
Afro-Cuban religiosity. The former subsumes the individual in the collective and is,
almost by (socialist) definition, identified with the (encompassing) role of the state.
This means that collectivities, not just individuals, which have proved difficult to
fully “translate” (or be encompassed) into the revolutionary state’s terms, were
pushed to the suspicious individuating domain. Traditionally (not just under the
revolution), Afro-Cuban religiosity has flourished in this domain. Intense atten-
tion to the self, homebound centrality of the “religious family,” and a multiplicity
of “spiritual” centers—voices, deities, spirits of the dead that interact with one’s
“path,” witchcraft attacks and counterattacks, persistent “spiritual” hauntings, the
oracular immediacy of traditions—amount to the tendency of individuation to
function at the expense of large and solid collectivities.
The fact that two opposing tendencies of encompassment seem to be charac-
terizing each “entity” does not, however, mean that one must strive to encompass
the other through opposition. This is one outcome among many others and it is
a matter of historical contingency, rather than exclusionary definitional fixation.
There is a common understanding that relations of difference or opposition tend
to imply conflict and, in the case of the “individual” and the “collective,” this may
transform from a tendency into an axiom. Dumont suggests, however, drawing
on structuralist theory, that difference and opposition may be the very glue of
relationships. What we propose here is that relationships of difference do not nec-
essarily lead to an encompassing hierarchical structure—as suggested by Fernando
Ortiz.
Writing in the first half of the twentieth century, Ortiz worked mainly on issues
of criminality, law, race, Afro-Cuban religiosity and, generally, Cuban economics
and society. These last themes were explored in Cuban Counterpoint: Tobacco
and Sugar (1940). Here, Ortiz provides a stark contrapuntal comparison between
the two national products: tobacco and sugar. Although Cuba’s soil and climate
are uniquely apt for the cultivation of both, there are intense physical, symbolic,
and socioeconomic differences between them. For instance, sugar is processed
to become white, while tobacco remains naturally brown. One seeks shadow or
darkness to grow, while the other seeks light. One comes out in liquid form, the
other as smoke. One awakens and activates, the other provokes lethargy and re-
flection. One is “feminine,” “divine,” felt by one sense only, and gives pleasure to
the flesh; the other is “masculine,” “demoniacal,” felt by many senses, and gives
pleasure to the spirit. Of more socioeconomic significance, sugar requires vast
plots of land, economic centralization and monopolization, use of slaves and/or
machines, organized mass production, and results in an emphasis on quantity,
anonymity, investment, and the polarization of classes (a few rich and many poor).
On the other hand, tobacco favors small plots of lands, economic decentraliza-
tion and diversity, workers as artisans, a spontaneous, idiosyncratic and relatively
16 Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology