Proxemics [and Comments and Replies] Author(s): Edward T. Hall, Ray L. Birdwhistell, Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, A. Richard Diebold, Jr., Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmonson, J. L. Fischer, Dell Hymes, Solon T. Kimball, Weston La Barre, Frank Lynch, S. J., J. E. McClellan, Donald S. Marshall, G. B. Milner, Harvey B. Sarles, George L Trager, Andrew P. Vayda Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 9, No. 2/3 (Apr. - Jun., 1968), pp. 83-108 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2740724 . Accessed: 04/03/2011 19:52 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology. http://www.jstor.org Proxemics1 byEdward T. Hall WESTERN MAN has conceptualizedspace in manyways, of thecorrectness of myown interpretationsof observ- rangingfrom Bogardus' (1933, 1959) social space and ed behavior in other cultures.In interpretingthe Sorokin's(1943) socioculturalspace to Lewin's(1948) actionsof people in othercultures, the only thing topologies.Chapple and Coon (1942) and Hallowell about which I am reasonablycertain is my own (1955) treateddistance technically when they describ- fleetingresponses. Working in a detailedway on the ed how it is measuredin differentcultures.2 Jammer micro-culturallevel (Hall 1966: 96) and onlywhere it (1960) has dealtwith the concepts of space (including was possibleto detectresponses on the,affective, as theirhistorical underpinnings) in physics.Proxemics,3 well as thebehavioral, level has motivatedme to con- the studyof man'sperception and use of space,per- centrateon my own cultureas it has been revealed tainsto noneof thesedirectly. Is is muchcloser, in- againstthe contrasting backdrop of othercultures. In stead,to thebehavioral complex of activitiesand their thissense, I am in agreementwith LUvi-Strauss (1966b) derivativesknown to the ethologistsas territoriality.when he speaksof theanthropology of thefuture as a It deals primarilywith out-of-awareness distance-set- sciencein whichpeople study themselves. My approach ting,4and owesmuch to thework of Sapir (1927) and has beento usemyself and othersas measuringdevices Whorf(1956). (or "controls,"if you like) at thosetimes when we Because of my communicationsbias, the sub- have been subjectedto contrastingcultural environ- jectsof proxemicresearch have generallybeen mem- ments.This last is important,for one can be no more bersof my own culture.Like Bateson(1948), I have learnedto dependmore on whatpeople do thanwhat 1 The researchreported on in thispaper was supportedby the theysay in responseto a directquestion, to pay close NationalInstitute of MentalHealth and theWenner-Gren Founda- attentionto thatwhich cannot be consciouslymanipu- tionfor Anthropological Research. lated, and to look for patternsrather than content 2 Hallowell'sintroduction to his Chapter9 (CulturalFactors in SpatialOrienta:ion) is particularlyrelevant to spaceperception. (Hall 1966). However,except in a few exceptional 3 In the courseof the developmentof proxemics,the workwas instances,I have neverbeen able to be reallycertain spokenof as "socialspace as bio-communication,"and "micro-space in interpersonalencounters." these wereactually abbreviated tech- nical descriptionsin whichthe propermeanings of the termsof referencewere known only to a fewspecialists. Further, the wide EDWARDT. HALL is a Professorof Anthropologyin theCollege spreadinterest in activitiesconnected with outer space provided an of Artsand Sciencesand a Professorof OrganizationTheory incentiveto distinguishbetween my workand thatof the outer- in the School of Businessat NorthwesternUniversity. He is spacescientists. I decided to inventa new termthat would indicate, also currentlya consultant to government,private foundations, in general,what the field was about.Among the terms I considered and business.Previously he servedas Directorof the United werehuman topology, chaology, the study of emptyspace, oriology, StatesState Department's Point IV Trainingprogram. thestudy of boundaries,chorology, the study of organizedspace. I Educatedat the Universityof Denver(A.B.) and Columbia finallychose "proxemics"as the mostsuitable for thataudience University(Ph.D.), Hall has taughtat theUniversity of Denver, mostlikely to encounterthe topic in thenear future. BenningtonCollege, Harvard BusinessSchool, and Illinois 4 The followingquote (Hall 1963) speaksto thematter of levels Instituteof Technology.He has done fieldwork in Micronesia. of awareness:"Any culture characteristically produces a simultaneous His mostrecent research deals withthe questionof how space arrayof patternedbehavior on severaldifferent-levels of awareness. is perceivedin the UnitedStates and abroad.His publications It is thereforeimportant to specifywhich levels of awarenessone is includeThe Silent Language,The Hidden Dimension,and describing. numerousarticles in professionaljournals. "Unlikemuch of thetraditional subject matter of anthropological The presentarticle, solicited by the Editorof CURRENT AN- observation,proxemic patterns, once learned, are maintainedlargely THROPOLOGY,was submittedon 6 x 67, and was sentfor CA* outof consciousawareness and thushave to be investigatedwithout treatmentto 40 scholars.The followingresponded with written resortto probingthe consciousminds of one's subjects.Direct comments:Ray Birdwhistell,Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, questioningwill yield few if anysignificant variables, as it willwith RichardDiebold, Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmondson,J. L. suchtopics as kinshipand housetype. In proxemicsone is dealing Fischer,Dell Hymes,Solon T. Kimball,Frank Lynch, Weston withphenomena akin to toneof voice, or evenstress and pitch in the La Barre,Donald Marshall,J. E. McClellan,G. B. Milner, Englishlanguage. Since these are builtinto the language,they are HarveyB. Sarles,George L. Trager,and AndrewP. Vayda. hardfor the speaker to consciously manipulate." Theircomments are printedin fullafter the author's text and Also see Hall (1959: Chap. 4) fora morecomplete statement are followedby a replyfrom the author. concerninglevels of awarenessrelating to change. Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 83 than vaguely aware of one's own culturein the absence thatis writtennowhere, known by none,and under- of face-to-faceencounters with people of other cul- stood by all." 8 It is this elaborateand secretcode tures.5 that becomesconfused with what is popularlycon- I firstbecame aware of my own interestin man's ceivedof as phenomenologicalexperience. It has long use of space when I was trainingAmericans for service beenbelieved that experience is what menshare and overseas and discovered that the way in which both thatit is possibleto bypasslanguage by referringback time and space were handled constituteda form of to experiencein orderto reachanother human being. communicationwhich was responded to as if it were This implicit(and oftenexplicit) belief concerning built into people and, therefore,universally valid. In man'srelation to experienceis basedon theassumption 1963a, I wrote: thatwhen two humanbeings are subjectedto thesame "experience,"virtually the same data is being fed ... Americans overseas were confrontedwith a variety of to the two nervous systemsand the two brains difficultiesbecause of culturaldifferences in the handling respond similarly.Proxemic researchcasts serious of space.People stood "too close"during conversations, and doubtson thevalidity of thisassumption, particularly whenthe Americans backed away to a comfortableconver- whenthe cultures are different.People fromdifferent sationaldistance, this was takento mean that Americans were cold, aloof, withdrawn,and distinterestedin the culturesinhabit different sensory worlds (see Hall people of the country.6U.S.A. housewivesmuttered about 1966: Chaps. 10, 11). They not only structurespaces "waste-space"in housesin the Middle East. In England, differently,but experienceit differently,because the Americanswho wereused to neighborlinesswere hurt when sensoriumis differently"programmed."9 There is a theydiscovered that their neighbors were no moreaccessible selectivescreening or filteringthat admits some types or friendlythan otherpeople, and in Latin America,ex- of data whiferejecting others. Sometimes this is accom- suburbanites,accustomed to unfencedyards,