gifts
does not mean for Mauss that a gift is never free; it does, however, suggest
that, by fulfilling the obligation to give, it is recreated by the reaffirmation
of the social relationships of which the obligation is a part from the com-
mencement of the exchange. Mauss conceives of the process of exchange
in a rather broad way because the exchange goes beyond mere economic
goods; it includes social acts of politeness conceived in a liberal way that
encompass such activities as rituals, dances, festivals, banquets, military
service and can even involve the exchange of women and children.
When a person gives a gift to someone that person is not merely giv-
ing some inert or neutral object, but is rather giving an active part of
him/herself. This suggests that a gift is inalienably connected to the
giver. Mauss is further suggesting that a gift is something personal and
alive with a special power that not only generates itself, but also pos-
sesses the power to renew the relationship between the giving and
receiving parties. Thus, a gift possesses a vitality, which often includes
individuality for Mauss. By giving part of him/herself in the gift, a per-
son participates in it, but this also creates a lasting spiritual bond between
persons.
The dynamic nature of the gift is evident in the phenomenon of the
potlatch, a kind of orgy of generosity in some indigenous societies that
can become violent, exaggerated, and antagonistic. The potlatch is an
all-encompassing competition that revolves around honor and prestige
for the participants in a reciprocal pattern that creates obligations among
the parties. The competitive nature of the potlatch is similar to a game
that a participant risks losing, which means for the loser a loss of social
rank and status. It is the obligation to reciprocate that Mauss identifies as
the essence of the potlatch.
It is precisely the excessive, destructive, disruptive, and irrational
nature of the potlatch that captures the attention of the postmodern
thinker George Bataille, who sees it as an acquisition of power. Bataille
envisions a relationship between power, a surpassing virtue of gift-
giving, and renunciation. The power that the giver gains over the recipi-
ent manifests the absurdity of gifts. The intertwining of power, obligation,
and absurdity allows Bataille to show that the gift is not some homoge-
nous pattern of exchange, but rather more akin to a heterogeneous and
irrational phenomenon.
Jacques Derrida, another postmodern thinker, treats the concept of the
gift in an even more radical way than Bataille by placing it within the flux
of time, which renders the gift impossible due to the predominance of
time. The gift is only possible at a paradoxical moment when time is torn
apart because the present is related to temporal synthesis, which makes
it impossible to think the present moment of the gift. The gift is also