The Theology of Performance and the Vedic Rituals
While the debate on the relationship between ritual and theatre goes back decades, the most recent speculation can be fully understood in the framework of the mutual influences between the social sciences and performance studies. In retrospect, the spreading of structuralism to anthropology, sociol...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Ksiegarnia Akademicka Publishing
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/86592b20c48d4de0b996ccc6b202aa27 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | While the debate on the relationship between ritual and theatre goes back decades, the most recent speculation can be fully understood in the framework of the mutual influences between the social sciences and performance studies. In retrospect, the spreading of structuralism to anthropology, sociology, and history (among other fields) and the absorption of theory-oriented terms in theatre studies’ terminology have facilitated a linguistic and conceptual ambiguity (or simply a confusion). Such ambiguity arises especially from the attempt to outline the borders between the religious and the aesthetic. In this paper, I will focus on the crucial role of conventional terms such as ‘performance’ and ‘performative’, the increased use of which in different fields has given rise to new dichotomies, such as performativity vs theatricality, self vs role. I will discuss some theoretical issues that allow us to define a ritual text as ‘religious’ instead of ‘theatrical’, focusing on the performative effect of recitation, more specifically on the Vedic texts on ritual prescriptions and their aim to display the officiants’ skills and authoritativeness.
https://doi.org/10.12797/CIS.19.2017.01.04
***
References
Agamben, G. 1995. Homo sacer. Il potere sovrano e la nuda vita. Torino: Einaudi.
—. 1998. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
—. 2003. Stato di eccezione: Homo sacer, II, I. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
Alexander, J. C. 2004. Cultural Pragmatics: Social Performance between Ritual and Strategy. In: Sociological Theory, 22(4): 527–573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0735-2751.2004.00233.x.
—. 2011. Performance and Power. Cambridge (UK): Polity.
Alter, J. 1990. A Sociosemiotic Theory of Theatre. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania Press.
Artaud, A. 1964 [1938]. Le Théâ tre et son Double. Repr. in: A. Artaud. Oeuvres complètes. Vol. 4. Paris: Gallimard.
—. 1971. Messages révolutionnaires. Paris: Gallimard.
Austin, J. L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
Bansat-Boudon, L. 2012a. Artaud and Balinese Theatre, or the Influence of the Eastern on the Western Stage. In: Saṃskṛtavimarśaḥ, 6: World Sanskrit Conference Special. Delhi: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan: 344–354.
—. 2012b. Artaud’s Poetics, or Nāṭ yaśāstra and Post-modern Theatre. Unpublished paper presented at the 15th World Sanskrit Conference, Delhi, Panel “Nāṭ yaśā stra in the modern World”.
Barthes, R. 1971. De l’oeuvre au texte. In: Revue d’esthétique, 3: 225–232.
—. 1977. The Death of the Author. In: R. Barthes. Image, Music, Text. Essays selected and translated by Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang: 142–148 (Or. ed. published in Aspen Magazine, 5/6, 1967).
Bauman, R. and C. L Briggs. 1990. Poetics and Performance as Critical Perspectives on Language and Social Life. In: Annual Review of Anthropology, 19: 59–88.
Bell, C. 1992. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
—. 1997. Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. 1971. Genèse et structure du champ religieux. In: Revue française de sociologie, 12(3): 295–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3320234.
—. 1975. L’invention de la vie d’artiste. In: Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 1(2): 67–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/arss.1975.2458.
—. 1979. La distinction: critique sociale du jugement. Paris: Éditions de Minuit.
—. 2000 (1972). Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique: précédé de Trois études d’ethnologie kabyle. Paris: Seuil.
Brereton, J. P., M. Deshpande and S. W. Jamison (eds.). 1991. Sense and Syntax in Vedic. Leiden–New York: E. J. Brill.
Brereton, J. P. and S. W. Jamison. 2014. The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious Poetry of India. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burns, E. 1972. Theatricality: A Study of Convention in the Theatre and in Social Life. New York: Harper & Row.
Butler, J. 1988. Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory. In: Theatre Journal, 40(4): 519–531. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3207893.
Carlson, M. 2002. The Resistance to Theatricality. In: SubStance, 31(2/3). Issue 98/99: Special Issue: Theatricality: 238–250. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3685489.
De Marinis, M. 1993. The Semiotics of Performance. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Diamond, J. 1996. Status and Power in Verbal Interaction: A Study of Discourse in a Close-Knit Social Network. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Dianteill, E. 2003. Pierre Bourdieu and the Sociology of Religion: A Central and Peripheral Concern. In: Theory and Society, 32(5/6). Special Issue: The Sociology of Symbolic Power: A Special Issue in Memory of Pierre Bourdieu: 529–549.
