Advertisement

“Family Time” and Domestic Sociality: Forms of Togetherness and Independence with Digital Media

  • Roxana Moroşanu
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Anthropology of Sustainability book series (PSAS)

Abstract

This discussion of “family time” as both a temporal modality and as a concept that people use in order to “measure” the quality of home life brings together English middle-class kinship literature with social constructivist critiques of the normativity of family time, and with work on family practices. The ethnographic material reveals some ways in which people use digital media at home in order to combine and balance togetherness and independence. Two forms of domestic sociality are described, and the role of digital technologies in their enactments is outlined. Alongside semi-structured interviews and participant observation, the chapter is based upon knowledge that was co-produced through the use of participant-led and arts-based methods.

References

  1. Andersen, Holly, and Rick Grush. 2009. “A Brief History of Time-Consciousness: Historical Precursors to James and Husserl.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (2): 277–307.Google Scholar
  2. Attfield, J. 1999. “Bringing Modernity Home: Open Plan in the British Domestic Interior.” In At Home: An Anthropology of Domestic Space, edited by Irene Cieraad. New York: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brembeck, Helene. 2012. “Cozy Friday: An Analysis of Family Togetherness and Ritual Overconsumption.” In Managing Overflow in Affluent Societies, edited by Barbara Czarniawska and Orvar Löfgren, 125–140. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Carsten, Janet. 2000a. “Introduction: Cultures of Relatedness.” In Cultures of Relatedness: New Approaches to the Study of Kinship, edited by Janet Carsten, 1–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carsten, Janet. 2000b. “Knowing Where You’ve Come From: Ruptures and Continuities of Time and Kinship in Narratives of Adoption Reunions.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 6 (4): 637–653.Google Scholar
  6. Carsten, Janet. 2004. After Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Christensen, Pia Haudrup. 2002. “Why More ‘Quality Time’ Is Not on the Top of Children’s Lists: The ‘Qualities of Time’ for Children.” Children and Society 16: 77–88.Google Scholar
  8. Christensen, Pia, Alison James, and Chris Jenks. 2000. “Home and Movement: Children Constructing ‘Family Time.’” In Children’s Geographies: Playing, Living and Learning, edited by Sarah L. Holloway and Gill Valentine, 120–134. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Collier, Jane, Michelle Rosaldo, and Sylvia Junko Yanagisako. 1982. “Is There a Family? New Anthropological Views.” In Gender and Kinship: Essays Towards a Unified Analysis, edited by Jane Collier, Michelle Rosaldo, and Sylvia Junko Yanagisako. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. DeVault, Marjorie L. 1991. Feeding the Family: The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Douglas, Mary, and Michael Nicod. 1974. “Taking the Biscuit: The Structure of British Meals.” New Society, 744–747, December 19.Google Scholar
  12. Edwards, Jeanette. 2000. Born and Bred: Idioms of Kinship and New Reproductive Technologies in England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Edwards, Jeanette. 2004. “Incorporating Incest: Gamete, Body and Relation in Assisted Conception.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 10 (4): 755–774.Google Scholar
  14. Edwards, Jeanette. 2008. “Creativity’ in English Baptist Understandings of Assisted and Assisting Conception.” In Creativity and Cultural Improvisation, edited by E Hallam and Tim Ingold, 167–185. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  15. Edwards, Jeanette, S. Franklin, E. Hirsch, F. Price, and Marilyn Strathern. 1993. Technologies of Procreation: Kinship in the Age of Assisted Conception. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Edwards, Jeanette, and Marilyn Strathern. 2000. “Including Our Own.” In Cultures of Relatedness: New Approaches to the Study of Kinship, edited by Janet Carsten, 149–166. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Elliot, Faith Robertson. 1986. The Family: Change or Continuity? Houndmills: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Finch, J. 1997. “The State and the Family.” In Families and the State, edited by S. Cunningham-Burley and L. Jamieson, 29–44. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  19. Gabb, Jaqui. 2010. Researching Intimacy in Families. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Giddens, Anthony. 1981. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism – Vol. 1, Power, Property and the State. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Gillis, John. 1996. “Making Time for Family: The Invention of Family Time(S) and the Reinvention of Family History.” Journal of Family History 21 (1): 4–21.Google Scholar
  22. Gullestad, Marianne. 1984. Kitchen-Table Society. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
  23. Hirsch, Eric. 1998. “Domestic Appropriations: Multiple Contexts and Relational Limits in the Home-Making of Greater Londoners.” In Migrants of Identity: Perceptions of “Home” in a World of Movement, edited by Nigel Rapport and Andrew Dawson. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  24. James, William. 1890. The Principles of Psychology, vol. 2. New York: H Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  25. Kremer-Sadlik, T., and Amy L. Paugh. 2007. “Everyday Moments: Finding ‘Quality Time’ in American Working Families.” Time and Society 16 (2–3): 287–308.Google Scholar
  26. Long, Nicholas, and Henrietta L. Moore. 2013. “Introduction: Sociality’s New Directions.” In Sociality: New Directions. Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  27. Madianou, Mirca, and Daniel Miller. 2011. Migration and New Media: Transnational Families and Polymedia. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Madianou, Mirca, and Daniel Miller. 2013. “Polymedia: Towards a New Theory of Digital Media in Interpersonal Communication.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 16 (2): 169–187.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, Daniel. 1998. A Theory of Shopping. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  30. Moores, Shaun. 1993. Interpreting Audiences: The Ethnography of Media Consumption. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Moran, Joe. 2007. Queuing for Beginners: The Story of Daily Life from Breakfast to Bedtime. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  32. Morgan, David H.J. 1996. Family Connections: An Introduction to Family Studies. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  33. Morley, David. 1986. Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure. London: Comedia.Google Scholar
  34. Ofcom. 2014. The Communications Market Report.Google Scholar
  35. Ofcom. 2015. The Communications Market Report.Google Scholar
  36. Schneider, David. 1968. American Kinship: A Cultural Account. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Schneider, David. 1984. A Critique of the Study of Kinship. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silva, Elizabeth Bortolaia, and Carol Smart. 1999. “The ‘New’ Practices and Politics of Family Life.” In The New Family?, edited by Elizabeth Bortolaia Silva and Carol Smart. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Simpson, Bob. 1997. “On Gifts, Payments and Disputes: Divorce and Changing Family Structures in Contemporary Britain.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 3 (1): 43–59.Google Scholar
  40. Simpson, Bob. 1998. Changing Families: An Ethnographic Approach to Divorce and Separation. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  41. Stacey, Judith. 1990. Brave New Families: Stories of Domestic Upheaval in Late-Twentieth-Century America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Strathern, Marilyn. 1981. Kinship at the Core: An Anthropology of Elmdon, a Village in the N-W Essex in the 1960s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Strathern, Marilyn. 1992. After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Valentine, Gill. 1999. “Eating in : Home, Consumption and Identity.” The Sociological Review 47 (3): 491–524.Google Scholar
  45. Williams, Fiona. 2004. Rethinking Families. Moral Tales of Parenting and Step-Parenting. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roxana Moroşanu
    • 1
  1. 1.Loughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations