Download Moro-Myers-Lehman Text Supplement

Lehmann-Moro-Myers Text Supplement
Garrett Stephenson
Ch. 2 Myth, Symbolism, and Taboo
Learning Objectives





To understand the importance of myth, symbolism, and taboo in the study of
comparative religion.
To learn different ways of defining and studying myth with cross-cultural perspective.
To understand different anthropological approaches to myth and symbolism,
particularly those of functionalism and structuralism.
To gain an appreciation for the significance and function of taboo.
To understand the integration of myth and symbol in religious practice.
Section Summary
Myths are sacred and true cultural narratives. They allow people to explain their origins
and worldview, and act as social charters. Myths and religions depend on symbols and
symbolic behavior. It is the task of the anthropologist to interpret the meaning of such
symbols and myths, and to discern the sociocultural structure from which they are
derived, as well as the function of such myths.
 No single analytical approach can result in a definitive account of myth; rather,
multiple analyses are necessary.
 Myth is often an allegory for the present-day social structure.
 Structuralism seeks to identify the underlying patterns of all human thought,
particular in respect to “binary oppositions.”
 The anthropological analysis of symbols can explain the problem of disjunction, “a
gap between the overt superficial statement of action and its underlying meaning.”
 A taboo is a restriction or prohibition, which to an outsider has little or no meaning.
However, under the surface, taboos are essential building blocks of social systems.
 Religions, such as experiential Protestantism, are dependent upon myth and
symbolism, though these are sometimes expressed in alternative ways, such as in the
practice of snake handling.
Reading 7: Scott Leonard and Michael McClure, “The Study of Mythology,” 2004.
Myths are narratives that help us understand fundamental human questions regarding our
origins, identity, values, and behavioral conventions. The meaning of myth has always
been contested, and to this day we are still without a single, all-encompassing explanation
of myth.
 Early anthropologists, such as Frazer and Tylor, saw myth as “primitive science.”
 Malinowski revised the anthropological view of myth, placing it into its functional
conception as a cultural charter and socializing agent.
IM-2 | 1







