THE DELANEY DOSSIER: OOFFMAN MATERlALS

1973: re: Frame Analysis manuscript

1. May 3, 1973 letter of thanks from EO to MD on my critique of the draft manuscript of Frame Analysis.

2. April 13, 1973 letter from MD to EO, meta-commenting on my critical commentary on Frame Analysis. In retrospect, I am not at all sure how penetrating (or even entirely understandable) these comments are, although I do think that EO may have toned down some of his more hard­edged positivistic proclamations in the final book as a result. I had urged him to adopt a more "perspectivist" account of frame analysis, in part because I considered his patchwork attempts at philosophically grounding the whole endeavor to be wanting, and for that reason all the more susceptible to critical attack. (It was, after all, a rather strange hybrid in being an empiricist­ethnographic approach to a number of "reality" issues commonly treated in philosophical theory.) In the completed book, EO addressed my suggestion in footnote 4 on page 26, where he argues (with considerable justification) that his version of a correspondence theory of cognitive validity ought not evade warranting its own claims to be a realistic depiction of reality (or at least the bulk of truth-claims put forth on the basis of everyday practical reason).

1974:

Acknowledgments page from Frame Analysis, citing MD's contributions, with a photocopy of a presentation card ("Compliments of the Author") sent directly to me in New Haven by the publisher, Harper & Row, along with a copy (unsigned) of the book.

Aside: I had already bought a copy of the newly-published FA from the Yale bookstore and had marked up some passages, making it unreturnable. Being short of money (as usual) at the time, I decided to swap copies and "return" the unmarked presentation copy in lieu of the purchased copy. As I later informed EO, this entailed using a bit of "framing" chicanery - namely, explaining away the lack of a Yale bookstore sticker - to dissemble the fact that I had not bought that particular copy of the book at the bookstore. (I think that EO was more often chagrined than not by his readers and students resorting to such ostensibly "Ooffmanesque" strategems, in effect taking his name in vain. By many accounts, however, he himself was not above resorting to such gambits as an interactional gamester adept at getting a "rise" out of his interlocutors. Besides, his many sly accounts of confidence games, hoaxes, forgeries, espionage exploits, criminal subterfuge, and the like gave some warrant for seeing a bit of a sharpster in his character. Not to mention his one-time stint as a card-counter in Vegas.)

~." .. '.,.; ........ -~"'-'li ~",,,,," .••.~...--:~--.,.- ·;r--.n...-.: ..-...;'-~~~.;~~~.;_........ " •.--_' ,~~..--­ ~-":'- < ._~,.,.... ~_........__~ ....: ..... (* __~~__.. :~__.•,---:-l-.~.• '\ ,.......

Goffman· UNlvERSiry of PENNSYLVANIA. \

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

UNIVERSITY MUSEUM

PHILADELPHIA, FA. 19104 t

~\ [.\.

\. ji­,{

'7:.

".

Mr. Michael Delaney c/o De:partmentofSociology

t \

MacNeil Btiilding \.

INTR AMURAL INTRAMURAL

'....,.~ , ~t .' .~ - ~*--~ ~ .~'.~ . ' ..,'--~_._ ..:........:.-.~.- . .:..

(j.

UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA 19104

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY UNIVERSITY MUSEUM

33rd and Spruce Streets

May 3 t 1973

Mr. Michael Delaney Department of Sociology University of Pennsylvania

Dear Mike:

I have just begun to work through your comments systematically and will finish doing this as soon as I get back to town on the 11th. May I sa;y now t

however, that I am much in awe of the work you have put in, and much in your debt for having done so. I don't know how far I can get in answering your larger complaints, but at least a wide range of the smaller ones will be dealt with.

I'll get in touch with you when I have finished. Again thanks; often those points which you are most doubtful about raising are ones most useful for me to hear about.

Sincerely, -----::::~

/'/[-' Ervi g-GOf~-

EG/LAC

4207 Che~ter ~v~. I Apt. 402 PhilQdelphia. Pal 19104 April 13, 1973

near ~rv1n~ ~~ffrnan,

The dirty d~ed le dene. Her~w1th you will find yeur l$vln!ly etreked w~rde mutilated with bloedy red ink and ether unkind cut~.

YlIJU have h.n~r.d me by inviti~ my cernmente. In return, naturally, I have btttrayed yeu. Y0U have aeked my senslbl11.ty te r.~ct, and it h&le, net heldlnl!; back \1ith~r id«as tlr or1ticieme, l.ttin~ thint;e ~purt where they may. It might help t. r.c~rd that ln thesf:' Macb"thian lab.r~ I have !8nerally net tarrl~d t~ lavish pr&l~.~.

The pa~el'!l are cluttered .n"'Hl~h wi theut an $n~.1n~ stream .r fJnthue1€ime. New, 1t w/Illuld net de in e!uch lI'.n effert n$t t. make cemm.nt on my cemmentary. Se let me ~et on with it.

L l\~ eu!:~eeted, the cemmentary i~ clGdd1eh, ni t ....picky, hy~.r­

critical and n~t alway~ ready te t~k. a joke. Prlakieh. And I'm serry. But the 0r1.ntatl~n 1s t. frame, n@t gamG playin~.

Su~~~eted ~ynenym8 ~r re-f.rmul~t1.n~ are th~r. n.t ~e much f@r 8ubetitut1on aB f~r p~~sibl~ tl~ht~nln~-up, pr8ci~i~n, clarifl­cation. I have little t. ~fAY ~b'but gtructure. As I rellld alon~,

I r.~p0nded lmm8diat~ly t. the t~xt---n.t always happily (m••d~,

fr"l&-ae!!i0clatl~ns, w1ld haire ••• ) By and lar~$ I dld n@t try- t. pile up s1mply m~re rlv~tin~ examples, a~sumi~ that the pr~bl.m

ie crt tical eelectten rather than underabundanc~. I c$uld have, but f •• tnote m.n~.rlng 1s n_t my 1nt.nt1en. BS3idRB y~u will have quite enou~h or me RR it ie.

Sometimes you may c$mplaln that I have .v.r-c.mpl~xlfled wh~r.

thin!!! must needs be R~pt eimple. That 1s true. Semetimes, h.w~ver,

you .v~r-simp11fy just where y*u hav~ t_ meBt o.r~ful.

If there 1s an eV!II!rall thrust to roy re1U~rkeJ it conc<I'Irne the 1$~1cal Bomffeldincl!(i)n whioh y.u bUild your cae.. Har.ln, 1t hae b~"n f(fJund wSlnt1n~. (I should add I I am nlll)t i\l~ learn-8d St.! I d i 2J P lay I am.)

2. On ~tyl.t It c.uld bllt that B'9D'le Itf Y"(l)ur ".!.E' cit • .!;" &re ttl@) spread lDut fer $111111y ref«rence. r.U8htn 't y~u ul5e ta,! t1 tlel! (fer Y8ur 311m ~l.f-qu~tm.tl@n~ 111./5 well)? ~v~uld It hQt.lp t. h1B.vlIt a lexicon ~f the maj~~ t~rmg? Surely m t~b10 ~f c~nt@nts and ind.x weuld be useful. We are all subjeot in thi~ day ~od &~~ t. tryi~ t. be t •• "relevant", t. c\\'I.fl1ment &0 the pal58in~ l5o'.t'ne. Unrertunately such c~nt~ropor.rl@ty by the time it r~~che~ print may sesm ~ut of whtl.ck, lillY whmt,.115 worse. n berlll. (AI5 H.L. N@nckttn.) I would ~eoh.w.

They~ a~~~ varlety *f l~v.ls $f c0nO~rnl5, data s~urc~s and .'S~ri.ul5n.ss appallrftnt, Berne iJJf whloh jar eaoh 0ther. (Naturally we w@)uld cl.lleh most en what we Ch&l*158 t3 irlOn1zlll atb$ut.) OOCl\151_nally ~.nerallzati~n2J and ep.olm~n $xampl«~ l5e~m n.t t$ match up.

Net_, y~u will net. I have n~ted 150m. notable n@tatlenl5. Of a.urse.

"

\'

'\

\ ••• 2

). Terme. M@~t ~f y@ur key term~ are flne-~pr.v.cfttlve And well-tooled. Trouble ie they tend t. 3hift, blur, ~~t unanohored 4t~ mattere pro~r.ee. Dlchl1llt0mies are s~t up, only t. be collap••d, one term ~&tl~ up anether. Terms stretch Qnd contract as if tr~ne­p3eed to an Eln~toinlan univ~res. It would e••• that yeu need eome­th 1.n~ 11ke, an .r~limGlm ef terms, all*win~th.m t. be ee1f-oontained .\; and stable at the c.nter~. If you oan, it weuld be helpful te b • able te syetematlcally lnt.rr~l&t@ the torme, .~cht. the .th.re, it' only in yeurewn head. (Can lIime think. ef ttr,atiee n herot)

Per lnstance, a "f.bricatl~n" s.~me to bea k.yin~,but ale. a tran:'!lferm. These Qr. All eub5umabl. under Hr.plicatln~ p.r.cee:!."." A key itself ~pp.are t. be a kind ef lnfr.a-fr&me. Y9U~ nover mana~e

te fully explicate the lnter-cennoote ~f b:asic sohemata and th.ir artlculatil$ne tnt3 mere phen.menally pr.~~nt rlD~ehe~ of life. Se they ~ft.m as if ~u1!p.ndlld "ab.ve" aotivity, in~t.ad .f·b.1n~ cen­~titutl®nally part .r it. Y'WIl «At fire!lt r ..~trict the bal!!ic dualil!lm y~u find, but lat~r it $pen~ up with@ut pr@ci~@ flx&tlen.

I have niltvttr b~·.nl1lbl. t.' cl.arly separ& te ~ut hfflw yeu dl e­tlnqul~h (if yeu de) • "frame" fr@m a "bracket tt and fr.m markerl!l @f them. (Ie a bracket SA frame marker? But hi/))W 1 i teral d .el!! thil5 have t. be? Compm.re a o\ll~k.d oyebr9w and a l~w.r.d curtain.) "Frame" I take t. b. the mtl\~t fleXible t~rm in y~ur w$I'd-bex, and u.!efully ~e. I tak.e it as pO.!!lsible al.n~w.rtJ t. the phenom4nally ~u!Jt&\ln.d issu.nc~ of "Wh..t i~ ~.i~ en here?"

But thle is your j$b t. w~I'k .ut. (A~ it ie!l already, y$u're lucky Y8U d_n't pay by the h$ur.)

