MG Anspach says that “To give a gift in return, to recognize the generosity of the first giver through a corresponding gesture of reciprocity, is to recognize the relation for which the initial gift is only a vehicle.” This helpfully highlights the fact that the return gift is less a matter of gift-for-gift, and more a matter of gift-for-giver. But this isn’t quite right either, since the gift is not a response to the giver himself so much as to the relation that the giver intends to and has established with the recipient through his gift.
This might also help to distinguish gift exchanges from other sorts of exchanges: When I purchase a cup of coffee, I don’t give my money in recognition of the relation I have established with the barrista. I give money-for-coffee. It’s that extra thing, the relation, that is the focus of gifts.
(I’m hesitant about the “vehicle” language; or, perhaps, I’m hesitant about that “only.”)
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Letters
We welcome letters to the editor. Letters appear two issues after the article to which they are…
Visiting an Armenian Archbishop in Prison
On February 3, I stood in a poorly lit meeting room in the National Security Services building…
Christians Are Reclaiming Marriage to Protect Children
Gay marriage did not merely redefine an institution. It created child victims. After ten years, a coalition…
