This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Alexander Source: Sociological Theory, Vol. 19, No. 3 (Nov., 2001), pp. 237-249 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3108594 Accessed: 22/01/2010 14:38
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
John Wiley & Sons and American Sociological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Sociological Theory.
and protectionof apparentlyautonomous culturaldiscourses and separatedinteractionalcommunities.rehabilitation.It means.. integrativeactor who had the desire and ability to put himself in the shoes of the other person in a relativizing. after 20 years of relatively successful struggles for the expansion of American citizenship.. "I do not enter into a humaninteractionbut instead become more awareof my whiteness and maletranscendent ness. of politics in short"(Kimball 1992:75).a highly visible conservative intellectual reaction has crystallized that is deeply suspicious about the motives of multiculturalactivists and sharply skeptical of the new and very different programfor intergrouprelations they rec*Addresscorrespondenceto: Jeffrey C. a scholar named Peter Adler (1974:369-71) concluded a widely used anthology called InterculturalCommunicationby offering a definition of "multicultural. he explained. but with "difference. "treatingsociety as the sum of several equally valuable but distinct racial and ethnic groups.In our dependence. Yale University In 1974.and an expandingintercultural own time. and Multiculturalism as Varieties of Civil Participation* JEFFREY ALEXANDER C." Fifteen years later. changing. He is a person who is always in the process of becoming a partof and apartfrom a given culturalcontext. "Multiculturalman. crossover. interin social understanding. "multicultural" community. These juxtaposed quotations suggest more than a shift in intellectual reference from Eriksonianego psychology to Foucaultianpower-knowledge. the editor of the explicitly multiculturalHeath Anthologyof AmericanLiteraturedefended his textbook'srace and gender organizationof literary materialsby insisting. the well-knownfeminist literaryscholarCatherineStimpsondefined multiculturalismin a decidedly different manner. In the course of this transformation. He is very much a formative being.They indicate a sea change connoted compromise. Hyphenation. the same term appearsto be ineluctably connected. delivering her presidentialaddressbefore colleagues at the Modern LanguageAssociation.. not with permeabilityand commonality. 20005-4701 ) American Sociological Association. 1307 New York .New Haven. which transcends the particularitiesof time and place . Yale University.Departmentof Sociology. with the reconstruction." Adler portrayed a protean." He is "capable of major shifts in his frame of reference and embodies the ability to disavow a permanentcharacter.Theorizing the "Modes of Incorporation": Assimilation. CT 06520-8265. and evolutionary. everchanging. "maintainsno clear boundariesbetween himself and the varieties of personal and cultural contexts he may find himself in." At that same meeting. nonjudgmentalway.In the early 1970s. Reading the work of a black woman author. social categories that shape my being" (Kimball 1992:69)... Alexander. In another scholarly presentationat the MLA.." he wrote. she said (1992:43-44." Emphasizing the "psychoculturallyadaptive. a relativizing universalism. a Shakespeareanscholarjustified the need for a multiculturalapproachto literatureby highlighting the boundednessof his own particularidentity."with the deconstructionand deflation of claims to universalism. efforts that began with black Americans and expanded to include other racial minorities and women. Sociological Theory 19:3 November2001 DC Avenue NW. resilient. Washington. USA.. "I know of no standardof judgment . italics added).
indeed. Rather.As Schlesinger sees it." After indicating how this approach casts the debate between multiculturalistsand conservatives in a different light." he (1991:112) decries. Young attacks the very idea of "civic impartiality.. implicitly or explicitly. The groupsthatcompose such a system are. "The cult of ethnicity. Their alternativenormative ideal is a social system of insulated but equally empowered groups who.238 THEORY SOCIOLOGICAL ommend. a liberal democratic polity. suggesting that their movements are. intensifies resentments By "exaggeratingdifferences..' Speaking as a feminist personally involved in the new social movements of the 1970s and 1980s."and he condemns it for "breaking bonds of cohesionthe common ideals.would simply granteach other the right to pursue their distinctive and "different"lifestyles and goals. Kennedy liberal and cosmopolitanthinkerof an earlier day. but also highly revealing in a theoretical sense. in fact. "thecult of ethnicity . On the basis of this empirical description of the contemporarysocial organization.the conservative critics of multiculturalismclaim that this movement has underminedthe solidarity upon which Americandemocracydepends.. Young sees Americanand. Comparingthe contemporaryfocus on difference with incorporative regimes that emphasize assimilation and ethnic-hyphenation.primary identities-she mentions age. "producinga nation of minorities [and] inculcat[ing] the illusion that membershipin one or anotherethnic group is the basic American experience" (p. divisions wherenone existed before. sex. ethnicity. engaged in endless and mortal conflict with each other. I will propose an alternative model of incorporationin contemporarysocial systems. race. that some of the most importantintellectual advocates of multiculturalismactually seem to agree with such critics. "has reversed the movementof Americanhistory.but as a new and more democraticmode of civil integration. 102). RECOGNITIONWITHOUTSOLIDARITY? The most importanttheoretical articulationof the radical multiculturalistposition is Iris MarionYoung's philosophical treatiseJustice and the Politics of Difference. In attackingmulticulturalismas a new form of racial particularism..I will argue that multiculturalismcan be considered. I draw upon Alexander (1998). moderndemocracies are composed simply of social "groups. and normative grounds. 112). common fate-that hold the republic together" (p. I propose to criticize this claim on empirical.common language. According to Kimball (1992:65). I will operationalizeit by presentingthree ideal-typical models of out-groupincorporationinto fragmentedcivil societies. ." and antagonisms"(p. common political institutions. moderndemocraciesas neithercohesive "societies"nor real democracies. ratherthan experiencing some sharedhumanityand solidarity. not as a separatingemphasis on separation. one that refers to the concept of "fragmentedcivil societies. composed of "social relations [which] are tightly defined by dominationand oppression"(Young 1990:32-33). Schlesingerclaims thatthey have actuallyreintroduced he writes.with the sole aim of enlargingthe field for the expression of their identity interests."The notion of an impartial "public" ' For this discussion of Young. theoretical.as Young explains it. "what we are facing is nothing less than the destructionof the fundamentalpremises that underlie . that is. and religion-and they are always and inevitably organized in a hierarchical way. common culture. blames multiculturalactivists for reviving "ancient prejudices" (Schlesinger 1991:15). 138). gender. a once unitednationhas now been torn apart."These groups are defined by particularistic. Rather than seeing these thinkers as responding to continuing inequality and exclusion. destroying the American community. ArthurSchlesinger." It is perplexing.
