Victor Turner - A (Partial) Critique

Are there universals of performance in myth, ritual, and drama?
A (Partial) Critique.

Victor Turner, a well renowned anthropologist, provided this essay for By Means of Performance: Intercultural Studies of Theatre and Ritual (1990: 8-19), a book which studies ‘performance behaviour’ within a variety of cultures and circumstances. In his essay, Turner discusses the development from ritual to theatre in non-industrial and industrial societies, and their interlocking relationships. He argues that:

…every major socioeconomic formation has its dominant form of cultural-aesthetic “mirror” in which it achieves a certain degree of self-reflexivity. (Turner 1990: 8)

From his own field observations in ‘markedly different’ cultures, Turner determines here that societies tend to form a performance behaviour reflective, to a degree, of their culture, be it through theatre or ritual. He states that, through his own findings, non-industrial societies tend to develop ritual which pertains to their immediate situation, while industrial societies tend to develop theatre that focuses on economic, political, or familial problems.

However, he also states that “both ritual and theatre…have an important aspect of social metacommentary” (1990: 8) and that cultures themselves develop a social drama, which he describes in four stages: Breach, where a rule is broken in a public setting; Crisis, where conflict follows the Breach; Redressive action, or judicial action; and finally either restoration of normality or recognition of an irreversible breach. But much like theatre and ritual, this social drama is open to manipulation as different cultures will affect the social drama in different ways. For instance, Turner references cultures such as the Nuba of the Sudan (1990: 9) who resort to ritualized violence in the outbreak of a Breach.

Linking back to theatre and ritual, Turner suggests that the world of theatre as we know it in the ‘developed’ world derives from the third stage of social drama (1990: 9) - that is, redress as a ritual process. He states that redressive ritual includes:

…divination into the hidden causes of misfortune, personal and social conflict, and illness (all of which in tribal societies are intimately interconnected and thought to be caused by the invisible action of spirits, deities, witches and sorcerers); they include curative ritual (which may often involve episodes of spirit-possession, shamanic trance mediumship, and trance states among the patients who are subjects of the ritual); and initiatory rites connected with these “rituals of affliction”. (1990: 11)

These rituals provide stages for unique experiences, detached from mundane life. Turner states that through the presence of ritual processes such as gender reversal, sacred symbols, instruction, and the presence of ambiguous ideas we can securely link ritual of old and tribal communities to the theatre of today as many of those processes are still present in today’s work.

This link is also evident in the writings of d’Aquili and Laughlin (1979:177) who state that a “brief ecstatic state and sense of union (often lasting only a few seconds)” is present in reference to both ritual and performance.

Additionally, on theatre, Turner further goes on to comment:

Theatre is one of the many inheritors of that great multifaceted system of preindustrial ritual which embraces ideas and images of cosmos and chaos, interdigitates clowns and their foolery with gods and their solemnity, and uses all sensory codes, to produce symphonies in more than music… (1990: 12)

A point which summarizes Turner’s argument that theatre and ritual are not only connected but originate from the same sentiment, that they are developmental twins integral to the state of culture and society.

To evaluate, Victor Turner was a cultural anthropologist who was well known for his observation and research into ritual and rites of passage. Much of his findings were based on first hand observation, but also on the study of other researchers and writers such as Dewey, Myerhoff and d’Aquili.

His area of expertise was clearly the study of human behaviour, particularly in a ritualistic society (which, he argued, included most societies). Though he had no background in theatre himself, he was an established collaborator of Richard Schechner, a published professor of Performance Studies, and the two worked together collaboratively until Turner’s death. From this, it’s clear that Turner’s theories were well informed both from a performance aspect and an anthropological one.

Turner’s argument is also a logical one; the definitions he’s made between ritual and theatre in this essay are clear and recognizable to anyone with experience in either theatre or ritual. His work is still considered to be one of the most influential theories in anthropology. But with anthropologists and performers still using his work twenty five years after his death, it’s clear that it is still valid and is in no way outdated.

His theories are also supported by practitioners of modern ritual; Starhawk, a well-known feminist, author and Pagan theorist (among others) is known to further this with displays of ‘ritual drama’ (1979: 197-213) in which participants of ritual re-enact characters and stories in a dramatic way. It is unclear whether she has been influenced by Turner’s work, but there is a clear similarity in thought and this ‘dramatic ritual’ is very common in modern Pagan practice in the Western world..

In conclusion, Turner’s theories are well presented and thoughtful and once you are able to contextualise his research his ideas are meaningful and accessible, and are just as important now as ever.

(c) Copyright 2008 Liam Robb

Bibliography

Laughlin, Jr., Charles D. & d’Aquili, Eugene (1974) Biogenetic Structuralism, New York, Colombia University Press

Schechner, Richard & Appel, Willa, ed. (1990) By Means of Performance, Cambridge, Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge

Simos, Miriam “Starhawk” (1979) The Spiral Dance, San Francisco, HarperSanFrancisco