Brief Communications 353 WINSTEDT, K. 0.

1925 Papers on Malay subjects. Life and cus- toms. Part 11. The circumstances of Malay life. The kampong, the house, furniture, dress and food. Kuala Lumpur, Federated Malay States Press.

SHAMANIZING ON AN EMPTY STOMACH DON HANDELMAN

University of Pittsburgh and The Victoria University of Manchestcl

Silverman, in a recent stimulating and perceptive paper “Shamans and Acute Schizophrenia” (1967), has presented anthropologists with the most so- phisticated and parsimonious model to date for delineating the psychological crisis that shamans ap- parently undergo at the onset of their careers, in- fluencing their future behavior patterns during healing rituals and ceremonies involving the collec- tive reaffirmation of the sociocultural unit. However, Silverman also raises, indirectly, a set of ethno- graphic and analytic problems that continue to hamper the study of shamans and shamanism.

1) Anthropology lacks “hard” data regarding the development of symbolic and cosmological concep- tions by individual shamans, as well as data on the childhood life-situations of shamans.

2) Anthropologists have failed to distinguish an- alytically between the conception of the shaman as person, with concomittant effects of personality differences on social behavior, and the shaman as actor of a social role performing according to the requisites of the sociocultural unit. This has effec- tively obscured the possible range of variation of personality among shamans, and usually only the overt portion of the shamanic iceberg, visual and ex- plicitly behavioral, is treated by anthropologists.

3) I stress the above point because of the oft- made assumption that there is a basic connection be- tween shamanic personality and forms of mental dis- order and that sociocultural units deal with these potentially troublesome individuals by steering them into functionally important and socially rewarding roles. This assumption rests primarily on the be- havior of shamans in public places where such be- havior is guided by cultural expectations and not on an intimate knowledge of the personal belief-systems of the shamans themselves. Here, psychological as- sumptions are constructed primarily on social and cultural evidence that, while crucial and central, obscures the psychological nature of the shaman, which is, of course, related to the social and cultural domains, but rarely a t one with them.

4) Most studies of shamans and shamanic be- havior treat the shaman within the context of his sociocultural unit as if that unit were an isolate, rel- atively unchanging through time, unaffected by cross-cultural contacts and interaction and trans- cultural cosmology and philosophy. While this view- point has long been disposed of in most other areas of anthropological inquiry, it persists in the study of

shamanism. The possibility that acculturative situa- tions may supply some shamans with greater leeway in reformulating traditional cosmological concep- tions and modifying treatment techniques is not considered, although this potential has been recog- nized (Nadel 1946; Voget 1950; Murphy 1964). To consider this properly might require seeing the sha- man, or certain shamans, as logicorational beings who have perhaps been as restricted by their cul- tures as molded by them. When Silverman con- cludes that “The emotional supports and the modes of collective solutions of the basic problems of exist- ence available to the shaman greatly alleviate the strain of an otherwise excruciatingly painful exist- ence” (1967: 29), he is restating an anthropological premise that shamanic behavior is bizarre enough to be comprehensible only within a specific cultural milieu, and yet this premise rests on almost no hard data. And in situations of social and cultural change even this prop, the institutionalization of deviant tendencies in terms of single culture functionalism, is damaged if not destroyed.

To expand on the above points: theethnographic literature is replete with descriptions dealing with the exotica of shamanism (Rock 1959; Rahmann 1959; Lid 1960), with analyses of the functions of shamanism in maintaining the sociocultural unit (Whiting 1950; Anisimov 1963; Shirokogoroff 1935; Siskin 1941) and with analyses of the healing func- tions of shamanism (Murphy 1964; Vallee 1966; Devereaux 1961b; Opler 1959). Yet data on the de- velopment of sharnanic character, of early and later socialization, of personal world view and philosophy, in short of the mind and personal experiences of the shaman, are essentially absent from the literature. One reason for this lack is the general dikiiculty of obtaining satisfactory life-histories from informants. This is further complicated in the case of shamans by the added difficulty of achieving rapport with in- dividuals who often consider such data to be secret, protected by personal and supernatural dictums that are often believed to result in the loss of rapport with the supernatural and corresponding loss of power if disclosed even to members of the shaman’s own sociocultural unit. The life-histories that exist (Lantis 1960; Smith 1963; Sachs 1947; Carpenter 1964; Turner 1964; Sturtevant 1964; Handelman 1967) leave much to be desired in terms of depth and quality of data. This lack is not crucial to struc- tural-functional analyses of sociocultural units but is crucial to the study of the psychology of shamans, role recruitment of shamans, effectiveness of thera- peutic techniques, and evaluation of the innovative creative potential of the shamanic role. Without ade- quate life-history material, theorizing in these areas must remain hypothetical. Reliance on secondary source material such as Eliade (1964), although often brilliantly conceived and thought-provoking, is often suspect in terms of accuracy of information. I agree with Silverman in his acceptance of Eliade’s definition of what is meant by a shaman, but I must

354 A mericalz Anthropologist [70, 19681

also agree with Leach when he criticizes Eliade for not properly evaluating the reliability of many of the sources that he uses. Stated bluntly, data do not yet exist for properly evaluating the personality de- velopment and personality dynamics of shamans.

