"Inalienable Possessions" tests anthropology's traditional assumptions about kinship, economics, power, and gender in an exciting challenge to accepted theories of reciprocity and marriage exchange. Focusing on Oceania societies from Polynesia to Papua New Guinea and including Australian Aborigine groups, Annette Weiner investigates the category of possessions that must not be given or, if they are circulated, must return finally to the giver. Reciprocity, she says, is only the superficial aspect of exchange, which overlays much more politically powerful strategies of 'keeping-while-giving'. The idea of keeping-while-giving places women at the heart of the political process, however much that process may vary in different societies, for women possess a wealth of their own that gives them power. Power is intimately involved in cultural reproduction, and Weiner describes the location of power in each society, showing how the degree of control over the production and distribution of cloth wealth coincides with women's rank and the development of hierarchy in the community. Other inalienable possessions, whether material objects, landed property, ancestral myths, or sacred knowledge, bestow social identity and rank as well. Calling attention to their presence in Western history, Weiner points out that her formulations are not limited to Oceania. The paradox of keeping-while-giving is a concept certain to influence future developments in ethnography and the theoretical study of gender and exchange.
具体描述
读后感
评分
评分
评分
评分
用户评价
Exchange theory, what drives exchange is not the hau but the desire to keep inalienable objects. The keeping of “inalienable possession” “confirms difference rather than equivalence” and serves as “a possible future claim and potential source of power”(1992: 10).
评分Exchange theory, what drives exchange is not the hau but the desire to keep inalienable objects. The keeping of “inalienable possession” “confirms difference rather than equivalence” and serves as “a possible future claim and potential source of power”(1992: 10).
评分Exchange theory, what drives exchange is not the hau but the desire to keep inalienable objects. The keeping of “inalienable possession” “confirms difference rather than equivalence” and serves as “a possible future claim and potential source of power”(1992: 10).
评分Exchange theory, what drives exchange is not the hau but the desire to keep inalienable objects. The keeping of “inalienable possession” “confirms difference rather than equivalence” and serves as “a possible future claim and potential source of power”(1992: 10).
评分Exchange theory, what drives exchange is not the hau but the desire to keep inalienable objects. The keeping of “inalienable possession” “confirms difference rather than equivalence” and serves as “a possible future claim and potential source of power”(1992: 10).
相关图书
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有