Dimensions of Liminality

Abstract

This chapter attempts to pave further analytical ground, with and beyond Victor Turner, towards the application of liminality within a context of modernity, and in three ways: first, by proposing a descriptive model and a 'typology' that identifies various spatial and temporal dimensions of liminal situations; second, by suggesting a series of complementary concepts that facilitate a meaningful application of the concept of liminality with reference to processes of change and transition within larger social settings; third, by indicating a disciplinary and methodological framework for the kind of meaningful dialogue it is possible to construct between anthropology and social theory. Types of Liminality In Turner's famous expression, liminality refers to any 'betwixt and between' situation or object. It is evident that this understanding opens up space for possible uses of the concept even beyond Turner's own suggestions. Single moments, longer periods, or even whole epochs can be considered liminal. Liminality can also be applied to both single individuals and to larger groups (cohorts or villages), or whole societies, and arguably even entire civilizations. These various dimensions of liminality can be spelled out very simply. As we have suggested elsewhere (Thomassen 2009), and which we can now further elaborate and exemplify, experiences of liminality can be related to three different types of subjecthood: 1. single individuals 2. social groups (e.g. cohorts, minorities) 3. whole societies, entire populations, 'civilizations' The temporal dimension of liminality can relate to: 1. moments (sudden events) 2. periods (weeks, months, years) 3. epochs (decades, generations, arguably even centuries) These different dimensions can function together in a variety of combinations. This descriptive model can be suggested: