Hahn 2004e - Appropriation

8/11/2019 Hahn 2004e - Appropriation

1/21

Hans Peter Hahn

Global Goods and the Process of Appropriation

Sonderdruck aus:

Peter Probst und Gerd Spittler (Hg.):

Between Resistance and Expansion.

Dimensions of Local Vitality in Africa.

(= Beitrge zur Afrikaforschung, 18)Mnster: Lit

[S. 213-231]


2/21


3/21

Global Goods and the Process of Appropriation

Hans Peter Hahn

Over the last decades, anthropological research on consumption hasexperienced a noticeable upturn. One result of recent studies conducted in

this field is the determination that the presence of certain consumer goodsin a society does not allow any immediate statements about theirmeanings. In order to clarify the difference between the fact of consump-tion on the one hand, and the various possible forms of evaluating and re-sponding to it on the other, researchers have introduced the term culturesof consumption.!1In so doing, they emphasize the creative aspect of sub-

jects" dealings with consumer goods in different cultures. Utilizing the

concept of cultures of consumption as a foundation, the following discus-sions will concentrate on determining the particular role of global goodsin African societies.

In explaining this concept, it should be mentioned that it predo-minantly refers to examinations of consumer societies, which is to saythose societies in which consumption receives a dominant role. Asregards societies in which subjects" dealings with goods are simul-taneously influenced by consumption and subsistence, it is questionablewhether a culture of consumption is present, and if so in which form. In areview article on the subject, Daniel Miller reported on the growing num-ber of studies on consumer research. He also questioned whether it is stillpossible today to carry out examinations of pure subsistence societies.2

An important consequence of globalization is the worldwide establish-ment of the principle of commodities, and today practically all societiesare to a greater or lesser extent involved with markets.3As a result of the

dealing with commodities on these markets, the consumption of global

1 In this sense Featherstone (1991: 13-27) negates the perspective of consumption as theresult of production, and calls for an autonomous, anthropological investigation of con-sumption.2 Daniel Miller (1998) did his own research in Trinidad, a society in which consumptionreceives a dominant role.


4/21

goods has become part of everyday life, even if subsistence as such hasnot disappeared. A few examples of globally distributed consumer goodsthat have become widely accepted as commodities in West Africa are

certain kinds of clothing, such as jeans, plastic containers, and soft drinkslike Coca-Cola.

In West Africa, in addition to these consumer goods, there are numer-ous locally produced goods which are manufactured by the same peoplewho use them. These goods should be assigned to the sphere of sub-sistence, which continues to play an important role, and which entails afundamentally different context than do consumer goods.4

This is the framework for our ongoing research into consumption andthe acquisition of goods within of the Collaborative Research Center onlocal action and global influences in Africa (SFB/FK 560-TP A 4).5

Within the scope of this research three individual West African societies,all of which are currently in a transitional stage between consumption andsubsistence, have been selected as case studies. The three case studies(the Tuareg in northern Niger, the Hausa in southern Niger, and theKasena in Burkina Faso) differ by their relative importance of sub-

sistence. For the compounds in a small Kasena village in Burkina Fasoexamined by the author, statistics can be presented which #although notrepresentative #provide an impression of the type of differentiationbetween commodities and subsistence goods. Those items locally pro-duced and not sold on markets make roughly 30% of the total goods.Global goods, in contrast, account about half of the objects in these com-pounds. Many of them were introduced as commodities; yet some others

such as, for example, recycling objects, are produced in the compoundsthemselves. This overview of the different origins of goods shows a fur-

3 The distinction between anonymous merchandises (commodities!) and personal goods(goods!) is fundamental for the description of global goods. Elwert (2000) emphasizesthe global spread of the principle of commoditization as a central element of globalization.4 In his overview article, Miller mentions the fact that studies of societies in a transitionalstage between subsistence and consumption are an important field of anthropological re-search (Miller 1995: 527). He is, however, also of the opinion that, in order to better our

understanding of the interaction with things in modern societies, more emphasis must beplaced on studies which concentrate exclusively on consumption.5 Gerd Spittler does research among the Tuareg, and Markus Verne is responsible for thecase study among the Hausa in southern Niger. I would like to take this opportunity tothank them both for their valuable commentaries on earlier versions of this paper. Ofcourse, sole responsibility for the statements made herein remains with the author. I wouldalso like to particularly thank the German Research Council (DFG) for making ourresearch financially possible.

214 Hans Peter Hahn


5/21

ther necessary differentiation: Local goods cannot automatically beequated with subsistence, and global goods may not entirely equated withcommodities.6

All three case study societies have in common that, over the last fewdecades, global goods and the relative importance of consumption haveincreased. Within the framework of this research, then, we also specific-ally address the following questions: How do local actors"dealing withthese things change in light of the increasing amount of global goods?And: How are global influences viewed from local perspectives?7Andfinally: What common traits do global goods have which allow them to bedistinguished from other categories of goods? Three locally important as-pects should be mentioned here: provenance, acquisition, and materialform.

Distinctions Between Local and Global Goods

For the purposes of examining the case studies, global goods!were

defined as those goods which have a provenance from outside of Africa.For global goods in West Africa, the most important countries of originare China and other Asian countries, as well as the Western industrializedcountries. This clear characteristic, based on a geographical criterion,must be supplemented with further characteristics. There are, for ex-ample, numerous objects which are produced in West African countries(Nigeria, Ghana, Cte d"Ivoire) using machines originating in Europe or

Asia. In terms of form and materials, they are not different from similargoods in Europe or other countries. The number of goods which are inprinciple global goods but are actually produced in Africa, is at least as

6 In attempting to establish a precise differentiation, for the case study in Burkina Fasofive groups of objects were classified according to provenance: I. Locally produced thingsused in local households (ca. 28%). II. Objects produced by local specialists and acquireddirectly from them (ca. 2%). III. Locally produced things which are also offered on themarkets as commodities (ca. 20%). IV. Global goods which have been locally modified

(such as recycling objects) (ca. 9%). V. Global commodities (ca. 41%). Quantitatively,groups I and V are the most important. They represent a common and simplified equationof commodities with global goods.7 For all of the case studies, a fundamental aspect of the change in consumption can thenbe determined: the expansion of household possessions. This expansion means the inte-gration of new things into everyday life, without pushing out other, long-familiar objects.Bringus (1986) describes this as a fundamental process of the change in consumption inhistorical periods of increasing prosperity.

215Global Goods and the Process of Appropriation


6/21

large as the number coming from outside Africa. A further special case isthat of various commodities which are produced in the same region, andoften even the same country, as they are used in but which are identical to

products of the same sort in other countries. Usually this is the case forpopular brands. Examples include Maggi!as a commonly used spice,cigarettes, and soft drinks like Coca-Cola.8Global goods can, thus, onlypartly be defined by referring to their geographical origin.9

The second characteristic of global goods concerns the form of theiracquisition. Many are #as mentioned before #sold as commodities on themarkets of the region. Many locally produced goods, however, can alsobe purchased and are sold on the markets. The essential differencebetween local and global commodities lies in the potential forcommunication with the producer. In the case of local commodities, theconsumer generally knows the artisans' village and compound, and inmany cases even the person himself or herself. Buyers and consumersoften also have particular relationships of trust with individualcraftspeople, who they seek out time and again.

Global goods as commodities tend in contrast to be rather impersonal.

In some (not all) cases the country of production is known, but no con-crete persons are ever associated with the production or seen as being theproducer. In this context, the role of the trader consists in little more thanopting to discontinue offering certain products if they prove unsatisfact-ory. He cannot influence their form. At this point it should be mentionedthat, by characterizing global goods as commodities, it is not my intent to

8 For such objects their imageas global goods is of high significance in their local appre-ciation. Even in rural regions of West Africa, where there are practically no advertise-ments, the brightly colored delivery trucks for Maggi!or for certain cigarette brands areto be found. These, along with the flags and stickers distributed to potential customers,ensure that a particular imageis associated with the commodity itself. Caputo thematizedglobal goods as imagesof the global (1997). In his view, these imagesare the foundationfor the global diffusion of certain brands.9 A popular method for visualizing global links is the cartographical depiction of the ori-gin of consumer goods commonly used in a particular place. This results in impressive

maps showing worldwide connections between the places of production and consumption.An examination of global consumption from a local perspective should, however, be lessconcerned with the often unknown places of production; rather, the subjects"views of con-sumer goods should be the main focus. These views correspond to maps within the mindsof the consumers, which are often quite different from geographical maps of consumption.Ger and Belk (1996) refer to these mental maps of goods"origins as consumptionscapes.!Such maps represent, in addition to geographical definition, another frame of reference forglobal goods.

216 Hans Peter Hahn


7/21

revisit the old debate over commodities and goods.10 Nevertheless,commoditization and the anonymity of the producer are important traitsof global goods in the context of the case studies examined here.

The fact that, in the case studies we have dealt with, the characteristicglobal!corresponds to the designation as a commodity!is to be under-stood as an empirically given fact. A few important exceptions furthershow that also in West Africa an equation of commoditization with glob-ality does not always correspond to local perspectives. Exceptions are, forexample, global goods that men bring back from their migratory work ortravels and give them as gifts to their wives at home. In the eyes of thewomen these objects are personal gifts with a clear gender association,which contribute to defining the feminine role, not simply undefined com-modities.11 Yet another group of objects shows the limits of equatingglobal goods with industrial, anonymous production. These are items cre-ated by artisans in the region, for which they utilize industrially producedmaterials, but rework them according to the wishes of the clients. Theseobjects include garments made of printed cloth and the previously men-tioned recycling objects made of wire or rubber.12

In addition to provenance and commoditization, the material forms ofthe objects themselves are a third characteristic of the distinction betweenglobal goods and locally produced ones. In order to explain this aspect, afew everyday objects may be presented as examples. Typical globalgoods, such as vessels made of plastic, enamel or stainless steel, whichare to be found in many households in all three case studies, are producedaccording to global patterns. The materials and processes used for their

10 Particularly in the context of local economies in West Africa, Keith Hart (1982, 1987)intensively concerned himself with the question of the constantly increasing number ofcommodities. See also Elwert and Wong (1979). Empirical studies on markets and theirlocal understanding confirm that, despite the commodity character of local products, in-tensive contacts between producers and users of objects are maintained on local markets(Vermot-Mangold 1977, Heermann 1981).11 Kopytoff"s The Cultural Biography of Things!(1986) showed that commoditization,as a rule, represents only a brief phase in the life of an object. Commoditization is thus a

socially defined and temporally finite (temporary) characteristic, which later may (for ex-ample, when the object in question is passed on to someone else as a gift) become mean-ingless.12 As a result of their materials and their local reworking, recycling objects represent aunique connection between the local and the global. As Suzanne Seriff (1996) contends,these objects often also represent a double relation on the level of meanings: The localcreation involved simultaneously refers to and alienates a global model, and creates aspace for distancing oneself from the global.



8/21

fabrication do not allow any changes after the production phase. This isnot true of many locally produced goods. Some of them can be radicallychanged or reworked. Others are produced in the region for reasons which

can only be recognized in the local context. In other regions, their use andsignificance would not be intelligible.

Global goods, in contrast, are used in many local societies around theworld while maintaining the same material form. If such an object were tobe removed from its context of use, and examined as such, without anyknowledge about its context, it would not allow any conclusions as towhere and how it was used. Such aspects as local value, its precise use,the group of persons who use it, and the associated meanings would neverbe detected from the objects' material structure.

None of these characteristics may be recognized from the object itself.There can nevertheless be no doubt that global goods do have such prop-erties in local societies. The term "cultures of consumption", mentioned atthe beginning of this work, refers to this indirect connection. Between theproduction, which results in a definite material form, and the contexts ofthe consumed object, a connection only takes place through the local

ascription of contexts. In other words, what happens here is that globalcommodities experience a local definition. In this process, that I call ap-propriation, characteristics such as value, form of use and meaning are ir-revocably ascribed.

Appropriation

The process by which objects of the same material form change fromcommodities!to personal goods!is to be understood as appropriation.

The result of appropriation is that the objects, although materially un-changed, are no longer what they once were as undefined commodities.!Daniel Miller (1995:452) has compared the local differences between loc-al consumption patterns, determined by differences in the process of ap-propriation, with the differences resulting from the variety of kinship sys-tems, which are a classic topic for anthropologists. His prognosis isessentially that the significance of the kinship ordering systems for cultur-al identity is decreasing and that, as a result of the appropriation, they willbe replaced by the increasingly important role of consumption. According

218 Hans Peter Hahn


9/21

to his thesis, appropriation is the key to societal creativity and localcultural identity.13

Can appropriation truly be viewed so positively? Is appropriation a

process which, based on the level of ascribed meanings, actually createsnew objects? Can appropriated goods actually play the same part aslocally produced objects or locally defined familial relations? It is obvi-ous that answers to these questions could, in light of the rapidly changingmaterial environment in the societies examined here, also contribute tosolving the question of the vitality of the local. Attempting to find theanswers to these questions from the perspective of the local actors istherefore also a part of the work of this project.

At this point a simple example should be mentioned, by means ofwhich the arguments reproduced in the following may easily be tested:Anyone who has any experience in Africa will be aware of the bicycle"sgreat significance there. In many places, both in cities and rural settle-ments, bicycles are important everyday objects. For many people in WestAfrica it is a personal goal to own a bicycle.14However, though the prin-ciple of use for a bicycle is universal, how actors actually use it varies

considerably, even among the case studies of this project, e.g. betweenthe Hausa in southern Niger (Berberkia) and the Kasena in Burkina Faso(Kollo). Differences do not only concern such questions as how the bi-cycle is used, which is to say the intensity of its use, its wear and tear, theitems transported with it, but rather also its societal connotations. Who isallowed to ride a bicycle? How is bicycle riding viewed? The answers tothese questions are a result of appropriation.

Thus, the concept of appropriation should be viewed as a tool to ex-plain the local roles of global goods. In this context, it must be asked howexactly the appropriation of goods takes place, and which types ofmodification an object undergoes before it is at some point viewed as apersonal good which is an unquestioned and integral part of local societyand identity. In the following, the primary goal is to understand appropri-ation as a process composed of differing yet closely connected aspects.15

13 For Miller (1995), the process of appropriation is the central argument for the claimthat, even if only objects of the same sort (global goods) were consumed across the planet,something like a uniform world culture will not come to exist.14 Ethnographic literature has to date barely documented the use and meaning of bicyclesin Africa. Two of the very few exceptions are Kipke (1988) and Renne and Usman (1999).15 The following description is based on an introductory text about the appropriation oftechnological goods by Roger Silverstone (Silverstone et al. 1992).



10/21

Here, four phases must be distinguished which an object passes throughon its way from being a commodity available on the market to being apersonal good. These are 1) material appropriation, 2) objectification, 3)

incorporation, and lastly 4) transformation, each of which will beexplained in detail:

1. Material Appropriation. Appropriation at the material level is thetransition from formal (the commodity has a certain price) to moral eco-nomy (an object has a personal! value). The commodity becomes agood. It becomes the personal possession of a man or woman. This pro-cess can also include changes in the item"s form (for example, the decora-tion of a bicycle), but in some cases is solely the internalization, the indi-vidual familiarity!with what was at first an external, unknown form.

