As an economics major, my studies have focused on economics in terms of what can be quantified. Much of the study of economics is in terms of some form of currency, some form of a numerical value, by which one good can be easily compared to another such good. Lewis Hyde's idea of a "gift economy" is less concerned with the idea of a certain object having a value, but the value in the case being derived from the giving of the object to another as a gift. The example of the Kwakiutl copper, in particular the giving of the copper named "Maxtsolem." The tribe who is given the copper first offers one thousand blankets in return, but eventually then bring out a total of 3,700 blankets. The tribe who receives the copper than adds an additional four hundred blankets. This particular exchange shows how a gift increases in value the more it is given. The object in question does not seem to be what has the value in this example. Rather, it is the act of giving the object that has value, and the value of this giving increases the more the same object is given as a gift.
This idea of a "gift economy" does not seem to fit in with anything I have learned in studying economics. Hyde's idea of art as a gift is also different from an economics view. In economics, there is a dollar value to everything. This is similar to the way that a commodity-centered economy works, as well. Gift economies are less focused on the objects, and deal more with what is done with those objects. The objects have no value on their own, unless given to another. Although the exchange itself does not require a return gift, the gift economy continues to function by the giving of another gift. In the Gaelic tale, the daughter who had given the gift of bread from her mother to the bird was given more than wage for the job of looking over the dead man. The additional gift of the cordial she had then used to revive her sisters, continuing to give of the gifts she received, and expanding the "circle of giving," as Hyde calls it.
The first chapter starts off with an example of a gift economy from Native Americans. The idea of expecting something of equivalent value in return for a gift was what allowed the gift economy to function for the Native Americans, but is a concept lost to those in a capitalist society, such as the U.S. Capitalism typically prompts people to think individualistically, looking at "what they can get out of" something. However, even in the U.S., when gifts are given, there is often something given in return, even if not in terms of another physical gift. When a parent gives a gift to their children, the children return signs of affection towards the parent. Very few instances of gift giving ever seem to expect nothing at all in return for them. When someone gives a gift to their significant other, they expect to receive that person's love and adoration in return.
In the preface to the book, Hyde refers to works of art as gifts. This idea puts such works in two economies, as Hyde says. The commodity economy puts a direct price on it, but in the gift economy, such a work only has value in the giving of the gift. The concept that such a work of art, although it can be consumed as a commodity, does not become exhausted of its gift but actually increases in its value as it continues to be given, is something that is a beautiful idea in my mind. Ideas like this concept of giving in a gift economy are very different from any idea I have experienced from economics. In economics, assumptions are made or certain cultural aspects of countries are overlooked in a way to allow for analysis of many very different countries to be treated as being mostly similar in empirical analysis. Since empirical analysis is only concerned with the numbers that can be quantified, it becomes very difficult to examine the effects of other factors, such as differences in government or culture, between various countries. A gift economy is not as concerned about such kinds of numerical values, however, since the objects that have the highest value only have that value when the object is given to another.
The idea of a gift's value being in the giving of the gift reminds me of something I had heard while I was in high school. Since it was a Catholic high school, I had taken courses in religion while I was there. During one of the masses that was held at the school (or maybe during a retreat, I don't actually remember exactly), I had heard the phrase "it is in giving that we receive." Examples of this can be found in the Bible, as well. Before the Last Supper, Jesus had washed the feet of his apostles. Even though the apostles looked to Jesus as their master and teacher, he acted as a servant would towards them. This gift was not without expectation of something in return, however. The apostles had already given up their old occupations and lives to follow Jesus, and after Jesus died, it was the apostles who then would lead the rest of the disciples. The leadership of the Catholic Church has continued in a similar fashion to the first apostles, in that they abandon their former lives and give of themselves to God, and in doing so make their entire lives gifts to God and to all those who believe in God. In a way, the Catholic Church and other religions serve as modern day examples of gift economies, in that what is done in the sake of religion is expected to be given back in the afterlife or in the next life.
No comments:
Post a Comment