During a liminal journey, initiates seek interaction to provide objectivity and solve .... the original Star Wars story, Lucas studied The Hero with a Thousand Faces and modified .... .nl/text/FINAL%20VERSION%20THESIS%20(compressed).pdf.
The Liminal Timeline: A Primer for Leadership Theory and Application J.W. Bergmann, ABD, MAOL Johnson University
Previous World
Transition
Separation
Incorporation
LIMINAL PHASE
New World
Figure 1: The ceremonial rites of passage stage progression depicted as a tripartite progression between two “worlds” (Van Gennep, 1960, p. 21).
Liminality is an uncomfortable and often avoided transitional process; the disturbance or an irritation in the order of things, the forbidden territory of knowledge one goes through to pass from one well defined position to another which is equally well defined. THE LIMINAL TIMELINE IN OTHER AREAS OF SCHOLARSHIP
LIMINALITY DEFINED Humans struggle with contentment. Out of curiosity we long for, explore, challenge, adapt, and evolve according to that which we perceive to be “better.” At the same time, change may be avoided or even despised. Thus, the opposing forces of change and stability seem to always be at odds in our lives and world (Hobbes, 1651). For better or for worse, change is unavoidable. During transition periods we process, come to understand, and eventually learn to live with new boundaries and status. Transition experiences do not allow us to remain innocent; knowledge gained during the process makes it impossible to go back and live as we once did. The Latin word limen signifies a threshold (Trumbull, 1896; Turner, 1969). It is a state of openness and ambiguity (van Gennep, 1960). It involves a personal crisis, change of status, and engages society in an encompassing way (Thomassen, 2014). Liminality nurtures a shift from one context, phase, stage, or worldview into another (Livermore, 2009).
LIMINALITY AS AN ANTHROPOLOGICAL CONCEPT In 1909, anthropologist Arnold van Gennep published Le Rites de Passage to describe transition periods.
In order to pass from one category to another and to join individuals in other sections, he must submit, from the day of his birth to that of his death, to ceremonies whose forms often vary but whose function is similar. Sometimes the individual stands alone and apart from all groups; sometimes, as a member of one particular group, he is separated from the members of others. (van Gennep, 1960, p. 189) Rites, “accompany every change of place, state, social position, and age” (Turner, 1967, p. 94). The Rites of Passage revealed a tripartite transition model for ceremonies, rituals, and initiations where the initiate “cross(es) the threshold” (van Gennep, 1960, p. 20) from one social or religious position to another: (1) separation, (2) transition, and (3) reincorporation (see Figure 1). Before going through a liminal phase, the subject’s position weakens or ends. During the threshold crossing, the initiate is stripped of status, undergoes testing, and is torn between old and new. Personal contentment is contrasted with advancement, restlessness, and the need for acceptance. Status change is met with loss, a disconnection with the old, and the fear of inability to perform at the new, higher level. While in the liminal phase, the subject is,
Betwixt and between . . . positions assigned and arrayed by law, custom, convention, and ceremonial . . . liminal beings . . . have no status, property, insignia, secular clothing indicating rank or role, position in a kinship system––in short, nothing that may distinguish them from their fellow neophytes or initiands. Their behavior is normally passive or humble; they must also obey their instructor implicitly, and accept arbitrary punishment without complaint. It is as though they are being reduced or ground down to a uniform condition to be fashioned anew and endowed with additional powers to cope with their new station in life. (Turner, 1967, p. 95) To reintegrate, the initiate must successfully complete the prescribed rite (Szakolczai, 2009). The subject then enjoys privilege, strength, and wisdom, via purification, acceptance, status change, and gifts. He is also obligated to act in “accordance with certain customary norms and ethical standards binding on incumbents of social position in a system of such positions” (Turner, 1969, p. 95).
TWO INFLUENCES IN A LIMINAL PHASE
SCIENCE
Normal Science
Anomaly
Crisis
Revolution
Normal Science
Figure 2: Kuhn’s (1962) scientific revolution structure illustrated as a tripartite progression (or paradigm shift) between two normal science paradigms.
Thomas Kuhn began developing the paradigm-shifting volume The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Structure) as a graduate student in theoretical physics at Harvard University (Kuhn, 1962). In preparing a course on physical science for the non-scientist, he was exposed to out-of-date scientific theory and practices that “radically undermined some of (his) basic conceptions about the nature of science” (Kuhn, 2012, p. xxxix). For over a decade, he developed his landmark examination of paradigms and paradigm shifts––uncommon words at the time (Kuhn, 1962). He realized that in the field of science philosophy a scientific revolution occurs when a proven scientific model is challenged, tested, and an improved, more accurate scientific model is achieved (Kuhn, 1962, 1977, 2000). His continued analysis and teaching agenda led him to a “simple and insightful all-purpose structure . . . that the general reader could pick up” (Hacking, 2012, p. xi, see Figure 2). The result of his work is a volume that is renowned, important, influential, widely read, and increasingly appreciated (Masterman, 1970; Strauss, n.d.), resulting in acclamation as one of the twentieth century’s paramount books (Modern Library, n.d.; National Review, 1999).
LITERATURE The hero’s journey is the typical progression of mythic adventure, which follows a character from “common day into a region of supernatural wonder” (Campbell, 1949, p. 30) through a course of events, and their return to common life transformed by the experience. Campbell developed his fictional transition timeline while writing a commentary on James Joyce’s book Finnegans Wake (1939). The novel was so complex, he described it as “a perverse triumph of the unintelligible” (Campbell & Robinson, 1944, p. xxi). To decipher Finnegans Wake, Campbell began sketching out the timeline of events and realized the story progression is repeatable and found in classic myths, folk tales, and religions, an “amazingly constant statement of the basic truths by which man has lived throughout the millenniums” (Campbell, 1949, p. viii). Campbell (1949) credited his progressive story arch timeline theory to the formula represented in and expanded from Van Gennep’s Rites of Passage model (see Figure 3).
Life Stage
Separation
Initiation
Return
Life Stage
Figure 3: Campbell’s (1949) mythological story arch progression illustrated as a tripartite progression between two life stages.
Since Campbell’s (1949) development of the mythological progression outline, his traditional story arch has circulated widely and is found in multiple sensory mediums: in print, music, visual art, television, cinema, theater (Bonnet, 2009; Campbell, 1949; McKee, 1997; Westerveld, 2011) and always takes place within a limited, knowable world so the audience may relate to the situation (Bonnet, 2006; Campbell, 1949; McKee, 1997; Turner, 1982, 1988). George Lucas, creator of the Star Wars movie series, credits his success as a storyteller to the concepts discovered in The Hero with a Thousand Faces (Bonnet, 2006). When writing the original Star Wars story, Lucas studied The Hero with a Thousand Faces and modified his next draft according to Campbell’s myth progression principles (Larson & Larson, 2002). As a consequence of the original Star Wars trilogy’s success, screenwriters, actors, and aspiring film industry experts rekindled a keen interest in Campbell’s story arch pattern (Bonnet, 2006; McKee, 1997).
PSYCHOLOGY The Grief Cycle is a model of emotional bereavement adjustment experienced by those suffering loss (Kübler-Ross, 1969). Originally developed while observing and interviewing terminally ill patients from 1964 to 1969, the grief cycle, commonly known as the KüblerRoss model or Stage Theory, has become accepted by the general public and has helped thousands of practitioners, assistants, and loved ones process what to expect in the final stage of life (Bonanno, 2009; Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005; Maciejewski, Zhang, Block, & Prigerson, 2007; Santrock, 2007). A summary of the grief stages developed in On Death and Dying (1969) reveals a period of separation (denial), transition (anger, bargaining, and depression), and incorporation (acceptance) from one distinct phase of life to another (see Figure 4).
Independence
Denial
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance
Decathexis
Figure 4: The Kübler-Ross (1969) grief cycle illustrated as a tripartite progression between independence and decathexis.
