Claude Lévi-Strauss: the Poet in the Laboratory

By Patrick Wilcken

Between his own publication of Tristes tropiques in 1955 and Jacques Derrida's publication of De la grammatologie in 1967, Claude Lévi-Strauss bestrode western humanities and social sciences as no one has before or since. Unlike philosophy or literary criticism, his discipline, anthropology, was not divided between "Anglo-Saxon" and "Continental" approaches, and the promise of a method that would analyse the fundamental processes of the human mind was initially plausible.

From the beginning, Lévi-Strauss argued two theses, logically separate but inseparably linked in his own writing. His great idea - the fruit of a close friendship with Roman Jakobson forged in wartime exile in New York - was that both myth and kinship were to be analysed by a functional relationship not to social and physical reality, but to the most elementary processes of human thought. The establishment of difference - the distinction between animals with or without cloven hooves, say - was dictated by the need to structure the world into pairs of binary oppositions. This insight built on the greatest discovery of 20th-century linguistics: rather than analyse the positive features of sound across an infinite continuum, the Russian linguist Nikolai Trubetzkoy and his successors had focused simply on the differences (between "b" and "p", for example) that produced meaning.

Lévi-Strauss claimed to have discovered the fundamental differences on which all kinship and myth were based, and produced a simple combination of differential oppositions that, he thought, underpin even the most complex and apparently dissimilar myths. Myths were privileged insights into thought, and here his second thesis came into play: "primitive" societies or, as Lévi-Strauss termed them, "societies without writing" are more authentic than societies that have succumbed to writing. Ever since Montaigne, and receiving its fullest expression in Rousseau's noble savage, there had been a current in western thought which saw in "primitive" societies a richer, less alienated relationship between men and their world than that which obtained in "civilisation".

Lévi-Strauss thus promised two things: first, a combinatory schema that would reveal the basic operations of the human mind - all kinship systems would be conceived as variations on a single theme, and all myths would operate around a set of basic differences - and second, a demonstration of the superiority of forms of thought that came before writing, before the fundamental alienation that occurred when writing intruded into an authentic idyll.

However, Lévi-Strauss's dominance of western thought evaporated after Derrida devoted a 40-page analysis to the anthropologist's foray into the world of the Nambikwara Amazonians. Derrida showed that Lévi-Strauss's position, far from breaking with a Eurocentric model, reproduced it. He demonstrated how the notion that the Nambikwara inhabited a different and better world, one before writing, reflected a long-held western prejudice that ignored the way in which any system of language had all the features of a writing system that Lévi-Strauss considered distinctively modern. The Amazonian enjoyed no more direct and unmediated a relationship with his surroundings than the western anthropologist trying to persuade little girls to break tribal taboos.

Derrida not only demolished Lévi-Strauss's sentimental valorisation of the Amazonians, but took an axe to his "scientific" project. Linguistics was based on the discovery of the phoneme, the basic element of sound difference from which all meaning in a language flowed. Yet the anthropologist's mythemes were always the result of interpretation.

Patrick Wilcken's biography barely mentions Derrida, and often seems somewhat ill at ease in dealing with Lévi-Strauss's intellectual project, but does succeed in describing the life behind the work. The picture that emerges is remarkably unengaging. Lévi-Strauss comes across as an opportunistic intellectual bureaucrat, always ready to bend the knee to power, and so uninterested in his own work except as a means of advancement that, despite building a considerable academic empire, he left behind no successors or inheritors. He was heavily dependent on close dialogue - with Jakobson, Georges Du­mézil, Émile Benveniste and Jacques Lacan - but once his career had taken off (he was easily the most institutionally successful of all the structuralists), he seems to have communicated intellectually with no one. The idiosyncratic analyses of the four-volume Mythologiques, published between 1964 and 1971, emerged from a life that had been hermetically sealed. He made contact with the contemporary world only to denounce it: he voted against admitting women to the Académie Française in 1979.

The most interesting passages in the biography occur early in the book as Wilcken follows the young Lévi-Strauss to a government teaching job in Brazil and then on to the expedition that brought him into contact with the Nambikwara and gave rise to the most important sections in Tristes tropiques. Wilcken also writes informatively about the semi-accident that led to Lévi-Strauss writing this, his best-known work, some 20 years later when, having failed in his first attempt to be elected to the Collège de France, he contemplated an alternative career in journalism. Tristes tropiques not only made Lévi-Strauss an intellectual cele­brity of a new type, but consolidated the "anthropological turn" that was the most significant development in the humanities in the 20th century, as every culture came to be seen as a potential bearer of meaning.

