Canadian Anthropology Society

Victor Turner's Social Drama and T. S. Eliot's Ritual Drama Author(s): Ronald L. Grimes Reviewed work(s): Source: Anthropologica, New Series, Vol. 27, No. 1/2, Victor Turner: Un Hommage Canadien / A Canadian Tribute (1985), pp. 79-99 Published by: Canadian Anthropology Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25605177 . Accessed: 07/05/2012 08:19
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Canadian Anthropology Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Anthropologica.

http://www.jstor.org

VICTOR T.

TURNER'S S. ELIOT'S

SOCIAL RITUAL

DRAMA AND DRAMA

Wilfrid

Ronald Laurier

L. Grimes University

Cet textes etude Eliot. l'autre. la

article mis de en

se

presente l'un au

comme face sujet demontre 1'etude la nature

une a

opposition Victor Turner ne argument en Publiee 1974, sur de Turner impact sur l'archeveque

analyse l'autre: piece l'un a du au

de c'est de derive

deux une T. S. de

d'une que cherche

Aucun theorie

montrer drame du

que social II

exerce opposant en 1935, considerable

un

Thomas

1'interpretation Becket

conflit Henri

roi

d'Angleterre
ces

en

1170.
le

Le
martyre les

drame rituel
de genres la respective inspirant du fait a case The Becket. et nous les

commemore definit oeuvres.

d'Eliot,
Une intentions de et conduit

publie
de chaque a la le

difference

deux l'un

Toutefois, l'autre, critique dominantes et Eliot

lecture

texte, discussion sens tion This either de que

eclairant de leur

revele

metaphores donnent Turner

1'interpreta historique. study by Victor

article is

Turner with a play

derived

"intertextualizes"

by T.
from the

S.

Eliot,
other. between

without
case

arguing
study,

that drama
Thomas pub

lished
to bear

in
on

1974,
the

brings

Turner's

theory

of social

confrontation

Becket and King Henry II of England in 1170 A.D. The drama published in 1935 for a play is a ritual by Eliot
commemoration and other they organize historic intentions leads to of of a Becket's the two

Archbishop

Nevertheless,

reading
discussion reveals and

each

the martyrdom. genres Thus, works differ considerably.

text

in the

of the

the dominant treatment

light

of the
that same

mutual

and imply, Turner's event.

critiques

Eliot's

metaphors of the

INTRODUCTION The confrontation between Archbishop Thomas Becket and King been anthropologically ana Henry II of England in 1170 A.D. has dramatized I lyzed by Victor Turner and ritually by T. S. Eliot. to show that, the difference of genre, the two propose despite
treatments sentially phors are comparison are comparable My thesis and and a static, linear, show how in that dominant metaphors. spatial, temporal, is to is on a system of depends are Eliot's es metaphors whereas meta Turner's circular, reason The for this processual. each that play and a theo

theologically-based

80 ANTHROPOLOGICA
retically-grounded analysis can imply mutual

N.S.
criticisms

27(1-2)
and

1985
re

This undertaking finements. illustrates the fruitfulness of link and textually oriented methods of religious ing the conceptually
with the of social Turner's of the of science treatment play, the methods of

studies

Turner's
consideration and an

theory
examination

will

be outlined.

This
of Murder in

will
the the

anthropology.

be

followed

First,

case

by a

of

Thomas

Eliot
Turner's

(originally
interpretation

published

in

Cathedral, with

1935).

Finally,

I will
of

Becket, S. by T.

compare
Eliot.

confrontation

that

TURNER'S THEORY OF SOCIAL DRAMA

Victor is "social Turner's drama." term Such for any conflictual can be social analyzed in interaction four phas interaction

(1) breach; Although Turner to this addition

treat the the the all model same model social by

es:

and (2) crisis; (3) redress; (4) reintegration. the possibility of other models in acknowledges one he tends to (Turner agonistic 1980:151),
conflict social in in terms of then insists it. He says he the did arrived Ndembu recognizing not derive on the at of interaction among subsequently that he of tragedy

observing Angola

west-central

pattern from

and Africa, elsewhere. Turner

Aristotle's

and then quently,

esthetic (which dialectically In drama. parent,"

on social interactions (ibid.: impose it his method is anthropological dramatistic

in he origin. calls related, his while is stage ritual. Despite "cultural Turner of is his recognition that and performance") often assigns genres," the social "child." drama become is the social

description

153). Conse rather than

esthetic drama to the of drama are social "grand between ritual cultural

stage

"genealogy drama

priority is drama The the

generations and judiciary performances.

procedures,

social Thus, then which

"parent" basis bases of

It
movement

is
of

difficult
drama from He his

to
one

determine
level to

whether
another among dialectical and drama

Turner
as

imagines

the
cau

sal-developmental, cal-typological. In any case, tural

theoretical-methodological, seems to vacillate "genealogy" as such becomes narrative

historical, or phenomenologi possibilities. as insofar as

these

cul para

digms which Put circle.

stories lay Such do "fiduciary

performances

function

the thus completing social dramas, provoke further can "emplot" When lives (ibid.:153). simply, stories
this, hold" whom they on reach a below the level of as by of consciousness (ibid.:154). and or person Turner refers seem conative group to persons "star seem groupers," scenarios exercising

persons, Their

possessed. cognitive, Of drama.

actions and importance evokes

driven force.

emotive, special Redress:

mances;
a society

and
can

(1)

is redress, rituals itself). If

the and we

third other think

phase cultural of

of

social

(2)

gives

rise

to reflexivity

(performances
cultural

in which
per

perfor

contemplate

Grimes
formances the eral, occurs origins but when as of in derived cultural redress,

SOCIAL
from

AND RITUAL
social

DRAMA 81
we must drama drama. look in for

performances the third

performances, not in social phase and of social

gen Redress

symbolic Turner

judiciary feedback

proceedings a crisis. during

designates

161),
Ceremony ritual, casts one

indicates,
reflects in things the into

while

"ceremony"

or

religious

(or liminal)

ritual religious provide whose ritual dimensions Law, "secular ritual" (ibid.:156,

ritual

transforms.
while order that and this

normative, narrower a the

structured, sense of the mode. analysis

social term, Turner in the

realities, dissolves states

subjunctivity
may amplify

is

the

"subjunctive" previous

"mother of indicativity"

(ibid.:164).
form of the

Thus,
fol

lowing Social (a) Ritual

diagram: Drama: Breach (Broad (b) Crisis Sense): (strict sense): Subjunctive,
Normative,

(c)

Redress

(d) Reintegration

(a) Ritual
(b) Y Ceremony: . .

Liminal,
Political.

Religious.

Indicative,

Reflexivity: Cultural
(a) (b)

Performances:
Drama Narrative: Stories, which Gossip, Turner Chronicles. thinks can heal a breach in the

social fabric by enacting it, sort. and religious juridical

self-awareness it can produce that drama and thinks ambiguous Another not reflexivity for can lead and gossip. of

Reflexivity,

to

is derived from rituals In turn, reflexivity is

an esthetic sorts as the about a above the of Turner frame of narratives, does not form of

of both the the kind of

mind. Thus, including explicitly his the is so

various Because dramas than caution

chronicle, story, state whether he discussion progression that ritual much as ritual is more does is seem.

narrative, makes diagram flow human chart mind mode. consists of

above

produce

in the reflexivity in the somatic-performative ritual

Turner's

model

phases

of a rite

of passage
the of posits those

understanding

as

the by

schematized

by Van
As is

Gennep
well-known

(1960):

transition, separation, Turner now, emphasizes a powerful source it as ture. Since he himself rite of

and

incorporation. or middle "liminal" transformation a of parallel a social and between drama,

phase, innovation the one

regarding in cul of wonder a

phases might

which

is really

passage

and

the model

for which:

82 ANTHROPOLOGICA Phases of a Rite of Passage:

-^

N.S.

27(1-2)

1985

Separation (preliminal)
-y

Transition (liminal)
-^

Incorporation (postliminal)

Phases Social

of a Drama:

Breach-Crisis

Redress

Reintegration

Does passage, dramas? and third question, or Or,

Turner does he

perceive perceive

social a rite

dramas of passage between

in

terms in terms some nor ritual

of

rites of social

of

social

do such striking homologies occur as the result experience factor? Turner neither Although it is will of nevertheless clear carried argument

experience underlying, answers this redress: if

of raises emphasizes

ritual
ing

transition

is
also

going
be

to be carried
out. To thus

why

he

out,

it

follows
redress

that
this

its

counterpart together

Turner's

ritual hinge of social rite of passage; (3)

nal social phase; (4)

the model for ritual is the (2) drama; is its limi the hinge of a rite of passage
in rise ritual this, ritual is a cultural mode and of reflex

recapitulate far: (1)

piec is the

ivity;

and
breach,

(5) an
and

liminality

increase

in
to has

ritual
esthetic a

reflexivity
narrative dramatic a

helps

heal

gives that

drama. a plot irrever such as

Turner (Turner sible. Eliade Turner, Ritual willing "pure" By ritual which Whether all his three "drama" and In (1959), ritual has to sense now

claims Turner maintaining who does a "point": (his it is to these

structure, ritual theorists circular is

1980:161). treat not ritual

in Sequencing Turner challenges in to terms of "return,"

imagine

namely, as ceremony Turner that

For imagery. somewhere. but goes instead, Turner is transform. Although he sees 1980:163), thinks all of being is tell. to treat one, he drama ritual, as social in linear. conflict, by the

term, obvious and

circular, Turner and Turner as dramatism to one

enactment, seems he the source of

drama stage mean linear, Turner's is this impossible inclines

conflict-laden, Since

"dramatic," time-bound. and the

of

everywhere, method. Turner uses and

or other, sees clearly as of part

the gossip account is is

term about of levels especially of failing

"narrative"

to

refer

to: (3) an

chronological
words, pologist connect 1980:145). nitive

connections

between
the

(1) anthro are

the

events;
same events; events. narrative to

(2)

indigenous
and Symbols (Turner

(emic)
what Turner "cog

stories, 's (etic) the Turner

those of careful to

different

and the

warn

ethnocentrism" are

narrative gist's who those of sists that an

emic indigenous

and

recognize culture-bound to the culture experience"

against an that the

from

anthropolo of view point He strive in to

"anthropology

of

studied. being must always

Grimes

SOCIAL

AND RITUAL (ibid.: 143-144)

action. to discover of

DRAMA 83 before
The nearest what events Turner "enables successive a fit Obviously, a method this and

know "men and women alive"

account can men Dilthey conceive of life"?that and past definition historical is that nomothetically come to actual and women. (1976). an of He for

it
an

tries
observer mean relies us events between such that inescap

to
to on to

their

is experience a For definition thus defines affinity

intrinsic

meaning between

meaning, as what the

to is, ability negotiate memory's and Turner 1980:156). present (Turner its to of meaning commits proponent and time-conscious. reflexivity An is

a is

ably

historical.

meaningful

of implication also retrospective

definition

TURNER'S

INTERPRETATION

OF

BECKET'S

SOCIAL

DRAMA

was

Until he became friends with King Henry II of England, the CE. cleric Thomas Becket (1118-1170 ) had held minor English In time, Henry II ensured that Becket clerical and civil offices.
elevated a to the office of

the king probably

Eventually, had Becket bitter mind a

thought
conflict of his

he could
own and

Archbishop arose

of

control
between

both church
the on the two

Canterbury,

and state.
men. Since of ec

whereby

insisted

clesiastical he soon found himself in defiance of his office, to harsh words spoken by Henry II, king. In 1170 CE., responding a group of knights forced their way into Canterbury Cathedral and
slew the public saint. Canterbury Turner's specifically martyrdom reconciliation concentrate 1170. Instead, by penance His archbishop. and as its Three years Becket continues support, veneration center. of Council At Henry. "ultimate focuses this One on Thomas of Becket (1974'.Chapter which lost 2) focuses his of to in later, accompanied was as canonized today with the by a martyr shrine Henry's and at

autonomy

analysis on the six on years. with the Turner

Northampton, Thomas council,

preceded all hope

have might drama" (1974:79) the earlier

Turner expected at Canterbury drama at Northampton

because: this (1) he believes cial and (2) there is drama;

it was during paradigm," What the historical Turner data this "root week-long of the that does not

to be the suggestive
council martyr that

initial breach of a so historical evidence that

Becket upon social present began the drama them to via is in enact crucis* organize terms falls a

entering this or

do

with

the
redress;

four
and

phases
(4)

of

chronologically

social

of

drama:
In

(1) breach;
fact, Turner's remarks, so severe

(2)

crisis;
scheme

(3) to

into

the
at

reintegration.

background.
the redressive crisis of redress deeper

Having

noted

that

begin soon formal situation

becomes means into

Turner stage, and crisis grew proved . crisis .

King Henry "

that throwing

II
...

tries
Breach

inadequate, ." (1974:79).

available, back

the

84 ANTHROPOLOGICA
One insistence ritual Turner be cal ture Turner is alludes can on not infer the as to and Rather, more akin deeply from linear, strict the do this statement nature as follow it a drama that

N.S.
Turner's of social here, single, or or (see, sometimes

27(1-2)
theoretical drama sounds. they seem

1985

temporal in practice

and As to

repeatable order. and was the

of social phases not necessarily are less a "layers" to

they to resistant

scenario rigid of consciousness models

chronologi struc plot action. for Yet example,

Turner
with methods

and Turner
timeless, Turner (see

1980:154)
abstract

because

cyclical

he associated
produced Like

cyclical
by

models

structures

felt
its speaks . the

that anthropology
diachronic time of axes social form' pointing connote historical methods. of

1971:349-353).

ought
"Social

to be closely
dramas,"

Evans-Pritchard,

synchronic Turner

linked
says,

to history
"represent when

and
. .

he

fields" dramas or out

(1971:363). Nevertheless, as a regularly "possessing that profile'" terms like which are

Turner

'processional resist hardly and "profile" time-bound

'diachronic structures contexts.

(1971:351), "recurring," abstracted

recurring one can from "form," their

sagas
actual

Turner (1971)
use of Both terms and

states that his (1974:63) study of the Icelandic In both cases, he led him to the study of Becket.
the it social to analyses a dramatistic page are or split so scheme (see, between for a but abbreviates his 1971:369; of theo "root The reading his treatment In of The social result both meta the of specifi of example, discussion

introduces 1974:79). retical phors")

"arena," (e.g., the chronicling concentrates on have the the to actual

"field," of historical of on kinship,

"paradigms," contexts. Turner's while

anthropological cally Icelandic sagas concentrates Becket Turner order than which terms seems to follow perfect are in of to

contribution martyrdom let go of course of of

paradigm. his model events.

cases, drama in a less

is

integration themselves

Turner's

structural less," and carry narrating he choose, typically overcomes and personal This peration pallet town, taking rank his was the

both of and narrating theorizing, I suspect that the technical provocative. a repository serve as for the "time theory while side of his chronicling interpretation, the processual narrates. For in [Becket's] the side. Occasionally, example, following low There was point, consider passage: the rock sick bottom on his If forced the by data to storyteller tone Turner's

anthropologist. involvement Thomas'

of his

life,
of in having up the St.

Black
the

Monday.

Picture

the gloom and des

Northampton from pressure to way which his his and have

scene. Andrew's been more

monastery debarred by comfortable in a strange monks

Thomas, outside royal quarters in

entitled exile

him?but among Cistercian cold weather

was king accusation.

attempt

to emulate
all The

the humility
cruelty, was dank

of the
masked and

foreshadowing and Pontigny

ideal
in

monk. The
law I

moral as

dull,

Grimes

SOCIAL myself

AND RITUAL in the

DRAMA 85 Northampton area in

known it often autumn. (1974:84)

Turner's

trolled
speaks thing typal" Such that point of

by
about

an

central "in

thesis people's

about

Becket heads" how static

is

that

he

is

con

as

"archetypal"

paradigm

(1974:92),

which Turner
curious "arche

being this

sounds, connotations

is terminology how intellectualistic and go against the

The (1974:96). and timeless heads" own In any

are and dynamic symbols the notion in introducing of events that the series suggest were as if it best treated not (1974:69), but rather

grain emotion-laden. of a as an

"people's of Turner's archetypal at a of

rings. insistence case, is his to

paradigm

beginning series if it were

is Northampton or moral political "fate," "genetic

decisions

or The evidence that Becket himself was "rite" (1974:72). code," a model driven by (if not consciously to) aspiring unconsciously to violate the liturgical is his choice calendar deliberate by
the saying mass begins, any Mass of "Princes . . ." St. Stephen sat and (Psalm 118). treating the of the Martyr out me: not as of and appear having season. This wicked to a point roots, sense "fi is against spoke Turner does the the

me persecuted contradiction

between

duciary

hold"

(1974:64)
(1974:66) the roots throes stylize

on

Becket
whole crisis

and
act

paradigm His from

suggesting
general preconscious actions.

that

Becket

manages" "stage in that people and that these

affair.

and

dramatize

T.
In tation for an But sis, ot's Roman their since poet. Turner's order of Turner's odd just so play. mixing the as is Becket, to

S.

ELIOT'S
perspective to examine nomadism" to

RITUAL
on T.

DRAMA
Turner's interpre Murder seem play, like since

a gain I want

Victor S. Eliot's

the Cathedral

(1963;
"incursive of forms there genres nor is a

originally
compare authors'

published

in 1935).

play,

in

Were it not

it might (his term), a case a and study intentions and Eliot drama theory were we and as are in of should as emic

neither

the

there

story-telling and ritual dramatic both other to as to view etic. Turner Anglo an be and

quite parallel. Turner's analy in Eli action (the not over a consider meaning, Christian view, and one

Although the Catholic, differences writes prone the more I am as

Catholic

Catholic), indigenous

Turner

an

anthropologist Eliot's play

squabble Eliot more

the

In his
great pains

play,
to

Murder
tell a

in the Cathedral,
story. Since this

T.
play

S.

Eliot
was written

is not at
to be

performed at the 1935 Canterbury where II incited Henry King

Becket, story case, of Eliot Eliot the did could historical not assume that art events produce

on the very grounds Festival the slaying of Archbishop Thomas

most of his audience knew In very the this fact the its for play own dramatizes. sake. The

which

86 ANTHROPOLOGICA
that it his play commemorates In Since ritual in event of one God Thomas, kind and as of for was written it for ritual the occasion of

N.S.
the

27(1-2)

1985
which

martyrdom

makes

drama. the interest The drama does primary of the its the actions are no not actions surprise. depend of on such the of been this

people

kept being a performance siastical mercy Blessed For liturgical;

actions the of drama, is know what coming, until the end. suspense are of its drawing 1170 December and Christ, the concluding audience another member, kind, A.D., its

"forward" evoking of Kyrie these

political-eccle

"down" drawing the intercessions play illustrates. must have However,

entertainment.

divergence most ritual

and Eliot's who year. poor," are The drama script

from that of is of intention probably no different both ritual dramas. The fact that the 1935 event was
invites opens in of this with the a intermingling of chorus dominates no action,/ of poor their But between song. only to frames women and motives. Canterbury new harvest and "For wait us, and the to from

waiting theme say,

seasonal

limbo

witness" precincts and eyes

action. "living An

they

to the cathedral of walking action Their (1963:13). Their feet but the is (1963:11). "presage of an act" of been have "forced" foreboding incipient by this
Becket's living." action will disrupt their cycle of

waiting is "there

fear They and partly activist A

passivity. of the

as all impotent waiting regard might ideology as evidence version would Marxist interpret waiting an as But has Eliot of peasant function opiate. religion and of martyrs the in mind, different namely waiting something were women the of if the saints. Even parasitic? peasant waiting the circling bones?there of vultures is understood. inaction sort essentially is not. Turner receptive. another ready kind Passive Eliot would to of suck inaction inaction poetically called have inaction Becket's that blood demands and pick to be while ritual desti

his

differently receptive proper?the being the bling

an is opiate, characterizes "transformative"?as waits immodest for

ny, that more inclusive

Second women," They know Priest

action

Receptive

which
the

is

in the hands

of God.
and

When
bab

complains Thomas Becket and do not

about replies: know,

"foolish,

what

it

is

to

act

or

suffer.

is suffering They know and do not know, that action Neither does the agent suffer And suffering action. But both are fixed act. Nor the patient
In an eternal

To which all must consent And which all must suffer

That the

action,

and

eternal

that that

it may be willed it, they may will

for the

patience

And the suffering, Be forever still.

pattern

may

that the wheel (1963:21-22)

subsist,

may turn and

pattern

is

the

action

still

Grimes

SOCIAL

AND RITUAL

DRAMA 87

either
when sounds

Eliot had finished One might that surmise just reading Kenneth Burke (1969) or a Buddhist philosopher. Especially
symbolized very that much at the by the like of image the "action a turning which the wheel, is eternal or the action "over

coming
states

from underneath"
time

of Asian
Eliot

thought.
wrote

Grover
play,

repose"

Smith
was

(1956:190)
interested

he

in Aristotle; Burke. Eliot's

mysticism and

to accounts the for similarities this at least is in keeping with both Christian view of action
Catholic

which Aristotle Ritual

ordered action cosmos tion trary the same 41). one as in to patterned, pattern notion passage This line:

contributed

theologies

of

martyrdom

and

significantly liturgical
fashion.

via

Thomas Aquinas. is not supposed

intend God liturgical nonarbi Actually, too is it and

sainthood,

to

action
some accord an

of the

sort

to be
this the ac

arbitrary with is

Rather, principles Not logos. to and

ultimate of his

liturgists of order: only a is greater, still."

expression it which of

supposed "subsists"

replicate is "forever not

Platonic

for Eliot's

replication

does in which

Aristotelian
above,

Thomism.
Thomas

go

far

In
Becket

Eliot's Tempters
for the the

enough;

play,

the
the of

women, is quoted What

pattern "sordid pattern; does Becket either does "agents," at The not is the not

quoted

back

to him
is

by one
verbatim the in Put so of of and As turns, the action

of the
except

patronizes omission suffering."

(1963:40 is that the

the a

quotation the "For

is

almost

the
is

pattern

Tempter
not particulars." it is the imitate higher on

does

not
else The

know, but Becket

action eternity, not does another much the passion as ecclesiastical chorus, way,

/ And but

does,
simply a ritual

somewhere

here

in imitate

pattern. the logos the ladder the action and act.

gesture Although than and As are are. and is

incarnate he

it.

or priests know what people its of move

women

hierarchy both knows

still.
which still.

In this

they do not differ

circumference between wheel oscillate taking cosmic is the

from
and actions

"patients,"

the wheel
at its of

(suffering) suffer they center performers to

of the cosmos,
forever and moments do both the like at and and

difference meditation,

movements

or martyrdom once. Instead, passivity,

in special that, except seem ritual actors unable back and law forth into between their

they between

from responsibility resigning feet. The knights in the play

the chorus I social have of women, said there going the second. are The happen no

activity own hands

for typify

the the

direction of their first possibility,

own and

there are. to

know

drama, what is

caught happen
he does wait enters not

in a ritualizing not know what is event, does to him, even if he suspects the knights will kill
the cathedral. is He "knows to him and by does the not Tempters, know." know presented (1963:23).

in surprises audience watching in a play about

ritual a

but in drama, ritual drama may but Becket, Becket,

going to him when

What "do he not

who

upon

ceremony"

88 ANTHROPOLOGICA
In number deciding of things. on a course he says, of action, "... Becket The

N.S.
is

27(1-2)

1985

act / Will be the strife with shadows" shadows, and (1963:23). that tempt him are: Among the shadowy deeds (1) to forget the with the king; past and return to his easy friendship (2) to give king (then, to use this office with intelligent obtain and (3) to form alliances with justice);
ons. Becket Fourth up his ecclesiastical office and again be chancellor under the

But,

substance

to do a tempted of our first

he these three but the says expected temptations, a surprise. who Tempter, "precedes presents expectation," the at other least themselves Although tempters identify by func no name. the fourth has The he offers, tion, tempter temptation as he quotes to himself, back Becket is twofold and specifically^ It ritualistic. to exercise is the of the in excommun power keys

self-interest the English

to bar

the king icating This (1963:39).

to and (1963:37), is the temptation

The one, thereby serve him temptation its face, He is

seek the way "to do the right

is the to turn greater

of martyrdom deed for the

a religious cause which

reason" wrong a act into Becket ought Becket sickness" action

(1963:44). political to serve, views this

temptation making instead. as he

In (1963:40). without damnation. action his for wiser The of efficacious

emerging can neither Yet

from act in

his nor the

"soul's suffer

passionate his gesture of depths ing but mean Becket in done "good." is faith.

becoming precisely and The deed from the revelatory. arising of dy the of the becomes ritual temptation ground the deed would of course destroy him, Untransposed, it does not sustains him. the reason, right "Right" does than action of "reason" this the and heights mean says, "rationally "Sin grows can tempt justifiable." with as doing as good" surely

bound. doubly a martyr is

the end, what makes

Nor

action of the depths. What Becket must find is the action that can arise at the both. This kind of action still only point.
is an action with no name.

(1963:45).

any

is It

Structurally,
play. Its homiletical

the

prose
prose

interlude
contrasts on

is

the still
with morning?by

point
the

of the it sepa

poetry
rates. points death

of
The to in

the first
sermon is

and second of time.

the

sharply

dramatic Christian

parts
Christmas

of the play

that

reckoning,
the

the
the

preached

hinge
paradox while

In
in

his

homily,

Archbishop

Becket

involved at

Mass,

reenacting same time

Christ's celebrating

and passion his birth:

For who
once joy; that and so we overborne

in the
for by it is can the only

World will
same in reason? or

both mourn
For either will at once

and rejoice
be joy cast for will out

at
be by

mourning, rejoice

mourning our these mourn

Christian

and

mysteries same the

reason.

(1963:48) the death

that the only

sermon

By comparing
suggests

of martyrs
valid reason

to that
for an

of Christ,
action such

this
as

Grimes
allowing plying one's that own such a a

SOCIAL
death deed person. should (personal, are they to any is is

AND RITUAL
the will of

DRAMA 89
God. at This least amounts in liturgical Although from of any to psycho im

social

sense.
through

The right

sort
call

unmotivated,

of action
we it political, secondary

is

one which

God himself
motive there a mar over

performs

Here

we proper. Perhaps are motives other tyr's coming ones. of point attachment view

the approach a non-motive. and to

social), the problem including

motive

whatsoever,

unconscious

Thomas Becket's is neither willful

a and martyr is at the once theological sacrifice in sured

a ritual, conundrum. and by

is to find a motive for action that struggle nor resigned activism His dying as passivity.
ethical, Ritually, an historical it of interests, balance and its political, martyrdom tradition is a choice which and power. shadows, with to psychological, is formal of which is such is capable of self ges pres of it self presents ones and of the

context

of group the

tures.

Ethically on all sides

politically,

substantially a contest is the against the difficulty of great orienting cosmic The phasizes

altering between desire of the wheel. for

the

self revenge.

Psychologically, a struggle martyrdom eternal the movement

aligning cycles

temporal of this

Theologically, deeds world

chorus's spatial

in the East? East and Spring are Spring? Is the wind stored up the directional and seasonal symbols that orient the event taking
in Canterbury. what work The shall chorus be done?"

which song and temporal

opens

Part

II

of Where

Eliot's are the

play signs

em of

orientation:

place Easter

waiting
the is the action going action of The Between Martyr, been

is

queries: ".

"Between . The time

Christmas is

and

those

and characters?knows everyone?audience, chorus, to happen. Not the but the orientation outcome, only is in question. When questions of orientation displace to ritual overshadow drama. outcome, begins slaying Christmas St. John of the Thomas and this as of Apostle, almost Becket date, and if natural to occurs the the slain on feasts December of St. Holy Becket's liturgical by on Thursday: 29,

that

long"

(1963:54).

The playwright's

task

is

short/But

to orient
of

1170. the have as of the

Stephen Innocents season, virtue

However, as well action

celebrated, all of that passion of

time?that of

establishing and transpire

lineage.

eternity?is which is about

now

coagulated

What day
Every

is

the day that

day we

is the day One moment

we know that we hope

should fear from or

or fear
from.

for?

hope

like another. in retrospection, Weighs Only We say, was that the The critical day. That is and Even here. now, always now,

selection, moment. in sordid

The eternal

particulars

design

may appear.

(1963:57)

90 ANTHROPOLOGICA
By deed in banners carrying in ecclesiastical rehearsing anathematized they the orient chorus his Becket's the king in martyrdom orients the of the

N.S.

27(1-2)
priests arrive the

1985
orient

the

history.

rhetorically once he years, always,

the martyrs, The knights as such actions, and secular fled to political cosmologically

and, by fact that for seven

France

action

it both knows already, and still does not quite know, what cally; is going to happen. What the knights know by decision and counsel in their veins, with the king, the women know by premonition, Even though and (1963:68). brains, guts they do not commit the
deed, giveness. they consent The chorus through forgets complicity and must beg Becket's cannot bear for very

As history. and cycli

much reality"
Spatial to and at and accuses believes He save bar

(1963:69)?but
orientation their the to door them must who of that become commits

its

easily?"humankind

feet

always
temporal. drag in a

remember.
The him sacred is priests, the into place. a not

follows

the

in cathe Becket

an

effort dral shouts beasts Becket

archbishop's He will door. open the

life, die a been

them the

The priests

try to convince
has arguing only a

Becket
always by form

door;

that
results. and

sanctuary barred

fortress.

the

knights

have

become
but this be sim rather

animals, against out In carrying not to end, action it, must not

he deed, considered. than an

ply be

its

agent

victim.
is killed, in

"patient" and he it,

motive, who suffers assent

must

When becomes a

Becket

the which

action the saint

ramifies. offers his

transaction

Ritually, blood

it to pay

for Christ's buy Becket's

effect it er is than a of

death, life
a sacrificial

as just (1963:75).
action

Christ had sacrificed the event Eventually,

But its presently, orientation is

his will
the eternal

blood to have the

chorus, rath

polluting cyclical: acts

cleansing. because

for

These

marked

limit

to

our

Every horror had its definition. Every sorrow had a kind of end: In life there is not time to grieve this But this, this is out of life,
An We instant are soiled supernatural eternity by a of filth vermin, evil that and we

suffering.

long. is out of time,

clear, united to

wrong. cannot

it is not it is not the house, is not we alone, that is defiled, But the world that is wholly foul. (1963:77-78) It
The drama

the city

and audience characters and ask us the audience

in eral rhetorical rather lawyers. action that prose than word, claim They

among

the

characters

ends

to The knights turn directly intensifies. to judge between them and Becket. Arguing
they men of are fair-minded Englishmen, case lib like their modern, argue our Even if deserve they applause. they they

here,

but

that

between

Grimes
are

SOCIAL
they say, the

AND RITUAL
audience is also

DRAMA 91 to that of the similar the presents Tempter, answer

aspects of who guilty. The passivity

of the chorus.
most

guilty,

considered is audience The Fourth Knight, like

case. He is that the If all, unsettled and the form seizes

complicity the Fourth

on the

convincing

really
rhetorical rather provoke patience

killed
than his or

the Archbishop
martyrdom; own death. passion is left at

ambiguous

(1963:83).
Becket's Archbishop this is but

His
action true,

to
set

his
suicide out is

own
to not

question

constitutes Becket's action

deliberately aggression. verdict to who the have

disguised and a the bridge

The priests third

case take

unrendered final chorus. already weave

as exited,

the The

over berates

priest

accusing
fictions

them

of

trying
during

to

knights,

justify
very

their
moment

actions
they

by weaving
them.

that

They will and rites"

The are priestly background. thanksgiving. it whether widest moving Since ironic. priestly the frame from its We in

even by losing never succeed, courts" "libidinous (1963:85).

has and The the last word, by notes the or is a are but "Te of of its Deum"

unravel

the

themselves

in

"filthy

chorus

language sung in

and Latin

accompanied

petitions in the

concluding Whatever suicidal play confession is very last go on, the

nature sacrificial?the liturgical. of sin the that will the

confession, Becket's concluding The ending

and petition, motive? final action is to not and read archaic thing praise. it again. and happy, as and

was the know its

of

to

movement

just well chant, the

reverse,

thanksgiving one is led waxing same the

There

will

cycle

must

always

be the need
wheel

for

chorus, do surely

"mercies
turn

of blood"

(1963:81);

must

again.

