Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

A general theory of magic, Translations of English Literature

Interesting and exciting magic tricks with deep psychology insghts.

Typology: Translations

2021/2022

Uploaded on 03/31/2022

alpa
alpa 🇺🇸

4.4

(20)

250 documents

1 / 2

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
BOOK REVIEWS
Marcel Mauss, A General Theory of Magic, translated from the French by
Robert Brain. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1972, pp. 148, Index,
$ 7.50.
To start off with the complaints. This is a translation from the French re-
print by Levi-Strauss in Sociologie et Anthropologie, a collection of some of Mauss'
writings selected to play down Mauss' connection with this uncle, Emile Durk-
heim. Nowhere in the text is any hint given that the original article was pub-
lished in 1904, not 1959 although Pocock, in the foreword states that "we must
remember the date at which the Theory of Magic was published" but no date is
mentioned. Moreover in L' Année Sociologique 1902-3, the article is jointly pub-
lished by H. Hubert as well as Mauss and in the absence of any definite informa-
tion as to how the workload was shared, it seems somewhat unethical to com-
pletely drop one of the names of the co-authors without acknowledgement. Al-
though the 1950 copy is close to the 1904 original text, one rather important
difference I noticed was in respect to Codrington's citation on p. 98. Mauss had
inserted a note after vigona as follows, "l'individu a mana, possesseur d'esprit,
vigona", which is omitted in the translation. Without this note showing that
Mauss identified the vigona tree with mana the latter part of the extract is not
very clear. Also after the second time vigona is mentioned, Mauss adds in
brackets to the original 1904 text, ` feuilles de vegetaux aquatiques" which is neces-
sary to understand the first sentence on page 127 when the reference to "aquatic
plants bringing clouds" makes one realise that it is to his earlier Codrington
reference that Mauss is looking back. Although these two points are perhaps not
very important, the editor of the book gives an impression ofslapdashness which
is not improved by the few spelling mistakes which occur in the text such as
Eskimoes on p. 57 or rights for rites on p. 46. If one be expected to pay $ 7.50 for
a book of only 144 pages of text, this comes to 10 cents each time one turns over
a page. One expects a high standard of publication at that price. For that reason
I am glad that a short but adequate index has been added omitted in the 1904
article.
Mauss himself was probably the most erudite and well educated anthro-
pologist ever to hold a chair. Apart from German and English he knew Greek,
Latin and Hebrew as well as Sanscrit and is reputed to have had a working
knowledge of Assyrian and other ancient languages. He was also a sociologist
in the modern sense and had been responsible among other things for preparing
the statistical tables for his uncle's book on Suicide. It is this substantial and
universalistic background which makes his writings so rewarding. Dr. Brain has
made a good translation of this text which flows freely and is accurate, although
every now and then he uses words which are not to be found in the Oxford
dictionary. For example, this quotation sounds exciting; (p. 38). "There is a
story of a Rajput who, having made a female glanders' spirit his prisoner ..."
pf2

Partial preview of the text

Download A general theory of magic and more Translations English Literature in PDF only on Docsity!

BOOK REVIEWS

Marcel (^) Mauss, A^ General (^) Theory of Magic, translated^ from^ the^ French^ by Robert Brain. (^) Routledge and (^) Kegan Paul, London, 1972, (^) pp. 148, Index, $ 7.50.

To start^ off with^ the^ complaints. This^ is a translation^ from the^ French^ re-

print by Levi-Strauss^ in Sociologie et Anthropologie,^ a collection^ of some^ of Mauss' writings selected^ to play down^ Mauss'^ connection^ with^ this^ uncle, Emile^ Durk- heim. Nowhere^ in^ the^ text^ is any hint^ given that^ the^ original article^ was^ pub- lished in (^) 1904, not (^1959) although Pocock, in the foreword states that "we must remember the date at which the (^) Theory of Magic was (^) published" but no date is mentioned. Moreover^ in L' Année Sociologique 1902-3, the article^ is jointly pub- lished (^) by H. Hubert as well as Mauss and in the absence of any definite informa- tion as to how the workload was (^) shared, it seems somewhat unethical to com-

pletely drop one^ of the^ names^ of the^ co-authors^ without^ acknowledgement. Al- though the^1950 copy is close^ to^ the^1904 original text,^ one^ rather^ important difference I noticed was in respect to Codrington's citation on p. 98. Mauss had inserted a note after (^) vigona as (^) follows, "l'individu a (^) mana, (^) possesseur d'esprit,

vigona", which^ is omitted^ in^ the^ translation.^ Without^ this^ note^ showing that Mauss identified the (^) vigona tree with mana the latter (^) part of the extract is not

very clear.^ Also^ after^ the^ second^ time^ vigona is^ mentioned, Mauss^ adds^ in brackets to the (^) original 1904 text, (^) ` feuilles de vegetaux aquatiques" which is neces-

sary to understand^ the^ first sentence^ on page 127 when^ the^ reference^ to "aquatic plants bringing clouds"^ makes^ one^ realise^ that^ it^ is to^ his^ earlier^ Codrington reference that Mauss is looking back. (^) Although these (^) two (^) points are perhaps not

very important, the^ editor^ of the^ book^ gives an impression ofslapdashness which is not (^) improved by the few (^) spelling mistakes which occur in the text such as Eskimoes on p. 57 or rights for rites on p. 46. If one be expected to pay $ 7.50 for a book (^) of only 144 pages of text, this comes to 10 cents each time one turns over a page. One (^) expects a high standard of publication at that (^) price. For that reason I am (^) glad that a short but (^) adequate index has been added omitted in the 1904 article. Mauss himself was (^) probably the most erudite and well educated anthro-

pologist ever^ to hold^ a chair.^ Apart from^ German^ and^ English he knew^ Greek, Latin and Hebrew as well as Sanscrit and is reputed to have had a working

knowledge of Assyrian and^ other^ ancient^ languages. He^ was^ also^ a sociologist in the (^) modern sense and had been (^) responsible among other (^) things for preparing the statistical tables for his uncle's book on (^) Suicide. It is this substantial and universalistic (^) background which makes his writings so rewarding. Dr. Brain has made a good translation of this text which flows freely and is accurate, although every now^ and^ then^ he^ uses^ words^ which^ are^ not^ to^ be^ found^ in^ the^ Oxford dictionary. For^ example, this^ quotation sounds^ exciting; (p. 38). "There^ is a story of a Rajput who, having made^ a female^ glanders' (^) spirit his^ prisoner ..."

I could not find (^) glanders in the OED nor a gree-gree (on p. 54) although both words sound (^) very exciting. But these unusual words are (^) exceptions. The (^) page

numbering in the^ first^ French^ edition^ and^ this^ English translation^ is almost^ the same with about the same number of words (^) per page in the French and (^) English

texts, a peculiar coincidence, which^ makes^ the^ cross-reference^ easy. But (^) what about Mauss himself? Excessive (^) emphasis has been (^) placed by Mauss' critics on his misunderstanding of mana, which he (^) regarded as a sort of universal middle term between the (^) performance of a rite and its results. We now know from the work (^) of Firth (^) and others that Mauss was (^) misguided in (^) his

understanding of^ the^ native's^ use^ of^ this^ term.^ Yet^ the^ way in^ which^ Mauss argues that^ magical judgements become^ analytical judgements, and^ magical reasoning changes from^ a priori to^ a posteriori arguments, is amply justified by modern research. (^) Although Mauss was influenced (^) by Frazer's (^) argument of the closeness of magic and science he nevertheless saw (^) clearly that the emotional content of magic put it into an (^) entirely different (^) type of thinking in fact. Simi- larly although Mauss^ was^ forced^ to some^ extent^ to adopt Durkheim's^ argument distinguishing magic and^ religion, nevertheless^ he^ argued against himself^ when he (^) emphasised the social (^) aspect of magic and that (^) any magical rite must include at least two (^) persons, the (^) magician and the (^) patient who (^) keep the same (^) sumptuary or (^) negative restrictions. Are not these two (^) people a "church" in Durkheim's sense and hence is not Durkheim's basic distinction between (^) religion and (^) magic of no value? Mauss also shows that (^) magic is (^) basically (^) simple in the limited number of forms it uses and is usually anti-establishment where an^ establish- ment exists. Mauss (^) says on (^) p. 51: "We ... (^) postulate, without (^) actually having the (^) proof that in (^) any system of magic the^ number^ of^ symbolic rites^ which^ are^ prescribed and^ performed is always limited.^ We^ also^ hold^ that^ they are^ performed,^ not^ because^ they^ are logically realisable, but^ because^ they are^ prescribed." The (^) meanings in^ magical symbols are^ always limited in^ aim^ and^ simple in scope. But^ the^ procedure of^ magic and^ the^ materials^ used^ in^ magic^ may^ be almost infinite. "The (^) magician's shrine is a magic cauldron. (^) Magic is the art of preparing and (^) mixing concoctions, fermentations, dishes. (^) Ingredients are (^) chopped up, pounded, kneaded, diluted^ with^ liquids, made^ into^ scents, drinks, infusions, pastes, cakes,^ pressed into^ special shapes, formed^ into^ images: they are^ drunk, eaten, (^) kept as amulets, used^ in^ fumigations" (53). Each technical rite in the above list is based on a particular example and Mauss' (^) attempt to (^) systematize a^ whole^ class^ of^ objects within^ a^ theoretical framework is an (^) extraordinary one when one realises the (^) very few field work studies which were available at the^ beginning of the^ century; practically only Spencer and^ Gillen,^ Codrington and^ the^ early^ reports^ of the^ American^ Bureau of Ethnology. These (^) early studies were (^) closely integrated with various classical texts to produce a background of unified (^) reasoning. So Mauss^ is a far^ from^ historical^ figure even^ today, 70 years after^ the^ first publication of this^ text.^ At^ the^ present^ time^ when^ we have^ a modern^ Frazerian such as L6vi-Strauss, claiming to continue the French^ tradition^ in sociology, it is extremely valuable^ to return^ to^ Mauss^ to see the^ empirical^ and^ logical^ curbs^ he placed (^) upon his^ own^ philosophical speculation with^ such^ conspicuous success. In (^) this (^) way Mauss modifies the extremes of the Durkheimian school. (^) Although