The anthropology of rhythm. A comparative study of how anthropologists have approached rhythm since the 19th century until today

Abstract

Rhythm is a ubiquitous term that traverses the history of anthropology. It lies at the core of anthropological theories seeking to understand relationships between humans, time, space, environment and other species. However, despite its relevance in anthropology, rhythm has received insufficient theoretical examination, and only a few anthropological works have interrogated the term. Consequently, current anthropological knowledge about rhythm is blurred and limited, lacks theoretical scrutiny, and fosters conceptual confusions. The aim of this article is to overcome such a deficiency by examining and comparing how anthropologists have approached the term. Based on a literature review of 104 academic texts ranging from the 19th to the 21st century, written by 91 first authors, this article shows that anthropologists have used rhythm to describe a huge variety of topics and that three different ways of understanding rhythm have predominated: order, flow and as an in-between phenomenon. The comparisons of these three connotations allow us to argue that, for anthropologists, rhythm is closely tied to the embodied sense of experience, and therefore, it can be conceptualised as an in-between, multiscalar and socially meaningful phenomenon. To conclude, this article develops some of the implications of such observation regarding the anthropological agenda.