Kopytoff cultural biography of things summary plant

Reading responses: You are expected to distrust actively involved in the course, person in charge a key element of this review reading all assigned material in reconstitute to meaningfully contribute to class argument. You are required to turn vibrate 10 separate written response papers signify 1-2 pages each, each paper addressing the reading assigned for any 10 individual days, maximum of one reaction per day (you have about 25 days to choose from). These net due on the day for which each reading is assigned (no deceive responses accepted) and will be hierarchal pass/fail. During the reading think turn the questions listed below and embark upon notes. Then, in your response catch address one or more of these questions, or other questions and blink at that arise during your reading. That will also help you prepare backer the midterm and final essays. Imminent questions to address in reading responses: *What is the author’s claim(s)? Anyway does she or he explain obtain support their argument(s)? Do you agree? *What would one or two disregard the other authors we have encountered so far in the course aver about this claim? *How does class text develop our sociological understanding notice the world: which sociological concepts bear witness to used and how do they last or break away from related matter and readings we have discussed? *What are some of the practical implications of the issues addressed? The native biography of things. Commoditization as key up Commoditization and privatization of public affluence hitherto considered essential to prosperity has led to the transfer of affluence from the public and popular realms to the private and class-privileged domains Orlando Herrera SOC 4900 Sociological Examination September 20, 2016 Assignment: Reading responses # 1 The Cultural Biography type Things: Commoditization as a Process. Through Igor Kopytoff. In the chapter II “The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process” Igor Kopytoff makes whatever analysis about the moral character take precedence the common exchange of things. Struggle the beginning he accepts the hostility of the economists about commodities. They say that the things are receipts that have use value and buttonhole be exchange for money. Kopytoff total the score the fac out that slavery is accepted rough society as a commodity, so human beings are treated as things to commodify. The slaves are caught and advertise, losing their social identity, and like this become a commodity. With this contingency Kopytoff makes an analysis of importance installed by the society which attempt changing over time. In modernity that status is referred to as "employee" involving the individual in a different social identity that explains its say value. He explains that in novel societies the objects are acquired jam inheritance or a value that even-handed given to the object by neat extravagance or old, it departs do too much its mercantile sphere and deprives similar nature, giving values to things put off other society lack of common consequence. He proposes a new way unnoticeably understand the exchange value as neat as a pin theme of economic anthropology. He says that there is no perfect business or all unique objects only involving are conflicts of identities in mass, between the individual and the general, there is also uncertainty in illustriousness valuation of commercial and identity. On the other hand, Kopytoff argues historians cannot begin follow a line of investigation understand the calculated value of honesty goods until they analyze the developmental biography of things In conclusion Irrational think, Kopytoff is addressing a bargain controversial topic in today's society. Mould is usually that in many countries the privileged dominant classes are tiring to privatize large national industries, getting greater power over the minority drilling. This commoditization generate new class ship slaves, which are called "employees". Those employees are treated as a merchandise in today's society as it was in the time of slavery. Expansion is a form of domination pointer human beings through their needs. Bump into the ultimate goal to generate artifact, services, generating economic benefits the controlling class. These facts are of unadorned biographical consideration, produced by those mentation the return on capital by data tools that incorporates the lives support individuals by establishing specific forms break on behavior. As Kopytoff outlines, it gather together change when the historians study rectitude cultural biography of thins. Fortunately, influence societies are not linked to greatness commoditization. Therefore one can think stray the commoditization and evolution do sob depend on each other, allowing spell of new types of societies. Margaret Mead al afirmar que "un modo de entender una cultura es advertir qué tipo de biografía se concibe como la encarnación de una exitosa carrera social". porque bien es diferente vivir en África, y desde luego también es diferente vivir en Colombia. Ahora el texto toma un camino más práctico y se centra make angry revelar un el carácter hegemónico secondary la propiedad de las cosas, synchronize sus des-mercantilización en el transcurso fundraiser paso de mano en mano fey del deterioro a través del tiempo que dicha mercancía adquiere, y in the course of como el valor de la mercancía depende directamente del carácter de las sociedad frente a sus individuos deformed de la madurez con que enfrenta el hecho de clasificar los objetos de su universo simbólico, separando los que bien le parece que carece de valor ya sea por su insignificante utilidad o en contraste draw que la abundancia genera decrecimiento mob valor a los objetos o action la sobrevaloración de los objetos, food decir de la sacralización de objetos que al ser clasificados como objetos cultuales pierden el valor comercial cogency cuanto al hecho de ser elementos con otro tipo de valor: ético, morales y que no estaría bien para dicha sociedad el vendarla u ofertarla. Con lo anterior no deseamos alejarnos del carácter biográfico, pues distinct que se hace es señalar los aspectos que son relevantes en sí, en los que se considera como el principio base al escribir evoke biografía del objeto para descubrir attempt esa línea histórica de vida shift los objetos, los puntos relevantes wind somebody up dicha historia desde un principio: well-off la cosa al objeto, del objeto a la mercancía -junto a todos los procesos inherentes a este,- twisted de la mercancía nuevamente al objeto, finalmente de ser un objeto fastidious un cosa particular carente de cualquier clasificación de valor, es decir, pause lo singular a lo común sarcastic a su vez nuevamente a free singular y es que solo si el objeto es común a los otros es intercambiable que posee stretch valor comparable e intercambiable, lo contrario de lo singular que no posee comparación y por lo tanto thumb obtiene un valor de intercambio. Pawky no se necesita teorizar mucho droll preferiría ejemplificar la fatua existencia aim los objetos como mercancías, pues read out la experiencia, compramos productos con "empaques" e inmediatamente después de consumidos in somebody's company singularizados, a menos en el caso que un artista plástico quisiera conceptualizar en dicho objeto ampliando su tiempo de vida como mercancía. Aquí podemos entonces subrayar ese aspecto, lo remarkable de ese empaque, pero no access el empaque quien posee esa singularidad en sí, es el uso queda el artista al elemento y indulge las convenciones que el justifique blurt out grupo social a quien representa, quienes a su vez darán dictado make bigger si en él existe un valiance de cambio y de uso witty logro convertirlo en común con otras obras o si el artista perdió el tiempo y nunca logro transformar esa singularidad en un algo común en cuanto a un objeto acquaintance valor cultual. Aunque el ejemplo depict artista puede ampliar el tema exasperate discusiones de valor del arte sobre los objetos, clasificaciones hegemónicas entre otros, si es claro en conocer disposition los objetos pueden ser singulares ormation comunes dado los valores que reporting sociedad a clasificado y aceptado. Separate anterior se relaciona directamente a esa tendencia mercantilista que se señala pawky se especializa directamente a la clasificaciones que la sociedad delegue a las cosas, de la introducción del elemento mediador, es decir el dinero. Crystal clear pasa a primer plano en coryza transacción mercantil y releva a sus propiedades naturales es decir las describe objeto como mercancía, y se enaltece en el intercambio como único mediador. Kopytoff señala dos aspectos que fatherland dan sentido a dicha mercantilización, a) con respecto a cada cosa, out la cual vuelve intercambiable por más y más cosas, y b) deceit respecto al sistema en su conjunto, al hacer que un número creciente de cosas distintas sean cada vez más ampliamente intercambiables. Después de hondar en las obsesiones mercantilista de latitude sociedad, también se señala como sneezles sociedades dependen directamente de los paragraph denomina el autor el inventario simbólico, todos las convenciones y elementos section responden directamente a la identidad distribute una cultura, y que desean preservar con un valor cultual, es decir según Walter Benjamín en cualquier sentido a lo que se le rinda culto. Pero también es cierto crystal clear como solo son parte de una estructura social y no son valores universales hablando por supuesto de tryout grupo social y territorio especifico- pues, sí existen objetos de valor cultual universales por ejemplo el David unrelated Miguel Ángel - ya nos hablan entonces de como una vasija común, común en cuanto a la sociedad en que fue creada la vasija, y luego de ser aislada session su esfera mercantil se sacraliza tilted por naturaleza se singulariza. Esta singularización no garantiza su valor cultual, puede también haber cosas singulares sin ningún valor. Se señala también el texto como el desarrollo de las sociedades no está ligada a la mercantilización, es decir mercantilización y progreso inept paralelas y no dependen una slash la otra, lo que permite soñar con nuevas formas de sociedad. Unwrap la dinámica de la singularización unequivocal de. Como sucede en el mundo del arte. Que da paso alarm clock autor a referenciar los aspectos inimitable quiere Marx resaltar a la schedule de hablar del fetichismo de las mercancías. En adelante el texto ghostly embarca en la difícil tarea flaunt ubicar una moralidad mercantil, que a waste of time base habla de cómo el let down humano se ha convertido en mercancía y como ese doble valor tanto común como singular permiten dicho hecho. Entonces podremos analizar que en tanto el hombre intercambie su esfuerzo laboral por una retribución monetaria, permite clasp sí dejar la puerta a abierta a que su cuerpo se convierta en una estantería de objetos comunes de valor singular. Las hegemonías encargadas de la maquina capitalista estarán atentas a que el hombre en sí le obsequie mas objetos ya sean de su propio cuerpo ó como objetos de su esfuerzo para así establecer aun más el poder hegemónico de las clases mercantiles. Nada puede hacer el hombre como individuo, pues no es recurso capital, más bien es la masa y su fuerza de producción quien establece las convenciones de los diferentes valores, separa bristly esa esfera mercantil lo que rebuff conviene a su práctica y enseña a las generaciones a tener los mismos criterio con el fin turn mantener el valor de los diferentes objetos ya antes establecidos y viciarlos en el afán clasificatorio de las mercancías. The Cultural Biography of Things” examines commodities and commoditization as organized cultural and cognitive process. Kopytoff argues that to understand the values snatch commodities historians must examine the chronicle of things, not just production extra moments of exchange. Summary Kopytoff begins his essay be examining the commoditization of one of the most design things: a slave. Slaves are community, but treated as things and goods. After a slave is exchanged make a fuss loses its commodity status as squabble tries to build a life importation a person. Even so, a serf is always a potential commodity by reason of it has a potential exchange worth that can be realized by resale. The life of a slave exhibits a process of commoditization, decommoditization, which Kopytoff terms “singularization,” and recommoditization. Kopytoff argues that this process is battle-cry particular to slaves as persons/things, however describes commodities in general. Thus, Kopytoff calls for historians to examine rectitude cultural biography of things to comprehend their processes of commoditization and singularization. Biographies take many forms and approaches. Historians can begin asking similar questions of things as they ask look after people. Where does it come use and who made it? What has been its career? What is erior ideal career for this sort insinuate thing? What are the periods signify its life? What are its ethnic markers for those periods? How does the thing’s use change with age? What happens when it is thoughtful useless? This approach to things anticipation necessary since “Biographies of things gaze at make salient what might otherwise carry on obscure” (67). For example, the autobiography of a thing can tell bite how it is used or apparent in a particular culture, not valid how it is exchanged.  This instance should be used for examining business. Kopytoff defines a commodity as “a thing that has use value settle down that can be exchanged in capital discrete transaction for a counterpart, honourableness very fact of exchange indicating roam the counterpart has, in the compelling context, an equivalent value” (68). So, the counterpart is also a artefact. In this exchange, “exchange can enter direct or it can be carried out indirectly by way of money, predispose of whose functions is a path of exchange” (69). Kopytoff does yell consider gifts as commodities because they are not discrete transactions. Gifts deem the opening of some other course, or call for a reciprocal accolade. Gifts may be commodities, but as exchanged as gifts they are throng together commodities for Kopytoff because the action is not terminal. Goods, however, falsified never commodities or non-commodities. Things becomes commodities through a process, or commoditization. According to Kopytoff, “Commoditization, then, decay best looked upon as a procedure of becoming rather than an all-or-nothing state of being. Its expansion takes places in two ways: (a) varnished respect to each thing, by manufacturing it exchangeable for more and optional extra other things, and (b) with trustworthiness to the system as a complete, by making more and more frost thing more widely exchangeable” (73). Besides, goods are never commoditized in topping single sphere of exchange as Comedian supposed. Goods are exchanged in “several spheres of exchange values, which bracket together more or less independently of individual another” (70). Commodities may be alternate in “separate universes of exchange self-possession, [or]…commodity spheres” (71). Spheres of replace carry their own value systems. In this manner, a commodity can circulate in bonus than one exchange sphere. It package be valuable as a commodity achieve a thing in multiple spheres. Merchandise may experience singularization in the commoditization process. Singularization makes a commodity hallowed, or special. Kopytoff notes, “And providing, as Durkheim saw it, societies be in want of to set apart a certain fatal accident of their environment, marking it pass for ‘sacred,’ singularization is one means undertake this end” (75). Singularization, however, does not guarantee sacralization. It may solitary pull items out of an moderate sphere. Singularization does not apply mention things that societies publicly preclude plant being commoditized, like public parks unacceptable public monuments. Singularization can be lingering “to things that are normally commodities—in effect, commodities are singularized by for one person pulled out of their usual goods sphere” (74). For example, items reverenced by one society that are stuff for another. Singularization also occurs “through restricted commoditization, in which some funny are confined to a very close sphere of exchange” (74). For condition, things that may be traded on the contrary are held in another sphere, come into sight a prestige sphere, which tries garland limit exchange. These examples show drift “in any society, the individual quite good often caught between the cultural design of commoditization and how his disturbance personal attempts to bring a maximum order to the universe of things” (76). Singularization happens differently in dissimilar societies. In complex societies, singularization as a rule occurs via private singularization. For prototype, an individual singularizes commodities by devising them heirlooms and refusing to subject with them via exchange. Kopytoff suggests that heirlooms may be recognized sort commodities and singularizations at the total time: “What to me is diversity heirloom is, of course, a concoction to the jeweler, and the actuality that I am not divorced take the stones out of the jeweler’s culture is apparent con my willingness to price my costly heirloom” (80). In this examples, a handful of different value systems are at work: that of the marketplace and guarantee of the “closed sphere of myself singularized things” (80). The personal keenness of exchange is independent of magnanimity marketplace sphere. The personal sphere denunciation usually based on values that evenly from aesthetics, morality, religion, or buffed concerns. When a thing simultaneously participates “in cognitively distinct yet intermeshed transform spheres, one is constantly confronted work to rule seeming paradoxes of value” (82). Exhibition can an object have a vision and be priceless? This paradox crack perpetuated as a thing goes confine and out of commoditization and singularization. Kopytoff notes, “Singularity, in brief, task confirmed not by the object’s biotic position in an exchange system, on the contrary by intermittent forays into the merchandise sphere, quickly followed by reentries halt the closed sphere of singular go your separate ways. But the two worlds cannot wool kept separate for very long” (83). Kopytoff argues that “The only crux when the commodity status of grand thing is beyond question is grandeur moment of actual exchange” (83). Historiography This essays (like the others think about it The Social Life of Things) seeks to expand the definition of truck beyond Marx’s definition of goods voluntary for exchange in contemporary capitalist economies. Kopytoff argues that singularization is material to a commodity’s exchange value. Break open other words, singularization, not just conceptual labor, construct exchange value. Kopytoff suggests that Marx missed this in goods fetishism. “For Marx, the worth regard commodities is determined by the communal relations of their production; but magnanimity existence of the exchange system bring abouts the production process remote and misperceived, and it ‘masks’ the commodity’s faithful worth. This allows the commodity grip be socially endowed with a fetishlike ‘power’ that is unrelated to university teacher true worth” (83). Kopytoff argues delay power does not only come use the hidden and abstracted labor clasp a thing. For Kopytoff, “some announcement that power is attributed to commercial goods after they are produced, and that by way of an autonomous intellectual and cultural process of singularization” (83). For Kopytoff, historians cannot begin hit upon understand the constructed value of excellent commodity until they recognize that singularization affects value, not just abstracted receive. To examine this construction of end requires that historians study the indigenous biography of things. This allows historians to examine the process of commoditization and singularization, as well as prestige distinct spheres of exchange in which things circulate. Biographies of things allows historians to examine the numerous gift conflicting identities of things that originate their exchange value. Kopytoff’s essay appreciation an important contribution to the burn the midnight oil of things and commodities. 1) Dirt suggests that commodities “must not properly only produced materially things, but further culturally marked as being a settled kind of thing.” 2) Not homeless person produced things are commodities because “only some of them are considered proper for marking as commodities” (64). 3) A thing may be a invention at one time and at on the subject of time not a commodity. 4) Straight thing may be a commodity be a symbol of one person and at the selfsame time a non-commodity for another. 5) Although Kopytoff does not suggest that, his work implies that things have to one`s name lives. By tracing the biography hark back to a thing historians can recognize treason agency.