Social Structure example essay topic

Victor Turner's notion of magic mirror as a symbolic concept in modern anthropology continues to thrive as an entry point into American literary studies and the cultural criticism it engenders. From to social drama, Turner's concepts have affected and are reshaping many critical practices that inform our approaches to American literature. Turner's theories of comm unitas, anti-structure and pilgrimage as they can be identified in genre, author or period studies give us the necessary insight into the works of dominant culture. In Turner's words: "comm unitas is made evident or accessible, so to speak, only through its juxtaposition to, or hybridization with, aspects of social structure". It seems crucial to stress also that Turner's account rids social or political matters of ideological concerns. It cannot be a question of envisaging a mode of social organization which will maximize the potential for spontaneous comm unitas.

It is therefore never a matter of seeking to overturn one social constitution with another ordered according to different principles: "there is no specific social form that is held to express spontaneous comm unitas. Rather is it expected best to arise in the intervals between incumbencies of social positions and statuses, in what used to be known as 'the interstices of social structure'". (Turner, 1995: 23) Rather than revolutionary activity being directed at the destruction of outmoded and despised forms of social organization with the aim of instituting new ideologically determined ones with the hope of greater freedom or whatever, such activity must instead seek to create or identify manifestations of comm unitas and provide them with increased force or intensity. In this way the dynamics of social organization are brought to the fore, while rigid stratification's are destabilized and open to change or collapse.

As Turner sees it: "structural action swiftly becomes arid and mechanical if those involved in it are not periodically immersed in the regenerative abyss of comm unitas. Wisdom is always to find the appropriate relationship between structure and comm unitas under the given circumstances of time and place, to accept each modality when it is paramount without rejecting the other, and not to cling to one when its present impetus is spent". (Turner, 1995: 46). The notion of dominant culture events as vehicles for social change may be illuminated by the notion of, a term originated by Victor Turner in 1974. Liminality refers to the ambiguity of the ritual realm, where everyday reality is transformed into a symbolic, commit arian experience which thereafter affects the individuals lived reality. In this way it can act as a catalyst for social change.

In psychological terms, ritual can be viewed in terms of flow as a psychophysical experience of involving oneself totally in an activity, which provides the individual with the opportunity to assess his / her normal life, and that this can induce personal and social change (Turner, 1982 a: 94). Turner argued that the dialectical relationship of dominant culture to social structure can facilitate creative responses to the negative aspects of day-to-day social structures, such as divisiveness, alienation and exploitation. In binding individual elements of the social fabric together in a whole, ritual serves to create a sense of community among its participants, reinforcing those communitarian values, which hold people together. In turn, dominance threatens the status quo by undermining status positions when participants share in the creation of new (albeit temporary) social roles, encouraging experimental direct and egalitarian exchanges between people. Finally, in serving the common good it reinforces peoples sense of community, a sense of which they can take back with them into everyday life. Dominant culture can also undermine the social structure, in that people find instruction in it as to the fundamental organizing principles and values upon which they base their society.

According to Turner, structure and anti-structure are brought into balance, as the bonds of conventional social construction are loosened and interaction becomes more egalitarian. In this way, dominance is a principal means by which society grows and moves into the future (Turner, 1982 a: 98). If liminal states are induced through processes of ritual they may be utilized to effect changes in consciousness where people experience a sense of spiritual unity, which can then be translated into social movements aimed at transforming the nature of society. This already happens to some extent, with musical genres such as punk rock and techno being associated with the DIY (Do It Yourself) anarchist movement, though at the same time this movement is scattered and sporadic rather than being an organized force in society.

In a state of, suggests Turner, comm unitas or the "liberation of human capacities of cognition, affect, volition, creativity, etc. form the normative constraints incumbent upon occupying a sequence of social statuses" may occur. People from all levels of society and walks of life may form strong bonds, free of the structures that normally separate them. Not only can a state of free one from the confines of one's designated role, it can contain the seeds of the future. According to Turner, liminal people or groups are a "kind of institutional capsule or pocket which contains the germ of future social developments, o social change".

In his essay From Liminal to Liminoid, in Play, flow, and Ritual, Turner notes: Prophets and artists tend to be liminal and marginal people, edge men, who strive with a passionate sincerity to rid themselves of the clicks associated with status incumbency and role-playing and to enter into vital relations with other men in fact or imagination. In Liminality and Comm unitas, Victor Turner writes of liminal beings: It is as though they are being reduced or ground down to a uniform condition to be fashioned anew and endowed with additional powers to enable them to cope with their new station in life. The author used the term "anti-structure", ... to describe both and what I have called "comm unitas". He meant by it not a structural reversal... but the liberation of human capacities of cognition, affect, volition, creativity, etc., from the normative constraints incumbent upon occupying a sequence of social statuses (Turner, 1982 a: 44).