The ‘interrogative gaze’Making video calling and messaging ‘accountable’
Richard Harper,Sean Rintel,Rod Watson and Kenton O’Hara
Social Shaping Research, Cambridge | Microsoft Research, Cambridge | Telecom ParisTech, Nice-Sophia-Antipolis | University of Bristol, Cambridge
This paper identifies salient properties of how talk about video communication is organised interactionally, and how this interaction invokes an implied order of behaviour that is treated as ‘typical’ and ‘accountably representative’ of video communication. This invoked order will be called an interrogative gaze. This is an implied orientation to action, one that is used as a jointly managed interpretative schema that allows video communication to be talked about and understood as rationally, purposively and collaboratively undertaken in particular, ‘known in common’ ways. This applies irrespective of whether the actions in question are prospective (are about to happen) or have been undertaken in the past and are being accounted for in the present or are ‘generally the case’ – in current talk. The paper shows how this constitutive device also aids in sense making through such things as topic management in video-mediated interaction, and in elaborating the salience of the relationship between this and the patterned governance of social affairs – viz, mother-daughter, friend-friend – as normatively achieved outcomes. It will be shown how the interrogative gaze is variously appropriate and consequentially invoked not just in terms of what is done in a video call or making such calls accountable, but in helping articulate different orders of connection between persons, and how these orders have implications for sensible and appropriate behaviour in video calling and hence, for the type of persons who are involved. This, in turn, explains how a decision to avoid using video communication is made an accountably reasonable thing to do. The relevance of these findings for the sociology of everyday life and the philosophy of action are explored.
Some words seem to evoke an era, resonant not just of the argot of everyday chit-chat but also the fixations and practices of a cultural moment. Skyping is one of those words. Already it is losing its sheen as alternative technologies muddle its role in vernacular language: Facetime, Google Hangouts, as well as nouns for other communications media – WhatsApp, Instagram – crowd into everyday parlance and, even as we write, Skyping is beginning to sound outmoded, past, echoing what is turning out of fashion. The world is constantly changing, after all, and much of this has to do with the evolving landscape of technology. But nevertheless, Skype is in practice a denotation for all types of video communication, like Xerox came to be for photocopying, and just as Xerox the company receded in importance, so too, perhaps, is Skype – but people still use that word to label all kinds of video calling, whatever the brand or supplier.
1981Conversational Organization, Interaction Between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.
Hanson, N. R.
1972Observation and Explanation: A Guide to Philosophy of Science. London: George Allen and Unwin.
2010Texture: Human Expression in the Age of Communications Overload. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
D. Randall, and
2016Choice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
D. R. Watson, and
. This issue. “The Skype Paradox: Homelessness and Selective Intimacy in the Use of Communications Technology.” In Special Issue of Pragmatics, Interpersonal video communication as a site of human sociality ed. by
Harperet al. Pragmatics 27 (3):. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2011Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description. Abingdon: Routledge.
[1739–40] 1974A Treatise on Human Nature, 2nd Edition, ed.
P. Niddich. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2000Why We Need Ordinary Language Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
1972 “An Initial Investigation of the Usability of Conversational Data for Doing Sociology.” In Studies in Social Interaction, ed. by
D. Sudnow, 31–74. New York: The Free Press.
1974 “On the Analysability of Stories by Children.” In Ethnomethodology: Selected Readings, ed. by
R. Turner, 216–232. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
1992Lectures on Conversation, Volumes I & II. Malden: Blackwell.
Sacks, H., and
1979 “Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and Their Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by
G. Psathas, 15–21. New York: Irvington Press.
1981 “Conversational and Organisational Uses of Proper Names: An Aspect of Counsellor-Client Interaction.” In Medical Work: Realities and Routines, ed. by
P. Atkinson, and
C. Heath, 91–108. Farnborough: Gower.
Watson, D. R.
2005 “The Visibility Arrangements of Public Space: Conceptual Resources and Methodological Issues in Analysing Pedestrian Movements.” In Communication and Cognition, Special Issue, ed. by
M. Ball, 38 (3/4): 201–229.