There is an uncanny and even fascinating relationship between mimetic theory and the topic of cannibalism. In one of his most influential books, La Violence et le sacré (1972), when René Girard has to produce an authentic tour de force in order to prove the “unity of all rites,” he resorts to ritual cannibalism. As Girard says, “Our discussion of the second type of sacrificial preparation – the integration into the community of a victim of foreign origin – leads directly into a consideration of the most notorious example of cannibalistic ritual, as practiced by the Tupinamba Indians of northwest Brazil.”
Later on, in Les Origines de la culture (2004), he provides an even more impressive synthesis of both the origins and the meaning of culture by dating its two poles, according to the principles of mimetic theory applied to history: from ritual cannibalism to Eucharist. In Girard`s words: “Primitive cannibalism is religion, and the Eucharist recapitulates this history from alpha to omega.” The equation can be translated as follows: from a social order founded on scapegoating and sacrifice to a social order grounded on the defense of the victim and acknowledgement of the other.
How to explain the instrumentality of cannibalism concerning the main assumptions of mimetic theory? The work of the Brazilian poet and thinker Oswald de Andrade (1890-1954) may help us to find a preliminary answer.
In 1928, Oswald published his “Manifesto Antropófago,” one of the most debated Latin-American avant-garde manifestoes. Oswald proposed that anthropophagy represented not only the “unity of all rites,” but that it also was destined to return as the utopian future of a primitive modernity – a vision perfectly aligned with the wave of primitivism, which overwhelmed European culture in the first decades of the XXth century. The manifesto opens up, as it could not be otherwise, with a punch line:
“Só a antropofagia nos une. Socialmente. Economicamente. Filosoficamente” (Only anthropohagy unites us. Socially. Economically. Philosophically).
Therefore, according to René Girard and Oswald de Andrade, anthropohagy, that is, cultural cannibalism, does provide the unity of human culture. However, this is not the most relevant affinity between the two thinkers. Let us then listen to Oswald’s synthesis of anthropophagy understood as a worldview:
“Só me interessa o que não é meu. Lei do homem. Lei do antropófago” (I am only interested in what is not mine. Law of Man. Law of the anthropophagite.)
Here lies the decisive element. In Oswald’s “Manifesto” the reason why the anthropophagite is radically caught by what the other has/is, is because he needs the other to shape his own self, that is, he needs the other to point out to him what is desirable and therefore what can be neglected. Fundamentally, the anthropophagite cannot find the stability required to indulge in self-centered notions of identity. Rather, the anthropophagite cannot simply be, he can only become through the constant assimilation of otherness.
The mimetic subject has the same basic structure; he also needs a model to determine “his” desire. In other words, the mimetic subject also, and necessarily, practices a sort of cultural cannibalism, which in mimetic theory gave birth to the only neologism created by René Girard: interdividuality.
This is going to be difficult for me because I am used to discuss Shakespeare in spanish with you. However, I do believe your proposal for cannibalism gives --in the figure of the most respected and talented dramatist of all times-- a perspective for the contemporary literature in Latin America, as we have discussed before: this is; anthropophagy was a tradition in America before the arrival of Columbus. It was --I would suggest-- a common way for all primitive civilizations). What I would offer to you for this discussion, my dear friend, is a new perspective for you to consider: religion in America was during the past centuries, the only obstacle for cultural cannibalism. And this comes from the origins of jewish tradition which gave christianity its first stone "On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it."
I hope this is an idea we can have an anthropophagic discussion about: cannibalism vs tradition.
Esto será difícil para mí porque escribo normalmente en inglés. Quería decir, sin embargo, que todos idiomas son bienvenidos à Arcade. De hecho, si usted prefiere escribir en español, los redactores (incluida yo) lo preferamos también! Lo malo, sólo, sería que yo quizás respondería en mi español deforme.
Thanks for your thoughtful remark. Indeed, I feel tempted now to reply in Portuguese. Seria uma bela ideia tornar Arcade uma autêntica Babel, com muitos idiomas e, possivelmente, mal-entendidos produtivos. Let us do it?
Dear María Luisa, ¡qué lindo encontrarte aquí! Es una forma de traer nuestro infinito diálogo mexicano al universo digital. Let me now, as a good anthropophagite, shift languages. Your point is quite insightful, and I will try to cope with it writing an entire new post in order to address the key issue you raised: cannibalism versus tradition – or what notion of tradition is properly assimilated through cannibalism. However, as an immediate reaction, let me raise two or three points. In the religious wars, especially in France, cannibalism became a powerful weapon in the hands of Protestants. According to them, Catholics were much worse than the Tupinambas; after all, more than anthropophagite they were “theophagite”, since Eucharist implied a literal absorption of Christ’s flesh and blood. In certain cases in colonial Brazil, rather, the Catholic literal understanding of Eucharist favored a sort of syncretism in the assimilation (imposition) of Catholicism because the native Brazilians could relate Eucharist to ritual cannibalism. I am preparing a new post, entitled “Shakespearean countries”, in which I will also touch upon some of your concerns. ¡Gracias por tus comentarios!