I am '!J<lIrry that yeu ch~<'#'!J. t. d.wnplay th. musical anal.~y, which I think could be lilt.!!ls tr0ubles~m. and In$re rich than Y$U ft'Jp'tArently do. I think ef suoh term~ ae "p€lllyph$nlc. n "greund-bass", flc'0untf.!r-p~int",

and enecurrently fav$r.dl!tm~n~~t.y.un~ reality buffs. Ifriff." Ko.~tl.r and L~n~er do nltt ~hy lllWAy from euch $xplicit}:y contr.lled wo;e or the m~tlll.ph.r9 (Far sup8rl IIII' t. mechanil!tic enlll1!.)

4. It is important t ••bs~rv. th~t n~t enly is this &n exsrcise in frame &\naly~i~ pr.p.r, bl.1t 1l1eo, te use the f~shi~nable prefix, in mst.-fram8 An_ly~ig. This latter lesue, I think, i~ wh~t ~lv.e

y.u the m~.t treubla. N~t 9nly de.e it lead t. phil*sophical be!" but ale.\1;~h.. viiI'Y center or s8cl.1.~y lteelf.

At tlmes. thee@ l.~ic~l lav@ls g*t mudctled. as d$ee tho dietinc­tien between observor Il.nd lItXperi8ncer. Ft3r as yau well knltw, .verythin~

in the essay is alreAdy a tr.neorlpti~n of • once-liv~d re~lity. But thAt is not always syet~matioally ol.~r.

I do not find it all.wabl~ t_ cenflllltilll ID!!i;ral lS5UfltS with frtlrne­fGrmAllstio one:!. In fact, ths wh.l~ intr~otabl~ issue ef the ~t~tus of thtt mor!t.l c(l9mp.n~ht i~ r!.l$s~Htd eVlItr, emcltpt Irrh.n i t ~ ...m~ oenv@!!ni­«tnt ft'r ~.me ~plllUtn-ve.nt'tJ.n~. Of oourse, y$U don' t have t .. addr<'!> 1!l1!

these problems head 8n. but then I find little prefundity (er warrant) flf>r equatirl(, the montios (If Abbi. With the m..chin~ti9ns 4t! eur CIA typos. FrAme 1BSU.~ .nter pr.ci~ely because each oase h~~ its ••n set Itt intentl(IJIl1ll.\l-c.ntentual o*neidertil.tiene that apply, if respen­sibility is t. b. adjud~$d, i.e. moral pron.unc~ments m~d.. Austin was certainly aware of this. ­

, . , .. '

: ... ':

I I 'J

5. "styl." remain:!! a nebul.U8 oe.te~ery, but I ~iv. up the attempt t. oenvert you t. my lnt.rpretati~n .r It. I o.n~ldftr it an ae6thetioal lnatt~r .f' .xprelH,iv8 ekill, like &tne~ ~.ul breth.re. Gender oenduot is fit mist1 t under this rubric. One may have very stylish rtlHnlnintt ~.etur.e, but female:!' ~1IH1t\.lr.~ ae I!!lueh are net II. matter sr etyl.. ~G.nrp, p~rhape?)

6. Evinced in the paper are s.v~r. theeretloal (sem.tlmes mera-l )etral ne J indoed; warrintr; eplet.m(ll~~l.l!!l. Nlltv~r e. muoh have you appr••ched a Fr~ud-llke sr.und-ferm .r theGry structure. (That il!l,19th C0ntury.) 1'he eplph*nemona are the sa.me, .hly the int.rpreatliltl$n dlff'e.reJ. (Dr.~ms ar. dan~til:r.us anti tiel!! rer .. G.rfman-werld. Whmt is it that &uld.~ th_ir delngs?) I am reminded t •• $f that ~r~at Frenoh intp,l tl ~ni~t, E. Durkhelm. whe ~tru~a;18d

len! to /!lhlll.ke .fr thlt f.tters ~f hie! p$sitlviet ~k1n. a.polly, $r no, !«tnlus need n~t alwaY$ o.nf~rm t. rig.r~ue phill1lsephical ferms.

Thol!le are m~et kn~tty lssu~s. L$t me b.~ln with the ~~p.ct I find most l1tbjeCti4Jnabl@l.

7. I take it thlltt :{i)U die not want t. in@rdlnately cemplicette matters by ~~ttin~ lnte an applloati9n of frame .naly~is t. th••r­etioal e-tructure:!! ~ Flne. J31.'\t then Y$U ge en to c'l/tlneist8ntly app.al tosoienoe, er r.ftthe:r to its auth\t)rlty. Such an elpp...l, heweveT, within the t~rrn~ $f Y«llUr ewn ItnalYl!ll~, Clan enly b. ax t. a £hil$Seph $f 301enc~, ~r @f naturo. And this in the .bs~l.te

form 8f hard-ea~.d p$3itivism. N~w, this ral ~et3 Sl. wi tch~s br~n'i .f prtotblwms--preblerns to whloh

tw'o oenturies '$f the fin.~t minds in the world x.XJI addrlts/!!ed them­1'!lelV4tS, whi chl1lbses8od thlft l~l!lt ~r.$tl.t w&rld ... cenoerupasl5i ~ m.v~m.nt

in ph11o~ephy, And which ftwalt reselutlem te this day. (You weuld nett kn"w it by reAding th~t ct»nfldent brtted ~f s@oial 1!!oiltntists "he m_re .ften th~n n~t are cl.~.t m.t~physioians.)

