Response to Caesar (2000)

In and Out of Elevators in Japan
Terry Caesar in The Journal of Mundane Behavior, 2000

Caesar argues that while in the Westerners are fairly outgoing in their behavior toward one another out in public though are awkward and reserved in the small space of an elevator, the reverse is nearer true in Japan. In Japan, where customs prohibit effusive friendliness or displays of emotion or opinion (and especially touching), the space of the elevator is considered separate from public space and thus the normal rules of conduct no longer apply. Caesar writes, "In the more restricted space of the elevator, however, questions are often ventured, opinions expressed, or even greetings exchanged that have a more expansive character."

Firstly, this proves that space in itself (e.g. "elevator space") has no inherent prescriptive function for conduct or activities. Instead, the activities that take place "within" these spaces are completely interwoven into existing cultural practices and behavioral scripts. Secondly, it implies that different "rules" apply to "transit space" than to non-transit space, raising the question What is it about transit space that changes our the way we conduct ourselves in such spaces? Caesar proposes that one factor is that these spaces are occupied/engaged in for shorter periods of time, giving them a feeling of being a "break" from normal life and customs, and even a chance to express oneself more freely without being self-conscious, since it will be over soon and people will return to their normal lives. And further, elevators remain one of the few non-monitored spaces in Japan, so it automatically implies a freedom from normal social codes. And thirdly, it shows how people categorize and segregate space, such as "inside space" vs "outside space" in Japan, and dependent upon the ways in which these spaces might be distributed in society, there are varying sensitivities to the distinction between them.

He concludes with this: "But then the study of the mundane, I think, reveals that public space is never limited to what it forbids. Otherwise, none of us would have anything to bring to our relationships there, and social life may as well consist of empty action, going up and down like an elevator, with no inside and nobody to occupy it." The lesson to be taken from this seems to be, again, that space needs to be considered as an ecology within and interconnected with a greater ecology, not as distinct and objective reality in itself.