Over the years, many scholars have urged social scientists to focus their attention on midrange sociological phenomena. Gary Alan Fine goes a step further in The Hinge: Civil Society, Group Cultures, and the Power of Local Commitments. The meso-level, or using his term, “hinge,” connects the microlevel with the macrolevel. More specifically, he “use[s] interaction order, group culture, circuits of action, and tiny publics as analytic strategies, revealing how this semiautonomous mesolevel analysis serves as the hinge through which micro-and macrolevels are linked” (8). Following Erving Goffman, as he often does throughout the book, the interaction order is performative and coordinated—it is where the “action is.” When group interaction is established and perpetuated, group culture has emerged. Fine calls culture unique to a group “idioculture.” Civic participation, as measured by the group, is what Fine calls circuits of action. Lastly, tiny publics are those groups individuals belong to that are connected and involved in the public arena.
Fine argues that coordination is how the hinge works. Individuals tune their beliefs and actions, even identity, to the group. Smaller collaborative endeavors, friendships, and the like complement the coordinating process. He then looks at voluntary associations, which are mesolevel entities, and their vital role in political action. Regarding political influence and action, he writes, “the power of associations to create commitment derives from interaction and a common culture” (97).
Besides the qualities of the group, place/stage is crucial in fostering public interaction. Fine uses the example of a New England townhall meeting and the Bohemian Grove to demonstrate how important space is for civic engagement. He notes that “Civil society depends on the existence of places of performance” (123). Such spaces go by all sorts of names, such as third space, safe space, cosmopolitan canopy—they all share the notion of a space where diversity and free expression are expected.
Fine recognizes that consensus is only part of the story with groups. But getting consensus is not easy and may require a lot of attunement between the individual and the group. Of interest to Fine is how groups negotiate conflict within and outside their boundaries. Here, he looks at two progressive groups with differing perspectives about homeless people in Venice, California. In another example, Fine writes about Freedom Summer participants, who because they are from outside of Mississippi, shared an idioculture that was at odds with that of many Mississippians.
How groups manage member interaction, or control, is an important aspect of understanding the hinge. Key decisions about both Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis were made among elites with very similar backgrounds. The homogeneity of a small group of elites led to groupthink and prevented members from recognizing other more viable plans than the one used for Bay of Pigs. In the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis, elite homogeneity was regarded more positively—mainly because it was successful. Fine then looks at control within the America First Committee and its local chapters. Lastly, he uses ethnographic techniques to study control in police units.
How a group extends its “reach” to macrolevel structures and forces is the subject of Fine’s last chapter. Fine recognizes the narrow edge groups must navigate between maintaining a local feel and yet having links to something bigger. Mass media is useful in sharing and connecting with other local groups and those more remote. He also mentions how shared memories “are central to how media shape the relationship of citizens to civil society” (177). Another way to link groups to something larger is through virtual spaces, which Fine also spends some time discussing, offering the Arab Spring as an example.
Overall, Fine argues that “local action serves the hinge that connects persons and institutions” (198). Fine describes well the different qualities of the hinge, dealing with interaction, culture, circuits of action, and tiny publics. His chapters on the components of the hinge, such as coordination, place, and conflict, are thorough and interesting. Furthermore, his use of a comparative analysis of cases to illustrate his points is compelling.
This book is engaging and thought-provoking. When I finished the book, I reflected on how my own research would benefit using the hinge concept. Fine is an exceptional ethnographer and much of what he writes in the book would be useful for ethnographers and other social scientists. I do think a chapter that more explicitly shows how to operationalize the hinge in an ethnographic framework is warranted, especially if the audience is students.
--------
[Review length: 735 words • Review posted on November 11, 2022]