Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Summary  





2 Influence  





3 Publication history  





4 Reviews  





5 Further reading  





6 See also  





7 References  



7.1  Bibliography  
















Purity and Danger






Français
Italiano
עברית
Polski
Suomi
 

Edit links
 









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Cite this page
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
Wikidata item
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

(Redirected from Purity and danger)

Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo
Cover of the first edition
AuthorMary Douglas
LanguageEnglish
SubjectSocial anthropology
PublisherRoutledge and Kegan Paul

Publication date

1966
Publication placeUnited Kingdom
Media typePrint
Pages196 pp.
ISBN0-7100-1299-3
OCLC50333732
Preceded byThe Lele of the Kasai 
Followed byNatural Symbols 

Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo is a 1966 book by the anthropologist and cultural theorist Mary Douglas. It is her best known work. In 1991 the Times Literary Supplement listed it as one of the hundred most influential non-fiction books published since 1945.

Summary[edit]

The line of inquiry in Purity and Danger traces the words and meaning of dirt in different contexts. What is regarded as dirt in a given society is any matter considered out of place. (Douglas took that lead from William James.) She attempted to clarify the differences between the sacred, the clean and the unclean in different societies and times, but that did not entail judging religions as pessimistic or optimistic in their understanding of purity or dirt, such as dirt-affirming or otherwise. Through a complex and sophisticated reading of ritual, religion and lifestyle, Douglas challenged Western ideas of pollution and clarified how context and social history are essential.

As an example of that approach, Douglas first proposed that the kosher laws were not, as many believed, either primitive health regulations or randomly-chosen tests of the Israelites' commitment to God. Instead, Douglas argued that the laws were about symbolic boundary-maintenance. Prohibited foods were those that did not seem to fall neatly into any category. For example, the place of pigs in the natural order was ambiguous because they shared the cloven hoof of the ungulates but did not chew cud.

Later, in a 2002 preface to Purity and Danger, Douglas went on to retract this explanation of the kosher rules and said that it had been "a major mistake". Instead, she proposed that "the dietary laws intricately model the body and the altar upon one another". For instance, among land animals, Israelites were allowed to eat animals only if they were allowed to be sacrificed as well: animals that depend on herdsmen. Douglas concluded from that that animals that are abominable to eat are not in fact impure but that "it is abominable to harm them". She claimed that later interpreters (even later Biblical authors) had misunderstood this.

Influence[edit]

A historian of Late Antiquity, Peter Brown, stated that Purity and Danger was a major influence in his important 1971 article "The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity", which is considered to be one of the bases for all subsequent study of early Christian asceticism.[1]

InPowers of Horror (1980), Julia Kristeva elaborates her theory of abjection and recognises the influence of Douglas's "fundamental work" but criticises certain aspects of her approach.[2]

Publication history[edit]

Reviews[edit]

  • Beidelman, Thomas O. (1966). "[Review of Purity and Danger : An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, by M. Douglas]". Anthropos. 61 (3). Nomos Verlag: 907–908. JSTOR 40458397.
  • Bergesen, Albert James (1978). "Rituals, Symbols, and Society: Explicating the Mechanisms of the Moral Order". American Journal of Sociology. 83 (4): 1012–1021. doi:10.1086/226648. ISSN 0002-9602. (also dealing with Douglas's later book, Natural Symbols).
  • Datta, Ronjon Paul (2005). "Book Review: Purity and Danger" (PDF). Anthropological Theory. 5 (3): 301–302. doi:10.1177/1463499605055724. ISSN 1463-4996.
  • Davidoff, Leonore (19 May 1995). "Speaking Volumes: Purity and Danger". Times Higher Education Supplement. Archived from the original on 2011-12-11. Retrieved 22 March 2010.
  • Gulliver, P. H. (1967). "[Review of Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, by M. Douglas]". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. 30 (2): 462–464. JSTOR 611049.
  • Kunz, Phillip R. (1969). "Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo". Review of Religious Research. 10 (2): 114–115. doi:10.2307/3510915.
  • Madge, Charles (1967). "[Review of Purity and Danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo, by M. Douglas]". Sociology. 1 (2): 209–210. JSTOR 42850525.
  • McCormack, William; Douglas, Mary (Autumn 1967). "Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 6 (2): 313–314. doi:10.2307/1384077.
  • Roux, J.-P. (1968). "[Review of Purity and Danger. An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo, by M. Douglas]". Revue de l’histoire Des Religions. 174 (2): 229–229. JSTOR 23668319.
  • Spiro, Melford E. (1968). "[Review of Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, by M. Douglas]". American Anthropologist. 70 (2): 391–393. JSTOR 671165.
  • Tamney, Joseph B. (1967). "Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo". Sociological Analysis. 28 (1): 56–57. doi:10.2307/3710425.
  • Further reading[edit]

  • Belton, Padraig (2018-02-19). A Macat analysis: Mary Douglas's Purity and Danger. The Macat Library. Macat International / Routledge. ISBN 978-1-912303-92-2.
  • Duschinsky, Robbie (2013). "The politics of purity: When, actually, is dirt matter out of place?" (PDF). Thesis Eleven. 119 (1): 63–77. doi:10.1177/0725513613511321. ISSN 0725-5136.
  • Duschinsky, Robbie; Schnall, Simone; Weiss, Daniel H., eds. (2017-01-12). Purity and Danger now: New perspectives. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315529738. ISBN 978-1-315-52971-4. Excerpt Preview via Book2Look
  • Klawans, Jonathan (2003). "Rethinking Leviticus and rereading Purity and Danger". AJS Review. 27 (1): 89–101. doi:10.1017/S0364009403000047. ISSN 0364-0094. JSTOR 4131770.
  • Lemos, T. M. (2009). "The universal and the particular: Mary Douglas and the politics of impurity" (PDF). The Journal of Religion. 89 (2): 236–251. doi:10.1086/596070. ISSN 0022-4189. JSTOR 10.1086/596070.
  • See also[edit]

    References[edit]

    1. ^ Brown, Peter (1998). "The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity, 1971-1997". Journal of Early Christian Studies. 6 (3): 359–63. doi:10.1353/earl.1998.0041.
  • ^ Kristeva, Julia, Trans. Leon Roudiez (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. Columbia University Press: 65-67.
  • Bibliography[edit]


    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Purity_and_Danger&oldid=1219122397"

    Categories: 
    1966 non-fiction books
    Anthropology books
    Books about social constructionism
    Books by Mary Douglas
    English-language books
    Hidden categories: 
    Articles with short description
    Short description matches Wikidata
     



    This page was last edited on 15 April 2024, at 21:47 (UTC).

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



    Privacy policy

    About Wikipedia

    Disclaimers

    Contact Wikipedia

    Code of Conduct

    Developers

    Statistics

    Cookie statement

    Mobile view



    Wikimedia Foundation
    Powered by MediaWiki