Kubis 1

COM 380 – Brief Reading #2

Proxemics
When is it my territory?
.The article looked at for the brief reading was Territoriality; A Neglected Sociological

Dimension by Stanford Lyman and Marvin Scott. Territoriality was defined as an “attempt to

mark the boundaries of territories that are ‘owned’ by individuals or groups.” in the class

content. Distance is typically seen as the amount of space between people. When communicating

it is determined by the relationship between interactors and the type of interaction that is

occurring. This factor of distance places a role in each level of territory. There are four types of

territories. They are as follows; public, home, interactional, and body territories. When analyzing

these territories they can often relate to Edward Hall’s types of distance. Both of these concepts

are laid out in four divisions.

The brief reading focused on two of territories, public and home territories in the

beginning portion of the article. Public territory is defined as areas where individuals have free

access. This does not mean that there is complete freedom of action in these areas though. For

instance you do not want there to be any illegal activity going on in territory that all people have

access to. Public territories are also unique in the sense that no individual has ownership of these

places. This territory relates closest to Hall’s public distance, which makes sense as they are both

the broadest category and have the same name. Activity in both of these open to all people who

share knowledge of the rules that govern these principles.

Home territories are when regular users claim territory as their own and interact freely

within these territories. Examples of this type of territory as explained in the brief reading are

children’s clubhouses, or a homeless person claiming a street corner. These are just a few
 Kubis 2

instances in which this claim may occur. Since public territories are free to all, oftentimes

individuals or groups will claim public territory as their own home territory. The article put it as

being “vulnerable to conversion to home territories,” (because of their officially open status

(p.177). This excludes those who are not part of the group that laid claim from being able to use

this territory. If outsiders do try make use of the now home territory they may risk injury or

punishment from those who have laid claim to it. This aspect of home territory can make it hard

to distinguish between home and public territories. Hall’s principle of public distance is often the

only one that can be used safely in these convert home territories. If anyone crosses over from

public distance to social distance in public space that has been converted to the home territory of

a youth’s clique or perhaps gang. These groups often protect their turf from encroachers. This

territory is frequently claimed through the use of fixed and semi-fixed features that show a

group’s claim to that territory. Violations can occur here when the claiming features (fixed or

semi-fixed) are destroyed by trespassers.

The article went on to talk to mention the other two types of territories, interactional and

body. Interactional is described as areas where social gatherings may occur or where individuals

gather informally, and can be surrounded by an invisible boundary (social membrane) (p.178).

This territory differs from the other two boundaries in that is mobile. People who play interactive

computer games together may close their laptops, move them into a new location, and resume

playing without much difficulty. The interactional territory may be violated when interactants

behave out of character (p.179).

Finally, body territories consist of the space reserved for the use of our bodies. Of all of

the territories this one is the most private and intimate. When violations occur in this territory

people are more likely to take offense since relates more to their own personal body. Body
 Kubis 3

territories can tell stories through the use of tattoos, scars, and other markings. The norms of

body territory state that contamination occurs when personal effects (toothbrush, comb, and

makeup like mascara) are used by an individual who is not the rightful owner of such items.

Body territory is similar to that of Hall’s intimate space. When violations in haptic norms occur

they also violate body territories as well where almost all haptic interaction occurs. Such

instances may be greetings whether the situation calls for a hug, kiss, or handshake, when this

norm is not met it is both a haptic and territorial proxemics violation.

 Kubis 4

Reference

Lyman, S. M., & Scott, M. B. (1967). Territoriality: A Neglected Sociological Dimension. Social

Problems, 15(2), 236-249. doi:10.2307/799516