Totem and Taboo in Retrospect

Author(s): A. L. Kroeber
Source: The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Nov., 1939), pp. 446-451
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2769858 .
Accessed: 23/02/2011 16:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Journal of Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

TOTEM AND TABOO IN RETROSPECT

A. L. KROEBER
ABSTRACT
Freud's explanationsof culturaloriginswaver betweenbeing historicand being
psychologicalin character. As historythey remainwhollyunfounded,but they may
prove to contain elementscontributingto understandingof the generichuman psychologyunderlyingthe historyof human culture,especiallyits recurrentor repetitive
is due partlyto an
features.Psychoanalyticintransigeanceas to historicinterpretation
in Freud's own thinkingand partlyto rigidityin his followers,
"overdetermination"
as exemplifiedby Jones and Roheim. Psychoanalysishas maintainedan all-or-none
attitude toward general science. Science has profitedby definiteabsorptionsfrom
psychoanalysis.

andTaboo
Nearly twentyyearsago I wrotean analysisof Totem
that brain child of Freud which was to be the precursorof a long
series of psychoanalyticbooks and articles explainingthis or that
aspect of culture,or the wholeof it.' It seemsan appropriatetimeto
returnto the subject.
I see no reason to waver over my criticalanalysisof Freud's book.
There is no indication that the consensusof anthropologistsduring
these twentyyears has moved even an inch nearer acceptance of
Freud's central thesis. But I found myselfsomewhat consciencestrickenwhen, perhaps a decade later, I listened to a student in
Sapir's seminarin Chicago makinghis reporton Totemand Taboo,
who, like myself,firstspread out its gossamer texture and then
laboriously tore it to shreds. It is a procedure too suggestiveof
breakinga butterflyon the wheel. An iridescentfantasydeservesa
moredelicate toucheven in the act of demonstrationof its unreality.
Freud himselfhas said of my reviewthat it characterizedhis book
as a JustSo story. It is a felicitousphrase, comingfromhimself.
Many a tale by Kipling or Anderssencontainsa profoundpsychological truth. One does not need thereforeto cite and tryit in the
sterncourtof evidentialconfrontation.
However, the fault is not whollymine. Freud does speak of the
''great event with which culturebegan." And therewithhe enters
history.Events are historicaland beginningsare historical,and huI "Totem and Taboo: An Ethnologic Psychoanalysis," Amer.
Anthropologist,
XXII (I920), 48-55.
446

TOTEM AND TABOO IN RETROSPECT

447

mancultureis appreciablehistorically.
It is difficult
to say howfar
he realizedhisvacillationbetweenhistorictruthand abstracttruth
expressed
through
intuitive
imagination.
A historic
callsfor
finding
ofplace and timeand order;insteadofwhich,he
somespecification
offers
a finding
ofuniquecardinality,
suchas historyfeelsit cannot
deal with.
Freudis reported
subsequently
to havesaid thathis"event"is to
be construed
as "typical."Herewith
webeginto approacha basisof
A typicalevent,historically
possibleagreement.
speaking,is a recurrent
one. Thiscan hardlybe admittedforthefather-slaying,
eating,and guiltsense.At anyrate,thereis no profit
in discussing
the
ofan eventwhichwe do notevenknowto haveoccurred
recurrence
once. But thereis no needsticking
faston theword"event"because
is evidently
Freudusedit. His argument
ambiguousas betweenhistoricalthinking
andpsychological
thinking.Ifweomitthefatalconceptofevent,ofan act as it happensinhistory,
wehaveleftoverthe
conceptofthepsychologically
potential.Psychological
insightmay
legitimately
hopeto attainto therealization
and definition
ofsucha
and to this,Freudshouldhave confined
potentiality;
himself.We
may accordingly
properlydisregardany seemingclaim,or halfofthesuggested
claim,to historicauthenticity
actualhappening,
as
beingbesidethe real point,and considerwhetherFreud'stheory
containsany possibility
of beinga generic,timelessexplanation
of
thepsychology
thatunderlies
certainrecurrent
historicphenomena
or institutions
liketotemism
and taboo.
Herewe obviouslyareon betterground.It becomesbetteryetif
we discardcertaingratuitous
andreallyirrelevant
assumptions,
such
as that the self-imposed
taboo following
the father-slaying
is the
originalof all taboos,thesederivingfromit as secondary
displacementsor distortions.Strippeddown in this way, Freud's thesis
wouldreduceto theproposition
thatcertainpsychicprocessestend
alwaysto be operativeand to findexpression
in widespread
human
institutions.
Amongtheseprocesseswouldbe the incestdriveand
incestrepression,
filialambivalence,
and thelike;in short,ifonelike,
the kernelof the Oedipussituation.Afterall, if ten modernanwereaskedto designateone universalhumaninstituthropologists
tion,ninewouldbe likelyto nametheincestprohibition;
somehave

448

THE AMERICAN JOURNALOF SOCIOLOGY

so constant
expressly
namedit as theonlyuniversalone. Anything
fluctuating
as this,at leastas regardsitsnucleus,in thenotoriously
universeof culture,can hardlybe theresultof a "mere"historical
accidentdevoidofpsychological
significance.
If thereis accordingly
an underlying
in an
factorwhichkeepsreproducing
thephenomenon
unstableworld,thisfactormustbe something
in the humanconstitution-inotherwords,a psychicfactor.Therewiththe dooris
butat any
opennotforan acceptancein totoofFreud'sexplanation
Moreover,
rateforitsseriousconsideration
as a scientific
hypothesis.
it is an explanation
certainly
markedby deeperinsightand supportthanthe
able by moreparallelevidencefrompersonalpsychology
olderviews,such as thatfamiliarity
breedssexualindifference,
or
recourseto a supposed"instinct"whichis merelya verbalrestatementoftheobservedbehavior.
whichis a muchrarerphenomenon
thanincesttaboo,
Totemism,
mightthenwellbe thejointproductoftheincest-drive-and-repressionprocessandofsomeotherlesscompelling
factor.Nonsexualtaboo,on theotherhand,whichrearsitselfin so manyproteanforms
overthewholefieldofculture,
mightbe due to a setofstilldifferent
have
butanalogouspsychicfactors.Anthropologists
andsociologists
underlying
whichwould
certainly
longbeengropingforsomething
in culture,
and thevariations
helpthemexplainboththerepetitions
providedthe explanationwere evidential,extensibleby further
nortoo one-sided.Put in some
analysis,and neithertoo simplistic
suchformas this,Freud'shypothesis
mightlongbeforethishave
intherealmofculturalunderstanding
insteadofbeing
provedfertile
mainlyrejectedor ignoredas a brilliantfantasy.
restatement
or
What has stood in the way of such a fruitful
Thereseemto be at least threefactors:one due to
transposition?
thethird
Freudhimself,
andhisfollowers,
anotherjointlyto himself
mainlyto theFreudians.
The firstoftheseis Freud'salreadymentioned
which
ambiguity
leads himto statea timelesspsychological
explanationas ifit were
inhisthinkis evidentelsewhere
one. Thistendency
alsoa historical
of
It
be
the
an
extraordinarily
exploraing. appearsto
counterpart
tive imagination,
constantly
impelledto penetrateintonew intellectualterrain.One consequenceis a curiousanalogyto what he
has discoveredin regardto the manifestand the latentin
himself

TOTEM AND TABOO IN RETROSPECT

449

dreams.The manifest
is there,butit is ambiguous;a deepermeanthe
ingliesbelow;fromthepointofviewofthislatentlowercontent,
Muchlikethis,it seems
manifest
is accidentaland inconsequential.
to me, is the historicaldresswhichFreud giveshis psychological
it; he doesnotstandbyit as integral.
insight.He doesnotrepudiate
buthisinsighthavingmanifested
itselfin the
It is reallyirrelevant;
ofthis"manifest"
form.His viewis
dress,he cannotdivesthimself
likea dream.
overdetermined
A secondfactoris thecuriousindifference
whichFreudhas always
hisconclusions
withthe
shownas to whether
do or do notintegrate
totality
ofscience.Thisledhimat onetimeto accepttheinheritance
attiofacquiredtraitsas ifit did notclashwithstandardscientific
in his
tude. Here againwe have thecompleteexplorer
whoforgets
ofwhathe startedfrom
orleftbehind.
quest,orrepresses,
knowledge
In Freudhimself
one is inclinednot to quarreltoo hardwiththis
vistas.
without
tendency;
it,hemighthaveopenedfewerand shorter
whohave so largelymerely
more
Ofhisdisciples,however,
followed,
liaisonmightbe expected.I recallRank,whilestilla Freudian,after
his viewsto a criticallysympathetic
audience,being
expounding
certainofthemto thefindings
ofscienceat large
pressedto reconcile
heldthatthere
and, afteran hour,concedingthatpsychoanalysts
eachon itsownlevelandindependent
mightbe morethanonetruth,
withoutappearingto realoftheother.Andhe madetheadmission
ize its import.
A thirdelementin thesituationis theall-or-none
attitudeofmost
avowedpsychoanalysts.
They insiston operatingwithina closed
system.At anyrate,ifnotwhollyclosed,it growsonlyfromwithin;
fromwithout.A classicalexampleis
it is not open to influence
ErnestJones'sresistanceto Malinowski'sfinding
that amongthe
Melanesianstheeffects
directedtowardthefatherinour
matrilineal
arelargelydisplaceduponthemother's
therelacivilization
brother,
tionoffatherand children
beingratherone ofsimpleand relatively
the
univalent
affection.
Therewith
Malinowski
hadreallyvindicated
oftheOedipusrelation.He showedthatthemechanism
mechanism
remainedoperativeeven in a changedfamilysituation;a minor
to thechangeingiven
conforming
modification
ofit,initsdirection,
couldnotseethis,andresisted
toothand
condition.Jones,however,
nail. Because Freudin the cultureof Viennahad determined
that

450

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY

had to reambivalence
was directedtowardthefather,
ambivalence
main directedto him universally,
even whereprimaryauthority
residedin an uncle.
The sametendencyappearsin Roheim,whose"Psycho-analysis
obof PrimitiveCultureTypes"2containsa massof psychological
mostvaluableto culturalanthropologists,
but so organservations
izedas to be unusableby them.Nonehaveusedit,so faras I know.
on thepartof anthropologists
in
This is notdue to lack ofinterest
forin recentyearsa whole
behaviorwithincultures,
psychological
seriesofthemhavebegunavowedlyto dealwithsuchbehavior.Nor
ofqualityinRoheim'sdata: thesearerich,
is it dueto anydeficiency
as to posvivid,novel,and valuable.But thedata are so presented
sess organization
onlyfromthepointof viewof orthodoxpsychoto theculturein whichtheyoccur,
analytictheory.Withreference
or to the consecutivelifehistoriesof personalities,
theyare inof
choate.The closingsentence the monograph-following
immematerial-is typical:"We see then,
diatelyon some illuminative
andthat
thatthesexualpracticesofa peopleareindeedprototypical
fromtheirposturein coitustheirwholepsychicattitudemay be
be imaginedwhichwouldappearmore
Can a conclusion
inferred."
arbitrarily
dogmaticthan this to any psychologist,
psychiatrist,
or sociologist?
anthropologist,
The fundamental
conceptswhichFreudformulated-repression,
and infantilepersistences,
dreamsymbolism
regression
and overtowardmembers
determination,
guiltsense,theeffects
of thefamily-have graduallyseepedintogeneralscienceand becomean integraland important
part of it. If one assumesthat our science
formssome kindof largerunit becauseits basic orientation
and
theseconceptsconstitute
methodare uniform,
thepermanent
conof Freudand psychoanalysis
to generalscience;and the
tribution
is large. Beyond,thereis a further
contribution
set of concepts
whichinthemainhavenotfoundtheirwayintoscience:thecensor,
thecastration
theexplanation
thesuperego,
complex,
ofspecific
culTo
turalphenomena. theseconceptstheseveralrelevantbranches
of science-sociology,anthropology,
psychology,and medicine
about as consistently
alike-remainimpervious
as whenthe con2Internat. Jour. Psycio-anIalysis,

searchnumber).

XIII

(1932),

I-:22I

(Roheir

Australasian
Re-

TOTEM AND TABOO IN RETROSPECT

45I

thatscience
ceptswerefirst
developed.It maytherefore
be inferred
on the
is likelyto remainnegativeto them.To thepsychoanalysts,
contrary,
the two classesof conceptsremainon thesame level,of
intoone system.
muchthesamevalue,and inseparably
interwoven
In this qualityof nondifferentiation
betweenwhat the scientific
worldacceptsas realityand rejectsas fantasy,betweenwhat is
moveessentialand whatis incidental,
theorthodox
psychoanalytic
mentrevealsitselfas partaking
ofthenatureofa religion-asystem
ofmysticism;
even,it mightbe said,it showscertainofthequalities
ofa delusionalsystem.It has appropriated
to itselfsuchofthedata
of science-the cumulativerepresentative
of reality-as were diIt has sought
gestibleto it and has ignoredthelargerremainder.
littleintegration
withthe totalityof science,and onlyon its own
has shown
terms.By contrast,
science,whilealsoofcoursea system,
itselfa relatively
openone: it has acceptedand alreadylargelyabIt is
sorbeda considerable
partof the conceptsof psychoanalysis.
indicativeof thelargenessof Freud'smindthat,althoughthe sole
and theoriginator
founder
ofthemovement
ofmostofitsideas,his
in themoredoubtfulareascarrya stampoftolerveryambiguities
he doesnotinsiston
ance. He maypersistin certaininterpretations;
Ofthisclassis
them;theyremainmoreor lessfruitful
suggestions.
his theoryoftheprimary
determination
of culture.As a construct,
neithersciencenorhistorycan use it; but it wouldseemthatthey
can bothacceptand utilizesomeof the processconceptsthatare
involvedin theconstruct.
notonlyas an
I trustthatthisreformulation
maybe construed
but as a tributeto one of thegreatmindsof our
amendehonorable
day.
UNIVERSITY

OF CALIFORNIA

NOTE.-Since the above was writtenand submitted,Freud has published

Der Mann Mosesunddiemonotheistische
Religion.The thesisof Totemand Taboo
"Ich haltean diesenAufbaunochheutefest" (p. 23I). One conis reaffirmed:
cessionin the directionof my argumentis made: the fatherkillingwas not a
unique event but "hat sich in Wirklichkeit
iuberJahrtausendeerstreckt"(p.
I46). Of his stimulator,RobertsonSmith,Freud says superbly:"Mit seinen
Gegnerntrafichniezusammen"(p. 232). We, on our part, if I may speak for
ethnologists,
thoughremainingunconverted,have met Freud, recognizethe
encounteras memorable,and herewithresalutehim.