Ruth Benedict – Anthropology by K.V RAMESH

Impact of Personality on Culture

(A) Patterns of Culture (1934) / Configuration of culture

Ruth Benedict (1887-1948) a student of Franz Boas and credit goes to her for providing a methodological model for studying human culture in terms of “pattern” rather than social contents. All the basic institutions that are a part of the culture, tend to mirror the overall pattern for that culture. This point was successfully highlighted in her book Patterns of Culture (1934) which is considered to be a classic work in anthropology.

Ruth Benedict consideration of cultures as integrated wholes where each is configured to be different from all other cultures; is perhaps one of the most significant.
She also stressed that a culture is organised around a basic theme, and that all of the various elements of that culture fit together.
A culture according to Benedict is analogous to an individual in that it is more or less a consistent pattern of thought and action. Hence, she says any analysis of culture requires a psychological approach.
According to her when traits and complexes become related to each other in functional roles, a cultural pattern is formed. Many cultural patterns integrate themselves into a functional whole and form a special design of a whole culture. This special design of whole culture is called configuration of culture.
The integration of culture is on the basis of tendency seen in all aspects of culture. This tendency is called by Benedict “special genius” that brings about integration.
She says there are two types of geniuses found in human society i.e. Apollonian and Dionysian. In Apollonian pattern, one will see the existence of peace, discipline and kindness. The Dionysian culture is characterised by a great deal of changes and aggressiveness. These two geniuses mold the personality of the members of their group. The Apollonian personality compels members of the group to behave in one form and the Dionysian personality in the other. This will lead to the formation of special cultural characteristics for the group concerned, thus personality influencing the culture.

Applying this approach to cross-cultural studies she did her fieldwork among the Zuni, Cochiti and Pima tribes of America. Benedict looked at different societies and described them in terms of their basic personality configurations. Pointing out how these personality types fit in with the overall culture. In her monograph Patterns of Culture (1934) she discussed, through literature, contrastive personality types between Zuni of the Southwest America and Kwakiutl of the Northeast Coast of North America.

The primary occupations of the two communities are different, the Zuni are foragers in a resource-rich environment whereas the Kwakiutl are agriculturists. She describes Zunis as very cooperative, never excessive in any aspect of their life. The typical Zuni was a person who sought to mingle with the group, and who did not wish to stand out as a superior among the other members of the tribe. Again she went on to point out how this basic personality type was reinforced in other elements of Zuni culture.

She found that child training patterns were designed to suppress individuality. Initiation ceremonies were characterised by a lack of ordeal, and the youths were initiated in a group setting. Marriage was relatively casual. Leadership among the Zuni was ignored whenever possible, and was accepted only with great reluctance. Priests were low key individuals and special positions of power were delegated on a group basis, so that there was a medicine society rather than a single powerful medicine man. Among them death was an occasion for little mourning.

While comparing her study she found cultural configuration of Kwakiutl much different from that of the Zuni. According to cultural pattern Kwakiutl were characterised by a frenzied outlook, excess being the rule rather than the exception. They were ambitious and striving, and individuality was emphasised in every aspect of their life. The ideal man among the community was the one who always attempted to prove his superiority.

Child rearing practices reinforced this pattern, emphasising the achievement of the individual over cooperation with the group. In the initiation ceremonies, a boy was expected go out by himself and experience a personal relationship with the supernatural. Marriage entailed tremendous celebration Leadership among this community was characterised by a constant struggle for power, which must be sought by any possible means. Religious positions included that of the shaman, a priest who wielded enormous personal power. Even the death ritual among the Kwakiutl reinforced this overall configuration. A death was a major event, an occasion for elabourate mourning and was not accepted calmly and peacefully as among the Zuni.

She considered the Zuni to be non-competitive, non-aggressive, and gentle etc., whereas the Kwakiutl to be characterised by strife, factionalism, painful ceremonies,etc. On the basis of above characteristics in her view the two tribal communities are represented by to contrastive psychological attributes on the basis of which she describe Zuni as Apollonian and Kwakiutl as, Dionysian after the Greek Gods of wine and light (i.e. wine as Dionysian and light as Apollonian) respectively. She says it is a pattern that describes the typical member of the society, and to which all members conform to some extent.

