Culture in a Netbag: The Manufacture of a Subdiscipline in Anthropology Author(s): Marilyn Strathern Source: Man, New Series, Vol.

16, No. 4 (Dec., 1981), pp. 665-688 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2801494 . Accessed: 27/09/2011 14:54
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Man.

http://www.jstor.org

IN A NETBAG: CULTURE THE MANUFACTURE SUBDISCIPLINE IN ANTHROPOLOGY*

MARILYN STRATHERN

OF A

University Cambridge of

A creative roleis suggested Malinowski's'strawmen',and by analogyforthestrawmanof for male bias which informs much feminist-inspired anthropology. However, theiruniversalising seductivenessis taken to task. The idea thatparticular symbolicrepresentations speak to a universal womanness' is examined critically relationto two Melanesian societies. The in of metaphor 'manufacture' pointsto certain for implications therelationship between anthropology and itsobjectofstudy;italso underlines suggestion the that onlydoes womannessin these not two societieshave different but thereis difference in the techniques symboliccontent, also of symbolconstruction.

The Trobriand Islands have been named 'one of the most sacred places in anthropology'(Weiner 1976: xv). That over the last ten years at least six anthropologists have spenttimethere attests thedrawingpower of thatfirst to fieldwork whichestablished Trobriand Man as a paradigm. Malinowskiwas the authorof thisentity a double sense. It is largely in through eyesstillthatwe his know theseislands-Sahlins (I976: 76) reminds how he privately us recorded one Saturdayafternoon approachingthem by sea: 'I get ready; littlegray, pinkishhuts. Photos. Feelingsof ownership: is I who will describeor create It them' (Malinowski I967: I40). And fromhis understanding Trobriand of behaviourhe developedwhathas remained somewhere betweenan assumption and a hope in the mindsof manyfieldworkers since,that-however facileit sounds (cf. Young I979: I0)-out of particular cultures generalisations be can manufactured. It is customary giversofthisLecture touchon that for to paradigm; dwellon I a feature generally consideredsomething an embarrassment. intention of My howeveris lessto assessMalinowskithanto assessourselves.Forall oursenseof what we experienceas going forward modernity may, in an epistemological sense,muchmoreresembleMalinowski'sboat bobbingbetweentheislands,a continuousdialecticaltacking'betweenstandpoints othershave held, leftand retaken again. Tapper has statedthat'In thelasttenor twelveyears,developnientsin [both Marxist anthropology and] women's studieshave influenced to many anthropologists re-examinethe basic premises of the discipline . . .marking theend of a certain anthropological complacency'(I980: 7).2 Yet in spiteofthesuggestion established of left positions behind,some ofthecourses
* MalinowskiMemorialLectureforI980, givenat theLondon School ofEconomicson i i March. Man (N.S.) x6,665-88

666

MARILYN STRATHERN

interested the study of women follow in nowadays set by anthropologists ofMalinowski. closelythose

Straw men his irritated contemporaries has been a sourceof embarand What apparently He rassment sinceis themanner whichMalinowskicasthis generalisations. in was fond of a device-Fortes calls it a compulsionwhich warped his work (1957: 157); Kupercharacterisesas 'outrageously it irresponsible' (I973: 35) thus: bestdescribed
his and discoveries theform in of Malinowski'scompulsionto present theories his ethnographic was as tiresome hislisteners itis preposterous thereaders to as an assaulton theancien to of regime or weremoreimagined writing his books . . . whether notthebattles thanreal,hisethnographic AuntSallysand therustle strawmen (Young I 979: 6). of was vitiated theparadeof grotesque by

In Argonauts Economic Man; in Crime custom, Savage and the appearsPrimitive view is that stomach slavishto law, and so on.3The received we thesestrawmen as thepriceforMalinowski'sgenius.They drovehim 'to wrap up some of his in ideasand observations labouredparadoxesandprolixrepetition' mostoriginal was moreto thestrawman there (FortesI957: I57, myemphasis).Yet perhaps syndromethan the projectionsof an egoist. If we considerit seriouslyas a techniquewe mightlearn somethingabout the techniqueswhich, without we thinking, use ourselves.It is Malinowskiwe make intoa strawman ifwe simplyset him up as an example of assumptions belongingto an outgrown We cultural background.4 shouldask whatinstrumental purposewas servedby thosestrawmen. is The Strawmenare made oftwo ingredients. first prejudice: theyrepresent theyrepresent bias, fallacy,mistakenassumption.The second is uniformity: held opinion,thereceived idea. Not quitethesame,in stereotypes, universally In the strawman theseare bundledtogether. knockinghim over one knocks of overnotjust bias butbias in theform universal generalisation. in Malinowskiwas little interested cross-cultural observedthat Itis frequently Even as other becameavailableNadel observed that comparison.5 ethnographies in 'He never thoughtstrictly comparativeterms.His generalizations jump straightfrom the Trobriandersto Humanity, as undoubtedlyhe saw the as instructive Trobrianders a particularly speciesofHumanity'(I957: I90). For view. The the device of the strawman obviatedany need fora comparative a aboutthecharacterisstrawmanis already universal, bundleofgeneralisations tics (in this case) of PrimitiveMan (cf. FirthI957: 2I7-I8). In substituting Trobriand Man for Straw Man, real for fake, the domain to which these to refer-universaltruths-can be takenforgranted.The procedureis first generalisaidentify bias, whichis bias in themindsofthosemakingtheoriginal tions. If everyonebelieves, in the words of Frazer(I922: X), thatPrimitive actuatedby no othermotivethanthatof filthy Economic Man 'is apparently on along thelineof lucre,whichhe pursuesrelentlessly, Spencerian principles, thentheone well established instance whichshowsthiscreation leastresistance', he up forthe 'fanciful, dummycreature' is (Malinowski I922: 6o) does more

MARILYN STRATHERN

667

than show one case where a generalisation failsto apply. It blows away the was whole edificeupon which the generalisation built,and replacesit with a fresh conceptualisation thegeneral of nature theprimitive of (MalinowskiI922: 96). If Bias is thusa powerful ingredient. generalisations be shown to result can is from biasesofpreviousthinkers, the attention drawnaway from material the itself theattitudes thosepresenting Iffurther to of it. thosebiasescan be shown to be universally held then a comparableuniversalism attachesitselfto the substituting proposition.Some of theworkbeingdone todayundertherubric of 'women's studies' employs preciselythis technique. Indeed thereis an of he analogybetweentherelationship Malinowskito thediscipline saw himself and theself-conscious efforts women interested thestudyof of in as founding is The conceptofre-thinking one's premisses women to redefine anthropology. But to be aware of thecreativity6thenew premissupon which of exhilarating. of some of thenew anthropology women is based, is also to acknowledgethe of creativity thosestrawmenofMalinowski. to the in It has become fashionable rediscover factthatthe anthropologist will also present cultural values of his or presenting accountsof othercultures that her own. The contemporary projectis perceivedas an effort eliminate to is a of bias. I say rediscover advisedly.Ifthestrawmansyndrome in fact marker then the historyof our subjectin its various turnsand paradigmaticshifts, of coursesis punctuated thisformulation bias. Malinowski'sown conviction by in was thatsomewherelurking-theirauthorsfrequently unnamedor ancient his time,butsinister nonetheless-was a massofassumptions valueswhich and could no longer be taken as the foundationfor generalisations about the as of was tobe builtup inthefaceof condition mankind. Anthropology a science prejudice.In threespecific ways thenew anthropology women retakes of this as methodological premiss, utilising itsstrawmantheanthropologist suffering from male bias. First, all theperceptiveness for withwhichsufferers from thisbias areseento of it own culture, is sometimes claimedthat new approach the be products their is exemptfromrelativism. Huizer and Mannheim(I979) devote a sectionto 'viricentrism' 'androcentrism'). One contribution considersthe different (or accounts of AustralianAboriginallife coming fromthe hands of men and women anthropologists.'It is evident that the androcentrism the male of scholars resultsin a perspectivewhich blinds them to the actualrealities of are aboriginallife'; and women anthropologists able to bring'a double conin sciousnessto their research whichresults holistic, accurate, objective and studies' et (Rohrlich-Leavitt al. I979: I27, I28, my emphasis).At one stroketheold is dissolved as subjectto prejudice,and the new supplants as explanationfor it phenomenaexistingin the real world.7The purported independence this of is is reality significant Stuchlik (cf. I976: 3-9). The objectofstudy reconstituted bothas separate fromand onlyaccessibleto thenew approach.8 is The secondMalinowskiancharacteristictheuniversalising mode,one ofthe in strawman's tricks.Few fieldworkers factmake generalisations fromtheir studiesto thewhole of mankind. But ifin treating worksofother the particular as anthropologists biased one can show that theyall share similarvalues,

668

MARILYN STRATHERN

can certainly made about the universeof anthropologists be generalisations The new appraisalcastsout theold as a worldview-and manages themselves. conceivedview of thetotalworld. Hence to suggestthatin itsplace is a freshly the a universal, the claim may be made thatwe have been ignoring significant is from stanceof thenew the category 'woman'. Universalism thustransferred practitioners onto theirsubject of study. In spite of criticalevaluation (cf. Ardener I978), it is a I975a; Caplan and Bujra I978; StolerI977; Wallman groundssuch that are social categorywhose dimensions knowableon a priori of womankind. women exemplify attributes a universal studiesofparticular of itself a reversal thefirst. as manifests The third Malinowskiancharacteristic In That was the notion that social realityexists outside the investigator. anthropologicaldiscourse this can be renderednot just by a self-conscious to proximity it (Asad distancefromthe subjectof studybut a self-conscious is thepointofview' ofthosewho aresaidto constitute 1979). Reality seen 'from
it.

