Games with Sex and Death

In Graeber’s chapter Games with Sex and Death he discusses “human economies” or economies that are deal primarily in the “creation, destruction, and rearrangement of human beings” (Graeber, 130).  In these sorts of economies money, though given at times for a life, is known as an inadequate substitute for a human being.  When a life is taken, a life is owed and this can be collected in a variety of ways.   One example Graeber looks at in depth is that of the Lele, who deal in ‘blood debts’.  In this system they practice pawning, and seek to own as many pawns as possible so that if he (and it is only males who can own pawns) was to incur a blood debt he could pay it off with a pawn and not one of his own family members. Pawns, however, are distinct from slaves in that they still have a context in their community and masters often end up paying for some of their societal debts

I found these economies to be very interesting and the example of the Lele both in depth and intriguing.  I’m not sure I quite understand what the role of pawnship is and how many people actually own pawns and are not pawns themselves.  It seems like becoming a pawn or being born in to being a pawn is more common that having no obligations to anyone.  I also wonder if there is a way to buy oneself out completely?  Though Graeber answers some of this when he tells how young males are often okay with being pawns because it means their masters may pay their own blood-debts.  It seems like being a pawn is not a horrible thing, but it doesn’t sound great, so I guess I’m just confused as to what exactly a pawn does day-to-day? Also I wonder how this operates into their justice system—would they then be super connected if the punishment for murder was a pawning of a family member, and is that the only punishment?