Cmar Mumallah

victoi Tuinei, Stiuctuialist. An inquiiy into his Biachionic analytic: continuities anu bieaks with
the stiuctuialist tiauition

@he 1960s was Lhe decade of Lhe publlcaLlon of Claude LevlSLrauss' 1be 5ovoqe MloJ a work
LhaL solldlfled an analyLlcal framework based ln Lhe search for baslc prlnclples around whlch sLable
sysLems of LhoughL and soclal sLrucLure are organlzed conLlnulng ln Lhe LradlLlon of anLhropologlsLs
such as LL LvansrlLchard and oLhers @hls ldea would come Lo comprlse Lhe core of sLrucLural
anLhropology uurlng Lhe followlng few years a Lhlnker offerlng a very dlfferenL framework came Lo Lhe
fore vlcLor @urner raLher Lhan sLresslng sLable menLal and soclal sLrucLures made hls focus on confllcL
opposlLlon change and collecLlve effervescence neverLheless ln splLe of Lhls slgnlflcanL change ln
focus @urner conLlnued Lo share a greaL many presumpLlons and commonallLles of meLhod wlLh Lhe
sLrucLurallsLs Pls enLlre argumenL Lhough examlnlng change ls sLlll predlcaLed upon Lhe noLlon of
sLrucLure @urner lnsLead of aLLacklng sLrucLure seeks Lo puL lL lnLo moLlon and Lo quallfy lL @urner due
Lo sLrucLure's foundaLlonal lmporLance Lo hls ldeas can never Lruly geL away from sLrucLure and so ls
soundly wlLhln Lhe sLrucLurallsL lnLellecLual LradlLlon generally
@o somewhaL quallfy Lhls clalm however vlcLor @urner cerLalnly offers a subsLanLlally dlfferenL
ouLlook from hls sLrucLurallsL forbears whlch he Lerms processual" @urner recognlzes a cerLaln
process of how an lndlvldual comes Lo occupy a cerLaln sLrucLural poslLlon (a process of becomlng" ) ln
hls analysls of tltes Je possoqe LlmlnallLy Lhe sLage of belng boLh beLwlxL and beLween soclal
caLegorles comprlses for @urner a cruclal [uncLure ln Lhlnklng abouL how people become lncorporaLed
lnLo soclal sLrucLures ln general (@urner 1969 p 93) lnLense camaraderle and egallLarlanlsm develops
among neophyLes durlng rlLes de passage as Lhey engage ln Lhe recognlLlon of someLhlng LhaL has
ceased Lo be someLhlng @urner flnds Lo be an lnLrlnslc human Lendency lylng ln momenLs of Lhe
absence of sLrucLure or anLlsLrucLure CommunlLas (@urner 1969 p 93) LlmlnallLy ls only one slLuaLlon
ln whlch CommunlLas manlfesLs and wlLhouL CommunlLas socleLy cannoL funcLlon [usL as LaoLze's
charloL wheel would noL exlsL wlLhouL Lhe hole ln Lhe mlddle SLrucLure depends on empLlness and LhaL
empLlness ls lLself sLrucLured Much llke uurkhelm's collecLlve effervescence" CommunlLas arlses ln
Lhe gaLherlng LogeLher and lnLeracLlon beLween human belngs experlenclng and creaLlng someLhlng
LhaL exlsLs on anoLher level AL Lhe same Llme LhaL Lhls fundamenLal human force ls experlenced Lhe
lndlvldual human belng ls asserLed ln a way lmposslble wlLhln normal sLrucLural consLralnLs whlch ln
conLrasL asserLs a parLlcular soclal poslLlon @urner calls Lhe neophyLe engaged ln Lhls experlence of
Cmar Mumallah
llmlnallLy (and Lhe CommunlLas embodled ln lL) a tobolo toso (much ln Lhe LradlLlon of !ohn Locke) Lake
Lhls ln opposlLlon Lo LevlSLrauss who more or less assumes LhaL sLrucLures of cognlLlon are already
lngralned ln Lhe lndlvldual by vlrLue of hls lnLeracLlon wlLh all oLher aspecLs of hls soclal world LhaL lends
a more obvlous or LakenforgranLed quallLy Lo Lhese sLrucLures for Lhe lndlvldual @urner's lnLroducLlon
of Lhe dynamlc lndlvldual consLlLuLes a slgnlflcanL break from LevlSLrauss' framework LhaL emphaslzes
