Fetishes and Monuments Iconoclasm, agency and materiality in a public art project in Bahia, Brazil. Dr.

Roger Sansi-Roca

Department of Anthropology, Goldsmiths College, University of London.

Keywords: Iconoclasm, Candombl, agency, materiality.

Abstract: In 1998, a new monument to the Orixs, the gods of the Afro-Brazilian religion Candombl, was inaugurated in Bahia. The project was subject to all kinds of reactions and private criticisms, but none as public as the violent attack on a Pentecostal group which identified the images with the Devil. This paper analyzes the controversial construction, the attack and other particular appropriations of the monument. In more general terms, the objective of this article is to reflect upon the relevance of thinking about the materiality of objects beyond theories of value and distributed agency.

Fetishes and Monuments Iconoclasm, agency and materiality in a public art project in Bahia, Brazil.

This is the short but intense story of a monument in its infancy. In spite of its young age, this monument has already been the object of suspicion, criticism, derision, and verbal and physical abuse, including an iconoclastic attack with a hammer. The monument is a group of sculptures called Orixs de Bahia at the Dique de Toror, a park in the center of the city of Salvador de Bahia in Brazil. The Orixs are the gods of the Afro-Brazilian religion Candombl, and they are one of the more public images of Bahia nowadays. In May of 1998, the monument was inaugurated as the emblem of the renovated park of Toror. Sectors of the artistic class in Bahia, and some of the people in Candombl 1 themselves, received it with a certain skepticism. But what really threatened the existence of the monument was the unexpectedly violent reaction of a Pentecostal Church, the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (UCKG). The church organized rallies around the images and some of its members attacked them physically, because they saw them as Devils. The attack only stopped when the local political chief, Senator Antonio Carlos Magalhes, intervened personally, calling the leadership of the church to stop or attend the consequences. Only then, the UCKG recognized their error: they had mistaken a perfectly legitimate and innocuous work of art for an idol of Devil worship. In the next pages, I explain the origin, construction and intricate early life of this
2

monument, giving voice to all the different points of view. First, the official discourse that defines it as a work of art and a legitimate cultural symbol, a monument. Then the critical perspectives that define it as a commodity for tourists, an idol of Devil worship or a reification of hegemonic power in all cases, I argue, presenting the monument as a fetish, or an object of false consciousness that masks relations of domination. Through these different perspectives, I discuss the implications of the case in the complex relations of religion, politics and culture in Bahia. But the final objective of this paper goes a little beyond these perspectives. In many ways, the official and the critical views share some basic assumptions on the way that people relate to these kinds of objects, either defined as monuments or fetishes. In spite of their apparent dissimilarity, I argue that both are based on the common assumption that the relation of people to things is immediate. They dont necessarily consider that there are modes of relation of people and things that imply territoriality and historicity; in other words, the relationship of people and things is transformed in unpredictable ways in relation to time and events, regardless of the values that humans give on them. In accusations of fetishism in particular, there is a certain sense of emergency: it is necessary to destroy the fetish before it becomes something else. This is a relatively straightforward point, but it is an important one, and I would contend that it hasnt received enough attention in the anthropological literature on the life of things. Some years ago, Appadurai (1987) defended the possibility of a methodological fetishism2, arguing that objects can be seen methodologically as focal points form which we can analyze a social context looking at the disputes and
3

movements they provoke, the values put into play by them. And yet sometimes things may not simply be the bearers of human values. Alfred Gell (1998) alleged that objects, especially art objects, can have agency, and not just methodologically. Gells bold statement is contradictory with the modern discourse of anti-fetishism, in Latours (1991,1996) terms: the denial of social agency to any non-human entity is constitutive of modernity and its split between society and nature ( see also Keane 1998, 2002). This contradiction could be the reason why Gell moderated his statement behind another methodological excuse, methodological philistinism: the fact that people believe in the agency of objects doesnt mean that anthropologists do. The ultimate consequence of this philistinism is Gells complicated formula of abduction: people abduct agency in objects when they recognize that they have a mind in ways similar to the human mind. This mind of things, in any case, is always a surrogate of the human mind: objects with agency are only delegates or indexes of the distributed person of the humans who make, exchange, and worship them. Both theories of value and agency see things as surrogates of human action, ultimately activated by humans. Theories of value3 see things as bearers of human action, but at the same time, they are essentially different from humans; theories of agency, on the other hand see things as parts of the person, extending its will beyond its immediate physicality. But in both cases, the social life of things is always a surrogate of human life. These perspectives may obscure the fact that some times things are relevant, and acquire a life, precisely because they are objects: not just because we imprint our values on them, or we see them as part of us, or we think they have a mind,
4

or a soul; but on the contrary, they are powerful because they have a body, because of their physical presence. This body can be substantially different from the human body, in its movement in space (since objects dont move by themselves) and time (since objects dont die, at least not in the same way that humans do). What defines an object, as Whitehead said (2000:144), is that it can be again: it is something that appears more than once, and therefore we recognize in it a continuous existence out there independently from our perception or will. Their life, in these terms, is substantially different from ours; it is in fact quite the opposite. The relevance of the materiality of things therefore comes from the resistance they offer to our values and abductions , in their persistence, their particular relation to space and time. In his seminal work on The problem of the Fetish(1985), William Pietz already introduced the question of the untrascended materiality of the fetish, its territorialization. Strictly linked to this territorialization, Pietz insisted on the question of historicity: the fetish is always a meaningful fixation of a singular event; it is above all an historical object, the enduring material form and force of an unrepeatable event Pietz (1985:12). The radical historicity of the fetish is the result of the singular realities generated by events that cannot be reduced to the list of elements that make a part of the situation before they happen (Latour 2001:131). New realities which are not reducible neither to processes of attribution or value or abduction or agency. As Latour (2002) has shown, iconoclasm is a particularly interesting arena to test the limits and ambiguities in our relationship with objects and images, their values and
5

agencies The immediacy of the accusations of fetishism, and the emergency of iconoclasm in particular, can be seen in many ways as a preemptive attack against the resistance of objects. Before they start resisting it is necessary to strike, to demonstrate the preeminence of humans over things. But in spite of the dogmatic impetus of the iconoclastic attack, often the attack itself creates ambiguous situations, in which it is not clear who is the subject and who is the object. The objective of this paper is not to unravel this confusion, but on the contrary, to reflect on the effects of this ambiguity.

The Monument as a Work of Art

The project of the Orixs of Toror was conceived as the hallmark, the emblem, of the revitalization of the Toror area. The Dique de Toror is a small artificial lake in the center of the city of Salvador, right behind the hills where the old city was set. It is an area of intense traffic, between the Lapa central bus station and the Fonte Nova football Stadium, linking the downtown with middle-class beach districts to the east and poor suburbs to the north. The area around the lake houses lower-rent neighborhoods. When the Department of Tourism of the State of Bahia and the City Council of Salvador decided to transform the Dique de Toror into a park, they endorsed the idea of furnishing it with a monument in honor of the Orixs. Toror has always been much related to Candombl: the lake has been used at least since the 19 th century as a sanctuary of Oxum, goddess of love, luxury and fresh water. Many Bahians have made offerings in
6