Is n-.tttre ee trUly discr.t~ .tl:\nd m.anln~fully evident 8S yeu want t. p.sit1 And if this is whtl1t selene. has c.ntrlbutl/td te our kn~wl.d!:., then h~,w in turn is this juetlfied, and whAt pre­oisely is it in the .bj~ot w~rld th~t 18 ae described? The thln~

i taelf? Or rather o$rt&ln llaepeots flit' 1 t Wt1i ch havlJI. prfllVfJn 3tm*n­able t_ v&rieue cltf;nl tl vo manlpulatb,ne'( Ie nr$t eoieDO. t •• ehet tnh.u~h wi th int• .n1 t1bnali ty And preeuppe.'5ed axloml!! _ w!viI.'lse truth oannet be d.menstrat.d? Is n~t it tee ~ ~ocial~--m.anin;ful--.aotivlty?

It t •• has a s~oial history. land thulJ a certain arbitrlaTY shape. Even physics oan b. $1})c101tl~;iz~d au eh.'#wn in the influentia.l w~rk

<tf Th,.mol!l Kuhn. And what to de wlth the Hel~~nburt; P;J;lnclpl..-? rrhfil filet 1s that m~d~rn-d.y phil.a.phy ~f sel.nc~ 11'!l t'Jimply n.t set up en • reundSltt.n of cert~l nt e~ ll'l~ WitS ~nc. thought. (Phl1,!Ci~'" .phl.~ 9r eelenctt all!lo h~ve a history.) And then, th$re i~ the preblem which Sc.p*nh~.urer p.lnted out, that IfCll~, the Mus.ef ..".,'.'" Rl$t.ry, leas tlvtr~~hly 1nf*cte:d wi th 11ft.! as fA. str•• tw$l.lker' .' With I!yphills." Wh~t we are f~o~d With is n~t .!$ much an infiblte r~gr.s~, but r~th.r the pr.bl~m ~f interpr.t~tiv. cenneotednel!S. And thAt~f ceurse, k related dlr~ctly t. frlJlme analy~l.! (bel.n~1n~ perhape, t. A phil@s.phio~l ~xl~.~is .fit. )

Here we stand en tho u.ncertaln ~r"u~that b~diftviled peer Ml\nnhoim All hi/! lif@: the rel_tien of syete.mtttic p\'ar~p.ctivl~m

te the e••min~ n••d t. ancher the oertainties of truth.

• •• 4

But hey.nd thSlt, wh.... t is lilt stake in frAme analy'!l~ is net scientifio pren.uncem~nt3 A'! such but e$~~.n belisf$, the e.~lt&tl~n

.r everyday ~ire (if net a Pcrltique" or it.) It mUBt be SAid th.t understandint') preced4le ltxplan$\tien. We must kn~wi wh~t "blue" is (or refers te) bef_ra we CAn analyze it en a sD.otroscepe. Thle r_rees us t. take $.0101051c.1 side'! with the latter Wltt~.n8t.ln,

n~t the .~rly .ne. A ~r~&t selentl~t .nc~ r.c.mm.nd~d that h~ncef@rth "t.blm" had

t_ be tAlk.d 'l)f etS a t1.~SU$ f!/!f hellts--th9.li.t's hit,W it ffreall y " 18 when $$en in An atomic mlon.sc~pe. But $f course if we went ar.und talkin~ ab~ut .v8rythi~ as blebs af at@ms ~r as 8tr~~k8 ~r o81erK, W. clIiIuldn't make tJ!ny uetltful talk at I'l,ll. (GroSlt ep$rt "'-SAnd ."$Y !ame--fer the lan!ua~e phl1.~cph.r~. On th.ee m.tt.r~ frem ~ vGry ~~tute an!le. ~.e Cft~~lr~r's L8~io ~f the Hpm~nit~e~.)

Scienoo has dltf~r.nt $bjeote ¥r~m ~rdinary lil~.-.r if y~u WAnt different &Sp.ot~ er l«vale ~f the ~bj.ots ~f $rdlnary life. It just do.sn't l.ekat na,tural .v~nts Q~ de y.u and I (sunsl!tte!, xJx s.y, _r stars.) Have l~u .v~r elcftn an e.tem? Has anyone ov_r seen an antl-nftutren?

N$W it's all v~ry well t. t4ltY areund With nr.tturMll science medele in ord.r to ~r1nd .ut in~1!t8 into a.Ql~l lif~. The precarl$ue mev. ie fr$ffi that sort ·of inspiration t. the equs.tisns I Nature'='Sclence= Reality. Ain't !!Itt. The plmin fmct is that i'lard C0rlt p~sitlvlsm

is dead, felled by its CPwn incohercsnce {s~Ut Cht~msl{y en Skinner). Of ceursc it 11 ves ~n &5 a ItJe 1 tans(}h4\l.uu~ Slf s0rta but surely e301I!tll.~1~tel ef ~"ll peepl. ~h\'l)uld be willklce!; fr$ill their d~gm3atlc

Ll!lumbers by no,w .Wa~n It hlr:!!illn~ .m~ugh to do the d~.d? I mlt!ht add that the R8,gUlnpti@!'l thJJ.t ~vent~ ~"ll1 uttlm~t.ly

bei\r .ut truth 18 a pr.-~I!lin~nt oultural 5u!)peMi ti@n ot8peotally t. bl! n,.ted .m....n~8t the pGpuIlRti <ll>n of pr~fe8si<HltA-l think~r8. (1\ small &mplrlo~l ~~nftr.li2ati0n .f min~.) It n••d n_t b~ that way at all, it mAy ~ft.n n@t be ®r ~~v~ any re&~8n t~ b$, ~nd it may n~t even m_klt $en~. in many sphl!ros q,f th.u~ht, ~. p;. th4Hse conCiilr n.d wi th deities, ~r m~rAl di8pUt~8. I'll rer.bear r.citlng the r31l-call 'lit' Artists, ~lth.ut:;h surely Hamlet .and K. weuld btl ~t&lr witne/'j.!ltlls.