conservatives recommend and radicals deplore. . My problem with Young's argument is not with its logical coherence but with its empirical validity and its moral status. In order to do so. we must redefine the object in relation to which claims for recognition are made." and "community"to a notion of the "civil sphere. criticism. To the contrary. I understandit as a social sphere or field organized arounda particularkind of solidarity. italics added).much less the simple demandfor deliberation. But isn't "selfishness"-the self-orientationproducedby xenophobic." "common values. we must move from concepts like "society.THEORIZINGTHE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 239 sphere. 106). grouplimited perception-exactly what Young herself has identified as the defining characteristic of contemporary social life? When socially marginalized and culturally polluted groups make claims for recognition and respect. Does Young have a realistic theory of the culture and institutionallife of contemporarysocieties? Of how social movements for justice actually work? Young claims that "a selfish person who refused to listen to the expression of the needs of others will not himself be listened to" (p.' possesses its own culturalcodes and narrativesin a democraticidiom. and respect" (1998:7).2The existence of such a civil sphere suggests tremendousrespect for individual capacities and 2I discuss my own take on this literaturein Alexander (1998). change the minds of the dominantgroups who have made them marginal and polluted? It seems highly unlikely that assertive argumentcould be so sufficient unto itself. bound by collective obligations to all the other individuals who compose this sphere. To the degree this solidary community exists. which are inextricably interwoven. 163). equality. She reads them simply as emphasizing difference and particularity-as identity movements in the contemporarysocial science sense-suggesting that the discourse of a radical. Young argues that recent social movements should be seen in just this way. "does not eliminate or transcendgroup difference" (p. "groupdifferentiationis both an inevitable and a desirable aspect of modern social processes. "The good society. and is visible in historically distinctive sets of interactional practices like civility. In the remainderof this article I will suggest a very differentposition. she asserts. It is not the mere fact of energetic positive self-identification." she writes. "masks the ways in which the particularperspectives of dominant groups claim universality" and actually "helps justify hierarchical decision-making structures.one whose members are symbolically representedas independentand self-motivatingpersons individually responsible for their actions. separatistmulticulturalismis not only rational and morally legitimate but politically effective as well." For this reason. Young links justice instead to the full expression of particularityand difference.An impartialcivil sphere does not homogeneous. at the same time. is patternedby a set of peculiar institutions. 47. it is exhibited by 'public opinion." With the hope for neutralterritoryand common understandingruled out. where I also offer a more formal definition of civil society as "a solidary sphere in which a certain kind of universalizing community comes gradually to be defined and to some degree enforced. yet also as actors who feel themselves. melted social values that necessarily rest upon the kind of undifferentiated. but the constructionof the social context within which claims for recognition are made that determines whether the negative understandingof social differences-"stereotyping" in an earlier vocabulary-can be amelioratedor reversed.justice "requiresnot the melting away of differences. can the simple assertion of these claims. but institutions that promote reproductionof and respectfor group differences without oppression" (p. THE FRAGMENTEDCIVIL SPHERE In orderto substantiatethis claim." While there are famously different approachesto this now highly controversialconcept. in and of itself.most notably legal andjournalistic ones.
