Paper #2 Crivelli 1

Federico Crivelli

Dr. Melanie Eckford-Prossor

ENG 110H

October 8, 2014

"
"
"
A reconsideration of the Social Ritual
by Federico Crivelli
"
October 8, 2014
"
A Guernica special issue.
"
"
"
"
"
"

"
"
"
After the success of his first essay “Shifting the boundaries of Either/Or,” published on September 10,
2014, Federico Crivelli discusses once again the natural tribal essence of the human being. On his first article, he
demonstrated how it prevents globalization from happening on every level of society. In this article, the Italian
young writer presents a new way to think about the meaning and significance of rituals of social interaction.
Paper #2 Crivelli 2

"
"For if relativism about ethics and morality were true, then,
at the end of many discussions, we would each have to end up
saying, 'From where I stand, I am right. From where you stand,
you are right.' And there would be nothing further to say. From
our different perspectives, we would be living in different
worlds. And without a shared world, what is there to discuss?
People often recommend relativism because they think it will
lead to tolerance. But if we cannot learn from one another what
it is right to think and feel and do, then conversation between us
will be pointless. Relativism of that sort isn't a way to encourage
conversation; it's just a reason to fall silent"
(Appiah 30-31).
"
The most widespread definition of “ritual,” and perhaps the most commercialized and

simplistic, describes it as an event or ceremony consisting of a set of actions performed

according to a prescribed order. Although correct and explanatory in its meaning, this denotation

falls flat in displaying the interesting nuances of the “ritual,” portraying something that is

charged with intention, belief, passion, and history, as a mechanical process and a

mathematically defined series of maneuvers. Not surprisingly, this commonly accepted definition

is offered by Google, the omni-present guardian of our lives, which is sadly more and more

responsible for shaping our knowledge, our beliefs, and our decisions. By reading this definition,

one question arises spontaneously: who prescribes the order? In an attempt to provide an answer,

we will dive into the studies of the sociologists Émile Durkheim and Erving Goffman, and filter

our examination of the two through the analysis performed by the leading contemporary social
Paper #2 Crivelli 3

theorist Randall Collins. Collins, a Sociology professor at University of Pennsylvania, focuses on

rituals of social interaction, which he defines "a mechanism of mutually focused emotion and

attention producing a momentarily shared reality, which thereby generates solidarity and symbols

of group membership” (Collins 1287-288). Although always thought of as force of unification

and vehicle of communal celebration, rituals of social interaction can in fact emphasize the tribal

nature of the human being, issue that many scholars have overlooked. Thus, by corrupting the

social integrity of a community, this “tribality” leads the social ritual to generate conflict and

disagreement within society.

According to Collins, who derives his theories directly from Durkheim and Goffman, the

interaction ritual is the foundation of social solidarity. It provides groups of people with unity,

common ideals, and a shared morality. The physical participation to the ritual of each member of

the group generates the emotional harmony responsible for the development of the collective

conscience and identity. In other words, the participation in a social ritual involves and requires a

delimited structure, in which participants and excluded are clearly labeled and differentiated, and

each member in the group focuses on the same object, thus mutually contributing to a collective

reality in which participants share a similar emotional intensity (Collins 383-397).

Therefore, according to these social studies, the prescribed order of action is better

described as an intrinsic quality shared and appreciated by each individual who participate in the

ritual. The individual and his tribe fuse together to determine the characteristics of their ritual.

Thus, while the content and features of the ritual can be arbitrary, it is crucial that they be shared.

So, do rituals act as magnetic forces which bring people together? Or is it possible for social

rituals to behave inversely, thereby generating conflict and separation within humankind? Collins
Paper #2 Crivelli 4

seems to suggest that while interaction rituals reinforce the social bond and moral complicity of

individuals moved by the same catalyst who participate in the same activity, they also emphasize

the disconnection between who can and who cannot participate in the ritual. Under this

perspective, social rituals would have a duplicitous character, in the surface appearing as

bringing union in societies, while secretly destroying its fundaments by amplifying the

underlying debate between contrasting groups— or “tribes.”

Among the rituals of interaction, sports are an exemplary representation of the

sociological theories that we are considering. In all the most diffused team sports, the

competition between two opposing teams translates into conflict between different tribes.

Supporters of each faction will demonstrate their deployed identity by wearing the colors of their

team and provoke the opponents with songs and insults, which occasionally even lead to

violence (Harrison, 822-834). Here we see the social ritual under a new and unexpected

perspective, one that bolsters conflict and incriminates tribal diversity.

An interesting and fresh example of a sport built over violence, the Spanish bullfight

doesn’t involve the division of the fans over passion between two opposing teams; instead, this

practice, hardly identifiable as a sport, builds on a moral and ethical sphere of conflict, involving

the brutality of the praxis and raising moral questions on the respect for the animal (Richardson).

In this instance, perhaps, taking ethics into consideration as taught by Peter Manseau might be

more urgent than some criticizers currently realize (Manseau, 103-114). Many animal rights

activists have discussed the gratuity of cruelty on the bull, arguing that la corrida is an unfair

fight. In fact, the match is not a one-on-one matador vs bull as many would expect; rather, as the

associate professor and Chair of Philosophy at the University of Texas-El Paso, Dr. Steven Best
Paper #2 Crivelli 5

explains, it is usually an unfair eight versus one. The battle has a defined ritualistic form, divided

into three stages. Before these can begin, all the toreros greet the president and then exit the

arena (Best); next, the bull is released in the ovation of the enlivened public calling for the

beginning of the show. Only at this moment, the first set of bullfighters, the picadores, enter the

arena riding heavily padded and blindfolded horses, and manage to weaken the bull by cutting

the muscles on its necks with lances; secondly, three banderilleros on foot cause further stress to

the animal and pierce a total of six colorful harpoons— called banderillas— in the bull’s neck.

The purpose to be served is to irritate and weaken the animal, reducing its danger potential by

slowing down the movements of its neck, therefore limiting its ability to gore the matador

(Snypp). Finally, the “killer” (literal translation of the Spanish word “matador”), enters the arena

and performs his ballet, showing agility and bravery in facing the 400 kilos beast until this is too

exhausted to charge the matador one more time. Reached the end of the spectacle, the “hero” will

perform the so called stockade, death blow designed to stab the bull’s heart. Unfortunately for

the animal, this last passage often goes wrong, so several stabs are necessary to kill the animal

while it chokes on the blood of its own perforated lungs (Higgins), (Luis).

It doesn’t appear difficult to imagine why much controversy is around the theme of

bullfight. Supporters and aficionados defend the bullfight in Spain with such arguments as that

the bull lives a better life than many animals until the fatal day when it’s killed, or that the bull

doesn’t really suffer during the fight because it is so driven by adrenaline. Also they claim the

importance of a $2billion industry that not only employes many people, but benefits the

environment as well, by protecting natural reserves and land that would otherwise be exploited

by human intervention (Spain then and now).

In reality, however, these arguments barely stand on their own. How a bull lives before

being tortured isn’t really the central point in the matter, while research has shown in the past

that bulls— as most mammals and many other animals— can feel pain and fear, and do indeed

suffer during the fight that lead to their death. Moreover, further research shows that in 2008 only

378 people were employed full-time, in a business that has been decreasing over generations, and

pulls an estimated $720 million a year from Spanish taxpayers’ money. Finally, because they are

neither predator nor prey in the natural ecosystem in which they breed, the removal of bulls

doesn't pose a significant threat to the maintenance of biodiversity (For a Bullfighting-free

Europe).

These arguments seem to portray the bullfight as nothing but an immature, cruel, and

inconvenient brutality, but what of the cultural motivations? The corrida de toros is considered

one of the oldest and most majestic traditions in Spain, often practiced as a celebration for

important religious occurrences (Best). This observation leads us to a compelling connection to

Durkheim’s studies. In fact, the origins of bullfight are sometimes linked to the findings of

prehistoric pictures in Spanish and French caves, describing the bull as a totemic symbol to

venerate and worship (Best). Religion and, specifically, the totemic religion of Australian

aborigines, was the main focus of Durkheim’s philosophy. Through the investigation of the social

forces that are imprinted in a community, Durkheim used religion to demonstrate that every

individual needs to integrate within a social system that gives her the integral strength of her

tribe in order to exists and to express her inner self (Birrel 356). What is sacred is understood as

an actual collective and social transcendence, not as metaphysic. Here the presence of a sacred

symbol that represents the union of the community, as well as the exclusion of the outsiders,
Paper #2 Crivelli 7

assumes primary importance to the achievement of the moral order of society. This is the idea of

the “social sacred,” meaning that what is venerated by society in the participation in a ritual is

the society itself, the community and the moral order that allows for social cohesion within the

group (Sulkunen 414).

This analysis reveals that the preservation of social stability needs an equal endowment

of cultural values and moral values. In this situation, it’s clear how ethics and attachment to

cultural traditions clash against each other (Collins 392). Although cruel and unjust in its nature,

the bullfight is a ritual embedded in the culture of the Spanish people. Sure is that, as underlined

by Anthony Appiah in “The Shattered Mirror,” even female circumcision and stoning a person to

death as a punishment for adultery are rituals derived by a cultural command. This doesn’t mean

that every culture will regard these acts as morally acceptable or perhaps indifferent. As

suggested by the Londoner-Ghanaian novelist, these religious practices indeed strike us as

morally wrong. “[P]erhaps,” claims Appiah, “when it comes to morality, there is no singular

truth.” However, simply acknowledging a difference in tribal perspectives doesn’t solve the

dispute. Accordingly, engaging in an open exchange assumes critical relevance (Appiah 18-19).

The real question here becomes does the ritual of the bullfight compromise the social

integrity of a nation? In this circumstance, the cultural component of the ritual, employed by

aficionados as the greatest justification for preserving the practice of this “sport,” really grows

into the greatest threat to its maintenance. Sociological studies demonstrate that the corrida de

toros does in fact affect primary aspects of human development such as education and social

behavior, whereas children attending bullfights were found to demonstrate traits of aggressive

behavior and psychological disorders (CAS International; Best).

After all, if the language spoken by an individual influences the way he sees the world, as

taught by Lera Boroditsky, it is clear that the country in which he lives plays a basic role

(Boroditsky 143). Now, if where we live impacts how we behave, so does what we live and

experience in the country we dwell in. According to the academic journal on Aggressive

Behavior published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., several children appear disturbed by the

exposure to this kind of violent practice. The statistics gathered by the study on 120 boys and

120 girls aged eight to 12, revealed that while most kids in Madrid, Spain don’t believe that it is

wrong for children to watch bullfights, 65.1% see the bullfight as “violent,” and 58.3% agree that

the practice is “bad,” leaving only 13.0% sustaining that it is “OK;” the others were simply

indifferent to this ritual (Graña).

An interesting observation is indeed the substantial shifting boundary in what is

considered acceptable by societies, as displayed by the considerable decrease in popularity of

this ritual over the past decades. In the U.S., Texas is the only state allowing bullfighting, but it’s

not a diffused ritual at all. Around the world, several countries, including, Canada, New Zealand,

Germany, Italy, the UK, and many others, have already banned the practice of bullfighting by

law: Uruguay, Argentina, Costa Rica, and Cuba are examples of Latin American countries that

were influenced by Spanish customs but at one point in their history all banned the bullfight,

considering it a brutal an uninteresting sport. In 2011, Ecuador banned the final killing of the

bull, which is no longer part of the show, but still takes place (Higgins). The same practice

occurs in Portugal, where in 2007 the majority of respondents to the Metris GfK national survey

on bullfighting declared to oppose this ritual. In France, the TNS Sofres survey found almost

three quarters (73%) of the population is against bullfighting, and that only five percent declares
Paper #2 Crivelli 9

to be strongly in favor (CAS International). Remarkably, bullfighting only interests 10 percent of

the French national territory, where it’s described by the national journal La Provence as an

“uninterrupted local tradition.” Finally, data of greatest interest regards the treatment of this

ritual in its geographical cradle: Spain.

For many years in the past, la corrida has been an untouchable facet of Spanish culture

and tradition. In 1936, renowned Spanish poet Federico Garcia Lorca described the bullfight as

“probably Spain’s greatest poetic and life-sustaining wealth… the most cultured fiesta anywhere

in the world.” Since then, increasingly, public figures ranging from pop stars— Amparanoia, to

actors— Rossy de Palma, to soccer players— Carles Puyol, have taken a firm position against

the bullfight. This is sometimes referred to as antitauromaquia.

Today, every fight is accompanied by movements of protest, which were virtually non-

existent 20 years ago (Richardson). Clearly, a shifting trend in the interests of the public is taking

place before our eyes. In 2006, the Gallup poll of Spanish opinions found that 72.10% of Spanish

completely disregarded this “social ritual,” while only 7.40% declared a sincere interest (Cas

International). Furthermore, an Ipsos MORI public opinion survey conducted by Human Society

International found that 75% of Spaniards hadn’t attended a bullfight in five years, while only

seven percent said to attend once a year. 67% agree that kids younger than 16 should not be

allowed to attend a bullfight, and in Catalonia, one autonomous region os Spain, the law has

forbidden the show to children 14 or younger since 1999 (Higgins).

Catalonia in particular was interested in December 2009 by a public movement that

collected 180,000 signatures toward the ban of bullfighting, achieving success in July 2010.

Since January 2012, the state of Catalonia and its province Barcelona have joined the Canary
Paper #2 Crivelli 10

Islands as the second region under Spanish rule to proclaim the practice of the bullfight illegal

(Richardson). Similarly, interest for this sport is experiencing a steep decline in the autonomous

regions of Galicia and Asturias. Especially in these regions, as representative of the whole

nation, younger citizens are less and less involved in the participation to this ritual, which is

economically sustained mainly by the inflow of tourists and elder aficionados (CAS

International).

The suggestion is that the ritual is dying. But really, can a ritual die? A ritual is the

“sublimification” of a habit, the perpetuation of a tradition, and the magnification of a pragmatic

behavior. The use of social media, although often hard to give up, is a settled tendency for most

people, but it becomes a ritual for Teju Cole in his denounce of human— specifically American

— lack of diligence and consideration. In his article he criticizes social medias around the issue

of the spread of the Kony 2012 video, and he intentionally does so through Twitter, making his

message bold and resounding (Cole 210-217).

A ritual also is a tradition, as it does add value and identity to the participants, and it is

both social and personal— as demonstrated by Durkheim and Goffman, who secularized the

religious studies of the former—, by creating an environment of similar people in which each

soul is responsible for the dignity of her own self and is empowered of the right to change her

mind (Collins 1288). However, a tradition must also be accepted as right by majority. As evinced

earlier, the bullfight in Spain is no longer appreciated as it was in the past. Most people are

indeed indifferent to this “cultural tradition.” Perhaps a tradition can just cease to be a ritual.

Maybe, instead, a ritual can in fact die. In sooth, if the issue of the corrida gets to a point where

there is no audience, then the ritual would cease to be. If this happens, it will be interesting to
Paper #2 Crivelli 11

observe whether there exists or will exist some form of ethically acceptable alternative to the

bullfight that comprises its values and unique attributes. One word of comfort comes from

noticing that the asking of critical questions around the theme of the bullfight are more urgent

today than ever: this represents a new and different approach to the “troubling questions”

described by Manseau in his essay “Plasticize me” (Manseau 114).

While the eradication and dismantling of a piece of Spanish culture may be an effect of

human tribal nature and an answer to the “troubling questions” that concern the issue, some of

the causes can be searched in the most constituent and fundamental component of social

interaction: the language. Clearly, the fact that most of the countries where the ritual of the

bullfight exists are Spanish-speaking is not a case: these countries all have been at some point in

history a possess or colony of the Spanish crown. However, today the Spanish culture has

evolved in its unique way, separately and differently from its Latin-American cousins. Yet, many

of these former colonies— Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, and Ecuador— have not

abandoned this ritual, just like the “mother” country in Europe (Luis). These considerations let

transpire that the Spanish language might play a role in preserving the existence of the bullfight

ritual. By shaping its speakers minds to see the world and reality in the unique way that only a

Spanish speaker can, the power of the language described by Boroditsky assumes a significance

of primary importance (Boroditsky 135-143). In this instance, one interesting study would be to

investigate Spanish as a second language speakers’ opinion about bullfights, to discover to what

extent language has power over values and over culture.

Nevertheless, come at this point, it would be quiet dishonest to disregard the fact that

only some of the Spanish former colonies still practice bullfights, while many others have
Paper #2 Crivelli 12

abandoned this ritual a long time ago, as we discussed earlier; and yet these were Spanish

speaking countries as well. Does the “death by monoculture” described by Stephen Pax Leonard

have a saying in all this? Leonard describes a rapidly changing 21st century, where the forces of

globalization and consumerism of society lead to loss of linguistic heritage and to the

homogenizing of cultures. In this milieu of disdain for tribal diversity, and if Boroditsky is right

in her claim that languages do shape human opinions and decisions, it becomes easy to forget a

trait or a part of the culture (Leonard 146-148). If the pressure to change coming from the outside

has a stronger influence than the intrinsic belief in the Spanish value of the corrida de toros, then

Leonard’s theory might be key. As he interestingly claims: “[w]hen languages die, we do not just

lose words, but we lose different ways of conceptually framing things” (Leonard 147).

Certainly, the bullfight in Spain is a diffused practice that arises controversial debate

around the implications of its essence. It generates conflict between contrasting opinions,

drawing a net separation line between those who enjoy and support the emotion and excitement

brought to them by this ritual, and those who condemn its brutality and unethical essence.

Therefore, rituals do actually act by bringing separation within a country, nation, or mentality, or

even throughout the world. British novelist Pico Iyer wouldn’t exclude— I assume— to consider

countries that still allow such brutal and obsolete form of “art” as “lonely places” (Iyer 31-36). In

the 21st century, after having overexploited most of the resources on the planet, caused the sixth

mass extinction after approximately 70 million years from the most recent one, and studied, and

understood, and agreed on what careful approach it is necessary that we take when dealing with

nature, after millions of animal right activists and movements and protests have invaded the

world and spread their message, after all, maybe, killing and torturing a natural creature just for
Paper #2 Crivelli 13

fiesta national might be considered silly, immature, or even— to take a French approach to it—

démodé— outdated and completely out of fashion (Green). Iyer says that “[m]ore than in space,

then, it is in time that Lonely Places are often exiled […]. There will never be a shortage of

Lonely Places, any more than there will ever be of lonely people” (Iyer 34-36).

Bullfighting countries might as well be the next “lonely places,” as anachronistic entities

stuck in the cultural and moral standards of the last century. That considered, are supporters of

bullfight kept blind in front of the necessity to espouse a morality of reverence for life?

Accordingly, does the participation in the social ritual of the bullfight extend a threat not only to

social integrity, but also to intercultural moral stability? Most importantly, is there a way for

distinct lines of thinking to meet, and for separate, contrasting tribes to find an acquiescence, or,

perhaps, even a peaceful agreement? 


Works Cited

Appiah, Kwame Anthony. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: Norton,

2006.

Appiah, Kwame Anthony. The Shattered Mirror. 2006. Globalization: A Reader for Writers. By

Maria Jerskey. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. 10-19. Print.

