RITUAL,ANTISTRUCTURE,ANDRELIGION:

ADISCUSSIONOFVICTORTURNER'S
PROCESSUALSYMBOLICANALYSIS

MathieuDeflem
PurdueUniversity

PublishedinJournalfortheScientificStudyofReligion
30(1):125,(1991).

ThispaperoffersasystematicoutlineanddiscussionofVictorTurner'santhropologyof
religionandritual.AlongwithanexaminationofTurner'stheoreticalstance,anaccount
ofhispersonallifehistoryispresented.AttentionispaidtoTurner'sinitialfunctional
analysis,thedevelopmentofhismethodologicalframeandprocessualmodeofanalysis,
andhisconceptionofantistructure.Thisaccountwillservetoelaborateonsome
importantissuesinthestudyofritualandreligion.First,thediscussionfocusesonthe
parallelsbetweenTurner'slifeandtheinnovationsinhisapproach.Second,hisnotionof
religionthestudyofritualisexamined.Finally,thedistinctiveness,value,andlimitations
ofhisworkareanalyzedwithreferencetootherapproachesinsymbolicanthropology.

INTRODUCTION
InthispaperIwishtoexploreVictorTurner'scontributiontotheanthropologicalstudyof
religionandritual.Theissuewillbeaddressedfromtwodifferentbutrelatedangles.
First,theconceptualapparatusandmethodologyofTurner'sworkwillbediscussedfrom
atheoreticalpointofview.Hismodeofanalysiswillbeexaminedwithrespecttoits
valueasadistinctinnovativeapproachintheanthropologyofreligionandritual,with
focusmainlyonTurner'sapplicationofhisideasamongtheNdembuofNorthern
Rhodesia.Second,Turner'sworkwillbecharacterizedasoneinwhichtherearecrucial
intellectualturningpoints,oftencoincidingwithimportantcrossroadsinhislifeparallels
canbetracedbetweenTurners'anthropologicalenterpriseandhispersonallifehistory.
Withoutthis,Ibelieve,justicecouldnotbedone,eithertoTurner'sworkortohislife,
"forinhimtherewas,mostunusually,noapparentdistinctionbetweenlifeandwork"
(Willis1984:75).(n1)
VictorWitterTurnerwasbornon28May1920inGlasgow,Scotland,thesonofCaptain
NormanTurner,anelectronicsengineer,andVioletWitter,foundingmemberandactress
oftheScottishNationalTheater.Attheageof11,TurnerleftScotlandandwentwithhis
divorcedmothertolivewithhismaternalgrandparentsinBournemouth,England.After
attendingBournemouthGrammarSchool,hestudiedEnglishlanguageandliteratureat
UniversityCollegeofLondon(193841).DuringWorldWarII,Turner,apacifistand
objectortomilitaryservice,becameanoncombatantbombdisposalsoldierinBritain.In
1943hemarriedEdithDaviswhoremainedhiswifeandcollaboratorthroughouthislife.
AfterthewartheTurnersandtheirtwosonslivedinagypsycaravannearRugbyTown,

England,aproperhomebeingunobtainableduetoGermanbombing.Inthepubliclibrary
there,TurnercameacrossComingofAgeinSamoabyMargaretMeadandThe
AndamanIslandersbyA.R.RadcliffeBrown.FromthesebooksTurnerdiscoveredthat
triballifewasevenmoredowntoearththanthatoftheBritishsoldierwhichhehad
experiencedduringthewar.HedecidedtostudyanthropologyatUniversityCollegeof
London,whereheattendedtheseminarsof(amongothers)DaryllForde,MeyerFortes,
andEdmundLeach,andreceivedhisB.A.withhonorsin1949.MaxGluckman,the
exiledSouthAfricananthropologistandspiritualleaderoftheManchesterSchool,then
offeredTurneragrantfromtheRhodesLivingstoneInstitutetocarryoutfieldworkinan
Africantribe.TurneracceptedandwasassignedtotheMambwetribe.However,henever
reachedtheMambwehomelandduringhisstayattheInstituteinLusakahereceiveda
telegramfromGluckman:"SuggestyouchangetoNdembutribeNorthwesternProvince
muchmalariayellowfeverplentyofritual"(E.Turner1985:2).In1950theTurners
movedtotheMukanzavillageintheMwinilungadistrictofNorthernRhodesia(now
Zambia).HereVictorTurnerstartedhisfieldworkamongtheNdembu.

THEFUNCTIONOFRITUAL
ThefirstreportofTurner'sresearchamongtheNdembuwashisdoctoraldissertation
(Turner195455),laterpublishedasSchismandContinuityinanAfricanSociety:A
StudyofNdembuVillageLife(Turner1957a).Thisworkwasfirstandforemostastudy
ofthemechanismsofresolvingsocialconflictsinNdembusociety.Athoroughstudyof
theNdemburitualcomplexwasnotyetTurner'sprimaryconcern.Themembersofthe
RhodesLivingstoneInstitutepaid'littleattentiontotheritualactivitiesoftheAfrican
tribestheywerestudying,andatfirstTurner,whowasaresearchofficerattheInstitute,
wasnoexception.Still,evenatthisearlystageinhiscareer,hemadeaninnovative
contributiontoanthropologybyintroducingtheconceptofsocialdrama.
SocialDramaandFunctionalRituals
DuringhisfieldworkamongtheNdembu(December1950toFebruary1952,andMay
1953toJune1954),Turnerconcentratedoninvestigatingthemainprinciplesgoverning
Ndembusocialstructure(Turner1957a:6181258287).Hediscoveredtwojointly
operatingprinciplesinNdembusociety:matrilinealdescentandvirilocality.Matrilineal
descentisthedominantorganizingprincipleinNdembusocialstructure,butwhen
combinedwithvirilocality,matrilinealtendenciesarecounteracted.Matrilineagesare
scatteredovermanydifferentvillagesgiventhehighrateofdivorce,thisleadstoahigh
degreeofresidentialmobility,preventingtheformationofsolidgroupingswiderthanthe
village.StrongaffiliationsbetweentheNdembuvillagesareunlikelytooccur,aridinthe
absenceofastrongoverallpoliticalunity,intervillagedisputesfrequentlytakeplace.
Withineachvillage,unstablemarriagerelationshipsinhibitthegrowthofdeeplineages
andincreasethepossibilityofindividualmobilityandvillagefission.Asaresult,
Ndembusocietyischaracterizedbymanyconflictsbothwithinandbetweenthevillages.
Turnerconsequentlyintendedhisdoctoraldissertationprimarilytobe"astudyofsocial
conflictandofthesocialmechanismsbroughtintoplaytoreduce,excludeorresolve
conflict"(Turner1957a:89).Heintroducedthenotionofsocialdramaasadevicetolook
beneaththesurfaceofsocialregularitiesintothehiddencontradictionsanderuptionsof
conflictintheNdembusocialstructure.ThesocialdramasamongtheNdembuexhibita
processualform(Turner[1957a:91]usestheterm"processional"),followingapatternof
fourphases:(1)abreachofregularnormgovernedsocialrelationshipsbetweenpersons
orgroupsofasocialunit(2)acrisisorextensionofthebreach,unlesstheconflictcanbe
sealedoffquickly(3)adjustiveandredressivemechanismsbroughtintooperationby
leadingmembersofthesocialgroupand(4)reintegrationofthedisturbedsocialgroup

orsocialrecognitionofanirreparablebreachorschism(9194).
Wheredoritualsfitintoallthis?InSchismandContinuityTurnerdevotedonlyoneof
twelvechapterstothestudyofritual,anditisindicativelyentitled"ThePolitically
IntegrativeFunctionofRitual"(288317).Atthisstageofhiscareer,Turnersawrituals
(alongwithpoliticalandlegaljudicialprocesses)asmerecompensations,orredressive
mechanismsforthetensionsproducedinthesecularorder(cf.phase3ofthesocial
drama,above).TurnerdidnotintendtostudytheNdemburitualcomplexassuch,ashe
statedinafootnote:"IdonotintendheretomakeaculturalanalysisofNdemburitualbut
simplytoisolatefromtheritualcomplexthosesociologicalfeatureswhicharerelevantin
thisbook"(289n).Rituals,performedbycultassociationscrosscuttingtheboundariesof
lineagesandvillages,creatingwidernetworksofassociation,weretreatedbyTurneras
merelythe"socialglue"thatholdsNdembusocietytogether.Ritualhasafunctionto
fulfill:"Theritualsystemcompensatestosomeextentforthelimitedrangeofeffective
politicalcontrolandfortheinstabilityofkinshipandaffinaltiestowhichpoliticalvalue
isattached"(291).
BritishStructuralismI:TheManchesterSchool
Turner'sinitialhesitationtoinvestigatetheNdemburitualcomplexasaseparatedomain
ofstudycanbeexplainedbyhispositionwithintheRhodesLivingstoneInstituteof
SociologicalResearch(Kuper1983:128129,150153Ortner1984:128132Turner
1969a:410vanDonge1985Werbner1984).Itwasasaresearchofficerofthisinstitute
thatTurnercarriedouthisfieldworkamongtheNdembu.TheInstitutewasfoundedin
1938byagroupofresearchersfromVictoriaUniversityofManchestertostudytheways
inwhichpermanentandsatisfactoryrelationshipsbetweennativesandnonnativescould
beestablishedinSouthernAfrica.StudiesofritualhadaverylowpriorityintheInstitute,
whichfocuseditsconcernonpoliticalandlegalsystems,urbanization,labormigration,
andsocialandeconomicorganizations.TheInstituteproducedstudieswithahighdegree
of(neoMarxist)uniformitywhereby"deviantsandturncoatsweretreatedwithgreat
ferocityinternally,butnocriticismwastoleratedfromoutsiders"(Kuper1983:129).Not
surprisingly,Turner'sdoctoraldissertationtoalargeextentborethemarkofMax
Gluckman,formerdirectoroftheInstituteandatthattimeheadoftheAnthropology
DepartmentatManchesterUniversity.ItwasGluckmanwhourgedTurnertostudythe
principlesofNdembusocialorganization:"Untilyou'vemasteredthat,you'reinno
positiontoanalyzeritual"(GluckmanasquotedinE.Turner1985:4).
ItwastheinfluenceofGluckmanandthetraditionalfocusoftheRhodesLivingstone
InstituteonaspectsofpoliticalandeconomicorganizationwhichIbelievehavebeen
responsibleforTurner's"prejudiceagainstritual,"ashehimselfcalledit(Turner
1969a:7).IntheperspectiveofGluckman(19541958),ritualstudiesareofsecondary
importanceacarefulexaminationofasociety'sprinciplesofsocialorganizationmust
comefirst(asitdidinTurner'sSchismandContinuity).InGluckman'sfunctionalist
approach,theroleofritualsistosustainasociety'sequilibriumandsecuresolidarity
amongitsmembers.Ritualsarelookeduponasmechanismstoensuresocietalunity,
althoughaccordingtoGluckman(andinthishedivergesfromtheclassicalfunctionalist
view),thisunitymaybeachievedinspiteofsocialconflictsandcompetingsocialnorms
andvalues.Whatmanyrituals(ofrebellion)oftendoispreciselytoenactsocialconflicts.
Similarly,Turnerregardedritualsinhisdoctoraldissertationonlyasmechanismsof
redressinaconflictualNdembusociety.However,fromGluckmanTurneralsoadopted
theinsightofstressingthedynamicprocessesofconflictsinsocieties.Turnerdeveloped
thesocialdramaapproachtotransgressthestaticframeworkofclassicalstructuro
functionalanalysesandtoreveal"socialstructureinaction"(Turner1957a:241,cf.Firth
1973:193195Grimes1985:8085).Gluckman'sdialecticalperspective,withits

emphasisonprocessratherthanstate,wassurelycoresponsibleforTurner'sapproachto
socialdramaandhisviewofsociallifeasessentiallyprocessualinform,anideawhich
wastopervadehisentirework.

RITUALANDSYMBOLANALYSIS
InthesameyearinwhichSchismandContinuitywaspublished,Turnerwrotehisfirst
essayonritualproper(Turner1957b).Withthispaper,notpublisheduntil1964,Turner
(1964b)laidthefoundationofhisapproachtoritualandmovedawaymoreandmore
fromthe"ritualhostile"frameworkoftheManchesterSchool.Strikingly,in1957he
resignedfromtheBritishCommunistPartyandrenouncedMarxism,possiblyasaresult
oftheSovietsuppressionoftheHungarianuprising,andwasreceivedintotheRoman
CatholicChurch.DuringhisyearsasSimonResearchFellow,lecturer,andsenior
lectureratVictoriaUniversityofManchester(1957to1963),Turnerdevotedhistime
largelytowritingsonNdemburitual(Turner19611962a[bothrepublishedinTurner
1975]1962b).
TwofactorsseemtoexplainwhyTurnerbythistimehadgivenuphis"prejudiceagainst
ritual."First,hisinterestinthehumancapacitytoengageincreativeandritualactivity
musthavealreadymanifesteditselfintheearlyyearsofhislife.Fromhismother,Turner
inheritedaprofoundinterestinthetheatricalandcreativesideofman(whichalso
providedthenameforhisconceptualtoolofsocial"drama").Turner'sfascinationwith
humancreativityisalsoclearfromhislifelonginterestnotonlyinritual,butalsoinart,
literature,andpoetry(whichheinfactwroteoccasionally).Suchinterestsledhimevenin
themidstofhisstudiesattheRhodesLivingstoneInstitutetowriteessaysonLunda
rituals(Turner1953)andontherevivalofthestudyofAfricanritualinthe1950s(Turner
1955).Second,equallyimportantasTurner'sspontaneousattractiontoritual,wasthefact
thathewasassignedtostudytheNdembu.FromthemanyreportsofTurner'sresearch
amongtheNdembu,thepictureclearlyemergesofapeopleinwhoselivesritualoccupies
aprominentplace.EdithTurner(1985:23)reportsthatthebeatingoftheritualdrums
couldbeheardsooften,andtheperformancesofsomekindofritualweresomanifold
duringTurner'sfieldwork,thatsurelyritualhadtobemorethanjust"socialglue"to
sustaintheNdembusocialorder.Asaresult,duringhissecondperiodoffieldwork
(195354)Turnerstartedtofocusonritualwithavigourwhichwouldeventuallymake
himoneofthemostprominentritualspecialistsinanthropology,andwhichonapersonal
levelmusthavebeenanimportantcontributingfactor,ifnotadirectcause,forhis
conversiontoCatholicism.
InthefollowingpagesIwilloutlinethemainelementsoftheapproachtoritualwhich
TurnerappliedinhisresearchamongtheNdembu,devotingaseparatesectiontohis
processualviewofritual.
RitualsasSymbolicAction
Turner(1967:19)definedritualas"prescribedformalbehaviorforoccasionsnotgiven
overtotechnologicalroutine,havingreferencetobeliefsinmysticalbeingsandpowers."
Likewise,asymbolisthesmallestunitofritualwhichstillretainsthespecificproperties
ofritualbehavioritisa"storageunit"filledwithavastamountofinformation(Turner
1968a:12).Symbolscanbeobjects,activities,words,relationships,events,gestures,or
spatialunits(Turner1967:19).Ritual,religiousbeliefs,andsymbolsareinTurner's
perspectiveessentiallyrelated.Heexpressedthiswellinanotherdefinition:Ritualis"a
stereotypedsequenceofactivitiesinvolvinggestures,words,andobjects,performedina
sequesteredplace,anddesignedtoinfluencepreternaturalentitiesorforcesonbehalfof
theactors'goalsandinterests"(Turner1977a:183).Ritualsarestorehousesofmeaningful

symbolsbywhichinformationisrevealedandregardedasauthoritative,asdealingwith
thecrucialvaluesofthecommunity(Turner1968a:2).Notonlydosymbolsrevealcrucial
socialandreligiousvaluestheyarealso(preciselybecauseoftheirreferencetothe
supernatural)transformativeforhumanattitudesandbehavior.Thehandlingofsymbols
inritualexposestheirpowerstoactuponandchangethepersonsinvolvedinritual
performance.Insum,Turner'sdefinitionofritualreferstoritualperformancesinvolving
manipulationofsymbolsthatrefertoreligiousbeliefs.
Symbols:TheMeaningfulVehiclesofRitual
Turner(1967:3132)drewadistinctionbetweendominantandinstrumentalsymbols.
Dominantsymbolsappearinmanydifferentritualcontexts,buttheirmeaningpossessesa
highdegreeofautonomyandconsistencythroughoutthetotalsymbolicsystem.
Instrumentalsymbolsarethemeansofattainingthespecificgoalsofeachritual
performance.Instrumentalsymbolscanbeinvestigatedonlyintermsofthetotalsystem
ofsymbolswhichmakesupaparticularritual,sincetheirmeaningcanberevealedonly
inrelationtoothersymbols.
Turner(1967:282950551968a:1819)identifiedthreemajorempiricalpropertiesof
dominantsymbols:(1)condensation,polysemy,ormultivocality,whenonesingle
dominantsymbolrepresentsmanydifferentthingsandactions(2)unificationof
disparatesignificata,wherethesignificata(theunderlayingmeaningsofthesymbol)are
interconnectedbyvirtueoftheircommonanalogousqualities,orbyassociationinfactor
thoughtand(3)polarizationofmeaningorbipolarity,inwhichdominantsymbols
possesstwodistinctpolesofmeaningattheideologicalornormativepole,aclusterof
significatareferstocomponentsofthemoralandsocialorder,toprinciplesofsocial
organizationatthesensoryororecticpole,thesignificataarenaturalorphysiological
phenomenaandprocessesthatarousedesiresandfeelings.Onesingledominantsymbol
comprisesbothanaturalnecessityandasocialneedordesireit"representsboththe
obligatoryandthedesirable.Herewehaveanintimateunionofthematerialandthe
moral"(Turner1967:54).
Turner(1967:50521968a:81821969b:1113)inferredthepropertiesofsymbolsfrom
threelevelsorfieldsofmeaning:theexegetical,operational,andpositionalmeaningsof
ritualsymbols.
1)Exegesis:Theexegeticalmeaningisobtainedfromquestioningindigenousinformants
aboutobservedritualbehavior,sothatasymbol'smanifestsense(ofwhichtheritual
subjectsarefullyaware)canberevealed.Theinformantsmayberitualspecialistsor
laymen.Exegesiscanalsobederivedthroughtheanalysisofmyths,throughthe
fragmentaryinterpretationsofseparateritualsorritualstages,andthroughwrittenor
verballyuttereddoctrinesanddogmas.Inexegesisthemeaningofasymbolmayreston
threesemanticfoundations:(a)thenominalbasis,orthenameofasymbolinritualand/or
nonritualcontexts(b)thesubstantialbasis,ortheculturallyselectedphysical
characteristicsofsymbolicobjectsand(c)theartifactualbasis,orthesymbolicobject
afterithasbeenmoldedandfashionedasaproductofhumanactivity.
2)Operationalmeaning:Asymbol'soperationalmeaning,revealingitslatentsense(of
whichthesubjectsareonlymarginallyaware),isderivedfromobservingnotonlywhatis
saidaboutaritual,butalsowhatisdonewithitandhowitisused.Thisincludes
observationofthepeoplewhohandlethesymbolinritualactivity,aswellasinquiries
aboutwhycertainpeopleareabsentonparticularritualoccasions.
3)Positionalmeaning:Thepositionalmeaningofasymbolreferstoitsrelationshipwith
othersymbolsinthetotalritualcomplexandrevealsthesymbol'shidden(fortheritual

subjects'unconscious)senses.Inagivenritualonlyoneorafewofthemeaningsofthe
polysemoussymbolmaybestressedorbecomeparamountatdifferentstagesofaritual,
sothatasymbolbecomesfullymeaningfulonlyinrelationtoothersymbolsofdifferent
ritualperformances.
SofarwehaveoutlinedthatpartofTurner'smodeofritualanalysiswhichhedeveloped
duringhisfieldworkamongtheNdembuinthe1950s(althoughmostoftheseideaswere
notpublisheduntilthe1960s).WeseethatTurnerhadalreadyconstructedseveral
importantelementsinhisapproachtoritual.First,ritualispartofanongoingprocessof
socialdramaithasamajorfunctionincontributingtoasociety'sconflictualequilibrium.
Second,ritualinvolvesthehandlingofsymbolsthatconstitutethesmallestunitsofritual
activitysymbolsinthemselvesarecarriersofmeaning.Third,themeaningsofsymbols
aremultiple,givingunitytothemoralityofthesocialorderandtheemotionalneedsof
theindividual.Finally,onamethodologicallevel,Turnerinferredthepropertiesof
symbolsfromvarioustypesofdataobtainedthroughobservationandquestioning.
AnothercrucialinnovationinTurner'sanalysis,whichtookplacerightbeforeheleftfor
Americain1963,wasthedevelopmentofhisprocessualviewonritual.

THEPROCESSOFRITUAL
In1963TurnerwasofferedaprofessorshipofanthropologyatCornellUniversityin
Ithaca,NewYork.HehadpreviouslybeenappointedafellowattheCenterforAdvanced
StudiesintheBehavioralSciencesatPaloAlto,California(196162),andheaccepted
alsothisnewoffertogotoAmerica.However,hewasheldupwithvisaproblems,andhe
andhisfamilyhadtospendsometimeinHastings,England.Inthepubliclibraryof
Hastings,TurnerreadTheRitesofPassagebyFrenchfolkloristArnoldVanGennep
([1909]1960).VanGennephadfirstpublishedhisclassicworkinFrenchin1909,butit
wasnottranslatedintoEnglishuntil1960.ViaHenriJunod([1913]1962)Turnerhad
takennoteofVanGennep'sideas,whichwouldinfluencehiswritingsprofoundlyinthe
yearstocome.(n2)InthelibraryatHastings,Turnerwrote"BetwixtandBetween:The
LiminalPeriodinRitesdePassage,"hisfirstessaydiscussingtheprocessualformof
ritual(Turner1964a).NowhewasreadytoleaveforAmericaandtodevelopfurtherhis
processualviewonritual.
RitualsasProcesses
In1955Turner(1955:54)hadalreadysuggestedthatthetemporalstructureofritualsof
rebellion,asdescribedbyGluckman(1954),mightshedlightonthecapacityofritualsto
transferarebelliousaffecttotheofficialsocialorder.InSchismandContinuityTurner
(1957a:298)alsonotedthatmanyNdemburituals"involvetheperformanceoftwo
successiverituals,separatedbyaperiodduringwhichthepatientundergoespartial
seclusionfromsecularlife."FromVanGennep'sRitesofPassageTurnerfoundthebasis
forthefurtherdevelopmentofhisritualanalysis:Notonlyisritualsituatedwithina
processofsocialdramaritualitselfisprocessualinform.
VanGennepdefinedritesdepassageas"riteswhichaccompanyeverychangeofplace,
state,socialpositionandage"(VanGennep[1909]1960inTurner1967:94).VanGennep
indicatedthatallsuchritesaremarkedbyathreefoldprogressionofsuccessiveritual
stages:(1)separationorthepreliminal(afterlimen,Latinforthreshold),whenaperson
orgroupbecomesdetachedfromanearlierfixedpointinthesocialstructureorfroman
earliersetofsocialconditions(2)marginortheliminal,whenthestateoftheritual
subjectisambiguousheisnolongerintheoldstateandhasnotyetreachedthenewone
and(3)aggregationorthepostliminal,whentheritualsubjectentersanewstablestate
withitsownrightsandobligations(Turner1967:941968b:576577).

