The Napo Runa of Amazonian Ecuador

Notes

Notes Introduction ฀ 1.฀Napo฀Runa฀refers฀to฀one฀of฀several฀Amazonian฀Quichua฀dialects฀and฀ethnicities฀ in฀Ecuador.฀There฀are฀salient฀and฀crucial฀differences฀among฀Amazonian฀Quichua฀ speakers฀(see฀Whitten฀1976,฀1985)฀that฀fall฀beyond฀the฀scope฀of฀this฀work.฀It฀is฀estimated ฀that฀Amazonian฀Ecuador฀contains฀70,0000฀Quichua฀speakers฀(Wibbelsman฀ 2003:xx).฀Ecuador฀is฀a฀strongly฀indigenous฀nation,฀and฀indigenous฀peoples฀dominate฀ Ecuador’s฀rural฀sectors.฀A฀July฀2001฀estimate฀posits฀that฀28฀percent฀of฀Ecuador’s฀total฀ population฀is฀indigenous฀(Wibbelsman฀2003:377). ฀ 2.฀To฀protect฀the฀identities฀and฀privacy฀of฀research฀consultants,฀I฀have฀replaced฀most฀ of฀the฀names฀with฀pseudonyms฀and฀have฀created฀fictional฀(but฀culturally฀appropriate)฀ names฀for฀all฀the฀places฀I฀mention.฀Because฀those฀who฀are฀familiar฀with฀my฀affiliations฀ with฀particular฀families฀in฀the฀Upper฀Napo฀region฀will฀be฀able฀to฀identify฀participants฀ in฀these฀pages,฀I฀have฀tried฀to฀keep฀negative฀or฀possibly฀controversial฀information฀to฀ a฀minimum. ฀ 3.฀I฀use฀the฀Quichua฀alphabet฀of฀Orr฀and฀Wrisley฀(1981:154)฀with฀the฀exceptions฀of฀ the฀letters฀w฀for฀hu฀and฀k฀for฀qu.฀These฀changes฀make฀many฀Quichua฀words฀easier฀ to฀follow฀for฀English฀speakers.฀The฀letters฀used฀are฀thus฀a,฀b,฀c,฀ch,฀d,฀g,฀w,฀i,฀j,฀l,฀ll,฀ m,฀n,฀ñ,฀p,฀k,฀r,฀s,฀sh,฀t,฀ts,฀u,฀y,฀z,฀and฀zh.฀Although฀a฀“unified”฀alphabet฀exists฀for฀ Quichua,฀it฀is฀more฀representative฀of฀highland฀dialects฀and฀distorts฀many฀words฀in฀ Napo฀Quichua.฀While฀the฀unified฀dialect฀also฀uses฀w฀and฀k฀(e.g.,฀“Kichwa”),฀it฀does฀ not฀include฀some฀letters฀that฀are฀necessary฀to฀the฀Napo฀dialect.฀Also,฀because฀of฀the฀ influence฀of฀Spanish,฀the฀Quichua฀vowel฀u฀is฀sometimes฀pronounced฀as฀o,฀but฀these฀ sounds฀are฀generally฀interchangeable฀(as฀in,฀e.g.,฀chonta). ฀ 4.฀In฀presenting฀the฀material฀in฀this฀book,฀I฀employ฀a฀strategy฀used฀by฀Marx฀ (1977),฀who฀organizes฀his฀translation฀of฀nineteenth-century฀capitalism฀through฀the฀ “philosophy฀of฀internal฀relations”฀(Ollman฀1976).฀The฀basic฀idea฀of฀this฀approach฀is฀ that฀factors฀or฀forms฀we฀normally฀think฀of฀as฀externally฀related฀are฀in฀fact฀elements฀ of฀a฀larger฀whole.฀As฀Ollman฀writes,฀“every฀factor฀which฀enters฀into฀Marx’s฀study฀ .฀.฀.฀is฀a฀definite฀social฀relationship”฀(1976:14).฀There฀are฀two฀senses฀in฀which฀Marx฀ talks฀about฀relations,฀“Relation”฀and฀“relation”฀(ibid.,฀14–17).฀The฀former฀are฀specific฀ 08.NOTES.171-180_Uzen.indd฀฀฀171 5/26/05฀฀฀9:29:47฀AM social฀factors฀(e.g.,฀capital).฀The฀latter฀are฀the฀connections฀among฀such฀factors฀(e.g.,฀ production฀and฀consumption).฀In฀Capital฀Marx฀(1977)฀uses฀both฀notions฀to฀describe฀ how฀the฀individual฀parts฀(forms)฀of฀the฀system฀articulate฀and฀are฀transformed฀by฀the฀ whole.฀Describing฀Napo฀Runa฀notions฀of฀value฀presents฀me฀a฀problem฀similar฀to฀the฀ one฀Marx฀faced.฀The฀chapters฀dealing฀with฀the฀life฀cycle฀(childhood,฀marriage,฀and฀ maturation)฀concentrate฀on฀Relations—namely,฀particular฀Napo฀Runa฀social฀forms.฀ Other฀chapters฀deal฀with฀the฀larger฀social฀configurations฀of฀value฀(kinship฀and฀exchange ),฀or฀relations. ฀ 5.฀I฀use฀alienation฀in฀the฀sense฀found฀in฀Ollman฀(1976).฀I฀do฀not฀mean฀that฀gifts฀ cannot฀be฀“detached”฀from฀people—detaching฀things฀in฀the฀gift฀context฀creates฀ significant฀relations.฀Alienation฀is฀different,฀however,฀for฀it฀describes฀a฀process฀whereby ฀things฀are฀exchanged,฀yet฀significant฀social฀and฀moral฀relations฀are฀not฀created฀ (Gregory฀1997:79). ฀ 6.฀The฀weakness฀of฀this฀model฀(Gregory฀1982)฀is฀that฀it฀does฀not฀identify฀the฀ subordinate฀processes฀by฀which฀dominant฀processes฀occur฀in฀the฀Dumontian฀sense฀ of฀hierarchies฀of฀value.฀Gregory’s฀contribution฀was฀to฀help฀us฀see฀how฀gift฀modes฀ locate฀value฀in฀the฀reproduction฀of฀people,฀an฀emphasis฀that฀is฀subordinate฀to฀the฀ production฀of฀things฀in฀capitalist฀contexts. ฀ 7.฀In฀this฀regard฀my฀perspective฀is฀contrary฀to฀the฀thinking฀of฀Appadurai฀(1986,฀ 1997),฀who฀has฀consistently฀argued฀that฀commodities฀are฀universal฀bearers฀of฀value฀and฀ that฀value฀lies฀squarely฀in฀the฀domain฀of฀“things.”฀Similarly฀I฀am฀critical฀of฀Bourdieu฀ (1977,฀1990),฀too,฀who฀assumes฀that฀the฀individual฀and฀individualistic฀motivations฀ such฀as฀calculation฀are฀universal฀social฀constructs฀(Piot฀1999).฀Bourdieu’s฀formalism฀ (as฀seen฀in฀concepts฀such฀as฀“cultural฀capital”)฀is฀too฀tethered฀to฀the฀logic฀of฀capitalism ฀to฀be฀effective฀in฀translating฀the฀value฀concepts฀of฀many฀of฀the฀world’s฀subaltern฀ peoples.฀As฀Marx฀showed฀clearly฀(1972),฀commodity฀forms,฀capital,฀and฀individualism฀ are฀interrelated฀process฀that฀alienate฀labor฀and฀allow฀the฀accumulation฀of฀value฀in฀ capitalistically฀defined฀social฀spheres. ฀ 8...