American Association for Public Opinion Research

Public Opinion Mechanisms Among Primitive Peoples

Author(s): Margaret Mead
Source: The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Jul., 1937), pp. 5-16
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2744663
Accessed: 06/11/2010 20:07

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=aapor.

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.

American Association for Public Opinion Research and Oxford University Press are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Public Opinion Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
PUBLIC OPINION MECHANISMS
AMONG PRIMITIVE PEOPLES
By MARGARET MEAD
MargaretMead (Ph.D. Columbia, 1928) sends this article to the
QUARTERLY fromtheislandof Bali whereshe is engagedon a two-year
researchprojectfor the AmericanMuseum of Natural Historywith
whichshe has been associatedas AssistantCuratorof Ethnologysince
1926. Field studiesundertheauspicesof suchinstitutions
as theNational
ResearchCouncil and the Social Science RtsearchCouncil have pre-
viouslytakenher to Samoa, 1925-26; the AdmiraltyIslands,1928-29;
and New Guinea, 1931-33. The results of some of these studies have
appearedin her Comingof Age in Samoa,GrowingUp in New Guinea,
The ChangingCultureof an Indian Tribe,and Sex and Temperament
in Three PrimitiveSocieties.This unusual analysisof public opinion
situationsamong primitivepeoplessuggestsmanynew perspectives of
the processof public opinion formationin our own more complex
civilization.

Studentsofprimitive societiesclaimthattheycanmakecontributions tothe

socialscienceswhichare primarily concernedwiththe analysisof social
processes withinour society.This claimhas varioustheoretical bases: (I)
The assumption thatprimitive societies are representative of simplersocial
forms, ancestral to our own,and therefore throwlightupontheprobable
history of an institution,and thefurther assumption thatthehistory of an
institution throwssignificant lightuponitsfunctioning; (2) The coherency
of thematerial;thefactthatthesocialsystem of a smallprimitive groupis
sufficiently simpleto be graspedin all itsaspectsby one investigator; and
(3) The importance of cross-cultural comparisons in helpingto clarify,
sharpen, limit,and enlargetheinstrumental concepts whicharebeingused
in theanalysis ofourownsociety. It is fromthisthirdpointofviewthatthe
findings fromprimitive societyshouldhave mostinterest forstudentsof
publicopinion.The theoretical claimsof (i) are somewhatdubious,and
also it is notof greatimportance forstudents of the operationof public
opinionat the presentday to considerhintsas to how our Stone Age
ancestors maybe supposedto havemanipulated theopinionsof thegroup.
Consideration (2), the coherency of thematerial, givesthedata a special
claimto consideration becauseit is fromtheanalysisof wholesocieties that
we canattempt thecross-cultural clarificationofconcepts.

PRIMITIVE OPINION MECHANISMS S

 In makingcross-cultural comparisonsvariouscoursesare open to us. We
may take a hypothesiswhich has been developed fromstudy of our own
cultureand subjectit to negativecriticism,showinghow the premisesupon
which the hypothesisis based are invalidated by such and such facts
obtainingin this or that primitivetribe.Such criticismrequiresthe social
scientistto redefinehis conceptsin the lightof the non-agreement of these
factsfromothersocieties.'
This approach leaves the studentof our societyholding the bag. The
ethnologistsays: "Here are instancesfromother functioningsocial systems
forwhich yourtheoryis not adequate. What are you going to do about it?"
In group discussionswhere the ethnologistplays this role, his major con-
tributionis to meeteverygeneralizationwith: "Yes, but . .
But it should also be possibleforthe ethnologistto make positivecon-
tributions:to analyze the social formsof primitivesocietyand to present
them in sufficiently compact and intelligibleterms so as to enrich the
workingconceptsof otherdisciplines.In so vast and so slightlydelimiteda
fieldas that of public opinion, the focus must be narrowedto make com-
parativecommentof any value at all. I shall confinemy discussionto the
relationshipbetweenpoliticalfunctioningand public opinion. I shall refer
to only a few selectedprimitivesocietiesof which I have first-handknowl-
writtenand oral materials.
edge,or upon which I have access to first-rate

THREE TYPES OF EMPHASIS

Among thesefew societiesI 'have found it possibleto distinguishthree
types of emphasis in the relationshipbetween political organizationand
public opinion. These types are: (I) Those societies which depend for
impetusor inhibitionof communityaction upon the continuingresponse
of individuals in public opinion situations,in the manner defined by
ProfessorAllport;2(II) Those which depend upon the operationof formal
alignmentsof individuals,who reactnot in termsof theirpersonalopinions
1 Examplesof thismethodare: Malinowski,B., Sex and Repression in Savage Society
(London: Kegan Paul, I1926); Benedict,R., "Cultureand thicAbnormal,"journal of
GeneralPsychology, Vol. IO, No. I, JanuaryI934, PP. 59-82; Mead, M., Comingof Age
in Samoa (New York: Morrow,i928).
2 "The termpublicopinionis given its meaningwith reference to a multi-individual
situationin whichindividualsare expressing themselves,or can be called upon to express
themselves, as favoringor supporting(or else disfavoringor opposing) some definite
condition,person,or proposalof widespreadimportance, in sucha proportion of number,
intensity,and constancy,as to give riseto the probability
of affecting action,directlyor
indirectly,towardthe objectconcerned."Allport,Floyd H., "Toward a Scienceof Public
Opinion,"PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, VOI. I, No. I, January1937, P- 23.

6 The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,

JULY I937
concerning thegivenissue,but in termsof theirdefinedpositionsin the
formalstructure; (III) Those societies whichdo notdependfortheirfunc-
tioningon publicopinionat all-in Professor Allport'ssenseof theterm-
but whichfunctionby invokingthe purelyformalparticipation in and
foran impersonal
respect pattern or code.
In our mixed and heterogeneous societyall of thesetypesof em-
phasesappear,no one in a pure form,whereasin the greatercoher-
ence and simplerintegration of primitive societies, the operationof each
formcanbe foundvirtually unconfused bythepresence oftheothers.Before
discussing theseextreme forms, however, it maybe well to illustrate from
ourownsociety. Whena groupofindividuals, as in a lynching mobor in a
popularand spontaneous uprisingdemandingbetterworkingconditions,
reactimmediately to a situation, each in termsof his own feelingon the
subject,and withoutreferring hisactionto considerations of partymember-
ship,churchaffiliations, ortherelationship between his actionand theforms
of his society,and theiractionis politically effective, this constitutesa
situation whichis typicalof societiesof Type I.3 Type II is foundwhen
individuals meetan issue,notbyresponding to theissueitself, butprimarily
in termsof partymembership. As an examplelet us takean issuewhichis
fortuitously present intheplatform ofonepolitical partyand is nota coherent
partof thepartyprogram, and letus saythatthe individualwhomwe are
considering is a member of his politicalpartypurelybecausehis father was.
Stillhe is strongly enoughinvolvedto supportfiercely all moves of hisown
partyand to condemnand execrate roundly all movesof theoppositeparty.
The issueitselfis subsidiary to itsplacein a schemeofopposition, in which,
iftheDemocratvotesYes,theRepublicanvotesNo. Type III is in a sense
the mostdifficult to illustratefromour own societybecauseour tradition
of emotionalinvolvement in everytypeof issuefromtheRevisionof the
Constitution to DaylightSavingTime is so strong. It is necessary to picture
a societyin whichissuesas vitalas migration or warare settled as formally,
fromthestandpoint of anyeffective expression of publicopinion,as is the
dateofThanksgiving Day. Here,althoughthebehavior oftheentirepopu-
lationis alteredfora day by the yearlyProclamation, thereis no issue
involving publicopinion.Similarly withthevagariesof thedateof Easter
Sunday.Although thedateon whichEasterfallseachyearis ofgreatimpor-
3 I am notconsidering
herethe individual'smotivations,
but merelymakingthe nega-
tiveprovisothatthosemotivesshouldbe primarilypersonal,and notconsciously
oriented
to some formof grouployaltyor some schemeof impersonalstructure.

