A Toolbox of Concepts: Liminality
The main reason I haven’t published the essay on the Theory of the Interregnum til now has been that I’ve felt the theory is composed of a complex of processes that are working at the same time. And while I worked through the model intuitively and with my own knowledge of American history, it became clear I didn’t understand what currents were causing it to function. So over the last two years I’ve been studying and working out different concepts that I think play into why the Interregnum functions and operates as it does. I’d be lying if I said I have it all figured out - I don’t. But at this point I can’t see any reason why what I’ve worked through shouldn’t see the light of day, and working through it on this platform may help me develop it further.
As such, this is the first of a series of essays that are going to be focusing on one or two concepts that I think help elucidate the phenomena at large. Again, I won’t say I have this all figured out, however the concepts are all useful tools in and of themselves. And considering the depth of our situation, I think a new toolbox is necessary for the challenges we face.
I first became aware of Liminality as a concept thanks to my friend Bird. While we were discussing the Interregnum (our conversations and his insight were fundamental) he mentioned liminality and I became so interested that I turned over every rock that I could. I came upon a rather curious school of political anthropology which takes liminality as its central concept and concern. In their own toolbox of concepts, I’ve found some rather helpful insight and so I’d like to do an essay going through the general outline of their work. Now I will say that I’ve taken issue with their viewpoint in certain areas, for example, their deference to what seems more conservative parts of Plato. However, these I do not find fatal, and even if I disagree with them in these areas, their work is truly a wonderful contribution and helps clarify our situation.
Liminality -
Bjorn Thomassen is a political anthropologist that’s written extensively on the subject of Liminality and his book “Liminality and the Modern” is perhaps the best crash-course on the subject. On Liminality he writes:
“Liminality refers to moments or periods of transition during which the normal limits to thought, self-understanding and behavior are relaxed, opening the way to novelty and imagination, construction and destruction. For these reasons, the concept of liminality has the potential to push social and political theory in new directions.” - pg 1 - Liminality and the Modern
Going a little further:
“The qualities pertaining to the concept of liminality are perplexing. On the one hand, liminality involves a potentially unlimited freedom from any kind of structure. This sparks creativity and innovation, peaking in transfiguring moments of sublimity.... On the other hand liminality also involves a peculiar kind of unsettling situation in which nothing really matters, in which hierarchies and standing norms disappear, in which sacred symbols are mocked at and ridiculed, in which authority in any form is questioned, taken apart and subverted; in which, as Shakespeare said, ‘degree is shaken’. Human experiences of freedom and anxiety (they do belong together) are condensed in liminal moments. Nothing really matters, and yet, deeply paradoxically, meaning often becomes over-determined.” - pg 1 - Liminality and the Modern
This concept of Liminality first comes from the field of anthropology and specifically from anthropologist and folklorist Arnold van Gennep. He introduced it in his 1908 book, “Rites of Passage” which is a broad survey of religious and magical rituals across a myriad of cultures around the world. In the work, he distills out of the material a tripartite structure of rituals:
Rites of Separation
Rites of Transition
Rites of Incorporation
In this model, the process in rites of passage is one that helps first remove someone from their particular social position (such as from child to adult), to a state without status, the liminal, and then transitions them into another. The Rites of Transition take place particularly in the liminal state, where the ritual subject is in a type of limbo. It’s at this point that they are subject to a structuring process that will crystalize into the new identity through the Rites of Incorporation. Along with social processes, Gennep also identifies spatial and temporal arenas of liminality, be it physical locations or seasonal changes which call for particular rites to be performed. We’ll discuss these aspects later.
After van Gennep, the concept was left unmentioned and in obscurity until the time of the anthropologist Victor Turner. He turned to van Gennep’s work while studying the Ndembu tribe, having found the tools of analysis in anthropology at the time, wanting. He formalized his own analysis into a 4 part construct, coined as a Social Drama:
Break
Crisis
Redress
Reintegration
For Turner’s research, he examined how the ritual process functioned in the Ndembu’s practices in addressing social conflict internally. Through the practice, conflicts were resolved and splits within the tribe were fixed. Rather than just in a ceremony, Turner noted that the theatrical nature of the community also seemed to run along this same process. The Redress here being the attempt to deal with the initial Break, and resulting Crisis, within the community. The Reintegration then being the acceptance of the change and the new state of things that were established through the Redress.
