"Can I have my hand back when you're done with it?"
Over the years, I have experienced many handshakes. Most, generally last from 2 to 4 seconds long, are firm yet not overbearing, and seldom stray too far from the normal expectation of a hand shake. So when someone breaks those norms, it immediately causes the receiver of the nonconforming handshake to question what they just experienced. As we discussed during lecture, a breach of etiquette, such as receiving an atypical handshake can cause embarrassment for either the receiver or by the receiver to the initiator, which then must be evaluated and resolved to move on or explain what just happened.
Goffman outlined the “Three Levels of Responsibility” where we compensate for instances of losing face through a corrective process to explain, excuse or understand the aberration. At the first level, a simple “Faux Paus” or innocent action outside of the “social rules” may have been committed. The second level, however involves “malicious intent” committed to cause someone to lose face intentionally. The third level is “incidental” where one may do something in spite of the outcome. In the situation of an abnormal handshake, the level of losing face can fall within the bounds of all 3 types. Someone may not realize they are shaking hands poorly (Faux Paus), or they may be trying to belittle the receiver by shaking too hard (Malicious Intent), or they may grasp someone’s hand in an exaggerated manner without a care about how the other feels (Incidental).
I decided to try a “breaching experiment” to see how others would react to an “out of the ordinary” handshake. I chose to focus on grasping someone’s hand in a normal style handshake and not let go. I have had this happen to me, and after the “normal” period of 2-4 seconds have passed; each second becomes a struggle to figure out what the other person is doing. You struggle to not forcefully pull away as it may seem that you are being rude, and you don’t want the initiator to feel like they have overstepped themselves either; in other words, you’re trying to help them, as well as yourself to save face as Goffman would point out.
I wanted to see if others would feel like something was out of the ordinary with a non-ending handshake. I planned on grasping and holding on until the recipient was forced to make a concentrated effort to pull their hand away. Of 5 people tested, all of them immediately let their hands relax and began to pull away after the normal period of 2-4 seconds had expired. When I felt this I slightly tightened my grip and held on. Immediately there was a slight look of bewilderment in their eyes, however they continued to shake hands and re-initiated a stronger grip almost anticipating that I was about to make a point about something because I wouldn’t let go. Once again after approximately several seconds later, they again tried to end the handshake with a bit more force. All but one person physically pulled their hand away and looked a bit confused. The sole person that did not pull their hand away finally made a comment asking if I could return their hand to them when I was done with it. In this breaching experiment, I used people I knew and when it was done explained to them what I was doing. Each of them found it funny, but also mentioned that they had felt uncomfortable and didn’t really know how to react.
As Goffman would explain in his “Dramaturlogical theory”, we each develop characters for ourselves to cope with numerous situations. When one of those situations is breached, no matter how small, it causes us to draw upon another character, if one is available. In the case of the handshaking, while I had breached a “gesture norm” four of the five people did not have another character “Line” to rely on. They were bewildered. The fifth joked about it falling back on a character personality to point out or challenge my “Faux Paus” rather than ignore it.
While this experiment was done in a social setting among friends, I have to wonder how in a business situation, this would be perceived. In watching the presidential debates, I couldn’t help but to notice the intentionally extended duration of the candidate’s handshakes and the practice of grasping the others elbow and not releasing until they were finished speaking. I wonder if Goffman would interpret this as Malicious or Incidental in nature?
Goffman outlined the “Three Levels of Responsibility” where we compensate for instances of losing face through a corrective process to explain, excuse or understand the aberration. At the first level, a simple “Faux Paus” or innocent action outside of the “social rules” may have been committed. The second level, however involves “malicious intent” committed to cause someone to lose face intentionally. The third level is “incidental” where one may do something in spite of the outcome. In the situation of an abnormal handshake, the level of losing face can fall within the bounds of all 3 types. Someone may not realize they are shaking hands poorly (Faux Paus), or they may be trying to belittle the receiver by shaking too hard (Malicious Intent), or they may grasp someone’s hand in an exaggerated manner without a care about how the other feels (Incidental).
I decided to try a “breaching experiment” to see how others would react to an “out of the ordinary” handshake. I chose to focus on grasping someone’s hand in a normal style handshake and not let go. I have had this happen to me, and after the “normal” period of 2-4 seconds have passed; each second becomes a struggle to figure out what the other person is doing. You struggle to not forcefully pull away as it may seem that you are being rude, and you don’t want the initiator to feel like they have overstepped themselves either; in other words, you’re trying to help them, as well as yourself to save face as Goffman would point out.
I wanted to see if others would feel like something was out of the ordinary with a non-ending handshake. I planned on grasping and holding on until the recipient was forced to make a concentrated effort to pull their hand away. Of 5 people tested, all of them immediately let their hands relax and began to pull away after the normal period of 2-4 seconds had expired. When I felt this I slightly tightened my grip and held on. Immediately there was a slight look of bewilderment in their eyes, however they continued to shake hands and re-initiated a stronger grip almost anticipating that I was about to make a point about something because I wouldn’t let go. Once again after approximately several seconds later, they again tried to end the handshake with a bit more force. All but one person physically pulled their hand away and looked a bit confused. The sole person that did not pull their hand away finally made a comment asking if I could return their hand to them when I was done with it. In this breaching experiment, I used people I knew and when it was done explained to them what I was doing. Each of them found it funny, but also mentioned that they had felt uncomfortable and didn’t really know how to react.
As Goffman would explain in his “Dramaturlogical theory”, we each develop characters for ourselves to cope with numerous situations. When one of those situations is breached, no matter how small, it causes us to draw upon another character, if one is available. In the case of the handshaking, while I had breached a “gesture norm” four of the five people did not have another character “Line” to rely on. They were bewildered. The fifth joked about it falling back on a character personality to point out or challenge my “Faux Paus” rather than ignore it.
While this experiment was done in a social setting among friends, I have to wonder how in a business situation, this would be perceived. In watching the presidential debates, I couldn’t help but to notice the intentionally extended duration of the candidate’s handshakes and the practice of grasping the others elbow and not releasing until they were finished speaking. I wonder if Goffman would interpret this as Malicious or Incidental in nature?