in there a is I979 andQuinnI977) that persistent premiss (documented Milton

It has alwaysbeena paradoxin Malinowski'sworkthat who saw so clearly he in (Leach of observer 'creating' Trobriand culture thesignificance theintelligent

of the prefigures claim thatthe new anthropology women is validatedby its on article 'Viricenthoughtful takingup women's pointsof view. Schrijvers's 'The sciences stillpenetrated valuesbased are trism anthropology' and by starts, of . on male superiority . . There are exceptionsof course:a handful ethnogis starting point'(I979: 97). Yet there a raphies withtheviews ofwomen as their he Malinowskineverpretended was a Trobriander-seeing crucialdifference. intoa general thingsfromtheTrobriandviewpointwould simplygive insight or conditionhe sharedwith them(common humanity) theysharedwithlike on others(primitive culture).Some women writers, the otherhand, suggest their insight. non-replicable gendergivesthema specific, et Rorhlich-Leavitt al. spell out what is meantby thedouble-consciousness research. women can bringto their

stress on alsohaveputsuch Malinowski I935: 317) should 1957: 134, andciting from Trobriand position the point view(I922: 25).9 Thissecond of seeing things

the of categories' preIn themaleethnographies theAustralian aborigines 'anthropologist's with as are the dominate; societies represented male-dominated, womenin a subordinate, in However. . . Phyllis status. Kaberry (I939) andJaneGoodale(I971) succeed degraded in with of native .. As women a society . the categories' those the combining 'anthropologist's of havethe that and that alsosexist, is sensitivity members subordinated Kaberry Goodale special time as those at same if are them, the develop to[wards] whocontrol groups must, they tosurvive, of a of that aware theeveryday oppression;quality thesuperordinate reality their they fully are lives world and and from actual lack.Thus,Kaberry Goodale ethnographies the develop groups the as viewofthe categories' (I979: I 19). study, wellas from 'anthropologist's people they

fromtheviewpointof thefemale people studiedis thusideologiSeeingthings in of withthecultural anthropologist her perceptions thefemale callycontinuous own society,and it is thisprivileged positionwhichallows value-commitment to inform'objectivity'(Omvedt I979: 375). Milton (I979: 47) points to the 'overwhelmingfemale bias' lying behind such judgements. Taking up a malebiasin ourunderstanding society, of much woman's pointofview replaces

MARILYN STRATHERN

669

as Malinowski put forwardthe Trobriand view as replacinguninformed Man. But if Malinowskialso saw himself the westernbias about Primitive as author thisview, some women'swritings of cultured givetheimpression in that theircase the continuities betweenauthorand subjectof studyare 'naturally' grounded.

Subcultures subdisciplines and There is of course no single 'anthropologyof women' in the sense of an agreed-upon body ofknowledgeor analytical approaches (see GlennonI979 on in typesof feminism general).I use the phraseto denotewhat has become a studies of women, that we take widely accepted basis for anthropological in seriouslywomen's participation social life. Quinn, reviewingthe current crescendoof books and articles women, notes 'the mushrooming on number of claimsto bias in theethnographic literature . . attributed thecombined . to of and distortions male-oriented ethnographers theirmale informants' (I977: I 83 overviewsof a body ofliterature in are defined suchterms givenin Rogers to the women are thebestqualified studywomen from woman's pointof view comprisesa kind of mentalethnicity (Shapiro I979: 269; Wallman I978: 37). in Milton (I979) has pointedto problems therelationship betweenthegender of theanthropologist thegender hisor herideas. Ultimately is thegender and of it of theideas whichis at theheartof bias-for women's experience western of et 'patriarchy'(Rorhlich-Leavitt al. 1979: 128) can give them not doubleconsciousness male blinkers. but Thus some femaleanthropologists said to are exhibitmale bias. Nevertheless, thereis a generalbeliefthatit is easier for women than for men to approach women's studieswith objectivity. These three suitable study;women anthropropositions- 'women' area category for pologistsobviatecustomary male bias in a self-conscious focuson women, and women anthropologists likelyto have a sensitive are intothecondition insight of women elsewhere-are tantamount themanufacture a subdiscipline. to of When 'women anthropologists focuson women's activities' (Leacock I979: I 35) a divisionis made bothin theobjectofstudy and in thediscipline forming itself carry sucha study.Takin,g a female to out up perspective simultaneously is woman's pointofview within anthropology forms orientation discrete a an as as subdiscipline. The endeavourmay be towardsa completereorientation the of whole discipline-and societies should'be seenas creations menandwomen' of explicitdialogue with a male point of view which necessarily recreates the conditions discourse a superordinate for at level.Methodologically result a the is 'subdiscipline' [my term],10 although to its practitioners may also be a it metonym an entire for reinvented anthropology. I have deliberately used the imageryof material culturein referring the to manufacture thissubdiscipline. of Thereis a necessary parallelbetweenconceptualisation whatis 'out there'forstudyand perceptions our craft. is after of of It
1978;

such approach, tenet Tiffany 1978; Shapiro with an 1979). Along that the

toperceivedomain toa subculture Shapiro a akin (cf. I979:

297),

andtoseethat a

(Schrijvers I979: I IO, original emphasis). discussion Yet frequently proceeds in

670

MARILYN STRATHERN

as subjectto itsown logic. A retreat styles knowledgeanthropology a culture of uneasewithan overallgloss;notonlydoes something to a subculture represents in dominatedor obscuredin the past seem real, we are able to divide further I In of terms fresh of categories. thesubdisciplinehavelabelledtheanthropology women, theprocessis givena double edge. Womenas thesubjectforstudyare not ordinary 'scientific' discourse in a symbolic but represented merely through in equationwhichringsmuchmoreofthescienceoftheconcrete, thegenderof themselves. anthropologists are Women's activities thus takenas a coherent for point of departure an of understanding 'humankind'(Reiter1975: I6; Slocum I975: 50). Such anarevealedin thecourseof studyplay a role in relation the to lyticalsubcultures emergent subdiscipline verysimilarto thatplayed by 'culture'in relationto as 'fromthepointof view of' x marksoff 'anthropology' such." To see things as of own. Hence claimsto 'see' are thenew practitioners possessing insight their in most strongly put on the groundsof some qualityinherent the observer. stressed Malinowskirepeatedly (Kuper I973: 40) thattheconnexionsbetween elucidation different dependedfortheir upon the aspectsof Trobriandculture in is special skill of the scientist himself.Where identification made on the quasi-ethnic groundsof common gender,thehomologyis setup: thewoman :: anthropologist:restof her culture/discipline women in the cultureunder If of Man was a paradigm for study:rest thatculture. forMalinowskiTrobriand 12 with. 'Perhapsthrough Primitive Man, he was also in a senseto be identified and foreign us, we shallhave to realising humannaturein a shapeverydistant shed some lighton our own' (I922: 25). In the writings a woman anthroof and value object is to understand pologist to whom I now turnthe ultimate in 'universalwomanness' (Weiner I976: 236), 'femineity' factin Ardener's I havesuggested of in that strawmen,thosecreatures bias,appearat moments when a self-conscious to the subject'sdevelopment attempt make a subdisciby plinestandforthewhole is accompanied theview thatpastworkpurporting has the to be about 'othercultures' in factreflected anthropologist's own. The of bias forthenew view itself are logicalconsequencesofthisdiscovery cultural in of blockedoff theexperience thenew orderofreality (subculture) necessarily and energising therebydiscovered. In this, straw men have a significant to It universalism is that function. is theirfurther tendency promotea misplaced a not entirely good thing.Two aspectsof thestrawman of male bias shouldat is The to leastbe scrutinised. first thatthemotivation see in previousworkssets which vitiatetheirfindings of values or assumptions can, when used insensifor analysis.The second lies in the tively,parade as a substitute comparative further claim sometimesmade that the way in which other culturesvalue in to women speaksmore truly whatis essential womannessthando our own Particular culturalformulations. studies can thus yield universalsabout the of condition womankindas such.
(I975b: 46) sense.

off other ingthem (Wagner I975; I978a; Asad I979), andin separating from

bothin representing other peoplesas possessall we who manufacture cultures,

MARILYN STRATHERN

67I

skirts netbags and Woman, Trobriand of froma female One of the most compellingreappraisals old ethnography Annette Weiner wentto itself. out has viewpoint been carried in theTrobriands full on herfirst to thesesacredislandsintending studystylesof wood carving; day she became involved in an elaborateceremonystagedby women which changed the whole course of her study. She looked in vain in Malinowski's the women's wealth she had seen disconcerning accounts for information of day played. 'From thatfirst I knew thatwomen were engagedin something had (1976: 8). thatapparently escapedMalinowski'sobservations' importance to was thusdiverted thearea of women's exchanges.These gave Her attention act: societies intotheway menin Western herinsights
throughobjects incapableof regeneration Does [Western]men's clutchingafterimmortality of In merely serveto devaluehumanbeingsand women's rolein theperpetuation life? thedrive fromwomen and separatethemselves fortheonly kindof power theycan get, men effectively womanness to preventing power contribute a myththatdeniesthefundamental ofwomen, thereby frombecoming publiclyvalued as being equal to or superiorto the power of men. Only by context withina sociocultural womanness thatmyth,by placingthevalueofuniversal unmasking of to will theimportance its attached theperpetuation within own right, as recognized powerful (I976: 236, myemphasis). humanlifehave a chanceto be restored

place upon women's controlover human From thevalue which Trobrianders of Weinerderivesher formulation this 'universalwomanness'. reproduction and the removedfrom islanders, geographically technologically 'The Trobriand of of mainstream thehistory humansocieties, the recognize valueofwomanness of and by extensionthe value of humanbeingsand thecontinuity life' (I976: Woman a our notionsof Humanity;and in Trobriand 236). Here are recharted model forWomankind. is indeedthere any such universal essencein The pointto pursueis whether womanness(cf. Ardener1978: 34-5; Winslow I980). From Weiner'saccount, are 'children see Trobriandislanders in women a symbolof social continuity: own dala[matrilineal group]andbytheir kin created nurtured their and father by dala and his dala', yet'only women recapitulate through time' (I976: I30, I23, original emphasis).13 What is importantto them about women is not-as of Weiner'sown castigation Western societytellsus-valued in thesame way everywhere.Yet it is to mistake symbol for index to imagine that what make out of women identifies something essential about womanTrobrianders kind. merely how it is thatcultures constitute themselves. We learn,surely, to Weiner's authority speak for Trobriandwomen lies partlyin the selfthis acknowledgementthat 'unlike the earlier Trobriand ethnographers, is opposes other ethnographer a woman' (1976: ii). Her accountspecifically approaches that follow a male-dominatedpath. Here are elementsof the subdisciplineI have been discussing. The notion that perspectivescan be in is changedand thatanalysisdoes nothave to be boundby prejudice validated thesupposition that new perspective the to bearsa closercorrespondence reality; if it describessomethingreal, it must be real itself.There is also the simulbut differently based validationthatlocates the abilityto taneouslypresented 'see in a special qualitypossessed by the beholder:readinessto take women

672

MARILYN STRATHERN

in concretised thestatement theauthor ofthesame that is seriously powerfully is sex. as In discarding chauvinistic the past Weineractuallyreproduces analytical of man. Of techniqueMalinowski's presentation his radicalview of primitive playsinherdefinition Trobriand of particular interest thepartwhich'culture' is Woman. The new approachis seen as corresponding a view Trobrianders to if havealready themselves explicit. theprocess, In objectified, notmadeverbally I myselfbecome one of Weiner's straw men, among those castigatedfor a studied (Hagen intheHighlandsofPapua propagating maleview ofthesociety male trap' of not takingwomen's New Guinea). I fall into the 'traditional was ofthecrucial rolewhich exchanges seriously 976: I 3). Her own discovery (I playin thedefinition dala of Trobriandwomen's bananaleafbundlesand skirts accordedto women through theseitems.Hagen identity, theprominence and in thatI have ceremonial exchangeis largely thehandsofmen;butshe suggests of overlookedthesignificance thenetbagsthatwomen give to one completely in on therefore, turning the to another variousoccasions.Thereis someinterest, topic of women's exchangesin the Highlands. I do not propose to compare but Hagen directlywith the Trobriands"4 to introduceanotherHighlands in of ideologyand divisionoflabour. The society,Wiru,similar terms descent questions about the constructionof comparison raises some interesting 'womanness' Bujra I978: I9) It also seemed that theremightbe some (cf. in rustling but,notpossibleforMalinowski's methodological profit notmerely strawmen,speakingformyself of BuiltintoMalinowski'stheory anthropological scienceis thebeliefthatit in its base. Given his belief thecreative role of theanthropolthrough material the through mechanism ogist('we reactand respondto thebehaviourofothers the a of our own introspection'), questionarises'of what it meansto identify fact'(I960: 7I). This meaningis to be soughtin thegeneraltheory of cultural and to phenomena yieldsa needs. At thesame time,attention material concrete of culture standardised or key to thenatureof institutions. Any trait material way of behaviourcan be placed withinorganisedsystemsof human activity is in or (I960: I60). In other words,culture manifested things actswhichlead the behindthem.It isa matter of to perceptive anthropologist seektheorganisation is becausetheir immediately apparent. perception, significance notnecessarily about her womanhood, Weinercontinues:'A critical Afterher statement is and my male predecessors thatI took seemingly betweenmyself difference as bundlesof banana leaves as seriously any kindof male wealth' insignificant key. In theTrobriands,she (I976: ii). Women's wealthbecomes the cultural represent intangible argues, wealth objects manipulated women tangibly by culturally womanly qualities.'The 'power' of women is thusan 'objectified', linkedto universal features thehuman of and women. It is a power, moreover, as our Western tradition having'effectively deniedboth condition;she regards thebiologicaland cultural powersofwomen' (I976: 23 5). Her stepstowardsthis and alienationof conclusion include a discussion of the depersonalisation 'things' and people in the West. It is not just thatTrobriandobjects carry

founded be must pragmatically (I960:

ioIiI).

Culture, is to be identified too,

constituted (cf.I976: fact

227;

also I978:

I77),

andis recognised bymen alike

MARILYN STRATHERN

673

fail different values,butthatWestern otbjects singularly to 'carry anysubjective and perpetuation' referent human life in termsof continuity to (I976: 235). of Thereis no vehiclefortherepresentation womanlyvalues,andwiththevalue of women in decline goes a declinein the value placed on lifeitself.By the meanthecapacity women to 'cultural powers' of women she musttherefore of say thingsabout theiressentialselves throughcertainmaterialsymbols. In deniesthevalue ofwomen, she also positsthat thatour own culture suggesting is a universalqualitywhich some cultures attestand others at issue properly and Those skirts bananaleafbundles,then,become theclue to a whole setof values bound up withwomanness.Weinerarguesnot only thatto understand must be paid to women's Trobriandnotionsabout women special attention is wealth,but thatwhatwomen exchangeeverywhere theculturally objectified key to theirpower. Introducing subject matterthroughsome item whose is is significance thenrevealedis a commonliterary ploy. Yet there a difference of a betweenusingsuch an itemto standfortheorientation thewhole analysis, all for kindof metaphor what has after been alreadyworkedout, and arguing The first of thatthe substanceof such clues is of intrinsic importance. chapter in Women between Strathern betweentheway (M. I972: I3) endswitha contrast burdened thenetbags their foreheads Hagen women arenormally by slungfrom whilea man's head is in whichtheycarry gardenproduceand youngchildren, This stylistic tactic leadsintoa description how a bride left free decoration. for of Here I appendthe brings netbagsto distribute among thegroom'swomenfolk. fateful remark,'Women's thingsare divided among women; men are not in interested thenetbags'(1972: I5). This is theobservation particularly Weiner takesup. Those netbagscouldhavebeenthecrucial clueto women'spower. We betweenHagen and theTrobriands are thusdeflected away froma comparison I as that tookHagen men'slackofinterest myown approachto to thesuggestion in devaluedthosecontexts whichwomen act out thenetbags,and accordingly central thesociocosmicdimension Melpa to their of 'powerwhichis structurally [Hagen] realities' (WeinerI976: I4). the We haveknownfora long timethat worldofgoods is culture; itwould yet in thatobjectsmeaningful one context will have identical be unwise to predict meanings in another-even when the objects are so generallydefinedas withunspecified manifestations of 'women s wealth' and are to be correlated 'women's power'. Weinerbypassesthe question,imputinga male bias into accounts which have not dwelt on such items. By introducinga double male bias on theone handand universal universalism-a prevalent womanness if that we looked perceptively on theother-she is able to implya third: enough we would findeternalfemalevalues, women's concernwith life,death and regeneration (I976: 236), made concretein resourceswhich women control (I976: 228-9). 'This discussion',she adds, 'is not merely polemicto bolsterthe feminist the fact the pointofview; itcomesfrom ethnographic that natural value in ofwomen is made culturally of socialand symbolic explicit a variety primary contexts'(I976: I7). The bananaleafskirts whichTrobriand women give away at mortuary ceremoniessymbolisethe power of being female,while the leaf 'As bundles are a symbol of milk and nurturance. bundlesare rewoven into
ignore.

674

MARILYN STRATHERN

women s wealthfurther comprisea 'cosmic statement regeneration pure of of dalasubstance'(I976: I 20). In Hagen, netbags certainly stand for womanness;it is what womanness

and ness": sexuality, reproduction, nurture' (I976:

skirts, skirt the itself be analyzedas an embodiment all thatis "womancan of

II9).