Claude Lévi-Strauss: the Poet in the Laboratory
Patrick Wilcken
Bloomsbury, 384pp, £30

Colin MacCabe is distinguished professor of English and film at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

10 comments

Joanne Goldstein's picture

It is well within the rights of anyone to make a complaint that they feel is worthy of discussion. What truly determines the conversational value of a topic is whether or not anyone responds to it. In essence, it is only my response (and future responses) that validate your words here projekty rodinnych domov. If no one reads and no one cares, then you might as well have been speaking to yourself.

Nathan Redd's picture

Considering the great value of this article alone, I find it useful and need to add something on my own. First of all, the reasoning is quite an essential thing to consider before talking about the straight facts, or facts which might seem obvious more cum. But it should be mandatory to cite various external sources used and to cite them properly. While this might look a bit pushy and directive hostely, it should be a primary thing to look at after reading any article. Thank you for your trial.

J. Capgras's picture

The vision of Lévi-Strauss sketched out in this review - as a grasping bureaucrat essentially uninterested in his own ideas - is extraordinarily wide of the mark. Derrida's criticism is something of a footnote to the Lévi-Strauss story, so it's rather a surprise that the Colin MacCabe makes such a big deal of it here. Perhaps in the interests of balance MacCabe might have mentioned that he himself was taught by Derrida.

Dana's picture

myth and kinship is precisely what western man is being asked to live without by liberals. As this article shows, that is not possible for any people.

harrymacz/gmail's picture

The more broadly you read the smaller becomes the number of books the mere mention of which transport you to the time and the place when you were touched and filled with the wonder of discovery you shall never experience again. Tristes tropiques is, to me, one of those books. I read a great deal of Levi-Strauss after, and structuralists in other disciplines, but in the end decided the whole exercise was one the one hand a belaborment of the obvious and on the other the trivialization of the irreducibly complex. So we slink back to Kant. Yet Tristes tropiques is, according to my heart, and in my experience, the most powerful evocation not only of our lost world, but of the unfathomable depths of mankind from the first step on the savannah to the first step on the moon. It raised for me the question that has haunted me since and that I still seek to answer: who are we?

Carl's picture

I recently read this biography and found it to be an extremely interesting exposition of the life and thought of Levi-Strauss. I kept thinking as I was reading, "is Levi-Strauss giving an account of how tribal people would think if they were French intellectuals?" The idea that myth and kinship have a structure, like language, is both intriguing and plausible but how would one falsify this conjecture or falsify Levi-Strauss's (or any particular) speculative description of this structure?

forshaw's picture

The notion that Derrida "demolished" Levi-Strauss is similar to the idea that a mosquito could demolish the Great Wall of China. There's certainly much to criticize and deconstruct in Levi-Strauss, and some of the romanticism in his portrayals of tribal cultures is certainly ripe for revision. But you can find such weaknesses in any text a few decades after it's written. Levi-Strauss's intellectual project was so broad, and so fruitful, that it continues to inform a wide range of anthropological thinking today. His influence goes far beyond the details of Nambikwara culture to the foundations of myth and knowledge in any culture, including our own. I'm an anthropologist, and I after decades I keep finding new insight in his writings. Derrida's writings, by contrast, have seemed more superficial and less applicable year by year, to the point that very few anthropologists nowadays have much use for him.

acjfddch's picture

YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

-------------- http://www.ftoto.com/ -----------

a leading worldwide wholesale company (or ucan say organization). We supply more than 100 thousand high-quality merchandise and famous brand name products all at wholesale prices.

-------------- http://www.ftoto.com/ -----------

Richard R. Bélec, Ph.D.'s picture

RE: Patrick Wilcken’s Biography of Claude Lévi-Strauss and the Review written by Colin MacCabe, one can only conclude that neither one knows what they are doing. Your readers’ comments seem to support that point of view.
I did not note where Mr. Wilcken teachers but it sounds suspiciously like England, which anthropologically speaking has never produced a coherently positive view of Structuralism. Mr. MacCabe on the other hand, seems incapable of understanding the project of Lévi-Strauss which is much more than Tristes Tropiques. I had the pleasure of meeting the father of Structuralism in 1972 and working on a documentary film on his research in British Columbia. I subsequently wrote my Ph.D. dissertation, in philosophy, using Lévi-Strauss’ work as a starting point. But for Mr. MacCabe to stand on Derrida’s shoulders as a Post-Modern Philosopher, is too much. He misses the point of what Lévi-Strauss contributed to ethnology, the human sciences, and to literature.
I would recommend that people read Lévi-Strauss, especially La Pensée Sauvage, and preferably in French. He is an excellent writer, and much more profound and insightful than Lacan, Derrida, Foucault, and Sartre.

enrique soto eguíbar's picture

The magazine Elementos from the Autonomous University of Puebla Mexico- www.elementos.buap.mx- will publish (it is now in print and will be openly available on-line) an article which discusses Lévi-Strauss and cites extensivelly Wilcken's book.

Latest tweets