Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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