Insofar as such solidarity exists-and this is. these tensions. economic institutions. and American societies were. competitionratherthan solidarity. for example. Thinking in functional terms about restrictionson the institutionalizationof early civil societies. Religious organizationsare similarly vertical in their organization.The emergence of this kind of civil realm supersedes.and. the problematicissue-we "see ourselves" in every other member of society. These noncivil spheres did not simply sit outside the boundariesof civil society and conduct with it a courteous and respectful exchange. not only between parentsand childrenbut between husbandand wife. interpenetrating with it in and fateful ways. were to be fully respected and obeyed. autonomousindividuals. but does not necessarily suppress. hierarchical ratherthan egalitarianforms of respect."our actions become simultaneously self-oriented yet controlled in some mannerby extraindividualsolidarity. more restrictive understandingsthat members of these communities have simultaneously held. To the contrary.they invaded civil society from its very inception.or honest enough to participatein the public sphere. For how could we grant a wide scope for freedom of action and expression to unknown others-as the democraticnotion of civil society implies-if we did not.despite the significant horizontalrelationshipsengenderedin Protestant sects. are boundby love and emotional loyalty. The same can be said for the market relations that define capitalism. which emphasize efficiency ratherthanfairness. one may say that civil society remainedonly one sphere among others within a broadersocial system.they have been committed to the highly elitist and exclusionary principlethatonly those bornwithin a faith. in principle.The family.they are organized. we act simultaneouslyas membersof a community and as rational. Imaginatively "takingthe place of the other. French. and among these only those specifically called to God. more particularcommitments we feel as members of primarygroups. English. self-willed. With the institutionalizationof the civil sphere in the formally democratic nation states of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. not civil respect and critical rationality. as the social theory of early liberalism imagined and as contemporaryconservatives would so much like to believe today. familial patriarchyexpressed itself in the widely held belief that women were not autonomous. and are. Such an idealistic vision of a civil social order has been a utopian aspirationof communities in different times and places.trust in theirrationalityand goodwill? This trustin the goodwill of autonomousothersis implied in the paradoxicalpropositionthatthe "free"membersof civil society are at the same time solidaristic with each other. even while it has generated sharp tensions with other.Families. of course.and goods highly valued in these systematic other spheres became translatedinto restrictive and exclusionary requisites for participation in civil society itself. only became more pressing and more centralto the social systems of which they were an increasingly importantpart. once again. also composed of powerful and decidedly noncivil spheres. The force of capitalist economic institutionsencouragedthe belief that failure in the marketsphere revealed a parallel incompetence in democraticlife. Scientific communities also manifest this exclusionary elitism-around truth ratherthan salvation-although they are even more associational and collegial internally. in highly authoritarianrelations. The qualities. hence the long-standing exclusion of the propertyless from full electoral participationand the polluting stereotypes about the irrationalityand even animalityof the "soot covered classes. scientific associations. religious groups.In this way. and geographically bounded regional communities produceddifferentkinds of goods and organizedtheir social relations accordingto different ideals and constraints.rational. For example. relationships. at least historically." It is easy to see the conversion of religious into civil competence in much the same way: .240 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY of rationalityand also a highly idealistic and trustingunderstanding the goodwill of others. moreover. far from being resolved.
qualities of race.To the contrary.or "primordial. They exist in real historical time as part of political regimes that are founded by conquest. language. Jews may have been allowed to practicetheir religion in the privacy of their homes-although sometimes they were not-but "Jewishness"carriedsuch a stigma that Jews were also excluded from most of the central institutions of public life. institutionally.let me affirm that primordialqualities do not exist in and of themselves.these early modern social systems were divided into public and private spheres. Only people of a certain race. But the utopian promises of civil society were also fracturedfor what might be called historical reasons.Any humanor social quality can be treatedin a primordialmanner. religion. 3To avoid any misunderstanding. and physical location.althoughcertain characteristicshave repeatedlyreceived such treatmentin the course of history. in the famous essay Kant wrote in 1784. In fact. to whom they liked. Kant declared. and who have immigrated from a certain part on the globe-only these very special persons are believed to actually possess what it takes to be members of our ideal civil sphere.THEORIZINGTHE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 241 only members in good standing of certified and dominantconfessions could possess the conscience. Civil societies are not some abstract. and it is these that will especially concern us here. .Yet when these same men are in their private spheres-in the church. Qualities are constructedas primordialratherthan being objectively so. the private spheres. "What Is Enlightenment. The founders of societies manifest distinctive primary. sexuality.3In the historical constructionof civil societies. it also testified to its profoundlimitations. class position.psychologically. that they are representedas embodying a higher competence for civil society. and revolution. While this private-publicdistinction served after a fashion to protect the civil sphere from complete affixiation." is that these contradictory dimensions of formally democratic social systems did not. To the contrary. and common sense requiredfor civil society itself." characteristics. and do not. The difficulty for liberal social theory. the functionaland historical particularitiesexpressed in private life invaded and distorted the understanding of civil life-culturally. immigration. religion. or the statethey are not allowed to exercise these civil rights and they do not have to allow others to exercise them in turn. who speak a certain language. the family. These empirical considerations bring us to the crux of the problem for theorists involved in contemporarymulticulturaldebates. express themselves in a transparentway. and in interactionalpractices of everyday life. therefore.Kant insisted. Only they can be trustedto exhibit the sacred qualities for participation.these contradictionswere hidden by constitutional principles and Enlightenmentculture alike. all men are enabled.civil and democraticprinciples prevailed. like race.free-floating space. and in all sorts of decidedly undemocraticways. and nationalorigins. The same contradictionof the purporteduniversality of the public sphere applied to other supposedly private categories. for communalizationin the Weberian. To the contrary. they must obey noncivil authorities in a highly subservient way. Primordialqualities are those that form the basis for the ethical in Hegel's sense. people were relatively "free" to do what they liked. gender. In the latter. For the public world was not nearly so shielded from the vagaries of the private worlds as Enlightenmentand constitutionalthinkingproclaimed. and for the participantsin these "actuallyexisting civil societies. who practice a certain religion. to challenge authority in the name of autonomy and to act according to the principles of universalism. As feminist social theorists were the first to clearly demonstrate."he made this distinction the very basis of his defense of autonomous reason itself. the army.as I have suggested. trust. In the former.one finds that the primordialqualities of these founders are established as the highest criteria of humanity. In the public sphere. ethnicity. gender and sexuality. the business organization. indeed mandated. not only for functional ones.
