MSU

LIBRARIES
“

~—

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
P1ace in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMMUNICATION IN TRANSIT

By

Mary Lou Burns

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Sociology

1985

C7
/

aassdo

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis was completed with the help of many, and I
would like to mention a few for their special assistance.
First, the residents of Lansing and East Lansing are to be
appreciated for showing this observer their personal com-
munication. Hopefully this study did no harm to their daily
lives and that their contribution broadens understanding.
Also critical was the help and guidance of Dr. Barrie Thorne,
who encouraged, assisted, and helped refine both the study
and the analysis. For giving personal support in getting
this report completed, inspiration of Ryzing Earth Dancer
came through. In the final production, Abby helped out en-
ormously by providing tools of completion. Finally, thanks
to my family for support, and Thora who was with me through
many drafts. I feel very fortunate to have such friends.

ii

II.
III.
IV.

VI.
VII.
VIII.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Method

Patterns of Communication
Commuters

Daytime Riders

Night Riders

Conclusion

List of References

iii

15
29
46
55
58

ABSTRACT
COMMUNICATION IN TRANSIT

By

Mary Lou Burns

This research and subsequent analysis and report is an
observation study of communication in a public place. The
problem to solve was how individuals show, or fail to show,
personal connection. The method used was participant ob-
servation. A large base of fieldnotes was collected and
then analysed for patterns, hypotheses, and sociological
theory. Hypotheses were tested in the field and revised.
Major findings were that three distinct types of communication
emerged among those found on buses or waiting for buses in
the Lansing and East Lansing areas. A separate type of com-
munication was seen exhibited by commuters, daytime riders,
and riders at night. Analysis of the contents of the dif-
ferent types of communication, as well as an analysis into
the reasons for each type of communication enacted was done.
Finally, the reader is invited to review with the writer some
possibilities for future public environment communication.

INTRODUCTION

This study is an analysis of communication in a public,
urban setting. It seeks to show the observable patterns of
communication enacted in daily lives of city dwellers within
the urban environment on public buses. The study began as
a generalized, unfocused observation of an urban environment
and evolved into a study of communication in a specific
setting.

Chapter One introduces the topic and focus. Chapter
Two explains the method used and the specific site of the
study, and also attempts to explain the existential and
phenomenological work involved in participant observation.
Chapter Three discusses previous research on the observation
of communication patterns in public, urban settings. Chap-
ters Four through Six describe and analyse three distinct
types of bus riding; commuting, daytime, and night time.
Chapter Seven offers additional conclusions and analysis.

II. Method

I chose the method of participant observation because
it allows the researcher to apprehend social life directly.
The most sensitive instruments of this method are the human
eye and the human brain's analytic ability, which allow max-
imum flexibility interpreting social events. Setting aside,
or temporarily "bracketing" pre-ordained categories of sig-
nificance and rigidly ordered research strategies, the social
world can reveal itself to the participant observer in the
fullness of real events understood by a detached analyst.
Being a co-worker in the accomplishment of the communication
provides an insider's understanding. Being an observer
and an analyst generates an eye for pattern and structure in
the experience at hand. Combining the tasks of participant
and observer, contemporary and analyst, provides a basis for
understanding everyday processes of communication.

A long tradition of participant observation in urban
settings has been an inspiration for this study. The
creative observation of "Chicago School" sociologists gave
social scientists revealing analysis of the lives of im-
migrant cultures, as well as such diverse worlds of expe-
rience as dance hall enthusiasts, homeless itinerants, and
the Y.W.C.A. (Faris, 1970). More recent sociological
studies of urban life, especially Erving Goffman's, clearly
show the richness of data and insight that can be gained by
using the method of participant observation.

Participant observation is closely tied to phenomeno-
logical and existential analysis, seeking to understand
social and natural events by being open to the "thing itself"
and going beyond conventional categorization to concentrate
on the appearance and mode of progression of the natural

2

3

communication event itself. George Psathas explains how a
phenomenological approach proceeds to get at the truth by
being open to the experience at hand. He describes how a
researcher attempts to "bracket" pre-existing knowledge of
the situation or thing in order to be open to a different,
possibly more "authentic" perception (Psathas, 1973).
Fresh perception may reveal important meanings.

Using a phenomenological approach to the understanding
of social life, this research has as a primary goal the con-
tinual deepening of partial understandings by continually
looking at new and questioning old understandings until a
truthful rendition is revealed. It is achieved through a
process of self-critical observation, questioning assump-
tions and patterns, building and testing patterns and under-
standing, and finally reviewing and theorizing about ob-
servations, patterns, and social trends.

In this fieldwork I also sought to gain an under-
standing of social events, that is, an understanding of
events from the point of view of the experience of its
participants. A continual, questioning sensitivity to
researcher biases and assumptions is a key element of the
process. The human capacity for empathy is central to ap-
prehending the member's view. The everyday process of
empathic communication must probe, and test, and intuit to
understand enough of other's feelings in order to live
comfortably with them. In addition, the researcher must
gain access to the other's communications to explain their
meanings and sequences. The existential field worker's
goal is to try to take, and then analytically understand,
an insider's view of the other's perspective.

Symbolic interactionists have recognized the human
capacity for empathic understanding as the basis for
socialization (Mead, 1970). This accomplishment of child-
hood is something that can be examined and consciously
intensified. Existential fieldwork involves more than re-
cording numbers and times of occurances, it involves

4
revealing the member's "being-in-the-world" by adjusting
one's own sensibilities to another's existence. Empathically
taking the role of the other is the existential accomplish-
ment of fieldwork, as recording and analysing is the work of
the scientist.

Every person survives because, with greater of less
ease, he or she successfully navigates the changing waters
of his or her social milieu. The fieldworker must attempt
to understand and then represent the way that the person in
the world accomplishes this navigational feat. An under-
standing of the rules of the social world and the meaning
of communication from.other members arms each person for life
in society. The fieldworker seeks to explain the person's
local survival over a specific period of time.

Looking specifically at the member's experience of
"being-in-the-world", it can be deduced that to actually be
in the world signifies willingness to comply with and create
understandings with local contemporaries. People are also
strongly motivated by a desire for community support, as each
person's experience can confirm. Society is created by us
as it creates us.

To fit in with historic social expectations and to be
involved in creating new understandings is to be a well
adapted human being. Heidegger describes the way that people
Egg the worlds in which they reside, the worlds the people,
when he describes the existence of the human being, "Dasein"
(Heidegger, 1962).

Participant observation, in its methodology, attempts
to represent the familiar residences that we call society.
This method goes beyond viewing social situations as simply
the product of individual whims, ideas, or plans randomly
collected together. It recognizes the collective production
of events and situations and seeks to reproduce their logic
and modes of feeling. Participant observation can produce
sociological description and analysis which takes into ac-
count the collective composition, common rules, and

5
understandings of social events.

Fieldworkers try to be empathetically sensitive to the
member's view of the world and also to produce an objective
record of the social events that are examined. As a re-
searcher, I was aware that my intentions and activities were
not solely those of most participating bus riders. The
completion of taking a trip by bus was not my primary
interest in taking the bus trip.

The "sociologist qua sociologist" does not approach
the world to be studied from the "natural attitude" - where
the primary practical interest is living in the world
(Psathas, 1973; Schutz, 1971). The sociologist approaches
the world from a scientific stance where the primary prac-
tical purpose is to make a study of and chart the meaningful
world that is natural and taken for granted by the member.
The sociologist must then continually work at keeping both
the member's everyday understanding of the social situation,
and at the same time harbor an analytic eye to weigh and
judge natural events.

Throughout the study, the model of objective scientific
analysis patterned my activities. I recorded events with as
much care and detail as was possible. I later expanded the
notes I took during the day they were taken. I continually
developed working hypotheses, checking them with subsequent
planned observations.

The method of developing categories and theory out of
data, rather than testing pre-set deductive hypotheses, is
called "Grounded Theory" (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). The
environments or types of communication, on buses, described
here evolves into a substantive theory of communication. The
final analysis attempted here works to create theory about
communication as a community builder.

This project began in the spring of 1975. The study
first began as a class project for a Field Methods class of
Professor Barrie Thorne. Her reading and notice of con-
sistencies, inconsistencies, cues, clues, and potentially

6
relevant patterns helped me see how substance could be built
from observation. The reactions and support of other class
members provided an environment of enthusiasm and ambition
for this work.

The vital statistics of this study are as follows. I
rode the most central and well traveled Lansing, Michigan
bus routes (the "Churchill Area", "Lansing Mall", and "East
Lansing - Meridian Mall" buses) for more than 90 hours.

This resulted in more than 150 pages of single spaced notes.
The notes were coded and analysed. The final editing was
done in 1978 and 1983, mainly to allow for more reflection
on the method.

III. Patterns of Communication

The personally experienced, subjective, situationally
grounded communication of people can be understood to be
flattened, distorted, and misrepresented by objective analysis
as observers of the scientific method have noted (Heidegger,
1971). In order to be understood in its general, univer-
salistic principles and processes, communication must lose
those aspects of its living reality that account for its
specific and unique existence. To understand communication
scientifically, the elements and processes of it must be
abstracted out and generalized. It is this scientific under—
standing of the general forms of communication that this
chapter will discuss. Studies of the general forms of com-
munication will be examined in order to provide an informed
framework for interpreting specific events of public urban
communication.

The studies of communication discussed in this chapter
will include language, paralanguage, and kinesics. Following
the outline of George Trager, language refers to actual speech
or written language, paralanguage to sounds that are not part

 

of our language code and symbol, and kinesics to the non-
verbal communication of meaning (Trager, 1972). In this chap-
ter, I seek to explain the mutually created, progressive
nature of communication and then growth of intensity, duration
of commitment, and style of development of communicative in-
teractions. I will start with a look at individuals who co-
exist in the same locale and have little mutual recognition
and proceed to examine the ways that mutual connection and

commitment are accomplished. The progression of this chapter
will follow this.

8

Introducing one's self, a person enters a social scene
and presents, for everyone's view, all of his or her ob—
servable characteristics and qualities. Each social actor
provides an exhibit of individual expression. As Erving
Goffman observed, one has no choice but to give an impression
the only choice involves how aware and intentional the
signals given are to the self (Goffman, 1959).

Talent may be another dynamic. A person could be con-
sciously choosing to convey something believed personally to
be true, but lack the skill, correct language currency, or
confidence to carry it off effectively, and may consciously
not convey lack of knowledge, care or feeling.

