Barbara Sellers-Young’s “Theatrical Aspects of the Zar,” presented in 1987, belongs to the early Sudanese phase of her scholarship, when dance and ritual were first becoming for her not simply objects of ethnographic description but privileged sites for thinking how social tensions are embodied, staged, and temporarily reorganized. The paper is modest in scale—a conference presentation built around a specific zar ritual in Yambio—yet intellectually it is already strikingly characteristic. It resists the reduction of possession ritual to superstition, pathology, or belief alone. It asks instead what becomes visible when one treats the zar as performance: not performance in the trivial sense of display, but as a socially consequential arrangement of space, bodies, roles, symbols, and actions through which a community can process forms of strain that ordinary discourse cannot easily contain.
The paper’s governing move is thus a reframing. Sellers-Young does not deny that the zar is a curing rite or spirit-possession ceremony. Rather, she insists that these descriptions remain incomplete unless one sees how the rite works theatrically. Its healing efficacy is not detachable from its form. A woman’s private distress is made public through procession, song, drumming, costuming, dance, trance, sacrifice, and shared eating; a social disturbance is rendered into a sequence of legible actions; a fraught situation is given rhythm, repetition, and a bounded space in which it may be handled. The zar is therefore neither simply religion nor simply theatre. It is a ritual theatre whose social force lies precisely in that overlap.
This argument is framed through the ritual/performance debates that were especially generative in the period. Sellers-Young opens by recalling the effort, across sociology, anthropology, and performance studies, to understand ordinary social relations through theatrical metaphors and processes. Goffman and Burke appear as thinkers for whom theatre serves as a “root metaphor”; Turner and Schechner provide the more immediate terms of analysis. Turner’s account of social drama is crucial: the sequence of “breach, crisis, redress and reintegration” gives Sellers-Young a way to show that possession is not an irrational interruption from outside society but a culturally organized response to conflict or strain within it. Schechner’s ritual-theatre continuum, meanwhile, authorizes a refusal of rigid disciplinary categories. Ritual may contain theatrical elements without ceasing to be sacred; theatre may inherit ritual procedures without becoming identical to religion. The zar becomes intelligible in the unstable but fertile zone between them.
What this framework allows Sellers-Young to do is to connect three scales of action that are often analytically separated: individual crisis, communal process, and aesthetic form. The paper’s central case, Saida’s zar, is exemplary in this respect. Saida, “a woman born and raised in Khartoum,” has married a wealthy Arab trader in Yambio and, after three years, “has failed to become pregnant.” She becomes lethargic, refuses food, and is finally taken to Amelia, a local female healer, who diagnoses her as possessed by a zar spirit. Sellers-Young maps this onto Turner’s sequence with admirable economy. The initial breach lies in Saida’s separation from her natal family through marriage and relocation. Crisis emerges through illness linked to infertility anxiety. Redress begins with diagnosis and culminates in the four-day ritual. Reintegration follows when “the woman’s self-esteem and status with the social group is restored.”
The clarity of this structure matters because it shows how little Sellers-Young is interested in sensationalizing trance. Possession is not treated as exotic excess. It is one moment within a larger social and performative process that gives form to women’s distress under conditions where fertility, marriage, and status are tightly bound. The paper had behind it the northern Sudanese and Somaliland scholarship that had already linked zar possession to the pressured and often liminal position of women in patriarchal settings, especially where female value is tied to reproduction and, among some communities, to the bearing of sons. Sellers-Young draws on that body of work, but she does not simply replicate it. Her insistence is that the Yambio zar has a locally specific shape, and that this shape must be read against the social world in which it occurs.
That world is sharply drawn. Yambio is described as a predominantly Azande town with a smaller Arab population that had grown during the relatively peaceful years of expanded north-south trade. The background is one of deep historical fracture: Arab slaving, unequal modernization under Anglo-Egyptian rule, religious division between north and south, and local tensions among ethnic and economic groups. Arab traders and administrators are marked as outsiders, wealthier and more socially enclosed; Arab and Azande women ordinarily inhabit largely separate spheres. The paper’s most original sociological claim follows from this setting. The zar in Yambio matters not only because it treats women’s illness, but because it creates one of the rare occasions on which Arab and Azande women gather together in a shared embodied event. The ritual does not dissolve political and ethnic division, but it suspends its ordinary arrangement long enough to produce a temporary female collectivity.
This is where Sellers-Young’s early anthropological functionalism is already more supple than a crude “ritual serves society” formula. She is attentive not merely to the overt purpose of curing, but to the latent work performed by the event. The zar offers women a sanctioned arena in which common anxieties—fertility, the possibility of polygyny, marital insecurity, political unease—can be enacted rather than merely endured in isolation. It also gives them leverage. One of the paper’s sharper observations is that women display “their own power by convincing husbands to periodically prove their continuing concern for a wife by financing a four day ritual.” The event is expensive; the husband’s payment is not incidental but materially expressive. The rite therefore becomes a medium through which women secure recognition, resources, and communal support under conditions that otherwise limit their direct authority.
The ritual’s theatricality is not, in Sellers-Young’s account, a metaphor pasted onto social life after the fact. It is built into the event’s organization. Her description of Amelia’s compound is especially revealing. No public zar rituals occur in Yambio; Saida’s rite takes place in the healer’s private compound. Yet the space is carefully differentiated. There are “backstage preparations” within Amelia’s house to which only adepts have access. The broader group of participants sits “in a semi-circle around the edge of the ritual performance space,” which extends from the healer’s dwelling to an altar of branches in the compound. The area is marked as sacred: shoes are removed before crossing it. Amelia’s opening signal—“three hard beats on the largest drum”—announces the public action much as a theatrical cue might mark the beginning of a performance. Sellers-Young’s language here is exact and deliberate. The ritual has a stage, backstage, director, performers, audience, financing relatives, music, dance, costume, and role assumption. But because it also includes sacrifice, cleansing, offerings, trance, and communal eating, it cannot be absorbed into theatre alone. The point is not classificatory cleverness but a more precise account of how sacred efficacy is inseparable from formal arrangement.
Amelia herself occupies a crucial position in this arrangement. She is not simply a healer in a generalized sense but a ritual specialist whose authority is narratively grounded. Having “died” three times, she receives in the third near-death episode a command from the spirit of a white man named Johnny: unless she uses his help to heal, she will die permanently. She works, she says, mainly with Johnny and “the Old Woman,” the two helper spirits most central to the Yambio ritual. The biographical account matters because it links personal ordeal, spirit authority, and social role; Amelia’s legitimacy is itself theatrically and cosmologically structured. Yet Sellers-Young does not romanticize charismatic authority. Amelia functions, among other things, as a director: she organizes access, initiates transitions, controls the sequencing of action, and guides the movement between hidden preparation and public display.
Particularly rich is Sellers-Young’s attention to the ritual’s economy of representation. In the comparative context of zar scholarship, Yambio appears unusually spare. Northern Sudanese forms, as reported by Boddy and Constantinides and others, include a larger, more elaborated gallery of spirit characters—holy men, Ethiopians, nomads, westerners, pashas, gypsies, pilgrims, southern slaves, Azande witches—with more developed mimetic enactment. In Yambio, by contrast, characterization is reduced to what Sellers-Young calls “minimalist performance.” A few movement motifs suffice: “A rocking step back and forth from front leg to back leg is the total movement of the Holy Man; a step hop is supposed to represent the Arab population; a swaying side to side, the Ethiopian; a shuffle step the old woman; and a simple walking step forward and back represents Johnny, the white man.” This is a fine example of her method. She does not treat minimalism as ethnographic deficiency or as evidence of aesthetic poverty. She asks what social conditions such minimalism may answer to.
Her answer is one of the paper’s strongest interventions. The reduced characterization of the Yambio zar reflects a different social environment. Northern Arab communities are comparatively homogeneous in culture and religion; Yambio is heterogeneous, politically tense, and stratified by ethnicity, class, and historical memory. In such a setting, a highly elaborated repertoire of ethnic or social stereotypes might intensify difference. The Yambio ritual instead emphasizes figures—above all “the Old Woman” and Johnny, “the white man”—whose symbolic resonance can be shared across Arab and Azande women. The form of performance is thus socially adaptive. Its theatrical economy is itself a mode of social negotiation. Sellers-Young’s larger premise, visible here in early form and central throughout her career, is that performance structure is never merely aesthetic. It registers and mediates the conditions of the community in which it lives.
