INTRODUCTION
Much has been written on the historical forces that led to the
development of medieval society (Brown, 1972). These analyses
of medieval historiography have focussed on the fall of the Roman
Empire, the creation of the Empire of Charlemagne in France, the
role of the Vikings in restructuring northern Europe, and the
reformation of the dominant theocracy that known as the Holy Roman
Empire. The societal transformations outlined in this essay have
to do with several prevalent concepts that characterize this period.
In particular, this is a continuation of the concept of pater
familias and how these symbolic structure that began in ancient
indoeuropean cities amd was modified by new structures, inventions
in government and society. What is at the heart of this concept
is how societies change. It appears that technological change
is the driving force that has modified and restructured the concept
of paterfamilias over the centuries. Nevertheless, vestiges of
the past continue to emerge as fragments of the tradition of paterfamilias.
In contemporary university systems, for example, the Provost runs
the university while the President functions as the spiritual
leader, the Pontifex Maximus.
| How do societies change? |
|
Is technological change a driving force in societal change? What were the forces that changed the concept of Paterfamilias during this period? |
THE RISE OF THE MIDDLE AGES
Feudalism has been traditionally viewed from a Marxist position
by sociologists. It is seen as a mode of production. Historians
do not concur with this narrow perspective (Brown, 1974; Cheyette,
1996; Reynolds, 1994). What sociologists know as feudalism, for
example, was a long process relationship between early medieval
war-leaders and their followers (Reynolds, 1994: 475). This relationship
eventually emerged as one between rules and nobles in the late
Middle Ages. This critical period, Reynolds contends, began with
the disintegration of the Carolingian power in the tenths and
eleventh centuries and culminated in Gregorian Reform. The concept
of feudalism emerged from scholars in northern France and Italy
where educators were concerned with the rights of government and
property. Much of their arguments came from the prestigious texts
of Roman Law (libri feudorum). They found that the charters of
the Middle Ages were legal documents that drew their meanings
from pre-existing bodies of Roman law, Theodosian and Justanian
judicial procedures. In these documents certain words refer to
property and to obligations. Latin terms such as feudum, beneficium,
and alod were used to describe kinds of property and only later
did scholars reinterpret them to define the Middle Ages . Reynolds
(1994; 2-3) argues that they are post-medieval constructs. They
emerged from the academic study of law. One of these terms (feudum)
was used to reconstruct the Middle Ages as a time of feudalism.
In the English language, for example, the word "feudal"
does not appear until the seventeenth century and "feudal
system" did not appear until the eighteenth century. Feudalism
emerged in English in 1839 and it was deemed to be synonymous
with the Middle Ages. (cf. http://www.uncp.edu/home/rwb/lecture_mid_civ.htm)
| |
|
What about the claims made by Reynolds (1996) that feudalism emerged upon the demise of the Carolingian Empire? What about her claims that feudalism was an anachronistic construct used to redefine the Middle Ages as feudal. Allen Brown (1996) disagrees. Although the name of feudalism based on the libri feudorum came later, he would argue that feudalism provided the very mold upon which society was cast (Brown: 1996: 110). These feudal relationships provided certain fundamental bonds that characterized the society of that time. Vassalage, for example, is a feudal concept that bound two free men together through reciprocal obligations. These relationships were created by a ceremony of vassalic commendation and it comprised of fealty, homage, and investiture accompanied by a fief . Hence, the bonds between lords and serfs were defined by conditions of protection, labor, and economic support. Not surprisingly, this is a tradition that emerged from the Roman villas of late antiquity where slaves worked for their patrons. With the emergence f the Middle Ages, this relationship of patron to slave was called the manor, the basic agricultural unit that replaced the Roman villas.
| The basic agricultural unit in Rome was the villa | The basic agricultural unit during the Middle Ages was the manor |
Between the fifth and eighth centuries the supply of slaves dwindled and a new class emerged from the combination of free peasants and slaves. They were called serfs. It has been argued that this was a period characterized by poverty. There were poor harvests and people went hungry . The lords (a term from Old English hlavfeod that means "giver of loaves") needed the serfs who were dwindling in number due to famine. These landowners began to grant plots of land called tenures or hides to serfs in exchange for tithes on their crops. In exchange, the lord was obligated to provide military protection and justice for his tenants. The result was that through manumission, increased amounts of cultivable lands were placed into the hands of non-nobles. Since these serfs were not trained soldiers, the lord of the manor provided military protection. This task was given to ecclesiastical nobles who were better organized and had higher levels of literacy. Abbots were secular clergy with military powers. Small owners of land (allods) found themselves seeking the protection of an overload through commendation. In this way the Church acquired vast tracts of land during the Middle Ages. It should be noted that it was during this time of warfare among landowners that the medieval castle emerged. These were the fortified residences of the lords, a tradition that began in northern France, West Frankia. In England, castles emerged only after the Battle of Hastings in 1066 when the Norman French invaded England and imposed their form of feudalism on that country. Some have argued that medieval societies were organized for war and that it was a time that was dominated by a militant aristocracy. This is because this aristocracy lived in castles and represented themselves through orders of knighthood. However, the rationale for this characterization does not explain the earlier periods of the Middle Ages where the society was organized around land.
| What technological changes made the Manor system possible during the Middle Ages? |
| How was the concept of Paterfamilias restructured during this period. Who was the new High Priest. Why did theocracies dominate the social scene during these times? |
THE CRUSADES
The Papacy and the Religious Orders gave the impression that the
history of the Middle Ages was essentially ecclesiastical. Such
was not the case. This period came later around the time of the
Crusades. From 1096 to 1291, secular and religious rulers launched
military expeditions against the Moslems in the Middle East. What
was at issue was desire by Christians to visit the Holy Land.
The Seljuk Turks impeded Christian pilgrimages to Jerusalem. In
the Battle of Manzikert, they defeated the Byzantine and seized
all of Asia Minor as well as the Holy Land. The Byzantine Emperor,
Alexius Comnenus, asked Pope Urban II for help against the Turks
around 1090. The Pope saw this request as a great opportunity
to restore Christian control over the Holy Land. He also saw it
as an opportunity to mend the schism in the Church between Constantinople
and Rome. Thus, the First Crusade began when European nobility
answered the summons of Pope Urban to retake the Holy Land. The
"People's Crusade" was led by Peter the Hermit, a wandering
preacher who claimed to have a vision to lead a crusade against
the Moslems. Most of his followers died before reaching Asia Minor.
The Turks slaughtered the remainder. Following Peter the Hermit
was an expedition of knights who had more success. They captured
the wealthy coastal city of Antioch. They eventually captured
Jerusalem and established four Latin States, the county of Edessa,
the Principality of Antioch, the Country of Tripolis, and the
Kingdom of Jerusalem. Having attained their goal, they returned
home to celebrate their victories. Soon after these victories,
the Seljuk Turks (1144) began to recover lost their lost territories.
This led to the Second Crusade (1147-1149) under Bernard of Clairvaux.
This mission failed and gave rise to the Third Crusade (1170 to
1180). This is the Crusade that has captured the imagination of
European literature. It was against the talented Turkish general,
Saladin. It was a crusade led by a Roman Emperor (Frederick Barbarossa)
and two kings (King Richard, the Lion-Hearted of England and King
Philip Augustus of France). Both the English and the French kings
were bitter enemies. King Richard eventually negotiated a peace
treaty with Saladin, securing the right of Christians to enter
Jerusalem. There were other crusades but they were concerned with
internecine warfare (1202-1291). With the end of the crusades,
Europe was no longer in perpetual warfare. During this time, the
noble class and the knightly class slowly merged from the twelfth
century onward. More and more nobles became knights. The son of
a knight was automatically a squire and was in training for knighthood.
Knighthood emerged as a hereditary class in Europe . What is important
about knighthood is that it began came to be associated with chivalry.
CHIVALRY
After the Crusades ended, elaborate rituals of "mock battle"
in the form of jousts and tournaments marked the social status
of the Knights. This was a period that was ritualized by chivalry.
The diversions of military prowess developed into the romantic
songs of the troubadours. They sang of the courtly knight and
their deeds of battle. They spoke of the chivalric code. This
elevation of the knighthood can be traced back to influence of
the Cluny monks in the twelfth century who redefined them as solders
of Christ (miles Christi). After the crusades, the knights
added further prestige to their noble class. They created various
Orders of Knighthood. They also created and displayed their coat
of arms. To add to their glory, they established tournaments and
announced their fame through heralds, minstrels who were responsible
for cataloguing the arms of the participants in the tournaments.
These minstrels took on special roles and became the troubadours
of the late Middle Ages. They sang of the exploits of the knightly
class. One must remember that song was usually associated church
music or with performances for the royal class. What is interesting
about the troubadours is that they made this tradition secular
and began a period that would be later called Romanticism.
| The Middle Ages was dominated by the metaphor of the Great Chain of Being. In this metaphor, the spiritual hierarchy of the paterfamilias was further articulated and instantiated. What are the signs that this pattern was undergoing change? What are the forces that allowed this to happen? |
| With the attenuation of the Roman Empire, one finds an emerging pattern of desecularization. Was chivalry a desecularized form of the old tradition of paterfamilias? |
Why is chivalry important? From a sociological perspective,
it provided a social marker of class status. It maintained the
noble class. In England, for example, the King owned the land.
In 1086, there were 107 tenants-in-chief who held land directly
from the King. These tenants-in-chief were called barons. They
are also known as the medieval lords of the manor. They held on
to fifty percent of the King's land. These barons, in turn, allowed
knights to hold land in return for military service. In the 11th
century, th?re were about 4,000 to 5,000 knights. They were part
of the knightly class. The other members of this class were the
esquires, knights in training. Later in English history, the barons
emerged as Peers in the British Parliament. The knights were redefined
as the gentry. This last class was placed into a hierarchical
structure based on income. The higher end of the hierarchy began
with the old knights and followed by their squires, the new esquires.
These were followed by county gentry and finally by gentlemen.
Later new groups would emerge based on land ownership. The parish
gentry included gentlemen, lawyers, merchants and rich yeomen
who owned land (Trupp, 1948). The gentleman was above the franklin
or yeomen. They were small landowners who were not supposed to
be involved in trade. This concept of gentry is peculiar to England.
What one found in other parts of Europe was nobility. Whether
this was inherited or acquired, nobility had a legal status. It
was never based on income as in the case of the English gentry.
Heraldry was an important part of the knightly class. Knights
were allowed to have coat of arms, but not esquires. Only after
1350 AD were esquires allowed to participate in a public display
of heraldry. By the 14th and 15th century, even merchants were
allowed to develop coat of arms. Their heraldry, however, was
related to their trade and may include symbols of their guilds.
THE WORKING CLASSES AND THEIR SOCIAL ROLES
Onamastics, the study of naming, provides insight into the structure
of the social classes and the social roles that existed during
the Middle Ages. People were named according to what they did
for a living. The following family names designate social roles
that one was born into during this time. Most of these are formed
with the agentive suffer -er.
|
|
| Farmer - one who farms Baker - one who bakes Shoeman - one who tends to shoes Shoemaker - one who makes shoes Bower - bowl maker Fletcher - one who makes bowls Brewer - one who makes ale Piper - one who plays the pipe Mason - one who constructs edifices Taylor, Tailor - one who sews or makes clothes Arrowsmith - one who makes arrows Singer - one who sings Green - one who plants and cares for vegetables Gardener - one who tends to the garden Dyer - one who dyes clothes Cook, Cooker - one who cooks Hall - one who tends to the halls Fishman - one who takes care of the fish Fisherman - one who fishes Weaver - one who weaves Herald - one who calls out news, keeper of the records Harker - one who calls out messages Hunter - one who hunts Furrier - one who cares for the fur Forester - one who guards the forest Cooper - one who makes barrels Tanner - one who tans the hides Wright, playwright, shipwright, wheelwright - one who creates or makes things Carpenter - one who builds furniture Bowman - one who makes bows Butler - one who attends to another in service Constable - chief groom, stable companion Houseman - one who tends to the house Spade - one who makes spades Reed, Reid - basket maker Digger - one who digs Planter - one who plants Sailor - one who sails Brazer - one who care for the coal Glover - one who makes gloves Plumber - one who tends to the water works Armor - one who takes care of the armory Marshall - one who takes care of the wealth stored in the stables Chamberlain - one who takes care of the wealth stored in the bedroom Chandler - one who makes candles |
Unfortunately, much of literature of the time addressed to the glory of the noble classes. It will not be until the second Industrial Revolution and the Rise of the Novel in English (and the roman in France) that one will begin to find detailed information about the other classes in European society. The earliest novels were about the noble class, however, Don Quijote de la Mancha was a satire on this class. It depicted the errand knight, Don Quijote, and his esquire, Pancho Sanza. It introduced other classes as background material only. One has to read such authors as Defoe, Richardson and Fielding before finding sufficient information about these other classes within European social structure. The latter two authors saw themselves as founders of a new kind of writing that brought realism into their novels. It depicted people of lower classes as protagonists. Moll Flanders (by Defoe) was a thief, Pamela (by Richardson) was a hypocrite, and Tom Jones by (Fielding) was a fornicator. This was a major break from earlier writers who only told stories about nobles and kings as central literary figures. Shakespeare, for example, drew his literary figures from King Lear, Anthony and Cleopatra, and never from the common people. What these new writers did was to create non-traditional story lines. They used highly descriptive language and introduced their readers to the lower classes of society.
THE MEDIEVAL GREAT CHAIN OF BEING
Sometimes a basic perspective such as metaphor can encapsulate
a whole age. This is especially evident in the writings of Arthur
Lovejoy (1936). He maintains that the whole social structure of
the Middle Ages could be readily summarized by one historical
metaphor, "the great chain of being." Lovejoy (1936:
Chapter Two) finds that the genesis of this metaphor can be traced
back to a related metaphor, Plato's distinction between this world
of material beings and the other world of spiritual forms. The
Platonic metaphor may have provided the basis for the medieval
metaphor of a continuum of beings, but it was a different metaphor.
This disparity in perspectives needs to be explained in the history
of ideas. Why did the metaphor undergo change? What forces or
influences molded these modifications? Prior to answering those
questions, one needs investigates the atavistic metaphor in greater
detail.
Where did this great chain of being come from? One needs only to look back to Plato to find the origins of this concept. Its beginnings can be found in his model of ideal and material forms. What began as a Platonic dichotomy soon developed into a medieval continuum. The dichotomy of the two worlds begins in ancient Greece. Plato argued that there is a world of material beings and it consists of an unstable, imperfect, and evil realm, which is always in the process of decaying. But, the other world is a realm that is not only stable, perfect, and good, it is also eternal. For exa mple, in The Republic (Cornford, 1945; 1957), Plato asked his contemporaries to turn away from the overabundance of their sensual experiences. He asked them to escape the imperfections of the world of senses and to focus upon the abstracted objects themselves through purification [katharsis] which, he argued, is the only possible object of thought. He called this abstract knowledge an Ideal Form and contrasted it with Appearances, which are the basis for opinions. To explain this difference within his cosmology, he introduced concept of the two states of mind. On the higher level there is intelligence [noesis], knowledge [episteme], and discursive thinking [dianoia] and on the lower level one finds belief [pistia] and imagination [eikasia]. These have been referred to in philosophic literature as the World of Ideal Forms and The World of Appearances. It is on the level of the intelligible world that one finds these abstract forms and mathematical objects. These forms, Plato contended are eternal in nature, they never decay or change. This is where, in the tradition of Pythagoras, one can also find mathematical forms. Furthermore, these ideal forms are sublime and as a consequence they also represent that which is good. For Plato, these ideal forms are found to be in stark contrast with the decaying and ephemeral things in the World of Appearance, the lower realm (Cornford, 1945: 222).
|
|
|
|
The reality of transcendental forms can not be understood by the senses. They are only understood through the intellect. Intelligence has to do with the comprehension of these forms. Knowledge is not about the material world but about the world of transcendental forms |
|
There are many kinds of forms in the Ideal World of Plato. The Good and the Eternal were those that he held in the highest regard. Forms of shapes and objects were ranked below this. Mathematical forms as proposed by Pythagoras were not held in the same state of high esteem by Plato, but they were a part of his transcendtal world of ideal forms. |
|
|
|
|
The other world that Plato established in his dichotomy was the world of appearances. The world of the senses cannot be trusted. They are subject to deception and imagination. |
|
The objects of the material world are entities known as particulars. They differ from the objects of the ideal world known as universals. These objects in the material world are known to the senses, but they are in constant decay. They are not real forms, according to Plato. Images are also forms that are not real; they are copies of ideal forms. |
The world of Appearances is full of change, chaos, and illusion.
In contrast to this system of forms, there is the real world -
the world that never changes. The real world, for Plato, is the
world of forms; and, the imaginary world is the world of appearances.
One understands these appearances only by looking beyond them
to the underlying real forms that they represent. The appearances,
then, are merely representations or copies of these ideal forms.
What is significant about this model is that it became the subject
of philosophical study among Europeans and provided them with
a new frame of discourse and a new kind of vocabulary (Ellis,
1967: 260).. It is this metaphor of the World of Ideal Forms that
led Europeans to reconsider their place in the world as imperfections
of an ideal world. It structured their existence and provided
them with a rationale for being. It became a part of their philosophy.
One of the great problems that dominated Greek society was the distinction between disorder (chaos) and order (nomos). Plato offered a system of thought that would explain order in the world. He arrived at the idea of a world of perfect forms. These forms, he noted, were not inventions of the intellect. They represent entities existing outside of the mind. Furthermore, these forms exist prior to their appearances. They are accessible to the knowing subject. What this means is that the person who has intelligence can ascertain them. Those who use discursive thought can discover them. This dichotomy of the two levels of the mind provides, in Plato's scheme, the ultimate separation of objective knowledge from the knowing subject. For Plato, real knowledge never changes and can only be found in his World of Ideal Forms. All other claims to knowledge which are not part of the World of Ideal Forms consist of mere opinion or imagination and belong to the World of Appearances. This discussion of the states of mind was important for Plato. He lived within an oral tradition with its propensity for tradition, opinions, and belief. He disagreed with these traditions because they were not rational. They were no more than dogma, opinion and imagination. He wanted use reason because it would explain that behind appearance there is something that is eternal and never changes.
Havelock Ellis (1967: 260) mentioned that Plato was building his efforts in the same direction as those who had gone before him. What was this tradition? Who had gone before him? The answer is informative because it demonstrates that the Metaphor of Form had a precursor. In other words, it is also a derived metaphor. It is a version of a much older Pythagorean metaphor of The Involution and Evolution of the Soul (Cornford, 1937; McClain, 1978). A discussion of this Platonic metaphor can be found in the Timaeus and also in the Critias. There is a scene in Timaeus in which Socrates is teaching a slave how to reason in geometry. The slave is not a mathematician and cannot know this special knowledge. But, he is able to use his reason in order to ascertain this system of knowledge through an intellectual dialogue [the original meaning of dialectics before its transformation by Hegel] with Socrates. The slave soon discovers that he has come to command and to control this special mathematical knowledge [anamnesis]. Plato argues that the reason for this is because this knowledge already exists in the World of Ideal Forms. And, what appears to be new knowledge is only a recollection of Ideal Forms. It is, consequently, eternal knowledge. Ernest McClain (1978) has demonstrated that Plato's dialogues abound in mathematical allegories and reflect the Pythagorean worlds of spirit versus matter. The Timaeus, for example, provides a lengthy discussion of mathematics and universals of thought as soul forms. In addition, the Statesman, the Critias, and the Laws are permeated with them. McClain (1978) is also interested in the mathematical theory of music, which emerges as a dominant theme in Plato's writings. This metaphor is also taken from the cosmology of Pythagoras and assumes that music with its intervals for the octave is the manifestation of mathematical proportions. All is number. Physical shapes are products of number . Music is number . Nothing escapes this principle of philosophy, this mysticism of number. For this reason, Plato's cosmology speaks of objects in the World of Appearances as representations or replications of a divine order - one that is mathematically structured (Gellrich, 1985: 20-22). This divine order is one in which the whole of the heavens is harmony. Number became the basis of this harmony. Even traditional and Renaissance rhetoric was based on this harmony (Yates, 1987). Yates has demonstrated how the mnemonist from classical times up until the Elizabethan Age (Yates, 1983) envisioned a Platonic World of Ideal Forms and how they placed these Ideal Forms in certain locations where they could be readily accessed by the mind through recollection or recall. An actor learned his lines not by rote, but by this system of visualization. Furthermore, theaters were constructed, she noted, to reflect this cosmos, this World of Ideal Forms.
The metaphor of the involution and evolution of the soul derived, most likely not from Plato but from Pythagoras. When Pythagoras went to Egypt he learned of the Myth of Isis and Osiris, which is a metaphor of the involution of the spirit into the body and its eventual evolution back to the spirit world upon death. He brought these and other forms of ethereal knowledge back to his homeland of Samos and incorporated it in his school of metaphysics. It was Pythagoras among the Greek philosophers who first spoke of the involution of the spirit into the concrete human body and of the task of the soul in its evolution towards a return to pure spirit. It was Pythagoras who first created the dichotomous realms of spirit and appearances. He lectured on the Forms of Opposites :
|
The Rest versus the Moving The Straight versus the Curved The Limited versus Unlimited The Odd versus the Even Male versus Female The Good versus the Evil The Light versus the Darkness |
Plato continued this dichotomization of polar opposites rather
than a continuum, which would have allowed for a gradual transition
from one value to the other. He added the distinction between
the habitual and unconscious use of rules [empeiria] and their
deliberate practical action, opinion vs. knowledge, the realm
of things vs. the ream of rational ideas.. In addition, he argued
that the soul should be purged of these impurities, of the degrading
and debasing lower world of myth and opinion. He wanted people
to raise from this world of sense perception to the world of rational
understanding.. He believed in a benevolent Demiurge who had formed
the universe from the entropy of primordial matter into an orderly
world. This Demiurge made it into a copy of the World of Ideal
Forms and also invested the World-body with a World-soul, making
the cosmos a living-being. Consequently, mathematics and numbers
were of special interest to both Plato and to Pythagoras because
they saw life and being as manifestations of this world of spirit,
of this world of pure mathematical forms. And, as noted earlier,
music was another special field of interest to him because it
also provided evidence in the mathematical division of the octave
of the manifestation of this pure spirit. What is significant
about The Platonic World of Ideal Forms is that it is concomitant
with the teachings of Pythagoras and the Presocratics.
The Pythagorean Decad is a figure based on a system of numbers
(1 + 2+ 3 + 4 = 10). The One represents the essence of Divinity.
Later, this divinity is manifested into spirit and matter, the
duality or two. After a period of rest, the divinity and its manifestations
produces an animating soul of the cosmos, number three. Four represents
the physical aspect that of the world. These four numbers (1 +
2 +3 + 4) totals ten. This Decad symbolizes the whole, a functioning
organism.
FROM DICHOTOMY TO A STRATIFIED CONTINUUM
Lovejoy is correct in asserting that this dichotomy between the
two worlds was modified during the middle ages. They were no longer
seen as a dichotomy of two disparate systems of being, but were
transformed into a continuum of beings. Hence, they visualized
their existence by the metaphor of the Great Chain of Being. What
is important about this root metaphor is that it dominated the
cultural horizons of Europe from the rise of the Middle Ages and
up unto the late eighteenth century . The void between these two
systems, Lovejoy explains, was gradually transformed into a continuum
that was occupied by an infinite number of linkages that were
arranged in a hierarchical order. This continuum ranged on the
lowest level from the exiguous or from the most meager kinds of
existents, through every possible grade of beings, to the highest
possible kind of creature, which is called the ens perfectissimum
(the most perfect being).
|
The Pope The conclave of Cardinals Clericus (priests) Milites (the soldiers) Labores (the workers) Lesser Humans |
It was this cardinal or root metaphor of catenation that dominated medieval life and kept the great mass of individuals within their social and spiritual place in the great order of things. The Pope, needless to mention, ruled this theocracy. He established himself as a greater being, an ecclesiarch, superior to those of the order of the cardinals beneath him. Similarly, the cardinals were also judged to be higher in the ecclesiology than the numerous Priests and acolytes who worked beneath their command. Obviously, the disenfranchised, the poor, the weak, and the lame were at the bottom of this plenitude of beings. This idea may not have been readily apparent in the social fabric of the fifth century, but it was to be eventually instituted and legitimated in the writings Augustine, the church's philosophical representative. He argued in logical terms that this was God's plan, for He did not make all people equal. Another philosophical representative of the church was Thomas Aquinas who also affirmed this same principle of plenitude in his Summa Theologica, viz., the universe is a continuum of beings. But, the concept was not limited to theologians. It can be found among scientists such as Roger Bacon who referred to the earth as the Middle Kingdom, a place between Heaven and Hell . He noted that the top of the chain of creation is where the higher beings dwelled and the bottom of creation where the dregs and baser elements of humanity sank, an in between these two there exists the Middle Kingdom of earth. This idea remained after the Middle Ages as evidenced by the writings of Montaigne. In his essays, he describes man's dwelling as a place of filth and mire. He infers that this is because humans dwell on the lower edges of the world, a place that is closer to the realm of sin and depravity - the lower realm of Hell. Hence the world located in "the bottom story of the house" (Lovejoy, 1936: 102). What is important about this discussion of the great chain of beings is that it provides interesting information on how medieval society was stratified. This metaphor favored the ruling theocracy. It maintained the religious class (clericus) in its position of prestige and power .
SPACE AND TIME IN THE MIDDLE AGES
The metaphors of time and space are related to each other and
they play significant roles in medieval thinking. These metaphors
emerged from Greek philosophy. In Plato's world of ideal forms,
for example, one finds the concept of time as being -- eternal
time. This view of time was countered by Aristotle's biological
perspective of time as becoming (Cornford, 1937: 1940).
|
|
The World of Eternal Being |
The World of Becoming |
Plato situated what is commonly known as real time in the World
of Being, whereas Aristotle placed it into the World of Becoming.
For Aristotle, time involves motion. Since motion is measurable,
it follows that time is also measurable, Furthermore, time always
occurs within the context of space. Aristotle went on to differentiate
between two kinds of motion: circular and linear motion. When
an object moves in a straight line it has a beginning, middle,
and an end. Hence, this kind of motion is perishable. It has a
final goal, a telos. But, circular motion, he added, differs from
linear motion because it has neither definite beginning nor a
discernible termination. Hence, it is both imperishable and real.
This clarification is interesting because it demonstrates that
in attacking the Platonic World of Eternal Forms, Aristotle had
tacitly accepted the model espoused by Plato between the two kinds
of worlds. His use of this distinction is evident in his attribution
of circular time to the Being and his attribution of linear time
to Becoming.
|
Never-ending circular motion that returns to its point of origin |
|
Linear motion that begins in time and ends in time Linear versus Circular Time |
The shifts in Western Europe from the theocracies of the Middle Ages to the rise of science have been shifts from the cyclical time of being to the linear time of becoming. This is evident in the language of Old English in which animals were defined in terms of movement in space.
|
|
|
| Fisc | that which moves under water |
| Tier | that which moves on land (German Tier, Modern English deer) |
| Vogel | that which moves in the air (German Vogel, bird) |
| Wurm | that which moves under the ground (English worm) |
This change came about gradually. Robert Nisbet (1969) has documented how Western Europe underwent a gradual change from the cyclical model of Aristotle to the spiral model of les philosophes. The linear model of time was originally promulgated by Aristotle and was subsequently legitimated again by Leibniz who advocated a relational theory of time in opposition to the Absolute theory of time proposed by Isaac Newton. Although the distinction between linear time and circular time existed in the writings of Aristotle, the treatment of linear time was not treated as a social metaphor during the time of Leibniz. This cultural shift (St. Clair, 1999: Chapter 8) from being to becoming provides an episode in historiography worth recapitulating.
The medieval world encompassed both kinds of time. For example, one finds among the common people the concept of mystical time. This is the eternal time of Plato and was reinterpreted in the middle ages as mystical time. These special moments in time and place are as real in their reoccurrence as when they were first encountered. Usually, such an event marks an ordeal in one's life. Something happened that changed the observer forever. The experiences may not be comforting, and may even return as a living nightmare. But, they return over and over again. When such an event is brought about by higher spiritual forces, it is no longer a profane experience, but becomes sacred. The enactment of the event becomes numinous. And, the continual reliving of the experience under very special conditions is known as ritual. Such are the temporal conditions for mystical time, and such is the site where the incident comes to be located in a sacred space. In modern societies (Hall, 1958), these sacred moments have been converted from ritual to political acts by the State. People refer to themselves as the chosen ones, their institutional founders have been elevated to the status of administrative gods, and their acts have been consecrated and are commemorated by a special holiday, a word which originally meant a holy day [hælige dæg] in Old English. Moments of greatness are erected on these holy sites, and the rituals of patriotism are performed in the name of these gods of government. Evidently, humans are not as devoid of ritual as they would like to believe. Both primitive and so-called civilized peoples re-enact rituals. Both enter into the numinosity of time and space to re-experience special moments that they hold to be sacred (Richey and Jones, 1974). Just as the priestly class in primitive societies elevated themselves above the commonplace and ordained themselves as mediaries of the gods, so too are members of governments notorious for creating a sacredness about their ruling class. The President is usually portrayed as a god like form, the members of Congress are ordained as a priestly class. They call themselves Honorable. They have been given a special mission on behalf of the masses. They maintain the mystique of being a sacrosanct mediator through their talismanic charisma. In The Myth of the Eternal Return, Mircea Eliade (1954) discusses how important ritual is to primitive society. When a sacrifice is made, for example, it is done under very special numinous conditions. This numinosity or awareness of spirituality is marked by a strange feeling that one has been transported to a special place where time has stopped. It is not just any time, but the time when higher spiritual forces originally revealed themselves and their knowledge. It is not just any place, but the very site where the original act occurred. The very act of the ritual is separated in time and place as a sacred event. It is the reliving of an archetype.
The second concept of time that occurred during the Middle Ages was linear time and this could be found in the cardinal concepts of physics. Roger Jones (1982) provides one of the more informative and insightful discussions of the use of cardinal metaphors in physics in his book on Physics as Metaphor. It is his contention that the physical sciences are not devoid of metaphor. Physics was born in the philosophical quest for meaning and understanding, and this understanding was expressed by means of the cardinal metaphors of space, time, matter, and number. Jones sees metaphors as creative analogies, comparisons which are used to extend previous theories. Sometimes, he notes, these metaphors become more and more abstract and eventually crystallize. When this occurs, they are detached from their roots of consciousness and emerge as highly complex, but unintuitive statements about reality - Baconian idols. In pursuing his metaphoric quest, Jones reconstitutes a holistic model of physics. He rejects the positivistic view that reality is external to the human mind, and claims to the contrary - in a Berkleyian sense - that it is the mind which scientists see reflected in matter. Jones believes that the human search for meaning and value is of paramount importance, and that physics can shed light on that search. First, however, it must cease to masquerade as an objective body of knowledge. In other words, it must reveal its subjective nature. Hence, he has been engaged in probing the human and imaginative aspect of physics (Jones, 1982: 11). What he has discovered is how his domain of science can trace its fundamental concepts of space, time, matter, mass and number back to atavistic metaphors based on the human need and ability to create meaning and value in the Middle Ages. He found that these metaphors emerged from an intuitive, mythic, life-giving character.
Quantification forms an intrinsic part of physical sciences. When a physicist measures an object, he does more than merely describe the dimensions of a thing, he is also making an ontological statement about scientific objectivity. He devalues that which cannot be measured and classifies it pejoratively as being merely subjective. Jones (1982: 16) characterizes the positivistic claim that an objective world exists independently of the human mind as an idolatrous notion. He thinks that it is an amazing fact about physics that none of its concepts are ever really defined. What we are given instead of a definition is a prescription for measurement, operationism. Jones is more interested in how scientists think about science and the physical world. He wants to know science in a more profound way. He is interested in the epistemological foundations of modern science. Jones is not just a physicist, he is a philosopher of physics. To discover the subjectivity in science, however, he does not invoke metaphysics. He merely needs to demonstrate how the concept of length is dealt with in his profession. He argues that Length, time, and matter form the basic trinity in the exact science because they define all other physical quantities. And, as a consequence, the question of meaning in these sciences is predicated on how space, time, and matter are defined. Unfortunately, they are defined operationally in terms of measurement.
What is important about this venture into the epistemology of physics is the role that the metaphor of space plays in the exact sciences. Space is a kind of prototype for length and matter. The experiences of associated with length (location of objects, distances between objects, and the measurement of objects) only have meaning through spatial representation. Similarly, when matter is discussed, it is understood that such objects exist in space. Time, it could be argued, implies movement in space. So, space provides the theoretical foundation upon which the trinity of length, time, and matter is based. Space organizes and gives meaning to the experiences of place and distance. It is in the texture of human consciousness (Jones, 1982: 53). It has to do with how an individual experiences and views solid objects, conceives of space. It has to do with understanding one's movement through space, and of the motion of external bodies. Space is involved in how one pictures the dimension of depth and utilizes other perspective notions. It engulfs the experience that one has of the passage of time. The paramount epistemological question in physics, then, is the nature of space. John Locke, the British empiricist, treated it as a primary attribute. His views on space were concomitant with those of his intellectual hero, Sir Isaac Newton, who believed in the concept of Absolute Space. In Germany, Immanuel Kant provided an interesting alternative to the empiricists. He argued that space, time, and causality are intuitive conceptual categories. They exist prior to experience and provide the categories for organizing sense impressions and other sensual experiences. Space, then, structures experience. Space provides it with order. It brings order out of chaos. But, what can one say about the sources of these sense impressions? Do they have an independent reality? Kant believed that they did have an independent reality. His was very familiar with the natural sciences and attempted to accommodate such information into his transcendental philosophy. This ultimate reality which he called Die Dinge an sich [things in themselves] is unknowable to the senses. Jones notes that this view of space as something separated from the individual humans perceiving it was not always the prescribed view. During the Middle Ages, for example, man was seen as a microcosm within a macrocosm. One did not see space as a geometrical or physical extension, but as an organic connection. One was mythically connected to the stars, psychological conjoined with others, symbolically united in archetypal experiences, and metaphorically bonded in consciousness - the feeling of being embedded in the cosmos. This oneness is denied by the modern concept of space. Hence, Jones argues (1982: 61-62) The metaphor of space is a modern mechanism to avoid the horrendous experience of oneness, of the chaos, of the ultimate state of unity which the mystic seers and philosophers of all ages have referred. It seems to be the antitheses of space with its extension, articulation, and impenetrability. This concept of modern space, he adds, is a recent invention. It is another created construct of the human mind. This new metaphor spreads out and disentangles the chaotic non-spatial world by delimiting objects and isolating them from one another in such a way that space no longer means oneness, but extension, distance, separateness, and isolation. This redefinition of space stems, he argues, from a fear of chaos. Jones (1982: 69) notes that the modern space is the perfect metaphor for separation, extension, individuation, and alienation. To exist is derived from the Latin verb meaning to stand out, and space is exactly what one stands out from . Space is the background from which people emerge or exist. It is the background from which individuals come to articulate themselves as individuated, unique being. On one side of the coin one finds existence and uniqueness, on the other, one finds alienation and isolation.
Where does this discussion of physics as metaphor lead? The answer is surprising. It leads back into the Middle Ages from which modern concepts of materialism in physics derive. In Medieval times, one was not in space; one was space. Life might have been difficult, Jones remarks, but never alienating. "Death might be frightening, but not annihilating." The Cartesian dichotomy of mind / body severed human beings from the synchronicity of space. His analytical geometry provided a new model of mathematical space and legitimated the modern concept of spatial extension. From a linguistic point of view, the metaphor of space provides an interesting vocabulary of motives.
| Cardinal Concepts in Classical Physics | Medieval Social Construction of Space |
| Matter | refers to a point of existence in space |
| Movement | refers to a change from one position to another in space |
| Acceleration | refers to how quickly one moves from one point to another |
| Length | refers to the distance traveled in space |
| Time | refers to the units of distance covered in space |
First there are the functional words which reflect this new framework. In word order languages such as English they occur in a position before nouns [pre-positions] or after nouns [post-positions]. What is significant about these terms is that they are what linguistics call functional words - words with grammatical meaning. They differ from content words - words with lexical or defined dictionary meanings. The reason that this is important has to do with the concept of linguistic depth. When words are borrowed into a language they are incorporated into the language as lexical items or content words. However, when these words exist as function words they form an intrinsic part of the linguistic code because they structure experience and define structures of consciousness. The fact that spatial metaphors have been adopted into a language as functional words (case endings or prepositions) demonstrates that these languages have undergone major epistemological changes with regard to the concept of space.
|
|
| Non-Movement To be inside (in essere) - to be inside of, to be in something, to be at some place. To be on top of (ad essere) - to be on top of, to be on |
| Movement Motion from interior (ex latus) - to go into, to go through something, to go out of Motion to the interior (in latus) - to go into, to go through , come out of Motion from the exterior (ab latus) - to move off of Motion to the exterior (ad latus) - to go around, to go under, beside, near, by, towards |
Time is another concept that Jones investigates within the context
of physical theory. Time, he observes, is a spatial metaphor.
It is interpreted in terms of a one-dimensional continuous space.
Lexical items having to do with temporality evoke spatial images.
|
|
|
| Position behind in space | In situ, in place in space |
| Position ahead in space | Before in
time Prior to in time Yesterday in time Behind in time Late in time |
| Duration in time | At this moment
in time While in time Now in time After in time Later in time Tomorrow in time Next in time Ahead in time |
It is interesting to note that the concepts of time and space
that emerged from the Middle Ages still function in contemporary
life. It is only when one enters the field of high-energy physics
that a newer concept of time-space can be found.
AS ABOVE, SO BELOW
There is another aspect to the great chain of being that needs
to be discussed if one is to better understand the world of the
Middle Ages. It was a world that existed as a theocracy, rule
of the clergy. All ideas were filtered through this world view.
Hence, the Platonic world of ideal forms became the world of the
divine, the realm of God. Below this world of perfection, one
found the world of the living, the home of man. Art, Plato argued,
was based on imitation. It can never approach the perfection of
the ideal forms. From this assumption that the world below is
a copy of the world above, one finds the medieval concept of society
as a text. The world below no longer is seen as the world of the
profane, but a world that attempts to replicate the supernatural
order. The forms of the world below not only replicate the divine
order, but they also reveal and illuminate its sacred principles.
Events in the world of man take on special meaning. They signify
the sanctity of life. Forms become the containers of the divine
plan. Nature is seen as a text. One is asked to find divine wisdom
in the book of nature, the eternal text. One is also sked to find
divine wisdom in temporal texts (sacra pagina) . What is important
about this view of society as a text is that it led to the medieval
sign theory (abecedarium culturae). The sign (signum) was
divided into forms of expression (signans) and the meanings behind
those forms (signatum) . The fathers of the church instructed
medieval readers to clarify and explain the mysterious purpose
of the divine word as revealed in the Bible (the book of God)
and in the book of nature (the book of his servant). The words
of these books were not arbitrary, but sacred. The forms of these
words (signans) was not to be separated form their sacred meanings
(signatum) . Just as the book of nature (lex naturalis) embodied
the eternal present in all things, so did the Bible (scripta).
Other books, the books of culture, were also expressions of the
sacred and need interpretation (hermeneutica) in order
for their divine meanings to be revealed. Hence, all things -
plants, animals, the rituals of man, and his daily life - were
linked together into an intricate system of meanings, the great
design. Cognitive dissonance could not be tolerated in this theocracy
and all systems of belief were made to be concomitant with those
of the Book. The great works of the classics were assimilated
into the Zeitgeist of the Middle Ages and assimilated into the
new culture as works of fiction. Classical mythology challenged
the beliefs of the Bible, but fiction did not.
The ecclesiastical representation of visual space was also
seen in non-mythological terms. For example, the early churches
of Rome were constructed near water because this represented the
womb of the world. They wanted to communicate with the ancestral
beings that resided in the depth of the earth. These scared temples
were enclosed in order to protect them the dead from evil powers
until their time of rebirth. Hence, the ancients linked the earth
(terra), the temple (ecclesia) and the mother goddess (mater generationis)
to their system of ancestral worship. These became the earth,
the church, and the mother of God under new theology. Mother Earth
was now seen as the mother church. Another example of how space
was reconstructed visual can be found in the Gothic columns that
supported the ecclesiastical edifices. In its Greek form, it contained
stylized motifs of foliage because it was associated with the
papyrus reeds in the columns of ancient Egyptian temples. The
pillar, the Egyptians argued, grew out of the earth like a tree
and united with the sky. They represented living trees. (Gellerich,
985: 53-4). They housed the tree of life and were considered to
be sacred. These columns were revised to fit into the new theology.
They represented the great men of the past such as the bishops
of the church. The study of medieval art has been well documented
and is replete with symbols of its wide spread theocracy.
Numerology emerged from the Middle Ages as part of that theocracy.
The Trinity comes from the older symbolism of the triangle. They
can be found to designate the three ages before the Law, the ancient
theological virtues, and the three Magi. The quaternity also played
a part in medieval thought. These were found to correspond to
the four quadrants, the four cardinal virtues, the four humors,
and the four cardinal directions. Hence, the numbers three and
four were deemed to be sacred. Their combination, seven, was also
seen as being sacred because they represented the Seven Deadly
Sin and the seven Sacraments, the seven parts of the Mass, the
seven petitions of the Lord's Prayer, and the seven tones of the
musical scale. What is of special interest is the number five.
It was considered to be a special number during the Middle Ages
and represented a state of perfection. The five senses, for example,
represented the limits of awareness. Where did this come from?
Carl Jung has related this to his theory of psychological types.
He traced their origins to the theory of the four humors and explained
how each of their four types represented as aspect of human cognition
(Keirsley and Bates, 1984). He called these four types: Intuition
(N), Sensation (S), Thinking (T), and Feeling (F). Every individual
develops one of these four types into his primary mode of cognition
during the first two decades of life. These types are paired into
opposites so that a person develops his intuition (N) in contract
to his sensate (S) qualities. Similarly, a person who is strong
in thinking (T) is weak in feeling (F). The greatest strength
during this early stage of development is one's Type. The greatest
weakness is one's Shadow. Later, secondary types will develop
and lead to temperaments. What is interesting about this reinterpretation
of the medieval concept of the four humors is that every one has
a shadow and only gods are perfect. They are balanced in all for
types. From this emerges a balanced unit that was represented
by the number five. Hence, five represented perfection in the
numerology of the Middle Ages.
The emergence of science during the Middle Ages led to interesting
conflicts with the ruling theocracy. Science was seen as representing
human knowledge (scientia) whereas the church provided divine
wisdom (sapientia). Aquinas argued that one cannot separate what
a name designates (quod nomen designat) from the way that it designates
(modus quo). This position in logic was known as realism and it
differed from those who argued that the relationships between
things and their names are arbitrary, just names (nominalism).
This battle continues to this day among logicians (Armstrong,
1995). Central to this line of argumentation was the issue of
whether one can separate the means of clarifying from what is
being clarified. Obviously, Aquinas believed that they could not
be separated. Consequently, reason cannot describe the divine
mysteries (sapientia), it can only clarify (scientia). This doctrine
was known as the manifestation (manifestatio) and governs much
of his Summa theologiae. It states that science can only know
formal knowledge but not the inner being (esse) of knowing. It
can compare things by studying their similarities (similitudines)
and differences (distinctiones), but it can never combine these
into a meaningful whole (concordantia). Hence, the understanding
of scriptural wisdom is beyond all scientific knowledge.
THE RE-PRESENTION OF THE WORLD
From the medieval theory of signs, a common metaphor emerged that
constituted a dominant epistemological framework in Western thought.
This is the metaphor of language as form. This has been referred
to as "the conduit metaphor" (Reddy, 1973). Information
is transmitted by putting messages into forms (in-form), sending
them through channels (conduits), and decoding them for the receiver
who retrieves the messages. This metaphor based on putting meaning
into form underlies linguistic theory, communication theory, semiotics
and other Western models of communication. Richard Brown (1977,
1987) calls this the "metaphor of language." This is
an apt nomenclature since linguistic theory acts as a theoretical
reference marker for other disciplines - the language of art,
the language of music, the language of dance, etc. However, there
is one problem with this metaphor. It is culture-bound. It overlooks
the fact that there is another viable model of communication used
by many cultures around the world, the metaphor of resonance.
More will be said about this metaphor shortly.
In the West, communication is rhetorical (Foucault, 1966). It is based on the hypothesis that human communication consists largely of a system of established forms, patterns, and structures. As noted earlier, this has not always been the case. In addition to the copy art theory of Plato mentioned in this chapter, Michel Foucault (1966, 1969, and 1971) has further documented that fact that rhetoric was not the dominant mode of communication among earlier Europeans. There was a time in among the ancients, he notes, when one acquired an understanding of an event by participating in it, by recreating the social drama behind that event (Turner, 1960). Events were ritualized and performed. At some point in the ritual, the understanding of the ritual emerged as social drama. There are several examples from Greek culture, for example, that demonstrate how the enacted rituals enabled people to resonate with these past experiences. One finds the purging of emotions ((((((((() through participation ((((((() in Greek drama (Cornford, 1937, 1957). In a like manner, one finds the enactment of rituals among agriculturists, viz. the annual Rite of Spring. Rituals are things that people do or perform (methectics). They are not meaning buried in words. They are meanings buried in actions. The chants that accompany rituals function as resonance markers. Unfortunately, modern Western cultures have lost contact with this ancient way of knowing and understanding. It has replaced them with the metaphor of language, system of signs. Consequently, experiences in Western cultures are now presented through signs. The rich contexts of these experiences have been abstracted and re-presented in new forms or codes.
When did this major epistemological shift come about in European
culture? Michel Foucault (1969) is one of the few Westerns scholars
to even address this issue. He called this shift in perception
an "epistemic rupture" because it is similar to an earthquake
that breaks up the sedimentation of the land and exposes new terrain
that lay hidden there in the past. Foucault (1969) uses an archeological
metaphor when dealing with historical research. He sees knowledge
as sediments on the land. Each period of history lies on another
level of social history. The forces of the past are still there
in the bedrock and can only be exposed by digging into the past.
Occasionally, there is an earthquake that exposes these forces
of the past and brings them into full view so that one can compare
them with the present. Only under these extraordinary conditions
does one come to fully understand the social forces acting on
contemporary society. This is what he calls an "epistemic
rupture." Hence, in his Archeology of Knowledge, he noted
that this process began in Spain around the time when the novel
emerged as a new literary genre.
Foucault notes that the novel began in Spain. Previous to this
time, the picaresque novels were essentially short stories told
in a narrative mode. Don Quijote de la Mancha, the novel by Miguel
de Cervantes first published in 1605, was different . It had plot
structures, character development, page-turners, and role reversals
. It was a true novel (St. Clair, 1997). Foucault found in the
novel, a new way of communicating. Story telling was no longer
based on the imitation theory of art (Gombrich, 1963). It was
no longer imbued with ritual and all of the markings of narrative
chants or rhymed assonance. It was a representation of life, not
life itself. When events happen, they are witnessed by those who
are present at the event. These people share their understanding
of the event with others through storytelling or ritual. In the
process, these events are relayed to others in a new form. They
are encoded. When the event is put into a new code, it becomes
a new event, a new account of what happened. Foucault has argued
that the telling of the event became more real than the event
itself. The representation became more important than the event
itself. He believes that these patterns of false consciousness
continue to pervade contemporary society.
As an example of this re-coding of the world in symbolic forms,
Foucault used the painting of Las Meninas in 1656 by the famous
Spanish painter, Diego Velázquez, Las Meninas, "ladies
in waiting." The portrait, Foucault notes, shows several
people in the painting looking directly outward in the direction
of the passing viewer. They appear surprised as if they had capture
the glance of a passing voyeur. They seem to have stopped their
actions to look at the intended audiences of the painter. What
is this painting about? Who is the central figure in this work
of art? At first glance it appears to be the five-year old future
queen of Spain, la Infanta Doña Margarita. She is the only
one who is cast directly in the sun light entering into the austere
room of the Alcázar. Around her one finds her dwarfs, Maribarbola
and Nicolasito who are there to amuse her. Behind them are her
meninas. Behind her are her guardadamas, her attendants. In front
of her is her dog, brooding and detached and tempered by the gentle
foot of the dwarf. Another important figure in the painting appears
to be the painter himself, Vel(zquez. He is the only other major
figure in the painting. He is located at the center of the portrait
and is looking directly at the viewer. Could this be a self-portrait?
There are other major figures in the painting but they do not
figure prominently in the painting. The King and Queen have been
reduced to reflections in a shadowy mirror on the back wall of
the room. Why? They are the real benefactors of the painting.
Why are they not at the center of the painting? Why are their
images reflected in the mirror? Vel(zquez has made an extraordinary
personal selection of whom to depict and how to display them.
One could argue that he saw the five-year old as the future queen
of Spain and that this painting was intended to display this event
as the divine right, sanctioned by God (light streaming through
the window). If this was his intent, then why is he given almost
equal prominence with youngest member of the royal family? Vel(zquez
has re-presented the event for his viewers and he has given himself
more prominence in this work of art than the King and Queen. He
has recast the circumstances into his own interpretation of the
event. He has re-coded the event. and made this commissioned painting
into a self-portrait. He has redesigned the event in accordance
with his own needs and concerns. He has given the Infanta Doña
Margarita and himself center stage in this painting. Art critics
have even called this a "self portrait" of the famous
painter. Velázquez has titled this painting Las Meninas
as this is meant to be a political statement. Spain is there along
with the ladies in waiting to welcome the new ruler of the country,
Infanta Doña Margarita. The situation that brought about
the event will be forgotten, but the painter and his painting
will not. The representation has become more important than the
event itself. Vel(zquez has aptly captured this cultural shift
in his painting of Las Meninas.
|
|
|
| The Vocabulary of Motives: (Latinate Root) | Form - the container
of meaning Format - the default pattern for the containment of meanings Conform - to have the same form Deform - to destroy or temper with the container of meaning Reform - to put meaning into a new container Inform - to put meanings into a form Perform - to put an action into a form Formula - Latin for a small form Formulate - to make a form for meanings. . |
| The Vocabulary of Motives (Greek Based) | Morph - the container
of meaning Morpheme - a canonical form, an abstract pattern of forms Isomorphic - having the same form Amorphous - having no set form Metamorphic - going beyond form, changing forms Pseudomorph - false or non genuine form Allomorph - the other form |
| Expressions in English of the Metaphor of Form: | to capture an idea in
words, to put concepts into words, to force one's ideas into
the wrong words, to have hollow words (form but no meaning),
to extract ideas from words, to find ideas in an essay, the idea is difficult to put into words |
What Foucault describes in his accounts of European social history
is the beginnings of semiotics, a theory of the study of sign
systems. This is the same concept that one found in the writings
of Aquinas and the medieval grammarians (modistae). This concentration
on form and the interpretations of form led to seeing the world
in a new way. The codification of the event became more important
than the event itself. In order to document his insights into
this epistemic rupture, Foucault employed cultural artifacts (paintings
and novels). In doing so, he wanted to remind his colleagues that
they also live in a socially constructed reality that is driven
by semiotic representations. Modern society, he argues, has lost
touch with reality. It is embedded in layers of false consciousness,
sediments of socially constructed realities from the past. The
codes have become the new reality. This is evident from the following
"vocabulary of motives" surrounding this metaphor.
COMMUNICATION AS RESONANCE
Before leaving the metaphor of form, it should be noted that there
was another metaphor of communication used by the Pre-Socratic
inhabitants of Greece, the metaphor of resonance. Although this
perspective on human communication may not be a dominant way of
interacting in Europe, nevertheless it is highly prevalent in
the rest of the world. It is also important because it is one
of the most interesting candidates for dealing with the expression
of emotions, shared feelings, the experiences of numinosity, the
impact of visual forms, the profoundness of music, and other experiences
of life. The tuning fork provides the model for this metaphor.
When a tuning fork is struck, it emits vibrations. Other tuning
forks that share the same frequency pick up the vibrations and
begin to resonate. What this model claims is that some aspect
of something in people with similar experiences resonates with
others. It may be an emotion, an experience, a feeling, or a vision.
For example, one who has fallen in love and who has had the experience
of falling out of love will immediately recognize the deep emotions
that can be found in simple songs that are heard every day over
the radio. For example, the words of a trite popular song seem
to take on a new and very personal meaning. They resonate with
what is happening in the lives of the lovers. Others who have
shared this experience will know immediately what these lovers
are going through. They resonate with the experiences of others
through their experiences and the emotions evoked by them. Similarly,
anyone who has been a caretaker to someone who is terminally ill
from cancer or who is a cancer survivor himself will immediately
know the emotional pain and turmoil that others experienced in
a similar situation. If someone declares that she has cancer,
for example, the person who was a caretaker of another cancer
patient then he would immediately understand the depth of this
social drama. No words need to be spoken. The understanding is
immediate. It is silent; and it is deep. There are many examples
of the metaphor of resonance in everyday life. English has words
for these experiences and treats these experiences as items that
can be verbally encapsulated, viz., sympathy, empathy, compassion,
understanding, insight intuition, and common sense. However, the
experiences shared by the resonance metaphor are not digital units
of compartmentalized life, they are analogs. They are in the stream
of life. They constitute social actions. They have to do with
life as social drama.
In many cultures, words fail (Hall, 1973, 1977, 1982, 1983; Mehrabian,
1971; Poyatos, 1976). This is why great emphasis is placed on
non-verbal behavior, rites, rituals, group dancing, group singing,
art, music, and dance. This propensity towards the resonance metaphor
does not mean that these cultures do not have semiotic systems
based on representation. They do. What it does mean, however,
is that the resonance metaphor is favored as a means of communication.
Zen Buddhism is noted for its famous Koans: What is the sound
of one hand clapping? These aphorisms are meant to force the student
of Buddhism to see through the illusion of forms. Words are forms.
They socially construct reality. For Buddhism, words are not to
be trusted. They are not reality. In the Buddhist monastery, the
metaphor of resonance may hold center stage while all around it
one finds the metaphor of language holding center stage in its
own theater of social drama. Both metaphors co-exist, but one
may dominate within the context of a social situation as evidenced
in the language of the counter-culture (love-in, sit-in, vibrations,
feelings, etc.).
|
|
|
| The Metaphor: Resonance | |
| The Vocabulary of Motives | vibrate, echo, resound, reverberate, touch, feel, sense, empathy, emote, impression, sympathy, radiate warmth, compassion, sentiment, etc. |
| Attempts to Express Resonance Through the Metaphor of Form: | He empathized with her, her thoughts reverberated through the room, he was compassionate, they were in tune with each other, let her walk in my shoes, he was touched by her concern, How do you feel?, If it feels good, do it (American expression), sit-ins (Counter-culture term for being together in harmony), love-ins (Counter-culture term for being together in harmony), Dasein (Existentialist term for being-there). |
What is interesting about these two metaphors of human communication is that they occur in all cultures, but only one of them is favored and legitimated. What does this mean for the individual living in a cultural system? It means that one may have a propensity for communicating with resonance, but happens to live in a culture that favors communication by means of discrete signs, the language metaphor. Furthermore, the former pattern of communication is characteristically associated with oral cultures and the latter with print cultures. Hence, a disparity exists between individuals living within a cultural system.
|
|
|
| PRINT CULTURE | ORAL CULTURE |
| Cognition, Analytical Mode,
Sequential Order |
Synthesizing Mode, Simultaneous Processing |
| Logical Thought | Affective, Emotive Thought |
| Predilections: Mathematics, Science | Predilections: Art, Music, Dance |
| Legitimation - Verbal , Rhetorical, Print, Technology | Legitimation - Visual Metaphor, Ritual, Orality, The Arts |
These cultures do not process information in the same way. Oral cultures favor the right hemisphere of the brain. This is where one finds gestalt thinking, emotions, visual thinking, and the simultaneous juxtapositioning of events. Print cultures favor the left hemisphere of the mind with its focus on analysis, linear thought, logic, and literacy.
There are several interesting patterns in the distinction between orality and literacy that seem to parallel those of the two metaphors of communication. Oral cultures favor the resonance metaphor of communication. They are concerned with life as an experience and know that wisdom cannot be taught. It must be earned by experiencing life. It can only be shared by others who already posses it and who resonate with the experience of wisdom. Oral cultures find the sharing of emotions to be a social asset. This is often done by story telling, the enactment of rituals, and group gatherings. Oral cultures favor action over words. Silence plays a major role in these cultures because communication takes place by doing things rather than talking about them. For this reason, oral cultures favor nonverbal communication and visual thinking. The members of oral cultures are listeners and find meditation to be a central part of their lives. Meditation involves listening to nature, to the animals, to the tree, and to the gods. By way of contrast, print cultures are more concerned with knowledge rather than wisdom. Knowledge has to do with the observation of life and not in the participation of life. Knowledge is an important part of the print cultures and this is best accomplished through the metaphor of language. Print cultures tend to focus on the codes of language rather than on the connotations or the value structures associated with those codes. More importantly, they place a heavier emphasis on the codification of experiences over the experiences themselves. Silence is an anathema for print cultures. It signals that communication is not taking place. Long moments of silence in the courtroom are interpreted as guilt, deception, or confusion when it may be none of these. Rhetoric, on the other hand, is an intrinsic part of print cultures. It can be found in the numerous formats used to communicate on paper: the memorandum, the brief, the case study, etc. Print cultures favor a distinction between public and private self. They favor formal education, education on paper rather than through apprenticeship.
LEGITIMATION OF COMMUNICATIVE METAPHORS
Given the propensity for polarities in Western thought, it is
only natural to see these metaphors as oppositions. It is assumed
that they may occur in one culture, but not in the other. The
truth of the matter is that both metaphors do occur in all modern
industrialized societies, but only one of them is sanctioned or
legitimated by the social system. One exception to this is Japan
where both models have nearly equal status. The reason that both
metaphors of communication are needed is simply because they do
different things and relate to different aspects of human information
processing. The metaphor of language is digital. This means that
it is excellent for use in analysis, the discovery of knowledge,
and the formalization of thought into articulated systems. The
metaphor of resonance, on the other hand, is analog. It is excellent
for dealing with the flow of life, the experiences of living,
the emotive aspects of being human, and the simultaneous processing
of discordant systems into mosaics of life.
Warren TenHouten and Charles Kaplan (1973) once asked why do humans
need two hemispheres of the mind? Why are they so different? It
seems as though humans have two minds, each different from the
other. They go on to associate the right mind with oral cultures
and the left mind with print cultures. This distinction has also
be the focus of studies of psychological differentiation by Manuel
Ramírez and Alfonso Castañeda (1974). The answer
appears to be that both hemispheres of the mind are needed for
bicognitive education. The problem is not why do humans have two
different mental capabilities, but why do societies only favor
one over the other? Howard Gardner (1983) has been the major proponent
of multiple forms of intelligence. His argument is that human
beings are not being developed to their full potential. They need
both hemispheres of the mind. To parallel this assertion, one
can say that they need both metaphors of communication. They do
different things and serve different needs.
| The Metaphor of Resonance (favors right brain laterality) |
The Metaphor of Form (favors left brain laterality) |
| Important for sharing wisdom. Wisdom cannot be taught. It must be earned by experiencing life. Once it is earned, it can be shared with others who resonate with those experiences. | Important for sharing knowledge. The focus here is on information and not on the values and the experiences of life. Knowledge has to do with observing rather than participating in life. |
| The system is expressed through actions, analogically | The system is expressed through form, digitally |
| Resonance is significant in relating the richer experiences of life. It is here where people share experiences, moods, feelings, and intuitions about life | Experiences are severely restricted by the codes of semiotic systems. The focus is on the form of the code rather than on the connotations or the value structures associated with that code |
| Favors action over words (Non-verbal Communication). Watch what one says and not what one does. Actions speak louder than words. | Favors words over actions (Verbal Communication). Western culture is rhetorical. It is steeped in the traditions of verbal form. |
| Favors silence, and nonverbal behavior Favors overt sounds, and colors. Resonance cultures tend to be nonverbal and use visual thinking | Rhetorical cultures are sign cultures. They are also print cultures |
| Common to oral cultures, cognitive processes are simultaneous, emotive, and affective. Favors art, music, dance, visual thinking | Common to print cultures, cognitive process are analytical, sequential, logical,. Favors mathematics, science, and technology. |
| Important for sharing emotions. It has to do with Empathy | .Important for articulating knowledge or information |
THE METHECTIC SOCIETY
Johan Huizinga (1955) advanced the hypothesis that play is a significant
part in culture. It transcends the immediate needs of life and
enables one to pretend. It allows one to impart a special meaning
to the daily patterns of life, and transforms the ordinary into
the divine. He sees in the Greek drama the embodiment of this
situation whereby the enactment of an event takes place and in
the process of presenting the dramatic situation one recapitulates
and identifies the act with its mystical origin. Some acts or
dramas are represented as imitative acts of life [mimesis] and
others involve actual participation, a methectic event.
The rite is a dromenon, which means 'something acted,' an act, action. That which is enacted, or the stuff of the action, is a drama which again means act, action represented on a stage. Such action may occur as a performance or a contest. The rite, or 'ritual act' represents a cosmic happening, an event in the natural process. The word 'represent' however, does not cover the exact meaning of the act, at least no in its looser, modern connotation; for here, 'representation' is really identification, the mystic repetition or re-presentation of the event. The rite produces the effect which is then no so much shown figuratively as actually reproduced in the action. The function of the rite, therefore, is far from being merely imitative; it causes the worshipers to participate in the sacred happening itself. As the Greeks would say 'it is methectic rather than mimetic. (Huizinga 1955: 14-15)
Consequently, he adds, play has a cultural significance by
its ability to create new images as well to manipulate already
established ones. That is, in a drama, one actualizes anew, or
recreates the events represented and thus maintains the symbolic
order. This view of symbolic maintenance is not limited to Huizinga,
the social historian. It can also be found among phenomenological
sociologists (Berger and Luckmann, 1966) who argue that once a
social reality is constructed, it remains a fragile construct
and must be supported and maintained by means of symbolic action.
The re-enactment of the symbolic event reifies the experience
and convinces the participants in the drama that they are indeed
dealing with the appropriate social reality.
During the emergence of the World Theater in the seventeenth century,
he notes, such notable playwrights as Shakespeare, Calderon, and
Racine made the stage their playground. It was an age that moved
away from the medieval concept of personification in which the
cosmic drama of Good and Evil competed for the soul of man. It
was an age when a secular shift towards impersonation in which
a person's actions reflected his character. The medieval qualities
of Good and Evil were replaced by the theory of the humors and
their characteristic personality types (Burns, 1973). Hence, the
plays of the World Theater of the seventeenth century were no
longer morality plays, didactic instruments of the church. They
were now social instruments of the newly emerging secular culture
and provided social interludes for their audiences, reprieves
from the profanity of their ordinary lives. They adorned their
characters with special sentiments, and amplified their derelictions.
They enhanced the order of life and demonstrated its limitations.
The game of mimesis enabled them to cast a spell over their audiences.
The mystical origins of drama still persisted, but it was no longer
the mysteries of the church which prevailed, but the enigma of
the human condition.
The concept of play, as Huizinga has noted, has many similarities with that of an illusion. And, this should not be surprising since the word "illusion" comes from the Latin word in ludo, which means "in play." But there are differences. Play has its rules and regulations and these determine how the outcome will enfold. In play, Huizinga adds, people wear masks and become another person (cf. Greek, persona "mask"). But the actor does much more than wear a mask,;he re-presents a special happening, a symbolic act. His representation is a mystical event, a cosmic happening. This comportment, however, differs significantly from an ordinary stage performance. The drama, in this case, is memethic. It is acted out. Whereas in the case of the stage production it is mimetic, it imitates life. Hence, for Huizinga, play takes on ritualistic dimensions, they correspond to the re-creation of a cosmic event. It becomes an enrapturement. Its raison d'être is mythical. Obviously, he has a reason for creating this dichotomy between the sacred and the profane. For him, play is sacred and work is profane. They belong to separate domains. There is another explanation within the contexts of structural epistemology for the differentiation between work and play in European cultures which Huizinga has overlooked - play is dialectal and involves the exploration of new mentalities, whereas work is rhetorical and is involved in the predefined constructs of a given system in which options are either severely limited or controlled. This shift in the rationale for the distinction between work and play also enables one to explain why, for some people at least, their work is a form of play -- they have the freedom to explore and redefine their work place whereas others do not.
Huizinga employed the instrumentality of etymology in his attempt to further divulge the relevance of play in past cultures. He noted that there is no common Indo-European word for play and this means that it was not a culturally salient concept at the time of this Urkultur. But his investigations did reveal several interesting words for play. In Greek, there two enlightening words for play: paidia that refers to the play of a child and agon, which pertains to adult contests of skill (cf. Latin ludus). These words are important because they provide the parameters for the classification of games by Huizinga (1955). But, his critic, Caillois (1979), has argued that Huizinga has overlooked other classical designations for play. In Latin, there is alea, the game of dice, which is associated with vagaries of fate and destiny; and there is the ilinx, the Greek word for whirlpool, which denotes a kind of game based on the pursuit of vertigo.
The underlying tenet of Huizinga's fascination with play can be found in the third chapter of his book Homo Ludens. He argues that cultures use play to express its interpretation of life. He is not saying that play turns into culture, but that the play metaphor pervades culture. It can be found in the childish play of paidia, the competitive skills of agon, the exhibits of the agora (the market place), and the victories or athlon of the Gods in Greek drama. Play involves a world of honor in which challenges are met in the cosmic drama of good over evil. Hence, play can be found in all aspects of culture from the heroes of mythology who win their contests by trickery (a form of gambling) to the contests of superiority in the battle field. What emerges from such contests is the aristos, the best or most excellent, those who demonstrate virtue by feats of strength, skill, courage, and wit.
In one of his essays on cultural play, Huizinga provides an insightful illustration of how competition or agon operates within a court of law. The litigation itself is agon, a form of a sacred contest in which the pronouncements of justice and honor take place. The courtroom itself is the tenemos, the sacred spot which is divorced from the ordinary world. The judges who administer this justice are in costume. They may wear wigs, coifs, robes, and other trappings of majesty. For it is in their court that the contest takes place, the diversion of legal play. The concern of the court is not justice, but matters of legality (the rules of the game). The fate of the litigants is promulgated by the judge, the oracle of their fate. His pronouncement becomes law. And the litigants must live with this ordeal for it is the final word. Hence, the image of the scales of justice is a sub-metaphor of the outcome of this game of legality. They represent the finality of a cosmic event.
In contrast to physical competition, Huizinga discusses the phenomena of mental competition. This is evident, he notes, in the solving of the riddle. Doing and daring are forms of physical power in which life is, in essence, the game of culture, but the ability to solve a riddle by mental prowess is a form of knowing which brings in the use of magical power. It is a form of enchantment in which the sacred knowledge of the universe is unraveled, and the cosmic order is unveiled. Hence, riddles are sacred. They contain esoteric knowledge. Only after a knight has demonstrated his ability to command physical competition is he allowed to enter into a new realm of rivalry. He is introduced into the game of the riddle, the secret language of the adepts, and a series of trials and tribulations. It is at this level that he learns of an agonistic universe in which everything is dominated by conflict and split asunder by opposites. At this stage, the ethereal life becomes ritual combat, but the riddle he has to solve is for his soul. The battles that he encounters are essentially battles for his own soul. From the point of view of secular society, his battles are on behalf of the king, or the royal order into which he was initiated.
A TRAVERSAL OF CULTURE AS PLAY
Huizinga's theory of play went unchallenged until the work of
Roger Caillois on Les jeux hommes appeared in 1938. What followed
in this treatise was a brilliant critique in which Caillois demonstrated
how Huizinga seemed to ignore some forms of play and even minimize
others. Callois expanded on the range and the diversity of the
forms of play. He noted how Huizing failed to elaborate on the
various needs served by the phenomena of play within the larger
context of culture theory. Caillois argued that there are four
basic types of play:
| Ludus (requires skill and patience) |
AGON: Competition (contest) |
| Paidia (uncontrolled fantasy) |
|
Roger Callois |
|
| ALGON | The Contest, Confrontation Cultures Demonstrated by Competitive Sports Individuals want to compete, winning is everything. |
| ALEA | Manifested by Gambling Fatalistic Culture People take chances with their lives and their possessions |
| MIMESIS | The Life of the Theater Individuals want to escape into another world, they want to hide in the illusions of others Escapist Culture |
| ILINX | Evidenced by the Frenzy of the Roller Coaster The ultimate escape through self destruction, flirting with death, and with various states of mental frenzy Panic Culture |
The Major Game Categories
AGON
There are many games that are adversarial or antagonistic in nature.
Each side confronts the other. Each competes with the other. What
they contend about is something of value. Usually, it is a highly
ennobled physical or mental skill. The side that wins the contest,
demonstrates its superiority. Agonistic games require sustained
attention, a great deal of patience, and considerable training.
The goal is to win the contest (Greek agon) and the victor is
the one who assiduously applies himself, and trains most strenuously
to accomplish that ideal and win the prize (Greek athlea).
There are many examples of agonistic games. Boxing is agonistic.
It requires two competitors who fight with each other in the ring
in accordance to certain rules. The winner is the superior fighter,
the one with the greatest physical skills of toughness, stamina,
speed, and boxing talent. Football is another example of an agonistic
game. In this case the battle takes place on a field which is
marked off into competing territories. A quarterback heads the
team. He organizes the plays and leads his team to victory. The
team that has reached the goal line the most after a stipulated
period of time wins the game. The skill in this case is a team
effort; it involves the physical strength and agility of the players
and the mental alertness and perspicacity of the team captain.
Chess is another type of agonistic game. The players compete on
a board with opposing rows of chess pieces. The object of the
game is to attack and conquer the king. The moves are regulated.
Each piece has certain constraints on how it can move, when it
can move, and where it can move to. The winner of the game conquers
his opponent through the use of his mental skills, experience
at chess, and employment of strategic moves.
ALEA
The Greek word for dice is alea and games of chance are called
by Caillois alea. What makes games of alea different is that the
players, in this case, have no control over the outcome. Winning,
he notes, is a matter of fate. The player is passive and waits
the outcome of his fate. Once the die (alea) is cast, the gods
have decided, and he is made aware of the outcome. It is all a
matter of luck. All is a blind verdict of chance.
There are many examples of games of chance. The lottery is a well-known
aleatoric game. It involves the buying of tickets from some commercially
recognized establishment. The tickets have been officially coded
and given a lucky number. Once a month, the winner of that lucky
number is revealed to the public. Those who favor the lottery,
sweepstakes, or similar aleatoric enterprises do so on fate. They
have no guarantees that they will win. They have no skills that
they can employ to enhance their chances. All that they can do
is wait for the die to be cast. It is all a matter of chance.
The gambling casino is a house of chance. There are many different kinds of games available in these establishments for the gamer. He may play the cards (blackjack), the jackpots (slots) or the games (roulette, wheel of fortune). There is a formality in casinos that contrast radically with local gambling clubs. The patrons wear formal attire, drinks are served, formal announcements are made periodically, and the establishment is furnished in warm eloquent colors. The illusions of wealth are built into the scene. Guard escorts winners to the cashier's office where official governmental declaration forms (IRS forms) are signed, customer information is recorded, and a check is ceremoniously conveyed to the patron.
Lifestyles can also be allocated to chance. In Anne Tyler's book, The Accidental Tourist, the protagonist is a man who lives his life by default. He avoids making decisions. His wife leaves him and he lets it happens. She wants to get back together with him, and he lets her execute the decisions in his life. He meets a woman whom he feels is special for him and she sets his agenda in life. When he travels, he does so passively. The choices have all been made for him. In computer terminology, the default is the primary settings given by the Software Company. It dictates how the product is to be used. Those who want to change the default setting must make the effort to open up a configuration file, study the technical manual for the relevant information, and execute the new selections. The accidental tourist, in this framework, lives a default life. He has been handed scripts in life. His consciousness is a false one. The life he lives is not his own, but one that others have planned for him. His sister also lives a default life. When things go wrong it is because they do not comply to the structures that she has been given. She is compulsive about organization. Others see it as her forte, but it is really her weakness. She is over-organized, over-structured. She also lives a default existence in which there are no surprises, no changes, no variations. Her life is a matter of fate, it is decided by others, it is aleatoric.
MIMICRY
Mimicry is an illusion. It is a game of escape. For the players
of agon and alea, there is an attempt to enter an ideal world
through competition or by chance. But, for the mimic, the desire
is to enter into a world of illusions (Latin in-ludo "in
play") through the imagination. It is a special form of escape
from the profane reality of everyday existence. It is the world
of the mask, the persona. The scripts are created by the playwright,
and the drama enfolds before an audience, real or imaginary. It
is all very dramaturgical. In its more sinister and controlled
form, it is the world of the spy who manipulates others, or the
domain of the fugitive whose mask (persona) becomes his outer
reality, or the universe of the impostor whose mask hides an empty
face, a person with unformed ego boundaries. Although all of these
are involved in acting and all are at home in play (illusion),
it is not the same world that is occupied by the actor. The impostor,
the spy, and the fugitive are all very serious in playing their
roles. They deception is serious. Their simulation is highly motivated.
It forms the basis of their survival. Such is not the case with
the professional actor who merely imitates life and who shares
his role taking openly with his audience. A similar pattern of
escape can be found among spectators who become openly involved
in the illusions before them and may, from time to time, vicariously
enter the stage with the actors. They are aware of their escape
mechanisms.
The most obvious example of the game of mimesis is the stage.
Theaters are houses of illusion. They are chambers of escape.
They are places where the audience escapes from the profane world
of everyday interaction to enter into a sacred space where heroes
are bigger than life, and the villains more evil than iniquity
itself. The earliest stages were allegorical. The messages of
these passion plays dealt with matters of apocalyptic proportions
(Burns, 1972). Its characters were the traits of the good, the
bad, love, hope, and charity. Later, when the art of memory gave
way to the rise of the printing press (Yates, 1987), the theater
became a place of mystical enlightenment. Its construction was
a mirror of the universe, and its actors shared stories of spiritual
enfoldment. With the advent of technological developments in the
area of cinematography, the mimesis of the stage was reformulated
into film (Dickinson, 1971). The stories were no longer about
gods and goddesses, but about actors and actresses with celebrity
status (Goode, 1978). Given the rising narcissism in the United
States, it is only natural that Hollywood would find a way to
assist their audiences in escaping life through celebrity worship.
Hence, Caillois could readily classify the United States as a
mimetic culture, but so would India, and Italy, and many other
nations around the world fit this classification. Hence, it is
not surprising that Huizinga saw all cultures as mimetic.
ILINX
The Ilinx is the pursuit of vertigo, a voluptuous panic. This
is a state of momentary seizure in which reality is destroyed.
The whirlpool affect can be found among the Mexican voladores
who hang by their feet and spin in an every widening circle as
they slowly descend to the earth. In such a state of suspension,
the blood rushes to the head, the background images merge into
a swirl, and all sense of reality is lost, the mind dissolves.
Another example of the pursuit of vertigo can be found among the
Sufi. They begin their whirling dance by means of a gradual rotation
with the arms are raised laterally and the head held up high.
As the pace quickens, they soon witness their horizon blurring
into a gyrating vista and once again reality is destroyed by the
momentary seizure of vertigo.
Ilinx destroys reality. It is an attempt to escape into another
reality, a different form of the senses. Whereas the games of
alea and agon are attempts to replace reality with an idealized
version either by effort or by change, ilinx is an attempt to
escape the status quo completely. Caillois (1979) argues that
ilinx is the desire for disorder, a desire for destruction. This
is the game of the drug culture, the game of destruction. For
those who are involved in the sport, it is a form of escape into
another reality; but, for those who witness the event from the
outside, it is a game of death. Such is the game of vertigo.
AN EXPANDED THEORY OF GAMES
Roger Caillois is interested in developing a theory of games.
He notes how when play becomes institutionalized, it results in
rules and these rules may become contaminated. This spoil theory
of games is really a by-product of Plato's theory of forms in
which the ideal forms (phantasia logike) are expressed by actual
substances (tungganon). However, instead of ideal forms, Caillois
has ideal games, which are divorced from the contamination of
people who try to influence the outcome of the game. And, instead
of the actual substances, Caillois has the actual games, in which
rules are violated, and in which people cheat, and in which the
decisions make by referees are often countervailed by political
and social pressures. Hence, in the ideal games, the following
conditions hold:
| Agon | The desire to win by one's merit in regulated competition. |
| Alea | The submission of one's will in anticipation of the wheel of fate. |
| Mimesis | The assumption of a strange personality through imagery and illusion. |
| Ilinx | The pursuit of vertigo to escape the present reality. |
In actual games, however, what was once pleasure soon becomes a passion, then a compulsion and eventually an anxiety. The game has been spoiled. Similarly, professionals and those who wish to cheat the system, to violate the rules of the game and to spoil the ideal setting. For the professional, the game is no longer sport, but work. Caillois is quick to point out that his model of the game is based on the ideal, the Platonic forms. These ideal games can be combined into six basic existing patterns.
| COMPETITION | |
| Competition (AGON) and
Chance (ALEA) Competition (AGON) and Simulation (Mimicry) Competition (AGON) and Vertigo (ILINX) |
|
| CHANCE | |
| Chance (ALEA) and Simulation
(MIMICRY) Chance (ALEA) and Vertigo (ILINX) |
|
| SIMULATION | |
| Simulation (MIMICRY) and Vertigo (ILINX) | |
There are certain combinations that are not possible: competition
and vertigo, for example, are not possible as the former requires
the use of controlled skills while the latter represents the abandonment
of controlled skills. Nevertheless, these six patterns can be
readily found in various cultures. The combination of competition
and chance, for example, can be found in such games as football,
and chess. In these games, one has only partial control, and chance
determines the outcome. For Caillois, these games are matters
of submission or control:
| SUBMISSION | |
| ALEA: Submission
of the will ILINX: Submission of the mind |
|
| CONTROL | |
| AGON: Control
of the will (body) MIMESIS: Control of the mind (body) |
|
After discussing the structure of games and how they form ideal patterns, Caillois introduces his theory of cultural types based on the kinds of games that they legitimate. Cultures, he argues, do different things with competition. Some focus on the mental, while others concentrate on the physical. Cultures also do different things with chance. For some it is a diversion, but for others it comes a way of life, a form of fatalism. Cultures also differ in the way in which they practice simulation. Some are aware of the roles that are socially constructed and distinguish the public self from the public self, but for other the roles become real. People identify with their conversational images. Finally, cultures also vary in how they deal with the games of vertigo. For some, it is an escape from the present whereas for others it is an excuse for non-action, a time out.
Caillois argues that primitive cultures are Dionysian. They are
involved in the games of MIMESIS and ILINX. The mask in primitive
society is used to symbolize the universe. The persona or mask
was used to transform officiates into gods, spirits, or animal
ancestors at ceremonies. The staging of god-play ended in a sacred
convulsion (ilinx). The transition was from simulation to vertigo
and trance was the bonding effect between the two. Hence Dionysian
cultures employ both MIMESIS and ILINX as cultural games.
Contemporary societies, on the other hand, are Apollonian. They
are marked by competition (AGON) and aristocracy. People compete
mentally at the executive level or physically at the factory level.
By industrial societies, especially those involved in monopoly
capitalism, have a two tiered system. Many are favored even before
the competition begins because they belong to the power elite.
These are the members of industrial oligarchy, those who have
achieved wealth and power through heredity. Their place is the
game is one of being born into wealth, a matter of luck, a matter
of chance (ALEA). Hence, the games of chance and competition mark
industrial societies.
What has happened in the course of history, Caillois argues, is
that there has been a transition from the Dionysian to the Apollonian.
This change brings with it many concomitant transformations. It
involves the transition from the charismatic to the rational,
and the substitution of submission to fate with the dictates of
reason. Although primitive societies did compete physically, this
pattern of AGON has been replaced. The new competition is bureaucratic.
It is one of merit examinations. The new competition is one of
meritocracy. Whereas the old heroes where man of physical strength,
the new heroes are now administrators. Their weapons are the pen,
paper, and the computer. Their rewards are commodities, financial
advancements, and executive perks. The old Greek world of tyche
(luck), moira (allotment by destiny), and kairos (the opportune
moment) has been replaced by the modern concept of self as the
company man. Business becomes the "real world." The
new battles are administrative, and competition is for market
share.
THE MIMETIC SOCIETY
Over the Globe Theater where Shakespeare staged his plays was
a sign that read "Totius mundus agit histrionem" [The
whole world is a stage]. This allusion to the drama of life represents
a root metaphor in Western thought. It is also a concept that
consciously emerged during the Middle Ages. Shakespeare used it
to account for how people interact socially with each other and
this intentional use of the metaphor can be found in the production
of As You Like It where Jacques openly expresses this conviction:
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts, ...
This great insight, it should be noted, is not unique to Shakespeare, as he was not the first to make an explicit analogy between the presentation of self and the staging of characters in drama. Plato, for example, made frequent use of the "play metaphor" in Philebus and so did such later writers as Petronius (Burns, 1972: 8). Elisabeth Burns has written much about the significance of these common references to the in her research on theatricality. The theatrical metaphor suggests that in ordinary life, as on the stage, one takes parts and fit into situations and scenes that are part of a larger scheme of action. Burns (1972: 126) sees these behaviors as roles that individuals adopt as means of imposing themselves on society. It is only gradually that one comes to realize the extent to which the role can impose itself upon the "self" which plays it.
The relationship between the concern for "theory" in sociology and the "theater" in literature merits further explication. Etymologically, for example, these words are related. The word theoria in Greek had several meanings. It was used to refer to an envoy that was sent to visit an oracle and to the ambassadors who witnessed sacred festivals and to the spectators who attended the games. What all of these meanings have in common is that these envoys, ambassadors and spectators came back to their city states to report on how they saw the world. They elucidated about what was seen and commented on the seen but unnoticed features of the world (Lyman and Scott, 1975). In other words, their task was to "theorize" about their missions. Another way in which the word for "theater" and "theory" are etymologically related can be seen in the Greek word for truth (aletheia). This word means, literally, "un-hidden-ness" and refers to the truth as something that is hidden from view (Lyman and Scott, 1975:2). Hence, the similarity between the quest for theory in sociology and the tradition of the theater in literature is well founded. Both are attempts to portray that which is hidden from view.
Where the event happenedThe theater of lifePersons witnessing
the eventThe beholdersReporting of the eventA theory of what happenedThe
understanding the EventThe truth, that which is unhidden
Erving Goffman (1959) has employed the dramaturgical metaphor
to describe how people act in public, the roles they play, the
masks they use, and the way in which they present themselves in
public. As a matter of fact, the language of sociology is laden
with the lexicon of the stage as this root metaphor underlies
the very foundations upon which major aspects of sociological
theory are constructed. Consequently, just how this illustrative
metaphor has articulated the paradigms of sociology merits further
investigation.
LITURGICAL TIME
The study of time is interesting because it is based on natural
events such as solar and lunar calendars, but it is also based
on religious practices. Just as the Roman City Priests established
the Roman calendar, the structure of time was highly influenced
and regulated by the theocracy of the Holy Roman Church during
the Middle Ages. This modification of time is known as the liturgical
calendar. The year began in December with the Advent, four Sundays
before Christmas. Next season (Old English tide) is called Christmastide
and it begins on Christmas Eve. This is after the darkest day
of the year (December 22), the winter solstice. Christmas Day
is the highlight of the Christmastide and it is followed by a
number of feast days: St. Stephen (December 26), the Holy Innocents
(December 28), the Circumcision of Christ (January 1), and the
Epiphany (January 6), the twelfth night of the long Christmas
celebration. The period following the Christmastide was the Septuagesima,
a period of three weeks of preparation for the coming of Lent.
This period begins on February 14th. One of the more interesting
feast days in this period is the Purification of the Virgin or
the Candlemas (February 2). The ?Candlemas is one of the ancient
Celtic quarter days (the others being May 1, August 2, and November
1). It is interesting to note that the Candlemas seems to have
survived in the secular world as Groundhog Day. The last day before
Lent is Shrove Tuesday (Mardi Gras). It is the last time to enjoy
a good meal before fasting. The next period in the liturgical
calendar is Lent. It begins on Ash Wednesday (40 days before Easter).
The palms used from the previous year were burned and smeared
on the faithful as a reminder of their mortality. Lent is a season
of fasting. No meat can be eaten. Notable feast days in this period
include St. Joseph (March 19) and Annunciation (March 25). Lent
culminates in Holy week, a commemoration of Christ's final days
on earth. Good Friday, the most solemn day of the year, commemorates
the crucifixion. Following the period of Lent, one enters into
the Eastertide. This period celebrates the resurrection of Christ
on Easter Sunday (between March 22 and April 25). Following Eastertide
is Whitsunday or ??the Pentecost The first Sunday after Pentecost
is Trinity Sunday. In September, one celebrates the feast of St.
Michael (Michaelmas) on September 29th. What is interesting about
the liturgical calendar is that it combines two ritual calendars,
the solar calendar that articulates the Christmas cycle of fixed
feasts and the Lunar calendar that expresses the Easter cycle
of movable feasts. .
| November | Advent |
| December 25 - Christmas | The Christmas Cycle (fixed ) |
| January 6 | Epiphany |
| February 2 |
|
| March 25 |
|
| May / June | Ascension |
| July | Pentecost |
| August 15 | Assumption
of the Virgin Corpus Christi |
| September - November | All Saints Advent |
Easter occurs on the first Sunday after the first full moon that takes place after the Vernal Equinox. Hence, The movable calendar is based on the variable lunar cycles. The Christmas cycle, on the other hand, is fixed because it is based on solar cycles. This pattern of feast days within the solar calendar was challenged during the Reformation. This is because the Protestant reformers wanted to destroy the established rhythms of the liturgical calendar. Other changes that took place at this time was the destruction of the systems of patronage associated with the Great Chain of Being. One no longer needed a priest to intercede between the populace and God.
The days of the week were also culturally defined. The rationale behind the seven day week rests on the creation of the Sabbath, a special Jewish day. It was marked apart from secular time (Sunday through Friday) and designated a special day for rest and prayer. The Sabbath was a holy day in the Jewish tradition. What is interesting about the Sabbath is that it was designated by cyclical time whereas the rest of the week was marked by linear time. Cyclical time is eternal. It marks the eternal present. Within the Christian tradition, Sunday was designated as a holy day. The present days of the English week are based on the tradition of Pagan gods (Zerubavel, 1985).
| Sunday | Day of the sun |
| Monday | Day of the moon |
| Tuesday | Day of Tiwes |
| Wednesday | Day of Wotan |
| Thursday | Day of Thor |
| Friday | Day of Frieda |
| Saturday | Day of Saturn |
The days of the week in Romance languages are based on both Christian
and pagan gods. Consider, for example, the days of the week in
Spanish.
| Domingo | Day of the Lord, Dominus |
| Lunes | Day of the Moon, Lunar |
| Jueves | Day of Jove |
| Miercoles | Day of Mercury |
| Martes | Day of Mars |
| Viernes | Day of Venus |
| Sabado | Day of the Sabbath |
The hours were also culturally defined by the theocracy of the
Holy Roman Church. Around 530 to 540 AD, St. Benedict of Nursia,
the abbot of Monte Cassino, created a system for marking time
during the day. This system was called "The Benedictine Rule."
He broke up the day into parts (9 PM, midnight, and 3 AM). He
announced these periods by the ringing of bells. This system was
called "The Divine Office." The liturgical day began
with the matins in the middle of the night. This was followed
by the lauds at daybreak. After this came four little hours: the
Prime (around 6 AM), the Tierce (around 9 AM), the Sext (around
noon), and the Nones (around 3 PM). The evening was marked by
the third segmentation of the day, the Vespers (around 5-6 PM).
Why did St. Benedictine create such a regulated system of time?
He developed these markers to time in order to the activities
of the monks from prayer time to latrine time.
THEORIES OF REPRESENTATION - NOMINALISM VERSUS REALISM
Chomsky wants the concept of linguistic competence to be based
on linguistic universals. This claim is not without reason. He
wants his theory to imitate the general laws of the positivistic
sciences (e.g., physics, and chemistry). The more general these
laws are, the more they are able to predict phenomena within the
discipline. Universals represent the acme of generalizations.
They represent the most global assertions that one can make about
a field of knowledge. Hence, when a theory of linguistic structure
endeavors to achieve explanatory adequacy, it must provide an
account of the various linguistic universals in that theory. Chomsky
has argued that these universals were of two kinds: substantive
and formal universals. The description of each language, for example,
is drawn from a fixed class of universal items such as distinctive
features, the grammatical parts of speech, etc. Chomsky called
this fixed class of items: substantive universals.
| Substantive Universals: The vocabulary of Universals used in the description of language |
In addition to the search for substantive universals, linguists must also be concerned with the formal conditions under which such universals are used. These formal properties are important because they demonstrate the mathematical properties of natural language. They specify the character of the rules used in a language. The proposition that natural languages use transformational rules is such a claim. Traditional structuralism limited natural languages to only phrase structure rules. Chomsky argues that both are needed.
| Formal Universals: The Character of the rules used in Universal Grammar |
For Chomsky to assert this quest for universals is noble, but it leaves much unsaid. What does he mean by universals? Perhaps the importance of this question can be best explained by reverting to the distinction of tokens versus types. Charles Sanders Peirce, a mathematician and creator of American semiotic theory came up with this distinction in his discussion of semantics. To consider how tokens and types are related to one another, consider the following:
THE THE
How many words are there in this display? Some would answer that there is only one word. Others would argue that there are two words. The problem, Peirce noted, is caused by the sameness of type. There are two different particulars, but only one "type." These particulars are called "tokens." These two tokens have something in common and for this reason they constitute the same "type." At this point, Chomsky's arguments for universals do not present a problem. The problem of universals begins to emerge, however, when one asks if the classes are real. This problem is not new to the philosophy of language. John Locke, for example, believed that all things existed as particulars. He did not believe in universals. Those who did not believe in universals were called Nominalists. They treated two tokens as real and the name given to such a class or type was unreal. The objects existed in name (Latin: Nomen) only. Plato, on the other hand, did not put much credence on particulars, he only trusted a world based on universal ideas. He claimed that types and classes were real and that particulars or tokens were ephemeral and consequently unreal. Plato was a Realist. For him, types are real, they are not mere names for tings. Is Chomsky a Nominalist or a Realist? Are his linguistic universals real? Since he believes that language is innate and that it represents a faculty of the mind, one could argue that he is a Realist. Now consider an extension of the previous example of tokens and types.
THE AN
Here are two tokens. Are these tokens of the same type? Even structural linguists would concur that these form the same type. They called it a linguistic form class. The type that they had in mind was the class of determiners in natural language. THE is a definite article; AN is an indefinite article. Both belong to the linguistic form class of Determiners. Notice that the tokens are no longer the same word. They are defined as the same type because of a property that they share, viz., the same linguistic form class. So now the problems of Nominalism and Realism shift to one of properties. Consider the more common example of properties:
The apple is red. The book is red.
The predicate adjective "red" designates the property possessed by the noun subject. Are these properties real or are they merely qualities of something else that are real? The apple is real, it has substance. It meets the traditional notion of a substantial universal. The color of the apple, on the other hand, is a quality, a property, or accidence of the substance. Is it a universal? Is 'redness" real? A Nominalist would agree that entities have properties, but he would not conclude that these properties are themselves universals. A Nominalist will allow the discussion of properties but will not consider them to be real. They are not universal and cannot be strictly identical across tokens. Properties are particulars . For them, properties belong to particular substances. They do not exist by themselves. A Realist, on the other hand, would treat these properties as universals.
It is here that one begins to understand the writings of Chomsky and Halle (1968) as Realists because they argue for a theory of distinctive features that described the properties of sound systems and they claimed that these features are universal. Hence, the feature [+nasal] is predicated on the universal quality of nasality. If it exists as the property of an entity, it is called [+nasal]; if it doesn't exist, it is called [-nasal]. The problem becomes more complex, however, when one realizes that for Chomsky and Halle (1968) a sound is abstract and consists of a bundle of distinctive features. Hence, there is no phonological entity, just a bundle of phonological features and these features are considered to be universal properties. The properties are real. The properties are universal. The problem is that they are not tied to any particular. . Since they have also argued for such a unique fictional class of features that define a phonological entity, they should be labeled as Class Nominalists. How can they be both Realists and Nominalists at the same time? When one says "the apple is red" one states that there is an entity, the apple, and that it has a certain property of redness. However, distinctive feature theory claims that sound entities only exist as bundles of features. The features are universal. Their combined existence allows them to constitute a particular sound.
One of the claims made by Chomsky is that substantive universals form natural classes. It is here that tokens are placed into types because of their similarities. This means that the classes of properties that constitute universals are defined in terms of relations. They are grouped together because they are similar or share a partial identity. It is only when talking about natural classes that one can better realize the nature of his claims for universals. Natural classes do not have to do with entities, but with relations. To make a claim that a natural class of linguistic features occurs as substantive universals is to claim that the attributes and the relationships between these entities are real. This claim may startle logicians, but they do not bother linguists. It is a claim that can be found in the rudiments of classical structuralism. Ferdinand de Saussure argued that a system consists not of entities, but of relationships. He argued that the relationships are abstract and real.
| MANNER OF ARTICULAR |
|
||
| Bilabial | Dental | Velar | |
| Voiceless Stops |
|
|
|
| Voiced Stops |
|
|
|
| Nasal Stops |
|
|
|
Sounds are defined in terms of their oppositions. The bilabial
voiceless stop /p/ exists only because it is in opposition to
the voiced bilabial stop /b/. The relationship between these stops
is what constitutes the basis for existence of relationships within
a phonological system. Linguistic analysis is about the study
of relationships. Linguists do not study entities, they study
the relationships between entities. Realists admit that properties
can also exist as relations and go on to claim that these are
universal relations. Nominalists admit that properties exist as
relations exist but make them into particulars. For the Nominalist,
an entity has properties and these properties have a unique and
particular relationship to that entity. These relationships are
designated as particulars. For the Realist, an entity also has
properties and these properties may exist independently of any
entity. Consequently, they are universals.
|
|
|
| The apple is red | The apple is red |
| "redness" is a relationship that exists by itself regardless of the object | "redness" exists only in relationship to the object. It cannot exist by itself. |
| Redness is real | Redness is merely a name of a particular quality of an object. It does not exist by itself |
| Redness is a universal quality | Redness is always particular and located in an object. It does not exist by itself. |
| Redness is a universal
Qualities are universals |
Qualities are particulars |
| Qualities are relationships and therefore qualities are universals. Redness is a particular | A Quality is relationships to a particular object. Such relationships are particular. |
It would be wrong to conclude from this discussion of Realists and Nominalists in Linguistics that structuralists were not interested in theory, while generative grammarians were. Both groups espoused theoretical models. What differentiates them is in their manner of approaching linguistic theory. The generative grammarians began with claims about universals and attempted to apply them to natural languages. This approach to theory is fully deductive. One begins with the concepts and attempts to explicate them within a database. The structuralists, on the other hand, were more cautious. They were also interested in universals under the guise of linguistic typology, but their approach to theory was inductive. They began by investigating structure in various languages and used this information to create a theory of universals based on the tradition of linguistic typology (Greenberg, 1963). It is common within a new scientific tradition to begin with an inductive approach. One may recall that before the turn of the century, syntax was not considered to be a part of linguistics because it was too amorphous. It was after the turn of the century that the study of sentence patterns among American linguists led to a comprehensive model for syntactic analysis Bloomfield, 1933; Sapir, 1921; Pike, 1963). Chomsky and his colleagues had a rich tradition of grammatical analysis to draw upon when they shifted their method from an inductive to a deductive approach to theoretical modeling.
It is interesting to note that the field of semantics is in a
way similar to that of syntax around the turn of the century.
There are several approaches to semantics and many of them are
inductive and those that are not inductive are based upon the
rich traditions of an established research paradigm. Philology
is a model of semantics that attempts to understand words in terms
of their etymologies. It uses an inductive approach. General Semantics
is another model of semantics that attempts to analyze language
use in terms of its clarity of semantic expression. It is also
inductive. Logical Positivism also purports to be a semantic system
based on the logical analysis of language. It rests on a strong
tradition of logic and is deductive in nature. Semantic Interpretation
also claims to be a semantic model for linguistic analysis. It
rests on a strong tradition of generative grammar and is also
deductive in nature. Its strength is in the analysis of grammatical
meanings, but it fails to account for other aspects of language
use. Logical Forms are now a part of the Minimalist Model of linguistics
and it is deductive in nature because it rests on a well-developed
tradition of logic. Nevertheless, many would argue that the study
of semantics systems should remain an inductive endeavor because
the field is still in its infancy and that it would be premature
to make any claims about semantic universals at this time.
Sociologists have been struggling with similar issues. They want
their theory to account for sociological knowledge. Those who
want to describe sociology in terms of global patterns argue for
a macro-theory of sociology. In such large systems of thought,
the individual is virtually non-existent. Such theories deal with
sociological forces. Those who want to focus on the role of the
individual in a social group argue for a micro-theory of sociology.
The sociology of everyday life is an effort to deal with particulars
in social theory. It represents an effort to return to the study
of the uniqueness of social life. When Dell Hymes (1974) argued
for a model of sociolinguistic competence, he asked linguists
to return to the tradition of documenting the existence of the
tokens that constitute a type. He wanted to develop a social theory
of language that is connected to the particulars of everyday life.
His quest is not one of universals, but of social relationships
which can be studied as structures or form classes. When these
structures have to do with social relationships, they are called
registers; when they are concerned only with the formal linguistic
properties of language they are called codes. A linguistic code
is unique in that it has a social role. It reflects social relationships
and constitutes the particulars of everyday interaction. In this
regard, he wanted to study the sociology of everyday life. This
quest is in direct conflict with Chomsky's claim for substantive
and formal universals. The sociology of language studies human
entities and their interactions through language. It does not
limit itself only to the study of the abstract universals. The
sociology of language allows one to incorporate a theory of particulars.
The conflict between these two models may never be resolved. One
is very abstract and the other is highly concrete. They represent
different attempts at understanding language. Chomsky is interested
in linguistic form (the codes of language) and how these forms
function in a formal system of language; Hymes is interested in
language use and how these patterns of social interaction function
in a theory of society.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Karl Marx has articulated the Middle Ages as the age of feudalism.
His concern for this period of history was focussed on the alienation
of the indentured servant. Although this area of study is informative,
it does not begin to cover many of the other changes that occurred
during that time. Feudalism was a fact of the Middle Ages, but
it developed in the north of France and spread towards southern
Europe. It arrived in England rather late. This diffusion of feudalism
was gradual and this means that the whole of the Middle Ages was
not immersed in a system of lords and vassals. Other things happened
during this time besides patronage. In effect, many transformations
occurred during this time. These changes were structural, but
most importantly, they were also symbolic.
Europe was subject to numerous cultural influences. The Celts invaded the continent and left behind archeological evidence of their presence from France to the Near East. Their languages provided a substratum for the development of several Romance languages, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian. The German tribes also invaded Europe and left and brought with them different patterns of warfare. However, the most interesting influence on the Middle Ages came from Rome. The system of patron and client associated with the Roman villa was embraced and re-articulated into a new system of patronage centering on the manor. The Roman military made its presence known throughout Europe and ruled the provinces in the name of Rome, the eternal city. It was only after the fall of Rome that the feudal system was allowed to emerge. However, this new system of patronage did not occur in a vacuum. It was based on the principles of Roman law, Another pattern that derived from Rome was the stratification of society into the nobles and the serfs. This aristocracy began to redevelop itself and developed into the class of knights.
Towards the end of the Middle Ages, the influence of the clergy
was socially reconstructed the Middle Ages. The Crusades were
fought on behave of the clergy. Serfs toiled and were under obligation
to the clergy. The Middle Ages became a theocracy. It redefined
time around ecclesiastical feast day. It reinterpreted pagan rituals
into Christian rites. It imposed the great chain of being on all
things with the Holy Father at the top of the hierarchy of beings
and everyone else below him. It reinterpreted Plato's dichotomy
of the two worlds into a continuum defined in religious rather
than secular terms. The world of the Middle Ages was enchanted
by carefully defined spiritual beings. To merely define the Middle
Ages as feudal is counterproductive because it omits the numerous
nuances of secular and non-secular influences that motivated feudalism.
In many ways the Middle Ages still remains amidst contemporary
societies. Much of linguistic theory has its foundations in the
medieval conflicts over realism versus nominalism. Current semiotic
theory rose out of this time and permeates contemporary models
of re-presenting events. The re-enchantment of the medieval world
still exists among present subcultures and is now called the new
age metaphysics. The theater and its focus on character development
grew out of the mystery plays, the religious rites, of that time.
Many of the metaphors that permeate modern Western thought are
medieval, especially the dramaturgical metaphor and the metaphor
of language. The whole basis of material physics rests on the
medieval conceptions of space. For all of these aforementioned
reasons, the Middle Ages merits further investigation as the cradle
of contemporary symbology.
Minor landowners often held their own lands. These were called allods. During the seventh to the ninth centuries, Europe was involved in almost continuous warfare and even small landowners found themselves seeking the protection of overlords.
A fief was a section of land that was granted for temporary
use. The vassalage agreement was between the owner of the fief
(the lord) and the recipient of the fief (the vassal). The structure
of feudal arrangements was fluid and a man could be a vassal to
more than one lord.
This was especially true during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries
when colder and wetter climates meant that large areas of previously
fertile land became unproductive. It was also a time of the Black
Death, the plague that decimated the population. There were few
serfs to maintain even the best farmlands or to preserve feudal
patrimonies.
Knighthood was not a hereditary class in England. This is because
England developed its feudal system later than most of the other
countries of Europe. It began its feudalism after the Battle of
Hastings in 1066 AD. Hence, the evolution of knighthood in England
was different. It was attained by paying a fee and not by ascription.
Those who held land could become knights. If they did not wish
to, they could pay a fee that would enable them to remain a part
of this noble class of landed gentry.
The word for knight in Old English is cniht, a boy servant
(cf. German Knecht). Hence, knighthood came from a Germanic tradition.
Chivalry, on the other hand, came from the Vulgar Latin, caballus,
horse. Chivalry came from French chevalerie and the knight was
called a chevalier (cf. German Ridder, rider). The professional
soldier (Latin miles) took on new dimensions during the Middle
Ages. After the invention of the stirrup in the eighth century,
more and more the professional soldiers fought on horses, these
equites were the forerunners of the medieval knights.
Plato was influenced by the Pythagoreans who classified numbers
into categories of odd, even, prime, composite, perfect, and amicable.
The used stones or pebbles and studied the number patterns that
they formed. A triangle consisted of the first series of natural
numbers. The ratio of 3:4:5, for example, designates the sides
of a right-angled triangle. The first series of odd numbers formed
a square (1+3+5 ... + 2 (n-1). Plato also held to the view that
there is a harmony among the various fields of mathematics. Arithmetic
deals with one-dimensional numbers; geometry has to do with two-dimensional
numbers; stereometry has to do with three-dimensional geometry,
and sphaerics has to do with stereometry in movement.
When a string or flute is shortened to half of its original length, the note or tone that it produces is one octave higher. The Pythagoreans experimented with ratios and found that the ratio of 3:2 gives the fifth note on a scale of seven notes. The ratio of 4:3 gives a fourth note. The Greeks built their music on the Pentatonic Scale, a five-note scale. Pythagoras developed a scale that uses only two intervals: 9:8 (white keys on the Piano) and 256:243 (black keys on the piano). This is known as the Lydian Mode. The 9:8 intervals were chosen and then the gaps were filled in with semitones with 256:243 ratios. It should be noted that much of Chinese and Scottish music is based on this Pentatonic Scale.
When Darwin arrived at his concept of the how the species were connected through time in a great continuum, it was not a new concept. It was already inherent in the metaphor of the great chain of being. What was new, however, was the assertion that the continuum did not only apply to human beings, but that it continued right down into the animal and plant kingdoms. His new concept threatened the religious aristocracy who found solace in the older paradigm in which they were the intermediaries between god and other humans. They found that claim that they were linked to primates to be abusive. It created great cognitive dissonance with their own world view.
This concept is part of Nordic mythology that envisioned nine
worlds between heaven and hell. The Nine worlds of Norse mythology
include the following: the abode of the Aaesir and Vanir tribes
(Asgard); (2) the abode of humans (Midgard); (3) the old abode
of Vanir (Vanaheim); (4) the abode of the light elfs (Alfheim)
and their ruler, Frey; (5) the region of cold (Niflheim) or the
land of the dead (Hel); (6) the abode of the giants (Jotunheim);
(7) the region of fire (Muspelheim); (8) the abode of the dark
elves (Svartalheim); and (9) and the abode of the dwarves (Nidavellir).
It was not until the Great Plague that this stratified society
was weakened. Everyone died from the plague, even the priestly
classes. Due to the lack of members in these classes, those from
the military were allowed to train for the priesthood and those
from the laboring classes were allowed to become soldiers.
Plato borrowed his idea of eternal time from Pythagoras who
had spent many years in Egypt and adopted their cosmology. One
could argue that Plato had a system of ideas that encompassed
both being and becoming. The world of eternal forms is where one
finds his concept of being whereas the world of appearances accounts
for time as becoming. Plato, however, focussed on time as being;
and Aristotle emphasized time as becoming. For Plato, time as
being was eternal. It belonged to the world of being. Time as
becoming, on the other hand, was linear and belongs to his world
of appearances.
A more accurate description of exist means ""to be in
space. There are several meanings of the verb "to be"
because this verb is a conflation of four different verbs in Indo-European.
What Jones wanted to say is that one of the forms of being occurs
in "John is here." This is translated in many languages
as "John stands here." The clear example of this verb
in English is the adjectival form "extant" that means
"to stand out" or "still standing out."
As society became more and more secular and as the power of the printing press made texts more available, this dichotomy between sacred and secular texts were emerge into debates about the wisdom of the ancients. The works of the classics were deemed to be better than research findings in medieval thought. Once the society became secular around the end of the Middle Ages, the sacred texts were replaced by the classics, the new forms of sacred knowledge.
The work of Ferdinand de Saussure in the late 19th century
was a restatement of the medieval modes of knowning (modistae).
Even his concept of language (langue) as a social text that resided
in the library of public consciousness comes from this earlier
period of grammar (grammatica) during the Middle Ages. His whole
theory of signs (semiologie) was a restatement of medieval thought.
By the time of the Cours linguistique générale of
Ferdinand de Saussure (1911), the society was no longer embedded
in a theology and the relationship of words to their meanings
was deemed to be arbitrary.
The novel grew out of the oral tradition. Originally, it was the
story of the eternal cycles of life and death. Tragedy, stories
about death and the misfortunes of man, was the bedrock of these
myths. Eventually, the stories of life emerged as a different
kind of story telling, the comedy (cf. Dante's Commedia dell'Arte).
With the novel in Spain, one found true character development
for the first time. Plots were no longer merely action-driven
narratives depicting the details of a journey. They also became
character-driven. This is what made it new (novel).
This novel has characteristics of both quest plot and adventure
plots (Tobias, 1993:71-78). The plot appears to be character-driven
as in the case of a spiritual or psychology quests. In such plots,
the hero is changed by the journey. He gains new insights or understanding
upon completing his quest. In the adventure plot, the focus is
on movement. It is action-driven. He embarks on an adventure into
the unknown. He visits places that he has never seen before. He
seeks places that are strange and romantic. He goes into the world
in search of a fortune. The purpose of the journey is excitement
and change. It is not motivated by spiritual needs. In most adventure
plots, however, the characters are not fully developed because
the author wants to make the events larger than the characters.
The novel, Don Quijote de la Mancha, combined the strength of
character development with the dynamism of a powerful plot.
The Western version of this Koan can be found in the following
philosophical query: If a tree fails in the forest and there is
no one around to hear it, does it make a sound. Both are attempts
at breaking out of a socially constructed reality. Richard Sennett
(1978) did a study on the rise of narcissism in Europe during
the end of the last century. He goes into length about the difference
between public self and private self and how this distinction
was lost during the second industrial revolution. He provides
several reasons for the loss of public self and the rise of capitalism.
He does not discuss Asian cultures, but they also have a strong
distinction between public self and private self. Native American
cultures also have a strong focus on public behavior. Perhaps
the distinctions between public and private self are not one of
oral and print cultures. Something else is happening here. It
may have more to do with the distinction between guilt and shame
cultures. Print cultures favor guilt; oral cultures embrace shame.
Another use of classes can be found among Class Nominalists who
argue that for a thing to be of a certain type, it must be a member
of a certain class. The mathematical study of classes is the domain
of Set Theory. Logicians, it should be noted, distinguish between
sets and classes. They realize that tokens can be grouped into
type and types can belong to classes, but not all classes form
sets. The problem is that many contemporary scientists work with
classes that are not sets. They define entities as being made
up of a conjunction of properties, a pure type. These classes
are not tied to particulars. Scientists tend to treat classes
(bundles of features) as tokens. For them, classes are formed
by a conjunction of properties that are not repeatable. Repeatable
properties are universals; but these unique conjunctions of properties
are not repeatable. They are classes (bundles of features) that
are treated as tokens. Hence, modern scientists who designate
classes as tokens may be labeled as Class Nominalists.
The structuralists were interested in classifying linguistic structures. Their theory was predicated on the assumption that properties and relationships exist in language. In this regard, they are no different from Chomsky. They differ substantially, however, in how they envisioned these relationships and properties. For the structuralists, relationships designated patterns or structures. The usual term for these linguistic structures were form classes. An example of a form class is the class of Adjectives. They occur as a class because of their unique relationship to nouns and articles, viz. they follow articles and occur before nouns. A class is a statement about relationships. The elements that make up the form class are called fillers. They are the tokens that exemplified the existence of these abstract structures. Structuralists referred to these classes and their tokens as Slots and Fillers. Hence, the structuralists were Nominalists. Structures did not exist by themselves because they reflected unique relationships within a particular language. Things exist and they form relationships. Relationships do not exist by themselves outside of this particular language. For Chomsky, on the other hand, relationships are universal. They can exist by themselves. Chomsky is a Realist because he believes that these linguistic properties and relationships are real. In this regard, he is no different than all natural scientists. The new Realism, however, differs from the old one that characterized medieval discussions on universals and particulars.
| Oral Culture | Language is action, all communication involves speech acts |
| Print Culture | Language is representation. What is real? Some argue that language is real (Nominalists) and others argue that names are not real (Realists) |
| Neo-Realism Scientific abstractions are real. | Neo-realism is possible only because modern societies already exist in re-presentations of daily life. Re-presentations are possible only because medieval societies moved away from oral cultures into a new mode of existence, print cultures. |