The concept of subcultural variation, cultural, so- cial, and psychological, has long been accepted in anthropology. In psychological anthropology this concept has been effectively utilized in conjunction with the concept of variation of psychological types or modes within a sociocultural unit to explicate points of divergence and convergence between the dynamics of personality structure and the dynamics of social structure. Yet in their studies of shamans, anthropologists seem primarily to accept cultural definitions of the shaman’s role and then to work from these cultural definitions to an explication of the personality structure of shamans. The possibility that the overt behavior of the shaman may be as much a product of these. cultural definitions as of personality structure is therefore often overlooked. My evidence (Handelman 1967) indicates the pos- sibility that the shaman may consciously conform with societal expectations in behavior patterns while operating in terms of a different set of philosophical premises in healing sessions, much of the content of these being known only to the shaman himself. But these philosophical premises, and the world view of the shaman, are crucial to the comprehension of personality dynamics. Silverman states that his “discussion will be primarily concerned with those inspirational medicine men who communicate di- rectly with the spirits and who exhibit the most bla- tant forms of psychotic-like behavior” (1967:22), but this sidesteps the issue. Analytically, to charac- terize the shaman primarily in terms of the overt content of his social role without considering varia- tions between the personality structures of different shamans both within sociocultural units and among merent units is to obscure one of the major jobs of the anthropologist, the explication and explanation of the variation, sociocultural and psychological; and correlating personality differences in terms of socio- cultural variation provides only part of the answer, since causality is overly attributed to the socio- cultural dimension. The end result has been to treat the shaman in one of two ways: either as a relatively strange social being whose role is comprehensible within structural-functional analysis or as the “primitive” neurotic or borderline psychotic, a clinical case-study of psychoanalytic theory.

Perhaps there is a valid correlation between cer- tain kinds of mental disorder and individuals who fill sharnanic roles, but the conditions under which such a correlation would be valid, the variations and exceptions, have again never been clearly delineated. Such a correlation is far from being completely ac- ceptable to researchers (Opler 1959; Honigmann 1960; Murdock 1965), yet the list of researchers who take this position is impressive (Kmeber 1952; Radin 1937: 108; Spencer and Jennings 1965: 151; Boyer

1962:233; Lantis 1960: 164; Devereaux 1956, 1957: 1043,1961a: 1088,1961b:634). But theresearchers who do take this position know relatively little, in terms of actual data, about the mind of the shaman, his world view, and the philosophical premises that form the basis of his healing activities. On the basis of the existing available evidence, or the great bulk of it, these researchers are describing the social pathology of a cultural role, that of shaman, through an examination of overt social behavior that must meet certain cultural expectations in specific social situations. Assuming that there is a correlation be- tween the mind of the shaman and his overt be- havior, we still do not know its dimensions in terms of both psychological and social theory. I t is doubt- ful, to say the least, that personality dynamics can be deduced primarily from sociocultural evidence. This is especially true of the shaman for whom so much of import, of guidance, takes the form of cognitive contacts with, and journeys to, the supernatural realm. If we, as anthropologists, are only interested in the shaman as a social being per- forming useful and important social functions, then his behavior, and the motivating forces of his beha- vior, are only of descriptive ethnographic interest. If our legitimate interests also include the shaman as a psychological being, as healer, as potential innova- tor, perhaps as L‘primitive” philosopher, then we simply must know more of his cognitive processes and world view.

