Lecture 8

[Reading] → Yosuke Shimazono: Repaying and Cherishing the Gift of Life

>> Discusses kidney transplants between family members in the Philippines, focusing on the
concept of gift-giving and the relationships it creates.
1. Gift Exchange Theory:
a. The author uses Marcel Mauss's theory of gift exchange in "archaic" (old)
societies to analyze kidney donation.
b. In these societies, gifts create obligations to give, receive, and repay.
2. Kidney Donation in the Philippines:
a. Most kidney donors are living relatives, especially siblings.
b. Receiving a kidney is seen as receiving a "gift of life."
3. Recipient's Feelings:
a. Recipients feel a deep sense of gratitude and indebtedness.
b. They often struggle with guilt and the feeling that they can never fully repay the
gift.
4. Ways of Repaying:
a. Recipients try to repay through love, gratitude, caring for the donor's health, or
financial support.
b. Some believe that taking good care of the donated kidney is the best way to
repay.
5. Relationship with the Kidney:
a. Many recipients talk to and caress their transplanted kidney.
b. They see the kidney as a living part of their donor, creating a unique bond.
6. Cultural Context:
a. In Filipino culture, family gift-giving usually flows from older to younger or
wealthier to poorer relatives.
b. Kidney donation often reverses this flow, creating complex feelings and
obligations
7. Shimazono emphasis on gift principles:
a. The need to repay the gift (similar to Mauss's theory)
b. The importance of cherishing the gift rather than repaying it
→ Kidney transplantation in Filipino families involves complex gift relationships. With some of
Mauss’s theory of reciprocal obligations aligning, Shimazono focuses on cherishing the gift
(kidney) as a way of honouring the donor. Which helps some recipients avoid feeling trapped
in an endless cycle of reciprocal obligation.

→ This study examines kidney transplantation as a form of gift exchange within Filipino
families, emphasizing how cultural values shape ideas of reciprocity and obligation.
The Gift of Life
Kidney donation, especially among living relatives in the Philippines, carries deep emotional
 weight, creating a sense of "utang na loob" (inner debt) for recipients. While material
reciprocation like financial support is common, the emotional value of the gift often outweighs
such gestures.

Navigating Reciprocity
Recipients vary in how they manage feelings of debt; some offer tangible support, while
others feel burdened by the impossibility of full repayment. When donors are younger or less
affluent, traditional family roles can be disrupted, creating a desire to rebalance through
material means.

Beyond Material Repayment

An alternative view sees maintaining good health as the ultimate form of gratitude, where
recipients care for the transplanted kidney to honor the donor’s sacrifice, showing respect
beyond material repayment.

The “Spirit” of the Kidney

A belief exists that the donor’s intentions influence the transplant's success, similar to Mauss’s
idea of "hau." Willingly donated kidneys are thought to integrate better, highlighting the
importance of the donor's mindset.

→ Viewing kidney transplantation through the lens of gift exchange reveals the complex mix
of cultural values, emotional ties, and ideas of reciprocity in Filipino families. The emphasis on
cherishing the gift through self-care deepens our understanding of this unique form of
exchange.

Gift Giving
: Anthropologist agree that gift giving is culturally universal

Spontaneous or Rule-Governed?
→ Diversity on the surface but on the inside there is similar rules that we share to gift giving

● Reciprocity → the obligation to give a gift back once received

○ True universal: a gift given requires one return
● Social relations → it fosters relationships
○ We exchange gifts to build relationship and the rule of reciprocity hold social
relations - provides connection
○ gift not returned can violate this relation
● The value of a gift cannot be reduced to its monetary value/price
○ When someone focuses on the monetary value it can violate social relations
○ About the symbolic value to gifts that represent affection, gratitude, and shared
experiences that → reinforces relationships (social/cultural norms)
○ Commodities require effort to personalise
○ Gift cards:
■ Cultural Shifts: The growing acceptance of gift cards reflects changing
societal norms where convenience and practicality often take precedence.
→ evolving nature of relationships
Reciprocity

- Kinship relations, family relations

- Gift giving has played a large role in establishing societies
- Study of reciprocity allows anthropologist to examine the economy
Are we really never expecting anything in return?
→ there's always somehow in someway or form an expectation of reciprocity
● “Paying it forward”: you do it hoping that someone will do something nice for you

Generalised >> Giving without measuring the gift's exact value or expecting a specific
return.