PRIMITIVE OPINION MECHANISMS 7

tanceto largenumbersof peoplewhosecommercial interests
are involved
in the seasonablenessof the event,the date of Easter,arbitrarilyfixed
according to an outmodedmethodof calculation,remainsoutsidethefield
ofeffectivepublicopinion.Withthesepreliminary in mind,we
illustrations
can look at primitive
societies
whichexemplify thesetypes.
TYPE I: THE ARAPESH
The Arapeshare a Papuan-speaking people of New Guinea,who
occupya mountainous countrystretching betweenthe sea coast and an
inlandplain.They are withoutany institutionalized politicalforms;4they
haveno chiefs,priests, sanctioned soothsayers,or hereditaryleaders.They
live in smallcommunities in whichresidenceis exceedingly shifting,
and
are looselyclassifiedfor ceremonialpurposesinto geographical districts.
Betweenthe hamletsof each district, and betweenadjacenthamletsof
different districts,
thereare numerousinter-relationships basedon present
and pastmarriages, tradefriendships,economiccooperation, etc.Anycom-
munalworkis doneby temporary constellations
of affiliated
personsbased
on thevarioustiesofbloodrelationship, marriage, and residence.No man's
allegianceto anygroup-hispatrilineal kin,his patrilineal
clan,his heredi-
taryhamlet,his district, his ceremonialfeastingdivision-iseitherfixed
enoughovertime,or bindingenoughat anygivenmoment, to preventhis
following his own immediateimpulsesof helpfulness his
or of hostility,
tendency to avoid troubleor to plungeinto it whenoccasionoffers. The
smallest event-theslaughter ofa pig,thepresence ofa festeringsoreon the
footof someunimportant person,thedeathof an infant, theelopement of
a woman-maybecomea politicalissue,and maylead to theformation of
new alliancesor to thedeclaration of new animosities.Bothalliancesand
hostilities,
however, are equallyshort-livedbecause,owingto the lack of
politicalorganization,theycannotbe maintained overtime;a newissuewill
realigneveryone tomorrow.
Let us taketheinstanceofthetrespass of a pigownedbya resident in
one hamleton the gardensof a memberof anotherhamlet.Thereis in
existence a modeof procedure in suchcases.The man whosegardenhas
beentrespassed uponkillsthepig,and-if hefeelsfriendly towardtheowner
4 It is impossiblein thespace of a shortarticleto deal in any but thesketchiest
fashion
withthepoliticalsystemof thesepeople.For a shortsummarj,see ChapterI, Mead, M.,
ed., Competition and Cooperationamong PrimitivePeoples (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1937). See also Mead, M., Sex and Temperament in Three PrimitiveSocieties(New
York:Morrow,
1935).

