Edith Kurzweil
THE MYTHOLOGY OF STRUCTURALISM
It
is now several decades since STRUCTURALISM was launched
by Levi-Strauss, and ever since then, its defenders have claimed that it answers
many of the persistent questions about nature and culture, while its oppo-
nents have argued that it is just another piece of rhetoric masquerading as a
supertheory . The discussions rage on, but whether it is a new vision or just a
fad, structuralism provides the kind of ideology that can be useful to both the
right and the left. For the French right, Levi-Strauss's belief in unconscious–
yet immutable-structures confirms conservative views about the constants in
all of existence, while the left finds an affinity with some of Levi-Strauss's
pro-Marxist proclamations. But since 1968, with the growing political and
economic crisis, the mystique of structuralism has lost its more general appeal,
a number of "post-structuralist" theories have emerged , and Levi-Strauss's
stock among French intellectuals has gone down . In the last few years,
however , a few French intellectuals who still believe that some form of
structuralism illuminates all of human activity have developed their own
versions of structuralism, in different fields, and in competition with each
other, so that one can now choose one's favorite variety-to support or knock
down. In America though, where academics are always a few years behind the
latest French fashions, structuralism-in one form or another-remains a hot
issue at scholarly meetings where a longing for big theory persists-and this is
or.!y partly due to the long delay of translations.
But we still are not sure what we think of structuralism . How does the
peculiar combination of analytic and mythical components , for example , fit
in with the native empirical bent? Do we think of it as a contribution
to
modern thought, as a science, as a religion-or as simply a moment in the
4
history of ideas? In what way-if any- does structuralism add to the under-
standing of literature, psychoanalysis, anthropology, and other disciplines?
Does it answer any fundamental questions , or is it to be regarded as just
another of the perennial French philosophical constructions like existential–
ism-a flashy insight built into a theory, or into the "form of thought
