Gifts are heart-warming. It feels good to be able to give something of value to someone we care about, and it feels good to receive something unexpected that signals someone has thought of us. 

Or… maybe not.

It can also feel stressful when you’re under pressure to find the right gift. It’s awkward when you’ve been given something overly generous or inappropriate. Turns out this isn’t just an issue in our modern-day, materialistic society – but an inevitable dynamic that shows up in almost every society around the world, right back to the beginning of human civilisation. Reciprocity is “one of the rare universal norms”, as I’ve learned through studying for a Diploma in Philanthropic Studies.

Gift-giving is an important act of solidarity. It’s one of the things that enabled warring clans to lay down spears and build a more stable society. But researchers argue that there’s no such thing as a true gift, because in giving, you expect something back. 

We offer a birthday present as if it’s entirely voluntary, spontaneous and unexpected, but it’s not – it’s expected and even required by social norms. Fail consistently to return the gift at the appropriate time, and the relationship will be weakened. And, even when what is given in return is intangible – gratitude, recognition, respect – the requirement to give something is still there. So ingrained is the exchange element that researchers found one island community that gives “so-called solicitory gifts… gifts expressing the wish to receive a specific type of gift in return”. Yet we collectively choose to “mis-recognise” this reciprocity. In other words, we pretend this element of exchange isn’t there, because doing so makes the feeling of giving and receiving more enjoyable.

Because it’s not always possible to reciprocate a gift, a relationship can easily sour. There are examples of this within more formal gift-giving – philanthropy, in other words. A philanthropist has resources to offer; in accepting them, the recipient becomes dependent on or indebted to their giver. As Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in 1844 of gifts: “How dare you give them? We wish to be self-sustained. We do not quite forgive a giver.” There’s an even darker aspect to this. The German word Gift originally referred to the same thing as it does in English, but has now evolved to mean poison. The poisonous nature of an apparent gesture of generosity surfaces often in mythology and literature. 

Yet we still value and celebrate the ritual of exchanging presents. We wrap them to emphasise their significance, not for what they contain but for what they symbolise. In Japan, it’s apparently considered rude to open a gift immediately, because that would show too much interest in what’s inside, rather than appreciating the sentiment. And even an indignant Emerson suggests that while we often resort to buying “cold” and “lifeless” items, we can instead offer meaning by giving something unique and personal:

“Rings and other jewels are not gifts, but apologies for gifts. The only gift is a portion of thyself. Thou must bleed for me. Therefore the poet brings his poem; the shepherd, his lamb; the farmer, corn; the miner, a gem; the sailor, coral and shells; the painter, his picture; the girl, a handkerchief of her own sewing.” 

Something to consider for the Christmas list…

Image by Leopictures from Pixabay

Sources:

• Bourdieu, P. (1997). ‘Marginalia: Some Additional Notes on the Gift’, in A. Shrift (Ed.) The Logic of the Gift: Towards an Ethic of Generosity. New York: Routledge. 
• Breeze, B. (2021). In Defence of Philanthropy. Newcastle: Agenda.
• Cheal, D. (1988). The Gift Economy. Routledge 
• Emerson, R. W. (1844). ‘The Gift’, in Essays: Second Series. Boston, MA: James Munroe and Company. 
• Hendry, J. (1995). Wrapping Culture: Politeness, Presentation, and Power in Japan and Other Societies. Clarendon.
• Komter, A. (2007). ‘Gifts and Social Relations: The Mechanisms of Reciprocity’. International Sociology, 22(1), 93-107.
• Mauss, M. (2002, centenary re-edition). The Gift: The form and reason for exchange in archaic societies. London: Routledge.