Circumcision As A Rite Of Passage Essay

Rites of passage, specifically circumcision, are the focus of study for multiple theorists. Circumcision as a ritual of passage encompasses various theories on the function of these ritualistic passages. Arnold Van Gennep, Vincent Crapanzano, and Victor Turner each approach the ritual of circumcisions’ function differently, specifically they question whether the ritual can be considered in stages.
Van Gennep focuses on rituals as stages through which persons move into a new stage , especially on the notion of circumcision as a “rite of separation.” Thus, in this model, circumcision shifts young boys from the stage of childhood into manhood. Van Gennep focuses on his theory of territorial spaces, about how and why we must move through these “doorways.” In the ritual of circumcision, the movement from boyhood to manhood can be marked both symbolically and physically.
“That such changes are regarded as real and important is demonstrated by the recurrence of rites, in important ceremonies among widely differing peoples, enacting death in one condition and resurrection in another.”
Yet, this shift from boyhood to manhood can be

marked with tension and possible social disruption, thus for Van Gennep these rites of passages, like circumcision, are meant to limit social movement that could jeopardize societal order.
Turner argues for the liminality of rites of passage, that ritualistic passages are defined by their integrative functionality. Circumcision thus acts, in this theory, to integrate young boys into the societal category of men; this integration for Turner represents a larger social integration, that of communitas. Communitas comes to recognize the vitality of rituals in the foundation of society. Communitas, through liminality, defuses the tension that emerges from the movement from one societal status to another, more prestigious, status. During the rite of Ndembu circumcision boys are taken from the world of their mothers, placed into a liminal state of neither child nor man, then after the physical circumcision is completed the boy is removed from his liminal state into the world of his father, the world of men.
Crapanzano vehemently disagrees with the theories established by Van Gennep and Turner. He disagrees with their theories that center around the idea that the child of circumcision must move directly from one stage to another. Instead, Crapanzano argues that the ritual of circumcision is circular, young boys are falsely moved into the stage of manhood. In actuality, according to Crapanzano, circumcision tranfers young boys into manhood, and then quickly transfer them back into boyhood. Unlike Van Gennep’s assertion of territorial spaces and our movement through them, Crapanzanos’ assertion pushes back to claim that these territorial spaces, as rituals of separation are merely illusions of separation.
Crapanzano also speaks to the parental aspect of circumcision, specifically to the interactions between the mother and father and their child. The father, in Crapanzanos’ argument, is submitting to ritual along with his young son:
“The father is also vicariously reliving, anxiously remembering and repeating his own circumcision; he too is submitting now as he did then to the manifest message of the rite, to custom and tradition, ultimately to the will of God.”
Furthermore, Crapanzano argument around the circular nature of the Ndembu circumcision rite correlates with the parental nature of the rite. Unlike, either Turner or Van Gennep’s theories, the model presented by Crapanzano expressly acknowledges that both parents are fundamental participants, as well as the removal of the boy from his mother’s world, to a state of liminality, to the world of his father, and then the boy once again returns to the world of his mother, to the state of childhood.
Turner, rather, argued that the boy is permanently removed from the world of his mother, placed into a state of liminality, and then becomes part of the world of his father, he becomes apart of the tribesmen.

Similarly, Van Gennep argues that in rites of passage, the person transitioning, leaves their previous status behind evermore, then they must enter a territorial passage, or a doorway into their new status, ultimately, after the completion of the ritual passage, the person now joins their improved social status. In the ritual of Ndembu circumcision, according to Van Genneps’ model, the young boys would leave behind their previous status of childhood, then enter both the symbolic and physical doorway of circumcision, and ultimately after the rituals completion the boys emerge from the doorway into the realm of men, he becomes a

man.
The complexity of social movement, specifically that from childhood to adulthood, is maintained as straightforward, a boy reaches a certain age, he is then removed from the world of childhood through the action, both symbolically and physically, of circumcision, following the ritual he becomes an adult, he becomes a man. However, while this model explained the transitional space of the ritual of circumcision itself, the liminal and/or territorial passage for Turner and Van Gennep respectively, it cannot and does not explain the complexity of actual social transition. Social transition cannot be accurately, complexly, defined in neat, simplified stages; instead as argued by Crapanzano, rituals may symbolically and physically transition boys to manhood, they do not socially transition him. Indeed, Crapanzano asserts the boy does not become a man simply because he participated in the ritual, the boy rather, remains just that a boy: “the ritual allusion is the assumption that what the ritual is said to do is in fact what it does.” The ritual of circumcision for Crapanzano is an allusion of social movement, the boy temporarily enters the world of manhood, through the painful cutting of his genitals, and is then placed back into childhood.
Rites of passage, for Turner, Van Gennep, and Crapanzano revolve around the idea of (social) movement and the spaces in which these movements are occurring. Yet, the importance of this movement, and in particular, whether this ritualistic movement reflect social reality, are the main points of tension and difference between these three theorists. Circumcision for Turner and Van Gennep represents the social reality of movement from boyhood to manhood, but for Crapazano circumcision represents the illusion of movement from boyhood to manhood, it does not however, reflect the social reality of the boys status, the boy remains a boy.