II/hat is at r'~'l'iit iS3-UCl herl'J) 18 mere a Huattmr ~f m.rt than ·~r

sclence. When you dl!eal with ffi4UHllnt.;, o.~nj~tlv~ structurln~, yeu leilve b~hind claims te .. privll.~ed windtiW ~ntill bJ\\re-4t88ed reaLli ty. And mt!lAnl~ 1s !Q! issue h.re.

8. ~lth r.~.rd t_ secia1 reality, the pr.bl.m~ b.cGme n~ter­i.usly more intractabl~. Y0U app.art. imply a sp.al • • r ~v.rydAY

riltilbn8<lity, but wlth@lut b~l~ able t. pr(Jlvlde"rtny ~ub~t.ntlv.

IlCCI9Unt ~r Why th18 sheuld be se. (Even l<'finlraa!i'l filll th ruu~t hAv. a rati$na,l., if it i~ to be ar.;uab1e. ) Partly the f!1l.ult l~ that ,Yi?'¢U are n{)t w111i~ t" ~r;a,nt cultural reality it~ 0wn ~ul 5~n.r115

re~llty--~ gtrAn~e po~it1~n net .nIy f~r a s@ci.l.~l~t but r_r It Durkheimian in partioular. r<[«Dre ~p~r$lti$n&lly. I think yUJU mIx tho r.ality status ~f ab~tr~ct~d id.al-tYP~B (~r 0.11 it par~dIgm

C.S.~ J wi th tlxi1!lt@ntiQl ~oln~;g-en-in-mindB. N~w, if I UU!lo,if f.llCl'W y~ur own ad '110«, I w0uld til.k~ ... lead frem 'j{ ur tr8111. troe«nt eff "the lnt tlal stil,t,emftnt U (p. 637.) This illi~ht well ~~rve .e th.

• •• 5

key t!;rt9und -f\trm t'ffr fro.me a.n.ly~i~ In t<llneral. with each ~trl'p /fif

m.an1n~ aleng wi th 1 t~ 1nt_rrelated 4'U'!p.Ct~ lAnd trlltn~f.rmtl\ti I1ln p$te.ntll2ls taken llS a brZlckotctd Itpl$che. Such II. m~ve w4Juld. all.w y~u t. by.p.~~ the wh$le pr~bl«m~tic termin$l~~y ef nlnn~rm.gt

reality" and ~. on. Y_u ceuld B~Y wh~t y~u n~cd to say wlth~ut

plu~ln~ orf lnt- the heady sphere Gf .nt.lG~lc~l declsiGns (er r.o~mmend~tl('\ln~. ) It would s;\ve y'tu c.n~ld0rablet ~rl.df t. tr•• t thl$ 8l.b15tract~d ~p(l)clm"ltn al5 lit "sl'tntlltnce" te b. par~ltd, ratther thAn • r~allty te b~ r~tlfl~d. Y$U r~311zo ~l$.wh.r~ th~t ~ny

event $T act1en il5 subj_ct t$ indefinitely ~bund~nt re$din~~1 that even in the ffi9$t crYl5tQlline .xC\mpl~~, there are $llw~Yl5 pcussl ble exc,pti ~n8. Wh$'( t y,*u w!l.nt il5 tho b.und~ril!b8 a:l.nd l~.minati.ns ef ,.~r~t 1~ taken ilt.$ r •• l, er &».8 unreal. BU.t being empirical, as a!~ln~t 1~!10~1, in Y3ur interpretative thrust. you n~ad net c.nc.ct Ima!lned w*rlds ~ft~r Wltt&.n$t~ln, but rather explicate~ th.~e ferms er I1v«l8 in them~.lve", 5'3lcial$gloally ~1.8s.d er CeUTl5ft. :F'rJtnkly, I think .ntelfJ~Y c~n take oare .r ipseif. 'fhero w~uld remain difficult cen~truct5 f'0r y~u te ~drlllw (vl~., y.ur drama-ract 11m dichlfit~my) but thoyst&.nd in need er recastl~ in 11t88 blat:1l.nly unsupp!6rtable f$rm.

I find it \ltxc'lutdln~;ly rel'.;,rlttt'l!\ble that llt Chic:i1l,~9-trC\lnltd mind wll.luld alll$w hllnself tlf (J~ny a l{n~)'wled,!.!,(t Gf relal re111i ty te 95% ~f' the w6Jrld 's p$pul~ti@;n. ()f C$ur~@ t.h~re 15 i~p1,jj)r~nCft in tho wlIirld (5@ro.tim.~ in hl~h pl~c~~) and a~~urftdly m~st ~f the w~rld's p@.ple d~ nl!)t U1(Ut~U.r@ up t. ~trln~.nt crt ttarill er l{m~win~ the lait8~t~ci-4!ntlfic advac$. (N\\lIr d8 I ... ,..h~w .\ltnd by Nh*Ol ,1.8 the 11ne to be drawn?) Wh~t y~u really r~f~r to 1~ th~ ceD~sttrn~nt to sci0ntific mod'J!!l '!Ilf res~arch ~nd tru~t in i t3 findin,lf;8 in~tt9fJl;r6'i5 1~n. w.uld w~nt to know .b~ut them. In scientific !~tt.r5j scientistl5 functi.n .tIXXJ()( ~8 m.bi t$r$ {Qf explo'l'.tJ'l4i. ti @n, III o@~ni ti v~ oourt *f final Il.PP4llAl. But thtltt is alS ~ft~n to pr.v8k~ cris@l8 &ts· t. r013121vfIl th~m, and the l\\oceptll,ne~ .rthi5 frStmtt lJf r~f!!!r.nce i~ 1ft frJtme L~gue unto 1 tSlDif. Who 1~ to d.clde, eln wh~t ~rf>und,s. when an i,ssue is n\')t am.n~bl.

t. ~c111mco ,,'iT wh$n 8cl~ntj fio b~uncla:r.le.! hAve t. ,-:;1 ve W8\Y to explain ~lvenphonem\!M? I just want tm n!flte th4it scienoGlb 1Il13 a knit.lwln~ aotivity is nt1llt wlth&ut its int@r'nal pr$blemfttic~ (which I dGlubt frame (\lnaly~13 p@r 5~ c"'uld r.~$lv~) ~nd that it t •• requiree .. w·hel. cultural bllJ.ckdr0p and attitude g)f mind. t\'layba the werld 115 b.c.min~ aln lncr.~~in~lJ d18$nchanted, r~ti~nl\l\llzsd mestnln~-eph.r•• As yeu kn.w, thie clAn b. clin151dilJlred tli> b. n~t whGlly without its difflcuttle~ ~~ w~ll.

I h*ve ~lwaYI!! f.lt th~t .n~ ~f the ~r~&t m~rlts 0f yeur work hae been 1 t8 zanthr<'Jlp6\l go,!'; 1 cal @tppliCtl.bl11 ty by virtuCi '6!f f3rmal18 tl 0 .fflcacy. Why "band.,.h tha.t.t ~r18at &.nthr,~p(~l~e;ical COI'l!l1 in Y6ur writi~~ by luetint!; Aft~r hard-cera reality; In thl~ veice Yli&U eound all tellt likft that crypt'9-*pi3te)ml'tll~~~il9t Lenin. wh~l!!.

"emplrice-mlllt$:r.1&\11emll 1.!'l ~ gc~ndAl and embaauI58ment even te the d6V@Ut. And sp.aki~ of Lfinln, Y$U de net Addres8 .xx at all the QGmplicat.d dlecul!!~i~ne of "id*.l.~y" and "I!!elf-fulfilll}~ prephecies." Wur Vietnam .xporl.nQe~ the m0~t r.tl~nali~tlcally f@Utht WAr In

t .•• 6

hi ~t.ry. may ~1 ve u.s ~om. pause About t •• ~mu~ly alS~.rtin~.; the ~up~r1.rity .r .ur ultrtl-ml1ldern modes _r olb~nltive .manlpulatl.n~.

The r •• llty...t.~tln~ c.n~ bfHHIJme taxlnr:; ind.ltd. If yeu ever ~.t l.~t in the desert, I hepe f.r yeur sake

thero is a shr.wd Arab, I)r 519me such, t. ~u.id. yeu te the neli.re8t r ••llty er a water-h_l••

A8 Weber ~ucolnctly put it, .Vftn 13~lc 1s • ou1tQral preduct. Nmb.dy sl$ri~u$ly wgtnt5 t. deny that thero i~ ~n !t~1')ject-w(trld .ut there". Ner tha.t 301lSnce C~tn XJuf}:l ll!l true And .imp~rtant thin!s about the und.rlyin~ ~truotur. -f th.~o .bj~ot8 ef ev.ryday life. (As did m.t~phY!lic:~ pr~d.min&!.ntly in m~~:r. ~l~rl"us tim.e.) What is ln~dmi5Babl. i3 t. eaSily ~pp6~1 t. th~t .bject w@r1d--or t. "the act lt~.lf"---f.r the lnt.r~ubj.otiv. Appr.h*nslen or it 1~ exactly what n••d~ explicatl~n. All th. m$re fflir the Itbstract. mind-affect.d "$bject U th~t 18 8~oiety.

What ie $trange in your ~r~ument(alth$u~h I see the struotural re.s.n~ r.r i t) i~ thmt ;Y'~u nll'l.turali Ztt s~ci~l reali ty r&thor than 5.C1.•1.~iz. naturitl r«ulllty. Yeu e;et all t~ntled up 1n the bael0 schemata that are culturally speoifio t~ us {~r t~ y$u) which t~nd5

t. dr~ frt.!m.. an.lysie pJl41$psr lnt~ tre~cher~us r.~i0ns where it OQl.n d. little ill{\lre than iseutfI! little P~UIPS lie to h~w rit;ht w••re. Tho (ll$re fruitful Il.ppr••oh, on my vl.w, 1~ f~r f'r4tm~ annly:s13 t. ehew preei 3ely the 11m! te Ilnd t.n~l ,*ne ~f sur tttkllbn-f.r-~;r.nt.d

