In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Gift-Giving in Japan: Cash, Connections, Cosmologies
  • Hikaru Suzuki (bio)
Gift-Giving in Japan: Cash, Connections, Cosmologies. By Katherine Rupp. Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2003. xiii, 235 pages. $45.00, cloth; $19.95, paper.

Gift-Giving in Japan: Cash, Connections, Cosmologies is an outstanding book that painstakingly examines the tremendous variations of gift-giving norms in contemporary Japan. The author, Katherine Rupp, demonstrates the significance of anthropological fieldwork to untangle the complexity of gift-giving practices—an interrelated set of phenomena that cannot be formulated into a single economic model.

Major issues Rupp examines are:

Why do people give as much, as often, and in the particular ways that they do? Why do some people reject giving and receiving? How do attitudes toward and practices of giving relate to considerations of age, class, gender, geographic area, occupation, and religion? How have these practices changed over time? How have they been used for political ends? In what way can the study of gifts in Japan contribute to the broader field of gifts and exchange in anthropology?

(p. 2)

Rupp examines these questions by carefully selecting informants who represent different ages, genders, occupations, neighborhoods, religions, and [End Page 431] levels of social hierarchy. She spent 18 months doing fieldwork in the Tokyo metropolitan area and in Warabi as well as in other parts of Japan. The length of Rupp's extensive fieldwork allowed her to record a complete annual cycle of gift-giving and receiving.

The major question examined by Rupp is how one determines the proper value and amount of a gift. Rupp delineates the strength of relationship, gratitude, and hierarchy as critical factors in deciding what amount of money would be appropriate to give (pp. 34–50). She suggests that four major criteria differentiate the strength of relationships, namely, "the level of friendship that exists between two people" (p. 35), "the number of intervening links of people between giver and receiver" (p. 37), "the place of residence" (p. 38), and "the historical connection between giver and receiver" (p. 39). For example, at Mr. Hoshino's house-building ceremony, his "true friends" gave larger amounts than his "superficial friends." Similarly, at the funeral of Mr. Ishiyama's father, close friends of the deceased gave ¥20,000, twice as much as the close friends of the son of the deceased, while the living siblings of the deceased gave ¥50,000 because they had the strongest relationship (p. 37).

The amount of a gift is also related to one's gratitude to the recipient. At Mr. Hoshino's house-building ceremony, the son of the younger sister of Mr. Hoshino's father gave more than other relatives because Mrs. Hoshino had been taking care of the son's mother who had been seriously ill (pp. 40–41). Hierarchy is obviously one of the important criteria that affect giving. "In general, people who are of higher status are given larger amounts of money or objects of higher value than people of lower status. They are also under obligation to give more than people of lower status" (p. 41). In contrast, "lower ranking people are expected to give less than higher ranking people" (p. 43). In addition, women are expected to give less than men, and gifts given by a woman for a woman are expected to be less expensive (p. 43).

Rupp beautifully explains the interrelationship between gratitude and hierarchy in these words: "The giving of more money or a gift with a high monetary value by persons of higher status is not only an obligation; it is also a right" (p. 45). Take the example of weddings: guests of lower rank, namely, the bride and groom's friends, give about ¥20,000 each (p. 7) but they often receive transportation costs (kurumadai) to cover their travel. Thus, "givers at the lowest end of the scale ended up receiving more than the original gift" (p. 8). Another example given by Rupp is about a party attended by professors and graduate students. The first-year students did not pay, the second- and third-year students paid some, the fourth- and fifth-year graduate students paid more, and professors paid the most (pp. 45...

pdf