Read Erickson First, Then Read Orwell And Answer

Read Erickson First Then Read Orwell After That Answer This Questionqu

Read Erickson first then read Orwell after that answer this question Question: Kai Erikson describes communities as being “boundary maintaining†(9), which means they share a defined geographic and/or cultural space. He argues that any behavior that pushes or crosses that boundary is considered “inappropriate or immoral†(10) i.e. deviant. How might this definition help you understand any of the texts we’ve read?

Paper For Above instruction

This paper explores how Kai Erikson's definition of communities as boundary-maintaining entities can illuminate our understanding of various texts we've studied, particularly in relation to concepts of deviance, morality, and social cohesion. Erikson's perspective emphasizes that communities uphold boundaries—whether geographic, cultural, or moral—and treat behaviors crossing these boundaries as inappropriate or deviant. By examining literary and societal texts through this lens, we can better understand the social dynamics that influence perceptions of deviance and morality.

Firstly, Erikson's theory suggests that behaviors deemed deviant are not inherently immoral, but are largely defined by social boundaries that hold communities together. This is particularly evident in texts that depict social sanctions and community responses to what they consider immoral acts. For example, in Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Scarlet Letter," the community's judgment of Hester Prynne's adulterous act illustrates a boundary of moral expectation. The community perceives her transgression as crossing a moral boundary, leading to shaming and ostracism. Through Erikson's lens, Hester's punishment underscores how community boundaries regulate behavior and reinforce social cohesion. Her ostracism exemplifies the community's effort to maintain its moral boundary, confirming the idea that what is considered deviant is socially constructed.

Secondly, Orwell's works, particularly "1984," offer a compelling context to analyze Erikson's boundary-maintenance concept. In Orwell's dystopian society, the boundaries of morality and truth are manipulated by the State. The Party maintains the boundary of acceptable thought and behavior, defining deviation as thoughtcrime. Orwell depicts a regime where the government controls not only the physical boundaries of space but also the moral boundaries of truth and morality. The relentless suppression of dissent and the concept of doublethink serve to uphold the boundary of ideological conformity. Deviance, in this context, becomes synonymous with rebellion against the Party's boundary of truth, illustrating how powerful the social construction of deviance can be when backed by institutional authority.

Thirdly, Erikson's boundary-maintenance perspective helps us understand societal reactions to civil rights movements and protests depicted in texts such as James Baldwin's essays or literature about social upheaval. These movements challenge existing social boundaries of race, class, and morality. The backlash against such movements often involves labeling activists or protesters as deviant or immoral, reinforcing the community's boundary against change. Understanding these reactions through Erikson's framework reveals how communities resist boundary crossings that threaten social cohesion or threaten to redefine moral standards.

Moreover, Erikson's concept is instrumental in analyzing how communities create mechanisms to enforce boundaries, such as laws, norms, and social sanctions. In literature that deals with criminal justice, like Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment," the protagonist's moral violations violate the social boundary of acceptable behavior, prompting responses from society that seek to restore order. The treatment of Raskolnikov illustrates how communities respond to deviance—whether through punishment, redemption, or exile—aiming to maintain social stability.

In conclusion, Kai Erikson's definition of communities as boundary-maintaining entities provides significant insights into the understanding of social behaviors, morality, and deviance in various texts. This perspective reveals that what is perceived as deviant is largely shaped by social boundaries, which serve to reinforce community cohesion. Whether in literary portrayals of moral judgment, dystopian control, or social upheaval, recognizing the importance of boundaries deepens our comprehension of the mechanisms society employs to define and enforce morality.

References

• Erikson, K. (1966). Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Conflict Between Community and Individual. Rutgers University Press.
• Orwell, G. (1949). 1984. Secker & Warburg.
• Hawthorne, N. (1850). The Scarlet Letter. Ticknor, Reed & Fields.
• Baldwin, J. (1963). Notes of a Native Son. Beacon Press.
• Dostoevsky, F. (1866). Crime and Punishment. The Russian Messenger.
• Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
• Scheff, T. J. (1966). Guilt and purgation: The control of shame in the social process. American Sociological Review, 31(3), 329–343.
• Durkheim, E. (1897). The Division of Labour in Society. Free Press.
• Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press.
• Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Pantheon Books.