What’s important in both van Gennep and Turner’s use of the concept, is both are addressing particular instances where the standard social construction is suspended. For the initiate or the community, liminality is the place where they are positioned between two states of being and are in a process of both deconstruction and construction. In the tribe going through the social drama, the standard structures are suspended to deal with the break and crisis and then reconstructed towards a new equilibrium.
Thomassen points out, the attempt to expand Liminality as a form of analysis for understanding larger and more complex societies had not been done by van Gennep, and Victor Turner’s work was limited in this direction. Instead, a number of scholars after them expanded the project, notably Agnes Horvath and himself. To do so properly though, Thomassen advises that there needs to be extension of the analysis and other complementary concepts brought into the approach to account for how Liminality functions in large scale societies.
In the extension of the analysis of Liminality, Thomassen states:
“As we have suggested elsewhere (Thomassen 2009), and which we can now further elaborate and exemplify, experiences of liminality can be related to three different types of subjecthood:
Single Individuals
Social Groups (e.g. cohorts, minorities)
Whole societies, entire populations, ‘civilizations’
The Temporal dimension of liminality can relate to:
Moments (sudden events)
Periods (weeks, months, years)
Epochs (decades, generations, arguably even centuries)”
- pg 90 - Liminality and the Modern
In the extension to spatial elements, he writes:
Specific places, thresholds (a doorway in house, a line that separates holy from sacred in a ritual, specific objects, in-between items in a classificatory scheme, parts or opening of the human body);
Areas, zones, and ‘closed institutions’ (border areas between nations, monasteries, prisons, sea resorts, airport);
Countries or larger regions, continents (mesopotamia, medi-terranean; Ancient Palestin, in between Mesopotamia and Egypt; Ionia in Ancient Greece, in between the Near East and Europe).
pg 91 - Liminality and the Modern
To consolidate this a bit, liminality is an experiential phenomena. One that can be experienced from the individual to large scale societies, that endures for variant amounts of time, and can be denoted geographically at equally variant sizes of space.
For demonstration sake of how these can vary in scale, we could consider the the example of illegal immigration across the Mexico and US border. In passing through the border, undocumented migrants are quite literally between, not only the boundaries of nation states and distinct cultures, languages, and governmental system, but also between their identity as Mexican citizens and then a new identity of undocumented migrant. The temporal aspect endures for however long it takes them to cross and arrive at a safe location on the other side, while the very geography they are crossing is a kind of liminal zone, where codified law and structure are in limbo and tenuous at best. And not only are we speaking of an individual, but also sometimes small groups and caravans all experiencing it at the same time.
Now I hope, in light of the Interregnum essay, you could understand why I find liminality as a pertinent concept. It seems to me that the Interregnum as a phenomena is a liminal state, where it can feel like anything is possible, and at the same time there is a deep anxiety that the structures of society are unraveling at the seams. What could be expected from the state or the economy or even your neighbor, is no longer assured. I of course don’t want to run ahead of myself but I think it’s clear why working with this concept seems like a good start.
This school of political anthropology understands that one concept is not enough to tackle modern society alone. As Thomassen writes:
“The analytical potential of liminality needs to be enhanced by other anthropological concepts, which to a surprising degree have been ignored by social theorists (Szakolczia 2009: 153; Horvath and Thomassen 2008). Three such concepts can be singled out: imitation, schismogenesis and trickster logics. These complementary concepts become particularly relevant once we move into liminal situations without clearly defined boundaries of space and time, and without pre-defined masters of ceremony. - pg 99 - Liminality and the Modern
Imitation & Contagion -
Considering Imitation first, Thomassen references the work of Gabriel Tarde and Rene Girard. Through these mens’ work, Imitation is understood as an important component in societies of all scales. Individuals imitate one another in their roles, their interactions, and their desires. Girard’s work on mimesis is largely in study of how desires are imitated and result in clashes (such as his mimetic spiral) and the creation of institutions that coordinate this imitation. Tarde focused on how imitation was at play on individuals at a distance and how there was a replication of activity between people produced by “inter-psychical photography” pg 100. As Thomassen points out, van Gennep and Turner were aware of this phenomena when they noted the contagion like effect that the “initiands” are treated as having as they’re often intentionally sequestered from the rest of social group.