the lake: flowers and fruits, sometimes with little notes asking for Oxum for help in their love lives. Official institutions perceived Toror as both a small natural reserve and a reserve of the Afro-Brazilian traditions of Bahia. In fact, these two values are seen as intertwined because Candombl is often defined as a nature cult. Thus, the sculptures of the Orixs would enhance the natural landscape since they are mystical entities linked to nature. 4 The commission of the monument was given to the sculptor and decorator Tati Moreno, who presented a project of building seven Orixs of gigantic dimensions (about 7 m. tall) to be placed on the lake, in circle around a fountain. The project of Toror has several political implications. First, it is trying to revitalize and beautify an area in a poor neighborhood, with the political objective of giving a new option of leisure to neighbors and passersby. At a more abstract level, the project seeks to create a sense of citizenship amongst Bahians on the premise that cleaning, improving the view and redesigning the city would instill public pride on them. This in turn would produce an awareness of their responsibilities as citizens. 5 This identification of citizens with the city and its facilities in this case was supposed to be enhanced by furnishing the park with public art, cultural referents and symbols like the Orixs which are close to the experience and the culture of the popular classes, 6 like the Orixs. The purpose then is to strengthen citizenship through the promotion of local cultural identity. I think that this point, although apparently obvious, needs to be explained. In the next lines I go into some detail on the philosophical foundations of our contemporary
7

idea of art, to make explicit what mode of relation to objects does the Western discourse on esthetics imply, before I discuss other modes of relation. This idea of promoting citizenship through art is very linked to the image of the public sphere, that as Mitchell says, provides the space in which disinterested citizens may contemplate a transparent emblem of their own inclusiveness and solidarity, and deliberate on the general good, free of coercion, violence, or private interests (Mitchell 1990:35). More specifically, public art is supposed to stimulate the esthetic sensibility of citizens, their judgment of taste, which after Kant, is defined as a very particular form of relating subjects to objects. In the Critique of Judgment Kant defines esthetic judgment as free of need and finality: object and subject are independent and the subject has no interest in the object by itself, but only in its appearance. For example: when you look at an apple because it is beautiful not because you are hungry. Furthermore, judgments of taste are universalizing: we want everyone to share them; we see the beauty of the apple as an objective quality that everybody else should see. But paradoxically, we recognize it as a subjective taste, our own take, and we know other people may have different tastes. Therefore, esthetic judgment is a form of relationship of objects and subjects based on detachment and free of need and interest: one does not look at the utility or need of the thing, the price of the apple or the hunger one feels, to follow with the minimalist metaphor. On the other hand it also prefigures a relationship between subjects based on tolerance and mutual understanding (the acknowledgement of each owns taste), but also having the aspiration of a final agreement, a universally shared taste, a sensus communis. Kant described beauty as a symbol of freedom, because esthetic judgment is based on
8

disinterestedness and tolerance. Following Kant, Schiller proposed that this sensus communis, this shared taste and sensibility, may lead to the formation of public interest -as a transcendent goal that is not limited to individual interest. In his On the Aesthetic Education of Man Schiller reflects on how the exercise of esthetic judgment can lead to the formation of citizenship as a consciousness of public responsibilities independent from private interests: only the communication of the Beautiful unites society because it relates to what is common to them all (Schiller, 1954:138). The exercise of this public consciousness is constitutive of what Habermas calls the public sphere 7. Citizens in the public sphere have the right to freely exercise their judgment autonomously from other concerns The very existence of the public sphere depends upon the autonomy of a cultural or artistic field, as it has been theorized in classical sociology (from Weber to Bourdieu), an autonomy allowing for the construction of a cultural system of value independent from other forms of social value or interest (e.g. religious, or economic).

The Monument as a religious-cultural symbol

Beyond the question of citizenship, the project of the Orixs is also making claims to promote cultural identity: choosing a subject of the popular Afro-Brazilian religion, Candombl, the promoters were seeking an object that the people of Bahia could identify with. The first question at this point is to what extent these artistic representations are accepted by its participants? The opinion of Candombl people in regards to the project is difficult to account for, since Candombl is not a centralized religion with official
9

representatives, but a myriad of independent cult houses. But the reaction of the people of Candombl I did fieldwork with to the project was cautious, in various ways. First of all, it was not clear which Orixs were to be represented, and how; but particularly it was not clear why. The problem resides, first of all, in the fact that the status of visual representation in Candombl is not that obvious. The Candombl of Bahia is a religious complex resulting of the synthesis of cults of West-African origin, cults of worship to the Orixs or Voduns, the Saints. The presence of the Orixs in the cult takes various forms according to the different rituals involved. The more well known are the public rituals of possession, in which the initiates embody the Orixs in the dance. But hours before the public rituals of possession, in private, the Orixs have to be called, and their force ( ax) has to be awakened, from the altars where they are kept, with offerings and sacrifices. These containers or altars (assentos) seldom contain images, and in any case images are not central to its force. The altars are centered around the fundamentos (foundations) which in general are stones (otan), sitting in dishes, pots or other kinds of kitchenware filled also with water and leaves. These objects were called fetishes by the Afrobrazilianist literature.8 The otan stones, are used ritually in several ways: as absorbers of the blood of sacrifices; as hammers to smash magical herbs; their ritual washing ( ox) is also a fundamental form of communion with the Orix. The ota is not the Orix, but its house, its repository. Through sacrifices and offerings, the spiritual forces ( ax) contained in the stone are activated, allowing the incorporation of the initiate - the transference of the Orix to the head (or). The story of the initiation of the person, and of
10

its deepening into the ritual knowledge and practices of the Orix cult (what Apter (1992) has called deep knowledge) is the story of the accumulation of spiritual life in the otan. It is not strange at all to hear this popular saying in Candombl: stones grow. And this growth is strictly related to the growth of the Orixa in the head and body of the person. In these terms, the Ota can be see as a part of the distributed person (Gell 1998) of the initiate9. Images in Candombl dont have the centrality that they have in Catholicism. We could say that Candombl believes more in the power of concealing than of displaying. This means that the foundations are systematically hidden from strangers, even from initiates in the lower levels of knowledge, which are not allowed to look at them directly. The progress in initiation is also an opening of doors and an allowance to see the containers of spiritual power. There is no doubt that the immanent power of these fetishes is intensified in this sightless experience, by this ritualized invisibility. On the contrary Catholic images maximize their display, their absolute visibility to show their power. In Brazil, the Catholic religious image has a place of privilege in the church, in the house, in the street; it is remarked, elevated, focalized as the visual axis of worship. But it is also true that images were one of the paths through which Catholicism entered into Candombl houses, because of the so-called syncretism of the Saints to the Orixs. It was common until not so long ago to have Catholic images in Candombl altars, as part of the attributes of the Orix- like other forms of decoration: vessels, beads, cloths, perfumes, leaves, flowers and meals, which extended the indexical series of the altar10. But they were not the center of worship, just a complement to the altar. The
11

situation has been slightly changing in the last years: a growing anti-syncretism movement amongst the more intellectualized practitioners of Candombl has explicitly asked for the renounce to Catholic images.11 In these terms, Candombl practitioners didnt necessarily see the project of the Orixs of Toror as a faithful representation of Candombl. This skepticism was in fact stimulated by the technical problems occurring during the development of the project. The artist Tati Moreno wanted to fix the sculptures on the lake, over balancing platforms which would move with the waves, giving thus an impression of movement. The idea was that the Orixs would look like dancing 12. But the structures were too heavy, and the experiments of Moreno made in the lake repeatedly failed, resulting in the sinking of the structures. Any initiate in Candombl would think that the responsible for these failures was the owner of the lake, the Orix Oxum, was manifesting her disagreement. Tati Moreno was aware of this and so decided to do it the right way. Although not exactly an initiate, Moreno is an Ogan13 in the Gantois since the time when Me Menininha congregated around her a court of politicians and artists. Moreno decided to go to the Gantois and ask the Orixs about the project, which one does by consulting the oracle of the bzios (the cowry shells).14 According to the oracle, the Orixs had nothing against the project, but they also dictated how many Orixs should be represented, and which. With the authority of Gantois, Moreno had apparently solved the problem of legitimacy for his work amongst Candombl people. He also decided to give up on floating platforms, to instead set the sculptures on solid concrete pillars and to place the
12

supplementary sculptures that the Orixs had required on the shore.