Aunque no tengo suficiente confianza en mi español, me gustaría decir que yo también prefiero que los redactores usen otros idiomas como español. Esto va a mostrar que Arcade es internacional. De hecho, sufrimos de la hegemonía de inglés.
Although I had read Oswald's article in translation, I find this explication here really interesting in posing the importance of cultural anthropoghagy for expressing the assimilation of otherness. This notion of anthropophagy is both shocking and insightful at the same time.
Gracias por tus comentarios. De hecho, como propongo, la antropofagia es un procedimiento cultural empleado en situaciones asimétricas, en general en condiciones de “belated modernity” – y comprendo el término en el sentido en que lo empleas en tu importante libro – Belated Modernity and Aesthetic Culture. No sólo eso: la antropofagia es un recurso de los que se encuentran en una posición subalterna. En otras palabras, un sujeto antropofágico es sobre todo un sujeto que no puede definirse sino a través la asimilación de lo que fundamentalmente le hace falta: todos los otros posibles. Por ello, no se debe confundir antropofagia con determinación ontológica – sea brasileña, sea latinoamericana. Se trata de un equívoco que no permite desarrollar la radicalidad antropológica de la antropofagia. Al fin y al cabo, Arthur Rimbaud produjo la más sintética y poderosa definición del sujeto antropofágico: “Je est un autre.” De ahí el vínculo con el sujeto mimético, tal como comprendo la teoría mimética de René Girard. Deseo desarrollar las consecuencias políticas y éticas de tal acercamiento.
Olá João Cezar,
numa tentativa provavelmente infrutífera e cheia de generalizações, tenho tentando buscar em uma palavra a mais definidora característica dos brasileiros. Por enquanto, a que obteve mais votos de mim mesmo foi: "descontração". "Ser descontraído" me parece uma boa maneira de pensar como se caracterizaria o modo hegemônico brasileiro de se viver e olhar para as coisas. Ser descontraído, não se deixar contrair, escapar do que nos contrai, dar a volta no contraído.
"Rather, the anthropophagite cannot simply be, he can only become through the constant assimilation of otherness."
Entre muitas outras de seu artigo, essa frase me chamou a atenção e me clareou ainda mais o pensamento sobre a descontração - não estar rígido, ou seja, aberto e, in fact, sedento pela troca e utilização do que o outro pode oferecer. Sempre em busca do que o outro pode me oferecer - acho essa uma das posturas básicas que Oswald muito bem definiu e marcou, para mim, um povo.
To mix different voices in one single emition or emitter. In the footsteps of Oswald, maybe is what I try to do in a project and site called MixLit, or remixed literature. It's something strange and not always I know what it is - beyond the text - but I'm trying to figure out. Pienso em libros como "Biblioteca" de Gonçalo Tavares, en que él toma partido de los puntos de vista de muchos otros escritores, pienso em "Verbos auxiliares del corazón" de Peter Esterhazy, en que el narrador toma emprestado trozos de textos de otros libros para jugar luz o sombra sobre lo que se pasa con él. Pienso em el libro "The street of crocodiles" canibalizado y transformado por Jonathan Safran Foer en "Tree of codes". E así me parece que la expresión "Interdividuality" - no la conecía antes de leer aquí - es una de las más preciosas y necesarias para nuestros tempos, y quizás una clave-mestra para la cuestión tradición vs. canibalismo.
Caro Leonardo,
Obrigado pelos seus comentários, muito instigantes. By the way, your MixLit project is great, and most likely I will write a post about it. I am finishing a book right now, which will be called O Contexto Machado de Assis: por uma poética da emulação. Creio que essa pode ser uma forma para levar adiante suas inquietações. Numa palavra: diferencio emulação, como técnica própria de assimilação da tradição, técnica definidora do sistema literário anterior ao Romantismo, e emulação como poética, deliberadamente anacrônica, que permite redefinir as relações assimétricas entre culturas hegemônicas, centrais, e circunstâncias não hegemônicas, periféricas. I see that you also are in dialogue with María Luisa Armendáriz's comments. That is why I wll also prepare a furure post on the relationship between cultural cannibalism and tradition.
João Cezar,
fico feliz que tenha achado interessante o MixLit. Your about to finish book seems very curious. Your post got me thinking about if the term "deliberadamente anacrônica" is due to the fact that if one emulates other, that necessarily indicates that this other emulated comes from the past, and, in consequence, the emulation is an act of turning one's eyes from present's esthetics to the a past's esthetics. But if this act redefines the relations between central and marginal cultures, why would it be anacronic? Or to whom? Well, as you see, I'm just thinking aloud and trying to guess.
Looking forward for your next entries.