This paper builds on the work of Norbert Elias to examine how conduct varies across cultural contexts. We compare courtship practices in New York and Berlin and ask how people act during the course of ‘getting together’ with a sexual or romantic partner. Drawing on interviews in both contexts, we find that conduct associated with the practice of ‘dating’ among New York respondents is more rationalized as indicated by a greater awareness of timing, a greater degree of intentionality and planning and a greater tendency to psychologize self and others. Berlin respondents report observations of themselves and others in less detail and tend to describe themselves as passive objects of the impersonal forces of love. Whereas conduct associated with dating is more reflexive in some ways, these forms of reflexive conduct are not themselves fully conscious or the object of reflection but have in turn become taken for granted and habitual. These findings challenge us to conceptualize habitus in a manner that does not reproduce the opposition between habit and reflexivity but allows us to use the concept as a tool to capture variations in how self-monitoring and habit are combined in modes of conduct.
AdkinsL., (2004), ‘Reflexivity: Freedom or habit of gender’, in AdkinsL. and SkeggsB. (eds), Feminism after Bourdieu, 191–210, Sociological Review Monograph, Oxford: Blackwell.
2.
ArcherM., (2003), Structure, Agency and the Internal Conversation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
ArcherM., (2007), Making our Way through the World: Human Reflexivity and Social Mobility, New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
AtkinsonW., (2008), ‘Not all that was solid has melted into air (or liquid): A critique of Bauman on individualization and class in liquid modernity’, The Sociological Review, 56: 1–17.
5.
BaileyB.L., (1988), From Front Porch to Back Seat: Courtship in Twentieth-Century America, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
BeckU. and Beck-GernsheimE., (1995), The Normal Chaos of Love, Cambridge: Polity Press.
9.
BeckU.BonssW. and LauC., (2003), ‘The theory of reflexive modernization’, Theory, Culture & Society, 20 (2): 1–33.
10.
BeckU.GiddensA. and LashS., (1994), Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11.
BlackwellD.L. and LichterD.T., (2004), ‘Homogamy among dating, cohabiting, and married couples’, The Sociological Quarterly, 45: 719–737.
12.
BogleK.A., (2008),Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus, New York: New York University Press.
13.
BourdieuB., (1980), The Logic of Practice, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14.
CamicC., (1986), ‘The matter of habit’, American Journal of Sociology, 91: 1039–1087.
15.
ChartierR., (1989), Cultural History: Between Practices and Representations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
CollierJ.F., (1997), From Duty to Desire: Remaking Families in a Spanish Village, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
DerneS., (1994), ‘Cultural conceptions of human motivation and their significance for culture theory’, in KraneD. (ed.), Sociology of Culture: Emerging Theoretical Perspectives, 267–287, Oxford: Blackwell.
18.
Du BoisW.E.B., [2007 (1903)], The Souls of Black folk, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
DuncanS., (2011), ‘The world we have made? Individualisation and personal life in the 1950s’, The Sociological Review, 59 (2): 242–265.
20.
DuncanS. and SmithD., (2006), ‘Individualisation versus the geography of “new” families’, 21st Century Society, 1 (2): 167–189.
21.
EliasN., [1996 (1989)], The Germans: Power Struggles and the Development of Habitus in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, New York: Columbia University Press.
22.
EliasN., [2000 (1939)], The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.
23.
EnglandP.ShaferE.F. and FogartyA.C.K., (2008), ‘Hooking up and forming romantic relationships on today's college campuses’, in KimmelM. (ed.), The Gendered Society Reader, 531–547, New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
FoucaultM., (1979), The History of Sexuality, New York: Vintage Books.
25.
FurnhamA.BondM.HeavenP.HiltonD.LobelT.MastersJ.PayneM.RajamanikamR.StaceyB. and Van DaalenH., (1993), ‘A comparison of Protestant work ethic beliefs in thirteen nations’, Journal of Social Psychology, 133: 185–197.
26.
GabrielN. and MennellS. (eds), (2011), Norbert Elias and Figurational Research: Processual Thinking in Sociology, Sociological Review Monograph Series, Oxford: Blackwell.
27.
GiddensA., (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
28.
GiddensA., (1992), The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love, and Eroticism in Modern Societies, Cambridge: Polity Press.
29.
GlennN. and MarquardtE., (2001),Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Hoping for Mr. Right: College Women on Dating and Mating Today, New York: Institute for American Values.
HamiltonL. and ArmstrongE.A., (2009), ‘Gendered sexuality in young adulthood: Double binds and flawed options’, Gender & Society, 23 (5): 589–616.
32.
HofstedeG.H., (1984), Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
33.
HofstedeG.H., (2001), Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
HondrichK.O., (2004), Liebe in den Zeiten der Weltgesellschaft, Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
35.