This claim becomes even more persuasive when one turns to her narration of the ritual’s four days. The first day establishes Saida as ceremonial focus. Emerging from Amelia’s house, she is dressed “in a long white dress that resembled a jelabiya,” with face covered and hands and feet decorated in henna. Women process around the shrine seven times carrying food, clothing, and candles. She is placed before the shrine and eventually performs a small shuffle in place. The scene has both the dignity and the restraint of an initiation. Sellers-Young notes that no one appears to pay Saida particular attention while she dances; the ritual’s logic is not one of individual exhibition but of insertion into a larger sequence of actions. The afflicted woman is both central and held within a communal structure.
The second day, devoted to sacrifice, makes the relation between social division and ritual togetherness especially visible. Arab and Azande women initially sit separately, “drinking orange squash and waiting for the sacrifice to begin.” The separation is a crucial detail. Communitas, in Sellers-Young’s account, is not an achieved social equality but a temporary embodied relation that occurs without erasing ordinary distinctions. After backstage preparation, Saida and the adepts process around the shrine. The goat is placed between Saida’s legs “as if she were riding it,” and Arab women explain the action as “an imitation of the bridal journey of a woman.” This bridal symbolism links the rite tightly to marriage, fertility, and female status. The goat and chickens are slaughtered; Saida drinks the blood; Amelia anoints the women with blood on forehead, chin, and chest; then singing and dancing resume, especially for Johnny. Sellers-Young is attentive to the density of this sequence without overinterpreting it. Blood here marks sacrifice, danger, transformation, and incorporation; bridal imagery places possession within the nexus of conjugal and reproductive expectation. The healing of illness cannot be separated from these social meanings.
The third day brings the ritual’s theatrical dimension into fullest relief. Saida appears in the previous day’s blood-stained clothes and must eat from bowls containing the cooked internal organs of the sacrificed animals. A table of food is set beneath palm arches. Then the adepts emerge costumed either as the Old Woman or as Johnny. The old women wear white dresses and scarves; those embodying Johnny wear white shirts, trousers or shorts, and hats. Most vivid of all are Amelia and her chief adept Mary, dressed alike in striped trousers, blouses, “raccoon skin bibs, tennis shoes and straw hats,” each carrying what Sellers-Young calls a “British swagger stick.” They circle the table and perform a short dance of forward-and-back steps, “much like a ‘tea for two’ number.” The simile is memorable because it catches the scene’s stylization without dismissing it. This is not realism, nor even full dramatic personation. It is role display through condensed costume and motif. A special plate of food, whisky, and cigarettes is set aside for Johnny. The spirit is fed through theatricalized offering; the feast fuses representation, exchange, and communal participation.
The fourth day closes the cycle through washing and seclusion. Saida is ritually bathed at a stream, returned home, and remains apart for seven days before being fully healed. Reintegration is thus gradual, controlled, and bodily marked. The woman passes through the stage of public affliction into a managed return to ordinary life. Turner’s sequence is completed, but Sellers-Young’s contribution is to show how this completion depends on enacted form: processions, altar, sacrifice, costuming, trance, gestures of restoration, and food.
Her description of trance itself is notably concrete. As drumming and singing intensify, a woman dances either solo or in small groups “in character” until she may fall to her knees, convulse through isolations of torso and head, and collapse. An adept then undertakes a careful sequence: orienting her toward the shrine, straightening limbs and fingers, twisting and tilting the head, blowing into each ear, running hands up and down the spine, stabilizing shoulders and feet, then finally “throw[ing] her hands” at the shrine “as if she were throwing something away.” The fallen woman is then pulled upright and led away. Sellers-Young’s attention to this procedure matters because it reveals trance as both experience and choreography. The actions are therapeutic, but they are also highly patterned. Again, the paper’s argument returns: the zar’s efficacy lies not in belief alone but in the performative means by which shared symbols become bodily real.
The paper’s invocation of “Islamic aesthetic concepts” is perhaps the most historically dated and also one of the most intriguing elements in the argument. Sellers-Young proposes that the Yambio zar, though occurring in a mixed Muslim and non-Muslim environment and among largely Christian Azande participants, nonetheless displays formal qualities she associates with a broader Islamicate aesthetic. She identifies three: a serial structure of successive “threads,” each leading to a mini-climax or dafqah rather than to a single dominant climax; an abstract and non-narrative mode of presentation; and improvisation, since the dances are unrehearsed and depend on the specific transformation of the possessed woman. The value of this claim is not that it establishes doctrinal Islam as the ritual’s essence. Rather, it suggests that expressive forms can move across religious and ethnic boundaries as aesthetic logics, leaving traces in local practice. Even here, one sees Sellers-Young’s sensitivity to mediation: forms travel, settle, and alter; they are not confined to one stable cultural container.
At the same time, this part of the paper reveals a tension that would become increasingly important in her later work. The desire to locate broad formal continuities—here, an Islamic or Islamicate aesthetic—risks smoothing over the local specificity and mixed social life that the paper elsewhere captures so well. Yet the tension is productive. It shows Sellers-Young at an early stage grappling with a question that would recur across her writings on Japanese performance, belly dance, and intercultural pedagogy: how to acknowledge transregional aesthetic lineages without mistaking them for unbroken essence. In this sense, the paper is less a finished synthesis than an important experiment in thinking cultural form relationally.
The paper’s understanding of women’s solidarity is equally careful. Sellers-Young invokes Turner’s term communitas to name the bodily “feeling of ‘at oneness’” generated in shared ritual experience. But she does not indulge in a sentimental fantasy of female unity. Arab and Azande women arrive separately; their ordinary lives remain sharply divided by residence, wealth, ethnicity, and political history. The zar creates not a permanent collective identity but a temporary commonality founded on participation: singing together, witnessing trance, sharing food, moving within the same sacred frame. This temporary collectivity is all the more significant because it occurs where everyday social life offers few such opportunities. The rite thus becomes, in Sellers-Young’s early and lasting sense, a social technology for managing what cannot be straightforwardly resolved.
In her later career, Sellers-Young would broaden and complicate this insight in several directions: toward somatics and the performer’s self, toward the mediated and often ethically fraught movement of dance forms across borders, toward reflexive attention to the scholar’s own embodied position. None of those later elaborations is yet present in full. But “Theatrical Aspects of the Zar” already contains the core intellectual disposition from which they would emerge. Dance and ritual are treated as event-contexts rather than isolated movement texts. Technique and form are understood as socially patterned, not neutral. Performance is neither mere mirror nor mere escape; it is a structured redressive practice. Embodied participation can produce solidarity, but only temporarily and under specific social conditions. Most important, the paper insists that one cannot understand a ritual’s social work without understanding how it is staged.
Within the fields of dance and performance studies, the paper’s continuing value lies in this precise conjunction of ethnography and performance analysis. It does not simply borrow theatrical language to enliven anthropological description. It demonstrates that the categories of stage, audience, role, direction, and character can illuminate ritual only when they are held in tension with sacrifice, trance, healing, and sacred space. Conversely, it suggests that theatre itself may be rethought through rituals in which acting, possession, and communal efficacy are not cleanly separable. This was, and remains, an important corrective to disciplinary habits that either secularize performance too quickly or exoticize ritual by placing it outside aesthetic intelligence.
Within Sellers-Young’s own development, the paper stands as an early statement of a conviction that would become foundational: communities use embodied, rhythmic, symbolically dense actions to survive strain. The zar addresses infertility anxiety, marital precarity, ethnic separation, and female vulnerability not by solving them discursively, but by converting them into a communal event. Its “specified stage,” its “minimalist performance,” its serial threads, its alternation of concealment and revelation, trance and recovery, sacrifice and feast—these are not decorative additions to a healing rite. They are the means by which social life is reconfigured, if only for a time.
What the paper finally offers is a disciplined way of seeing. The woman who collapses in trance is neither merely ill nor merely acting. The women who gather are neither passive believers nor an audience in the modern theatrical sense. The healer is neither only priestess nor only director. The event is neither solely sacred cure nor proto-drama. By refusing these simplifying oppositions, Sellers-Young makes the zar legible as a form of embodied intelligence. It is a cultural practice that knows something about social fracture, female anxiety, and communal repair—and knows it not abstractly, but through drums, steps, blood, veils, costumes, and the temporary, fragile solidarity of women moving together.
Reflect with VABS