|
GHOSTS
AND LIMINALITY: A BRIEF INTRODUCTION
by George
P. Hansen
Ghosts are odd. Are they
alive? Or are they dead? Are they fact? Or are they fiction? Are
they natural? or supernatural? hallucinations? or real?
These questions are
not new. They’ve been asked for thousands of years, yet they remain
unresolved. Ghosts are inherently ambiguous. So how can we
understand them?
Anthropologists’
concept of liminality may help because it addresses phenomena that
are ambiguous and paradoxical. The word liminal comes from limen,
meaning threshold, and liminality refers to the condition of being
betwixt and between. This concept is not well known, and
it’s likely to be foreign to nearly all persons involved with
parapsychology or ghost research. Nevertheless, this
anthropological theory has innumerable implications for paranormal
fields.1
Liminality applies to
change, transition, and transformation--conditions that are
conducive to psi phenomena. For instance, poltergeist effects tend
to occur around someone in puberty. A person at that stage in life
is neither a child nor an adult, but rather is betwixt and between
those roles. Death is another transition, and people are more
likely to experience psychic phenomena near the death of someone
they know than during more normal periods. Every culture has
rituals surrounding death; it is a major rite of passage. In fact,
analyses of rites of passage led to the concept of liminality.
Ancient peoples
recognized, and respected, the reality of ghosts, and they had a
deeper understanding of them than we do now. Those peoples used
rituals to summon and channel supernatural power, but they also knew
that the power was dangerous, and they had taboos surrounding it.
We can benefit by studying their ways of thought.
Anthropologists report
that in earlier cultures, novices in ritual initiations were
frequently likened to “ghosts, gods, or ancestors.”2 But
how in the world are ghosts like initiates? That just doesn’t seem
logical to us. But the connection has
|
proven to be
illuminating, and other societies’ ideas will help us understand
ghosts.
Classification,
Boundaries, and Binary Oppositions
Structural
anthropologists have shown that so-called “primitive” cultures often
classified things in terms of binary oppositions. The Figure below
shows some of the major binary oppositions recognized by many
societies.

Figure --
Major Binary Oppositions of Earlier Cultures (Items in
italics are liminal persons or phenomena) |
Usually one element in
an opposition has greater power, prestige, or privilege. Those in
the top line have the higher status. But it’s the area betwixt and
between the binary oppositions that’s especially interesting. It’s
a region of ambiguity and uncertainty. It’s also a realm of taboo,
and for earlier cultures, contact with that domain sometimes
required protective rituals.
Notice that all of the
betwixt-and-between items in the Figure are paranormal or
supernatural phenomena, or are persons associated with such
phenomena.
Spirits, ghosts, and
near-death experiences (NDEs) challenge the all-too-simple
distinction between life and death. Mediums serve as mediators
between the living and the dead.
|
Mystics strive to unite with god; thus they blur the boundary
between the human and the divine. They engage in extended periods
of prayer and meditation, and mystics have produced some of the most
dramatic paranormal phenomena ever reported (e.g., levitation,
miraculous healings, multiplication of food).
Berdache were persons in American Indian tribes who took the
role of the opposite sex. Many of them became shamans, but even
those who didn’t were looked upon as having supernatural power.
Angels and UFOs travel between the heavens and the earth.
Angels relay religious messages, and UFO occupants sometimes do
too. Bigfoot lies between human and beast, and so do vampires and
werewolves. Some North American Indian tribes knew that Bigfoot was
not an ordinary animal. If a member of the tribe wanted to pursue
such a creature, the individual had to be ritually purified.3
There was a contagious, unclean aspect to encountering Bigfoot.
Paranormal phenomena have a betwixt-and-between aspect; as
such, they are liminal occurrences, and they display the properties
associated with liminality. Liminal persons, phenomena, and events
tend to blur boundaries, upset classification schemes, and foster
ambivalence and ambiguity. Such conditions are dangerous, but they
can also be a source of supernatural power.
Relevance for Ghost Research
Ghost research faces peculiar problems:
- For thousands of years ghosts have been reported,
discussed, and denied. Today the debates over their
existence are as heated as ever. They show no sign of being
resolved.
- Movies such as The Sixth Sense, Ghost,
and Ghostbusters have been immensely popular. Each
has taken in hundreds of millions of dollars in box office
receipts. In contrast, the average support for serious
ghost research published in refereed, scientific,
English-language journals is probably less than $10,000
annually, and it may be less than half that amount.