From this it’s evident that Liminality and it’s chaotic effects can spiral and spread through imitation. Like a virus, the liminal state has an infectious quality via imitation and as such can spread, especially within crowds. An example of this could be the number of protests that devolve into riots such as the 2011 England Riots or 2020 George Floyd protests. Where a protest march creates the space and the crowd, the dissolution of the standard social conduct within the march lends itself to a liminal situation that spreads through imitation and the ensuing lawlessness that is a component of liminality. This is then replicated and begins a spiral of looting and sacking of the space.
Schismogenesis -
Moving forward we have to deal with Schismogenesis. Per Thomassen on the phenomena:
“In terms of definitions, [Gregory] Bateson (1958: 175) described schismogenesis as ‘A process of differentiation in the norms of individual behavior resulting from cumulative interaction between individuals’.... For Bateson schismogenesis could become part of any communication system or ‘communication relationship’ where individuals or groups interact. The behaviour of person X affects person Y, and the reaction of person Y to person X’s behaviour will then affect person X’s behaviour, which in turn will effect person Y, and so on, potentially leading to a ‘vicious circle’. Bateson’s schismogenesis theory is indeed about such circles. It is in the form of such circles that the ‘system’ is somehow ‘functioning’ although it may produce undesirable effects for everyone involved. That is why Bateson was not afraid to talk about pathologies in communication and in epistemology.” - pg 107 - Liminality and the Modern
“Bateson usefully distinguished between complementary and symmetrical schismogenesis. In the former, two ‘opposite’ types of behaviour reinforce each other in ‘opposite directions’: assertive versus submissive behaviour between two persons or two groups is the oft-quoted example here. In the latter, the ‘same’ behaviour will lead to more of the ‘same’ on the part of the other individual or group - a repetitive system of escalating competition: boasting leading to more boasting is the example invoked by Bateson himself (p. 177). Symmetrical relationships are those in which the two parties are equals, competitors, such as in sports, party politics or was.” - pg 107 - Liminality and the Modern
Schismogenesis is therefore a kind of reinforcing phenomena between individuals and groups. A game of tit for tat can result when the line between the two has been drawn and from there the results open to a Girardian mimetic spiraling. As this goes along with imitation as a concept, we can see how in a liminal period this is especially problematic. Where a group has been stripped of their status or prior mode of being, the need for a status or frame of existence necessarily leads individuals to being prone to a role and a line being drawn for position. In this way, Liminality is a state that opens people to schismogenesis and so susceptible to its spiraling and reinforcing attributes.
The Trickster -
Through the scholarship on Liminality, there has been a particular character that has been noted as arising in these states: the Trickster. In myth, the Trickster usually accompanies or causes a liminal situation. As Thomassen writes, this character is necessary for understanding how Liminality plays out in large scale societies:
“But what happens in liminal situations when there is no designated master of ceremonies? The short answer is that someone will invent himself as such, and present himself as possessing the key to law and order. He imitates, or highjacks the position of saviour. This is why the mythical figure of the trickster is a crucial complementary concept to the analysis of liminal situations in large-scale settings.” - pg 103 - Liminality and the Modern
“For a start, it is quite evident that the trickster has particular affinities with liminal situations. Discussing the liminal position and the didactics of the trickster figure in a Native American context, Larry Ellis points out that ‘[the trickster’s] power is rooted in liminality and he calls it forth merely by expressing his liminal nature in the outlandish behavior for which he is so well known’ (Ellis 1993: 57). As Ellis says, the trickster is the ‘shaman of the liminal’. In the same vein, Joseph Campbell describes the Trickster as a ‘super-shaman… The chief mythological character of the paleolithic world of story… an epitome of the principle of disorder, he is nevertheless the culture bringer also’ (1959: 273). In liminality, as Turner scribed so vividly, the world is realized via reversals and opposites, inversions and reversals. This liminal setting is, alas, the most fertile terrain possible for tricksters to play their act.”
- pg 104 - Liminality and the Modern
Further:
“Sophists or tricksters live for the attention of the public, and they play with words and images, but they disregard the real nature of their own acts. They think they are the originators of a new world, they have no sense of measure, and they equally disregard social effects. They cannot trust other humans, and the trust that people invest in them will only be used against those same people. In van Gennep’s short comment on Hitler in 1933, he had understood something very central here, which has since been too often forgotten: The defining feature of terror regimes is not order, system and repression - it is ambivalence and the constant obfuscation of categories, sacred reversal that turn things on their head.
Tricksters are trained in upsetting the social order by reversing values, and via their rhetorical and theatrical skills.” - pg 105 - Liminality and the Modern
As can be seen, the Trickster is a figure that is tangled up in Liminal situations. They both take advantage of, and foment, liminality as it is the condition that they are most potent in. Rather than the general population who are caught up in the liminal, the trickster is at home in it, as it is the topsy-turvy ground that allows them the most flexibility to act. As Thomassen mentions at the start, the lack of a distinguished master of ceremonies means that the arena lends itself to being co-opted by such a figure. And as large scale societies, inundated with all their complexities, liminal periods are often without any masters of ceremonies, and so they stand as particular instances for trickster figures to arise.
The Trickster in tandem with the other concepts of imitation and schismogenesis then presents the very real danger of Liminal periods in large scale societies. As the Trickster can create and exacerbate schismogenesis, the antagonism created between different groups can reach successively worse levels, especially when the Trickster has something to gain. Imitation and its contagious effect mean that schismogenesis becomes even more pervasive when the Trickster rules, as his manipulation is amplified and his tactics of division spiral throughout the population.
What we can determine then is that the Trickster can and will dominate in this sphere until he either stumbles or until the seemingly endless liminal period causes a return of it back on him. When we try to understand the role’s impact we could also see the Trickster as one of those “structuring” elements in the liminal period. While abusing the situation, the actions and attempts to create by the Trickster result in elements of development that must be taken into account, positively or negatively, when the liminal period is ended. As the liminal period must end, the Trickster will have had a hand in the Reaggregation/Reincorpation intentionally or not, and that new reality will be marked by Trickster one way or another.
Summary -
At this point we can concisely put the analysis together. Liminality is an experience that can occur throughout a society, and is one that can bring the low and the high together at different points. The limbo-like state that is experienced can occur in various amounts of time and can be restricted locally as well as witnessed and experienced in massive areas of space. Within Liminality, groups of people experience the same general sense of lack of status and lack of meaning that gives them a common sense of identity. At the same time, Liminality is the junction where structure and meaning are being formed for the point at which the liminal state ends. By Imitation, the liminal state can become pervasive and can cause a viral like spread of this general uncertainty in identity and meaning. People in the liminal state are highly susceptible to Schismogenesis and the quasi-identity that it provides, and at the same time by the contagious effect of imitation, schismogenesis means that the competing factions are easily spread across wider and wider groups of people. As this situation is without a master of ceremony in large scale societies, the opportunity is particularly prone to the rise of Trickster figures who play the role and articulate themselves as the individual that can resolve the crisis. However, the Trickster is incapable of resolving the crisis and is apt to only worsen it until he is removed or runs. Resolution must be brought, at least in part, to the liminal state and we can imagine that eventually a master of ceremony is able to command enough of the situation to end the liminal state to a degree, depending on the level of society that liminality has pervaded.
Now as I mentioned, this is the basic structural analysis provided by this particular school of political anthropology. They seem to be centered around the academic journal International Political Anthropology. While I’ve restricted this essay to Thomassen’s book, there are several other prominent figures active in the school such as Agnes Horvath and Arpad Szakolczai. In future pieces on the subject, I’ll deal with their work and others involved. I also want to emphasize that this is a summary and there are further details that I’ll run through at a later time as I bring this into the folds of other frameworks.