8 The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,

JULY I 9 3 7
of thepig,or is a quietmanand anxiousto avoid trouble-sendswordto
theownertocomeandgethispig.This results in a minimum ofbad feeling
as themeatcan stillbe usedto discharge debtsamonga meat-hungry people.
If,however, theownerofthelandis angeredbythetrespass and hisfeeling
ofoutrageis notassuagedbykillingthepig,he notonlykillsthepigbuthe
eatsit. But'suchan act maylead to hostilities fromthepig'sownerand is
therefore an act of politicalsignificanceupon whichhe will not venture
without first
sounding outpublicopinion.Whilethepigcontinues to rootin
hisgarden,or whileit lies freshly bleedingfromhis spear,he consultshis
nearestage-mates and immediate associates,hisbrother, his brother-in-law,
hiscousin.Iftheyareagainsteatingthepig,themattergoesno further. But
iftheyapprove, thematter iscarriedtoa slightlyhigherauthority, thefathers
and uncleswho happento be in the immediate vicinity. Finally,to clinch
thematter, a Big Man,a manwhohas shownsomeratherreluctant ability
to takeresponsibility in theorganization of sociallife,is consulted.If he
saysyesalso,thepig is cutup and all whohavegiventheirconsentto the
venture sharein eatingthepig,andthusaffirm theirwillingness to sharein
any unpleasantconsequences-animmediatescrap, a longerbattle of
blackmagic,ortheseverance ofexisting peacefulfeasting relationshipswith
the pig-owner's group.This situationfulfils,it seemsto me, Professor
Allport'sdefinition, and is the crux of all Arapeshpoliticalaction.5An
Arapeshhas an opinion foror againsteverycourseof action proposed,and
upon the natureof theseexpressedopinions,who is forand who is against,
dependsthefateof theissue.Sucha societymay,perhaps, be said to repre-
sentthepoliticalimportanceof publicopinionat its maximum, a society
whichdependsupon personalattitudesand reliesupon aggregations of
involved
emotionally personstoproduceaction.
Amongothersocieties in whichtheimmediate expressedresponses of
areofmaximum
individuals importancemaybementioned theAndamanese,6
the Ojibwa,7 and the Eskimo.8
5 For theexpression of publicopinionin a case of suspectedsorceryamongtheArapesh
see Sex and Temperament, pp. III-I2I, especiallyp. I2I.
6 Brown, A. R. (Radcliffe-Brown), The Andaman Islanders (CambridgeUniversity
Press,1932).
7 Landes, R., "The Ojibwa of Canada," ChapterIII of Competition and Cooperation
amongPrimitive Peoples,op. cit.
8 Thalbitzer,W., ed., Meddelelserom Grdnland, Vols. 39 and 40; and Mirsky,J.,"The
Eskimo of Greenland,"ChapterIV of Competitionand Cooperationamong Primitive
Peoples,op. cit.

PRIMITIVE OPINION MECHANISMS 9

TYPE II: THE IATMUL
Societiesof Type II are morehighlyorganizedand containcultural
formswhichresultin individuals actingtogether in groupsin regardto an
immediateissue,not becausetheyhave an opinionabout the issue,but
becausetheyhavean emotional allegianceto a formalgroup.Such societies
arecommonly organizedupona dual basis.This dualitymaybe basedupon
differences as simpleas thatbetweenthepeoplebornin winterand those
bornin summer, or betweenthosewhoareforbidden toeat hawkand those
forbidden or betweenthosewholivesouthof thecemetery
to eat parrot, or
thosewholivenorthofit.Butuponsucha simpleand formal base,ideasof
social oppositionmay be builtwhichare sufficiently well organizedto
becomethestructural principleofactionwithina society. Whenmembership
in a groupwhichis by definition opposedto anothergrouphas becomeof
primeimportance, anypoliticalissueinsteadof raisingthequestion:"How
do I personally feelaboutit?" raisesthequestion:"WhatdoesmyGroupA
thinkaboutthis?Have theytakenup a positionin favorof it? If so, I, as
one of theGroupA, supportit againstGroupB whowillof courseoppose
it."In suchsocieties thesuccessofanyattempt to influencethegrouptoward
actiondependsnotuponthepersonalopinionof individuals, but uponthe
functioning oftheseformalantagonisms.
The latmulpeople9of New Guinea are a tribeof head-hunters who
liveinlarge,independent villageson theMiddleSepikRiverin New Guinea.
Withoutanyformofchieftainship or centralizedauthority,theyare ableto
integrate for peacefulcommunity livingand actionagainstoutsidersas
manyas a thousandpeople-the Arapeshdistrictseldomincludedmore
thantwohundredpersons, a hamletaveragedaboutforty. latmulsdepend
upona system ofcross-cuttinggroupsin termsof whichindividuals act as
members ofpatrilinealclans,as members ofmatrilineal groups,as members
ofopposedage grades,as members ofone oftwoopposedtotemic moieties.
Considerations ofinter-group ofdefending
relationships, one'smother'sclan
againstall others, or of alwaysmeetinga challengefromtheopposingage
grade,supersedethe meritsof actual issues.The communities are held
together onlybythefactthatthesevariousloyalties overlapand contradict
eachotherso thatthemanwhois one'sformalfoetoday-qua groupmem-
bership-isone'sformalallytomorrow.
9 See Bateson,G., "Social Structure
of the latmul People," Oceania, Vol. II, Nos. 3
and 4; Bateson,G., Naven,A SurveyoftheProblemsSuggestedbya CompositePictureof
the Cultureof a New Guinea Tribe,Drawn fromThreePointsof View (CambridgeUni-
versityPress, 1936).

