YES. Interpretive Repertoires and Identity Construction in
Dutch Teenage Magazines
Analysis of interviews with Dutch teenage readers of the teenage
girls’ magazine Yes demonstrates various ways in which girls
use media content to construct gender identity. Theoretical concepts
drawn from a symbolic interactionist perspective and reconstruction
of interpretive repertoires illustrate the complex mechanism of
identity construction, enabled by the process of reading. The
results indicate that reading magazines can be considered analogous
to interaction in process.
Background: meaning and gender
Sociological interest in the concept of identity has grown
exponentially during the past decade. Theories of modernization,
globalization or detraditionalization (i.e., Heelas, Lash & Morris
1996) account for several aspects of modern life. This trend has not
bypassed the field of communication research either as the work of
Meyrowitz (1985), Thompson (1995), Grodin and Lindlof (1996) and
Turkle (1997) suggests. These scholars’ main assumption is that the
media are part and parcel of the dynamics of modernization. My
analysis refers to this assumption, concentrating on the process of
identity construction and illustrating it by means of interviews
with readers of the Dutch girls’ magazine
The present study aims to supplement research into the reading of
women’s magazines which is mainly conducted from the viewpoint of
women’s studies (e.g., McRobbie & Garber 1976; Winship 1987; Van
Zoonen & Hermes 1987; Hermes 1993) with a focus upon the
construction of gender identity. For instance, Dutch scholars Van
Zoonen and Hermes point out that magazines are particularly
important for female adolescents in the process of sex role
socialization. Thus before actually entering into relationships with
the other sex, girls have already adopted from parents, friends and
media numerous ideas about boys (De Waal 1989). Besides magazines,
and other media, institutions such as family, school and peer group
are important as a life-world and background of definition and
interpretation on which this analysis is built.
Several studies of identity construction of teenage girls have shown
that girls develop a so-called ‘bedroom culture’ and a subculture
oriented strongly towards relations between couples. By talking
endlessly about boys, girls sharpen their insights into their own
identity as girls. In this way they learn how to behave and be
prepared for their future role as a woman (De Waal 1987).
analysis re-examines interviews conducted by Van Knippenberg and De
Lange (1995), focussed on the importance of the magazine Yes
for girls’ subculture and daily life. Their results point out that
girls discuss the contents of the magazine, they regularly circulate
issues among themselves, and many of them are introduced to Yes
by girlfriends. Their conclusion is that Yes enhances the
femininity of the reader because the magazine relates to already
existing notions of gender originated by other institutions. Yes
offers assistance in developing ideas about femininity (1995:67).
difficulty with this and other analyses is that the importance
attributed to women’s magazines for the construction of gender
identity is predicated simply on their popularity or on grounds of
their profiles and contents. What lacks, however, is a theoretical
perspective to understand respondents’ statements in terms of the
process of identity construction.
Hermes (1989) attempts such an approach by treating the reading of
women’s magazines as empowerment i.e. the construction of authority
and identity. Hermes says that reading about experiences of other
women produces a form of subjective knowledge that contributes to
the process of becoming a subject. Reading is a game of comparison
of oneself with speakers featured in an article, which produces a
sense of identity: ‘I am like this or I am more like that.’ What we
can learn from this conception is that the construction of identity
(becoming a subject) is a consequence of comparison. This seems
plausible although Hermes does not explain the ‘how ‘and ‘why’ of
this process. Partial explanations, such as 'para-social
interaction' (Horton & Wohl 1956), later adopted by Thompson (1985:
218) as 'mediated quasi-interaction', fit naturally in the
encompassing and classical theoretical perspective of symbolic
interactionism on identity construction.
Symbolic interactionist perspective
Symbolic interactionism assumes the reflexivity of human thought and
(self)consciousness. Its main thrust is directed towards processes
of interaction and attribution of meaning. I consider the reading of
Yes as a form of interaction between reader and text, that is
one which generates meaning functional in daily life, for instance
in a girls’ subculture. I consider identity construction principally
as a process of positioning individuals among other community
members. This concept of identity emphasizes interrelationships
between an individual and society (cf. 'Self’ and 'Society', Mead
1934). In this perspective both levels are interrelated: the self is
always a social self and a product of interactions and relationships
with others (Mead 1934: 140).
meaning is always a social meaning. This means that so-called 'significant
others', 'reflexivity' (self-objectivation) and 'role-taking'
(taking the perspective of the other) are the core of identity
construction. In this perspective interaction with significant
others is of vital importance for the evolving identity. During
socialization, the number of significant others increases until an
individual has incorporated the ‘generalized other’, that is all
socially relevant knowledge that a competent member of society needs
Because identity construction is an outstanding example of a social
and relational process and because magazines can only be a distant
(mediated) resource in this process, I want to explore whether the
magazine Yes is of any importance for identity development,
for instance by functioning as a symbolic significant other.
