| dc.description |
We provide a framework for reconciling two seemingly incompatible claims regarding
identity in social and economic arenas: (a) that complex, multivalent identities are
advantageous because they afford greater flexibility; and (b) that simple, generic
identities are advantageous because they facilitate interpretation by key audiences.
Following Faulkner (1983), we argue that these claims do not conflict with one another
but that they apply to different contexts. A generic identity is helpful in gaining the
recognition necessary for sustained participation in a social arena. However, as one
becomes better established, the limitations entailed by a simple, “typecast” identity
increasingly rival the benefits. We test these hypotheses in an analysis of the labor
market for actors in the feature film industry. Interviews with key informants and
analysis of comprehensive data from the Internet Movie Database support the proposed
theoretical framework. In addition, the evidence supports the salience of the
hypothesized typecasting processes even in the presence of related processes based on
underlying skill differences and social networks. Our results have important implications
for research on identity formation in various social arenas, categorical boundaries in
external labor markets, and more generally, the interplay between actor and position
inherent in market dynamics |
|