Download Stephen Gudeman. 2008. Economy`s tension

DAJ
DAJ 17(1) 2010: 135–138
Copyright © 2010 Daniel Sosna
Durham
Anthropology Journal
ISSN 1742-2930
BOOK REVIEW
Stephen Gudeman. 2008. Economy’s tension: The dialectics of market and
economy. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Reviewed by
Daniel Sosna, University of West Bohemia, Pilsen
[email protected]
http://www.dur.ac.uk/anthropology.journal/vol17/iss1/sosna.pdf
Stephen Gudeman builds his text around the central argument: ‘Economy is made up of a
contradiction’ (p. 4). This provocative proposition grows from the idea that the basic
human propensity to compete contrasts with mutuality growing from social relationships.
These two opposing realms provide a prism through which one can visualise economy. The
dialectical tension between mutuality and market creates an environment in which humans
manage resources and live their lives.
The initial discussions focus on reasoning and production of models in social sciences.
Following the anthropological tradition, rationality is understood in a broad sense. It
includes calculative reason situated in context. Such reason produces local economic
models that differ from the dominant derivational models based on law and certainty. The
call for contextualisation fits the general trend in the classic substantive branch of economic
anthropology. Gudeman, nonetheless, goes further to argue that local models are also not
ideal due to their incompleteness. An understanding of economy requires the construction
of both types of models.
135
Gudeman’s investigation of the first realm of economy – mutuality – requires him to
describe its foundation. Mutuality is not based solely on the management of material
resources. Materiality is rather embedded in the complex web of social relationships,
Daniel Sosna
DAJ 17(1) 2010
DAJ
DAJ 17(1) 2010: 135–138
Copyright © 2010 Daniel Sosna
Durham
Anthropology Journal
ISSN 1742-2930
meanings, and practices. Gudeman’s concept of base may include various components
such as a forest, water, knowledge, skills, and identity. It is ‘bas(e)-ic’ in a sense that it
provides community with materials that are shared and from which mutuality grows
irrespective of their nature. Therefore, established categories such as technology, the social
or mental are dissolved within a base. The point is that the foundation of mutuality may be
composed of diverse components in different parts of the world. Moreover, a base has the
potential to change over time as actors interact within communities.
Market trade contrasts with mutuality because of its emphasis on calculative reason and
competition. Trading disconnects persons from the relationships of mutuality and
emphasises calculative reason to reach the optimal results in exchange. Inspired by Marx’s
concept of fetishism and Lukács’ concept of reification, Gudeman puts into the centre of
his interest the fetishism of prices. It means that in market systems exchange rates
seemingly exist on their own. Prices become so ubiquitous and powerful that they
significantly affect persons who participate in market exchange. There is also an important
point about the nature of comparisons that use common measure in markets. Gudeman
argues that commensuration is not an a priori phenomenon but emerges during market
exchange because each act of exchange depends on many contextual factors. Therefore,
commensuration cannot be based on a priori preference scales and optimal choices. This
argument contrasts sharply with the arguments of neoclassical economy’s champions.
Mutuality and market are in dialectical relationship. In contrast to neoclassical and new
institutional economics, Gudeman demonstrates how closely mutuality and market are
intertwined. Ethnographic examples are used to illustrate that trust – a typical feature of
mutuality – plays its role in markets, and market trade may be practiced just to build trust
and create mutuality. Other interesting examples point at money given as gifts at Christmas
136
or money loaned interest-free to a friend. These instances show the tensions that may arise
between the expectations of mutuality and calculative reason, which is closely associated
with money. Discussion on fairtrade practices explores another sphere where elements of
mutuality join market exchange to generate an ambiguous hybrid full of internal tensions.
DAJ 17(1) 2010 Daniel Sosna
DAJ
DAJ 17(1) 2010: 135–138
Copyright © 2010 Daniel Sosna
Durham
Anthropology Journal
ISSN 1742-2930
The partnership and respect stand in contrast to the calculative reason of fair trade
companies and labelling organisations that need to generate profit because of market logic.
Gudeman builds a sophisticated world of analytical categories to describe tensions in
economy. The book tells an old story about the complexity of economy in the world of
humans that scholars such as Mauss, Polanyi, or Sahlins began. Economy’s tension,
however, takes various pieces of a puzzle and assembles them in a new and refreshing way
that stimulates further thinking. The investigation of dialectics between mutuality and
market, a relational view of fetishism, and a figurative approach to money – constructed
through analogy, metaphor, substitution, and calculation – represent a small handful of
many cases where the author demonstrates such innovative thinking.
The analysis of economy’s tension is also powerful because the author employs a multitude
of binary contrasts that guide the reader’s reasoning. Mutuality and market, conjoint and
disjoint, limited and unlimited, permanent and flowing, positive and negative, among
others, are categories used to organise the text. Regardless of the intensity and extent of
the post-ism critique of binarism, it remains an effective strategy for analysis when used
with the knowledge of traps that it may produce. For those who view anthropology as a
systematic production of knowledge, this book represents a worthy example of such a
quest. Economic anthropology is very diverse in terms of its theory and terminology.
Gudeman makes a sterling effort in organising diverse concepts and theories into a
coherent body of knowledge. In addition, the strength of the book lies in its elegant shifts
between the general and particular. Highly abstract thoughts are tied to particular
ethnographic examples that illustrate and explain the author’s argument. This is a most
successful strategy which helps the reader to understand thoughts which are far from trivial. 137
Daniel Sosna
DAJ 17(1) 2010
138