The researcher must take great care not to accept a
communication, or an apparent meaning, at the message's face
value. The conventional summary of the type of event ob-
served is important - at least it reveals the other's choice
of expression, and possibly the way they survive in the local
environment. What deeper value exists may be revealed on
future, more prolonged, probing, and sympathetic study.

People continually communicate their public feelings
and attitudes by their appearance and manner. Involved in
this is the communication of interest in the other. Each
person chooses and presents his or her interests in sociable
contact. Each person acts as a contributor that forms the
observable substance of social interaction.

The expressive contribution of the individual is pre-
sented in the society of others. Individual expression is
presented in the society of others within some social sit-
uation. Individuals fit their contributing presence into
the social scene. Alfred Schutz reveals the special under-
standing of the other's state of being that develops in
face-to-face relations (Schutz, 1971). Schutz also brings
out the coordination of mutual space and time, of lives and
experience that come from knowledge of the state of the
other. It is like the microhistorical creation of lived
life (Schutz, 1971).

9

People sense and consciously understand the other
through their communication. When a person enters the situ—
ation, he or she shows membership. Cicourel points out that
as members we not only can understand what the other is
saying, but can also understand the cultural grammar of our
resulting encounters and relationships (Cicourel, 1974).
Cicourel outlines the manner of progression in an exchange
explaining how character is revealed, how knowledgeable
interpretations of the other are accomplished (Cicourel,
1974).

It can be seen that participants have accumulated such
knowledge and understanding of the other and his or her
actions and orientations. Members have this knowledge based
on their specific and general human sensitivity and memory,
and use this knowledge to create and continue social rela-
tionships and patterns with others. These facts of mutual
orientation and thoughtful coordination are of central im-
portance to an explanation of the progression of commu-
nication.

To examine how the progression of communication from
aware coexistence to shared, intensely meaningful rela-
tionships works, this section will begin with the lowest
level of mutual involvement, and continue to get more in-
volved. The order I will use to review this literature will
begin with an examination of the individual showing "non-
recognition" and finish with an examination of how com-
munication patterns progress.

The lowest level of connection with another present is
the "non-recognition" of the other. Communicating at this
level of interest or involvement, the person has become aware
of what is going on around him or her, but shows no special
attention to it. David Sudnow explains this level of kinesic
work and its common application in a public setting as "pre-
glance monitoring" routinely done as a first screening of the
content of the social scene (Sudnow, 1972).

10

At this minimal level of communicative involvement,
which is both typical and normal for the urban setting,
people are mutually aware of and monitoring but now giving
signs of recognition. This level of communication is in-
volvement characterized by seemingly accepting awareness,
and extends up to the level of acknowledged mutual re-
cognition, or meeting of the eyes in eye contact.

Eye contact is an interactional benchmark; individuals
who signal that they are open to more involved interaction
with the other generally do so by giving eye contact.
Looking into the other's eyes implies interest in the other.
By showing interest, the individual stands ready to meet,
and perhaps to raise the intensity of any offer of interest
from the other, as Goffman theorizes (Goffman, 1963).

This level of interaction is fundamentally different
from those that preceeded it because it involves recognition.
It involves kinesic action and implies notice of the other,
specifically through the use of eye contact, or gaze con-
nection. Sudnow describes how focused eye contact is de-
veloped after unfocused monitoring has scouted the area and
spotted items of special interest and openings. He describes
the observable levels of "looks", describing how motivation
and focus build the intensity (Sudnow, 1972). Emphasizing
the sequential character of this interaction, Sudnow outlines
the two levels of communication that he observed and states
the relationship, as one that provides a sequence of un-
focused to focused looking (Sudnow, 1972). Goffman also
brings out the fundamental difference between the common
background of "civil inattention" and the special kinesic
figure of interest, eye contact. The significance of eye
contact is the opening up of language exchange, Goffman
theorizes (Goffman, 1963).

Eye contact is the visible commitment to establish an
interchange usually involving language. It signals to the
other that a person is interested and that interaction may

11
further progress. Again, Goffman recognizes and names the
newborn relationship that people begin when they exchange
focused looks an "encounter" (Goffman, 1963).

An encounter is the level of involvement that can in-
volve speech. An example of an encounter that remains non-
verbal might be a series of nonverbal kindnesses -- eye
contact, smiling in recognition of a burden carried, a facial
muscle change that communicates opening of the face and per-
haps an offer to share the suffering, then an averted glance.
This series could later be opened when one of the passengers,
in this case, leaves the bus and makes some brightening,
opening eye movements and closes off the short encounter with
a sign of pleasure and recognition. While it may be nearly
impossible to put an exact meaning on the interaction ob-
served, the interaction clearly stands out as a greater con-
nection than most riders have, and as an event that tends to
raise eyebrows and possibly spirits. The continuum in an en-
counter takes many forms. It may lead to conversation.

The next level of progression in communication is the
active opening of verbal interaction, or conversation. Ver-
bal interaction signals the accomplishment of an established
interest in particularistic, other-sensitive, more than com-
mon communication. The other is talked to as an individual,
rather than being merely "taken in" as part of the sur-
rounding environment.

The accomplishment of verbal interaction is, like the
accomplishment of eye contact, a mutual choice. It seems im-
portant to note that when it is not a personal choice of each,
the relationship is known and recognized generally as one of
dominance or coercion. The agreement to establish eye con-
tact is somehow achieved, and is maintained by both parties.
If participants do continue, and have no previously estab-
lished relationship on which to base their contact, they can
use a variety of reasons or excuses. Sacks theorizes about
the discovery of qualifiers; how people gain "rights" or
"tickets" to engage the other's attention (Sacks, 1966).

12

The content of verbal interaction used to engage the
other initially varies with the situation and cultural ex-
pectations. Men and women signal the other in ways that are
conscious of the sexual identity of each, for example. In
public, urban settings that participants have experienced
throughout their lives, there is an entire web of expec-
tations that hold each person in position as one of the same
or the other sex approaches. Interest, loneliness, fear, and
personal motivations of every type create the public stance
we each take. Sacks talks about common "tickets" such as
warnings to the other concerning the other's personal safety
(Sacks, 1966). In bus riding encounters I observed, in-
quiries were often made as to the arrival of the bus or the
state of the weather -- how bad it would be soon. Comments
were often made by older women especially about their own
clothing choice or their shopping plans in relation to the
weather; first an analysis was given of their own fate, then
an implied invitation extended (nonverbally usually) for the
other to evaluate his or her plans. There are many mutually
understood, low risk, low commitment beginnings for verbal
interaction.

Once verbal interaction has begun, there is the po-
tential for conversation and eventual acquaintanceship.
While the most significant factor in progressions from the
stage of non-recognition to initial verbal interaction is
the observable appearance of openness and interest in the
other, the most significant factor moving interaction from
the stage of initial verbal interaction to more intense ver-
bal interaction is the content of the verbal interaction.
Interaction that nurtures the relationship upwards to the
level of acquaintanceship is qualitatively different than
less intense interaction in that it is based on the personal
qualities of those involved. It recognizes the multifaceted
and complex nature of the other instead of reacting to the
other as if he or she were the bland, uni-dimensional facade
that is the persona of the typical stranger.

13

Looking again at the progression in a relationship that
involves verbal interaction, it can be observed that the
model of mutual commitment is in effect. Encounters proceed
by participants taking turns at signalling their interest
and commitment. It is observable that the parties involved
take turns speaking, or in the building of conversations.
Harvey Sacks has an explanation of this learned system of
"turns" works, governed by what he calls the "chaining rule"
to proceed according to participant's "rights" in conver-
sation (Sacks, 1966).

Schegloff generalizes this rule to speaking in general,
not necessarily involving questioning (Schegloff, 1972). In
summary, it can be seen that communication proceeds in a re-
ciprocal manner, featuring alternating commitments of in-
terest, and using some sense of "taking turns" (again, with
the lack of this alerting both the participants and observer
to look for dominance, hierarchy and coercion). Effort and
resistance, presentation and validation, question and answer,
request and compliance, and other recognizable patterns of
initiation and response weave the fabric of interaction.

Up to this point, I have implied that continued com-
mitment is required for participants to continue. While the
continuation is enacted by each participant at each step,
there are social pressures that will make the continuation
seem mandatory. For example, as Sacks reveals, a question
brings pressure or obligation for an answer (Sacks, 1966).
Not to respond to the other's advance communicates a neg-
ative stance and points also to the imagined uninteresting
or dangerous character of the relationship that is anti-
cipated with the other. Schegloff points out the social
meaning of "no response (Schegloff, 1972).

In summary, it is expected that an opening request
will be answered. Keeping in mind that it is impossible to
communicate nothing in a face-to-face situation, it can now
be seen that once looks of recognition have been established,
communication proceeds by the signalling of either advance or

14
lack of interest in advance. Once verbal interaction is ini-
tiated, the choice becomes either another verbal offering or
the communication of a "cold shoulder", or active denial and
withdrawal from the other.

While verbal interaction may be stopped in its tracks,
it may also progress. Growth in relationships is an ob-
servable phenomenon. Growth depends upon mutual action.
Setting up a dual switchboard model that both parties move
along, Murray Davis analyses how this process is accom-
plished (Davis, 1973).

Davis uses the term "philemics" to refer to the smallest
behavioral units that meaningfully communicate, and goes on
to explain maneuvers, shifting and escalation of intensity
between acquaintances and intimates (Davis, 1973).

So far, this review has characterized communication as
built in a linear progression. Participants communicate
intentions to the other, and define the relationship and
its course by their responsiveness. There may, however,
be analysis possible that is even more minute in its par-
ticles of change.

As Barrie Thorne has suggested, environmental pro-

 

gression may move and deepen the intensity of an encounter
or relationship. My observation confirms the atmosphere as
an actor, for example the fact that an arriving bus rider
meets 30 other quiet, privately engaged riders and immedi-
ately finds a place and blends in points to a real ability
of individuals to learn appropriate interaction from at-
mospheric cues.

This section attempted to explain how communicative
encounters come into existence and to outline the structure
and sequence of their progression. This survey of com—
munication lays the groundwork for analysis of observations
in this field project.

IV. Commuters

We are all hustling and dealing

as we broil on the iron grates of the city.
Our minds charred, we collide and veer off
(Piercey, 1982).

