Emile Durkheim and His Perspective on Rituals - Essay Example

Emile Durkheim and His Perspective on Rituals Introduction Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), is considered to be one of the most important and influentialof the early sociologists. Over a hundred years after his works were written, his theories and ideas are still studied and utilized. Aside from his great contributions to theories of labour and criminology, and his dominance of early understanding of suicide, Durkheim was also known for his work on religion and ritual. He considered these subjects to be closely bound to sociology: The general conclusion of the book…is that religion is something eminently social. Religious representations are collective representations which express collective realities; the rites…take rise in the midst of assembled groups, and which are destined to excite, maintain or recreate certain mental states (Durkheim) Durkheim was one of the first to posit the important point that the individual is made from the society into which they were born, rather than that the individuals make the society in which they live. Durkheim managed to focus upon a number of different subjects throughout his short life, all connected to the idea of society and unity. As Durkheim was a sociologist, it is unsurprising that he chose to see religion in terms of its effects upon the social order. “God is society, writ large”, as he suggests, or: [Religion is] a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things…things set apart and forbidden…[and] beliefs and practices which unite all those who adhere to them (Durkheim, page 62). He sees the people’s conceptions of ideas such as the religious and supernatural worlds as directly related to their social order. The purpose of rituals, the main focus of his work, is to divide the supernatural or sacred world from the mundane or profane one. In considering how Durkheim connected an inner religious life to an outer social life, it is necessary to explore his understanding of ritual, and the role of this in creating a social order. This essay will examine Durkheim’s theory of ritual, beginning with an explanation of the two forms of Social Phenomena which he described as acting within religion; symbol and ritual. This will then extend into a closer consideration of the three systems of ritual which Durkheim considered important: positive rites, negative rites, and rites of Expiation. After a brief examination of the differences between Marx, Weber and Durkheim, an example of ritual which helps to illustrate Durkheim’s point will be discussed, followed by a conclusion in which all the separate parts of the essay are drawn together to provide a complete explanation of his perspective on ritual, and modern applications of Durkheim’s theory is also considered. Durkheim’s two kinds of Social Phenomena As described above, these two kinds of social phenomena directly relate to the process of ritual; other forms of social phenomena are not included here. While these two social phenomena are described separately, they are, of course, intimately connected, both in religious terms and also in the wider sphere of social relations. No matter how the terms relate to each other or the environment, Durkheim’s ideas of their importance helped to create his theory of ritual and social connection. Symbol Durkheim considered religion to consist of three elements; belief in the sacred; religious organization; and ritual. This sense of the sacred then became focused on a group symbol, or totem. Like Freud, he believed in the importance of ‘Totemism’, although he conceived of it in a very different way; in Durkheim’s theories, the Totems of ancient societies were the original form of social bonding: In reality, a cult is not a simple group of ritual precautions which a man is held to take in certain circumstances; it is a system of diverse rites, festivals and ceremonies which all have this characteristic, that they reappear periodically. They fulfil the need which the believer feels of strengthening and reaffirming, at regular intervals of time, the bond which unites him to the sacred being upon which he depends. (Durkheim, page 63) This cult, with its rituals begins as a bond between the individual and his personal connection to the divine. However, this later becomes the process by which a man is connected to the wider social group, of which he is now a member. . The groups who worshipped the totem were unified, and willing to sacrifice their own personal needs or inhibitions for the sake of the Totem: and out of this social grouping around the totemic device comes ritual, ritual which binds the man not to his vision of the sacred, but to a common social awareness and experience. Perhaps partially down to this movement away from the divine, Durkheim seems to suggest that the important members of the religious groups, such as priests and mystics, come to rely upon methods other than totemism to contact the divine: The prophets, the founders of religions, the great saints, in a word the men whose religious consciousness is exceptionally sensitive very frequently give signs of an excessive nervousness…The ritual use of intoxicating liquors is to be explained in the same way. Of course this does not mean that an ardent religious faith is necessarily the fruit of drunkenness and mental derangement. (Durkheim, page 226) It seems that Durkheim was suggesting that the sacred is retained in some senses within ritual – priests and seers generally bring together society, and therefore the creation of ritual from the totemism of the sacred is itself renewed. Ritual is essential to society, and possibly also essential to the emergence of new forms of ritual over time. Ritual “Ritual is the organization of behaviour directed toward the sacred. Ritual serves to emphasise the cult identity and energize its normative structure”. (Brooklyn, date unknown). Durkheim suggests that ritual reinforces the norms of a society. During these rituals, the participants come together as a group: one might consider a football match, where the social ‘group’, usually formed around the teams’ home towns, are united in their desire to see their team triumph. This is reinforced in ritual through the wearing of team colours, the singing of team songs, and identification of the individual with the group. The purpose of ritual is to re-enforce the central barriers and norms of the society in which the ritual takes place. For some communities, such a ritual might be a marriage: marriages exist for society, as it reinforces the norms of gender and sexuality, as well as ‘normalizing’ a sexual relationship. People may love one another without matrimony, but it is the latter which both brings the couple into harmony with their society, and also reinforces that society through its ritual: The Mythology of a group is the system of beliefs common to the group…it is a moral and a cosmology as well as a history. So the rite serves and can serve only to sustain the vitality of these beliefs, to keep them from being effaced from memory…through it all, the group periodically renews the sentiment which it has of itself and its unity, at the same time, individuals are strengthened in their social natures (Durkheim, 474) Personal rituals, while demonstrated in both social and private areas, do not fall under the purview of psychology (rather, they are the interest of psychology). Durkheim is primarily interested in social ritual, as provided by a shared group interest, whether that be religion, politics, or sport, work roles or other kinds of activity which involves performed roles within a social context. Durkheim considered that rites created social grouping through a series of different rituals: Negative ritual, Positive ritual, and rites of expiation. All of these rites are somehow connected to the other, and relate to the particular ritual being enacted. A negative football prohibition, for example, might be not sitting in the stands of the opposing team or not walking through parts of the host city prior to the match; this would involve corresponding rites in order to obey this prohibition. A ritual of expiation does not always involve the breaking of a prohibition; it might also include funeral rites (including feasting, normally associated with positive rites, but here indicating passing, or the beginning of a journey) Negative Rites Consisting of taboos and restrictions, most commonly in connection to positive rites, negative rituals might also be described as avoidance or Tabu. What they are essentially concerned with is the threat of contact between the sacred and the profane. These cannot touch without contaminating the other (Durkheim, page 54). Negative rites tend to focus upon prohibition: covering food, marriage partners, or the seating arrangements at a match. What is true of all these negative rites, however, is how they affect the practitioner once the rules have been broken. The object of the negative rites is to prevent this occurring – rites of expiation may be used to correct any breaking of the rules. Nevertheless, Durkheim feels that it also has positive effects upon religion – the negative rites are the gateway to the positive ones (Durkheim, page 348). One example, asceticism, which involves severe negative rituals and restrictions, also provides the ascetic with a sacred element: by conducting the negative rights, the ascetic separates himself from the profane, and thereby achieves a greater position within the religion. Negative rites also have a powerful role in social groups, as these restrictions encourages the individual to reign in his own desires or needs, to be in accordance with the social demands of the rites (Durkheim, page 356) Positive Rites Communal ceremonies, dancing and feasting: Positive rituals are concerned with social celebrations – events such as marriage or births provide evidence of such rituals, which affect our social habits. Positive rituals are often considered in the modern era to be the things which identify the religion clearly from other faiths: the way in which a person marries or is accepted into the faith is a very significant indicator of which religion is being practiced; and an individual coming into one faith from another, even coming into a different sect of the same religion, is often re-accepted into that faith, according to the rituals of the sect. Durkheim would probably consider this to be proof of his claims that ritual reinforces social grouping. Rites of Expiation These would include such situations as fasting, or, as mentioned above, attending a funeral. These rituals (called Piacular by Durkheim), are those which enforce morning and confirmation of the obligations of the individual in the social rituals. These stress the commitment of the individual to the social group, and of that group to the individual; thus the traditional concept that funerals are performed for the benefit of the living. As with both the negative and positive rites, expiatory rites confirm the ‘norms’ of the society, and link one individual to a series of prohibitions and behaviours established by the social group, which is the principle of the rituals in Durkheim’s theory. Durkheim and Marx and Weber Although Durkheim was a near-contemporary of Marx and Weber, his theories were very different from theirs. Marx suggests that the idea of social order requires two opposing elements, for example upper class and lower class, which serve to keep the whole of society in the same kind of system. It is the opposition of these elements, and their occasional conflict, which provides the ‘social order’. Weber is also connected to this idea, as described by Raymond Aron in Main Currents in Sociological Thought: Modern society, as he describes it, tends towards an increasingly bureaucratic an rational organisation…the more modernity prevails and extends its sphere, the more the anonymous, bureaucratic, rational element of organization will be enlarged. This rational organization is, as it were, the fate of modern societies” (Aron, page 14). For Max Weber, religion provides for “A human need for metaphysical beliefs: that is, for meaningful interpretations of reality” (Lee, page 3) Durkheim, on the other hand, looked for unity in society, suggesting that harmony, rather than opposition, created social order. As Lee points out: “Ritual is socially meaningful as a demonstration of social solidarity because it transcends the personal beliefs of individuals” (page 4). He is much more concerned with the idea that social pressures force the individual to perform positive, negative or expiatory rites in order to conform. Here, deviancy and individuality are punished through being considered profane, and conformity and normalcy are rewarded through being sacred. For Durkheim, there seems little possibility of class conflict or revolution, as this would quickly be overtaken by sacred and profane rites set down by the new society. Therefore, Durkheim can be seen to contrast strongly with both Marx and Weber, being much more of a ‘functional’ sociologist than either of the other two theorists. Example A particularly intriguing example of the way in which ritual provides membership of a society is in the Navajo religious practice. One such ritual, the Navajo House Blessing Ceremony, has been described as a ritual according to Durkheim’s use of the phrase. The intent of the ritual is to “Feed the house, show proper treatment and respect to it, prevent timber breakage, and remove the hogan’s loneliness” (Biehl, 1992). It also serves as an initiation of both the house and the new residents. The first rite serves as a purification for the Hogan…the next rites performed in the ceremony are liminal and signify a transition… the four cardinal directions, starting at the east and moving counterclockwise, are marked with corn meal (Biehl, 1992) Considering how these ceremonies are connected with Durkheim’s theories of ritual, it is possible to see that the ceremonies involve both the new residents and the already established society; this confirms both the new members and the older ones as part of the same society. It “Helps reaffirm the accepted social order within the Hogan” (Biehl, 1992). The second kind of ceremony, that of a public building, involves much more participation by the society: “The ceremony begins with a speech by the singer that includes the origins of the ceremony and its purpose” (Biehl, 1992); clearly thereby reiterating the things which help to identify the social group; the individuals all identify with the story, and thereby help to reinforce the idea of the ‘norms’ of society. Durkheim appeared to consider the feast part of the Navajo system particularly significant: “Every feast…has certain characteristics of the religious ceremony, for in every case the effect is to bring men together” (Durkheim, 427). Feasting, or social celebration, is seen in such events as weddings, funerals, christenings and religious celebrations. Therefore, the feast of the Navajo blessing ceremony is essential to the ritual, which joins the community. They, in other words, break bread together: a traditional symbol for those who have a common unity. Mutual engagement in a feast is one way in which a social bond is renewed through ritual processes. It is clear, then, that the purpose of the Navajo House Blessing Ceremony conforms to Durkheim’s ideas of ritual and social reinforcement. As states: In the case of the Navajo House Blessing Ceremony, the sentiments that are expressed; wishes for harmony order and sa’ah naaghei bik’eh hozhoo, are those essential to the Navajo…the…Ceremony is a commemorative ceremony which upholds the Navajo social order by replaying the tradition of the original rite which is prescribed by Navajo mythology (Biehl, 1992) We can move easily from an actual ritual into the areas described by Durkheim as essential to social order in this manner: Navajo rite – tradition – mythology – social reinforcement. What this theory confirms is that there are strong social elements in even a complex set of rites such as the Navajo House Blessing Ceremony. This could be classed as a positive rite, although there does seem to be elements of expiatory rites: the house being re-consecrated, for example. One might suggest many reasons for the dual-purpose of the ceremony, including expiation for building on a new plot, or for moving into a new area. What is clear, however, is that the rite is both a cleansing and a welcoming of the new members of the society, very much like a re-acceptance into a new sect of a faith. Conclusion Durkheim’s theories still exist in action; sociologists have now extended his theory into many areas of modern life, including education, childcare and family structure, and ‘holidays’ as socialization tools. Typically, home life is regarded by followers of Durkheim as “Profane (Secular), routine, daily life, the conduct of instrumental activities at work and carrying out household chores”. (Etzioni, page 2). The feminist idea that women are expected to perform chores and other profane roles while others are not working is confirmed by Etzioni, who notes that: There has been a significant measure of Regression toward traditional mores during holidays…women still seem to do a disproportionate share of the inviting, planning and preparing, cooking and serving of holiday meals, and above all are expected to be the ones to ensure the warm glow of the holiday spirit (Etzioni, page 13) Following in the traditions of Durkheim, this would lead the theorist to conclude that holiday rites have a role in maintaining the social norms of gender roles, even while there is modernization in other areas of women’s social lives. Holidays have begun to attract the attention of theorists, as they provide a quantifiable element which can then be compared to variables. Theorists suggest that holidays serve a similar role to religion in creating rites which maintain the social norms of a group. In his article on the sociology of holidays, Etzioni suggests that holidays serve to socialize members of a society as well as to reaffirm their commitments to values, and as such serve to sustain the integration of society (Etzioni, page 4) Durkheim had already considered some kinds of holidays, which he described as “Holidays of recommitment”, and includes periods such as Easter and Passover. Easter dramatizes and extols the essential message of Christianity: the resurrection of Christ…the rebirth and reaffirmation of faith. The holiday is marked by specific and elaborate rituals (Etzioni, page 4) This recommitment contrasts quite obviously with that of Christmas, the other well-known Christian holiday – here the majority of rites surround the commercial element of the ‘festive season’. While Easter also has a festive element, there are generally fewer positive rites here, and more rites related to expiation and reaffirmation of Christian faith. A second series of Holidays are called “Tension Management holidays”. There are greater time limits on the amount of ‘holiday’ provided with these: “Time limits refer to points in time after which participants are expected to return to conformist modes of behaviour that reflect societal beliefs” (Etzioni page 5). Christmas might be moving into more of this capitalist ‘socializing’ series of holidays, and away from one of religious celebrations. What can be seen from this is that the Holidays, whether religious or provided as Tension Management, both serve to enforce conformity through rites: the role of women in celebratory holidays, and the return-to-work after commercial holidays. While Etzioni suggests that “The privatization of holidays that used to be public will undermine societal integration, in conflict with Durkheim’s expectation” (Page 13-14), it is also possible to suggest that both holidays serve to reinforce social norms, exactly as Durkheim predicted, and has been demonstrated in this essay to exist in all cultures and social roles. Durkheim theorised about the way in which rites provided a social structure in which individuals are performers. It is possible that this has partially broken down, as modern society reduces the distance between sacred and profane elements. Lee has noted that some religious communities are failing to live strictly by their positive rites, resulting in a breakdown of the connection between ritual and social norms: Due to the operational closure of both consciousness and Communication, participants in ritual cannot attach their thoughts To ritual in a socially meaningful manner. Conversely, society Cannot restrict or govern the thoughts of participants. (Lee, page 21) Durkheim’s theory of rites and socialization relies to a degree upon the participants in a rite attaching importance to their role. Without this attachment, the pressure to conform to social roles would be considerably lessened. The Navajo actively participate in the Blessing Ceremony: the new resident’s connection to the established community would be lost without it. The role of Negative rites in preventing the sacred meeting the profane also appears to be lessened – while the positive rites remain identified with religious social groups, other groups do not necessarily perform such rites, and this is not so much in defiance of social norms as in previous decades. However, Durkheim’s theory is interesting enough to apply his theory of ritual to other areas of modern life, such as the holiday seasons. While older forms of rite and ritual, as described in Durkheim’s book, might have reduced influence, there are other forms which seem to be as influential on individual’s actions as previous religious rituals or principles. Works Cited Aron, Raymond (1990) Main Currents in Sociological Thought: 2 Penguin, New York Biehl, Michelle (1992) “The Navajo House Blessing Ceremony” http://www.jammed.com/~mlb/hogan.html retrieved 18/04/2008 Brooklyn University (Date unknown) “Durkheim Topic no. 1. Functionalism, Anomie, Religion” http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/soc/courses/18ts/anomie.htm retrieved 19/04/2008 Durkheim, Emile (1965) “The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life” Translated by Swain, Joseph Ward. New York Free Press. Etzioni, Amitai (2000) “Towards a theory of Public Ritual” Sociological Theory, Volume 18, number 1 (2000) pp 40-59 Lee, Daniel B. (date unknown) “Ritual and the Social Meaning and Meaninglessness of Religion” http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~ls_nassehi/ls1/religion_0405_statements/Lee_meaninglessness_of_religion_.pdf retrieved 19/04/2008 Read More