These itemsof

withsexuality, associations women s netbagscarry reproduction nurture, and the further questionremainsas to the overall relationship theseto Hagen of social representations.

we stands that shouldask (cf.ForgeI966: for

28;

Godelier 1976). Forwhile

Women's inexchange: part Hagenand Wiru Hagen netbagshave some value as objectsof exchangeamong women. They a of can be used as compensation payments; bridegivespresents themtohernew and affines; when shehas a babythesewomenin turn maygiveherold netbags so thatherown do not getsoiled. Netbagsdo not,however,have thestatusof wealth objects comparable to the valuables which are the focus of public exchange.Women manufacture onlyenoughfortheir personaluse. They are a as source of pride;but as symbolstheyrepresent much therestricted lives of and gardeningas they do women's roles in women spent in child-bearing The womannessthey one valuablesfrom setofkinto another. embody carrying and social regenesis:these themesare with clan continuity is not conflated set handled througha quite different of symbolicmechanisms(A. Strathern no than pointofview,Hagen womentakethem moreseriously 1979). Fromthis women produce Hagen men do. Netbags remainreceptacles-bothforthings 15 in have an interest some of and forporkand shellvaluables. Women certainly of the wealth items men exchange. Indeed a proper consideration Hagen women's roles in exchange would take us away from objects over which control domainsof maleactivity. to women have primary and theirsubdivisionsare the social unitsin whose Exogamous patriclans the are name Hagen prestations generally made, whether contextis a funeral, or ceremonialexchange (moka) as such. At public moka cult performance theirachievement amassingthepigs or in displays,the male donors celebrate laid out forall to see. Entranceto the ceremonial shellsor nowadays money and groundis staged,so theycome in as a body ofclansmen danceas a group.If timeto time.A short itis livepigsbeinggivenaway, women tendto themfrom line of donor's wives may also dance. There will be many ties of marriage betweenclanson thedonorand on therecipient side, and each wealthitemnot to destined a for onlycontributes thecorporate displaybutwill be individually are likely to be connected particularexchange partner.Exchange partners a or kin. Speeches, related through woman and thusto be affines matrileterally of made always by men, dwell on the implications the giftforlocal political of relations(A. Strathern 1975). The words pointto the creativity the transin Not mentioned thespeechesarethose actionsininfluencing groupalignment. and kinshipwhich also bind together numerousties of personal friendship sides. These ties, which depend upon individualson the donor and recipient

MARILYN STRATHERN

675

are from one clanintoanother, in thissensetakenforgranted women marrying (A. Strathern 1978: 87-8). bothfundamental marginal. and Women are 'in between'themale partners, in For all theirculturally acknowledgedimportance production-gardening, pig-raising-only a handful will have danced. For all theimportance givento the factthatclans who regularly make mokaare those with multipleties of intermarriage between them, these ties are not themselves the rubriciinder which giftsare given at clan level. For all thatwomen are involvedin men's and mayfeelpossessiveovertheitemstransacted, aretheformal men exchanges And forall thecarethatHagen women bestowupon the donorsand recipients. and of moka valuablescan feeding maintenance thepig herd,no morethanother 'women's wealth'.16 pigs be considered as Now if pigs are not countedspecifically 'women's wealth' theyare not be men s wealth' either. Shell valuables on the other hand may certainly is regarded 'men's wealth';there notthesameproductive as intothese,and input standforpuretransaction shelltransactions itselfFor itis above to some extent all theactivity whichis sexed. Thereis no simpleprogression from 'genider' the of the object to that of the activity-as in the Trobriandswhere womlen as wealthobjectsthemselves female.In Hagen it manipulate regarded primarily is theactsof 'production'and 'transaction' thatare givengender,such thatthe production wealthin theformofpigs is seenas dependent of upon women and and itspublicmanipulation displaytheprerogative men.This is significant of to of any estimationof what value is at stake in transactions this kind. It also indicatesthe absurdity looking forwomen transacting of with netbags.The thatpass betweenwomen carry same meaning similar the little gifts as gifts that who aremen.Hagen womendo notpublicly transact with pass betweenfriends netbags,becauseHagen women do notpublicly transact. kill thanhand themover The Wiruin the Southern Highlands"7 pigs rather alive. Ribcages,porklegs,alongwithshells, themainobjectsinvolvediln are the periodicpig kills'.These are stagedby villages,non-exogamouscongeriesof smallindependent In connected dispersed to agnatic lineagesseverally phratries. Hagen it is the donors who are most elaboratelydecorated;here it is the who enter a body and standin a row as individual as recipients, donorsfrom the hostvillagethrowdown legs of pork at their feet.In additionthevillageplaza will be dotted about with separategatherings; donors call out to personal acrossthesite-to receivethisribcageor partners-some seatednearby, others thatshell.At no pointaretheselatter gifts amassed;at no pointformal speeches one can countthevaluablesbeinggivenaWay,as made. During a Hagen moka one can countthelineofdonorsdancing to shoulder shoulder; a during Wirupig killitis impossibleto keeptrack thesimultaneous clamoroustransactions of and thatcrossone another LeRoy I979). (cf. Wiru recipients may arriveat a pig kill in a block; subsequenttransactions fragment theminto theparticular maternal and affinal of thedonors.Men kin are theprominent but transactors, it is women who give themtheir definitioti. Valuables may be givento women, withthestylised thatmarksthemas a cry Thus a woman sometimes 'forthechildren'. receives shellto pass on a payment to herbrother, a ribcagein return or destined herhusbandshe mayhand to for

676

MARILYN STRATHERN

him herself.And the rubric under which these giftsare given expressly by are the that betweenmalepartners mediated a woman. ties acknowledges fact centred the on on will be instalments variouslife-payments Many of the gifts factthatit is women who give birth.Maternalkin receiveshellsforthe 'skin' sister'schild,and as thechildgrowsup he or she takeson these (body) of their paymentsto the maternalrelatives.Thus a man can be makinggiftsto his or for brothers his own skin,and to hiswife'sparents brothers the for mother's develop into exchangesas the shellsare skin of his offspring. Skin payments part, but the rationale with ribcages. Men play the prominent reciprocated a conceptualisation bonds of substanceimplied in the fact of of remains which is being motherhood.Wiru quite clearlyplace a value on femaleness in transactions. Moreover,as actorsWiruwomen life-long ceremonialised these them. of have something a partin promoting by towardsherself a It is possiblefora woman to stimulate flowofpayments enteringinto exchanges with younger male relatives.She will give them for withshellvaluablesor money,as a skinpayment they reciprocate vegetables; passesthewealthon to her The woman sometimes themselves their or children. kin own matrilateral and thus'pays forherself'.Whena man givesto his wife's A can together. grandmother receive kinhe may give to herfather mother and pride,keep for children. Some women,withapparent payments herdaughter's valuablesgainedin thisway in their personalpossession;theyin any case may evenwhenthevaluablesgo to as of themselves 'recipients' skinpayments regard men. in husband'sbrothers, return Wiruwomen mayalso initiate foodgifts their to forwhich theyreceivesmall wealthitems.Hagen women would neverinsert in themselvesbetween brothers thisway. But thenit would be mistakento a valued this of interpret involvement Wiruwomen as reflectingmoreculturally Indeed, the very metaphorof being 'in between' is role of intermediary. What,then,is thevalue ofwomannessin Wiru? inappropriate. value put on womannessis notnecessarily An initial pointmustbe clarified: to be equated with value put on women. Althoughwe 'see' Wiru women to certain exchanges,and othersbeing givenin reference them,this initiating paid high regardby does not mean thatas personswomen are axiomatically Wiru men and women. We cannot read offfrom theirsubstantial part in for or a transactions notionofprestige respect all women. Indeedto some extent whichvaluestheir actualWiruwomen arerendered helplessby theverysystem womanness. Skin paymentsare obligatoryin thatpaymentmust always be of who therecipients such in made, yetnon-obligatory thatitis notpredictable wealth will be. One may choose to make skin paymentsto classificatory kin thanto morecloselyrelated maternal relatives livingin one's villagerather is that woman's motherhood every away. Itdoes notfollow,then, livingfurther are in celebrated the same way. Moreover thepayments seen to be verylittle It of upon thecircumstances thewoman herself. is worthexpanding contingent thispoint. Wiru bridewealthis relativelysmall, the expectationsof the bride's kin focusing on the possibilityof later payments'for the children'. Whereas in carriesan interest future bridewealth solicitedby Hagen affines exchange

MARILYN STRATHERN

677

is so transactions, thatfroma man's pointofview there a merging individual of alliance with group relationsand women become intermediaries between lack thispoliticaldimension.It is oflittle affinally linkedclans,Wirumarriages into which village a woman marries; significance indeed,of littlesignificance which man she marries.Futurepaymentswill restnot only on the kind of the to exchangepartnerships men will build but also on thewoman's capacity fromthisphysiological have children.Ideally,wealthwill flowautomatically do A fact.Thus skinpayments not dependupon a marriage enduring. husband to continues makethemto hiswife'speople evenifhiswifeleavesor dies,as his children will continuein turn.At thesame timetheydo not have to go to the kin immediatematernal of the child:in the case of remarriage payments may mother to theman's secondwife. or insteadbe made to thekinofa child'sfoster 'other' to whom the child must related: ratherthese be There is no definite about the child's skinthatany matrilaterally claspaymentsmake statements are 'thosewho sified'other'will symbolically satisfy. Recipients categorically a mothered you', butsociologically comprise variedsetofrelatives. Divorce is dramatically high. It is less thebreakup of a unionwhichworries thanthepossibility a woman havingno husband of and Wirufathers brothers children. One might have thought thattremendous forfuture emphasiswould but the be placed upon femalefertility, thisis not apparently case. Whatseems crucial is that a woman should be attachedto some man willing to make fathers notcountenance do their for payments herchildren; daughters returning home, and put great pressureon them to marryor remarry.For all that its womannessis valuedin Wiru,beinga woman brings own difficulties. More so than in Hagen wives are beaten up, and suicide or the threatof it is commonplaceamong girls.And forall thatpigs pass in their name, consumptionpatterns suchthat are receive-relativeto whatHagen women they actually consume-less porkto eat.

Womanness in contraststechnical manufactured: style in There are differences Hagen and Wiruwomen's rolesin exchange;womannessin thesetwo societies also constructed is alongrather different lines.Neither associatedwith womannessnor thetechnical the attributes processesof symbolisationarethesame. I takemycue from essayby Schwimmer an (I974) inwhich,during thecourse ofanalysing way in whichOrokaiva use coconut,arecaand taro,he refers the to metaphoric metonymic and These concepts now rather are gifts. worn,butitis in thespirit mypresentation to be afraid old fashioned of not of deviceson those groundsalone. The contrast arisesin Schwimmer'sdiscussionof a mythin which a man and a woman exchange various items. The objects of social exchangeare male and femalesexuality, and theobjectsof mediationcoconut and areca. At one pointtheintention to establish is symbiosis, and herethegift and the recipient identified. are Thus the femalegives coconut to the male, because coconutis male and appropriate him. In thisexchangecoconutis for for metaphor theman-and an interdependence established is betweenthesexes

678

MARILYN

STRATHERN

in so far theone dependson theother a gift is himself. another for as that At point manand woman transact witheachother separate in thestory as entities. Where the partners a social exchangeare of different in each uses his or her natures, objectof mediation gift theother.The femalewhose nature as to distinctive is is arecagivesarecato themale;hisnature coconut,whichhe givesto thefemale. are betweenpartners is Here relations conducted whose constitution established priorto the giftand is not changedby it. Each metonymically gives a partof a In himself herself, retains distinct or but identity. themetaphoric arecaand gift in betweenthepartners; themetonymic coconutsetup an interdependence gift theirdiscretenaturesare stressed.These proceduresare found side by side withinthe one Orokaiva myth.I liftthemout of contextand suggestthatin constructing womanness in relationto mannessWiru employ the logic of metaphor,Hageners the logic of metonymy.In other words, there is a in in fundamental contrast betweenthesetwo cultures theverymanner which out symbolsare generated ofgender. is The sociologyof thetwo situations relevant. Hagen clansmen combineto makejoint prestations otherclansundervariouspoliticalrubrics. to Marriages of follow the patterns politicalamity,and women are the 'roads' for men's to their own kin.Emotionally as committed they transactions, andfrom maybe controlover thefinaldisposalof to thesuccessof an exchange,theyhave little valuables and no part in speech making. Unlike Hagen men, women have divided loyaltiesand cannot expresspoliticalcommitment. Like Trobriand who are a sourceof exogenousnurture, men, rather, Hagen women represent outside origins.Thus womannessis definedas 'in between'. As a figurative 18 for construction, standing itself WagnerI 977; I 978b), maleness (cf. symbolises values associatedwith collectiveaction. In same-sexcontexts,malenessthus the common aims of prestige,and so on. In same-sex refersto solidarity, femalecontexts, however,muchlessis builton whatwomen havein common, and 'being sisters'by contrast with 'being brothers' of weak illocutionary is force.Whatwomen do have in commonis their in-between-ness. This characwith men. Values teristic,however, always puts them into a relationship associatedwithwomannessthustendto be brought intorelationship withthose associatedwithmaleness;in a cross-sex context Hagen genderconstructs point to difference. Women are differentiated one another thehusbandand brothers from to by whom theyhave first from loyalty,as muchas a man is differentiated his clan brothersthroughhis personal affinal-maternal network. With a cross-sex in discriminates. That is, ideasaboutthesexesareconstructed a referent, gender relational(conventional)mode, such that the subject of the symbol is the difference between them. Wheneverstatements made which call upon are in the is intention to pointto oppositionor gender a cross-sex context, symbolic antithesis. Thus constituted, contrast a betweenmale and femalemay stand,in the eyes of Hagen men and women alike, forcontrasts betweenprestige and betweengroup and individualorientation, so on. As actors, and rubbishness, women can replacemenon certain occasions,and mencan behavelikewomen. But when male and female valuesareat issue,thelogic ofthesymbolallows no substitution.

MARILYN STRATHERN

679

Each sex contriThis structure difference also thatof complementarity. of is Sexualityitself may thusbe used as a butesits own attribute an enterprise. to based co-operation.Neithermale symbolof mutuallyorientedbut distinctly to nor femaleloses any part of his or her identity the othersex, but each is a sexualidentity givenand contributes gender-specific portion.Physiological mediaterelations betweenmen (sets of absolute;and Hagen women socially When males exchangethings clansmen)whose natureis alreadyconstituted. of is Womengivewomen's things withfemales, nature thegift metonymic. the on and men give men's things.Productiveactivities the partof women assist as augmentthe basis for men's transactions, men throughthesetransactions for gift no production. The spheresremaindistinct, themetonymic establishes exchanges identity betweenthepartners, onlyequivalence.Thus in male-female as and donorand recipient sustained are neither loses itsgenderto theother, sex entities. innately differentiated I suggested that in Hagen pig exchanges it is the activity(transaction, production)and not the objects (pigs) which are, as it were, sexed. Shells, as to however,are regarded belongingespecially men,and netbagsto women. in withothermales,in the Men give away partsofthemselves shelltransactions same way as women give away netbags to persons like themselves,other but women. Such exchanges can indicate same-sex identification, are not in shellsand netbagsdo creative cross-sexcontexts.Unlike Trobriandskirts, cross-sex for identity. Netbags arereceptacles not have thepower to constitute and not constitutive malewealth;shellsaredifferentiated menas things of from usedin mediations but between 'on their men,andnotalso skin',19 areinvariably in betweenmen and women. It is pigs whichfigure transactions betweenthe sexes, and these are neutral,unsexed mediators.Pigs are neither'male' nor it of 'female';iftheystandforanything is forthatcomplementarity purposeand whichis one basisupon whichthesexesinfluence each other. joint production in in husband'saffairs general, and AlthoughHagen wives areinterested their in in pig transactions particular, muchmoreaboutwhatmen theydo notbother of do withshellsthanmenbotherabouttheir gifts bags. In cross-sex exchanges thus take one of two forms.Eitherwomen contribute women's things gifts and men men's thingsto each other'sendeavours;or else men and women are mediated by a giftsuch as pig not itselfgiven gender. However they are in turn structured othercontexts, symbolsthatbringthesexesintoconjunction and betweendifferences employthelogic of metonymy: on relations each sex in withpartofitself, witha nature constructed a priormanner not transacts and in itself to be reconstructed thetransaction Wiruis verydifferent. do of Marriagepatterns not followrelations political of alliance,and it is not possibleto visualisethemovement women as a symbol ofinter-village ties. Individualrelations betweenaffines remain disconlargely for nectedfrompolitics:thereis no grouprationale theskinpayments thatare thefocusof Wiruexchanges. These skin paymentsare made explicitly the one who 'bore the child'. to and thefactthatthemother Emphasisedhereis women's role in givingbirth, in makeschild'sbody ('skin'). It was notedthatwomen participate themaking of these payments.At pig kills a woman may hold the shells and give the

680

MARILYN STRATHERN

appropriatecries of presentation when handingover the item to a father or skin. Or she may visitthevillageof hernatalkin to brother her children's for obtainribcagesdue to herhusband.Thereis an equationbetweenthewoman as mother and thebody of thechildwhichtheseexchanges celebrate. is striking It thatwhile a man will continueto pay forhis own skin throughout life,a his woman generallyceases at the point at which she becomes a mother.Her interest becomes much more on seeing thather husbandmakes properpaymentsfortheir offspring. Payments own skinandpayments herchildren for for it thusmerge-it maybe ambiguouswhether is thewoman or herhusbandwho a donatesshellsto herkin. Sometimes woman talksaboutherself beingat the as centre an elaboratenetworkof exchanges:yetultimately thecentre her of at is bodilysubstance. In this sense Wiru women defineand constitute aspect of 'the person', an and whereHagen women areproducers carriers. Maternal in substance Hagen is to kin exogenous (of extra-clan origin)and small gifts maternal made at birth 'in recognise this.But ifHagen womenremain between',Wiruwomen areonly themselves (logically,theycannotbe objectsof mediation becausethere no are entitiesbetweenwhom theymightpass). Ties tracedthrough differentiated Wiruwomen arecreated an actofparenthood, alliance, not by whichmeansthat is themother as it were alreadyherown child.This is truewhether childis the maleor female.Males forever the acknowledge female element their in makeup; are absorbedin their own progeny. females forever Giventhat other figures may as for of be substituted the genetrix recipients thesepayments, notion of the is itself generalised. progeny as is Womannessin Wiruis thusself-signifying, a metaphor self-signifying (Wagner I978b: 76; pers. comm.). Womanness is valued as reproduction, manifested its own products.Aspectsof parenthood certainly in are differentimethisdifference annihilated, transformis a tiatedby gender;yet through ationnot conceivablein Hagen. in to kin Wiruskinpayments theformof shellsrender themother's whatis of theirs.The affiliation the childis not offset thesegifts-groups do not by definethemselvesthroughexchange,as Wagner (I967) suggestsforDaribi. Maternalkin are not layingclaims which have to be 'opposed' (A. Strathern from his maternal I97I). Indeed, far from the person being differentiated withthem:these are reaffirmed. he origins, or sheis identified origins constantly In one sense thegifts whatis alreadycreated.Yet in another recreate sensethe in the the childwhichreplaces woman is also morethan woman. This is a culture whichlineagetiesare composed through males,so thatthewoman's substance When the child gives back shells to its is reconstituted throughpaternity. in individuated its mother's kin,it gives back itself an altered manner, through the of paternalconnexions. Shells in thissense represent creativity the father also. In thecourseof Wirubridewealth transactions there an important is pointat for whichshellvaluablesareloaded intothegirl'snetbag herfather herto take by to to thegroom's kin. A man of statusis concerned fillhis daughter's netbags of well. The groom has alreadygivenhimpigs undertherubric payingforhis bride'sskin(A. Strathern ig80a: 62). Now up to thispointthewoman's father