IllouzE., (1997), Consuming the Romantic Utopia: Love and the Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
36.
InglehartR., (1977), The Silent Revolution, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
37.
InglehartR., (1990), Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
InglehartR., (1997), Modernization and Postmodernization, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39.
InglehartR. and AbramsonP.R., (1995), Value Change in Global Perspective, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
40.
InkelesA. and LevinsonD.J., (1997), National Character: A Psycho-social Perspective, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
41.
JamiesonL.AndersonM.McCroneD.BechhoferF.StewartR. and LiY., (2002), ‘Cohabitation and commitment: Partnership plans of young men and women’, The Sociological Review, 50 (3): 356–377.
42.
KalbergS., (1987a), ‘West German and American interaction forms: One level of structured misunderstanding’, Theory, Culture and Society, 4: 602–618.
43.
KalbergS., (1987b), ‘The origins and expansion of kulturpessimismus: The relationship between public and private spheres in early twentieth century Germany’, Sociological Theory, 5:150–164.
44.
KuzmicsH., (2000a), ‘Nationaler Habitus und Handlungstheorie: Das Beispiel von Autoritaet und Selbstironie im österreichischen Charakter’, in TriebelA.KuzmicsH. and BlomertR. (eds), Zivilisationstheorie in der Bilanz, 221–243, Opladen: Leske and Burich.
45.
KuzmicsH., (2000b), Autorität, Staat und Nationalcharakter: Der Zivilisationsprozess in Oesterreich und England 1700–1900, Opladen: Leske und Budrich.
46.
LamontM., (1992), Money, Morals and Manners: The Culture of the French and the American Upper-Middle Class, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47.
LamontM., (2002), The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
48.
LenskiG., (1961), The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion's Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life, New York: Doubleday.
49.
LuhmannN., (1998), Love as Passion: The Codification of Intimacy, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
50.
McCarthyB. and CaseyT., (2008), ‘Love, sex, and crime: Adolescent romantic relationships and offending’, American Sociological Review, 73: 944–969.
51.
MeadG.H., (1934), Mind, Self, and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
52.
MeadM., (1928), Coming of Age in Samoa: A Study of Adolescence and Sex in Primitive Societies, London: Penguin.
53.
MeadM., (1944), And Keep your Powder Dry, New York: Pelican Books.
54.
MennellS., (2007), The American Civilising Process, Cambridge: Polity Press.
55.
PaulE.L.McManusB. and HayesA., (2000), “‘Hookups”: Characteristics and correlates of college students’ spontaneous and anonymous sexual experiences”,The Journal of Sex Research, 37 (1): 76–88.
56.
RothmanE.K., (1984), Hands and Hearts: A History of Courtship in America, New York: Basic Books.
57.
SchaletA., (2000), ‘Raging hormones, regulated love: Adolescent sexuality and the constitution of the modern individual in the United States and the Netherlands’, Body and Society, 6: 75–105.
58.
SchaletA., (2011), Not under my Roof: Parents, Teens, and the Culture of Sex, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
SmartC. and ShipmanB., (2004), ‘Visions in monochrome: Marriage and the individualisation thesis’, Sociology, 55 (4): 491–509.
60.
SweetmanP., (2003), ‘Twenty-first century dis-ease? Habitual reflexivity or the reflexive habitus’, The Sociological Review, 51: 528–549.
61.
SwidlerA., (2001), Talk of Love: How Culture Matters, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
62.
SyltevokL., (2010), ‘Sense and sensibility: Cohabitation in “cohabitation land”’, The Sociological Review, 58 (3): 444–462.
63.
WeberM., [1978 (1922)], Economy and Society, Vol. 1, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
64.
WeberM., [2001 (1905)], The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Los Angeles: Roxbury.
65.
WhiteH., (1981), ‘The narrativization of real events’, in MitchellW.J.Y. (ed.), On Narrative, 249–254, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
66.
WoutersC., (1987), ‘Developments in the behavioural codes between the sexes: The formalization of informalization in the Netherlands, 1930–85’, Theory, Culture & Society, 4: 405–427.
67.
WoutersC., (1998), ‘Balancing sex and love since the 1960s sexual revolution’, Theory, Culture & Society, 15: 187–214.
68.
WoutersC., (1999), Informalisierung: Norbert Elias' Zivilisationstheorie und Zivilisationsprozesse im 20. Jahrhundert, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
69.
WoutersC., (2004), Sex and Manners. Female Emancipation in the West 1890–2000, London: Sage.
70.
WoutersC., (2011), ‘How civilizing processes continued: Towards an informalization of manners and a third nature personality’, The Sociological Review, 59 (1): 140–159.
