16 chapter one
extravagant potlatch feasts. Instead of fighting wars, competitions were
played out when tribes demonstrated their status through a self- inflicted
destruction of property:
Whole boxes of olanchen (candlefish) oil or whale oil are burnt, as are houses
and thousands of blankets. The most valuable copper objects are broken and
thrown into the water, in order to put down and “flatten” one’s rival. In this
way one not only promotes oneself, but also one’s family, up the social scale.
(Mauss 1990 , 37 )
In this example, “fighting with property” became a substitute for war be-
cause it established a clear and indisputable hierarchy (Codere 1950 ). For
outsiders, the meaning of this destruction was unclear. For the first West-
erners to arrive at that region, the potlatch was a curious, wasteful, and
irrational behavior that was to be discouraged and even banned (Fisher
1992 , 206 ).^36 This incommensurability between two cultures highlights the
importance of understanding prestige as social and community based.
What may be an incontrovertible signifier of prestige for one community
may be unintelligible for another.
Thus, effective signaling is not a function of cost alone. The meaning
depends not only on the magnitude of the actors’ consumption but also
on the type of goods that they choose to consume and on the social setting
in which the goods are consumed. Certain goods have categorical signifi-
cance inasmuch as they help us to catalog actors into different classes and
types. Hence, China can see the acquisition of a new aircraft carrier or the
funding of an ambitious space program as means for claiming superpower
status. Indeed, Bourdieu ( 1984 , 376 ) observed that families from different
classes often spend very similar amounts of money on food. However, an
examination of the contents of their respective diets shows clear differ-
ences in tastes and preferences that correspond to class distinctions.^37 In
this example, it is taste rather than expense that distinguishes between the
different actors. For Bourdieu, taste is an institution, cultivated and re-
fined through repeated social interactions. Ultimately, taste acquires clas-
sifying significance that is central to the process of distinction. Similarly,
actors in the international system may use their “taste,” as is manifested
through their consumption choices, as an act of classification. In this way
actors who wish to improve their standing in the international hierarchy
may develop a “liking” for larger naval vessels, space programs, foreign
interventions, or contributions to foreign aid. The same actors could have
