I’ve heard this many times in my cultural anthropology classes before – they call this “performance theory,” “performativity,” or “performance studies.” Seems like there’s no real categorization of this sociological lense yet, and probably because it’s far too broad. I’ve heard the term used in constructions of syntax ( J.L. Austin), all the way to constructions of gender and self (see Judith Butler). Key to Butler and her colleague’s theories is that we perform differently, and usually unconsciously so, for each unique situation we find ourselves in. That is to say, we have a mask for every occasion, whether we like it or not.

The internet has been extremely liberating for those wishing to wear certain masks: the gay man in rural Montana may not have the physical social space to be “himself”, but on the internet he can find other like-minded men without fear. The dark side to this is that the pedophile can easily don deceptive masks, too.

If we’re nothing more than a collection of masks, what is the “self”? Are we ever in a mask-less state that reveals the true self? If one has a huge variance in masks worn, does this mean he has a less-defined, more scattered inner self?

I can’t help but feel like a discrete entity, an individual. But maybe there is no “me”. If the only way “me” is constructed is through interactions with others and my environment, the lines distinguishing the individual from the collective seem to blur considerably.

to deal with some of the issues you mentioned here, we are focusing on access controls based on degrees and context of your relationships.

While it is true that your “digital self” (i.e., the collection of all the stuff you generate) can and often does reveal multiple “facets” of your interests and perhaps personality, the bottom line is that all such interpretation results from others viewing the stuff you’ve CHOSEN to share. Yes, my del.icio.us bookmarks might reveal more than one interest, but at my own discretion.

If you’re already blogging, sharing bookmarks, and sharing photos, I don’t see how having one place to share them “mixes public and private.”

Admittedly, my view seems clear to me, and so I may be biased. I’m also behind Peoplefeeds (www.peoplefeeds.com) so I appologize if I’m acting convinced. I believe that there is a purpose for associating content you generate with yourself, and at least the bigger idea behind Peoplefeeds is proving it.