Durkheims Ideas of the Sacred - Coursework Example

How are Durkheim’s ideas of “the sacred” similar to or different from the concept of “sacralization”? Be sure to define your terms. Give specific examples of how something can be sacralized from at least two of the following readings: “Cultural Valorization & African American Literary History” (Corse & Griffin), “From Mobs to Memorials” (Zelizer), “The Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial” (Wagner-Pacific & Schwartz). Durkheim’s idea of “the sacred” is similar to “sacralization” with regard to society; joining together to form a congruent thought or idea and in turn movement or “ritual” in relation to a certain cultural, societal, spiritual etc. trend or phenomenon. Although the readings, “Cultural Valorization & African American Literary History” (Corse & Griffin) and “The Vietnam Veteran’s Memorial” (Wagner-Pacific & Schwartz) discuss different social and cultural phenomenon, we see clear examples of how the concept of “the sacred” is similar to the concept of “sacralization” specifically with regard to social unity and a social movement from deeming something socially insignificant to socially indispensable. Both readings also demonstrate how Durkheim’s idea of “the sacred” differs from the ‘sacredness’ so to speak, of Hurston’s novel, Their Eyes Were Watching God and The Vietnam War Memorial in that both cultural phenomenon cannot be compartmentalized into Durkheim’s simple definition of what deems something sacred. Nevertheless both phenomenon are in fact “sacred” in society and add another dimension to Durkheim’s concept. All of the fore mentioned readings include a societal and cultural happening, which at one point in history was considered insignificant and undervalued but through a social, academic, political etc. unity and validity placed upon the phenomenon; there have been distinct and necessary alterations in societal thought as well as accomplishments with regards to the phenomenon at hand. In “Cultural Valorization & African American Literary History” Corse and Griffin extensively discuss the historical and ideological transformation of the Western Literary Canon and the creation of the African-American literary canon with regards to African-American literature and specifically Zora Neal Hurston’s novel, Their Eyes Were Watching God. When Hurston’s novel was first reviewed, it was considered “simple and unpretentious”, “unsuccessful”, not a literary work that would ever “move into serious fiction” and “politically invalid” (Corse and Griffin 180). However over a period of time, the novel went through a “sacralization” process as it were, and was considered in academia as well as in society as “sacred” in other words culturally legitimate and absolutely appropriate for academic study and therefore part of the literary Canon. The position of this novel went from very low in literary hierarchy to “one of the most privileged texts in the African-American literary canon” (190). This change in position was an extensive socially unified “sacralization” process involving scholars, novelists, such as Alice Walker, the MLA and other members of society in order to make this novel what it is today. This “sacrilization” phenomenon is very similar to what occurred with the Vietnam War and specifically the honor due to the Vietnam veterans. The homage granted to the Vietnam Veterans came “too late” and was quite controversial since the war was unsuccessful. For many years, the soldiers were ignored and mistreated in the United States until a unified decision was made to credit and thank Vietnam veterans for the duty. As Wagner-Pacific & Schwartz explain, a unified societal point of view no longer focused on the defeat and controversy of the war but on the ones who sacrificed their lives for their country, and therefore it was decided to deem veterans’ services “sacred” by commemorating them with a long over due “ritual”, a memorial (380). These phenomena are also considered “sacred” because they are, as Durkheim would call it commemorations of the glories of the past integrated with the aspirations and concerns of the present (Wagner-Pacific & Schwartz 379). Hurston’s novel is closely related to the Vietnam War Memorial in that they both commemorate the past to a great extent, and they both integrate the aspirations and concerns of today. However, both differ from Durkheim’s concept of “the sacred” in that both the novel and the Memorial have extremely discordant pasts. The novel is reminiscent of racist America and the memorial is reminiscent of the defeat with Vietnam. Therefore both commemorations are neither “untainted” nor “heroic” but demonstrate a tumultuous past in which the memory perhaps cannot be communally glorified but nonetheless both works are “sacred”. Both works are made “sacred” and illustrious, through a sort of “ritual” (403). The validation of Hurton’s novel and the acknowledgement in the canon today is a sort of ritual, as Durkehim would suggest, since the novel alone is just a novel, a thing, which at one time was even considered insignificant and could have remained as such. Yet it became “sacred” in the canon through an agreed upon higher critical positioning and a communal celebration “only by the group in its members” just as the Vietnam War Memorial became a place of “expressions of strong emotions” by a group, which projects a certain consciousness, as Durkheim would suggest. Without the crucial act or commemoration of the group both phenomena would hold no major role in our social and cultural thinking and development. Hurston’s novel and the Vietnam War memorial are in turn worthy and imperative in society. Continuous social reception of the novel as well as the memorial, either on social or personal levels are a kind of ritual, despite its past and controversy, which deems them “sacred” but not in the same way Durkheim would suggest. He seems to attach no realistic