good, Roger follows i t by asking, "From the o l d man's viewpoint?". At f i r s t t h i s appears to be an odd statement since a notion about something being good seems to involve a judgement of one's own and, therefore, seems t o be taken from the perspective of the speaker which would cause i t to be heard as Ken's viewpoint. That Roger questions t h i s implies that, f o r Ken, the t a l k could not have turned out good and, therefore, i t must be h i s f a t h e r ' s viewpoint that he i s g i v i n g which i s to say that playing a b i g person i s f o r them only play and, thus, i t does not e n t i -t l e them to a l l of the respect, p r i v i l e g e s , c o n t r o l , and i n -dependence that the a c t u a l category c a l l s f o r t h . Even Ken's fo l l o w i n g comment, "For once i n h i s l i f e " takes t h i s perspec-?4 t i v e by i n d i c a t i n g that t h i s was an unusual case f o r i t to have turned out good f o r him, , Here, Dan i s speaking about professions that amount t o some-thing versus professions that do not amount t o something. So there i s an occupational c l a s s i f i c a t o r y system which i n -cludes maintenance engineer among the occupations that do not amount t o anything and Dan uses that knowledge when he speaks about what these teenagers might have t o be and com-pares that with what they might want to be. Here, he does nearly a pun on the occupation of an engineer by doing a strong contrast set e.g., money and prestige versus l i t t l e money and low p r e s t i g e . So, ice-cream man, although the same kind of contrast, would not do the work of d i s p l a y i n g how the society would look at them i f they went to apply f o r an engineer's job without having the experience since, i f one of them was untrained but s a i d that he was an engineer, he would be looked at i n the terms of an engineer and not thought of as a p o s s i b l e ice-cream man, although perhaps as a low form of an engineer i . e . , a maintenance engineer. That i s , i t i s not as though they would be given j a n i t o r ' s jobs when they a p p l i e d as engineers, but they might be thought of i n those terms where, i n f a c t , the two jobs could be placed within the same b u i l d i n g . 4, That there i s a contrast between various subclasses of occu-pations i s a p t l y discussed i n a study on occupations that can be found i n A l b e r t J , R e i s s ' book, Occupations and S o c i a l Status, New York, Free Press of Glencoe, 1962, p. 195. The f o l l o w i n g i s a b r i e f summary of two f i n d i n g s : Two conclusions seem inescapable from t h i s inves-t i g a t i o n : l ) despite the f a c t that the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n of a person has an e f f e c t on h i s r a t i n g s of some occupations, the prestige status of occu-pations i s viewed i n s u b s t a n t i a l l y the same way by major s o c i a l groupings i n American s o c i e t y and 2) despite the r e l a t i v e l a c k of consensus on the c r i t e r i a f o r r a t i n g a job as having e x c e l l e n t stan-ding, there i s almost complete agreement on the nature of the occupational pres t i g e s t r u c t u r e of American s o c i e t y , at l e a s t where the rated occupa-t i o n s are h i g h l y s a l i e n t . 5. Another example of the i n t e r n a l structure and organization of 75 l i s t s can be found i n an examination of Roger's l i s t : Roger: You're not in t e r e s t e d i n cars, you're not inte r e s t e d i n sports, you're not i n t e r e s -ted i n mechanics, // you're not-Jim: Well I'm in t e r e s t e d i n i t , but I don't f e e l that I sh'd-that I wanna go in t o the f i e l d , In the above, where Roger begins to focus on Jim, he i s depen-ding on p r i o r t a l k to be able to make that kind of l i s t . That i s , i t i s not that Roger can begin to t e l l Jim that he does not l i k e c e r t a i n things, by pure guessing alone, without l i k e l y r e c e i v i n g complaints such as "How do you know?" and, a l s o , i t i s not perhaps i n t e r e s t i n g or even unusual that Jim would not l i k e c e r t a i n things, since no one i s expected to be i n t e r e s t e d i n everything. So Roger could perhaps receive a response such as "Well, you ju s t chose the things that I do not l i k e " , where that could be seen as a complaint since i t presumes that Jim i s not int e r e s t e d i n anything and, a f t e r a l l , he i s i n t e r e s t e d i n quite a few things that Roger has not paid a t t e n t i o n t o . In a c t u a l i t y , none of these possible responses are ones that Jim o f f e r s and, as i t turns out, Jim says that he i s in t e r e s t e d i n them as i f somehow he ought to be. How Jim can po s s i b l y come to a conclusion such as that involves f i r s t , perhaps, that Roger can f i n d some way to s i n g l e out those i n t e r e s t s as ones that belong t o some group of i n t e r e s t s that Jim ought to f i n d appealing and, second, that Roger have some grounds f o r deter-mining that Jim i s not i n t e r e s t e d i n those a c t i v i t i e s . That i s , f o r Jim the l i s t i s i n t e l l i g i b l e i n that i t i s responded to e i t h e r as the t o t a l so f a r or i n that he has l e t i t go so f a r . When he challenges one item of i t , he challenges not i t s belonging i n the l i s t or the i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of the l i s t but only the tru t h f u l n e s s of i t s a p p l i c a t i o n to him. He both must allow i t to be taken that he understands the construction of the l i s t and he must expect that others w i l l i n order to make any sense of h i s response. Now, as was previously mentioned, there must be a m i l l i o n things that Jim i s not i n t e r e s t e d i n but one cannot make up a workable utterance by c o l l e c t i n g some of those without p o s s i b l y r e c e i v i n g complaints. So, f i r s t of a l l , that Jim i s not in t e r e s t e d i n something has to be heard as presumably something that he could be i n t e r e s t e d i n , where i t might make no sense to say that Jim i s not int e r e s t e d i n Chinese His t o r y because i t i s true, since we would wonder how Roger would ever know. So Roger has to f i n d a way to make a l i s t of those things a person i s not in t e r e s t e d i n i n t e l l i g i b l e and coherent, where one way might be to f i n d such items that they might be expected to be int e r e s t e d i n given who and what they are and from those items to s e l e c t those that one's b i o g r a p h i c a l conversational experience with that person has in d i c a t e d that they are not in t e r e s t e d i n . Therefore, i t i s not as though t h i s l i s t i s an e s p e c i a l l y e s o t e r i c one that Jim alone i s i n t e r e s t e d i n or that i s relevant f o r only Jim, but these are perhaps things that a l l of the others are i n t e r e s t e d i n as w e l l or at l e a s t which a l l of the others can pos s i b l y be i n t e r e s t e d i n , i n order f o r that to be s a i d to Jim, which gives grounds f o r r u l i n g out Chinese History, r e p a i r i n g watches, o r i g i n s of the second world war, and so on. So, t o extend the l i s t , Roger has to come up with items that have some warrant through who Jim i s with respect to them and who they are with respect t o Jim, and what has t r a n s p i r e d between them. He has come up with i n t e r e s t s that are seen to be common in t e r e s t s f o r teenage boys and he has found grounds f o r a s s e r t i n g that those are not i n t e r e s t s f o r Jim because Jim has remained s i l e n t on those issues when they arose i n pre-vious conversations. An example s i m i l a r t o t h i s i s noted by Harvey Sacks, where a lady c a l l s about an apartment f o r rent and says, a f t e r the landlady says that she does not accept pets, "I don't have any pets but I have a fourteen year o l d son". The question gets r a i s e d , what do pets and sons have i n common? Over the course of t a l k , that i s po-t e n t i a l l y consequential f o r them given the kind of negoti-a t i o n that they are i n i . e . , i t i s not enough t o say "I do not have any pets" as a response, i f the woman turned up with a c h i l d , i t could turn out that not only d i d the land-lady not accept pets, but she d i d not accept c h i l d r e n e i t h e r , since c h i l d r e n and pets are the kind of things that get p r o h i b i t e d by apartment owners. So even though the landlady has not s a i d that she takes no c h i l d r e n , i t gets checked out by the p o t e n t i a l renter as an issue and gets t r e a t e d unproblematically by. Therefore, with regard t o Roger's l i s t , Dan, Ken, A l , and Louise can be expected t o f i n d some sense i n Roger proposing that Jim i s not i n t e r e s t -ed i n those things and, when Jim gives a response that add-resses one or a l l of those items, i t can be heard that i n order f o r Jim to produce such a response he must have found the i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of that c o l l e c t i o n of i n t e r e s t s , and Jim must assume that the others found i t i n order t o make some sense of h i s response. In t h i s manner then, i f one wants to make a teenager out to be not l i k e everyone e l s e , then that he i s not i n t e r e s t e d i n cars, sports, or mechan-i c s i s a c o l l e c t i o n of items that w i l l do that where, of the many other items that he i s not interested i n , most of them w i l l not only be puzzling t o Jim i f they are proposed but to the other hearers as w e l l , although they could per-f e c t l y w ell be correct. That i s , some grounds have to be found f o r t h e i r a s s e r t a b i l i t y , making such proposals hard t o object t o . One of the ways that Roger can obtain a response and a l s o have the p o t e n t i a l l y unconnected i n t e r -ests that he i s naming observable as a l l belonging to one category, i s to form a l i s t that i s seen to be incomplete but where a l l of the items w i l l appear r e l a t e d and where a response w i l l become necessary i n order to terminate the l i s t . That i s , by p l a c i n g the items i n a l i s t he has made them appear r e l a t e d and he has emphasized that relatedness by prefacing each i n t e r e s t with the same clause, "You're not i n t e r e s t e d i n " which, beside d i s p l a y i n g a relatedness, i s repeating over and over the point that he i s making i . e . , Jim's lack of i n t e r e s t . So l i s t s have an i n t e r n a l structure and organization that i s composed f o r persons or agents of given i n t e r e s t s , t a s t e s , and occupations. 78 C H A P T E R V O C C U P A T I O N S : A R E T R O S P E C T I V E V IEW I t i s the purpose of t h i s chapter t o examine some features of the data that was presented i n chapter four. A l -though we were previously concerned with noting the more formal and generalizable features of the t r a n s c r i p t utterances, many of which were operable independently of the t a l k about occupations, the group therapy s e t t i n g , and the f a c t that the p a r t i c i p a n t s were adolescents, l e t us now turn to a more p a r t i c u l a r examination of that same t a l k about occupations by adolescents i n an e f f o r t t o f u r t h e r understand the i n t e r a c t i o n a l resources that stand be-hind the utterances and that provide f o r t h e i r reasonableness and i n order t o discover what the utterances amount t o when spoken by adolescents and among adolescents about occupations. R e c a l l that i n chapter f o u r we were di s c u s s i n g the follow-ing utterance as being a d i s p l a y of the t r u s t that the teenagers have i n the structure of the occupational world, as a r e s u l t of i t s elaborate organization: 22. Ken: When you were f i v e years old d i n ' you have-didn' you have dreams of b e i n a- a-a- a-fireman? 79 Although Ken's utterance i s i n the form of "When you were f i v e , . . " , we can see that i t i s speaking f o r a l l f i v e year olds and that i t i s autobiographical which becomes more apparent as he goes on to explain that he had such dreams but that, when he expressed them t o ad u l t s , those dreams were tr e a t e d as i n -appropriate and he was t o l d that he wanted to be an engineer. Therefore, i t i s not that only these kid s , as teenagers, f i n d that they have t o contend with being asked what they are going t o be, where that i s a question that kids get asked at e a r l y ages as w e l l , but i t Is not n e c e s s a r i l y a serious query on the part of an adult f o r a f i v e year o l d while i t i s a serious query f o r a teenager. That i s , a ten year o l d i s already expected t o be g e t t i n g r e a l i s t i c about what he wants to be but a f i v e year o l d i s not expected t o be r e a l i s t i c and, although he i s perhaps serious about h i s answers, he has notions about the so c i e t y t h a t turn out t o be wrong or useless when he grows up. Now, Ken can look back on h i s f i v e year o l d dreams and see that they were dreams as opposed t o plans from where he i s now but that, at f i v e , c h i l d r e n ought not to have problems by t e l l i n g t h e i r occupational choices to adults since adults are ex-pected to see that they are only dreams and not serious occupa-t i o n a l choices and, thereby, ought not to t r e a t them as such. 80 So Ken has a s p e c i a l complaint i n that he was t r e a t e d at f i v e as i f h i s dreams were a serious occupational choice by an older c h i l d . Thus, i t may be that Ken r e a l l y d i d want t o be a policeman or an ambulance d r i v e r when he was f i v e but now, at f i f t e e n , he can see that h i s parents should not have t r e a t e d i t as i f he wanted to be a policeman or an ambulance d r i v e r , but only as a f i v e year old's dreams which even he now f i n d s to be "horseshit". That i s , h i s parents ought t o have known then what he knows now because they were adults but, instead, they t r e a t e d h i s dreams as responsible, occupational choices and countered them with adul t , r a t i o n a l arguments of the kind that would be addressed to somebody who was making what they thought t o be a mistake i n a serious occupational choice where, Ken, at f i f t e e n , can see that h i s f i v e year o l d thoughts were the product of imaginations and dreams. In t h i s manner, although now t h e i r plans are treated as i f they amount to responsible, occupational choices, which f o r them poses trouble since they do not want to be categorized, f o r Ken to have always been l i s t e n e d to i n that sense enables him to f i n d grounds f o r making a powerful complaint, since he can f i n d that even at f i v e he was categorized and treated as a problem c h i l d by v i r t u e of wanting to be the wrong things. Thus, as a r e s u l t of Ken's utterance, we are able to see what things he wanted t o be at f i v e which are occupational i n t e r e s t s of other f i v e year o l d boys, how as a f i f t e e n year old he can re-evaluate what he wanted to be at f i v e and how, at f i f t e e n , he can see that when he was f i v e h i s parents d i d not seem to have the i n s i g h t i n t o him then that he himself has ten years l a t e r . So, being someone who has s u f f e r e d a family mal-functioning, where the average parent would have t r e a t e d h i s dreams f o r what they were worth, Ken was reprimanded and t r e a -ted as a problem c h i l d which, i n turn, has given him problems ever since. That i s , ever since Ken can remember he has been t o l d that he wants to be an engineer which now poses problems f o r him that stem around an i n d e c i s i o n about h i s career, a r e v o l t against h i s parents, and an i n d e c i s i o n about what he r e a l l y would l i k e to be, but which he can trace back to when he was f i v e years o l d , when h i s parents were mishearing things that f i v e year olds say. Therefore, Ken can not only f i n d that but he can f i n d that i t i s relevant to where he i s now, even with regard to being 82 i n therapy, where a l o t of what he i s concerned about r e l a t e s to h i s worries about whether he i s going to be an engineer. That i s to say that i t i s not mentioned c o i n c i d e n t a l l y that when he was f i v e h i s parents s a i d that he wanted to be an engin-eer, but a l l of these concerns f o r Ken have been constantly mentioned throughout the t r a n s c r i p t as a r e s u l t of them consis-t i n g of things that he cannot get s t r a i g h t i n h i s head and, now, he can f i n d a h i s t o r y f o r them by going back to a point i n h i s l i f e where h i s parents ought not to have been t r e a t i n g h i s occupational choices as occupational choices but, rather, as dreams, imagination, and horseshit that he himself can see them as being. So having dreams i s seen by Ken as a normal f i v e year old's preoccupation and, that i t should have received the kin d of parental treatment that i t d i d i s seen as something that he can now make a complaint about, since Ken's parents were i n a p o s i t i o n to know about h i s thoughts since they were already adults, and he was not i n such a p o s i t i o n since he was only f i v e . Now, Roger's response to Ken's utterance, "That's j u s t a search f o r adventure" ( utterance #25 ), can be heard by Ken to be not only i d e n t i f y i n g the category of occupations that he i s r e f e r r i n g t o and a l s o suggesting that those f i v e year o l d in t e r e s t s are occupations that c h i l d r e n want because they are g l o r i f i e d by the adult world, but he i s suggesting that those occupations may not be so desi r a b l e once one has seen that t r u t h . Therefore, what one does a t f i v e years o l d i s not merely c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of occupations but i t i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of adventure and that can then be t r a n s l a t e d i n t o things such as occupations and, thus, i t i s not to be regarded as an occu-p a t i o n a l choice i n the way that engineering may be regarded as an occupational choice. To t h i s extent, f i v e year o l d occupa-t i o n a l choices are l i f e s t y l e choices i n that the occupation i t s e l f appears to promise a range of a c t i v i t i e s that are a t t r a c -t i v e . They are not l i f e s t y l e s i n a teenage sense, where a teenager might want a l i f e s t y l e that involves communing with nature or being free to come and go as he pleases, but they are l i f e s t y l e s i n that when one i s f i v e he sees occupations not as ways of supporting himself, making money, or keeping a family but as made up of t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a c t i v i t i e s , and those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a c t i v i t i e s appeal to him because they are e x c i -t i n g , glamorous, heroic, and so on. Therefore, f i v e year o l d occupational choices are s i m i l a r to l i f e s t y l e s i n that they 8 4 promise a l i f e where one can do the things that, at f i v e years old, he would r e a l l y l i k e to do, such as grow up and be able to carry a gun. These teenagers have gone beyond the f i v e year o l d dreams and now occupations no longer seem to them to be repre-sented by the a c t i v i t i e s that are e s s e n t i a l to an occupation or else t h e i r notions of the a c t i v i t i e s that are e s s e n t i a l to an occupation have changed. Let us look at an example to i l l u s t r a t e t h i s point: 33. Roger: N-bu'i-but i t ' s d - d i f f e r e n t y'know they come about i t under d i f f e r e n t circum-stances. No boy sees adventure i n bein a cop, an* then a l l of h i s l i f e wants to be a cop, and then becomes a cop. That's very r a r e . In the above utterance, Roger i s no longer seeing that what a cop does i s pleasant and e x c i t i n g and something that he would l i k e to be, although he may have thought those things when he was f i v e but, instead, being a cop i s now despicable to him as a r e s u l t of both f i n d i n g out the t r u t h about cops and f i n d i n g that, f o r him now, cops are persons who give him trouble and who give teenagers trouble. In a sense, Roger's view about becoming a policeman i s 85 not too d i f f e r e n t than the adult view of becoming a garbage man or an ice cream man since, f o r Roger, becoming a policeman i s something that j u s t happens to somebody by g e t t i n g to a point and needing a job, which i s not how he might have seen the pro-cess of becoming a policeman e a r l i e r i n l i f e . So there i s a s t r u c t u r a l p a r a l l e l here since, when one i s f i v e years o l d he may look forward to years of contemplating being a policeman and f i n a l l y becoming one but, when one i s f i f t e e n , he i s expected t o look forward to becoming an engineer with that same kind of time span b u i l t i n t o i t , the only d i f f e r -ence being that when one i s f i v e he v o l u n t a r i l y looks forward to becoming a policeman while at f i f t e e n he may be constrained to orient t o becoming an engineer. That i s , both perspectives have a future reference and i f i t was not f o r t h a t reference i t would be a d i f f e r e n t story since, i t i s not that these teenagers have t o get out and get a job but that they have t o do whatever teenagers have to do i n high school, and do i t now, i n order to be able t o be an engineer eight years from now. Thus, when they were f i v e , i t might have been easy t o contemplate a d i s t a n t occupation where, perhaps, they had no idea what they would do between being f i v e years o l d and grown 86 up "but, now at f i f t e e n , the t r a i n i n g , commitment, and announce-ments f o r adults can be a d i f f i c u l t experience. So, Roger's t a l k about becoming a cop invokes a notion of how there are occupations that one becomes party to when he i s an adult by v i r t u e of a steady adherence to them over a period of years, versus occupations that one can c i r c u m s t a n t i a l l y f a l l i n t o . That i s to say that when one i s f i v e years o l d a policeman might look l i k e something that one a t t a i n s by v i r t u e of long f e l t ambitions but, by the time one becomes a teenager, perhaps f o r these teenagers cops get seen to be people who could not do anything e l s e or who ended up being cops through circum-stances. Therefore, i t i s not merely an accident that "policeman" as a term gets transformed i n t o being a "cop" by Roger since, as a f i v e year o l d one wants t o be a policeman but now, when he sees the r e a l i t y behind i t , he cannot even imagine being a cop. P o l i c e -men switch from being heroes and adventure f i g u r e s to being d i s -l i k e d persons who s p e c i f i c a l l y give trouble to people l i k e Ken and Roger, and who are the enemy. That i s , f o r these teenagers, they have a common know-ledge about cops and a cop i s a profession that f o r them no s e l f -8? respecting k i d would want to be such that, unless they display that they are t a l k i n g about cops a r b i t r a r i l y , then they get to be heard as t a l k i n g about policemen i n the way that teenagers t a l k about policemen, which i s as "cops", "pigs", and so on. So we see that there are enforceable notions of what people or category members are l i k e and, although they may not r e a l l y be that way, these teenagers can use those notions where, here, i