lntorp1'otatlvft 5chemata, what pr.015~ly is b@yond the r.~ch or ~lv.n oatet:;eries and why. Such &\n Interp1'etoati<\fins IfBlf intttrpretll.­t i ~ns then ntted bfl subJ eot \$n1y to i te inherent o~~nvi no in~ne~~,

ceh.r~noe ilnd 1 ..~1o~1 oriteria 1'lltth~r than the que~tl:m ilif whft.t­1l!ne5~. You eeal ~ff .ne linet .r "'tt~ek ra-tther th4\!l ,!Jimply b.t;t:l~ the ori tlo.ttl qUf{l!8t13n~. (Wa~ Sh*,-ke5pcl'1.re f 5 u~o .f f'ra.mln~ d.vl c.~ any .more "rea-lit. <ltr l~s~, than Pir~nd.1l@'~?)

Thl!s4t cl/Jmfusl{l)ne a.nd cl9ntl'ilrti.ns eu~;~est t. me the lack .f fA

phi ll\1illl$phl oa1 :pr.pilCltdu.~tlc te frame analY5i ~ i t ~u,lf •

9. But, you may ~bject, ph1l@5~phy is ju~t ~what wants aV.idin~

he1'~. r:J.~h~ treuble 15 Y$ur grilll-und w'Iflcrk 15 n~t ae £fiuoh 5f1phoffiSlric phil$sephy 8l.S ll1t ril~-ba@? IIlppr.pri*ltl$nl~f the stril'ind.!l ~f v~ri.ul!

oltnfllctlne; phl1$soph1 e5. In shltrt, bll\d::<hi l~s*phy.

The fact 1e yeur v.rly subtitle rin~s phl1.s.phlc~1 bolls. The m~dern ~lant here 1e the mi!hty xant wh.~. prinoipal task wa~ to ~9t itt th. SChiilt-ffi!i!tll: tlIf8eh.m~ta tnvelved 1n l.41l o,*gniti3n. fie ig. of ceurslt, the f.unt~inhe.nd Illf ph«tn.men01fll~;yl. (UnlilcfII y.u Ilnd eth6rs, h. had It. tranecendtal reali ty behind ph.en~m~ntAl 1'eall ty. )

A c.htral p$lnt 3t.mmin~ fr~m Kant 1~ tho qu.~tl~nJ H0W can thln!e be ~bjootlve at all unleB~ fram8~ are -15. ~u~rant8.d veridioal ~tatue? At issue. 13 n~t th~ 0nt~10~icml 8t~tU8 0f fr~m.g _s such, but rAther the epret.m~10~ioml-functiwn~10no. What weuld it b. like (f4r USJ th. world) net te have frames at &117 F*1' fr_mes are n$t ju~t linked t- ex.p«rience---they ~r. c.m~titutl ve of 1t. But fr.ro~ analys1~ aea th~~rlc, h~u1'l~tlc f1'~m.w~rk ~f frames le enly 1.e;ltm~t.d tlla be r@f,Ulative in it.'! o~nc.ptu~l {~~lyels of phenem.n~l appearancos. (Ir.-lnt~rpr.t K~ntlAn dl~tlnoti8n$.) Te ~et at th••l.tn~ntal structure~ 0f all 3.013.1 Aoti$n 1~ 8l. pr_ject that .hly Par~.n~ ha~ h8en ineAne .n~utJ1t. attempt.

• •• 7

(If y.u have tw. years sr ~. t. spar., y~u m1~ht read Critique.!!. ~ H....~.n. Lackln~ t~t, K~nt hiros_if h6l.~ supplied U8 with 11

trot. fer that I';roat werk, viz. PrlJle!i.m~na !! ~\ny Furtur~ Met.phyelcs. Fr. Coplost.n has writtttn 8ln acCe5O!'Jtble 8wnmary $r the c@I'mplete werke.)

A further oonsideril. tlo.n ,What d.e!!! framo II.nalY5 i 5 brllcl{ot It.ff frem lt5elf? On wh~t principles? Hl&w deep llltnd hew wid. :'llh*uld we talte 1 t? And e.ertalnly hf/lJW te ~;. on wi th 1 t. aft~r thL! ln1 tlal fln'mulati\1lln? D••s 1 t have a future in 1 tself er \<1111 1 t serve m.ro· IlS aon.-eh~t·aff.lr, to be usod th.r~llft.r $\5 an srientin,; teol. a mind eharponer? Sometim~e frame analY51e thr.~t~ns t. take in *.nythln!iunder the eun (overythl~ mtulnln~ful, thz\lt le) suoh ae our ent,ire 1 lnt;Uieti 0 Bystem. (I do not oCimplaln, enly wonder. )

10. New, .n~w.y yeur try to ciroumv¢nt 120,11 thl~ 1B by lnv.kln~

the l$~ic.l p.rtioularlem 'JiIf va ttg.n~t1.en. And this ,1thlnk,l~ A

~~ed ffi$Ve. What yeu .1.'. after 1~ a d.~c1.'iptlv••plet.m~l~~y S8 te ep.ilk~-J\n flthno~r4phy er lcn'0wl.d~.. Unf@rtunelQtely, Y~H~r uee t»f

him .,nd yeur appeal t. his .utherl ty, 1" rar from consl "tent, e.m.... time" the@reetlcally .ppertuniBtic. .As you ehall e~., hil'lwever, .. number .·f yeur 8wn ferrnula tion" .revuln~r.bl$ t@ W. -type ea,llles.

What is n~tabl~ i", ae with Ber!.:t)r and LueknJAnn, a certain the&retlcal premlecultj·. At It certillin structural leY.1, var.l.ue currents ".em t. fl~ht fer supremacy. You want yelIT ph~n.m~n.l.~y.

Pl.ut your Witt(,$nBtelae,plu,e your ~cl6!ntiBm, $Ill in 0ne bundle. At . im~B, their c1aeh re,e8unds when it d ...ee nl1}t tinkle.

One way te clrcumv.nt the caneequent Jl:UX tensilltne 13 te rev<tke e~m. of the m~r••xtr~va~~nt cl.lms. To trado eff a bit .f intelleot­ual dra.mA tlc('IJ fer '. inl$re m<!ldeet prelciel ~n, 'rho ld.A8 3l:re teo ~«t.d, te. prevlloatlve, to have te drag al.n~ thie phillil,s.phical bag~.~•• (Of c.'lu·~••.a .t.ul'Ji en that rUnl)5thr\l1lut';h\ttut your wh&l. c~rpue 1.5 whilt c@uld be cl\llnceptualizltd a~ ae an J(JllxmJm~ Ilntim Sl,my b.tw••n an "8v~r~0cializ~d o.nceptl~n @f m~nn and a B@rs8nian fr•• eplrtt. Given ~uoh It rGrc.....rl~ld, ~p.arkl'J are bound tefly.) In l!urnmary, I w.,uld l'Ju!,~el'Jt that Y$U will have t. aee(!J)me ftl'Jhln~ in de.p w.-ters or ~11'J. cut y~ur phl1oI'JephicI\1 b#llt.

11 ~ l'he mit ttere y"'u dtutl with, or t ~uch ~n, 4<tre a:l.e J ,l~U kn~w, devil1shly clIlmpllltx, ffilll.nifeld, and slimtshly. c~nv.lu,t@d. Lifetimes have blt_n ep.nt p.ndfl)rln~ on them,while it r~malnl'J true that "th. fl.wdamont en whioh all ~ur kUijlwl.dge a,nd l.u\rhin~ r(tl'Jtl'J il! the in.xpllc~bl•• ", (Sch8ptlnhaure:r, but it ct&uld have been L.W.) I am ~lad yeu have tackled them; I thlnky~u hav~ added much.t of !';r~lI'tt .!u~~estiv.n.~1! to thltm; and even YEliur flabbiest f@rmulation!l

litrlll n.-t @f unred1tiltmlng public interest. What ie J:'lGvel le to attack these gx:tttx grlndin~ v0xod pr0bl.m~ lit! ll'l.ppeltrance And r'!\'41i ty from fl des1151 vtlt!y ebbn~~rAphic vtltnt @f view. (If phli.~­cphy oan aid $-cliJlet;y, .5uraly w. can in turn ~$nmr~lt. s.m. inter­tl st in~: phl10esphl cal tlll.n,~le.5.) Why, then, swt y~ursf}lf up fer .. prlltfall by h.ml~ in en .. wln~ and a W~ltamrh.ut.m~?

• •• 8

P••plft eut there Are ~ettint t~. rag~.dy-~~~ ~mArt ~b.ut the~e

matters. There is enly se much y.u CAn slide by with Itn roputatlen. (You have car••d ;~ut ffifilre th•.n mest.) And there are tilt. mll.ny o.~er he.dhunters .ut there 1n the acad_mle w1ld II!. 'l'ry t .. ktutp held ef y~ur sCAlp. (I appreaclate tho eppQrtunity t. de my c@up-count1n~

here. )-I mi~ht dare add that I find it appl~udabl. (if nl$t alway~

specifically) thll\t the 1!lllmidfmi:m !!loulful mind is t.\l:.Lt.i)wln~ its..1f m~r. openly t. p••p~ turtle-lik., frem with0ut the cynic shell. It wou.ld be __ pity,4\. hapl.ss irony, wore the thceiljrlst te becomes. ov~rly committed te a tho@retloal p.rsenn whioh cannot o$ntain n-cedful thln~e w@rth elll.yin~ in thie e'lH111.~e Slg~.

Finally, let me $~Y th... t I find myself in the strAn~. p.el tl ~n

.r .r~u1n~ against myself A~ I ar~u. a~ainst you, a~ I pit ene G-ffman .?;aln~t t!.nether. Y_u Qre gu.ilty, if nibt re~p.nslb1~. fsr helplnt; r ...nlmitte my int.r.~t in phl1~~.phical Il.pplioati.n~.

Phllosephy--the @ri~inAl and ultimate f.rm ~r frame analysis--le b.o.mln~ useful again. Thorein lies ~r •• t excitcm.nt. ~nd w@rk to de.

In these r.mark~ I have had the spiritual l~d taste t. take yeu at Y$ur word-.. to attempt t_ b. uneparlnl!;ly hen.st. Se I wlnd up fe~lln! 11k. the Plat.nic slave wh$, when it wag drawn eut .r him, ind.ed could p~rfltrm simple aritmetic .ptlrati~ne. Butt.gain, I r •• l like the Witt~*n~t.lnl~n pupil whe. wh~n ~iv.n the f~rmu1•• , inexplioably starts c~mln~ up With different anBW~~~.

Se let matters m~v. en frem there.