35 pages • 1 hour read
Ruth BenedictPatterns of Culture
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1934A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Key Figures
Themes
Index of Terms
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
BetaChapters 7-8
Chapter 7 Summary: “The Nature of Society”
Benedict begins the chapter with a stance of cultural relativism. She states that although it is productive to compare different societies and their variations, they should not be judged in terms of each other, for their motivations are different (223). She then turns her attention to scholarly representations of cultures. Benedict highlights the importance of objective fieldwork and cautions against overgeneralizing or selectively picking cultural traits to fit predetermined ideas about a consistent, integrated whole (229). Benedict speculates that it is possible for societies to lack internal cohesion. She hypothesizes that a “lack of cultural integration” is more likely to occur in societies that reside on the “borders of well-defined culture areas” and are exposed to “outside influences” (225).
Benedict also discusses anthropology’s differences with sociology, which she attributes to a difference in datasets. She claims non-Western societies are bound by discrete spatial units, making it possible to study local groups in their entirety. Sociologists largely focus on stratified and geographically dispersed societies. According to Benedict, it is difficult for them to see uniformity within Western societies, and so they focus more on individualization. Sociologists tend to claim that “society is not and never can be anything over and above the individual minds that compose it” (230-31). Benedict disputes this depiction of society and writes, “It is obvious that the sum of all the individuals in Zuñi make up a culture beyond and above what those individuals have willed and created” (231). She contends that it is just as important to study “group phenomena” as it is to study the individual.
In the remainder of the chapter, Benedict stresses the need to incorporate historical perspectives when studying cultures to better understand why they select or reject particular traits. She writes that the selection of traits is “situational” or context dependent but does not elaborate on the historical reasons for why particular traits are chosen or rejected. Benedict ends Chapter 7 by noting that it is important to study dominant traits within our own society, although we have difficulty recognizing them because they are so ingrained (250).
Chapter 8 Summary: “The Individual and the Pattern of Culture”
In Chapter 8, Benedict reiterates the importance of studying individuals and their collectivity as a society. For her, the two are inseparable. Individuals are shaped by society, and societies are made through the contributions of individuals (253). Benedict then addresses the issue of free will and writes that individuals and society are not at odds with each other. Individuals, while constrained by society, still express themselves through an “arc of possible human behavior” (254). Typically, though, they tend to reinforce the norms of what is available to them within this arc of human potential.
In the rest of the chapter, Benedict addresses the cultural constructions of societal norms. What is considered “abnormal” in one society may be accepted and even revered in another society. Benedict uses the example of homosexuality to show that, while often maligned in Western societies, individuals in Native American societies who identify as berdache (today referred to as “two-spirit people”) assume special roles and have a venerated status (263-65). Benedict also makes the case that “normality” is variable historically. She draws on the example of witch trials in 18th-century New England to show that, from a contemporary perspective, it is the accusers who are considered “psychopathic” for their condemnation of innocent women (276).
Benedict ends the book by again emphasizing the importance of cultural relativism as well as the need to study individuals and societies from a scientific perspective. For Benedict, this approach is critical in creating a society that is more tolerant and aware of peoples and cultures different from one’s own (278).
Chapters 7-8 Analysis
In previous chapters Benedict focuses on how individuals acquire culture through processes of enculturation. She takes this analysis further in Chapters 7 and 8 and systematically investigates the relationship between the individual and society. As she explains, individuals are more than the aggregate parts of society, and society, in turn, shapes the attitudes and behaviors of individuals. What distinguishes Benedict’s approach is the view that “the arc of possible human behavior” is infinite yet also constrained by the expectations of society (254). This argument foreshadows later debates in social theory about whether and to what extent “structures” (i.e. social institutions) or “agency” (i.e. the ability to realize one’s individual will) have primacy in the conditioning of human thought and behavior.
Benedict’s discussion of what is “normal” and “abnormal” also distinguishes Patterns of Culture as a text that is sensitized to the experiences of marginalized individuals. The focus on feelings and emotions sets Benedict’s work apart in a field that largely devotes itself to “objective” and “scientific” writing. Benedict recognizes the suffering of people who do not conform to societal norms. Instead of casting them out from her theorizations, she makes them central to her analysis of cultural relativism. Her case examples show that individuals are deviant not in their predilections but rather in their placement within societies that do not support them (272). As she writes, “The persons who are put outside the pale of society with contempt are not those who would be placed there by another culture” (259). What is considered “normal” in any given society varies from society to society as well as across time.
Benedict’s even-handed treatment of marginalized individuals is consistent with her view that all cultures and, by extension, people are deserving of respect and recognition and should be studied in their own right. The contribution of this perspective to the social sciences cannot be overstated, for Benedict was writing during a time when most disciplines either ignored non-Western societies or presented them as inferior to “Western civilizations.” Benedict refers to the overuse of Eurocentric examples in disciplines like sociology and psychology, yet she also is careful not to dismiss these examples altogether, for she recognizes the value of cross-cultural comparisons as well as turning the ethnographic gaze inward to denaturalize assumptions about what is “normal.” Benedict thus leaves another lasting imprint on anthropology, which values learning about other cultures to learn more about one’s own.