LifeCrisisRitualsandRitualsofAffliction
InhisdiscussionsoftheritualcomplexamongtheNdembu,Turnerpresentedthe
processualviewofritualwithadistinctionbetweenlifecrisisritualsandritualsof
affliction.HehadalreadydrawnthisdistinctioninSchismandContinuity(Turner
1957a:292),butitwasnotuntiltheintroductiontoTheForestofSymbolsthathe
elaboratedthemodel(Turner1967:715).
Lifecrisisritualsrefertothatclassofritualswhichmarkthetransitionofonephasein
thedevelopmentofapersontoanotherphase.Suchphasesareimportantpointsinthe
physicalorsocialdevelopmentoftheritualsubject,suchasbirth,puberty,ordeath.Life
crisisritualsamongtheNdembuincludeinitiationceremoniesforboysandgirls,and
funeralrites.Ritualsofaffliction,ontheotherhand,areperformedforindividualswho
aresaidtohavebeen"caught"bythespiritsofdeceasedrelativeswhomtheyhave
forgottenorneglected.Thosespirits(Turner[1967]usestheterm"shades")mayafflict
theNdembuinoneofthreeways:(1)theshadeofahuntermaycausehiskinsmento
misstheiraim,failtofindanimalstoshoot,ordriveanimalsoutofrange(2)theshadeof
awomanmaycauseherkinswomentohavereproductivetroublesor(3)shadesofboth
sexesmaycausetheirlivingkintobecomeillinvariousways.Thecorresponding
Ndemburitualsarehunters'cults,women'sfertilitycults,andcurativecults.Ndembu
ritualsofafflictionareperformedbycultassociationsonbehalfofpersonsbelievedtobe
afflictedbyashade(Turner1968a:1516).Themembersofthecultassociationsare
recruitedfromallovertheNdembuterritory,regardlessoftheirparticularvillageor
lineagemembership.Inthisway,thesystemofcultshelpstoholdtogethertheloosely
organizedNdembusociety.
AlltheNdemburitualsarecharacterizedbythethreephasedprocessualformofritesof
passage(Turner1967:1314):(1)separation(IlembiorKulemba),thetreatmentand
dancetomakethesubjectssacred(2)margin,aperiodofseclusioninvolvingpartialor
completeseparationofthesubjectsfromeverydayexistenceand(3)reaggregation(Ku
tumbuka),afurthertreatmentanddancecelebratingtheendoftheseclusionperiod.
TheNotionofField
Withthedistinctionbetweenlifecrisisritualsandritualsofafflictionidentified,Turner's
notionoffieldcannowbeclarified.FollowingthefieldtheoryofKurtLewin(1949),
Turner(1967:262268)distinguishedthesocialfromtheculturalfieldinwhichrituals
takeplacesuchanexaminationhelpstounderstandfullythemeaningofeachritual
performance.
Thesocialfield(oractionfield)referstothegroups,relationships,andsocialstructural
organizationalprinciplesofthesocietyinwhichtheritualsareperformed.Inthecaseof
theNdembu,thisreferstotheritual'sfunctionasaredressivemechanisminasocial
drama,andtosuchnumericalcharacteristicsasthenumberofvillagesrepresentedduring
theritual,thepatternofintervillagerelationships,andthegoalsandaimsofthepeople
attendingtherituals.InNdembusociety,thesocialfieldisdominatedbythe
contradictionbetweenmatrilinealdescentandvirilocality.Theritualsofafflictionhere
serveasredressivemechanismswheneveracrisisoccurs.Thesocialfieldbearsno
relevancetolifecrisisrituals,becausethelatter"takenoaccountoftheactualbalance
betweenpersonsandgroupsbutdogmaticallystressthekeyvaluesandconceptsof
Ndembusociety,invirtualindependenceoftheconcretehistoricalsituation"(Turner
1968a:8788).
Intheculturalfield,ritualsymbolsareregardedasclustersofabstractmeanings.The
dominantsymbolsarestudiedineachritualperformanceandineachofitsphases.The

culturalfieldencompassestheritualwithinthetotalityofNdemburitualsandwithinthe
culturalrealmofNdembureligiousbeliefs.Turner(1968a:1415)distinguishedfour
componentsinNdembureligion(1)abeliefintheexistenceofahighgod(Nzambi)who
hascreatedtheworldbutdoesnotinterferewithworldlyhumanactivities(thisgodis
largelyabsentfromNdemburitualandprayer)(2)abeliefintheexistenceofancestor
spiritsor"shades"whomayafflicttheNdembu(theirimportanceismanifestedbythe
numerousperformancesofritualsofafflictionamongtheNdembu)(3)abeliefinthe
intrinsicefficacyofcertainanimalandvegetablesubstancesand(4)abeliefinthe
destructivepoweroffemalewitchesandmalesorcerers.
NdembuColorClassification
OfthehighlycomplicatedritualcomplexamongtheNdembu,whichissodetailedand
vividlydescribedthroughoutTurner'swork,IwishheretodiscussTurner'scommentson
theuseofred,white,andblacksymbolicobjectsintheNdembulifecrisisrituals.(n3)
Thisaccount(basedonTurner1966[reprintedinTurner1967:5992]1977a:187189)
willproveusefulforacomparisonofTurner'sapproachwithFrenchstructuralist
anthropology.
TurnerdiscoveredthatinmanyNdemburitualsthecolorsred,white,andblackare
representedinsymbolicobjects(redorwhiteclay,blackcharcoal).Frominformants'
reports,Turnerlearnedthattherelationshipbetweenthethreecolorsreferstothemystery
ofthethreerivers(theriversofwhiteness,redness,andblackness).Theseriversrepresent
apowerflowingfromacommonsourceinthehighgodNzambi.Exegetical,operational,
andpositionalmeaningsoftheredandwhitesymbolsinNdemburitualsalsoindicated
thatwhitesymbolsareassociatedwithgoodness,health,power,visibility,andliferitual
whitenessreferstoharmony,continuity,purity,themanifest,andthelegitimate.Red
symbolsareassociatedwithdifferentkindsofbloodrednessactsbothforgoodandill,
forgoodblood(animalbloodshedbythehunters)andbadblood(bloodofmenstruation
andmurder).Blacksymbolsareassociatedwithevil,disease,andwitchcraftblackis
oftenrituallyneglectedbecauseitdoesnotmakethingsvisibleandisassociatedwith
deathandimpurity.Redandwhiteareassociatedwithlife:Whitestandsforthe
preservationoflife,whileredreferstothetakingoflife,orbloodshedforthecommunal
good.Thisbinarystructurebetweenredandwhiteiscapturedwithinawidertripartite
modeofclassificationofwhichblack,referringtodeath,isthethirdelement.The
supremeantitheticalpairofthetriadisthewhite/black(life/death)contrast.
FrenchStructuralism
Turner'sinterpretationoftheNdembucolorclassificationoffersausefulpointof
referenceforacomparisonofhisprocessualsymbolicanalysiswithFrenchstructuralist
anthropology.WithintheframeworkofFrenchstructuralism,notablyinthewritingsof
ClaudeLeviStrauss(195819621981)andLucDeHeusch(19751982),analtogether
differentapproachtoritualhasbeenemployed.DeHeusch(1975:167177),forinstance,
indiscussingTurner'sanalysisoftheNdembucolorclassification,hasarguedthatTurner
neglectedthefactthat,accordingtotheNdembuinformants,redisanindependent
symboliccategory.Ritualredness,symbolizedbygoodandbadblood,exposesan
ambivalencewhichdoesnotallowthecolortriadtobereducedtoabinarystructure
betweenblackandwhite.AccordingtoDeHeusch,thispieceofexegesisshouldbe
consideredanintegralpartoftheclassificatorymodeofthoughtestablishedin
mythology.Exegesisisanexpressionofmythology,andinthelastresort"ritualactivity
isfirmlybasedonamythologicalsystem"(DeHeusch1975:368).
ComparingthisperspectivewithTurner's,(n4)weseethatwithinFrenchstructuralist
anthropology(ofwhichLeviStrausswasthefounderandDeHeuschoffersavariant)

ritualsymbolsarestudiedthroughtheanalysisofritualspeechandmythology,whichis
thoughttobeattherootsofritual.ForLeviStrauss(1981),aritual,definedas"words
tittered'gesturesperformedandobjectsmanipulated...[ofwhich]gesturesandobjects
areinlocoverb)theyareasubstituteforwords"(671),"isnotareactiontolifeitisa
reactiontowhatthoughthasmadeoflife"(681).Therefore,fromthisperspectivethe
abstractuniversalprinciplesunderlyingritual(andinfactallhumanbehavior)are
analyzed.A"thoughtstructuralist"studyofritualsimpliesastudyofthecognitive
classificatoryaspectsofritualsymbolsthroughananalysisofmyths.Theunconscious
categoriesormentalcircuits(especiallythemuchfavoredbinaryoppositionsof
structuralisticanthropology)areunravelledastheyarereflectedinmultiplesymbols.In
hisdiscussionoftheNdembucolorclassification,forexample,DeHeusch(19751982)
arguesthatthequalitiesofred,white,andblack,andtheirsymbolicrepresentationsin
variousforms,canbeunderstoodonlywhenput(astheyareinthestructureofhuman
thought)inrelationtooneanother.Asymbolicobject,gesture,orwordassuchcarriesno
meaningsymbolsbecomemeaningfulonlyinoppositiontoeachother.Therelationship
betweendifferentritualsymbolscorrespondswiththerelationshipbetweendifferent
categoriesofhumanthoughtthesymbolicobjects,gesturesandwordsare"goodto
think."
ForTurner,ontheotherhand,studyingsymbolsmeantprimarily"studyingsymbolsin
socialaction,inpractice"(Turner1985b:216).RitualinTurner'sapproachisaboveall
ritualperformed,ritualinaction.Turnerwasinterestedindiscoveringhowritualworks,
whatritualdoes,andhowpeoplehandlesymbolsduringritualperformances.Moreover,
Turnerstudiedallkindsofsymbolsinaritualperformance,buthediscoveredthe
propertiesofmultivocality,unification,andbipolarityinasingledominantsymbol,notin
itsrelationshipwithothersymbols.IfweconsideragainthecolorsymbolisminNdembu
ritual,weseethatforTurnerthebipolarityof,forinstance,redsymbolsiscomprised
withinanyonesingleredsymbolicobject.IntheNdemburitualNkula,inwhich,asa
ritualofaffliction,afemalepatient'sreproductiveormenstrualtroublesaredealtwith,
portionsofthemukulatreeareused(Turner1968a:5288).Thistreeexudesaredgum,
referredtobytheNdembuasthe"bloodofmukula."This"blood"asusedrituallyrefers
atthesametimetotheorecticpoleofchildbirth,aswellastothenormativepoleof
matrilinyandallfemalethings.Thebipolarqualityofthesymboliscapturedwithinthe
symbolitself.Turneralsoarguedthatusingsymbolsinritualmeansattemptingto
manipulate,to"anticipate,evengenerate,change"(Turner1980:163).ForTurner,
symbolshadthequalityofefficacy.Theredgumofthemukulatree,forinstance,is
knownforitsqualityofquickcoagulation,whichintheNkularitual,itishoped,will
ensurequickhealingofthepatient.Symbolsare"goodtomanipulate"andthehandlingof
symbols"works,"becausetheyarenotjustreflectionsofcognitiveclassifications,but
also"asetofevocativedevicesforrousing,channeling,anddomesticatingpowerful
emotions"(Turner1969a:4243).Turner'sviewisheredirectlyopposedtothe
structuralistapproachbecausethelatterwouldfailtodrawattentiontothewholeperson
involvedinritual(cf.thebipolarityofsymbols).
TothisdiscussionshouldbeaddedthatTurnerinhisritualanalysisdependedupon
exegeticalinformationandthesemanticfoundationsofsymbols,andthathewasalso
'awarethatatleastpartofritualinvolvesverballyutteredcognitivestatements.However,
thisdoesnotimplythatTurner'smodeofanalysiscomesclosertothestructuralist
approachquitethecontrary.AsLeviStrauss(1981:668671)himselfexplained,for
Turnerexegesisandritualspeechconstitutedelementsofritualactivity,andassuch
belongtoritual,nottomythology.ForLeviStrauss,ontheotherhand,mythologycan
existintwodifferentmodalities:eitherasexplicitmyths,orimplicitlyasfragmentary
sketchesofatext(e.g.,interpretationsbyritualspecialists)whichshouldberemoved
fromritual.HereliesthemethodologicalcoreofTurner'sdivergencefromthe