The first world of public communication that will be
described here is the "world of commuters." Commuters ob-
served for discussion were those who traveled the Capital
Area Transit Authority (CATA) buses in Lansing and East
Lansing Michigan during rush hours, from 7:00 a.mw until
9:00 a.m. and from 4:00 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. This "world"
is being considered first because more people ride at this
time than any other and because people who ride at all
times consider the anonymous, minimally intense communi-
cation -- which was found by this researcher to be typical
of commuters -- to be the normal way bus riding is done.

For example, though a person who rides in the evening may
decide to venture an interaction that is more intense than
that generally practiced by commuters, there is no expecta-
tion on the part of other riders that he or she will. When
riders are in doubt as to how they should conduct themselves,
the shared expectation is that they will assume the com-H
muter's nonchalant stance towards the other. This most com-
mon interactive stance is the one that the host environment
seems to engender, and that most bus riders practice.

While some other people travel during rush hour times,
the predominant travler at this time is the working commuter;
the working person traveling to his or her job. When riding
or waiting for the bus, the interactional stance is one of
minimal involvement. Commuters show the lowest level of
involvement in interaction. They display the aloof but awake

15

l6
and alert attitude of "civil inattention" most often. Even
in the face of a possible rider or two who have a great in-
terest in personal contacts with other riders, minimal in-
volvement dominates. In the display of nonchalance, com-
muters accommodated to the situation in which they were.
The accomplishment of minimizing the appearance of being
a person who must wait is done by being occupied with some
task or project, such as the very common bus rider who is
"busy" reading the paper.

Since the bus is a carrier of many persons, and must
take a fixed route regardless of traffic and special weather
conditions, its timing is necessarily approximate. Buses do
run based on schedules, but the schedule is only a rough
guide which any number of delays can alter. Being a bus
rider involves putting extra time or flexibility into one's
own plan to allow for unpredictable delays. When doing this
essential waiting for a bus, commuters often display a
mildly impatient look and restless manner, visually showing
that they do not find it pleasant to be spending time this
way.

Commuters may find it a waste of their time to be
waiting for a bus, or find it necessary to convey to others
that they are not the type of person to be spending time this
way. Spending time in a way that does not appear productive
may degrade the person. Barry Schwartz, observing waiters,
writes that degradation is a general feature of waiting
(Schwartz, 1976).

Waiting itself is degrading because it shows that the
waiter is not an important person, and must wait for the
more important, Nancy Henley theorizes (Henley, 1976). For
those who have internalized the cultural value of being a
distinguished individual, waiting in a mass of equals may
seem to deny special qualities and imply common status.

One way to show distance from the situation of waiting
is to show impatience. Being restless implies frustrated

17
action, and can be read to say that one is restlessly
waiting until another productive activity can be done.
An example from my fieldnotes describes this activity.

Three business-types came to the stop,
separately, about two minutes before
the bus came. The middle aged man
who was waiting, in the blue striped
suit, had walked around, sat down ten-
tatively on the edge of his seat, got
up and walked around a ain, and sat
down again (Fieldnotes?

Though the cliche "hurry up and wait" takes on special
frustration for the bus rider, the observer can notice that
"hurrying up" is a standard and highly valued activity in
itself for commuters on their way to work. Bus riding, of
course, involves the process of rushing to the stop to catch
the bus on time, then waiting for it to arrive, hurrying
over to the bus door, boarding and choosing a seat quickly
before the bus lurches into gear, waiting for the desti-
nation, then hurrying off. The operations of the bus dic-
tate ebbs and flows of activity to the commuter. During the
passing of lags and flows of the bus, the commuter appears
busy. This can be observed to be an unwritten rule of the
commuting scene. To back up the benefit of this business,

I can remember that on Chicago subways, small metal signs
told riders to read while riding -- apparently the whole
system flows well with riders who have a job of their own.

A final way that commuters may appear occupied when
they are waiting is to "rush" around. Goffman tells of how
a person, feeling that he or she must always be involved in
something significant, becomes involved in rushing (Goffman,
1963). To be viewed as an idler, a wastrel, or simply to
fail to show vitality and purpose (even for a short time),
could be hazardous to one's self image. Commuters do rush --
out into the street to look for the bus, to the news stand
to quickly get a paper, and in running to the stop at the
last minute. Rushing is a respectable occupation.

18

In summary, people on their way to work cannot simply
act in the slow and easy way that their bodies might find
most comfortable. The commuters are instead influenced
by expectations of social censure or welcome acceptance,
to appear to be the active and alert rider, and to show
a nonchalant recognition of others.
Status Shows

I looked around, in what I thought was
a friendly way, I caught her eye. She
did not break it - eye contact - but
looked at me as if I were impertinent

to be surveying her - as if I had a

lot of nerve to be looking her over.

She did this in such a convincing way
that I looked away and felt somehow

put in my place. It is fascinating

to me that she could do this, she suc—
ceeded in putting herself across as a
person who was not to be sneezed at

. . . nonverbal differentiations are
all these people have to go on; clothing
posture, gait, and facial expression
seem to be their resources (Fieldnotes).

 

In a situation where many types of workers ride together
the differences between them, both in appearance and expres-
sion, communicate their rank in society. In examining the
display of identity, Randall Collins notes that individual
”market positions" depend upon the emotional and cultural
resources acquired from previous interactions (Collins, 1976).

During rush hour, both the higher status, upper middle
class professional, administrative, or managerial workers
and the lower status, lower middle and working class opera-
tives, laborers, sales clerks, and service workers ride
to their respective jobs together. They are clear about
showing that they are not the same by their dress, expression
and manner.

As would be expected, differences in people are ref-
lected in interactional style. Differences in life style
and position in the social order, or social class, would seem
to create different ways of approaching communication.

l9
Sociolinguists Thorne and Henley have found this to be true;
they summarize and theorize how factors of different sex,
race, status and ethnicity are tied to styles people choose
(Thorne and Henley, 1975). Goffman points out that people's
social position or qualities, as recognizable traits of
people in social situations, are expected to determine their
manner of interaction (Goffman, 1959).

I sought to discover the ways that people displayed
who they were and the type of social encounter they were
to be found in. Interactants in a social situation can be
seen to be signaling their expected place in social en-
counters. Social encounters in public situations are com-
prised of the configurations of socially meaningful signals;
individuals know their own position and that of others in
the social world around them.

Dress is the first visible differentiator. Professional
and administrative workers (whom this researcher could not
distinguish) can be identified by the matched, well tailored
”outfits" that they wear. Barrie Thorne has observed the
meaning of an outfit -- the matched, coordinated set of
clothes that imply the intelligent and coordinated self of
the wearer. Their clothing tells the world that they can
afford good clothing and have the good taste to choose and
wear it well. Their clothing usually offers no clues as to
what they actually do; it - like them - is low on disclosure,
and certainly shows no signs of their work process. They
appear to do genteel, mental work, if any. They can be seen
to wear the clothing appropriate to a gentry class who have
no wealth and oversee, but do not toil.

In contrast, operatives, laborers, sales clerks, and
service workers wear roughly fitted clothing of hardier
material that usually states by its shape, material, and
color the type of work they engage in, and may state the em-
ployer's company name as well as the worker's. These working
class occupations require the kind of work that often shows

20
in the worker's appearance. Far from the more intellectual
or vaguely "business" type work imputed to the more bourgeois
person, these peOple obviously toil, and the observer can
often tell just how. By the puff pink uniform or the navy
blue coverall with embroidered ID patch, the working class
person is clearly labelled as to their work, for the benefit
of boss, client, security or other reason not the workers'.
This clothing difference is congruent with other status
shows.

Besides clothing, upper middle class workers set them-
selves apart in other ways. They show, with degree of dis-
pleasure at having to wait and follow bus procedures,that
they are of a superior cast. The higher status person has,
in addition to the burdens borne by all bus riders, the
added problem of showing his or her higher rank.

In a hierarchically stratified society where power,
privilege, and prestige are concentrated disproportionately
in the hands of those in the highest class positions (hence,
ruling class) one would expect to see, and the observer can
see, the visual representation of class rank. Since bus
riding is democratic in terms of its official rules, and
since it is not characteristic of superior rank people to act
as a common person, or to interact democratically, the su-
perior person has the task of differentiation to accomplish.

The motivation for the accomplishment of status dif-
ferentiation is fear of demotion in rank. Especially dis-
satisfied, restless waiting behavior can be observed. Barry
Schwartz describes the special degradation of having to wait
alongside one who may not be considered one's social equal
(Schwartz, 1976).

Status differentiation is accomplished by averting the
eyes, registering absolutely no reaction to possible comments
and greetings of other riders, and bringing an interest ab-
sorbing prop, such as a paper or printed matter or even an
engagement book in which to become exclusively engaged.

21

Aversion and engaging props, as well as the narrowing of
eyes and the pursing of lips in a closed off, frowning ex-
pression help the higher status person communicate that he
or she is set apart from and unavailable to the crowd at
large.

Like traditional caste defined Indians, contemporary
U.S. upper classes insist on being above the reach, or touch,
of lower class citizens. Not only do higher status persons
make no contact with others, they show that they expect others
to make none to them. Research findings indicate that lower
status people are not generally allowed to touch, or intrude.
upon, those of higher status (Henley, 1976). The fact that
this rule is in effect can be verified. Often, the use of
newspapers and other physical barriers to contact serve the
social purpose of cutting off higher status people from ap-
proach, in much the same way as the veil is used in tradi-
tional Moslem societies to cut off contact (Murphy, 1964).

An example, from the observations of this study, i1—
1ustrates the phenomenon of a higher status person's ex-
pectation of differentially favored authoritativeness. Two
boys were making noise and a professional looking man showed
that he did not approve by casting a threatening look to-
wards them. He seemed especially irritated that this ob-
server did not show agreement with his interpretation of
the situation. This man illustrates the case of one who ex-
pects both to be left alone, and also to have his superior
judgement accepted as final.

He seemed to be looking back threat-
eningly at the boys . . . although there
was no chance they could have seen his
expression, he must have felt it neces-
sary to register his expression..

Later this man was looking at me as I
looked around, with a . . . look that
seemed intrusive -- as if I should

take it into account (Fieldnotes).

Higher status people, in summary, stand apart as the type of
person with the most visible show of aloofness, removal from

22
the situation, and superiority and the least inclination to
have their positions challenged or compromised.
Gender Shows

 

The middle aged male role may not fit
with the bus rider role that requires
passively waiting and then getting on
the bus on command. This may be why
these men came to the stop at the last
minute, why the one longer-term waiter
was restless, and why the other two
boarders of the bus had to separate
themselves by taking their time to get
on the bus and not doing it right with
the crowd (Fieldnotes).

In social life, people are reacted to fig a member of
their gender category (Henley, 1976) and in turn react to
others based on what they have discovered from past inter-
action to be their interactional place. For example, Henley
writes of the finding of increased interpersonal sensitivity
of women to men and blacks to whites and ties it to oppres-
sive conditions and the need to account for the societal
superior (Henley, 1976). As a member of a particular racial
or gender category, a person is met with a particular inter-
actional response and in turn forms his or her own responses
or adaptation to the social encounters in which the person
finds him or her self at the time.

When waiting or riding, male restlessness, like the
restlessness of higher status people, can be seen. Shifting
position, pacing, walking to the curb and leaning into the
street to scout the bus, folding and refolding newspapers,
shifting brief case materials; all are used by men to show
restlessness. It is apparently not easy being an active man
in the passive occupation of bus riding. To be passive, to
take another's direction is more associated with the tradi-
tional "feminine" role. Being the controlling driver fits
the traditional "masculine" role, waiting for a bus of others
to be driven to work does not, and the result is a discomfort
that is visible.

23

In contrast to this restless behavior, is the tendency
of women to huddle together at the bus stop. Instead of
feeling uncomfortable at being passive and controlled, women
may feel some discomfort at being alone in public, and hence
unprotected. Women were observed to be sitting near one
another far more often than men were. An example from the
fieldnotes illustrates the phenomenon of women standing and
sitting together, in this case on a bench, while waiting for
the bus during rush hour.

If it is generally true that only
women sit on the bench (my obser-
vation confirms that this is the
pattern) one effect of this is that
women and not men are spatially
very close to each other. The leg
of the woman next to me is touching
my coat, on the other side of her
is a barrier, her purse, and the
woman on the other end of the bench
is touching that, the woman behind
me is constantly moving her arm
back into my back when she is
opening a small white and blue box
with a medical insignia on it. In
contrast totthis people waiting

at the wall, men and women, are no
closer than two feet of each other.
(Fieldnotes).

Waiting for the bus becomes a gender show where men pace and
strut and fiddle while women huddle together patiently to
wait and watch.
A Sociological Analysis of the World of Commuting

As a sociological fieldworker, it is necessary to draw
out the sociological implications of interaction that is ob-
served. The meaning, in terms of underlying social forces
and patterns, must be wrenched from the shape and character-
istics tones of the social picture. An intensive effort to
uncover the logic and structure of this world must be under-
taken, its data base being the mass of social events that
were observed. The essential problem is to understand the
meaning of the cold, aloof, anonymous relationships that are

24
seen among commuting people in public, urban settings such as
bus riding. The nonchalant attitude of these urbanites is
expected and normal. This section will explore the reasons
for it.

One approach to this question is to ask why the people
observed came to the city; what business did they accomplish?
The answer of course, is that they came to work in the fac-
tories, shops, administrative and professional offices of the
manufacturing and commercial center that is the city and also
to provide for human services of the city residents and
smooth coordination and direction of people and activities.
People came to the city in the nineteenth and twentieth cent-
uries to offer their time and talents to private enterprise
and later monopoly capitalists and the state'innexohangefforia
wage they needed to support their survival.

A brief look at the historical growth of cities is use-
ful. Historically, the city was formed as a centralized
place for a trade, or large scale commercial selling of
goods. The growth of cities is a result of the capitalist
enterprise of concentratinglmany numbers of workers and
using the greater productivity of the increasingly efficient
machinery and techniques developed (by workers concentrated
productivity) to produce commodities with exchange value for
the owner-capitalists.

In other words, the legal right to private property
was used by owners to take advantage of the productivity of
groups of workers who, in combination in large scale opera-
tions with machinery, could produce great quantities of mar-
ketable goods. Offers of wage paying jobs in factories by
property owning capitalists were taken by those who lived
near the city and by those who found themselves unable to
survive in the country because landlords claimed too large an
amount of their produce, and the general uncertainty of
agricultural livelihoods. Especially the small farmer was

forced to seek a livelihood in the capitalist enterprise; to

25
become wage laborers for the minority of owners. Individuals
came to survive by selling their labor power. This change in
production is observable as it influences social life to show
also this market exchange of equivalents as the way to con-
duct social life, as Baran and Sweezy find (Baran and
Sweezy, 1966).

The city grew, based on the logic of capitalist develop-
ment, and continues to display that logic in its growth and
structure. The ideological support of this capitalist deve-
lopment has always been belief in the legitimacy of fact that
ownership confers the rights to the produce of that property
Whether it be a tomato or transmission; whether it be pro-
duced by rain and animal fertilizer or the time and intelli-
gence of a human being. The support for the rights of pri-
vate property forms the basis for the capitalist mode of
operation.

Once private property is owned and used to profit-
making advantage to make more and amass more private enter-
prise.andipgy the wages for the time of workers, the system
of concentration and accumulation is well underway. The
system has become one of concentrated industry and trade,
controlled by a few, where the mass of people have, as their
only choice for survival, the selling of their labor power
for a wage with which to purchase the means of their essen-
tial support. The mass of people, then, came to immigrate
to the centers of industry, trade and coordination to sell
their labor for the price and in this way survive as citi-
zens. Contemporary workers act out of this framework.

The result of this pattern of work and survival is that
people enter the city to exchange time for money. As Baran
and Sweezy point out, relations between people became moti-
vated by the logic of exchange relations - at least in terms
of their trips from their homes to the industrial and com-
mercial areas of the city (putting aside, for the moment,
that they may have many other motivations in their home and

26
and neighborhood lives that are different, though not unre-
lated). This dominance of exchange relations is clear to see
in the interaction of city travelers in public areas. The
urban commons is a locale of the exchange of equivalents, an
area inhabited by those who wish to effect economic gain by
their activities in it.

An economic relations form the structure, and it does
not call for a well developed, intensely sociable interacting
public community, an interest in more personally based social
relations in public recedes. Nothing is to be gained, in
terms of the logic of the trip to the city, from opening
one's self up to the other in personal ways. An interest in
human friendliness for its own sake is not part of the
motivational forces at work in the plans of the typical,
reasonable city traveler. Nothing is to be gained, and time
and energy are to be lost without payment for such personal
efforts. Personal efforts at interaction with others also
on their way to sell their labor power are not expected, and
generally not engaged in.

One must not, however, assume that commuters are lone
workers single mindedly on their ways to the job. People
can not gather and ride together without taking one another
into account and allowing for the action of the other with
whom they share space and a common activity to communicate.
The passage of workers to work needs to be orderly and non—
problematic; this smooth trip of workers from their homes
to their jobs needs to be accomplished by aware human beings.

Erving Goffman describes proprietors of a middle class
tourist home change from having to separate, opposing stan-
dards and values from their customers to easing their per-
sonal discomfort by becoming more accommodating and even-
tually like minded with their guests. The human motivation
for fitting in with those around, even if it involves lower-
ing one's personal expectations for life and interaction, is
a very powerful social psychologicalfforee.

27

The interaction that ends up being practiced is a
generally polite, but essentially disinterested nonchalance.
It involves a personal style that sees and takes account of
the other's mutual need to travel to work, but carries no
personal interest. The resulting accommodative, manner is
well described, by Baran and Sweezy.(Baran and Sweezy, 1966).

The resulting social relations are personal and inter-
personal indifference that reflects the fact that economic
quid pro quo relations are being practiced. The surface

 

interaction observed reflects the values and ideology that
is created by and in turn supports the enterprise that is
the contemporary western capitalist city. We have the
specific reproduction, in social relations, of capitalist
work relations.

Capitalist work relations are stratified, hierarchical
and characterized by top down authority. Workers must accept
and give the life of daily practice to this method of organ-
ization which the culture supports and which characterizes
their lives both at work and in personal relations. People
reproduce congruent social relations; people accept and sup-
port, by their actions, their way of life.

It should not surprise the social analyst, then, to find
the reproduction of hierarchical, top-down, authoritarian
social relations in the public life of the city. The social
scientist can observe, and analytically understand the shows
of status that people endeavor to stage. The show of aloof-
ness by higher status people in a non-profit making activity
like riding the bus with lower status people can be seen as
both expected and logical. To observe the contrary would be
surprising and illogical, given the framework of daily oper-
ations.

In summary, a social analyst can see the reason for the
nonchalant and status conscious interactional stance of the
commuter. The reason for the interaction flows from the
enterprise that commuters are engaged in: making their place

28
in this capitalist society. Commuters are acting normally,
given their society. This chapter has attempted to describe
and explain the basis for this normality. Other, special
cases of interaction follow this chapter and prove the rule

with the exception.

V. Daytime Riders

In addition to rush hour buses, other types of buses
travel in the morning. Though these buses are going at
nearly the same times as rush hour buses, just after mor-
ning rush hour and.continuing until just before afternoon
rush hour, the tone of interaction is radically different.
If interaction on rush hour buses is the least intense, in-
teraction on buses that travel mid-day is the most intense.

On these buses, old people set the tone of interaction.
Though they often do not make up more than half the popula-
tion on the bus at this time, the communication feeling that
abounds on these buses is one the old bring. They enter the
bus riding scene with an openness to interaction and a wil-
lingness to give eye contact. Because there are enough
like-minded interactants, they can succeed in overriding the
rule of minimal involvement. When a significant number of
people present are meeting one another's eyes and showing by
their expressions that they are open to further contact,
should something of further interest present itself, then
interaction has a chance to progress in intensity.

Observation reveals that old people not only are open
to interaction, but that they frequently initiate it. Old
people often seem to have something to talk about, making
conversation topics of a wide variety of everyday events.
The weather, the time, the earliness or lateness of the bus
all provide beginnings of verbal interchange and are often
used on the person that meets the eyes and greets older
people. The sequence of interaction is allowed to continue
by the willingness of the other. For some reason, perhaps
because of the preponderance of the friendly on these buses,
the other often does.

29

30

The waiting behavior of older people is not like that
of commuters. While commuters visibly endure various en-
vironmental and human disturbances and still show only "civ-
il inattention" to others. Old people often share their
views about what is going on. Often when I was waiting at
the shelter at Michigan Avenue (the main downtown Lansing
center for catching buses) in the rain, an old woman would
say something about wishing that the rain would stop so
that the walk to the stores to shop would be more pleasant.
One woman told me that she had worn the wrong shoes, given
the weather - sharing her everyday dificulty with a friendly
stranger. Another time I was asked where I was going, and
when I let the woman know, she helpfully offered the speci-
fic bus that would be the last returning one to East Lansing.
In general, old people, and in particular old women in my
experience, wanted to make contact and once contact was made,
continued the interaction as long as time and the threads of
interest and topic would permit.

The friendliness old people exhibited waiting for the bus
was also reflected in their patterns of riding. After boar-
ding the bus, old people almost invariably concentrated them-
selves in the front third. Only once did an older woman sit
in the back half of the bus, and in that case she sat right
behind the back exit. Older men generally sat in the front
third of the bus also, but were more likely to be found in
the second third than were older women. Sitting in the front
of the bus, older people and some other friendly people, con-
centrated their friendliness and in this way almost insured
that a more intense interaction would get off the ground.

The driver played an important role in these bus rides.
He or she emerged as an individual with a personality. The
people who sat in the front of the bus often immediately
began talking to the driver; he or she was seen as having an
almost automatic interest in talking. The bus driver often
got into friendly conversation with one or more passengers

31
sitting in the front of the bus. I interviewed an ex-bus
driver who said that "all these people want to do is talk
to you." Though he said it was sometimes an unwanted
nuisance, he also indicated that he regularly engaged in
talking to them. On one ride the driver talked to an older
woman and looked at her as one would in conversation (dir-
ectly), rather than the quick looks most drivers give talkers
next to them. The fact that the driver was available and
friendly gave those who were interested in having a con-
versation an easy way to begin.

Even without the aid of a captive participant like the
bus driver, successful comments and opening questions often
lead to more conversation. Conversation seems to be engaged
in for the pleasure it brings in itself and not for any in-
strumental reason.

This type of interaction points out the basic human
satisfaction involved in conversing with other people. For
the old, for reason that will be explored later, the colder,
economical type of activity that commuters are under the in-
fluence of is less dominant. Sociability, for its own re-
wards, is practiced. Georg Simmel describes the unique
character of sociable interaction, interaction for the
pleasure it provides and nothing more, which he observed
among nineteenth century urbanites (Simmel, 1950). On these
buses people come together for the pleasure of human as-
sociation. This then becomes the tone of the bus riding
world, a tone of openness and interest in conversational
encounters.

The commuter world can be seen as the archetype of non-
involvement because of the tone set by working people, so
the bus riding world of the older people can be seen as the
archetype of involvement because of the tone set by sociable
old people. In both of these worlds others are present; in
the world of commuters, students and old people also ride,
in the mid-day world of riding, students, workers, and

32
women with children also ride. In these worlds, the others
that are present pick up the tone from the dominant style-
setters and adjust their behavior so as to go along with it.
Old people and commuters, each presenting and representing
their own communicative interests, represent the two ex-
tremes of the way bus riding encounters are conducted.
Many encounters exhibit elements of these two polar types
of bus riding communication.

The world of daytime bus riding, in general, is a
variation on the theme of older people's bus riding en-
counters. As the day wears on from earlier morning to late
afternoon, the population becomes more mixed, with more
students and women with children. The stronger interests
of the old in sociability become watered down by the weaker
interests in sociability of the rest of the bus riding
people, and personal communication wanes.

Mid-day is the time maximum variety of riders exists. TA
variety results in mid-day riders being the least predictable
social world to enter, in terms of interactional style. In
many ways it can be seen as an extension of the older
people's bus ride, changed only in that a few more, dif-
ferent types of, people have joined.

The driver plays an active role on the buses during the
day. During mid-day rides, and at no other time I observed,
the driver may turn on a portable radio and listen to music
or a mystery show. The passengers seem to accept the dri-
ver's right to control the background of their bus riding
environment - or the driver knows they would likg it. Con-
versation does not seem to take the turn of discussing the
radio show, so perhaps the radio is even a signal to the
riders that the driver is engaged socially, as well as doing
his or her job bus driving.

The driver is allowed to enjoy radio shows and the ra-
dio show seems to create a background similar to home during
the day in which a soap opera's story is told in the back—
ground as those at home talk and sit around the living room.

33
This living room atmosphere of daytime bus rides fits well
with the friendly older people and women with children who
ride the bus at these times.

Old people continue to ride and continue to initiate
interaction, but with a lower success rate as the day wears
on. Others on the bus will generally meet the eye of one
interested in making a contact (blacks more than whites in
my observations) and so initial contacts begin. As more
students fill the buses, more women and children, and a re—
sulting smaller proportion of older people, escalation from
looks to speech is less often accomplished. An example from
the fieldnotes illustrates this. Here, a student begins con-
tact but does not allow it to continue. Instead of letting
a sociable interaction develop, she cuts off the contact and
therby defines it as a purely instrumental one.

The woman in the purple poncho asked the
old man next to her what time it was.

He looked up at his watch, told her the
time. She said "thanks" and looked away.
He put his arm up on one of the bus sup-
ports and looked up at the watch. He
looked out the back window of the bus
and made some comment, but she did not
give him any response to it (Fieldnotes).

While the friendliness of older people is not always
enough to push the interaction beyond friendly looks to con-
versation, it does play a part in adding interactive
"warmth" to them. Old people often possess a charming man-
ner that radiates good feeling to others that are around.
Because the people that ride at these times usually offer
their eye contact to others present, others can often pick
up these warm kinesic vibrations from the old. An example
illustrates this.

Another stop down, a woman of about sixty
five . . . walked on. As she was sitting
down, at the end of the bench seat across
from the driver, she bumped into the L.C.C.
student's foot. She smiled, looking right
into his eyes and said "I'm sorry." "Oh,
that's O.K.," he said, and smiled back.

34

She sat and looked at the people a-
cross from.her. He kept his smile
for a minute - he seemed to be taken
with her charming smile. I think
that the sincerity one feels coming
through in the greeting of some of
these old people produces very good
feelings (Fieldnotes).

WOmen and Children Riders

Another group that travels on buses during the day is

 

women with children. Occupationally household and child care
workers, and wearing casual clothing and often having shop-
ping areas as destinations, these women with their children
make up a significant proportion of mid-day bus riders.

These women, while generally not initiating verbal inter-
action, are open to eye contact or greetings initiated by
another. Often they look around at others on the bus. Par—
ticularly if they have small children with them, which they
often do, they monitor the contact others are making with
their children. Women with children travel with an active
interest in others and can often be seen smiling at or
greeting others that they come in eye contact with. Children
also do open mothers to communication, as well as having
their communication screened by their parents.

Students who ride at this time, like women with child-
ren, are willing to meet and return another's look or verbal
offering. In Davis's schema of intensity of intimacy, they
are willing to respond with an allophile of the same phileme
family, but not to signal a change to a higher phileme (Davis,
1973). Unlike old people, they do not try to entice, by
friendly looks or verbal greetings, an opening of friendly
conversation with a fellow rider.

The difference in being open to interaction and opening
it can be illustrated by examples from my fieldnotes. In
this case, communication was initiated by a friendly look.
The differences in reaction illustrate the fact that old
people wish for and attempt to accomplish a bus riding

35

world where friendly interaction is carried on, while stu-
dents who have friendly motives may wish for but do not
expect or attempt to accomplish such an interactional world.

When she got off, the other pas-
senger . . . the older woman
looked around. I was busy writ-
ing so I was looking down at my
notes, the others did not make
eye contact with her. I raised
my head when she was finished
with her survey of people (I
feel sure she was doing this
because I saw her looking at a
few people for contact). I
would guess she was looking for
someone to collude with on the
strangeness of the just exited
passenger. She did not get any
takers and a look formed on her
face that I have seen before
(especially on old people). It
was like 3 e sucked in her mouth,
as if she was getting rigid be-
cause she had been rejected by
those she she tried to befriend.
I have seen others respond like
this when they offer something
that they consider valuable and
it is refused. It is telling

to me that this is the look that
this woman formed, because it
said to me that she was offering
her friendship (on a certain
level) and that she felt rejected.
This said something to me about
the expectations she had of fel-
low passengers.

I think a person with no expecta-
tions of friendly feelings and
openness from fellow travelers
would not be at all surprised
not to be able to concur with
others on an impression that
they had. To this woman - and

I think a lot of older people -
the people around are always pos-
sible and potential communicants,
which I see as creating ahproblem
that every time they are proved
wrong they get offended (though
it certainly has the positive

36

effect of making these buses a more
friendly place.) (Fieldnotes).

The dissapointed reaction of old people contrasts with
the lack of disappointment registered by a typical student
who, offering friendliness, boarded the bus.

When she got on . . . she smiled
contentedly at everyone - I did
not see anyone recognize it. This
overall friendliness displayed
while getting on the buses was also
shown by the student man who got
on on the way to Lansing earlier.
In neither case did they seem
disappointed or very affected at
all when their friendliness was

not reciprocated (it may have been
more of an inner mood type that
would have been shared if someone
else was around, but if not was
taken back into the person). This
was different than the friendliness
of the older people who were look-
ing to specific people for inter-
action and not getting it. (Field-
notes).

The interests and expectations about interaction are
quite varied among the passengers of daytime buses. A person
may enter this bus riding world and be invited to converse,
or they may enter, inviting others to communicate more in-
tensely with them. Whichever is the case, interaction will
proceed as far as a mutually consenting pair can match their
commitments to it.

Weird People

 

At this point, I will attempt to describe the special
sociability of the socially eccentric. If, in keeping with
the general pattern of communication, the overtures of poten-
tial interactants need to be matched, then one aspect of the
weird is that they do not accomplish this. The weird are
either unaware of the overtures that they are making, and
their interactive meaning, or they are unwilling or unable
to proceed with interaction according to the customary rules.
Weird people are ones who initiate interaction without

37

a“ticket of any kind, without clearance from the other that
interchange is desirable by means of even the smallest pos-
sible interest hook. The wierd continue interaction prog-
ressively and unilaterally.

The presence of a weird interactant on a bus changes the
way other riders orient themselves to one another. The
fieldnotes illustrate:

A few stops down, a very heavy old
man with a large head and a gray
crew cut got on slowly, with a cane,
and sat next to the last arriver on
the bench seat behind the driver.

