Posted August 2000
In the village, there is a positive value associated with giving and sharing. As we saw in the last chapter, people consider giving as a virtue. Indeed, they even practiced to the best of their ability the art of giving. But there is another side of the equation which requires analysis: the receiving end. Is there any embarrassment or shame associated with accepting goods? Alternatively, do people readily accept, purchase and receive goods advanced and offered to them by fellow villagers? If the answer is yes, is this related to saving? What are the reasons for this? At a theoretical level, what can we learn about receiving as an 'institution'? My argument in this chapter is that people readily accept goods passed or proffered to them. It is my contention that villagers accept or receive goods - sometimes against their inclination - as a strategy to enhance their own life chances and opportunities. By accepting goods, the receivers become entitled to future multiple services from givers or traders.
The chapter is divided into four sections. The first examines the background and evidence of exchange of goods within the village. The second section examines trading. This is followed by a section that examines the reason for the practice. The last section tries to make conclusions on the meaning and significance of the practice of receiving or accepting goods within the village.
In the village, the greatest movement of goods from one person to another is through trade. Buying and selling is widespread, particularly among women. First, people sell items which they do not want or for which they have in excess. Such items may include chickens, goats, or crafts. Occasionally, women buy items for resale from outside the village. These items they deal with include spoons, cups, watches and clothes. Sometimes women buy these items locally. In rare circumstances, they buy them from foreign countries. Since it is a taboo in the village for women to do international small-scale trading, women sometimes send middlemen to buy on their behalf. It may take as much as 7 days before traders receive their goods from middlemen, but these are immediately sold upon receipt.
When a villager has goods on sale, other villagers are expected to converge at his home, see the goods and buy from that person. During fieldwork, when Ms. Mpala brought her household goods, mostly cups and plates, from South Africa, people gathered at her home, where they took time to examine and even bought the goods. Similarly when Ms. Shumba, taking advantage of funeral gathering, such as is common today, announced that she had good items for sale, all women in the villages came to inspect the items, though at different times.
All villagers are, despite their personal circumstances, under social compulsion to buy the goods. Thus, even though she had identical cups to those on sale from South Africa, Ms. Hove bought a set from Ms. Mpala. Similarly, Ms. Shumba bought a set of plates from Ms. Mpala even though she could have bought one from a cheaper source. Ms. Shumba's son, who has contacts in South Africa, could have purchased the plates at 40 dollars less. And there were other women whom I was told about who bought these goods even though they could have bought them cheaper elsewhere.
Those villagers not having money have to find ways of fulfilling their obligation. Some borrow, clandestinely because sometimes borrowing may attract ridicule from competing households. Such villagers may borrow from new lenders. However, they may also borrow from those people to which they are already indebted. One of the women, Ms. Zhou, who visited Mpala to examine the cups, had no money. She approached a villager, Ms. Musha, for 'a few coins' as she put it, 'to take care of a small trouble that had befallen her.' When Ms. Musha could not come to her aid, possibly because she also needed a set she, went to Ms. Ncube, a fellow church member from another village who eventually provided her the required money so she could buy the imported items. I personally was approached for 'a small loan' by a villager who wanted to buy the imported chinaware. When I said I had no money, the woman, who was a relative of mine to me protested saying that she was the only person who had not as yet bought a piece from Ms. Mpala.
Other villagers, not wanting to borrow money, but requiring it to fulfil their obligation, may adopt the more usual strategy of purchasing the goods on 'credit' or 'chikwereti'. In this circumstance, the seller understands that payment of the goods will come at some time in the future; that the payments will be made in installments; and, that the eventual payment will cover the value of the goods. Ms. Chigaba, a fellow villager, bought fish on credit from Ms. Shumba who had brought these from the Lowveld where she had gone for a ritual to commemorate the death of her brother-in-law. Ms. Denga was once asked by a group of poor women, gathered at her place to inspect second hand goods, to allow them to buy her goods on credit. When she agreed on condition that they keep their promise, the women then happily disappeared each with an item. At the time of the research, all women had paid, some in part, the majority in full.
Finally others without ready cash, may opt for 'kuchinjanisa' meaning 'to barter' or exchange goods for goods. This is a form of trade that used to carry a degree of shame, for buyers employing this mode of payment were often thought of as poor and backward. But attitudes are now changing, and since money is getting scarce, bartering has become a legitimate form of goods transfer; Ms. Mape, who could neither raise money nor get it from reliable lenders, promptly asked Ms. Hove to accept grain in return for fish.
Sometimes bartering may involve a detailed calculation of the values exchanged. Both Ms. Mape and Ms. Hove, on the day of the sale, sat on the ground and with the aid of school children managed to get the exact amount of grain that would be required to pay for the fish. In many instances however, this does not represent an exchange of equal economic value. The buyer may decide to give elaborate 'goods' in return. Ms. Chigaba, in her payment for the fish, brought more grain than was required. Similarly, Ms. Hove paid an additional quarter of a bucket in return for the cutlery she bought from Ms. Mpala.
During fieldwork, we did not examine the reasons why those buying or accepting paid more than was required of them. Could this be a form of interest charged on the bartered or purchased goods? This can hardly be so, for `interest' is generally regarded by villagers as a terrible form of extortion. We saw evidence of this in Chapter, 4). We suspect that those doing this (i.e., paying a bit more), would be making a symbolic point that they are not poor as is suggested by bartering and can even afford to pay more than is necessary. This view may be speculative, requiring detailed evidence to support it. But it is, in my view, more persuasive that the suggestion that the superfluity in payment reflects an appreciation for services rendered!