structuralistperspective:ExegesisforTurnerispartofritual,whilecommentaries
associatedwithritualareinstructuralismtreatedasimplicitmythology.
Insum,althoughFrenchstructuralistanthropologyandTurner'sprocessualsymbolic
analysisarenotmutuallyexclusiveapproachesbutrepresentdifferentanglesfromwhich
tostudythesameritualsymbols,theiranalysesdivergeintheemphasisonritual
performanceversusmythicalthought,singledominantsymbolsversustheopposition
betweenseveralsymbols,andtheefficacyofsymbolsinactionversusthe
correspondenceoftherelationshipbetweensymbolstothestructureofhumanthought.
TheRelationshipbetweenReligionandRitual
Turner'sdefinitionofritual,aswehaveseen,includedthemanipulationofefficacious
symbolsinritualperformancesandthereferencethatismadeinritualtoabeliefin
supernaturalbeingsorpowers.ForTurnerthereisinritualanessentialelementof
religiousbelief.Thisisdemonstratedbytheattentionhegavetotheculturalfieldin
whichritualstakeplace.Asmentionedbefore,examinationoftheNdembuculturalfield
involvesananalysisofthefourcomponentsofNdembureligiousbelief.Thus,religionin
Turner'sworkreferstobothbelief(religionasthought)andpractice(religionasritual
action).ThecomponentofpracticeoractionisclearlydemonstratedbyTurner'sfocuson
detailedanalysesofritualperformances.Thecomponentofreligiousbeliefandits
significanceinritual,however,arelesswelldevelopedinTurner'swritings.Inhisstudy
oftheNdemburitualcomplex,TurnerdiscussedtheideasofNdembureligiousbelief
onlybriefly(Turner1968a:1415,seeabove).Againwesee,asinthediscussionwith
LeviStrauss,thatreligionforTurnerwasprimarily"religioninaction"religioniswhat
religiondoes,howgenerativeitisforhumanactionandmanipulation.Inthissense,
religionisinTurner'sperspectiveritualistic,sinceitisstudiedprimarilythroughthe
analysisofritualaction,whilean!elaboratesystematictreatmentofNdembureligious
thoughtislacking.
Nevertheless,thereligiouscomponentinritualwasessentialforTurner.Inhisworkon
theChihambaritual,forinstance,Turner(1962a,reprintedinTurner1975:37203)
refusedto"explainaway"thereligiousaspectinritual:"Onehastoconsiderreligious
phenomenaintermsofreligiousideasanddoctrines"(Turner1975:195\.Weseethatfor
Turnerritualisreligious,andreligioninvolvesbothsocialexperiencesinritualistic
activityandasystematiccorpusofbeliefs"whichhavefortheirobjectinvisibleand
intangiblebeingsorpowerswhichahumangrouprecognizesassuperior,onwhichit
depends"(V.TurnerandE.Turner1982:201).Turner(1975:3132)wentevenfurtherin
assertingnotonlythatritualisreligious,butalsothatreligionhasontologicalvalue:
"AftermanyyearsasanagnosticandmonisticmaterialistIlearnedfromtheNdembuthat
ritualanditssymbolismarenotmerelyepiphenomenaordisguisesofdeepersocialand
psychologicalprocesses,buthaveontologicalvalue."InTurner'sapproach,religious
beliefseemstocorrespondwiththenatureofrealityitself.Itmaycausesomesurprise,
then,tonotethatTurner,whoinhisdoctoraldissertationstillregardedritualsasmere
functionaldevicesforthemaintenanceofthesocialsystem,nowgavesupremestatusto
thereligiouscomponentinritual.SoonafterthepublicationofhisworkontheChihamba
ritualTurnerwascriticizedforoverestimatingtheroleofreligioninhisstudyofritual.
Horton(1964),forinstance,arguedthat"ritualman"isbutpartof"theorybuildingman"
bothreligionandother(secular\systemsofthoughthaveasbasicaimstoexplainand
predicttheeventsofthingsintheworld.ReligioninHorton'sviewcannotbegiven
superiorstatusoverotherformsofknowledge.
Inconclusion,Iwouldarguethatwheneverritualisinspiredbyareligiousbeliefin
supernaturalbeingsorpowers,itsstatusisdifferentfromother,innerworldlyformsof
knowledge.IconcurwithTurnerthat,forthepeopleinvolvedinmanyritualactivities,

religiousbeliefshavesomekindof"surplusvalue"overandaboveother,secularformsof
thought.Itisonlyinthedifferentformsofreligionthatreferencesaremadetothe
supernatural(beitapersonalizedgod,invisibleenergies,ordivinepowersattributedto
naturalphenomena)andtothewaythingsaremeanttobeinconcordancewithareality
whichis,accordingtoCliffordGeertz(1973:112),"reallyreal,"andwhichisindependent
fromworldlycontingenciesandmanmadearrangementsbasedonsecularknowledge.In
thisway,itcanbesaid(againstHorton)thatreligionisnotjustlikeanyothersystemof
ideasanddoeshavesupremeontologicalvalue,but(adaptingTurner'sclaim)onlyforthe
subjectsinvolvedinreligiousrituals.Religion,referringtothesupernatural,ismorethan
"theory,"butonlyintheeyeofthebeliever.Thisdoesnotnecessarilyimplythatallritual
activityispersereligious.Sofar,wehavediscussedonlyTurner'sanalysisofritual
amongtheNdembu,i.e.,ritualinaprimitive,tribalsociety.Inhislaterworks,aswewill
see,Turneralsoappliedhismodeofanalysistothestudyofritualinmodernindustrial
society.Thequestionthenariseswhetherreligionentersintoritualinthesamewayfor
modernasfortribalsocieties.BeforeIaddressthisissue,Iwillexplorethefinalstepsin
Turner'sritualanalysis:theconceptsofliminalityandcommunitas.

ANTISTRUCTURE:LIMINALITYANDCOMMUNITAS
HavingadoptedtheprocessualviewonritualfromVanGennep,Turnerthroughouthis
workrepeatedlydiscussedtheimportanceoftheliminal,intermediatephaseinritual.In
1967,whenTurnerleftCornellUniversitytobecomeaprofessorofsocialthoughtand
anthropologyattheUniversityofChicago,hehadalreadypublishedTheForestof
Symbols(Turner1967)inwhichhisrepublishedessayonVanGennepoccupiedacentral
place.ThencamethepublicationofTheDrumsofAffliction(Turner1968a),awork
whichrevealsnotheoreticalinnovationsbutoffersdetailedaccountsoftheNdemburitual
complex,followedbyTheRitualProcess(Turner1969a).Thesethreeconsecutively
publishedbooksareverymuchthecentralcoreofTurner'sapproachtoritual.Among
theseTheRitualProcess,thepublicationofTurner'sHenryMorganLectureswhichbe
deliveredattheUniversityofRochesterinApril1966,ismostcrucial,foritisthework
inwhichTurnerdiscussedtheconceptsofliminalityandcommunitasatsomelength,and
atthesametime,itistheworkinwhichhewasledawayfromanexclusivestudyof
Ndemburitualandstartedtofocusonphenomenaincomplexsocieties.
TheLiminalPhaseintheRitualProcess
FollowingVanGennep'spassagemodel,Turneridentifiedathreephasedprocessof
ritual:Aritualexemplifiesthetransitionofanindividualfromonestatetoanother.
Turner(1967:931031969a:9496,102106)notedthatbetweenthestatestheritual
subjectsareoftensecludedfromeverydaylifeandhavetospendsometimeinan
interstructural,liminalsituation.Duringthisphase,theritualsubjectsaregivennew
namestodenotetheir"nolonger/notyet"status.Thesymbolsexhibitedexpressthatthe
"liminalpersonae"areneitherlivingnordead,andbothlivinganddeadtheyexpressthe
ambiguityoftheinterstructuralperiod.Thisambiguityisalsodemonstratedbythefact
thattheritualsubjectsareduringtheseclusionperioddisguisedorhiddentheyare
consideredneithermalenorfemale,deprivedofrank,statusandproperty.Theyareall
treatedequallyandaresubjectedtotherestofthecommunity.Insum,theliminal
subjectsare"neitherherenortheretheyarebetwixtandbetweenthepositionsassigned
andarrayedbylaw,custom,convention,andceremonial"(Turner1969a:95).
Turnerdistinguishedanalyticallythree(inactualritualperformances,ofteninterwoven)
componentsofliminality(Turner1967:991081985a:291301V.TurnerandE.Turner
1982:203206):(1)communicationofsacra,wheresecretsymbolsarecommunicatedto
theritualsubjectsintheformofexhibitionsofsacredarticles(relics,masks,instruments,

"whatisshown,"),actions(dancing,"whatisdone")andinstructions(mythicalhistory,
"whatissaid")thesymbolsrepresenttheunityandcontinuityofthecommunitythey
aresimpleinform,but,becauseoftheirmultivocality,theyareoftengivencomplex
culturalinterpretations(2)ludicdeconstructionandrecombinationoffamiliarcultural
configurations,whichreferstotheexaggerationordistortionofthecharacteristicsof
familiararticlesinthesacrafamiliarobjectsareoftenpresentedindistorted,deviantor
grotesqueforms(insmallerorlargershape,inothercolors)theserepresentationsforce
theritualadeptstothinkabouttheirsocietytheyprovoketheritualsubjectstoreflecton
thebasicvaluesoftheirsocialandcosmologicalorderand(3)simplificationofthe
relationsofthesocialstructure,inwhichtheonlyremainingstructuralcharacteristicin
liminalityistheauthorityoftheritualinstructorsoverthecompletelysubmissiveand
obedientadeptsbetweentheritualsubjectsthesociostructuraldistinctionsdisappearin
favorofanabsoluteequality.Itisthisthirdcomponentofliminality,the"sameness"of
theliminalpersonae,whichledTurnertodevelophisnotionofcommunitas
Communitas:GeneralCharacteristicsandTypes
Inhisfirstessayontheprocessualformofritual,Turner(1964a,reprintedinTurner
1967:93111)notedthattheritualsubjectsduringtheliminalphaseinaritual
performancearealltreatedequally,deprivedofalldistinguishingcharacteristicsofsocial
structure,constituting"acommunityorcomityofcomradesandnotastructureof
hierarchicallyarrayedpositions"(Turner1967:100).InTheRitualProcessTurner
introducedtheconceptofcommunitastodenotethisfeelingofcomradeshipamongthe
liminalpersonae.AccordingtoTurner(1975:21),thefirstempiricalbaseforthisconcept
washisexperienceoffriendshipwhilehewasanoncombatantsoldierduringWorldWar
II,butitwasnotuntilhisanalysisoftheNdemburitualcomplexthathebecamefully
awareofitstheoreticalrelevance.
Communitascangenerallybedefinedinoppositiontostructure:Communitasappears
wherestructuredoesnot(Turner1969a:9497,125130).Socialstructurereferstoan
arrangementofpositionsorstatuses.AsTurnerdiscoveredfromhisanalysisofpassage
ritesamongtheNdembu,thecharacteristicsofthesocialstructurearenolongerandnot
yetapplicableduringtheintermediateperiodofliminalityinritual.Whatisbroughtabout
inliminalityiswhatTurnercalledcommunitas,atermheadoptedwithadifferent
meaningfromthatofPaulGoodman(GoodmanandGoodman1947).
InTurner'swork,communitasinritualsreferstoliminality,marginality,inferiority,and
equality(Turner1969a:9497,1251301974a:4555).Theritualsubjectsareduringthe
seclusionperiod"neitherherenorthere"theyaresubjectedtotherestofthecommunity
andtreatedasequalstooneanother,creatingagenericbondandasentimentof
"humankindness"betweenthem.Assuch,communitasreferstooneofthethree
componentsoftheliminalphaseinrituals.Yetthereismore.InTheRitualProcess,
Turner(1969a:9697)arguedthatcommunitasandstructurealsorefertotwomodalities
ofsociety.Turnerconceivedsocietyasinvolvingadialecticprocessbetween
communitas,theundifferentiatedcommunityofequalindividuals,andstructure,the
differentiatedandoftenhierarchicalsystemofsocialpositions.Thisdialecticprocess
appearsinthecourseofhistoryinacyclicalway:"Maximizationofcommunitas
provokesmaximizationofstructure,whichinturnproducesrevolutionarystrivingsfor
renewedcommunitas"(129).Turner(1969a:131140)distinguishedthreetypesof
communitasinsociety:(1)existentialorspontaneouscommunitas,whichisfreefromall
structuraldemandsandisfullyspontaneousandimmediate(2)normativecommunitas,
orexistentialcommunitas,whichisorganizedintoasocialsystemand(3)ideological
communitas,whichreferstoutopianmodelsofsocietiesbasedonexistentialcommunitas
andisalsosituatedwithinthestructuralrealm.Thetypesofcommunitasarephases,not

permanentconditions.Ifwetakeforexamplethe"hippie"movementinthelate60s
(Turner1969a:112113,138139),followingthecommunitasscheme,itsdevelopment
canbeoutlined!ashavingstartedwiththespontaneouscommunitaswhichoccursin
"happenings"(rockconcerts,experimentswithdruguse).Aroundthesehappeningsa
unionoffollowerswasnormativelyorganized,withtheirownplacesandtimeswhere
communitascouldbeexperiencedonthemarginsofthesocietyatlarge.Eventually
completeideologiesweredevelopedtopromote,ideallyforallmembersofthesociety,
thetypeofcommunitasthehippiesexperienced.Intheend,however(aswasthecase
withthehippiemovement),thefateofanytypeofcommunitasisinevitablya"decline
andfallintostructureandlaw"(Turner1969a:132),afterwhichanewformof
communitasmayriseagain(Turner1974a:282).
FromNdembuRitualstotheHumanBrain
WithTheRitualProcessTurnerreachedacrucialpointinthedevelopmentofhis
approach.Thisworknotonlyroundedoffhismodeofritualanalysis,butatthesame
timeitledhimtoapplythenotionsofliminalityandcommunitastophenomenain
complexsocieties,suchastheFranciscanorder,thehippiemovementofthe60s,andthe
SahajiyamovementofBengal(Turner1969a:112113,154165).Intheyearstocome
Turnerdevotedhisattentiontosuchwiderangingphenomenaascommunitasinthe
historyofreligions(Turner1972),pilgrimagesinChristianculture(Turner1974cV.
TurnerandE.Turner1978),Westernliterature(Turner1976b),andritesandceremonies
intheCatholicChurch(Turner1976a).Inthisway,Turner'swork,whichhe
characterizedas"comparativesymbology"(Turner1974b1976b1978),exhibitedashift
fromtribalstudiestoanalysesofcomplexindustrialsocieties.Realizingthatcommunitas
andliminalityinthemodernworldaredifferentfromtheliminalphaseinNdemburitual,
Turnerintroducedtheterm"liminoid,"denotingthequasiliminalcharacterofcultural
performances(e.g.,theatreplays,musicconcerts,artexhibitions)andleisureactivitiesin
complexsociety(Turner1974b1977b1982cf.Hecht1985).
Theliminoiddivergesfromtheliminalinseveralways(Turner1974b:8486).Liminal
phenomenaarepredominantlyrestrictedto"primitive"tribalsocietiestheyare
experiencedcollectivelyastheresultofacrisisinthesocialprocess(ritualsofaffliction),
orsynchronouswithabiologicalorcalendricalpattern(lifecrisisrituals).Liminal
phenomenaarealsofullyintegratedintothetotalityofthesocialworld,andtheyreenact,
oftenbyinversion,themainprinciplesofthesocialorder.Liminoidphenomena,onthe
otherhand,takeplaceinthecomplexindustrialworldtheyaretheproductsofindividual
orparticulargroupeffortsandaregeneratedcontinuously.Theliminoidoriginates
outsidetheboundariesoftheeconomic,political,andstructuralprocess,andits
manifestationsoftenchallengethewidersocialstructurebyofferingsocialcritiqueon,or
evensuggestionsfor,arevolutionaryreorderingoftheofficialsocialorder.
AfterTurnerlefttheUniversityofChicagoin1977tobecometheWilliamR.Kenan
ProfessorofAnthropologyandReligionattheUniversityofVirginiainCharlottesville,
hecontinuedhisinterestinthestudyofliminoidphenomenaincomplexsocieties.During
thefinalyearsofhislife,hestudiedtherelationbetweenthefindingsofhisritualstudies
anddiscoveriesinneurobiology(Turner19831985a:249301cf.Hefner1986
Schechner1985E.Turner1986a1986b).Turnerbelievedthatthemodelsofsociety
whichhehadidentified,structureandcommunitas,correspondwiththeneurobiological
thesisontheworkingsoftheleftandrightsidesofthebrain:Thelefthemisphereofthe
brainisconcernedwithstructureandlogic,whiletherighthemispheregivesasenseof
thewhole,ofcommunitas(inTurner'sterm).Thehumanbrainitselfwouldthus
encompassbothfreewillandthegeneticallyfixed.ThisledTurnertobelievethathis
notionsofcommunitasandstructure,conceivedasphasesintheritualprocessandas

recurringmodelsofsociety,haveaneurophysiologicalbasis.
ReligionandRitualinTribalandModernSocieties
HavingdiscussedTurner'snotionofantistructure,weseethatTurnerappliedthepassage
modelofVanGenneptoallkindsofrituals,inbothtribalandmodernsocieties.Inhis
discussionsonritualinmodernsocieties(Turner1974b1976a1977b1982),he
employedthesamedefinitionofritualasinhisworkontheNdembu:ForTurner,all
ritualsinvolvedsymbolicmanipulationandareferencetoreligion.Inthecaseofrituals
amongtheNdembuthismaybeclear.FromTurner'sanalyses,weindeedlearnthatin
Ndemburitualsofaffliction,forinstance,referenceismadetoareligiousbeliefinthe
powersofthesupernatural"shades"oftheancestors.However,Turner(1976a:504505)
alsoarguedthatritualsinmodernindustrialsocietyare"aboutmattersofultimate
concernandaboutthoseentitiesbelievedtohaveemunicated,clarifiedandmediateda
culture'sbondingaxiomstoitspresentmembers."Evenritualsinmodernsociety,which
maybesituatedoutsidetheboundariesoftheinstitutionalizedreligionsofchurches,
sects,andotherreligiousgroups,andwhichtakeplaceinthedomainof,forinstance,
recreationalactivity(inwhatTurner[1974b]calls"play"),havesomereligious
component.Intheatreplays,forinstance,Turner(1982:12)arguedthatthereis
"somethingoftheinvestigative,judgmental,andevenpunitivecharacteroflawinaction,
andsomethingofthesacred,mythic,numinous,even'supernatural'characterofreligious
action."Allrituals,itseems,areinTurner'sperspectivereligioustheyall"celebrateor
commemoratetranscendentpowers"(V.TurnerandE.Turner1982:201).
Still,Turnerdidviewritualsinmodernindustrialsocietyashavingsomecharacteristics
differentfromthetribalritualshestudiedinNdembusociety.Intribalsocieties"alllifeis
pervadedbyinvisibleinfluences"(Turner1976a:507).Inthisway,tribalsocietiesare
whollyreligious,andritualactionssurroundingtheirreligionsare"nationwide"theyare
orientedtowards"allmembersofthewidesteffectivecommunity"(Turner1977b:45).In
modernsocieties,ontheotherhand,religionis"regardedassomethingapartfromour
economic,political,domesticandrecreationallife.Religionispartofthedivisionof
sociallabor"(Turner1976a:507cf.Turner1968c:441443).Modernreligion,sincethe
industrialrevolutionandbecauseoftheprocessesofinstitutionalizationand
secularization,hassplitfromtherestofculture.Theritualsofmodern,industrialreligion
weredenotedbyTurnerasliminal(asaretribalritualswherereligionandothercultural
sectorsareinterwoven).Aswehaveseen,however,hereferredtoritualoutsidethe
religiousdomainasliminoid,havingasitsmostdistinctcharacteristicthatritualactivity
isnolongernationwidebutindividualizedtocertainspecificgroups.
WeseetheninTurner'swritingsacertainambiguity:Ontheonehand,heconsideredall
ritualstohavereligiousconnotations.Ontheotherhand,hetypifiedbothtribalrituals
andreligiousritualsinindustrialsocieties(whichareconfinedtotherealmof
institutionalizedreligion)asliminal,whileritualsintherecreationaldomainofmodern
societyweretermedliminoid.InthismatterTurnerseemstohaveunderestimatedhis
distinctionbetweentheliminalandtheliminoid,aswellasthedifferencesbetweentribal
andmodernsocieties.Ibelievetheambiguitycouldhavebeenresolvedinoneoftwo
ways.First,theterm"ritual"couldhavebeenrestrictedtoreligion(andonlyreligion)in
action,whileanewtermcouldhavebeenintroducedforroutinized,rituallikebehavior
inwhichnoreferencetothesupernaturalismade.Gluckman,forinstance,has
distinguishedbetweenritualandceremony:Onlyinrituals,notintheceremoniesof
industrialsocieties,arereferencesmadetomysticalpowers(GluckmanandGluckman
1977).(n5)Second,andthisisfullyacceptablewithinTurner'sperspective,adistinction
couldbemadebetweenreligiousandnonreligiousorsecularritualbytakingfullyinto
accountTurner'sview'ofthedistinctionbetweentribalandmodernsocieties(cf.also

