Skip to content

Verbatim quote · from the corpus

Thus Girard interprets the Tikopia myth cited in Des choses cachées... , where Tikarau, the scapegoat-god, “flies away” with most elements of the feast but leaves behind (vegetable) foods important to the Tikopia, as a cause-and-effect relationship between (1) the “radical elimination” of the scapegoat and (2) the subsequent alimentary (and classificatory) well-being of the people, rather than as a representation of the sparagmos itself with the subsequent feasting on the food it provides. The fact that the foods left behind are all vegetal suggests nonetheless that the god-victim was not merely “eliminated” (perhaps by driving him off a cliff) but provided the meat for the feast. From the generative perspective, the prevalence in major cultural works of figures of sacrifice in which, following the example of Oedipus, the tragic hero takes upon himself the sins of his community, may be discussed in two ways. The simpler answer to the Girardian claim of the universality of the scapegoat is that the sparagmos is indeed a moment of the originary hypothesis; the aggressive concentration on the central figure is less uniquely emphasized but no less present in the generative scenario than in Girard’s. But there is a stronger answer: the centrality of the human figure in the scapegoating/tragic scenario is not merely a late development of the originary scene but bears this lateness on its face as a feature of hierarchical society.

Eric Gans, GA and Mimetic Theory II: The Scapegoat · Saturday, March 18th, 2006 · Chronicles of Love & Resentment

Evidences

Read in context →center.study/q/aa82c64c290d
GuideSearchConceptsAsk AIArchive