Power and "Rich Person"

Love and Hate

With the landscape prepared by the First Peoples, embedded with the "gifts" (mi'yep and suumesh  = "the bones") and with Animal and Plant Peoples, and we the Human Peoples, in our baaeechichiwaau, perpetuating the health of the "the family," of landscape for all Peoples, how we we understand and apply the mi'yep and suumesh  to relate to and help our fellow human kinsmen?     reflective write

The following materials are key presentation points developed by the instructor during class lectures. They are not a substitute for student participation in the class lectures, but a highlighting of the pertinent items considered.

Go to:

• Rich Person  and the Individual

• Kinship and Descent - the Family

• Marriage and Love

• Gender and the Status of Women

• Hatred and War

• Summary

Overall Theme:  Images       How do we define "a rich person?"   How do we define "family?"    Why do we "love," and "hate?"

The defining qualities are in part related to how we orient our social relationships.    In this section we will contrast the "collective" orientation of Indigenous peoples with the "individualistic" orientation of Euro-American peoples.    In addition, we will discuss how have people defined their "social experiences" and related to other human beings?   The focus of this discussion will revolve around different forms of social organizations, such as the "family" and "clan," and marriage systems.    Is a particular society characterized by an equalitarian or a hierarchical approach to political and economic power? 

Each orientation can have a marked effect on how community segments within a society gain access to decision making, privilege and status, and on the manner in which interpersonal relations are played out:

empathy and compassion  . . . .   or  . . . . . hatred, crime and intra-group prejudice, conflict and war.  

Reiterations and Foundations:

1. The foundational basics: we have males and females, as biological species, . . . . that can procreate and perpetuate the species.

2. But the ways in which the nature of relationships between and among males and females can be defined (with whom and how) can be quite variable, all culturally constructed.  

   Consider the example of the Arapesh (both male/female act maternally), Mundugumor (both male/female act aggressively), and Tchambuli (male as passive and female as aggressive) of Papua New Guinea, and how roles are culturally defined.

3. As with all the Indigenous ethnographic materials we have dealt with this semester, "male," "female," as well as "kinship," "marriage" and "social organization" are cultural constructions of reality.      Social roles are a construction by a community; nothing innate or biological determined.      They entail symbolic both "relationships" and "categories," vested with particular expectations, obligations and roles, all of which are cultural specific and relative to given societies.

Consider the example of "father."  A "father" entails expectations given its relationship with a "son" or "daughter," which are typically different from a "father's" relationship his sister's "son," for example.   

And further, the category "father" can potentially include a large host of individuals, as it does for the Hopi or Crow Indians, e.g., every male a generation above you, within your mother's clan - some 30 individuals

and it can even transcend gender to include females, as it does among the Nuer of East African and "female fathers."

4. The behavioral and social manifestations of such constructions are expressed in "corporate entities," such as -- "father," or such entities as --   "individual," "family," "clan," or "community."    The term, "corporate," refers a culturally defined entity that has specific functions and an existence regardless of the enrollment by actual people.  A entity or group can exist in name alone.   

   For the Hopi, the clan functions fully, even if there are few living members to fulfill all its functions and duties, as the corresponding clan in the underworld continues to perform all the ceremonies and clan duties.  

   Like wise, the power of the corporate entities can dissolve the living, as in the example of the Nuer "living dead"  (original use of term)

5. We thus find tremendous social organizational variation between and among cultures throughout the world today, and we must be cautious of assuming universal relationships and categories taken for granted. 

   • Take the examples of how we define such corporate entities: a "rich person" and "individual."

  

"Rich Person" and the "Individual"    reflective write 

Video: Weyewa Stone (21 min., notes on Weyewa Stone) and  Gabra Stranger (23 min., notes on Gabra Strange)

  

• In Euro-American society, a "rich person" is often defined in terms of "individualism" and acquiring "material possessions" -- the greater the individual autonomy and ownership of property the greater the mark of success.   With material wealth comes autonomy and independence from others, and thus individualism.  Thus the understanding, "a poor man shames himself."

• In Indigenous communities, a "rich person" is often defined in terms of social integration and ethic of sharing -- the greater number of linkages with others and the giving away of possessions to those others, the greater the mark of success -- kinship and family. 

  Consider the example of the Crow give-away, following the state basketball championship or after one's high school graduation (a network of exchanges in which gifts are given out rather then received upon achieving an accomplishment; a group rather than individual focus). 

  These cultural values are expressed among such peoples as the Weyewa and Gabra.  

  • Weyewa -- "There must be an exchange of favors, of knowledge, of labor. . . . I am in your debt, you are in my heart. I am in your heart, you are in my debt."  

  • Gabra -- "Most of all, camels are for giving." "If you are a selfish man, you will die alone under a tree." And thus the understanding, "a poor man shames us all."

"Individual"

• In American society, "individualism" (as a key corporate entity) is often essential to and expressed in terms of political freedom and rights, economic producers and consumers and material possessions, biomedical health and well-being, athletic winners and losers, spiritual redemption (saving of souls), philosophical free will, and the ethos of "rugged individualism" and "pulling yourself up by your boot straps."

• While certainly expressed in other societies and throughout European history, this "social construct" has assumed prominence in American society only within the last two centuries, first coined by Alex de Tocqueville in the 1830s.

• "Individualism" is thus not a universal social category,   nor is it even a primary corporate entity in Indeginous communities.

• Why has "individualism" assumed such importance in Euro-American culture?     reflective write

[Return to Top]

The Family

As a university researcher, what two disciplinary methodologies would you rely upon to study the nature of the family?   How would each be applied and what could each reveal? 

As in any family, the terms (nomenclature) we use to address and refer to each other (symbols like "father" and "mother") that have assigned meanings, roles and expectations for each member, and have associated rules of expected behavior guiding our interactions with each other, i.e., roles and responsibilities.  These structures of these terminologies also provide functional strategies and adaptations for the larger social, ecological and political organization of a society, facilitating a more or less effective society.  Two distinct types of family nomenclatures and strategies include "descent" and "affinal" family ties.  

Descent:  these kinship relations focus on "consanguineal" (blood) ties, e.g., mother to child.

• Kinship and many forms of "descent" are used by all human societies.     Imagine your own family and contrast it with those of the Schitsu'umsh and Apsáalooke.         Or re-structured, the examples we may consider are:

• Bilateral kinship is a system of family structure in which the relatives on the mother's side and father's side are equally important for emotional ties or for transfer of property or wealth - expressed in kinship terminology that is "bifurcate collateral".    It is a family arrangement where descent and inheritance are passed equally through both parents.    It allows individuals to rely on two sets of families dispersed over a wide area.

  • While the norm in Western societies, it is also traditionally found among groups in West Africa, India, Australia, Melanesia and Polynesia, and in the Plateau, such as the   Coeur d'Alene/Schitsu'umsh bilateral system.

• Unilineal kinship.  Nearly two-thirds of all human societies are organized around unilineal (matrilineal or patrilineal) descent principles.  Individuals are related to each other based upon blood ties or "consanguinity," e.g., a child and its mother.  Descent structures form corporate groups, e.g., "clans" and "lineages," which transcend and have existence beyond the individuals composing them.   Membership is necessarily involuntary, i.e., by birth and blood.   

  • A patrilineal systems defines membership along the father's descent line, i.e., male and female offspring of each proceeding generation of fathers (you belong to your father's clan).

    • Virolocal residence, the wife moves into her husband's parent's household, is typically associated with patrilineal societies. 

  • A matrilineal system defines membership along the mother's descent line, i.e., male and female offspring of each proceeding generation of mothers (you belong to your mother's clan),  such as the  Crow/Apsáalooke  matrilineal system   

    • Uxorilocal residence, the husband moves in with his wife's parent's household, is often associated with matrilineal societies.

    • The matrilineal system  is based upon  "cross-generation equivalencies"  as well as "classificatory" and "bifurcate merging"  kinship term principles

      e.g., kinship terms such as Mo and Si are called by the same term, or Fa and FaBr are called by the same term.    With this inclusive kinship terminology, all the matrilineal kinship categories designate a vast assemblage of individuals of potentially differing generational orientation,

      • i.e., a "brother" can refer to someone of one's own generation, as well as someone of one's father's and grandfather's generation, and someone of one's son's and grandson's generation -

        • so simply put,    all male members of one's mother's clan.

    • In turn, the least enduring, social significant and cooperative relationship in a matrilineal system is that found between husbands and wives.

    • Most importantly, a breakup of the marriage bond does not translate and result in a breakup of the family. The critical social, economic and nurturing roles continual to be fulfilled by matrilineal kinsmen, i.e, mother's brothers and other in-marrying husbands within the lineage-based household.

  •  A given patrilineal or matrilineal "household" (actually comprising multiply adjoining residential structures) can thus include several extended families, e.g., the wives and offspring of brothers, as well as the wife and offspring of the father of those brothers and all the relations of the brothers of one's father.  

    • Such a kinship group is typically called a "lineage."

  • The "clan"  (as an other corporate entity) is made up of several matrilineal or patrilineal related extended families or lineages, has numerous functions.

    • They can include: common name and identity, exogamous marriage rules, common religious obligations, property ownership, mutual economic and political support, education, government, and protection from a rival or aggressor, among others.

    • In short, the clan and its designated kinship roles address and attempt to provide for all the critical functions necessary for a healthy human life.

    • While a matrilineal system may seem overly-complicated, for instance, it can provide all the security and comforts of any other form of kinship system.

• Unilineal Descent systems are thus highly successful, clearly defining one's place in the social world and integrating individuals into a vast network of mutually supportive ties.     

  • They address problems associated with the need to provide strong  internal organization within groups by clearly demarcating succession of members from generation to generation (who belongs and doesn't belong to your group) -- "replacement" -- and delegation of authority and rights (who makes the decisions and who are granted privileges, and who are not) -- "delegation of authority."

    

  • The Matrilineal Challenge is characterized with women as "trustees" of property and men with divided residences and loyalties.

    For the men, as "husbands" in the household of his wife (Uxorilocal), the challenge is to keep  the social, religious and political ties secured with one's mother's clan, as the ultimate source for one's own identity and status is dependent upon it, - - look to one's mother's clans

    • This challenge is intensified in  matrilineal systems, as they are characterized by strong mutually, cooperative relationships including siblings  (both brother-brother and sister-sister, and less so with brother-sister),  mother-daughter, and, most importantly,  mother's brother-sister's children dyads. i.e., the challenge given  the power of the matrilineally defined clans

    yet at the same time  husbands must provide for economic and emotional support for one's wife's household, including their children, who belong to their wife's clan and not their own, yet they deeply love

    • resulting in an extended and bifurcated focus  on one's own biological children and on one's own clan members

    • and the unique to matrilineal system is how a son relates to his "mother-in-law" relations, i.e., avoidance, even to reference to words of name

    • As part of the Crow matrilineal  system, a particularly important and exemplary relationship is the  father-child dyad, expressed in the biilápxe relationship .  

      • This "strong" and "unique" dyad characterizes their mutual exchange and reciprocity of goods and services.

    [Return to Top]

Marriage:  these kinship relations create and are based on "affinal" (marriage) ties, e.g., husband and wife    (as opposed to "consanguineal" blood ties) relations    

video:  Wodaabe Love (17 min., notes on Wodaabe Love)

Example among the Apsáalooke and Schitsu'umsh:   there is no marriage is allowed between any known relative.  Marriage could be arranged by the parents or the couple may simply elope.

Marriage validated through exchange of goods in a "wedding trade" between the two families.

Typically practiced virolocal residence, though could easily move into bride's family.  

Marriages tended to be monogamous, though polygynous marriages were accepted.  First marriages were often unstable, with few people married only once in a lifetime. 

Divorce was easy, as thus was re-marriage. 

The instability of the marriage bond is not equated with instability within the family, but reflects its flexibility and adaptive qualities.  

• Marriage serves essential kinship and descent functions and is characterized by certain features.   In this sense, descent structures and marriage relations complement each other, functioning hand-in-hand, one providing for internal organization while the other seeks external order.   Marriage:

  •  Legitimizing of descent,  and the facilitating of the transfer of rights and responsibilities within groups, and among married partners and their offspring,

  • Establishing and solidifying external ties between groups -- integration among and between groups.  

  • Insures membership of clan groups through the procreation of new clan members    NOTE:  the importance of marriage as a means to legitimate procreation of family grows generally with the rise of  a focus on "individualism" and a nuclear family  as opposed to extended, descent-based structure.

  • Strict monogamy as the rule is the exception, with polygyny a permitted ideal in many societies   (one husband and multiple wives;  for example,  the Wodaabe of West Africa)

    • Polygyny may seem to offer the husband a sense of status and prestige, but it may not be all that it is cracked up to be for him (from the male perspective).   There can be issues of equitable treatment by the husband of all his wives and their children and even of his wives banding together against him for their mutual benefit.  

      • Consider the examples of the polygyny among the Gusii and Tallensi of Africa.

    • Polyandry  (one wife and multiple husbands; example of the Nyinba of Nepal)  rarely occurring,   though to be noted as one expression of human variation,  

       

  • Sexual relations (and thus procreation, may or may not be restricted to and synonymous with the marriage partnership,

  • Romantic love," as the motivation means to create the marriage bond,  is the exception rather than the rule in most Indigenous communities. 

  • Such  forms of " romantic love" are often considered a threat to the stability of the marriage institution, and societies have dealt with it in varying ways.  

    • Within many societies marriage does not even entail sexual relations at all, with procreation accomplished through "lovers" outside the marriage relation.

    • European and Euro-American communities have defined themselves, for the most part, as monogamous societies that have limited the only form of legitimate sexual relations to married partners.   While Roman Law permitted prostitution, concubinage, and sexual access to slaves, the Christianized European and Euro-American societies formally banned these practices with laws against adultery, fornication, and other relationships outside a monogamous, lifelong covenant.  Children born outside of the marriage partnership are considered "illegitimate," and without rights or inheritance.  

    • In contrast, consider the example of "ghost marriage" among the Nuer.  

  • Nevertheless, "romantic love" is certainly expressed in Indigenous communities, and a key dynamic to social relations

  [Return to Top]

  ---

   

  In reflection of the entire seminar, I would propose that "the Glue" that holds together the essential relationships between between human/spirit peoples (religious relations), human/animal/plant peoples (ecological relations), and between human peoples (kinship and social relations) =  Love.

  So just what is "love"?   reflective write         Theory of love as presented by the Irish poet, essayist, academic medievalist, Christian apologist, author of the The Chronicles of Narnia (humanities professor at Oxford and Cambridge, England):  C S Lewis

   

  Question, what is the flip side of corporate social responsibility - giving to charity, environmental stewardship and worker benifites?

  Question, what happens when "love" is no longer the glue that is holds relationships together?

   

[Return to Top]

---

return to 101 schedule