Sunday, February 8, 2009

Memo #1

This memo highlights the differences between notions of mechanical and organic solidarity, and explores how Durkheim's models of both concepts can be applied within the institutional setting of a national sorority.

3 comments:

  1. In Durkheim’s attempt to understand the consequences of a division of labor in society, he makes a distinction between the different forms of social solidarity that can arise given the stage in such a division of labor, specifically those forms he refers to as “mechanical” and “organic” solidarity.
    For Durkheim, mechanical solidarity is born in societies in which the division of labor is fairly undeveloped. With little specialization, individuals maintain many similarities in their beliefs and develop a sense of unity surrounding such shared interests that prevails over individual ones. Durkheim refers to this sharing of beliefs as the collective consciousness, and sees it as the prevailing force in a society marked by mechanical solidarity. The collective consciousness is overbearing in a society in early stages of division of labor, and the individual submits to it instead of his unique beliefs as an individual.
    Durkheim’s model of organic solidarity stands to represent society at an entirely different stage in the development of the division of labor. This type of solidarity, for Durkheim, comes to rise in a society that is highly specialized. He argues that as specialization increases, individuals diverge in their beliefs and attitudes, and the collective consciousness becomes less central for the individual. The individual’s growing awareness of his specific role or job as part of the large network of interdependent organism leads to a solidarity grounded in interdependence.
    Durkheim makes clear that both such forms of solidarity are not typically pure in form, but rather society usually is made up of some combination of the two. He sees, however, that as the division of labor becomes increasingly developed, so too does the individual consciousness and organic solidarity, or that based on complementary differences. Inversely, this relationship suggests that with such development, the collective consciousness plays less of a role and mechanical solidarity, or that based on such likenesses will decrease.
    Durkheim recognized that the development of labor and the role of solidarity existed not just in a broad sense, but also within specific institutions and relations such as that of trade and marriage. Using this framework, the sorority can be understood as an example of an institution in which both types of solidarity can be recognized. As a national organization with hundreds of branches across the country, mechanical solidarity prevails. The leadership structure for each chapter is the same, regardless of location, as are rules for the recruitment procedure and initiation ceremonies. There is a national philanthropy that causes members to unite around a common goal regardless of other local projects. Secret ceremonies, handshakes, songs are exclusive to members but are the same for every member in every chapter. Members are reminded constantly through house events and literature of a specific set of values that should be sought after and exemplified at all times. Such reinforcement of collective ideals acts as a mechanism of mechanical solidarity and a way of promoting and strengthening the collective consciousness and likeness of the group. It is in these ways, the solidarity within the sorority as a national organization seems mechanical in that individual chapters’ desires and unique qualities are downplayed while procedure, tradition, and specific collective goals and attributes are encouraged.
    As an isolated chapter, however, the sorority is a model of organic solidarity. The structure of leadership is highly specialized with great variation in the skills and personality type needed for each. The house executive board includes positions to handle the tasks of finance, event planning, membership, philanthropy, and scholarship in addition to committees for members to get involved in the particular aspect of the house that interests them, whether it be house morale, green issues, ceremonies, or food. There are various levels of commitment, and many jobs leave room for the member to be creative with her individual task. Such opportunities allow members to unite with the understanding that each person plays a unique role. Additionally, with the exception of certain mandatory all-house events, there is no unifying factor with regard to the activities with which members are involved. The house prides itself on the diversity of its membership, and solidarity comes from each girl’s awareness of her unique contribution to this larger goal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Carrie I also am looking at a sorority for my institution! Is there more of an individual consciousness over collective consciousness throughout the sorority or the other way around? Even though your sorority has secret ceremonies/handshakes, do you know if they vary from chapter to chapter? Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  3. First, you did a great job differentiating between mechanical and organic solidarity and especially demonstrating that the two are not mutually exclusive but rather overlap for the most part.

    Secondly, the way that you apply that knowledge to your institution of a national sorority is intriguing. I thought of a sorority as an institution of mostly organic solidarity. I only thought about a sorority as an individual chapter and what each member could give to the sisterhood, but I like the way you approach each chapter as only a part of the entire sorority, bringing mechanical solidarity into play. It's very true that there is an incredible amount of similarity and repressive law within the national or international sorority. Anyway, very interesting perspective.

    ReplyDelete