Astructure/Which Structure?: Rethinking “Astructural Bias” in Symbolic Interaction Through Georges Bataille and his Followers

Abstract

This chapter examines the issue of the “astructural bias” critique of symbolic interactionist theory and research practice by reconsidering the conception of structure in light of work within the French social theoretical tradition that reflects upon this concept. Proceeding through the work of Georges Bataille, Jean Baudrillard, and Marshall Sahlins, the chapter examines the evolving theorization of symbolic structures. Bataille’s theory of the “general economy” and the “labyrinth” provides an initial expansion of the concept of structures and formulating symbolic practices as fundamental to the structuring of the social order. Baudrillard expands this work on symbolic structures with his analysis of symbolic exchange and seduction, taking Bataille’s initial work into a more nuanced analytical perspective and applies it to a range of cultural practices, including fashion, an area of particular interest to symbolic interactionism. Marshall Sahlins, directly influenced by Baudrillard, refines much of this thinking through his theorization of cultural reason, and provides anthropological field research to illustrate some of this theory, taking this thought into more conventional social scientific territory and offering examples of its methodological possibilities. The chapter suggests that symbolic interactionists can move from a defensive position regarding the presumed astructural character of their work to a more positive case for its status as a particularly acute form of engagement with a range of social structures.

Citation

Bailey, S. (2016), "Astructure/Which Structure?: Rethinking “Astructural Bias” in Symbolic Interaction Through Georges Bataille and his Followers", The Astructural Bias Charge: Myth or Reality? (Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Vol. 46), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 167-184. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-239620160000046028