Not only must villagers buy or receive things, they also must not say or comment directly on the quality of the products on offer. The person buying must not show his displeasure on the quality of the product. Mr. Shoko brought two solar batteries to the village. Some say he had acquired the batteries from his kinsmen in Harare, because they say its not possible for a simple villager to buy two batteries at the same time. Others say that he had picked it from a dumping ground in Harare because people say the city is a dumping ground for batteries and other used items. Whatever the source of the batteries, Shoko sold one of them to Mr. Shumba, his neighbor. Mr. Shumba says from the onset that the battery was of a poor quality:
Whether Shoko knew the condition of the battery to be faulty or not is hard to say. One can interpret the selling as either an attempt to raise cash out of an item of value or as strategy to get rid of useless items. But this is not important to us here. What is of relevance is that when the battery was being sold to him Mr. Shumba did not protest about the quality even though he suspected and doubted its authenticity.
Instead of passing negative comments, village buyers are expected to make positive if not flattering comments on the goods on offer. This has to be the case even in those cases where the buyer or receiver secretly complains about the quality of the goods on sale. Ms. Moyo, a newly married woman in the village, never stopped praising Mpala's cups, even though she secretly did not like the red line that runs across the saucers.
Village buyers however, may express their views wildly. The plates sold by Ms. Mpala became the basis for debate among young women for many weeks to come. Women talked about these at the water wells and at the grinding mills where they met. Similarly, Shumba took time at the beer parties to make inflammatory comments regarding Shoko and his battery. While these disparaging comments were made widely and possibly reached the sellers in some form or the other, it is important to point out they never were made directly during a transaction. As pointed out, people spoke well about the goods and even bought them. But why this stress on receiving goods? Why this preference to suffer in silence and feel compelled to accept goods which the buyer or receiver never intended to receive? The section below tries to address this point.
At the ideological level, villagers say receiving, accepting or buying goods is the correct thing to do morally and culturally. They say refusing or rejecting to accept goods is immoral and is no different from 'witchcraft'. As a matter of fact, people say anyone who stays to himself and refuses to accept gifts from others is a 'witch' or a potential 'witch.' Such an individual enjoys human flesh, darkness, divides his time between being a wolf or hyena and being a human and enjoys darkness more than light. But most important of all, such an individual commands a fleet of ghosts who at night roam the villages beating the innocent, making them lose their mind and unleashing illness that cannot be treated except by mighty prophets and traditional healers. So evil are witches that they should be ostracized by the community. It is the fear of being labeled a witch that influences people to receive, accept, or purchase goods from other local villagers.
At a more practical level, villagers say they do so in order to prepare a future market for their products, goods and services. There is an unacknowledged pact among all villagers to boycott the goods and services of those who reject, deny and refuse similar services from fellow villagers. This boycott may have drastic consequences as indeed it happened to Mr. Mushani. A former driver with a plantation company, Mr. Mushani would not buy or accept gifts from other villagers, something that came to the attention of all villagers. Accusing people of being ignorant and lacking entrepreneurial skills, he got a loan to start a poultry project. While technically the project was sound, he could not sell the chickens and the eggs among the villagers who resolved to boycott his products. 'We wanted to teach him a lesson', the village-head remembered years later, 'that good relationship with others is important'. It is very likely that he learnt the lesson quickly because he suffered huge loses and could not pay the costs of inputs he had acquired through credit. The case demonstrates why people are keen to patronize the goods and services from others.
Secondly villagers say they patronize goods and services from village-based traders as part of assisting them in capital accumulation. Villagers say there is much to be gained by having a rich person in their midst. As one elder said, 'The rich person among us is a cave for all time.' Such a person is a 'cave; because he offers refuge to the hungry and the needy. But he is also a 'cave' because in him people can hide their poverty and avoid being ridiculed by other well endowed villages and villagers. Whatever, the reason for supporting a trader, it is clear that people are not engaged in acts of charity or just another economic transaction when the buy or receive goods. We are dealing here with issues of saving and investment.
Thirdly some accept or receive goods as a strategy of bailing-out the supplier from competing demands from relatives. This is clear from the unique case of Mutsindikwa, a widow in the area whose brothers in-law greedily took things from her because they said they had a right to the wealth left by their deceased brother. Women friends who were members of a piggery project therefore agreed to buy chickens from her as a preemptive strategy:
Again it is not correct to say that they adopted this strategy to simply prop up a colleague, although this is important too. They did so in anticipation of similar support in the future. Ms. Shoko put it very well, when she said:
During the research period we did not systematically examine whether this preemptive strategy achieved its intended objectives. It is very possible that it did because it monetized wealth. While one can not hide chickens and goats easily, they can hide money in secret places difficult to decipher.
In the village people receive, buy and accept items from each other. Villagers have to receive, accept and purchase goods from each other whether or not they have a need for or can afford such items. So strong is this obligation to acquire goods from others that those without money adopt a variety of strategies, which include battering and buying on credit. Those who buy do so to prepare a market for their products, for if they do not do so they risk future material and moral support from the community they dwell in. In addition people receive and accept goods from their kinsmen as part of supporting them in the accumulation of property or for some other reason; therefore we can then conclude, theoretically that accepting goods is an institution rather than a single act or event in time. It serves a function without which communities and individuals would not be able to cope and to reproduce themselves. And it is a function which no other formal institution has been able to perform in any meaningful and socially acceptable manner.
In the next chapter I shift focus and examine how and why people save a particular form of wealth, cattle.
Saving to death: Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3 | Chapter 4 | Chapter 5 | Chapter 6 | Chapter 7 | Chapter 8 | Chapter 9 | Chapter 10 | Chapter 11 | Bibliography
 
|