Commodities and Relics

Apparently the definition of what a commodity is and how it interacts with people and society is fairly subjective according to Arjun Appadurai.  The simple definition of a commodity forwarded by Appadurai is commodities are "objects of economic value" (3).  He then builds on the concepts of Simmel's work concerning value as a subjective exercise.  This concept was clearly seen when the class tried to define a commodity last week.  I agree with Kirsten, that there was a great variety in the definition; from the product view point, the ascribed value angle or the trade or exchangeable nature of an object and many more.  I believe we came up with a list of over two dozen aspects of a commodity.  I came into the the class with a particularly narrow view that a commodity was a raw material or a material worked to be used for other purposes.  Appadurai has helped me fine tune, and surprisingly, expanded my view of these "objects of economic value" by introducing the concept of the spirit of the commodity.  The social aspect is critical to an object becoming a commodity. He suggests they are "things with a particular type of social potential, that they are distinguishable from "products," "objects," "goods," "artifacts," ...." (6).   It is the in social setting of possible exchange based on subjective societal value, which change through time, that an object comes to life as a commodity.

A fascinating look at how an object becomes a powerful commodity is provided by Patrick Geary in his essay about scared commodities - relics.   The notion of a person being a commodity is commonly discussed in the analysis of slavery, but the Medieval societies commoditization of the body of a saint was quiet new to me.   The value of a relic is solely based on the perception that the holder ascribes to it.  The holder was usually a church that had the body, part of the body or an object that a saint has touched.  The relics great value was found in the miraculous occurrences that was attributed to the relic and the cult following that kept interest alive.  Of course relic had to pass a test publicly to prove its authenticity.    Geary talks about how a commodity at the time was exchanged through commerce, gifting or theft -with the later two being most important mode.  The gifting of a sacred relic was powerful in that it held the recipients in debt to the giver. The giver could use the gift as a sign of his care and or power over the recipient (i.e the Pope to local parishes).   I was surprised that theft was a way to elevate a relic.  The logic is that  if a relic was worth stealing, if must be worth a great deal because it was stolen (184).  Geary ties the sacred relic into the field of commodity because 1) it was of social value 2) it was exchanged at the time through gifting and theft, and 3) it had a temporal cycle - it moved in and out of interest over time, and 4) they possessed stories of their power or as Igor Kopytoff says - biographies.