Lhe collecLlve undersLandlng over Lhe world over Lhe llmlnal lndlvldual's comlng Lo undersLand hls
parLlcular world ?eL where hls analysls Lruly Lakes a deparLure from sLrucLurallsm ls hls lnLeresL ln
dlachrony as opposed Lo Lhe synchronlc perspecLlve ln whlch LevlSLrauss was lnLeresLed
LevlSLrauss Lhe faLher of anLhropologlcal sLrucLurallsm made expllclL hls focus on soclal
phenomena from a synchronlc perspecLlve aL Lhe expense of dlachronlc processes Accordlng Lo Levl
SLrauss dlachronlc undersLandlngs of soclal phenomena should be lefL Lo Lhe realm of Marxlan pollLlcal
economy LevlSLrauss lnsLead concerns hlmself wlLh Lhe lnLernal coherence and deeper prlnclples LhaL
underlle and glve unlLy Lo a seL of culLural phenomena and Lhe sysLems of classlflcaLlon LhaL are bullL up
from Lhese prlnclples @urner noL saLlsfled wlLh leavlng all analysls of soclal change Lo a MarxlsL
framework concerns hlmself wlLh Lhe acLual flux and changefullness of Lhe human soclal scene"
(@urner 1974 p24) @hls emphasls on flux and dynamlsm leads Lo a relflcaLlon of confllcL over harmony
ln conLrasL Lo Lhe LradlLlonal sLrucLurallsL framework @urner flnds lL elemenLary LhaL culLural sysLems
are predlcaLed on Lhe experlence and parLlclpaLlon of consclous vollLlonal feellng agenLs Slnce confllcL
ls rlfe lL ylelds ln aharmonlc eplsodes ln whlch acLors are moLlvaLed by Lhelr personal senLlmenLs
deslres goals as well as by Lhe concepLual LhoughL sLrucLures Lhey hold Lo and have absorbed from
greaLer socleLy Lenslonal lrrupLlons @urner deslgnaLes as soclal dramas" (@urner 1974 p33) @urner
argues Lhls emphasls on dlsLurbance confllcL and dlachrony can Lell us more abouL boLh Lhe Lemporal
and concepLual (aLemporal) sLrucLures" around whlch socleLy ls orlenLed (@urner 1974 p34) @emporal
sLrucLures are llke Lhose of Lhe soclal drama whlch medlaLe psychologlcal facLors and whlch yleld ln
changes of varylng degrees lor aLemporal sLrucLures Lhese forces are unlmporLanL for such sLrucLures
reveal Lhemselves as already exhausLed achlevedaxloms" (@urner 1974 p37) @hey are Lhe self
evldenL Lhe unspoken assumpLlon and Lhe obvlous ConcepLual sLrucLures are Lhose wlLh whlch
synchronlc sLrucLurallsL analyses llke Lhose of LevlSLrauss concern Lhemselves whereas Lemporal
sLrucLures are @urner's emphasls As can be seen @urner by no means dlscards Lhe noLlon of sLrucLure
buL raLher seeks Lo expand lL Lo phenomena LevlSLrauss falls Lo address
Cmar Mumallah
@urner's own noLlon of sLrucLure ls broad ln a nuLshell Lhe more sLable aspecLs of acLlon and
lnLerrelaLlonshlp" (@urner 1974 p36) @he very sLasls of sLrucLures ls ln facL a cumulaLlve effecL of soclal
dynamlcs for all sLrucLures galn Lhelr lmpeLus from Lhe flows and performances LhaL energlze Lhem
(@urner 1974 p37) Compare Lhls ldea wlLh Lhe followlng
lL ls as Lhough Lhere are here Lwo ma[or 'models' for human lnLerrelaLedness [uxLaposed and alLernaLlng
@he flrsL ls of socleLy as a sLrucLured dlfferenLlaLed and ofLen hlerarchlcal sysLem of pollLlcolegaleconomlc
poslLlons wlLh many Lypes of evaluaLlon separaLlng men ln Lerms of 'more' or 'less' @he second whlch
emerges recognlzably ln Lhe lumlnal perlod ls of socleLy as an unsLrucLured or rudlmenLarlly sLrucLured and
relaLlvely undlfferenLlaLed nltotos communlLy or even communlon of equal lndlvlduals who submlL
LogeLher Lo Lhe general auLhorlLy of Lhe rlLual elders" (@urner 1969 p96)