and electoral change."which suggests a more gemeinschaftlich kind of participation. But incorporationdoes not only occur in the public arenaof social movements. in a sense. These translationsare often punctuatedby efforts at gaining more regulative intervention through court rulings.social movements emerge that issue challenges to the culturallegitimationof exclusion. Insofar as social contain a civil dimension. and thus are worthy of respect. macro arenas like labor markets. Whethersocial movements try to close this gap or exacerbateit. inclusive. gender. instead of the anticivil discourse of repression. The discursive "stuff" of such struggles over exclusion seems invariably to revolve aroundtwo points of contention.and that regulative institutionsbe more responsive. Whether or not members of the core group of society become communicatively convinced-or are regulated to behave as if they are-that subordinategroup members actually possess a common humanity. Such movements demand that out-group identities be reconstructedin terms of the civil discourse of liberty. religion. (1) Is the civil society of a particularnation-statereally autonomous?How "freefloating" can it be vis-a-vis the historical primordialitiesinstantiatedin various forms of national stratification?Or is the nation's civil realm so closely attached 4I choose this as a more value-neutralterm than.and emotional argumentsabout definitions of competence and identity." Incorporation points to the possibility of closthe gap between stigmatized categories of persons-persons whose particularidentiing ties have been relegatedto the invisibility of privatelife-and the utopianpromises that in principle regulate civil life. solidarity. it is a process that proceeds along extraordinarilycomplex paths. in the Durkheimiansense of Parsons and Shils. cultural. they make their insistent demands vis-a-vis the imminent possibilities of this incorporative process. I choose incorporationto describe the accession of out-groupsto emphasize a movement "into"society. for example. ratherthan simply the assumptionof greaterpower by a dominated group. administrativedecrees.a trueopening up thatinvolves something like authenticrecognition. such as intermarriage. about symbolic representationsof the primordial qualities of dominantand excluded groups. efforts that depend upon resources of a more coercive nature. "inclusion. criticizing stigmatizing interactionsand challenging distorted institutionsof communicationand corrupt institutions of regulation. These "demands"of out-grouprepresentativesand social movement leaders should be conceived in the first instance not as connected with force but rather as efforts at of persuasion. issues that obsess out-groupchallengers and core group members alike. membersof their core groups always face the imminent systems questionof whetherin regardto a particular categoryof excludedpersons-whether defined class. more integratedmembers. is critical to the 4 process thatcan be called "incorporation. "translations" the discourse of civil society that social movements broadcastvia communicative institutionsto other. extending from micro to interactions. .they are. and attentive. by Should the incorporationof this particulargroup into civil society proceed? As intensive symbolic and materialconflicts develop between core and out-group.At the same time. region.242 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY VARIETIESOF CIVIL INCORPORATION: AND INCORPORATION RESISTANCEIN CIVIL SOCIETIES In the 300 years since the first democratic institutionalizationsof civil society emerged. and respect among membersof society.that fictional and factual media representationsof out-group activities be more sympathetic and evenhanded. or national origin-this gap should be closed. race. These have not only been political struggles for power but legal. principles that imply equality.that interactionbetween core and out-groupmembersbe more respectful. the crippling of its utopian promises has generated continuous struggle.
to "pass"into public life. Assimilation is possible to the degree that socialization channels exist that can provide "civilizing" or "purifying"processes-through interaction. even when such democraticanswershave been given. impartingto them the competences required for participationin democratic and civil life. they have been formulatedand institutionalizedin three very differentideal-typicalways-as assimilation. this overarchingcultural frameworkhas changed surprisinglylittle over centuries of time.In real civil societies. From the perspective of the formal promises of civil society. The discourse is conducted in reference to a culture structurethat specifies desirable and undesirablequalities in terms of actors' motives. . of course. Cf. their relations. as I have indicated. As this notion of passing suggests.THEORIZINGTHE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 243 to primordialunderstandingsthat it should be regardednot as providing a counterweight to stratificationbut. this assimilating purification process provides for the membersof out-groupsa civil education. civil 5This notion of civil impartiality as merely a legitimation of primordialityis exactly the claim made by the radical multiculturalistsI discussed above. Enlightenmentanswers to this pair of fundamentaland fateful questions are straightforward. such incorporation is not merely the result of regulative institutions guaranteeingexcluded groups civil treatmentin a proceduralsense. honest or deceitful.postmodern point of view. it is also.and cultural reasons. In assimilative incorporation. and often encouraged. open or secretive. and often from the perspective of core group members themselves. (2) How should the identities of outsiders be understoodin relation to the dualities of the discourse of civil society? For example. in the article that accompanies the present one in this journal. such morally correct answers have not been fully forthcoming. For a combinationof systemic. in a distinctive way. much more symbolically complex. and the kinds of institutionsthey form. 6The discourse about the qualities of outsiders and insiders is. are they rational or irrational. it is importantto define assimilationvery precisely. Assimilation: Separating Persons from Qualities Assimilation has been by far the most common way in which the historical expansion and revision of the civil sphere have taken place.is that. or transformation. ethnic hyphenation.and multiculturalism. or mass mediated representation-that allow persons to be separatedfrom their primordialqualities.education. It is not the qualities themselves that are purified or accepted but the persons who formerly. from our contemporary. for example. Because civil competences are always interlardedwith particularidentities. autonomousor dependent?6 The democratic. however. however.What is particularlyinterestingfrom a sociological point of view.as well as for moral ones. instead. on how the civic competences of core groups are relatedto the abilities of subordinateones. The communal life of societies is much too layered and culturally textured for that. its limitation in both an empirical and moral sense. This is the genius of assimilation. As we have seen. moreover. Alexander and Smith (1993).members of primordiallydenigratedgroups are allowed. any mode of incorporationmust focus on the public constructionof public identities. institutional. Assimilation is an incorporativeprocess that achieves this extension. and often still privately. simply as a legitimation of it?5 that The othermode of argumentation continually surfaces connects to but is from the first. bear them. Assimilation takes place when out-group members are allowed to enter fully into civil life on the condition thatthey shed their polluted primordialidentities. For comparative and empirical reasons. therefore.
