I. The Limitations of Exchange Theory

A. Mauss too rule oriented
B. Mauss over-emphasizes gift-commodity distinction
C. Absence of women in Mauss, Malinowski, and Boas

1. Kula and potlatch seem entirely male
2. Cultural bias: economic activities seen as public, male

D. Annette Weiner: How does looking at women's economic activities lead us to reconceptualize the role of exchange and such institutions as the kula?

 

II. Banana leaf bundles in the Trobriand Islands

A. Bundles establish a woman as important, improve status of family
B. Banana leaf bundles = type of cloth, connected with gender and reproduction
C. Matriliny gives women a role in politics, titles, property includes banana trees
D. Competitive funeral distribution of bundles
E. Making bundles requires time, skill

1. Value of bundles reflects work involved
2. One funeral requires at least several thousand bundles, $400-500 value

F. Bundles go to mourners and anyone with a relationship to the deceased, e.g. kula partners
G. Distribution of bundles signifies importance of deceased
H. Women assert personal and matrilineal power through bundles
I. Women's bundles and men's yams

1. Men sell pigs, yams, and crafts so women can get bundles
2. Bundles as currency
3. Men give yams to matrilineal kin
4. Support for wives' bundles is way men repay wives' matrilineage for yams
5. Constant negotiation between men's yams and women's bundles

J. Malinowski described women's wealth briefly, saw it as unimportant compared to men's wealth

 

III. Banana Leaf Bundles and Kula

A. Malinowski: kula is constant circulation
B. Weiner: kitomu is key part of kula

1. Kitomu: valuable shells which don't circulate
2. Like bundles, kitomu can be used to buy things
3. Kitomu involves strategizing: hold on to it to maximize benefits when it eventually re-enters kula circulation, means to enhance individual fame and power
4. Balancing keeping kitomu with other financial obligations, such as to kin

 

IV. Keeping while Giving

A. Tension between kula as individual fame and women's wealth as matrilineal strength
B. Choices must be made: expand one's own network through kula, or support obligations to matriliny, ties of descent
C. Ebb and flow between power and resources of individual and group
D. Paradox of keeping while giving

1. Give enough in kula to be strong and famous
2. Hold back enough to have a really important kitomu to attract partners
3. Meet obligations to wife's kin outside of kula

 

V. Inalienable Possessions

A. Kula wealth and bundles must be distributed
B. Samoa: items which are too valuable, too important to be given

1. Fine mats: given at weddings, births, funerals, important political events
2. Mats require reciprocating with another mat of equal or greater value
3. Best mats become heirlooms
4. The best mats are returned as a reciprocal gift, they are inalienable

C. Inalienable possessions are sign of wealth and power, permanence, link to past
D. Trobriand skirts and bundles aren't inalienable

1. Represent durability of kinship, regeneration of matriliny
2. Cloth decays and tears, represents fragility of wealth, status
3. Life's fortunes wax and wane, but lineage persists

 

VI. Reciprocity and Power

A. More to kula than trade in armshells and necklaces, men's shells and women's bundles are connected
B. Different views of reciprocity

1. Mauss: equality, sharing, peace
2. Weiner: power and difference

a. Reciprocity is strategy to keep most valuable possessions, wealth, status
b. Temporary inalienability of kitomu gives you power
c. Give away fine mats, keep best for self and lineage
d. Reciprocity is simply outer appearance of gift exchanges which are fundamentally about difference, hierarchy

C. Weiner challenges gift/commodity distinction

1. Trobrianders have accumulation
2. "Primitive" societies focus on exchange value

D. Capacity to withhold goods from exchange is sign of political power
E. Women as political and economic actors

 

For more information, contact:  aleshkow@holycross.edu