|
|
Geertz : Balinese Cockfight
|
|
Part-I
"The Raid"
Early in April of 1958, my wife and I arrived, malarial
and diffident, in a Balinese village we intended, as anthropologists, to study. A small place, about five hundred people,
and relatively remote, it was its own world. We were intruders, professional ones, and the villagers dealt with us as Balinese
seem always to deal with people not part of their life who yet press themselves upon them: as though we were not there. For
them, and to a degree for ourselves, we were nonpersons, specters, invisible men.
We moved into an extended family compound (that had been
arranged before through the provincial government) belonging to one of the four major factions in village life. But except
for our landlord and the village chief, whose cousin and brother-in-law he was, everyone ignored us in a way only a Balinese
can do. As we wandered around, uncertain, wistful, eager to please, people seemed to look right through us with a gaze focused
several yards behind us on some more actual stone or tree. Almost nobody greeted us; but nobody scowled or said anything unpleasant
to us either, which would have been almost as satisfactory. If we ventured to approach someone (something one is powerfully
inhibited from doing in such an atmosphere), he moved, negligently but definitively, away. If, seated or leaning against a
wall, we had him trapped, he said nothing at all, or mumbled what for the Balinese is the ultimate nonword-"yes." The indifference,
of course, was studied; the villagers were watching every move we made and they had an enormous amount of quite accurate information
about who we were and what we were going to be doing. But they acted as if we simply did not exist, which, in fact, as this
behavior was designed to inform us, we did not, or anyway not yet.
My wife and I were still very much in the gust of wind
stage, a most frustrating, and even, as you soon begin to doubt whether you are really real after all, unnerving one, when,
ten days or so after our arrival, a large cockfight was held in the public square to raise money for a new school.
Now, a few special occasions aside, cockfights are illegal
in Bali under the Republic
(as, for not altogether unrelated reasons, they were under the Dutch), largely as a result of the pretensions to puritanism
radical nationalism tends to bring with it. The elite, which is not itself so very puritan, worries about the poor, ignorant
peasant gambling all his money away, about what foreigners will think, about the waste of time better devoted to building
up the country. It sees cockfighting as "primitive," "backward," "unprogressive," and generally unbecoming an ambitious nation.
And, as with those other embarrassments -opium smoking, begging, or uncovered breasts-it seeks, rather unsystematically, to
put a stop to it.
As a result, the fights are usually held in a secluded
corner of a village in semisecrecy, a fact which tends to slow the action a little-not very much, but the Balinese do not
care to have it slowed at all. In this case, however, perhaps because they were raising money for a school that the government
was unable to give them, perhaps because raids had been few recently, perhaps, as I gathered from subsequent discussion, there
was a notion that the necessary bribes had been paid, they thought they could take a chance on the central square and draw
a larger and more enthusiastic crowd without attracting the attention of the law.
They were wrong. In the midst of the third match, with
hundreds of people, including, still transparent, myself and my wife, fused into a single body around the ring, a superorganism
in the literal sense, a truck full of policemen armed with machine guns roared up. Amid great screeching cries of "pulisi!
pulisi!" from the crowd, the policemen jumped out, and, springing into the center of the ring, began to swing their guns around
like gangsters in a motion picture, though not going so far as actually to fire them. The superorganism came instantly apart
as its components scattered in all directions. People raced down the road, disappeared head first over walls, scrambled under
platforms, folded themselves behind wicker screens, scuttled up coconut trees. Cocks armed with steel spurs sharp enough to
cut off a finger or run a hole through a foot were running wildly around. Everything was dust and panic.
On the established anthropological principle, When in Rome,
my wife and I decided, only slightly less instantaneously than everyone else, that the thing to do was run too. We ran down
the main village street, northward, away from where we were living, for we were on that side of the ring. About half-way down
another fugitive ducked suddenly into a compound-his own, it turned out-and we, seeing nothing ahead of us but rice fields,
open country, and a very high volcano, followed him. As the three of us came tumbling into the courtyard, his wife, who had
apparently been through this sort of thing before, whipped out a table, a tablecloth, three chairs, and three cups of tea,
and we all, without any explicit communication whatsoever, sat down, commenced to sip tea, and sought to compose ourselves.
A few moments later, one of the policemen marched importantly
into the yard, looking for the village chief. (The chief had not only been at the fight, he had arranged it. When the truck
drove up he ran to the river, stripped off his sarong, and plunged in so he could say, when at length they found him sitting
there pouring water over his head, that he had been away bathing when the whole affair had occurred and was ignorant of it.
They did not believe him and fined him three hundred rupiah, which the village raised collectively.) Seeing my wife and I,
"White Men," there in the yard, the policeman performed a classic double take. When he found his voice again he asked, approximately,
what in the devil did we think we were doing there. Our host of five minutes leaped instantly to our defense, producing an
impassioned description of who and what we were, so detailed and so accurate that it was my turn, having barely communicated
with a living human being save my landlord and the village chief for more than a week, to be astonished. We had a perfect
right to be there, he said, looking the Javanese upstart in the eye. We were American professors; the government had cleared
us; we were there to study culture; we were going to write a book to tell Americans about Bali. And we had all
been there drinking tea and talking about cultural matters all afternoon and did not know anything about any cockfight. Moreover,
we had not seen the village chief all day, he must have gone to town. The policeman retreated in rather total disarray. And,
after a decent interval, bewildered but relieved to have survived and stayed out of jail, so did we.
The next morning the village was a completely different
world for us. Not only were we no longer invisible, we were suddenly the center of all attention, the object of a great outpouring
of warmth, interest, and, most especially, amusement. Everyone in the village knew we had fled like everyone else. They asked
us about it again and again (I must have told the story, small detail by small detail, fifty times by the end of the day),
gently, affectionately, but quite insistently teasing us: "Why didn't you just stand there and tell the police who you were?"
"Why didn't you just say you were only watching and not betting?" "Were you really afraid of those little guns?" As always,
kinesthetically minded and, even when fleeing for their lives (or, as happened eight years later, surrendering them), the
world's most poised people, they gleefully mimicked, also over and over again, our graceless style of running and what they
claimed were our panic-stricken facial expressions. But above all, everyone was extremely pleased and even more surprised
that we had not simply "pulled out our papers" (they knew about those too) and asserted our Distinguished Visitor status,
but had instead demonstrated our solidarity with what were now our covillagers. (What we had actually demonstrated was our
cowardice, but there is fellowship in that too.) Even the Brahmana priest, an old, grave, half-way-to-Heaven type who because
of its associations with the underworld would never be involved, even distantly, in a cockfight, and was difficult to approach
even to other Balinese, had us called into his courtyard to ask us about what had happened, chuckling happily at the sheer
extraordinariness of it all.
In Bali, to be teased is to be accepted. It
was the turning point so far as our relationship to the community was concerned, and we were quite literally "in." The whole
village opened up to us, probably more than it ever would have otherwise (I might actually never have gotten to that priest
and our accidental host became one of my best informants), and certainly very much faster. Getting caught, or almost caught,
in a vice raid is perhaps not a very generalizable recipe for achieving that mysterious necessity of anthropological field
work, rapport, but for me it worked very well. It led to a sudden and unusually complete acceptance into a society extremely
difficult for outsiders to penetrate. It gave me the kind of immediate, inside view grasp of an aspect of "peasant mentality"
that anthropologists not fortunate enough to flee headlong with their subjects from armed authorities normally do not get.
And, perhaps most important of all, for the other things might have come in other ways, it put me very quickly on to a combination
emotional explosion, status war, and philosophical drama of central significance to the society whose inner nature I desired
to understand. By the time I left I had spent about as much time looking into cockfights as into witchcraft, irrigation, caste,
or marriage.
Of Cocks and Men
As much of America surfaces in a ball park, on a golf links, at a race track, or around a poker table, much of Bali surfaces
in a cock ring. For it is only apparently cocks that are fighting there. Actually, it is men.
To anyone who has been in Bali any length of time,
the deep psychological identification of Balinese men with their cocks is unmistakable. The double entendre here is deliberate.
It works in exactly the same way in Balinese as it does in English, even to producing the same tired jokes, strained puns,
and uninventive obscenities. Bateson and Mead have even suggested that, in line with the Balinese conception of the body as
a set of separately animated parts, cocks are viewed as detachable, self-operating penises, ambulant genitals with a life
of their own. And while I do not have the kind of unconscious material either to confirm or disconfirm this intriguing notion,
the fact that they are masculine symbols par excellence is about as indubitable, and to the Balinese about as evident, as
the fact that water runs downhill.
The language of everyday moralism is shot through, on the
male side of it, with roosterish imagery. Sabung, the word for cock (and one which appears in inscriptions as early as A.D.
922 ), is used metaphorically to mean "hero," "warrior," "champion," "man of parts," "political candidate," "bachelor," "dandy,"
"lady-killer," or "tough guy." A pompous man whose behavior presumes above his station is compared to a tailless cock who
struts about as though he had a large, spectacular one. A desperate man who makes a last, irrational effort to extricate himself
from an impossible situation is likened to a dying cock who makes one final lunge at his tormentor to drag him along to a
common destruction. A stingy man, who promises much, gives little, and begrudges that is compared to a cock which, held by
the tail, leaps at another without in fact engaging him. A marriageable young man still shy with the opposite sex or someone
in a new job anxious to make a good impression is called "a fighting cock caged for the first time." Court trials, wars, political
contests, inheritance disputes, and street arguments are all compared to cockfights. Even the very island itself is perceived
from its shape as a small, proud cock, poised, neck extended, back taut, tail raised, in eternal challenge to large, feckless,
shapeless Java.
But the intimacy of men with their cocks is more than metaphorical.
Balinese men, or anyway a large majority of Balinese men, spend an enormous amount of time with their favorites, grooming
them, feeding them, discussing them, trying them out against one another, or just gazing at them with a mixture of rapt admiration
and dreamy self-absorption. Whenever you see a group of Balinese men squatting idly in the council shed or along the road
in their hips down, shoulders forward, knees up fashion, half or more of them will have a rooster in his hands, holding it
between his thighs, bouncing it gently up and down to strengthen its legs, ruffling its feathers with abstract sensuality,
pushing it out against a neighbor's rooster to rouse its spirit, withdrawing it toward his loins to calm it again Now and
then, to get a feel for another bird, a man will fiddle this way with someone else's cock for a while, but usually by moving
around to squat in place behind it, rather than just having it passed across to him as though it were merely an animal.
In the houseyard, the high-walled enclosures where the
people live, fighting cocks are kept in wicker cages, moved frequently about so as to maintain the optimum balance of sun
and shade. They are fed a special diet, which varies somewhat according to individual theories but which is mostly maize,
sifted for impurities with far more care than it is when mere humans are going to eat it and offered to the animal kernel
by kernel. Red pepper is stuffed down their beaks and up their anuses to give them spirit. They are bathed in the same ceremonial
preparation of tepid water, medicinal herbs, flowers, and onions in which infants are bathed, and for a prize cock just about
as often. Their combs are cropped, their plumage dressed, their spurs trimmed, their legs massaged, and they are inspected
for flaws with the squinted concentration of a diamond merchant. A man who has a passion for cocks, an enthusiast in the literal
sense of the term, can spend most of his life with them, and even those, the overwhelming majority, whose passion though intense
has not entirely run away with them, can and do spend what seems not only to an outsider, but also to themselves an inordinate
amount of time with them. "I am cock crazy," my landlord, a quite ordinary afficionado by Balinese standards, used to moan
as he went to move another cage, give another bath, or conduct another feeding. "We're all cock crazy."
The madness has some less visible dimensions, however,
because although it is true that cocks are symbolic expressions or magnifications of their owner's self, the narcissistic
male ego writ out in Aesopian terms, they are also expressions- and rather more immediate ones-of what the Balinese regard
as the direct inversion, aesthetically, morally, and metaphysically, of human status: animality.
The Balinese revulsion against any behavior as animal-like
can hardly be overstressed. Babies are not allowed to crawl for that reason. Incest, though hardly approved, is a much less
horrifying crime than bestiality. (The appropriate punishment for the second is death by drowning, for the first being forced
to live like an animal.) Most demons are represented-in sculpture, dance, ritual, myth-in some real or fantastic animal form.
The main puberty rite consists in filing the child's teeth so they will not look like animal fangs. Not only defecation but
eating is regarded as a disgusting, almost obscene activity, to be conducted hurriedly and privately, because of its association
with animality. Even falling down or any form of clumsiness is considered to be bad for these reasons. Aside from cocks and
a few domestic animals-oxen, ducks-of no emotional significance, the Balinese are aversive to animals and treat their large
number of dogs not merely callously but with a phobic cruelty. In identifying with his cock, the Balinese man is identifying
not just with his ideal self, or even his penis, but also, and at the same time, with what he most fears, hates, and ambivalence
being what it is, is fascinated by-The Powers of Darkness.
The connection of cocks and cockfighting with such Powers,
with the animalistic demons that threaten constantly to invade the small, cleared off space in which the Balinese have so
carefully built their lives and devour its inhabitants, is quite explicit. A cockfight, any cockfight, is in the first instance
a blood sacrifice offered, with the appropriate chants and oblations, to the demons in order to pacify their ravenous, cannibal
hunger. No temple festival should be conducted until one is made. (If it is omitted someone will inevitably fall into a trance
and command with the voice of an angered spirit that the oversight be immediately corrected.) Collective responses to natural
evils-illness, crop failure, volcanic eruptions-almost always involve them. And that famous holiday in Bali, The Day of Silence
(Njepi), when everyone sits silent and immobile all day long in order to avoid contact with a sudden influx of demons chased
momentarily out of hell, is preceded the previous day by large-scale cockfights (in this case legal) in almost every village
on the island.
In the cockfight, man and beast, good and evil, ego and
id, the creative power of aroused masculinity and the destructive power of loosened animality fuse in a bloody drama of hatred,
cruelty, violence, and death. It is little wonder that when, as is the invariable rule, the owner of the winning cock takes
the carcass of the loser- often torn limb from limb by its enraged owner-home to eat, he does so with a mixture of social
embarrassment, moral satisfaction, aesthetic disgust, and cannibal joy.
The Fight
Cockfights (tetadjen; sabungan ) are held in a ring about
fifty feet square. Usually they begin toward late afternoon and run three or four hours until sunset. About nine or ten separate
matches (sehet) comprise a program. Each match is precisely like the others in general pattern: there is no main match, no
connection between individual matches, no variation in their format, and each is arranged on a completely ad hoc basis. After
a fight has ended and the emotional debris is cleaned away-the bets paid, the curses cursed, the carcasses possessed- seven,
eight, perhaps even a dozen men slip negligently into the ring with a cock and seek to find there a logical opponent for it.
This process, which rarely takes less than ten minutes, and often a good deal longer, is conducted in a very subdued, oblique,
even dissembling manner Those not immediately involved give it at best but disguised, sidelong attention; those who, embarrassedly,
are, attempt to pretend somehow that the whole thing is not really happening.
A match made, the other hopefuls retire with the same deliberate
indifference, and the selected cocks have their spurs (tadji) affixed- razor sharp, pointed steel swords, four or five inches
long. This is a delicate job which only a small proportion of men, a half-dozen or so in most villages, know how to do properly.
The man who attaches the spurs also provides them, and if the rooster he assists wins its owner awards him the spur-leg of
the victim. The spurs are affixed by winding a long length of string around the foot of the spur and the leg of the cock.
For reasons I shall come to, it is done somewhat differently from case to case, and is an obsessively deliberate affair. The
lore about spurs is extensive-they are sharpened only at eclipses and the dark of the moon, should be kept out of the sight
of women, and so forth. And they are handled, both in use and out, with the same curious combination of fussiness and sensuality
the Balinese direct toward ritual objects generally.
The spurs affixed, the two cocks are placed by their handlers
(who may or may not be their owners) facing one another in the center of the ring. A coconut pierced with a small hole is
placed in a pail of water, in which it takes about twenty-one seconds to sink, a period known as a tjeng and marked at beginning
and end by the beating of a slit gong. During these twenty-one seconds the handlers (pengangkeb) are not permitted to touch
their roosters. If, as sometimes happens, the animals have not fought during this time, they are picked up, fluffed, pulled,
prodded, and otherwise insulted, and put back in the center of the ring and the process begins again. Sometimes they refuse
to fight at all, or one keeps running away, in which case they are imprisoned together under a wicker cage, which usually
gets them engaged.
Most of the time, in any case, the cocks fly almost immediately
at one another in a wing-beating, head-thrusting, leg-kicking explosion of animal fury so pure, so absolute, and in its own
way so beautiful, as to be almost abstract, a Platonic concept of hate. Within moments one or the other drives home a solid
blow with his spur. The handler whose cock has delivered the blow immediately picks it up so that it will not get a return
blow, for if he does not the match is likely to end in a mutually mortal tie as the two birds wildly hack each other to pieces.
This is particularly true if, as often happens, the spur sticks in its victim's body, for then the aggressor is at the mercy
of his wounded foe.
With the birds again in the hands of their handlers, the
coconut is now sunk three times after which the cock which has landed the blow must be set down to show that he is firm, a
fact he demonstrates by wandering idly around the rink for a coconut sink. The coconut is then sunk twice more and the fight
must recommence.
During this interval, slightly over two minutes, the handler
of the wounded cock has been working frantically over it, like a trainer patching a mauled boxer between rounds, to get it
in shape for a last, desperate try for victory. He blows in its mouth, putting the whole chicken head in his own mouth and
sucking and blowing, fluffs it, stuffs its wounds with various sorts of medicines, and generally tries anything he can think
of to arouse the last ounce of spirit which may be hidden somewhere within it. By the time he is forced to put it back down
he is usually drenched in chicken blood, but, as in prize fighting, a good handler is worth his weight in gold. Some of them
can virtually make the dead walk, at least long enough for the second and final round.
In the climactic battle (if there is one; sometimes the
wounded cock simply expires in the handler's hands or immediately as it is placed down again), the cock who landed the first
blow usually proceeds to finish off his weakened opponent. But this is far from an inevitable outcome, for if a cock can walk
he can fight, and if he can fight, he can kill, and what counts is which cock expires first. If the wounded one can get a
stab in and stagger on until the other drops, he is the official winner, even if he himself topples over an instant later.
Surrounding all this melodrama - which the crowd packed
tight around the ring follows in near silence, moving their bodies in kinesthetic sympathy with the movement of the animals,
cheering their champions on with wordless hand motions, shiftings of the shoulders, turnings of the head, falling back en
masse as the cock with the murderous spurs careens toward one side of the ring (it is said that spectators sometimes lose
eyes and fingers from being too attentive), surging forward again as they glance off toward another - is a vast body of extraordinarily
elaborate and precisely detailed rules.
These rules, together with the developed lore of cocks
and cockfighting which accompanies them, are written down in palm leaf manuscripts (lontar; rontal) passed on from generation
to generation as part of the general legal and cultural tradition of the villages. At a fight, the umpire (saja konong; djuru
kembar) - the man who manages the coconut - is in charge of their application and his authority is absolute. I have never
seen an umpire's judgment questioned on any subject, even by the more despondent losers, nor have I ever heard, even in private,
a charge of unfairness directed against one, or, for that matter, complaints about umpires in general. Only exceptionally
well-trusted, solid, and, given the complexity of the code, knowledgeable citizens perform this job, and in fact men will
bring their cocks only to fights presided over by such men. It is also the umpire to whom accusations of cheating, which,
though rare in the extreme, occasionally arise, are referred; and it is he who in the not infrequent cases where the cocks
expire virtually together decides which (if either, for, though the Balinese do not care for such an outcome, there can be
ties) went first. Likened to a judge, a king, a priest, and a policeman, he is all of these, and under his assured direction
the animal passion of the fight proceeds within the civic certainty of the law. In the dozens of cockfights I saw in Bali, I
never once saw an altercation about rules. Indeed, I never saw an open altercation, other than those between cocks, at all.
This crosswise doubleness of an event which, taken as a
fact of nature, is rage untrammeled and, taken as a fact of culture, is form perfected, defines the cockfight as a sociological
entity. A cockfight is what, searching for a name for something not vertebrate enough to be called a group and not structureless
enough to be called a crowd, Erving Goffman has called a "focused gathering"-a set of persons engrossed in a common flow of
activity and relating to one another in terms of that flow. Such gatherings meet and disperse; the participants in them fluctuate;
the activity that focuses them is discreet-a particulate process that reoccurs rather than a continuous one that endures.
They take their form from the situation that evokes them, the floor on which they are placed, as Goffman puts it; but it is
a form, and an articulate one, nonetheless. For the situation, the floor is itself created, in jury deliberations, surgical
operations, block meetings, sitins, cockfights, by the cultural preoccupations-here, as we shall see, the celebration of status
rivalry-which not only specify the focus but, assembling actors and arranging scenery, bring it actually into being.
In classical times (that is to say, prior to the Dutch
invasion of 1908) when there were no bureaucrats around to improve popular morality, the staging of a cockfight was an explicitly
societal matter. Bringing a cock to an important fight was, for an adult male, a compulsory duty of citizenship; taxation
of fights, which were usually held on market day, was a major source of public revenue; patronage of the art was a stated
responsibility of princes; and the cock ring, or wantilan, stood in the center of the village near those other monuments of
Balinese civility-the council house, the origin temple, the marketplace, the signal tower, and the banyan tree. Today, a few
special occasions aside, the newer rectitude makes so open a statement of the connection between the excitements of collective
life and those of blood sport impossible, but, less directly expressed, the connection itself remains intimate and intact.
To expose it, however, it is necessary to turn to the aspect of cockfighting around which all the others pivot, and through
which they exercise their force, an aspect I have thus far studiously ignored. I mean, of course, the gambling.
Odds and Even Money
The Balinese never do anything in a simple way that they
can contrive to do in a complicated one, and to this generalization cockfight wagering is no exception.
In the first place, there are two sorts of bets, or toh.
There is the single axial bet in the center between the principals (toh ketengah), and there is the cloud of peripheral ones
around the ring between members of the audience (toh kesasi ). The first is typically large; the second typically small. The
first is collective, involving coalitions of bettors clustering around the owner; the second is individual, man to man. The
first is a matter of deliberate, very quiet, almost furtive arrangement by the coalition members and the umpire huddled like
conspirators in the center of the ring; the second is a matter of impulsive shouting, public offers, and public acceptances
by the excited throng around its edges. And most curiously, and as we shall see most revealingly, where the first is always,
without exception, even money, the second, equally without exception, is never such. What is a fair coin in the center is
a biased one on the side.
The center bet is the official one, hedged in again with
a webwork of rules, and is made between the two cock owners, with the umpire as overseer and public witness. This bet, which,
as I say, is always relatively and sometimes very large, is never raised simply by the owner in whose name it is made, but
by him together with four or five, sometimes seven or eight, allies- kin, village mates, neighbors, close friends. He may,
if he is not especially well-to-do, not even be the major contributor, though, if only to show that he is not involved in
any chicanery, he must be a significant one.
Of the fifty-seven matches for which I have exact and reliable
data on the center bet, the range is from fifteen ringgits to five hundred, with a mean at eighty-five and with the distribution
being rather noticeably trimodal: small fights (15 ringgits either side of 35 ) accounting for about 45 per cent of the total
number; medium ones (20 ringgits either side of 70) for about 25 per cent; and large (75 ringgits either side of 175) for
about 20 per cent, with a few very small and very large ones out at the extremes. In a society where the normal daily wage
of a manual laborer - a brickmaker, an ordinary farmworker, a market porter - was about three ringgits a day, and considering
the fact that fights were held on the average about every two-and a-half days in the immediate area I studied, this is clearly
serious gambling, even if the bets are pooled rather than individual efforts.
The side bets are, however, something else altogether.
Rather than the solemn, legalistic pactmaking of the center, wagering takes place rather in the fashion in which the stock
exchange used to work when it was out on the curb. There is a fixed and known odds paradigm which runs in a continuous series
from ten-to-nine at the short end to two-to-one on the long: 10-9, 9-8, 8-7, 7-6, 6-5, 5-4, 4-3, 3-2, 2-1. The man who wants
the underdog cock shouts the short-side number indicating the odds he wants to be given. That is, if he shouts gasal, "five,"
he wants the underdog at five-to-four (or, for him, four-to-five); if he shouts "four," he wants it at four-to-three (again,
he putting up the "three"), if "nine" at nine-to-eight, and so on. A man backing the favorite, and thus considering giving
odds if he can get them short enough, indicates the fact by crying out the color-type of that cock - "brown," "speckled,"
or whatever.
Almost always odds calling starts off toward the the long
end of the range - five-to-four or four-to-three- and then moves toward the shorter end with greater or less speed and to
a greater and lesser degree. Men crying "five" and finding themselves answered only with cries of "brown" start crying "six."
If the change is made and partners are still scarce, the procedure is repeated in a move to "seven," and so on. Occasionally,
if the cocks are clearly mismatched, there may be no upward movement at all, or even movement down the scale to four-to-three,
three-to-two, very, very rarely to two-to-one, a shift which is accompanied by a declining number of bets as a shift upward
is accompanied by an increasing number. But the general pattern is for the betting to move a shorter or longer distance up
the scale toward the, for sidebets, nonexistent pole of even money, with the overwhelming majority of bets falling in the
four-to-three to eight-to-seven range.
The higher the center bet, the more likely the match will
in actual fact be an even one. In a large-bet fight the pressure to make the match a genuinely fifty-fifty proposition is
enormous, and is consciously felt as such. For medium fights the pressure is somewhat less, and for small ones less yet, though
there is always an effort to make things at least approximately equal, for even at fifteen ringgits (five days work) no one
wants to make an even money bet in a clearly unfavorable situation. And, again, what statistics I have tend to bear this out.
In my fifty-seven matches, the favorite won thirty-three times over-all, the underdog twenty-four, a 1.4 to 1 ratio. But if
one splits the figures at sixty ringgits center bets, the ratios turn out to be 1.1 to 1 (twelve favorites, eleven underdogs)
for those above this line, and 1.6 to 1 (twenty-one and thirteen) for those below it. Or, if you take the extremes, for very
large fights, those with center bets over a hundred ringgits the ratio is 1 to 1 (seven and seven); for very small fights,
those under forty ringgits, it is 1.9 to 1 (nineteen and ten).
The paradox of fair coin in the middle, biased coin on
the outside is thus a merely apparent one. The two betting systems, though formally incongruent, are not really contradictory
to one another, but part of a single larger system in which the center bet is, so to speak, the "center of gravity," drawing,
the larger it is the more so, the outside bets toward the short-odds end of the scale. The center bet thus "makes the game,"
or perhaps better, defines it, signals what, following a notion of Jeremy Bentham's, I am going to call its "depth."
The Balinese attempt to create an interesting, if you will,
"deep," match by making the center bet as large as possible so that the cocks matched will be as equal and as fine as possible,
and the outcome, thus, as unpredictable as possible. They do not always succeed. Nearly half the matches are relatively trivial,
relatively uninteresting-in my borrowed terminology, "shallow"- affairs. But that fact no more argues against my interpretation
than the fact that most painters, poets, and playwrights are mediocre argues against the view that artistic effort is directed
toward profundity and, with a certain frequency, approximates it. The image of artistic technique is indeed exact: the center
bet is a means, a device, for creating "interesting," "deep" matches, not the reason, or at least not the main reason, why
they are interesting, the source of their fascination, the substance of their depth. The question why such matches are interesting-indeed,
for the Balinese, exquisitely absorbing-takes us out of the realm of formal concerns into more broadly sociological and social-psychological
ones, and to a less purely economic idea of what "depth" in gaming amounts to.
Part-II
"Playing with Fire"
Bentham's concept of "deep play" is found in his The Theory of Legislation.
By it he means play in which the stakes are so high that it is, from his utilitarian standpoint, irrational for men to engage
in it at all.
This, I must stress immediately, is not to say that the money does not
matter, or that the Balinese is no more concerned about losing five hundred ringgits than fifteen. Such a conclusion would
be absurd. It is because money does, in this hardly unmaterialistic society, matter and matter very much that the more of
it one risks the more of a lot of other things, such as one's pride, one's poise, one's dispassion, one's masculinity, one
also risks, again only momentarily but again very publicly as well. In deep cockfights an owner and his collaborators, and,
as we shall see, to a lesser but still quite real extent also their backers on the outside, put their money where their status
is.
It is in large part because the marginal disutility of loss is so great
at the higher levels of betting that to engage in such betting is to lay one's public self, allusively and metaphorically,
through the medium of one's cock, on the line. And though to a Benthamite this might seem merely to increase the irrationality
of the enterprise that much further, to the Balinese what it mainly increases is the meaningfulness of it all. And as (to
follow Weber rather than Bentham) the imposition of meaning on life is the major end and primary condition of human existence,
that access of significance more than compensates for the economic costs involved. Actually, given the even-money quality
of the larger matches, important changes in material fortune among those who regularly participate in them seem virtually
nonexistent, because matters more or less even out over the long run.
This graduated correlation of "status gambling" with deeper fights and,
inversely, "money gambling" with shallower ones is in fact quite general. Bettors themselves form a sociomoral hierarchy in
these terms. As noted earlier, at most cockfights there are, around the very edges of the cockfight area, a large number of
mindless, sheer-chance type gambling games (roulette, dice throw, coin-spin, pea-under-the-shell) operated by concessionaires.
Only women, children, adolescents, and various other sorts of people who do not (or not yet) fight cocks - the extremely poor,
the socially despised, the personally idiosyncratic - play at these games, at, of course, penny ante levels. Cockfighting
men would be ashamed to go anywhere near them. Slightly above these people in standing are those who, though they do not themselves
fight cocks, bet on the smaller matches around the edges. Next, there are those who fight cocks in small, or occasionally
medium matches, but have not the status to join in the large ones, though they may bet from time to time on the side in those.
And finally, there are those, the really substantial members of the community, the solid citizenry around whom local life
revolves, who fight in the larger fights and bet on them around the side. The focusing element in these focused gatherings,
these men generally dominate and define the sport as they dominate and define the society. When a Balinese male talks, in
that almost venerative way, about "the true cockfighter," the bebatoh ("bettor" ) or djuru kurung ("cage keeper"), it is this
sort of person, not those who bring the mentality of the pea-and-shell game into the quite different, inappropriate context
of the cockfight, the driven gambler (potet, a word which has the secondary meaning of thief or reprobate), and the wistful
hanger-on, that they mean. For such a man, what is really going on in a match is something rather closer to an affaire d'honneur
(though, with the Balinese talent for practical fantasy, the blood that is spilled is only figuratively human) than to the
stupid, mechanical crank of a slot machine (....Continued...)
What makes Balinese cockfighting deep is thus not money in itself, but
what, the more of it that is involved the more so, money causes to happen: the migration of the Balinese status hierarchy
into the body of the cockfight. Psychologically an Aesopian representation of the ideal/demonic, rather narcissistic, male
self, sociologically it is an equally Aesopian representation of the complex fields of tension set up by the controlled, muted,
ceremonial, but for all that deeply felt, interaction of those selves in the context of everyday life. The cocks may be surrogates
for their owners' personalities, animal mirrors of psychic form, but the cockfight is - or more exactly, deliberately is made
to be - a simulation of the social matrix, the involved system of crosscutting, overlapping, highly corporate groups --villages,
kingroups, irrigation societies, temple congregations, "castes" - in which its devotees live. And as prestige, the necessity
to affirm it, defend it, celebrate it, justify it, and just plain bask in it (but not given the strongly ascriptive character
of Balinese stratification, to seek it), is perhaps the central driving force in the society, so also - ambulant penises,
blood sacrifices, and monetary exchanges aside - is it of the cockfight. This apparent amusement and seeming sport is, to
take another phrase from Erving Goffman, "a status bloodbath."
The easiest way to make this clear, and at least to some degree to demonstratee
it, is to invoke the village whose cockfighting activities I observed the closest - the one in which the raid occurred and
from which my statistical data are taken.
Consider, then, as support of the general thesis that the cockfight,
and especially the deep cockfight, is fundamentally a dramatization of status concerns, the following facts:
- A man virtually never bets against a cock owned
by a member of his own kingroup. Usually he will feel obliged to bet for it, the more so the closer the kin tie and the deeper
the fight. If he is certain in his mind that it will not win, he may just not bet at all, particularly if it is only a second
cousin's bird or if the fight is a shallow one. But as a rule he will feel he must support it and, in deep games, nearly always
does. Thus the great majority of the people calling "five" or "spes the great majority of the people calling"five" or "speckled"
so demonstratively are expressing their allegiance to their kinsman, not their evaluation of his bird, their understanding
of probability theory, or even their hopes of unearned income.
- This principle is extended logically. If your
kin group is not involved you will support an allied kingroup against an unallied one in the same way, and so on through the
very involved networks of alliances which, as I say, make up this, as any other, Balinese village.
- So, too, for the village as a whole. If an outsider
cock is fighting any cock from your village you will tend to support the local one. If, what is a rarer circumstance but occurs
every now and then, a cock from outside your cockfight circuit is fighting one inside it you will also tend to support the
"home bird."
- Cocks which come from any distance are almost
always favorites, for the theory is the man would not have dared to bring it if it was not a good cock, the more so the further
he has come. His followers are, of course, obliged to support him, and when the more grand-scale legal cockfights are held
(on holidays and so on) the people of the village take what they regard to be the best cocks in the village, regardless of
ownership, and go off to support them, although they will almost certainly have to give odds on them and to make large bets
to show that they are not a cheapskate village. Actually, such "away games," though infrequent, tend to mend the ruptures
between village members that the constantly occurring "home games," where village factions are opposed rather than united,
exacerbate.
- Almost all matches are sociologically relevant.
You seldom get two outsider cocks fighting, or two cocks with no particular group backing, or with group backing which is
mutually unrelated in any clear way. When you do get them, the game is very shallow, betting very slow, and the whole thing
very dull, with no one save the immediate principals and an addict gambler or two at all interested.
- By the same token, you rarely get two cocks from
the same group, even more rarely from the same subfaction, and virtually never from the same sub-subfaction (which would be
in most cases one extended family) fighting. Similarly, in outside village fights two members of the village will rarely fight
against one another, even though, as bitter rivals, they would do so with enthusiasm on their home grounds.
- On the individual level, people involved in an
institutionalized hostility relationship, called puik, in which they do not speak or otherwise have anything to do with each
other (the causes of this formal breaking of relations are many: wife-capture, inheritance arguments, political differences)
will bet very heavily, sometimes almost maniacally, against one another in what is a frank and direct attack on the very masculinity,
the ultimate ground of his status, of the opponent.
- The center bet coalition is, in all but the shallowest
games, always made up by structural allies - no "outside money" is involved. What is "outside" depends upon the context, of
course, but given it, no outside money is mixed in with the main bet; if the principals cannot raise it, it is not made. The
center bet, again especially in deeper games, is thus the most direct and open expression of social opposition, which is one
of the reasons why both it and match making are surrounded by such an air of unease, furtiveness, embarrassment, and so on.
- The rule about borrowing money - that you may
borrow for a bet but not in one - stems (and the Balinese are quite conscious of this) from similar considerations: you are
never at the economic mercy of your enemy that way. Gambling debts, which can get quite large on a rather short-term basis,
are always to friends, never to enemies, structurally speaking.
- When two cocks are structurally irrelevant or
neutral so far as you are concerned (though, as mentioned, they almost never are to each other) you do not even ask a relative
or a friend whom he is betting on, because if you know how he is betting and he knows you know, and you go the other way,
it will lead to strain. This rule is explicit and rigid; fairly elaborate, even rather artificial precautions are taken to
avoid breaking it. At the very least you must pretend not to notice what he is doing, and he what you are doing.
- There is a special word for betting against the
grain, which is also the word for "pardon me" (mpura). It is considered a bad thing to do, though if the center bet is small
it is sometimes all right as long as you do not do it too often. But the larger the bet and the more frequently you do it,
the more the "pardon me" tack will lead to social disruption.
- In fact, the institutionalized hostility relation,
puik, is often formally initiated (though its causes always lie elsewhere) by such a "pardon me" bet in a deep fight, putting
the symbolic fat in the fire. Similarly, the end of such a relationship and resumption of normal social intercourse is often
signalized (but, again, not actually brought about) by one or the other of the enemies supporting the other's bird.
- In sticky, cross-loyalty situations, of which
in this extraordinarily complex social system there are of course many, where a man is caught between two more or less equally
balanced loyalties, he tends to wander off for a cup of coffee or something to avoid having to bet, a form of behavior reminiscent
of that of American voters in similar situations.
- The people involved in the center bet are, especially
in deep fights, virtually always leading members of their group-kinship, village, or whatever. Further, those who bet on the
side (including these people) are, as I have already remarked, the more established members of the village - the solid citizens.
Cockfighting is for those who are involved in the everyday politics of prestige as well, not for youth, women, subordinates,
and so forth.
- So far as money is concerned, the explicitly expressed
attitude toward it is that it is a secondary matter. It is not, as I have said, of no importance; Balinese are no happier
to lose several weeks' income than anyone else. But they mainly look on the monetary aspects of the cockfight as self-balancing,
a matter of just moving money around, circulating it among a fairly well-defined group of serious cockfighters. The really
important wins and losses are seen mostly in other terms, and the general attitude toward wagering is not any hope of cleaning
up, of making a killing (addict gamblers again excepted), but that of the horseplayer's prayer: "Oh, God, please let me break
even." In prestige terms, however, you do not want to break even, but, in a momentary, punctuate sort of way, win utterly.
The talk (which goes on all the time) is about fights against such-and-such a cock of So-and-So which your cock demolished,
not on how much you won, a fact people, even for large bets, rarely remember for any length of time, though they will remember
the day they did in Pan Loh's finest cock for years.
- You must bet on cocks of your own group aside
from mere loyalty considerations, for if you do not people generally will say, "What! Is he too proud for the likes of us?
Does he have to go to Java or Den Pasar [the capital town] to bet, he is such an important man?" Thus there is a general pressure
to bet not only to show that you are important locally, but that you are not so important that you look down on everyone else
as unfit even to be rivals. Similarly, home team people must bet against outside cocks or the outsiders will accuse it - a
serious charge - of just collecting entry fees and not really being interested in cockfighting, as well as again being arrogant
and insulting.
- Finally, the Balinese peasants themselves are
quite aware of all this and can and, at least to an ethnographer, do state most of it in approximately the same terms as I
have. Fighting cocks, almost every Balinese I have ever discussed the subject with has said, is like playing with fire only
not getting burned. You activate village and kingroup rivalries and hostilities, but in "play" form, coming dangerously and
entrancingly close to the expression of open and direct interpersonal and intergroup aggression (something which, again, almost
never happens in the normal course of ordinary life), but not quite, because, after all, it is "only a cockfight."
More observations of this sort could be advanced, but perhaps the general
point is, if not made, at least well-delineated, and the whole argument thus far can be usefully summarized in a formal paradigm:
THE MORE A MATCH IS . . .
- Between near status equals (and/or personal enemies)
- Between high status individuals
THE DEEPER THE MATCH.
THE DEEPER THE MATCH0/00
- The closer the identification of cock and man
(or: more properly, the deeper the match the more the man will advance his best, most closely-identified-with cock).
- The finer the cocks involved and the more exactly
they will be matched.
- The greater the emotion that will be involved
and the more the general absorption in the match.
- The higher the individual bets center and outside,
the shorter the outside bet odds will tend to be, and the more betting there will be over-all.
- The less an economic and the more a "status" view
of gaming will be involved, and the "solider" the citizens who will be gaming.
Inverse arguments hold for the shallower the fight, culminating, in a
reversed-signs sense, in the coin-spinning and dice-throwing amusements. For deep fights there are no absolute upper limits,
though there are of course practical ones, and there are a great many legend-like tales of great Duel-in-the-Sun combats between
lords and princes in classical times (for cockfighting has always been as much an elite concern as a popular one), far deeper
than anything anyone, even aristocrats, could produce today anywhere in Bali.
Indeed, one of the great culture heroes of Bali is a prince, called after his passion for the sport,
"The Cockfighter," who happened to be away at a very deep cockfight with a neighboring prince when the whole of his family-father,
brothers, wives, sisters-were assassinated by commoner usurpers. Thus spared, he returned to dispatch the upstarts, regain
the throne, reconstitute the Balinese high tradition, and build its most powerful, glorious, and prosperous state. Along with
everything else that the Balinese see in fighting cocks-themselves, their social order, abstract hatred, masculinity, demonic
power-they also see the archetype of status virtue, the arrogant, resolute, honor-mad player with real fire, the ksatria prince.
Conclusion
What sets the cockfight apart from the ordinary course of life, lifts
it from the realm of everyday practical affairs, and surrounds it with an aura of enlarged importance is not, as functionalist
sociology would have it, that it reinforces status discriminations (such reinforcement is hardly necessary in a society where
every act proclaims them), but that it provides a metasocial commentary upon the whole matter of assorting human beings into
fixed hierarchical ranks and then organizing the major part of collective existence around that assortment. Its function,
if you want to call it that, is interpretive: it is a Balinese reading of Balinese experience; a story they tell themselves
about themselves.
What the cockfight says it says in a vocabulary of sentiment-the thrill
of risk, the despair of loss, the pleasure of triumph. Yet what it says is not merely that risk is exciting, loss depressing,
or triumph gratifying, banal tautologies of affect, but that it is of these emotions, thus exampled, that society is built
and individuals put together. Attending cockfights and participating in them is, for the Balinese, a kind of sentimental education.
What he learns there is what his culture's ethos and his private sensibility (or, anyway, certain aspects of them) look like
when spelled out externally in a collective text; that the two are near enough alike to be articulated in the symbolics of
a single such text; and-the disquieting part-that the text in which this revelation is accomplished consists of a chicken
hacking another mindlessly to bits. Every people, the proverb
has it, loves its own form of violence, The cockfight is the Balinese reflection on theirs: on its look, its uses, its force,
its fascination. Drawing on almost every level of Balinese experience, it brings together themes-animal savagery, male narcissism,
opponent gambling, status rivalry, mass excitement, blood sacrifice-whose main connection is their involvement with rage and
the fear of rage, and, binding them into a set of rules which at once contains them and allows them play, builds a symbolic
structure in which, over and over again, the reality of their inner affiliation can be intelligibly felt. If, to quote Northrop
Frye again, we go to see Macbeth to learn what a man feels like after he has gained a kingdom and lost his soul, Balinese
go to cockfights to find out what a man, usually composed, aloof, almost obsessively self-absorbed, a kind of moral autocosm,
feels like when, attacked, tormented, challenged, insulted, and driven in result to the extremes of fury, he has totally triumphed
or been brought totally low.
Note: All the text are from the real writings of the Geertz and is based entirely on web research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|