Birrell, Susan. "Sport as Ritual: Interpretations from Durkheim to Goffman." Social Forces 60.2,

Special Issue (1981): 354-76. JSTOR. Web. 05 Oct. 2014.

Boroditsky, Lera, and Maria Jerskey. How Does Our Language Shape the Way We Think? 2009.

Globalization: A Reader for Writers. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. 135-43. Print.

“Bullfighting in Spain ("Corrida De Toros”)." Bullfighting in Spain. Spain Then and Now, 5

Sept. 2009. Web. 3 Oct. 2014.

Carls, Paul. "Émile Durkheim (1858-1917)." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy | A Peer-

reviewed Academic Resource. The University of Tennessee Martin, Web. 5 Oct. 2014.

Cole, Teju. The White Savior Industrial Complex. 2012. Globalization: A Reader for Writers. By

Maria Jerskey. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. 210-17. Print.

Collins, Randall. "Interaction Ritual Chains." Princeton University Press 83.3 (2004): 1287-288.

Project MUSE. Web. 3 Oct. 2014.

Collins, Randall. "Time-Bubbles Of Nationalism: Dynamics Of Solidarity Ritual In Lived Time."

Nations & Nationalism 18.3 (2012): 383-397. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Oct. 2014.

Dr. Best, Steven. "Bullfighting, Violence & the Crisis in Human Identity." IMPACT Press

(2003). IMPACT Press. Aug.-Sept. 2003. Web. 2 Oct. 2014.

"For a Bullfighting-free Europe." For a Bullfighting-free Europe. CAS International, WSPA,

FLAC, PETA, Adda, EFA, CRAC, 12 Nov. 2008. Web. 3 Oct. 2014.

Graña, J. L.Cruzado, J. A.Andreu, J. M.Muñoz-Rivas, M. J.Peña, M. E.Brain, P. F. "Effects Of

Viewing Videos Of Bullfights On Spanish Children." Aggressive Behavior 30.1 (2004):

16-28. Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection. Web. 5 Oct. 2014.

Green, Adam. "Extinction." SBCC ENVS110. Biological Sciences Santa Barbara City College,

Aug. 2014. Web. 6 Oct. 2014.

Gomez, Patricia, and Thomas Van Hemert. "Children and Bullfighting." CAS International. Web.

3 Oct. 2014.

Harrison, Emily A. "The First Concussion Crisis." American Journal Of Public Health 104.5

(2014): 822-834. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Oct. 2014.

Higgins, Wendy. "Bullfight Opinion Poll: As Spain Debates 'Support for Bullfighting' Bill, Most

Spaniards Oppose Use of Public Funds for Cruel, Waning Bloodsport." RSS. Humane Soci-

ety International | Europe, 23 Apr. 2013. Web. 3 Oct. 2014.

Iyer, Pico. Lonely Places. 1994. Globalization: A Reader for Writers. By Maria Jerskey. New

York: Oxford UP, 2014. 31-36. Print.

Leonard, Stephen Pax. Death by Monoculture. 2011. Globalization: A Reader for Writers. By

Maria Jerskey. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. 145-48. Print.

Luis, Cendan. "Blood Sport: The Tragedy of Bullfighting." VERTEBRATE JOURNAL. 12 Nov.

2011. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Manseau, Peter. Plasticize Me. 2011. Globalization. By Maria Jerskey. New York: Oxford UP,

2014. 103-14. Print.

Richardson, Paul. "Why Bullfighting Is Making Spain See Red." The Guardian. World News -

The Observer, 5 June 2010. Web. 3 Oct. 2014.

Snypp, Shannon Lauren. "Bullfighting." Bullfighting. University of North Carolina at Chapel

Hill, 22 Feb. 2002. Web. 03 Oct. 2014.

Sulkunen, P. "Book Reviews : Jeffrey Alexander (ed.): Durkheimian Sociology: Cultural Studies.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1988." Acta Sociologica 33.4 (1990): 413-15. Web.

4 Oct. 2014.

"
"
"