The Monument as a tourist commodity

Besides Candombl people, what did other artists think about the sculptures? Tati Moreno has been known in Bahia for his sculptures of the Orixs of smaller dimensions. Some artists privately criticized his appointment because of his close links with the political establishment. Still, one of the more reputable art critics in Bahia told to me plainly that Moreno was probably the only artist capable of building such a monument: since the early 1980s, the city council had commissioned him to make the street decorations of Carnival, and this gave him the experience and resources to develop projects of monumental dimensions, like the Orixs of Toror. Tati Morenos use of the iconography of the Orixs is not exceptional among artist in Bahia. Images of Candombl have been used since in the 1940ies the first generation of Modernist artists, writers, and social scientists vindicated the AfroBrazilian culture of Bahia as a source of inspiration (Sansi-Roca 2003). Until then, the Bahian elites had attempted to obliterate and repress the overwhelmingly African past of the city. But with the nationalist political and cultural revolution of the 1930ies, the vindication of the mixed-race origin of the country became a source of pride, a mark of modernity and ultimately a state policy. Native and foreign artists like the writer Jorge Amado, the painter Caryb, and the photographer Pierre Verger spread through the world their stories and images of vibrant Candombl rituals.
13

However, what started as a project of cultural modernity with time became standardized. In the 1960, the first governments of the military regime identified cultural policies with tourist promotion (Santos 2000, Sansi-Roca 2003) By the 1970ies, the images of exotic Candombl rituals had clearly become an object of tourist consumption. Tati Moreno started to work in that period, producing little brass images of the Orixs that he first sold to the visitors of the Candombl house of Gantois. The project of Toror can certainly be seen in this context: the park was obviously not only addressed to Bahians, but also to national and international tourists, one of the citys main sources of income. Building a monument to the Orixs that could eventually become a postcard was totally consistent with the policies of the Department of Tourism, which has stimulated the commodification of Candombl as a tourist attraction. When I talked to people of the younger, more progressive generations of intellectuals and artists of Bahia about the monument, they often manifested their criticism in these terms: they saw it as a commodity for the tourists. Implicit in this criticism is the assumption of the contradiction between art and commodity values: artistic value in our culture is defined as a inalienable possession with a transcendent cultural value( Myers 2001) something that bears the soul of a people. Accusing the Orixs monument of being a souvenir does not only deny its esthetic quality, but it states that it is precisely the contrary from a work of art. And yet these are not the only criticisms that the monument received. Worse things were yet to come, when it was finally inaugurated in May of 1998. At that time, an unexpected and extremely violent attack came from another religious congregation: the
14

Igreja Universal do Reino de Dus.

The Monument as an idol of Devil Worship

The rise of the Igreja Universal do Reino de Dus (IURD) and other new Pentecostal churches is one of the more astonishing and relevant phenomena in the recent history of Brazil, a sign of the enormous contradictions and the cultural transformations of this country. The IURD has carried out a noisy propaganda in the mass media, through direct participation in politics, and by physically occupying public spaces where they perform their spectacular ritual sessions. It has gained a wide success, particularly amongst the lower classes, offering a shelter for the victims of violence, alcoholism, drugdependency, and poverty in general. In exchange, the IURD asks for two things: first, the economic help of its followers, based on the slogan that for every dollar they gave, God would give ten dollars back; and second, an extreme combativeness against other religions, Catholicism and particularly the Afro-Brazilian cult, accused of idolatry and Devil worship (Macedo 2000). This combative public presence is reflected in IURD temples, which are seen by some researchers also as theaters and markets of faith (Campos 1996). The attack on the traditional religions is, arguably, what has provoked most of the outrage of the Brazilian establishment and intellectuals, who see Catholicism and Candombl not only as religions, but as a part of Brazilian cultural heritage (Kramer 2001). The IURD and other Pentecostal churches seem to be challenging the traditional relationship between religions
15

in Brazil, in which Catholicism occupied the public sphere, while leaving Candombl to the private and the backyard. The IURD does not seem to vindicate only its own place in the public sphere: its combativeness against Catholicism raises the suspicion that in fact its objective is to attain hegemony in it. One of the more combative features of the IURD is its iconoclasm- its explicit attacks to the worship of images of the saints. An extremely polemical instance of this iconoclasm came on a television program when a pastor of the IURD, facing the cameras, kicked an image of Nossa Senhora Aparecida, the patron saint of Brazil on her holy day (Johnson 1997; Kramer 2001). The public outrage against this attack stretched official religious tolerance to the breaking point. If the iconoclastic attacks against Catholicism are symbolically violent, the relationship between the IURD and Afro-Brazilian cults has arrived at extremes of physical violence (Soares 1992). Even more than with Catholicism, the war with AfroBrazilian cults is a holy war against the forces of Evil. One of the more important public rituals of the IURD is the performance of exorcism for former members of Afro-Brazilian cults who are considered to be possessed by the Devil. These converts are obliged to ritually break with their past in Candombl by burning, breaking or throwing away all the ritual paraphernalia of the Afro-Brazilian cult. Their houses are also cleansed ritually with holy oil, chasing the Devil, who is commanded to leave ( sai, Diabo, leave Devil). If the convert is a Candombl priest, the cleansing attains the dimensions of annihilation, even the ground is dug up to extirpate and throw away the foundations (fundamentos) of the Orix cult that were buried there.
16

In this sense, the IURDs iconoclasm conflates Catholic images and Candombl fundamentos as instruments, maybe even incarnations of the Devil. Whether these objects are thought to be only false projections or are actually inhabited by the Devil, is unclear. The lawyers of the IURD pastor that kicked the saint Aparecida argued was that he was only using the image as a rhetoric device, to exemplify visually his rejection of idolatry and therefore exercising his right to express his religious faith (Kramer 2001). Yet, in the everyday practices of iconoclasm of the IURD such a didactic justification is hard to apply; there is a certain ambiguity. If we look closely at the ritual practices of the IURD, it seems that they give a lot of importance to the actual material destruction of objects and images, and it is difficult to understand the violence of their actions only as a symbol of rejection. The violent cleanings of the terreiros are not public acts to be showed in TV, but ritually effective operations that are actually kicking out the evil spirits that inhabit that place. In other terms: they acknowledge the personhood attributed to altars and images by other religions. In this sense, they are certainly very far from the classical model of Calvinist Protestantism, with its insistence on the fact that things dont have agency as described for example by Keane( 2002). It is also interesting to point out their forced esthetic blindness - saying that an image is just a piece of wood doesnt only deny its religious value, but also its value as art, and its visual qualities: it is just matter, and matter only has instrumental value. This iconoclasm is not only a rejection of the wrong faith, but also a rejection of sensuality and sensitivity, reducing human action to two inter-connected goals: the achievement of spiritual elevation and the achievement of material wealth. In this scheme, the material
17

world can only be seen as an enemy (because of its temptations) and an instrument (to achieve your goals). This is very different from Candombl. Although Candombl is also a totally pragmatic, trouble-solving ritual practice, the submission to the Orixs requires precisely a deep intimacy with material things in the world, and a very refined esthetic sense to satisfy the exquisite taste of the Orixs- since nothing pleases them more than beauty; the beauty of offerings, the beauty of their house, the beauty of their dress and jewels, of the dance, music, good food. This is not an inner beauty, but a real, visible, material one. However, this concern with beauty and the sensuous cannot be reduced to sensuality and a religion of pleasure. The submission to the Orixs is lived by many as a form of slavery, because the level of obligations (obrigaes) and taboos (quizilas) can be excruciatingly high for initiates. The conversion to Protestantism may seem, on the other hand, liberation from this servitude and the establishment of an alliance with a higher power. I have heard several times in Bahia that a good prayer is more powerful that any sorcery (feitio15). From the perspective of classical Protestantism, the change from a heavily ritualized and esthetic (sensuous) relationship to the Orixs to a more internalized, verbalized system of communication with God can be also correlated to a change in the notion of the person, from the subjugated slave whose life was to serve the Orixs, to the Protestant Christian who is in control of his will and who establishes his allegiance with God freely, through faith (Soares 1994, Keane 2002). A faith that shall not be the trust to a patron, like it is in the case of the cult of saints, but the acceptance of a whole ideological system
18

that postulates a certain supernatural truth beyond experience. This rejection of the sensuous, of images, is a rejection of the world as a fiction that hides a truth that can only be reached internally through faith: iconoclasm would be then a manifestation of and individualist, subjectivist asceticism. The asceticism of the converted involves a rejection of a past life, which has extremely important consequences in the social life of the new believer. He unilaterally excludes himself of many aspects of the public life of the city. Catholic celebrations and Candombl rituals, of course, and not only the more public ones, but also the domestic celebrations to saints, or to the Orixs, which constitute the web of social exchanges in the neighborhoods. And yet, in these new Pentecostal groups, particularly for the IURD, the achievement of spiritual freedom and subjective consciousness is not so evident to the external observer. More traditional Pentecostal groups like Assemblia de Deus have a more cohesively ascetic behavior: they dont watch TV, they dress with modesty but dignity, all alike, men with long pants, long shirts and a tie, women with long skirts, and they dont cut or dye their hair. In more general terms, they do no to interfere in public life and politics. But the IURD has not strictly followed this asceticism. Its followers are relatively free in their dressing styles and they dont have a sexually repressive morality. And they participate combatively in the public sphere; in fact they have become a little empire of the mass media. This is particularly clear in our case. In Salvador, opposing the project of the Orixs in Toror was an exceptional opportunity because of its possible impact in the
19

media. Hence, the leadership of the IURD started a campaign against the installation of the monument, considered by them as a clear example of idolatry and Devil worship. The campaign started with rallies at Toror; the IURD people formed a human chain around the Dique to block the installation of the sculptures, and they stayed there praying up to eight hours. The campaign was also directed against Moreno. He received menacing calls; once, his car was followed by a carload of women shouting Tati, Dus te ama (Tati, God Loves you), and that they still could rescue him from the Devil 16. The situation came to a head when a young man dove into the Dique, and swam to the sculpture of Oxal (father of the Orixs, identified with Jesus Christ). He jumped on it threw his shoulders on the sculpture, and started shouting this is not God (isso ai no Dus ). Firefighters had to remove him, and he violently resisted. One of the sculptures of the shore was also attacked late at night with a hammer, apparently- but the offender could not be found.17 At this point Moreno had reached his limit, and decided to call for help to his friend, Senator Antonio Carlos Magalhes (ACM), the single most powerful politician in Bahia. According to Moreno,18 Magalhes personally called his sidekicks, the Governor of the state and the Major of Salvador, and ordered them to intervene directly. Shortly thereafter the IURD resumed its campaign, but the leadership now declared that they recognized that they recognized the sculpture was a work of art, and not a fetish or an object of Devil worship.

Iconoclasm and other misunderstandings.

20

This recognition is one of the more interesting aspects of this case, since it was not by any means the only time evangelicals have opposed public artworks that make reference to the Orixs: there are at least three other cases. First was a mosaic by Bel Borba, representing the mermaid Iemanj, Orix of the sea. Borba is famous in Bahia for his mosaics, halfway between graffiti and sculptures, which are genuine works of public art since they are not commissioned by any private party. Borba generally executed them on the rocky sides of the many hills in the urban landscape of Bahia, or in the outer walls of abandoned houses. In this case, it was on the wall of an abandoned movie theater in the Rio Vermelho neighborhood. Rio Vermelho is famous for its festa in honor of the Orix Iemanj, so Borba made a huge four-meter long mermaid. Shortly thereafter, the IURD bought the theater, and the first thing they did was to smash the tiles and paint the walls. However Borba told me that he could not complain: 19 that was their building now, and although he was sad about it, he could do nothing. Thus the disappearance of Bel Borbas mermaid went unnoticed, at least in the media. That was not the case of a mural in the lobby of another theater, which featured paintings and sculptures by Juarez Paraiso. In 1982, the owner of the Art Theater asked him to decorate the lobby, and Paraiso made an allegory of the myth of the Orix Oxumar that covered two walls of the hall, a space three meters high and ten meters long. However, in 2000 an evangelical church, Igreja Renascer, bought the theater. On 5 May 2000, a neighbor saw that the mural in the lobby was being destroyed. According to his testimony, the evangelicals were painting slogans over it proclaiming God is
21

true(Deus fiel), Nothing Satan(Nada Satanas[sic]) and Resist the Devil until he flees (resista o Diabo at ele fugir), and they covered the breast of a naked sculpture with a plaster brassiere. The neighbor went to tell the author Juarez Paraiso, who lives nearby, but by the time he found him it was too late. Juarez called the newspapers, but when they got there the sculptures had already been destroyed with a hammer and the walls were being covered with white lime. The journalists attempted to interview the head of the church, who at first seemed surprised by the presence of the press and a bit ironic20, saying he didnt notice that the mural was a work of art and he didnt know the author (this was a work of art? It looked of pretty bad taste to me. And you say that that guy [the painter] is still alive? 21). But when the second journalist showed up he was more impatient and aggressive, saying that the journalists were there because a band of gays had complained, that the church had bought the theater and he had nothing else to say.22 In fact he was right; there was nothing else to say. Paraiso had been paid when the then-owner of the Art Theater asked him to make a mural. He is certainly the author, but not the owner of the mural, and he had no legal rights on it at the moment of its destruction. He was very upset by the barbarism of the evangelicals, but he also was upset because the government was not taking care of these cases: the government should declare of public interest the art works that are in public places. What happened to me can happen to any artist.23 There is thus a common problem then in the Borba and Paraiso cases: these are their works but they dont own them, and according to the laws, the owners of the space
22

where these works are installed can do what they please. So even if the destruction of art works may be considered as barbaric by the intellectual elite, the legal system does not provide any protection, unless these art works are public property or at least of cultural interest: unless they become monuments.24 As for the third case, in May 2000, the IURD blocked the installation in Rio de Janeiro of a sculpture of the Orix Ex by the renowned Bahian artist Mario Cravo Jr. Among the Orixs, Ex is the more associated with the Devil, and Evangelicals consider a public image of Ex an absolute execration. This project, like the Orixs of Toror, was public, so it would have the guarantee of being protected as a monument and as public property. But in Rio, as a matter of fact, the IURD has an extraordinary political power. 25 Precisely for this reason the project never got to be realized: because the government of the city of Rio would not concede the category of local monument to an image of the Devil. In Bahia, however, the situation is different. The political power of Protestants is still not significant. Moreover, the ruling party and its leader, Magalhes (ACM), have always encouraged the promotion of the image (and the images) of Afro-Brazilian culture in order to promote tourism and local identity. The IURD has had to accept not only the official position but also the official discourse: an attack on the Orixs of Toror is an attack on Afro-Brazilian culture; and whoever opposes Afro-Brazilian culture goes against the people of Bahia and their great leader, Antonio Carlos Magalhes.

