The Presentation of Self of Everyday Life by Erving Goffman discussed the importance of human social interaction and how it is inconsistent due to certain attributes comparing it to a Theatrical Performance , as though we take on a variety of roles, observing each other constantly, judging each other. It is difficult for an individual to be themselves because of this feeling of a present audience, unfamiliar settings, attention to appearance, inconsistent manner etc.

Goffman labels the actors Front as the individuals main image or impression to give off to their observers or audience. One performance I see and participate in everyday is digital communication. Whether it be through texting, Facebook message, tinder, twitter, .. everything is easier to communicate through these digital mediums because of the lack of Front. There is no Theatrical role to attain when the script is completely virtual. This is why I often argue that in terms of the Self (no performances involved) It is much more comfortable communicating through virtual interaction. . in order to create a social breach in physical space I chose Written Communication that took place with human to human contact. I sat next to each of my Subjects and passed a piece of paper back and forth as if it were a text message travelling through time and space but we made eye contact every time. I considered this a hack of human to human contact because I allowed them to temporarily un-adhere to the Theater of Real life and break conventions.

As far as what was written, I tried my best to break hack breach these conventions as well. My subjects each have known me as a silly friend who would not normally write them a note unless it was a letter for serious means. “Tell me about your Family”

“Are you Happy” some friends gave me silly and sarcastic answers and chose not to break their front.

— my playful friend

— i think he was high

— thought this was just another one of “my games”

I hacked my own experiment by looking for some subjects who I really thought might have something to say had I given them the chance. I wasn’t really looking for anything groundbreaking, but I was really looking for the outcome of my experiment to contain more depth than some giggling and note passing. Some conversations turned awkward and emotional.

— a great friend whom I occasionally sleep with

— a best friend who secretly intimidates me

— accidently broke his heart

— we both have a lot of experience with prescription drugs.. He made me a little uncomfortable. (my own experiment hacked!)

My last Conversation was with a Tinder Match who was willing enough to meet me in physical space.. This was unexpected and very breaching itself. It really enforced my initial challenge of relying on comfort ability in digital communications since that is all we had made until our brief human contact and Written communication. I may have pushed him to meet very early in our ‘relationship’ but thanks to virtual technology and connections I found he has similar interests wanted to help me out with my experiment.

I chose this form of documentation (writing) because It feels true to the Subject (person).. The Viewer can see where we confronted each others formal or informal roles. I can review each written piece despite what was going on in that moment of time and see what we each independently thought about the conversation…. or the experiment. The outcome is that some participants were willing to break their front during our in-person Written Communication, and some were hesitant.

“And to the degree that the individual maintains a show before others that he himself does not believe, he can come to experience a special kind of alienation from self and a special kind of wariness of others.”

Erving Goffman