t i s an enforceable notion of how adolescents f e e l about cops and i f someone has a d i f f e r e n t notion, then he e i t h e r i s required to o f f e r an explanation why he sees cops d i f f e r e n t l y , such as that h i s f a t h e r i s a policeman, or he ought to remain silent.''' Now, one of the things that i s story m a t e r i a l and enables persons to get a pleasant r e a c t i o n from others i s the contrast between what they are now, which i s often a s u c c e s s f u l actor, writer, e t c e t e r a , and the c h i l d i s h things that they wanted to be at f i v e such as a fireman, policeman, or ambulance d r i v e r , where that can then be seen as charming s i n c e , even a person such as that, when he was f i v e , had c h i l d i s h notions j u s t l i k e everyone e l s e . For these adolescents, who as yet have become nothing and are having problems becoming anything, when they look back to 88 what they wanted to be at f i v e years o l d they f i n d that they bought int o the occupational system i n a way that has now betrayed them. They bought i n t o the occupational system because, at f i v e , they wanted to be something and knew what they wanted to be and now those things do not have charm f o r them and they do not look back on those choices as naive and with a tolerance, but they look back upon those things with a b i t t e r n e s s and resentment, f i n d i n g that they were l e d to have notions about the occupational world that experiences proved t o be untenable. In a d d i t i o n , both now and then they saw occupational categories as being adult bound so that one way to achieve a d u l t -hood was to achieve an occupation where, when they were f i v e , be-coming an adult was viewed with f a v o r while now, perhaps, becoming an adult i s seen to be a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y that means being monitored i n the process, depravations, being accountable f o r t h e i r time, and so on. Thus, when the person who has s u c c e s s f u l l y a t t a i n e d an occupation looks back to when he was f i v e , he does not see h i s notions as being f a l s e , but sees them as charming while these teenagers do not have that kind of s e c u r i t y that enables them to look at t h e i r f i v e year o l d a s p i r a t i o n s at a distance since those a s p i r a t i o n s appear sardonic and, given what they thought before, 89 They are now lear n i n g the hard way about the occupational world, 2 having not yet att a i n e d an occupation. I t soon becomes apparent, when we look t o Roger's u t t e r -ance, that he i s suggesting that adult cops are not the product of c h i l d r e n who wanted to be policemen and who maintained that as a stable choice over a period of years but, rather, that cops came about t h e i r occupations through d i f f e r e n t circumstances, Roger's utterance looks back on the f i v e year o l d occu-p a t i o n a l choices and on Ken's c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of those occupa-t i o n s as "horseshit" by d i s p l a y i n g that those are not v i a b l e occupations once one knows about the world from a perspective of someone other than that of a f i v e year o l d . That i s , he discovers that firemen, ambulance d r i v e r s , and policemen do not lead l i v e s of adventure and, s p e c i f i c a l l y , that cops are not merely things that they do not want to be as a r e s u l t of d i s i n t e r e s t , but pre-c i s e l y what they do not want t o be as a r e s u l t of knowing what cops now are and what they stand f o r f o r persons such as them. Moreover, f o r some occupations, they sc a r c e l y know what incumbents of those occupations a c t u a l l y do. For example, i n one fragment of the t r a n s c r i p t previously given, Ken i s uncertain about what an accountant does: 49. Ken: There's a l o t t a guys i n college who st a r t e d - s t a r t e d out saying they wanted to be a, a-a-50. Jim: ( ) 51. Ken: a-a- whaddyacallit a — not a mathema-t i c i a n , a see-not a secreta-you know, // a-a- s p e c i a l - a s p e c i a l i z e d // man, // he *s-52. Roger: ( ) 53. Roger: Technician. 54. Roger: ( 's'at whatchu mean? ) 55. Ken: A t e c h n i c i a n yeah, a secretary l i k e , y* know only he does a l l kinds of book-keeping and things l i k e t h i s ? 56. Roger: An accountant? 57. Dan: Accountant, 58. Ken: Yeah. 59. ( ): Uh huh 60. Jim: ( ) be a // ( ) 61. Ken: They get i n there and they-they s t a r t -they go through college f o r t h ' f i r s t two years and they got a semester more to go? And a l l of a sudden t h e y ' l l just change t h e i r minds, t h e y ' l l say 62. Dan: Sure. 63. Ken: I don' // l i k e t h i s . 64. Roger: They r e a l i z e t h i s i s n ' t what they wanted. 65. Ken: Well, 91 66, Dan: Sure, 67, Ken: See th-yet-yet you c'd change, you can change at almost any time, 68, Dan: Of course, ( / ) 69, Ken: When you're older. I guess, I dunno // Now you don't have any choice, 70, Dan: ( No, you- now. ) 71, Ken: Mommy and daddy make you do // what they-what they want. Now, from Ken's point of view, he may have a problem i n deciding how he i s going to be an accountant at f i f t e e n when he does not even know what an accountant does. That i s , these boys are u n f a m i l i a r with many of the occupational terms such that, when those occupations are r e f e r r e d t o , they are c a l l e d by gener-a l i z e d terms so that, i f one was that occupation, he might not c a l l i t by the same term, Thus, Ken r e f e r s to an accountant as a s p e c i a l i z e d man, by not having the proper term, and he makes i t apparent that he does not know the proper term although he knows that h i s term i s inc o r r e c t where, i f engineer and accountant are equally e s o t e r i c occupational terms, perhaps there are some occupational terms that one simply knows as of h i s autobiography while others remain e s o t e r i c at that stage. 92 So, at some stage, possibly one can get to know sev-e r a l occupational terms without there being an autobiograph-i c a l account f o r how he has mastered them but, f o r now, Ken may know and use a set of engineer's terms, as a r e s u l t of h i s fa t h e r always wanting him to be an engineer, but he can be t o -t a l l y u n f a m i l i a r with an accountant's term and what an accountant does as a r e s u l t of that occupation having no r e l a t i o n s h i p to h i s biography as of yet. Previously, we have been looking at Ken's account and Roger's account of what f i v e year olds want to be and what they might turn out to be while now, i n the utterances j u s t given, we have an account by Ken of persons i n college and what they want to be, which involves an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t subclass of occupa-t i o n s , many whose names Ken does not yet know. That i s , he i s r e f e r r i n g to a subclass of occupations that one f i n d s out about, knows about, and orients to by the time that he gets to college where, p r i o r to that time, he might not even know what they co n s i s t of or what they are c a l l e d although he knows that they e x i s t . Therefore, when Ken r e f e r s to.a s p e c i a l i z e d man, here, ( utterance #51 )• he i s t a l k i n g about an accountant i n a naive way that i s not the way that an adult would r e f e r to the same occupation but, f o r Ken, i t i s r e f l e c t i v e of where he i s now such that when he gets to college he w i l l have those kinds of i n t e r e s t s . That i s to say, i t i s supposed that there i s an abun-dance of t a l k about g e t t i n g married and having c h i l d r e n among teenagers or younger persons, which i s not where they are now but they can already see that i t i s where they are going to be sometime. They can suppose that they w i l l end up g e t t i n g married although r i g h t now the idea of g e t t i n g married might f o r them be a strange idea. Thus, Ken knows i n that same way that when he gets t o college he w i l l have a s p i r a t i o n s f o r occupations that presently he does not even know the names of and, yet, he knows that such occupations e x i s t and that he w i l l have a s p i r -ations f o r some of them but, at t h i s time, he only knows about them i n an inexpert's or an outsider's way, which i s the way of someone not yet involved with them, In t h i s respect, there i s a nice progression from f i v e year olds to teenagers to adults where f i v e year olds want t o be an occupation but they want to be the occupation because of the things that i t w i l l permit them to do; teenagers want t h e i r freedom and want to be able to l i v e the way that they want to 94 l i v e and occupations, f o r them, are problematic because they are expected to be t i e d to them and they are then monitored and bothered by a d u l t s ; and adults view occupations s e r i o u s l y because they have t o make a l i v i n g and because occupations help them to be respectable and get them things such as a place i n the country which, f o r them, represents a notion of a l i f e -s t y l e but which, f o r teenagers, does not represent a l i f e s t y l e or represents a r e j e c t e d l i f e s t y l e . In t h i s chapter we examined the ways i n which the ques-t i o n "What are you going t o be?" can be e i t h e r a serious or a non-serious query on the part of a d u l t s and, depending upon how i t i s treated, i t can r e s u l t i n both present and future problems f o r i t s incumbents. In a d d i t i o n , we examined the ways i n which notions about occupations can have a determinate character placed upon them f o r s p e c i f i c age groups, although those age groups may have a s t r u c t u r a l p a r a l l e l as w e l l . F i n a l l y , i t was noted th a t there are notions of what people or category members are l i k e and that those notions are enforceable i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y . FOOTNOTES The notion of what policemen stand f o r f o r teenagers i s one that presumably e x i s t s f o r most teenagers i n American c u l -ture, although f o r these teenagers that notion i s a p a r t i -c u l a r l y relevant one since perhaps many of them are i n therapy as a r e s u l t of having problems with j u s t such au-t h o r i t i e s . That i s , they have been sent t o the group t h e r -apy sessions as a r e s u l t of being la b e l e d "problem ki d s " , where part of t h e i r problem i s one of delinquency e.g., having a poor r e l a t i o n s h i p with law a u t h o r i t i e s as a r e s u l t of committing robberies, speeding, or f i g h t i n g with weapons i n gangs, Roy Turner i s t o be given c r e d i t f o r proposing t h i s as an a l t e r n a t i v e perspective. 96 CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION Through the analyses i n t h i s t h e s i s , we have seen that the attainment of adulthood i s not simply a matter of maturation and p h y s i c a l development, where i f we permit persons to grow up things w i l l take t h e i r proper course, but the attainment of adulthood involves an e n t i r e s o c i a l i z a t i o n process that enables one to become a 'good* adult which i s someone who i s more than p h y s i c a l l y and sexually mature but, rather, who has over a period of time experienced, oriented t o , and learned various things i n a way that has made him a responsible adult. We have seen that occupations are t i e d with adulthood i n that adulthood not only i n a contingent way involves occupa-tions i n so much as persons, as a d u l t s , are expected to be able to provide f o r themselves and a t t a i n l i f e s t y l e s by way of occupa-t i o n s , but occupations are things that persons who are not yet adults ought to already be o r i e n t i n g to and continuing to o r i e n t to over the course of t h e i r l i v e s , unseriously as f i v e year o l d c h i l d r e n but s e r i o u s l y o r i e n t i n g to by the time that they are teenagers although, perhaps, f o r them i t may always be a serious o r i e n t a t i o n . 97 Thus, the question, "What are you going to be when you grow up?", i s a request f o r an occupational term because, f o r adults, occupations provide f o r l i f e s t y l e s and enable one to l i v e so that he can be something, although i t i s not semantically necessary that an occupation be given. Various categories i n our s o c i e t y , such as teenagers, are vulnerable to that question i n so much as they are responsi-ble f o r doing the things that they ought to be doing now that w i l l get them in t o a p a r t i c u l a r occupation at a l a t e r date, and the p a r t i c u l a r answer that they give w i l l enable adults to deter-mine whether they are l i v i n g up to those r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as w e l l as, perhaps, to monitor future a c t i o n s . That i s , they are expec-ted to be attending high school, choosing the c o r r e c t courses, and g e t t i n g the proper t r a i n i n g and experience that w i l l enable them to become responsible adults. So, during that time, such persons w i l l be asked what they w i l l be and that i s seen as a reasonable query, i n that a l l persons are expected to be o r i e n t i n g to being something, where that something i s an occupation. Now, with c h i l d r e n such as f i v e year olds, that query i s treated by adults i n a humorous way, not with regard to the nature of the question but with regard to the answers that are 9 8 given since those answers are r e v e a l i n g about what the c h i l d has so f a r been doing, experiencing, watching on t e l e v i s i o n , reading and so on. That i s , i t can be seen as both cute and informative f o r a f i v e year o l d to say that he wants to be a cowboy when he has grown up i n the c i t y and has never been to the country since i t enables adults to see that he has, perhaps, been watching cowboys on t e l e v i s i o n and, at a minimum, that although he i s not held responsible f o r h i s occupational choices, he has already come to take them s e r i o u s l y himself, knowing that he i s expected to o r i e n t to being something i n occupational terms. Moreover, although h i s occupational answers are not taken s e r i o u s l y i n the way that f i f t e e n year o l d occupational answers are taken, adults are already able to monitor f i v e year old choices i n such a way as to determine whether they are proper, although not serious, f i v e year o l d choices. In other words, adults can come t o see that when a f i v e year o l d says that he wants to be an accountant, he i s not making a f i v e year old's occupa-t i o n a l choice, since f i v e year olds are not expected to have even learned the term f o r an accountant l e t alone the duties that the occupations c a l l s f o r but, instead, that the c h i l d probably has a parent or r e l a t i v e who i s an accountant from whom he has heard the term and repeated i t without knowledge of the occupation. 99 So answers to the question of what i s one going to he are t o be oriented t o by a l l persons with regard t o occupa-t i o n s where, at age f i v e , they are not heard by adults to be serious choices but, at age f i f t e e n , they are heard and moni-tored as serious choices. Thus, by the time that f i v e year olds get t o be f i f t e e n they have learned that some answers t o that query are not good ones to give, e i t h e r because those answers are not r e f l e c t i v e of occupations but are, instead, r e -f l e c t i v e of l i f e s t y l e s , which w i l l get them to be laughed a t and thought of as immature and problem k i d s , or because those answers are occupations that w i l l h old them responsible f o r preparing f o r them now and being monitored and f o r l i v i n g up to them i n the f u t u r e . Therefore, incumbency f o r adolescents i s i n some ways t h e i r problem, r a t h e r than i t being due t o incomplete s o c i a l i -z a t i o n or b i o l o g i c a l stages, since adolescents know that they are hel d responsible f o r occupational choices and, having once been ch i l d r e n , they already have a h i s t o r y f o r what things are expec-t e d of them and, f o r the problem teenagers mentioned i n t h i s t h e s i s , they have a h i s t o r y f o r what they have been t o l d to be. That i s , incumbency f o r adolescents as i t i s r e l a t e d i i i I 100 to occupations, "both as a future release from incumbency v i a adulthood and as a present reminder that they ought to be preparing f o r those occupations now and are being monitored now, i s a problem f o r adolescents i n that they must d e a l with adults by masking t h e i r l i f e s t y l e preferences or by f a i l i n g to give t h e i r occupational choices which, were they to expose those preferences t o adults, would get them t o be l a b e l e d as problem k i d s , by v i r t u e of holding those views, or categorized and monitored i n order to determine whether they were l i v i n g up to the things t h a t those occupational choices required. Thus, one of the s o l u t i o n s f o r e i t h e r s i t u a t i o n , that chooses a p a r t i c u l a r kind of trouble by coming on as an equal to adults and which terminates the query, i s t o propose th a t one wants to be a bum or wants to be nothing, which states what the adolescent's chosen l i f e s t y l e would amount t o f o r those addres-s i n g the question and which i s an a l t e r n a t i v e to being categorized and monitored since "bum" i s not an occupational term. In t h i s manner, there are various t o p i c s that are on the minds of teenagers, such as occupations, since they are immer-sed i n becoming what they w i l l be as a d u l t s , which are occasioned by v i r t u e of being troublesome matters between teenagers and adults and which make teenagers co-members i n that they have 101 s i m i l a r problems which are s p e c i f i c t o t h e i r stage i n l i f e and which they can then t a l k about with one another with regard t o the way that they handle those problems with adults. Part of a teenager's concern i s not only that he i s bothered by adults about occupations, but that he can look back on h i s own e a r l i e r s e l f and f i n d that he has always had a stake i n the occupational world where, now, he has b i t t e r and mixed f e e l i n g s about that world such that he f e e l s that he has been fooled. That i s , the f i v e year o l d romantic occupational choices have disappeared and the ad u l t occupational choices are unappealing because he i s not ready t o make the adult commitments that w i l l mean depravations and ca t e g o r i z a t i o n and l i f e s t y l e s , f o r him, are not n e c e s s a r i l y dependent upon a t t a i n i n g an occupa-t i o n . So, a teenager, when looking back on h i s e a r l i e r occu-p a t i o n a l a s p i r a t i o n s , can see that the occupational world i s di v i d e d i n t o various subclasses of occupations such that, when he was f i v e , he was i n t e r e s t e d i n f i v e year o l d occupational choices which were c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of adventure and a p a r t i c u l a r l i f e s t y l e that he wanted to lead but which, now, he has found to be a t t a i n e d i n a way d i f f e r e n t than l i f e l o n g ambition and t r a i n i n g and which stand f o r duties and commitments that are d i f f e r e n t than those 102 he saw at age f i v e . He can a l s o see that, at age f i f t e e n , there are jobs, that are i n another subclass of occupations, that are simply jobs and a way to provide f o r oneself while others are occu-pations that involve commitment and preparation and that those occupations are f u r t h e r subdivided such that, i f he does make a commitment to an occupation and then changes h i s mind, he w i l l have to s e l e c t another occupation from that same subclass i n order to be seen to be l i v i n g up to the same l e v e l of achieve-ment, preparation, p o t e n t i a l s a l a r y , and so on, where the grounds on which he s e l e c t s an occupation may not be the same grounds on which an adult would s e l e c t an occupation. Thus, although a teenager i s expected to be o r i e n t i n g to jobs as occupations which involve preparation and o r i e n t a t i o n , he may be a problem f o r adults by vi r t u e of being i n t e r e s t e d i n jobs as ju s t jobs, since he does not connect a l i f e s t y l e to an occupation or he does not want to be monitored f o r h i s present actions. That i s , he sees occupations as being adult bound where, when he was f i v e , he may have wanted to become an adult and, perhaps, carry a gun ( i n the case of wanting t o be a policeman ) but now becoming an adult means being monitored, being accountable f o r one's time, and being deprived and, therefore, occupations do not look so appealing or e l s e he has not yet come to terms with 103 the subclasses of occupations. So, when a teenager t a l k s about occupations, that t a l k i s constrained by an i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e of the occupational world and he must r e l y on the others having a common knowledge about the ways i n which occupational categories are subdivided i n order to be understood where, part of the i n t e r n a l structure of the occupational world w i l l involve t h a t parents c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y hear the occupational choices of teenagers f o r what they mean i n terms of whether t h e i r c h i l d w i l l be unambitious, u n r e a l i s t i c and immature, lazy, or whether he w i l l bring shame on the family. Therefore, these teenagers are aware of whether they are d i s p l a y i n g achievement and ambitions f o r a d u l t s , being aware of the expectations of t h e i r parents, such that they can f i n d that those things are a source of problems f o r them since with some occupations they do not yet even know t h e i r names or what they e n t a i l , having not yet grasped many occupational terms and, therefore, they cannot presently decide to be those things even though decisions are required of them while, f o r other occupations that they may have once wanted to be, they can f i n d that they were misled to have f a l s e notions about them such that those occupa-tions are no longer d e s i r a b l e now that they have seen the t r u t h . 104 That i s , they can f i n d both a present source f o r t h e i r problems, as a r e s u l t of not yet being i n a p o s i t i o n to grasp a l o t of occupational terms, and f i n d a h i s t o r y f o r t h e i r prob-lems where, at a younger age, they were misled into having f a l s e notions about occupations and about the way people a t t a i n occupa-t i o n s and, as i s the case f o r Ken, where they had t h e i r f i v e year o l d occupational choices heard as i f they were serious occu-p a t i o n a l choices when they ought not to have been heard i n a serious way. So, there are various subclasses f o r the domain of occupations where, i n any p a r t i c u l a r piece of t a l k , subclasses can get invoked and constructed which are not formal pieces of know-ledge that are c a r r i e d i n one's head or learned i n classrooms such as that occupations are d i v i d e d i n t o three groups: those that f i v e year olds are int e r e s t e d i n , those that teenagers are i n t e r -ested i n , and those that adults are concerned with, but that on the occasion of the need a r i s i n g , such subclasses can be invoked and analyzed by hearers to f i n d that class character and f i n d what i t i s doing with respect to a t o p i c of t a l k where, with regard to the occupation of an engineer, we have previously found at l e a s t two a l t e r n a t i v e subclasses: that of policeman, ambulance d r i v e r and fireman versus engineer and that of i c e cream man versus engin-105 eer. That i s , i n the former, we have a subclass that invokes f i v e year old occupational choices and adult occupational choices while, i n the l a t t e r , we have occupations that require l i t t l e prep-aratory work, are low i n p r e s t i g e , s a l a r y , and education, and which are occupations that one can f a l l i n t o versus occupations that require a great deal of education, preparation and e a r l y t r a i n -ing and which are high i n prestige and s a l a r y . Thus, there are two ways to d i v i d e the domain of an occu-pation to make a here and now point that i s relevant f o r a p a r t i -c u l a r conversation so, although we have been looking at a t r a n s c r i p t of the t a l k of Ken, A l , Roger, and Jim, that t r a n s c r i p t d i s p l a y s the workings of these kinds of systematic properties of membership ca t e g o r i z a t i o n terminology that are usable i n a l l kinds of general ways and which are not r e s t r i c t e d t o teenager's t a l k about f i v e year o l d occupational choices. That i s , i n other s e t t i n g s we could f i n d the same kinds of mechanisms so that, f o r example, middle aged adults could t a l k about t h e i r occupational a s p i r a t i o n s when they were students such that, f i n d i n g where they are now and looking back on those a s p i r -a t i o n s , they could see that r a t h e r than expressing a d e s i r e f o r adventure, they are expressing that they had i d e a l i s t i c notions of the world which could now be characterized as " a l l that h o r s e s h i t " 106 since, when they were students, they had a naive view of a world that they had not yet entered. So there i s a structure that goes "beyond Ken, A l , Jim, and Roger and which goes beyond therapy, but which they can trade on i n therapy as teenagers. Now, t h i s t h e s i s was begun by r a i s i n g s e v e r a l issues. I t was noted that various utterance parts appeared to have a cog-n i t i v e connection and that, presumably, those utterances could be heard as being reasonable, occasioned, and commonplace, even when the utterances, themselves, could i n i t i a l l y be heard as contradic-tory or when they could have multiple p o s s i b l e meanings over a range of s e t t i n g s . An example was given which included three utterance parts from the t r a n s c r i p t : "I don* wanna be nothin." He says ( utterance #5 ), He says that he wants to be something he knows what he wants t o be ( utterance #7 )» and 0-oh I j u s t wanna be a bum out i n the- out i n the f o r e s t ( utterance #9 ). From these utterances we asked how i t was that a teen-ager could propose t o another teenager that a t h i r d s a i d that he did not want to be anything when, i n a c t u a l i t y , he wanted to be something. That, as a question, l e d us to ask what provided f o r the reasonableness of those utterances, Titterances which appeared to be i n opposition to one another, such that they were treated by t h e i r r e c i p i e n t s as unproblematic; and how were those u t t e r -107 ances a r r i v e d at t o p i c a l l y , with regard to the i n t e r a c t i o n a l resources behind them, so as to capture a major theme i n the t a l k , A f u r t h e r examination of the data revealed some i n t e r -e s t i n g things. R e c a l l i n g that the s e t t i n g was a group therapy ses-s i o n among teenagers who had been designated as "problem k i d s " , we noted that the t a l k , although i t was not t o p i c a l l y p r e -arr-anged, was b u i l t upon the knowledge that each one had of h i s being i n a s i m i l a r p o s i t i o n with the others i n t h i s respect, and that the t o p i c choices had an o r d e r l i n e s s i n so much as they were t o p i c s that engaged them i n thoughts and quarrels with adult a u t h o r i t i e s such as t h e i r parents. Furthermore, we noted that those t o p i c s were t a l k e d about i n s p e c i f i c ways, the utterances being produced f o r ' i n s i -ders', and that those ways were not the ways that those same t o p i c s would be t a l k e d about with the a u t h o r i t i e s . T h i s l e d us to propose that Roger's utterances about h i s brother wanting to be something were, perhaps, a reference t o occupations and that occupations had become t o p i c t a l k as a r e s u l t of the troublesome character that occupations had f o r these teenagers who were "problem kids", i n part, by v i r t u e of having no goals and by 1 0 3 being underachievers. That i s , although they were not yet i n occupations, i t became apparent that they were expected by adults to have plans and expectations f o r various occupations and t o be i n the process of preparing f o r those choices. Therefore, we could see that Roger's comments f o r hi s brother were not only statements that stood f o r what h i s brother had said , but they were made from the perspective and were r e f l e c t i v e of someone who had not yet achieved an occupa-t i o n and f o r whom occupations were troublesome, and those things could be seen by the p a r t i c i p a n t s as w e l l . That i s , the per-spective of Roger's brother could a l s o be seen to be the per-spective of a l l of these teenagers and that perspective was one which stated that the teenagers had to conceal t h e i r l i f e s t y l e or occupational preferences from adults i n order to avoid being laughed at or categorized and monitored, where the way that that problem was handled by Roger's brother was by i r o n i c a l l y using the adult perspective t o describe h i s l i f e s t y l e choice as a "bum". In other words, we were able to f i n d that, f o r those teenagers, "bum" was what that l i f e s t y l e amounted to f o r adults. A f t e r p i e c i n g together the i n i t i a l l y given utterance parts 109 ( utterances #5, #7, and #9 ), the i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y of those parts, that had at f i r s t appeared contradictory t o one another, were made reasonable and commonplace, since Roger's brother s a i d that he wanted to be nothing ( or that he wanted t o be a bum, which amounted to nothing ) to adults but t o l d Roger, an ' i n s i d e r ' , h i s r e a l l i f e s t y l e preferences, and he d i d that i n an e f f o r t to avoid being laughed a t . Moreover, the ways i n which those utterances were ar -r i v e d at t o p i c a l l y became apparent, and they were seen to have become occasioned i n therapy and among teenagers as a r e s u l t of the problems that occupations posed f o r each of them with respect t o adult a u t h o r i t i e s . That those d i s c o v e r i e s were found t o be commonplace knowledge and i d e n t i f i a b l e by the p a r t i c i p a n t s , enabled us to answer why the utterances were treated by t h e i r r e c i -pients as unproblematic. A d d i t i o n a l observations i n t o other utterances revealed a complex st r u c t u r e among occupational subclasses, a structure that had to have been e s s e n t i a l l y known by the adolescents i n order f o r the meaning of t h e i r utterances t o have been understood and which, was seen t o have e f f e c t e d our f i r s t utterances. That i s , i t was a knowledge of the occupational subclasses that had caused each of 110 them t o f i n d that there were some occupations t h a t they could not give t o adults and that the g i v i n g of any occupation t o adults would give cause f o r i t to be heard f o r whether i t would bring shame on the family or f o r whether t h e i r son was an underachiever. Furthermore, i t was that same knowledge of the subclasses of occupations that l e d Roger's brother t o declare that he wanted t o be a bum, since "bum" had to have been proposed as an a l t e r n a t i v e to a l l of the occupations. F i n a l l y , we noted the ways i n which Ken and Roger took a retrospective view of occupations, by looking at t h e i r f i v e year o l d occupational choices, and we discovered that a determinate c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n had been placed on those views such that they now believed that they had been defrauded. That perspective permitted us t o , again, return t o our i n i t i a l utterances i n an e f f o r t t o f u r t h e r explain how a teenager could come t o o f f e r t o adults that he d i d not want t o be anything and how, as "problem ki d s " , they could come t o t a l k about occupations, where i t was observed that part of t h e i r present problems were a r e s u l t of t h e i r d i s i l l u s i o n -ment with the occupational world. Therefore, t o summarize, we have seen that these teen-agers view themselves as r a t i o n a l beings who l i v e i n a world that they understand, a world i n which they know what they want and I l l where they want to go and what t h e i r preferences are, but they f i n d that there are people around c a l l e d adults who have r i g h t s t o put them away, check them, monitor them, and send them f o r treatment, Nov;, from the adult point of view, teenagers are not t o be seen as creatures who have free w i l l or who can decide what t h e i r own problems are but, instead, they are seen t o be pas-s i n g through a stage that i s not r e a l l y understood by themselves but that i s understood by ad u l t s . So adults do not r e a l l y need t o l i s t e n t o the contents of teenager's problems i n order to know that they are teenager's problems and what teenagers, i n f a c t , have to do i s shape up or get treatment or buckle down, where the ways that teenagers them-selves t a l k about t h e i r problems are not l i s t e n e d to as s t a t e -ments of what t h e i r problems i n f a c t are. That i s to say, perhaps one of the hallmarks of a d u l t -hood i s that one can come to define h i s own problems, where f o r others t o re-define them f o r him i s t o be heard as a put-down or as patronizing. Thus, even though others re-define problems f o r adul t s , i t i s probably done l a r g e l y behind t h e i r backs. Now, one of the problems that these teenagers have i s that t h e i r parents and other a u t h o r i t i e s have scenes with them 112 where they examine c r i t i c a l l y those things that are wrong with them and what they ought to do, where adults can be seen as i r r a t i o n a l i n p o l i c i e s of making wrong choices but they get those things hon-ored i n t e r a c t i o n a l l y by fellow adults i n that they are responsible f o r t h e i r own l i v e s and are competent to make those choices. So, although they make judgements of one another, those judgements t y p i c a l l y are heard by t h i r d p a r t i e s . In t h i s manner, an adult does not often say to another adult's face that he ought to shape up or that he i s immature be-cause, i f he does, he i s l i k e l y to be t o l d to mind h i s own business, where teenagers are frequently t o l d to shape up because they are immature but, i f they give the same r e t o r t , they are not seen to be doing something that they have a r i g h t to do but are seen to be t a l k i n g back, demonstrating even more that they are a problem, and showing that they are i r r e s p o n s i b l e . Therefore, i n some ways i t may be that teenagers p a r a l l e l former mental patients i n the ways that they get viewed and treated by the society around them. That i s , former mental p a t i e n t s get talke d about by s o c i a l workers and p s y c h i a t r i s t s as having a m u l t i -tude of problems that are tal k e d about i n medical, mental, emotion-a l , and p s y c h o l o g i c a l terms but, i n a b a s i c sense, the problems of i i 113 the mental patient are that people w i l l not give him a job or that h i s family w i l l not t a l k to him. In other words, he sees h i s problems as mundane ones that would be problems f o r anybody. Now, former mental patients may be p a r a l l e l e d to s t a -tuses whose incumbents are not e n t i t l e d to speak f o r that status as to i t s problems and i t s management because there are other persons i n the world who are l i c e n s e d to do that. Teenagers are one such status which has adults l i c e n s e d to manage and speak i n behalf of i t , A former mental patient's complaint that he cannot get a job i s not seen to be the complaint of a normal unemployed per-son but, instead, i t i s seen to perhaps be part of h i s emotional problem that he complains instead of looking f o r work, where i f a normal person i s t o l d that he complains instead of looking f o r work he can p o s s i b l y f i n d grounds f o r g e t t i n g angry. Teenagers are i n a s i m i l a r p o s i t i o n i n that i f they f i n d that they want to be something that resembles a l i f e s t y l e more than i t resembles an occupation, they f i n d that they must conceal that from adults or e l s e they w i l l be seen to be immature and u n r e a l i s t i c r ather than to be making r a t i o n a l , responsible choices s i n c e , f o r a d u l t s , one way to become responsible and e n t i t l e d to speak i n behalf of oneself i s to a t t a i n adulthood through an occupation. BIBLIOGRAPHY A r i e s , P h i l i p p e , Centuries of Childhood. New York: Khopf 1962. Banton, Michael, Roles- An Introduction to the Study of S o c i a l Relations, London: Travistok P u b l i c a t i o n s , I 9 6 5 . Coleman, James S, The Adolescent Society. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, I96I, Douglas, Jack, Understanding Everyday Life-Toward the Recon-s t r u c t i o n of S o c i o l o g i c a l Knowledge, Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, London, Routledge, and K, Paul, 1970. Eisenstadt, Shmuel Noah, From Generation to Generation- Age Groups and S o c i a l Structure, I l l i n o i s : Free Press of Glencoe, 1956. G a r f i n k e l , Harold, Studies i n Ethnomethodology. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1967. Goffman, E r v i n g , I n t e r a c t i o n R i t u a l - Essays on Face to Face Behavior, Garden C i t y , New York: Anchor Books, I967. Presentation of S e l f i n Everyday L i f e , Garden C i t y , New York: Doubleday, 1959. , Stigma. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1 9 6 3 . . S t r a t e g i c I n t e r a c t i o n. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Univer-s i t y of Pennsylvania Press, I 9 6 9 . Sacks, Harvey, Unpublished Lectures. F a l l , Winter, Spring Quarters 1971 and 1972, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , I r v i n e . Schutz, A l f r e d , C o l l e c t e d Papers I: The Problem of S o c i a l  R e a l i t y . The Hague: Martinus N i j h o f f , I967, Searle, John, "What i s a speech Act", i n Max Black ( ed. ), Philosophy i n America. London: George A l l e n and Unwin Limited, 1966, Smith, Ernest A, American Youth Culture- Group L i f e i n Teenage Society. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. Speier, Matthew. "The Everyday World of the C h i l d " , i n Jack Douglas ( ed, ), Understanding Everyday L i f e . Aldine Press, 1970. , "The Organization of Talk and S o c i a l i z a t i o n P r a c t i c e s i n Family Household I n t e r a c t i o n " , Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Department of Sociology, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, I969. Sudnow, David, Passing On: The S o c i a l Organization of Dying, Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 19b9. , Studies i n S o c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n . New York: The Free Press, C o l l i e r Macmillan Limited, London, 1972, Turner, Roy. "The Ethnography of Experiment", The American  Behavioral S c i e n t i s t , A p r i l I967, , "Occupational Routines: Some Demand Cha r a c t e r i s -t i c s of P o l i c e Work", paper presented to the Canadian S o c i o l o g i c a l and Anthropological A s s o c i a t i o n , Toronto, June 1 9 6 9 . . "Some Features of the Construction of Conversation", paper presented to the American S o c i o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , San Francisco I969. "Some Formal Properties of Therapy Talk", i n David Sudnow ( ed, ), Studies i n S o c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n . New York: The Free Press, C o l l i e r Macmillan Limited, London, 1972, . "Talk and Troubles: Contact Problems of Former Mental Patients", unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Depart-ment of Sociology, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, I968, , "Words, Utterances and A c t i v i t i e s " , i n Jack Douglas ( ed. ), Understanding Everyday L i f e , Aldine Press, 1970, Whiting, Beatrice B, Six Cultures- Studies of C h i l d Rearing, New York: Wiley, I963. 116 APPENDIX CONVENTIONS HSED IN T R A N S H P T ^ O 1. SEQUENCING. The t r a n s c r i p t of sequential features i s done with s p e c i a l care, using the fo l l o w i n g conventions: The double oblique (//) in d i c a t e s the point at which a current speaker's t a l k i s overlapped by the t a l k of another: V: Th' guy says tuh me- hh my son // d i d i d . M: Wuhjeh do:. A multiple-overlapped utterance i s followed, i n s e r i a l order, by the t a l k which overlaps i t . Thus C's 'Vi:c' occurs simul-taneously with V's ' l e f t ' , and her 'Victuh' occurs simultan-eously with h i s 'hallway': V: I // l e f t my garbage p a i l i n i z // hallway, C: V i : c , C: Victuh, An alternate system i s t o place a s i n g l e bracket at the point of overlap, and place the overlapping t a l k d i r e c t l y beneath the t a l k i t overlaps: V: Th' guy says tuh me- hh my son r d i d i d , M: LWuhjeh do:. In f r o n t of two s e r i a l l y t r a n s c r i b e d utterances, the bracket in d i c a t e s that they s t a r t simultaneously: M: r I mean no no n'no, V: L P ' t i t back up, A s i n g l e right-hand bracket i n d i c a t e s the point at which two overlapping or simultaneously-started utterances end, i f they end simultaneously, or the point at which one of them ends i n the course of another, or the point at which one utterance-component ends v i s - a - v i s another. In some data c i t e d , an as-t e r i s k i s used instead: M: j " I mean no no n'no,] V: L P ' t i t back up,} 11? M: Jim // wasn' home] uh what. V: Y* kno:w?3 M: Jim // wasn' horned uh what. V: Y' kno:w?* In general, the equals sign (=) indicate::, 'latching'-!.e,, no i n t e r v a l between the end of a p r i o r and c t a r t of a next piece of t a l k . I t i s used f o r the r e l a t i o n s h i p of a next speaker's t a l k to a p r i o r speaker's, f o r l-he r e l a t i o n s h i p of two parts of a same speaker's balk, and as a t r a n s c r i p t convenience f o r managing long utterances which are overlap' ped at various points, i n which case a through-produced utterance may be more or l e s s a r b i t r a r i l y broken up: Wuhjeh do:.= = I s a i d d i d , he, get, hurt. My wife // caught d' ki:d,=* Yeh. = l i g h t i n ' a f i y u h i n Perry's c e l l u h . Well my son d i d it=I'm g l a d j e r con didn' get hu:rt, * hh I s a i d but... An equals sign at the end of one speaker's utterance, follow-ed by the equals s i g n combined with a left-hand bracket, i n -dicates that the bracketed speakers have s t a r t e d simultan-eously, with no i n t e r v a l a f t e r the preceding t a l k . T h i s may occur f o r a speaker followed by two others, or for. one 'con-t i n u i n g ' speaker and one other: J : V V J The son of a b i t c h g o t t i z // neck cut o f f . wuhd *e should of d i d , = Wuh-rl'm not intuh t h i s . L i f he- i f he's the one thet broke i t , Dass An a l t e r n a t e system i s t o place double obliques i n the course of what i s treated as a s i n g l e ongoing utterance by a f i r s t speaker: V: ...Dass wuhd 'e should of d i d , // i f he- i f he's the one thet broke i t , I'm not intuh t h i s . A right-hand bracket plus equal s i g n i n d i c a t e s that two u t t e r -ances have ended simultaneously and w i l l be 'latched' onto by a next. In t h i s case, the two p r i o r s arc latched onto by two simultaneously-starting nexts: 118 V: Ya:h, w e l l I woulda picked i t up, M: T I mean no no n'no,3 = V: LP't i t back up,] = M: _ [ " Ih doesn' make any-] = V: ~L I t doesn' mattuh.3 = M: I f i t breaks] V: So d i h gu:y3 says hh Numbers i n parentheses i n d i c a t e elapsed time i n tenths of sec-onds. The device i s used between utterances of adjacent speakers, between two separable parts of a si n g l e speaker's t a l k , and be-tween parts of a s i n g l e speaker's i n t e r n a l l y organized u t t e r -ance: V: ,,,dih soopuh u l clean i t up, (o.3) ( ) : hhehh V: No kidding. M: Yeh there's nothin the:re? ~To75) M: Quit h a s s l i n g , V: She's with somebody y' know'hh ennuh, (0 , 7 ) she says Wo:w,., An al t e r n a t e system i s to use one oblique between parentheses per ,1: V: ...dih soopuh u l clean i t up, (/?/) ( ) : hhehh The long dash, r a r e l y used, i n d i c a t e s an untimed pause, e.g. a •beat': V: I'm intuh my_ thing, intuh my:: — a t t i t u d e against othuh pih-'hh 2. SOUND-PRODUCTION i s neither conscientiously nor c o n s i s t e n t l y attended i n the present data, but the f o l l o w i n g s p e c i a l sym-bols are used: Punctuation markers are not used as grammatical symbols, but f o r intonation. Thus a question may be constructed with 'comma' or 'period' intonation, and 'question' intonation may occur i n a s s o c i a t i o n with non-questions: V: Becuss the soopuh d i n t pudda bu:lb on dih sekkin flaw en Its burnt ou:t? 119 V: A do:g? enna cat i s d i f f r e n t , R: Wuhjeh do:, Colon(s) i n d i c a t e that the p r i o r s y l l a b l e i s prolonged. Mul-t i p l e colons i n d i c a t e a more prolonged s y l l a b l e , as i n the second example, i n which V*s 'Wow' covers f i v e s y l l a b l e s i n M*s overlapped utterance: V: So dih gu:y sez'hh M: Yeh i t ' s a l l i n the c h a i r a l l th//at junk i s i n the chair."] = V: Wo::: : ::: :w]= V: =1 didn' know tha:t? Underscoring indicates various forms of s t r e s s i n g , and may involve p i t c h and/or volume: V: I sez y' know why, becawss look. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t r e s s and prolongation markers i n -dicates p i t c h change ( or non-change ) i n the course of a word. In the f i r s t sentence, with s t r e s s marked only under the f i r s t l e t t e r , p i t c h does not change. In the second senten-ce, p i t c h drops at the end of 'ha:rd'; i n the t h i r d , i t r i s e s at the end of 'ha:rd?