Stella Rehbein is going to present a working paper on 'Happy Objects and Unhappy Bodies - 'Depression' and the ideal of positive emotionality''

This paper presents preliminary findings of my first analysis of empirical material. Far from being a presentation of results or a draft for a chapter it gives a work-in-progress insight, going back and forth between interpretations and possible theoretical paths. Starting with an interest in ‘romantic rituals’ of couples it first seemed quite surprising to find narratives on (female) depression being of overwhelming importance for the interviewees. Taking this empirical hint seriously I now think about how to grasp the connections between romance, intimacy and ‘love’ on the one hand and perceptions of emotional normalcy and (in)sanity on the other.

Stella Rehbein gives a working paper on 'Romanticism in times of decreasing resonance. -An inequality and Gender sociological study of love between ritual and routine'

In the first part of this paper I outine the theoretical background of my project, my research interest and how I want to proceed empirically. In the second part I want to discuss theoretically and methodologically the meaning of class within my research project, arguing that my field of research is bound to be conducted in a class-sensitive way. The sample I aim at in researching romantic rituals and practices of emotional and physical care, intimacy and relating consists of people who are positioned (more or less) at the bottom of social space. My conceptualization of social inequalities draws on Bourdieusian thinking and his notion of capitals, especially economic and cultural capital. What goes hand in hand with this theoretical framework is an understanding of inequalities that considers itself relational and has therefore a direct impact on my research practice. For my research it brings the necessity to reflect on the relation and the class-dimension of the relationship between research subject and research object. Taking into account that science is a middle class practice asks for a critical reflection on the ideal of an objective, neutral (meaning class- and genderneutral) researching subject. The aim is not to negate class and its prevalence in science and within research practices but to spell this dimension out. So with the anticipated class difference between research object and research subject arise not only methodic question – as implicated in the differences of the dominant medium of expression in different social environments or ‘milieus’1 – but also ethical questions: as how to avoid symbolic violence (Bourdieu) or classrelated distinctions that cause humiliation (Neckel). The aim is to theorize beyond middle class norms. One strategy is to objectify
my own position in social space and the classed perspective that derives from it; my taken-for-granted categories and my conceptions of normalcy will be treated as part of my research object. Some questions leading this selfreflexive work are: Where do I conduct practices of distinction, of producing hierarchical differences? What norms and normalcies guide my personal and scientific interest (and how do they coincide with my position in social space?)?