Transcript Pragmatic Constructions of History among Freemasons

Pragmatic Constructions of
History among Freemasons
J. Scott Kenney
Department of Sociology
Memorial University
Introduction
•
•
•
•
•
•
So-called “secret societies” are a hot topic in both popular culture &
academia.
Much has been made of both their role in history and their often debatable
“historicizing”
Freemasonry (FM) comprises an excellent example (e.g. the ritual focus on
King Solomon’s Temple, preoccupation with origins, discussion of the
Knights Templar, and allegations of involvement in events like the French
Revolution).
Yet, current accounts - in popular culture, academia and within FM - do not
sufficiently consider the ways in which contemporary members themselves
reconstruct the past in the present
Thus, this paper explores various uses of the past by contemporary
Freemasons.
Drawing upon the symbolic interactionist approach to the past rooted in the
works of George Herbert Mead (1932), and qualitative data from 21st
century Freemasons, I attempt to shed light on Masons’ uses of history in
today’s rapidly changing world.
Theoretical Matters
•
George Herbert Mead (1932) argued that while the present always implies a
past and future, our reality is always that of a present.
•
Maines et. al. (1983: 164) identify four dimensions:
•
(1) The symbolically reconstructed past: “redefining the meaning of past
events in such a way that they have meaning in and utility for the present.”
(2) The social structural past:: “the past that structures and conditions the
experiences found in the present.”
(3) The implied objective past: some event had to have taken place in order
to exist in present experience as a past event.
(4) The mythical past:: fictitious “symbolic creations,” which are “not
empirically grounded,” yet are “empirical in their consequences because
they can materially affect relationships.”
•
•
•
•
Each of these result from past and ongoing social processes (Fine and
Beim, 2007), even promotion (Fine 2001).
Method & Approach
•
In this preliminary study I used 3 sources of data:
(1) 58 videotapes shot as footage for a documentary film (covering 27 individuals
including 21 contemporary freemasons, 3 journalists, 2 spouses and 1 academic,
hailing from 3 countries);
(2) Interviews with 118 Freemasons in 2 Canadian Provinces;
(3) Field notes taken during my involvement in struggles over the sale of historic
Masonic temples in 2 communities.
•
These data were entered into Nvivo software, then coded using Maines, Surgrue and
Katovich’s (1983) fourfold classification of Mead’s (1932) philosophy as “sensitizing
concepts” (Blumer, 1969).
•
As coding progressed, data were carefully cross-checked and subjected to negative
case testing until reaching the point of theoretical saturation. During this process,
several subdimensions emerged from the data as well.
•
These data shed light on the different ways that today’s Masons meaningfully
reconstruct the past in the present.
(1)The Symbolically
Reconstructed Past
• The symbolically reconstructed past involves
redefining the meaning of past events such that
they have meaning in, and utility for the present).
• Claims fell into three sub-dimensions:
(i) The current state of Freemasonry/
membership;
(ii) Freemasons’ personal lives;
(iii) Masonic built heritage
(i) The Current State of
Freemasonry / Membership
•
•
•
•
•
Secretiveness rooted in past persecution (e.g. WWII) fostered negativity:
more openness required. This is opposed by the idea that secrecy in past
(e.g. mid-century Scotland) encouraged curiosity, fostered membership and
tighter bonds.
Changes in social structure, demographics and culture in 20th century are
claimed responsible for membership decline
Recent slight increases in membership among young men related to the
“uncertainties” of our “disposable” consumer societies and decline in
historical impediments
Counterbalancing factors: growth of cynicism; era of mass leisure and
consumption; and emphasis on family and ‘couple-oriented” activities. Also
less need for benevolence societies, fewer “high status” brethren as
membership draw, proliferation of anti-masonry, and Masonic “generation
gap”
Proposals to reinvigorate membership: more Masonic education,
mentorship, more interesting meetings, and community visibility.
(ii) Freemasons Personal Lives
• Freemasonry is claimed to serve as a transformative practice in
relation to Masons’ past selves.
• Changing their past selves vs. enabling identification of who they
“really were”
• Friends they wouldn’t have met otherwise
• Increased morality and community involvement
• A means of developing administrative competence/status
• A sanctuary from previous troubles/means of coping
• Providing tools, serving as a vehicle for self-exploration
• Carrying on a meaningful family tradition
• Pointing to famous past Masons as role models
• “Masonry has been good to me.”
(iii) Masonic Built Heritage
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Many large, historic temples are becoming costly to maintain.
Ensuing struggles over whether to sell or retain them invoke reconstructions
of the past revolving around preserving heritage vs. saving, extending or
building upon heritage.
I observed similar struggles occurring in two communities with overlapping
issues/arguments
In each, one lodge stood against the rest to oppose the sale and invoked
history in support. Their opponents did the same to justify the sale and
move elsewhere. Both preservationist groups lost. Bitter recriminations
followed.
One lodge folded rather than move; the other moved – but is now in trouble
Interestingly, in the second community another group of preservationists
formed a new lodge and do not meet in the new building
Corroborates Milligan (2007): collective memory can be strongly embodied
in built heritage
Preservationists tended to be younger/newer Masons, those seeking to
sell/move were older/more established members of the fraternity
(2) The Social Structural Past
• This is the past that structures and conditions the experiences found
in the present
• Strong emphasis on tradition/disdain for “innovation”
• Much continuity in ritual, dress and language
• Adherence to “landmarks,” involving historical exclusions
• “This is the way it’s always been done, so that’s why we do it this
way”
• “Traditionalists” find continuity comforting/ others find it stifling
• This serves as the backdrop/foil to discussions for change: what
is essential and what may be modernized (e.g. debates over
language, solicitation, memorization, etc.)
• “Strong” vs. “soft” versions of the social structural past may thus
be identified
(3) The Implied Objective Past
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
This refers to the idea that events had to have taken place in order to exist
in present experience as a past event
Historical emergence of FM in Scotland in 17th century (Stevenson, 1990).
Declining stonemasons guilds began admitting “gentlemen” imbued with
late Renaissance Hermetic, Kabbalistic, Neoplatonic and Rosicrucian ideas
Synthesis of mysticism and metaphors of the building trade
Outside distinctions of politics, religion and class prohibited: lodges became
popular ways to interact across social boundaries
Formalized in formation of United Grand Lodge of England1717
Rapidly spread around the world (Colonization / military lodges)
Masons themselves invoke the but/for argument in relation to “who had the
education and ability to come up with this stuff?”
Localized versions: founder of city, first Lodge in country, first Grand Master,
fight for responsible government, royal connections, etc.
“But/for” argument also used to suggest more esoteric histories for the Craft
(4) The Mythical Past
• This refers to fictitious creations rather than re-creations: these
“pasts” are not empirically grounded, but can affect relationships and
actions
• Books, websites & ideology drawing alleged links to notable
persons, cultures, & institutions in history
• Romanticizing and speculation provide a ready market
• Ritual incorporation of symbolic elements from past cultures
• Some are taken in by such claims; those who are not still use ideas
as tools to construct moral/philosophical system of charity/ personal
development (e.g. “the wisdom of the ages…”)
• Real in its consequences: fostering curiosity, reflection, pride,
legitimation, research, etc.
• Also helps blind members to less charitable aspects of group (e.g.
hierarchy, internal politics, gender issues).
Discussion and Conclusion
• E.H. Carr (1961): History “is a continuous process of interaction
between an historian and his facts, an unending dialogue between
the present and the past.” Emphasizes historian’s selectivity of
relevant facts in relation to values and task at hand
• I have attempted to democratize this to look at similar processes
among contemporary Freemasons historicizing their order
• The above reveals that FM is an institution where the past is, in a
variety of ways, actively made part of an ever present social reality
• The significance of the past for today’s Freemasons suggests
further, comparative research on the relative significance of aspects
of the past for other contemporary social groupings.