Douglas, M. 1970. Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology. New York: Pantheon Books.
Egginton, W. 2003. How the World Became a Stage: Presence, Theatricality, and the Question of Modernity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Fischer-Lichte, E. 1995. From Theatre to Theatricality: How to Construct Reality. In: Theatre Research International, 20(2): 97–105.
—. 2005. Theatre, Sacrifice, Ritual: Exploring Forms of Political Theatre. London–New York: Routledge.
Fischer-Lichte, E. and B. Wihstutz. 2013. Performance and the Politics of Space: Theatre and Topology. London–New York: Routledge.
Gärtner, B. 2013. Der Lachende Brahmane. In: Architectural Digest, 2: 101–104.
Gonda, J. 1980. Vedic Ritual: The Non-solemn Rites. Leiden: Brill.
Grammatas, T. 2012. Theatricality before the Theatre. The Beginning of Theatrical Expression. In: Antropologia e Teatro. Rivista di Studi, 3: 193-213. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2039-2281/3104.
Hall, K. 2000. Performativity. In: Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 9(1–2): 184–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1999.9.1-2.184.
Herrmann, M. 1914. Forschungen zur deutschen Theater-geschichte des Mittelalters und der Renaissance. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
Hüsken, U. 2007. When Rituals Go Wrong: Mistakes, Failure, and the Dynamics of Ritual. Leiden: Brill.
Hüsken, U. and F. Neubert. 2011. Introduction. In: U. Hüsken and F. Neubert (eds.). Negotiating Rites. Oxford–New York: Oxford University Press: 1–17(1–2). https://doi.org/10.1163/15685292-12341254.
Inoue, N. 2000. Le théâ tre pur chez Antonin Artaud—à travers Le Théâ tre et son Double. In: Gallia, 40: 227–234.
Jeffery, C. “To see the world in a grain of sand”: Wolfgang Laib and the Aesthetics of Interpenetrability. In: Religion and the Arts, 17(1–2): 57–73. https://doi. org/10.1163/15685292-12341254.
Keith, A. B. 1920. Rigveda Brahmanas: The Aitareya and Kauṣī taki Brāhmaṇas of the Rigveda. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Knipe, D. 2015. Vedic Voices: Intimate Narratives of Living Andhra Traditions. New York: Oxford University Press.
Laidlaw, J. and C. Humphrey. 2006. Action. In: J. Kreinath, J. Snoek and M. Stausberg (eds.). Theorizing Rituals. Vol. 1: Issues, Topics, Approaches, Concepts. Numen Book Series. Studies in the History of Religions 114–1. Leiden–Boston: Brill: 265–283.
Laib, W. et al. 2009. Wolfgang Laib. Torino: Fondazione Merz.
Larios, B. 2017. Embodying the Vedas. Traditional Vedic Schools of Contemporary Maharashtra. Open Access Hinduism. Warsaw–Berlin: De Gruyter.
Leach, E. R. 1966. Ritualization in Man in Relation to Conceptual and Social Development. In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 251(772), Issue: A Discussion on Ritualization of Behaviour in Animals and Man: 403–408.
—. 1968. Ritual. In: D. L. Sills (ed.). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Vol. 13. New York: Macmillan: 520–526.
Lincoln, B. 1996. Theses on Method. In: Method and Theory in the Study of Religion, 8: 225–227.
Lubin, T. (forthcoming.). Brāhmaṇa as Commentary. In: F. Grimal and N. Dejenne (eds.). Forms and Uses of the Commentary in the Indian World. Pondicherry: Institut français de Pondichéry. Proofs available at https://www.academia.edu/3250272/Brāhmaṇa_as_Commentary (last accessed: February 2017).
Lodermeyer, P. 2008. Time—Existence—Space: A Conversation with Wolfgang Laib. In: Sculpture, 27(2): 24–29.
Magnat, V. 2002. Theatricality from the Performative Perspective. In: SubStance, 31(2/3), Issue 98/99: Special Issue: Theatricality: 147–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3685483.
Michaels, A. 2016. Homo Ritualis: Hindu Ritual and Its Significance to Ritual Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
Olivelle, P. 1999. Dharmasūtras: The Law Codes of Āpastamba, Gautama, Baudhāyana, and Vasiṣṭ ha. Oxford–New York: Oxford University Press.
Ottmann, K. 1986. Interview with Wolfgang Laib. In: Journal of Contemporary Art. http://www.jca-online.com/laib.html, (last accessed: August 2017).
—. 2009. A Conversation with Wolfgand Laib. In: Laib et al. 2009: 44–53.
Patton, L. L. 1994. Authority, Anxiety, and Canon: Essays in Vedic Interpretation. Albany: State University of New York Press.
—.2005. Bringing the Gods to Mind: Mantra and Ritual in Early Indian Sacrifice. Berkeley–Los Angeles–London: University of California Press.
Rappaport, R. A. 1999. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robertson Smith, W. 1899. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites. New York: Appleton.
Rozik, E. 2005. The Roots of Theatre: Rethinking Ritual and Other Theories of Origin. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Saussure, F. de. 1985 [1916]. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.
Sbisà, M. 2001. Illocutionary Force and Degrees of Strength in Language Use. In: Journal of Pragmatics, 33: 1791–1814. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00060-6.
—. 2009. Linguaggio, ragione, interazione. Per una pragmatica degli atti linguistici. Trieste: EUT (digital revised ed. of the first printed ed. Bologna: Il Mulino: 1989).
Scharfe, H. 1989. The State in Indian Tradition. Leiden: Brill.
Schechner, R. 1974. From Ritual to Theatre and Back: The Structure/Process of the Efficacy—Entertainment Dyad. In: Educational Theatre Journal, 26(4): 455–481. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3206608.
—. 1990. Magnitudes of Performance. In: R. Schechner and W. Appel (eds.). By Means of Performance. Intercultural Studies of Theatre and Ritual. New York: Cambridge University Press: 19–49.
Schieffelin, E. L. 2007. Introduction. In: Hüsken. 2007: 1–20.
Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
—. 1989. How Performatives Work. In: Linguistics and Philosophy, 12(5): 535–558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00627773.
Smith, J. Z. 1982. Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Squarcini, F. 2012. Forme della norma. Contro l'eccentricità del discorso normativo sudasiatico. Firenze: Società Editrice Fiorentina.
Staal, F. 1990. Rules without Meaning: Ritual, Mantras, and the Human Sciences. New York: P. Lang.
Tambiah, S. J. 1979. A Performative Approach to Ritual. In: Proceedings of the British Academy, 65: 113–169.
Taylor, D. 2002. Translating Performance. In: Profession: 44–50.
Taylor, S. 2013. What Is Discourse Analysis? London–New Delhi–New York–Sydney: Bloomsbury.
Tosatto, G. 2009. Elsewhere, The Fire. In: Laib et al. 2009: 17–18.
Turner, V. W. 1964. Betwixt and between: The Liminal Period in Rites de Passage. In: The Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society. Symposium on New Approaches to the Study of Religion: 4–20.
—. 1969. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-structure. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
—. 1982. From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play. New York: Performing Arts Journal Publications.
Wegley, A. C. 2007. Ritually Failing: Turner’s Theatrical communitas. In: M. Franko (ed.). Ritual and Event. Interdisciplinary Perspectives. London–New York: Routledge: 56–74.
White, H. 2002. Westernization of World History. In: J. Rüsen (ed.). Western Historical Thinking: An Intercultural Debate. New York: Berghahn Books: 111–118.
Worthen, W. B. 1997. Shakespeare and the Authority of Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
—. 2003. Drama, Performativity, and Performance. In: P. Auslander (ed.). Performance: Critical Concepts in Literary and Cultural Studies. Vol. 2. London–New York: Routledge.
Wulf, C. 2001. Einleitung. In: C. Wulf et al. (eds.). Das Soziale als Ritual. Zur performativen Bildung von Gemeinschaften. Opladen: Leske + Budrich: 7–17.
Wulf, C., M. Göhlich and J. Zirfas (eds.). 2001. Grundlagen des Performativen. Eine Einführung in die Zusammenhänge von Sprache, Macht und Handeln. Weinheim: Juventa.
Wulf, C. and J. Zirfas. 2001. Das Soziale als Ritual: Perspektiven des Performativen. In: C. Wulf et al. (eds.). Das Soziale als Ritual. Zur performativen Bildung von Gemeinschaften. Opladen: Leske + Budrich: 339–347.
Wulf, C. 2006. Praxis. In: J. Kreinath, J. Snoek and M. Stausberg (eds.). Theorizing Rituals. Vol. 1: Issues, Topics, Approaches, Concepts. NumenBook Series. Studies in the History of Religions 114–1. Leiden–Boston: Brill: 395–411.
Zarrilli, P. 1990. What Does It Mean to “Become the Character”: Power, Presence, and Transcendence in Asian In-body Disciplines of Practice. In: R. Schechner and W. Appel (eds.). By Means of Performance. Intercultural Studies of Theatre and Ritual. New York: Cambridge University Press: 131–148.
|
|---|