Taking the example of the Basel carnival Fasnacht, the paper shows in what way ritual can maintain the impression of being traditional and unchanging, and yet be open to changes and innovations. As the basic conceptual framework we use the notion of liminality, which Victor Turner identified as the creative moment of ritual. In Fasnacht, this liminal dimension appears in two degrees. The carnival as such represents a reflexive liminal counterpart to the standard social structure, yet it is itself also highly structured and bound by conservative traditional rules. As a reaction to this, there arises within Fasnacht a second-order liminality in the form of the so-called wild Fasnacht, which turns the official antistructural Fasnacht rules upside down once again, testing their validity. While the carnival structure offers a regulated opportunity for questioning everyday social behaviour, wild Fasnacht questions even this regulated manner of questioning as such, opening space for its reflection and modification. We use detailed examples to demonstrate how the subtle dialectics of structure and antistructure keeps the tradition of Basel’s Fasnacht alive and allows it to evolve without destroying its aura of traditionality.

The article analyses the current antagonism between the Czech pro-Western liberal democratic discourse and the discourse of national sovereignty from the perspective of long-term conceptions of Czech national identity and the mythical narratives through which they have been expressed. I identify two basic mythical perspectives that have been crucial for the Czechs since the 19th century: the ‘particularist’ and the ‘universalist’. The latter originally only existed as a complement of the former, and it was not until 1968 that it was clearly expressed on its own (in its pro-Western version) in opposition to the particularist myth, eventually becoming the dominant narrative of the 1990s with their ethos of returning to the West. Once the post-revolutionary enthusiasm evaporated, however, the subsequent disillusion again came to be expressed through the particularist myth. While at present the universalist myth might seem as superior to the particularist one, from the perspective of theories of nationalism, both have their bright and dark sides, and it is only due to their present-day opposition that the particularist myth has taken the illiberal turn. A critical reflection of the limitations of both myths might allow us to soften their antagonism.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract