Every day we all go to different places, surrounded by a diverse group of people; we see how genders interact, relationships between genders are built/broken, and sometimes even how love is formed. For my observation I went to Friday’s and sat in the bar section of the restaurant.
The first person I observed was a man wearing a hat and a green shirt that had an Abercrombie logo on the front. He told the waitresses to take a man, a couple of tables away, a drink and to put it on his tab.
Two women sat in the table in front of me. They both seemed young in their late 20’s, both dressed in tight, low cut, revealing shirts, tight pants, and heels. One of them had their hair straightened, the other had curls. Then a guy approached them; he was wearing jeans, a white Famous Star T-shirt. He was standing in front of their table; the guy got closer to the girl with the curly hair. He starts whisperings into her ear and she laughs at everything he says; she gives him a little push. The guy and girl with the curly hair go outside.
Next I observed a couple who walked in holding hands. They sat close together, he had his arm around her and they were sharing the menu and deciding what to order. The waitress arrived and he ordered the food. When he would get a text he would remove the hand he had around her to hold his phone and text back. They shared a plate; talked in between bites and kissed.
After observing people at Friday’s it became clear that our surroundings affect our behaviors. William’s suggests culture is given meaning by each individual; culture can be created through communication, gender relationships, and economic status (Barker, 42). Everyone was drinking, socializing, and being louder than if they would have been seated on the other side of the restaurant. In a sense we all interpret the world and our surroundings in a similar way. According to William’s approach on culture, the reason everyone is louder at a bar is because people interpret their surroundings in a similar manner therefore creating the culture (loud, sociable, etc.) in the bar (Barker, 41).
The appearance of the two women I observed can be explained by Leavis and Arnold’s high culture; how media and magazines influence our thoughts and sense of style (Barker, 46). All the women in the bar had a similar style because that is what is considered to be in fashion. It is advertised daily by the media and magazines what a women should look like; that if you buys this, you will get this. The majority of the men were wearing some type of brand logo on their shirt. As Fiske argues, culture is money motivated (Barker, 51); so the logos on the men’s shirts were a way to show their class (afford brands). The same can be applied to the phones that both the men and women had (iphones, sidekicks, etc.). Also when the guy in the green shirt bought a guy a drink it was to show off and appear to be a big shot. We live in a materialistic society, especially in a big city like Los Angeles where we are constantly being reminded we need the nice cars, brand named cloths, and so on in order to belong, and impress others. It is as if love itself is being advertised and sold.
When the guy approached the girls their behavior changed. As Gidden’s stated, identity is cultural and changes according to particular times or places; it is our own creation (Barker, 217). Magazines for women today flaunt new ideas for women to impress men. So the girl with curly hair was doing what she has been told will work to get this guy’s attention. The guy on the other hand most likely had already had his eye set on this girl. Like Beauvoir says, to men women mean sex; unfortunately, not much has changed and many men still think this way. So when this guy saw these two girls sitting along he possibly interpreted it as they went there with the purpose of meeting guys, why else would they be at a bar alone right?
When the guy approached the girl, this in a way can be considered to be radical because in our culture it is expected for the men to always approach the women first. When the guy and the girl were talking and she would laugh, or put her hand on his shoulder; they did not know what the other was thinking. We can communicate through language and speaking but our words are lost in translation; everyone interprets things differently (Barker, 18). The guy might think he knows what the girl is thinking; it was her body language that let the guy know if it was ok to get closer or not. In reality, as Derrida said, there are no real truth only concepts of what we see. Her body language may seem to come off as saying “I am interested in you,” when she may be really thinking “I will talk to him until someone else comes along.” Or maybe this was love which was forming before my eyes. Or was this just another random hook-up at a bar. Who is to say if there is no truth to words, language, or signs for that matter?
Observing the couple was interesting. When they kissed they were short and quick little kisses; they were on their phones most of the time. Does this mean they were not in love? Not necessarily, everyone defines love from a different perspective; there is no concrete definition. This could be love in the making; everyone has their own unique way to express their feelings toward the person they love, or are falling in love with. This couple may just be starting their relationship or just do not feel the need to be all over each other in public to show people they care for one another. Female and male expectations for each other are constantly changing, as Derrida states in his theory, things are always changing and have endless meanings. In the end love means whatever we want it to mean to us.
Work Cited
Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008.
Beauvoir, de Simone. The Second Sex, Women as Other. 1949
Derrida, Jacques. "Différance." Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004.