MARILYN STRATHERN

68i

has been chiefly responsiblefor makingskin paymentson her behalfto her now on will assumethisrole. He will sendgifts maternal kin;herhusbandfrom kin; in additionhe will give to herown father, to thewoman's same maternal of partly anticipation thegirl'seventualstatusas a mother.These exchanges in in marka significant transformation socialrelations. This truismtakes on meaningif we considerexactlywhich relationsare only sometimeschangesvillage of residence.No changed. The bride herself and is greatstress put on herpassage fromone lineageto another, notuntilshe will she be an explicitvehiclefortheflowof wealthbetween has had children she Even heremotherhood something has always affines. simply acknowledges the containedwithinher-indeed one can interpret pigs paid by thegroom as the signifying factthatin a sense the woman is alreadywith child (her own whichis changed marriage thanthoseof .2O by substance) Itis lesswomen's status the men around her. Wiru marriageforeshadows parenthood.The groom's whichwill replacenothisown substance but a is paternity prefigured,paternity It aspectsof his individuality. is femaleswho are bodily replaced,and in the processmenare feminised. In skin shellsgo This is whathappensto thebride'sfather. ordinary payments of ribcages(pig). These gifts pork followand to thematernal kin,who return may be seen as part of the originaldevolutionof substance.At bridewealth, live pigs are givenforthebride'sskin,and the along withseveraltypesof gift, last so makesis ofshell.This I interpret thefather's as return father carefully the towardshis daughter. Thereafter will ceasegiving he shells act of individuation in respectof her and insteadbecome the recipient them. He will in turn of the slaughter verypigs thatwill provideribcages,symbolsof the daughter's menfigure therecipients as of to substance, sendback to herhusband.Although as skin payments,the parenthoodat issue is conceptualised female.Women mothers and mothers' and say mothers, mayexplicitly speak of givingto their of mother.In bridewealth thatwhen theygive to their theythink their parents, is paternity to be transactions are 'seeing' themomentat whichthefather's we swallowed up in a more generalisedand feminisedparenthood. Once his daughterhas borne children,he and his wifejointly receive paymentsas kin' to thechild.In so faras he acceptswealthforthe 'maternal undifferentiated of he withthedaughter's transmission (female)substance, becomes identified Certainly obliterate paternity. his mother and thushis own wife.Her children the momentseems to be of some psychological for and difficulty both father in 21 efforts getdaughters leave to to daughter. Fathers maybecome violent their home, while the daughter'scustomaryreluctancemay be in response to a set a at to conflicting ofmessagesfrom father thesame timereluctant lethergo. Gender symbols are in Hagen used in a cross-sexcontextto talk about in is for) (substitute the difference; Wiruthere a sensein whichone sex candefine constructs sexes in terms dialectic the of other.Hagen symbolisation and conWiru employ a selftrast,resolved throughoppositionor complementarity; mode in whichtheone can collapseor mergeintothe signifying, metaphorical other.The metaphoric in Schwimmer's an usage establishes identification gift and a dependencyon the source of thatgift.In between giftand recipient, skinpayments his daughter's for receivestwo children, Wirufather a receiving

682

MARILYN

STRATHERN

In things. so faras theshellsrepresent individuated paternity, is another it man's immediatepaternity thathas replacedhis own; in so faras theyrepresent the in substance whose name theyaregiven,itis a remoter, feminised parenthood, in to be converted back into more substance theformof theribcageshe must return.Wherethe giftis maternal substanceitself, and where womannessis thenthereis a sense in which theWiruwoman is a conflated with maternity, for metaphor thisaspectoftheperson.

as No such thing woman We can take an itemof material culture such as a netbagand see in it cultural meaning.We can even agree thatin both Hagen and Wiru thenetbagtellsus about womanness.But we are not dealingwithrefractions some of something attributes some cultures universal Womannesswhose essential value and others both to do not. Therearedifferences in thequalities attributed womanhoodand in out in themanner whichsymbolsaregenerated ofa male-female dichotomy. On thesegroundsTrobriandWoman cannotbe a paradigmforWoman. As value-for example,that soon as theconceptis givencultural essential womanness is concernedwith social regenesis-the proper focus for comparative becomesnotwomen butthevaluesso assigned.Thatin theTrobriands analysis overthegenesisofhumanlifeshouldnotbe confused women have control with our own biologism (women are nearerto nature;cf. MacCormack and M. intothetrapofimagining from norshouldwe fall that sucha set Strathern I980), of images we learn in the end more about women than we do about the Trobriands. of In some respects Wiruformulations womannessarecomparable thoseof to to the Trobriands.Motherhoodis highlyvalued; women contribute the subis in celebrated life-long stanceof persons,and thatcontribution perpetually Yet thereis a crucial contrast.If I understand the Trobriand transactions. what Trobriand situationaright,thereis a remarkable symbolicconsistency: the the of women do as individuals, eventsofchildbirth, dailyroutine carealso as and of becomewritlargeon thesocialscreen reproduction nurture and forthe to kin group. Trobrianderschoose to see in women's partialcontribution a human reproduction total phenomenonwhich embracesthe regenesisof Trobriandwomen reproduce society. clanship.Wiruwomannessis a substance in which shows itself the make-upof men as well as women, yetin the end but Wirulineagesare not matrilineally women reproduce nothing themselves. conceived. It is not in terms of group membershipthat women transmit cannotbecome a metaphor group contifor substance,and thistransmission to nuity.Womannessrefers an aspectof theWirupersonwhichfora woman is of and submergedwith theidentity her offspring, fora man with thatof his A male-female can contrast in certain be contexts used mother/wife/daughter. but of withdifferentiating celebrations womannessturn on not effect; thechief status. thisbuton itsconstitutive, metaphoric Hageners, however,use male and femaleas perpetualsymbolsof contrast witheach other.Furthermore, when theyare broughtinto conjunction since

MARILYN STRATHERN

683

group continuity conspicuously is associatedwith same-sexrelationships beas tween males, femaleness such is also individuating. Women's part in reproductionis acknowledged:but what does thisreproduction itselfsignify? On theone handHagen ideas aboutsexuality stress combining essentially the of on distinctmale and femalecontributions; the otherhand motherhoodis a narrowly based symbolofdomesticity nurture, and bothcomplementary and to in oppositionto malegroupinterests. this In latter sense,feminine reproduction the that transactions is but symbolises householdproduction underpins political not to be mergedwiththem.The dualismof male and female constructed in is such a way thattheone nevercollapsesintotheother.Sexuality, reproduction and nurture may be bound up withthevalue of Hagen women, but as purely female elements nota cultural to Hagen sociallife. are key and bundles,then,we cannotseek any Unlike Trobriandbanana leafskirts of immediatecontinuity meaningin the objects Highlandsmen and women manipulate. Those itemsofwomen's wealthwhichWeiner describes articles are their and manufacwomen wear,reflecting femine Trobriand sexuality fertility, In turedand exchangedin publicby them,symbolsof clanshipand matriliny. thiscontinuum meaning,fromthepersonalto thecosmic,each transformaof tionis informed thekeynotionof womanness.In Hagen we are facedwith by Womannessis thefoundation ofsociety not and cosmictimebut discontinuity. of particularexchange partnerships, indiexogenous connections,fertility viduallymanifested, productionat the householdlevel. When thisdomain is with politicallychargedalliances,internal broughtinto antithesis solidarity, clanperpetuity grouptransactions, and valuesthusassociated withmalesareset is againstfemaleones. Given thesesymbolicconstructs there no sensein which female couldhavemeaning Hagen; and no in publicly exclusively yet exchanges senseinwhichwomen'spartin reproduction couldstandforsocialreproduction in general. So it is not enoughto 'see' Hagen women carrying articles fromone man to anotherin theirladen netbagsor walk into a Wiruvillageand hear a woman recountthe exchangesbehindthe shell she is wearing.What it means to be a mustrestto some extent thecultural woman in thisor thatsituation on logic by which gender is constructed.Analysis of women's participation events in shouldbe informed concepts theperson,individuality, and so forth of by will to the be readfrom dataand notintothem.This shouldequallybe true concepts for ofwomannessas such. In challenging Malinowskinevertheless in theplace ofhisstraw prejudice put man another ratherungainly creature,Trobriand Man. Those who with see comparableinspiration male bias as shadowingthe assumptions much of run sometimes theriskofa similar pastanthropology in Malinowskiancreation their aboutwomannness.In thesameway as Malinowski'sdefinition postulates ofculture was a metaphor thediscipline anthropology, thoseconcerned for of so withrevolutionising subjectin termsof studiesfocusedupon women may the make out of women's activities of something a subculture out of their and own endeavourssomethingakin to the subdiscipline.Thus thereis the idea that women's social interests have to be shown in activities whichinvolvewomen alone, and thatsymbolsof womannessare to be foundin whatwomen do and

684

MARILYN STRATHERN

whatthey construct themselves forthemselves. and This maybe anilluminating strategy understanding for rhetorical references values in particular to social IndeedI haveused theterm contexts. 'creativity' acknowledging powerof in the thesamestrategy ourselves-notions suchas malebiasor thewoman's point for ofview can be tremendously productive, certainly and altertheway we 'see', as for Weinerhas done so effectively theTrobriands.Yet thesounds of our own industry shouldnot deafenus to thepointof forgetting others creative that are too. cannotreallyparadeas an innocent Anthropology childof culture.It is true thatthereseems no way to controlthe factthatat one pointwe are satisfied of tackback to a promontory that withexplanations one order,and at another in is view. Nevertheless so faras anthropology a craft, in will yielda different are theothersense of theword, and in so faras anthropologists aware of their choicesdo present In manufacturing certain role, themselves. lookingat objects women have at theirdisposal, various courses are open. We may see the of predicament Highlandswomen as (metonymic) extensions our own, their of netbagsself-evident symbolsof a continuous femininity; rather may see or we in and that the as predicament an analogousmanner, present netbags (metaphorically)standing an aspectoftheir for position comparable ourown; or we may to frameoff the experiencesof Highlands women and insteadjuxtapose their and artefacts ours. There is no way to obviatebias (cf. Slocum I975: 37). But well equipped to perceiveat leastsome of our surelywe should be reasonably own symbolic strategies. the same token,whateversymbolicstatusthe By of experiences and constructs othershave in our accounts,we also know that, liveswithoutour creative intervenmercifully, theywill live out mostof their tion.
NOTES

I to This is the textof the lectureas delivered,with some modifications. am grateful Andrew and Edwin Ardener, Jonathan reading,and to Shirley Strathern GillianGillisonforan earlier and comments. Benthall,Paula Brown and Rena Ledermanforsubsequent ' The phraseis Geertz's (I976: 235), thoughhe was speakingof a rather different movement, 'Dialectic'hererefers between'themostlocal oflocal detailand themostglobalofglobalstructure'. in and definition opposingviewpoints factinform receivetheir to the manner whichapparently in fromone another(cf. Wagner I977). Such oppositionsare of coursea sourceof greatenergyand production(Ortner I974: 67): perhapsthe sensationis not unlikethe vertigoproducedby ritual outsidetheactors(Gell I980). Tiffany (I978: 47) swingingin Muria-inducing a sense of reality refers one setof them;Wallman(I978: 2I) to another. to 2 Though one might ask if that complacencyitself is not of a rathermythicalnature-old (A. positionsareonlyworthleavingbehindiftheyare seenas entrenched Strathern ig80b). 3 However,thestraw manis notalwaysan unnamed abstract and In and entity. Crime custom 926) (I authors,and in The sexuallifeof Malinowski makes explicitreference the works of particular to to formulations Trobriandand European cultures. of Malinowsavages(I929) refers the differing in Frazer(1922) ski's originalstrawman, of course,was fiction itsown time.In his famousPreface tellsus thatthePrimitive Economic Man againstwhom Malinowskirailedwas a kindof bogey,a in horrible This raisesthequestionofwhyhe persisted callinghimto his phantom,a dismalfiction. aid. 4 I am not suggesting bias, thatwe erectstrawmeneverytimewe become consciousof cultural is to for butthatthere a tendency do so ifwe takea scholaronly whathe or shetellsus abouthisorher as of whichis alreadydetermined a matter prejudice. cultural background

MARILYN STRATHERN
I
6

685

terms the methodin theoretical In spiteofhis acknowledging comparative (I960: i8). thatfeminist-inspired approaches contribution There is no doubt about the verysubstantial who have written about women have made to anthropology.Not all women anthropologists specified here;myintention to pointto is would, however,identify withsome of theassumptions sayingthatI simultaneously based premisses. goes without It certain concomitants ideologically of hold thatideologiesareinescapable. I Cf. Schrijvers are approachmostwritings of male-centered (1979: 104): 'As a result thecurrent of (my biasedor distorted renderingsreality' emphasis). 8 The proposition a like mustact either a male orlike a femalerecreates thatthe anthropologist in that except whichis mirrored a subjectmatter canno longerbe described male-female dichotomy froma male or femalepointofview. 9 An aspect of this Sahlins takes up in his critique,in referring the contradiction to between value. to Malinowski'sdesiresto see fromthenativepointof view and to reducethings utilitarian with an independentand 'Rather than submit himselfto the comprehensionof a structure of he that autonomousexistence, understands structure his comprehension itspurpose-and so by makesitsexistence dependon him' (I976: 75). 10The fact assumea 'crossdisciplinary' character does not as that women's studies suchfrequently the are to contradict analytical by point.Subcultures defined valuesin response othersetsofvalues, and/or by discrete social interestssimilarlycontained, even though those interestsmay be as conceptualised 'autonomous' (cf.Ardener1975a). 11Malinowski comparedtheluckyethnologist withthe [armchair] anthropolog[fieldworker] as and thus'had to function material istof his day who had to relyon historical simultaneously his was and of sources';theethnologist in themore own chronicler as themanipulator hisself-produced fortunate positionof being 'able to envisageculturesas a whole and to observe themintegrally culturewas the basis for an throughpersonal contact' (I960: 12). The notion of an integrated of (I960: 4). groundofall branches anthropology integrated discipline-the meeting 12 In hergeneral of differently based'idealtypes'.In Glennon(1979) pointstofour study feminism with an three thembeing'human'replaces identification being'male' or 'female';at thesametime of devicethenotionthatall women aresisters; fact being the of theseapproaches'use as an organizing femalecarrieswith it a common bond thatis not available to males, at least not untilthe social advocatecome intobeing' (1979: I75). changesthesefeminists 13 Elsewhere (1978: i83) Weiner writesthatit is properto view 'both [Trobriand]men and . forces . . The cyclical of withexternal women as reproductive regeneration dalamustbe nurtured women'. Weinerdoes not intendto eclipse [male] forcesas much as it mustbe conceivedthrough is men's reproductivecapacities (cf. 1979: 330) but their contribution to be understood as different fromthatof women-'male provisioning' opposed to 'femaleessence' as qualitatively
14 Weinermakessome attempt comparing at theTrobrianders' and matriliny divisionof labour based on male yam productionwith the Hageners' clan connexionsreckonedthroughmen and in laboursignificantly thehandsofwomen,butdoes notpursuethesedifferences. Some productive are in comparisons developedin M. Strathern press. own distinctive meansof carrying poles. goods, slungfrom 15 Men have their 16 In some contextswomen are likened pigs, an association intended bringto mindcertain to to with malenessand men's likenessto birds; thisis by qualities aligned with femaleness contrast fromthesignificance pigs as wealthobjects. of separate 17 This accountoftheWiruis taken largely from workofAndrewStrathern the (I968; I97I; I978; 18 The formulation which follows owes much to the work of Roy Wagner. I must make it the as in absolutelyclear,however,thatI am not characterising two cultures different respectof in nor of for Hagen andWirualikeemploy symbolformation general, evenin respect symbols gifts. bothwhatWagnercallsconventional on modesofsymbolisation theone hand,and on [metonymic] its theotherfigurative metaphoric or assimilates modes. (The former the imposesboundaries; latter is in in context itself.) to in My intention to pointto a contrast emphasis themanner whichmaleness and femaleness conceivedin relation each other.In Hagen 'male' and 'female'are constantly are to intoexplicit as discrete social categories. (Thatin their relationship, innately comparedand brought behaviourpeople to some extent 'achieve'a placement their of sexualidentity terms prestigious in of

(1976: 130).

1980a).