Criticism:

Benedict believed that each society had a wide range of cultural options to choose from she did not explain why a society chooses one and not the others.
Morris Opler criticised this configurationalist approach stating that there are not only two bases of cultural integration but many. Thus, this approach is very narrow
Benedict has been criticised on her studies because of her strong belief that cultures have logical constancy.
She has been criticised for saying that Pueblo in her study they did take alcohol during her fieldwork and they still do.
She has been criticised for her statement like ignoring aspects of cooperation among Kwakiutl and strife, suicide and alcoholism among the Zuni cultures.
Applying individual personality attributes to characterise whole cultures was also considered to be risky, as was later found from national character studies.

(B) National Character studies

National Character is the totality of traditions, interests and ideals which are so widespread and Influential in such a way that they mould it’s , image, both in the mind of a nation concerned and In that of other .
According to Mead, the aim of NC studies is to describe, analyze and interpret the characteristic behavior patterns and personality trait of nations.
The assumption is that any nation, groups of people will tend to display the same mental characteristics and psychological regularity.

Background:

During the Second World War the need was felt to understand the national characteristics of Japan and some of the American anthropologists helped in by analysing it through the Japanese films, and books on the history and culture of Japan. They concluded that the strict toilet training among the Japanese made them aggressive fighter in warfare. Ruth Benedict made a significant contribution in developing and then applying the “content analysis method” to study the culture at a distance. This content analysis method was developed by Benedict, when anthropologist could not freely travel to do fieldwork among the indigenous societies during World War II. The U.S. office of War information had asked her to undertake research on occupied or enemy nation. She selected Japan as her first target and wrote the famous work The Chrysanthemum and the Sword (1946) depicting the culture of that nation in a holistic manner, although she never visited Japan. She gathered material for her monograph from historical documents, literature readings of Japanese life and interviews of Japanese immigrants. After going through all these data properly, she analysed and arrived at many significant conclusions about the Japanese society. To study culture at a distance it was first of its kind in the anthropological research.

She describes Japanese culture has two methods of child rearing. In Japan during childhood an individual is given full love, freedom, care and cooperation. But when he or she reaches the stage of adolescence, a strict discipline is imposed. He or she is asked to behave in manner which will be pleasant and appealing to elders. She or he as adolescence is not expected to break cultural traditions. In fact the individual has to work according to the instructions provided by the family traditions.

This paradox in personality traits of Japanese appears due to different cultural traditions of rearing in two periods, i.e. childhood and adolescence. She compares childrearing practices in Japan to the national flower of Japan Chrysanthemum and the Sword. Chrysanthemum symbolises the socialisation of a child during childhood. At the time of childhood, the Japanese parents take every care of their children to make them blossom like a chrysanthemum flower. When the children are fully blossomed like adolescents, they have to face a tough life. Parents leave them to earn something and lead independent life. As a result of this, children become aggressive and violent. A sword always hangs on their neck, because they do not seek cooperation from the elders.

During the late forties the school flourished with some of the best known studies on national character like Ruth Benedict’s Chrysanthemum and the Sword (1946) on the Japanese national character . Later in her study Keep Your Powder Dry: An Anthropologist Looks at America (1942), she deals with the national character of America. She did not find difference in the personality of a baby in America as compared to Japan and Russia. Thus, the early personality was similar. They gradually start differing as the growth follows and family education and school education become effective. other national character studies conducted were Geoffrey Gorer and John Rickman’s The People of Great Russia: A Psychological Study (1949). However the interest in understanding national character though faded after 1950s.

Relevance of National Character Studies

NC studies provide an opportunity for analyzing the culture and personality of a nation as a totality
These studies reduce the cultural bias and show how embodies national culture in a comparative perspective
They provide an adequate atmosphere for interdisciplinary stimulation teamwork.
They provide a basis for estimating the intentions and interests of other nations and having these estimates for appropriate political decision making.

Limitations of National Character studies:

Unsuitability of the- techniques used for studying the culture and personality of small scale tribal groups for studying higher , complex and modern societies.
Arbitrary samples applied for whole nation
Danger of preparing ground for new racism
Questionable assumptions of influences of early childhood experiences and learning on later adulthood.

extra data on patterns of culture

Benedict’s core idea that different cultures reward different personality traits, with the result that what is considered psychologically abnormal in one culture, such as homosexual behaviour or altered states of awareness (what biomedicine might refer to as hallucinatory), can be considered psychologically normal in another culture. In demonstrating the cultural elativity of personality, Benedict makes a compelling case for human tolerance of diversity