Psychologists Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung saw myths as the conscious expression
of ubiquitous, unconscious psychological phenomena.
Joseph Campbell suggested that human narrative is based upon a “monomyth” of
individual heroic adventure and self-discovery.
Lévi-Strauss and other structuralists attempted to discern the essential and
omnipresent framework of human myth, eventually postulating that myths are
mediators between two binary oppositions.
Mircea Eliade conceived of myth as a vehicle by which people can periodically return
to their sacred origins; he also conceived of several polemics similar to Levi-Strauss’s
binary oppositions.
Scott and McClure consider all of these approaches as lacking in two areas: they
ignore the fact that myths are “stories,” and that the psychological, literary, and
structural/functional analyses are ahistorical, often ignoring the context in which the
myth was conceived.
Newer literary approaches to myth are desirable because they emphasize the
historical evolution and sociocultural context of myth.
No single analytical approach can result in a definitive account of myth; rather,
multiple analyses are necessary.
Discussion Questions
1. What can be learned about a society by studying its mythical narratives?
2. If you were to analyze a myth, which theoretical tools (of those that are explained in
this reading) would you utilize and why? Which would you ignore?
3. Do you agree that “personal connections” of the scholar to the myth are pertinent, as
suggested by Leonard and McClure? How can the emotional impact of a myth factor into
a rigorous analytical framework?
Reading 8: John Beattie, “Nyoro Myth,” 1960.
Beattie suggests that myth is an explanation of the behavior and practices of present-day
society. As a functional analysis, this article shows how this particular myth underpins
Nyoro hierarchy and social structure by underscoring the legitimacy of Nyoro descentbased leadership.
 Myth is an allegory for present-day social structure.
 The Nyoro favor inheritance of wealth and authority by the youngest son, a custom
which is validated by the story of the “first family.”
 The Nyoro “cautionary tale” suggests that while power must be invested in the young,
the wisdom of the old must also be respected.
 Nyoro myths explain the origins of the ruling families and connect them to important
mythical progenitors, thus investing them with ancestral authority.
 Myth has a very important social function, in this case the setting off of Nyoro leaders
by explaining their credentials for governing.
IM-2 | 2
Discussion Questions:
4. How does this myth validate Nyoro social structures?
5. Beattie draws directly from Malinowskian functionalism by emphasizing the very real
way that myths explain social structures. Is this analysis compelling? Are there other
analytical perspectives that could apply to this myth?
6. Are there myths from your culture that have functional implications? If there are, try
analyzing them according to Beattie’s framework.
7. Can you think of any myths which cannot be explained according to a functional
analysis?
Reading 9: Claude Levi-Strauss, “Harelips and Twins: the Splitting of a Myth,”
1979.
Levi-Strauss founded a method of analysis known as structuralism, which seeks to
identify the underlying patterns of all human thought, particularly in respect to “binary
oppositions.” The present analysis postulates a type of binary opposition that exists
between a single benevolent deity and twins, one of which is good and the other bad,
mediated by the hare, which represents incipient twins.
 For many indigenous American societies, twins were thought to have special superhuman powers, particularly the ability to control the weather.
 Twins, though equal at birth, undergo divergent events that “untwin them,” often
meaning that one is “good,” while the other is “bad.”
 In the same way that twins may be considered superhuman, people born feet-first are
also considered somehow heroic, though at times evil.
 Such generalizations are possible with a meta-analysis such as this one, where many
different myths from many difference cultures are compared.
 Lévi-Strauss believes that the myths of the Americas are similar because the precontact population was sufficiently large to suggest that American societies were in
contact with one another, thus making mythical exchange possible.
 In all American mythology, deities (as the hare, in this case) play the role of
intermediary “between the powers above and humanity below.”
Discussion Questions:
8. How does the hare in this analysis function as an intermediary?
9. What can this analysis tell us about myths in general? What are some other examples
of binary oppositions?
IM-2 | 3
10. Do you agree with Levi-Strauss’s use of a meta-analysis rather than an in-depth
investigation into one group’s mythology? Can one establish general characteristics of
myth by looking at several different cultures?
11. What is the connection between twins, people with harelips, and people born feetfirst? Do you find this argument convincing?
Reading 10: Raymond Firth: “An Anthropologist’s Reflections on Symbolic Usage,”
1973.
Anthropologists are especially equipped to ascertain the meaning and importance of
symbols for the culture which generates them, and to use the knowledge to further
explain the human condition. Specifically, the anthropological approach can explain the
problem of disjunction, “a gap between the overt superficial statement of action and its
underlying meaning.”
 An anthropological approach must provide systematic description and comprehensive
analysis of symbols or symbolic acts.
 The anthropological study of symbols has its roots in the very beginning of the
discipline, but did not reach its fever-pitch until the mid-late twentieth century.
 Anthropologists must try to relate their interpretations of symbolic language and
behavior to other social values and cultural phenomena with which they are familiar.
 One should attempt to analyze not only political and religious symbols, but also
everyday symbols and symbolic behavior.
 Researchers must account for both private and public aspects of symbolic behavior,
as well as the relationships between public/private and social/personal symbols.
 Anthropologist must survey symbolic analyses by specialists of other disciplines to
construct a more thorough and rigorous account.
Discussion Questions:
12. How can you relate your knowledge of symbols from your own culture to those of
others in order to better understand them?
13. What attributes of cultural anthropology make it especially well suited to studying
symbols?
14. Do you believe that most behavior has a symbolic element? How is non-political or
non-religious behavior symbolic? What kind of “everyday” symbolic behavior can you
discern in your culture?
IM-2 | 4
Reading 11: Mary Douglas, “Taboo,” 1979.
A taboo is a restriction or prohibition, which to an outsider has little or no meaning.
Beneath the surface, however, taboos are essential building blocks of social systems.
Douglas suggests that without taboos, every thought and action would be subject to
personal appraisal and re-appraisal, thus slowing our though processes and making
interaction far more difficult.
 Taboos are the result of a particular and often different worldview: the difference
comes from the way a culture categorizes its knowledge.
 Within the political realm, taboos are important expressions of power and authority.
 Because taboos depend on classifications of social and cultural relationships, as those
classifications change, so do taboos.
 As more and more people subscribe to particular classifications, whole social
structures are built up behind them, thus strengthening the taboo.
 Taboos also strengthen the classification systems and social structures they are based
on by suppressing challenges to these systems.
 Because taboos are often built upon social distinctions, when such distinctions are
weakened, so too are the taboos.
 Taboos essentially convert basic classifications into psychological reflexes, thus
greasing the wheels of thought, action, and social interaction.
 At the same time, taboos are barriers, inhibiting the person from conceiving of reality
differently from those around him.
 Taboos are not arbitrary; they are expressions of the social structure.
Discussion Questions
15. Discuss the relationship between categories, social systems, and taboos. How does
each inform the other?
16. How do taboos perpetuate the existing social order?
17. Do you agree with Douglas’s assertion that taboos are necessary in order to pass on
knowledge and to regularize behavior? Could a world without taboos be viable?
18. Since their meanings are often obscured to an outsider and unrecognizable to an
insider, what sort of research would be necessary to achieve an in-depth analysis of a
system of taboos?
IM-2 | 5
Reading 12: Mary Lee Daugherty, “Serpent-Handling as Sacrament,” 1976.
Daugherty contends that the act of handling poisonous snakes reflects “the danger and the
harshness of the environment in which most people have lived.” In her analysis, snake
handling is similar to any other kind of mainstream sacrament, such as communion.
 Serpent-handling religions are usually found among groups of people who are
especially culturally and economically isolated, who seldom venture far from their
communities. Such communities are most commonly found in Appalachia,
particularly in West Virginia.
 Their worship services are generally informal and unstructured, and the teachings of
the Bible are passed on orally—though the Bible itself is interpreted literally.
 Snake handling is an alternative way of celebrating the life, death, and resurrection of
Jesus Christ.
 The handling of snakes also symbolizes the power over sickness and death as wielded
by Jesus Christ, and suggests that such power is omnipresent.
 When one is bitten and is injured or dies, it is believed that God allowed it to happen
in order to reemphasize mortality and the dangerousness of the practice.
 To handle a snake and risk death signifies a deep commitment to one’s faith and the
willingness to sacrifice oneself.
 Through the handling of snakes as a group experience, worshipers experience a
profound sense of community, spiritual power, and equality in the face of adversity
and sociopolitical marginalization.
 Daugherty suggests that the symbol of the serpent is a kind of mediator between
several binary oppositions, such as sickness and health, mortality and immortality.
19. In what ways does the handling of snakes reaffirm social bonds and create a period of
equality?
20. Would you characterize this analysis as functional, structural, literary, or
psychological? What combinations of theoretical interpretations, if any, are present?
21. How is the symbolic act of snake handling a product of the society from which it has
developed? Do you agree with Daugherty’s analysis that the social structure accounts for
the snake-handling sacrament?
22. How does the mythical story and figure of Jesus Christ underpin the symbolic act of
snake handling?
IM-2 | 6