Structuralism
It is
probably best to approach the term "structuralism" through an attempt
to understand the concept of "structure" within this theoretical
point of view. Without an understanding of this fundamental concept, it is
difficult to arrive to an understanding of the intellectual movement referred
to as structuralism. Traditionally the major problem with the term structure
has been its concreteness. The word refers to phenomena, e.g. buildings, which
are most physical in their essence. Needless to say, structures in
structuralism are not neither concrete nor physical. Structures refer to mental
models built after concrete realty. Furthermore these models are not obvious
but demand an understanding of hidden, or deep aspects, of the matter at hand.
Following this approach structuralism is an attempt to build models which can
help understand or, as structuralists, would put it explicate the materials at
hand.
The most difficult aspect of structuralism is that these
structures are not based on concrete or physical phenomena as they are in
biological or other sciences but based on cultural realities such kinship
organization or tales. These cultural realities are mental as are the
structures which explicate them. These structures and their structuralist
models exist only in human minds, and not in nature as e.g. a Marxist would
claim.
There are many structuralists including Ferdinand de Saussure,
Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Jacques Lacan and L思i-Strauss. It is even
possible to claim that some important social and/or psychological theoreticians
and certain sciences are structuralist in character because what they do is to
build models of psychological or social reality. This seems to be particularly
true of Sigmund Freud and Carl Marx. In all of the above a distinction is made
between what may be called surface (consciousness, superstructure) structure
and deep (unconscious, infrastructure) structure. It is also worth noting that
structuralist claim that to understand the surface structure one has to
understand the deep structure, and how the it influences the surface structure.
It is accurate to say that of all the structuralist the best known and most
influential is Claude L思i-Strauss.
Structuralism, however, is not a
unified school or methodology; L思i-Strauss does not have a monopoly on
structural studies in anthropology or other disciplines. Furthermore, the work
done by structuralists is extensive, diverse, and difficult. However because of
his influence L思i-Strauss is an excellent example of structuralist approaches.
In anthropology the use of the concept of "structure" is far older
than L思i-Srauss; R. Radcliffe-Brown, George Peter Murdock, and many others
have used the term in a different ways. However, it is important to note that
the main influence on the work L思i-Strauss' work is multifaceted and that he
was influenced not only by other anthropologists but also by linguists,
geologists and others. L思i-Strauss brings into anthropology these and other
influences which have shaped his thinking and anthropological thought through
his work. The main aspects of L思i-Strauss' work can be summarized under three
headings (1) alliance theory, (2) human mental processes, and (3) structural
analysis of myth.
(1) Alliance Theory: L思i-Strauss' theoretical
contributions to social anthropology are numerous and significant. The best
known of these is "alliance theory." Alliance theory stresses the
importance of marriage in society as opposed to the importance of descent. Its
basic supposition is that the exchange of women between groups of related men
results in greater social solidarity, and that the result of this cohesion is
better chances of survival for all members of the resultant kin group. L思i-Strauss'
claims that the regulating of marriages through prescription and preference and
the proscription of other types of marriage creates a "exchange" of
women in simple societies. This interchange, accompanied by exchanges of gifts,
ensures the cooperation of the members of these groups.
His analysis of
the incest taboo is fascinating. For L思i-Strauss the link between nature and
culture in humankind comes from this universal proscription. In the incest
taboo nature transcends itself and creates culture as the controlling element
of human behavior. Sex and other drives are regulated by culture; man has
become a cultural entity.
(2) Human Mental Processes: There is unity in
the way the human mind functions. L思i-Strauss claims that, although the
manifestations may be very different, the human mental processes are the same
in all cultures. The unity of the mental processes results from the biology of
the human brain and the way it works. As a result of this unity, e.g. the
classification of the universe by "primitive man" has the same basis
as when it is done by any group, it is done through models. The fact that
resultant models of this classification may be different is irrelevant for him.
The analysis of myth in L思i-Strauss is also based on the premise about the
unity of the human mind.
(3) Structural
Analysis of Myth: L思i-Strauss' work on myth parallels his interest in mental
processes. His attempts to discover unconscious the regularities of the human
mind. The use of the structuralist models of myth allows for the reduction of
material studied to manageable levels. The dominant manner to accomplish this
goal is based on the use of the following concepts: a) surface and deep
structure, b) binary oppositions Culture/Nature, and c) mediation.
a)
Surface and Deep Structure: To discover the model/structure of a myth one must
explore the deep structure of a myth. The surface structure provides us with
the narrative, the deep structure with an explication of the myth. This is
accomplished by discovering the major binary opposition(s) in the deep structure.
b)
Binary oppositions: These occur in nature and naturally in the human mind. They
are such things as night and day, left and right or nature and culture. Nature
and culture often functions as a binary opposition in tales. However, depending
on the tale or myth the binary opposition changes. For example, the binary
opposition life and death is a useful one to explicate "Sleeping
Beauty." Here, the deep structure of the story suggests that when the
thirteenth fairy declares that Sleeping Beauty is to die at her fifteenth
birthday that a life versus death binary opposition is posited. A mediation to
solution the problem is now necessary.
c)
Mediation: A binary opposition can be mediated by finding a solution to the
opposition created by the binary. The mediation to the culture/nature binary
opposition is that culture transcends nature. In the case of "Sleeping
Beauty" the nature of the mediation is quite different but equally
embedded in within the subject matter. Here the life versus death binary opposition
is mediated by the twelve fairy's action: death is transformed into one hundred
years sleep.
In
"Sleeping Beauty" or in any myth the deep structure of the narrative
is analyzed through the discovery of a binary opposition and the resultant
mediation. This process may in itself create new binary oppositions in the
story which need to be followed until one arrives to a final mediation for the
story.
Structuralism is an intellectual movement which bases it analysis
on the reduction of materials into models referred to as structures. It is
fundamental to structuralism that it be understood that these structures are
not concrete manifestations of reality; but cognitive models of reality. L思i-Strauss
stresses that all cultures and not only scholars understand the universe around
them through such models, and that humankind comprehends his world on the basis
of these mental structures.
Mark Glazer
December 14, 1994
McAllen,
Texas
Bibliography
Foucault,
Michel
1970 (1966) The order of Things: an Archeology of the Human
Sciences, London, Tavistock.
1972 (1969) The Archaeology of Knowledge,
London, Tavistock.
Barthes, Roland
1967 (1964) Elements of
Semiology, London: Cape.
1973 (1957) Mythologies, London: Paladin.
1975
(1970) S/Z, London: Cape.
Hawkes, Terence
1977 Structuralism and
Semiotics, Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press.
Lacan,
Jacques
1968 The Language of the Self: The Function of Language in
Psychoanalysis, Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press
L思i-Strauss,
Claude
1967 "The Story of Asdiwal," in Edmund Leach, editor,
The Structural Study of Myth and Totemism, London: Tavistock, pp. 1-47.
1967
(1955) Structural Anthropology, Garden City, New York: Anchor Books.
1969
(1945) The Elementary Structures of Kinship, Boston: Beacon Press.
1969
(1964) The Raw and the Cooked, New York and Evanston: Harper Torch Books.
Saussure,
Ferdinand de
1966 (1915) Course in General Linguistics, New York: McGraw
Hill.
ﾒStructuralismﾓ by Mark Glazer, University of Texas-Pan American, 04/11/2008,
<http://www.utpa.edu/faculty/mglazer/Theory/structuralism.htm>
Academic
year 2008/2009
ｩ
a.r.e.a./Dr.Vicente For市 L用ez
ｩ
Bel始 Garc誕 Castiglioni
Universitat
de Val熟cia Press