Concepts on pilgrimage as a social process Essay
To what extent do Turner ‘s constructs of ‘liminality ‘ and ‘communitas ‘ dramatis personae visible radiation on pilgrim’s journey as a societal procedure? The constructs of “ liminality ” and “ comunitas ” is “ evanescent, like a wisp of fume in the air current. ” ( Shure, 2005 ) It attempts to accomplish some formalisation of a societal procedure in a theoretically perspective, though academically this can be achieved ; it is really difficult to get the hang the full and in-depth construct of the pilgrim’s journey. As all academic essays require the clear and standard definition of the inquiry, Turner ‘s constructs will later be explained and moreover the significance behind both the “ pilgrim’s journey ” and “ societal procedure ” will be dealt with in item. Turner draws on constructs of Van Gennep ‘s theoretical account of rites of transition ; liminality is a province of passage argued by Turner, it is “ neither here nor at that place ; they are betwixt and between the places assigned and arrayed by jurisprudence, usage, convention, and ceremonial. ( Turner, 1969, p. 95 ) The effort of the essay will demo how the liminality identifies itself as period of passage with the societal procedure of a pilgrim’s journey, place the equality and communitas will try to exemplify the procedure of a pilgrim’s journey, nevertheless is construction genuinely lost during a pilgrim’s journey and what is the construct of a societal procedure and does a pilgrim’s journey truly fit into this definition, is a pilgrim’s journey one of equality and individualism or that of a structured formation or a societal experience.
“ The rite of transition ” , focuses on the fact that a member of a group neither belongs to the group she was a portion of or the group she will belong to after the luminal phase has been completed. A typical liminal phase can be seen as the kid between going an grownup and remaining a kid, pubescence as a liminal phase in every single individuals ain life pilgrim’s journey. ( Turner V. E. , 1978 ) Continuing with the impression of liminal periods one can detect that in Mary Douglas ‘ Purity and Danger, illustrates that the person is a fouling force on the external groups as liminal persons are of “ no position, insignia… affinity place, nil to demarcate them structurally ” ( Turner V. , The forst of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu rite, 1967, p. 98 ) Liminality, In the usage of Van Gennep ‘s theoretical account of the three, Turner illustrates the stages of the ritual, the rite is an accelerator and exemplifies the transitional period. The transitional period is identified as the liminal period. ( Turner V. , 1967, p. 94 ) Privacy from mundane life is a typical effect to the liminal period which is the effort to take the person from the society, later coercing the person into an interior pilgrim’s journey of development of ego. The application of categorization is frequently used, in making so this continues the passage and the remotion of old individuality, moreover denoting the position of passage. Turner develops this construct further in the ambiguity that is suggested, the construct of privacy, and the non designation of the person of gender or category. Turner continues to propose the equality of this transitional period nevertheless many anthropologist are hesitating to use this to an overall spectrum as in assorted societies the formation of construction is still imposed. ( Turner V. , 1967 )
Turner ‘s three stage construct is simplistic in construct and hard in application, phase one being the communicating of sacra, where secret symbols are communicated to the ritual topics in the signifier of exhibitions of sacred articles, actions, and instructions ; the symbols represent the integrity and continuity of the community. This so transcends into the liminal period of “ ludic deconstruction ” ( Deflem, 1991, p. 13 ) and so later the recombination of the person ; Turner develops on this and we move into the stage three, which is the remotion of all societal construction and what is left is entirely the authorization of the teacher and purpose of the ritual. ( Turner V. E. , 1978 ) This stage three fuelled Turner into formalizing the construct of Communitas as the designation of one.
Anti-structure and Communitas are blood brothers in the resistance to construction, Turner clearly notes that communitas is present within in a liminal phase when construction is non present ( Turner V. , 1969, pp. 94-96 ) as criticised above Turner clearly identifies this to be present within a period of liminality in a ritual procedure. The remotion of all societal elements and the exclusion from this constitutes a community bond, one of human kindness ; representing this ritual communitas of persons in a separate passage society such as the construct of oblivion between Eden and snake pit, between life and decease. Turner farther explains communitas in the Ritual Process, explicating that they refer to two farther modes of society. ( Turner V. , Pilgrimage and communitas, 1974 ) A Dialectic procedure between assorted communitas, a general position of equality of persons ( subsequently works such as Eade argue against this construct ) and that of the structured persons in a hierarchal system such as in the Hindu faith. The Dialectic has been used throughout clip such as in Revolutions and the “ maximization of communitas provokes maximization of construction, which in bend green goodss radical nisuss for renewed communitus ” . ( Turner V. , 1969, p. 129 )
Communitas is observed as something that is a stage in a procedure of a ritual non something that will go on after the procedure has been completed as the destiny of any type of communitas is necessarily a “ diminution and autumn into construction and jurisprudence ” ( Turner V. , 1969, p. 132 ) , after which a new signifier of communitas may lift once more. ( Turner V. , Pilgrimage and communitas, 1974, p. 282 ) The construct of a pilgrim’s journey and the community are centred to many scholarly arguments, Eade and Sallnow question the function of the pilgrim’s journey in prolonging or contradicting the societal construction. ( Sallnow, 1981 ) In following onto the construct that is discussed, the contrast to Marxist understanding to the pilgrim’s journey as a structural care juxtaposed with Turner ‘s pilgrim’s journey construct of self-generated communitas. Therefore in treatment of the experience does it non adhere one to the larger construct of a community? ( Eade J. a. , 1991, p. 5 )
