Reciprocity and Exchange can be hard to establish and maintain if either party believes they are in control. Similarly, highly cooperative individuals may find it difficult understanding the importance of both concepts in social arrangements. Marcel Mauss’ The Gift uses the value of reciprocity and exchange as part of building unity and continuity for human social arrangements. The book’s analysis of archaic communities shows how objective exchange can help establish and maintain relationships between groups.
In archaic societies, Mauss establishes evidence that early communities existed around the obligation to give, receive, and reciprocate for social continuity. Exchange systems occurred between groups as opposed to individuals were an important part of the need to gain wealth and forge alliances. The Maori of Polynesia, for instance, believed in the power of gifts as vital in all societal elements such as politics, religion, law, and kinship (2002: 13-17).
Particularly, Mauss teaches the need for objectivity in establishing and building on reciprocity in social arrangements. Ideally, both parties have to acknowledge the importance of shared responsibility to establish societal unity and continuity. In any case, one party cannot take all the credit while the other offers all the credit. Thus, both instances exist in a society that shows emotional maturity in the presence of time and awareness. It would be rewarding learning that the art of giving and taking helps in the creation of healthy social arrangements.
For instance, Mauss conducted an ethnographic study on the Samoa (Polynesia). The studied group exhibited an elaborate behavior of exchange among chiefs following intermarriages. Mauss identified two elements revealed from this relationship, namely, honor and the analogy for a social contract (2002: 10-12). Such sacrifices enhance the establishment of a society that results in a healthy social arrangement through reciprocity and exchange.
Mauss also identifies reciprocity and exchange as important values in the continuity of healthy, committed and lasting social arrangements. This kind of interaction shows societies where groups are mature enough to engage in intergenerational and deep discussions along trend. They know how to define and control their extreme feeling, and in a way, keep the relationship on an upward growth path.
For instance, in Mauss’ Polynesian setting among the Maori, as outlined by Parry, exchange and reciprocity are part of societal valuables known as taonga. Parry describes the taonga as heirloom and treasure items that are unique to the group. These items pass through generations as gifts that can start, continue, or conclude a peace treaty. Notably, on the taonga, Parry notes that it can, “create a strong bond between people (1986: 464).” The special identification and description of gift-giving in such societies shows the essence that exists in collective societies to maintain unity and continuity in healthy social arrangements.
However, Mauss’ work has also been crucial in understanding reciprocity and exchange in the contemporary individualistic society. According to Parry (1986), one major challenge for real societies is that there are a lot of self-interested individuals, who show no interest in reciprocity. Parry asserts that individualism places a strong emphasis on individual rather that collective choice-making action. Such cases depict situations where people are more takers than givers (1986: 454). In highly capitalistic societies such as the West, such individuals form relationships only either under the societal obligation, or in instances that best serve their interests. As opposed to collectivism, they tend to avoid situations that compromise their ability to take advantage of their counterparts.
In conclusion, this discussion shows that the concepts exchange and reciprocity can both explain and develop social arrangements. Social arrangements best exist in environments that allow for free will reciprocity and exchange. Such societies require that each group articulates their feeling to the other party. However, social arrangements are difficult in current societies due to the existence of chronic imperfections. In such a case, groups do little to respect the other group’s belief in the arrangement. Those who successfully forge into social arrangements do so out of self-interest.
Bibliography
Mauss, M. 2002 [1950]. The Gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies (trans. W.D Halls), London, UK: Routledge Classics.
Parry, J. 1986. The Gift, the Indian Gift and the "Indian Gift". Man, 453-473.
