A holiday is permitted, or rather a prescribed excess, a solemn
violation of a prohibition. People do not commit the excesses which at
all times have characterized holidays, as a result of an order to be in
a holiday mood, but because in the very nature of a holiday there is
excess; the holiday mood is brought about by the release of what is
otherwise forbidden.
But what has mourning over the death of the totem animal to do with the
introduction of this holiday spirit? If men are happy over the slaying
of the totem, which is otherwise forbidden to them, why do they also
mourn it?
We have heard that members of a clan become holy through the consumption
of the totem and thereby also strengthen their identification with it
and with each other. The fact that they have absorbed the holy life with
which the substance of the totem is charged may explain the holiday mood
and everything that results from it.
Psychoanalysis has revealed to us that the totem animal is really a
substitute for the father, and this really explains the contradiction
that it is usually forbidden to kill the totem animal, that the killing
of it results in a holiday and that the animal is killed and yet
mourned. The ambivalent emotional attitude which to-day still marks the
father complex in our children and so often continues into adult life
also extended to the father substitute of the totem animal.
But if we associate the translation of the totem as given by
psychoanalysis, with the totem feast and the Darwinian hypothesis about
the primal state of human society, a deeper understanding becomes
possible and a hypothesis is offered which may seem fantastic but which
has the advantage of establishing an unexpected unity among a series of
hitherto separated phenomena.
The Darwinian conception of the primal horde does not, of course, allow
for the beginning of totemism. There is only a violent, jealous father
who keeps all the females for himself and drives away the growing sons.
This primal state of society has nowhere been observed. The most
primitive organization we know, which to-day is still in force with
certain tribes, is _associations of men_ consisting of members with
equal rights, subject to the restrictions of the totemic system, and
founded on matriarchy, or descent through the mother[208]. Can the one
have resulted from the other, and how was this possible?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account