MooreandMyerhoff1977).Intribalsocieties,asTurnerargued,religion,economy,law,
politics,andotherculturaldomainsareessentiallyinterwoven.Tribalrituals,therefore,
musthavesomereligiouscomponent,sincetribalreligioninbothmythologyandritual
practiceshasnot(yet)splitofffromothersectorsoftribalculture.Inindustrialsocieties,
ontheotherhand,theseveralinstitutionshavebecomeindependentofeachother,eachof
themdealingwithcertainneedsandquestionswhichthesesocietiesface(law,politics,
economy,religion,etc.).Ritualsmaytakeplaceineitheroneoftheseinstitutional
domains,butnotalwayswithreligiousconnotations,sincetheymayhappenoutsidethe
realmofinstitutionalizedreligionindomainswheremattersofthe"supernatural"arenot
dealtwith.Contrarytothisview,ithasbeenargued,forinstancebyMaryDouglas
(1978:3639),thattherearealsosecular,thisworldlyritualsintribalsocieties(although
notasmanyasintheindustrialworld),andthatthereforeritualshouldbestudiedinterms
ofthesociostructuralenvironmentregardlessofreferencestothesupernatural.However,
suchanapproachwouldcontraveneTurner'srefusaltoexplainawaythereligiouselement
inritualintermsofthesocialstructure,anditwoulddisregardthedifferencesbetween
tribalandcomplexsocietieswithrespecttotheparticularextentandnatureoftheir
secularization.Turner'sdistinctionbetweentribalandcomplexsocietiesmaybestbe
preservedattheleastasanidealtypicalconstruct,wherebydueattentionwouldbegiven
tothewaysinwhichthesesocietaltypesmayhavecomeclosertogetherorremained
furtherapart.NdembusocietyatthetimeofTurner'sresearch,forinstance,wasstill
largelyisolatedandrelativelysparedfrommodernizationtrendsthereforethereferences
inNdemburitualtoNdembureligiousbeliefwerestillmanifest.Takingintoaccountthe
trendsofconvergenceanddivergencebetweensocieties,scholarscouldaddressthe
changingcharacterofritualactivityinrelationtopatternsofchangeinandbetween
societies,asaresultofbothinternaldevelopmentsandexternal(e.g.,colonial)influences.
Thus,theproblemincontemporaryritualstudiesisnotwhethertribalsocietiesareall
religiousoralsoincludesecular,nonreligiousritual,butwhetherortowhatextenttribal
societiesstillexist.
AHumanisticStanceinaScientificWorld?
ItcanbearguedthatTurner'slaterwritingsontheliminoid,communitas,andthe
importanceofreligioninsocietyseemtohavehadlesssolidethnographicfoundation
thandidhisanalysesoftheNdemburituals.(n6)Turnerhasoftenbeenpraisedforthe
carefuldetailinhisaccountsofritualamongtheNdembu.EvenAdamKuper(1983:153),
criticalobserverofBritishsocialanthropology,wroteofTurner'searlyworkSchismand
Continuitythat"thequalityofthecasematerialandthecarewithwhichitwaspresented
andanalyzedputthemonographinaclassofitsown."Moreover,Turnerhasbeenwidely
acclaimedforhisviewsontheprocessualnatureofritual,andhisidentificationofthe
liminalphaseinritualwasanimportantinnovationintheanthropologicalstudyof
religionandritual.However,whenTurnerstarteddiscussingtheliminoid,ritualand
religioninindustrialsociety,andtheoverallimportanceofcommunitasinthecourseof
worldhistory,hisownpersonalconvictions(heremainedadevotedCatholicafterhis
conversion)appeartohaveenteredintohisanthropologicalanalysis.Inthedifferent
manifestationsofcommunitas,Turnercametoseetheoperationofameaningfuland
powerfulhumanenergybywhichthetightnetsofthesocialstructurecouldbe
circumvented.Inthisway,Turner'sworkmaybereadasapleaforpeopletoengagein
communitasinspiredactionandconstantlytodefythesocialorderbyinverting,oreven
perverting,itsstructuraldemands.Forsohumaneanendeavor,Turner,oneoftheleading
authoritiesinascientificenterprise,hasbeencriticizedforoverestimatingthepowersof
liminalandliminoidphenomenatochallengethesocialstructurewhilepaying
insufficientattentiontothewaysinwhichthesocialstructuremayrespondtoandeven
neutralizethesepowers.Forinstance,MaxGluckman,oneofTurner'sformerteachers,
hasarguedthatTurner'sdistinctionbetweenstructureandantistructureistoorigid,and

thatcommunitasissignificantonly"withinanestablishedstructurewhichisasserted
againafterwards,andwhichindeedisassertedduringtheliminalperioditself,by
inversion"(GluckmanandGluckman1977:242).Itcanalsobeargued,followingErving
Goffman(1961),thatatleastsomemarginalphenomenaoftheliminalandliminoid(like
"totalinstitutions")arenotatallchallengingtothewidersocialstructureandinvolveno
feelingofhumankindnessorcommunitas,butonthecontraryofferanoutletforthesocial
orderandinvolvemechanismsofdepersonalization("mortification")bywhichthewhole
personalityofthemarginalindividualisstrippedoff.Moreover,asMorris(1987:122)has
argued,Turnermayhavefailedtoseetheinformal,egalitarianaspectsinstructured
relationshipsandmayhaveignoredthesymbolicdimensions,informalities,andthe
humanlymeaningfulwithintherealmofstructuredrelationships.
ItseemsthatforTurner,asapiousCatholic,communitasinhislaterworksbecamemore
amatteroffaiththanfact,andthathewantedtoseecommunitasandreligioneverywhere
leadingtothedaywhen,asTurner'sformercollaboratorRichardSchechner(1985:198)
explained,"eachindividualwilllovehis/herneighborashim/herself,andwhenabused,
willbeabletoturntheothercheek."Turner'sownreligiousexperiencesevenledhimto
searchforaphysiologicalbasisofcommunitasandreligioninthestructureofthehuman
brain.Thus,therewasashiftinTurner'sworkfromanthropologicalanalysissensustricto
tophilosophicalbelief,toanattempttolookforanewsynthesis"notmainlybetweentwo
scientificviewpoints[anthropologyandphysiology],butbetweenscienceandfaith"
(Schechner1985:203).
BritishStructuralismII:StructuralismandBeyond
Intheprevioussections,Ihavetriedtodemonstratehowtherewasconsiderablegrowth
anddevelopmentinTurner'santhropologicalapproachtoreligionandritual.Soonafter
Turnerpublishedhisdoctoraldissertation,hemovedawayfromthenarrowstructuralist
perspectiveoftheRhodesLivingstoneInstitute.Thisisexemplifiedfirstbyhisfocuson
ritualproper,whichheundertookduringhissecondperiodoffieldwork,andsecondby
hisemphasisontheprocessualnatureofritual,aninnovationinhisworkintroducedjust
beforehisdeparturetotheUnitedStates.Turner'smaintheoreticaladvancewastoshow
howritualsaremorethanjustsocialglueforthemaintenanceofthesocialorder,and
howritualsareprocesses,notstates,inthesocialworld,whichitselfis"aworldin
becoming,notaworldinbeing"(Turner1974a:24).
TurneralsowentbeyondclassicalBritishsocialanthropologybydescribingritualsas
detailedcasestudiesofritualperformancesinvolvingactivesymbolicmanipulation.In
thisway,Turnerwantedtobringinthe"humancoefficient,"ashecalledit(Turner
1974a:33),andshowhowthesocialisnotsomethingoverandabovetheindividual,but
howprinciplesofsocialorganizationbothaffectandaremanipulatedbyconcrete
individuals,i.e.,howsocietyandtheindividualcometogether.Thisisespeciallyapparent
inTurner'sidentificationofthebipolarityofsymbols.Inidentifyingthesensoryandthe
ideologicalpolesofsymbols,Turnercontributedtoreconcilingsociologicaland
psychologicalinterpretationsofritualsymbols.Herehewasclearlyinfluencedbythe
workofSigmundFreud.AccordingtoTurner(1978cf.Scharf1979),duringhissecond
periodoffieldworkamongtheNdembuhewasdirectedtowardstheworkofFreud
becausehewasunabletolinkallritualsymbolsoralldifferentmeaningsofonesingle
symboltoprinciplesandconflictsofthesocialorder.ThroughFreud,Turnerdiscovered
thatsymbolsmayrefernotonlytothesocialorder,butalsotophysiologicalphenomena
(bipolarity).YetitshouldnotbeconcludedthatTurnerwasaFreudian,sincethiswould
denythewholesociologicalsideofTurner'sapproach(especiallyTurner'snotionoffield)
andthedistinctivenessofFreudiananalysiswithitsemphasisontheindividual,
subconsciousdriveinritual.TurnermerelyusedFreud'sconceptsmetaphoricallyand

appliedthemanalogouslytoritualsymbolsdirectedtowardacollectivity(andnotto
dreamsymbolsattheleveloftheindividualpsyche,asdidFreud).ItwasFreud'sstyleof
thinking,nothsconceptsandhypotheses,asTurner(1978:582)hasacknowledged,that
influencedTurner'swork.
Finally,TurnerwentbeyondBritishstructuralisminstressingtheinterstructuralphaseof
liminalityinritualandtherelatednotionofcommunitas.Thismeantashiftinhiswork
awayfromthesocialstructuralanalysescharacteristicofBritishsocialanthropology.
Withinthelatterperspective,theDurkheimianargumentlargelyprevailsthatritualisa
merereflectionandperpetuationoftheprinciplesofthesocialorder(cf.Turnerinpress).
Resonanceof'suchanapproachmaybefoundintheworkofMaxGluckman(1954
1958)andinthewritingsofMaryDouglas(196619751978\.Gluckmanconsidered
ritualperformancesasfunctionalonlyforthemaintenanceofthepoliticalandsocial
order:Ritualsareintegrativetheyensurethebondingofmantosociety.MaryDouglas,
althoughsympathetictoTurner'swork(cf.Douglas19681970),inasimilar
Durkheimianfashion,hasreferredtoritualsasexpressions"ofsociety'sawarenessofits
ownconfigurationsandnecessities"(1975:54),anditisthemainpurposeofhersymbolic
studiestoanalyzethesocialstructuralcontextsinwhichritualandothercultural
performancestakeplace,notablythroughananalysisofthedimensions"grid"and
"group"(1978:7792).
Turner,however,whowasatfirstheavilyinfluencedbyBritishstructuralism,inhislaser
studiesemphasizedtheculturallypurposefulelementsinritualsbothamongtheNdembu
andinmodernWesternsociety.Inthisway,Turner'sworkcomescloser,forinstance,to
thatofCliffordGeertz.AlthoughGeertz(1980)hascriticizedTurnerforapplyinghis
modeofanalysistoogenerallytoritualsofallkinds,times,andplaces(therebypaying
insufficientattentiontothespecificsofthelocallymeaningfulcontextinwhichritual
formsofactiontakeplace),bothscholarsshareacommoninterestinthehumanly
meaningfulelementsofritual(awayfromsociety'sfunctionalrequisites).Geertz(1973)
hasargued,inamannersimilartoTurner's,andagainstfunctionalism,thatculture
(includingsymbolicritual)isnotjustaderivativeofthesocialstructure,butrefersto
meaningfulstructuresembodiedinsymbols,to"websofsignificance"(Geertz1973:5)
thatshouldbestudiedinterpretatively.InTurner'sritualstudies,wefindmore
resemblancetosuchaninterpretativeapproach,whichismorecharacteristicofAmerican
culturalanthropology,thantoBritishstructuralism.Thus,Turner'schangeofperspective
coincidedperhapsnotaccidentallywithhismovetotheUnitedStates,wherehe
developedfullyhisapproachonliminalityinritualandtheliminoidofcultural
performancesincomplexsocieties.

