ABELES, M. (1988) Modern Political Ritual Ethnography of an Inauguration and a Pilgrimage

SAVE OFFLINE

Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research

Modern Political Ritual: Ethnography of an Inauguration and a Pilgrimage by President Mitterrand Author(s): Marc Abeles Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Jun., 1988), pp. 391-404 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2743455 Accessed: 01/07/2010 06:56 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://dv1litvip.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://dv1litvip.jstor.org

CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Volume 29, Number 3, JuneI988 ? I988 byThe Wenner-Gren Foundation forAnthropological ooi I-3204/88/2903-0002$2.50 Research.All rightsreserved

Modern Political Ritual Ethnography ofan Inauguration and a Pilgrimageby President Mitterrand' by Marc Abeles This paperexaminesfroman anthropological perspective two ritualsperformed bytheFrenchpresident, FrancoisMitterrand. The firstrelatesto thewell-established customofinauguration and commemoration. The second,thepilgrimage to Solutre, wouldappearto be an originalinventionofitsprotagonist. On the basisofthisethnographic analysis,it is possibleto findin modem politicalritualstheformalprocedure thatanthropologists have describedin traditional societies.In oppositionto manywhounderlinethesecularization ofpoliticsin contemporary societies,it is observedherethatritualssuchas thesevisitsofthepresident havea religiousdimension.These modemrituals,whichparticipatein theconstruction ofpoliticallegitimacy, arecharacterized byinventionandmessage. ABELES iS Chargede Recherche ofCNRS anda member oftheLaboratory ofSocial Anthropology (5.2ruedu Cardinal Lemoine,75005 Paris,France).Bornin I950, he was educatedat theEcole NormaleSuperieure(i968-73) andtheEcole des Hautes Etudesen SciencesSociales(Doctoratd'ethnologie, 1976). He has donefieldwork in Ethiopia,in southernSpain,andin theYonne. His publicationsincludeAnthropologie etmarxisme(Paris:EditionsComplexe,1978), Le lieu du politique(Paris:Societed'Ethnographie, noire,edited i983), Age,pouvoiret societeen Afrique withChantalCollard(Paris:EditionsKharthala,i985), "Le degres zerode la politique"(EtudesRuralesI986, pp. ioi-2), and "L'anet le politique"(L'Homme26: I-2). The presentpaper thropologue was submitted in finalform25 vi 87. MARC

That the governanceoftraditionalsocietiesis characterized by the comminglingofpolitics and ritualis a commonplace foranthropologistsand social historians,who are used to tracingthe pansocial implicationsof major rites and exposing the intimate connections between power and the sacred. A substantialbody of literature has been devoted to the relations between these two aspects of social life not only in non-Westerncultures but also in our own history,particularlywith respectto kingshipand the doctrineof Divine Right.If commentatorsnowadays referfreelyto the "charisma" associated with certainpolitical leaders to the extentof comparingthem to real kings, such parallels are generally proposed metaphorically-eitherrealisticallyor satirically, in accordance with the author'sparticularstandpoint. However, such commentatorshardlybother to draw out the sense of the metaphoror to considerthe image of power therebyprojected. Occasionally the concept of "political drama" is evoked in a pejorativesense, especially in referenceto the role of the news media. But the overall impression givenis thatthe political is immersedin a sea ofappearances thateffectively masks the realitiesof conflictand domination. We need to remind ourselves that the dramatizationofthe politicalis not peculiarto ourmodern civilization: witness the vivid political dramas enacted in Africankingdomssuch as the Swazi.2 It will doubtless be argued that between modernpolitics and the customs of African monarchies or even of preRevolutionkingshipin Francethereintervenesthe process of secularizationwhich has separatedchurchfrom state and which has entailed, at a still deeper level, a dissociationbetweenpoliticalpowerand the sacred.Accordingto this view, modernpolitical "show business" representsa new way of portrayingpower, in which coerciverelationsand the juxtapositionofcrudeimages tendto obliterateawareness of any fixedreferent, either transcendantor immanent(God, the Law). Attractivethoughit may seem, this idea of the political seems unduly schematic. One can certainlyadmit, with Habermas (i986[i962]:24I), that the "public political sphere"has undergonea remarkableevolutionsince the Enlightenment, to the extentthatit "has been taken over by techniques of demonstrationand manipulation invented by organizationsthat constructa 'publicity' from which the subordinated 'public' has been excluded." But does the analogybetweenpolitical competitionand a greatmarketin which new "products"are paraded beforethe public accordingto the latest commercial and advertisingtechniques adequatelydescribe relationsbetween professionalpoliticians and theirfellow citizens?And should these latter,at least in democraticsocieties,be equated withconsumers,albeitfickle ones? Evidently,the question ofpolitical dramais inseparable fromthe complex question of political representation in modern society. At this point the analysis of

i. Translated byRoyWillis.An originalversionofthistextformed to theColloquiumat BadHomburg thesubjectofa paperpresented Octoberi6-I8, I986. It appearedin Frenchin Le TempsModernes in March I987 and is translatedhere by permissionof the pub- 2. The Ncwala, the greatannualritualofthe Swazi,describedby Kuper (I 947:197-225), explicitlygeneratesthe powers of kingship. lisher.

39I

392 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, JuneI988

contemporary societywould seem partiallyto invalidate the notionoftotal secularizationofpoliticallifein favor of a less strictlyevolutionistview of matters.If we examine politicalritualin present-day France,we findourselves dealing with relationsof abiding complexity,as Lefort(I986) has emphasized,betweenthe political and the religious.3That is why I have chosen to consider from an anthropologicalperspective two rituals performedby a particularlytypicalstatesman,namely,the Presidentofthe Republic,FrancoisMitterrand.The first ritualrelatesto a well-establishedcustom,thatof inaugurationsand commemorationssuch as are regularlyattendedby elected representativesin the course of their duties. The second ritualwould appearto be an original inventionand also contains informationabout the personal historyof its protagonist.Analysis of the characteristicsof these kinds of political practiceleads us to question the adequacy of the veryidea of "ritual," and deeper studyof these public proceduresmay enable us betterto understandthe functionof political ritual in termsof legitimacy.

A PresidentialDay On FebruaryI4, I986, PresidentMitterrandwent to Nievre,a departmentforwhich he had been the elected representativeformore than 30 years,rightup to his accession to the supremeoffice.The officialpurposeof this journeywas to inauguratethe new railwaystation at Nevers (the principaltown of the department).The remainderof the day was to be devotedto otheracts of commemorationand inauguration,such as the bestowal of decorationson various local personalities:a full day that was to take the presidentall over the department. Let us now followM. Mitterrandand his entourage:we shall also take note of the various local and national press commentariesthat marked this visit and effectivelymade an event of it. On this Fridaya special trainconveyedthe president, accompaniedby the state secretaryfortransportand the presidentof the state railwaycorporation,fromParis to Nevers. The journey became the occasion for a freewheelingdiscussion with journalists,and inevitablyinterestfocussedon the legislativeelections,due withina month; on this topic M. Mitterrandobservedthat his pronouncementsplaced him "verymuch in advance" of his predecessors.Accordingto him, the electionswould follow a patternalready laid down by the presidential campaign: "Undoubtedlythe legislative elections will take just that shape." As to a possible "deal" over the premiership,the presidentemphasized that he would choose "whomeverhe wishes" as primeminister.This concernovertheproperpreeminenceofthehead ofstate 3. Lefortrightlyemphasizesthe interrelation of the politicaland religiousdimensions, notingin thisconnectionthat"it is impossible to separatewhatbelongsto theelaborationofa politicalform ... fromwhatbelongsto the elaborationof a religiousform"(p. 26i).

did not in any way imply denyingthe futureprime minister access to certain spheres of activity: "The primeministerhas everyrightto contributeto all political debate outside the provinceof the president." These carefullyconstructedstatements did not, of course,go unnoticed.The followingday theymade the headlines in the political columns of the majornewspapers: "The PremierAccordingto Francois Mitterrand" (Le Monde, FebruaryI7); "I Remain VeryMuch in Advance of My Predecessors"(La Montagne,FebruaryI5); "Mitterrand:Diplomacy a Jobforthe Prime Minister" (Le Matin, FebruaryI 5). Fromthepresidentialjourneyin Nievre, the national dailies and the television service selectedthese briefstatementsrelatingto the mannerof selectinga prime ministerand to the role assigned to him by the occupant of the Elysee Palace. However,the actual day in Nievre had yet to begin: it was II: I4 A.M. when the trainarrivedat the station.The buildingwas bedeckedwith both the national colors and those ofthe town. The main elementoftheritualperformed bythepresidentwas the inaugurationofNevers railwaystation.On his arrival,M. Mitterrandwas welcomed by the deputy mayorof Nevers (M. Beregovoy,ministerof economics and finance),the presidentof the department'sGeneral Council, anotherdeputyforNievre,the regionalprefect, and the departmentalprefect.The red carpethad been duly rolled out, and the presidentemergedinto the station courtyard,where he revieweda detachmentof the SeventhR.A. To the applause ofthe crowd,estimatedby the journalistsas close on a thousandpeople, he moved towards the station entrance.For a moment,together with the stationmaster,he contemplatedthe building. Then he cut the symbolicred ribbonand unveiled the plaque commemoratingthis inauguration.Followed by several hundred invited guests, M. Mitterrandwas shown around the premises by the regionaldirectorof the railway corporation.Twelve minutes later, he returnedto the grandconcourse,wherehe made a speech on a modestplatformspeciallyconstructedforthis purpose. The presidentspoke afterlisteningin turnto the wordsofNevers's deputymayorand thepresidentofthe railway.The speeches were relayedthroughloudspeakers to the crowd gatheredoutside the station. His addressconcluded,M. Mitterrandlaid a wreathin memory ofthe railwaymenwho had died fortheircountry,in the presence of the veterans' standard-bearer.He next moved towardsthe buffet, whererefreshments had been preparedforthe guests,pausing on the way to sign two copies of his recentlypublishedbook, R6flexionssur la politique exterieurede la France, and presentthem to the station library.Without pausing at the buffet,the presidentwent out into the courtyardand mingledconviviallywith the crowd beforegettinginto his car and headingforLa Baratte,the hall that houses the annual Nivernais-MorvanExhibition.Accompanied by the directorofthe exhibition,M. Mitterrandvisitedthenearly completednew hall. This visit providedan opportunity forseveralminutes'conversationwiththeformermayor of Nevers and several otherguests.

AB ELE S

At half-pasttwelve the head of state took a helicopter tripto Lormes,a cantonal headquarterssituatedwithin the parliamentaryconstituencyhe had represented.The pretextforthis visit to his fiefofMorvanwas the investitureof the general councillor of Lormes with the Legion of Honor. On his receptionat the town hall, M. Mitterrandmade a shortspeech in which he expressed his pleasure at once again meeting with friendlyand loyal people: "I see here many familiar and friendly faces. This is a special occasion for me." Addressing himselfto the generalcouncillorwhom he had come to decorate,the presidentevoked the past: "I knew your father,a respectedand conscientiouscraftsmanof deep political convictions." Remembranceand also attachment to the land of Morvan were signalledin the president's assertion, "If I were in need of reassurancewhich I must hasten to add I am not-it is to this place thatI would come forit" (Le Journaldu Centre,February I5). With this ceremonythe morning'sbusiness concludedwith a privateluncheonforI 5 guestsprovidedby the generalcouncillorof Lormes. M. Mitterrand'sday in Nevers was by no means over. We findhim again at 3:30 P.M. inauguratinga block of27 An old buildinghad apartmentsat La Charite-sur-Loire. been renovatedfor this purpose. Numerous local personalitiesaccompaniedthe president,includingthe deputy mayorsof Nevers and Cosne-sur-Loire,the local director of housing, and the local senator. The press photographers recordedthe "affectionategesture"with which M. Mitterrandembraceda little girl beforecutting the inauguralribbon.From his address,what was particularlynoted was his insistence on "the will for renewal of this commune,in the contextof the general renewal" (La Montagne, Februaryi 5). Once again, M. Mitterrandtold of "the pleasure I feel at being among you, togetherwith my sense of the historicsignificance of this place." The faces of those presentbetrayedtheir emotion.This was the momentto proceedwith the investitures:two general councillors and a mayor were made respectivelyofficerand knightsof the Legion of Honor. "A signing of the golden book, several autographs,a kiss forthe little girl,a warm handshakefor AdrienLangumierwho has come fromSaint-Amand-enPuisayeforthis littleexchangeofcivilities. . . the Presidentialvisit was over in less than an hour,"reportedLa Montagne. A littlelater,thepresidentialhelicoptertoucheddown at Chatillon-en-Bazois.M. Mitterrand'spurposein comingherewas to unveil a plaque in memoryofthefounder of a children'svillage, a man who was also his deputy when he was deputy mayor of Chateau-Chinon. The ceremonywas performedin the presence of the dead man's widow, currentlythe guidingspiritof the village. In his speech, the presidentemphasizedthe importance of this kind of enterpriseand observedthat "the village has been part of the largermovementwhich has led to Nievre's being the departmentthathas best understood childhood" (Le Journaldu Centre,Februaryi5). After decoratinganother woman, who is handicapped and comes fromCorbignyand who is also extremelyactive

Modern Political Ritual | 393

in the affairsof her commune, the presidentmade a point of devotingthe last moments of this visit to answering questions from the press. It fell to a young woman to have the privilegeof questioningM. Mitterrand, and she simply asked him, "What do you think

about worldhunger?"At

6:o5

P.M.

the presidential

helicoptertook off;the constraintsofprotocolhad been observedfornearlyfiveminutes. A studyofthe different phases ofM. Mitterrand'svisit to Nievre gives one the sense ofbeingpresentat a major ritual in which the combination of spoken words, significant acts, and manipulated objects (cf. LeviStraussI97I: 6oo) bringsintoplay the symbolismofrelations between political power and civil society.We see here the bringingtogetherof an ensemble of coded behaviors,whose meaningis well understoodbythe different participants,around certain "focalizing elements" (6l6ments focalisateurs)that markthe highlightsof the presidentialday. PierreSmith,to whom I am indebted forthis expression,has rightlyemphasized one of the characteristicsofritual,dramatization,the actingout of performancesthat mobilize public support.When we look at M. Mitterrand'sjourney,the dual dimensionsof ritualare clearlyapparent:on the one hand, a high degree of formalization,given that all the acts are thoroughly codified,fromthe cuttingof the ribbonat the stationto the investitureofnew knightsofthe Legionof Honor; on the otherhand, the promotionof a high degreeof emotion in the participants. Let us tryto understandbetterthis curious contrast between formalismand artifice,drama and sentiment, that lies behind the ritual. Here one may readilyagree with PierreSmith's contentionthat an inaugurationis no more than a "symbolic act." There can hardlybe a Frenchcitizenwho has not been presentat some time at a performanceof this sort.Each one knows the scenario beforehand.Taken individually,each participantwill readilyconcede that both the organizersand the public could put the time taken up by this ceremonyto better use. It will also be generallyagreed that there is "artificiality"in certaintypes of behavioradopted by the principal protagonists,behavior expressive of respect, meditation,emotion,etc. In this sense, the ritualfunctionsas what Smithcalls a "snareforthought,"in which everythingis acceptable because no one asks more in thatmomentthanto believe. No one would have turned downhis invitationto attendtheinaugurationofNevers railwaystation; and so the photographersrecordedthe expressions,respectfulor admiring,ofthosemembersof the public who were presentwhen M. Mitterrandunveiled the plaque in memoryof his old deputy.Moreover,no one would dare to talk aloud or look cheerful duringthe minute's silence. Comedy? Conjuring tricks?In reality,it is obvious that everyonebelieves: the ritualdoes not generatebut presupposessolidarity.To understandthis it is necessary to consider the second dimension of the ritual, whichI shall call "contextualdramatization"and which produces,I believe, the "snare forthought."If we take into account the totalityof the acts performedby the

394

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, JuineI988

presidentduringthis day of FebruaryI4, we see that theycompose a series ofmovements.Besides the initial trainjourneyto Nevers,the sites of Lormes,La Charitesur-Loire,and Chatillon-en-Bazoisconstitutethe stages of this pilgrimage.One may furthersuggestthatthe toand-froing all over Nievre is the central"focalizingelement" of this ritual. Thus the various celebrationsare grouped around an action which provides the real significanceofthis day: the movementofM. Mitterrand fromthe centerto the peripheryand then,as if into an abyss, fromthe departmentalheadquartersto outlying localities. The inaugurationof the Nevers station symbolizes in itselfthe permanenceof the exchangesrepresentedby this political man between the abidingcountryside,in which he findsthe source of his legitimacy, and the capital city,fromwhich it is his task to attract financialmanna forthe benefitof his department.4 M. Mitterrand'sspeech at Nevers at the outset of his visit clearlyillustratesthese themes.In it he evokes the atmosphereof railwaystationsand theirsignificancein the dailylifeofthepolitician: "I have travelledbyrail so many times, and very frequentlyon the Paris-Nevers line." And he goes on to say, "I have crossedthis grand concourse [of the station] so many times: this station has been associated with many importantmomentsin my life, some fraughtwith uncertainty,others with hope; as a resultI have a kind ofpersonalattachmentto it" (La Montagne,FebruaryI5). Hence a returnto Nevers, and a fittingone, forin the context of exchange betweenterritorialand national collectivities,it is only rightthat the presidentshould rememberthe parliamentaryrepresentativethat he once was and the land which engenderedhis political career.He had himself made sure that Nevers acquired a new station: "We are workingforFrance,but it is not forbiddento work also forNievre. It is not a matterof privilegebut of due recompense." But this celebrationcontains a deeper concern,forthe presidentis visitinghis friends,and is glad of it: "It is a greatpleasure forme to be in Nevers this morning,to be in Nievre.... we comprisesome sortof community." In the course of his journeyM. Mitterrandmakes numerous referencesto his delight at being among his faithfulfollowers,his "old stagers."The tourof the departmentrepresentsa returnto his roots,as the opening addressat Nevers stationmakes clear: "Nievre remains forme, and in both senses of the term,a place of election. As for me, I preferthat sense which refersto a 4. As I have notedelsewhere(Ab6l6si986), the markedpolycenfrom trismoftheFrenchsystemimpliesa perpetualto-and-froing local the centralto the local and vice versa;a deeplyentrenched intoan accumulationofsuccessiveelectoral base,oftentranslated mandates,is the minimal but essential preconditionfor the tourbears M. Mitterrand's achievementof "national"legitimacy. betweenthe electedperson witnessto the graduatedrelationship and his constituency: he returnsthereonly to obtainthis fresh Byway whichcommunicateslegitimacyconfirmed. endorsement ofcomparisonit will be recalledthatit was fromChamaliere,his local town,thatValeryGiscardd'Estaingannouncedhis candidacy forthepresidency in 1974.

heartfeltchoice, to the friendshipand gratitudeI owe to thispeople, loyal throughthe years" (La Montagne,Februaryi 5). Friendshipand loyaltyare two themescentral to the presidentialmessage, associated with a certain stubbornness,the "solidarity"referredto a little later duringthe visit to Morvan. The image of returnrecursagain in this referenceto Nievre: "It is hereperhapsthatI have most readilybeen able to relate directlyto the men and women of a department"(La Montagne, Februaryi 5). This is a paradigmaticinstance of political discourse,forthe quasitransparency oftherelationshipbetweenthe electedand the electoratein Nievre on thisfourteenth day ofFebruary,I986, also reveals an underlyinguncertainty.Forall that the topic is never explicitly raised, everyone is aware of the imminentnational elections,the possibilityof the coexistenceof a presidentand an executiveof opposed political allegiances and all the potential for conflictinherentin such an outcome.The tourofNievre is in part an acting out of a reply to these unspoken questions. The opening address at Nevers proclaims a returnto origins,as in thisevocationofthepast: "I spent my earliest years in the shadow of a railway station, because when I was bornmyfatherhad just leftMontluc,on,where he was stationmaster.All the men of my familyforthe two precedinggenerations,my fatherand had been railwaymen"(La Montagne,Febgrandfathers, ruaryi 5). The inaugurationof Nevers stationthus servesas the occasion for a return to origins: the elected one is reunitedwith his loyal followers,and the son remembershis forefathers. The speech at Nevers lays out, as it were, the ritual program.The actions which thereafter punctuate the presidentialprogressmake visible this "journeyto the heart of legitimacy"in the manner of royal progressesrecordedby anthropologistsin certain Africankingdoms(cf.Evans-Pritchard i962 [I948], Izard I973). Obviouslywe are dealingherenot with a quest of the kind characteristicofroyalenthronments but rather with the symbolic reaffirmation of a continuingrelationship between the presidentand the country.The tour of Nievre constitutesin this sense one of those "occasional rituals" defined by Smith (I979:I47) as "based on theidea ofa disorderthatmustbe dealtwith." The formulaadoptedconformswhollyto a traditional pattern,fromthe beribbonedbouquet to the fanfareat the reception.The day is thus composedofmonotonous sequences informedto the point of satiation by what Claude Levi-Straussdescribesas the two characteristic proceduresofritual:minutedivisionand repetition.Division is manifestin the decompositionof the principal actionin each sequence into a multiplicityofspeechand actions.Forexample,at La Charite-sur-Loire theinauguration of the 27 apartmentsincludes in succession the greetingsto those responsibleforthe operation,the architect's expositionto the president,the cuttingof the ribbon,a hastyvisit to one apartment,the hearingof a piece of music played by the local philharmonicorchestra,a motorcade to the festivalhall, a visit to a museum, a receptioncomprisingthe senator's address

ABELE S

Modern Political Ritual | 39 5

and that of the president,the bestowal of decorations, their purpose, one being "political significance,"the and the signingof the town's Golden Book. other"ceremonial offeredto the department,"does not It would be superfluousto emphasize the repetitive suffice.Obviously, the correspondentof Liberation is character,fromone place to another,ofthese operations not concernedabout the details of the stationinaugurato do withdecorations,inaugurations,etc. Levi-Strauss's tion. For its part,Le Monde, while satisfiedwith a sum(I97I:602) commenton certainrituals of the Navajo is mary of the remarksof the presidentduringhis interrelevanthere: "at the price of a considerableexpense of view with the journalists,returnsa couple of days later words,the ritual becomes an orgyof repetitions."This to the tourof FebruaryI4 and devotes to it threelines, ensemble of microsequenceslinked togetherwithouta not without a touch of humor: "The presidentNievre break conferson political ritual a special atmosphere. has given France,accordingto M. PierreBeregovoy,the On the one hand,thereare real eventsofgenuinecollec- mayorM. Mitterrandhas givenNievre,still owes sometive interest,concrete gains accrued by reason of the thingto his department.... M. Mitterrandhad the right eminentpolitical role acquiredby Nievre's politicalrep- to all the flummeryof a full-dressofficialvisit . . ." (Le resentative;on the other,the whole celebrationoccurs Monde, FebruaryI7). Behind the simple words of these on the margin of ordinarylife, in a special time that national journaliststherelies the outline of a negative formsa kind of parenthesisas much in relationto the message projectedby the president."M. Mitterrand'innormalpreoccupationsofthe participantsas to the cares auguratedthe chrysanthemums,' as the late General de of governmentone would generallyassociate with the Gaulle mighthave said, all throughthat day of Friday, officeof Presidentof the Republic. FebruaryI4. But afterMarch i 6 it will be a different This contrastbetweenritualtime and thegeneralcon- story" (Le Monde, FebruaryI7). And was not this the juncturein which it is inscribedin fact constitutesa essence of the matter,the simple idea offeredto the necessaryconditionforthe settingup of the "snare for public-an idea which could be paraphrasedas "See me thought."All the participantslay aside their ordinary playingthe role of a presidentin the styleof the Fourth activities for several hours to join with the principal Republic!But know well thatI will neverbe confinedto officiant in a ceremonyto effecta double homage:on the such a role!", a message in the formof a paradox well one hand dedicated to the elected one, to the "sover- summedup in the openingaddressat Nevers (Le Monde, eign," on the otherby the presidentto the department, February I7): "I am not particularlykeen on inauwhose heroic notables he continuously extols. This gurations"? The day in Nievre, thus placed in perspectiveby its quasi-religiousaspect ofthepoliticalritualis perceptible to the context of in the actions and even in the looks of both parties. principalprotagonistand transferred Public attentionis riveted on M. Mitterrandas if he the ongoingpolitical debate on the role of the President were,in decoratingone of the guestsor in goinginto an of the Republic in the event of a victoryby the opposiapartment,performingsome mystic act. Like a priest tion in the legislative elections, takes on a special ofpresidentialpower his office,the presidentconcentrateson his significance.It is the irreducibility performing in the face of public everymove, and no one would thinkof distractinghim that M. Mitterrandis reaffirming, fromthe task in hand. He himselfwalks amonghis fol- opinion. That at least is the sense of the image of the lowers,sometimesslightlyin front,his eyes on thehori- ceremonial occasion as reflectedin the mirrorof the zon, exceptforthe briefmomentswhen his gaze settles national dailies. As in many other societies, political on an individualwho is receivinga decorationor whom ritualis eloquent here,simultaneouslyevokingthe repa shortexchangeofwordsrescuesfora fewsecondsfrom resentativecharacterofthepresidentas thechoice ofthe people and the authorityhe exercisesas a head of state. anonymity. In a centralizedpolitical systemit is hardlysurprising But whereas the inaugurationof the Nevers stationand thata presidentialact, even ifnot seen as an eventat the the subsequent celebrationsall serve to highlightthe national level, nevertheless makes some impression firstterm-the relation between the elected one and there.Even so, one may wonder to what extentan of- civil society-the second term becomes evident only ficialday spentin a departmentis also intendedto affect when studied in the context of a speech act endowed the global society. Does the symbolicefficacityof this with its strictrhetoricalsense of antiphrasis,pure and kind of ritual exceed the boundariesof the territory to simple. which it is devoted? A reading of the national daily The consistencyand polysemicrangeofthe ritualunnewspapersenables one to gauge the effectofM. Mitter- doubtedlyderivein part fromthe multiplicityof regisrand's tour of Nievre on Frenchpolitics. I have quoted ters employed,in part from this insertionof the saseveral newspapercommentswhich dwelt on the pros- cralizedact into a fieldof communicationsharedby the pect of the elections.As faras the joumalists were con- global society.The president'sartconsistedin adhering cemed, what seemed to be importantwas said in the scrupulouslyto a model belongingto the Republican train beforethe beginningof the presidentialtour. It traditionwhile using its symbols,its actions, even its would appear the ritual servedas a pretextwherebythe time to expresssomethingquite otherthan what would presidentcould feedthe media with one or two carefully have come across in a speech or a pressinterview.Here thereis an instructiveparallel to be noted between the chosen phrases. On furtherexamination,it seems that an interpreta- practiceofM. Mitterrandand thatofGeneralde Gaulle. tion distinguishingtwo kinds of messages accordingto It is well known that the latter,an expertin the matter

396 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, JuneI988

of communication,never showed much interestin the classical duties of a president(inauguration,commemoration,etc.). Certainlythe generaldid not neglectprovincial tours,as Viansson-Ponte(I963) has remindedus in a work devoted to Gaullist ritual: "[The provincial visit] is consideredso importantthat despite its timeconsuming and tiring character it is systematically undergone,departmentby department,and so it will be to the end" (P. 35). But thesejoumeys executedat breakneck speed were ill-suitedto the communicativeardor ofDe Gaulle, who had discoveredin televisionthe ideal medium to embody the relationshipunitinghim with the nation. Viansson-Ponte has admirably described thosegrandmomentswhen thegeneralgave a pressconference:"It is a sung High Mass, a majorritualendowed withall the ceremonyofa sacredholiday" (P. 46). Forhis part,M. Mitterrandhas shown littleinclinationto cultivate this medium. Less at ease than his predecessor when addressingthe Frenchdirectly,he has, contrariwise, become master of the art of communicatinghis ideas, of lightlysuggestinghis intentions,in contexts where a few words (conversational,reflective,confessional) can be contained within a series of ritualized acts-such as the tourof Nievre-so that theycome to signifymore than the words themselves.This mastery was particularlyevidentin anotherritualthatappearsto have been a true creationex nihilo. And here the constraintsof protocol are relaxed to permita celebration which was originallymore intimatebut afterI98I took on quite anothersignificance.

The Pilgrimageto Solutre Since May IO, I98I, joumalists have grownaccustomed to travellingto Solutre on the Monday of Pentecost, thereto follow the pilgrimageperformedby M. Mitterrand. Here we have a case of a national political ritual with the peculiarityof having been to some extentinventedbyits principalprotagonist.The rockofSolutreis a prehistoricsite5in the heartof Bourgognethat dominates the surrounding vineyardsofPouillyand the Saone Valley. A walker who takes the troubleto ascend this highpointreaches,by rathera steep path,an altitudeof 495 m, fromwhich may be contemplatedthe peaceful and fertilecountryside,soaked in immemorial traditions. Since I946 M. Mitterrandhas made an annual pilgrimage to Solutreto relive in memorythe war yearswhen, newly escaped from Germany, he went into hiding nearby.He was givenrefugeby the Gouze familyalong with othernotable membersof the Resistance such as Henri Frenayand BertieAlbrecht.It is common knowledge that soon afterwardsthe futurepresidentmarried

5. At the footofthisrock,a pile ofhorses'bonesand lithictools datingto theUpperPalaeolithicwerediscoveredin I864. According to legend,theseprehistoric horsesthrewthemselves,forunknownreasons,fromthe top ofSolutreRock.

one of his hosts' daughters.Until I98I the ascent of Solutrewas partofjust such an intimateritualas anyone mightperformto commemoratea comparablysignificantepisode in life.M. Mitterrandwould hererediscover a familiarcountrysidein the companyof a fewintimate friends:"I like to spend a long time lookingat the view. There I understandbetterwhat is happening,what has been happening,and-above all-what is unchanging" (MitterrandI975:I84). A suitableoccasion forquiet thought,the pilgrimageto Solutre thus affordeda moment of escape fromthe distractionsof public life. Once become Presidentof the Republic, M. Mitterrandremainedattachedto theritualhe had created.This indeed continued substantiallyunchanged,except that journalistswere invitedto follow the presidentialprogress. The orderof the ritual comprisedthreesuccessive stages: First,the ascent of SolutreRock accompaniedby the "faithful":this was the opportunityfor the photographers to bombard the illustrious walker with their cameras. The resultingpicturespresentedan image of the president'sphysical condition. It was as if, every year,the latterwas obligedto bear witness,in action,to the excellentstate of his health. M. Mitterrand'sclothing also providedcause forcomment.Trousersofribbed velvet or of linen, sportshirt,linen hat or cap, walking stick, here was a statesman free of the constraintsof protocoltakinghis ease late in the moming."The man who walks at its [the procession's]head, cane in hand, wearinga kindofangler'slinenhat,has an appearanceof serenity,as if momentarilyrelieved of his cares. The weatheris fine" (Le Monde, May 24, I986). The presidentan angler?At all events,here the dress makes the man: velvet and linen, beige or chestnutin color,suggesta closeness to the earth,a rusticsimplicity thatrecall the attachmentof the occupantof the Elysee Palace to the values of the soil. One detail is illuminating in this respect.Whereas in previousyears the journalists had reportedthe presidentas wearingplimsoles, M. Mitterrandinformedthem duringthe I985 pilgrimage that his shoes were of another kind, "made at Chateau-Chinonin a factorycalled Morvan-Chaussures, I think"(Le Monde, May 25, I985). The choice ofa local productmade not faraway, in the president'sold conmeanstituency,is eloquent testimonyto the territorial ing of the ritual. As a commemorationofthe welcome he receivedhere in a difficulttime and of the marriagehe made, here in Bourgogne,with a familyand with a place, the ascent phase of the ritual has a double significance.Here, on one side, is a man who has sworn never to forgetand who has come to steephimselfin the contemplationofa past bothsomberand glorious;at the summitoftherock M. Mitterrandcan also meditatein peace on the future of the country.But at the same time the ascent of SolutreRock is not made by one man alone. Everything here remindsus of alliance and loyalty:the presenceof the president'sfamilyand of his friends'spouses and children,the atmosphereof a springouting,in all this the ritual presentsthe image of a shared well-being.It is

ABELES

Modern Political Ritual | 397

thus describedby one of the joumalists present(Libera- pen in his case [Giscardwon the legislativeelections of tion,Juneii, I984): I978]. Why do you want it to happen in mine?" (Le GilbertMitterrandand the children,Mme. Hemu and otherfriendsfromthe rue de Bievresun themselves

at thesummit.TowardsI2:30

P.M.

theadvanceguard

arrives.The sunbumedRogerHanin, Mme. Lang and herdaughter,GeorgesFillioud,JeanRiboud. For securityreasons,theyare not withouta following.The partybreaksup to allow FrancoisMitterrandto arrive incognito.Riboud,sportingbig sunglasses,takes Fillioud by the arm,he wearingzip-fastenedslacks: "Georges,what has happenedto our things?"At I2:30 P.M. the presidentis announced.FrancoisMitterrandin the lead, thenHemu, Attali,Francheschi. ... the presidenttells the children:"Be careful,don't take risks!" To the joumalists who surroundhim: "You are blockingmy view!"

The second phase of the ritualbringsthe participants togetherin a nearbyrestaurant,La Grangeau Bois. Here we again findthe good-naturedatmosphereof Solutre. On the menu card is inscribed:"The Mitterrandfamily relax over lunch in the wine country."Afterthis meal, sharedby those describedby the press as "close friends and neighbors"of the president,therecomes the great communicativemomentofthe day.Neitherformalconferencenor anodynedialogue,the conversationbetween M. Mitterrandand therepresentatives ofthepressseated aroundhim providesthe presidentwith an opportunity to expresshimselfon currentmattersof concem in an atmosphereof calm and, even, confidentiality. It will be seen that Solutreis also the occasion to delivercertainanticipatorymessages about likelypolitical developments.During the I986 pilgrimagethe head of stateindicatedhow he intendedto coexistwith the new majority,and he let it be understoodthat the signingof ordonnanceson denationalizationand the redrawingof electoral boundaries would pose problems. Several monthslaterthe Frenchcould appreciatethe continuity ofpresidentialpolicyin thesematters.Otherstatements byM. Mitterrandin previousyearswere also predictive; thus,in I984, when asked about the head ofthe govemment, the presidentreplied: "The prime ministerhas plentyof qualities, much merit,much courageand sensitivity.He works a lot. It would not be easy to find anotherwith such qualities. But such exist,I hope" (Le Monde, JuneI2, I984). A month later Laurent Fabius replaced PierreMauroy, who was certainlyaccumulating a great many superlatives. The headlines of the newspaper reportson the Solutre pilgrimageindicate ratherclearlyhow these forecastsare understood:"Mitterrand:What I Know About Post-I986" (Liberation, May 2, I985); "Mitterrandon His Rock: He Refusesto Give Up AnyofHis Rights"(Le Quotidien de Paris,May 27, I986). The year I985 providedthe presidentan opportunityto loose several shots at his political opponents.ForM. Giscardd'Estaing,who would certainlysee the presidentof a futurecoexistence retiringto Rambouillet: "I believe he liked Rambouillet[an allusion to his predecessor'spassion forthe hunt].That didn'thap-

Monde,May 27,

I985).

One could well evoke other

statements by the president,other throw-awaylines which delightedthe journalists.The inimitabletone of the Solutre conversations,a mix of reflectionson the solitaryexercise of power and very concrete observations about the immediateconcems ofthe French,have made this pilgrimagea veritable"present-dayclassic." This is a strangeevolutionofthis intimateritualthat after30-odd years has become an element in a communicativestrategy.Having become substantiallypolitical, this ritualmightseem in some way "denatured,"a mere pretextforthe media operationsbeloved of present-daycommentators.But to dwell exclusivelyon this latteraspect of the presidentialday would be to go too far,reducingthe message ofthe ritualto what the president says. While keepingtrackof the president,the anthropologistmust contest the type of approach that tends to impoverishthe significanceof the event as a whole. What we have seen is firstan ascent, and the themeofverticalityhas its importancein Mitterrandian symbolism.At the time ofhis installationin May I98I, thehead ofstatewentup, followedbymanyParisians,to the top of the Montagne Sainte Genevieve to meditate inside the Pantheon. The ascending characterof this kind ofmovementpartlyreflectsthe protagonist'sposition in the political hierarchy.We have seen that the descent from Solutre provokes no comment, being merely the necessary complement of the presidential outing.The ascent gives evidence,as we have seen earlier, of the president'sstate of health. The ritual thus makes visible the man invested with supreme power, exposing a president walking with his family and friends.But it is also apparentthat the ascent not only tells us about the man but equally servesas the prelude to deeper reflection.As at the Pantheon, though in a verydifferent mode,thepresidenthas a rendezvouswith historyat the summit: a veryancient historybeing exposed by the local archaeologistsand much morerecent eventsto do with the Resistance,but in both cases conceming Franceand its greatness. Here we come upon the authenticallyreligiousdimension of the political ritual: exactlyas duringthe tourof Nievre,the sacredis hereinvoked.But at Solutrewe are dealingwitha dialoguebetweenMitterrandtheman and the transcendenthistoryof France, whereas the first ritual concemed the elected one and the Republican tradition.While it is truethatthe tourofNievre and the Solutrepilgrimageparticipatealike in the construction ofthepresident'slegitimacy,the second ritualhas a particularoriginality, introducinga new traditionmade entirelyof symbolscreatedby M. Mitterrandhimself:the place, thekindofmovement,the meditationat the summit,etc. By combiningthe registersofthe mundaneand the sacred,theritualprovidesan arrestingsummationof the different facets of Mitterrand'spersonality,at the same time as it tendsto establishhim as a mythological hero in an arrestingface-to-facewith the nation and withhistory.No pomp or fanfarehere,but the represen-

398 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, tune I988

tation of an unswervingloyaltyto a land and a people among whom the presidenthas fought. In the Solutreritualthe public man is fusedwith the private,the mundane mergeswith the sacred to enrich the personageof the presidentwith a more authentic dimension. In this sense the ritual constructsa richer and morecompleximage ofits protagonistthanemerges fromthe customaryeulogies ofthepresidentin the news media. These media obscure the passion, and where Generalde Gaulle managedthroughhis televised"High Mass" to evoke a trulyspiritualrelationwith the country,M. Mitterrandremains one seen initiallyas just a major politician. During the Solutrepilgrimage,on the contrary,the political "message" simply prolongs a moreloftykindofthought.Admittedly,theritual'sinvitation to a conversationwith joumalists mightappear somewhat artificial,destroyingin some sort the harmonyofthis "familyouting,"or to reintroducethe contingencyof the presentimmediatelyaftera momentof withdrawal.In other words, what makes this day of Pentecost propitious for the public display of the thoughtsof the head of state? To answerthis question,it is necessaryto referto the meaning of Pentecost in the Christian tradition.We know that this festival commemorates,50 days after Easter,the effusionofthe Holy Spiritupon the Apostles and the disciples of Christ.Accordingto the Acts of the Apostles (2:I-4I), the disciples who had scatteredafter the arrestofJesusreturnedto Jerusalemand passed their days in prayerin a high room. The fiftieth day afterthe Resurrectionof Christ,being assembled to the number of i2o and praying,theywere suddenlyfilledwith the Holy Spiritand began speakingin foreigntonguesthey had neverlearned.At thattime therewere at Jerusalem Jewswho had come fromall overthe worldto be present at the festivalsand who were astonishedby this strange phenomenonand accused the disciples of drunkenness. Peterthen spoke in replyto this accusation, and 3,000 people were instantlyconvertedbyhis words.The miracle ofPentecostthusmarkedthe beginningofa new era: tongueswereunleashed,and prophecyexplodedthrough those who had adopted the new faith. Withoutmakingany pretenceof findingin this reference to the Acts of the Apostles any sort of key to the understandingof the Solutreritual,one point should be notednonetheless:the descentof the Holy Spiritshows itself in the immediate ability to understandand be understood.Whetheror not the choice of this day for frankdiscussion with the representativesof the information media was intentional,it still takes on a particular significancein this eminentlyreligious context. Whereas the interviewwith the journalistsappears at firstsightas a profaneinterludecontrastingwitha ritual that sets up a relation between the man and transcendence,the referenceto the miracle of Pentecostintroduces a true continuitybetween the differentmoments of the presidential day. More, it generates a contextof enunciationpropitiousto the mode of communication adopted by the head of state: confidential and at times,ifnot prophetic,at least inclinedto prediction.

Observingthis interweavingof a religiousmotifand profaneintentionalityallows us thebetterto understand the true complexityof the political ritual.It is evident that this ritual comportsa relationto the sacred.In decreeing the separation of church and state, secular France has not effaceda religious dimension which is one with the Republicanproject.6The visits of M. Mitterrandto Nievre and Solutre affordthe opportunityto evoke those transcendentvalues called Nation, Republic, Land, Family,History.There is thus no difference in kind between the political ritualsof traditional societies and those contemporaneous with us. Like otherleading statesmen,the Presidentof the Republic conformsto a logic of representationswhich preexists him: thatlogic ordersthe relationsofthe centralgovemmentwith the different territorialsegmentsand decides theformofrepresentativity ofthe Republicanelect. The rituallabor engendersthe insigniaof legitimacywithin this framework. Ifwe findagain in modem political ritualsthe formal procedureswhich anthropologistshave describedin societies fardistantin space and occasionallyin time,two characteristicscan be said to specifythose procedures: first,we have seen that conformity to values and forms does not exclude the inventionof new rituals. In this respect the Solutre example is significant:here the public celebrationoriginatesin a strictlyprivateact and participatesin the constructionof the presidentialpersonalityand in his mythology.Secondly,the generation of signs in the ritual can eithertake the formof a message, as in the case of the tourof Nievre as summarized in the statement"the Presidentwill not insist on inauor determinethe condiguratingthe chrysanthemums," tions of enunciation of a message, conferring a special characteron it: thus the conversationwith the joumalists at Solutreappearsas a naturalprolongation,in both its tone and its content,of that of the precedingascent. These two aspects-invention and message-appear to me to be peculiar to modem political ritual, even allowing that ritual can vary greatlyin formin other societies. Returningto the close relationbetweenmessage and ritual,the lattershould not be conceivedin an instrumentalist fashion,such thatpolitical ritualserves merelyas one ingredientamongotherswithinan overall strategyofcommunication,forwe have seen thatrituals generatemany othermeanings than those expectedby theirprotagonists.That thesepracticesparticipatein the constructionofpolitical representativity does not make ofthema simple,ifsomewhatarchaic,instrumentofthe political spectacle. It means, on the contrary, thatritual constructsa historicformoflegitimacy,an image ofthe electedpersonwhich is reflected,in inevitablydistorted form,in the mirrorsofthe mass media. Farfrombeinga mere survival,political ritual,whetherit appearsin the simple nudity of a formalvisitation or invents an al6. The factthattheintimaterelationbetweenthetheologicaland abolished(Leforti986:299) in no way thepoliticalwas thenceforth impliesa separationofthe politicaland the religious.Rather,we it see a sacralizationof the Republicand of the representations bears.

ABELES

Modern Political Ritual | 399

togethernew costumeforitself,constitutesa most effec- ply a question, perhaps to remain unanswered,rather tive "snare forthought." than a criticism.

Comments GEORGES

AUGUSTINS

Laboratoired'Ethnologieet de Sociologie Comparative,Universitede Paris x, 9200I Nanterre, France.7 x 87 One must certainlybe gratefulto Abeles forhavingtackled what he calls "modem political rituals" with the rigourand considerationattachedto the studyof traditional societies. He seems perfectlyconvincingwhen he concludes thatthe political "ritual" ofmodem societies is stagedin a contextin which secularizationis probably not absolute and thatit is not a survivalbut a necessary elementof the definitionof an individuallegitimacy. His contentionis that two featuresare necessaryto characterizepolitical "ritual": a dependencybetween formalizationand emotion and a necessaryrelationbetweenthe "rite" itselfand its incorporationinto a wider political context. His analysis conceming this second point is particularlyilluminatingand constitutesan essential intellectualtool forhis successors.The relation betweenformalizationand emotion seems to me more complexthanhe presentsit: manyrituals,includingreligious ones, put up with disbelief;theymay or may not generateemotionin a particularparticipant,but to what extentthis emotion is relatedto beliefis a particularly difficultquestion. This bringsus to the centralissue thatAbeles's article most judiciouslyraises: obviouslyit is deliberatelythat he uses the word "ritual" and not the word "ceremonial." The use of the word "ritual" is justifiedby the referenceto an alleged "symbolicefficacy";one way of understandingthis expressionmightbe as a particular impact of certainformalizedgesturesor words on the unconsciousofthe participant,who sees themas action upon the world. I do not know if Abeles would agree withthisdefinition,but ifwhat is describedis actuallya ritualone mightexpect a descriptionof the mentalprocess by which it becomes a "snare for thought."The whole problemofritualsis to make explicitthisconcept of"symbolicefficacy,"to elucidatetherelationbetween ritualact and emotion. What Abeles describesare ceremonials, which in and of themselvesare discoursesin action about legitimacy;he explains,convincingly,that they are something more than ordinarydiscourses, somethingin whichlegitimacyis reassertedbymeans of symbolic evocations, but the emotional involvement and involuntaryadherence of the individual spectator are probablyfarless importantthan in the case of a believer attendinga religious rite. In other words, is it sufficient to say thatthereis symbolicefficacybecause a conjunctionbetween formalizationand emotion possiblyoccurs?How are we, in thisparticularcase, to understand symbolicefficacy?This must be consideredsim-

MAURICE

BLOCH

DepartmentofAnthropology, London School of Economics,HoughtonSt., London WC2A 2AE, England. 5 x 87 The comparison made by Abeles between the largely unformulatedritualofMitterrand'sannual ascent ofthe Solutreanrock,the inaugurationsofthe provincialvisit, and Africanroyal rituals is most thought-provoking. It raises questions about the nature of the sacred and whether this folk concept from our religio/academic culture has any analytical value. It also makes us ask whether there really is a fundamentaldifferencebetween "traditional"and modem society. To get fuller answersto these centralquestionsit would be necessary to follow up similaritiesand differences in more detail than is possible in an article,but we can be gratefulto Abeles forhavingformulatedtheproblemso engagingly. I was particularlystruckby the crucial importanceof the familiarthemes of aging,death, and continuityin the two examples,and I wonderifit is perhapsthis content,ratherthan the formalaspects by which ritual is usually defined,that makes us so readilyconcur with Abeles in his feelingthatthereis somethingin common betweenthese acts ofMitterrandand ritualssuch as the Swazi Ncwala and the celebration of Pentecost. The Ncwala is a ritual of renewal, and at its heart lies the symbolicdeath ofthe king,who is thenable to commune withhis timelessancestorsand so regainpolitical and militarystrength.Similarly,Pentecostis the celebration of retumed vitality to the church after the earthlydeathofChrist.Mitterrandtoo,byretumingto a point of departureand so symbolicallycompletinga joumey,is willinglyforthe momentacceptingagingand dying,aligninghimselfwith the old and the dead. But this is only the beginningof the ritual.Mitterrandthen declaresthatthe death ofhis predecessorswas not truly final,and so by implicationneitheris his; like themhe will continuerevitalizedand purifiedbyhis shortperiod in anotherworld on the summitof the rock halfwayto heaven, in a place where beginningsand endingsmeet. He therebypowerfullylegitimiseshis promisedpolitical return as a strengthenedrejuvenatorof himself and others. There is something repulsively facile about such familiarperformances, but perhapsone of the most interestingpoints made by Abeles is his referenceto the participants'simultaneousrecognitionof thisfacileelement and theirapparentinabilityto escape a sentimentality that, in more discursive contexts, they would despise. The possibilityof having such apparentlycontradictoryattitudesto a ritual and the feelingof being trappedby the performanceis not exceptionalbut typical not just of rituals in the West but of all rituals. I thereforedo not believe that thereis any fundamental differencebetween what Abeles describes and more familiaranthropologicalcases.

400

1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, tune I988

Nonetheless, there is a difference, and it lies in the degree to which the participantsbelieve that they are creatingor inventingwhat theyare doing.In traditional African societies the participantssee themselves as merelyfollowingthe "custom of the ancestors,"but of course theyare also, to a degree,reinventingthe ritual theyperform.They therebydelude themselvesin minimizing the significanceof their intentionality.In the French case the participantsdelude themselvesin believingthattheyare creatinganew, ex nihilo,whereasin fact,as we have seen, they are followingfamiliarpattems. They,by contrast,are overestimatingtheirintentionality.Perhapsthe familiarcontrastbetweenindividualism and holism, oftenlinked to a contrastbetween "traditional"and "modem" societies, is nothingmore than this-differentmisleadingfolk evaluations of the natureof actions which are in themselvesverysimilar. RALPH

GRILLO

School ofAfricanand Asian Studies, Universityof Sussex, Falmer,Brighton,Sussex BNi 9QN, England. I4X87

small literaturein anthropologywhich might enable this task to be begun (e.g.,the work of Lane [I98I] and Binns [I979]on the Soviet Union or thatofMass Observation on England[JenningsI937]). Finally,I wonder if Abeles underestimatesthe conscious way in which contemporary politiciansand their advisers-possibly since the late fifties-have increasingly set out to create images and effectsfor the "media," e.g., forconsumptionon the eveningnews on TV. In Britainwe know that in the I983 election Mrs. Thatcher's itinerarywas planned months in advance, with camera shots and "photo opportunities"worked out in detail-something which all partieswere doing by I987. ofthiskind There is always a dangerthatethnography will be seen as little more than good joumalism. That would be unfair,as the paperhas in an unobtrusiveway much to say ofanalyticaland theoreticalinterest.There are gaps,and in various respectsit is deficient,but I am glad to have seen it published. JAMES

LETT

DepartmentofAnthropology, Indian River This paper addresses in an interestingand thought- CommunityCollege, 3209 VirginiaAve., Ft. Pierce, provokingway some importantquestions.The natureof Fla. 33454, U.S.A. 5 ix 87 ritualin contemporary Westem society,especiallypolitical ritual of the kind Abeles examines,is a neglected Abeles's descriptionofpolitical ritualin the Mitterrand subjectin anthropology, thoughperhapsnot as neglected presidencyis ethnographicallyrich and interesting.He as he suggests.The ethnographicdetail is valuable, and offersa compellingdemonstrationof the importantrole the commentaryon the two ritualsmakes a numberof that symbols and ritual play in the political organizainterestingpoints which illuminate,forme, certainas- tions of contemporary industrializedsocieties. I believe pects of French political life (e.g., the importanceof he errs,however,when he arguesagainst"the notionof place and roots). Some suggestionsforways in which total secularizationof political life" in France.I do not this work could be extendedare in order. think,as Abeles does, that we are "dealing with relaFirst,the two rituals which Abeles discusses are of tionsofabidingcomplexity... betweenthepoliticaland similar types and a particularkind. Without a wider the religious" (emphasis added). The Mitterrandrituals rangeofdata,analysisofthe significanceoftheserituals that he describes are essentially devoid of any supercan be only partialand suggestive.Both are minorlocal natural allusion or symbolism. Perhaps I am simply ceremonies,albeit ones gracedby an importantperson- quibblingover semantics,but I thinknot. Most anthroage. A broadreviewofa wide rangeofcomparative,con- pologistsaccept the notionthatthe "supematural"(i.e., and historical,Frenchmaterial(whichmayor the nonempirical)lies at the heart of any definitionof temporary may not be available) is necessary to allow their full "religion." The Mitterrandperformancesare assuredly significanceto emerge.Forexample,I would like to see a symbolic and inescapably ritualistic, as Abeles ably similar (contemporary)analysis of the great (Parisian) demonstrates,but they are not religious-and that is occasions of state,followedby an examinationof con- preciselywhat is interestingabout them. Abeles correctlyobserves that magico-religioussuptinuityand changein FrenchstateritualfromLouis XIV throughthe Revolutionand Napoleon to De Gaulle and port of political institutionsis ubiquitous in "tradiMitterrand.The extensive sociohistoricalliteratureon tional" societies. Certainlycontemporary industrialized political ritualin I7th- and i8th-centuryFranceshould state societies do claim supernaturalsupportfortheir provide plenty of source material. The paper hints at politicalinstitutions,but,froman evolutionaryperspecsome interestingdifferencesas well as similaritiesbe- tive, theyare doing so less and less. Political organizatween the ritualsof De Gaulle and Mitterrandbut does tions in state societies continue to rely heavily upon littleabout it. (A Frenchfriendobserved,"We are always highlychargedsymbolsand powerfulrituals,but those symbols and rituals are quickly becoming secularized. tryingto resurrectthe kingwhose head we cut off!") Secondly,the paper also hints at a comparativetask, This is what Wallace (I966) realized yearsago when he but brieflyin its referenceto Swaziland. Equally if not wroteabout the preeminenceof ritualoverbelief.Conmore illuminatingwould be a comparisonwith other temporaryindustrializedsocieties continueto have ritEuropean and North American state systems (forex- uals of technology,therapy,ideology, salvation, and ample, a comparisonon a line taken fromWashington revitalizationjust like band,tribal,chiefdom,and noninthroughLincoln to Kennedy and Reagan). There is a dustrialstate societies, but all five formsof ritual are

ABELE S

losingtheirsupematuralideology.The formremainsthe same, but the contenthas changeddramatically. Abeles's interestingarticledoes nothingifnot demonstratethis.The evocativesymbolsmanipulatedbyPresident Mitterrandat the inaugurationin Nevers are all secular:thelayingofthememorialwreath,the awarding of the Legion of Honor, the reverentialallusion to "the land of Morvan," the affectionateembrace of a little girl-these are all symbols of group identification,of nationalismand culturalheritage,and as such theydo notdependupon anysupematuralassociations.They are powerfulsymbolsand theyare expressedin a ritualcontext-and theirformand functionare identical to religious symbols expressedin religiousrituals-but they are not religioussymbols,nor is the inaugurationa religious ritual.The same is true of Mitterrand's"pilgrimage" to Solutre.Here, as Abeles observes,what Mitterrandsymbolicallyaffirms is his "unswervingloyaltyto a land and a people," not to a god or a transcendentforce. What I find most interestingabout Abeles's article, though,is the paradigmaticissues that it suggests.His analysisfollowsfairlyclosely the pointofview takenby symbolicanthropologists(Geertz I973, I983), with additional inspiration drawn from structuralists(LeviStrauss I963, I976). Both of these paradigmsare centrally concemed with the role that symbols play in human life, and both recognize that the most powerful symbols often find expression in ritual behavior. Abeles's article is furthervalidation of the utility of symbolicanthropology-theparadigmdoes in factlead us to interesting insightsabout theworld.He has offered us one more illustrationof how symbolicanthropology can be put to use, in effectperformingwhat Kuhn (I970:25-28) calls "normal science"-examining the factsat hand,comparingthemwithhis paradigm'stheoretical predictions,and demonstratingthe paradigm's theoreticalprinciples.As I have arguedelsewhere(Lett I987), however,symbolic anthropologyand structuralism do not,at the presenttime,need further demonstrationsoftheirapplication.Instead,bothparadigmsneed a more rigorousformulationof their theoreticalprinciples. I do not faultAbeles forfailingto addressthisissue (I do not expect him to be interestedin the issues that interestme). On the whole, however,myreactionto his article is yes, that is intriguing;yes, I generallyagree; but thereis otherwork to be done. JULIAN PITT-RIVERS

3, rue de l'Universite, 75007 Paris,France,I7 X 87

During the last decade we have witnessedan expansion in the definitionofritualto include actions and institutionsnotformerly recognizedas such. This development is connectedwith an increase in the numberof ethnographicstudiesofcivilised,supposedlyrationalsocieties and the breakdown of the conceptual distinctionbetween themand those of supposedlymagical mentality. The old opposition,datingfromTylor,between ritual and rationalityhas (at last!) been dissipated.The whole notion of rationalityhas, in fact,taken a knock, even

Modern Political Ritual 140 I

amongphilosophers.At the same time,symbolicvalues have acquired greaterimportancein the understanding of power and legitimacy.The functionof ritual is, as I have explainedelsewhere(I987), to establishconsensus withregardto legitimacy,and therefore it is as necessary today as it was when the kings of France had to be crowned at Rheims and annointed with oil fromthe Holy Phial to be legitimized.The riteshave changed;the need forthem remains. Abeles's meticulous ethnographicdescriptionof the symbolicactivitiesof PresidentMitterrandcomes, after various studies of ritualin industryand ludic ritessuch as footballmatches (cf.Abeles I987), to reinforcethese tendencies,lookingforthe hiddenmeaningsbehindthe explicit justificationsof our collective practices.Thus he opens the road to a redefinitionof "ritual" and perhaps also of "the sacred," which covers much more today than religiousceremonies.The distinctionbetween politics and religion,taintedwith ethnocentrismat the best of times, becomes untenable for anthropologists once God is no longerthe unique referentof sacrality. PresidentMitterrand'ssuccess did not depend upon any firm doctrinal commitment. He denies being a Marxist(whateverthat means these days),and he came to socialism late in life. Nor was it due merelyto his abilityin political manoeuvre (thoughthis has always been masterly)or his charisma(forhe is a secretiveand mysteriousfigure[see thefilmabout him "Certainsl'appellent'Francois' "]). In largeparthe owes his popularity as chiefof state to his handlingof symbolicvalues and (forwant of a betterphrase)his "sense of the ritualsignificance"of his actions and words.Abeles's subject is certainlywell chosen forsuch a theoreticaldemonstration. PETER

H. STEPHENSON

DepartmentofAnthropology,Universityof Victoria, P.O. Box 1700, Victoria,B.C., Canada V8W2Y2. 20 X 87 Abeles's thought-provoking descriptionand interpretation of modem political ritualin Franceunderthe waning presidency of Mitterrandposes many lines for furthercommentary.I shall restrictmyselfto his essentially"monistic" pointofview and the conceptuallimitationsimposedon his interpretation byFrance'sbeinga republic.These two issues are related,in my view, because both yield the same blind spot. If one takes "monism" to mean that the universeof explanationis sharedby analystand subject and consequently that anthropologicalresearch methods are as useful in one's own society as elsewhere,then this is indeeda "monistic" work(see Leaf I979). As it happens, I agree with this position, but it is not clear whether in Abeles's conclusion that "thereis thus no difference kindbetweenthepolitical ritualsoftraditionalsocieties and of those contemporaneouswith us" derives from adherenceto a monisticpoint of view or inheresin the mannerin which he mounts his description.I suspect thatit is partlythe latter,because it is ratherdifficultto

402

1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, June 988

assume the privilegedposition of an outsiderwith special knowledge when one works at home, where the elitism so opaque (and acceptable) in the cross-cultural situationbecomes transparent(and intolerable).My suspicion arises fromthe simple fact that Abeles only asserts his conclusion-he does not marshal any direct evidence for it here. A briefreadinglist of others' research does not really sufficeas evidence forwhat he describesonly as "traditional"society.By "traditional" one suspectshe means a monarchyofsome sortand not a republic,and preferably a non-European,nonconstitutional monarchy.To draw the conclusion Abeles does, ratherthan merelypresupposingit, would necessitatea careful comparison with other societies and would emerge fromthe data ratherthan overwhelmit with assertionssupportedwith a mere handfulof references to otherworks by otherwritersabout othertimes and places. I suspect that the case Abeles puts forwardcan be made, but it also entails utilizing a differentset of categoriesthan "traditional" and "contemporaneous," which simplyreducehistoryto criticallydimensionless cultural stereotypesno more satisfactorythan "primitive" and "modem." These categoriesmustbe historical in nature: postmonarchic republic, constitutional etc. For example,Franceis a monarchy(parliamentary), republicthat has experienceda historicallywrenching division between sacred power and profanepolitical power. Consequently,the symbols and political ritual that brushthe touchstonesto legitimatecurrentofficeholdersmust do so ratherdifferently than forpolitical leaders still encumbered with monarchs whose sole functionis to personifythe state. Mitterrandhas his Solutre,Americanpresidentstheir folksytrips to the ranch or firesidechats. In both instances the "personalizedrituals" seem to have become extremelyimportantto the public, the media, and the presidents themselves. Perhaps this is because the deepervalues held by all in a republiccan onlybe effectivelycommunicatedin the absence of the regal pomp and fanfarethey have replaced. There may have been timesand places in whichkingsand queens were obliged to do somethingsimilarin orderto earn the privilegeof asserting their power, but in today's constitutional monarchies that time has long past. Today's monarchs-one has onlyto thinkofElizabeth and Beatrixmay representboth the state and historyin theirvery persons.Perhapsthis explains in partthe public obsession with what they wear ratherthan what they say. PrinceCharles,forexample,may give an addresson rebuildingBritain'sinnercities with a greatdeal of scope forpolitical interpretation by the media, but the latter will describeat lengthwhat his wifewore forthe occasion and not reporta word he uttered.Mitterrand'sand Reagan's attiregains symbolic value during"personal ritual moments" as well because in the absence of a monarchtheytoo may personifythe state,but this can be taken only so farwithoutoffending democraticsensibilities.The primeministerin a constitutionalmonarchy can never representthe state withoutusurpingthe onlyremainingfunctionofthemonarch.Furthermore, it

is my strongimpression,given the recentevents in the presidentialselection process in the United States (the retreatfromthe frayof several candidatesin "personal" disgrace)that the lives of politicians tend farmore toward crucial symbolicinterpretation in a republicthan in a parliamentarydemocracywith a monarchsuch as Britain,Holland, or Canada. Several Canadian prime ministershave had verydifficult personallives thatwere well known to the public but had little if any consequence fortheirpolitical lives. Justa week ago, Queen ElizabethvisitedVictoria,British Columbia, where I live. She only stayedan hour at the airport,and her visit was describedby the press as "shortbut sweet." Since Victoriawas herpointofentry into the country,the presence of both the governor general (her appointee) and the prime minister (her "servant")was required.The press went into the usual rhapsodiesabout her attireand quoted snippetsof conversationwithold soldiersand children,totallyignoring the prime minister,whose political interestsseemed submergedin the wake of the travellingmonarch. In fact,he had everyreason to be over 3,000 miles away in Ottawa,wherehis governmentwas at a criticaljuncture in Canadian-Americantrade talks, but "pomp and circumstance"requiredhis presenceand his formalsilence on VancouverIsland. My pointis simplythatwherepoliticalpowermust be gained and subsequentlyreaffirmed by a solitaryleader (whetherpresidentor king)in a ritualizedperformance, the personal stake of the leader is such that he must continue to invoke sacred powers and trustsin ways which personifythe condition of the people. Where a monarchycontinues but can no longer be gained by political leadersotherthan througha regicidewhich the politicalimpotenceofthe monarchcould neverwarrant, the onlyexpressiona primeministercan make is one of loyaltyof varyingdegrees.The symbolicpotencyof the monarchand the political power of the primeminister are to be kept separate,and infringement by eitheris regardedby the pressand the people as dangerous.Imperial presidentsmay edge cautiously in the directionof "l'etat c'est moi" in the absence of a monarchin ways thatparliamentaryrepresentativesin a monarchycould nevereven attempt.Ironically,then,if thereis littleto separate imperial presidents from earlier kings-as Abeles suggests-there is still plentyto separateleaders in today's constitutionalmonarchiesfromboth.

Reply' MARC

ABELES

Paris,France. 24 xi 87 The comments on this analysis of modem political ritualtie in with questions thatI myselfhave been ponI.

Translatedby MaryTurton.

ABELES

deringand am farfromhavingresolved.ThereforeI shall not pretendto solve the oftenverycomplex problems thatmy colleagues so kindlyhelp me to formulate. It may seem somewhat "thought-provoking" to treat the excursionsofthe Presidentofthe Republicas exotic rituals,but thereis no legitimateobjectionto this kind of comparison. On the contrary,it seems to me that when we are studyingour own societies it is important to distance ourselves somewhat fromevents that seem all the morenaturalto us because we are accustomedto observingthem every day. This is one of the major difficultiesencounteredin the anthropologyof modern societies: not to become ensnaredby the image of itself that our society projects. To overcome the obstacle raised by this overfamiliarity with our subject, a resolutely comparativeapproach is essential. It was with this in mind that I referredto the Swazi ritual so well analyzed by Hilda Kuper. Grillo observescorrectlythat I mightprofitablyhave comparedthe ritualsof FrancoisMitterrandwith those of American presidentsand, more generally,used historicdocumentsrelatingto ritespractisedby the kings of France and by Napoleon. It seems to me that with such an encyclopaedicapproachone would be in danger oflosing sightof the real object of the work-namely, a betterunderstandingof the functionof political rituals in our societies-in a welterofhistoricalreferences. It is here,as I understandit, that the difference betweenthe journalistand the anthropologistcomes into play: the former describes the phenomenon, sometimes very shrewdly;the lattertriesto understandits sociological and symbolicimplications. One of the problematicalaspects of this paper is the contrastbetweenthe modem and the traditional.Here I have retumed to a distinctionnot always explicit but always present in anthropology-one that has developed, incidentally,froma dichotomybetween "other" ("primitive,""exotic," "holistic") societies and our own so-called "complex," "modem," "individualistic,"etc., ones. Now, this dichotomyis clearly ratherarbitrary: Stephenson seems to think that I could not adopt it withoutbeingpreparedto accept "culturalstereotypes." He criticizesmy "monistic point of view": am I really blindedby the nearnessof my subject?But in thatcase, is an anthropologyof our societies conceivable at all? When I write that "there is thus no difference in kind betweenthe political ritualsof traditionalsocieties and ofthose contemporaneouswith us," I am onlychallenging a dichotomythat is merelypedagogicalat best. Let us say thatwe must be preparedto complicateproblems ifit leads, given a littlepatience,to a bettersolution. Besides,I thinkStephensonis well aware ofthis,since he complicatesmy puzzle by introducinga stimulating comparisonbetweenpresidentialsystemsand constitutional monarchies.This seems to me a veryimportant question, and I have tackled it in a paper to appear shortlyon the symbolismoffiliationin the presidential traditionof the FifthRepublic and in the functioningof the Britishmonarchy.The role of leaders in a constitutional monarchyis worthyof studyon its own because of the eminentand ambiguousposition theyenjoy.

Modern Political Ritual | 403

Augustinsobserves correctlythat I deliberatelyused the word "ritual" and not "ceremonial." It is truethatI particularlystressedthe relationshipbetweena riteand its political context. Augustins's remarks concerning the symboliceffectivenessof ritual give full value to a point of view that I underestimatedin my analysis: the point of view of those who are presentat the ritualbut play no directpartin it. To explainhow operationssuch as I describedcan arouse a formofemotionin thepublic, I insisted on the multiplicityof the registersmanipulated by PresidentMitterrand.But we must also bear in the remindthepsychologicalmechanismsdetermining actions of the individual spectators.It is here that we feelthe need forconvincingexplanatory"paradigms,"to use Lett's expression. This awareness of somethinglackingin anthropology does not,however,seem to me to invalidatethe development of researchinto the symbolicbases of legitimacy, which is as much the prerogativeof historiansas of anthropologists.One may marvelat the povertyofthe anthropologyof modem societies in this matter,whereas the historianshave ceaselesslyprobedthe question (see, forexample, Kantorowicz [I957] on the symbolismof theroyalbodyand Duby [I 978] on thetheoryofordersin the Middle Ages). May we use the word "sacred" about these ritualspracticedby politicians and echoed in the media? My criticstake different positionson thispoint. Lett,in his otherwisestimulatingcomment,assertsthat modem rituals "are essentially devoid of any supernatural allusion or symbolism."But I cannot see how ofsymboliccontent,the substitution thetransformation of notions such as the Republic or the Nation forthe notion of divinity,should automaticallyimplythe disappearanceofbeliefas an expressionofreligion.Francois Mitterrandis obviouslyno priest,and the pilgrimageto Solutredoes not figurein an ecclesiasticalcontext.But it is obvious too that an explanationthat retainsnothing but the "mechanical" aspects of the ritual distortsits real import.It is not by chance thathistoriansspeak of "secular worship" in connection with the ceremonies performedat war memorials: "It is secular worship without god or priest.Or ratherthe priestand the believer mergetogether,"writesProst (in Nora i984:221) on the subject of the commemorationsof the armistice of I9I8. In anothercontext,we may note the significant remarkof Ramsay Macdonald, a leadernot suspectedof any particularreligiosity,on the occasion of the jubilee of George V: "We all went away feelingthat we had taken part in somethingverymuch like a Holy Communion" (quoted by Cannadine in Hobsbawm and RangerI983: I 52). Pitt-Rivers,a pioneer in the anthropologyof modern societies, pleads fora redefinitionof ritual and the sacred.This seems to me to be all the moresensibleas the intricationbetween the political and the religious,an example ofwhich I have analyzed,forcesus back to preconceived definitionsthat are not untainted by ethnocentrism.It is no doubt one of the contributionsof anthropologicalproceduresthat theycall into question artificialdivisions(politics,religion,etc.) thatin no way correspondto the realityof social practices.

404

1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 29, Number 3, June1988

Francois Mitterrand'sexceptional political success our societies withoutfallingvictimto the fascinationof since at last he took up the chargeof Presidentof the the institutional-state model and the languageofwhich Republic can be explained largely by the skill with it is a vehicle. That is why, at a time when the social which he manages to harnessthese diffuseformsof be- sciences appear to have their vision clouded by their liefin values whose persistencehas been demonstrated own history,it seems to me a veryhealthythingthatan in a recentbook (Nora I984). Whereasthe purelypracti- extensionof the fieldof political anthropologyinto the cal actions of the Frenchpresidenthave nevereliciteda modem age should fumishmaterialfora debate richin real consensus, the remarkablesymbolicwork he per- stakes of an epistemologicalnature. formsnot only in his speeches but in the way he "contextualizes" them has made him a rallying point, whence the greatpopularityhe enjoys at the end of his second term. Bloch's commentsstrengthenme in the idea thatreferenceto the Otheris a heuristicelementand thatit is et le politique.L'Homme26 impossibleto escape froma confrontation with what is ABELES, M. I986. L'anthropologue (1-2):I91-212. different. Bloch sees in the pilgrimageto Solutrea ritual .I987. Terrain.Cametsdu Patrimoine Ethnologique 8. [JPR] of regenerationanalogous in its significanceto the BINNS, CHRISTOPHER. 1979. The changingfaceofpower:RevoNcwala of the Swazi. The interpretationhe suggests lution and accommodation in the development of the Soviet ceremonial system. Man 14:585-606. [RG] goes some way towardscompletingthe one I myselfproposed, a factwhich bears witness to the symbolicrich- DUBY, G. 1978. Les troisordres,ou L'imaginairedu feodalisme. Paris: Gallimard. ness of the ritual. EVANS-PRITCHARD, E. E. i962 (1948). "The divine kingshipof The commentatorsthenreturnto the notionofinventheShilluk,"in Essaysin social anthropology, pp. 66-86. Lontion in contemporary don: Faber and Faber. rituals.It is quite obvious thatthe protagonistsin the rites practicedin Africansocieties EVANS-PRITCHARD, E. E., AND M. FORTES. 1940. African political systems. London: OxfordUniversityPress. may behave creatively,but the essential difference GEERTZ, CLIFFORD. 1973. Theinterpretation ofcultures.New seems to me to lie in the possibilityof inventingnew York:BasicBooks.[JL] ritualsthat is offeredto membersof our societies. I do .I983. Local knowledge: Furtheressays in interpretiveanthropology. New York:BasicBooks.[JL] not mean the renewal of an existingtradition,perhaps deflectedtowardsends different fromthose it originally HABERMAS, j. i986 (i962). L'espace public. Paris: Editions Payot. E., AND T. RANGER. I983. Theinvention oftradifulfilled:in that case, we are dealing with the reinven- HOBSBAWM, tion. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. tion ofa tradition,a phenomenonobservablein our soci- IZARD, M. 1973. La lance et les guenilles. L'Homme 13 (3):I39eties (cf. Hobsbawm and Ranger I983) that exists in 49. many others. In contrast,certain types of ritual are JENNINGS, H., ET AL. 1937. May thetwelfth.London:Faber. [RG] specificto us and, like the pilgrimageto Solutre,repre- KANTOROWICZ, E. 1957. Theking'stwobodies:A studyin sent a creationex nihilo even thoughtheymake use of mediaeval political theology.Princeton: PrincetonUniversity all the symbolicingredientsfamiliarto the anthropolo- Press. KUHN, THOMAS. 1970. 2d edition.Thestructure ofscientificrevgist. olutions.Chicago:University ofChicagoPress.[JL] It is interestingto see thatan ethnographicanalysisof KUPER, H. 1947. An African aristocracy: RankamongtheSwazi. presidentialrituals can raise questions as fundamental London: OxfordUniversityPress. as those approachedby the commentators;thisdoes not LANE, C. I98I. Therites ofrulers.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.[RG] surpriseme, foranthropologycan providea whollyoriginal approach to modem political fact. Indeed, anthro- LEAF, M. J.1979. Man,mind,and science:A historyofanthropology.New York:ColumbiaUniversity Press.[PHS] pologistsrefuse,in the Maussian tradition,to adoptpre- LEFORT, C. I986. Essais surle politique(XIX16me XX1emesiecle). conceived distinctions by arbitrarilyseparating,for Paris: Le Seuil. example,the religiousfromthe political. Moreover,the LETT, JAMES. I987. Thehumanenterprise: A critical introduction to anthropological theory.Boulder: Westview Press. [JL] comparativestandpointimplies a critical attitude toVol. I. anthropology. wards dichotomies(e.g., traditional/modem) that often LEVI-STRAUSS, CLAUDE. I963. Structural New York:BasicBooks.[JL] proveproblematicalboth in the fieldand in theory. 1971. L'homme nu. Paris: Plon. When Evans-Pritchard and Fortes(I940), almosthalfa 1976. Structuralanthropology.Vol. 2. New York: Basic centuryago, attemptedto constructa political anthro- Books. pologyof Africansocieties, theyfaced theoreticalprob- NO RA, P. Editor.I984. Les lieux de la memoire. Vol. I. La republique. Paris: Gallimard. lems thatare not unrelatedto thosewe encountertoday. PITT-RIVERS, JULIAN. I987. La revanchedu rituel.Le Temps They asked themselves how to constructa non-state- Moderne, March. [JPR] based model ofpoliticalrelationshipsbutrefusedto adopt SMITH, P. 1979. "Aspects de l'organisation des rites,"in La fonction symbolique. Edited by M. Izard and P. Smith. Paris: Gala reductionist attitudetowardsphenomenathatdidnotfit limard. into the mould of modem political representations. ToPIERRE. I963. Les Gaullistes:Rituelet anVIANSSON-PONTE, ofindusdaythe constructionofa politicalanthropology nuaire. Paris: Le Seuil. trial(orpost-industrial) societiesposes an identicalprob- WALLACE, ANTHONY F. C. I966. Religion: An anthropological lem in a different view.Homewood,Ill.: DorseyPress.[JL] way: how to thinkof the political in

ReferencesCited