2. Objectification. This refers to the classification of an item as be-longing to one of the categories of known objects in the households. Theyare arranged in specific areas of the local universe of things,!placed incontexts which allow more detailed description, and become subject to asocially determined objectivity.! Contexts! in this case are fields ofmeanings, which are generally defined by other items. (Who is allowed to

use the object? Is the object seen as an individual or shared possession?What part does it play in everyday life, or is it only reserved for specialoccasions?) In short: The new objects are categorized and, in the process,classified according to the same or similar categories as those used forknown objects, or are demarcated from them. Through this process anitem becomes, for example, a gendered object for men, for women, or forboth sexes. The key element here is that every object is categorized using

already existent elements of meaning and, as a result, is integrated into anexistent practice of dealing with objects.16

In the case of new, global goods the relevance of objectification be-comes particularly clear. When, for example, young people bring backnew, previously unknown things from the city, and seek to distinguishthemselves from those who have remained in their town of origin, theyare not always successful. It is only in the city that jeans and tennis shoesare understood as expressions of particular autonomy, or of a special role

16 This aspect underlies the elementary determination that all material objects utilizedwithin a society are subject to categorization. In an earlier ethno-archaeological work,Miller (1985) presented empirically how complex the criteria of categories are which makea vessel into a water jug in a certain society. These largely unconsciously applied cate-gories are the result of inter-subject conventions. Thus, objectification must not beconfused with objectivity.!

220 Hans Peter Hahn


11/21

for young people.17 In rural areas, in contrast, these things are notnecessarily perceived as being provocative, but rather are either not paidattention to at all, or are rejected as being impractical. This example

illustrates how important the connection to existent local fields ofmeaning is for objectification.

Objectification also includes the naming of things, and how peopletalk about them. In the local language of the Kasena, for example, bi-cycles are #not surprisingly #called wire donkeys.!This does not mean,however, that similar meanings are associated with bicycles and donkeys.

To cite another example, plastic canisters, at the level of linguisticappropriation, become calabash bottles. Again, the name is borrowedfrom an existent object. Nevertheless, the use of the canister is clearlydifferent from that of the calabash bottle.

Material appropriation and objectif ication are important for the pro-cess of appropriation. Becoming familiar with and naming of objects arecore elements of appropriation, yet they are insufficient to makesomething a part of one"s identity. Of equal importance are the followingtwo stages:

3. Incorporation.This term refers to the potential, the ability to usethings correctly.!Every object which is familiar, which has already beenobjectified, calls for a specific way of using and interacting with it, whichis seen as the correct! way from the local perspective. How, forexample, does one ride a bicycle correctly?!The item itself, its opera-tion,!defines in a certain sense the time spent in its immediate physicalpresence. At the same time, one"s perception of one"s own body changes

through the use of the object. The example of the bicycle in Africa makesthis particularly clear. This includes the physical fitness which is attainedby riding a bicycle on a regular basis. As a result of the condition of thebicycles (nearly all removable parts quickly disappear) and the particularform of use, the ability to stop them without brakes, or to maintain one"sbalance while transporting heavy loads, also come into play.

Incorporation refers more clearly than the other stages of appropriationto the fact that the process is by no means a strictly intentionally directedone. Appropriation makes one"s own body into a tool oriented on the ob-

17 Bauer (2000) depicts the conflicts arising from the desire to wear jeans in Korhogo(Cte d"Ivoire). In other West African societies, however, the wearing of jeans has led tono conflicts whatsoever. Such differences show how society-specific the meanings of cer-tain objects are.



12/21

ject, a tool which one needs in order to make use of the object. This isparticularly clear in the case of complex technological objects like thetelevision and bicycle.18Yet incorporation also takes place similarly with

cooking pots or beverage containers made of metal or plastic. Without theuser noticing it, their ways of doing certain things change through theroutine use of new objects, as do their own perceptions of their surround-ings. To continue with the same example: It is only when drinking from agourd has become unusual and unpleasant for certain beverages that theincorporation of metal beverage containers can be said to be complete.

The use of the gourd remains unchanged in certain contexts. Often theglobal goods do not immediately lead to substitution, but rather to an ex-pansion of one"s possessions.

Whereas objectification is primarily of significance at the level ofmeaning and categorization, incorporation describes action, the interac-tion with things and the corresponding consequences in the actors"per-ceptions. In comparing the stages it should be emphasized thatobjectification and incorporation are important at both the individuallevel, centered on the subject, and at the level of societal expectations.

Both aspects exist within the framework of the larger society, but are alsoperformed individually.

4. Transformation. The result of appropriation is the final trans-formation into an autonomous good integrated into the local context, intoa part of the individual or collective possessions. The appropriated objecthas definite local meanings and is now only to a limited extent still seenas something foreign from the local perspective. Appropriation needs not,

however, result in the negation of provenance. In many cases the societylives quite well with the paradox of knowing an object"s provenance as aglobal good, yet simultaneously considering it something of its own.

The termtransformation!indicates that an object is subject to locallydefined, societal norms and restrictions, with all their consequences. Anexample of this, again in reference to the bicycle, is the classification ac-cording to gender. Here there are differences between the Hausa insouthern Niger, among whom only the men use bicycles; and the Kasena,among whom bicycles are predominantly but not exclusively used by

18 The incorporation of the television includes, for example, the viewer"s ability to sitstill, and to focus their attention on the screen without interacting in any way. Abu-Lughod(1997) describes the appropriation of the television in a village in upper Egypt. Shefocuses, however, predominantly on the content of television programming, only brieflymentioning physical appropriation.

222 Hans Peter Hahn


13/21

men. This assignment of an object to a particular group of users is a normfrom the local perspective. In this context the possibility that an objectmight have a different group of users or other meanings in other societies

is not even considered.A closer examination of such local differences can help to understand

where in a society spaces of meaning are available, and which motiva-tions lead to the classification of new things into particular contexts. Thisincludes, for example, classification according to gender, which in onecase is very clearly defined, yet in another remains open. The term oftransformation underlines the fact that this classification represents afinal, irreversible process. It emphasizes the accomplishment of making athing into something different, new, and locally defined, without chang-ing its material form.

Terms like domestication! (Marshall Sahlins) or nostrification!(Karl-Heinz Kohl) depict similar concepts as appropriation, but have an-other focus.19Both terms emphasize the active side of the appropriationprocess, and were therefore not utilized for our discussions. Appropri-ation is a process which can only partially be controlled by the members

of a society, the results of which are not known in advance. Both con-cepts, domestication!and nostrification,!further emphasize the volun-tary aspect of a genuinely constructive, creative and apparently spon-taneous act.20It is true that, without this creative aspect, appropriation isnot conceivable. However, other factors must also be taken intoconsideration, such as the historical context of those African societieswhich appropriated global goods, a context often marked by painful ex-

periences.21

From this perspective, appropriation is more to be understood

19 According to Miller (1995: 145) there is an unclear transition between resistance tonew things and their appropriation, which he delineates with the term taming.!Millerunderstands taming in the same way as domestication,!introduced by Sahlins (1976).20 Kohl (2002: 10) describes appropriation as the underlying principle of European cul-tural expansion. The abilities of appropriation, of synthesis, and of global expansion havebeen the recipe for success!for both Europe and America since the beginning of themodern. Admittedly, European history represents a historically unique example of appro-

priation. Appropriation from the perspective of local societies in Africa has taken placeunder completely different historical conditions.21 An interesting thesis which explains a motivation for appropriation without referring tothe voluntary nature and apparently spontaneous interest of the local societies is theconcept of synchronization. Wilk (1994) views the post-colonial societies as victims of atraumatic experience in the course of which an externally defined anachronism was as-signed them. In the colonial era, the major urban areas determined what was important,and what was new. To this day, local societies are struggling to overcome this



14/21

as a type of work which a society carries out. James Carrier (1995)therefore accurately speaks of the work of appropriation.!

The meanings ascribed to an appropriated global good in a society

cannot be generally defined, nor can it by any means be predicted. Theaforementioned classification according to gender is, for example, oftenassociated with power and a part of the overall assignment of genderroles. This is also true of the previously mentioned gifts from the men ofthe Kasena: They offer the women global goods which they believe fit tothe role of women. A classification according to gender precedes the actof gift-giving.

The four aspects of appropriation described here, namely material ap-propriation, objectification, incorporation and transformation are comple-mentary. They complete one another, and the absence of one or more as-pects can be interpreted as partial appropriation. Partial appropriation canbe an expression of the fact that, in a local society, an object is familiar,but has not yet become part of everyday use. The four aspects, however,do not form a sequence. They may proceed simultaneously or in a differ-ent order than that described above. Individual stages can also be re-

peated, leading to a redefinition of a particular category of objects"role.The work of appropriation!is in this sense never completely finished,and its results are called into question time and again.

The Ambiguity of Appropriation

The previously mentioned creativity is certainly a hallmark of appro-priation. Something new is always created when people have to deal withnew things and arrive at binding concepts of them within a social space.

The creativity of appropriation cannot, however, be equated with volun-tariness. The confrontation with new things often happens to people, nev-er having asked for those things. They have no choice as to whether ap-propriation should take place or not. Therefore certain forms of rejectionor negative connotation are also to be understood as appropriation. It isnamely not uncommon that negative or even dangerous qualities are

anachronism and to achieve a synchronism with the former metropolises. This striving forsynchronization is, according to Wilk, the motor of the rash and uncritical appropriation ofglobal goods in many post-colonial societies.

224 Hans Peter Hahn


15/21

ascribed to a thing.22Diseases are appropriated in this manner, such asAIDS or, in Burkina Faso, the Apollo!illness, a painful eye infectionwhich received its name because of its epidemic spread at the time of the

first flights to the moon.A demonstrative example of the ambivalent evaluation of appropriated

goods is the gradual acceptance of soap in Zimbabwe, a phenomenon in-vestigated by Timothy Burke (1996). Burke emphasizes that it is by nomeans necessary for those appropriating to play an active role. Of coursethe consumers in Zimbabwe also acted during the course of the decades-long appropriation of soap, and the completed appropriation can be recog-nized today by the fact that soap is subjectively seen as an indispensableproduct for daily needs, and is purchased on a regular basis. The tradersin the region, however, at first felt forced to give soap and other consumerarticles away for free so that they would eventually be recognized as con-sumer articles at all. At first the future consumers accepted these gifts,later received the commodities in trade for produce, and only after alengthy period began to pay money for them. This intermittent, passiveattitude poses no contradiction to the fact that soap was repeatedly as-

signed new contexts (gift, luxury good, everyday good) during this morethan 30-year period. Today, the people of Zimbabwe are an importantconsumer group of that kind of soap (predominantly produced in GreatBritain), a fact to be understood as the result of appropriation.23

In addition to a close examination of appropriation and of the chang-ing contexts of things, a second methodological aspect is also importantfor our project on consumption in West Africa. In attempting to answer

the question of local vitality, we use an approach which does not confineitself to describing individual global goods and their appropriation. Itseems to be essential to view global goods as only a part of the everydayobjects in these societies. Beside the global goods there are as well theaforementioned locally produced goods. What happens to them mean-while appropriation becomes more and more important? This funda-mental question can only be answered by the recording of the possessions

22 Appropriation can #from a historical perspective #also be connected to painfulexperiences, or be accelerated by external pressure, as Rothermund (1999) shows.23 In contrast to what one might expect, there are only a few ethnographic reports docu-menting processes of appropriation in African societies. Examples of recent literature onthe topic are Hansen (2000), who focuses on the role of second-hand clothing in Sambia,and Weiss (1996), who describes interaction with new global goods as a blueprint for thelife world!in a phenomenological sense among the Haya in Tanzania.



16/21

in a number of compounds in their entirety, and classifying them ac-cording to specific contexts. Only from an overview of the total posses-sions does it become recognizable whether global goods play a particu-

larly pronounced part or not. And only in this larger context is it possibleto answer the question of how the actors"interactions with things havegenerally changed in the face of the spread of global goods. A few re-marks based on the results of our ongoing research may show which state-ments the application of the appropriation concept allows to be made.

A common statement about global goods by Hausa in southern Nigerand Kasena in Burkina Faso indicates that the change in the nature oftheir possessions is perceived much less dramatically from the local per-spective than one might expect from the figures on the percentage ofglobal goods. While the people know that many things were made inChina or Europe, in everyday use they see no need to fundamentally dis-tinguish them from locally produced objects. This can be explained withthe observation that, for many everyday tasks, both local and global goodsare often used together. Thus, in the households there is no spatial separa-tion related to the origins of goods. The actors" knowledge of certain

items" global! provenance and other, ascribed characteristics such astheir high price are no reason to treat them fundamentally differently thanlocally produced ones.

Although the distinction between local and global from a local per-spective is possible at the level of knowledge, it would not appear to be ofparticular importance. Despite this lack of exclusivity, however, there aresometimes conflicts accompanying the introduction of new things. Such

conflicts have to do with the question who should be allowed to use anobject, whether restrictions are applicable etc. The specific ways of deal-ing with such contested global goods allow a supplementation of theconcept introduced above. They namely show that appropriation is notalways based on a consensus of all involved parties. Among other factors,there is for example no definite connotation of the things in question, asone might assume to be a result of appropriation; or the assignedmeanings can be subjects of controversy within the society. 24

24 Arnould and Wilk (1984) go so far as to interpret the progression of global goodswithin societies fundamentally upon the basis of conflicts among the social groups. In theview of the authors, this is often a case of young people who, through the possession ofsuch goods, protest against the authority of their elders.

226 Hans Peter Hahn


17/21

Markus Verne observed that among the Hausa in Berberkia newly ac-quired, expensive things are at times hidden. This practice is necessary ifthe person in question wants to be entirely certain that no-one else can

make a claim to their things. This could also be interpreted as showingthat, for the local society, there is a logic of public and private property.Certain objects can be visible without causing any problems, or are evendemonstrably displayed in highly visible places.25 Others (especiallymany global goods) are better off not being shown, or are even hidden inthe homes of relatives. The residents of Kollo, Burkina Faso, make simil-ar statements. They refer to the possession of certain things to the effectthat, for example, the owner of a motorcycle is better off not living intheir town of origin. It is suggested that he goes to a city, where he is farfrom his relatives and can use the economic opportunities at hand to pre-serve and increase his possessions. The common and otherwise generallyaccepted pressure to give things up and to share, and therefore the im-possibility of refusing a neighbour or close family member"s request, leadto the fact that one ultimately cannot keep and use goods acquired fromelsewhere (global goods) in one"s place of origin.26For the owners of

global goods, the social control would appear to be something negative inthis specific context.

What, then, is the result of appropriation in the light of this ambiguity?Appropriation is a continuing process, which does also assign new con-texts to things already integrated into a society. Therefore a final result ofappropriation is not to be expected. Appropriation is in any case a fittinginstrument for pointing out the existence of cultures of consumption. Yet

thework of appropriation

!not only designates the flexibility in ascrib-

ing meanings from a local perspective. What is more important is that ap-propriation implies a change in the overall way of dealing with things or,in a more general sense, a change in the society, as the conflicts about pri-vacy described above show. This statement may at first seem trivial, butin the application of the appropriation concept to date this aspect has infact not been given due consideration.

25 This refers to the context of display!described by Renfrew (1986, 1988), by use ofwhich the presence of certain types of objects can allow a determination of the relative dis-tribution of wealth in a given society.26 Wilk (1989) made a similar report on a peasant group in Middle America. After someof the peasants had built their houses of new, costlier materials, in the eyes of the remain-ing peasants it was impossible to maintain their previous principle of reallocation.



18/21

Appropriation may not only be equated with the transformation of ananonymous commodity into a subjective, locally common and connotedgood. Appropriation must also be understood as a redefinition of the

overall way of dealing with things. Alone the fact that certain thingswhich are commonly used and appreciated in everyday life must now beacquired at local markets at great expense changes the perspective onthose things produced by the locals themselves or by craftsmen in the re-gion, which is to say on the sphere of subsistence. Our methodologicalchoice to record the possessions of entire families and compounds alsoprovided the necessary space to be able to simultaneously document thechange in views of local goods. The public-private dynamic in the casestudy of the Hausa in southern Niger, for example, clearly demonstratesthis.

Appropriation and Vitality

What does appropriation mean for the question of local vitality in gen-

eral? First of all, the concept of appropriation as such leads to the insightthat vitality cannot be equated with an insistence on the own.!Appro-priation as a process is a conceptual tool that explains why the use ofglobal goods is also to be recognized as a part of local identity and, there-fore, an assertion of the own.!Yet only on the surface does appropri-ation seem to be an integration!of the global without consequences. Amore accurate depiction is that appropriation results in both the percep-

tion of theown

!and the entire way of dealing with things beingchanged.

The changes in local societies, which are just as uncontrollable for thelocal actors as is appropriation itself, upon careful observation, prevent usfrom equating local vitality with successful appropriation.27In attemptingto determine the vitality of the local, it is not enough to observe the pro-cess of appropriation and to analyze the integration of global goods.While appropriation canmean vitality, appropriation alone is not suffi-

27 As Spittler (2002: 1) explains, vitality was at the beginning a concept borrowed fromethno-linguistic vitality theory (ELVT). Within ELVT, linguists utilize ethnographicmaterial to arrive at a partial definition, which they then supplement with linguistic data.From a social sciences perspective, vitality is understood more as a characteristic of localentities, which explains their continued existence in a setting of structurally different, morepowerful entities such as the nation-state.

228 Hans Peter Hahn


19/21

cient to determine vitality. Based on the empirical results of the three casestudies, two critical aspects must be mentioned. First of all, the claim thatappropriation may be equated with voluntariness is contradicted by its

historical experience in West Africa. Secondly, the integration of the newobjects results in a new way of dealing with the familiar.28 Thus,appropriation is fundamentally suited to understand the process ofchanges in consumption; however, it cannot necessarily be equated withthe vitality of local societies.

References

Abu-Lughod, Lila (1997). The Interpretation of Culture(s) After Television. In:Representations 57: 109-34.

Arnould, Eric. J . and Richard R. Wilk (1984). Why do the Natives Wear Adidas?In: Advances in Consumer Research 11: 7-12.

Bauer, Kerstin (2000). Blue Jeans: Zeichen fr die Amerikanisierung der Welt?In: Bauer, Ulrich (ed.): Interkulturel le Beziehungen und Kul turwandel in

Afr ika. Beitrge zur Globalisierungsdebatte. Frankfurt a.M.: P. Lang, pp. 253-69.

Bringus, Nils-Arvid (1983). Bedrfniswandel und Sachkultur. In: Kstlin,Konrad (ed.). Umgang mit Sachen. Zur Kul turgeschichte des Dinggebrauchs.( 23. Deutscher Volkskunde-Kongre). Regensburg: Lehrstuhl frVolkskunde, pp. 135-48.

Burke, Timothy (1996).Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women: Commodification, Consump-tion and Cleanli ness in Modern Zimbabwe. Durham: Duke University.

Caputo, John S. (1998). The Rhetoric of McDonaldization: A Social SemioticPerspective. In: Alfino, M. (ed.).McDonaldization Revisited. Critical Essayson Consumer Culture. Westport: Praeger, pp. 39-51.

Carrier, James G. (1995). Gifts and Commodities: Exchange and Western Cap-ital ism since 1700. London: Routledge.

Elwert, Georg (2000). Globalisierung als Phnomen der sozialen und kulturellenEntwicklung. In: Moser, Rupert (ed.).Die Bedeutung des Ethnischen im Zeit-alter der Globali sierung. Ei nbindungen, Ausgrenzungen, Suberungen. Bern:

Paul Haupt, pp. 1-16.

28 Ger and Belk (1993) go one step further in this regard. They suspect that appropriationalways implies a new uncertainty among the local society as to its perspectives on previouspossessions. The view of one"s own things is, after the integration of global goods, nolonger the same.



20/21

Elwert, Georg and D. Wong (1979). Thesen zum Verhltnis von Subsistenz undWarenproduktion in der Dritten Welt. In: Arbeitsgruppe BielefelderEntwicklungssoziologen (ed.). Subsistenzproduktion und Akkumulation.( Bielefelder Studien zur Entwicklungssoziologie 56). Saarbrcken: Breiten-bach, pp. 25-578.

Featherstone, Mike (1991). Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London:Sage.

Ger, Gliz and Russel W. Belk (1996). I'd like to buy the World a Coke. Con-sumptionscapes of the Less Affluent World. In: Journal of Consumer Poli cy19: 271-304.

Hansen, Karen T. (2000).Salaula. The World of Secondhand Clothing in Zambia.

Chicago: University of Chicago.Hart, Keith (1982). On Commoditization. In: Goody, Esther (ed.). From Craft to

Industry. The Ethnography of Proto-industr ial Cloth Production (= Cam-bridge Papers in Social Anthropology 10). Cambridge: Cambridge University,pp. 38-49.

$(1987). Commoditisation and the Standard of Living. In: Hawthorn, G. (ed.).The Standard of Living. Cambridge: Cambridge University, pp. 70-93.

Heermann, Ingrid (1981). Subsistenzwir tschaft und Marktwir tschaft im Wandel.

Wirtschaftethnologische Forschungen bei den Builsa in Nord-Ghana. (=Kul-turanthropologische Studien 2). Hohenschftlarn: Kommissionsverlag KlausRenner.

Kipke, Barbara G. (1988). Bicycle Reference Manual for Developing Countr ies.Afr ican Exper iences. Eschborn: CASE.

Kohl, Karl-Heinz (2002). Aneignungen. Kulturelle Vielfalt im Kontext derGlobalisierung. In: Kohl, Karl-Heinz (ed.). New Heimat. New York: Lukas &Sternberg; 2002, pp. 8-18.

Kopytoff, Igor (1986): The Cultural Biography of Things. In: Appadurai, Arjun(ed.). The Social Li fe of Things. Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University, pp. 64-91.

Miller, Daniel (1985). Artefacts as Categor ies. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity.

$(1995). Consumption and Commodities. In: Annual Review of Anthropology24: 141-61.

$(1998). Coca-Cola: A Black Sweet Drink from Trinidad. In: Miller, Daniel(ed.). Mater ial Cultures. Why some Things Matter. Chicago: Chicago Uni-versity, pp. 169-87.

Renfrew, Colin (1986). Varna and the Emergence of Wealth in PrehistoricEurope. In: Appadurai, Arjun (ed.). The Social Li fe of Things. Commodities inCultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University, pp. 141-68.

230 Hans Peter Hahn


21/21

$ (1998). Mind and Matter: Cognitive Archaeology and External SymbolicStorage. In: Renfrew, Colin (ed.). Cognition and Material Culture: TheArchaeology of Symbolic Storage. Cambridge: MacDonald Institute forArchaeological Research, pp. 1-6.

Renne, Elisha P. und Dakyes S. Usman (1999). Bicycle Decoration and EverydayAesthetics in Northern Nigeria. In:African Arts32 (2): 46-51.

Rothermund, Dietrich (1999). Aneignung und Selbstbehauptung. Antwor ten aufdie europische Expansion. Mnchen: Oldenbourg.

Sahlins, Marshall (1976).Culture and Practical Reason. Chicago: University ofChicago.

Seriff, Suzanne (1996). Recycled, Re-Seen. Folk-Art from the Global Scrap-

Heap. In:African Arts26 (4): 42-55, 93-94.Silverstone, Roger, E. Hirsch, and D. Morley (1992). Information and

Communication Technologies and the Moral Economy of the Household. In:Silverstone, Roger (ed.).Consuming Technologies: Media and Information inDomesti c Spaces. London: Routledge, pp. 15-31.

Spittler, Gerd (2002). What is meant by Local Vitality?Newsletter of Afr icanStudies at Bayreuth University (NAB), 1(2): 1-3.

Vermot-Mangold, Ruth (1977).Die Rolle der Fr au bei den Kabre in Nord-Togo.(= Basler Beitrge zur Ethnologie 17). Basel: Ethnologisches Seminar derUniversitt.

Weiss, Brad (1996).The Making and Unmaking of the Haya li ved World. Con-sumption, Commoditization, and Everyday Practice. Durham: Duke Uni-versity.

Wilk, Richard R. (1989). Houses as Consumer Goods. Social Processes andAllocation Decisions. In: Orlove, Benjamin S. and H. J. Rutz (eds.). The

Social Economy of Consumption(Monographs in Economic Anthropology 6).

Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 297-322.

$(1994). Consumer Goods as Dialogue about Development: Colonial Time andTelevision. In: Friedman, Jonathan (ed.). Consumption and Identity. (Studiesin Anthropology and History 15). Chur: Harwood, pp. 97-118.


Documents

Hahn 2004e - Appropriation