societal problems to his ideas of “ritual” and “the sacred” yet we cannot deny that the novel and the memorial have both passed through widespread “sacrilization” processes and are therefore “sacred” despite the realities that may go along with fighting for a just and necessary societal cause and paying appropriate homage to the victory of the cause as we have seen in both the cultural valorization of Their Eyes Were Watching God and the final agreement and construction of the Vietnam War Memorial. According to Howard Becker, what is an “art world” and what role do “conventions” play in it? Use specific examples from “The Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial” (Wagner-Pacifici & Schwartz) to discuss these concepts. Be sure to address both how and why Maya Lin’s design differed from accepted conventions within the “war monument genre.” The “art world” according to Howard Becker is made up of all the affiliates that create and cooperate in what we know as art. The creation and production of art, the promotion of art, the preservation of art and even the sales of art are part of the “art world” and influence society in a manufactured way. The ‘art world’ establishes for the general public a unified understanding in which to appreciate a particular art form. The Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial is also a contrived work of art, which influences societal thinking with a constructed position. The general publics’ understanding and acceptance of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial did not arise from a subjective point of view of the artist, or a ‘naturally’ developed public consensus but rather from a viewpoint that was established and defined for the artist and for the populace by the “art world”. The “art world” in this situation also included a heavy political influence as well. The Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial has been controversial within the “art world” with regards to “war monument” genre. The production of the monument veered expansively away from a typical war monument. In "The Vietnam Veterans Memorial: Commemorating a Difficult Past", Wager-Pacifici, Robin and Barry Schwartz also discuss how Maya Lin’s design and how it has given the populace as well as the “art world” diverse ways to think about war monuments and how they relate to art, society and the necessary yet controversial commemoration of a “painful past” (385). The Vietnam Veterans’ memorial is first of all not a war memorial by any means. It does not celebrate any victorious battle, it is not imposing in stature as most triumphant war memorials, and it does not even have the name of the cause, the Vietnam War, documented in any area of the memorial itself. Maya Lin originally designed it without any suggestive political message since the political views of the war are not socially unified. In essence, the purpose of the memorial is to be socially collective and to induce a memory devoted to “absolutely nothing” with regards to the war itself, but to the soldiers who fought in the war. Lin’s main goal was “evoking feelings, thoughts, emotions of a variant and private nature” (393) in a very public setting. However, without having a defined genre to follow, it was a challenging task with numerous oppositions and compromises to appease political figures, critics as well as the general public. Many veterans as well as critics did not think a black rounded plaque with just names written on it randomly was enough to evoke the sentiments describes by Lin. One critic said it reminded them of a public urinal and many agreed that the design did not pay sufficient honor to the veterans, therefore to draw a clearer association to the genre of ‘memorial’ the Interior Secretary demanded to add a flag and a statue, which was frowned upon by Lin and by the Commission of Fine Arts since the original intention was not to draw attention to nationalistic ideals but to the individuals that fought for the nation. Despite the forced addition of the three realistic soldiers and the flag, Wager-Pacifici, Robin and Barry Schwartz consider the monument ambivalent, which is a reflection of the war and the process devoted to establishing the monument itself (398). The fundamental reason why there was so much indecision about this particular work of art or monument is that is digressed immensely from the genre of what it was expected to be (398). Although compromises were made to appease the idea of ‘war monument’ there was still debate pertaining to the memorial and its over-expressive ‘femininity’. The memorial is not phallic as most memorials are, devoted to heroism, strength and war. It is rounded, close to the ground and defined as “womblike” (397). This diversion from phallic war symbolism, which was black and so closely connected to the ground was considered “weak” and “shameful” and a monument devoted to “losers”. Again, Lin’s artistic vision did not intend for the monument to represent a false triumph or an unnecessary ‘macho’ nature to make up for the reality of the defeat. Lin did not even want to consider weakness or strength as one of the aspects related to the monument however the limitations of the war monument genre left little room for an open possibility to convey and consider Lin’s intended viewpoint. It was rather manipulated by the “art world”. Once there is an expectation or a permanent ‘genre’ forced upon an art form and upon the minds of society, it is difficult to be open to new ideas of what art is and what art may represent. There are therefore limitations and criticisms put upon the artist and the cause of the art itself if it is not always congruent with the “art world”. The outcome is an artistic product, such as the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial, which is in a sense, lacking in cohesiveness that may have existed if there were not so many unnecessary and unreasonable confines of genre. Read More