Oldenberg1989: Oldenberg, R. (1989).
The great good place. Chapter 2, pages 20-42. [available
here∞]
Discussion leader/summarizer: Paul Resnick
Key Points/Claims
The summary at the end says it well:
"Third places exist on neutral ground and serve to level their guests to a condition of social equality. Within these places, conversation is the primary activity and the major vehicle for the display and appreciation of human personality and individuality. Third places are taken for granted and most have a low profile. Since the formal institutions of society make stronger claims on the individual, third places are normally open in the off hours, as well as at other times. The character of a third place is determined most of all by its regular clientele and is marked by a playful mood, which contrasts with people's more serious involvement in other spheres. Though a radically different kind of setting from the home, the third place is remarkably similar to a good home in the psychological comfort and support that it extends."
Neutral ground requires that people
not get "uncomfortably tangled" in one another's lives.
The leveling of status distinctions is experienced as a joy both by those of higher and lower status in the outside world.
The rules of conversation taken from Sedgwick are quite interesting:
- Remain silent your share of the time (more rather than less)
- Be attentive while others are talking
- Say what you think but be careful not to hurt others' feelings.
- Avoid topics not of general interest.
- Say little or nothing about yourself personally, but talk about others there assembled.
- Avoid trying to instruct.
- Speak in as low a voice as will allow others to hear.
In order to be accepted, "one simply keeps reappearing and tries not to be obnoxious."
Plainness provides "protective coloration" so that the place does not attract too many transient visitors.
Critique
This is an interesting metaphor for online communities. Especially the notion that it is a neutral ground without entanglements or implied obligations is at odds with the community metaphor. The requirement that interaction is always playful may preclude more task-focused kinds of interaction spaces. For different kinds of online interaction environments, one or the other may be more useful.
The argument doesn't account very well for competition between the third place and the home. I suspect that many regulars find that the third place provides psychological comforts absent at home, and that this substitution may allow home life to deteriorate, especially if so much time is spent there that it draws time needed for investment elsewhere.
Connections with other readings, ideas, etc.
It will be interesting to compare and contrast Sedgwick's rules of conversation to general netiquette and norms that have emerged in particular on-line communities. Certainly lots of online communities help to establish trust and intimacy by individuals revealing information about themselves.
How well do the online communities you've observed or participated in fit the metaphor of "third place"?
The point about plainness (low profile) seems important. If there are attractors other than ongoing connection with the regulars, then people will come just for that. We'll talk later in the course about barriers to entry.