Blog Fourteen: Norms and Convention in Family Life and in Society

Duck’s chapter on family communication includes a discussion of the norms involved in families as ways of orchestrating proper behavior in certain activities.  These norms provide families with the foundations of routines, and this specific and expected behavior is repetitively used to share meaning amongst its members, who practice these norms as part of the family structure.  Duck defines norms as “habitual rules for conducting any family activity” (185), and Fiske defines them as “common practices of a group and society (that are) thus predictable, the expected” (101).  Both mean to say that behavior, whether in a small group or in a larger aspect of society, is dictated by what people feel is conventional and that coincides with how others behave.  I feel that Duck’s portrayal of norms within the family expresses an idea of separation from others in a way, as he points out that these family norms “distinguish (a family) from other families and their worlds of meaning”(185).  By saying that norms within a family are used to tie together that particular family through traditions and customs that differ from those of other families, Duck focuses more on a familial transacted relationship that is distinctly unique from its relationship with society.  Fiske refers more to the entire social picture of acceptance of norms and the reluctance to deviate from common social practices.  In essence, both authors demonstrate how people transact relationships.  Adopting a certain behavior to fit in is a form of establishing relationships and signaling something about the way we want these relationships to develop, based on our convergence toward or diversion from convention.  After reading about norms, I have realized that it is not only “Society’s Secret Agents” that enforce standards of behavior and interaction, but how we ourselves do the same thing by choosing to accept such standards, and that we can even enact these norms in our own family life.  It appears that “society’s” secret agents are not limited to their role in society, but also affect close, small group or family communication.