Since its inception, the Kübler-Ross model has expanded to include any form of personal loss including the death of a loved one, job or income loss, rejection, divorce or end of relationship, addictions, incarceration, the onset of chronic illness or disease, diagnosis of infertility, and minor losses (Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005; Maciejewski et al., 2007; Nouwen, 1990; Santrock, 2007). Processing is vital to clear-mindedness; journaling and discussing the grief and death process with the dying individual, loved ones, and trusted authorities allows all parties to maintain a positive outlook, soothes the pain being experienced, forms bonds with others who grieve, and allows the grief cycle to take a natural course (Koop & Koop, 1979; Kübler-Ross, 1969; Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005; Lewis, 1961). Compassion, honesty, empathy, and faith play a strong part in the success, speed of recovery, and overall health of a grief-stricken individual (Bonanno, 2009; Fowler, 1995; Koop & Koop, 1979; Kübler-Ross & Kessler, 2005; Maciejewski et al., 2007; McNeill, Morrison, & Nouwen, 1983; Nouwen, 1990). The grief cycle has also been empirically tested, confirmed, and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (Maciejewski et al., 2007).
School of Business & Public Leadership
REFERENCES Bonanno, G. (2009). The other side of sadness: What the new science of bereavement tells us about life after loss. New York: Basic Books. Bonnet, J. (2006). Stealing fire from the gods: The complete guide to story for writers and filmmakers (2nd ed.). Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions.
During a liminal journey, initiates seek interaction to provide objectivity and solve anomalies. Discourse aids in shaping and transforming reality. Persuasive influences push limits and invite exploration. Acceptance or rejection of each siren shapes the initiate’s path. THE TRICKSTER Persuasive in nature, tricksters conjure up a cunning, calculative, and rational strategy to hook their victim (Szakolczai, 2009). They are comfortable in liminal situations and is not interested in solving the crisis at hand––their interest lies in prolonging conditions of confusion. “They are a tragic figure, a diminished condition of the spirit, a being who desperately needs love” (Horvath & Thomassen, 2008, p. 15). These characters are highly entertaining, personable, and the desire to trust them is ever-present, yet normally leads to inconclusive or irreparable ends or suspension in the liminal phase for extended periods of time.
Tricksters are always marginal characters . . . they are not taken seriously, given their affinity with jokes, storytelling, and fantasizing . . . tricksters can suddenly become dangerous: in a situation where the attention of the community is on the wane, in an instant the trickster can capture the occasion and institute a lasting reversal of roles and values, making himself a central figure in place of the marginal outcast . . . certainties are lost, imitative behavior escalates, and tricksters can be mistaken for charismatic leaders. (Szakolczai, 2009, p. 155) THE AUTHENTIC LEADER (AL) A self-aware, self-regulating leader is true to their core values and resistant to social or situational pressures––they play a vital role in a follower’s life (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa, 2005). They are true to themselves and lead others by helping them also achieve authenticity (Gardner et al., 2005). The AL is also marked by awareness and acceptance of their personal strengths and weaknesses. They incorporate balanced processing, authentic behavior, and relational transparency as opposed to a “fake” self through selective self-disclosure––they encourage others to do the same (Gardner et al., 2005).
As a goal, the authentic leader seeks to develop followers with low self-concept clarity by modeling self-discovery processes, shifting them away from personal identification with and dependence on the leader to identification with the collective and autonomy, and ultimately, internalization of the core values and mission of the collective. (Gardner et al., 2005, p.361) Modeling, a form of positive persuasion, is a key concept and may be diametrically opposed to negative persuaders who purposefully or unwittingly steer and derail the liminal traveler. They are, “morally attractive . . . leaders (who) recognize the autonomy of followers” (Ciulla, 2004, p. 12). Autonomy in thought and understanding one’s place in the collective allows one to process more clearly–– more objectively––as they toil through a period of uncertainty. An AL shows followers “how to move from external and introjected regulation to progressively more internalized (identified and integrated) forms of regulation” (Gardner, 2005, p. 364).
SUMMARY The purpose of this poster and my forthcoming dissertation is to expose liminality as a vital interdisciplinary concept––the key to the structure of human experience (Szakolczai, 2015). This study introduced evidence of a single timeline and event construct for improved interdisciplinary studies. A study of this nature will assess the constraints of commensurability, expose logic, philosophic gaps and boundaries, and create further scholarly dialog. Initiates are vulnerable in the liminal wilderness. Clarity is vital to successful reintegration. Recent scholarship asserts that modernity has achieved a permanent liminal state (Szakolczai, 2017). This paper affirms liminality should be of utmost importance to the twenty-first century scholar as a permanent liminal state cannot last. Our era of constant change must someday reach a post-liminal reality. A glaring question remains: Who will guide this generation through a seemingly permanent liminality? The answer is authentic leaders––those who are both willing AND capable of travel alongside initiates; guiding with truth, humility, and grace.
