The sociological study of individuation processes in modern occidental societies has mobilized the thesis of institutional individualism as a key concept. This article argues that this thesis may not be appropriate to understand societies with different cultural traditions and institutional practices. Based upon the results of qualitative research conducted in Chile the article discusses the existence of a specific path to individuation in this society. The data show the analytical preeminence within the individuation process in Chile of a group of competences that must be generated and developed in confronting social life itself. Individuation leads in Chile to the constitution of relational hyper-actors based upon four dimensions: self-effort, abilities, interpersonal relationships and pragmatic consistency. This is what we propose to understand as agentic individualism.
Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0011392113512496csi.sagepub.com
CS
Beyond institutional individualism: Agentic individualism and the individuation process in Chilean society
Kathya AraujoUniversidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano, Chile
Danilo MartuccelliUniversité Paris Descartes, IUF, CERLIS, France
AbstractThe sociological study of individuation processes in modern occidental societies has mobilized the thesis of institutional individualism as a key concept. This article argues that this thesis may not be appropriate to understand societies with different cultural traditions and institutional practices. Based upon the results of qualitative research conducted in Chile the article discusses the existence of a specific path to individuation in this society. The data show the analytical preeminence within the individuation process in Chile of a group of competences that must be generated and developed in confronting social life itself. Individuation leads in Chile to the constitution of relational hyper-actors based upon four dimensions: self-effort, abilities, interpersonal relationships and pragmatic consistency. This is what we propose to understand as agentic individualism.
Corresponding author:Kathya Araujo, Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano, Condell 343 Providencia, Santiago de Chile, Santiago 7500828, Chile. Email: [email protected]
512496 CSI62110.1177/0011392113512496Current SociologyAraujo and Martuccelliresearch-article2013
Article
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
The production of individuals has been related in modern occidental discussion to a par-ticular cultural tradition and a group of specific institutional practices. In sociology, the thesis of institutional individualism has been without doubt a key concept in explaining this process (Bourricaud, 1977; Parsons, 1951, 1964). According to this thesis, in mod-ern societies the most important institutions (work, school, family, etc.) are specifically and explicitly oriented towards the individual. They compel each person to develop and constitute themselves as a subject according to pre-established institutional models.
Based upon this conceptualization, for a long time social sciences affirmed the inex-istence or insufficiencies of individuals in semi-peripheral or peripheral societies (Araujo, 2009a; Martuccelli, 2002, 2010a). Individuals from other societies – or from the same societies before modernity and institutional individualism – were perceived from the point of view of their anomalies. The fact that canonical theoretical versions about the production of individuals hypostatized specific features of occidental modern socie-ties obstructed comparative analysis and veiled the existence of other individuation modalities from those described by institutional individualism.
This distinction between terms is fundamental. Even though the notion of individua-tion is not exclusive to sociology, in this discipline and since classical authors, the pro-cess of individuation defines the type of individual structurally produced in a society (Martuccelli, 1999, 2010b). Classic sociology described the emergence of the individual in western civilization associated with different structural factors (social differentiation, secularization, urbanization, rationalism, industrialization, etc.). Nevertheless, it must be recognized that in the end all these features were subordinated to the institutional indi-vidualism model. Without disregarding the importance of this model, in this article we argue that this should not be considered as the only historic path to individuation. In this regard, we will discuss the existence of another way of production of individuals.
To argue this thesis we rely upon the results of an empirical qualitative research on the individuation process in Chile developed between 2007 and 2010. In this research 96 semi-structured interviews were conducted in three different cities (Santiago, Concepción and Valparaíso) with a sample of men and women between 30 and 55 years of age from middle- upper-middle and low-income sectors.1 We develop our argument in four steps. First, we analyse the most important axes of the sociological tradition of institutional individualism. Second, we present the four relevant competences through which our interviewees constitute themselves as individuals (effort, personal abilities, interpersonal relationships and pragmatic consistency). Third, we develop a conceptual discussion of the kind of individual to be found resulting from the individuation process (the relational hyper-actor). Lastly, we propose a sociological definition of the distinctive individualism model in Chilean society (agentic individualism).
Institutional individualism and the subject in the modern western world
A brief presentation of the theoretical discussion
Louis Dumont (1985) has proposed a very important distinction. It is necessary to distinguish between individuals as empirical agents, therefore existing in every human
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
collectivity, and individuals as moral beings attached to a particular subject representa-tion. It is only in this second sense that individualism should be seen as an occidental distinctive historical feature (Dumont, 1983). The difference with traditional societies (holistic) should be considered enormous. For centuries in these societies the individ-ual was mainly considered as an anomaly because she or he was seen as a particular deviance from the common features of a social group. The general takes precedence over the particular so that the individual dimension is understood as a fairly contingent specialization of the ‘community’ (Tönnies, 2005 [1887]). Against this interpretation the thesis of institutional individualism meant a real revolution. Individual was no longer perceived as a singular deviance of a general model. It became itself the insti-tutional model to be incarnated. The importance of this transition should not be over-looked. Therefore, it is relevant to define precisely the sense of the transformation produced in occidental modernity by this notion.
What institutional individualism thoroughly changes is that the individual is regarded now as a result of a collective central imperative that impels that person to the constitu-tion of her- or himself as an individual-subject. This is to be seen in the economic sphere (as shown by the importance of possessive individualism), in the political sphere (under the prevalence of equality), or even in the sentimental sphere (with the cultural triumph of love).