.learning how to embody and express those qualities that allow core group members persuasively and legitimately to exhibit civil competence. rather. and thought. Civic education is not an opening up to the abstractqualities of Enlightenmentrationality per se.institutionalizedvalues. with its split between public and private. indeed. rather.formally universalistic way. When Eugen Weber (1976) wrote that the French Third Republic turned "peasantsinto Frenchmen. neitherpracticednor understoodin such a purely abstract. but they can now be left behind at the door of private life. They can change from being "different"and "foreigners"to being "normal"and "one of us. in fact.he himself never historicized this approach. The qualities of these groups remain stigmatized. those who carry them privately can venture forth into the public exhibiting civic competence in a very different way. language. as whites ratherthan as blacks. What they are learning is not civil competence per se but how to express civil competence in a differentkind of primordialway. from backstage. As ErvingGoffman (1956) and suggested. therefore. religion. thatprimordialcharacteristics not belie the substantivevalidity do 7To speak of "exhibiting"or "manifesting"civil qualities suggests not only a theoreticalemphasis on self and agency but a sense of the complexities of the self. it fails entirely to challenge the myth of civility.244 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY competence is. as Protestants ratherthan as Catholics or Jews. particularlyby Parisianelites.of course.which when properlyexhibited gave them a newfound status.allows such assimilative transformation occur vis-a-vis every conceivable primordialquality.Ratherthanviewing the normativecriteriamediatinginteractionsculturallyor comparatively."he was talking about exactly such assimilation. as Anglos ratherthan as Mexicans. Neither did he relate his notion of the fragmentedself to the notion of the fragmentedcivil sphere. assimilative incorporationis paradoxical. Members of ruralFrance learned how to manifest the qualities of ParisianFrenchness.the qualities thatdefine "foreign" and "different"do not change. With assimilation-and this is the crucial point-the split between privateand public remainsin place. On the one hand. a social respect that allowed them to be much more thoroughlyincorporatedinto the civil and democraticlife of France.While Goffman's dramaturgical sociology of public interactionhas extraordinary relevance to the interactionaldimensions of civil exclusion and incorporation. The qualities of peasant life. leaving in place the illusion.qualities of lifestyle. because the polluted qualities of stigmatized group membershipare even more firmly restrictedto the private sphere. allowed to shed these qualities in theirpublic lives.7 Assimilation is historically the first and sociologically the most "natural" response to the contradictionbetween public civility and privateparticularitythat has markedmodern because incorpomass civil societies from their very beginnings. gender. in and of themselves.persons whose identities are polluted in the private sphere actually are learning how to exhibit new and different primordial qualities in the public sphere. From a moral point of view. this split becomes sharper and more unyielding. actors generally try to "present" only those elements of their selves that embody social values. It is always and everywhere filtered throughthe primordialitiesof the core group. as it were.as middle class ratherthan working class persons. that is. so cherished by members of already "transparent" establishedcore groups. It is the most "natural" ration can be achieved without appearingto challenge the established primordialdefinitions of civic competence. bearing. its cultural and constructedcharacter. Not only ethto and language but the public identities of stigmatizedmembersof religious and even nicity race. Goffman tended to describe them as generic to human behavior as such. they make publicly available only those parts of their identities that they hope will be regardedby interactional partnersor observers as typifying dominant.In assimilative incorporation. one whose relation to social values must be conceptualized more fully thanany simple notion of value internalization exteralization implies. and sexual groups can be reconstructedin an assimilative way. civic education means. the persons who are membersof foreign and different out-groupsare. as northwestEuropeansratherthan as southernor easternEuropeans. Insofaras assimilative processes occur. remainedhighly stigmatized by the core groups of France. This frontstagebehavior may be markedly different." The plasticity of identity.