Knoxville, Tennessee www.JohnsonU.edu
Kuhn, T. (1962/2012). The structure of scientific revolutions (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kuhn, T. (1977). The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Kuhn, T. (2000). The road since structure: Philosophical essays, 1970-1993, with an autobiographical interview. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Campbell, J. (1949/1973). The hero with a thousand faces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Larsen, S., & Larson, R. (2002). Joseph Campbell: A fire in the mind. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions.
Strauss, J. (n.d.) Thomas Kuhn’s concept of paradigm: Narrative displacement in history of science [Web page]. Retrieved from http://www.worldvieweyes.org/resources/Strauss/KuhnsConceptPar.htm Szakolczai, A. (2009). Liminality and experience: Structuring transitory situations and transformative events. International Political Anthropology, 2(1), 141-172. Szakolczai, A. (2015). Liminality and experience: Structuring transitory situations and transformative events. In Horvath, A., Thomassen, B., & Wydra, H. (Eds.), Breaking boundaries: Varieties in liminality (pp. 11-38). New York: Berghahn.
Campbell, J., & Robinson, H. (1944). A skeleton key to Finnegans wake. Novato, CA: New World Library. Lewis, C. S. (1961/1989). A grief observed. New York: HarperCollins. Ciulla, J. (Ed.) (2004). Ethics, the heart of leadership. Westport, CT: Praeger. Fowler, J. (1995). Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest for meaning. New York: HarperCollins. Gardner, W., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., May, D., & Walumbwa, F. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A selfbased model of authentic leader and follower development. Leadership Quarterly, 16. 343-372. Hacking, I. (2012). Introductory essay. In T. Kuhn. The structure of scientific revolutions (4th ed.) (p. xi). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hobbes, T. (1651/1904). Leviathan or the matter, forme and power of a common wealth ecclesiasticall and civill. London: Cambridge University Press. Horvath, A., & Thomassen, T. (2008). Mimetic errors in liminal schismogenesis: On the political anthropology of the trickster. International Political Anthropology, 1(1), 3-24.
Livermore, D. (2009). Cultural Intelligence: Improving your CQ to engage our multicultural world. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Maciejewski, P., Zhang, B., Block, S., & Prigerson, H. (2007). An empirical examination of the stage theory of grief. Journal of the American Medical Association, 297(7), 716-724. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.297.7.716
Szakolczai, A. (2017). Permanent liminality and modernity: Analyzing the sacrificial carnival through novels. New York: Routledge. Thomassen, B. (2014). Liminality and the modern: Living through the in-between. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing. Trumbull, H. C. (1896). The threshold covenant: Or the beginning of religious rites. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Masterman, M. (1970). The nature of a paradigm. In Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (Eds.) Criticism and the growth of knowledge: Proceedings of the international colloquium in the philosophy of science, London, 1965, volume four (pp. 59-89). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Turner, V. (1967). The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. London: Cornell University Press.
McKee, R. (1997). Story: Substance, structure, style, and the principles of screenwriting. New York: HarperCollins.
Turner, V. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. New York: PAJ Publications.
Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Turner, V. (1988). The anthropology of performance. New York: PAJ Publications. McNeill, D., Morrison, D., & Nouwen, H. (1983). Compassion: a reflection on the Christian life. New York: Image Books.
Van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Joyce, J. (1939). Finnegans wake. New York: Viking Press. Koop, C. E. & Koop, E. (1979). Sometimes mountains move. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.
Modern Library. (n.d.). 100 Best Non-Fiction [Web page]. Retrieved from http://www.modernlibrary.com/top-100/100-best-nonfiction/
Kübler-Ross, E. (1969). On death and dying. New York: Scribner.
Nouwen, H. (1990). The wounded healer: Ministry in contemporary society. New York: Image Books.
Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. (2005). On grief and grieving: Finding the meaning of grief through the five stages of loss. New York: Scribner.
Santrock, J. (2007). A topical approach to life-span development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Westerveld, J. (2011). Liminality in contemporary art: A reflection on the work of William Kentridge. Retrieved from http://www.judithwesterveld.nl/text/FINAL%20VERSION%20THESIS%20(compressed).pdf