Secondly, my analysis of identity construction will be confined to
relations of similarity and difference. In fact identity is a
multidimensional phenomenon that can be analysed from different
points of view, for instance from a historical or interactionist
point of view, and be understood as a social or personal identity. I
consider an awareness of 'similarity and difference' between the
self and other as one of the central issues of identity
Interpretive repertoires and meaning
relation to reading a girls' magazine and processes of meaning and
definition, Hermes and Schutgens (1991) and Hermes (1993) use the
concept of 'interpretive repertoires' (systematically recurring
terms) that readers use to convey meaning and that can be
reconstructed in order to discover underlying structures of meaning
(Hermes 1993: 59).
This seems to be an appropriate starting point for analysis, but
contrary to the linguistic approach adopted from Potter and
Wetherell (1987), my approach is directed to the content of
meaning. In this way I refer to the symbolic interactionist concept
of 'perspective', in which the 'definition of the situation' is the
focal point (Shibutani 1955; Becker et al 1961; Hijmans 1985). This
implies that individual and shared meanings are the point of
interest rather than linguistic aspects of the discourse.
3. Research goal and design
My aim is to find out whether symbolic-interactionist
perspective provides clarity into the question of whether and how
reading of Yes contributes to identity construction.
I have searched for an answer to this question by means of two
sub-questions which, given the limited scope of the research sample,
can provide tentative but interesting answers:
Yes read? Which interpretive repertoires can be distinguished?
its relation to identity formation? Does Yes fulfil the
function of a symbolic Significant Other?
Social scientific research into the
production of meaning belongs to the interpretive or qualitative
paradigm, which since the nineteen-eighties has enjoyed increasing
popularity also in media studies (Servaes & Frissen 1997). In a
qualitative paradigm the central idea is that social action is based
on meaning production (‘constructions’) or ‘definitions of the
situation.’ This type of research requires that the researchers'
analysis and interpretations are grounded in acting subjects (the so
called 'actors perspective').
In keeping with this, comprehensive
semi-structured interviews were performed with 21 girls from the
target readership. The girls were asked to reconstruct their reading
experience, using copies of the magazine as a point of reference.
This sample is not statistically representative but contrastive
enough in order to cover sufficiently concrete variations of
meaning. Both ‘faithful’ and former female readers, individual girls
and small groups were interviewed.
The analysis was performed by means of
transcripts of interviews and largely followed the initial phases of
the Grounded Theory of Glaser and Strauss (Wester 1995). Qualitative
analysis is a comparative study of meanings found in the field,
objectivated by constant comparison into substantive and formal
meanings. I grouped substantive meanings of the reading experiences
into interpretive repertoires.
Previous research on repertoires makes
clear that one particular magazine can be read in a variety of ways,
that is, different readers assign different meanings to it and even
one individual reader may assign several, sometimes even
contradictory meanings to reading a particular magazine (Hermes
1989; 1993; Van Selm 1995). Repertoire-research is aimed at
discovering and designating differences and similarities in the
attribution of meaning, the most common similarity in this case
being the image of Yes cherished by female readers, the
youngest included. They see it as a magazine addressed to a
particular age group of girls, and one which responds to ‘needs and
problems of girls of this age.’ As one fourteen-year-old said: ‘You
know, each generation grows up with Yes.’ This idea of
generation can be roughly detected in two different groups of female
readers. On the one hand, there are ‘marginal’ readers who mostly
tell their stories in retrospect, and on the other, ‘faithful’ ones,
for whom reading Yes is an integral part of life. Differences
between the two groups, however, coincide neither exactly with age
differences (some older readers belong to the ‘faithful’ group and
some younger ones to the ‘marginal’ group) nor with particular
repertoires. Rather, repertoires that we have distinguished are (or
were) applied to both groups.
The question ‘how’ the magazine is read
is given a literal answer: ‘alone’ or ‘in a group of girlfriends.’
In the latter case particular repertoires surface, such as for
example ‘malicious joy repertoire’ which reveals the group dynamic
of a teenage girls’ culture. Reading in a group intensifies mutual
bonds, and since Yes certainly functions as an incitement to
conversation, its socially and substantially mediating role is
obvious. Social mediation is visible in the ‘go-between repertoire’,
whereas in ‘encyclopaedia’ and ‘romantic-ritual’ repertoires the
subject matter of Yes comes to the foreground. Readers make
ample use of the five repertoires. Each reader applies several
repertoires, although not necessarily all five. Repertoires make it
clear that Yes is significant but not exclusively for its
cognitive aspects. Besides, the magazine is preoccupied with daily
concerns. We will see that Yes can be used in an instrumental
manner. It serves as a material for conversation and is functional
as a source of easy entertainment, as a form of amusement and as a
social binding agent.
The (malicious) joy repertoire
Both individual respondents as well as
group conversations mention a collective reading experience.
Although this repertoire is formulated upon reconstructed
experiences, this way of reading is first of all functional in
groups. Especially letters to editor and agony columns give cause
for jokes and gossip about other people’s problems. The function of
(malicious) joy for the group becomes clear in the extract of a
group interview below in which a 13-year-old girl answers the
question whether other members of the family also read Yes:
R2: ‘Yes, my sister and my sister’s
girlfriends do too. My sister’s boyfriend also. And then they will
make jokes and laugh if they read about a problem ….’
I: Do you never talk about what they
write in Yes?
R2: ‘Yes, we do, about how stupid these
problems are. For example we’d sit in the hall and name all these
problems one by one, and then I am ‘Dear Abby’ and then we sit and
discuss it (laugh).’
Later on in the same interview it
appears not to be the only repertoire with which this 13-year-old
girl reads and interprets Yes. In other examples of this
repertoire I discovered an ambivalent attitude towards the magazine
contents, both distance and involvement. Yes is thus read in
various ways at once or in various ways changing in time. Marginal
and less interested readers seem especially prone to draw from this
repertoire. Interestingly, these readers began the conversation by
stressing this repertoire as if to convince interviewers that
reading Yes was but a stage in their life they had already
passed. Those readers also emphasise its limited scope and
insufficient response to their interests.
Present first of all in groups, this
repertoire works to intensify group cohesion. Jokes have also this
function of making it emphatically clear for readers themselves and
others that in the meantime they have already gone ‘further’ or, to
the contrary, that they are not so advanced. This repertoire
expresses thus emotional distance.
This repertoire is the opposite of the
previous one, and expresses affective engagement. It is quite
diffuse and not confined to specific columns but relates to the
magazine as a whole. Readers have an affective bond as an individual
with Yes and the way in which matters important for girls are
introduced. The repertoire is coloured by positive feelings, as
Yes ideally responds to girls’ intimate problems. Needless to
say, especially faithful readers in the sample draw from this
repertoire, although marginal readers also recognise it from the
past. The extract below presents a 24-year-old former reader:
R: ‘I have a feeling that it serves a
I: What function is it?
R: For this target group it’s a
confidante. Or how should I put it, well, you see familiar things in
it; you say I know that too. You learn about problems others have.
It is also nice to read about your own problems, it’s gives you a
nice feeling. It’s like talking about such things with your friends,
you talk like that with Yes. I would find it a pity if
something like that disappeared.’
Respondents feel a confidential,
personal bond, as expressions connoting feelings and affections
suggest. They call Yes ‘pleasant’, ‘relaxing’, ‘attractive’
and ‘simply nice’ or ‘funny’ and ‘cute’. A sense of familiarity,
relevance, and confirmation seem to be common denominators that
raise confidence in readers. Calling Yes a genuine partner
for conversation, suggests that my starting notion of reading as a
form of (indirect) interaction with the text was justified.
The go-between repertoire
Individual reading of Yes can
also contribute to collective girls’ culture, providing material for
conversation or, which is quite common, as a latent manner of
signalling one’s own problems towards friends or parents. Yes
functions then as a safety switch between an individual and a group.
Just like in the example below, where by means of Yes an
18-year-old vocational medical school student tries to say something
I: ‘Are there also any subjects in
Yes about which you don’t talk with anybody or only with certain
people because they are too personal?
R: Yes, only if it concerns me. But in
Yes it is about others, so you can talk about it …
I: You said it was about those girls,
not about you. Do you ever make yourself a subject of conversation
after you read Yes?
R: Yes, sometimes. Most often it starts
like, “Have you read in Yes that…”, and that I’ve experienced
something like that too. It does happen.
I: Is it easier then to talk?
R: Yes, it is, because then I can say:
“I’ve read it in Yes and I’ve experienced that myself too.”
I: Does it happen often after you’ve
R: Yes, it does, quite a lot’.
The magazine appeared to be socially
mediating for faithful readers. Its authority is then strategically
employed for example about such issues which might be controversial
for parents as the age to go out or to solve tricky problems without
exposing oneself to criticism. The latter seems touchy for most
girls in the sample. Girls anticipate mutual critical looks, and
Yes plays an intermediary role enabling them to avoid direct
Apart from the discussed repertoires
which betray quite common meanings and social uses of the magazine,
we have distinguished two repertoires which quite substantially rely
on information value of particular columns. Yet Yes is first
of all perceived as an ‘advice magazine’, as Van Knippenberg and De
Lange (1995:66) conclude. Together these repertoires form the ‘hard
core’ of its reading. I term this core ‘hard’ because both these
repertoires have been noted with almost all studied interviewees.
The core consists of two complementary parts. Opposed to the realism
of ‘encyclopaedia’, there is the idealism of ‘romantic ritual. ’
Together they constitute a large part of the ‘socialising potential’
The encyclopaedic repertoire
Practical and informative aspects of
fashion journalism, physical care and trendy life-style products
(‘girls’ stuff’) are highly appreciated. Readers who distance
themselves from Yes seem to hang on to this repertoire. As a
15-year-old reader says, it provides directly usable knowledge:
‘Yes, but about those looks, I find it really useful. You learn
things about what to do’. In the following another 15-year-old
tells about the most interesting column:
R: ‘Those questions and such a story at
the end, and stories about things that really happened, for example
about a girl whose mother died; I always like such stories … Now, I
know a girl who also lost her mother. And then I think I’ll read a
bit first, you know… I think because I know such a person ... and
then you look how they describe these things and how they explain
these problems …’
An agony-column aspect oriented towards
solving problems is a supplement to practical-informative aspects of
this repertoire. Questions from the agony and advice column can
function not only as a source of (malicious) joy but can also raise
sympathy for and curiosity about described cases. That column also
constitutes part of the ‘hard core.’ It attracts the interviewees
and is mentioned often as an occasion to exchange ideas with others.
