Y Myfyriwr Ymchwil
Cyfrol 2, Rhif 2, Mai 2013, 59–77
Prifysgol Cymru
Y Drindod Dewi Sant
The Student Researcher
Vol. 2, No. 2, May 2013, 59–77
University of Wales
Trinity Saint David
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
Fenella Dean
MA Cultural Astronomy and Astrology
Crynodeb
Fel y pwysleisia Alan Dundes (Dundes: 1961; t. 25), nid gwaith hawdd yw diffinio
ofergoelion gan fod ofergoelion wedi’u plethu mewn systemau cred a chwedloniaeth sydd
i’w gweld yn amlwg ar draws hanes a diwylliannau, ac sy’n rhan annatod o gymdeithasau,
bywydau ac ymddygiadau pobl heb iddynt o reidrwydd gydnabod eu bodolaeth na deall
pam. Nod y prosiect ymchwil hwn yw ymchwilio i ddilysrwydd y datganiad hwn oddi
mewn i gymuned drefol, fach, gyfoes trwy gyfrwng holiaduron a chyfweliadau. Bydd
yr holiadur ar ffurf cyfres fer o gwestiynau er mwyn cael gwybod a yw’r unigolyn yn ei
ystyried ei hun yn ofergoelus. Dosberthir yr holiadur i ryw 20 o unigolion. Yn dilyn hyn,
dewisir nifer fach o unigolion o blith y grwp sydd wedi llenwi’r holiadur i’w cyfweld. Bydd
y meini prawf ar gyfer dewis yr unigolion hyn yn dibynnu ar nifer y rheini ‘sy’n credu’
neu ‘nad ydynt yn credu’ mewn ofergoelion, fodd bynnag, y nod yw dewis nifer gytbwys
o’r naill grwp a’r llall pe bai modd. Bydd y cyfweliadau ar ffurf hanner-strwythuredig lle
bydd hawl i’r cyfwelai sôn am ei gred neu’i ddiffyg cred mewn ofergoelion wrth iddo gael
ei gyfarwyddo trwy wahanol gwestiynau ynghylch ofergoeledd gan y cyfwelydd. Amcan
y cyfweliad yw casglu rhagor o wybodaeth ar gyfer dealltwriaeth ddyfnach ynghylch
ofergoeliaeth o safbwynt yr unigolyn yn ogystal â’r unigolyn oddi mewn i’r gymuned.
Geiriau allweddol: Ofergoelion, systemau cred, cymuned, ethnograffeg, gwaith maes
Abstract
As Alan Dundes (Dundes: 1961; pp. 25) highlights it is not a simple task to define
superstition as superstitions are interwoven in belief systems and folklore that are prevalent
throughout history and cultures, and are integrated into societies, peoples’ lives and
behaviour without them necessarily acknowledging their existence or understanding
why. This research project aims to explore the validity of this statement within a
small, contemporary, urban community via both questionnaires and interviews. The
questionnaire will take the form of a short set of questions in order to ascertain whether the
individual believes him/herself to be superstitious. The questionnaire will be distributed
to approximately 20 individuals. Following this, a small number of individuals, will be
chosen from the group who have completed the questionnaires, to be interviewed. The
criteria for choosing these individuals will depend on the number of ‘believers’ or ‘nonbelievers’ in superstitions, however, the aim is to choose a balanced number of both groups
should this exist. The interviews will take a semi-structured form with the interviewee
being allowed to talk of their belief or non-belief in superstitions being guided by various
questions with regard to superstitions by the interviewer. The aim of the interview is to
gather more information for a greater depth of understanding with regard to superstition
both in terms of the individual and the individual within the community.
Key words: Superstitions, belief systems, community, ethnography, fieldwork
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 59
03/05/2013 14:29
60
Fenella Dean
Introduction
In his study entitled “Some Observations on Superstition in Contemporary Life”
Judd Marmor stated it is often assumed “[A]s man’s scientific knowledge has increased
… his irrational beliefs must be diminishing proportionately” with Marmor aligning
1
superstitions with irrational beliefs. Marmor goes on to say that this superiority “over
2
earlier or more primitive societies is actually more apparent than real”. He is surprised
to discover “how many beliefs of irrational nature persist in contemporary society
3
despite the far-reaching advances in our technological understanding”, mentioning
the prevalence of the superstition knocking on wood in order to ward off ill-luck. So,
it would appear that for all the technological advancement that man/woman seems to
embrace, superstitions persist however irrational they may be. As Hamlet said;
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
4
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” (Shakespeare, I, v)
Marmor’s observations are further supported by Alan Dundes’ research entitled
5
“Brown County Superstitions: The Structure of Superstitions” undertaken a few years
later. Dundes highlights it is not a simple task to define superstition as superstitions
are interwoven in belief systems and folklore that are prevalent throughout history
and cultures, and are integrated into societies, peoples’ lives and behaviour without
them necessarily acknowledging their existence or understanding why. The following
research project explores the validity of these statements within a small, contemporary,
urban community in the 21st century, via both questionnaires and interviews.
The questionnaire was distributed to a small number of individuals in the chosen
community. Following this, a smaller number of individuals were interviewed from
the group who had completed the questionnaires. The aim of the interview was to
gather more information for a greater depth of understanding with regard to belief in
superstition both in terms of the individual and the individual within the community.
Defining Superstition
Samuel Adams Drake in 1900 said “[S]uperstition is not easily defined.’ (Drake, 1900,
6
pp. 7), Mazie Earl Wagner in 1928 referred to superstition as ‘these irrational beliefs”.
The anthropologist, David Bidney in 1953, defined superstition as “a mode of fear
7
based on some irrational or mythological belief and usually involves some taboo”.
In 1997, Michael Thalbourne defined superstition as “a belief that a given action
can bring good luck or bad luck when there are no rational or generally acceptable
8
grounds for such a belief ”.
What the above illustrates is that superstition is commonly categorised as a form
of belief and a belief, according to David Bidney (Bidney, 1953), is made up of three
types of knowledge: rational, irrational and non-rational. Rational knowledge being
that which people assume to be true, for example four multiplied by four equals
sixteen. Irrational knowledge which is assumed by sane individuals to be false, for
example four multiplied by four does not equal seventeen. Non-rational knowledge
is deemed to be everything in between rational and irrational knowledge; “it is
knowledge that can neither be proved nor disproved – commitments we make and
9
assumptions we act on every day”.
Thus, superstition can be assumed to be a form of belief, however, Carl Lindahl
questions what belief is and whether we know what we believe. In his study “’It’s
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 60
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
61
Only Folklore…’ Folklore and the Historian”,10 an example of this conundrum is
given by Lindahl when he asks his new students at the start of folklore classes each
year if they believe in ghosts and if not would they spend the night in a cemetery.
Of the students who say they do not believe in ghosts, several in the class would not
spend a night in a cemetery. Lindahl asks the question “If you say you believe one
thing, and act immediately and instinctively as if you believe the opposite, what
11
do you really believe?” Whilst the above example is not a scientific study it does
show the transient nature of belief. Patrick Suppes in his paper “The Measurement
of Belief ” summed up this transience with the analogy, “[O]ur beliefs….are rather
like the leaves on a tree. They tremble and move under even a minor current of
12
information”.
Another aspect of defining superstition as a form of belief is that these
definitions have a psychological basis; Bidney’s definition above centres on the
psychology of irrational fear. Gustav Jahoda in his book “The Psychology of
Superstition” highlights the psychological theories explaining superstition and
how these definitions and theories have been formulated, dividing superstitious
13
belief into four categories. Sociologists in formulating theories and definitions to
explain superstition in modern society have looked to theories that “were developed
to explain a different phenomena: that of magic and ‘superstition’ in traditional,
14
mainly non-literate societies”. For example Bronislaw Malinowski’s ‘theory of the
gap’ which says that magic is used to reduce anxiety, filling the unknown space.
Magic and superstition being assumed to be the same or similar, Malinowski states;
“[M]an, engaged in a series of practical activities, comes to a gap [...] his anxiety, his
fears and hopes, induce a tension in his organism which drives him to some sort of
15
activity”. John McLeish in his study applied this theory to superstitious belief and
practice in modern society and summed it up as “[T]he functional significance of
these unfounded beliefs,....is that they contain, or otherwise cope with, individual
16
and group anxieties”.
The weakness with these definitions and theories of superstition, as mentioned
above, is that “[T]hey attempt to explain a phenomenon – superstition – which
17
is envisaged as a uniform trans-historical and trans-cultural phenomenon”. They
have ignored the cultural and historical aspect of superstition and that superstitious
18
belief and practice develops and changes over time, from one generation to another.
Additionally, they assume “that people actually believe in the superstitious acts which
19
they perform”.
Superstitious beliefs and practices in contemporary society differ from premodern society in that they are on the whole “individualistic, unrelated to social roles
20
and generally devoid of any degree of social prescription”. The practises are usually
21
“unrelated to any system of beliefs” and therefore possess no rationale. People if they
22
are asked to explain their behaviour”are typically unable to formulate any reason”.
Additionally, people may go further when attempting to give a reasoned response to
their superstitious behaviour by denying “that they believe in the effectiveness of the
23
acts that they perform”.
So distinguishing features of modern superstitions appear to be that “the beliefs are
barely articulated, have virtually no coherent structure and are only partially accepted
24
by those who carry out the associated practices”. For example few people can give a
coherent explanation why they knock on wood rather than plastic. Individuals appear
to “half-believe” in superstitions and their practices, they do not have a problem with
25
this lack of “coherent and meaningful belief ”. This “half-belief ” behaviour was
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 61
03/05/2013 14:29
62
Fenella Dean
explained by Peter McKellar in his book “A Textbook of Human Psychology”,26 half27
belief being “a given type of norm governing belief ”. McKellar highlighted that
28
superstition “may involve either belief or half-belief ”, and many people who may
“intellectually reject a superstition nevertheless allow it to influence their thinking
29
and actions”.
Kenneth Garwood in his article “Superstition and Half-Belief ” in 1963 explains
that half-beliefs possess “some of the qualities of beliefs, together with some of the
30
qualities of disbelief ”. This discrepancy in peoples supposed superstitious beliefs
and their practices in contemporary society was highlighted by the 1984 Gallup poll
suggesting “that roughly one quarter of the British population perform superstitious
31
practices in which they ‘don’t believe”. Campbell explains this behaviour by saying
“that the practice is self-sustaining in the sense that it does not appear to require any
32
justification in terms of accompanying beliefs”.
Methodology and Discussion
A single sheet questionnaire (Appendix I), composed of 4 questions was distributed
to 21 people within the community by hand or email. Twenty of the questionnaires
were returned completed of which one was ‘spoilt’ and is to be ignored, leaving
19 questionnaires to analyse. The responses were from nine males and ten females
in the age range 32 to 51, representing a virtual 50:50 split between the genders.
The questionnaire included a definition of superstition to frame the research and 2
questions asking whether the individual believed themselves to be superstitious and
if so to what degree. The final question asked for a list of superstitions that could be
remembered regardless of their belief.
The questionnaire was composed of 4 questions, starting with a definition of
superstition to frame the questionnaire and guide the respondents. The subject of
superstition is very broad and it was necessary to frame the subject matter for such a
small study although this could be viewed as leading. In addition, whilst it has been
outlined above the difficulty in defining superstition and the drawbacks of each style
of definition, the reason for choosing David Bidney’s definition was due to the fact I
believed it to be an easily understood definition. It also included the words ‘fear’ and
‘irrational’ and I wished to test the respondents’ reaction to the use of these words and
how superstitious beliefs, if they are deemed to be based in fear and irrationality, have
a place in an urban contemporary community. I felt the best way of doing this was to
use a definition which attempted to question their belief in themselves as irrational, if
they deemed themselves superstitious. To give an example of the power of superstition
based in fear and irrationality, during the terms of the American President Ronald
Reagan, his wife Nancy Reagan consulted an astrologer, Joan Quigley, allegedly “to
advise her on a wide range of topics, many of which bore directly on the affairs of
33
state”. In addition, there is the “twenty-year death cycle” which is the superstition
that “since 1840, every President elected or reelected in a year ending in zero had
either died or been assassinated in office. Mr Reagan was elected to his first term in
34
1980”. This example of actions being influenced by superstition could be viewed as
being rooted in fear and irrationality.
There was also the subjective issue of the choices given to answer question one
and three of the questionnaire. Whilst it can be argued that “[W]ords which have a
35
common meaning to you may mean something to other people”, the reason for the
choices was again to assess the reaction to the definition with regard to question one
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 62
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
63
and how the respondents view their level of superstition with question three (Appendix
II, Tables 1 and 3). In addition, I believe it made it easier for the respondents to
answer the questions.
The first question was a definition of superstition and the respondents were asked
to what degree they agreed or disagreed with the statement (Appendix II, Table 1).
Fourteen of the total nineteen respondents ‘Agreed’ with the statement representing
74%, whilst two ‘Strongly Agreed’ (11%), two were ‘Not Sure’ and one ‘Disagreed’.
Of these results, six of the fourteen who agreed with the statement were male and
the remaining eight were female. The two who ‘Strongly Agreed’ and the one that
‘Disagreed’ with the statement were male. The two individuals who were ‘Not Sure’
with regard to the statement were female.
The second question asked whether the respondent regarded themselves as
superstitious or not (Appendix II, Table 2). Of the 19 respondents, 11 said they
were superstitious, 7 said they were not superstitious and one was neutral on the
matter. Of the 11 who said they were superstitious, 9 were female and 2 were male.
The 7 individuals who were not superstitious were composed of 6 males and one
female. The neutral respondent was male. This result concurs with the general belief
36
that females are more superstitious than males, as seen in Table A below. However,
Michael Shermer points out in his book, “Why People Believe Weird Things” that
the issue is with a limited sampling size as men tend to believe for example in UFO’s
37
more than women. He goes further by saying that with regard to the power of
belief there are no differences between the genders but it is the choice of belief
that differs. This is an area that could produce interesting information with further
research.
Table A: Gender Differences in Superstitious Belief
Gender
Superstitious
Not Superstitious
Male
Female
2
9
6
1
The third question asked how superstitious the respondents believed themselves
to be, if they had answered question two positively (Appendix II, Table 3). Of the 11
respondents said they were superstitious, 5 said they were “Superstitious” of which
one was male and 4 were female. The remaining 6 respondents said they were “A Little
Superstitious”, of which one was male and 5 were female.
Interestingly, an overwhelming majority of the respondents “Agreed” with
the definition (14 out of 19) whilst 2 “Strongly Agreed”. Of the 2 that “Strongly
Agreed”, one regarded themselves as “Neutral” in answer to question two (Do you
regard yourself as superstitious?) and the other said they were “Superstitious”. Of
the 14 respondents who “Agreed” with the definition, 5 regarded themselves as not
superstitious and 9 regarded themselves as superstitious. Of the 9 that regarded
themselves as superstitious, 5 regarded themselves as a “Little Superstitious” in answer
to question three and the remaining 4 regarded themselves as “Superstitious”. There
was only one respondent who “Disagreed” with the definition and also regarded
themselves as not superstitious. Not one of the respondents regarded themselves
as “Extremely” or “Very” superstitious in answer to question three. This may be a
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 63
03/05/2013 14:29
64
Fenella Dean
cultural response, possibly cultural reticence, or it may be not wishing to appear too
superstitious and therefore appearing “irrational”. Further research could provide
some answers. There is also the possibility of researching the reason why two of the
respondents were “Not Sure” with regard to the definition. These two respondents
were female and one regarded themselves as not superstitious whilst the other was a
“Little” superstitious.
Overall, the respondents listed 73 superstitions regardless of their superstitious
belief in answer to question 4. The most prevalent are listed in the Table B below
along with the percentage of responses:
Table B: Results from Question 4
Whether you regard yourself as superstitious or not which superstitions
do you know or think you know?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Superstition
Percentage (out of 19 responses)
Unlucky to walk under a ladder
Unlucky/lucky to see magpies
Lucky/Unlucky to meet a black cat
Unlucky to spill salt
Lucky to touch wood
Unlucky to open an umbrella indoors
Unlucky to break a mirror
Number thirteen
Unlucky to walk on the cracks in the pavement
Friday 13th
Lucky to find 4 leafed clover
Unlucky to put new shoes on a table
95% (18 out of 19)
84% (16 out of 19)
63% (12 out of 19)
47% (9 out of 19)
42% (8 out of 19)
42% (8 out of 19)
42% (8 out of 19)
32% (6 out of 19)
32% (6 out of 19)
26% (5 out of 19)
21% (4 out of 19)
21% (4 out of 19)
From the above table it can be seen that the most commonly known superstition is
unlucky to walk under a ladder with a 95% (18 out of 19) response rate. 84% (16 out
of 19) of respondents knew unlucky/lucky to see magpies and 63% (12 out of 19) knew
lucky/unlucky to meet a black cat.
Comparing the above results with a similar survey undertaken in 1998 by
Steve Roud and Jacqueline Simpson with assistance from the Folklore Society, it is
38
interesting to note that the results are broadly the same. The Roud and Simpson
39
survey had more respondents (215) and whilst “not a scientifically valid project”
indicated the prevalence of superstitious belief in Britain. The most commonly
known superstition was unlucky to walk under a ladder with 83% of respondents
mentioning it, compared with 95% of respondents (18 out of 19) for this research
in 2009. Whilst unlucky/lucky to see magpies ranked fourth in the Roud and Simpson
survey with 47%, in this survey it ranked second with 84% (16 out of 19). However,
unlucky to spill salt ranked virtually the same in both studies and percentage. Lucky to
touch wood ranked fifth in this study with 42% and tenth in the Roud and Simpson
study with 16%. In fact, Roud and Simpson highlighted that “[T]he only real
40
surprise was that touch wood scored so badly”. The evidence given was that they
believed it was “passing out of the area of superstition and becoming simply a saying
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 64
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
65
which was uttered in certain social situations”.41 However, this does not appear to be
the case 11 years later and the superstition has moved up the ranks to fifth with 42%
response rate (8 out of 19).
The superstitions unlucky/lucky to see magpies and lucky/unlucky to see black cat
were confusing for respondents and this concurs with the 1998 Roud and Simpson
survey. Whilst respondents agreed it was unlucky to see one magpie, the majority
42
could not recite the full rhyme. With regard to lucky/unlucky to see a black cat, there
was confusion from the respondents as to whether it was lucky or unlucky to see one
or one to cross your path, again agreeing with the Roud and Simpson survey. Further
evidence of this confusion was given in one of the interviews, with interviewee ‘E’
saying: “Black cat cross your path, I don’t know if that’s right, is it good or bad luck, I
never know, which one it is?”
However, regardless of whether the respondents believed themselves to be
superstitious or not and whether they agreed or disagreed with Bidney’s definition
of superstition, all respondents could list several superstitions. Interestingly, several
respondents reported back that they “enjoyed remembering superstitions” and “isn’t it
funny how many you remember when you sit down and think about it”. So it would
appear the exercise became an enjoyable game/quiz for the respondents.
Looking at the historical perspective the list of the most prevalent superstitions
43
is not what could be called ancient, again concurring with Roud and Simpson. For
example, referring to Table B, Nos. 3 and 4 (black cat and spilt salt) ‘are the oldest
44
being included in John Melton’s 1620 list’. Only No. 10 (Friday 13th) ‘can be
45
dated possibly to the 14th century’, with Nos. 5, 6 and 12 (touch wood, umbrella,
shoes) to the 19th century; these results potentially providing information for further
46
research.
Table C: Breakdown of Interviewees’ Questionnaire Answers
Respondents
Male
Female
Definition
Agree/Disagree
Superstitious –
Yes/No/Neutral
How Superstitious
1/1/1
2
From the completed questionnaires, 5 individuals were chosen to be interviewed
(Table C): 3 who believed they were superstitious (2 female and one male), one who
believed they were not superstitious (male) and one who took a neutral stance on the
subject (male). The interviews were semi-structured, being loosely based around the
interviewees’ answers to the questionnaire and recorded. Each interview took between
10 and 20 minutes and was conducted either in their residence or the interviewer’s
residence.
Survey interviewing can be described as “a conversation between interviewer
and respondent with the purpose of eliciting certain information from the
47
respondent”. However, this is not as straightforward as it may first appear, in
order to hear “perspectives accurately, we have to learn to listen in stereo, receiving
both the dominant and muted channels clearly and tuning into them carefully to
48
understand the relationship between them”. Interviewing is a highly subjective
process and “wording the questions is almost as demanding for interviews as it is for
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 65
03/05/2013 14:29
66
Fenella Dean
questionnaires”.49 There is the danger, which I had to counter in the interviewing
process, of listening “with at least part of my attention focused on producing potential
50
material for the research”. I found just like Anderson and Jack that transcribing
back the interviews I had “lost opportunities” for the interviewees “to reflect on the
activities and events they described and to explain their terms more fully in their own
51
words”. For example, Respondent B linked superstition to religion, in retrospect
it would have been an interesting line of inquiry for further research: “You know
religion, some people believe if you crack a mirror that’s seven years bad luck, some
people believe there’s a god, same sort of thing really”.
Respondent N also made the same link:
“You don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow, but having a religious faith
gives you that security and I think superstition, not to such an organised extent,
does that. You almost think, not rationally, that if I do this and that I will be
safe.”
In addition, there is the etic/emic or the outsider/insider issue and with it comes the
issue of reflexivity. “To be reflexive we need to be aware of our personal responses
52
and to be able to make choices about how to use them”. I had to be “aware of the
personal, social and cultural contexts in which we live…..and to understand how
53
these impact on the ways we interpret our world”. The dilemma being that I am a
member of the community and socialise with all the individuals involved with this
research. The etic/emic issue is not just one regarding the interviews but also the
questionnaire. It was necessary to ask myself whether the respondents completed the
questionnaires because I know them, and was the response rate so high due to me
being an “insider” in the community. Also, was there an element of “wishing to please”
or “social obligation/blackmail” to the research as I am an “insider”. These issues are
reflexive in nature, and “the use of reflexivity exposes and makes explicit many of the
54
moral dilemmas that are there but go unnoticed in non-reflexive research”. It was
also necessary for me to remember that the “etic and emic data do not constitute a
rigid dichotomy of bits of data, but often present the same data from two points of
55
view”. In addition, when transcribing the responses from the interviewees, I “have
56
simply aimed to present a readable text”.
“Contemporary Western culture offers two contrasting sets of expectations and
explanations to choose from – rationalist ‘traditions of disbelief ’; and a supernaturalist
57
culture, the ‘traditions of belief ’.” Respondent B, male and neutral on the subject
of superstition said the following when asked whether he touched wood for good
luck:
“Yeah, I did touch wood but I suppose in a way I am superstitious but it’s just one
of those things you do through life, it’s a comfort thing. You know I feel more
comfortable that I have touched wood if I want something to happen more than I
feel superstitious that it will or won’t, it’s just part of life”
And he goes on to say when asked whether superstitions affect his behaviour:
“Yeah, it does impact it, I wouldn’t say I was superstitious at all, but there are some
comfort things that I might do which you could regard as superstitious which is
touch wood but that’s more habit than belief.”
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 66
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
67
We can see that Respondent B whilst believing he is neutral on the matter of
superstition actually exhibits superstitious behaviour. “Two traditions are available” to
58
him “as explanatory mechanisms, and” he “hovers between the two”. He uses both
the language of the traditional rationalist (“that’s more habit than belief ”) and the
language of the supernatural belief (“I suppose in a way I am superstitious”). The two
cultures are competing with each other. In addition, it is an example of McKellar’s
“half-belief ” theory, with Respondent B rejecting the superstition intellectually but
59
allowing it to influence his actions.
However, this is in total contrast to Respondent E, male and not superstitious, who
can be described as a rationalist, one who believes that there is a rational explanation
for all things. He says, when asked about fear and superstitions:
“I am just an organism that exists, and my job is to be here and to exist, and
probably to reproduce and then that’s it, there’s no higher being, there is
no anything else, so if I walk under a ladder it makes no difference, the only
thing that is more likely to happen to me is that something may fall on top of
me, nothing to do with the natural something, a greater environment taking
place.”
He goes on to say:
“I don’t think necessarily what I do impacts on anything, one thing doesn’t
necessarily impact on another. I don’t think if I see a magpie it necessarily means
anything is going to change. Whatever is going to happen, will happen.”
However, Respondent E does not make derogatory remarks about other people being
superstitious, he respects their beliefs:
“I wouldn’t go out of my way to walk under a ladder, and I wouldn’t open an
umbrella for the sake of it because, I can just show I’m not superstitious. It’s not
necessary.”
60
The opposing view is the supernaturalist culture, the “traditions of belief ”. Believers
form their case with “the interaction of tradition, “news”, rumours, and written
61
accounts with personal experience”. An example of which was given by Respondent
N, female and superstitious:
“We’re not necessarily in control of our own destinies but if we avoid walking
under a ladder or breaking a mirror then that’s what we are trying to do.”
Another example is from Respondent J, female and superstitious:
“Most of the superstitions I know will come from my parents, the more familiar
ones like the ladder, find a penny, spilling salt, pinch punch first of the month are
common in my household. My dad always did the pinch punch thing.”
What is apparent from the interviews is that “[T]raditions of belief and disbelief are
learnt through folkloric processes such as face-to-face communication, the sharing
of information, and the telling of stories, and the rhetoric and arguments of both
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 67
03/05/2013 14:29
68
Fenella Dean
traditions are familiar and available to all”.62 During the interviews, the interviewees
could all recite superstitions whatever their belief:
Respondent F: “Magpies, if I see one I’ll search for a second and then I’ll do the
‘hello Mr. Magpie’ thing if I don’t see a second one.”
Respondent J: “…a four leafed clover and black cats you learn if you live in the
country, they are general things you learn.”
Respondent N: “Sometimes you have completely random superstitions, I
remember walking along the street with someone and this might be OCD, and
they wouldn’t step on 3 drains, and I haven’t even heard of that one.”
Respondent E: “Touch wood – just constant. Don’t walk under ladders … I see
that as part of our society as something they would talk about. Umbrellas, oh tell
you where that comes from, whenever you go to do it people say ‘don’t do that’, or
‘why have you still got that up’. Salute magpies, my wife does that. Don’t walk on
single drains, she does that as well.”
Respondent B: “Horse shoes, yeah, I know that one from the pub. Living in Kent
pretty much all the pubs have horse shoes. The country pubs, it’s just one of those
things you are made aware of and you ask and they say good luck.”
It appears that the two belief systems, rationalism and supernaturalism, “are cultural
options, competing discourses”.63
When discussing Bidney’s definition with the interviewees’ not one individual
found the use of “fear” or “irrational” disturbing or offensive:
Respondent B: “No not really.”
Respondent F: “It doesn’t bother me.”
Respondent J: “Superstitions in general have a little bit of a fear factor and they
are irrational…”
Even the person who disagreed with the definition, disagreed with it because of the
use of the word “taboo”:
Respondent E: “I actually believe most of it, but it was the taboo bit I didn’t agree
with. I don’t think the use of the word irrational is offensive.”
It would appear that the definition did not impact in the way I thought it would.
People do not appear to be swayed by the use of the words “fear” and “irrational”
when describing superstition and superstitious behaviour. It is accepted and
incorporated into their behaviour, not questioned. As Campbell states and I
reiterate “the distinctive features of modern superstitions are that the beliefs are
barely articulated, have virtually no coherent structure and are only partially
64
accepted by those who carry out the associated practices”. These features of
modern superstitions vary from person to person depending on the degree of
superstition, however, it does hold that superstitions and superstitious behaviour
are barely acknowledged by people. As Respondent J said, “Well, they are just there
aren’t they, part of the culture, what we do”.
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 68
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
69
Conclusion
65
Superstition, therefore, “is not an easy word to deal with”. As Alan Dundes argues,
whilst it may be necessary to record whether a superstition is believed or not “belief
66
is not a reliable criterion for defining superstition”, as the theory of “half-belief ”
exemplifies, and the above interviews. He goes on to argue that definitions of
superstition do not appear to deal with the “material itself but rather with opinion
about the material,” and that “while the collector should as a matter of course
record whether or not a superstition is believed, belief is not a reliable criterion for
67
defining superstition”. This is exemplified by the number of superstitions (73) that
respondents listed regardless of their belief in superstitions.
The research results also appear to concur with Dundes’ in that superstitions
are integrated into societies, peoples’ lives and behaviour without them necessarily
68
acknowledging their existence or understanding why. Further, Campbell’s assertion
that superstitious “practice is self-sustaining in the sense that it does not appear to
69
require any justification in terms of accompanying beliefs”, is played out by the
respondents in the contemporary urban community.
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Dr Nicholas Campion and Dr Bernadette Brady for their
support with this article. Additionally, I would like to thank all the people who
generously gave of their time in order for this research to be undertaken.
Notes
1 J. Marmor, ‘Some Observations on Superstitions in Contemporary Life’, Psychiatry in Transition
(New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1994 [1974]) [hereafter Marmor, Psychiatry in Transition],
p. 30
2 Marmor, Psychiatry in Transition, p. 30
3 Marmor, Psychiatry in Transition, p. 30
4 W. Shakespeare, ‘Hamlet’, Complete Works of Shakespeare, http://shakespeare.mit.edu/
5 A. Dundes, ‘Brown County Superstitions: The Structure of Superstitions’, MidWest Folklore,
Indiana Issue, 11(1) (1961) [hereafter Dundes ‘Brown County Superstitions’], pp. 25–56, http://
www.jstor.org
6 M.E. Wagner, ‘Superstitions and Their Social and Psychological Correlatives Among College
Students’, Journal of Educational Sociology, American Sociological Association, 2(1) (1928),
p. 26
7 D. Bidney, Theoretical Anthropology (New York: Transaction Publishers, 1995 [1953]) [hereafter
Bidney, Theoretical Anthropology], p. 294
8 M.A. Thalbourne, ‘Paranormal Belief and Superstition: How Large is the Association?’, Journal of the
American Society for Psychical Research, 91 (1997), p. 221
9 D. Bidney, Theoretical Anthropology, cited in C. Lindahl, ‘It’s Only Folklore…’ Folklore and the
Historian. Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, Louisiana Historical
Association, 26(2) (1985) [hereafter Lindahl ‘It’s Only Folklore’], p. 142, http://www.jstor.org
10 Lindahl ‘It’s Only Folklore’, pp. 141–154
11 Lindahl ‘It’s Only Folklore’, p. 143
12 P. Suppes, ‘The Measurement of Belief ’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological),
36(2) (1974), p. 174, http://www.jstor.org
13 G. Jahoda, The Psychology of Superstition (Middlesex: Pelican Books Ltd, 1971) cited in S. A. Vyse,
Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition (New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2000), pp.
20–22
14 C. Campbell, ‘Half-Belief and the Paradox of Ritual Instrumental Activism: A Theory of Modern
Superstition’, The British Journal of Sociology, Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The London School
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 69
03/05/2013 14:29
70
Fenella Dean
of Economics and Political Science, 47(1) (1996) [hereafter Campbell ‘Half-Belief and the Paradox’],
p. 152, http://www.jstor.org
15 B. Malinowski, Magic, Science and Religion (Garden City, New Jersey: Doubleday & Co, 1948),
p. 81
16 J. McLeish, ‘Children’s Superstitions: British and Canadian’, Canadian Journal of Education/Revue
cadadienne de l’education, Canadian Society for the Study of Education, 9(4) (1984), p. 426
17 Campbell ‘Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 155
18 I. Opie and M. Tatem, The Dictionary of Superstitions (Oxford: University Press, 1989) [hereafter
Opie & Tatem The Dictionary of Superstitions], pp. vii–xi
19 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 156
20 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 156
21 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 156
22 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 156
23 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 156
24 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 157
25 Campbell ,Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 157
26 P. McKellar, A Textbook of Human Psychology (London, Cohen & West, 1952) [hereafter McKellar A
Textbook of Human Psychology]
27 Campbell ‘Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 157
28McKellar A Textbook of Human Psychology’, p. 320
29McKellar A Textbook of Human Psychology’, p. 320
30 K. Garwood, ‘Superstition and Half-Belief ’, New Society, 18 (1963)’, pp. 120–121
31 Campbell ‘Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 158
32 Campbell ‘Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 158
33Vyse Believing in Magic, p. 24
34Vyse Believing in Magic, p. 25
35 J. Bell, Doing Your Research Project: a guide for first-time researchers in education and social science
(Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1999) [hereafter Bell Doing Your Research Project], p. 121
36 E. Conklin, ‘Superstitious Belief and Practice among College Students’, The American Journal of
Psychology, University of Illinois Press, 30(1) (1919)’, p. 86, http://www.jstor.org. S. Blum and L.H.
Blum, ‘Do’s and Don’ts: An Informal Study of Some Prevailing Superstitions’, Psychological Reports,
American Psychological Association, 35(1) (1974)’, p. 569
37 M. Shermer, Why People Believe Weird Things (New York: Henry Holt & Company Inc., 2002)
38 S. Roud, The Penguin Guide to the Superstitions of Britain and Ireland (London: Penguin Books,
2006) [hereafter Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions], pp. xix–xx
39Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. xix
40Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. xix
41Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. xix
42Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. 7
43Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. xx
44Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, pp. 447–448
45Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. xx
46Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions. Opie & Tatem The Dictionary of Superstitions
47 C.A Moser and G. Kalton, Survey Methods in Social Investigation (London: Heinnemann Educational,
1971), p. 271
48 K. Anderson and Dana C. Jack, ‘Learning to Listen: Interview Techniques and Analyses’, in The Oral
History Reader, Perks, Roberts and Alistair Thompson (eds) (London: Routledge, 1998) [hereafter
Anderson and Jack ‘Learning to Listen’], p. 157
49Bell, Doing Your Research Project, p. 135
50 Anderson and Jack, ‘Learning to Listen’, p. 159
51 Anderson and Jack, ‘Learning to Listen’, p. 159
52 K. Etherington, Becoming a Reflexive Researcher: Using Our Selves in Research (London: Jessica
Kingsley Publishers, 2004) [hereafter Etherington Becoming a Reflexive Researcher], p. 19
53Etherington Becoming a Reflexive Researcher, p. 19
54Etherington Becoming a Reflexive Researcher, p. 32
55 K.L. Pike, ‘Etic and Emic Standpoints for the Description of Behavior’, in The Insider/Outsider
Problem in the Study of Religion: A Reader, R. McCutcheon (ed.) (London: Cassell, 1999), p. 33
56 G. Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost! Traditions of Belief in Story and Discourse (Utah: Utah State University
Press, 1999) [hereafter Bennett Alas, Poor Ghost], p. 187
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 70
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
71
57Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 31
58Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 31
59McKellar A Textbook of Human Psychology, p. 320
60Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 31
61Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 37
62Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 38
63Bennett, Alas, Poor Ghost, p. 38
64McKellar A Textbook of Human Psychology, p. 157
65Roud The Penguin Guide to Superstitions, p. ix
66 Dundes ‘Brown County Superstitions’, p. 26
67 Dundes ‘Brown County Superstitions’, p. 26
68 Dundes ‘Brown County Superstitions’, pp. 25–26
69 Campbell ‘Half Belief and the Paradox’, p. 157
References
Anderson, K. and Jack, Dana C. (1998) ‘Learning to Listen: Interview Techniques and Analyses’, in
The Oral History Reader, Perks, Roberts and Alistair Thompson (eds), pp. 157–171. London:
Routledge
Bell, J. (1999) Doing Your Research Project: a guide for first-time researchers in education and social science,
Philadelphia: Open University Press
Bennett, G. (1999) Alas, Poor Ghost! Traditions of Belief in Story and Discourse. Utah: Utah State
University Press
Bidney, D. (1995) Theoretical Anthropology. New York: Transaction Publishers
Blum, S. and Blum, L.H. (1974) ‘Do’s and Don’ts: An Informal Study of Some Prevailing Superstitions’,
Psychological Reports, American Psychological Association, 35(1), pp. 567–571
Campbell, C. (1996) ‘Half-Belief and the Paradox of Ritual Instrumental Activism: A Theory of Modern
Superstition’, The British Journal of Sociology, Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The London School of
Economics and Political Science, 47(1), pp. 151–66, http://www.jstor.org
Conklin, E. (1919) ‘Superstitious Belief and Practice among College Students’, The American Journal of
Psychology, 30(1), pp. 83–102, University of Illinois Press, http://www.jstor.org
Drake, S. A. (1908) Myths and Fables of To-Day, Norwood, Massachusetts: Norwood Press
Dundes, A. (1961) ‘Brown County Superstitions: The Structure of Superstitions’, MidWest Folklore,
11(1), pp. 25–56, Indiana Issue, http://www.jstor.org
Earle Wagner, M. (1928) ‘Superstitions and Their Social and Psychological Correlatives Among College
Students’, Journal of Educational Sociology, 2(1), pp. 26–36, American Sociological Association,
http://www.jstor.org
Etherington, K. (2004) Becoming a Reflexive Researcher: Using Our Selves in Research. London: Jessica
Kingsley Publishers
Garwood, K. (1963) ‘Superstition and Half-Belief ’, New Society, 18, pp. 120–121
Jahoda, G. (1971) The Psychology of Superstition. Middlesex, Pelican Books Ltd
Lindahl, C. (1985) ‘It’s Only Folklore…’ Folklore and the Historian. Louisiana History: The Journal of
the Louisiana Historical Association, 26(2), pp. 141–154, Louisiana Historical Association, http://
www.jstor.org
McKellar, P. (1952) A Textbook of Human Psychology. London, Cohen & West
McLeish, J.(1984) ‘Children’s Superstitions: British and Canadian’, Canadian Journal of Education/Revue
cadadienne de l’education, 9(4), pp. 425–436, Canadian Society for the Study of Education
Malinowski, B. (1948) Magic, Science and Religion. Garden City, New Jersey: Doubleday & Co
Marmor, J. 1994 [1974] ‘Some Observations on Superstitions in Contemporary Life’, Psychiatry in
Transition, pp. 30–46. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers
Moser, C. A. and Kalton, G. (1971) Survey Methods in Social Investigation. London: Heinnemann
Educational
Opie, I. and Tatem, M. (1989) The Dictionary of Superstitions. Oxford: University Press
Pike, K.L.(1999) ‘Etic and Emic Standpoints for the Description of Behavior’, in The Insider/Outsider
Problem in the Study of Religion: A Reader, R. McCutcheon (ed.), pp. 28–36. London: Cassell
Roud, S. (2006) The Penguin Guide to the Superstitions of Britain and Ireland. London: Penguin Books
Shakespeare, W. (1993) ‘Hamlet’, Complete Works of Shakespeare, http://shakespeare.mit.edu/
Shermer, M. (2002) Why People Believe Weird Things. New York: Henry Holt & Company Inc.
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 71
03/05/2013 14:29
72
Fenella Dean
Suppes, P. (1974) ‘The Measurement of Belief ’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B
(Methodological), 36(2), pp. 160–191, http://www.jstor.org
Thalbourne, M.A. (1997) ‘Paranormal Belief and Superstition: How Large is the Association?’, Journal of
the American Society for Psychical Research, 91, pp. 221–226
Vyse, S.A. (2000) Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition. New York: Oxford University Press
Inc.
Wagner, M.E. (1928) ‘Superstitions and Their Social and Psychological Correlatives Among College
Students’, Journal of Educational Sociology, 2(1), pp. 26–36, American Sociological Association
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 72
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
73
APPENDIX I
QUESTIONNAIRE
Superstitions in a Contemporary, Urban Community
Preliminaries
First I would like to thank you for agreeing to complete the attached questionnaire.
I am a student at the University of Wales, Lampeter, studying an MA in Cultural
Astronomy and Astrology. Part of the MA course requires that students undertake
some form of research which includes fieldwork (or asking people questions!). As
a consequence of including members of the public in research, the researcher has
to adhere to ethical guidelines, which can be found on the following website of the
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC):
http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/ESRC_Re_Ethics_Frame_tcm611291.pdf
However, for ease, below are the principles set out by the ESRC which I will adhere to
for the purposes of this research project:
•• Research should be designed, reviewed and undertaken to ensure integrity and
quality
•• Research staff and subjects must be informed fully about the purpose, methods
and intended possible uses of the research, what their participation in the
research entails and what risks, if any, are involved
•• The confidentiality of information supplied by research subjects and the
anonymity of respondents must be respected
•• Research participants must participate in a voluntary way, free from any
coercion
•• Harm to research participants must be avoided
•• The independence of research must be clear, and any conflicts of interest or
partiality must be explicit
I will also add that should you at any time wish to withdraw from the research project
and the information you have supplied not be used then please inform me and your
wishes will be respected.
If you could complete and return the questionnaire by Friday, 5 June, I would be very
grateful.
Once again I thank you for your time.
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 73
03/05/2013 14:29
74
Fenella Dean
QUESTIONNAIRE
1. David Bidney defined superstition as “a mode of fear based on some irrational or
mythological belief and usually involves some taboo”. Do you:
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Not Sure
Agree
Strongly Agree
2. Do you regard yourself as superstitious?
Yes
No
Neither Superstitious or Not Superstitious (Neutral)
3. If you regard yourself as superstitious, how superstitious do you believe you are?
Extremely Superstitious
Very Superstitious
Superstitious
A Little Superstitious
4. Whether you regard yourself as superstitious or not which superstitions do you
know or think you know? (Continue overleaf if required)
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 74
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
75
APPENDIX II
Table 1 – Results from Question 1
David Bidney defined superstition as “a mode of fear based on some irrational or
mythological belief and usually involves some taboo.” Do you:
Strongly Disagree
Male
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Female
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
Disagree
Not Sure Agree
Strongly Agree
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 75
03/05/2013 14:29
76
Fenella Dean
Table 2 – Results from Question 2
Do you regard yourself as superstitious?
Yes
Male
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Female
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
No
Neither Superstitious or Not
Superstitious (Neutral)
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
Prifysgol Cymru Y Drindod Dewi Sant
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 76
03/05/2013 14:29
Superstitions in an Urban Contemporary Community
77
Table 3 – Results from Question 3
If you regard yourself as superstitious, how superstitious
do you believe you are?
Extremely
Male
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Female
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
Very
Superstitious
A Little Superstitious
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
University of Wales Trinity Saint David
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 77
03/05/2013 14:29
07-StudentRes2-2_059-078.indd 78
03/05/2013 14:29