The primacy of this thesis was never questioned in sociology. This was the case despite the existence of very clear national differences within modern occidental indi-vidualism (Dumont, 1991; Kalupner, 2003; Lukes, 1973; Martuccelli and de Singly, 2009); the acknowledgement of a plurality of historical models of the subject (Macpherson, 1962; Weintraub, 1978; Taylor, 1989); the existence of diverse cultural and political traditions in a society (Bellah et al., 1985); or, even, the emergence of new modalities of individualism (Elliott and Lemert, 2006; Lasch, 1979; Lipovetsky, 1983; Riesman et al., 1950; Sennett, 1977).
The contemporary individualization thesis, which was originally produced in Germany (Junge, 2002) and then developed in England and France, is a good illustration of the former statement. This thesis contends that the growing individualization is an outcome of the shift to a society (‘second modernity’ or ‘late modernity’) in which insti-tutions do not transmit harmonious prescriptive norms to the actors but impel them to give sense on their own to their social trajectories through reflexivity (Bauman, 2001; Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002; Giddens, 1990, 1991; Kron, 2000; Le Bart, 2009). This does not imply that individuals are freer. This means that they are subdued by a new historical process that produces them through other institutional commandments. What remains untouched is the idea that individuals are required and produced by a sum of institutions that oblige them to develop a personal biography. Certainly, as Beck points out, individuals must give biographical solutions to systemic contradictions, but this must not veil the fact that these personal solutions are answers induced by an institutional prescription (Araujo, 2012; Martuccelli, 2010b).
In other words, the individuation process in the modern occidental society is related to a set of social representations and especially to institutional interpellations, a fact well expressed by the importance given to the relationship between the welfare state and indi-viduation modalities (Castel, 1995; Esping-Andersen, 1990; Therborn, 2009), the amount
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
of support that they have available to answer to institutional prescriptions (Ehrenberg, 1998) or the effects of the institutional subjection mechanisms, as discussed by Foucault (Fassin and Memmi, 2004; Memmi, 2003).
In no society do individual actors invent subject ideals. These ideals are offered and put at their disposal. They are part of the culture and society in which an individual is forged. The specificity of occidental modernity and institutional individualism is that the individual is interpellated to constitute her- or himself as an individual-subject by institu-tions. Institutions are the ones that offer representations and support.
Latin American anomalies?
The institutional individualism thesis has been scarcely explored in Latin America. Social sciences in this region concluded the inexistence of the individual due to many reasons, even those related to critical and anti-occidental arguments. There has been a vivid contrast between the importance and richness of studies dedicated to moderniza-tion, and poverty – at least for some decades in this last case – and those devoted to modernity strictly speaking (Brunner, 1992; García Canclini, 1989; Pinedo, 1999).2 It is true that the situation has varied thanks to the inflexions produced in the debates about modernity with the contributions on the role of culture to understand Latin America’s specific path to modernity (Brunner, 1992; García Canclini, 1990; Martín-Barbero and Herlinghaus, 2000; Monsiváis, 2000). The originality and strength of these studies need not be underscored here. However, although these works admit some particular features of individuals in the region they generally fail in paying consistent attention to the differ-ences between these individuals and those forged in modern occidental societies by insti-tutional individualism (Brunner, 1994; Domingues, 2009; Ortiz, 1988).
Thus, the theoretical aggiornamento is not sufficient because it does not take into account the specificities of Latin America’s individuation modality. To achieve this task it is necessary to dissociate the study of individuation processes from occidental moder-nity. More precisely: to stop privileging the preeminence of a theory of the subject reduced to the analytical predominance of its institutional production. As we have already pointed out, for a long time this thesis has led to the conclusion of the insufficiency of the individual in Latin America. As Octavio Paz (1979) has stated, the individual in this region would have never reached the full exercise of autonomy, an important reason being the fact that pillar institutions such as the Church and the Army would have imposed a tutelary order over individuals (Nugent, 2001). As long as the study of the individual privileged the influence of institutions, it concluded that individuals did not exist, even in the case of Chilean society, one of the most institutionalized in the region.
Our argument here is that a variant of institutional individualism is not a fruitful con-ceptual tool to approach the individual in Latin America, not only because individuals do exist in these societies but also because as our empirical results show for the case of Chile, a set of nuclear initiatives that actors perceive as constitutive of their individuality are to be seen as independent of institutional prescription. Actors do not only feel impelled to ‘fulfil’ the insufficiency of institutions, but at the same time individuals do not perceive themselves mainly under the effects of an institutional interpellation. Individuals set themselves up based much more on their intrinsic abilities to deal with
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
social life than on their capacities to adhere to a prescriptive institutional programme. A closer analysis of our material will allow us to argue this point. We start by discussing in the next section the components of the individual. After that we will carry out a more conceptual discussion of this modality of individual, which we would like to name the relational hyper-actor.
The individual: Practical skills and competences
Our argument is that in our study case the constitution as individual leans upon a particu-lar set of practical skills and competences. We found that there are four strongly related features that make up the relational hyper-actor: effort, personal abilities, interpersonal relationships and consistency. They are all different faces of the same experience. For example, in individuals there coexists an open heroic discourse about themselves and the non-explicit recognition of the nevertheless decisive support they have received from some people or networks. On the other hand, even though all these dimensions are always present they are not evenly or similarly mobilized among individuals. The state-ment about the importance of personal abilities is far more prevalent within low-income sectors (especially women) than in middle sectors. In this last case the role of networks and relational capacities is more often recalled. Even though a more detailed analysis of all these different nuances is not possible in this article, we will point them out when necessary.
Efforts
First, individuality is constituted assuming the structural character of the lack of protec-tion in society which drives a strong development of agency. Against age-old stereotypes about the laziness and isolation of Chileans (Larraín, 2001; Quevedo, 2000), our inter-viewees praised personal effort as a prerequisite to succeed over adverse situations. In this context, personal effort and the recognition of merit obtain a particular meaning. ‘Effort’ has plural cultural roots in Chile that go from a Christian to Socialist tradition not to mention the most recent neoliberal model. But what characterizes this notion nowa-days is the confidence that individuals place in it and their frustration when they judge that it is not recognized. This is a testimony to the fact that merit has become a core ele-ment of the idea of justice in Chile today (Engel and Navia, 2006). Success, although counter to the reality people face (Núñez, 2004), is, for many of them, first of all the fruit of effort and an expression of expanded expectations of horizontality in social life that traverse Chilean society. ‘To succeed’, says a woman who has experienced significant social mobility thanks to her work, ‘you have to be super persistent’, or to have, as another woman, an entrepreneur originally from a low-income sector, says, ‘persever-ance’, before acknowledging that ‘not everybody has the same, I don’t know how to say it, the same courage, the same strength to not get discouraged’. A man, a security guard, gave a masculine version of this same attitude: ‘With my morale very high, I never cried, never went there [to his parents] … You know, I don’t have this, I never told my mom, you know, I do not have enough to eat, never … I have never knocked on any door. Because of dignity. I am a proud person.’ He insists: ‘I have lived life with ups and
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
downs, and I have got over it. I haven’t stayed at the bottom [of society] … maybe if I had been a lazy person I would have been there, I would have been down there now.’ What the interviews clearly show is an individual who copes with vicissitudes by means of self-effort, hence more as an ideal than as a concrete experience. The implicit critique of other people or of abuse (Araujo, 2009b) disappears behind this enthusiastic praise of personal courage. Nothing shows this better than the strong contrast observed when com-paring the effects of precariousness and flexibility on individuals, as a significant amount of specialized literature has discussed.3 Where contributions that rely on institutional individualism underscore new forms of subjection, social exclusion or subjective destruc-tion (Castel, 1995), our study shows that even though these realities are not unknown (Ramos, 2009; Soto, 2008) and there is a vivid perception of the strength of coercion and the weakness of social protections, work was in general evoked as a very important and necessary expressive realm.
In this modality of the individual, the lack of institutional support does not justify any failure. For some it is even important to live without turning to this support. This is a frequent experience within low-income sectors. If many of them usually or exceptionally appeal for public assistance, many (sometimes the same ones) exhibit a legitimate pride in rising from the difficulties on their own. This is a fact that contends a tradition of thought that reviles poor people by distinguishing between the ‘good poor’ and the ‘assisted poor’. Certainly, pride appears many times mixed with resentment. A woman, a single mother, recalls how she overcame a very difficult situation with courage. ‘Veronica, I told myself, you are an important person and you have to be self-reliant and get over all of this … because if the system closes all doors to you, I won’t shut them to myself. And that’s what I did.’ Life is a struggle with or without institutional support.
This modality even though present in middle sectors has a particular strength within popular sectors. Affirming the will of not depending on public assistance, a woman recalls: ‘We got the house by our own effort, we fought and we got ahead. I think every-body should do the same.’ She is proud of having achieved the ‘objective, alone. Of depending only on ourselves, and that nobody may say “it is because of me that you have that”.’
Personal abilities
The second dimension of the individual specifies the nature of the effort: individuals emphasize their abilities more than their strength when talking about the way they cope with uncertain and adverse situations. To confront ordinary challenges in social life it is necessary to find in oneself the required skills. ‘Whole life is a challenge’, contemplates a male dress designer, ‘and it is not worth seeing only the negative part of it.’
To be skilful is to be able to take advantage of opportunities.4 Opportunity is the natu-ral companion to the skilful individual in societies defined by the experience that every-thing is hindered and that every acquired position is unstable (Araujo and Martuccelli, 2011). It is a way of intelligence that combines sagacity, prudence, daring, alertness and ‘instinct’. What is really important is to know how to avoid obstacles.
To take advantage of opportunities is a deeply optimistic and individualized ability. It is a way in which to depart from adversity many of them take their fate into their own
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
hands. A shop-keeper narrated to us how he adapts his business very fast to the market by changing his products (fruits, clothes, shoes) and being flexible. He says he is perma-nently alert. This attitude is not exclusive to this kind of activity. Many workers are proud of being always available for every work opportunity that may appear (Díaz et al., 2006).
In a society where asymmetry of power has been structurally durable, practical skills are a way of introducing contingency in necessity. It is a way of opening exchange hori-zons and in so doing to install openness in the interactive realm. This attitude is often momentary because in the end ‘structures’ generally have precedence over ‘agents’. Nevertheless, what is important is to keep open situations to which opportunity gives a philosophy of life. To achieve it, one must be smart, quick, astute, but also have enough flexibility to avoid obstacles. ‘You have to be bright, very smart, we are living in the world of the astute ones, nowadays you cannot stay still, nowadays you cannot trust, nowadays you have to be very alert, it is not enough with two eyes you have to have four, you have to be focused, and to know that you have to take opportunities, all of them because they do not come back again’, a male social educator explained to us. ‘If you don’t take them somebody else will. Yes it is so. It is so in every perspective. If you do not marry him, somebody else will. If you don’t eat that piece, somebody else will. I think life is like this’, says a female attorney. Opportunity is not evident: it is a sign that you have to decipher and take advantage of.
What is important in this regard is not introspection but a state of alertness. It is a moment and not a condition. On the other hand, even though opportunism is an indi-vidual performance, it is at the same time an authentic collective value. This makes it a component of the modality of the individual in Chile. Individual astuteness is to be cel-ebrated and a source of esteem and self-esteem. A man from the low-income sector told us how some years ago the opportunity ‘appeared’ to him. A friend of his who was a postman offered him work on some of his postal rounds. ‘I made myself a friend of the postman that ceded to me a part of his territory. Postmen have quadrants and he gave me some he had. I always remember that they were 289 houses. I went there and delivered [letters] twice or three times a week and monthly I made around 450,000 or 400,000 pesos at the time, and I charged more than for the letters for the service I gave.’ A good ‘business’ demands a good ‘technique’. The business, he explains, is a ‘matter of skin’, a reason why many times he stayed chatting more than necessary with people to whom he delivered the mail, time he charged at the end of the month.
Nevertheless, the mandate of taking advantage of opportunities may not be applied at any price. Here one must navigate the winding border with transgression (Girola, 2005; Méndez et al., 2002; Nino, 2005; Portocarrero, 2004). Opportunism may be an object of admiration, which is not the case with transgression. Although opportunism might be seen as a collective vice, it is often considered a personal virtue.
Interpersonal relationships
The two dimensions discussed above show how the individual appears as a hyper-actor. But this representation is accompanied by another one. Individuals acknowledge that they ask for help. They lean on others and receive help from them. To some, this support takes the form of ‘exemplary persons’. To others, it is a matter of material support. Such
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
was the case of one woman. After her first marriage broke up she remained ‘alone with my daughter, I had to struggle so that nothing was lacking … It was hard for me to work alone to rise up.’ This was a process in which she recognizes she received active support from a man who would become her second husband. The true dynamic is a combination between effort and support from others, but as we shall see even this second element requires the display of personal skills.
Support is basically associated with interpersonal relationships. When it came to insti-tutions, situations were always far more categorical, univocal and hostile. Some speak about an institutional abandon, like a stallholder who recalls how she had to ‘work with my children, I couldn’t leave them alone. Those were years and years of my life that were like a big, big nightmare.’ In this context, family plays a decisive role as a multidirec-tional and multifunctional support (Valenzuela et al., 2006). ‘The most important thing is family’, declared a man who works as a real estate agent. Family is without doubt a central institution that compels certain roles and obligations in Chilean society. However, there is another dimension that is strongly present in our results: family is seen primarily as a strategic relational resource for individual affirmation. It is only in those cases in which family is absent or has serious limitations that other relationships are mainly referred to as a source of support. This is the case of a woman in her thirties. As long as she has no familiar network, she says, she must develop ‘the virtue of cultivating differ-ent networks’. Social relationships appear also as bonds clearly and explicitly associated with professional strategies: ‘I have made very good friends on my job, and making good friends at work allows me to do a lot of interesting activities’, affirms emphatically a middle-aged university professor. Lastly, social relationships are seen as a source of profit in different spheres, from politics to religion, as the commentary of a middle-income man reveals: ‘the boom of the Legionnaires of Christ is not to be explained but as a social network’.
It is from sociability and thanks to the competencies acquired by means of their rela-tional skills, that individuals assume their existence and reaffirm it daily. As a male engi-neer explained to us: ‘In this world, at least in this country … people move thanks to a network of contacts, and you make contacts at school, the group of friends you had then are the ones that finally can give you a hand, get you a job, help you to get a business, there is your base, your strength for the rest of your life.’ Of course such a representation dismisses everything that individuals owe to institutions. The solitude in the face of insti-tutions, even when this discourse omits the different kinds of support that people do receive from institutions (rights, infrastructure, assistance, etc.), is coloured by the knowledge of being able to achieve through the support received from others, or at least some others. Individuals are propelled to incarnate relational hyper-actors, a trait that highly differentiates them from the self-made man model.
Consistencies
Lastly, the individuals that emerge from the individuation process studied seek to pro-vide themselves with a practical consistency. Within the frame of institutional individu-alism, the production of the individual is closely related to the work through which under an institutional prescription the individual achieves the constitution of oneself as a
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
subject. From Marxism to psychoanalysis, from feminist works to those of Foucault, even if theorizations have shown extremely important differences (collective subject, subjection, intra-psychical work and so on), subjectivation has in all cases been analysed as the product of a work of individuals assisted or compelled by institutions, and defined as a path to obtain a moral consistency.
The process that we studied shows a different direction, in that individuals as rela-tional hyper-actors seek to constitute themselves around a practical personal consistency. In other words, for individuals it is not the case basically to ‘choose’ or to ‘decide’ but to ‘do’ and to ‘be’. In Chile today the individual must display a set of consistencies which seek to achieve a peculiar form of pragmatic consistency. With this notion we are not referring to psychic self-esteem but to a specific form of confidence in one’s practical competencies; that is, in the skills individuals possess and through which they strive to cope with the situations they must confront. It is a source of pragmatic assurance in a society perceived as a permanent source of insecurity.
By facing life’s vicissitudes, the pragmatic consistency and the self-confidence that it provides are an important element. Of course, underlying this type of self-confidence is evidence of an expansion of self-help literature in Chile, especially among the middle-income sectors (Méndez, 2008). But this is not the only explanation. The permanent allusion to self-confidence gains its complete significance if we understand it as the indispensable fuel to confront everyday challenges. It is this attitude, for example, which allows many interviewees to consider that if their financial situation severely worsened, they would find in themselves the necessary strength to go forwards. What interviewees recalled was confidence in their practical skills and not psychic self-esteem. Pragmatic consistency is a tool to face life and for the constitution of oneself as an individual.
Here too, as with the other three dimensions discussed, pragmatic consistency is more a product of personal elaboration while confronting social life than an answer to institu-tional prescriptions. This is a reason why individuals underscore the endogenous charac-ter of their strength, even though they might appeal to the support of cultural representations or even some institutional resources. Consistency appears as a trait of character or as temperament. In order to confront the difficulties faced in society, char-acter (which means, our results suggest, to have a strong temperament) appears as an important resource to develop pragmatic consistency. For example, to explain why she does not let herself be intimidated by her employers, a domestic employee says: ‘I have character … I have a special character, so when I don’t like something, I just walk away.’ Character as temperament appears to be mobilized as the indispensable support of a per-sonal attitude that would not be possible to sustain otherwise due to the persistence of verticality in social bonds in Chile.
The existence of this modality of consistency does not mean that there are no subject configurations or moral performances in Chile. We do not subscribe at all to those theses that conceive individuals in the region as transgressors or as morally weak (Nino, 2005). Indeed, this type of consistency based on a pragmatic self-confidence may on occasion turn into actions that are critically judged from a moral point of view. Among our inter-viewees nobody expressed this tension better than one man, who was a lawyer: ‘I try [to make] people assume responsibility when they have screwed up. In Chile guilt is always put outside and people never assume the responsibility; as a result, they are condemned
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
to repeat the story permanently.’ The pragmatic consistency of the relational hyper-actor is a resource for action and not a principle of moral rectitude. However, this does not deny at all the constant moral work of individuals but frames it. This may be associated with the fact that ordinary moral performance is closely related to the effects of social experiences and it is not the sole effect of the internalization of institutionally provided norms and social ideals (Araujo, 2009b).
Individuation in Chile: The relational hyper-actor
The relational hyper-actor as the modality of the individual in Chile must be put in con-text. Chilean society has undergone a set of transformations related, on the one hand, to the turn to neoliberalism in the 1970s, with the country becoming the first laboratory of this model (Harvey, 2007). On the other hand, these transformations were associated with demands for equality which have led to increased exigencies of horizontality within interpersonal relationships as well as in the relationships with institutions. The neoliberal politics redesigned the borders between the market and the state (Garretón, 2000; Góngora, 1981; Tironi, 2005). The relationships between social groups underwent a deep modification, to the extent that the country’s economy was strategically opened to inter-national markets and later to capital markets. New forms of regulation in the labour market appeared. Public protections and regulations decreased and workers’ responsibil-ity for their work trajectories, health and pensions was emphasized. Salaries were thor-oughly individualized (Ramos, 2009). Principles of social protection were modified (Raczynski and Serrano, 2005): health services, education and social security privatized. Consumption and credit became the structural elements of social relationships and per-sonal life (Moulian, 1997). As an effect, a feeling of positional inconsistency spreads through society. This feeling refers to the perception that every social position may suffer active processes of destabilization due to the transference to individuals of the tasks related to the level and quality of their social integration (Araujo and Martuccelli, 2011). In this context, individuals are the ones that must constantly face macro-sociological (inflation, political instabilities, changes associated with globalization …) and micro-sociological (family events, health problems, dismissals …) challenges.
It might be correctly argued that these are transversal transformations that face many if not all contemporary societies. True. But it is important to acknowledge that there are specific ways of confronting this issue behind the apparent similitude of these situations. It is precisely this specificity which defines the different individuation models. In Chile this situation produces, as we have seen, individuals that must take charge of themselves in a very different way to that referred to by institutional individualism. Even though the strength of the representation of the individual might be at the institutional level (some-thing well expressed by rights), the individual does not perceive her- or himself and is not perceived primarily as a result of institutions, as other studies have pointed out (Robles, 2000). A major consequence of this situation to be emphasized is that in this society social integration takes precedence over systemic integration (Lechner, 1987).
These individuals sustain and build themselves based upon their capacity to ‘do’. Of course, every individual is an actor, that is, somebody that reacts and transforms her or his environment. Nevertheless, in the occidental tradition, this dimension of the
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
individual was subordinated to the notion of subject due to the strength of mechanisms (market, citizenship, school or emotions) that compelled individuals to constitute them-selves as subjects. In this regard we find a deep analytical coincidence between Durkheim and Weber, Parsons and Bourdieu, Elias and Foucault, Althusser or Touraine (Martuccelli, 1999). This is not what our study shows in the case of Chile. In this case, the individual presents and conceives her- or himself fundamentally as a hyper-actor. To make our point clearer: the models of subject (that do exist) to which individuals might appeal, are sub-ordinated to the set of practical competencies that individuals as actors must develop to deal with the challenges of social life. Individuals are not essentially actors that consti-tute themselves departing from a normative figure of the subject institutionally provided. Individuals constitute themselves as individuals because they perceive themselves as actors capable of practically dealing with challenges.
But individuals are also propelled to constitute themselves based on a specific rela-tional management. They must take charge of themselves, counting on their interper-sonal relationships. This dimension is experienced as a basic resource and a source of support, even though it is at the same time perceived as undergoing strong tensions and contradictions. The individual is to be conceived as a relational vertex and weaver of networks, loyalties and bonds (Barozet, 2006; Lomnitz, 1971). This explains the reason why the individual is not allowed to disregard either interpersonal relationships or collectives.
Certainly, the relational nature of the individual has been actively described within the frame of institutional individualism. This has underscored the importance of the ‘signifi-cant others’ and interactions (Blumer, 1969; Goffman, 1974), the issue of recognition (Honneth, 1992) or, from a more instrumental perspective, social capital (Bourdieu, 1980; Coleman, 1990; Granovetter, 1973). All these elements are to be found in Chilean society and in its individuals’ experiences. But what is essential in this case is something different. Individuals conceive themselves as intimately being their relationships. Their practical competencies include a set of relationships that are not to be dissociated from their agency in society (‘contacts’, networks or ‘favour chains’). These relationships are far more significant in this sense than as supports in their everyday care (Tronto, 1993). Nevertheless, these individuals do not perceive themselves based upon their position within a lineage or an exclusive relational network, as in the so-called traditional socie-ties.5 Their personal conscience is not framed by communitarian obligations.