The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,

JULY x937
 Let us consider, then,examplesof the functioning of publicopinion
amongthelatmul,in theplayof groupattitudes. The elderage gradeof
MoietyA'0 wereinitiating thenovicesfromMoietyB. Initiation ceremonies
amongthelatmulare markedbya seriesof irresponsibly executedbrutali-
ties.On thisparticular occasion, an innovator, a memberoftheeldergroup
ofMoietyA, proposedthatone bullying episodeshouldbe omitted fromthe
series.Thiswasan occasionuponwhichpublicopinioncouldbe expressed. A
memberof theelderage gradeof MoietyB, thegroupwhichwouldpres-
entlyinitiate thenovicesof MoietyA, immediately turnedtheproposalinto
an occasionforceremonial hostility,
completely ignoringtheissueat hand,
and accusingMoietyA ofbeingafraidofwhathismoiety, B, woulddo later
whentheyhadto initiatetheA novices.MoietyA, in response to thistaunt,
carried outtheritewithparticular cruelty.The factthattheproposed change
wouldhavesoftened thefateoftheirownchildren was ignoredbyMoietyB
in favorofthechanceto makea pointofceremonial hostility.
Hereitis necessary torecognize a peculiarityofIatmulculture. Anyrite
onceneglected is regardedas goneforever. Iftheproposed omission hadbeen
carriedthrough, theinitiatorysystem wouldhavebeenimpoverished byone
episode.Had themember ofMoietyB beeninterested in preservingan item
ofceremonial hecouldhavechosenno moreeffective methodthanto invoke
the rivalryfeelingbetweenthe two groups.So a Iatmulwho wishedto
organizea head-hunting raidin whichotherpeoplewerenotyetinterested,
mightstarta proposalfortheraidwitha tauntto theotherside aboutthe
paucity ofheadswhichtheyhad takenin thepastyear.This tauntwouldbe
flungbackwithinterest, and in theend thejealousprideof each moiety
wouldbe involvedin goingon thesameraid.
Thus in societies so organizedtheimpetusto actionis givennotbyan
appealtothedirectopinionofindividuals on an issue,butindirectlythrough
theinvocation of grouployalties and grouprivalries. Wherean individual
is a memberof a seriesof concentric groups-sothat,as a memberof his
family,of his household, his clan,his village,his dual organization, his
district,he is consistentlyassociatedwiththesamepeople-thereis danger
of thesegroupattitudeshardeninginto hostilities which will splitthe
society.Unlessthereis a centralauthority at the head to whichall are
bound,thisdangeris especially greatif opinionsbecomeorganizedinstead
10 I haveconsiderablysimplifiedthisstatement.
The moreintricate detailsmaybe found
on p. 135 of Naven,op. cit. I have translated
Ax3 as "elderbrothergrade of MoietyA";
Ay3 as "elderage gradeof MoietyB"; By4 as "novicegroupof MoietyB," etc.

PRIMITIVE OPINION MECHANISMS xx

 This condition
of fortuitous. hardlyobtainsamongtheIatmulbecausethe
the formation
of loyaltiesprevents
cross-cutting of permanent
antithetical
withinthecommunity."
attitudes
TYPE III: THE BALINESE
In thethirdtypeof societytheindividualis notemotionally involved
withtheimmediate issue,or in hisloyalty to a group or to series of groups
withoverlapping and cross-cutting memberships. The community is not
composedof politicalindividuals, butof a certainnumberof housesites,
seatsin thecouncilhouses,recurrent dutiesto thetemple.Intothesecubby-
holesin a spatially and calendrically definedsocialorganization individuals
arefitted as occasiondictates.Theirwholedependence is on thepreservation
oftheimpersonal pattern.
In a Balinesemountain village,all able-bodiedmenaremembers ofthe
villagecounciland progressin turntowardgreaterand greaterofficial
importance untilat lasttheyaresuperannuated and replaced.In thisscheme
each humanunitis a cipher;he fitsintoa cubbyhole whichis successively
filledbya seriesofhumanbeings,eachone ofwhomhas beentrainedfrom
childhoodto feelthathiswholesafety dependsuponthecontinuance of the
pattern.Whereasin societies ofTypeI, the question is: "How do I feelabout
it?" and "How do A, B, and C feelaboutit?" and in societiesof Type II
thequestionis "Does mygroupsupport this?"or "Does theoppositegroup
opposeit?",and theissueitselfbecomesirrelevant exceptto a fewindivid-
ualswhomayconsciously orunconsciously exploittheseloyalties to produce
results,in societiesof Type III thequestionis only:"Whatis theplace of
thisnewproposalin ourpattern ofdecreedand traditional behavior?"This
questionis askedas seriously and as self-consciously as theconstitutionality
ofa proposedactof Congressmightbe discussed bya professor of jurispru-
dence.The processof rejection or acceptance, however, is as colorless as the
placingofa namein a decreedalphabetical order.
For example,a new formof incestis committed in a village;a man
marries hisfirstcousintwiceremoved, hisclassificatory grandmother. In this
11 But in such societiesdecisionsare not reachedby majorities, but by balancingand
discardingirrelevantloyalties.This throwslight,I think,uponone of thepuzzlingaspects
of AmericanIndian politicalprocedure,the requirement thatany decisionof a council
shouldbe unanimous.This requirement amonga peopletrainedto feelfor or against an
issueonlywhenthe issuewas translated intogroupterms,meantthatmembersrefrained
frominvokingirrelevantgroup loyaltiesand so left the few who were interestedor
capabletodecidethecurrentissueon itsmerits.[The readermaybe interested to notethat
in the article"Peasantsand Propagandain Croatia" in this issue Dinko Tomasic refers
(p. 72) to thecustomary unanimity of decisionsin theCroats'villagecouncils.-ED.]

12 The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,

JULY 19 3 7
 village it is not permittedto marrya firstcousin. In othervillages of which
the people have heard, it is forbiddento marrya person reckonedas two
generationsremoved. The council meets and. deliberates.The head men
hesitateand demur; theydo not know the answer. Relativesof the girl and
of the boy are called beforethemand say merely:"We will followwhatever
decision is made." The village law about first-cousin incest is that both
personsshall be expelled fromthe village and placed on "Land of Punish-
ment" to the south of it, and forbiddento participatein village land or
worshipotherthan the Gods of Death. No one pleads the cause of the boy
or the girl.No one speaks of theoutrage.Neitherfamilyattemptsto gather
adherentsand form a party. The calendrical expert who is the greatest
authorityon village law pointsout: (i) that theymightconsiderwhether
a firstcousin twice removed is nearer than a plain second cousin, with
whom marriageis permitted;and (2) that if the couple are expelled the
village will have to undergoa taboo periodof forty-two days and thatsuch
and such of the variousfeastswhichare scheduledwill have to be postponed
and such and such feastswill have to be omittedentirely.The day drags on.
Occasionallysomeonepointsout to the head man: "You are the heads. It is
yourbusinessto decide whatthe law is." Finallyit is decided that,no matter
how farremoved,a firstcousin is a firstcousin,and the law of the village is
clear. The villagersare apportionedand half are sent to each house to lift
the house and set it outsidethe village.The relativesof the girl worryabout
the cost of the purification ceremonies;the relativesof the boy weep a little
quietlyat home. No one takes sides; theyfollowthe law, and forforty-two
days no one mayprayto the gods or consulta soothsayerabout his illness.In
ProfessorAllport'ssensethereis no public opinion situation.No one can be
said to "favoror support"or to "disfavoror oppose" "some definitecondi-
tion, person, or proposal of widespread importance."The only political
feelingthe people possessis in favorof the preservationof the pattern.Not
How do I feel?or How does mygroupfeel?,but How does thisissue fitin?
That is the only question.
It is as if the body politicto which a new issue had to be referredin
each of thethreetypesof societymightbe likened to threetypesof officials
to whom one applied for some relaxationof a regulation.The firsttype
would act as he felt,accordingto whetherhe liked or dislikedthe applicant,
whetherhe wishedto appear to be a jollygood fellow,whetherhe fearedthe
consequencesin termsof a rebuke froma superior,etc. The second type
would referhis behaviorto such considerationsas thathe and the applicant