Giving without an immediate expectation of return

- Where we dont keep tally of gift giving
An expectation of you will do your part in due time
→ only works in close knit and family relations

Balanced >> Direct exchange involves trading or giving something with the
expectation of receiving something of equal value in return within a set
timeframe.

Direct exchange
- “I give a gift and expect a gift back in similar monetary value”
- Happens with acquaintances

Negative >> An attempt to gain without giving in return; typically occurs in

impersonal settings among strangers, such as in gambling or market
transactions focused on personal profit.

→ “Taking advantage people”

Giving something small inorder to get something big back
- Scam
- Capitalist economy
- Giving low to except high

The Kula Ring

Malinowski and the Trobriand Islander
→ people spend a strange amount of time in building boats and sailing from one island to
another to exchange objects that at first glance seem worthless.
● Theres nothing else being exchange (food, money)
● Mainoswsku took a functionalist approach to argue that this was meant to build social
relations and hierarchy
● Men of high status - had specific trading partners: act of exchange would confirm the
social status of men
○ Possession of the object, only temporary hold - the bracelets would go in
circulation of the island (10 years to complete)
Lecture 9

[Reading] → Marcel Mauss (1-18) “The Gift”

1. “Total services” in primitive and archaic societies: complex system of exchange not just
material goods, but also rituals, marriages, and social status
2. The Potlatch: Mauss describes a specific form of exchange called "potlatch," practiced
by some Native American tribes. Potlatch involves lavish gift-giving, sometimes even
destruction of wealth, to demonstrate power and gain prestige

Chapter 1
Polynesian societies, particularly Samoa and Maori culture
Term: Oloa (masc) and Tonga (fem)
→ refers to different types of property and their roles in marriage and family life
❖ Tonga: Permanent paraphernalia or fixed property
ex) mats given at marriage, decorations, talismans
● Inherited by daughters of the marriage
● Brought into the new family by the wife
● Come with an obligation to return them (possibly to the wife's family)
● Considered "immovable" due to their cultural significance and destination
>> Tonga items linked to: Soil (land), clan, family, person

❖ Oloa: moveable good/objects

ex) tools, items belonging specifically to the husband
● More easily transferable or movable
● In modern times, may include items introduced by Western culture
>> Oloa items are less tied to cultural or familial significance

A translation by Turner:
● Oloa = foreign; Tonga = native
○ While this translation is noted as incorrect and insufficient, it highlights the
cultural distinction between these two types of property
→ the text refers to how the meaning of oloa has recently expanded to include items introduced
by Western culture ("Whites"), indicating how traditional concepts can evolve with cultural
contact.
→ These terms reflect a complex system of property ownership and transfer within the culture,
particularly in the context of marriage and family inheritance. The distinction between tonga and
oloa demonstrates how different types of property carry varying levels of cultural, familial, and
personal significance.

Concept of ‘tonga’ is significant across several Polynesian societies: Maori, Tahitian, Tongan,
Mangarevan (from the Gambier Islands)
1. Possessions: Everything that can be properly owned
2. Sources of Power and Influence: Items that confer social status, wealth, or authority
3. Exchangeable Goods: Objects that can be traded or used for compensation
 4. Specific Examples:
● Precious articles, Talismans, Emblems, Mats, Sacred idols, Traditions (in some
cases), Cults (religious or cultural practices), Magic rituals

“Property-as-Talisman” → general concept throughout the malaysian, polynesian world and the
pacific as a whole

Significance:
- Cultural Value: Tonga items are not just material possessions but carry deep cultural,
spiritual, and social significance.
- Power and Influence: Ownership or control of tonga items can confer status and
authority within the community.
- Economic Role: Despite their cultural significance, tonga items can be exchanged,
suggesting a complex system of value and trade.
- Spiritual Dimension: The inclusion of sacred items, rituals, and traditions suggests that
tonga encompasses both tangible and intangible aspects of cultural heritage.
- Regional Commonality: The widespread nature of this concept across the Pacific
suggests a shared cultural understanding of property and value among diverse island
societies.

Chapter 2
The spirit of the Gift - Concept of Hau
● Hau: the spiritual essence or power contained within a gift
○ gifts are believed to contain a spiritual essence (hau) that compels the recipient
to reciprocate. This creates a cycle of obligation and exchange
○ The hau is described as a spiritual force that wants to return to its original owner
or place of origin.
○ Keeping a gift or failing to reciprocate is seen as dangerous, potentially causing
harm or even death to the recipient.
→ a gift contains a part of the giver’s spiritual essence, accepting a gift makes you par of
someone else creating a spiritual bond
- This spiritual connection creates a strong obligation to reciprocate, as keeping the gift
(and thus, part of someone else's spirit) is seen as inappropriate and potentially harmful.
| “It would not be fair (tika) on my part to keep these taonga for myself, whether they were
desirable (rawe) or undesirable (kino). I must give them to you because they are a hau of the
taonga that you gave me. If I kept this other taonga for myself, serious harm might befall me,
even death.”

