When I first started reading “social problems,” I must admit,
I felt a bit like my intelligence was being insulted, but it got better, and
hopefully will continue to do so. We
have been discussing examples how we have constructed the structures that lead
to social problems throughout this semester, so discussing the social
construction of social problems seemed like nothing new. I feel that Best’s description of the social
construction of problems deals primarily with social movements, and misses some
of the cultural and structural forces out of which social movements arise. Of course, social movements construct and
frame topics they are passionate about as social movements, but social
movements themselves arrrise from society’s structures and culture. This may be
where the book is headed, but as of now, Best has not dove into the fact that
the structures from which social movements arise are themselves social
constructions constantly created and recreated by members of society. One argument I did find compelling was Best’s
discussion of how if claimants keep saying the same things their message will
become commonplace and boring, meaning that social movements must constantly repackage
and reframe their claims in order to keep them relevant. I also liked his ideas
about the dynamic nature of the construction of social problems in a dialectic
between groups of claimants, the media, policy makers, and the general public. The
idea of an evolution of social movements made me think of some discussions I have
had in Sociology of Religion about Weber. We talked about how social movements,
and the social problems they construct, begin with idealism, emotionality,
drive, and gusto, but become hollow and bureaucratized as soon as they are institutionalized,
and end up losing sight of their original value-oriented goals. In light of
weber’s critique it seems that social movements must remain dynamic and agile not
only to keep the public interested, but to keep themselves interested.
No comments:
Post a Comment