Dianne suggests that male anthropologists have tended to notice only the roles of men in the initiation of boys, and have failed to realise the importance of the women's involvement throughout these ceremonies. Dianne's own education prior to living with the community was based on this vision - and she had to work hard to 'un-learn' it! This viewpoint was that the main function of the women was to run away screaming when the men turned up to carry the boys away for their circumcision, and that the rest of the 'important' stuff was about the men working out amongst themselves how this affected their status and future relationships as men.
The point Dianne Bell makes is that these ceremonies are important to the whole community, and they really are an expression of what the whole community is trying to achieve. Her attention to what the women were doing during these ceremonies uncovered a completely different picture - the women were actively and strongly making independent decisions which would have powerful impacts on the future life of the boy/man in question - including choosing his mother-in-law! (ie. lots of bonding/creating/shaping of the future community life that would be shared by all).
I am wondering if this might be a bit of a picture of what traditional understandings of (male) ordination - in the Christian church have been like.
I noticed on Sunday at the ordination service, that there are a large set of 'prescribed' expectations about what this 'becoming a minister' is and should be all about. For example-
- There is something to do with receiving God's Call - which is Very Important.
- There is something about being 'called' by the community / church you are part of
- You have to stand up straight, and look formal
- You have to be quite serious and show Humility
- you need to speak some words - which will be listened to by an audience - with solemnity
- you make public vows
- you need to have letters after your name
If "becoming a minister" was something studied by male anthropologists as being defined through this ceremony, a particular image of ministry would be evoked... something which I also have had in my head, which may have to be 'un-learned' as well. I think of the image of a man who is serious, who thinks a lot, who prepares sermons and then delivers them to a solemn and silent audience (except for the hymns) - as well as being a person who mentors and 'guides', offering advice and teachings.
But this misses completely the image I received from Keren - because like Dianne Bell, I was priveliged to glimps bits and pieces of how the ordination looks from a different point of view (the 'women's camp'). The image Keren gave me of the work she does is much more about realising opportunities for people to participate in creating the kind of community they want. And that is hard work. And it is not the work that is reflected in the world of 'male' ordination ceremonies. Both the speaches of the two women who were ordained (out of about 7 candidates) seemed to me to 'subvert' that paradigm. Keren's talk included (my gosh!) emotional expression (not solemnity). And the other female ordinand spoke of her re-creation of her role as focusing on preparations for festivity (like making feasts and painting the walls in many colours).
One of Keren's achievements has been the re-creation of an opportunity for young people in her church to celebrate a 'coming-of-age'.... and when she told me about it, it made me think of what Dianne Bell said about male anthropolgists' views of initiation and women's work in Central Australia:
"Meggitt's analysis of initiation focuses on the way in which men are establishing relationships with each other in a ritual context. Strehlow's interest in tjuringa [sacred object] ownership leaves women as the cooks and keepers of the home fire. Spencer and Gillen are at a loss to explain the presence of women during initiation, although they do allow that women have a role. The role I suggest women play at initiation is consonant with the image of themselves that women project in their own ritual .... women are autonomous, independent ritual actors who actively participate in the creation, transmission and maintenance of the values of their society"
Bell, Dianne. (1993) Daughters of the Dreaming, Uni of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pg. 226
Thanks for this, Jono. I did a tiny bit of anthropolgical linguistics as part of my Honours degree, and that's where I heard about Dianne Bell. This sounds like an interesting book.
ReplyDeleteIt was the first time I attended an ordination service of any faith or denomination, and I found the formalities and flow very interesting. I liked the formal and warm presentation of the ordinand to the boss (not sure what the term is, but I don't want to say the "man in charge").
We had a discussion on our way home about the gendered nature of the ceremony and how differently the women positioned themselves in their new role, from the way that the men did. It seemed to me that the women were more humble and also acknowledged that they are in an ongoing transformative process, rather than having gone through the process and now coming out the other end. In that sense there seemed to be for the women, more opportunity for continued growth, learning and expression. I liked the way both women ordinands spoke about their work and their learning as having changed them, rather than presenting themselves as exalted and presestined for ministry.
yep, I agree about the predestination thing, Melina! I'd be leaning to a bias about one of the women though...
ReplyDeleteJono - you could stick some of your favourite websites on here?