CONCLUSION
InthispaperIhavepresentedanoutlineanddiscussionofVictorTurner'sapproachto
religionandritual,pointingoutthegrowthandevolutionthathisworkunderwent
throughtheyears.WhenVictorTurnerdiedon18December1983inCharlottesville,he
haddevelopedauniqueritualapproachstressingtheprocessualnatureofritualamong
theNdembuandofritualactivityincomplexsocieties.Duringandafterhislife,Turner's
workhasfoundwidespreadadmiration.Indicativeofthisarethemanyintroductory
reviewsandgeneraldiscussionsofhiswork(Bouissac1985Collins1976Edwards
1972Grimes1976Porter1975Seneviratne1983)andthenumerousinstancesinwhich
hismodeofanalysishasbeenappliedanddiscussedinsuchdiversefieldsasthe
anthropologicalstudyofpilgrimage(DaMatta1979MesserschmidtandSharma1981
Pace1989Sax1990,thehistoryofreligion(Shorter1972),medicalanthropology
(Devisch1985),studiesonpopularculture(LyonsandLyons1985Manning19851938

Salamone1988Trosset1988),and,withincreasinginterest,theologicalstudies
(Arbuckle1986Gilhus1984Holmes19731977McKenna1976Moore1984Nichols
1985Perdue1981Senn1982Smits1976Worgul1979).However,theoretically
provocativediscussionsonTurner(which,forinstance,thesymbolanalysisofLevi
Strausshascometoenjoy)arerare.IbelievethisispartlyduetothenatureofTurner's
writings.First,considerableshiftsinhisviewpointmayhavepreventedathorough
debate,andsecond,Turner'stheoreticalideas,althoughpresentedwithgreataccuracy,
werescatteredoveralargenumberofessays.Turnerhasbeenpraisedforthe
ethnographicrichnessofhisritualanalysesandforhistheoreticalinnovations,buthe
cannotbeapplaudedasagreatsystematizer.Turner'sfailuretotreathisideas
systematicallyisevidentfromthemultitudeoflabelswithwhichhisworkhasbeen
characterized:Ithasbeencalled"situationalanalysis"(Collins1976),"symbolicaction
theory"(Holmes1977),"thesemanticsofsymbolism"(Gilsenan1967),"comparative
symbology"(Grimes1976Turner1974b),"antistructuralsocialanthropology"(Blast
1985),and"processualsymbolicanalysis"(Arbuckle1986Keyes1976Moore1984
Saler1979).Inthispaper,Ihavepreferredtousetheterm"processualsymbolic
analysis,"whichTurneradoptedfromKeyes(1976),sinceitindicatesthemainadvance
ofTurner'sapproach,namelyhisstressontheprocessesofbothlifeandritual.
Notwithstandingsomeofthecriticismsmentionedearlier,Turner'smostvaluable
contributionsremainhisconceptualapparatus,hisdistinctanalyticalmodeofritual
analysis,andhisapplicationthereofinhisNdemburesearch.Thislastaccomplishmentis
amajorstrengthofhiswork.Turner'sethnographicdescriptionsoftheNdemburitual
complexaresorichindetail,hisaccountssobrilliantlywritten,thathismonographshave
continuedtodrawtheattentionofmanyreadersthroughtheyears.
Turneralsoofferedafruitfulsetoftoolstodiscoverthemeaningsofritualperformances,
andhesuggestedausefulcomplementtoFrenchstructuralisminwhichritualanalyses
aredominatedbymyth,speech,andthoughtanalysis.Turner'sapproachtakesinto
accountnotonlywhatissaidaboutritual,butalsotherelationshipsamongritual
performances,mythandreligiousbeliefthemannerinwhichritualsymbolsare
manipulatedandhandledbytheritualsubjectsthemeaningandefficacyofsingleritual
symbolsaswellastheirrelationtoothersymbolsatallritualstagesandthefield
contexts,bothsocialandcultural,inwhichthesymbolsappear.
Finally,Turner'sprocessualsymbolicanalysiswasanimportantadvancein
anthropologicalresearchonritualsince,byitsfocusonritualproper,ittransgressedthe
traditionalframeworkofBritishstructuralistanthropologyoftheManchesterSchool(of
whichTurnerhimselfwasonceanadept).Wesawhowthisimportantinnovationin
Turner'sworkcoincidedwithhisrejectionofMarxismandhisconversiontoCatholicism.
ItwasTurner'snotionofsocialdrama(stillverymuchafunctionalistdevice)in
combinationwithVanGennep'sinfluentialworkonritesofpassagewhich,Ibelieve,led
Turnertoanalyzeritualnotsimplyasamechanismofredress,butashumanly
meaningfulculturalperformancesofanessentiallyprocessualnature.Ritualnotonly
takesplacewithinasocialprocessbutisitselfprocessual.Inhisstudiesoftheliminal
phaseinritual,Turnershowedthatritualisnotjustaresponsetosociety'sneedsbut
involveshumanlymeaningfulaction.Inthisway,Turner'smodeofanalysishasbeenan
importantalternativeforoftenalltoostaticsocialstructuralanalyses,anditmaycontinue
tostimulateresearchonritualtocontributetoacomprehensiveunderstandingofritual's
rolebothinhumanthoughtandinaction.

(*)TheauthorthanksJohnS.Boston,EdithTurner,RenaatDevisch,andLodeVan
Outrive,aswellastheeditorandrefereesofJSSR,fortheircommentsandsuggestions

onearlierdraftsofthispaper.
(n1.)AtvariouspointsinthispaperIusethebiographicalnotesonVictorTurnerby
Douglas(1984)Frankenberg(1984)McLaren(1985)Manning119841Sullivan
(1984)E.Turner11985)E.TurnerandF.Turner(1985)Turner(1982:791984
1987)andWillis(1984).
(n2.)MaxGluckman(1962)readandcommenteduponVanGennep'sRitesofPassage
beforeTurnerdid.Surprisingly,however,TurnermakesnoreferencetoGluckman's
essay.
(n3.)Sincespaceislimited,IcannotpresenthereacompletereviewoftheNdembu
ritualsdiscussedinTurner'swork,Turner'smostcomprehensiveethnographicaccountsof
theNdemburitualcomplexcanbefoundinTurner(19671968a1975[including
reprintsofTurner19611962a]).ForaclassifiedinventoryofallNdemburituals
describedbyTurner,seeDeflem(1988:3437).
(n4.)ThisaccountisbasedonCollins(1976:339341)Douglas(1970:305308)Kuper
(1983:183184)Turner1969a:41431andWieting11972).Foradifferentperspective,
seeSchwimmer(1985).
(n5.)Inasimilarperspective,Pickering119741hassuggestedtheterms"ritual"and
"ceremonial"toaccountforthepersistentneedofpeopleincontemporarysocietyto
engageinpassagerites(baptism,marriage,burial)withoutconsciouslybelievinginthe
religiouselementsoftheserites.Ritualisdefinedas"formalizedactionrelatedtoadeity
orsuperhumanbeing,whileceremonialcouldbeviewedasanelaborateorstylizedform
ofsocialbehaviornotrelatedtosuchabeing"(751.Thus,thepersistingritesofpassage
inmodernsocietyareceremonials,notrituals.
(n6.)SeealsothediscussionsonthisissuebyObeyesekere(1986),Porter(1975),Ray
(1977),andSchechner(1985).

REFERENCES
Arbuckle,GeraldA.
1986Theologyandanthropology:Timeforadialogue.TheologicalStudies
47(31:428447.
Blasi,AnthonyJ.
1985Ritualasaformofthereligiousmentality.SociologicalAnalysis
46(1):5971.
Bouissac,Paul,ed.
1985VictorTurner:ACanadiantribute.Anthropologica27(12):1239.
Collins,Mary
1976Ritualsymbolsandtheritualprocess:TheworkofVictorW.Turner.
Worship50:336346.
DaMatta,Roberto
1979Ritualincomplexandtribalsocieties.CurrentAnthropology
20(3):541590.

Deflem,Mathieu
1988ProcessualsymbolicanalysisinthewritingsofVictorW.Turner.M.A.
dies.,TheUniversityofHull,England.
DeHeusch,Luc
1975Whatshallwedowiththedrunkenking?Africa4514):363372.
1982Thedrunkenkingortheoriginofthestate.Translatedandannotatedby
RoyWillis.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.
Devisch,Renaat
1985Approachestosymbolandsymptominbodilyspacetime.In
InternationalJournalofPsychology20(4):389415.
Douglas,Mary
1966Purityanddanger:Ananalysisofconceptsofpollutionandtaboo.
London:Routledge&beganPaul.
1968Thesocialcontrolofcognition:Somefactorsinjokeperception.Man
3(3):361376.
1970Thehealingrite.[reviewarticle]Man5(2):302308.
1975Implicitmeanings:Essaysinanthropology.London:Routledge&
KeganPaul.
1978Naturalsymbols:Explorationsincosmology.London:Barrie&
Jenkins.
1984VictorTurner.[obituary]RAIN:RoyalAnthropologicalInstituteNews
61(April):11.
Edwards,Adrian
1972V.W.Turner:ApathbreakerintheforestofsymbolsTheClergy
Review,57(6):410418.
Firth,Raymond
1973Symbols:PublicandprivateLondon:Allen&Unwin.
Frankenberg,Ronald
1984Prof.VW.Turner.[obituary]TheTimes,January2,p.10.
Geertz,Clifford
1973Theinterpretationofcultures.London:Hutchinson.
1980Blurredgenres:Therefigurationofsocialthought.AmericanScholar
49(2):165179.
Gilhus,IngvildS.
1984Gnosticism:Astudyinliminalsymbolism.Numen:International
ReviewfortheHistoryofReligions31(1):106128.
Gilsenan,Michael
1967MythandthehistoryofAfricanreligion.InThecraftofsocial
anthropology,editedbyA.L.Epstein,5070.London:Tavistock.
Gluckman,Max
1954RitualsofrebellioninSouthEastAfrica.Manchester:Manchester
UniversityPress.
1958AnalysisofasocialsysteminZululandRhodesLivingstonePaperNo.
28.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
1962"Lesritesdepassages."InEssaysontheritualofsocialrelations,

editedbyM.Gluckman,152.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
Gluckman,MaryandMaxGluckman
1977Ondramaandgamesandathleticcontests.InSecularritualeditedbyS.
F.MooreandB.Myerhoff,227243.Assen:VanGorcum.
Goffman,Erving
1961Asylums:Essaysonthesocialsituationofmentalpatientsandother
inmates.Hammondsworth:Penguin.
Goodman,P.andP.Goodman
1947Communitas:Meansoflivelihoodandwaysoflife.NewYork:Vintage
Books.
Grimes,RonaldL.
1976Ritualstudies:AcomparativereviewofTheodorGasterandVictor
Turner.ReligiousStudiesReview2(4):1325.
1985VictorTurner'ssocialdramaandT.S.Eliot'sritualdrama.
Anthropologica27(12):7999.
Hecht,RichardD,ed.
1985VictorTurnercommemorativenumber:Jerusalemseminaron
comparativeliminality.Religion15(3):201338.
Hefner,Philip,ed.
1986Recentdiscoveriesmneurobiology:Dotheymatterforreligion,the
socialsciences,andthehumanities?Parts1&2.[Dedicatedtothememory
ofVictorTurner]Zygon:JournalofReligionandScience21(1):5112
(2):141257.
Holmes,UrbanT.
1973Liminalityandliturgy.Worship47:386397.
1977Ritualandthesocialdrama.Worship51:197213.
Horton,Robin
1964RitualmaninAfrica.Africa34(2):85104.
Junod,HenriA.
[1913]ThelifeofaSouthAfricantribe.NewHyde
1962Park:UniversityBooks.
Keyes,CharlesF.
1976Notesonthelanguageofprocessualsymbolicanalysis.Unpublished
synopsisofacourseoflectures.UniversityofWashington.
Kuper,Adam
1983Anthropologyandanthropologists:ThemodernBritishschoolRevised
edition.London:Routledge&KeganPaul.
LeviStrauss,Claude
1958Anthropologiestructurale.Paris:Plon.
1962Lapense'esauvage.Paris:Plon
1981ThenakedmanIntroductiontoascienceofmythology,4.London:
JonathanCape.

