Abstract
The process of dying is widely acknowledged as a liminal situation (see e.g. Schröder 1986; Thompson 2007; Kaufman & Morgan 2005). Some characteristics which make pre-exital dying in Germany special agree with the classical concept of liminality introduced by Turner (1967). For example, we find a change of status by initiation; a betwixt-and-between state of ontological positioning; and conversions of roles and rules for liminal personae (Turner 1969). However, other aspects of liminality seem to be absent in dying. Most prominently, these are communitas (Turner 1974) amongst dying persons, and liminal guidance by an already initiated guide.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In his later writings, Turner elaborates differences between existential liminality, on the one hand, and quasi-liminal or liminoid events and situations, on the other hand (Turner 1982). Liminoid phases resemble liminality as they provide an acknowledged frame in which partial suspensions of ordinary norms and rules takes place. However, liminoid situations are structured by special sets of norms and rules; they do not involve disintegration from society; and they allow the participants to drop out and return to their former roles and norms. Therefore, liminoid phases do not result in irrevocable transformation. An example of liminoid situations is leisure time activities (Turner 1982: 33, 42).
Similarly, later works of Turner distinguish between liminal communitas (appearing when liminal personae undergo an existential transformation together with others involved in the same process); and ideological and normative communitas (rather pre-structured forms of togetherness in liminoidity). Examples of the latter are hippie communes, or the eucharistic fellowship gathering for communion in Roman Catholic holy mass (Turner 1982: 48-50). However, dying processes are clearly liminal as an existential and irrevocable transition (Turner 1982: 25). Therefore, liminoidity and quasi-communitas are not relevant here.
- 2.
Or, if they are psychotherapists, they care for a patient’s feelings by helping her to deal with them. However, psychotherapists do not initiate a person into dying, and are therefore exempted at this point.
- 3.
Some elderly and lonely persons may be exceptional, as they sometimes seek personal attention from doctors to satisfy unmet emotional needs. This is mostly seen as understandable, but nevertheless inappropriate by both doctors and other patients.
- 4.
This agrees with Walter’s (2003) and Walter et al.’s (2011) prognosis that consulting the Internet will become a major future stage for dying – in terms of acquiring general knowledge about dying, and also as an exchange platform for persons with terminal illnesses.
- 5.
In contrast to e.g. burial practices. These remain rather stable: For example, the practice of ideally putting a dead body back into the ground post-exitally persists in forms of rather conventionalized urn or coffin burials. In contrast to e.g. Japan, radically new re-inventions as pre-exital burials have not yet come up in Germany (see Suzuki 2013).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Menzfeld, M. (2018). Dying as liminality in the making. In: Anthropology of Dying. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19826-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-19826-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-19825-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-19826-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)