Inalienable Possessionstests anthropology’s traditional assumptions about kinship, Annette B. Weiner . Afterword: The Challenge of Inalienable Possessions. : Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-While Giving ( ): Annette B. Weiner: Books. In Inalienable possessions, Annette Weiner () focuses on the paradox of ‘ keeping-while-giving’ rather than the ‘norm of reciprocity’ as the.
These inalienable possessions are a form of property that is inalienable, yet they can be exchanged. These possessions created in and authenticated by The Dreaming circulate from one person or group to another in a weiber way. Part of a series on. There, only chiefs were allowed to engage in Kula exchange.
She also describes practices of loaning inalienable possessions as a way of either “temporarily making kin of inslienable or garnering status. The Paradox of Keeping-While-Givingfocussing on a range of Oceanic societies from Polynesia to Papua New Guinea annethe testing existing theories of reciprocity and marriage exchange. Among the Kwakiutl a certain number of objects, although they appear at the potlatchcannot be disposed of.
Views Read Edit View history. The Kula trade was organized differently in the more hierarchical parts of the Trobriand islands. Only gifts that are “immoveable property” can become inalienable gifts.
The Forgotten Dimension Inalienable Possessions: Inalisnable 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.
According to Barbara Mills, “Inalienable possessions are objects made to be kept not exchangedhave symbolic and economic power that cannot be transferred, and are often used to authenticate the ritual authority of corporate groups”. Focusing on Oceania societies from Polynesia anette 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.
Kula exchange is the only way for an individual to achieve local prestige without local political action. About the Book Inalienable Possessions posessions anthropology’s traditional assumptions about kinship, economics, power, and gender in an exciting challenge to accepted theories inailenable reciprocity and marriage exchange. The Paradox of Keeping-While Giving. Uses editors parameter CS1 maint: Classical, Early, and Medieval Plays and Playwrights: The chiefs have saved their Kula valuables for external trade, and external traders seek to trade with them before they lose their valuables to internal claims.
Reciprocity, she says, is only the superficial aspect of exchange, which overlays much more politically powerful strategies of “keeping-while-giving. It is for this reason that women retain high prestige and authority despite the fame of male Kula exchange players. But this prestige is fleeting and does not transform into permanent differences in rank because women’s participation is minor and Kula shells lack cosmological anmette.
Reviews “Weiner provides not only a new perspective on social and natural reproduction weiiner also a framework through which to compare societies.
Inalienable possessions – Wikipedia
As a result, most seek to exchange their kula valuables with chiefs, who thus become the most successful players. Disciplines Anthropology Cultural Anthropology Asian. Goods can serve as systems of social communication according to Mary Douglasa prominent anthropologist.
University of California Pr Amazon. The paradox of keeping-while-giving is a concept certain to influence future developments in ethnography and the theoretical study of gender and exchange.
It is even incorrect to speak in these cases of transfer.
Other inalienable possessions, whether material objects, landed property, ancestral myths, or sacred knowledge, bestow social identity and rank as inaljenable. That ownership may be a bundle of rights inalienablee in common by groups of individuals or lineages.
As an ideologyThe Dreaming is immaterial but in another sense, The Dreaming flourishes because it consists of material and verbal possessions—myths, names, songs, ceremonies, and sacred objects inherited from one generation to the next. Social and cultural anthropology. The more prominent the woman, the more mana the object is thought to inherit.
Inalienable Possessions: The Forgotten Dimension
He states that these objects are “durable wealth [that] is collective property that is continually in circulation among persons who have temporary possession of it. Weiner shows that the focus on women as wives ignores the importance of women as sisters who are not “lost” as a result of becoming wives. An analogy in Western culture is sporting trophies, such as championship boxing belts owned by all the clubs comprising the association that controls the competition in which constituent club members compete, and which pass for agreed periods of time into the possession of particular champions, changing hands as new champions emerge.
Key theories Actor—network theory Alliance theory Cross-cultural studies Cultural materialism Culture theory Diffusionism Feminism Historical particularism Boasian anthropology Functionalism Interpretive Performance studies Political economy Practice theory Structuralism Post-structuralism Systems theory.
Australian inalienable possessions are given cosmological authentication through their religious beliefs in the Dreaming. However, insofar as these inalienable possessions lose their cosmological authentication, these social hierarchies lose intergenerational longevity.