The relational realm has clear individual and even individualistic features. These should be understood as skills that the individual must have in order to deal with the chal-lenges of social life. Relationships are a core component of the social resources that individuals possess that bring them to temper their own interests with plural forms of commitment, responsibilities, reciprocities or gifts. This fact explains the double nature of many social relations: at one and the same time, affective and instrumental. A new conceptual precision results from this feature of the process of individuation in Chile. It is not the case here of an individual based on her or his autonomy, as contended by clas-sical sociological and before them philosophical authors in the European debate.
To avoid misunderstandings we would like to underscore our point. Of course there are institutions in Chile as in any other society, but it is not by departing from them that the path to individuation in this society should be defined. It is worth to recall here the
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
fact that institution is a polysemic notion. Some authors give it such a wide definition that every social phenomenon (ways of making, thinking or feeling) that reproduces itself is meant to be an institution (Mauss and Fauconnet, 1981 [1901]). In this article we use a more restrictive conception of this notion: institution defines a reduced number of legitimate principles usually incarnated in specific social organizations under the form of a recognizable and explicit institutional programme (Dubet, 2002). It is from this under-standing that we contest the importance of institution to understand individuation pro-cesses in Chile.
An agentic individualism
To review our argument before going further: the process of individuation in Chile differs from that of the institutional individualism model.6 Certainly, the work of institutions is active and explicit in many realms of social life. However, individuals are not forged basically in reference to institutional prescriptions. Individuals are forged confronting social life’s vicissitudes by means of their capacities and skills, which include the mobilization of interpersonal relationships, and through a singular set of strategies and competencies. Thus, empirical individuals should be defined as relational hyper-actors.
What our results show is that the absence or weakness of a cultural and political indi-vidualistic tradition linked to a strong institutional programme of individualization as in modern occidental societies does not impede the formation of individuals. The individ-ual is produced on another basis.7 This means that we do not face here an institutional individualism but what we would like to call an agentic individualism. That is to say, a social, cultural, political representation of the individual and its preeminence constituted upon competencies for agency. Individuals are produced and conceived by means of their practical skills and competencies and is from these that subject ideals or models to which they may eventually be attached derive.
Institutions in this context are at the most just another resource to mobilize in a prag-matic and specific way. Institutions are not the main support of the individual. Moreover, in Chile, and probably in Latin America as a whole, the situation is almost inverse: actors not only perceive themselves as unprotected by institutions but also in many cases have the feeling that they have to protect themselves from the prescriptions that these institu-tions transmit to them. This is clear in the case of Chile: individuals feel that have to protect themselves from the excesses of consumerism or time expected to be spent at work (Moulian, 1998). This is also to be seen in the excessively high levels of mistrust in institutions present in the region (Rojas, 2010). This fact evidences the risk of inter-preting individuals in this region according to the conceptualizations proposed, for example, by Robert Castel (1995) or Sennett (1998) about the negative effects of institu-tional abandonment.
To summarize and point out the differences between these two modalities of individu-alism: within the framework of institutional individualism the role of institutional pro-grammes in the production and interpellation of individuals as subjects is essential. Within the context of agentic individualism what takes precedence is the self-sustainability of individuals as social actors. In the first path, individuals must measure up to a model
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
proposed by institutions. In the second, individuals must primarily achieve to get along by relying upon their own skills and competencies. In the first model, the individual as a subject is never ‘first’, she or he is always a consequence of institutional or disciplinary principles or mechanisms. On the contrary, in agentic individualism individuals con-ceives themselves as obliged to take charge of themselves, on their own. It is only from their concrete and ordinary experiences of inhabiting the social, and not from institu-tional prescriptions, that these individuals develop the work of constituting themselves as moral subjects.
Funding
This work was supported by the Chilean Sciences and Technology National Council (grant number 1085006).
Notes
1. For a detailed presentation of this research see Araujo and Martuccelli (2012).2. Such an interpretation may also be found in studies concerning other regions such as Asia
(Shayegan, 1996: 163–188), and specially Sub-Saharan Africa (Copans, 1990), where the existence of an economic modernization without modernity has been insisted (that is, without the spirit of Enlightenment).
3. A visible process is the way in which different authors from different perspectives have inter-preted informal work as a complex source for the production of individualities (but see Matos Mar, 1984; De Soto, 1986; and in Chile, Lavín, 1987).
4. This is individuality trait is not only to be found in Chile. This matter has been discussed, for example, by Brazilian authors like Amante and Garramuño (2000) and Wisnik (2008).
5. A fact that differentiates the Latin American path to individuation from the individuation modalities found in some contemporary Sub-Saharan African societies (see Marie, 1997, 2007).
6. For a more detailed presentation of the social processes of individuation related to agentic individualism see Araujo and Martuccelli (2012).
7. Certainly our results are circumscribed by the case of Chile, but it is worth recalling that this is a country with one of the highest levels of institutionalization in the region.
References
Amante A and Garramuño F (eds) (2000) Absurdo Brasil. Buenos Aires: Editorial Biblos.Araujo K (2009a) Individuos y feminismo. Notas desde América Latina. Iconos 33: 141–153.Araujo K (2009b) Habitar lo social. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Araujo K (2012) La tesis de la individualización en las sociologías alemanas y chilenas: Una
lectura crítica. In: Bodemer K (ed.) Cultura, política y sociedad en América Latina. Madrid and Frankfurt: Iberoamericana Vervuert Verlag, pp. 229–250.
Araujo K and Martuccelli D (2011) Positional inconsistency: A new concept in social stratifica-tion. CEPAL Review 103: 153–165.
Araujo K and Martuccelli D (2012) Desafíos communes: Retrato de la sociedad chilena y sus individuos, I and II. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.
Barozet E (2006) El valor histórico del pituto: Clase media, integración y diferenciación social en Chile. Revista de Sociología 20: 69–96.
Bauman Z (2001) The Individualized Society. Oxford: Polity Press.
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Beck U and Beck-Gernsheim E (2002) Individualization. London: Sage.Bellah R, Madsen R, Sullivan WM et al. (1985) Habits of the Heart. Berkeley: University of
California Press.Blumer H (1969) Symbolic Interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Bourdieu P (1980) Le Sens pratique. Paris: Minuit.Bourricaud F (1977) L’Individualisme institutionnel. Paris: PUF.Brunner JJ (1992) América Latina: cultura y modernidad. México: Grijalbo.Bunner JJ (1994) Tradicionalismo y modernidad en la cultura latinoamericana. In: Herlinghaus H
and Walter M (eds) Posmodernidad en la periferia. Berlin: Langer, pp. 48–82.Castel R (1995) La Métamorphose de la question sociale. Paris: Fayard.Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard
University.Copans J (1990) La Longue Marche de la modernité africaine. Paris: Karthala.De Soto H (1986) El otro sendero. Lima: Editorial El Barranco.Díaz X, Godoy L and Stecher A (2006) Significados del trabajo en un contexto de flexibilización
laboral: La experiencia de hombres y mujeres en Santiago de Chile. In: Díaz X et al. (eds) Trabajo, identidad y vinculo social. Santiago: Centro de Estudios de la Mujer-UDP, pp. 29–60.
Domingues JM (2009) A America Latina e a modernidade contemporánea. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG.
Dubet F (2002) Le Déclin de l’institution. Paris: Seuil.Dumont L (1983) Essais sur l’individualisme. Paris: Seuil.Dumont L (1985) Homo Aequalis, I. Paris: Gallimard.Dumont L (1991) Homo Aequalis, II: L’Idéologie allemande. Paris: Gallimard.Ehrenberg A (1998) La Fatigue d’être soi. Paris: Odile Jacob.Elliott A and Lemert C (2006) The New Individualism. Abingdon: Routledge.Engel E and Navia P (2006) Que gane el ‘más mejor’. Santiago: Editorial Debate.Esping-Andersen G (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Fassin D and Memmi D (eds) (2004) Le Gouvernement des corps. Paris: Editions de l’EHESS.García Canclini N (1989) ¿Modernismo sin modernización? Revista Mexicana de Sociología 3:
163–189.García Canclini N (1990) Culturas híbridas. México: Grijalbo.Garretón MA (2000) La sociedad en que vivi(re)mos. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Giddens A (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Giddens A (1991) Modernity and Self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Girola L (2005) Anomia e individualism. Madrid: Anthropos-UAM.Goffman E (1974) Frame Analysis. London: Harper and Row.Góngora M (1981) Ensayo histórico sobre la noción de Estado en Chile en los siglos XIX y XX.
Santiago: Ediciones de la Ciudad.Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360–1380.Harvey D (2007) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Honneth A (1992) Kampf um Anerkennung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Junge M (2002) Individualisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.Kalupner S (2003) Die Grenzen der Individualisierung. Handlungstheoretische Grundalgen einer
Zeitdiagnose. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.Kron T (ed.) (2000) Individualisierung und soziologische Theorie. Wiesbaden: Opladen-Leske
und Budrich.Larraín J (2001) Identidad chilena. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Lasch C (1979) The Culture of Narcissism. New York: Norton.
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Lavín J (1987) Chile: Revolución silenciosa. Santiago: Editora Zig-zag.Le Bart C (2009) L’Individualisation. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.Lechner N (ed.) (1987) Cultura política y democratización. Buenos Aires: CLACSO.Lipovetsky G (1983) L’Ère du vide. Paris: Gallimard.Lomnitz L (1971) Reciprocity of favors in the urban middle class of Chile. In: Dalton G (ed.)
Studies in Economic Anthropology. Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association, pp. 93–106.
Lukes S (1973) Individualism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Macpherson CB (1962) The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.Marie A (1997) L’Afrique des individus. Paris: Karthala.Marie A (2007) Communauté, individualisme, communautarisme: Hypothèses anthropologiques
sur quelques paradoxes africains. Sociologie et Sociétés 39(2): 173–198.Martín-Barbero J and Herlinghaus H (2000) Contemporaneidad latinoamericana y análisis cul-
tural. Madrid and Frankfurt: Iberoamericana Vervuert.Martuccelli D (1999) Sociologies de la modernité. Paris: Gallimard.Martuccelli D (2002) Grammaires de l’individu. Paris: Gallimard.Martuccelli D (2010a) ¿Existen individuos en el Sur? Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Martuccelli D (2010b) La Société singulariste. Paris: Armand Colin.Martuccelli D and de Singly F (2009) Les Sociologies de l’individu. Paris: Armand Colin.Matos Mar J (1984) Desborde popular y crisis del Estado. Lima: IEP.Mauss M and Fauconnet P (1981 [1901]) Sociologie. In: Mauss M, Œuvres, Vol. III. Paris: Minuit.Memmi D (2003) Faire vivre et laisser mourir. Paris: La Découverte.Méndez ML (2008) Middle class identities in a neoliberal age: Tensions between contested authen-
ticities. The Sociological Review 56(2): 220–237.Méndez J, O’Donnell G and Pinheiro P (2002) La (in)efectividad de la ley y la exclusión en
América Latina. Buenos Aires: Paidós.Monsiváis C (2000) Aires de familia. Barcelona: Anagrama.Moulian T (1997) Chile, anatomía de un mito. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Moulian T (1998) El consumo me consume. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Nino C (2005) Un país al margen de la ley. Buenos Aires: Emecé.Nugent G (2001) ¿Cómo pensar en público? Un debate pragmatista con el tutelaje castrense y
clerical. In: López S et al. (eds) Estudios culturales. Lima: Red para el Desarrollo de las Ciencias Sociales en el Perú, pp. 121–143.
Núñez J (2004) Ni Gonzáles, ni Tapia: Clasismo versus meritocracia en Chile. Santiago: Departamento de Economía de la Universidad de Chile.
Ortiz R (1988) A moderna tradiçao brasileira. Sao Paulo: Brasiliense.Parsons T (1951) The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Parsons T (1964) Social Structure and Personality. New York: The Free Press.Paz O (1979) El ogro filantrópico. México and Barcelona: Seix Barral.Pinedo J (1999) Chile a fines del siglo XX: Entre la modernidad, la modernización, la identidad. In:
Devés E, Pinedo J and Sagredo R (eds) El pensamiento chileno del siglo XX. México: Ministerio Secretaría General de Gobierno, Instituto Panamericano de Geografía e Historia, FCE.
Portocarrero G (2004) Los rostros criollos del mal. Lima: Red para el desarrollo de las ciencias sociales en el Perú.
Quevedo F (2000) La tristeza del chileno. Santiago: Mosquito Comunicaciones.Raczynski D and Serrano C (2005) Las políticas y estrategias de desarrollo social: Aportes de los
años 90 y desafíos futuros. In: Meller P (ed.) La paradoja aparente. Equidad y eficiencia: resolviendo el dilema. Santiago: Taurus, pp. 225–283.
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Ramos C (2009) La transformación de la empresa chilena. Santiago: Universidad Alberto Hurtado.Riesman D, Glazer N and Denney R (1950) The Lonely Crowd. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.Robles F (2000) El desaliento inesperado de la modernidad. Santiago: RIL Editores.Rojas F (2010) Confianza: Base para la gobernabilidad y la convivencia democrática en América
Latina y el Caribe. San José CR: FLACSO.Sennett R (1977) The Fall of Public Man. New York: Knopf.Sennett R (1998) The Corrosion of Character. New York: W.W.Norton.Shayegan D (1996) Le Regard mutilé. La Tour d’Aigues: L’Aube.Soto A (ed.) (2008) Flexibilidad laboral y subjetividades. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.Taylor C (1989) Sources of the Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Therborn G (2009) Les Sociétés d’Europe au XX et au XXI siècle. Paris: Armand Colin.Tironi E (2005) El sueño chileno. Santiago: Taurus.Tönnies F (2005 [1887]) Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft.Tronto J (1993) Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York and
London: Routledge.Valenzuela S, Tironi E and Scully T (2006) El eslabón perdido. Santiago: Aguilar Chilena de
Ediciones.Weintraub K (1978) The Value of the Individual. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Wisnik JM (2008) Veneno remédio. Sao Paulo: Companhia das letras.
Author biographies
Kathya Araujo is a Professor of Sociology and Psychology at the Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano at Santiago de Chile. Her main research fields are individuation and subject configuration and the relationship of individuals with norms, and gender and feminist studies. Currently she is conducting research on authority and democratization processes. She is author, among others, of Habitar lo social (2009), Dignos de su arte (2009) and editor of ¿Se acata pero no se cumple? (2009). She is co-author (with Danilo Martuccelli) of Desafíos communes: La socie-dad chilena y sus individuos (2 vols, 2012).
Danilo Martuccelli is a Professor of Sociology at the Université Paris Descartes. He is member of the Institut Universitaire de France (IUF) and affiliated with the research centre CERLIS – CNRS. His work focuses on social theory, sociology of individuation and political sociology. He has published more than 20 books, among them: Sociologies de la modernité (1999), Grammaires de l’individu (2002), Forgé par l’épreuve (1996), ¿Existen individuos en el Sur? (2010) and La Société singulariste (2010). He is co-author (with Kathya Araujo) of Desafíos communes: La sociedad chilena y sus individuos (2 vols, 2012).
Résumé
L’étude sociologique des processus d’individuation dans les sociétés occidentales mobi-lise la notion d’individualisme institutionnelle comme concept-clé. Cet article suggère que cette thèse n’est pas forcément appropriée à la compréhension de sociétés ayant des traditions culturelles et des pratiques institutionnelles différentes. A partir des résu-ltats d’une enquête conduite au Chili, nous examinons l’existence d’un parcours spéci-
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
fique qui conduit à l’individuation dans cette société. Nos résultats mettent en évidence la prééminence analytique d’un ensemble de compétences qui naissent et se dévelop-pent dans les conflits de la vie sociale. L’individuation au Chili aboutit à la constitution d’hyperacteurs relationnels à quatre dimensions : auto-effort, qualifications, relations interpersonnelles et cohérence pragmatique. C’est ce que nous proposons de concep-tualiser comme individualisme d’agent.
El estudio sociológico de los procesos de individuación en las sociedades occidentales modernas ha movilizado la tesis del individualismo institucional como un concepto clave. En este trabajo se discute que esta tesis no puede ser apropiada para entender socie-dades con diferentes tradiciones culturales y prácticas institucionales. En base a los resultados de una investigación cualitativa desarrollada en Chile, problematizamos la existencia de un camino específico hacia la individuación en dicha sociedad. Nuestros datos muestran la preeminencia de análisis, dentro del proceso de individuación en Chile, de un conjunto de competencias que deben ser generadas y desarrolladas para enfrentar la vida social misma. La individuación en Chile conduce a la constitución de hiper-actores relacionales, basados en cuatro dimensiones: el auto- esfuerzo, las habili-dades, las relaciones interpersonales y la consistencia pragmática. Esto es lo que pro-ponemos que se entienda como individualismo agéntico.
Palabras clave
Individuación, hiper-actor relacional, Chile, individualismo institucional, el individualismo agéntico
by guest on April 2, 2015csi.sagepub.comDownloaded from
