Density of Objects

Wiener's article highlights the political and social value of objects and how these objects can create hierarchy and meaning within a society. I think that this is an extremely interesting phenomena to consider especially with regard to social structure and inequality. In particular, it is interesting how disengagement of an object such as the kula shells from economic activity may be a sign that it is of great economic or cultural value.  Also by its disengagement its value may increase since it is then recognized as an important or powerful artifact and an object that the owner does not wish to part from. I enjoyed how the author compared and contrasted this type socioeconomic activity in various contexts, ranging from modern art collectors to mats of the Samoan islands.
Interestingly, money in our society exhibits a slightly similar function when an individual disengages it from economic activity. By saving money we can increase its value through interest or by repeatedly saving amounts of money over a period of time.  In may aspects this is completely different from Wiener's examples of material objects because banks use deposited money from investments where as material objects of value are only possessed/used by the owner. Additionally, money lacks the cultural density and individuality Wiener describes and the reasons for saving money are more economic than political/cultural. However, in both cases we see a an example of saved value and potential, increased, delayed returns - the owner saves an object or money with the hope or knowledge it will bring greater or extended utility in the future.