Ritual
A final element connecting anthropological and sociological theory on
gifts and solidarity is ritual. From Durkheim’s sociology of religion (1965
[1912]) – in particular, his analysis of “primitive” Australian cults and beliefs
– the enormous impact of ritual for affirming and sustaining social
bonds and social structure has become apparent. Religious rituals are
adaptive to the life of the community by imposing self-discipline. They
bring people together in ceremonies, thereby contributing to solidarity.
Ritual also “revitalizes the social heritage of the group and helps transmit
its enduring values to future generations” (Coser 1971: 139). Moreover,
rituals have a euphoric function by counteracting feelings of frustration
and by establishing the sense of being right and acting in a morally
justified way.
It is the merit of anthropologists to have uncovered the variety and
complexity of the meanings and functions of ritual. They have described
and interpreted the numerous rituals surrounding important transitions
in the life cycle, or other events that demand sacralization and ritualization
(van Gennep 1960; Lґevi-Strauss 1966 [1962]; V. Turner 1969; Geertz
1973). In his fascinating account of the Balinese cockfight, Clifford Geertz
(1973) offers an interpretation of ritual that differs from the usual functionalist
one of reinforcing status positions and social structure. The
cockfight can be “read as a text” saying something about Balinese experience.
Participating in a cockfight is for the Balinese “a kind of sentimental
education” (1973: 449). The ritual symbolizes that society is built of certain
emotions like the thrill of risk, the despair of loss, and the pleasure
of triumph. “Drawing on almost every level of Balinese experience, it
brings together themes – animal savagery, male narcissism, opponent
gambling, status rivalry, mass excitement, blood sacrifice – whose main
connection is their involvement with rage and the fear of rage, and, binding
them into a set of rules which at once contains them and allows
them play, builds a symbolic structure in which, over and over again, the
reality of their inner affiliation can be intelligibly felt” (Geertz 1973: 449–
450). The symbolic structure of the cockfight allows emotions to be expressed
while at the same time putting restrictions on them by the setting
of rules.
By bringing together assorted experiences of everyday life, the ritual
creates a “paradigmatic human event” enabling the Balinese to see
adimension of their own subjectivity that they would not have seen
otherwise, at least not in such a condensed form. This seems to be a
basic aspect of solidarity as well: by participating in a group activity
the individual members learn how to “read” themselves, how their basic
emotions become transformed in the interaction with other people,
and how their individual being gets shaped through their interdependency
with other people. In this sense rituals reinforce the main basis
of organic solidarity:mutual dependency. Rituals tie people together because
they give expression to feelings of group dependency, even while
group members do not share exactly the same values or interpret the
ritual in exactly the same way (Kertzer 1988). In addition to the wellknown
functions of ritual as affirming social ties, revitalizing group life,
and promoting the attainment of group goals, at a more basic level it
may function as a “school” where lessons can be learned about how the
group can contribute to realizing one’s own full potential. If it is true,
as Durkheim thought, that individuals can only become fully human in
and through society, then social rituals presumably fulfill an important
socializing role.
In most anthropologicalwork on gift exchange the focus is on the ritual
and symbolic aspects of gift giving. Gifts are not primarily or predominantly
exchanged for any economic purpose. Rather, they are instruments
to convey symbolic messages of the most varied kind, as Lґevi-Strauss has
argued. Individuals participating in the ritual and respecting its symbols
see their “emotional energy” andmutual confidence enhanced. Inversely,
persons showing disrespect for the symbols are subject to anger and
punishment. The solidarity generated through the interaction processes
involved in gift exchange indeed transcends the mere behavioral interaction
between the exchange partners by extending it to the emotional
mood and the quality of the social relationship.