Malinowski and Mauss: Debate over the Kula exchange Bronislaw Malinowski's groundbreaking work,
Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922), posits the question, "why would men risk life and limb to travel across huge expanses of dangerous ocean to give away what appear to be worthless trinkets?" Carefully traced the network of exchanges of bracelets and necklaces across the
Trobriand Islands, Malinowski established that they were part of a system of exchange, the
Kula ring. He stated that this exchange system was clearly linked to political authority. In the 1920s and later, Malinowski's research became the subject of debate with the French anthropologist,
Marcel Mauss, author of
The Gift (
Essai sur le don, 1925). Contrasting Mauss, Malinowski emphasised the exchange of goods between
individuals, and their non-altruistic motives for giving: they expected a return of equal or greater value. In other words,
reciprocity is an implicit part of gifting; no "free gift" is given without expectation of reciprocity. Mauss, however, posited that the gifts were not merely between individuals, but between representatives of larger collectivities. These gifts were, he argued, a "total prestation." They were not simple, alienable commodities to be bought and sold, but, like the
Crown jewels, embodied the reputation, history, and identity of a "corporate
kin group". Given the stakes, Mauss asked, "Why anyone would give them away?" His answer was an enigmatic concept,
hau, "the spirit of the gift." Largely, the confusion (and resulting debate) was due to a bad translation. Mauss appeared to be arguing that a return gift is given to keep the very relationship between givers alive; a failure to return a gift ends the relationship and the promise of any future gifts. Based on an improved translation,
Jonathan Parry has demonstrated that Mauss was arguing that the concept of a "pure gift" given altruistically only emerges in societies with a well-developed market ideology. Weiner contrasted "moveable goods," which can be exchanged, with "immoveable goods," which serve to draw the gifts back. In the context of the Trobriand study, male Kula gifts were moveable gifts compared to those of women's landed property. She argued that the specific goods given, such as
Crown Jewels, are so identified with particular groups that, even when given they are not truly alienated. Not all societies, however, have these kinds of goods, which depend upon the existence of particular kinds of kinship groups. French anthropologist
Maurice Godelier pushed the analysis further in
The Enigma of the Gift (1999).
Gifts and commodities The misunderstanding about what Mauss meant by "the spirit of the gift" led some anthropologists to contrast "gift economies" with "market economies," presenting them as polar opposites and implying that non-market exchange was always altruistic.
Marshall Sahlins, a well-known American cultural anthropologist, identified three main types of reciprocity in his book
Stone Age Economics (1972). Gift or
generalized reciprocity is the exchange of goods and services without keeping track of their exact value, but often with the expectation that their value will balance out over time.
Balanced or Symmetrical reciprocity occurs when someone gives to someone else, expecting a fair and tangible return - at a specified amount, time, and place. Market or
Negative reciprocity is the exchange of goods and services whereby each party intends to profit from the exchange, often at the expense of the other. Gift economies, or generalized reciprocity, occur within closely knit kin groups, and the more distant the exchange partner, the more imbalanced or negative the exchange becomes. This opposition was classically expressed by
Chris Gregory in his book "Gifts and Commodities" (1982). Gregory argued that Commodity exchange is an exchange of
alienable objects between people who are in a state of reciprocal
independence that establishes a
quantitative relationship between the
objects exchanged… Gift exchange is an exchange of
inalienable objects between people who are in a state of reciprocal
dependence that establishes a
qualitative relationship between the
transactors" (emphasis added.) Other anthropologists, however, refused to see these different "
exchange spheres" as polar opposites.
Marilyn Strathern, writing on a similar area in Papua New Guinea, dismissed the utility of the opposition in
The Gender of the Gift (1988).
Spheres of exchange The relationship of new market exchange systems to indigenous non-market exchange remained a perplexing question for anthropologists.
Paul Bohannan (see below, under substantivism) argued that the Tiv of Nigeria had three spheres of exchange, and that only certain kinds of goods could be exchanged in each sphere; each sphere had its own different form of money. Similarly,
Clifford Geertz's model of "dual economy" in Indonesia, and
James C. Scott's model of "moral economy" hypothesized different exchange spheres emerging in societies newly integrated into the market; both hypothesized a continuing culturally ordered "traditional" exchange sphere resistant to the market. Geertz used the sphere to explain peasant complacency in the face of exploitation, and Scott to explain peasant rebellion. This idea was taken up lastly by Jonathan Parry and
Maurice Bloch, who argued in
Money and the Morality of Exchange (1989) that the "transactional order" through which long-term social reproduction of the family takes place has to be preserved as separate from short-term market relations.
Charity: "the poison of the gift" ,
Sharon, Ontario circa 1860. In his classic summation of the gift exchange debate, Jonathan Parry highlighted that ideologies of the "pure gift" (as opposed to total prestations) "is most likely to arise in highly differentiated societies with an advanced division of labour and a significant commercial sector." Schrauwers illustrated the same points in two different areas in the context of the "transition to capitalism debate" (see
Political Economy). He documented the transformations among the
To Pamona of
Central Sulawesi,
Indonesia, as they were incorporated in global market networks over the twentieth century. As their everyday production and consumption activities were increasingly commodified, they developed an oppositional gift (
posintuwu) exchange system that funded social reproductive activities, thereby preserving larger kin, political and religious groups. This "pure gift" exchange network emerged from an earlier system of "total prestations." wedding. Similarly, in analyzing the same "transition to capitalist debate" in early 19th century North America, Schrauwers documented how new, oppositional "
moral economies" grew in parallel with the emergence of the market economy. As the market became increasingly institutionalized, so too did early
utopian socialist experiments such as the
Children of Peace, in
Sharon, Ontario, Canada. They built an ornate temple dedicated to sacralizing the giving of charity; this was eventually institutionalized as a mutual credit organization, land sharing, and co-operative marketing. In both cases, Schrauwers emphasizes that these alternate exchange spheres are tightly integrated and mutualistic with markets as commodities move in and out of each circuit. Parry had also underscored, using the example of charitable giving of alms in India (
Dāna), that the "pure gift" of alms given with no expectation of return could be "poisonous." That is, the gift of alms embodying the sins of the giver, when given to ritually pure priests, saddled these priests with impurities that they could not cleanse themselves of. "Pure gifts" given without a return, can place recipients in debt, and hence in dependent status: the poison of the gift. Although the Children of Peace tried to sacralize the pure giving of alms, they found charity created difficulties for recipients. It highlighted their near bankruptcy and hence opened them to lawsuits and indefinite imprisonment for debt. Rather than accept charity, the free gift, they opted for loans. This emphasis on things has led to new explorations in "consumption studies" (see below). == Cultural construction of economic systems: the substantivist approach ==