Radical Interactionism and the Symbolism of Methamphetamine

doi:10.1017/9781108656184.016

Chapter 15 - Radical Interactionism and the Symbolism of Methamphetamine

from Part II - Historical and Theoretical Issues in the Study of Social Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 March 2018

Michael A. Katovich

Edited by

A. Javier Treviño

Show author details

A. Javier Treviño: Affiliation:
Wheaton College, Massachusetts

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter provides a radical symbolic interactionist interpretation and analysis of the television series, Breaking Bad and its representation of a deviant innovator, Walter White, and the crystal methamphetamine he cooks. Using the central concepts of radical symbolic interaction, domination, and specifying its four themes related to categorical identification and competence, partnership, emergence, and self-objectification, I characterize White as one who seeks domination in methamphetamine worlds and discuss methamphetamine as an object defined through the prism of attaining status. While acknowledging methamphetamine as a powerful drug in regard to ingestion, I also characterize it as an inanimate thing that becomes meaningful in regard to specific responses to it. White's particular brand, blue crystal methamphetamine, becomes significant not so much as a powerful drug ingested but as a drug representing purity in the methamphetamine world through which White navigates. Furthermore, methamphetamine in Breaking Bad gains meaning as linked, specifically, to White's persona, Heisenberg. In the above light, I link particular scenes to the themes of domination, concluding with brief analogies to other worlds in which deviance or at least being noticeably different relates to domination specifically.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Social Problems , pp. 259 - 278

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108656184.016 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Albertson, T. E., Derlet, R. W, and Van Hoozen, B. E.. 1999. Methamphetamine and the expanding complications of amphetamines. Western Journal of Medicine 170:214–19.Google Scholar

Anglin, M. D., Burke, C., Perrochet, B., Stamper, E., and Dawud-Noursi, D. 2000. History of the methamphetamine problem. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 32:134–41.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 1994. The self as soliloquy. The Sociological Quarterly 35:521–32.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2002. Domination: The blind spot in Mead's analysis of the social act. Journal of Classical Sociology 2:25–42.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2005a. Mead's lost conception of society. Symbolic Interaction 28:305–25.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2005b. Character contests and violent criminal activity: A critique. The Sociological Quarterly 26:419–31.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2007. Radical interactionism: Going beyond Mead. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 37:139–65.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2009. The roots of radical interactionism. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 39:387–414.CrossRef Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2010. Human subordination from a radical interactionist perspective. Journal for The Theory of Social Behavior 40:339–68.Google Scholar

Athens, L. 2013. Mead's conception of the social act: A radical interactionist's critique. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 41:25–51.Google Scholar

Becker, H. 1963. The Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Blumer, H. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Brownstein, H. H., Mulcahy, T., and Huessy, J. 2014. The Methamphetamine industry in America: Transnational Cartels and local Entrepreneurs. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar

Caulkins, J. P., and Reuter, P.. 1997. Setting goals for drug policy: Harm reduction or use reduction? Addiction 92:1143–50.Google Scholar

Caulkins, J. P., and Reuter, P.. 2010. How drug enforcement affects drug prices. Crime and Justice 39:213–71.Google Scholar

Cook, G. 2011. Revisiting the Mead-Blumer controversy. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 36:16–38.Google Scholar

Desroches, F. 2007. Research on upper level drug trafficking: A review. Journal of Drug Issues 37:827–44.Google Scholar

Dewey, J. (1922) 1957. Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar

Douglas, M. (1966) 2003. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Douglas, M. (1968) 2002. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Routledge Classics.Google Scholar

Eck, J. E., and Gersh, J. S.. 2000. Drug trafficking as a cottage industry. Crime Prevention Studies 11:241–71.Google Scholar

Espelin, D. E., and Done, A. K.. 1968. Amphetamine poisoning: Effectiveness of chlorpromazine. New England Journal of Medicine 278:1361–65.Google Scholar

Foote, N. 1951. Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. American Sociological Review 16:14–21.Google Scholar

Friedrichs, D. 2010. Trusted Criminals: White Collar Crime in Contemporary Society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar

Frontline. 2006. The meth epidemic. February 14.Google Scholar

Glaser, B., and Strauss, A.. 1964. Awareness contexts and social interaction. American Sociological Review 29:669–79.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Goffman, E. 1983. The interaction order. American Sociological Review 48:1–17.Google Scholar

Gougherty, M., and Hallett, T.. 2013. Revisiting learning to labor: Interaction, domination, resistance, and the grind. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 41:123–60.Google Scholar

Gray, M. 1998. Drug Crazy: How We Got Into This Mess and How We Can Get Out. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Grinspoon, L., and Hedblom, P.. 1975. The Speed Culture: Amphetamine Use and Abuse in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Gross, E., and Stone, G.. 1964. Embarrassment and the analysis of role requirements. American Journal of Sociology 70:1–15.Google Scholar