As he got on and dropped his coin,
he said to the driver: "I have got
to go to a meeting at Resurrection."
He said it loudly and as a state-
ment, not an opener for conversation
(almost no variation in tone). He
sat down in the "drop" way and imme-
diately began reading the advertise-
ment on the upper wall of the bus

on the opposite side of him "Hey
young man, did you know that you
still have to register with selec-
tive service, contact . . ." He

was reading every word on the sign,
Word by word, like a child who has
just learned to read but had not
learned to do so with "expression".
I thought that the woman sitting
across from him.was uncomfortable
with this, as was the man in over-
alls next to her. When he finished
the sign, before letting him go on
to another, the driver said: "I
better do that". This brought a
laugh from the two at the opposite
bench, and broke the tension (that

I felt, and seemed to be caused by
the pitiful reading of the man) . . .
The driver had successfully shifted
the spotlight from the man by bring—
ing about group joking. "Why don't
you join the army, that would be a
good job for you," the woman said
grinning at him, and now also grin-
ning at me and the man who sat across
from her. "What would I do?" the
driver said, looking over and smiling.
"Oh, they might need bus drivers,"

38

the woman said, and laughed (Field-
notes).

Another example from my fieldnotes illustrates this weirdness
and the way it is recognized as such by other participants.

A very white woman crossed the street,
running, and ran around the back of the
shelter . . . She had absolutely white
skin and a white dress on, in her hair
she had a blue chiffon scarf tied near
toprlike an ornament. I had seen her

at these stops before. Her eyes looked
very bright, they were blue or green and
fairly wide open; she looked about 60.
She came in and stood near the back for
a minute. Now she said, bending down
and stroking the hand of the black "bus-
iness man" who was sitting on the end

of the bench near where she was standing:
”You're beautiful!" He looked at her
and grinned - almost a laugh - seeming
not to know what she was talking about.
The others waiting looked, but didn't
keep looking or stare. I kept looking.
She repeated her declaration, this time
rubbing on his forehead: "You're beau-
tifull' She looked up at the woman (the
strange one - for other reasons) near
her and asked: "Isn't he beautiful?"
The other nodded and said "Oh, yes,"
with expression. At this point, I glan-
ced around, another older woman .
knitted her eyebrows and put her mouth
into a straight tight smile and looked
at me as if to say: "Isn't this ridi-
culous?" I gave her the same knowing
look and tight smile - because I agreed
(Fieldnotes).

The presence of the weird and their inappropriate inter-
action serve to bring together peOple in this bus riding
world that might not otherwise effect such a coming together.
As a person defined as outsider or enemy can serve the social
function of defining and bringing together insiders, the
weird allow normal folks to confirm their normality. The
weird serve the social function of being an unexpected force
that unites other riders, even if the other riders' recog-
nition actions are very slight and fleeting.

39
Incidents as a Social Catalyst

Incidents, like weird people, are an unexpected and so-
cially potent force in bringing people together. Incidents
bring bus riders together. Mid-day riders, not having the
cool unimpressed manner of commuters, allow incidents that
occur at this time to make an impression that is shared in
the group. Incidents make the most difference to inter-
action progression in this bus riding world because the par-
ticipants are at least minimally connected to one another;
they are riders actively anticipating a common topic to de-
velop. If a special stimulus appears, riders can use the in-
cident to connect themselves to others present. An example
of this coming together could be seen in an incident that
happened with the police.

A police car had turned the corner quickly and hit the
car a woman was driving. The police officer had first
irately run out of his car and started yelling at the woman.
A little later, when other police had arrived at the scene,
all police personnel seemed to be embarrassed and interested
only in calming the woman and ignoring the people waiting
nearby for the bus. One older man, though, was interested
in acquainting every new waiter with what happened. He would
be talking to one person and then offer explanation to
another by making a comment about the police and inviting,
by his obvious interest in talking about it, questions from
the new person at the bus stop. This incident succeeded in
making the group of waiters into lively conversationalists
even in the nearly all student population. His enthusiasm
in reporting how the police had first Hit and then verbally
abused the driver (and now were trying to make it EQE a pub-
lic event), may have contributed greatly to his finding the
perfect conversational starter. This older man was able to
achieve his interactional goals of highly developed conver-
sation that would probably have been impossible if the inci-
dent had not appeared. Incidents bring about conversation

40
where people are willing, but not overly interested.
Analysis

Once again, it is necessary to draw out the deeper so-
ciological implications of the social events observed. This
world of daytime riding exhibits far different social pat- u
terns than were observed among commuters. This section will
explore the reasons for the occurance of the types of social
encounters that are observed mid-day.

As was important in an analysis of the commuter world,
the reason for travel during the day is crucial. In this
case, the answer involves more reasons, more of a variety
of motivations for the bus ride. While commuters rode almost
exclusively with the purpose in mind of going to work to
earn a wage, daytime riders ride to do their shopping, to
visit others in the area, to escort children, and just to go
on an outing. The analysis that follows will explore these
various trip motives in terms of their accompanying social
interactional interests and goals.

Daytime riders often board the bus on the way to down-
town or shopping centers. Women riders can often be seen
boarding with shopping bags and riding to shepping areas.
Riders can also often be observed boarding the bus at stops
near shopping areas with bags bearing store names and filled
with bulging contents. Riders can be heard discussing prices
and sales on store merchandise with one another and sharing
information on shopping subjects, becoming wise shoppers.

Is there a way to avoid the high price of meat? Is it
worth traveling to Meridian Mall for a seasonal sale? Are
prices lower in the Lansing area than East Lansing (with its
more modern shops)? These and other questions are of in-
terest to those who must shop and are concerned with high
costs and their own limited budgets. The sharing of infor-
mation, past shopping experiences, and hunches are of benefit
to the shopper. Others who ride the bus can be encouraged
to discuss such questions. This becomes a welcome and useful

41
conversation that is a help for those on their way to do the
difficult and necessary work of shopping.

Shoppers, and generally they are women when one is
speaking of those who ride buses during the day to do this
work, gain_from a sociable atmosphere where they can gain in;
formation. They may also gain because the sociability pro-
vides an adult conversational break from.the isolation of
the home. The discussion of sales, bargains, and values is
a clear aid, though, in the accomplishment of the work of
purchasing the items needed to feed, care for, and sanitize
the family and home. If one can assume that these shoppers
have as a goal the maintenance and growth of their families
in society, the reproduction of people in the most basic
sense, it can be seen to be logical that they choose to
share strategies. Perhaps competition still factors in when
there is a "limited supply", but this is not generally a
fear that is taken seriously. In summary, shoppers have a
real interest in conversations about their work since sharing
of information among shoppers is a mutually beneficial acti-
vity. The motivation for building up an encounter to the ’
level of conversation is apparent and understandable.

Visiting is another major motivation for daytime riders.
Many people who ride the bus during the day both board and
exit in residential areas. Some riders can be seen riding
the bus to Sparrow Hospital, flowers or parcel under their
arm, perhaps with visiting in mind. Riders on their way to
personal visits and trips to places of personal interest can
be seen doing their travels during the day. These riders are
traveling because of social and personal motivations; they
are on their ways to the satisfaction of social and personal
needs and desires.

Riders with this type of motivation are not caught up
in the pursuit of a daily wage. On the contrary, they are
caught up in the enactment of their social lives. It is,
therefore likely that they will find sociability on a friend
ly level to be compatible with their personal feelings and

42
mood. It is logical to expect that these people may be open
to, and even make the effort to initiate, friendly encoun-
ters, as indeed they are.

One other possible reason visitors choose to engage in
conversations with other bus riders could be related to their
ages and length of time in the community. Visitors may pick
up their acquaintances where they left off with them the last
time, on a social errand or otherwise.

Visitors, many of whom are old, may have ongoing rela-
tionships that the greetings and small talk of each meeting
maintain. In short, visitors can be seen to extend socia-
bility.

While visitors are intent on their own sociability,
there is also a set of daytime bus riders who concern them-
selves with the sociability of children. Whether riding to
shop or visit, or merely to accompany a child to his or her
destination, many women can be seen riding in the company of
children. While some men do ride with children, it was such
a rare occurrence in my observation, that I will concentrate
on the far more common and general pattern of adult females
being the escorts of children.

Because of a lack of private car transportation, women
are seen riding with children on the buses (or because the
women prefer the bus). The addition of a child to an adult
woman's travels is a change from a street-wise, aware adult
traveling alone to a traveling couple consisting of one fully
adult}?and’onefsmailer person who is dependent on the first
member of the team for instructions as well as physical and
emotional support. The addition of a child is the addition
of an only partially predictable, specially vulnerable and
partially wise traveling partner. Because of the child's
relative street-innocence and weakness, the woman becomes the
especially aware and actively protective compensatory member.
Because of the task of child care, the adult becomes a rider
with extra alertness and active interest in what is going on.

43

Children, especially young children, are generally not
aware of the attitude of nonchalant aloofness that is the ex-
pected bus riding expression. Instead, children are often
interested in the looks and appearance of fellow riders and
are overt about registering their interest. Children will
look at, smile at, stare at, and even make audible comments
about other passengers. Those who accompany these children
have as their task the explanations and resolutions of their
child's overtures. WOmen will turn their children's head
away and silence their children when they judge that the
person with whom their child has begun an interchange is not
of the type that they approve. WOmen will extend the smiles
of their children by adding their own to the people contacted
by their children's friendliness whom they approve of and 1
like to see their children practicing their social skills
with. Women continually watch and monitor children's socia-
bility and control the course of it with their superior
judgement.

The work of social instructors, facilitators and censors
is continually done by those who care for children in public
settings. The task of reproduction of our young is extended

 

in our culture to involve basic education in values, beliefs,
and some sense of how to survive and grow in society.
Cicourel, like other social scientists, examines the ways
stratification (an abstract, yet empirically grounded sys-
tem) is learned. He writes of how the culture and its' rules
are learned (Cicourel, 1981). The accomplishment of child
care work involves an awareness and sensitivity to people
and social events which, far from the limited transit goal
of solitary commuters, makes those who do it become es-
pecially aware and socially ready for encounters with other
riders.

Daytime riders also include those who ride for the pure
pleasure of the trip, or are on an outing for the day. The
motivation for these rides on the bus is a tour through the

44
city and a chance to ride with thinking, feeling other people
doing their daily business. The ride provides satisfaction
in itself, much as the sociability observed mid-day provides
pleasure in itself to many daytime riders.

It is logical to assume that many who ride for this
reason look for and welcome the friendly interaction of fel—
low riders. They came to add a pleasant and possibly stimu-
lating "time" to their day. They do not refuse to enrich the
trip with friendly sociability. The possibility of being
with others in a low commitment, low risk activity like
riding the bus is not overwhelming for any but the most fear-
ful social being. The possibility of enjoying a ride with
other friendly people is attractive to a wide variety of
lonely, stimulus-hungry people. They choose the daytime
for their adventuring possibly because they are free during
the day, and also possibly because many would Egg consider
it safe at night making the same expedition in a more de-
serted and considerably more dangerous environment.