COMPARING
Although T. S. the Eliot's of drama By to

A RITUAL
events play 1974 and this, at of was ritual I mean

DRAMA AND A SOCIAL

Canterbury was 1935 a social are that in ritual dramatistic relatively because they 1170 A.D

DRAMA
were And social Victor The (cf. in

drama, Turner's social

drama.

essay forms of

analysis. "unframed" are almost

Goffman

visibly
observable of drama bounded, action.

embedded

1974).

in the fabric
trained forms and is play Turner's

of
of set doubly

society,
In ritual

their

patterns
esthetic that genres and a

are
forms is, of as and

only and religious differentiated, T. S. Eliot's

observers.

apart framed

contrast, are "framed"; as nameable as to seemed be

ritual frame

whereas drama, of events that without intersecting pattern

Victor to or axes: the

study

attempts

series on two

participants probably can order. The variables

chaotic

diagrammed

92 ANTHROPOLOGICA Framed (Bounded)

N.S.

27(1-2)

1985

Rites Ritual-j-Drama Interaction

1
Ritual

|
I

2
Plays Social

Drama

Unframed

Framed

ritual

or action

"rites" is is

fall necessarily

in

the

first

ample
sense tion.

is
that

the

liturgy
a and The rite its elevated.

of the Mass.
secondary have actions The actions

A rite
in of the the

is not
derived sense

quadrant;

an social it has

ex ac been than

secondary
from that

in the

ritual

Rather, off cordoned arranged, ordinary the of rites are and ones.

been framed performed elevated of

selected, are Mass

deliberately "other"

second

modern

plays differentiated differentiated rather is point three are social not also an it or is not

quadrant, are which by being by as

most contains drama, Whereas in theaters. into social norms, focused plays on are them or

increasingly as art forms

having agents

attention

than quite between

reinforcement

religious
social near the

edification.
location, midway

Since

Eliot's
the

play,
in

by both
this and social actors is The a no

intention
it

and
falls

theatrical ritualistic or as

sense, dramatic drama. are

poles. Events in

Quadrant quadrant unaware of cess or polarity as such, al is but this

contains unframed events around

unframed, insofar them.

the There

completely dramatic pro unframed of events individu

ritual

but structure, concerned only with action the as

chaos. merely with people's to which degree distinct it is Whenever think the of roles, events or unframed

framed/ awareness or it as has A.D. an has

recognizes when framed its own a play niche

society nameable. when

bounded; identity. to begin ritualized frame Drama because way to As to impose I use is

social in

interaction or enacting can Turner acts. it, way but One is

participants themselves framing 1170 of because observer is on a to it.

is Something no has longer in ordinary playing begun. as a actor seen parts Look social decided events on the

back, ing in drama to it; perform another as dramatistically.

four

not present a trained frame an the action image term, an as as a it,

social
event event which deed it as If action,

drama of
a which other if if has

1170 began
been

a theory impose of The framing

rapidly.

By 1173,

people
deed An measure is

"deed." actions return a

out singled can cluster to standard. it, imitate

orientation or

or gesture around point becomes a by

regarded

the

center.

event

people it were one the

themselves

were term

to

define However,

ritual ritual" it is

"unframed

only in

in

terms to

of four consider

intentional would certain be

quadrant

self-contradictory.

helpful

Grimes

SOCIAL

AND RITUAL

DRAMA 93

as or as such ones, actions, habitually repeated stylized poten a term ritual is to tial ritual Interaction gestures. referring ritual Unframed ritual is processes. tacit, barely recognizable or "nascent" Grimes is and still 4) (see 1982:Chapter "decadent," gaining actions. or Lack beginning a of to frame lose (cf. its Mary distinctions Douglas's from ordinary definition of

"grid,"
social

1973:
consensus.

Chapter
Thus,

4)
a

may indicate
comparatively

that

the

action
ritual is to

lacks
likely

unframed it

to be
part of recapitulate can that consider

highly
what be to

individualized,

if not

idiosyncratic,

it ritualized is that may make actions. other Ritualization "seen be as" such. ritual, Victor but which Turner actors

seems

even though
or repeat of actions may events not as

consists themselves to such

refers

"liminoid"
Even an work in as the ultimate is Becket's a

(Turner and Turner

T. though moment social life, S. in these chart Eliot's Thomas two

1978:253).
work Becket's is a ritual and on means drama Victor an initial focused Turner's phase on

dramatistic

analysis are works

life, focused by no

incommensurate,

following

illustrates:

TURNER ELIOT
1. "Ritual cal the a Paradigms Action: Thomas Council social of and Politiat 1. Murder dral, a in the Cathe drama,

Becket

ritual

Northampton," dramatistic analysis.

(1974:Chapter
2. Analysis an initial focused

2)

on

breach, ted

2.

Dramatization on cluding redress, moment. drama Christian

concentra a con

phase.

3.

Primary social

drama interaction.

is

in

phases

of

3.

Primary eras of tory.

is

in his

the

4.

An an

etic, emically

political religious

frame

for

4.

An

event.

emically frame for

an

religious etic

political

event.

5. Lapses 6. Too

into hagiographic
theorizing.

5. Lapses 6. to

into Aristotelian

storytelling.

little

analysis?

Too little

narrative? rite
to become polluted.

7. Social
become

drama threatening
ritually fixed.

7. Sacrificial
threatening dramatically

94 ANTHROPOLOGICA
8. Political principle 9. Becket both motivation of explanation. "stage (i.e., both manages" his 9. as the 8. Political

N.S.

27(1-2)
motivation

1985
as

temptation. Becket neither chooses avoids knows and does

and

is

in the

of a paradigm is martyrdom and unconscious). 10. Paradigms are

"fiduciary

hold"

not know (i.e.,

he

manipulative

unconsciously nor deliberately martyrdom). design" is in

in

"actors'" heads.

10.

"Eternal the sordid pattern

particulars." is the

11.

Paradigms which, patterns. in

emplot turn,

actions form

11.

The action,

12.

Dominant linear,

metaphors: processual

temporal, (e.g., "flow").

12.

Dominant spatial, (e.g., still"

metaphors: the circular, "forever static

center).

Although
drama of action, is the leads and action

Eliot
continuum him then to

and Turner
between to locate find is a drama poet, although a Christian

make quite
them. Turner's first analogized he does a more dramatist, of

different
dramatistic all or not in locate

uses
social the

of it,
theory inter on the prima

drama

reflected

Even stage. on ry drama have might the primary the link

Eliot though the stage, so. As done drama in

"platonic" Eliot in death, the

playwright has located events and which that in that

crucifixion

history, Jesus of

specifically to Becket's political while historians elements of seems the to into frame Eliot

turn link
Turner devotees frame Nevertheless, has

both of
erected would frame an both

these
an

to
etic,

the commemorative

festival
a as

of
events

1935.

around casts regard

around

religiously, event which men retain

religious political.

dialectic.
erate, opposite

In

both
each

treatments
work

of Becket, into

the dialectic
"lapse"

religious-political into

is delib
its own story

although

sometimes interpretation is that on too with paradigm events Eliot's poetry

telling,
action. it has treatment analysis By a

and Eliot's
The become, of for outcome is

genre?Turner's

Becket
of not this

Aristotelian
Eliot's

hagiographic

theorizing
drama, classic too mind.

about

Becket

strong contains

narrative. much nomothetic that of the sparse

Similarly, and narration goals in

though Turner's little

anthropologists the the

emphasizing makes interpretation like zation rite. or And plot, despite his

grips social attention to

Turner's Becket, to be drama appear to characteri a sacrificial

rite.

For all
of a

that might be said

and in drama drama actual which

manages on a

dramatize

about

the kinship,

or even

the

identity other may analyzes

ritual social

theoretical

dominate

performance. is usually

one or the level, Turner Even though characterized by flow,

Grimes
an archetypal paradigm

SOCIAL
threatens

AND RITUAL
to fix

DRAMA 95
the action into a rite or

is true for Eliot, whose fate. The opposite Becket is in danger to dramati of undermining the efficacy of martyrdom by yielding
cally-instigated tion is for thing for Both tional him a acts. Eliot's wrong (i.e., and Eliot What Becket for a Turner is a principle to of do temptation?namely, reason. political) depict Turner's Becket explana the right

Turner

struggle.

vacillating and Goffman) scious synonym not does stage

However, between unconscious

as undergoing characterization stage Because "fiduciary Eliot's and Becket, struggles action.

a of

motiva has (a con not and both we do a la

Becket

manipulative

prehension" for faith. know, is and is

compulsion. Turner's (1974:64), By contrast, unconscious

managing it is "beneath hold" who to reject is knows

not know
action,

managing which

hardly benevolent

if he

achieves
neither

political

mere

this,

Eliot's

Becket
nor the

aims at

Although

faithful

resignation locates By

willful

coercion. compel the places Eliot's though possibili never are than cultural the that that

Turner Becket "eternal conception of ty denied. insides the "in

metaphorically actors' heads." in seem its the might to remove

comparison,

paradigms Eliot

design" criticism, Thus, of

eternity actors' is the

Even particulars. a design such from the roots in culture and politics no is less accessible (or more) Eliot's means that Aristotelian one cannot

sordid

heads. action

insistence avoid

criticism when thinking The difference between theologically. on this point Turner and Eliot is probably that Eliot would be to less than Turner to standards willing subject theological
cultural see as Turner or during, In Eliot the ral, Turner or Eliot as results the a criticism. On the other paradigm the connection by a locates between highly hand, and Turner action not is as ethical after, more prone to and unmediated automatic, reflection. the time

pattern

reflexivity crisis. final dramatist of their or of analysis, and dominant processual action as if

self-conscious, in the time

before

Victor

of many Turner

the as By an

differences anthropologist to for spatial, is or its "forever rings. basic content casting appealing

between are tempo example? circular, still"?

metaphors. metaphors?"flow," as phasic. the center were By

linear, conceives treats

static

metaphors?e.g., actions

using that

they could obvious Eliot's

layers

are

this Though now drawn, Turner's "apply"

comparison and it is theory to

continue, I that play,

parameters merely Eliot's to

am

not thus

play
work question

in

the role
in their are

of

"data."
social

differences warrant the

form

and

Nor am I willing
function of

to admit

that

the
to the to (2)

we play, consider

theory, forced

compartmentalization. and do not merely to ask or Turner social whether drama

and dramatic scholarly If we allow the play the it as is only theory linear; to (1) and adequate:

apply

either

narrative

96 ANTHROPOLOGICA
to helps tion. claim us that notice all the rituals static, play question is have circular a dramatic side of it

N.S.
plot. Turner's makes

27(1-2)
Eliot's interpreta use minimum of all

1985
play of

Eliot's Although thus into plot, calling as structured. narratively If Eliot, conscious we we must of to allow ask the what do to

dramatic, Turner's

treatment

rites

Turner's whether intricacies it

Becket
Secondly, Perhaps those

case and theory is clear really of martyrological

study that

to

question was Becket Was view? minds of

unwittingly
martyrs who wish

compelled
extent not "invent" is "exist"

by

images

rather

martyrdom

except them after play drama the social locates in no

a retrospective only in the and hearts fact. one keenly Turner as

than theology?

theology.

the makes

the

only

or Reading access data words,

seeing to the are may one

Eliot's social strongly interpret the though Turner be in located Turner's

aware

that

which by ritual drama the

through In other cally mary. heads bury

which

marked

earlier drama is

is analyzes ritual drama. hermeneuti in pri actors'

even primary, The which paradigm can just as or the easy 1980:163) it metaphorically managing. Another problem whether On the and well even

historically

historically in Mass, "Where" obvious. heads: both is Becket two

Festivals, is paradigm reason

head. means in

Canter yearly one locates the There Becket's, the may is no and

important,

because
it is (Turner locate stage

why not

he

is British
to

paradigm locate and

although cannot

by arise

(Scottish)
the on if

and Catholic,
model that which

Turner's.
in

However,
"depths" we would have been

martyrdom the "surface," we believe

where

which stage

and ma, the there

Turner or other? are

is

emerges drama

from is can a we

the

reflection assign Becket Eliot (1)

comparison of priority and King and

of social to Henry

Eliot dra one or II, head;

vice-versa. Does Turner several

principle, occur drama Becket, or

between between dramas:

between

Turner? Becket's

Perhaps

(2) between Becket and Henry; (3) between Turner and Becket; and, if we are to be fully reflexive, and Eliot's (4) between Turner's
readings If ply Instead, of we we the take the must affair. Eliot's social also the interpretation and political consider: (1) we cannot sim seriously, Becket. forces surrounding motivational Becket's strug

overlapping

within

consider

and performers, and ecclesiastical "indigenous theory. actions is also ity by of On are any one in

gle;

and

(2)

the exegesis

of

the event

as

offered

by pilgrims,
of are martyrdom both partly

at clergy assessments and the by emic Eliot's

Canterbury. of Becket's partly and

Theologies act

exegesis," level, conflict. not theory only that

competing accounts etic of dramatism

anthropological of Becket's Becket's motive

overridden

Turner's

specification social from results Among

argues martyrdom.

