Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

SAN1: gift giving - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Thus, clans and tribes exchange not only material goods, but also “acts of politeness” such as “banquets, rituals services” or even “women and children.”
  - - - that a chief who wants to affirm and maintain his superiority or to outshine a rival ought to give. A person who does not give things will display his weakness and inability to lead a group [Urapmin big men had a bit of this?].
      - , they have to give “not solely property and wealth [but also] movable and immovable goods, and things economically useful,” such as jewellery, food, blankets etc.
    - - since a person who refuses a gift shows that they are afraid to give back.
      - at a certain point, one is obligated to return a counter-gift, so if you refuse the original gift, you are admitting that you have been vanquished in advance.
      - is the reason why gift giving is always consented and accepted aloud in these archaic societies — even if it is clear that it seems more like a ‘poisoned’ gift.
    - - that the receiver must organise a potlatch — a gift-giving ceremony commonly practiced on the Northwest Coast of North America — to give back.
      - the potlatch is based on a generosity rivalry since the receiver becomes the donor and the donor becomes the receiver and so on.
      - the counter-gift comes with interest to show that one is always more generous than the original gift-giver. The gift-giving relation is then put to a stop when one party can no longer reciprocate.
      - differentiated reciprocity since the counter gift always happens sometime after the original gift — a point which will be discussed later on in relation to Bourdieu.
- - - - a gift that is given “is not inactive [even] when it has been abandoned by the giver, it still possesses something of him.” mauss
        
        Munn: it is believed in Maori law that everything contains a soul, including a gift and Mauss “to accept something from somebody is to accept some part of his spiritual essence, of his soul”
        
        This belief is also mentioned in Munn’s work when she underlined that “the canoe’s irreversible journey as an exchange valuable does not alienate it from its producers: all its conversions return to the owning clan.”
      - there is a sense of perpetuity in the canoe exchange process since she even went so far as to observe that “[even] some kitomu of canoes whose builders are dead, still return to the Gawan matrikin of these men, thus continuing the bond between the canoe and the matriline.
        
        Therefore, when a canoe is transformed from an “inanimate material” to “human animation,” holding ‘kula’ value through its prowboard adornment, there is a perpetual spatiotemporal property that is created to mediate exchanges.
      - Munn’s analysis on Gawan kula thus allows us to revert to Mauss’ conclusion on gift0giving being a total social fact and service.
    - - internal change entails an exchange conducted within a clan, such as when “a builder and his clan may decide to give the canoe to the builder’s wife, who in turn gives it to one of the men who has been making raw yam and taro gifts for her as part of her marriage payment.”
    - - Munn puts a lot of emphasis on different kinds of exchanges linked together in a network. Direction in terms of levels of value that people are trying to achieve and levels of social space that are the context of the value that is trying to be achieved.
      - Suggesting that the crux of all this (gifts make society/relations) is contrast between kinds of giving and moral understanding of the relations built in them. Grammar and resource through which we transition as a way of telling a story of how life works. Study different types of transactional relationships.
- - - - Regarding the former, it establishes a “relationship between the subjects,” while the latter “establishes a relationship between objects exchanged,” C. Gregory
        
        in industrial societies, a gift “bears the identity of the giver” whereas most possessions are simply “anonymous commodities.” Carrier
    - - there is a heavy emphasis on gift giving during holidays like Christmas or recurring events like birthdays among close family and friends — whereas commodities would have just been exchanged between strangers who will not develop any lasting social obligations.
    - - If we wanted to connect the dots about Carrier and Mauss is that the American gift isn’t Mauss’ gift (gone off in some weird direction) because of the market economy. has connectedness from Mauss but different in a way
    - - Knowing the person (inside joke) can turn a commodity into the perfect gift, somehow go through the pure person separated from utility and financial value.