In the name of threatenedprimordialgroups. understanding. Mosse 1964). Conceived as "ethnic"ratherthan "foreign.like assimilation.not to the emergence of cross-group identities but to the even further separation of primordialidentities. at the same time. On the other hand.the emergence of ethnicity can be said to "hyphenate" primordialidentities of the core group.hybrid discourses can emerge from the symbolic codes and narratives of primordial groupings that were once entirely separated. The paradox is that precisely by failing to challenge negative representationsof out-group qualities.multiculturalcivil society. In this the manner. the anticivil narrowingsof national communities can be demystified only by moving beyond .THEORIZINGTHE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 245 of the civil sphere.and emotional bonding that lead to increasing between members of core and out-groups. these particularitiesis viewed more positively as well.to the contrary. which provide opportunitiesfor dialogue. These same dynamics."they are more toleratedin both private and public life.g. the possibility of forming stronger and deeper cross-group bonds that bridge. In social systems that have weaker and less autonomouscivil spheres.and even more so with assimilation. It suggests. rather. by keeping them private and outside of the public sphere."less dichotomized direction.significant stigmatizationremains. For this reason. Outsider particularitiesare viewed in less one-sidedly negative ways. eventually even to the creation of a much less contradictory. social movements arise that demand a more restrictive identification of civil competence and even the destructionof civil society itself (e. sharply narrowingthe range of primordialidentities that are available for expressing civil competence in a positively evaluated way. At the same time. Hyphenation:Neutralizing Negative Qualities by Symbolic Association with the Core In its ideal-typical form. it is precisely this failure to challenge civil transparency that allows out-groups to be massively incorporatedin an assimilative way. however. also can trigger reactions that close civil society down. this instability can lead not to a widening but to a narrowing. the instability of assimilation can push it in a more "ethnic. confirming the substantiverestrictionsand debilitating contradictionsof the promise of civil society. suggesting some fluidity in the interchangeof primordialqualities and. This positive development involves a double movement. however.At the interactional level. Culturally. The dynamics that produce it and that follow in its wake can lead to a more independent civil realm and more recognition for outsider primordialqualities. It is precisely because differential valuation remains that hyphenation. The more fluid interchangecan take place at various levels of civil society. does not in any sense suggest the equal valuationof core and outsiderqualities. however. is that its ambition does not extend to redefining outsider qualities as much as to allowing members of denigrated groups to be separatedfrom them. or transcend.a movement of relative reevaluationthat allows more fluidity and transferability between primordialcategories that remain more and less polluted representations of civic competence. rates of friendship and intermarriage The notion of ethnic hyphenation. is not only an ambiguousbut a highly unstable social form. contributingto the creation of a common collective identity that may be neither core nor peripheralin itself. assimilation reproduces demeaning stereotypes in its own way. In social systems with relatively stronger civil societies. Multiculturalism:Purifying Subaltern Qualities and Pluralizing the Civil Sphere The moral and sociological "problem"with hyphenation. new sites for the public presentation of self can emerge.. assimilation is an unstable social process.
Insofar as outsider qualities are seen not as stigmatizing but as variationson civil andutopianthemes. discursive conflicts that are mediated by the multicultural mode of incorporation revolve around efforts to purify the actual primordial qualities themselves.multiculturalismexpands the range of imagined life experiences for the members of a society's core groups. "Difference"and particularitybecome sources of cross-group identification.Instead of trying to purify the characters of denigratedpersons. In doing so.the universal is particularized.Insofaras such understandings achieved.It is set in motion by discursive and organizational conflicts over incorporation. the particularis universalized. They are folded into the culture of authenticity that communitarianphilosophers like Charles Taylor (1989) have described as one of the most distinctive achievements of modernity. even minoritylanguages and peripheralareas of the national territory-all these primordialqualities are as open to reinterpretation representationsof the "sacred"qualities of civility. however. Because there is a dramaticdecrease in the negative identification of previously subordinated. While multiculturalincorporationremains in its infancy. the sharp split between private and public realms recedes. Noncore primordialitiesbecome publicly displayed. It is the qualities of being woman.the ambition is to achieve-to performand to display-what once appearedto be an ascriptivelyrooted. In societies that have experienced intense racial and ethnic conflicts.conflicts that participantsbelieve can be resolved only by more successfully legitimating their different qualities. In contrastwith assimilation. of being handicappedthat core group and out-groupmembers struggle to understand and experience. and. a universalizing movement toward the recognition of particularitybegins to appear. they will be valued in themselves. the outlines of what it might entail for democratic societies are beginning to become clear.increasingly common experiences are created across the particularcomWilhelmDilthey. In multiculturalism. When universal solidarity is deepened in this way. hyphenationto a mode of incorporation Only very recently in democraticsocieties has there emerged such a third. This is what the "recognition of difference.The rhetoricgeneratedby this new model of incorporationstill focuses on whetheror not civil society can be truly universal and separatedfrom the primordialrestrictions of particulargroups.the ambition of out-groups is to replace ascriptive identification with status based on achievement. it opens up the possibility not just for acceptance but for underare standing. and have deepened civil society by hyphenatingcore group identity with primordialitiesof different kinds.In assimilation and hyphenation. Because particulardifferences do not have to be eliminatedor denied in orderfor this kind of incorporationto be gained. munitiesthatcompose civil society." an importantideological slogan as well as a philosophical idea. means in sociological terms.andeven with hyphenation.Yet it is also very much an empirical process. in this apparentlyparadoxical manner. peripheralnational origins.or . and this possibility continues to be discussed in terms of "purifying"or reconstructingout-groupsin terms of the discourse of liberty ratherthan repression. Race. primordialidentity. incorporationis not celebrated as inclusion but as the achievement of diversity. In a multiculturalcommunity. and is more than ever subject to strenuousdebate. can never surpass the investigator's own argued that social scientific "understanding" experience of his own life. particularity and difference become the guiding themes of the day.The greatphilosopherof hermeneutics. rigid distinctions between core and out-group members break down.246 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY that seems differentnot only in degree but in kind. "multicultural" possibility for expanding and revising the civil sphere. marginalizedreligions. In assimilation and hyphenation. and notions of particularityand universality become much more thoroughlyintertwined. of being nonwhite. Multiculturalismcan be understoodas a moral preference. subordinated genders and repressedsexualities. of being homosexual or lesbian. In multiculturalism.
