Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2014. x, 204 pp. (Figures.) US$24.95, paper. ISBN 978-0-8047-9049-9.
This wonderfully written book is about changing marriage practices in Tamilnadu, South India. Dravidian Kinship has been characterized as a mammoth “system” in the study of kinship in India/South Asia, and in general, in anthropology. This book provides an update by taking us back into the world of Kallars, made famous by Louis Dumont. The author looks at the “rights” (murai) that some kin have over others when it comes to marriage. Such a concept of entitlement could have “moral and emotional consequences when matrimonial rights are denied” (2). For consequences there are, and quite traumatic and exacting ones at that. The subject of kinship is made real and “visible” in this ethnography. The author convincingly argues that ignoring kinship (“demotion,” as the author puts it) would deprive anthropology of some remarkable practices which may soon “disappear” (3).
Clark-Decès starts with a detailed discussion of the various theories of kinship delineated for Tamilnadu by Dumont and Good. The excessive attention paid to kinship terminology meant that the “logic of marriage rules” was overlooked (6), and for a long time Dumont’s structuralist model of marriage alliances was the governing paradigm. This was refuted by Good when he started looking at marriage “at the level of practice” (8). His assertion that “uncle-niece marriage” was the most preferred in Tamilnadu/South India changed the understanding of kinship and marriage (9).
The author presents her case with three main arguments. The first is that instead of focusing on kinship terminologies, the emphasis should be on murai, rights of marriage endowed on some individuals over others. But this right can be challenged and subverted, thus giving rise to violence, vanmurai. The case studies in the later chapters establish that “when a ‘right’ marriage does not take place, the missed opportunity can deeply, and negatively, affect one’s sense of self” (16). Clark-Decès next calls for an examination of the mother-daughter duo as the “atom” of Tamil kinship, not brother-sister (16). These two women, and other sisters, are heavily invested in arranging (or de-arranging) matrimonial alliances. The final point is about exploring why close-kin marriages are no longer preferred, from the perspective of young people and their experience of close kin relationships (20).
Why is the mother’s brother “inherently different” (37)? Clark-Decès demonstrates in chapter 1 how a once criminalized group has now become economically and politically powerful by looking at the significance of gift-giving as evidence. The mother’s brother bears nearly or more than half of the expenditure of a girl’s wedding, even if that share of burden is undocumented. The small sums of rupees given, now run into several hundred thousands, most of which is entered into further circulation of capital through investments in real estate and trade. This “ritual cooperative” (32) has not only helped the Kallars become dominant, but has also ensured that gift-giving remains important, especially from the mother’s brother(s).
Probing Tamil terms like contam (mine) and anniyam (other), the author argues in chapter 2 that “entitlement rather than exchange” is the organizing principle of Tamil kinship relations (38). To suggest that “I own my kin and whatever they have” is to affirm not only “right” but also to give back in the same way. This practice then leads to “doing the right thing,” (43) such as a man marrying his mother’s brother’s daughter. Murai not only means “right” but also “order.” Murai ensures democracy in that everyone has the possibility to receive the right gift or the right woman. But when this right does not play out as it should, then it begets violence (53–56).
But marriages are as much about power play, in the sense defined by Bourdieu (58–59). Chapter 3 illustrates in great detail two marriages that were not “right” because the persons concerned were not in control of things themselves; the same “right” rules of kinship did them in. Kallar ideas of what applies to elder siblings and those in the lower order ends up becoming an ordeal in some lives. “Marriages missed” (74) extract a heavy toll.
On the “mother’s brother,” Clark-Decès argues in chapter 4 that in uncle-niece marriages, the uncle is the sacrificial being. The women around him—his mother and his (elder) sister—are the primary movers and shakers, forming the “most critical bond” (90). In such marriages, money transactions from the bride’s family are considerably reduced. Uncle-niece marriages are also preferred by most castes in Tamilnadu because it brings familiar kin together, especially a woman and her natal kin, and reduces chances for conflict.
Critiquing Trawick’s (1990) Oedipal take on brother-sister relationships among Tamils, Clark-Decès proclaims in chapter 5 that it is “entitlement,” rather than any sexual longing, which results in cross-kin marriage (103). But this close “chain of kinship” can also become “unbearable,” as is demonstrated in one “wrong” marriage, with devastating consequences for those involved.
Clark-Decès discusses change in the Tamil marriage system in chapter 6. While uncle-niece marriages are fast disappearing, cross-cousin marriages are also less favoured. A decreasing birth rate, and widespread belief that close kin marriages result in genetic defects in children, or “medicalisation of spouse selection” as she puts it (124), have resulted in the decreasing popularity of the “right” kin as spouse. Instead, young people imagine their future to be more about social mobility and less about family ties.
The last chapter is about young Tamils’ understanding of love, particularly the unrequited kind. The changing socio-economic landscape of the state has left many young people in rural areas with neither the qualifications to compete in the neoliberal economy nor the desire to engage in agriculture. They find themselves in a conundrum when it comes to pursuing their love interests. Through the lives of two people, Clark-Decès illustrates the hopeless situation they are placed in, unable to marry the ones they love, and being rejected by “right” kin for having lost out in the race.
This beautifully written study on the “emotional cosmology” of Tamil kinship (165) is an important contribution to the anthropology of kinship. It will be of interest to scholars in anthropology, South Asian studies, gender, and to anyone interested in what’s going on in the marriage scene in India.
Haripriya Narasimhan
Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad, India
pp. 950-952