The effect of situations of culture contact, of social change, on the normative conditions regulat- ing the behavior of shamans can result in the con- scious rational reformulation of shamanic world view by the shaman involved. What is important here is that the shaman may not simply adjust to a new set of situational determinants but can ac- tively adopt, modify, and synthesize new ideas and conceptions. However, the comprehension of such processes requires that the researcher understand the shaman as a logico-rational being who also strives for parsimony and synthesis in his under- standing and comprehension of the natural and paranatural worlds. If researchers simply maintain the general view of the neurotic defense of the sha- man as being unstable, transitory, and inadequate, requiring constant reformulation in the face of ex- ternal stresses and internal strains, then the above perspective is lost. If the shaman is seen as wholly dependent on institutionalized and rewarding social roles within a single sociocultural unit for his mental well-being, then how is it possible for him to survive the cultural shock of intensive and rapid sociocul- tural change? The probability is that certain sha- mans not only survive but thrive in the absence or partial destruction of the normative rules and cul- tural expectations that governed their roles. In the case with which I am most familiar (Handleman 1967), the shaman concerned, a Washo Indian, com- pletely reworked traditional Washo conceptions of the nature of both the natural and paranatural

Brief Communicaiions 355 worlds, modified his healing techniques in accor- dance with his new theories, and developed the concept of transcultural healing, healing without regard for ethnic or tribal distinctions, in terms of a new ethical code. While his new healing techniques and the identities of his clients were clearly visible to an observer, they provided few hints a,s to the underlying cognitive and philosophic innovations that had occurred in the mind of the shaman. While this case may be unusual, I doubt if it is exceptional, and I expect more such cases to appear in the litera- ture as greater emphasis is placed on the analysis of the relationships between personality structure and changing social systems.

The shamanic role has high creative potential in the cognitive sense. There is evidence (Frank 1961) to indicate that creativity may be as much a product of a stable and well-integrated personality with much ego strength as it is of the co&ct-laden and guilt-ridden personality often suggested by orthodox psychoanalytic theory. In our need to develop more flexible approaches to encompass the range and vari- ability of shamanic types in both relatively stable and changing social systems it may be profitable to adapt to cross-cultural research the conceptions of psychologists like Lecky, Maslow, and Allport, utilizing their emphasis on the importance of stable, continuous personality development and ego strength in conjunction with our knowledge of psychoanalytic theory. Such a synthesis, together with the collection of intensive life-histories of shamans, could provide us with tools to evaluate the range and variability of both shamanic behavior and cognition.

REFERENCES CITED

ANISIMOV, A. F. 1963 The shaman's tent of the Evenks and the

origin of the shamanistic rite. In Studies in Siberian shamanism. Henry N. Michael, ed. Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

1962 Remarks on the personality of shamans. I n The psychoanalytic study of society. W. Muensterberger and S. Axelrad, eds. New York, International Universities Press.

BOYER, L. B.

CARPENTER, EDMUND 1964 Ohnainewk. Eskimo hunter. In In the

company of man. Joseph Casagrande, ed. New York, Harper Torchbooks.

1956 Normal and abnormal: the key problem of psychiatric anthropology. In Some uses of anthropology, theoretical and applied. Wash- ington, D. C., Anthropological Society of Washington.

1957 Dream learning and individual ritual dif- ferences in Mohave shamanism. American Anthropologist 59: 1036-1045.

1961a Shamans as neurotics. American An- thropologist 63: 1088-1090.

1961b Mohave ethnopsychiatry and suicide: the psychiatric knowledge and the psychic

DEVEREAUX, GEORGE

disturbances of an Indian tribe. Washington, Smithsonian Institution.

1964 Shamanism: archaic techniaues of ec- ELIADE, MIRCEA

Stacy. New York, Pantheon Boocs.

Tohns HoDkins Press.

FRANK, JEROME D. 1961 Persuasion and healing. Baltimore, The

HANDELMAN, boN

HONIGMANN, J. J.

1967 The development of a Washo shaman. Ethnology 6:444-464.

1960 Review of culture and mental health: cross cultural studies. Marvin K. Opler, ed. American Anthropologist 62:920-923.

1952 Psychosis or social sanction. In The nature of culture. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

LANTIS, MARGARET 1960 Eskimo childhood and interpersonal rela-

tions. Seattle, University of Washington Press.

LID, NILS 1960 North European shamanism. In Men and

cultures. A. F. C. Wallace, ed. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press.

1965 Tenino shamanism. Ethnology 4: 165-171.

1964 Psychotherapeutic aspects of shamanism on St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. In Magic, faith, and healing. Ari Kiev, ed. New York, The Free Press.

1946 A study of shamanism in the Nuba Moun- tains. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 76:25-37.

1959 Dream analysis in Ute Indian therapy. In Culture and mental health: cross cultural studies. Marvin K. Opler, ed. New York, Macmillan.

RADIN, PAUL 1937 Primitive religion. New York, The Viking

Press. RAaasA", RUDOLF

1959 Shamanistic and related henomena in Northern and Middle India. An&opos 54:681- 'Ifin

KROEBER, A. L.

MWFDOCK, G. P.

MURPHY, J. M.

NADEL, S. F.

OPLER, M. K.