* V: "M not saying he works ha:rd, V: I don't work ha:rd. H: Does he work ha:rd? The short dash indicates a 'cut o f f * of the p r i o r word or sound: V: He s a i d - yihknow, I get- I get s i c k behind i t . The h, within parentheses, within a word or sound, in d i c a t e s explosive a s p i r a t i o n , e.g. laughter, breathlessness, e t c . : M: I'd a' cracked up_ ' f duh f r i g g i n ( g l a - i ( h ) f y* kno(h)w i t ) sm"(h)a(h) heh heh The h without parentheses i n d i c a t e s audible breathing. A dot placed before i t indicates an in-breath; no dot i n d i c a t e s out-breath: V: So I sez, *hh wa:I whuddiyou goin do 120 The degree s i g n ( *) indicates that the t a l k i t precedes i s low i n volume: M: Jim wasn' home, // *( when y* wen over there ) Upper case indicates increased volume: V: En i t dint f a l l OUT! READER'S GUIDES. The following a d d i t i o n a l conventions should be noted: Single p a i r s of parentheses i n d i c a t e that t r a n s c r i b e r s are not sure about the words contained t h e r e i n : M: I'd a* cracked up 'f duh f r i g g i n ( g l a - i ( h ) f y' kno(h)w i t ) sm(h)a(h) heh heh M: Jim wasn' home, // °( when y' wen over there ) Matched p a i r s of parentheses i n d i c a t e not merely two poss i b l e hearings, but address the e q u i v o c a l i t y of each: V: I ' l l be ( r i g h t witchu. ) ( back inna minnit, ) Empty parentheses i n d i c a t e that no 'hearing' was achieved: ( ): Teh! ( ) On occasion, nonsense s y l l a b l e s are provided, i n an attempt t o capture something of the produced sounds: R: (Y* cattuh moo? ) The speaker designation column i s tre a t e d s i m i l a r l y : s i n g l e parentheses indicate doubt about speaker, p a i r s i n d i c a t e equiv-o c a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s , and empties i n d i c a t e no achieved i d e n t i f i -c a tion of the speaker. Materials between double parentheses ind i c a t e features of the audio materials other than a c t u a l v e r b a l i z a t i o n , or v e r b a l i -zations which are not t r a n s c r i b e d : M: (( whispered )) ( Now they're gonna, hack i t . ) M: (( RAZZBERRY )) M: (( cough )) V: (( dumb-slob voice )) Well we usetuh do d i s , en we use-121 TRANSCRIPT Dan: rOh a f i n e a r t i s t // a c t u a l l y , Roger: LYeah, ( /// ) Dan: Whe-what i s i t thatchu want to be? Jim: I dunno, - ( / / ) Roger: TYou must wanna be // something Ken: pYou have- you had // ( a c t u a l l y - ) Jim: L l don't. I: r e a l l y don' know // what I wanna be, Roger: |What are you i n t e r e s t e d i n . ( // ) Jim: Y'know,- What am I in t e r e s t e d in? Well what-whaddyou mean, rwhat am I int e r e s t e d // i n or what-Roger: LY'see I can't very w e l l speak on t h i s thing because I-I never was i n a s i t u a t i o n where I didn'know what I wanted to be, ( ): Mh Roger: So I-I, I c a n ' t - I - i t doesn't dawn on me that somebody couldn' knovr what they wanted t'be. So I can't r e a l l y — say a word. L-le g i t ima te l y , ( // ) Dan: And yet, y ' - i n - i n one way, even though you know whatchu want to be,there have been d i f f i c u l t i e s s i m i l a r to Jim's, Roger: Well, i t was never o f f e r e d to me, t h i s i s the path you take i f you wanted to be- I always saw i t that t h i s i s not. This won't get me where I wanta go. Maybe i t was r a t i o n a l i z i n g , but ~ y'know. Maybe when- or I was younger, nobody s a i d - I knew what I wanted t o be. Right o f f the bat, ( / ) Roger: W::ell I don' know how long- but nobody s a i d you want to be t h i s , go t h i s way. This i s the only way, ( / ) Roger: An' i f they d i d , say t h i s i s the only way, I would say no I see a d i f f e r e n t way. An* I'd move i n that d i r e c t i o n , ( / ) Dan: And i f you saw the d i f f e r e n t way, and i t was p o t e n t i a l l y s u c c e s s f u l , sure, Roger: Yeah, Dan: Why not, Roger: Well, As I say. What about t h i s person who knows what he wants to be, and he f e e l s the school, won't, move him i n that d i r e c t i o n , , 122 f -j I n i r (( cough )) Yeh, I know, Dan: r A n ' what-it // won't and vrhat e l s e i s -Roger: LOr he sees the f a u l t , i n the school. And he (says) uh I can't correct the school, so I ' l l j u s t move i n a d i r e c t i o n that w i l l uh a f f o r d me success, ( / ) Dan: Which i s ? (./) Roger: Other- other than, i n - i n the school, ( ): Mh hm, Roger: rTherefore, the-// i n my s-case, Dan: LWell the on-uh the only problem i s that i n uh in our s o c i e t y i t ' s very d i f f i c u l t , ( / ) to see other d i r e c t i o n s . Roger: Mh hm, Dan: S p e c i a l l y when person wants t o get a- to be an engineer, Roger: Mmyeah, Dan: Cause i t hasta go through the school system, Roger: rMh//hm Dan: ^Otherwise you // won't be h i r e d as an engineer. Y o u ' l l be :// h i r e d as a uh- as a // maintenance engineer, Jim: Ken: ( ) :| -hooky, Roger: r A l / / r i g h t . Jim: L-Yeh Dan: Which means thatchu sweep f l o o r s , Roger: pA l r i g h t , Now maybe he doesn't // wanna // accept the f a c t that t h i s jLs the d i r e c t i o n i f you wanna ( ) Jim: LTrue hehh Dan: That's about i t . ( 7 7 ) Ken: Well, I dunno maybe- now- N Ken: r( )-Roger: L-Le-let's say I wanted to be a s c i e n t i s t . And then I s a i d but I'm not gonna go to school and become one, ( / * ( ): ( Can't do i t . Ken: I-Roger: A l r i g h t so I-I'm j u s t I'm ju s t kidding myself, I-I ju s t didn* wanna go to school. So I'm j u s t g e t t i n round the problem, ( ): Yeh Roger: Why. Didn' I wanna go to school, I knew deep down insi d e I had to go to school to be- 'f I w-really wanted to be t h i s , y'know, so I - e i t h e r s h i f t e d that I r e a l l y didn' r e a l l y wanna be t h i s , or sa i d t h i s i s n ' t the way to become t h i s . 123 ( ////// ) Ken: Honestly i n my uh-in my opinion, I don't r e a l l y think that ( / ) I-I r e a l l y want to be an engineer more than I-I could think of other things that I'd much rather be, ( / ) Ken: But yet, ^  ^  Ken: Uhh i t ' s been poked into my head since I was a l i t t l e k i d that's what I was gonna be, Dan: That's a very important remark to make, Dan: r-Really, Ken: LWell i t ' s - t h i s - t h i s - I mean- maybe- maybe- maybe i t - i t seems funny t o you guys, (rr Ken: But uh ( //) Ken: i - i t ' s dawned on me, a- a buncha times i t - t h ' t - a c t u a l l y I've had no r e a l choice i n what I wanted t o be, (// r — Ken: I- t h i s i s the t r u t h . My- my father, i s uh, i s never s a i d j u have to be an engineer, but yet he says i f you're not going to be, I^m^gonna s e l l the company. Ken: In other words, Roger: So you f e l t c h u had to be one. Ken: [~No,-Roger: tin order to make yer f a t h e r happy, T'appease // yer father, rWi//th who nted to uh // be on good terms with, p e s , Lin some-_ I n -Ken: pOh h e l l , In-in some i n some ways ( // ) uh I - i t - / / i t dawned on me that I-I almost h-have to be, I'm forced t'be. <( s n i f f ) ) ( // ) Ken: Ken: Ken: ( ): Roger: r l // think that I was p u t t i n i t ( i n i t s r i g h t d e t a i l . ) Ken: Lis i t - is Ken: I t _is waitami-it i s s t i l l i n the l i n e t h a t I want t o be. In uh e l e c t r o n i c s , ( / ) Ken: But yet I'm gonna- I'm gonna end up bein an engineer. I f i t -i f i t — I f , i f I'm three hundred an' f o r t y years o l d , when I make an engineer. (/) ,. Roger: Yeah, j 124 Ken: Roger: ( ): Roger: Ken: Ken: Roger: Ken: Ken: Ken: Roger: Ken: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Ken: That's what I'm gonna be. ( / ) Well i n a d i f f e r e n t way I was given that same thing. ( ), my f o l k s recognized k-my t a l e n t when I was very young, and- "Oh we're very disappointed thatch(h)u do(hh)n*t hehhh make some use of t h i s t a l e n t " , you know, so, not commanding me you (h)have to be an engineer, but-I guess i t was i n s t i l l e d i n me very young. ( / ) Mh hm, Well I wanted to be that, y'know, but, I a l s o f e l t that I should be. ( / ) Yes but I've been t o l d that's what I want t o be. (//) „ r l ' v e been t o l d // that's what I LBut as I'm saying, i n a- i n a roundabout way I was t o l d the same thing. Yes but you weren't- you were t o l d but yet you had a choice, ( / ) I'm-told, and I've got- I've gotta uh a business a l l set, but yet i f i f I become an engineer, I've made a vow t h a t - I mean you know, t h i s i s n ' t p u b l i c , my father, by the time-by the time I become an engineer my f a t h e r might not even be a l i v e , " ~ ( / ) ) f e r y e r s e ( h ) l f , "But // when I become an engineer-sYou s(h)ure as h e l l ' s ( // hh hh hh hehh -Wait-I t ' s not-You s a i d y'were gonna be a f o u r hundred an' f i f t y years o l d r / / before you become an engineer, LWell-[I know "at the // rate I'm going", hehh heh I - i t ' s - s t i l l - s t i l l hhh rhhehh L S t i l l I don't think I w i l l work f o r my father, W'r-if I rbecome an engineer, I wou//ldn't-LYou'd buy 'im. No! tSe(h)t up a r i v a l // company heh No i t ' s j u s t that-I t - i t ' s that he's-h-he s a i d things to me, t h a t - he may not of thought that they bothered me. 125 ( / ) Ken: But i - i n s i d e y'know you think w e l l , h e l l . Just t o - j u s t to prove that I could, I'm going to be. And t h i s i s what I'm saying now. J s - j - j u s t to prove, that I could be an engineer, I'm gonna get the diploma. Roger: Test y e r s e l f ? Ken: I dunno i f I'm t e s t i n g myself, but u h - h e l l , i - i f i t means t e s t i n g myself, ok I'm t e s t i n g myself. But yet when I get outta college i t ' s gonna say 'engineer' on that thing i f i t -i f i t takes me t i l I'm f o u r hundred'n ten years old. Ken: A(hh;t the rate I'm going, i t m(hh)ay j u s t be f o u r hundred an' ten years o l d , Roger: Y'know you gotta learn to sound more convincing. Ken: rNo // but I -Jim: Lprobaly-hhhehhh Ken: Heh heh Jim: heh g- gonna end up bein i c e cream man e r sump'n, ( / ) Ken: I c'd t h i n k -Roger: Couldn' ya — Ken: I c'd think of a l o t t a things that I'd rather be than an engineer, or e l e c t r o n i c s t e c h n i c i a n , ther're a l o t t a things, Y'know there's-there's jobs that-that-that innerestchu, an' jobs that-that you'd l i k e , but yet you don't know i f you'd l i k e to make a l i v i n g of i t , ( / ) Ken: And uh, you know, Roger: You haven't been w r i t i n g , ( //) Ken: No, he's gotta long memory, Takes i n ten minutes somedimes, Roger: Huh? Jim: rSmog, A i / / r -Ken: Lsmo(hhh)g ehh heh Jim: ehhehh! Ken: Oh God I hate those things, Oh I d e s p i - I've bought a // r p a i r a those things-Roger: Ll'm not doin i t to-cause you // hate i t . I j u s t wanted t o -Ken: [ i bought a p a i r of g l a -Roger: ( ) Ken: Next week I'm gonna br i n g 'em i n here an' wear 'em, ( // ) 12.6 Jim: Roger: Roger: Jim: Roger: Jim: Roger: (Jim): Ken: Roger: Dan: Roger: Roger: Roger: Dan: Roger: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Dan: Ken: Dan: Roger: Dan: Dan: ( ): Roger: rl'm just wearin' 'em // cause of the smog i n here. LBut you see they don't-they don't bother us, so you won't be accomplishing anything, ( / > rSee heh you're the only one i t // bothers-LYou never know you might grow up 'n be a sun- uh one of [those guys t h ' makes shades. Sun//glass manufacturer. Ahhhahhhhhh yer gonna de-design su(h)ngla(hhh)sses hehh hhh t'be worn indoo(hh)rs heh heh! t Dug peo (hhh)pie. hyeh heh hehh Yet maybe someday, someday I ' l l get over the f e e l i n g that I have to, I have t o be, what- what I'm expected to be. ( Y'know my glasses work- f e r spectacles. ) Why d i d j u say that he had t'sound more convincing. When he s a i d "I am going to be an engineer i f i t takes me the r e s t of my l i f e " , i t sounded- I dunno maybe i t ' s ' i s manner of speech, but i t sounds to me, that uh he's j u s t t r y i n g to make people:: He's t r y i n g to support h i s image. He's saying uhm ( // ) I don'- i s i t - look- I c'n see through t h i s - I - a t l e a s t I think I c'n-th't- a l r i g h t . "I want these people to think no matter what I am gon-" I t ' s something that I would do, Uh huh. I-I uh I'm not say-I'm not saying that he doesn't wanna be an engineer, A 1 ) rYou // probaly do, Ll don't! You don't? ("I don' // wanna be an engineer, L-He just s a i d i t , I've s a i d i t a buncha times, I don't r e a l l y wanna be one! He said he wants t'be an engineer i n order t*prove to 'cm that he can make i t , rNo-I'm j ' s t saying that the way // he s a i d i t , I'm n-I'm j u s t pj-// making a comment, ' That's ) L( Yeah ) Oough! heh "I'm gonna be an engineer i f i t takes me four hundred f i f t y years," And t h i s sounds, very fake t'me, ( //) 127 Ken: rW'l maybe i t does, but- uh//hh Roger: Ll-I-I mean i t just sounds t'me l i k e I'm j-I'm j u s t saying t h i s fmake people think I'm perseveerant an* — I - i - y a - i t doesn't sound very convincing t'me, Ken, On Ken: I don't r e a l l y give a damn. Ya know that? Roger: r A ' r i g h t jusa min', I wanna study / / i t h i s , Ken: Uhhh hhh//hh ( ): Q ) Roger: J-maybe I'm not convincing to other people e i t h e r but I c'n rno t i c e i t *n // s'mbody e l s e . Ken: L l t - i t - i t r e a l l y doesn't bother me i f you don't think I'm going to. ( / } Roger: p i didn* say I don't // think you're going tuh, I s a i d I don't think, you convince people the way you t a l k . Ken: LNo I mean-Ken: rMmaybe // I don't. Roger: LAnd that that's whatchu r e a l l y wanta do. Ken: Maybe I don't. Maybe I'd be a b e t t e r salesman. Or maybe I'd be a — b e t t e r g i r l s c o u t leader, I don' know, Roger: t c h mmyer not-you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm j ' s t saying, By saying "I'm gonna be an engineer i f i t takes me f o u r hunert'n f i f t y years, Nuh matter what. I t ' s gon-" I t j u s t doesn't sound l i k e — Ken: W-( //) Roger: Oh ( ): nuhh Roger: I dunno, ( // ) Ken: But- Maybe someday t h ' t uhh t'ht my f-my f a t h e r ' 1 1 q u i t f e e l i n g t h a t- uh maybe I ' l l q u i t f e e l i n g that I have to f i l l h i s image, ( / ) Ken: Maybe then I w i l l be what I want, but uh i n some ways I don* r e a l l y - y'know, 's a l o t t a f i e l d s open, ( //// 5 Roger: Oh w e l l , hhmhhhh ( /////// ) Roger: You have no i n t e r e s t s Jim, ~ ~ ( / ) Jim: Hm? Roger: You have no i n t e r e s t s . 