Tuesday, October 6, 2009

"The Strength of Weak Ties" as a symptom of postmodernism?

In reading Granovetter's piece on the strength of weak ties, I was reminded of the qualities Jameson uses to describe postmodernism. First, Granovetter's focus of 'weak ties,' or superficial relationships, is very reminiscent of the postmodern quality of depthlessness. Weak ties (or acquaintances rather than friendships) lack emotional depth and complexity, and thus parallel the metaphorical and physical depthlessness of Jameson's argument. A tie to a superficial acquaintance is as flat and arguably as unreadable as the facade of SOM's Wells Fargo Court. Further, these 'weak ties' relate to the loss of affect, because of they lack true emotional meaning. Granovetter does not discuss the character of people's relationship to each other, further than quantifying them as 'strong' or 'weak' and speaking of them in relation to the people's common acquaintances. Granovetter even seems to dismiss with the 'subject' in his essay by speaking about people as units (A, B, C...) that can easily be tabulated, mapped, and swapped one for another. He does not address individualism and subjective difference when describing the failure of communities to mobilize due to fragmentation. In this sense, though Granovetter isn't advocating the loss of the subject, he paints a picture of social relations that seems to leave little room for the subject. Like Jameson's discussion of postmodernism in relation to capitalism, Granovetter discusses social connection as tied to economic ventures--he discusses at length immediate and extended networks as a means to get a job--as if economic incentives drive the upkeep of most social links. I find Granovetter's argument compelling, if somewhat unsettling. I feel that this is somewhat because of his scope: he does not interest himself much with 'strong ties', because of the specific thrust of his argument. However, with the general discounting of meaningful relationships in relation to the transmission of information, Granovetter paints a picture of human relationships as largely depthless, mathematical, and homogenous that are of use in furthering specific goals, rather than being meaningful in themselves.

No comments: