Marcel Mauss

Marcel Mauss (French: [mos]; 10 May 1872 – 10 February 1950) was a French sociologist and anthropologist known as the "Father of French ethnology."[1] The nephew of Émile Durkheim, Mauss, in his academic work, crossed the boundaries between sociology and anthropology. Today, he is perhaps better recognised for his influence on the latter discipline, particularly with respect to his analyses of topics such as magic, sacrifice and gift exchange in different cultures around the world. Mauss had a significant influence upon Claude Lévi-Strauss, the founder of structural anthropology.[2] His most famous work is The Gift (1925).

Marcel Mauss
M.Mauss 1872-1950.jpg
Born(1872-05-10)10 May 1872
Died10 February 1950(1950-02-10) (aged 77)
Alma materEcole Pratique des Hautes Etudes
Known forThe Gift
Scientific career
Fields
InstitutionsÉcole des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS)
InfluencesÉmile Durkheim
Influenced
Signature
Signature de Marcel Mauss.svg

BackgroundEdit

Mauss was born in Épinal, Vosges, to a Jewish family, his father a merchant and mother an embroidery shop owner. Unlike his younger brother, Mauss did not join the family business and instead he followed socialist and cooperative movement in the Vosges. Following the death of his grandfather, the Mauss and Durkheim families grew close and there Mauss began to feel concerned about his education and took initiative to learn. Mauss obtained a religious education and was bar mitzvahed, yet by the age of eighteen he stopped practicing his religion.[1]

Mauss studied philosophy at Bordeaux, where his maternal uncle Émile Durkheim was teaching at the time. In the 1890s, Mauss began his lifelong study of linguistics, Indology, Sanskrit, Hebrew, and the 'history of religions and uncivilized peoples' at the École pratique des hautes études[3]. He passed the agrégation in 1893. He was also the first cousin of the much younger Claudette (née Raphael) Bloch, a marine biologist and mother of Maurice Bloch, who became a noted anthropologist. Instead of taking the usual route of teaching at a lycée following college, Mauss moved to Paris and took up the study of comparative religion and Sanskrit.

His first publication in 1896 marked the beginning of a prolific career that would produce several landmarks in the sociological literature. Like many members of the Année Sociologique group, Mauss was attracted to socialism, especially that espoused by Jean Jaurès. He was particularly active in the anti-semitic political events of the Dreyfus affair. Towards the end of the century, he helped edit such left-wing papers as Le Populaire, L'Humanité and Le Mouvement socialiste, the last in collaboration with Georges Sorel.

In 1901, Mauss began drawing more on ethnography, and his work began to develop characteristics now associated with formal anthropology.

Mauss served in the French army during World War I from 1914 to 1919 as an interpreter.[4] The military service was liberating from Mauss’ intense academics, as he stated, “I’m doing wonderfully. I just wasn’t made for the intellectual life and I am enjoying the life war is giving me” (Fournier 2006: 175). While liberating, he also dealt with the devastation and violence of the war as many of his friends and colleagues died in the war, and his uncle Durkheim died shortly before its end. Mauss began to write a book “On Politics” that remained unfinished, but the early 1920s emphasized his energy for politics through criticism of the Bolshevik's coercive resort to violence and their destruction of the market economy.[5]

Like many other followers of Durkheim, Mauss took refuge in administration. He secured Durkheim's legacy by founding institutions to carry out research, such as l'Institut Français de Sociologie (1924) and l'Institut d'Ethnologie in 1926. These institutions stimulated the development of fieldwork-based anthropology by young academics. Among the students he influenced were George Devereux, Jeanne Cuisinier, Alfred Metraux, Marcel Griaule, Georges Dumezil, Denise Paulme, Michel Leiris, Germaine Dieterlen, Louis Dumont, Andre-Georges Haudricourt, Jacques Soustelle, and Germaine Tillion.[6]

In 1901, Mauss was appointed to the Chair of the History of Religions of Non-Civilized Peoples at the École pratique des hautes études.[7] [7] Two years later in 1931 Mauss was elected as the first holder of the Chair of Sociology in the Collège de France, and soon after he married his secretary in 1934 who soon was bedridden after a poisonous gas incident. Later, in 1940, Mauss was forced out of his job as the Chair of Sociology and out of Paris due to the German occupation and anti-Semitic legislation passed. Mauss remained socially isolated following the war and died in 1950.[8]

Theoretical viewsEdit

Marcel Mauss and Emile Durkheim

Marcel Mauss's studies under his uncle Durkheim at Bordeaux led to them doing work together on Primitive Classification which was published in the Annee Sociologique. In this work, Mauss and Durkheim attempted to create a French version of the sociology of knowledge, illustrating the various paths of human thought taken by different cultures, in particular how space and time are connected back to societal patterns. They focused their study on tribal societies in order to achieve depth.

While Mauss called himself a Durkheimian, he interpreted the school of Durkheim as his own. His early works reflect the dependence on Durkheim's school, yet as more works, including unpublished texts were read, Mauss preferred to start many projects and often not finish them. Mauss concerned himself more with politics than his uncle, as a member of the Collectivistes, French workers party, and Revolutionary socialist workers party. His political involvement led up to and after World War I.[9]

The Gift

Mauss has been credited for his analytic framework which has been characterized as more supple, more appropriate for the application of empirical studies, and more fruitful than his earlier studies with Durkheim. His work fell into two categories, one being major ethnological works on exchange as a symbolic system, body techniques and the category of the person, and the second being social science methodology.[10] In his classic work The Gift [see external links for PDF], Mauss argued that gifts are never truly free, rather, human history is full of examples of gifts bringing about reciprocal exchange. The famous question that drove his inquiry into the anthropology of the gift was: "What power resides in the object given that causes its recipient to pay it back?".[11] The answer is simple: the gift is a "total prestation" (see law of obligations), imbued with "spiritual mechanisms", engaging the honour of both giver and receiver (the term "total prestation" or "total social fact" (fait social total) was coined by his student Maurice Leenhardt after Durkheim's social fact). Such transactions transcend the divisions between the spiritual and the material in a way that, according to Mauss, is almost "magical". The giver does not merely give an object but also part of himself, for the object is indissolubly tied to the giver: "the objects are never completely separated from the men who exchange them" (1990:31). Because of this bond between giver and gift, the act of giving creates a social bond with an obligation to reciprocate on the part of the recipient. Not to reciprocate means to lose honour and status, but the spiritual implications can be even worse: in Polynesia, failure to reciprocate means to lose mana, one's spiritual source of authority and wealth. To cite Goldman-Ida's summary, "Mauss distinguished between three obligations: giving, the necessary initial step for the creation and maintenance of social relationships; receiving, for to refuse to receive is to reject the social bond; and reciprocating in order to demonstrate one's own liberality, honour, and wealth" (2018:341). Mauss describes how society is blinded by ideology, and therefore a system of prestations survives in societies when regarding the economy. Institutions are founded on the unity of individuals and society, and capitalism rests on an unsustainable influence on an individual's wants. Rather than focusing on money, Mauss describes the need to focus on faits sociaux totaux, total social facts, which are legal, economic, religious, and aesthetic facts which challenge the sociological method.[12]

An important notion in Mauss' conceptualization of gift exchange is what Gregory (1982, 1997) refers to as "inalienability". In a commodity economy, there is a strong distinction between objects and persons through the notion of private property. Objects are sold, meaning that the ownership rights are fully transferred to the new owner. The object has thereby become "alienated" from its original owner. In a gift economy, however, the objects that are given are unalienated from the givers; they are "loaned rather than sold and ceded". It is the fact that the identity of the giver is invariably bound up with the object given that causes the gift to have a power which compels the recipient to reciprocate. Because gifts are unalienable they must be returned; the act of giving creates a gift-debt that has to be repaid. Because of this, the notion of an expected return of the gift creates a relationship over time between two individuals. In other words, through gift-giving, a social bond evolves that is assumed to continue through space and time until the future moment of exchange. Gift exchange therefore leads to a mutual interdependence between giver and receiver. According to Mauss, the "free" gift that is not returned is a contradiction because it cannot create social ties. Following the Durkheimian quest for understanding social cohesion through the concept of solidarity, Mauss' argument is that solidarity is achieved through the social bonds created by gift exchange. Mauss emphasizes that exchanging gifts resulted from the will of attaching other people – 'to put people under obligations', because "in theory such gifts are voluntary, but in fact they are given and repaid under obligation".[13]

Mauss and Hubert

Mauss also focused on the topic of sacrifice. The book Sacrifice and its Function which he wrote with Henri Hubert in 1899 argued that sacrifice is a process involving sacralising and desacralising. This was when the "former directed the holy towards the person or object, and the latter away from a person or object."[14] Mauss and Hubert proposed that the body is better understood not as a natural given. Instead, it should be seen as the product of specific training in attributes, deportments, and habits. Furthermore, the body techniques are biological, sociological, and psychological and in doing an analysis of the body, one must apprehend these elements simultaneously. They defined the person as a category of thought, the articulation of particular embodiment of law and morality. Mauss and Hubert believed that a person was constituted by personages (a set of roles) which were executed through the behaviors and exercise of specific body techniques and attributes.

