VT #3 - 351
zahedpourtanin
TheoryCh11-Dialectics-F2020.pptxRelational Dialectics of of Leslie Baxter & Mikhail Bakhtin
11
A First Look at
Communication Theory
Em Griffin
Andrew Ledbetter Glenn Sparks
10th edition
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Relational Dialectics
Discourses that Create Meaning
Caught in a Chain of Utterances
Three Common Dialectics that Shape Relationships
How Meaning Emerges from Struggles Between Discourses
Dialogue Creates Our Relational Worlds
Slide 2
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Discourses that Create Meaning
Discourse:
The central concept of RDT
A “set of propositions that cohere around a given object of meaning.”
Slide 3
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Discourses that Create Meaning
EX: The many discourses about “APPLES” that influence the meaning:
Apple a day keeps the doc away (health)
Apples + brown sugar+ crust = pie (not healthy!)
Organic vs. non
Local vs. imported labor issues
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
4
Relational Dialectics: Intro
RD is about struggle between discourses
Struggles are located in the relationship
Produced and reproduced through communication
Struggles aren’t necessarily bad; good things can emerge from them!
Slide 5
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Discourses
Baxter draws on the thinking Mikhail Bakhtin.
Bakhtin criticized monologue
Emphasizes one discourse; silences others.
Bakhtin embraced dialogue
Unity and difference are at play, both with and against one another.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Bakhtin: 20th century Russian intellectual
6
Applications
Research in this area has been done in the following types of relationships:
Friends
Co-workers
Romantic relationships
**Family (including stepfamilies)
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Discursive struggles/ Competing discourses
DEF: Two or more discourses compete for dominance over meaning.
Baxter emphasized that dialectics are NOT about conflicts between people or needs
Slide 8
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Internal vs. External Dialectics
Internal dialectics – Discursive struggles played out within a relationship.
External dialectics – Discursive struggles played out between a couple and their community.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Kate and Kevin’s relationship exists outside of their relationship with ALL the siblings AND the family as a whole (siblings +parents).
9
Three Common Dialectics that Shape Relationships
Three discursive struggles / competing discourses
Integration/Separation
Stability/Change
Expression/Non-expression
Slide 10
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Beiber with girlfriend VS Beiber out with friends
10
Typical Dialectical Tensions Experienced by Relational Partners (Figure 11-1)
Slide 11
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Jagged edge at bottom reminds us that there are many, MANY more dialectics. This is just the “tip of the iceberg”.
11
Dialectic of Integration vs. Separation
Great Quote to explain this dialectic:
“No relationship can exist unless the parties sacrifice some individual autonomy. However, too much connection paradoxically destroys the relationship because the individual identity becomes lost.”
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Dialectic of Integration vs. Separation
A. Connection vs. Autonomy (internal)
Comm. reflects a need for both closeness and distance
EX: “I love being with you, but need time w/ friends too.”
B. Inclusion vs. seclusion (external)
Comm. reflects a need to spend time just as a couple, and also with others
Holidays with family; (inclusion) vs. alone (seclusion)
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Connection – Autonomy is the MOST FUNDAMENTAL dialectical tension
The inclusion/seclusion tension: EXAMPLE is from FOUR Christmases.
13
Dialectic of Stability vs. Change
A. Certainty vs. uncertainty (internal)
EX: I love that we see a movie every weekend (predictability/certainty) for “date night,” but this weekend let’s go dancing (novelty/uncertainty)!”
B. Conventionality vs. Uniqueness (external)
Consistency/inconsistency with other relationships
“I love that we still make a Christmas ham like your family used to do (convention), but that we also have our own tradition of going out for Chinese on Christmas Eve (uniqueness)!”
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
B. Conventionality vs. Uniqueness : Consistency or inconsistency with the larger social group
Certainty vs. Uncertainty: People avoid talking about death because it makes the prospect of death more certain.
14
Dialectic of Stability vs. Change
A. Certainty vs. uncertainty (internal)
B. Conventionality vs. Uniqueness (external)
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
A: Mindy and Danny relax and just hang out together a lot (certainty). This is how they grow close. However, sometimes Mindy wants to go out and have fun, despite Danny’s preference to stay in and stay set in his ways.
B. Monica and Chandler (“Friends”) go through with a traditional wedding. Ross and his wife Carol get divorced, and raise a child together with Carol’s girlfriend (later wife), Susan.
15
Dialectic of Expression vs. non-Expression
A. Openness vs. closedness (internal)
EX (study): College Students want openness with non-residential biological parent, but avoid sharing positive stories about stepparent (Closedness).
B. Revelation vs concealment (external)
EX: LGBTQ couples may want to reveal their relationship with others, but conceal to avoid negative consequences.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Openness vs. closedness (internal)
EX: “My partner and I talk about “everything,” but there are some things I keep to myself so I won’t upset him.”
MEME: Lil Nas X reveals he is gay on social media
16
How Meaning Emerges from Struggles Between Discourses
*Not all discourses are equal: some possess more prominence (and power) than others
Dominant discourse – Talk that is central and prominent, with power to define meaning.
Marginalized discourse – Talk that is peripheral, lacking power to define meaning.
Slide 17
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
“Managing” Discourses
We can voice different discourses at different times
Called: Diachronic separation
We can voice different discourses at the same time
Called: Synchronic interplay
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Note: Baxter typically doesn’t like the term “manage” because it implies that the struggles exist outside of communication.
**Instead she would rather consider how patterns of talk position certain discourses as dominant or marginalized.
18
Two typical patterns of Diachronic Separation
1. Spiraling inversion – Switching back and forth between two discursive struggles: Voicing one, and then the other.
EX: Inclusion vs. seclusion
Spend time with family for holidays,
Spend time ALONE other times (e.g., anniversary)
Slide 19
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Diachronic Separation: voicing different discourses at different times
19
Two typical patterns of Diachronic Separation
2. Segmentation – Compartmentalize certain aspects of the relationship.
EX: Expression vs. Non-expression
Previous example with step children talking about some things with non-residential biological parent (e.g., school, work, etc.), but not others (positive experiences with the new stepparent), in order to avoid conflict or hurt feelings.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
4 Patterns of Synchronic Interplay
Baxter’s 4 forms of synchronic interplay:
Negating
Countering
Entertaining
Transforming
Slide 21
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
4 Patterns of Synchronic Interplay: Negating
Mentioning a marginalized discourse, mainly to dismiss it as unimportant.
EX: Foster parents may bring up the idea that a child being with a biological parent is ideal, only to bring up examples of ”bad kids” that were raised by biological parents.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
4 Patterns of Synchronic Interplay: Countering
Replace expected discourse with alternative discourse.
EX: Adoptive parent mentions that she values her child’s contact with their biological parents
Then mentions negative experiences with the bio parents
Then mentions they cut off contact w/ bio parents.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
23
4 Patterns of Synchronic Interplay: Entertaining
Recognizing that every discourse has alternatives; none are dominant
EX: Adoptive mom finds information about the biological father, and struggles with whether or not to tell the child
Could be good for him; could cause issues in family dynamic
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
ENTERTAIN (consider) All discourses
In the show This is Us, Randall’s mom (Rebecca) does not tell Randall that his father is trying to contact him, because she assumes he is a drug user. Randall later resents her for withholding this information from him.
24
4 Patterns of Synchronic Interplay: Transforming
Combining two or more discourses into something new.
EX: Many adoption discourses treat it as an “all or nothing” scenario
Adoptive family wins; bio family looses, and vice-versa
But… it’s possible to express gratitude for bio. family, while also expressing gratitude for adoptive family
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Highest transformation is AESTHETIC MOMENT: Sense of unity and respect for disparate voices in dialogue
EX: A special vacation or a child’s high school graduation.
EX: Family Reunion – lots of different voices and perspectives come together and form something new.
In “This is Us” Randall integrates his biological father into his home and family (his adoptive mom AND his own family including wife and kids)
25
Dialogue Creates our Relational Worlds
Constitutive approach
Belief that communication creates and sustains our relationships
We don’t just “manage” dialectical tensions with communication
Relationships EXIST IN Communication
Slide 26
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Dialogue Creates our Relational Worlds
Dialogue is always in a state of dialectical flux.
Makes our relationships unpredictable
Social construction of relationships is always changing
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
The Messiness of Personal Relationships (Figure 11-2)
Slide 28
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Critique of Relational Dialectics Theory
Baxter promotes multiple discourses, but doesn’t always speak dialogically about other theories.
Baxter is particularly tough on scientific scholarship.
RDT does stack up well as an interpretive theory on all six criteria (new understanding, community of agreement, etc.)
Slide 29
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
EXTRA
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Caught in a Chain of Utterances
Talk reverberates with words spoken before, words yet to come, and words that speakers may never dare to voice.
Baxter calls them utterances linked together in a chain.
Slide 31
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Baxter Insists We Consider Discourses on Two Dimensions.
Slide 32
| Who speaks them: Nearby versus distant | ||
| Time: Already-spoken versus Not-yet-spoken | Already-spoken Nearby | Already-spoken Distant |
| Not-yet-spoken Nearby | Not-yet-spoken Distant |
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Caught in a Chain of Utterances
These discourses intersect to form four ‘links’ in the utterance chain that create the utterance’s meaning.
Bakhtin and Baxter believe dialectical tension provides an opportunity to work out ways to mutually embrace the conflict between unity with and differentiation from each other.
Slide 33
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Another way to think about Integration/separation
A set of discursive struggles regarding independence versus interdependence; freedom versus intimacy.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Another way to think about Stability/change
A set of discursive struggles regarding routine versus spontaneity; traditional versus novel.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Another way to think about Expression/non-expression
A set of discursive struggles regarding transparency versus secrecy; privacy versus disclosure.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
How Meaning Emerges from Struggles Between Discourses
Family talk reveals relationships in constant flux as some discourses move to the center and then recede to the margins.
Diachronic separation – Voicing different dis-courses at different times.
Synchronic interplay – Voicing different dis-courses at the same time.
Slide 37
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Synchronic Interplay’s Highest form of Transformation
The highest form of transformation is the aesthetic moment:
A fleeting sense of unity through a profound respect for disparate voices in dialogue.
Slide 38
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Ethical Reflection: Sissela Bok’s Principle of Veracity
Baxter argues for critical sensibility – an obligation to critique dominant voices.
Bok thinks lying can do this and contends all people are affected by lies, she hopes to establish when, or if, lies can be justified.
Slide 39
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Ethical Reflection: Sissela Bok’s Principle of Veracity
Bok rejects absolute prohibition of lying
Also rejects consequential ethics – judging actions solely on basis of their beneficial or harmful outcomes
Proposes the Principle of veracity – that truthful statements are preferable to lies in the absence of special circumstances that overcome their negative weight
Slide 40
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