stage-managed

but theory, or assumes the prior other Eliot's things,

Grimes
Becket not implicitly hide sermon, but consideration consideration

SOCIAL
challenges

AND RITUAL
the

DRAMA 97
of an any social

psychological
merely Christmas revelation, serious serious makes construes "forces." and seen Eliot's The Becket drama, seem between and er tion or not (etic) as and to between be the make as it a it

interpretation
behind Becket presents of

of action.
but

omni-competence

To do

this,

Eliot

does
his and to

dogma, does an

presents announce not for attitudes or decision product those and is

In argument. some infallible reflection in addition of a process.

argument

serious phases and of who less

theological of the results of personal as the also criticizes Turner "culture"

Through Becket,
the it In a more

Eliot
result

challenges

any view

of action

that

either
or social

fact, causal

passively Turner

"willpower," reified reify 1980:144). mystical

culture When than

motive

(see agent for action,

Turner no

"eternal process social thus

design." of drama juxtaposing against over drama would belief matter and than with of (i.e., and like a two a a ritual case and theory dramatization of boundary. Becket of the study same of that may conflict

confusing

orders sacred

stepping two orders Eliot's

conceptualization, But the and

between Turner's to keep

theorists and a competing to Turner of debate

dramatism) the two these and social

Henry King II, is real. Wheth spheres?explana two spheres fact, are

sometimes, as enced indebted the arena

(emic)?separate, historical

There may be no clashing. own research his allowing a scholarly dramatist such

experi more strategy to enter into as Eliot.

REFERENCES
Browne, E. Martin

CITED

1969

The

Making

of

T.

S.

Eliot's

Plays.

Burke, 1969 Eliade,

Cambridge Kenneth A Grammar California Mircea

University of Motives.

Press. Berkeley, California:

Cambridge,

England:

University

of

Press.

1959

Cosmos
Willard T. S.

and
R. in

History:
Trask,

The

Myth
New

of
York:

the

Eternal
and Brace,

Return.
Row. Jovan

translator. New

Harper

Eliot, 1963

Murder

the

Cathedral.

York:

Harcourt,

ovich, Incorporated. Wilhelm Dilthey, 1976 Selected Writings. Cambridge University

Douglas, 1973 Goffman, 1974 Mary Natural dom House. An Harper Symbols:

Originally

published

in 1935. England: in 1914.

York: Ran

H. P. Rickman, ed. Press. Originally

in

Cambridge, published
New

Explorations

Cosmology.

Erving Frame Analysis: ence. New York:

Essay and

on Row.

the

Organization

of

Experi

98 ANTHROPOLOGICA
Grimes, Ronald Press of L.

N.S.

27(1-2)

1985

1982

Beginnings Russell Eliot

T. go, Carol T. S. S.

in Ritual
America.

Studies.

Washington, Random House.

Development,

D.C:

University

Kirk, 1971
Margolis, 1972 Smith, 1977 Smith,

and His
D. Eliot's Illinois: Eliot's Press.

Age.

New York:

John

Intellectual University Dramatic of

1922-1939. Press.

Chica

Chicago and

Theory

Practice.

New

York:

Gordian Grover

1956

T.

S.

Eliot's
Chicago,

Poetry
Illinois:

and Plays:
University

A Study
of

in Sources
Chicago Press.

and

Turner,

Meaning. Victor Ndembu versity versity

1957

Schism and
Village Press of

Continuity
Life. for Zambia. the

in

African

Society:
England:

A
Institute,

Study of
Uni Uni

Manchester,

Manchester

Rhodes-Livingstone

1962

Chihamba,

the

White Spirit:
Press

A Ritual
Number for 33.

Drama of the Ndembu.

Manchester, England: the Rhodes-Livingstone

Papers Rhodes-Livingstone Manchester University Institute.

1971

An Anthropological
Translation T. New 0. cations York). Fields Ithaca, and of (distributed Beidelman, ed.

Approach
Culture: pp. in

to the
to America

Icelandic
E. E. by London:

Saga.
Evans-Pritchard. Tavistock

In The
Publi

Essays 349-374. North

Barnes

and

Noble, Human

1974

Dramas,

1974

Ritual
the phors: pp. Four. Tyler, views

Society.

New

Paradigms
of

and

in Action Symbolic Metaphors: Press. York: Cornell University

Political

Action:

Thomas Becket
and Meta Victor Turner, Press.

at

Council

1975

Symbolic 60-97. Ithaca,

Northampton. in Action New J. York:

In Human

Dramas, Society

Fields by

Cornell

Symbolic

Studies.
pp.

In Annual
Siegel, 145-161. Palo

Review
Alan Alto, R.

of Anthropology,
Beals, California: and

University

Volume
A. Re

Bernard eds. , Incorporated.

Stephen Annual

1977 1978

Synthe Process, System, and Symbol: A New Anthropological sis. Daedalus 106(3):61-80. Encounter with Freud: The Making of a Comparative Symbolo In The Making of Psychological George Anthropology. gist.
D. versity Spindler, of ed. California pp. 558-583. Press. Berkeley, California: Uni

1980
Turner,

Dramas Social 7(4):141-168.

Victor, and of

and

Stories
Turner

About Them. Critical Lectures

Inquiry on the

Edith

1978

Image and Pilgrimage

History Press. Religions

in Christian
Series. New

Culture.
York:

Columbia

University

Grimes
Van Gennep, Arnold

SOCIAL

AND RITUAL

DRAMA

99

1960

The Rites
edition Chicago,

of Passage.
Monika by Illinois: B.

Translated
Vizedom of

from
and Chicago

the original
L. Press.

1909
Caffee.

Gabrielle

University