Mauss and Hubert wrote another book titled A General Theory of Magic in 1902 [see external links for PDF]. They studied magic in 'primitive' societies and how it has manifested into our thoughts and social actions. They argue that social facts are subjective and therefore should be considered magic, but society is not open to accepting this. In the book, Mauss and Hubert state:

"In magic, we have officers, actions, and representations: we call a person who accomplishes magical actions a magician, even if he is not professional; magical representations are those ideas and beliefs which correspond to magical actions; as for these actions, with regard to which we have defined the other elements of magic, we shall call them magical rites. At this stage it is important to distinguish between these activities and other social practices with which they might be confused."[15]

They go on to say that only social occurrences can be considered magical. Individual actions are not magic because if the whole community does not believe in efficacy of a group of actions, it is not social and therefore, cannot be magical.

LegacyEdit

 
Marcel Mauss

While Mauss is known for several of his own works – most notably his masterpiece Essai sur le Don ('The Gift') – much of his best work was done in collaboration with members of the Année Sociologique, including Durkheim (Primitive Classification), Henri Hubert (Outline of a General Theory of Magic and Essay on the Nature and Function of Sacrifice), Paul Fauconnet (Sociology) and others.

Mauss influenced French anthropology and social science. He did not have a great number of students like many other Sociologists did, however, he taught ethnographic method to first generation French anthropology students. In addition to this, Mauss' ideas have had a significant impact on Anglophile post-structuralist perspectives in anthropology, cultural studies, and cultural history. He modified post-structuralist and post-Foucauldian intellectuals because he combines an ethnographic approach with contextualization that is historical, sociological, and psychological.

Mauss served as an important link between the sociology of Durkheim and contemporary French sociologists. Some of these sociologists include: Claude Levi Strauss, Pierre Bourdieu, Marcel Granet, and Louis Dumont. The essay on The Gift is the origin for anthropological studies of reciprocity. His analysis of the Potlatch has inspired Georges Bataille (The Accursed Share), then the situationists (the name of the first situationist journal was Potlatch). This term has been used by many interested in gift economies and open-source software, although this latter use sometimes differs from Mauss' original formulation. See also Lewis Hyde's revolutionary critique of Mauss in "Imagination and the Erotic Life of Property". He also impacted the Mouvement Anti-Utilitariste dans les Sciences Sociales and David Graeber.[16]

CritiquesEdit

Mauss' views on the nature of gift exchange have had critics. Main critiques against Mauss stem from beliefs that Mauss's essay is analyzing all primitive and archaic societies, but rather his essay is used to apply to one society and relationships within.[17] French anthropologist Alain Testart (1998), for example, argues that there are "free" gifts, such as passers-by giving money to beggars, e.g. in a large Western city. Donor and receiver do not know each other and are unlikely ever to meet again. In this context, the donation certainly creates no obligation on the side of the beggar to reciprocate; neither the donor nor the beggar have such an expectation. Testart argues that only the latter can actually be enforced. He feels that Mauss overstated the magnitude of the obligation created by social pressures, particularly in his description of the potlatch amongst North American Indians.

Gift Economy theorist Genevieve Vaughan (1997) criticizes the French school of thought based on Mauss, exemplified by Jacques Godbout and Serge Latouche and the Mouvement Anti-utilittarisse des Sciences Sociales, for defining gift-giving as consisting of "three moments: giving, receiving, and giving back. The insistence upon reciprocity hides the communicative character of simple giving and receiving without reciprocity and does not allow this group to make a clear distinction between gift-giving and exchange as two opposing paradigms."[18] In subsequent works, for example, The Gift in the Heart of Language: The Maternal Source of Meaning (2015) [19] Vaughan elaborated on gift-giving as a relation between giver and receiver that takes its form from the primal human experience of mothering and being mothered. The Maternal Gift Economy Movement gathered around Vaughan's work has brought together exponents of similar theories from multiple cultures (see, for examples, the websites maternalgifteconomymovement.org and gift-economy.com ).

Another example of a non-reciprocal "free" gift is provided by British anthropologist James Laidlaw (2000). He describes the social context of Indian Jain renouncers, a group of itinerant celibate renouncers living an ascetic life of spiritual purification and salvation. The Jainist interpretation of the doctrine of ahimsa (an extremely rigorous application of principles of nonviolence) influences the diet of Jain renouncers and compels them to avoid preparing food, as this could potentially involve violence against microscopic organisms. Since Jain renouncers do not work, they rely on food donations from lay families within the Jain community. However, the former must not appear to be having any wants or desires, and only very hesitantly and apologetically receives the food prepared by the latter."Free" gifts therefore challenge the aspects of the Maussian notion of the gift unless the moral and non-material qualities of gifting are considered. These aspects are, of course, at the heart of the gift, as demonstrated in books such as Annette Weiner's (1992) Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping While Giving.

