Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 28, 1917.djvu/256

224 Revieivs. ceremonies. The performers evidently believe that they themselves bring about the increase of the food supply; or at any rate that they set free a mystic power inherent in the rite as such. There are no signs of any appeal to a god. The ceremonies are not only mimetic, but in a sense directly "productive." The members of the witchetty grub totem, for instance, go through the actions representing the growth and development of the grub, and believe that in this way a plentiful supply is obtained. Should the result be unsatisfactory this is attributed to some omission in the ceremony — some fault in the actors. The purport of the rainmaking ceremonies, though somewhat more obscure, is evidently the same in principle. Compare the explanation given by Sir James Frazer in The Golden Bough (3rd ed. i. 261).

Altogether, one is inclined to suspect that Dr. Havemeyer has not given much study to the psychology of the drama. It is significant that he makes no mention of The Origins of Art, by Yrjo Hirn, in which the psychological aspect of art is so well treated. On the other hand, he seems to lay stress on the euhemeristic origin of some forms of drama, and in this way approximates to the standpoint of Professor Ridgeway. It is true that he does not refer to Professor Ridgeway's latest book on the subject. Dramas and Dramatic Dances, although he would probably agree with some of the views expressed there. But it is possible that Dr. Havemeyer's book was already in the press when Professor Ridgeway's work appeared.