Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
victor_turner [2007-07-12 09:32] – external edit 127.0.0.1victor_turner [2008-09-16 11:40] (current) 81.188.78.24
Line 1: Line 1:
- 
- 
-[[/cgi-bin/oops/Main/VictorTurner?template=oopschangelanguage]]{{/pub/TWiki/TWikiDocGraphics/flag-gray-small.gif|Change language}} 
- 
-[[/cgi-bin/view/Libarynth/WebHome]][[/cgi-bin/view/Main/WebHome]]{{/pub/TWiki/TWikiDocGraphics/web-bg-small.gif|}}[[/cgi-bin/view/Libarynth/NikGaffney]][[http://lib.fo.am/cgi-bin/edit/Main/VictorTurner?t=1176470460|Edit this topic text]][[/cgi-bin/attach/Main/VictorTurner|Attach an image or document to this topic]][[/cgi-bin/view/Main/VictorTurner?cover=print.pattern|Printable version of this topic]] 
- 
- 
- 
- 
 ==== some key concepts ==== ==== some key concepts ====
  
 **liminality** **liminality**
- 
  
 What is interesting about liminal phenomena for our present purposes is the blend they offer of lowliness and sacredness, of homogeneity and comradeship. We are presented, in such rites, with a "moment in and out of time," and in and out of secular social structure, which reveals, however fleetingly, some recognition (in symbol if not always in language) of a generalized social bond that has ceased to be and has simultaneously yet to be fragmented into a multiplicity of structural ties. These are the ties organized in terms either of caste, class, or rank hierarchies or of segmentary oppositions in the stateless societies beloved of political anthropologists. It is as though there are here two major "models" for human interrelatedness, juxtaposed and alternating. The first is of society as a structured, differentiated, and often hierarchical system of politico-legal-economic positions with many types of evaluation, separating men in terms of "more" or "less." The second, which emerges recognizably in the liminal period, is of society as an unstructured or rudimentarily structured and relatively undifferentiated comitatus, community, or even communion of equal individuals who submit together to the general authority of the ritual elders. What is interesting about liminal phenomena for our present purposes is the blend they offer of lowliness and sacredness, of homogeneity and comradeship. We are presented, in such rites, with a "moment in and out of time," and in and out of secular social structure, which reveals, however fleetingly, some recognition (in symbol if not always in language) of a generalized social bond that has ceased to be and has simultaneously yet to be fragmented into a multiplicity of structural ties. These are the ties organized in terms either of caste, class, or rank hierarchies or of segmentary oppositions in the stateless societies beloved of political anthropologists. It is as though there are here two major "models" for human interrelatedness, juxtaposed and alternating. The first is of society as a structured, differentiated, and often hierarchical system of politico-legal-economic positions with many types of evaluation, separating men in terms of "more" or "less." The second, which emerges recognizably in the liminal period, is of society as an unstructured or rudimentarily structured and relatively undifferentiated comitatus, community, or even communion of equal individuals who submit together to the general authority of the ritual elders.
Line 18: Line 8:
  
 **communitas** **communitas**
- 
  
 Communitas breaks in through the interstices of structure, in liminality; at the edges of structure, in marginality; and from beneath structure, in inferiority. It is almost everywhere held to be sacred or "holy," possibly because it transgresses or dissolves the norms that govern structured and institutionalized relationships and is accompanied by experiences of unprecedented potency. The processes of "leveling" and "stripping," to which Goffman has drawn our attention, often appear to flood their subjects with affect. Instinctual energies are surely liberated by these processes, but I am now inclined to think that communitas is not solely the product of biologically inherited drives released from cultural constraints. Rather is it the product of peculiarly human faculties, which include rationality, volition, and memory, and which develop with experience of life in society.... Communitas breaks in through the interstices of structure, in liminality; at the edges of structure, in marginality; and from beneath structure, in inferiority. It is almost everywhere held to be sacred or "holy," possibly because it transgresses or dissolves the norms that govern structured and institutionalized relationships and is accompanied by experiences of unprecedented potency. The processes of "leveling" and "stripping," to which Goffman has drawn our attention, often appear to flood their subjects with affect. Instinctual energies are surely liberated by these processes, but I am now inclined to think that communitas is not solely the product of biologically inherited drives released from cultural constraints. Rather is it the product of peculiarly human faculties, which include rationality, volition, and memory, and which develop with experience of life in society....
Line 31: Line 20:
 //Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic action in human society//, pp. 35-6 //Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic action in human society//, pp. 35-6
  
 +==== related ====
 +  * "Ritual, Anti-Structure, and Religion: A Discussion of Victor Turner's Processual Symbolic Analysis" http://www.cas.sc.edu/socy/faculty/deflem/zturn.htm
  
  • victor_turner.1184232761.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2007-07-12 09:45
  • (external edit)