Chapter 4—Victor Turner’s Concept of Anti-Structure

1A notable, but little known, exception is the work of Peter Rogerson

(1986).

2The translator’s note claims that the book was first published in 1908, but the French Catalogue General des Livres Imprimes de la Bibliotheque Nationale and the U.S. National Union Catalog both give the original publication date as 1909.

3 For biographical information on van Gennep see Arnold Van Gennep: The Creator of French Ethnography by Belmont (1974/1979). See also Rodney Needham’s Introduction to his translation of van Gennep’s The Semi-Scholars, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967. See also “Arnold van Gennep: The Hermit of Bourg-la-Reine” by Zumwalt (1982).

4 For biographical information on Victor Turner, see his posthumously published books On the Edge of the Bush (1985) and Blazing the Trail (1992) which were edited by his wife.

5 Turner, 1969, p. 131.

6 Van Gennep, 1909/1960, p. 114.

7 Van Gennep, 1909/1960, p. 114.

8 Turner, 1969, p. 125.

9 Turner, 1982, p. 26.

10 Turner, 1969, p. 95.

11 Turner, 1982, p. 27.

12 12Turner, 1982, p. 27.

13 Turner, 1982, p. 28.

14 See Peters, 1982, 1994.

15Both Jungian and Freudian analysts have made use of Turner’s ideas. The Jungians have adapted them more extensively; for examples see the anthology Liminality and Transitional Phenomena edited by Nathan Schwartz-Salant and Murray Stein (1991). Volney Gay, who has more of a Freudian orientation, made use of Turner’s ideas in an article “Ritual and Self-Esteem in Victor Turner and Heinz Kohut” (Gay, 1983a). Gay also addressed the trickster in “Winnicott’s Contribution to Religious Studies: The Resurrection of the Culture Hero” (Gay, 1983b). Via his interpreters, Donald W. Winnicott’s work may provide some useful insights, though his own writing is some of the most impenetrable I’ve ever encountered. Winnicott introduced the idea of the “transitional object.” Gay called attention to its relevance to the trickster, though he did not discuss liminality in that article.

16 Turner, 1969, p. 116.

17 Turner, 1974, p. 274.

16 Turner, 1969, p. 95.

17 Turner, 1969, p. 111.

18 Turner, 1969, p. 128.

21Turner, 1974, p. 298.

22Turner, 1974, p. 273.

23 As mentioned earlier, a number of women and minority scholars show an appreciation for Babcock’s insights on the trickster. A few other writers are beginning to recognize the connection to anti-structure (e.g., Grottanelli, 1983; Koep-ping, 1985).

24 Babcock-Abrahams, 1975a, p. 184.

25 For some reflections on Koestler, see Arthur Koestler and Parapsychology by Brian Inglis, Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, Vol. 78, 1984, ^pp. 263-272.

26 Basso, 1987, pp. 7-8.

27 Ferdinand Demara was the subject of Robert Crichton’s The Great Impostor (New York: Random House, 1959). Demara performed surgeries, served as an assistant warden of a prison and as a university dean, among other escapades. He had an attraction to monasteries, which provide a containment structure for liminality. Frank Abagnale, another celebrated impostor, tells in his autobiography Catch Me If You Can (Frank W. Agabnale, Jr., with Stan Redding, New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1980) how he was able to pass as an airline pilot, attorney, and college professor. Both Demara and Abagnale had a remarkable ability to adapt to new situations and readily take on new identities, being shape-shifters, at least in a psychological sense. During their childhoods both of their fathers had suffered a severe financial setback and consequent loss of status. Carlos Castaneda shows a similarity. Psychologist Richard de Mille analyzed Castaneda in his The Don Juan Papers (1980) and suggested that Castaneda’s father did not achieve the status that one might have expected of him. Perhaps that contributed to a trickster constellation and served as one of the subtle influences that led Carlos to perpetrating his hoax.

28 Brown, 1947, p. 97.

29 8Peacock (1969).

30 Turner, 1982, p. 26.

31 See Needham, 1973.

32 Turner, 1969, pp. 108-109.

33 Turner, 1969, pp. 109.

34 Middleton, 1968/1973, p. 380.

35 5Leach, 1962/1969, p. 11.

36 Otto, 1917/1975, p. 18.

37 Degh & Vazsonyi, 1973, p. 28.

38 Douglas, 1966, p. 8.

39 Douglas, 1966, p. 94.

40 Makarius, 1973, p. 663.

41 Makarius, 1973, p. 663.

42 See Ballinger, 1989; Carroll, 1986.

43 E.g., Brown & Tuzin, 1983; Girard 1972/1977; Tierney, 1989.

44 For accounts of Toelken’s experiences with, and views on, the trickster, see Toelken, 1987, 1995a, 1995b, 1996; Toelken & Scott, 1981.

45 Toelken, 1995a, p. 30; also Toelken, 1996, p. 7.

46 Turner, 1969, pp. 137-138.

47 Turner, 1969, p. 128.

48 See Fraser, 1992; Tatro, 1974; for additional references see Boles, Davis & Tatro, 1983.

49 Bainbridge, 1989.