Raymond T. Smith
Copyright 2000: All Rights Reserved
Go To Site Map
CONCLUSION
|
I |
N
this study
we have
attempted to
present a
series of
ethnographic
observations
in such a
way that
they would
serve to
clarify
certain
specific
problems
concerning
the nature
of family
structure in
the
communities
with which
we were
concerned.
The
most
important
conclusions
which emerge
from the
study
concern the
relations
between the
configuration
of domestic
relations
and the
position
which the
family and
its members
occupy in
the total
social
system. This
is exactly
the kind of
problem with
which social
anthropologists
have been
concerned in
societies in
other parts
of the
world;
societies
where ‘the
total social
system’
has often
been
represented
by a
‘tribe’,
internally
differentiated
on a
kinship-defined
basis.
Such
societies
have
generally
been
characterized
by the
absence of a
developed
technology
and economy,
and by a
very
rudimentary
division of
labour.
Domestic
rôles have
often been
closely
associated
with
political
and economic rôles, in
the sense
that the
former have
often been
the starting
point of the
definition
of the
latter.
In
British
Guiana we
have been
faced with
an entirely
different
situation,
but we have
tried to
elucidate
the
structural
framework of
social
relations by
the same
general
method of
approach as
that used by
social
anthropologists
working in
what are
usually
termed
‘primitive’
societies.
We
have adhered
to the
theoretical
principle
that the
unit of
study is a
whole
society; in
this case
the whole of
British
Guiana is
taken as
constituting
the total
social
system from
an
analytical
point of
view, but we
have been
concerned
with
particular
aspects of
the total
social
structure,
isolated for
special
study
according to
a
theoretical
scheme.
We
have taken
the colour/
class
divisions to
represent
the major
lines of
differentiation
within the
total social
system, and
it is in the
nature of
the
functional
unity of the
society that
the units so
differentiated
are
hierarchically
arranged,
being
allocated
different
statuses,
different
degrees of
political
power and
different
social
functions.
Every
social
system has
internal
differentiations
of this
order, but
we have been
primarily
concerned
with the
basis on
which the
differentiation
takes place
rather than
with the
social
function of
the
differentiation
itself.
It
has been our
contention
that a
primary base
line for the
differentiation
of function,
and of
status, is
the fact of
ethnic
identity,
and this
fact has
important
implications
for the
study of
domestic
relations.
It
would be a
complete and
complicated
study in
itself to
analyse even
the formal
aspects of
the total
social
system in
full, and it
must be made
quite clear
that we have
not
attempted to
do this.
Enough
has been
clarified to
make it
possible to
state that
in the
villages
with which
we are most
concerned we
find that
the bulk of
the
population
constitutes
a cohesive
group bound
by ties of
kinship and
territorial
affiliation,
and
occupying a
low position
in the
status
system, both
on account
of the
position of
its members
in the scale
of values
relating to
ethnic
characteristics,
and because
of the
nature of
the
occupational,
political,
and other
functions
which they fulfil.
In
this case,
ethnic
characteristics
are merely a
convenient
factor by
which status
and
functions
can be
ascribed to
individuals
and groups.
In
other
societies,
as our
comparison
with a
Scottish
mining
community
shows, such
cohesive low
status
groups can
exist
without the
presence of
an ethnic
distinguishing
‘badge’,
and other
bases of
ascription
of status
may exist
such as
birth into a
particular
family,
possession
of certain
cultural
characteristics
and so on.
Even
in British
Guiana,
status and
occupation
can be
changed to
some extent
by various
means we
have termed
‘achievement’,
after
Linton, but
the
institutionalized
social
values of
the total
social
system lay
less stress
upon
achievement
than upon
ascribed
characteristics,
and there is
not a high
rate of
mobility in
the status
scale.
In
Chapter I we
laid out as
concisely as
possible the
facts which
are
necessary to
an
understanding
of the
position of
the Negro
communities
in the
historical
development
of the
colony, and
in the
present-day
economic
system.
We
described
the systems
of drainage
and
irrigation
which are
necessary to
make the
Guiana
coastlands
habitable
and
agriculturally
productive,
and we also
dwelt upon
the
necessity
for some
kind of
political
organization
in order to
operate them
effectively.
Whilst
ecological
factors have
been of
great
importance
in
determining
the lay out
of the
clusters of
dwellings
and farm
lands which
we call
villages, it
is a
striking
fact that
there are no
really
highly
developed
political
institutions
at the
village
level, with
a series of
important
offices held
by members
of the main
village
group who
would
control the
activities
of their
fellow
villagers.
There
are such
institutions,
of course,
in the form
of the Local
Authorities,
but the
tendency is
for the
really
important
control
functions to
be delegated
to persons
occupying
offices in
the wider
social
system of
which the
village is
only a part.
Thus
there has
not
developed within
the villages
any really
important
rank
differentiation
of a
political
kind, and
such
political
functions as
are carried
out at the
village
level are
usually
thrust upon
school
teachers,
i.e.,
persons who
derive
higher
status from
other
specialized
functions.
The
villages are
not
self-contained
economic
entities
with their
own internal
division of
labour
supplying
all their
needs
neither are
they
specialized
units of
production
in the
over-all
system.
They
are largely
reservoirs
of labour on
the one
hand, and
their
inhabitants
are small
scale
farmers and stock-rearers
on a
part-time
basis on the
other.
This
has always
been the
case from
the date of
their
establishment
as villages.
In our discussion of the household group and the kinship system in Part II, we have had to break a good deal of new ground so far as discussions of West Indian family life are concerned. It has long been known that the lower-class Negro family all over the New World tended to be matri-focal, and controversies have arisen as to why this should be so. This book has attempted to throw light on this question, as well as examining in some detail exactly what ‘matri-focal’ implies in the three villages we have studied. It seems likely that the detailed anthropological study of family structure, concentrating upon variations within this one ‘culture area’, are only just beginning, and by carrying out a series of studies concentrating upon the ‘depth’ analysis of specific problems such as that attempted here, it will be possible to build up a body of comparative material which can be integrated with the more extensive problem analyses undertaken by sociologists.
We
have shown
quite
conclusively
that the
normal type
of domestic
unit in
British
Guiana comes
into being
as the
result of a
man and a
woman
entering a
conjugal
union of
some kind,
and that the
elementary,
or nuclear,
family is
the normal
type of
co-residential
unit,
particularly
at that
stage of
development
where the
children are
young.
The
variations
from this
norm arise
as the
result of
the strength
of the
mother-child
relationship
and the
relative
weakness of
the conjugal
bond, and
they
generally
result in
the
emergence of
the
typically
solidary
unit of a
woman, with
her
daughters
and their
children.
There
is a sense
in which the
conjuga1 tie
is always a
potentially
weak one in
every
society, for
in a matrix
of close
kinship
relations,
it is the
only
non-kinship
relationship,
and it has
to be
buttressed
by moral and
legal rules
which are
compatible
with other
features of
the social
structure.
These
may be
stronger or
weaker in
each case
depending on
the way in
which the
elementary
family is
integrated
into wider
structures,
and there
are some
matrilineal
societies
where the
conjugal
tie, and the
father-child
relationship,
may be
regarded as
being
extremely
tenuous.
In
our
particular
case there
are no such
extreme
conditions,
and in so
far as the
conjugal tie
can be
considered
‘weak’,
its weakness
is not
correlated
with the
existence of
matrilineal
descent
groups, but
rather with
the relative
unimportance
of the jural
position of
the father
in relation
to the
children,
without
there being
any
comparable
relation of
the child to
its
mother’s
brother or
mother’s
lineage.
The
functions
which the
husband-father
performs are
minimal and
are almost
solely
confined to
providing
food,
shelter and
clothing for
his spouse
and her
children,
though of
course he
has
important
functions in
the
socialization
of the
children,
even if
these imply
no more than
just
existing as
a
father-figure.
The
consideration
of a
strongly
patrilineal
society such
as the
Tallensi
throws
interesting
light on the
Guianese
situation,
and can be
held to
constitute a
source of
valuable
‘negative
evidence’
(Fortes 1945
and 1949a).
In
societies
such as this
the position
of the
husband-father
in the
domestic
unit is
firmly
fixed.
As
head of the
compound he
is head of a
corporate
property-owning
group, and
all rights
of
possession
over land,
stock,
buildings,
food etc.,
may be
vested in
him so long
as he
occupies
this
position.
