Trinidad
…
Mortuary Rituals, Mourning, and the Concept of Afterlife: Differences and cohesion
among sub-groups of Orisha devotees in Trinidad
Josiah O. Olubowale
(Cultural Studies Unit)
Dept. of Literary, Cultural & Communication Studies, Faculty of Humanities &
Education,
University of the West Indies,
St. Augustine.
dada_jo@yahoo.com
5th European Conference on African Studies
African Dynamics in a Multipolar World
June 26 – 29, Lisbon, Portugal
Panel P171: Multipolar Religious Production: Old and new trends
Introduction
This paper discusses the interplay between three concepts: religion, citizenship and afterlife.
This research utilizes rich ethnographic data of funeral rituals as conceived and practiced by
different groups of Orisha practitioners in Trinidad. Although the ethnography that this paper
relies on was conducted among Orisha devotees in Trinidad between 2009-2012. The
analysis, however, serves as a template on which the understanding of the interplay between race, perception and interpretation of history by different groups on the one hand, and on the other hand, the use of religion in individual and group agency in Trinidad and Tobago. The paper also discusses the context of agency that religion serves within a diverse society, in a post-colonial state. While Orisha as a religious entity can be broadly grouped together as one within a national space, I argue that such a general description needs to be peeled off in order to reveal the individualistic and sub-group specifics that agency is constructed to address through religion.
The substance of the discourse on identity formation is often constructed to pointedly
address the condition of individuals while alive. In this paper, I suggest that death, which
might seem to signify the end of the whole identity argument for the deceased, extends the
discussion through funerals. Funeral rites and rituals have thus become instrumental in
performing or asserting group preferences of identity definition and in fact, rejection of
practices that might be preferred by other group or groups.
address the condition of individuals while alive. In this paper, I suggest that death, which
might seem to signify the end of the whole identity argument for the deceased, extends the
discussion through funerals. Funeral rites and rituals have thus become instrumental in
performing or asserting group preferences of identity definition and in fact, rejection of
practices that might be preferred by other group or groups.
Two pitfalls that beset description and analysis of Orisha practices as a minority
group culture, and thus need to be avoided are at the two ends of the same plane: the first is the assumption of unity in form and structure of religion as well as coherence necessary to assert group identity. This unravels with inherent contradictions that are usually left
unmentioned. The single unifying designation, Orisha, that is broadly applied in referring to
the practices and ways of lives of devotees, is challenged by the fractured, contradictory but
permissible practices. One unifying factor that joins all these practices is the life conditions
and realities that these practices jointly address. The expected implication of unified doctrine, dogma and beliefs in defining the religion is thus disappointed. On the other side of the plane is the attempt to explain away the complexities inherent in the practices, as well as the absence of a coherent simple narrative by grouping the whole set of practices under the same designation as syncretic form. I point to the insufficiency of syncretism both as a theoretical instrument in describing practices such as Orisha in the New World or as an excuse for the advent of the structure of these practices.
group culture, and thus need to be avoided are at the two ends of the same plane: the first is the assumption of unity in form and structure of religion as well as coherence necessary to assert group identity. This unravels with inherent contradictions that are usually left
unmentioned. The single unifying designation, Orisha, that is broadly applied in referring to
the practices and ways of lives of devotees, is challenged by the fractured, contradictory but
permissible practices. One unifying factor that joins all these practices is the life conditions
and realities that these practices jointly address. The expected implication of unified doctrine, dogma and beliefs in defining the religion is thus disappointed. On the other side of the plane is the attempt to explain away the complexities inherent in the practices, as well as the absence of a coherent simple narrative by grouping the whole set of practices under the same designation as syncretic form. I point to the insufficiency of syncretism both as a theoretical instrument in describing practices such as Orisha in the New World or as an excuse for the advent of the structure of these practices.
No comments:
Post a Comment