PRIMITIVE OPINION MECHANISMS 13

werebothMasonsorbothCatholicsortoa difference ofrace,nationality,
or
class.The thirdtypeofofficial
merely looksup thecodebooktofindwhether
or not the law whichhe is administering permitsthe grantingof the
request,and quiteimpersonally and coollyhe repliesthatit can or cannot
be done. He is involvedin neitherpermissionnor refusal;he merely
administersthelaw.
INNOVATION IN THE THREE TYPES
An innovatoror importeramong the Arapesh must suit the new item
to the feelingof the people. There is no bodyof law to which an innovation
may be referred.The people are so easy-goingthat theyare quite readyto
accept as alreadycustomary'2an act which has occurredtwice. There is no
group sufficiently powerfuland organized to defend an innovation,or to
imposeit on the community.There is no group pride which can be invoked
to supportan innovationotherwiseunsupported.There is nothingwhatso-
everto determinethe issue exceptthecongruenceof the proposedinnovation
with the feelingof the individualArapeshwho are immediatelyconcerned.
For example, a new ceremonywas being purchased by an Arapesh
village, a ceremonywhich had been broughtfromafar. It contained new
masks,new songs,new dances, new stylesof clothing,and bits of associated
magic. One of these bits of magic providedthatthe owners would become
so desirable that all the women within many miles would run away to
them. Now the village of Kobelen had paid a greatdeal forthe ceremony,
strain,ing its resourcesto the utmost.But this last observancetheyrejected;
they refused even to hear this charm. The idea of being pursued by
strange and amorous women was thoroughlydiscordantwith the mild,
highlydomesticatedlove ideals of the Arapesh.They said: "You may keep
thatspell. It would onlybringus trouble."
An examinationof Arapesh importationsfrom surroundingcultures
shows thatthisis typical;everyimportationis prunedand toneddown until
it is congruent-not with the articulateformof the culture,but with the
feelingof individuals.
On the other hand, in the latmul village of Komindimbit,a strange
wooden mask was introducedintotheinlitiatory ritual.A group of men from
thatvillagehad found it restingas a trophyof war in a foreignvillage and
12 This happened,forinstance,in thedistrict
of Alitoawhentwo menof thehamletof
Ahalesimihieach marriedfirsta youngwoman,and thenthat youngwoman'swidowed
mother.No one was offended,and theybegan to speak of "the marryingfashionof
Ahalesimihi."

14 JULYI937
The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,
had stolenit and takenit homewiththem.Theydecidedto makeit into
onemoresymbol in termsofwhichtheycouldscoreofftheothermoiety. At
the nextinitiation, the maskwas dulytreatedas a mystery, housedin a
specialhouse,thenovicesof theothermoietywereall whippedbeforethey
couldseeit.Afterthisitwas dulyentrenched as partoftheinitiatory system.
As a thirdcontrast, consider
thisproblem arisingin a Balinesemountain
village:Can thevillagepriestess wearblackand whitestripedvelvet?She
is a sacredperson,surrounded withtaboosconcerning whatshe maydare
to wear,eat,carry, whomshemaysafelyvisit,underwhattypeof roofshe
maysafely sleep.It is a goodpieceofcloth,butcan shewearit? The matter
is referredto thosewho are wisein the law, and theirdecisiontakesinto
account(a) all blackclothis forbidden to religiousfunctionaries in that
village;(b) silkis forbidden; (c) thisclothis neither all black nor exactly
silk.Can shewearit? Oncetheproblemis settled, legalistically,in termsof
how muchblackmakesa pieceof clothblack,how muchsoftness maybe
assumedtobe analogousto silk,sheis stillfreeto wearit or not.But ifthe
decisionis incorrect, she herself-notthe village,not her kin, but she
herself-will be punishedbytheGods,and in anycase no one else will be
interested.The slightest breakin the patternmustbe viewedwithgreat
caution,and ifadoptedmustbe rationalized.13
It maybe objectedthattheseinstances are curiously incomparable; in
one case I describethe rejection of an imponderable bit of magic,in the
secondcasethe incorporation of an alien religiousobject,and in thethird
a decisionaboutwearinga pieceof cloth.But I can plead,in extenuation,
thatI am following herethefactsas I knowthem.Societies liketheArapesh
whichdependupontheemotional organizationoftheirmembers to integrate
theirinstitutions can affordto riskthe importation of whole institutions,
whereasmoretightly organizedsocietieshaveto finda formalplaceforthe
importation, whilethe Balinesehabituallydeal with itemsof culturein
smalldiscrete bits.
Although I have,forpurposesofclearerexposition, distinguished these
threetypes,it mustnot be supposedthatthe classifications are mutually
exclusive or thattheyexhaustthepossibilities. The society of Zuni maybe
13So a Brahmanpriestin Bali has beenforbidden fromtimcimmemorial to walk under
runningwater,and Balineseroadsare frequently crossedby irrigating
aqueducts.As motor
roadswerebuiltand priestsfaredfurther afield,gettingout and climbingsteeproadbanks
becamemoreand moreof a nuisance.And now one famouspriesthas decidedthathe
maysitin a closedcar and notget out whenthecar goes underan aqueduct,becausethe
car is reallyhis house,and he is noton theroad at all.

PRIMTIVE OPINION MECHANISMS 15

said to lie betweenthat of latmul and Bali; theypossess a series of cross-
cutting and overlappinggroups, as do the latmul, but their emotional
involvementin any group is much less,and theyrelya greatdeal, as do the
Balinese,upon devotionto an impersonalpattern.Buitunlike the Balinese,
the judgmentof one man upon his neighboris continuallyinvoked-among
the Zuni-as a socially regulatingmechanism,and so public opinion is a
constantlypresentnegativesanction,slowing down and preventingaction.
But the termsin which a judgment is renderedin Zuni are reminiscentof
the impersonallegalism of Bali. For example, a Zuni familymurdereda
Navajo guest.This was articulately condemnedbecause the man who com-
mittedthe murderdid not have the ceremonialrightto kill people.

CONCLUSION
This briefconsiderationof divergentsocial systemssuggeststhat each
of the differenttypes of appeal to public opinion or ignoring of public
opinion which we find in modern societypresupposesa different relation-
ship betweenthe characterformationof the citizen and the politicalsystem
of which he is a unit.Each appeal: "How do you personallyfeelabout this?"
"Every memberof X group will of coursesupport . . ." or "The Y group
are supportingthis, thereforeyou, as a memberof the opposed X group,
mustoppose!" "The proposedchange will introducesuch and such discrep-
ancies in the legal structureupon which our societyis based"-each of these
designatesthe recipientof theappeal as a differentsortof politicalanimal. In
an integratedprimitivesociety,one type of appeal is reiterateduntil it
becomes a factorin furtherintegratingthe individuals.In our diverseand
disintegratesociety,the incommensurability of these types of appeal may
possiblystimulatesome individualsto criticalthoughtwhich transcendsany
of them. But it is even more possible that a continuedexposureto such
incomparableassumptionsmay be an importantinfluencein the fragmenta-
tion and distintegration of the average citizen.
Bajoeng Gede,
Bali,Netherlands
East Indies.

x6 The PUBLIC OPINION Quarterly,

JULY I 9 3 7