Inciardi, J. 2008. The War on Drugs IV: The Continuing Saga of the Mysteries and Miseries of Intoxication, Addiction, Crime, and Public Policy. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar

Innis, H. A. 1951. The Bias of Communication. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Jackson, C. O. 1975. The amphetamine democracy: Medicinal abuse in the popular culture. The South Atlantic Quarterly 74:308–23.Google Scholar

Jenkins, P. 1994. The “Ice Age”: The Social Construction of a Drug Panic. Justice Quarterly 11:7–31.Google Scholar

Katovich, M. A., and Couch, C. J.. 1992. The nature of social pasts and their use as foundations for situated action. Symbolic Interaction 15:25–47.Google Scholar

Katovich, M. A., and Reese, W. A.. 1993. Postmodern thought in symbolic interactionism: Reconstructing social inquiry in light of late-modern concerns. The Sociological Quarterly 34:391–411.Google Scholar

Katz, J. 1998. Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions of Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Kramer, J. C. 1969. Introduction to amphetamine abuse. Journal of Psychedelic Drugs 2:1–16.Google Scholar

Luckenbill, D. 1977. Criminal homicide as a situated transaction. Social Problems 25:176–86.Google Scholar

Mead, G. H. 1932. The Philosophy of the Present. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Mead, G. H. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Merton, R. 1938. Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review 3:672–82.Google Scholar

Merton, R. 1968. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Miller, D. E., Hintz, R., and Couch, C. J.. 1975. The elements and structure of openings. The Sociological Quarterly 16:479–99.Google Scholar

Milligan, M. J. 1998. Interactional past and potential: The social construction of place attachment. Symbolic Interaction 21:1–33.Google Scholar

Morgan, J. P. 1981. Amphetamine. In Substance Abuse: Clinical Problems and Perspectives, edited by Lowinson, J. H. and Ruiz, P., 167–84. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Press.Google Scholar

Musolf, G. R. 2013. Domination and resistance: The political theory of John Dewey. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 41:83–121.Google Scholar

Park, R. 1950. Race and Culture: Essays in the Sociology of Contemporary Man. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Picart, C. J. S. 2013. Reflections on power and intersectionality. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 41:191–214.Google Scholar

Plummer, K. 2003. Queers, bodies and postmodern sexualities: A note on revisiting the “sexual” in symbolic interactionism. Qualitative Sociology 26:515–30.Google Scholar

Puddephatt, A. J. 2011. Language and mind in the thought of G.H. Mead: Challenges from Chomsky's linguistics. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 36:75–106.Google Scholar

Puddephatt, A. J. 2013. Toward a radical interaction account of science. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 41:53–82.Google Scholar

Reding, N. 2009. Methland: The Death and Life of an American Small Town. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Ritzer, G. 2015. Prosumer capitalism. The Sociological Quarterly 56:413–45.Google Scholar

Schutz, A., and Luckmann, T. The Structures of the Life World. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar

Scott, M. B., and Lyman, S. M.. 1968. Accounts. American Sociological Review 33:46–62.Google Scholar

Simmel, G. 1950. The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Edited by Levine, Donald. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Simmel, G. 1971. On Individuality and Social Forms. Edited by Levine, Donald. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Smith, R. C. 1969. The world of the Haight-Ashbury speed freak. Journal of Psychedelic Drugs 2:172–88.Google Scholar

Stone, G. 1962. Appearance and the self. In Human Behavior and Social Processes, edited by Rose, A., 86–118. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar

Strauss, A. 1978. Negotiations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes, and Social Order. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Szasz, T. 1974. Ceremonial Chemistry: The Ritual Persecution of Drugs, Addicts, and Pushers. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.Google Scholar

Szasz, T. 1992. Our Right to Drugs: The Case for a Free Market. Syracuse, NY: University of Syracuse Press.Google Scholar

Tanne, J. H. 2006. Methamphetamine epidemic hits middle America. British Medical Journal 28:982.Google Scholar

Thompson, H. 1966. Hell's Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar

Wald, J. 2001. Narcocorrido: A Journey into the Worlds of Guns, Drugs, and Guerrillas. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Weber, M. 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar

Weisheit, R., and White, W. L.. 2009. Methamphetamine: Its History, Pharmacology, and Treatment. Center City, MN: Hazelden Press.Google Scholar

Wiley, N. 2003. Emotion and film theory. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 26:169–87.Google Scholar

Wiley, N. 2011. The Chicago School: A political interpretation. Studies in Symbolic Interaction 36:39–44.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.