Tamati Ranaipiri's Explanation:

● Mauss quotes a Maori informant, Tamati Ranaipiri, who explains the hau using a
three-person gift exchange scenario:
a) Person A gives a gift to Person B
b) Person B later gives that gift (or something derived from it) to Person C
c) Person C then gives a gift back to Person B
 d) Person B must give this new gift to the original giver, Person A

Implications:
● Mauss uses this Maori concept to illustrate a broader principle he sees in many
societies: that gifts are never truly free or detached from the giver.
● This principle helps explain why gift-giving creates social bonds and obligations in many
cultures.
● The hau concept blends spiritual beliefs with legal and moral obligations, showing how
intertwined these aspects are in Maori society.

Chapter 3
Obligation to Receive:
● Mauss emphasises that in many societies, refusing to receive a gift is considered a
serious social offence.
○ Examples:
■ Polynesian clans must accept hospitality and gifts.
■ Dayaks of Borneo have a moral and legal system based on the duty to
partake in meals they've seen being prepared
Obligation to Give:
● Equally important as receiving, the obligation to give is crucial in maintaining social
bonds.
● Refusing to give can be seen as:
○ A declaration of war
○ A rejection of alliance and community
● In some cultures, potential recipients have a sort of "right" to expect gifts from certain
individuals
Exchange system of obligations creates a constant flow of Material goods, Spiritual essence,
Social status, Women and children, Labor and services between clans, ranks, genders, and
generations.
→ the obligatory of giving and receiving helps maintain social cohen and hierarchies
ex) Australian customs where son-in-laws owe hunting spoils to parents-in-law.
Samoan and Fijian customs giving special rights to nephews over uncles' possessions

>> Mauss notes that although these obligations seem forced and contradictory, they create a
balanced system of rights and duties in these societies → not just an economic transaction but
involve larger aspects to society.
lecture notes

Marcel Mauss and “the Gift” (1925)

● Writing after WW1 influenced his work questioning “What happened to our society, such
that war is possible?”
● “Armchair” study of a range of books and historical texts
→ Argued that bonds were first created through the exchange of gifts
→ Gift economies: Exchange of goods and services
→ gifts are given and repaid under obligation creating something like a contract
1. To give
2. To receive
3. To return

Why do we feel obligated to give a gift?

Maori concept of HOU
● A piece of your spirit remains with the object that’s given
○ Always wants to return to its original owner
>> The Maori concept of hau suggests that when a person gives a gift, they impart part of their
spirit into it. This makes the gift feel foreign to the recipient, creating an obligation to reciprocate.
Reciprocity is seen as essential for building and maintaining social bonds, fostering social
stability. However, commodification and self-interest can weaken the spirit of gift-giving and the
idea of hau.

Marketing in contemporary society → social coherence through reciprocity

Is a “free gift” impossible?

● Do we always expect something in return?
○ Paying it forward?
● Does anonymity allow for obligation-free gifts?
● How do we reciprocate if we do not know who to thank?
● What about “the gift of life”?

Organ donations as obligation-free gifts?

● Anonymity with Organ Donation
○ Anonymity can reduce the direct sense of obligation, as the recipient cannot
reciprocate to the donor personally.
○ Recipients may still feel a broader sense of responsibility to honor the gift, such
as by taking care of their health or advocating for organ donation.
● Donations Between Siblings
○ Often creates a complex dynamic of gratitude and obligation.
○ can lead to a sense of "never-ending reciprocity," where the recipient feels
indebted to the donor
○ Reciprocity may not always be tangible but can involve emotional support or
maintaining family bonds
● Taking Care of the Organ as Reciprocity
○ Caring for the transplanted organ is seen as a form of respect and gratitude
○ Reflects the idea that the recipient becomes a steward of the donor’s gift.
● The Concept of Hau
○ The hau implies that a part of the donor’s spirit or essence remains in the gift,
creating an ongoing connection.
○ Even without direct repayment, there is an obligation to honor this bond.
○ This connection can lead to the formation of new relationships or deepens
existing ones, creating social bonds that feel unbreakable, like fictive kin.