Marcel Mauss

Marcel Mauss (May 10, 1872- February 10, 1950) was a French sociologist best known for his role in elaborating on and securing the legacy of his uncle, Émile Durkheim and the Annee Sociologique. His most famous work is The Gift, on reciprocity and gift economies among "uncivilized peoples".

Critiques

Mauss' views on the nature of gift exchange have not been without their critics. Testart (1998) for example argues that there are "free" gifts, such as passers-by giving money to beggars in e.g. a large Western city. Donor and receiver do not know each other and are unlikely to ever meet again. In this context, the donation certainly creates no obligation on the side of the beggar to reciprocate; neither the donor nor the beggar have such an expectation. Moreover, the transaction does not establish a relationship between the two, much less a mutual interdependence . Testart also suggests that there are different kinds of obligations: a) feelings of obligation, e.g. created by having been invited for dinner and having a feeling that one should reciprocate; b) social obligations, meaning that the social context obliges one to reciprocate, and that a failure to do so would not only affect one's relationship with the giver but also affect one's reputation in general; and c) legal obligations, as established through a legal contract. Testard argues that only the latter can actually be enforced. He feels that Mauss overstated the magnitude of the obligation created by social pressures, particularly in his description of the potlatch amongst North American Indians.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Another example of a non-reciprocal "free" gift is provided by Laidlaw (2000). He describes the social context of Indian Jain renouncers, a group of itinerant celibate renouncers living an ascetic life of spiritual purification and salvation. The principle of non-violence influences the diet of Jain renouncers and compels them to avoid preparing food as this could potentially involve violence against microscopic organisms. Since Jain renouncers do not work, they rely on food donations from lay families within the Jain community. However, the former must not appear to be having any wants or desires, and only very hesitantly and apologetically receive the food prepared by the latter. Laidlaw describes how the renouncers produce litanies of refusal when receiving the food and never show thankfulness or appreciation for it. In order not to appear as beggars, they visit families at random, attempting not to create relationships with a family by returning there regularly. What is given is not considered a gift by either donors or receivers, and since appearing as having any wants would spoil the Jain renouncer's spiritual purity there absolutely must not be anything given in return. Consequently, what Jain renouncers receive is supposed to be a spontaneous free gift without any strings attached, and the elaborate culturally constructed process surrounding this procedure is meant to ensure that this is what happens.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In his argumentation, Laidlaw employs Derrida's four criteria for a "free gift":

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• There is no reciprocity
• The recipient must not recognise the gift as a gift or himself as the recipient of a gift
• The donor must not recognise the gift, either
• The thing itself cannot appear as a "gift"

Laidlaw argues that food donations received by Jain renouncers fulfil all four criteria. They are a non-reciprocated free gift, although they aren't a very altruistic one since such donations are the "paradigmatic religious good deed" (punya), and the local lay families are very eager to make them regularly.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Laidlaw's example poses a further challenge to Mauss' definition of the gift. The gift itself is alienated from the original owner in two ways: first, it is given without any expectation to receive it or an equivalent object in return; second, what is given is not of permanence. Cooking something for another person may or may not create obligations, but since the object given is necessarily consumed in the process it becomes questionable whether there remains an "indissoluble bond of a thing with its original owner" (Gregory, 1982:18). Similarly, money given to beggars in a context where giver and receiver are aliens (as in Testart's example) appears to be fully alienated from the former, particularly since money - in contrast to other objects - often (albeit not always) has no inherent personal qualities.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

"Free" gifts therefore challenge all three aspects of the Maussian notion of the gift: it can be questioned whether

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• there is an inalienable bond between giver and the object that is given
• the gift necessarily creates an obligation to reciprocate, or
• gift exchange forms a mutual interdependence between the parties involved.