ROCK;: F. 1959 Contributions to the shamanism of the

Tibetan-Chinese borderland. Anthropos 54: 796418.

SACHS, WULF 1947 Black Hamlet. Boston. Little, Brown.

SHIBOKOGOROFF, S. M. 1935 The psychomental complex of the Tungus.

London, Kegan Paul. SILVERXAN, Jnww

1967 Shamans and acute schizophrenia. Ameri- can Anthropologist 69:21-31.

SIBKIN, E. 1941 The impact of the peyote cult upon sham-

anism among the Washo Indians. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University.

Dark puritan. Kingston, University of the West Indies.

S m , M. G. 1963

356 American Anth.ropologist [70, 19681 SPENCER, R., AND J. JENNINCS

and Row. STURTEVANT, W. C.

1965 The native Americans. New York, Harper

1964 A Seminole medicine-maker. I n In the company of man. J. Casagrande, ed. New York, Harper Torchbooks.

1964 Muchona the Hornet, interpreter of re- ligion. I n In the company of man. J. Casa- grande, ed. New York, Harper Torchbooks.

1966 Eskimo theories of illness in the Hudson Bay region. Anthropologica 8: 53-84.

TURNER, V. W.

VALLEE, F. G.

VOCET, F. 1950 A Shoshone innovator. American Anthro-

Doloaist 52:53-63. WHI~NC; B.

1950 Paiute sorcery. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. 15.

SHAMANS, SCHIZOPHRENIA, AND SCIENTIFIC UNITY

JOHN 11. WTAKLAND Mental Research Institute

Palo Al to , California

I t seems important to comment on Julian Silver- man’s paper “Shamans and Acute Schizophrenia” in the February 1967 Ant/iropologispisl, yet diflicult to do so justly and justifiahly. These difficulties center on the fact that what Silverman has done is done well, and ordinarily it is not considered fair or legitimate to criticize an author for not doing some- thing outside of his chosen framework. In this in- stance, however, I think something resembling this is appropriate, since the paper in several respects at least implies an orientation to important-and pos- sible-goals that it does not then pursue. Rather, in an area that strongly calls for a synthesis of views, it repeatedly represents particular ideas and observa- tions of considerable merit, but fails at the most general and significant level.

By its title, much of its content, and the very fact that it is by a psychologist in an anthropological journal, this paper implies a promise to interrelate shamans and acute schizophrenia and thus, in these substantive areas, anthropology and psychology-a task I also consider very important. Yet the paper does not really do this; it is made up, fundamentally, of an anthropological half and a psychological half, which are stitched together but never unified within a single conceptual framework. Shamanism is con- sidered as occurring within and related to social contexts; this is, even more than an anthropological

view, a general behavioral view, and much of this exposition is very pertinent and valuable. Schizo- phrenia, however, is not viewed similarly, but quite differently and separately, within a psychological framework in an old and restricted sense-that is, as only a manifestation of inner psychic or mental organization, however well this is done in such terms.

Thus there is an essential disjunction between the two parts of the paper. Further, and still more seriously, there is no indication whatever that the nature and etiology of acute schizophrenia itself might even conceivably be viewed in terms of social interaction and behavior (e.g., in relation to certain family contexts) quite similarly to the way Silverman views outcomes of schizophrenia as influenced by differing sociocultural contexts. This lack seems strange and unfortunate in view of the fact that there has been much work on schizophrenia along just such lines in the past dozen years-especially so since one major line of this work began at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Palo Alto, where Silverman himself has also worked, and this work itself centrally involved (in addition to Jay Haley, communications analyst) two anthropolo- gists, Gregory Bateson and myself, and Dr. Don I). Jackson, a former student and intellectual descen- dant of Harry Stack Sullivan to whom Silverman refers so much. (An introduction to this work is provided by the two joint papers of our group [Bate- son et al., 1956, 19631 and Watzlawick’s review [1963], which gives references to related inquiries and evaluations.)

While Dr. Silverman has a right to structure his own views according to whatever conceptual frame- works he feels most appropriate, readers of the d4nl/zropo&sl have a right to know that informa- tion and conceptual frameworks exist, focused on behavior in relation to communication and social interaction, which offer more potential for that in- tegration of anthropological and psychological oh- servations that seems a consummation not only devoutly to be wished but now more possible than before.

REFERENCES CITED BATESON, GREGORY, DON D. JACKSON, JAY HAIXY,

1956 Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Be-

1963 A note on the double-bind-1962. Family

AND JOHN WEAKLAND

havioral Science 1 : 251-264.

Process 2:154-161. WATZLAWICX. PAUL

1963 A review of the double-bind theory. Family Process 2:132-153.