Readers are interested not only in advice but also in the variety of
opinions and want to confront their opinions with those of others.
Yes plays an obviously
important function in the construction of girls’ culture. By
providing a forum for exchange of ideas and an occasion to laugh and
talk together, Yes consolidates them as a group. As a variety
of culture, girls’ culture differs from other cultures, and
especially from that of boys even though the two groups are strongly
oriented towards each other. It is striking that girls’ and boys’
cultures are two separate worlds; even girls who have brothers are
still curious. At least, these girls seem to absolutely distrust
their own practical knowledge and remain interested in opinions in
Yes. Only when they have had a boyfriend for some time, can
this curiosity decrease although it can just as well intensify, as
the following example suggests:
R: ‘Recently I’ve read: “Boys’ sensitive
spots”. Then I kept on reading.’
I: What do you think about it?
R: I like it. It’s useful because I
have a boyfriend and then it’s good to know such things. And when I
have problems with my boyfriend, I can read: do this, or do that … I
try things out.’
Boys are different, and in Yes
you can read how different they are. The magazine functions
as an expert intermediary between the two cultures, in this way
cultivating differences between them. The opposite sex’s mystery
seems a strong motive to read Yes as one of its functions is
to provide knowledge about the world of boys’ experience and the
practice of dating. Many faithful readers appeared highly curious
about boys’ ideas and opinions and build their genuine knowledge in
the way as described below:
R: ‘… Fantasising about boys, you know
something about how they feel. “When they act rough, they like you”
and so on. Or: “When you tease them, they like you”, and that’s what
I wasn’t aware of, but I learnt that from Yes.’ ( 23 years)
This repertoire is amply represented in
the interview data, and it seems an important way of reading it.
Both marginal and faithful readers draw from this repertoire a wide
range of facts about physical appearance, health and lifestyle.
Besides, they learn about themselves and others by empathising with
people described in particular situations and by confronting their
own opinions with those of others.
The romantic ritual repertoire
Placing oneself in an imaginary way into
a (fictive) situation of others is emphatically present in this
repertoire, in such a way that this manner of reading can be termed
a form of idealism. This repertoire makes it clear that the fictive
character of romantic stories in Yes is alluring for both
faithful and marginal readers, even if they read it but
sporadically. In fact very few readers show no interest at all. For
this reason, this repertoire, apart from the ‘encyclopaedia’, makes
part of the reading ‘hard core’ of reading Yes. Readers in
the research sample find narrative form interesting and exciting,
and even though they realise it is not totally true but exaggerated
and ‘made more attractive’, they experience this imaginary quality
as crucial in the sense that it can happen to them as well.
Stories are read in bed, in the intimacy
of one’s own room and are regarded as ‘something really for you’ so
that you can nicely dream away while reading. Just as in the
quotation below, it becomes clear that ‘meeting’ is an
often-mentioned topic especially for girls who have no boyfriend and
who enjoy drifting away in a fantasy world. In the example below a
24-year-old explains why the romantic short story column is her
I: ‘And what do you like so much about
R: That they meet and that it has a
happy ending. You know simply before that happy ending but it is
always exciting to read anyway. I simply like those stories when
there is a story to tell in it. That’s why I like those columns,
it’s really a story to tell; it started so and so, and then it ended
so and so … The story develops, there are exciting things in it. It
begins, and then I read how it ends … I always like to read about
what those people experience, I like to read those stories.‘
Other examples manifest that not what
‘is’ but what ‘could be’ really matters. Imagination, (day)dreaming
and fantasy are ways to anticipate the domain of love relations and
problems that belong there. Romantic relations, love and intimacy,
according to Illouz (1997), form the main part of what is called
‘the romantic utopia’, one of foundations of contemporary culture.
Part of it is learning the ‘vocabulary of feelings’, which seems to
be one of the functions of this repertoire.
The underlying idea of the ‘ritual’
element of this repertoire is that respondents indicate that what
really matters is not a particular content but rather repetition of
a certain form, an exciting love story in which a handsome young man
must conquer a heroine’s heart, or the other way round. Re-reading
of old Yes issues while staying overnight at one’s friend’s
place, on holidays or in other circumstances is always a pleasant
way to spend time. As one marginal reader put it, ‘feelings and
human relations are interesting anyway.’
Thus this repertoire relies on
exaggerated human emotionality, the not real but not totally
impossible either, projected onto future scenarios. We can describe
it as a form of future-oriented, anticipating socialisation that can
take group forms, and as such is related to the already discussed
5. Repertoires and identity construction
The repertoires show that Yes can
be read simultaneously in a number of divergent ways. We could see a
combination of distance and involvement, as well as one or the other
predominating. Analysing identity development as a social process,
we have seen Yes first of all as fulfilling the role of
positive or, possibly, negative instruction. In this sense Yes
is a symbolic resource used for identity construction. The magazine
provides material for conversation and analysis, and information
about facts and people. We have defined its reading core as a
combination of realism and idealism, as a double source of knowledge
and imagination from which to draw. Yes mediates not only
thematically but also socially. The authority attributed to Yes
suggests that it can be treated as a symbolic Significant Other.
As a form of openness, emotional
involvement with Significant Others is a condition of identity
construction. All repertoires reveal the various degrees to which
the readers bond emotionally with the content of the magazine. With
the ‘malicious joy’ repertoire the bond is negative (which, however,
can be constructive in identity construction), whereas with the
‘girlfriend’ it is obviously positive. Being open towards the
content of Yes provides space for the construction of one’s
identity, or the process of identification. In symbolic
interactionism identification means both a process of acquiring
identity as well as ascribing identity to others. In the field of
media Donders (1989) discusses affective bonds between viewers and
television programmes contents, and reaches the conclusion that
identification is an assumption that accounts both for learning and
conformity of the media audience. Fuss studies identification from
the psychoanalytical perspective, surprisingly close to symbolic
interactionism, saying that: ‘Identification is the detour through
which the other defines a self’ (1995:2). In my concept,
identification is a process of comparison, a play of similarity and
difference between a self and others, between one’s own and other
groups, in order to define one’s own place among others. As
realisation of ‘similarity and difference’, and realisation of
uniqueness, identity is a (temporary) result of a process in which
we always relate and situate ourselves towards and between others.
In this sense Hermes’ definition of reading as ‘comparing’ with the
feeling ‘I am this and that’ or ‘rather that’ (1989:289) should
indeed be interpreted as an expression of identification.
Identity construction as a process is
visible in the interview data in the role-taking mechanism,
emphasised by Mead (1934) as the social origin of identity.
Identity, just like thinking, consists in cooperation between ‘I’
and others. In symbolic interactionism role-taking is the
source of identity as a form of taking over of and placing oneself
in others’ position. This process is a fundamental human property
related to reflection. Being aware of the other produces one’s
self-awareness, i.e., realisation that you are an other and yet at
the same time participating in one and the same culture. A self is
always partly a socialised self, endowed with cultural knowledge
necessary to survive in a group. Thus identification and
role-taking should be regarded as learning and teaching
processes that involve more than a subjective form of knowing. As
Hermes claims (1989:289) from the point of view of socialisation, it
is precisely objective forms of knowing that are necessary. As we
mentioned above, reading Yes functions as a source of
knowledge and imagination.
In the following part I will illustrate
what I mean by identification and role-taking as they appear in
repertoires, and give an answer to the question whether Yes
can be regarded as a symbolic Significant Other. First, I will
concentrate on identification as a manifestation of relations of
similarity and difference. Positive identification relies on
similarity to the content of Yes whereas negative
identification underlines difference to and emotional distance from
it. These relations are first of all manifested in drawing symbolic
borders and symbolic inclusion and exclusion. Subsequently, using
central columns from the core repertoires, I will discuss
identification in its cognitive aspect.
Just as in repertoire ‘(malicious) joy’,
difference to the magazine content is the main principle. In this
case a reader makes it clear what she does not want to be like or
what she has already grown out of. Here Yes is no Significant
Other (any more) but rather helps a reader in defining her position
towards others through drawing symbolic borders between herself and
the Yes readership. Precisely by accentuating differences,
the reader realises fully and makes it clear to others that her
identity is ‘different.’ See the extract below in which a
13-year-old and a 14-year-old talk about stories which they find too
romantic and too ideal:
I: ‘Would you like it more if something
else was written there?
R2: I like it as it is.
R1: Yes, perhaps you do because you
think it’s ridiculous. Perhaps that’s exactly why you like it, you
get a better feeling because you’re not such a romantic person. At
least I mean I’m not.’
The above extract illustrates the idea
that identity always involves a relation towards others, and in this
case this relation is negative. As mentioned above, with this
repertoire reader’s emotional distance can be a sign of identity
construction in process, and symbolic borders can be a symptom that
certain realms of meaning are not accepted (any longer). The present
identity may be at odds with the magazine content and therefore
The process opposed to the above can be
detected first of all in the ‘girlfriend’ repertoire, and somewhat
less prominently in the ‘go-between’ repertoire. In a general sense,
Yes functions here as a symbolic Significant Other, to which
female – especially young - readers feel positively attracted. As
one of them puts it:
R: ‘When you look at them in a photo,
you think, wow, I’d like that too. Sometimes in stories it also
makes me think that I’d react this way myself too.
I: Do you find it right that…
R: Yes, I do, I think that’s what you’re
in fact looking for because if you get a story about somebody
totally different to you, you find it interesting. But I believe
it’s not that you go and buy Yes to see, hey, what a strange
person that is.’ (15 years)
An 18-year-old Moroccan girl who has
been a reader of Yes for three years but who is not allowed
by her parents to subscribe to it represents a curious case in which
positive identification means at the same time acculturation:
R: … ‘Sex and that kind of subjects, we
don’t talk about it at home. I’ve been brought up this way. And
that’s why I love to read about such things in this magazine. Then
you simply know everything about sex and that kind of things.’
R: ‘Yes talks about things I like
and my parents don’t. I am for what they write in Yes.’
Recognition and a concomitant sense of
similarity seem to be essential as a 15-year-old says: ‘You get to
read things you recognize yourself in ‘. Processes of positive and
negative identification related to these repertoires represent
largely the role reading Yes plays for the readers in the
sample as a common point of comparison and identification. Through
defining similarities and differences in relation to Yes, an
individual works on her self-conscious identity. Taking all the
readings together, as a Significant Other, Yes does not have
a sharply defined but merely a general profile. An analysis of core
repertoires suggests that readers’ relation towards columns can
quite differ. In fact, Yes provides various ‘others’
scattered over columns which all together represent a ‘generalised
other’ of girls’ culture and partly of a larger culture as well. In
this way identity construction reaches a different stage. Given
their age, teenage girls possess an already developed self-awareness
and will be first of all oriented towards internalisation of
gender aspects as a relatively new element of their identity,
especially the interest in relations with the opposite sex .
The core repertoires ‘encyclopaedia’ and
‘romantic ritual’ embrace most important sections of the magazine.
As mentioned before, through their realism on the one hand and
idealism on the other, they cover an important element of Yes’s
socialising potential. For the interviewees Yes is an advice
magazine, a source of knowledge and imagery. Specification of the
four sections indicates that identification and role-taking
involve orientation and knowledge acquisition.
The romantic story
This section coincides with the
‘romantic ritual’ repertoire. Its central mechanism is also positive
identification with personages or empathising with a romantic story
and identification with its heroine.
Positive identification in this section
not only means similarity or recognition but an affective
affiliation with an imaginary other, a temporary cancelling of one’s
self and transcending one’s factual situation. These processes of
identification are subtle, and the connection between a female
reader and a heroine can be precarious as transpires from situations
when readers skip a romantic story if a boy in an accompanying
picture is not handsome enough (to be their imaginary partner).
Curiosity about and evaluation of those
stories suggest that this column provides a pleasant reading
experience. Daydreaming in literature is sometimes condescendingly
described as ‘escapism’ but in relation to identity construction it
is rather a detour, via an other, towards one’s self. One’s own life
gives temporarily way to a life of a fictive other. Acting ‘as if’
is a play, an imaginary taking over of a future role of a mistress
and a partner. For this reason we can say that this section meets a
living need of knowledge of the ‘vocabulary of feelings’ and the
mentioned ‘romantic utopia’, and various possibilities and
difficulties which accompany them. Identification is, as Donders
(1989) claims, a condition of conformity and learning, in this case
of learning scenarios for the future. In this way this and other
sections contribute to the development of a feeling of
individuality, along with a sense of affiliation and sympathy for
others. In other words, through this section a female reader learns
about herself performing an imaginary role-taking and projection of
The ‘encyclopaedia’ repertoire contains
three different sections:
These columns, amongst other things,
also partly deal with (love) relations but focus rather on practical
sides of being a woman/girl. This can be also seen as a form of
knowledge acquisition, and as such, as a form of gender
socialisation or performativity (Butler, 1990). Its main mechanism
here is identification not with imaginary others but with real
existing others who send letters or write reportages (about e.g. how
it is to be motherless). Interviewees mention: curiosity about
others’ experiences and opinions, and sympathy for girls who regret
their deeds. I recognize a process of reflection taking place in the
confrontation of one’s own opinion with those of others, which again
confirms that Yes can function as a forum for the exchange
of ideas. The mechanism of role-taking can be reconstructed
from the interview data, but it functions in a slightly different
way than role-taking in a romantic story. There role-taking consists
in the fact that one ‘becomes’ (temporarily) an other, whereas here
a self remains clearly separated from the other. Finally,
recognising oneself in others as a form of positive confirmation
deserves positive evaluation. We can understand it as a sign of
identity which comes into being in an (indirect) exchange with
Fashion and beauty sections
At first sight these seem to be purely
informative columns predominated by practical aspects. Importance of
knowledge about one’s physical appearance should not be
underestimated for apparently inner processes of identity
construction. The external appearance, according to Stone
(1962), as a visual presentation, is no less important for a self
than verbal presentation. We not only tell others who we are, but we
also show it. Natural signs are also functional in identification of
oneself and others as specific individuals. The point is thus not so
much identification ‘with’ somebody (unless as an example) but
identification ‘of’ oneself and others as particular types of
In Davis’ formulation clothes and
appearance constitute a visual metaphor of identity (1992:25).
Various respondents argue that ‘how you look says also something
about what you’re like’, and ascribe considerable importance to
sections on fashion and clothes as changing phenomena. Readers in my
sample emphasise that is important to know fashion trends and not to
differ too much from a group they belong to. Inner uncertainty is
thus partly translated into orientation towards outer styling of
one’s identity, and Yes is helpful by delivering material for
comparison. Readers usually imagine themselves in place of photo
models, try on looks photos suggest, or take a photo to a
hairdresser’s or a shop, which is a ‘physical’ form of
Test or quiz
This section does not come out weekly
but despite that is of great importance. We relate this section to
the already mentioned need of knowledge, here conceived as
self-knowledge. However Yes is read, readers will do the
test, half-ironically or very seriously, but will not omit to do so,
alone or together, out of curiosity or to see what comes out of it,
to compare it with friends, to see if the answer agrees with what
you think about yourself. Sometimes a weekly horoscope is added to
it as well. One way or another, this practice indicates that one
looks seriously for information about oneself, for self-knowledge or
knowledge of what is ‘normal’ in order to reduce uncertainty about
who you ‘really’ are.
As a juncture for identity construction
the test is relevant for self-identity, self-image and thus for a
relation of the ‘I’ towards others. The ‘I’ is partly a mystery and
has its secret aspects and deeper levels. The test offers a
possibility to learn oneself from an unexpected side, which
initiates a process of reflection that contributes to identity
construction in the sense of self-awareness. Such expressions as ‘I
like tests because then you can see who you are, and what you don’t
understand yet’ indicate that direction. Role-taking could not be
reconstructed here, contrary to processes of self-identification
aimed at giving an answer to the question: who am I ?
The answer to the main question is that
for my sample of readers Yes contributes indirectly to the
gender-specific socialisation of the age group which it addresses.
Yes mediates both in the informative respect, as a source of
knowledge and imagery, and socially, especially between readers and
their peer group. Theoretically, girls’ culture is likely to play a
stronger role because processes of interaction are real and mutual.
Practically as well, the role of girls’ culture seems stronger,
because Yes functions as a social binding agent and
contributes in this sense to preservation of girls’ culture. As Van
Knippenberg and De Lange wrote: ‘Yes fits the already
existent gender concepts and ideas generated by other socialising
institutions. Yes assists in developing ideas about
femininity’ (1995:67). The impact of Yes in the process of
gender socialisation cannot be isolated; for precision, we would
need another, biographical, model in which textual research would be
combined with reception study.
Even if the impact of Yes should
not be exaggerated, it cannot be ignored totally either. As other
media, Yes does offer its readers a possibility to expanding
their horizon. As the example of the Moroccan girl suggests, there
is no way back from that development. Concentration of knowledge and
information and a possibility to combine facts and images as one
pleases renders Yes one of the players in the field of gender
socialisation. Anticipation of future roles and possibilities
requires self-knowledge as well as knowledge of the surrounding
world. In Mead’s terms both are interconnected: self-knowledge
always involves knowledge of the group to which one belongs. We have
demonstrated how the theoretical mechanisms of identification and
role-taking are recognisable in this material.
Concluding in terms of the symbolic
interactionist perspective the role of Yes as a Significant
Other is indirect by definition because processes of interaction are
mediated and not mutual. In this context, Thompson (1995:218)
mentions ‘mediated quasi-interaction’, which generates a form of
’non-mutual intimacy.’ According to him, media are nevertheless an
important resource for present-day identity. The fact that in my
sample Yes is used as a source of knowledge indicates that
for its female target group it can really be an aid for identity
construction, corresponding to their life-world. The magazine
appeared to have different meanings in various phases of the
process. As a resource, especially for beginner readers Yes
constitutes a value, in terms of symbolic interactionism a symbolic
Significant Other. For other readers it is also important as they
can discern several Significant Others in different sections and
they can identify themselves with the generalised other of
the girls’ culture. That this phase is transitional show marginal as
well as former readers in my sample. In this sense Yes is a
stop-over on the way towards an abstract and encompassing
generalised other of the larger culture.
Contact (by e-mail):
Becker, H., B. Geer, E. Hughes, & A.
Strauss (1961). Boys in white. Chicago: University of Chicago
Bellah, R., R. Madsen, W. Sullivan,
A. Swiddler, en S. Tipton (1985). Habits of the heart.
London: University of California Press.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender trouble.
Feminism and the subversion of identity. London: Routledge.
Davis, F. (1992). Fashion, culture and
identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Denzin, N. (1970).
Sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine.
Donders, C. (1989). Identification
and mass media, an exploration. [Identificatie en massamedia, een
verkenning]. In J. Hahn & F. Tillmans (red.) Kijken naar
levensbeschouwing (pp. 38-59). Hilversum: Gooi & Sticht.
Fuss, D. (1995). Identification
papers. New York/London: Routledge.
Gergen, K. (1991). The saturated
self. New York: Basic Books.
Giddens, A. (1991).
Modernity and self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1992). The
transformation of intimacy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Grodin, D. & Th. Lindlof (eds)
(1996). Constructing the self in a mediated world. Thousand
Hall, S. & P. Du Gay (eds) (1996).
Questions of cultural identity. London: Sage.
Heelas, P., S. Lash & P. Morris (eds).
(1996). Detraditionalization; Critical reflections on
authority and identity. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hermes, J. (1989). “Some things I only know
from women’s magazines and not from real life”. About reading
women’s magazines and empowerment. ["Sommige dingen doe ik
alleen op uit vrouwenbladen en niet uit de praktijk". Over het
gebruik van vrouwenbladen en empowerment]. Massacommunicatie, 17
Hermes, J. (1993). Easily put down;
Women's magazines, readers, repertoires and everyday life.
Amsterdam: diss. University of Amsterdam.
Hermes, J. & Schutgens, V.(1991).For smart,
leftist, book reading, cat lovers: a reception and textanalysis of
the feminist monthly Opzij. [Voor slimme, linkse,
boekenlezende poezengekken: een receptie- en tekstanalyse van het
feministisch maandblad Opzij,] in Tijdschrift voor
Vrouwenstudies 12 (4), 453-469.
Hijmans, E. (1985). Teacher
perspectives in primary education [Leerkrachtperspectieven in het
basisonderwijs], in W. Arts, H. Hilhorst & F. Wester (red.)
Betekenis en interactie. Symbolisch interactionisme als
onderzoeksperspectief. (pp. 22-36). Deventer: Van Loghum
Hijmans, E. (2000). Reading Yes.
Teenage girls, interpretive repertoires and identity construction.
[Van Yes en dingen die voorbij gaan. Tienermeisjes,
interpretatieve repertoires en identiteitsconstructie].
Sociologische gids, 47, 2, 95-111.
Horton, D. & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass
communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy
at a distance, Psychiatry 19, 215-229.
Knippenberg, van K. & E. de Lange
(1995). Every reader has her own Yes. The meaning of the teenage
magazine for readers.[Iedere lezeres heeft haar Yes.
De betekenis van het meidenblad Yes voor lezeressen.] Nijmegen:
Illouz, E. (1997). Consuming the
romantic utopia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McRobbie, A. & Garber, M. (1976).
Girls and subcultures. In S. Hall & T. Jefferson (eds.)
Resistance through rituals: Youth cultures in post war Britain.
(pp.208-222). London: Hutchinson.
Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self and
society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense
of place: the impact of electronic media on social behavior. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Mooren, A. van der (2001). “What
a girl should know.” A study of Yes and its readership.[“Wat een
meisje weten moet”. Een studie naar Yes en haar lezeressen.]
Amsterdam: Rozenberg publishers.
Morley, D. & K. Robins (1995). Spaces of
identity. London: Routledge.
Potter, J. en M. Wetherell (1987).
Discourse and social psychology. London: Sage.
Selm, M. van (1995). Zingeven,
ouder worden en mediagebruik. Massacommunicatie, 1, 2-17.
Servaes, J. & V. Frissen
(red.)(1997). De interpretatieve benadering in de
communicatiewetenschap. Leuven: Acco.
Shibutani, T. (1955). Reference
groups as perspectives, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 60,
Stone, G. (1962). Appearance and the self.
in A. Rose (ed.) Human behavior and social processes (pp.
86-118). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the
self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. (1994). De malaise van de
moderniteit. Kampen: Kok.
J. (1995). The media and modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Turkle, S. (1997). Identity
in the age of the internet. London: Phoenix.
Waal, M. de (1987). Who's that
girl? In B. Klap, S. Rijven & P. Rutten (red.) Tachtigers, glimp
van een generatie (pp. 69-84). Hilversum/Baarn: IKON/Anthos.
Waal, M. de (1989).Girls, a
world apart. An ethnography of girls in secondary school. [
Meisjes, een wereld apart. Een etnografie van meisjes op de
middelbare school]. Meppel: Boom.
Wester, F. (1991).Strategies for
qualitative research. [Strategieën voor kwalitatief onderzoek].
Winship, J. (1987). Inside
women’s magazines. London: Pandora Press.
Zoonen, L. van (1988). Between
pleasure and politics. Preliminary remarks on feminism and media. [Tussen
plezier en politiek. Inleidende opmerkingen over feminisme en
media]. In L. van Zoonen (red.) Tussen plezier en politiek.
Feminisme en media (pp. 7-21). Amsterdam: SUA.
Zoonen, L. van & J. Hermes
(1987).Career and guys: on women’s magazines and the absence of
men’s magazines.[Karrière en kerels: over vrouwenbladen en het
ontbreken van mannenbladen.] Massacommunicatie, 15, (3),
Zoonen, L. van (1994). Feminist
media studies. London: Sage.