Finally, the reason for trips by older people can be
examined. The Lansing community, like those in other cities,
contains a sizable population of old, retirement age and
older people. These people value their abilities to live
self sufficient lives in their own neighborhoods. In fact,
they are organized politically to maintain their right right
to afford the cost of living autonomously in the face of
rising costs and fixed incomes. While adamant about their
choices to live in their own homes, many old people must
face the reality of being alone, having lost the company of
their children and often spouses as well. These people,
then, may have special social needs and interests in others
that younger people with work and heavier familial obliga-
tions to contend with do not feel. The taking of bus trips
as social outings may provide satisfaction to the needs of
lonely old people who ride the bus, which may account for
their special friendliness. Whether the trip is taken as

45
an outing or to shop, visit, get medical care, or any other
reason, the relative social isolation (compared to other
points in their lives, or to their needs) and stimulus-
hunger of older people helps make them the most active inter-
actants.

In summary, one can point to motivations for more in-
tense and long lasting social encounters among daytime ri-
ders than among commuters. The visible display of a com-
munity in public is the most evident during day rides. Of
course, the community is one piece, whether day or night;
however, the display of visible connectedness between so—'
ciable people is not. This section has attempted to show
how differential displays are rooted in the social conditions
of the people who inhabit the different times of day on the
bus line.

Interest in the benefits and the rewards of sharing, and
conversation itself, acts to produce a social environment
that engenders sociability, friendly encounters and conver-
sation. Given the interests and activities of the parti-
cipants involved, the interaction observed is logical and
understandable.

VI. Night Riders

”No, there's a lot of weird things that
go on on these buses," said the first
woman "a lot of weird people too," she
added. ”That's probably why people don't
talk," said the second, half jokingly.
"That could be," I said, and looked at
her again, interested in hearing more.
(One minute later)

"You never know who you're going to run
into on these buses," the first said.
"Yeah, and that's why nobody will talk,
they're afraid of who they might be
talking to,” the second said. "And if
you're talking to someone, you can't
just leave," said the first (Field-
notes).

The final distinguishable social world of interaction
occurs among bus riders at night. Those who rode at night
displayed distinct patterns of sociability, including a
cautious expression, a circumspect manner, and a defensive,
sometimes fearful stance towards others. Everyday suspicion
of the potentially malevolent intentions of unknown others
took on the reality of expectation at night. Darkness, with
its poor visibility, and night hours with their dearth of
population and open refuges - such as buildings, centers, and
shOps - leaves the unprotected person alone and fearful.
Feelings of lonely vulnerability and defenselessness against
unseen and evil intentioned strangers produce a quiet and
cautious rider whose main interest is minimizing his or her
risks by minimizing the time spent in the public locale and
avoiding the notice and social advances of others. Two vari-
ations on the theme of night bus riding, both exhibiting the
atmosphere and feelings characteristic of the public world
at night, will be discussed.

46

47
The Night World of East Lansing - Students' Night Out
The night world of East Lansing is one of variation on

 

the theme of night riding. It is characterized by relati-
vely less fear and caution than other night bus riding, in
Lansing, and relatively more display of openness to the
other. The night buses in East Lansing primarily carry
students to shopping areas, mainly Meijer Thrifty Acres and
Meridian Mall. To a lesser extent, they carry students to
bars and night clubs (East Lansing being a town newly ”wet"
to alchohol, a "strip" of drinking establishments has long
been established right outside its city limits). Students
also ride the buses home from classes and other events at
schools they attend. Students, people generally under 25
and dressed in casual, modern-style clothing, comprise the
vast majority of the population.

Students at night ride to their destinations much like
commuters, showing no special interest in and ignoring po-
tential personal relationships withtthe other by averting
their eyes. Students responded to incidents much like day-
time riders, showing active interest and exchanging meaning-
ful glances and comments to other riders. In short, student
riding at night appears to be a hybrid of day and commuter
interactional styles, with the addition of some special
cautions at night. Students' interactive stance of openness
but not active solicitation of interaction produces the ob-
servable result of buses that look like commuter buses when
nothing presents itself, and much like mid-day buses if some-
thing does.

Incidents are the events that are of primary importance
in the social interaction of night time student travelers.
They are the special happenings that catalyze mutual orien-
tation and understandings among riders. Incidents, generally
formed by "weird" riders, have an important social signifi-
cance on these buses; they are both frequent and strong in
interactive effect. Incidents are so common that everyone

48
who has ridden these night buses has seen many. The event
could be a practicing mime player deciding to amuse or per-
plex people, a talkative religious zealot, or a semi-coherent
drinker. When these unusual people do their presentations,
students look to each other for validations of their impres-
sions, share evaluative looks, and at times share verbal ’
judgements as well. Students are relaxed enough in their
night riding to respond to interesting stimuli, but uninter-
ested or cautious enough in their general attitudes to avoid
meaningful exchanges with others if noteworthy happenings do
not present themselves.

Incidents may also serve to keep the students isolated
from one another by preventing open, friendly interaction.

As the student interview presented at the beginning of this
chapter describes, students often do not respond to people
who initiate conversation, because they are afraid that the
person that they will be conversing with is "weird". Rather
than taking the interpretation that students are xenophobic,
this fear of being trapped with someone unpredictable can be
seen to stem from the fact that the fear occurs when night
riding. Students' interactive style during the day is far
more relaxed, less fearful and wary. The result is that
students, while sometimes interested in more intense, per-
sonal interaction with others on the bus, are usually not
willing to go along with another's attempt to progress the
interaction because their interest is not strong and, when
coupled with a fear of being trapped, is unlikely to produce
intense, conversational interchanges.

In summary, the night world of bus riding is one where
anything can happen and sometimes does. Night time student
travelers can be seen to be casually waiting for the bus or
riding to their destinations without much expressed interest
in conversing with the other. For this reason, conversation
rarely progresses past the stage of eye contact, except among
those who travel together and have an established relation-

ship. More intense communication among those who meet on the

49
bus is rarely built up.

This night riding world, like the other night world that
follows, is characterized by a generally low level of comr
municative involvement.. Unlike the night world that follows,
though, it is also characterized by an atmosphere of re-
laxed and easy openness to chance events and a wary but not
obviously worried stance towards other people. The lack of
relaxed feelings and openness marks the central difference
between the bus riding interactional worlds of East Lansing
and Lansing. The significance of this difference will be
clear in the discussion of Lansing that follows.

City Nights

Bus riding at night in Lansing is the other variation on
the theme of night riding. The Lansing buses are very empty,
usually having less than ten and often less than five people
riding. On the basis of discussions with both bus riders and
long-time Lansing residents, I found that bus travel in Lan-

 

sing at night is considered unpleasant and dangerous. Many
consider the downtown Michigan Avenue area, the main street
for nearly all city activity, as unsafe and populated by
"undesirables" who are not welcome interactants. The few
people that ride do so with the collective judgement of their
fellow city dwellers that they are taking risky chances.

The population that rides these buses - some students,
some late workers, some teenaged boys, and rarely, "weird"
older people - ride with little apparent recognition of the
other. They, more often than riders at any other time in
Lansing, avoid the gaze of one another. The other is seen
to have far more potential to shock, hassle, or harm than to
provide pleasant conversation and companionship. Riders as-
sume that others are potential enemies, and show that this is
their feeling in their approaches to other riders.

When waiting for the bus, people can be observed looking
away and making a point of checking for the bus when another
approaches the stop area. Should the other ask the time or

50
a question about the arrival of the bus, the responding answer
was very abrupt and contained the signal for the ending of
conversation. Pursing lips and narrowing eyes, quickly
looking away, or looking into or at a book, lunch box, purse,
or paper being carried all served to cut off the interchange
at the information giving level only. No further interest
was desired, no special attention or notice was appreciated.
In this case, being left alone was seen as the best way to
avoid unwanted attentions, and the actual avoidance of un-
wanted attentions was a primary interest of night riders.

Once on the bus, riders did not meet one another's gaze.
On the occasions that I looked around, trying to engage a-
nother's eye, the attempt was unsuccessful. Chance eye con-
tact that did occur was not strengthened by a look of under-
standing or friendly greeting, as it might have been at
another time, but stripped of personal contact by a return
look of blank non-recognition followed by a removal of the
eyes to a safer, unapproachable place. Contact was strongly
avoided.

On leaving the bus, especially when others were also
leaving at the same location - such as the end of the line,
Capitol area stop, riders disembarked quickly and without
looking at other riders. Once off the bus, people walked
very quickly down the sidewalk to their eventual destinations.
People walked away from the bus with their eyes fixed on some
destination straight ahead of them. People lowered their
eyelids and viewed the street, rather than lifting their gaze
and taking in a more panoramic view. Careful attention was
paid to the avoidance of calling attention to one's self.

People were continually conscious of the dangerous
quality of the environment that they traveled through. A
speedy escape from the downtown environment was the hope of
most riders. The police allayed the fears of riders, to some
extent, by being on patrol and parking their cars near the
end of the downtown bus line. Riders understood the very
limited value of this "protection" to help them in need.

51

Lansing residents, in the mid 1970's were used to the pres-
ence of police, on the densest street "mall" or in the air as
the helicopters buzzed down on their homes or spotlighted
them, but did not have any confidence that in their moment
of need any help would be around. Once leaving the bus,
riders could not rest easy and with great worry rushed to
their destinations. Night time riders steeled themselVes in
defensive hostility in whatever way they could manage - pre-
paring to run from or if necessary to jab, punch, or slash
with keys any unfriendly stranger who might approach.

In this tense and fearful way, those who rode the bus
at night endeavored to survive the trip. With fears for their
lives in the backs of their minds and defensive strategies
engraved on their reflexes, citizens of the dangerous metro-
polic accomplish their bus rides through the city.

Analysis: When Fear and Fatigue Ride, SociabilityTakes a
Back—Seat

Married or single, both I and the other
women with whom I have discussed night
work have felt especially vulnerable while
while making the nightly trip work.

Every time I disengaged the several locks
from my apartment door and stepped out
into the darkness, I wondered if someone
was out there waiting to grab me. Al-
though I was never mugged, I was subjected
to an act of indecent exposure in my apart-
ment parking lot on my way to work. When
I was in my car, especially at stop lights,
men often made obscene gestures and sug-
gestions. When I arrived in the hospital
parking lot, my fears were somewhat al-
layed by the bright lights and the secu-
rity guards present. But reports of as-
saults on women around the hospitals where
I worked remained frequent. So feeling

of safety did not really return until I
reached the ward and its protective male
staff (Kozak, 1974).