- No scientific institutions (with offices, buildings,
paid staff) are devoted to investigating the reality of
ghosts. There are virtually no university courses on ghost
research, and there is no credible academic textbook on the
topic.
|
Those who try to
investigate the phenomena are likely to be housewives, police
officers, or college students working on their own nickel, with
no support from any institution.
- Active ghost
research groups rarely last for more than a few years. Such
organizations frequently fractionate and dissolve, leaving
behind feelings of bitterness and disappointment.
- Conferences
devoted to ghosts often include presentations on UFOs, Bigfoot,
aliens, and channelers. The boundaries between these topics are
blurred.
- Many people will
speak of their ghost experiences, but often only in hushed
tones, and maybe only to close friends. They perceive a stigma
associated with the phenomena.
The above facts are well
known to ghost researchers, but they rarely, if ever, are
incorporated into theories of ghosts. Yet any comprehensive theory
must explain these difficulties and peculiarities. Liminality
theory directly addresses the matters, and it is founded on
understandings of earlier cultures, which respected the reality of
ghosts.
Liminal phenomena are
typically transient, ephemeral, and have an affinity for chaos,
transition, and instability. They are also usually viewed as
slightly disreputable. Ghosts themselves are transient; their
manifestations are unpredictable. They are neither solid nor
stable. The question of their reality is perennially in dispute.
Marginality is a type
of liminality, and ghost research is viewed as exceedingly marginal,
even laughable, by the scientific establishment.
Anti-structure is a
synonym of liminality in anthropological theory. The word reflects
the transitory, unstable nature of ghost research groups. Direct
attempts to engage the phenomena have side effects; they lead to
instability.
Strong manifestations
of liminality tend to destabilize established social
orders--including bureaucratic institutions of government, business,
academe, and religion. Such institutions unconsciously avoid
contact with liminal occurrences.
|
Liminal phenomena tend to blur together. Some suggest that
ghosts are telepathic hallucinations. Others ask if spirits exist,
or whether some spirit phenomena are a function of other psychic
abilities (e.g., clairvoyant powers of mediums). Professional
parapsychologists are still undecided whether there is any real
difference between ESP and psychokinesis. These issues of “blurred
categories” have been argued for over a century in psychical
research.
Liminal phenomena are frequently presented in popular works
of fiction, but with fiction, a reader need not seriously consider
reality issues. Readers can indulge their fascination but remain
distant from direct encounter with phenomena.
Earlier cultures understood that liminal conditions and
persons were dangerous; there were stigmas and taboos associated
with them. Approaching otherworldly powers was not done casually.
Ritual protection was required. Today such notions are considered
to be “superstitious.” Such attitudes serve to further marginalize
the phenomena and thus reinforce their liminality.
Supplementary Comments
Like most discussions of liminality, the one here has been
condensed. The full scope of the theory cannot be presented
briefly. The concept is abstract, and my discussion has risked
giving readers a too-limited impression. So I should say a few
words about its range of application.
The concept was initially explained by Arnold van Gennep
(1873-1957) and later advanced by Victor Turner (1920-1983) and then
by his student Barbara Babcock (1943-). Van Gennep’s formulation of
liminality covered matters such as initiations, vision quests,
retreats into deserts by hermits, travelers, strangers, sacred
contexts, and territorial passage. Turner expanded it to include:
“subjugated autochthones, small nations, court jesters, holy
mendicants, good Samaritans, millenarian movements, ‘dharma
bums,’...and monastic orders.”4 It has since been
applied to literary theory, analysis of film, theories of
postmodernity, and aspects of the Internet.
Such a jumble may seem bizarre, but comparative methods of
anthropology do throw light on things that seem completely
unrelated. Those methods are not restricted by linear cause-effect
thinking, which predominates in most sciences. They
|
provide a more
expansive vision for understanding ghosts, suggest new ways to think
about them, and open up relevant literatures that most scientists
have ignored.5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank
John Kearney and Joanne D. S. McMahon for comments on an earlier
draft of this paper.
ENDNOTES
1. The concept of
liminality has been developed in folklore, religious studies,
literary criticism, counseling psychology, performance studies, and
other fields. The notion has proven effective in understanding
shamanism, religious ritual, and the trickster figure of mythology.
Readers with an anthropological background may recognize some of the
synonyms and near-synonyms for liminality, which include:
anti-structure, interstitiality, communitas, betwixt and between.
Marginality and outsiderhood are types of liminality.
There are a few
commentators who have understood the relevance of liminality to the
paranormal. Stanley Krippner, an expert on dreams and a pioneer in
dream telepathy (and an eminent authority in humanistic and
transpersonal psychology), has recently published several papers
that discuss liminality: Conflicting Perspectives on Shamans and
Shamanism: Points and Counterpoints (American Psychologist,
2002, Vol. 57, No. 11, pp. 962-977. Available at:
http://www.stanleykrippner.com/papers/
conflicting_perspectives.htm);
Dancing With the Trickster: Notes for a
Transpersonal Autobiography (International
Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 2002, Vol. 21, pp. 1-18.
Available at:
http://www.stanleykrippner.com/papers/autobiogood.htm); Trance
and the Trickster: Hypnosis as a Liminal Phenomenon (Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2005, Vol. 53, No. 2, pp.
97-118. Available at:
http://www.stanleykrippner.com/papers/trance_trickster.htm).
Barbara Weisberg made
use of the concept in her book Talking to the Dead: Kate and
Maggie Fox and the Rise of Spiritualism (2004. San Francisco,
CA: HarperSanFrancisco).
David Taylor and Peter
Rogerson briefly mentioned the idea of liminality in relation to
haunted houses. See Taylor’s essay: Spaces of Transition: New Light
on the Haunted House (Available
|
at:
http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/spaces.htm
[First published in At the Edge, No. 10, 1998]). See
Rogerson’s essay: And the Dogs Began to Howl (Magonia, No.
27, September 1987, pp. 7-10). Rogerson also applied the concept to
UFOs in his article: Taken to the Limits (Magonia, No. 23,
July 1986, pp. 3-12).
The now-inactive
online journal Liminalspace (published 2000-2003) carried a
number of articles relevant to the paranormal. Back issues can be
downloaded at:
http://www.liminalspace.co.uk/download%20liminal%20space.htm.
2. Turner, 1982, p.
27.
3. Buckley, 1980, p.
155.
4. Turner, 1969, p.
125.
5. Readers wanting
more discussion of these topics may wish to peruse my book’s
Introduction, which is online at:
http://www.tricksterbook.com/Intro.htm
SOME USEFUL
REFERENCES
Babcock-Abrahams,
Barbara. (1975). “A Tolerated Margin of Mess”: The Trickster and
His Tales Reconsidered. Journal of the Folklore Institute.
Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 147-186. [The most important work applying
liminality theory to the trickster.]
Buckley, Thomas.
(1980). Monsters and the Quest for Balance in Native Northwest
California. In Manlike Monsters on Trial: Early Records and
Modern Evidence, edited by Marjorie M. Halpin & Michael M. Ames,
pp. 152-171. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.
[Other articles in the volume also discuss liminality.]
Clements, William M.
(1987). The Interstitial Ogre: The Structure of Horror in
Expressive Culture. South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 86, No.
1, pp. 34-43.
Cole, Susan Letzler.
(1985). The Absent One: Mourning Ritual, Tragedy, and the
Performance of Ambivalence. University Park, PA: The
Pennsylvania State University Press.
|
Hansen, George P.
(2001). The Trickster and the Paranormal. Philadelphia, PA:
Xlibris Corporation. [The most extensive discussion available of the
paranormal in terms of liminality.]
Hicks, David.
(1976). Tetum Ghosts and Kin: Fieldwork in an Indonesian
Community. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
Leach, Edmund.
(1969). Genesis as Myth. In his Genesis as Myth, and Other
Essays, (pp. 7-23). London: Jonathan Cape. (Original essay
first published 1962.)
Palmer, Richard E.
The Liminality of Hermes and the Meaning of Hermeneutics [Essay].
Available at:
http://www.mac.edu/faculty/richardpalmer/liminality.html
(First published in Proceedings of the
Heraclitean Society: A Quarterly Report on Philosophy and Criticism
of the Arts and Sciences. 1980, Vol. 5, pp. 4-11.)
Simon, Bruce Neal. How
to Do Things With Ghosts [Essay]. Available at:
http://www.fredonia.edu/department/english/
simon/ghostlit/howto.htm
Trubshaw, Bob. The
Metaphors and Rituals of Place and Time — An Introduction to
Liminality or Why Christopher Robin Wouldn’t Walk on the Cracks
[Essay]. Available at:
http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/liminal.htm
(First published in Mercian Mysteries, No. 22, February
1995.) [Trubshaw has published other articles mentioning liminality
on the indigogroup.co.uk website]
Turner, Victor W.
(1969). The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure.
Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
Turner, Victor.
(1974). Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human
Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Turner, Victor.
(1982). From Ritual to Theatre: The Human Seriousness of Play.
New York City: Performing Arts Journal Publications.
van Gennep, Arnold.
(1960). The Rites of Passage. Translated by Monika B.
Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee. Chicago, IL: The University of
Chicago Press. (Original work first published 1909.)
|