The pilgrim’s journey is an country of anthropology that had lacked any in-depth focal point within the field boulder clay Turner ‘s “ Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture ” and when formalizing constructs on the pilgrim’s journey one is prone to concentrate on the most powerful rites performed by spiritual members and non needfully the simplistic rites of mundane life Eade & A ; Coleman suggest that pilgrim’s journey has been neglected due to this averment of a pilgrim’s journey of a liminal nature, and that of a day-to-day life moreover proposing that a pilgrim’s journey is something of extraordinary nature such as the pilgrim’s journey to Mecca, a pilgrim’s journey to a holy shrine Why in this definition has pilgrim’s journey has been removed from mundane life and imposed on that of a spiritual ritual background, one could propose that the simplistic impression of traveling in hunt of a new brace of places or a occupation is a pilgrim’s journey of the person. In making so one is taking themselves from the pre-persona and passage into the new entity and within this liminal phase they are neither. ( Eade, 2004 ) Though Turner provinces that the single histories such as “ paperss or unwritten narrations of the personal experiences ” allow us to “ imagine the societal procedure ” of a pilgrim’s journey, later proposing that even though a pilgrim’s journey possibly an interior one between the Godhead or one or a societal community to Mecca, a pilgrim’s journey none the lupus erythematosus is a societal procedure. The pilgrim’s journey as a societal procedure is formed on the symbolic and structural elements, straight of import when sing the apparent or deficiency of “ construction, ” “ anti-structure, ” “ communitas, ” and “ liminality ” . ( Turner V. , 1974 ) ( Turner V. , Pilgrimage and communitas, 1974 ) Turner observes construction as “ a more or less typical agreement of reciprocally dependent establishments and the institutional organisation of societal places and/or histrions which they imply ” . ( Turner V. , 1974, p. 272 ) Therefore in such pilgrim’s journeies as Muktinath in Nepal such societal dealingss as caste cause the formation of “ distance and inequality ” ( Turner V. , 1974, p. 272 ) ( Edwards, 1972 )
“ That spiritual pilgrim’s journey serves to foreground societal rules which are idiosyncratic to a peculiar spiritual system ” ( Messerschmidt, 1980 ) Most of Turner ‘s work was based on the Christianity bases of a pilgrim’s journey as a consequence “ communitas behavior was expected… built-in rules and idealistic outlooks ” ( Turner V. E. , 1978 ) though juxtaposed with the pilgrim’s journey of Hinduism, it is really much a contradiction as a Hindu society is hierarchal and later even though through passage this structured formation is enforced. In relation to the inquiry being addressed, this illustration illustrates Turner ‘s specific constructs of liminality and communitas do non move coherently throughout all spiritual pilgrim’s journeies. Even though construction plays an component in this illustration of a pilgrim’s journey. Pilgrimage does non inherently maintain or take the construction, though Starke and Finke suggest that it instead strengthens the bonds between the person to a symbolic community. Therefore even though Messerchmidt suggests that construction is within the liminal phase and later communitas does non be, could non propose that the symbolic bond that is being achieved is later doing a communitus that exists in a greater topographic point. ( Stark, 2000 ) If we look at the Hajj, it is one of the largest and most good known spiritual pilgrim’s journeies to day of the month, that brings pilgrims back into “ the clip of the Prophets and into the utopian-like society that antecedently existed ” . This pilgrim’s journey is international, members of Islam ascend Mecca to carry through a one time in a life connexion to a religious community, it is a pilgrim’s journey of the single nevertheless a societal procedure which will everlastingly be linked into history, with the impression of communitus one could farther propose that the associating with a religious sanctum topographic point one is non merely associating to a communitus of the present but that of the past and hereafter. If all are equal at this period of clip and construction therefore the communitus above clip. ( McCarter, 2005 )
Turner ‘s constructs of “ liminality ” and “ communitas cast a visible radiation on the societal procedure of a pilgrim’s journey in some specific impressions. It has been clear that Turner has centred all research majorly on a Christianity stance and later foreshowing other spiritual pilgrim’s journeies that really do non hold the remotion of the construction within the liminal phase and hence the built-in construction is transposed from the pre to post formations of the person. As the inquiry straight asks to what extent does Turner ‘s constructs cast visible radiation, it can be seen that metaphorically Turner has been the beacon to the development of anthropology of the pilgrim’s journey ; nevertheless necessarily with the development of theories, Turner ‘s constructs notwithstanding will ever highlight others. Though as Modern development requires less demand for beacons, so make the constructs of Turner no longer stand entirely with theories of societal procedure and pilgrim’s journey. Turner illustrates that rite is a response to a society ‘s demand but that is actively involved in the human interaction and significance. His actions and constructs are far from “ inactive ” . ( Deflem, 1991 ) Furthermore supported in new research of John Eade, one can see that within Turner ‘s constructs the look of a pilgrim’s journey as something that is non a day-to-day procedure has one time once more project a shadow on the mundane constructs of a pilgrim’s journey. One, can see that the direct societal apprehension of a pilgrim’s journey is that of a spiritual one ; the hunt for the Godhead inspiration and “ where miracles one time happened, still go on, and may go on once more ” ( Turner V. E. , 1978, p. 6 )