8lLes de passage glve recognlLlon Lo an essenLlal and generlc human bond wlLhouL whlch Lhere could
be o socleLy" Plgh cannoL exlsL wlLhouL low one who ls hlgh musL know whaL lL ls Lo be low (@urner
1969 p97) All susLalned manlfesLaLlons of communlLas musL appear as dangerous and anarchlcal"
and so musL be bounded llmlLed and deflned by mechanlsms wlLhln Lhe sLrucLure (@urner 1969 p109)
ln any glven soclal order Lhere are necessarlly processes of preservaLlon and forces of change LhaL
produce socleLy and wlLhouL elLher of whlch socleLy would noL exlsL SLrucLures arlse ouL of momenLs
of consclous sLrucLurelessness 8uL wlLh all revoluLlons Lhe vlcLorlous revoluLlonarles' flrsL move ls Lo
geL Lhe revolL ouL of Lhe sLreeLs and lnLo Lhe hlsLory books Lo codlfy lL bound lL Llkewlse communlLas
can be grasped only ln some relaLlon Lo sLrucLure" (@urner 1969 p127) So boLh sLrucLure and
communlLas are muLually lnLerdependenL yeL opposlLlonal wlLh regard Lo one anoLher
@hls muLually consLlLuLlve yeL opposlLlonal relaLlonshlp can be besL descrlbed by from a
dlalecLlcal perspecLlve @urner's noLlon of dlachronlc change parallels LhaL of Marx and Pegel's dlalecLlc
ln whlch Lwo processes lnLeracL wlLh one anoLher accumulaLe conLradlcLlons and produce new
sLrucLures (or ln Lhe more slmpllsLlc Lhesls anLlLhesls synLhesls" formulaLlon) ln Lhls case @urner's
noLlon of Lhe lnLerplay beLween sLrucLure and anLlsLrucLure produces counLersLrucLure @urner hlmself
uses Lhe Lerm Lhough wlLhouL much reference Lo hls hlsLorlcal anLecedenLs soclal llfe ls a Lype of
Jlolentlnol ptness LhaL lnvolves successlve experlence of hlgh and low communlLas and sLrucLure
homogenelLy and dlfferenLlaLlon equallLy and lnequallLy" (@urner 1969 p97 emphasls mlne) WlLhouL
Lhls dlalecLlc Lhere would be no socleLy (@urner 1969 p129) Such a dlalecLlcal emphalsls ls rlghL ln llne
wlLh Lhe sLrucLurallsL LradlLlon @hough heavy usage of dlalecLlc ls whaL makes @urner's dlfference
fundamenLally dlfferenL from Lhe sLrucLurallsLs LhaL came before Lhe call for dlalecLlcal modes of
analysls came from LevlSLrauss ln Lhe flnal chapLer of 1be 5ovoqe MloJ As @urner puLs lL poslLlve
Cmar Mumallah
sLrucLurallsm can only become processuallsm by accepLlng Lhe concepL of soclal anLlsLrucLure as a
LheoreLlcal operaLor" WlLhouL Lhls second dlalecLlcal pole Lo sLrucLure @urner's processuallsm"
wouldn'L exlsL As such @urner's processuallsm aL lLs core ls Lhe progresslon conLlnuaLlon and
expanslon of sLrucLurallsm raLher Lhan a slgnlflcanL break from lL
As can be seen @urner's framework Lhough he glves lL Lhe name of processusal" never
escapes Lhe legacy of sLrucLurallsm lndeed hls framework embraces lL As he puLs lL processual
analysls assumes culLural analysls [usL as lL assumes sLrucLuralfuncLlonal analysls lncludlng more sLaLlc
comparaLlve morphologlcal analysls" buL puLs dynamlcs flrsL" (@urner 1974 p44) LlmlnallLy and
CommunlLas Lhough momenLs ln whlch sLrucLural norms are lnverLed are usually Lhemselves
sLrucLured enLlLles @urner Lhough he sLresses dynamlsm and confllcL cannoL help buL draw hls ldeas
agalnsL sLrucLure and harmony @o undersLand how Lhls almosL schlzophrenlc looklng boLh Lowards can
be coherenL one musL see @urner's analysls Lhrough Lhe lens of dlalecLlcs @urner should be LhoughL of
as a Lhlnker ln Lhls LradlLlon Lhough one who has slgnlflcanLly developed lLs ldeas