128 Jim: In what? Roger: In anything, ( //) Jim: Well nobody's ever pushed me into-y'know what I'm-nowat-not r / / that, nobody's s a i d -Roger: '-You haven't^pushed y o u r s e l f i n any d i r e c t i o n , Jim: Yeah, Roger: You're not in t e r e s t e d i n cars, you're not i n t e r e s t e d in -' rsports, you're not in t e r e s t e d i n mechanics, // you're not-Jim: LWell I'm int e r e s t e d i n i t , but I don't f e e l that I sh'd-that I wanna go i n t o the f i e l d , ( / ) Roger: Are you scared to go i n t o something? Jim: No, ( ////) Roger: That's the way my brother f e e l s y'know I had t'push him y'know h-he ( wasn't r e a l l y ) whole-hearted, "I don' wanna be nothin," He says, ( 1 1 1 } „ Jim: (( cl e a r s ^ t h r o a t Roger: Well y'see, i t ' s not a very r e a l i s t i c approach r e a l l y . He says that he wants t o be something he knows what he wants to be, but i t ' s not a very r e a l i s t i c thing, Roger: So he ju s t doesn't t e l l people about i t . Well I uh I d i d that too, y'know, ( //) Roger: 0-oh I j u s t wanna be a bum out i n the- out i n the f o r e s t y'know i n other words, he's gotta- an i n t e r e s t - natural, y'know, i n - i n nature i n other words, but he doesn't wanna be a f(hh)orest ranger. An' he doesn't wanna be categorized, ( / ) Roger: I'm t h i s , I'm that, ( /// ) Ken: p i n some ways I wouldn't mind bein a f o r e s t // ranger, Roger: LHe probably j u s t doesn't wanna t e l l people what he r e a l l y wants to be, you know, — s o l d i e r of fortune or some other ( (/////) Dan: Why not? ( //) Roger: Maybe he-he f e e l s that i t won't be accepted y'know, an' people'11 laugh at him. 129 (/) Roger: Y'know-I think a l o t t a people don't wanna be categorized, ( // ) Roger: He i s gonna be an engineer. He's gonna be a f o r e s t ranger. ~ ( / ) ( ): Or an a r t i s t , Roger: ( j people ( ) know what they wanna be, Dan: Mh hm, ( / ) Dan: ^ / ) Roger: But I don't think there's much sense i n that, ( / ) Ken: I dunno i t j u s t - I dunno i t doesn't seem f a i r t'me, I know that- i f I ever have kids I'm not gon- I'm not gonna -to even attempt ~ to uh t e l l them t h i s i s what they should be, t h i s i s what they shouldn't be, Y'know i t - t h ' t - I think that-that sh-you*re own d e c i s i o n , ( / ) Ken: Like Louise s a i d when she was here, uh, uh with-with her with her father's mother y'know the baby b i t ? Roger: r( )-Ken: L-M-my l i t t l e baby? Well, t h i s i s the same thi n g . I'm- I f e e l that I'm old enough t o - t'make my own d e c i s i o n s , and to do what I damn w e l l please, Dan: Butchu just s a i d thatchu can't. ( ):[-( / / ) -Dan: Lin many ways you've s-you've i n d i c a t e d thatchu don't r e a l l y want to be a.n engineer, Ken: Yeh. Dan: And thatcher father, t h ' t t h i s i s your father's d e c i s i o n , Ken: I t i s . Dan: Thatchu don't consider that t o be a f a i r approach, Ken: I don't. Dan: And that- 'n then you say i n - then on the other breath uhh uhh y o u ' l l - y o u ' l l say that i f i t takes four hundred *n ten' years I ' l l be an engineer. Ken: eh Just t o prove a point I think i t - t h a t ' s - t h a t ' s my -main object // i s to Dan: -To prove what point? Thatcher f a t h e r i s // r i g h t ? Ken: _Uh-no that-when he-when he sat over i n the corner and he says uh uhhh oh what i s - t h a t - t h a t f a t h e r and son t h i n g that we-y'know that family goody we had here? Dan: Yeah 130 Ken: When he'd say oh I've given up a l l - a l l thought of him ever being an engineer, but yet he's pushing s t i l l f o r me to be an engineer, but yet he's not-he's not acti n g l i k e - y'know l i k e he's ju s t too damn dumb to make i t , Jim: (( clears throat )) Ken: And t h i s p i s s e d me o f f to no extent, I was so mad, I didn*-N ( / } Ken: ( ). Uh I -Ken: I dunno i f ( / ) i f I could i - i f I c'n make i t , which I-I w i l l , I ' l l become an engineer, ( /) Ken: I ' l l go through school-Dan: rWithout working-Roger: LButchu j u s t s a i d you ha-yer gonna make i t . Ken: I am. Roger: But now you s a i d i f - i f I can make i t . Ken: TWell-Jim: *-I don't think yer g e t t i n anywhere, ( / ) Roger: pYeah I-I when I say I wanna be t h i / / s -Dan: LHow do you f e e l r i g h t now, Ken? Ken: I dunno, I j ' s t ~ Dan: F e e l low? F e e l l i k e yer bein put on? Roger: "Why me"? Hm? Dan: Attacked? ( / ) Ken: No, Dan: No? Ken: I-I r e a l l y don't. i - I mean, agreed, these guys may think something's wrong, I me(hh)an y(hh)'know, l i k e some kinda clo:d, Jim: I think-I t h i n k yer rev e r s i n g y e r s e l f every time you say (-something, y*n::: a few minutes l a t e r you s-say the oppo//site. Ken: LWell, I -Roger: I think so, too, (Dan): (( clears throat )) Jim: Wish you'd make up yer mind. ( / ) (Dan): ( Or that uhm — ) ( ///') Ken: T h i s pisses me o f f , ( /// ) 131 Roger: When I say I wanna be something, i t ' s not that I just wanna be t h i s , i t ' s just I - I - I . j u s t - t h a t ' s the only t h i n g I t e l l people that I wanta be an a r t i s t . I t ' s r e a l l y a whole way of l i f e , y'know, an' I guess t h a t ' s - — an' that's the way my brother f e e l s too, so he j u s t - j u s t t e l l s everybody, r-b'c3,use he won't be accepted, y'know, the idea i s // not standard, Dan: LYeah Dan: Uh huh, Roger: Y'know t h i s i s - t h i s i s just h a l f a the s i t u a t i o n . ( / ) Dan: Mh hm, Roger: You v i s u a l i z e y o u r s e l f uh l i v i n g a c e r t a i n way. An' the only thing 'tchu t e l l people i s uh whatcha do as yer occupation. Dan: Yeh Roger: I see i t as a whole p i c t u r e , Dan: I t i s , Roger: Y'know Dan: Yer r i g h t , Roger: Not just uh ( / ) l i k e my father, you know, "Well I-I'm a painter,"" Dan: Mh hm, Roger: Y'know? But I-I don't see i t that way at a l l . Jim: Huh, Roger: I- Hovr am I gonna l i v e , what am I gonna do f o r a l i v i n g , an' the whole-whole scene, Dan: Right, Roger: And uh since most people don't think along these l i n e s , they y'know they just think w e l l whaddya do, where d ' y ' l i v e i n an apartment? Dan: rOh // yeah, Roger: L-or a house? An' you-you go t'work t h i s way you go to ' work that way, T V ) ( ): Mmyeah, Roger: So you j u s t t e l l people i n order t ' y'know to-to meet t h e i r i d e a l s , j u s t w-what h a l f of i t ' s gonna be by saying what's yer occupational thing, Dan: Mh hm, Roger: So y-you don* wanna be categorized Dan: rYou don' wan'em t * // t h i n k -Roger: M f e l l , mmmhhh I guess c'se- You got more t o t e l l them that they won't understand, Y'know that t h e y ' l l j u s t - think tha'yet nuts. 132 Roger: Roger: Dan: Dan: Ken: Ken: Dan: Ken: Jim: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Ken: Roger: Roger: ( //) So vie just uh e i t h e r give 'em the occupation part of i t , or just don't say nothin at a l l , ( / ) Or don't want anybody to think whatcher gonna be. ( ///////// ) Ce r t a i n l y I do think that t h i s i s t r u e . I mean any kind of uh ( / ) cat e g o r i z a t i o n of an occupation i s ju s t you knovr, w e l l what are you gonna be? we l l I'm gonna be t h i s , and so on. C e r t a i n l y . Yer r i g h t . TI) I t i s -Sure but-CYet- When // you were f i v e years o l d , w:::-waitaminute. P a r t i c u l a r l y a ten year o l d ch i l d ? When you were f i v e years o l d din* you have- didn' you have dreams of bein a- a-a- a- fireman? r( // ) LA puhliceman? Uhh That's just a search f o r adventure. An ambulance d r i v e r , or some such — horseshit, Well every time I had t h i s imagination i t was blanked out. Y'know by, "Oh no, you don'wanna be that, that-there's no money i n that, there's no th i s . t h e r e ' s no that, uh you wanna be an engineer," ( / ) But that's j u s t c'se every boy wants adventure, y'know an' he sees i t as a fireman or a policeman, ( /) So some boys-C'd a l s o see i t as-rSo some boys gr//ow up bein a f i r e -LWhy d'they play with guns, -fireman or a policeman, N-bu'i-but i t ' s d - d i f f e r e n t y'know they come about i t under d i f f e r e n t circumstances. No boy sees adventure i n bein a cop, an' then a l l of h i s l i f e wants to be a cop, and then becomes a cop. That's very rare, ( /) I don'know, Just circumstances lead up to i t , [7=But I know there's a // l o t t a guys i n college // who st a r t e d J out-Ll mean-L l mean he sees the t r u t h of i t before he becomes o l d enough to be a cop. 133 Ken: Jim: Ken: (Roger: Roger: Roger: Ken: Roger: Dan: Ken: ( ): Jim: Ken: Dan: Ken: Roger: Ken: Dan: Ken: Dan: Ken: Dan: Ken: Roger: (Jim): Dan: Ken: Dan: ( h There's a l o t t a guys i n college who s t a r t e d - s t a r t e d out saying they wanted to be a, a-a-( ) a-a- whaddyacallit a — not a mathematician!, a sec- not a psecreta-you know, // a-a- s p e c i a l - a s p e c i a l i z e d // man, -//he's-\ ) -Technician, L( 's'at whatchu mean? ) A technician yeah, a secretary l i k e , y'know only he does a l l kinds of bookkeeping and things l i k e t h i s ? An accountant? Accountant. Yeah.' Uh huh f( ) he a // ( ) 'They get i n there and they-they st a r t - t h e y go through college f o r t h ' f i r s t two years and they got a semester more to go? And a l l of a sudden t h e y ' l l j u s t change t h e i r minds, t h e y ' l l say Sure. r l don' // l i k e t h i s , LThey r e a l i z e t h i s i s n ' t what they wanted. Well, Sure, See th-yet-yet you c'd change, you can change at almost any time. Of course. ( n rWhen you're older, I guess, I dunno // Now you don't have any choice, H No, you- now. ) ("Mommy and daddy make you do //what they-what they want, LHHHHAAACHHHU ( G*bless you ) Butcher analogy or yer reference or y e r example of the accountant i s the p r e - i s the person who has been able to wuh f i n d himself i n a p o s i t i o n where he's able t'change, Yeh That i s , he has not i n one way or another been removed, from the e n t i r e area of competition, Beca.use of the f a c t that he rhasn't competed or hasn't achieved h i s grades // before, L(( clears throat )) 134 ( // ) Ken: Well, uh a l o t t a people- you c'n get a job as a-as a salesman, Roger: rOh Jc//sus Ken: LAs a-uh no I mean- tfer a b i g comp'ny. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093495/manifest

Comment

Related Items