"Even if the [dense] possession is not displayed by its owner, the fact of its presence confirms the establishment of hierarchical difference in social and political identities. Participants are as aware of what is not being exchanged, as much as they attend to what is being exchanged" (p395).Weiner then shows how the relationship between political status and material culture with regards to the kula shells -- which she calls "keeping-while-giving" corresponds with similar relationships in Western capitalist society, such as with art.
Moving this forward onto a broader view of Western economics, I wonder how that can inform the way we think about the wealthy 1%, banks, inheritance, and other related issues. Wealth is not only invested in the art that Weiner mentions but through other wealth-storage mechanisms like bank accounts. Money is removed from the economy through these actions, and as the wealth accumulates for the higher classes it becomes inaccessible for most participants in the economy. "Keeping-while-giving" in this context also encompasses inheritances. Might this be at least part of the origin of wealth gaps generally?
Weiner, Annette B. 1993. "Cultural Difference and the Density of Objects." American Ethnologist 21(1) 391-403.
I think these wealth gaps can be attributed to keeping-while-giving in more ways than one. Fascinating to consider saving as method of assisting in creating class divisions from more humble ideology in hard-work and independent expansion.
ReplyDelete