Dubois Professor of the Humanities at Harvard. B. and broadcast widely. Every black American text must confess to a complex ancestry. Share it. not one nationality's. E.they have become fracturedand displayed in increasingly hybrid terms. There can be no doubt thatwhite texts informand influence black texts (and vice versa). (1992:197) Yet Gates also arguesthatblack literatureis.defends his efforts to reveal black literature'sdistinctive qualities.. in some streets:culturally. Take it. Americansdisplay ethnicity "symbolically.. a nationalSpanishlanguagemagazine. and recanonized. Multiculturalismhas a separatistcurrent (if I'm Latino and you're not. and with considerable kicking and screaming. and their critical interpreters.identities aspects of these identities begin to be embracedby core group members themselves.instead of submission and assimilation. Intermarriage also steeply risen (Farley 1999). you can't use my secret handshake). it's yours. W. Indian. necessary for survival-literally.. blackness is vigorously expressed in the world of fashion. and religious ties are transvaluated. and some of it is.our efforts to define a black American canon are often decried as racist. not one gender's. are not meant to refute the soundness of these gestures of integration.(ibid. alas. no one's. Students of contemporaryethnicity have discovered that ethnicity is increasingly becoming an identity that is selectively pursued. It's culture as integration. from the struggle to neutralize and invert its negative racial identification.culture is no one's hegemony. It also has an integrationistcurrent. Long after white American literaturehas been anthologized and canonized. race-blindprogramof the movement for civil rights. The attempts of black scholars to define a black American canon. often see their own efforts in a much more universalizing and incorporativelight. and models of male and female rates have beauty have dramaticallycrossed once forbidding racial lines.in some salons.the editorof Mas. neitherparticularistnor separatedfrom the wider democratic culture. and homosexual literatures have emerged. or "essentialist.) A similarperspectiveis expressedby EnriqueFernandez. have assumed influential intellectual positions on the American cultural scene." Attempts to derive theories about our literarytraditionfrom the black tradition . As subordinatedracial.themselves typically members of these once denigrated groups. the centrality of canonical bodies of art is being displaced. whereas the postwar generationof Jewish artists and entertainers. Stanley Lieberson. but also one white and black.however. from Saul Bellow to Milton Berle. not one class's.. so that a thoroughlyintegratedcanon of Americanliteratureis not only politically sound it is intellectually sound as well . were intent on translatingtheir particularexperiences 8The extraordinarilypublic debates about multiculturalismand the literary canon have so politicized this subject that it is almost inevitably employed as an example to cast multiculturalismin a separatist... has been forged. not one race's.. "Black is beautiful"was not a slogan that emerged from the assimilative.8 Similarly. In American universities and critical circles.As social observers such as HerbertGans. hispanic. On the one hand.. nationalist. and to derive indigenous theories of interpretation from within this canon.. A wide range of developments over the last two decades of American society can be understoodin terms of this multiculturalframe. If it's human. Henry Louis Gates. separatist. In that current.. are often greeted by our colleagues in traditionalliteraturedepartmentsas misguided desire to secede from a union that only recently. because earlier models of incorporationinto civil society were already beginning to take effect."because it is consideredinterestingand attractive ratherthan because it is treatedby selves and others as an unchangeableand essential part of identity.increasas particularities ingly prestigious bodies of women's. As communicativeinstitutionsbroadcastnarrativesby "minority" writersthat make their own sacredand cast theirdistinctiveparticularities heroic protagonists. Jr.And that means enlarging the barrierserected by chauvinism. It was expressed strongly and openly. Today. (1992:197) . black.THEORIZING THE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 247 subaltern.one high and low . It was an idea that arose later. indicating that civil interactionhas brokendown some of the most restrictive barriersof private life.fragmenting of light. in fact. Rock it. The leading critical interpreters their community'sown literature. and Mary Watershave shown. Mix. gender.