The feelings of fear dominate night travel. Anticipating

 

hostility is a central feature. Riders at night share mo-
tives and characteristics of both commuters and daytime

52
riders. Those on their ways to or from night work share with
commuters the purposeful traveling to earn their living wage,
and might be expected to display the same aloof, seemingly
unconcerned attitude displayed by their rush hour counter-
parts. Those on their ways shopping centers or night time
visits and outings might be expected to have interests in
friendly interaction not unlike the daytime riders on their
way to visit or shop. Such is not the case. Night riders
neither display the aloof nonchalance of commuters nor the
more relaxed friendliness of daytime riders. Instead, night
time riders travel with a tired and wary readiness for
trouble; they display a worried alertness and they - more
than riders at any other time - avoid contact with other
riders.

Though the social analyst can see that night travelers
ride for much the same reasons, possess much the same mo-
tivations, as riders at other times, they bear the special
burden of doing their traveling at night.

Fear is the additional burden the night travelers must,
fear of the aggression of others. There is fear of being
trapped into an endesirable, unpleasant encounter with a
weird or dangerous person - who may be found lurking in the
night shadows. Fears of aggressiveness from strangers wor-
ries riders. Riders who are worried about strangers who
may have malevolent intentions are inhibited in their in-
terests in any but the most perfunctory communication with
other unknown riders. Fear of being noticed by and then
accosted by unknown and possibly unseen persons scares riders
into being circumspect of activity and wary of expression.
The dread of the aggression of other people, who may not be
visible in their malevolent intentions, effectively stops
riders from seeking one another out for contact.

The possibility of being mugged has importance in for-
ming the attitude of people. The presence and fear of threat
is a significant variable in the urban environment. The

53

main threat that exists is the physical threat of bodily in-
jury. In many discussions this researcher had with bus ri-
ders, this fear of physical violence is mentioned as a near
constant worry. Lejeune, in his report about mugging finds
one possible outcome of mugging on people's attitudes, that
of making them feel as if they live in a conflict environ-
ment (Lejeune, 1973).

Lacking open community support for one's safety, one
can easily be led to find the urban community hostile. The
fear points to a lack of trust and ease in the presence of
a strange other, the special lonely fear of being unprotected
by others and unaware of any refuge. In this public area,
people generally only feel comfortable when they have good
visibility and a clear route to a familiar, safe place.
Special measures, carrying weapons, running, and in general
operating like a pggy from an unknown predator, take the
place of a safe community.

Women suffer in a special way. Not only is a robbery a
possibility; sexual assault, the constant danger of women, is
the greatest fear in a deserted environment at night. Susan
Brownmiller, in her study of rape, finds some peculiar quali-
ties to this threat, namely that it is always there, relati—
vely unpreventable, and that it causes women to know that
"civility" will not always be used (Brownmiller, 1975).

The sociologist can ask, why are some people - espe-
cially women — so afraid? Is there some number of armed po-
lice forces that would make us safe in our community? As a
social scientist, the question must be probed more deeply.
.The answers this study lead to were only more questions, but
possibly those that examine the roots of these dangerouS'
manifestations. Some of these questions are: How does rob-
bery relate to poverty and the fortunes of losers in a com-
petivie society? How does rape related to the physical op—
pression of women through violent aggression? How does '
lonely danger suffered relate to the isolation city dwellers
feel from one another? These questions deserve development.

54

The resulting social situation at night is distinctly
sparse and dull, from the point of view of one looking for
active communication work. Beneath the lack of connection
is the emotion of fear, and it is a very powerful inhibitor.
Bus riders, who are even more vulnerable than the average
night traveler who uses his or her private automobile, show
their fears and worries for their safety as they make their
trips in silent caution. In this worrisome environment,
people ride with fear of others and little expressed in-
terest in scratching the surface wariness of the other to
discover the personal self. In short, little observable
contact is made.

VII. Conclusion

The major findings of this study fall into two basic
categories: discussion of normal bus riding, and the dis-
cussion of variant bus riding. The normal bus riding occurs
mostly at commuter time, it reveals the person caught up in
a purposeful trip to work, exhibiting qualities as a worker,
and the fact of being 22.EEE.EEX evident in his or her ex-
hibit of persona, manner, and style of communication.

Variant bus riding occurs when the manifestation of
more intense and friendly communication with the other was
either increased by interest (for reason of help, companion-
ship, or care) or decreased by fear (of weirdness, violence,
or a deserted night scene).

The estrangement of those who show "civil inattention"
to fellow workers en route during rush hour manifests the
isolated, competitive social conditions under which they
work. More friendliness is exhibited by those who are not
in the productive sphere, who are not producing profit but
instead acquiring necessities, visiting or caring for others.
The fear and wariness of night rider, especially if she is
a woman, connects with caution about the desperation of a
class of "losers" who rob, and a tradition of male dominance,
violence, and sexual abuse. The future may change so that
people will reject the mechanism that structures and feeds
these social conditions, or continue to sharpen and grow.
Movement is continual, and the decisions by people to accept
and support inequality and dominance or reject and change
the structures under which we work, and those which form.our
social conditions dialectically, are continually made and
remade.

55

56

The usefulness of the data and theory generated from
this study lie in their ability to show connections within
urban culture. As the parts' relationship to the whole is
revealed and reveals more about both part and whole than
was previously known, the parts relationship to each other
and their interconnection, in time, reveals the constitution
of the process.

Various types of people and styles of communication
change and grow incrementally hot and cold, but always in
relationships to the changing elements and the known, normal
way mass transit is done in U.S. cities -— alone, with in-
strumental motive, and without sociable interchange. We can
see how the elements become "hotter" and more active, and
why, and can examine more and more about heating up process
and dampening influences. Finally, by of example, we can
see how the basic isolation of commuters is turned stone cold
to fear when the civility is threatened and the person has

reason to imagine a "

society of losers" as his or her enemy.

The validity of the findings can be evaluated by another
participant in the public, urban world. This study is con-
ducted in a "glass house" since anyone can ride the bus and
verify findings discussed here. The validity is hopefully
strengthened by the fact that the findings are close to the
data. The validity of the theory generated must be ques-
tioned. Theory, to be useful, must be alive and growing.

The future of mass transit itself will also be worked
out in the context of overall societal change. While this
society values mass transit for its energy efficiency and
accessibility of transportation to wide groups of people
(in cities, for those on routes and not severely handicapped).
it may not lend the support necessary for mass transit to
grow. Even though the cost may be paid in increased pol-
lution, greater ghettoization of the poor, minorities and
women, the U.S. may reduce or withdraw transit subsidies.
Even though it can‘be seen that when fares increase,

57
dramatically decreases (ACTA, 1981). Like other public sec-
tor services, the head of mass transit watches others roll
off the chopping block, and itself must find more creative
financing (Conally, 1982). As some of its arteries become
cut off, and the weakness of the funding mechanism dis-
covers new failures in public subsidy and riders' fares, its
vitality may be seriously threatened. To give the cities a
shot of adrenalin, capital could be injected into this pub-
lic sector service; it is a short term solution some poli-
tical economists theorize may cool city dwellers discontent,
and buy some time until the next crisis (O'Connor, 1973).
The other alternative, which the 80's so far reveal, is a
continual worsening of social conditions and an impoverish-
ment of the public sector in general. The observation of
the 1990's may reveal a much changed landscape of public
transit.

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

American Public Transit Association. 1981 Transit Fact Book.
Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1982.

 

Baran, Paul A., and Sweezy, Paul M. Monopoly Capital. New
York: Monthly Review Press, 1966. ’

Brownmiller, Susan. Against Our Will. New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1976.

 

Cicourel, Aaron. Cognitive Sociology. New York: Free
Press, 1972.

 

Cicourel, Aaron. "Role of Cognitive-Linguistic Concepts in
Understanding Everyday Social Interactions." Annual Review
of Sociology 7: 87 — 106.

 

 

Collins, Randall. "On the Microfoundations of Macrosocio—'
logy.” American Journal of Sociology 86: 984 ~ 1014.

 

Conally, Julia, and Page, Edith. "Keeping Transit Systems
Alive." Public Management 64, 7: 2 - 5.

 

Davis, Murray S. Intimate Relations. New York: Free Press,
1973.

 

Eriksson, Ingalill. "Soft-Data Sociology." Acta Sociologica
21, 2: 103 - 124.

Faris, Robert E. Chicago Sociology. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1970.

 

Glaser, Anselm, and Strauss, Barney. The Discovery of Groun-
ded Theory. Chicago: Aldine, 1967.

Goffman, Erving. Behavior in Public Places. New York: Free
Press, 1963

 

Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. New York: Harper and
Row, 1962.

 

Henley, Nancy. Politics of the Body, New York: Prentice-
Hall, 1976.

 

58

59

Kozak, Lola Jean. "Night People: A Study of the Social Ex-
periences of Night Workers." Summation 4,.1 - 2: 40 - 61.

 

Lejeune, Robert, and Nicholas, Alex. "On Being Mugged."
Urban Life and Culture 1, 3: 259 - 287.

 

Mead, George H. Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: Univer-
sity of Chicago Press, 1970.

 

O'Connor, James. The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York:
St. Martin's Press, I973.

 

Piercey, Marge. Circles on the water. New York, Alfred A.
Knopf.

 

Psathas, George. Phenomenological Sociology. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, I973.

 

Sacks, Harvey. "Lectures on Conversational Analysis."
Mimeographed. Los Angeles, Calif.: University of Cali-
fornia, 1966.

Schutz, Alfred. Collected Papers I The Problem of Social
Reality. The Hague: ‘Martinus_NinOff, I971.

 

Schwartz, Barry. Queing and Waiting. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1975.

 

Simmel, Georg. The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Edited by
Kurt Wolff. Toronto: Free“Press,’l950.

 

Sudnow, David. "Temporal Parameters of Interpersonal Ob-
servation." In Studies in Social Interaction, edited by
David Sudnow. New—Yofk: Free Press, I972.

 

Thorne, Barrie, and Henley, Nancy. "Difference and Domi-
nance: An Overview of Language, Gender, and Society."
In Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance, edited
by Barrie Thorne and Nancy HenIEy. Massachusetts:
Newbury House, 1975.

Trager, George L. Language and Languages. San Francisco:
Chandler, 1972.

 

    

 
 

S

"'Il’z'r'llllllll'fll'MW

 

WM":