Mauss' view on sacrifice was also controversial at the time. This was because it conflicted with the psychologisation of individuals and social behavior. In addition to this, Mauss' terms like persona and habitus have been used among some sociological approaches. French philosopher Georges Bataille used The Gift to draw new conclusions based on economic anthropology, in this case, an interpretation of how money is increasingly being wasted in society.[20] They have also been included in recent sociological and cultural studies by Pierre Bourdieu. Bourdieu used Mauss’ concept habitus through sociological concepts of socialization the embodiment of consciousness, an example being muscle memory.

Selected worksEdit

  • Essai sur la nature et la fonction du sacrifice, (with Henri Hubert) 1898.
  • La sociologie: objet et méthode, (with Paul Fauconnet) 1901.
  • De quelques formes primitives de classification, (with Durkheim) 1902.
  • Esquisse d'une théorie générale de la magie, (with Henri Hubert) 1902.
  • Essai sur le don, 1925.
  • Les techniques du corps, 1934. Marcel Mauss, "Les techniques du corps" (1934) Journal de Psychologie 32 (3–4). Reprinted in Mauss, Sociologie et anthropologie, 1936, Paris: PUF.
  • Sociologie et anthropologie, (selected writings) 1950.
  • Manuel d'ethnographie. 1967. Editions Payot & Rivages. (Manual of Ethnography 2009. Translated by N. J. Allen. Berghan Books.)

See alsoEdit

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ a b Fournier, Marcel (1994). Marcel Mauss: A Biography. France: Arthème Fayard. ISBN 0691117772.
  2. ^ Barth, Fredrik (2005). One Discipline, Four Ways: British, German, French, and American Anthropology. University of Chicago Press, p. 208, Quote: "Marcel Mauss' two most influential followers were Claude Levi-Strauss (b. 1908) and Louis Dumont (1911–1998). The impact of his work on both of them was strong."
  3. ^ Sica, Alan. Social Thought: From Enlightenment to the Present. p. 306.
  4. ^ Scott, John. Fifty Key Sociologists: The Formative Theorists.
  5. ^ Hart, Keith (2007). Marcel Mauss: In Pursuit of the Whole. Anthropology, Goldsmiths University of London.
  6. ^ Scott, John. Fifty Key Sociologists: The Formative Theorists.
  7. ^ Cashmore, Ellis; Rojek. Dictionary of Cultural Theorists. Chris.
  8. ^ Hart, Keith (2007). Marcel Mauss: In Pursuit of the Whole. Anthropology, Goldsmiths University of London.
  9. ^ Fournier, Marcel (1994). Marcel Mauss: A Biography. Italy: Arthème Fayard.
  10. ^ Cashmore, Ellis; Rojek, Chris. Dictionary of Cultural Theorists.
  11. ^ Mauss, Marcel (2002). The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchanges in Archaic Societies (PDF). London: Routledge. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-203-71568-0.
  12. ^ Hart, Keith (2007). Marcel Mauss: In Pursuit of the Whole. Anthropology, Goldsmiths University of London.
  13. ^ "D. Walczak. 2015. The process of exchange, solidarity and sustainable development in building a community of responsibility. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (1S1), p. 506". Archived from the original on 8 February 2015.
  14. ^ Cashmore, Ellis; Rojek, Chris. Dictionary of Cultural Theorists. p. 350.
  15. ^ Sica, Alan. Social Thought from the Enlightenment to the Present. p. 308.
  16. ^ [Graeber, D., Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value, pp 160–161, Palgrave Macmillan, 2001]
  17. ^ Panoff, Michel (1970). "Marcel Mauss's "The Gift" Revisited". Man. 5 (1): 60–70. doi:10.2307/2798804. ISSN 0025-1496. JSTOR 2798804.
  18. ^ Vaughan, Genevieve (1997). For-Giving: A Feminist Criticism of ExchangeP. Austin, Texas: Plain View Press (first edition); Anomaly Press (4th printing, 2002). p. 54. ISBN 0-911051-94-5.
  19. ^ Vaughan, Genevieve (2015). The Gift in the Heart of Language: The Maternal Source of Meaning. UK: Mimesis International. ISBN 978-8869770128.
  20. ^ Panoff, Michel (1970). "Marcel Mauss's "The Gift" Revisited". Man. 5 (1): 60–70. doi:10.2307/2798804. ISSN 0025-1496. JSTOR 2798804.

Further readingEdit

  • Mauss, Marcell. 2005. The Nature of Sociology.

External linksEdit

(in French)