He
has very
definite
rights over
the
procreative
powers of
his wife or
wives, these
rights being
transferred
to him in
customarily
defined
ways,
usually
through
payment of a
bride-price.
The
children
belong to
the segment
of the
patrilineage
of which he
is head, and
their
important
social
statuses are
fixed by
virtue of
their
membership
of that
lineage, and
hence by
reference to
the father.
The
husband-father
is not only
head of the
domestic
group or
compound, so
far as its
internal
relationships
are
concerned,
but he also
occupies a
position in
the
political
system by
virtue of
his headship
of that
unit, and it
is in this
way that the
family
system is so
closely
integrated
into wider
social
structures.
The
dual role of
the
husband-father
in two
systems is
crucial.
In
the case of
rural Guiana
Negro
groups, the
child’s
relationship
to his
father is
not a
crucial one
in fixing
his social
position. This
position is
fixed by his
birth as a
member of
the whole
Negro group
and of the
village
community.
In
Section III
we tried to
show why the
position of
the
husband-father
in the
social
status
hierarchy is
not
immediately
important
for the rest
of the
family.
We
pointed out
that as soon
as we leave
the
lower-class
group, and
begin to
consider the
middle and
upper
classes,
then there
is a
tendency for
the position
of the
husband-father
in the
occupational
system to be
important to
the rest of
the family,
in so far as
it is
status-determining.
Other
problems
arise of
course, with
which we
have not
dealt, such
as the
situation
which exists
when the
wife-mother
is of
lighter
complexion,
and can
therefore
claim higher
status on
account of
her position
in the
‘colour’
hierarchy.
Much
confusion
about the
nature of
lower-class
family life
in the West
Indies has
arisen as
the result
of taking
verbal
statements
from members
of the
middle-class,
or even of
the
lower-class,
too much at
their face
value, and
regarding
them as
statements
of fact
rather than
as symbolic
statements
of a state
of
inter-group
relationship.
It is
a part of
the
mythology of
the West
Indies that
the
lower-class
Negro is
immoral and
promiscuous,
and that his
family life
is
‘loose’
and
‘disorganized’,
and unless
it is
clearly
recognized
that such
myths are an
integral
part of the
system of
relationships
between
various
groups,
reflecting
value
judgements
inherent in
their status
rankings,
then serious
bias may be
introduced
into
objective
study.
Differential
standards of
sexual
morality
reflect
group
differentiations
of another
order, and
in fact, far
from being
completely
promiscuous,
sexual
relations in
the villages
are quite
definitely
regulated
within the
limits
imposed by
the family
structure.
Village
gossip often
turns around
specific
couples and
this gossip
is never
indifferent
to what is
taking
place, and
in itself it
constitutes
a means of
regulating
sexual
relationships.
There
are very few
‘don’t
care’
girls, and
the concern
they show
for what is
being said
about them
shows that
they do
really
‘care’
about public
opinion.
Admittedly
the limits
of
permissiveness
are
considerably
broader than
those found
in
middle-class
English
society, but
this does
not mean
that there
is no moral
constraint
whatsoever.
The
specific
comparisons
with other
societies
made in
Chapter IX
have shown
that similar
structural
principles
may be found
in other
societies
with a
different
cultural
tradition
and
historical
background.
Merely
to formulate
the
questions
leading to
such a
comparison
is a step
forward in
analysis,
and the
answers
would seem
to justify
our
contention
that it is
imperative
to explore
fully the
interrelations
between the
co-existing
parts of the
social
system
before
trying to
‘explain’
certain
social facts
in terms of
their
antecedent
states over
a long time
span.
Such
‘explanations’
are not
invalid or
without
value, but
they are not
sociological
explanations,
and they may
sidestep the
crucial
issues of
sociological
analysis.
This book has been concerned with one set of problems only, and in seeking to clarify them it has often been necessary to treat whole sectors of the social organization of British Guiana in a very cursory manner. This is inevitable when one is dealing with an area where so little research has been carried out and where one must give at least a brief indication of the nature of the background in which the main problems are set. If the deficiencies of this work are recognized, it is hoped that it will stimulate other scholars to make good those deficiencies and to help in the building of a more adequate understanding of the social processes operating in this most fascinating corner of the West Indies.
Go
to Contents