The Monument as a Fetish of Power

23

This is the happy end of the story: since it is a work of art, or better, a public monument, religious considerations do not apply. Since it belongs to the field of culture, battles in the religious field are out of the question. Public art appears here as a clear example on how the discourse and the institution of culture, in modern Brazil have more legitimacy than religion: they are even more untouchable than the sacred. If religious values can be disputed at a certain level, cultural values may not be disputed, since they represent the true soul of the nation. This point may help us understand the public reaction to attacks of Catholic religious symbols by the same infamous IURD, particularly the case of the kicking of the saint Nossa Senhora Aparecida, patron of Brazil, which I mentioned in chapter 1. The arguments of the intelligentsia and the mass media against this attack were not formulated as a defense of Catholic religion, but more of Catholic traditions, and particularly the image of Aparecida, as a very important part of the history and culture of Brazil. Attacking Aparecida, the IURD was attacking a precious cultural image of the nation, a national monument. Therefore, they argued the Nation should respond with the full weight of the law.26 Yet it is interesting to see which ideas of culture, and whose consensus are we talking about here, because as we have seen, this structural predominance of culture over religion, has not applied in other cases- like the sculpture of Ex in Rio de Janeiro. Why is Bahia different from Rio? Because the Pentecostals didnt have the same kind of political power there. In Bahia, the power was then in the hands of ACM. As I mentioned earlier, one of the objectives of the project of Toror would be to
24

promote citizenship and identity. Did the project of public art in Toror succeed in promoting citizenship, did it produce a public sphere? Not apparently. The artists, for example, were only gossiping, prejudging the art work as a commodity for tourists; Candombl people maintained an attitude of suspicion; and the IURD attacked the monument without any consideration to art or culture, but to religion and the eternal fight of Good and Evil. This dialogue of the deaf was cut off by the authoritative voice of the owner of the slot (o dono do pedao), ACM. Imposing his will ACM closed any possibility of public discussion, any exercise of the prerogatives of the public sphere. In fact, ACM acted as, and probably was, the owner of Bahia. In this situation, citizenship, and public interest are bourgeois ideals very remote to the daily reality of this city. We can perceive it clearly in the behavior of the people of Candombl, who know that most Bahians are not seen as citizens, but as little people (povo 27). What the little people can hope for is not the democratic respect, but the paternalist affection of the established power. This image of public power as an extension of paternalist family relations is not at all unfamiliar to the sociology of Brazil (from Gilberto Freyre 1946 and Buarque de Hollanda 1936 to Da Matta 1991), and it still holds perfectly true in Bahia. It is certainly opposed to bourgeois notions of the public sphere. Instead of talking about democratic public art, maybe we should talk about the power of monuments as state fetishes, as objects that not only represent but also produce and reproduce the power of the State. From this perspective, the monument would not simply stand for the Devil, or for commodification, but for Magalhes himself, as an embodiment of local power: it is part of his extended agency (see Taussig 1997
25

Gell1998). This could be the conclusion of this paper: what is presented as a work of public art that builds up citizenship in reality is a fetish of power. And it would be a right conclusion, probably, but maybe it is not enough. But that is what we, social scientists, always expect to find as critical, pessimist intellectuals: the ugly truth of power as usual lays hidden beneath the pretty masks of culture. As Taussig says, this is a bit of a trick: we know the answer to the question before we ask. efore we start, we know that regardless of the cultural practice we describe, at the end we will unmask it to reveal the truth of power. As if we knew all along that what we have seen, all we have talked about are just images, fictions, shades in the cave. Let me note that this may not be so different from the discourse of the Pentecostals. In fact, all the critical perspectives I have presented, including them, share some common assumptions. All see the monument as a reification of something otherwhich is hidden behind the fetish. Either a commodity fetish, a fetish of power, or an idol of Devil worship the monument is hiding something other. The objective of the monument, from all these perspectives is to control the ignorant masses through fetishism. Who is behind? that is the question for the critical thinker. The answer can be Capitalism, the Devil, or ACM, it depends it could be all of these together in fact. The iconoclasm of the IURD in these terms is not substantially different from the iconoclasm of intellectuals, even if the forms of the latter are more subtle and enlightened. But all assume a radical criticism on something that should be changed. As Latour has ironically pointed out (1999; 2002), the critical move can be seen as an
26

iconoclastic discourse that tries to show the hidden hand behind the false fetishes that enslave the masses. What if we suspend for a moment the crushing blow of the hammer (Latour 1999:268)? What if we try to find other forms of relation to this object that may not adjust neither to the official model of the monument or the critical model of the fetish? The sculptures of Toror take their inspiration in what is called popular culture, and attempt to display experience-near references to the people of the city. Maybe we should turn to some of the people in the city and see what they say.

Beyond anti-fetishism: Appropriation

What did the people think about the monument of the Orixs of Toror? That question intrigued me for a certain time. I asked many people, but I assumed that most of my friends and acquaintances were not representative: they are either upper-class intellectuals or people of Candombl or both, and I have already laid out their answers. So I decided to head to the Dique de Toror to talk with people randomly. This was not a rigorous survey, but still some of the things people told me were interesting. In general, I found a difference between tourists and locals. The first often liked the Orixs as a part of the culture or folklore of Bahia. The plaque on the shore, which explains the attributes of each Orix, helped them greatly. On the other hand, locals expressed little interest, some liked the statues and some did not. In general for both locals and tourists, the Orixs of Toror are very linked to the park in general - the lake and its landscaped shores- and in that respect public opinion is positive, although some complain that money is being spent
27

in building parks before solving more urgent problems. Some people who worked in the Dique gave me lengthier, more specific answers. Two were particularly interesting: a policeman and a park security guard. The policeman, Mr. Coelho, is a small but strong mulatto with a moustache and a martial expression that combines aloofness, irony and menace. He first explained to me how the kids in the neighborhood told him that they had nightmares of the Orixs, dreaming that the sculptures were walking out of the lake with their swords and axes. I could picture it, considering the resemblance of the Orixs with the Japanese cartoon robot monsters these kids avidly watch on TV. Mr. Coelho confessed that he did not generally care much about Candombl and that the statues were not to his liking, either. He didnt belong to any Church, but he liked reading the Bible, and thought that everything would be so much easier if everybody did. The Bible says the same in all languages. Dont they also read it in Australia? he asked rhetorically. All this stuff about the Orixs is confusing and probably wrong, he suspected. In fact he started disliking all of it, and particularly those sculptures he saw every day, once he read the information plaque by the shore. He took me there to show it to me and read aloud a paragraph referring to the Orix Logum Ede: ... here it says: Logum Ede is a man half of the year, and a woman the other half... He looked at me in silence, mutely saying, OK, I had enough; he was not interested in transsexual gods. Another interesting opinion came from a security guard, Paulo, a young black man. In reference to the sculptures of the Orixs he told me: I have nothing against them...And if I did, nothing would change anyway. Interestingly, he is a member of the
28

IURD, but he did not participate in the rallies in the Dique because he did not belong to the church at that time yet. He repeated the official discourse of the IURD when he said with indifference that they were just big painted dolls. Curiously enough, an important part of his task as a guard is to ensure that nobody makes a mess with sacrifices in the lake. Offerings of flowers and fruits are allowed, but not animals and blood because they smell bad and are unsanitary. The park is a place to jog, not to kill chickens. However, after talking with him for a while a very curious discourse emerged. Paulo started explaining to me how Candombl, like Catholicism, was a misreading of the Bible. All the Orixs, in fact, can be found in the Bible. For example Oxal in the Bible is the name of the language of the angels, and Candombl people worship an Angel, confusing him with an Orix. This is meaningful because the Holy Spirit is incorporated by the evangelicals, and one of its manifestations is speaking in tongues. This theory is interesting because it gives a more sophisticated view of the identity of Orixs, besides the Manichean reduction to the Devil. If the Orixs are biblical figures, Angels, then the Devil is responsible for the confusion of images, but the practice may not be ill intentioned, but only mistaken. Thus Candombl becomes somewhat more acceptable for the Pentecostals. Oxal, in his pure whiteness, may appear to Paulo at some point as an image of an angel. Why not? Syncretism has so many paths... In these two cases we can find a confirmation of the points I have made in relationship to citizenship. Neither the policeman nor the security guard wanted to express their opinion as citizens the beginning. In particular Paulo said: Nobody would care about what I think. This is a very self-deprecatory attitude: he is nobody, his
29

judgment is irrelevant. It is an attitude of neither assent nor dissent, but of conformity, especially meaningful since he is a Pentecostal, and as we have seen, his leaders emphatically denounce this attitude. Yet, his conformity does not mean that his mind stops working. Although I found Paulo very young and a bit naive, he is neither a Protestant thug nor had he been brainwashed by the Universal Church. He is just a regular guy, with his theories, his ways of seeing, and his own syncretisms, his personal synthesis of knowledge and experience. He is appropriating the sculptures of the Orixs to fit his own knowledge, using the expression of De Certeau (1984). By appropriation, or reappropriation, De Certeau meant the processes of making things ones own, making them similar to what one is (166:1984). Through appropriation, common people like Paulo overcome and (involuntarily) mock both the official and the critical discourses on the monument. They dont recognize their alienation, neither they try to mimic a taste that is being imposed over them. They dont feel like subjects of fetishism. Quite the contrary: they make their own story with objects like the sculptures. On the other hand, they are not only resisting because they are not aware of opposing an official interpretation; they are producing something else, something new, inscribed in a time and a space. We could say the same about Mr. Coelho and the kids he talks about who have nightmares of the statues as cartoon monsters: Mr. Coelho projects his homophobia, seeing the sculptures as a crazy gay parade. They are all appropriating the Orixs of Toror through their particular imaginations.

30

This is a particularly relevant point: how people appropriate objects in the urban landscape in their own stories of the city, indexes of their own life. This attitude of appropriation goes beyond either iconoclasm or esthetic judgment, because appropriation is not deployed in the abstract immediacy required by them but it involves a personal relationship to the object through time. Let me explain this point further : it looks like for either for esthetics or iconoclasm, the object is seen as an image presented to our senses, asking for a direct response, either negation and attack for iconoclasm or detachment and pure sensibility for esthetics. Even if theses two responses are radically different, they are comparable in a very basic point; for both find necessary to save the distance between object and subject. For iconoclasm, the destruction of the idol is necessarily immediate because the very presence of the idol threatens the autonomy of the subject who might become an idolater. For esthetics, the immediate detachment from the object is a prerequisite for the judgment of taste; if the subject gets involved in the object if they become familiar, too close, too intimate, the esthetic judgment is denaturalized. If the subject becomes too close to the object, the esthetic experience becomes kitsch (Giesz 1960). Iconoclasm and esthetics cannot give any time to objects, they risk becoming idolatry and kitsch. This is a risk of being seduced by objects, of getting involved to them, loosing the sacred unity of the self and its irreconcilable distance form objects.Appropriation brings to consideration how time and everyday events influence the relationship of objects and subjects. The way that people see things changes, almost imperceptibly perhaps, sometimes through minor events. Everyday processes of sensual
31

appropriation are somewhat less explicit than the highly conscious ideas of esthetic judgment or iconoclasm; they seem to operate in a more entangled, implicit sphere of action. For example, we could think about our daily trajectories, in the recurrence of certain elements that become our indexes: your coffee pot, a certain building, that bench you pass by constantly; your neighbors loud boom-box. They may even appear randomly in your dreams, become intertwined in your personal history, wrap themselves in your memory, and acquire personal meanings that nobody else could deploy, maybe even acquire an agency in the story of your life: you belong together. The low intensity of esthetic perception is offset by the high intensity of intimacy precisely because appropriation builds context, whereas esthetics and iconoclasm keep objects out of it. AGENCY? Conclusion: Fetishes and Monuments

I came back to the Dique de Toror two years after my initial research, in 2003. I talked to seu Raimundo, also known as Jacar (caiman), a former boxer who rents little boats to tourists and visitors in the Dique. Seu Raimundo was the leader of the neighborhood association for the ecological protection since the reurbanization and the foundation of the park. But in his words, the association has slowly faded away, by lack of interest, both of neighbors and institutions. The Orixs need to be repainted urgently. The city council does not provide as much security and policing as it used to, and the result is that the park is suffering with the actions of vandals. For example the sign by the side of the lake, explaining each Orix, was covered
32

with graffiti. The city council took it away, and it never got there back. Who were these vandals who trashed the sign? It was not clear. Raimundo introduced to me one of the cleaners of the park, an initiated in Candombl, who may know something about that. Raimundo jokes with him, saying that he is a son of Logun Ed, six months a woman, six months a manand he laughs ( it is interesting to note how Raimundo remembers this information from the panel; it was not only the policeman who was shocked by this information). The cleaner, a bit uncomfortable, says that he is actually a son of Nana, but that most of anything he believes in God. The cleaner said that the vandals were probably soccer hooligans coming out of a game: the soccer stadium is right by the side of the park, and they often trash it and burn garbage cans when their team looses a game. Now, the tourists sometimes ask Raimundo which Orix is which and so on, but he doesnt always remember. What will happen with the monument to the Orixs? Maybe Brazil will have a final religious and cultural revolution and it will be demolished. If the Pentecostals seize political power in Bahia one day, they may finally destroy the Orixs of Toror. In the meantime, they fade away, in the reflections of the sacred lake, loosing their shiny colors by oxidation. The sign has already disappeared, the first effective victim of an act of vandalism that apparently had no more motivation than the rage of a hooligan it cant even be considered iconoclasm (Gamboni 1997). The monument is being incorporated to the landscape of the city, like old monuments to the heroes of Abolition and independence. Maybe some years from now people will pass by and not even notice it. Time, that greatest of all iconoclasts, as
33