Lewin,Kurt
1949Fieldtheoryandsocialscience.London:Tavistock.
Lyons,AndrewP.andHarrietD.Lyons
1985"Returnoftheikoikoi":ManifestationsofliminalityonNigerian
television.Athropologica27(12):5578.
McKenna,JohnH.
1976Ritualactivity.Worship50:347352.
McLaren,PeterL.
1985AtributetoVictorTurner(19201983).Anthropologica27(12):1722.
Manning,FrankE.
1984VictorTurner:Anappreciation.TheAssociationforthe
AnthropologicalStudyofPlayNewsletter10:2022.
1985Theperformanceofpolitics:Caribbeanmusicandtheanthropologyof
VictorTurner.Anthropologica27(12):3953.
1988Anthropologyandperformance:TheplayofpopularculturePlay&
Culture1(3):180190.
Messerschmidt,DonaldA.andJyotiSharma
1981HindupilgrimageintheNepalHimalayas.CurrentAnthropology
22(5):571572.
Moore,RobertL.
1984Ministry,sacredspace,andtheologicaleducation:ThelegacyofVictor
Turner.TheologicalEducation21(1):87100.
Moore,SallyF.andBarbaraG.Myerhoff
1977Secularritual:Formsandmeanings.InSecularritual324.See
GluckmanandGluckman,1977.
Morris,Brian
1987Anthropologicalstudiesofreligion:Anintroductorytext.NewYork:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Nichols,J.Randall
1985Worshipasantistructure:ThecontributionofVictorTurner.Theology
Today41(4):401409.
Obeyesekere,Gananath
1986Stagesofthesocialdrama.[reviewarticle]TimesLiterarySupplement,
July25,p.821.
Ortner,SherryB.
1984Theoryinanthropologysincethesixties.ComparativeStudiesin
SocietyandHistory26(1):126166.
Pace,Enzo
1989Pilgrimageasspiritualjourney:Ananalysisofpilgrimageusingthe
theoryofV.Turnerandtheresourcemobilizationapproach.SocialCompass
36(2):229244.
Perdue,LeoG.

1981Liminalityasasocialsettingforwisdominstructions.Zeitschriftfurdie
AlttestamentischeWissenschaft93(1):114126.
Pickering,W.S.F.
1974Thepersistenceofritesofpassage:Towardsanexplanation.British
JournalofSociology25(1):6378.
Porter,H.Boone
1975Liminalmysteries:SomewritingsbyVictorTurner.Anglican
TheologicalReview57:215219.
Ray,Benjamin
1977Ananthropologist'spilgrimage.[reviewarticle]HistoryofReligions
16(3):273279.
Salamone,F.A.
1988Theritualofjazzperformance.Play&Culture1(2):85104.
Saler,Benson
1979Liminalityforthelaity.[reviewarticle]JournalfortheScientificStudy
ofReligion18(4):432434.
Sax,WilliamS.
1990Villagedaughter,villagegoddess:Residence,gender,andpoliticsina
Himalayanpilgrimage.AmericanEthnologist17(3):491512.
Scharf,B.R.
1979Freudianismtodayandsomeanthropologicalapproachestoreligion.
Religion9(2):157181.
Schechner,Richard
1985VictorTurner'slastadventure.Anthropologica27(12):191206.
Schwimmer,Eric
1985Exprimerl'inexprimable.Anthropologica27(12):2338.
Seneviratne,H.L.,ed.
1983EssaysinhonorofVictorTurner.[specialissue]SouthAsian
Anthropologist4(1):158.
Senn,FrankC.
1982Theologyandthebehavioralsciences.Dialog21:201206.
Shorter,Aylward
1972Symbolism,ritualandhistory:AnexaminationoftheworkofVictor
Turner.InThehistoricalstudyofAfricanreligion,editedbyT.O.Ranger
andI.N.Kimambo,139149.London:Heinemann.
Smits,Kenneth
1976Liturgicalreforminculturalperspective.Worship50:98100.
Sullivan,LawrenceE.
1984VictorW.Turner(19201983).[obituary]HistoryofReligions
24(2):160163.
Trosset,Carol

1988Welshcommunitasasideologicalpractice.Ethos16(2):167180.
Turner,EdithL.B.
1985Prologue:FromtheNdembutoBroadway.InOntheedgeofthebush:
Anthropologyasexperience,editedbyE.L.B.Turner,115.Tucson:
UniversityofArizonaPress.
1986aThegenesisofanidea:RememberingVictorTurner.Zygon:Journal
ofReligionandScience21(1):78.
1986bEncounterwithneurobiology:Theresponseofritualstudies.Zygon:
JournalofReligionandScience21(2):219232.
Turner,EdithL.B.andFrederickTurner
1985VictorTurneraswerememberhim.Anthropologica27(12):1116.
Turner,VictorW.
1953Lundaritesandceremonies.RhodesLivingstoneMuseumOccasional
PaperNo.10.Livingstone:TheRhodesLivingstoneMuseum.
195455ThesocialsystemoftheLundaNdembooftheMwinilunga
District,NorthernRhodesia.Ph.D.dies.,VictoriaUniversityofManchester,
England.
1955ArevivalinthestudyofAfricanritual.TheRhodesLivingstone
Journal17:5156.
1957aSchismandcontinuityinanAfricansociety:AstudyofNdembu
villagelife.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
1957bThelimitsofnaively:Someproblemsintheinterpretationofsymbols
inNdemburitual.(Preliminarydraftonlyforlimitedcirculation).
Unpublishednotes.
1961NdembudivinationItssymbolismandtechniques.RhodesLivingstone
PaperNo.31.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
1962aChihamba,thewhitespirit:AritualdramaoftheNdembu.Rhodes
LivingstonePaperNo.33.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.
1962bThemesinthesymbolismofNdembuhuntingritual.Anthropological
Quarterly35(2):3757.
1964aBetwixtandbetween:Theliminalperiodinritesdepassage.In
Symposiumonnewapproachestothestudyofreligion:Proceedingsofthe
1964AnnualSpringMeetingoftheAmericanEthnologicalSociety,edited
byJ.Helm,420.Seattle:AmericanEthnologicalSociety.
1964bSymbolsinNdemburitualInClosedsystemsandopenminds:The
limitsofnaivelyinsocialanthropology,editedbyM.Gluckman,2051.
Edinburgh:OliverandBoyd.
1966ColorclassificationinNdemburitual:Aprobleminprimitive
classification.InAnthropologicalapproachestothestudyofreligion,edited
byM.Banton,4784.A.S.A.MonographNo.3.London:Tavistock.
1967Theforestofsymbols:AspectsofNdemburitualIthaca:Cornell
UniversityPress.

1968ThedrumsofafflictionAstudyofreligiousprocessesamongthe
NdembuofZambia.Oxford:ClarendonPress.
1968bMythandsymbol.InInternationalencyclopediaofthesocialsciences,
editedbyD.Sills,576582.NewYork:Macmillan&TheFreePress.
1968cReligiousspecialists:I,Anthropologicalstudy.InInternational
encyclopedia,437444.SeeTurner1968b.
1969aTheritualprocess:Structureandantistructure.Chicago:Aldine.
1969bFormsofsymbolicaction:Introduction.InFormsofsymbolicaction:
Proceedingsofthe1969AnnualSpringMeetingoftheAmerican
EthnologicalSociety,editedbyR.F.Spencer,325.Seattle:Universityof
WashingtonPress.
1972Passages,marginsand,poverty:Religioussymbolsofcommunitas,
PartsI&II.Worship46:390412482494.
1974aDramas,fieldsandmetaphors:Symbolicactioninhumansociety.
Ithaca:CornellUniversityPress.
1974bLiminaltoliminoidinplay,flow,andritual:Anessayincomparative
symbology.RiceUniversityStudies60(3):5392.
1974cPilgrimageandcommunitas.StudiaMissionalia23:305327.
1975RevelationanddivinationinNdemburitual.Ithaca,NewYork:Cornell
UniversityPress.
1976aRitual,tribalandcatholic.Worship50:504526.
1976bAfricanritualandWesternliterature:Isacomparativesymbology
possible?InTheliteratureoffactSelectedpapersfromtheEnglishInstitute,
editedbyA.Fletcher4581.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
1977aSymbolsinAfricanritual.InSymbolicanthropology:Areaderinthe
studyofsymbolsandmeanings,editedbyJ.L.Dolgin,D.S.Kemnitzerand
D.M.Schneider,183194.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.
1977bVariationsonathemeofliminality.InSecularritual,3652.See
GluckmanandGluckman1977.
1978EncounterwithFreud:Themakingofacomparativesymbologist.In
Themakingofpsychologicalanthropology,editedbyG.D.Spindler,558
583.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
1980Socialdramasandstoriesaboutthem.CriticalInquiry7(4):141168.
1982Fromritualtotheatre:Thehumanseriousnessofplay.NewYork:
PerformingArtsJournal.
1983Body,brainandculture.Zygon:JournalofReligionandScience
18(3):221245.

1984VicTurner:Biography,influences,interests.Unpublishednotes.
1985aOntheedgeofthebush:Anthropologyasexperience,compiledbyE.
L.B.Turner.Tucson:UniversityofArizonaPress.
1985bLiminality,kabbalah,andthemedia.Religion15(3):205217.
1987Curriculumvitae:VictorTurner.Unpublishednotes.inpressMorality
andliminality.InBlazingthetrail,editedbyE.L.B.Turner.Tucson:
UniversityofArizonaPress.
Turner,VictorW.andEdithL.B.Turner
1978ImageandpilgrimageinChristianculture:Anthropological
perspectives.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,
1982Religiouscelebrations.InCelebration:Studiesinfestivityandritual,
editedbyV.W.Turner,201219.Washington,D.C.:SmithsonianInstitution
Press.
vanDonge,JanK.
1985UnderstandingruralZambiatoday:TherelevanceoftheRhodes
LivingstoneInstitute,Africa55(1):6076.
VanGennep,Arnold
[1909]1960Theritesofpassage.London:Routledge&KeganPaul.
Werbner,RichardP.
1984TheManchesterSchoolinSouthCentralAfricaAnnualReviewof
Anthropology13:157185.
Wieting,StephenG.
1972MythandsymbolanalysisofClaudeLeviStraussandVictorTurner.
SocialCompass19(2):139154.
Willis,Roy
1984VictorWitterTurner(19201983).[obituary]Africa54(4):7375.
Worgul,GeorgeS.
1979Anthropologicalconsciousnessandbiblicaltheology.Biblical
TheologyBulletin9(1):312.

Back
Citation@AnthropologyofPolitics,Law,Ritual