Advertisement

This Is Not … a Shock: On the Passage Between Multiple Worlds

  • Paul Stenner
Chapter
Part of the Studies in the Psychosocial book series (STIP)

Abstract

This chapter examines Alfred Schutz’s thought-provoking concept of ‘shock experiences’. Schutz distinguishes the 'worlds' of dream, play, theatre, humour, religion and science from the world of ‘everyday life’. He considers the transition from daily life to each of these worlds to be a shocking experience and in so doing he strangely exaggerates the shock whilst ignoring actual experiences of shock. The main point of the chapter is that Schutz’s multiple worlds can be illuminated by liminality theory. The liminal is tightly connected to the sacred, but to grasp this it is necessary to deconstruct the purified concept of the sacred proposed in the influential tradition of Robertson Smith, and to grasp the sacred experientially as an inherently ambiguous and ambivalent wavering between worlds: as a way of making sense of experiences of liminality. This volatile ‘double-worldedness’ in turn sheds new light on the nature of dream, play, theatre, painting, religion and so on as liminal worlds-between-worlds, and it draws attention to ritual and the arts as liminal affective technologies for fabulating and navigating liminal experience ‘betwixt and between’ worlds.

References

  1. Akerstrom Anderson, N., & Pors, J. (2016). Public management in transition: The orchestration of potentiality. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bateson, G. (1972/2000). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, J., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  4. Cassirer, E. (1944). An essay on man. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Douglas, M. (1975). Implicit meanings: Selected essays in anthropology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Frazer, J. (1890/1955). The golden bough: A study in magic and religion. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Freud, S. (1908/1959). Creative writers and day-dreaming. In J. Strachey (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 9, pp. 143–144, 146–153). London: Hogarth Press.Google Scholar
  8. Freud, S. (1913/1965). The interpretation of dreams. New York: Avon Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Greco, M., & Stenner, P. (2017). From paradox to pattern shift: Conceptualising liminal hotspots and their affective dynamics. Theory and Psychology, 27(2), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hocking, B. T., Sturgeon, B., Jarman, N., Dominic, B., Dixon, J., Whyatt, D., Huck, J., & Davies, G. (in preparation). Place-identity and policy: Sharing leisure spaces in the post-conflict city.Google Scholar
  11. Holzkamp, K. (2013). In E. Schraube & U. Osterkamp (Eds.), Psychology from the standpoint of the subject: Selected writings of Klaus Holzkamp. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. Huizinga, J. (1938/1955). Homo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  13. Husserl, E. (1964). The idea of phenomenology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  14. James, W. (1889/2005). The psychology of belief. In J. M. Capps & D. Capps (Eds.), James and Dewey on belief and experience. Illinois: The University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  15. James, W. (1890/1950). The principles of psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Proust, M. (2000). In search of lost time, vol V. The fugitive. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  17. Pryor, F. (2004). Britain BC: Life in Britain and Ireland before the Romans. Bury St Edmunds: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  18. Rozik, E. (2002). The roots of theatre: Rethinking ritual and other theories of origin. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.Google Scholar
  19. Schütz, A. (1945). On multiple realities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 5(4), 533–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Simmel, G. (1918/2015). The view of life: Four metaphysical essays with journal aphorisms. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Smith, W. R. (1889/1927). Lectures on the religion of the Semites. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Spencer Brown, G. (1969). Law of form. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  23. Stenner, P. (2017). Being in the zone and vital subjectivity: On the liminal sources of sport and art. In T. Jordan, K. Woodward & B. McClure (Eds.), Culture, identity and intense performativity: Being in the Zone (Antinomies). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Szakolczai, Á. (2009). Liminality and experience: Structuring transitory situations and transformative events. International Political Anthropology, 2(1), 141–172.Google Scholar
  25. Thomassen, B. (2009). The uses and meanings of liminality. International Political Anthropology, 2(1), 5–27.Google Scholar
  26. Thomassen, B. (2014). Liminality and the modern. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Turner, V. W. (1977). Process, system, and symbol: A new anthropological synthesis. Daedalus, 106(3), 61–80.Google Scholar
  28. van Gennep, A. (1909/1961). The rites of passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Voegelin, E. (1974). Order and history. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Von Uexküll, J. (1926). Theoretical biology. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.Google Scholar
  31. Whitehead, A. N. (1927/1985). Symbolism: Its meaning and effect. Virginia: University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Stenner
    • 1
  1. 1.School of PsychologyThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations