Sunday, January 31, 2010
Gift Giving
While watch the video in the past few classes, I kept coming back to the question of what a gift is? It seems the idea of how a gift was represent in the film was not how I had always though of it. In my understanding if someone gives me something as a gift, I now own that thing which was given. However, the concept in the film seemed to be one of loaning, a kind of gift with strings attached. Is this really what a gift is? and if so do we ever own them? since they must be somehow repaid. It giving a gift to we somehow own the right to gain something from the transaction later on?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This was Malinowski's reaction to the gift patterns of the Trobriand Islanders -- the way gift-giving generated obligations of return offended his assumptions of what a 'pure' gift should be. Mauss replied that he was missing the point of gift-giving, even in European cultures. It is not just a loan or a quid pro quo (and the Trobrianders distinguish it rigorously from barter), but a robust expectation of a particular kind of reciprocity creates social connections, and expresses the fundamental values of a community. We will attempt to understand this in some detail as the course proceeds.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting that the other tribe seemed to be giving the gift back, with interest. In our society, giving a gift back is considered a great insult.
ReplyDeleteI suppose that in our society we either exchange gifts (say, at Christmas time) or multiple people give gifts to one person (on a birthday). If you are on gift-giving terms with someone, you will probably expect a gift from that person when your birthday rolls around. I know that the Trobrianders aren't returning the gift as an insult, but perhaps they are not that different from our society and they exchange gifts the way that we do on birthdays. The gift between the Trobrianders, however, is much more significant and necessary to their lives than gifts are in our society.
Yes, 'regifting' (as Seinfeld called it) is supposedly extremely tacky, as is returning a gift to the giver as though you did not appreciate it, but as you say exchange of gifts is not -- it's practically compulsory. Even a gift from an elder to a resourceless youth bears the expectation of a thank-you note (without which the gift ceremony is incomplete, and may well not recur). In fact, I'm not sure we can easily claim that gift-giving is less important to us than to the Trobrianders -- just less systematized.
ReplyDeleteWell, gifts between Trobrianders are practical. They receive pigs to eat and motorbikes and trucks to transport things. Yes, there were some impractical gifts (I don't believe the birds held any purpose other than decoration? ). Gift giving in our society is rarely practical...yes, most people try to give something the other person will actually use and appreciate, but it's rarely something essential to life like food. So I think in that sense, gift-giving is more important to the Trobrianders.
ReplyDeleteYou might be confusing the Papua New Guineans of the film with the Trobriand Islanders (whole other thing).
ReplyDeleteBut substantively, while it may be true that one can use some of the things given, it would be a big mistake to assume that their usefulness is the point of the gift -- or even that it has much of anything to do with it.
I think in terms of the "gift"-giving in the movie, the "gift" is different than what we in America or other countries might think of a gift. These "gifts" are not tokens of appreciation; they are ritualistic payments used to buy higher status in the tribal community. In Japan, for example, gift-giving is done to show appreciation for hospitality or service, and it isn't done to one-up whomever is recieving the gift.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to usefulness, tribal cultures such as the one in the video give useful gifts because they can't afford to squander resources on pointless trinkets. They live in tough conditions, and so must put survival first, even in the case of giving gifts. In modernized civilizations, such as our own, we don't necessarily need to give gifts that are vital to the survival of whomever is recieving the gift because chances are, they can get it themselves. We give stuff that could be practical, like tools or cooking utensils, but we also give stuff like video games for entertainment or jewelry (which has no use whatsoever, unless it's a watch) because people enjoy owning these kinds of things, and we show our appreciation for other people by giving them things they enjoy owning.
I think it's the importance of the act itself, rather than the importance of the item being gifted, that matters. With the islanders, the gifts given do factor in, but it's how big of a gift that really matters. Using Japanese gift-giving as an example again, it's not so much what is given, but that something is given just to show that there is an appreciation of someone else; gift-giving is a very important part of that society, even if the gifts given aren't vital to survival.
In our culture, we give gifts mostly as observances of traditions (holidays, birthdays) as well as for recognition of achievements (graduations, promotions) celebrations (weddings), or even just to repay a favor someone may have done. What we give in these cases is rarely more important than the thought behind it; that's what really counts, and what makes the gift have more meaning, in my opinion.
It may sound like a strange question but getting a gift somehow put you in debt, or make you indebted to the person that gave it to you?
ReplyDeleteJust like in the case of the film, it is true that in order the gift ceremony to be complete something must be done by the person that received the gift "Even a gift from an elder to a resourceless youth bears the expectation of a thank-you note (without which the gift ceremony is incomplete, and may well not recur)." (Silliman, earlier comment) So could it be the case that the gift only truly becomes our property when we mix our labor with it(writing the thank you note)?