The Hammer and the Flute: Women, Power, and Spirit Possession

300 Pages·2005·3.82 MB·English

by  Mary Keller

TheHammerandtheFlute

The Hammer
and the Flute
Women, Power, and
Spirit Possession
Mary Keller
TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress
Baltimore&London
TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress
Allrightsreserved.Published
PrintedintheUnitedstatesofAmericaonacid-freepaper
        
TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress
NorthCharlesStreet
Baltimore,Maryland-
www.press.jhu.edu
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Keller,Mary,–
Thehammerandtheflute:women,power,andspiritpossession/
MaryKeller.
p. cm.
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
---(alk.paper)
.Spiritpossession..Women—Religiouslife. I.Title.
.
.(cid:1)—dc

AcatalogrecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary
Contents
Preface vii
Introduction 
Part. ReorientingPossessioninTheory 
Chapter.SignifyingPossession 
Chapter.ReorientingPossession 
Chapter.Flutes,Hammers,andMountedWomen 
Part. TheWork,War,andPlayofPossession 
Chapter.Work 
Chapter.War 
Chapter.Play(s) 
Conclusion 
Notes 
Bibliography 
Index 
Preface
Thisbookisamethodologicalargumentabouthowcontemporaryscholar-
shipapproachesbodiesthatarepossessedbyancestors,deities,orspirits.It
beganasaquestionoffeministhistoriography whenIwasfirstintroduced
to Greek maenads during a seminar with Professor Patricia Cox Miller on
genderinGreekantiquity:Howmightoneevaluatetheagencyofawoman’s
bodyinfifth-centuryAthensthatispossessed;abodythatisrunningfreely
and not confined to a traditional women’s space but “free” only because it
isabodythatisovercomebyadivineagency?Whatbeganasaproblemfor
feministhistoriographythenenteredintoaninterdisciplinaryconversation
with contemporary anthropology, psychology, and sociology as I became
aware of the extensive literature on spirit possession. Most contemporary
examples of possession are found where indigenous traditions are still
strong, either in rural areas or among immigrant communities in urban
areas. Possessed bodies are extremely different from the contemporary
Western model of proper subjectivity. They are volatile bodies that attract
the eye of observers, and often their volatility is related to erotic or outra-
geousactivity.Possessedbodiesarenotindividualbodies.Theyarenotoften
held personally responsible for their actions by their communities. Within
their communities, possessed bodies are rigorously scrutinized in order to
determinethatinfactanancestor,deity,orspirithadovercomethem;how-
ever, that is an interpretation that would be difficult if not impossible for
mostscholarstorepresentasthe“truth”ofthematter.Byandlarge,schol-
arly approaches to possessed bodies have reinterpreted them as repressed
psychological bodies, oppressed sociological bodies, or oppressed women’s
viii Preface
bodies.WhatIhavetriedtodoistodeliverareligiousstudiesapproachto
these bodies that can incorporate indigenous interpretations into a mean-
ingful,criticalinterpretationofthepowerrelationshipsthesebodiesnego-
tiate.
As I look back to the history that produced my engagement with pos-
sessed bodies, I want to thank the incredible collection of teachers that
broughtmetothisniche,whichliesattheintersectionoffeministphiloso-
phyandcriticalmethodologyinthestudyofreligion.Frommyintroduction
tofeministtheorywithWendyBrownandRosemaryTongtotheintroduc-
toryunitsinreligious studiesrunbyMarkC.Taylor andH.GanseLittle,
Jr.,fromJewishfeminismwithJudithWegnertogenderstudiesinJudaism
with Charlotte Fonrobert via Daniel Boyarin, from history of religions
methodologywithCharlesLongandJorunnBuckleytopostmoderntheol-
ogywithMarkTaylorandCharlieWinquist,fromnothingnesswithDavid
MillertoemptinesswithDickPilgrim,Ihavehadanincredibleopportunity
tostudywithpeoplewhoseintellectualconcernsinspiredme.
Morespecifically,theresearchinthisbookwasfirstpursuedasadisser-
tationthatbeganwhenIwastakingcoursesinGreekantiquitywithPatricia
Miller simultaneously with an anthropology and postcolonial theory unit
taught by Ann G. Gold—both of which included stories about possessed
women. Professor Miller supported the development of my argument—a
task that required her to give extensive feedback, which she did so rigor-
ously and graciously. Ann Gold read and commented upon several papers
anddraftsofchapters,alwaysofferingsupportandprovidingacriticalread-
ingofthetheoryIwasusingbasedonherexhaustivestudyandexperience
of the practice of anthropology. Professor Phillip Arnold’s lecture to the
department on “place” was important as I thought about the place-taking
oftheMalaysianspiritsdiscussedinChapter,“Work,”andalsotheimpor-
tanceoflandandtheShonaancestorsdiscussedinChapter,“War.”Pro-
fessorMicereMugotook timetolistentomyideas andthenfatefullytold
meoftheNehandamhondoroinZimbabwe,openingupanewareaofstudy
thatwasfartoocompellingtoleavebehind.InpursuitofresearchintoAfri-
can traditional religions I received information from Christina Le Doux,
subjectlibrarianforgenderstudiesattheUniversityofSouthAfrica.Claire
JonesoftheUniversityofWashingtonandDouglasDzivafromtheUniver-
sityofNatalbothreadearlierdraftsofChapterandgenerouslyprovided
Preface ix
me with technical as well as methodological critiques. Douglas kindly
shared sections of his dissertation manuscript, and both scholars provided
memuch-neededsupportasIsteppedintotheirareasofexpertise.Chapter
,“Play(s),”wasinfluencedbyProfessorDavidMiller’splayonlecturesand
lectures on play. ProfessorKen Frieden read an earlier draftof the section
on TheDybbuk, which was also a new area of research for me. His careful
critique and advice regarding technical as well as methodological issues in
the study of Yiddish arts were very helpful. I take his concern seriously
about the problems raised when nonspecialists draw from resources that
requirenuancedanddevelopedstudy.
TheriskIhavetakeninthisbookistoraiseaveryspecificquestionabout
how scholars represent and evaluate the agency of possessed bodies, and I
have applied the question to areas of study in which I am not an expert. I
would like to think that I have asked my question well enough that it will
beofinteresttothosepeoplewhoareexpertsandwhocanengagewithmy
argument, bringing it to greater precision and depth. What is exciting for
me is that the unique linguistic, geographical, historical, and cultural ele-
mentsofeachplaceinwhichIhavestudiedpossessedwomenbroadenthe
horizonsbywhichonecanconceiveofsubjectivity;thisisanareathatfur-
ther scholarly research and argumentcan bring to greater accuracy. I have
benefitedfromtheexpertiseofothersasIpursuedmyresearch;anyshort-
comingsaremyown.
Therehavebeenmanyimportant friendsandcolleagueswhosesupport
was vital for health and sanity and also for their questions and critiques.
TheseincludeJudithPoxon,RobertGlass,YiannaLiatsos,CorinneDemp-
seyCorigliano,CraigBurgdoff,HeathAtchley,MehnazAfridi,JudyClark,
KathrynLanier,SebrenaMcBean,DeanDavidPotter,NancyVedder,Di-
onne Smith, and the gang in the academic advising office where I worked
fortwoyears.IbeganmyfirstteachingpositionattheUniversityofStirling
in Scotland as I finished this manuscript and want to thank the Religious
Studies Department for their support. While the larger university system
in Britain is driven to distraction by RAE deadlines, which for the sake of
measuring research output push scholars to publish before they feel their
manuscripts are ready, Keith Whitelam and Richard King as my heads of
department continued to express their confidence in this project and en-
couragedmetofocusmyenergiesoncompletionofthemanuscript.Richard