Introduction
The paper herein examines "The Saints and The Roughnecks," by William J. Chambliss. It seeks out to evaluate and bring a connection between the article and the sociological theories and perspectives that are discussed in the book, Essentials of Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach, by James M. Henslin. Several theories have been reflected by the author, and therefore, the paper shall explicitly reflect on at two sociological theories that link the article to the book. The theories to be analyzed include; conflict theory and labeling theory. The conclusion shall criticize the article from a sociological perspective.
Conflict theory
The theory herein is best applicable to Chambliss evaluation of “The Saints and The Roughnecks”. In Hannibal, the theory is very practical to the noticeable resistant that subsisted amid The Saints and The Roughnecks. The conflict was mainly stimulated by the forces behind the different ways that the two groups were being handled. As Chambliss asserts, in case the police were to handle The Saints and The Roughnecks in a comparable way, then they would be welcoming conflicts from those in power. Even though the police were very mindful on the way they treated the two groups without explicitly discriminating either of the group in terms of social class, the theme of social struggle was very evident throughout the town (Chambliss, 1973).
Labeling theory
Labeling is absolutely an aspect, when one reflects on what Roughnecks behaved when they completed their high school education. They still could not be referred to “boys just being boys" even after their transition to being men, they were still labeled as “roughnecks”. According to the public, their was no change noticeable with the “roughnecks”. They still continued with they unrelenting disgusting behavior, while the saints were perceived as being successful. Even if Roughnecks could disguise themselves in order to attract some positive view from the public, the behavior of being roughnecks was still remarkable. They could not disguise themselves in any way. The theory is very practical to both the Roughnecks and the saints. They were classified as tertiary deviants. The label they had in the society was very vivid, in that anyone would easily recognize them. Both the roughnecks and the saints are also classified under secondary deviance. They have been labeled in diverse ways, but still retain similar idea. They have accepted the label and embraced it and turned to be part of them. The only distinguishing factor between the two groups under labeling theory is that, Roughnecks have been termed as exclusively bad people predestined to not succeed. The label is very apparent from the way they behave, and they have nothing to conceal. On the other hand, the saints act similar to the Roughnecks, but because they do not disclose to the society, it seems they may be classified under primary deviance Chambliss, 1973).
Conclusion
As confirmed by Henslin (2010) in Essentials of sociology, issues on social status and deviance are very prevalent in this community. The way the young men presented themselves corresponded with their real behaviors. The two groups had been labeled as The Saints and The Roughnecks. The saints were linked to the middle-class and it was believed that they were very pious, a notion that encrypted everyone in the society. Roughnecks were connected to lower-class families and thus believed they were responsible for any mischievous behaving in the society. The saints were able to get away with their behavior and disguise themselves as outstanding characters before the eyes of the public, since they were well off and they practiced their ill mannered outside their hometown. On the other hand, Roughnecks, being voiceless in the society could not convince the society about their innocence. The societal perception about a person should not actually be a conclusive remark that whatever a person disguises him/herself to be in public is not what that particular person is meant to be (Henslin, 2010).
Reference
Athens, L. (1997). Violent Criminal Acts and Actors Revisited. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. (Instead of investigating on the causes of criminal behavior in personality disorders, as conformist wisdom often does, Athens revamps his essential argument that a violent circumstance happens when perceived by a person as a circumstance that propagates violence).
Chambliss, W. (1973). "The Roughnecks and The Saints." Society, 24-31. (The most fascinating theory is labeling theory. It elucidates that people focuses on a label that a person has rather than person. Labeling takes charge of the complete self –concept. If a person believes that they are either roughneck or saints, they expect to be treated in that manner. )
Henslin, J. (2010). Essentials of Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach, 9th Ed., Chicago:
University of Illinois Press. (The system and the writing style that Henslin uses, emphasizes the sociology of daily life and it is significance to the lives of students).
Zafirovski. M. (2003). "Some Amendments to Social Exchange Theory: A Sociological
Perspective." Theory and Science, 4.2 (The author endeavors in contributing towards the incorporation of sociological and social-psychological theory)
