Talk:Candomblé

Orixá, orisha and oricha

Hi, people. I'm creating this discussion because I've noticed the page predominantly uses the English-language word "orisha" to refer to Candomblé's deities. Well, this is English Wikipedia so maybe it's expected and the guidelines say to use English preferably. However, it also says to mention native written forms. In Brazilian Portuguese, the correct form is "orixá", so the first sentence of the second paragrah ("Candomblé is monotheistic, involving the veneration of spirits known as orishas" [also not sure why it's in italic if it's English]), maybe should be written as something like "Candomblé is monotheistic, involving the veneration of spirits known as orixás (or orishas)" or "known as orishas (or orixás, in Portuguese)" or "spirtis natively known as orixás". I don't know either if there's an established form used in English-language sources. For this purpose, Midnightblueowl may be the person to contact since s/he did a great work here. I'd also like to notice that the article currently also uses "orichas", which probably is not correct unless it's also widely used by scholars. "Orichas" is probably derived from Spanish "orichás"—as a side note, Santería articles mostly use almost-native form "orichas", but also uses "orishas" regularly. I think a standard should be adopted both here and in Santería article. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

You make a very good point, Gabriel Yuji. I agree that we probably should stick with the Portuguese spelling orixás in this article, although I have seen different spellings used in the English-language academic publications on Candomblé. Causing a slight bit of confusion is the distinction between the orixás as the spirits of Candomblé and the orishas of Yoruba-derived religious traditions as a whole; both of which are mentioned in the article. For that reason, we may still need a combination of the two spellings, depending on which is being referred to (and perhaps an explanatory note to make clear the difference in spelling?). Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Midnightblueowl, I haven't paid attention to the distinction between orixás and orishas. Good point. An explanatory note would be good to explain such a sudden change within the same article. (So this distinction explains the use of both "orichas" and "orishas" in the Santería article that initially confused me—a note there would be useful too.) Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:04, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

In further support of the differentiation suggested above, please note specificity in the uses of the term. In Brazil, "orixá" has the straightforward meaning as defined above; in Benin however, "Orisha" is also the name of the religion, as practiced by the Yoruba – distinguishing it from "Vodou", as practiced by the Fon. Parzivalamfortas 01:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Parzivalamfortas' comments

I have undone an edit to the first paragraph which had suggested the primacy of Bantu speaking peoples in the origin of Candomblé. Bantu, as made clear further down in the text is only one of several that contributed. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bantu_languages. Parzivalamfortas 00:55, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

I do feel some of the assertions need to be better authenticated...

1) 'That Candomblé spread to other countries...'. I think most of the evidence is that the varieties of Afro religions in other countries arose directly from the diaspora rather than each other. This is not to say that Candomblé per se could not be practiced in other countries as well.

2) 'That practitioners are "disproportionately poor, female, and a great proportion of males homosexual' ... The veracity and relevance of this needs to be better authenticated unless good demographics are available? In which case they can be cited. That a higher proportion are women is a common enough observation, but I have also visited terreiros where the gender balance at a particular gathering was approximately equal. The poorer sector is a common assumption as well, though remember that the past two Presidents also had Candomblé connections in Benin and Salvador includes academics that I have met. Disproportionate to what? The general population of Brazil as a whole high a high proportion of poorer people, yet the main cities are modern and Sao Paulo, which has vibrant Candomblé communities, has many wealthy people. As with "poor" and "female" the tag "homosexual" seems to be making a slur, however unintentional, especially as there is no especial link with the religion itself. The one source quoted for this, from Queer Black Anthropology, is by an American author and her article focuses on black lesbians, not homosexual men, and only in Salvador. A more balanced demographic study can be found here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6142372/. The author suggests that a higher female proportion might be due to women taking more interest in spirituality. Though there is much overlap as well as confusion generally between Candoble/Umbanda/Spiritism. With respect to the Wiki author's other work, I politely suggest that the statement is possibly irrelevant, misleading and should be removed.
3) One unique facet of Brazilian Candomble/Umbanda that differentiates it from its Afro-origins is the Pomba-Gira cult which is a considerable force for female empowerment (as is much of Candomblé, perhaps on account of its status as a non-patriarchal religion). If one must mention gender, then some positives might be in order. Categorizing (by implication) Candomblé practitioners as female/gay/lesbian is a little too close to the evangelical campaign to demonize the traditional religion.

Parzivalamfortas 13:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your message, Parzivalamfortas. On your first point, the article is saying (or trying to say) that Candomblé itself has been transplanted to countries other than Brazil, i.e. you will find terreiros in Germany, for instance, largely established by Brazilian emigrants. It is not trying to say that, for example, Vodou or Santería are the same thing as Candomblé. If the current wording on this is unclear then we can certainly reword things.

As for "Membership is disproportionately poor and female; among its male practitioners, a high proportion are homosexual", it is not essential to the lead so could be removed, although perhaps we might be better seeking to rephrase it? Giving some demographic information about practitioners is useful; we do so at the FA-rated Santería and Rastafari articles, for instance. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply Midnightblueowl. I agree with your statement on transplanted terreiros now you have explained it to me. I am less comfortable with the "poor, female, male homosexual" part but would agree that it could be removed. I include some further references to clarify some of the issues involved. I do think a large proportion tend to be female, though as that seems to be the case for many religions I'd question its relevance unless we express it more clearly. To clarify the homosexuality issue (which I thnk is misleading) a technical Candomblé dynamic and the necessary language used in the research by Professor Johnson (further down, below) is necessary but might not be suitable for a general Wiki page. If however we are in agreement about removing the reference to homosexuality it becomes academic.

On gender and gender orientation, Hayes for instance (https://www.academia.edu/47783693/Women_and_Religion_in_Contemporary_Brazil) mentions that “Candomblé and other Afro-Brazilian religions… recognise women’s sacerdotal authority” although this does not automatically translate into the numbers of worshippers; it may well do, but in making such a statement we would perhaps need to say “in comparison to what?” Hayes notes that there is greater involvement of women also in Brazilian Pentecostalism and (ibid. p.396) and one can find figures to say that for many religions (e.g. Hayes p.400-1 & refs). She adds (p.412) : “Men play critical roles in the ritual life of any Candomblé terreiro and the division of labor within the community reproduces conventional gendered norms in many ways.” And also (p.412) “Female mediums also outnumber their male counterparts in Umbanda, although the gendered division of spiritual labor that structures Candomblé terreiros generally is less apparent.” That Candomblé is disproportionately dominated by a majority of women is perhaps too strong a statement and open to misinterpretation.

Certainly we could say that “women seem to outnumber men significantly” (Hayes p.409, even though her refs are rather old); yet one must be cautious to avoid characterizing a religion in such a way.

On poverty again we come across evidence of numbers. Hayes notes that “Brazil’s rural poor continue to be predominately Catholic” and that “Pentecostal women thus are far more likely to be suffering from the effects of poverty than women involved in Spiritist or alternative religious communities, which attract better educated and more affluent Brazilians” (p.399). This goes some way against the idea that Candomblé adherents are predominately poor. (I could add that those known to me personally are certainly not poor, and include businesswomen and professors). Hayes (p.411) says “Some of these women [of Candomblé], like Mãe Menininha of Gantois, have become figures of national and even international renown, acclaimed as spiritual exemplars and sought out by politicians, writers, artists, musicians, and other culture brokers”.

I wouldn’t press any remarks of Pomba Gira, which is by definition female-orientated, but technically associated with Quimbanda (or Umbanda in the wider sense) rather than Candomblé.

There is indeed some support for the idea of homosexuals with Candomblé in the literature but it is equivocal (de Port, Ecstatic Encounters, AUP 2011 chapter 4) and may probably be an over-willingness of the western Gay Pride movement and traditional psychoanalysis to translate a symbolic (spiritual) gender-exchange into a physical reality.

Paul Johnson clearly examines and explains the limits of such an idea: “The drummer’s discourse equated such cool containment with a feminized body. A macho body in repose, he implied, is cock up and ass down. lt does not passively recline, however, but is rather open and cruising the street. lt is not worried about penetration; rather, it penetrates. If this were a strict logic of practice in Candomblé, then the only men in the terreiro would be bichas, gay men who assume a “female” role in intercourse. But this is hardly the case. Straight men are drummers and song leaders, are sacrificers (axogun) and ogans, select honored men who act as patrons and mediators between the terreiro and the public domain. The drummers and ogans bring the heat of the street to the cool house to fertilize the reproduction of children and axé.” (Johnson P. The Transformation of Brazilian Candomblé, Secrets, Gossips and Gods, Oxford University Press 2002, page 45 DOI:10.1093/0195150589.001.0001). Also pp.48.

I hope this helps! Parzivalamfortas 20:53, 9 August 2021 (UTC)