Re: circular - linear time

Dan Jorgensen (jorgensen@vaxr.sscl.uwo.ca)
Sun, 29 Sep 1991 20:40:46 EDT


I was interested in the short piece on "native" vs. "linear" time, but
am not so convinced about some of the discussion -- particularly the
notion that one of these is "natural" and the other "artificial." In
fact, most peoples recognize both kinds of time, but simply assign
different kinds of significance to them (do different things with these
ideas). "Linear" (i.e., non-reversible, nonrepeatable) time, for
example, is often very strongly marked among peoples who keep long
genealogies or pedigrees of ancestors (a very common pattern in many
parts of East Africa). This of course does not prevent the recognition
of seasons or cycles -- which Western types have little trouble with
either. So I think one point to beich made is not so much that there's
a simple one-or-the-other sort of time, much less that one of these is
"real" and the other "artificial." What might be more interesting is to
ask how the two are related, which has not received much attention....
(A nice starting point might be a couple of essays by E.R. Leach in
RETHINKING ANTHROPOLOGY on the symbolic representation of time, one of
which bears the fun title of "Time and False Noses" [structuring of time
and forms of ceremony].)

Two other points. While the kind of reasoning that says "West thinks one way
[good/bad depending on preference]" and "The Rest think the other way [bad/
good depending on preference] is very appealing for those enamoured of one
side of this divide and alienated from the other. But it's booby-trapped,
and can turn on us and bite us if we're not careful. For example, the argu-
ment that "Natives" only have cyclical/circular time has not only been used
to make arguments about Native Spirituality, but also to show that Natives
lack logic -- or, as in the bad old 19th Century, "Savages can't think
straight." I don't think this is what anybody here wants to say, but it
can sometimes come out that way [note that this can also often be tied to
arguments suggesting one can be either sensible or spiritual, but not both --
something I would find hard to swallow either logically OR spiritually]. In
more recent times, I think it might be worthwhile pointing out that arguments
about Native Thought being cyclical or turning time still [off] has in fact
led to ideas about Native societies as static and "cold," incapable of
innovation or change, and possessing no sense of history. This latter
charge has led to serious trouble and misunderstanding when Native views
of history -- which are often very precisely linear in very important ways,
thank you very much -- get presented. [Makes it easy for others to dismiss
Native views of the past by locating them in myth or dreamtime.....

Anyway, I've gone on too long as it is, but I would also point out that there
are all kinds of choices for how to do linear or cyclical time, and the choices
are often between the kinds of things or precesses one wants to choose as a
point of reference. So linear time can be in terms of arbitrary dates (but
linked to solar cycles = years) or human generations, the advance of glaciers,
and lots of other stuff. And cycles can be in terms of seasons, in terms of
festivals (which may be linked to other things), tides, or boom & bust cycles
on Wall Street.

Well, as I said, this is already enough, and I find I'm doing something else
now so I'll sign off.

Dan Jorgensen

jorgensen@vaxr.sscl.uwo.ca