Latour says (1999:272). Monuments often undergo the most curious process of disappearance: when built, they are meant to stand as the symbol of a city or nation, the pride of a government and a gift to the people; but then they gradually become a part of the landscape, as they get dusty, one more spot in the everyday trajectories of people going to and fro. Once they were a framework for overt or private argument, a field of battle, then they become harmless ghosts of a forgotten past. Modernism in this century has been extremely critical with monuments, as it has been critical with the ideologies they embody. Lewis Mumford saw monuments as a mummification of the past. For him, stones give a false sense of continuity, and a false assurance of life (Mumford 1935:435).28 The relationship of monuments with time is an interesting question. It seems like the aspiration to timelessness only leads to an invocation of death. And this death is a public death: they are dead because nobody looks at themWe could consider it in relation to the value of invisibility of Candombl altars, the assentos, what the afrobrazilianists called fetiches. We could say that assentos and monuments like public sculptures have a totally different relationship to time, memory, and people. The inalienable possessions (Weiner 1992) that constitute the life of a house, the assentos, are enacted by their constant participation in cycles of ritual activity; they are constantly being reenacted, feed, cleaned, used, re-wrapped They are embodiments of collective memory in a very particular way: they participate in a process of transformation and growth, a process of life, and their participation is very active since they are also alive: it
34

is said that stones grow; and this is said in quite literal terms. And why shouldnt we accept it? We have to consider that the constant ritual feeding, the extended relationship with the initiate, establishes a highly determined and determinant relationship between assento and initiate, to the extent that the ot stone almost becomes an exterior organ of her body, a part of her distributed person(Gell1998). Mumford was totally wrong in that case: here, stones give a true sense of continuity, and a real assurance of life. The stones of the assentos dont seem to behave like regular stones, especially not like those we find in monuments. If the ideologies originally inscribed in monuments aspire to eternity in their severe solidity, which paradoxically condemns them to oblivion, the living force of Candombl , ax, in its continuous and lively transformation, is very successful at preserving memory by fixing it precisely into a ritual time. At this point we could ask, how different are the forms of appropriation of public monuments and assentos? The position of both kinds of objects could get curiously reversed - because it is very clear that the relationship of ax and initiates in Candombl is highly determined and determinant. In fact, the initiate belongs as much to the assento as the assento belongs to the initiate; their relationship is very ritualized, and the relative degrees of invisibility of the assento is built precisely to enhance this rigidity, avoiding too overt a display, to allow a certain degree of intimacy of the Orix and a secrecy that is indispensable for the continuity of its mysterious power. On the contrary, the monument is totally open, totally visible in the public space. In a way we could say that where assentos are indexes of the particular relationship of devotees and Orixs, monuments are made to be permanent symbols of a certain
35

collective, abstract idea, like Afro-Brazilian culture, for example. And yet this publicity is unquestionably its major weakness. Despite their big volume, solidness, and apparent arrogance, they are just dead stone and metal. Even if the public authorities protect them, they cannot respond to aggression, cannot avoid being mocked and time always works against them. Assentos, with their intimate relation to the initiate, is much more in control of its integrity and its identity, and it can only be appropriated in a very restricted, prescribed number of ways. But nobody can control the ways in which people will appropriate public monuments in their vagaries, in ways that may contradict its original premises. Here resides the paradox: monuments are much more opened to the pleasures of imagination, sometimes in the most ironic, random ways. It is then that its dimensions of temporality and historicity appear more clearly. Besides their apparently permanent symbolism, they can also become indexes of the peculiar trajectories of individuals. What city planner or sculptor could have imagined that somebody would think of the Orix sculptures as cartoon monsters, transsexuals or fallen angels? And yet they cannot avoid it. Over time, it might well happen that the Orixs of Toror become part of the memory and the personal history of many people, thus acquiring a range of meanings and possibilities that have not been predicted in this article. And it is also possible, indeed probable, that they become invisible to most passersby. In these terms, the monument can aquire an autonomy from the intentions who built it, he may even manifest a resistence to these intentions. We may think that the agency of the object, then is not just an extension of the distributed person of its creators
36

or promoters, but a result of a particular relationship with time and space, and the resistence that this relationship awakes. Essa definio da agncia dos objetos radicalmente diferente da hiptesis de Gell, para quem os objetos tem agncia s como delegados dos humanos, que atribuiem neles uma intencionalidade, uma mente. Para Gell, dizer pessoa distribuida a mesma coisa que dizer mente distribuida. Eu defenderia, pelo contrario, o que Gell define como uma teoria externalista(11), na qual reconhecemos a agncia na prtica social independentemente de si vem de uma mente interior ou alma. Mas indo ms longe de Gell, eu no acho que uma aproximao externalista precise da noo de mente exterior. De fato no acho que seja preciso falar de mentes, nem de psicologia intencional para falar de agncia ou simplemente de ao. En certos casos, a agncia das coisas no resulta do fato que elas temham uma mente e uma intencionalidade, mas da evidencia da presena fsica delas, na sua relao como os humanos. No por que as coisas tem mente, mas por que elas tem corpo, e esse corpo radicalmente diverso do corpo humano, que elas podem participar na ao social en formas radicalmente diferentes dos humanos. Nesse sentido importante destacar a irredutvel materialidade ou

territorializao do monumento, para usar os termos de Pietz (1985:12). Objetos como os monumentos tem uma relao absolutamente diferente com tempo e espao que os humanos. Eles so fixos e, tendencialmente, imperecveis. Eles podem sobreviver os governantes que os construram e o seu contexto original, perdendo completamente o sentido ou incorporando sentidos novos. nessa materialidade, nessa obstinada presena,
37

onde as vezes encontramos a agncia das coisas, a sua resistncia a serem reduzidas a smbolos dos nossos valores, ou delegados da nossa pessa. Com o tempo, pode acontecer que os Orixs do Toror sejam reapropiados, destruidos, ou simplesmente esquecidos. Quem sabe? Si as pedras falassem...

38

Bibliography

Apter, Andrew 1992 Black Critics and Kings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brown, David 1996
Holanda, Sergio Buarque de, 1902Raizes do Brasil. Rio [de Janeiro] J. Olympio, 1936.

Campos, Leonildo Silveira 1997 Teatro, Templo e Mercado- Organizaao e Marketing de um empreendimento Neopentecostal. Petrpolis: Vozes Durham, Eunice Ribeiro 1986 A cidade vista da Periferia in Revista Brasileira de Cincias Sociais, 1( 1):24-31 Eiss and Petersen, Introduction: Values of Value, in Cultural Anthropology Fish, Stanley 1980 Is there a text in this Class? The authority of interpretative communities. Cambridge: Harvard U.P.
Freyre, Gilberto, 1900The masters and the slaves (Casa-grande & senzala) a study in the development of Brazilian civilization by Gilberto Freyre; translated from the Portuguese of the fourth and definitive Brazilian edition by Samuel Putnam. New York, Knopf, 1946.

Freyre, Gilberto
39

1961 Casa Grande e Senzala. Rio de Janeiro: Jose Olympio Gamboni, Dario 1997 The Destruction of Art. Iconoclasm and Vandalism since the French Revolution. New Haven: Yale U.P. Gell, Alfred 1998 Art and Agency. London: Clarendon Press Giesz, Ludwig 1960 Phnomenologie des Kitches Heidelberg: W. Rothe. Graeber, David, Towards and Anthropological Theory of Value. Habermas, Jrgen 1989 The historical transformations of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Harvard UP. 1992 (1985) The Philosophical discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: MIT Press, Hollanda, Sergio Buarque de 1988 Raizes do Brasil . Rio de Janeiro: Jose Olympio. Jauss, Hans Robert 1982 Toward an Aesthetic of reception. Brighton: Harvester. Johnson, Paul C. 1997 Kicking, stripping, and re-dressing a saint in Black. Visions of public space in Brazils recent Holy War. History of Religions, November 1997. Pp.129163. Keane, Webb Calvin in the Tropics Protestantism etc. Kant, Immanuel 1951(1790) Critique of judgment. New York: Hafner Pub. Co. Kramer, Eric 2001 Law and the Image of a Nation: Religious conflict and Religious Freedom
40

in a Brazilian Criminal Case.Law and Social Inquiry, Volume 26, N.1. Pp.3562. Latour, Bruno 1999 Pandoras Hope. Essays on the reality of Science Studies . Cambridge: Harvard U.P. 2002 What is Iconoclash? Or is there a world beyond the image wars? In (ed.)Iconoclash Cambridge: MIT Press. Pp 14-37. Macedo, Bispo Edir 2000 Orixs, Caboclos & Guias, Deuses ou Demnios? Rio de Janeiro. Ed. Grfica Universal Ltda., Matta, Roberto Da 1985 A casa e a rua .Sao Paulo: Brasiliense 1991 Carnivals, rogues, and heroes : an interpretation of the Brazilian dilemma... U of Notre Damme Press. Indiana Mitchell, W.J.T. (ed.) 1990 Art and the public sphere. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Mumford, Lewis. 1938 The Culture of Cities. New York: Harcourt, Brace&World Inc. Myers, Fred (ed.) 2001 The Empire of Things. New York: SAR press. Pietz, William 1985 The Problem of the Fetish, in Res 9, Spring , Pp.5-17. Sahlins, Marshall 1994 Waiting for Foucault. Prickly Pear Press, Cambridge. Santos, Joclio Telles dos 1987 As imagens esto guardadas: reafricanizao Comunicaes do ISER, n.4.Pp.50-8
41

2000 O poder da cultura e a cultura no poder: a disputa simblica da herana cultural negra no Brasil. PH.D. Thesis, Universidade de So Paulo. Schiller, Friedrich 1954 On the Esthetic Education of Man, in a Series of Letters. London: Routledge Soares, Luiz Eduardo 1992 A guerra dos pentecostais contra o afro-brasileiro: dimenses democrticas do conflito religioso no Brasil Comunicaes do ISER, n.44, pp.43-50. Weiner, Annette 1992 Inalienable Possessions. The Paradox of Keeping-While-Giving. Berkeley :University of California Press. Whitehead, Alfred North 2000 (1920) Concept of Nature Cambridge U.P. Other sources( newspapers): Jornal A Tarde Correio da Bahia Tribuna da Bahia

42

I use the expression Candombl people to translate the Brazilian povo do santo.

Even if our own approach to things is conditioned necessarily by the view that things have no meaning apart from those

that human transactions, attributions, and motivations endow them with, the anthropological problem is that this formal truth does not illuminate the concrete, historical circulation of things. For what we have to follow the things themselves, for their meanings are inscribed in their form, their uses, their trajectories. It is only through the analysis of these trajectories that we can interpret the human transactions and calculations that enliven things ( Appadurai 1987:5)
3

It would be unfair to give the impression that nothing substantial has been written about value since Appadurais The

Social Life of Things. On the contrary some of the more interesting and innovative research in the last years has been based on this question, specially from a Marxist perspective ( See Graeber 2000, Myers 2001, Eiss and Petersen 2004. But the focus of this paper is not to attack- or defend a certain theory of value, but to consider some aspects of materiality that are often left aside consideration by theories of value.
4

As esculturas representando os Orixs(...) enriquecem a paisagem natural na medida em que so entidades

msticas ligadas natureza Dique de Toror, A Tarde, 29/3/1998.

Following the urban revitalization plans of for example, Barcelona, that has become a raw model for urban

planners in Brazil and in other Latin American countries (personal communication of Javier Alfaya, president of the Camera de Vereadores of Salvador). Further on in the article I will discuss how these operations of estetization of the city are related to notions of a bourgeois public sphere.

Popular classes is a common expression in Brazilian sociology, including the vast majority of the population

that lives around the level of poverty- from the working class to the lumpen. It rephrases the traditional idea of povo, the people, the mass of unprivileged people. It can be criticized as a populist term, but on the other hand it is more inclusive and less deterministic, more historical and experience-near than Marxist ideas of the working class which dont fit so well the Brazilian situation ( see i.e. Durham 1986)

In Habermas own words, Schiller stresses the communicative, community building and solidarity-giving force

to art, which is to say, its public character (Habermas, 1992:46).According to him, Schiller is in fact prefiguring the idea of the independent logics of the value spheres of science, morality, and art. ( Habermas, 1992: 50)

Ruth Landes (1947)in the forties still used that terms fetish and fetishism, but it was abandoned afterwards because of the negative connotations that these terms acquired .

For a more detailed description of the Otan, see Sansi-Roca 2005 In David Browns words, in reference to Santeria thrones: It is possible to see() created orich objects as an

10

associated/associatable, mimetic or indexical series, without the assumption that conceptual blueprints of extended abstract reflection upon meanings intervene in their production. Some practitioners associate more concretely, and others more abstractly(Brown, 1996: 99)

11

In the Ile Axe Opo Afonja, the Candombl house that more radically defended the return to African roots, the

Catholic images were retired from public display and sacred settings. Still, after some years, many Candombl houses, like the traditional Casa Branca, still keep a place for Catholic images, even if they subscribed the Manifesto against syncretism (See Santos 1987).

12

Tati Moreno, Personal communication, March 2000. An Ogan is a Lord, a man who normally does not incorporate Orixas- and therefore is not a filho or filha de santo.

13

It is a position of honor for men who help the house in different ways with their work, money or prestige. Many important figures of Bahian society have become Ogans in Candombl houses- who traditionally have been interested in attracting important men as protectors and patrons.

14

The play of cowrie shells, coming from the Ifa oracle system in West Africa, is integral to the Orix cult- despite

of what it has become extremely popular in Brazilian society way beyond the cult.
15

feitio should not be confused with fetiche. If the feitio is an action, the fetiche is a thing. Again for

references on the etimology of these words, see Pietz 1986.

16

Tati Moreno, personal communication, March 2000

17

Mr. Coelho, policeman, personal communication, January 2001.

18

Tati Moreno, personal communication, March 2000.

19

Bel Borba, personal communication: May 2000.

20

The man was described by the journalists as a paulista, somebody from So Paulo, the south of the country.

The Pentecostal groups have spread through Brazil from the metropolis of the south, So Paulo and Bahia. As we will see, their arrival to Bahia is read by the intellectuals, journalists, and politicians in Bahia also as an invasion from people from the south that doesnt understand the culture and the traditions of Bahia.

21

uma obra de arte? Para mim de muito mal gosto(...) sse cara e vivo? Tribuna da Bahia 5/6/2000.

22

A Tarde 5/6/2000.It is clear that the journalist had a parti pris for Bahian art and that they had a certain confrontation with this protestant from So Paulo...

23

O governo poderia tombar essas obras, que tem um carater pblico, o que aconteceu comigo pode acontecer

com qualquer artista.A Tarde 5/6/2000.

24

With all, two years after that event (2000), the artist Juarez Paraiso sued the church and won his case for moral

damage: The church was condemned to compensate the artist with 170 minimal salaries (less than 1000 dollars at the exchange rates of 2003) . See A Tarde 22/2/2003.

25

In fact the governor of the state, Garotinho, depended on their political and financial support to a great extent.

26

And so one of the Legal Petitions against the Pastor of the IURD that had kicked the saint was: the Pastor in

question offended the Motherland, the struggle against slavery, the saga of the Afro-Brazilian nation, the reverence to humility, the respect for poverty, the origin of the colors of the flag, the Brazilian cultural patrimony, and the armed forces. (Quoted in Kramer, 2001:28)

27

Povo does not mean little people, but big people. Still, povo is a menacing brute mass of

undifferentiated (black and poor ) people. The big is therefore not superlative, but diminutive.

28

Some authors pointed out how easily the spectacularity of monuments becomes invisibility in everyday life .

Robert Musil said that monuments are impregnated against our attention and retired from our senses (quoted in Gamboni 1997:51). More recently Paul Veyne commented that public monuments are generally an art without a public, which awakes a very low degree of attention (Gamboni, 1997:51). Going even further, Hans Robert Jauss comments how monuments are opposed to true works of art, since monuments monologically reveal its untemporal essence, while works of art are fundamentally dialogical and historical (Jauss, 1982: 22).