Only when solidary feelings have been extended significantly to persons can they finally begin to be extended to their qualities.and in real historicaltime particularcommunitiesparticipate in all three of these processes at the same time. Belmont. time. I began this article by demonstratinghow multiculturalism often fundamentallymisis understood. contemporarieslike Philip Roth and Woody Allen publicly display their religious identities. including not just racial but linguistic minorities(Horowitz 1992:17). Porter. and institutionalposition also complicate the differentdimensions along which incorporationproceeds within any particularcommunity. Peter S. as members of a "communityof color. to the contrary. The millions of immigrantswho have legally enteredAmericancivil society since then have radically changed the racial complexion of the United States. feelings of common humanity. edited by LarryA. By placing this new and challenging model of interrelationinto the broader frameworkof civil society.Not only social conservativesbut radicalmulticultural intellectualsdescribe it as a process that is organized aroundseparationand difference ratherthan inclusion and solidarity. it discardedthe nationalorigins criteriathat in the 1920s had been institutedto and protectcore groupprimordiality to keep the assimilationmodel firmly in place. CA: WadsworthPublishing. rights but collective identities. non-Jewish terms. Multiculturalismthus represents not the diminution but the strengtheningof the civil sphere.Whenaccess to the ballotbox is proserving efforts aremade to ensurethatvoting will allow the expressionnot only of individual tected. "Beyond CulturalIdentity:Reflections on Culturaland MulticulturalMan. Members of the American black community continue to strive for assimilation and to be regardedin thoroughly nonracial ways. Economic divisions. not diminishing. adding a new range of particularisticsymbol roles for Jews and non-Jews alike. it is importantto recall Max Weber'sadmonitionthat the empiricaldistinctions have been emphasizedfor analyticalreasons. and interactive ways has carved out a domain in which collective intertwined. 262-380 in InterculturalCommunication:A Reader. In practice.I have tried to suggest.and other disparities of place. proceduresarenow put into place with the express intentionof pre"authentic" particular and culturalcommunities.and multiculturalism blend into one another. territorialseparations. The mannerin which the regulatoryinstitutionsof civil society enforcethese shifts in public opinion has begun to change in complementaryways.hyphenation.248 SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY into universal. a sphere that in cultural."Pp. . even as they become "African-Americans" developing hyphenatedidentities and. institutional. and by connecting it with other modes of incorporation. When legal rightsareextendedfor fuller civil participation.Multiobligationsand individualautonomyareprecariouslybut fundamentally culturalismis a project that can be attemptedonly in a situationof increasing. Amaovar and Richard E. CONCLUSION:ANALYTICCLARITYAND THE MESSINESS OF EMPIRICALREALITY I Because the "varietiesof civil incorporation" have presentedin this essay are ideal types. When the United States Congress radically opened up immigrationflows in the mid-1960s. assimilation. 1974.that multiculturalismsits between difference and solidarity as these terms are commonly understood.Multiculturalismframes a situationin which groups publicly assert the right to be admired for being different. adding demographicfuel to the to struggle to allow incorporation proceed in a more multiculturalway." strive to maintain and restore the distinctively different aspects of their racial culture and demand that it be recognized in a multiculturalway. REFERENCES Adler.
W. Horowitz and GerardNoiriel. 1989. Henry Louis. Reynolds. 1999. Schlesinger. Roger. Eugen. Iris Marion. New York:Dell. 1992. 85-128 in Diversity and Its Discontents. Mosse. "P.edited by Paul A. New York:W. edited by Neil J. 322-25 in Debating P.C. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press.C. Berman.60 in Debating P. Sources of the Self. "The Discourse of American Civil Society: A New Proposal for CulturalStudies.C. Berman. Donald L." Theoryand Society 22:151-207. Alexander. New York:Anchor. Gates. Kimball.: The Controversyover Political Correctness on College Campuses. Catherine R. 1870-1914.London: Sage.: The Controversy over Political Correctnesson College Campuses." Pp. Peasants into Frenchmen: The Modernization of Rural France. New York:Dell. 1992."Pp. 1992. The Crisis of GermanIdeology: IntellectualOrigins of the ThirdReich. "Racial Issues: Recent Trends in Residential Patterns. Smelser and Jeffrey C. New York:Dell. Erving. and GroupRelations in France and America.Enrique. Pp. Anyway?" Pp. Presentation of Self in EverydayLife.C. 1976."Pp. 3-35 in Immigrants Horowitz. 1992.: The Controversyover Political Correctnesson College Campuses. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Fernandez." Pp. Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. edited by Jeffrey C.: The Controversyover Political Correctnesson College Campuses. 61-84 in Debating P.edited by Paul A. "On Differences: Modern Language Association Presidential Address 1990. George. 1956. 1964. 1993.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press. "Whose Canon Is It. Alexander.THEORIZINGTHE "MODES OF INCORPORATION" 249 . New York:Dell." 1-20 in Real Civil Societies.. Jeffrey C. Farley. Taylor. Norton. 1990. New York:New York University Press. "The Peripheryv. II. "Civil Society I. II: Constructingan Empirical Concept from Normative Controversies and Historical Transformations.C.edited by Paul A. 40. . Berman.Jr. the Center:The MLA in Chicago. Goffman. 1992. and Philip Smith.Charles. Stimpson.edited by David L. 1991. Jr. Rider. 1998. Weber. Arthur. 190-200 in Debating P. Stanford: StanfordUniversity Press. Young. Berman."Pp. New York:Grossett and Dunlap. edited by Paul A. "Immigration in TwoDemocracies: French and AmericanExperience. The Disuniting of America. Alexander.