686

MARILYN STRATHERN

as or rubbishactions(M. Strathern 'a 1978) is to be understood their creating universeof innate convention constantly by to trying change,readjust, impinge and uponit:. . . an effort . . make to. and themselves powerful uniquein relation it' (WagnerI975: 87-8)) In Wiru,on theotherhand, to there a sensein which'male' and 'female'constantly is substitute eachother, for suchthat anyone at betweenmalenessor femaleness takennotas innatebutas constructed. is pointthedistinction '9 In thissense shellsare both to be identified withmen as indicative men's supremerole in of ceremonial fromthemas itemstheypossess and transact exchange,and to be separated with. To the pushtheterminology, sameobjectis botha metaphor theactor)and a metonym wealth (for (for and power). 20 Compare the Gimi of the EasternHighlands(Gillison I980: I 56): Gimi fathers put bamboo tubesintothedaughter's netbagat marriage-equated by menwiththeflutes thatsymbolise both idiomsto theextent penisand child.Wirudo not,however,use genital thatGimi do. 21 This statement not as extravagant one mightsuppose in the lightof evidence about is as father-daughter incestand homicidalaggression(and see A. Strathern ig80a, 63n). Ambiguities also arisein thebrother-sister relationship, I do notdiscussthesehere. but
REFERENCES

In S. Women Ardener, I975a. Introduction. Perceiving (ed.) S. Ardener. London: Dent. I975b. [I973] Sexual insultand femalemilitancy. Perceiving In Women (ed.) S. Ardener. London: Dent. The natureof women in society.In Definingfemales S. Ardener. I978. Introduction: (ed.) London: Croom Helm. Asad, T. I979. Anthropology theanalysis ideology.Man (N.S.) I4, 607-27. and of and women divided Bujra,J.M. I978. Femalesolidarity thesexualdivision oflabour.In Women united, (eds) P. Caplan &J. M. Bujra. London: TavistockPublications. women divided. London:TavistockPublications. Caplan, P. &J. M. Bujra (eds) I978. Women united, of In R. Firth, I957. The placeofMalinowskiin thehistory economicanthropology. Man andculture London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. (ed.) R. Firth. in Forge,A. I966. Artand environment theSepik. Proc.R. anthrop. 1965, 23-3 I. Inst. Fortes,M. I957. Malinowskiand thestudyof kinship.In Man andculture (ed.) R. Firth.London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. Frazer, G. I922. Preface.In Argonauts the J. of western Pacific B. Malinowski.London: Routledge by & Kegan Paul. in Geertz,C. I976. Fromthenative'spointofview. In Meaning anthropology K. H. Basso & H. (eds) A. Selby. New Mexico: Univ. Press. and possessionin Muria religion. Man (N. S.) 15, 2I9-48. Gell, A. I980. The gods at play:vertigo and (eds) C. P. Gillison, G. I980. Images of naturein Gimi thought.In Nature,culture gender MacCormack & M. Strathern. Cambridge:Univ. Press. and a New York: Longman. Glennon,L. M. I979. Women dualism: sociology knowledge of analysis. le des et de Godelier,M. I976. Les Baruyade Nouvelle-Guinee: probleme formes des fondements la domination masculine,Cah. Cent.Etud.Rech.Marx. I28, I-44. Press. Goodale, J. C. I97I. Tiwi wives.Seattle:Univ. ofWashington The Huizer G. -& B. Mannheim(eds) I979. Thepolitics anthropology. Hague: Mouton. of P. sacred profane. and London: Routledge& Sons. Kaberry, M. I939. Aboriginal woman, and London: AllenLane. Kuper,A. I973. Anthropologists anthropology. In and anthropological factsand fictions. Thepolitics of Leacock, E. I979. Women, development, anthropology G. Huizer& B. Mannheim.The Hague: Mouton. (eds) In to Leach,E. R. I957. The epistemological background Malinowski'sempiricism. Man andculture London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. (ed.) R. Firth. LeRoy,J. D. I 979. The ceremonial killof theSouthKewa, Oceania,49, I 79-209. pig culture MacCormack, C. P. & M. Strathern (eds) I980. Nature, andgender. Cambridge:Univ. Press. of Pacific.London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. Malinowski,B. I 922. Argonauts theWestern andcustom savage in 1926. Crime society. London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. 1929. Thesexuallife savages. of London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. and 193 5. Coral gardens their magic vols.) London: Geo. Allen& Unwin. (2

MARILYN STRATHERN

687

(ed.) R. Firth.London: Nadel, S. F. 1957. Malinowskion magic and religion.In Man andculture Routledge& Kegan Paul. definitional, methodological, studyofwomen's movements: Omvedt, G. 1979. On theparticipant In (eds). of and actionconsiderations. Thepolitics anthropology G. Huizer& B. Mannheim.The Hague: Mouton. is In and (eds) M. Z. to culture, society Ortner,S. B. 1974. Is female maleas nature to culture? Woman, Univ. Press. Rosaldo & L. Lamphere.Stanford: studieson women's status.In AnnualReviewofAnthropology, Quinn, N. 1977. Anthropological 1977.Palo Alto: AnnualReviewsInc. an New York: MonthlyReview Press. ofwomen. R. Reiter, R. (ed.) 1975. Toward anthropology reviewof anthropological theory.Comp.Stud.Soc. Rogers, S. C. 1978. Woman's place: a critical Hist.20, I23-62. R., 1979. Aboriginalwomen: male and female Rohrlich-Leavitt, B. Sykes & E. Weatherford. In (eds). of perspectives. Thepolitics anthropology G. Huizer & B. Mannheim. anthropological The Hague: Mouton. reason. Chicago: Univ. Press. andpractical Sahlins,M. I976. Culture in E. (ed.) I. Schwimmer, 1974. Objects of mediation:mythand praxis.In The unconscious culture Rossi. New York: Dutton. In of (eds) and Schrijvers, I979 [I975]. Viricentrism anthropology. Thepolitics anthropology G. J. Huizer & B. Mannheim.The Hague: Mouton. In Shapiro, J. 1979. Cross-culturalperspectiveson sexual differentiation Human sexuality:a California: and Univ. Press. (ed.) perspective H. Katchadourian. comparative developmental male bias in anthropology. Towardan anthropology In of Slocum, S. 1975. Woman the gatherer: women (ed.) R. Reiter.New York: The MonthlyReview Press. and female automony in ruralJava. In Women and national Stoler, A. 1977. Class structure (ed. WellesleyEditorialCommittee). Chicago: Univ. the of development: complexities change Press. A. variations two New Guinea Highlandssocieties. in Strathern, I968. Sicknessand frustration: Mankind 545-55I. 6, andDaribi matrilateral payments,P. S. 80, 449-62. J. 1971. Wiru and in society (ed.) language oratory traditional 1975. Veiled speechin Mount Hagen. In Political M. Bloch. London: AcademicPress. in in revisited: pursuit a comparison.In Research economic of 1978. 'Financeand production' Conn.: JAIPress. (ed.) anthropology G. Dalton. Greenwich, and pairingin the of 1979. Men's house, women's house: theefficacy oppositionreversal, J. Melpa AmbKorcult, P. S., 88, 37-51. and thecontingent: bridewealth among theMelpa and theWiru.In The ig80a. The central London: AcademicPress. payments (ed.)J. L. Comaroff. meaning marriage of in becomes mythagain. history ig80b. Reversalsof perspective the searchforlegitimacy: Camb.Anthrop. 47-53. 5, M. in London: Seminar(Academic)Press. Strathern, I972. Women between. of The of thinking. yearbook symbolic I 978. The achievement sex: paradoxesin Hagen gender London: Hurst. (ed.) anthropology E. Schwimmer. in press.Domesticity and thedenigration women. In The valueofthe of devalued: perspectives the California: Univ. Press. onwomenfrom Pacific (eds). D. O'Brien & S. Tiffany. and M. (ed.) L. Holy. Belfast:Queen's Stuchlik, I976. Whose knowledge?In Knowledge behaviour Papersin Social Anthropology. University association? RAIN, 36, 6. Tapper, N. I980. ASA: a professional of assessment, Man Tiffany, W. I978. Models and thesocial anthropology women:a preliminary S. (N. S.) 13, 34-5 I . and Chicago: Univ. of of Wagner,R. I967. The curse Souw: principles Daribiclandefinition alliance. Press.

Man Milton, 1979. Malebiasinanthropology? (N.S.) 14, K.

Kegan Paul.

of New York: OxfordUniv. Press. theory culture. I960 [1944]. A scientific (trans.)by N. Guterman.London: Routledge& in strict senseoftheterm I967. A diary the
40-54.

688

MARILYN STRATHERN N. 1975. The invention culture. of Englewood Cliffs, J.: Prentice Hall.

and indigenous of I977. Scientific Papuan conceptualizations theinnate:a semioticcritique and of the ecological perspective.In Subsistence survival (eds) T. P. Bayliss-Smith R. G. & Feachem.London: AcademicPress. in the In of I978a. Ideology and theory: problemof reification anthropology. Theyearbook London: Hurst. symbolic anthropology E. Schwimmer. (ed.) I978b. Lethalspeech. Cornell:Univ. Press. Wallman,S. I978. Epistemologiesof sex. In Femalehierarchies (eds). L. Tiger & Fowler. Chicago: BBS. Weiner,A. B. I976. Women value,men renown. of of Austin,Texas: Univ. Press. model in Trobriand society. Mankind,spec. issue, Trade and I978. The reproductive in Exchange OceaniaandAustralia. (eds). J. Specht& P. White. fromanother view: thereproductive I979. Trobriandkinship power of women and men. Man (N.S.), 14, 328-48. in menstruation SriLanka,Man (N.S.) I5, 603-25. Winslow,D. I980. Ritualsof first London: Routledge& Kegan Paul. Young, M. W. (ed.) I979. Theethnography ofMalinowski.