University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education

Becoming Sinners: Christianity and Desire among the Urapmin of Papua New Guinea Author(s): Joel Robbins Source: Ethnology, Vol. 37, No. 4 (Autumn, 1998), pp. 299-316 Published by: University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3773784 . Accessed: 17/03/2011 13:00
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upitt. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ethnology.

http://www.jstor.org

University

of

California,

San

Diego

BECOMINGSINNERS:CHRISTIANITYAND DESIRE URAPMINOF PAPUA NEW GUINEA1 AMONG T

t Joel Robbins

notionsof desire amongthe has transformed This articleconsidersthe way Christianity cargocults Urapminof the WestSepikProvinceof PapuaNewGuinea.WhileMelanesian comprehensible set of desires, as generatedby a relatively havegenerallybeenunderstood UrapminChristianityhas focused not on realizingdesires but rather on definingand controllingthem. In its efforts to exercise such control, Christianityhas come into conflictwith traditionalUrapminsocialstructure.Thelatterdependedupona dialectical that allowedthem both to be valuedand relationshipbetweenwillfulnessand lawfulness has made sinners all willfulness,Christianity to set limitson one another.By demonizing withinthat socialstructure.Aftertracingthe of those Urapminwho operatesuccessfully this articleconcludesby examiningnew way Christianity has createdthis contradiction, Christianrituals that have developedin order to allow people to resolve some of its effects on their lives. (Christianity,desire, Melanesia,social structure, ritual)

The study of religious movements in PapuaNew Guineahas recently been dominated by a rethinkingof the anthropologicalanalysis of cargo cults. Critics have arguedthat the notion of the cargo cult is a faulty analytic construct (McDowell 1988), a projection of Western models of desire onto Melanesians (Lindstrom 1993), or a One concept forged in pursuit of colonial domination (Lattas 1992; Kaplan consequence of these claims has been the reopening of ethnographicquestions long since thought closed about the nature of colonial and postcolonial Melanesian religious activity. Until recently, educationalprograms, local development groups, Christianchurches, nationalelections, or almost anything of interestto Melanesians were liable to be described as a cargo cult by some social scientist (for examples, see Swatridge 1985; Walter 1981; see Lindstrom 1993:ch. 3 for a review). At present, by contrast, it is not clear what, if anything, should be described in those terms. This situation presents an opportunityto begin thinking about contemporaryMelanesian re lglon ln new ways. This artlcle conslders the role of ideas about desire in the Christlanreliglon of the Urapmin of West Sepik Province. As in other parts of Papua New Guinea, Christianity in Urapmin is focused on the millennial themes of Jesus's imminent return and God's impending judgment, and this lends it at least a superElcial similarity to cargoism (cf. Gibbs 1977; Guiart 1970; Kempf 1992; Kulick 1992; Lawrence and Meggitt 1965; Ryan 1969). Yet there are at least two striking differences between UrapmlnChristianityand cargo religion as the latterhas usually been understood, and both differences turn on the role desire plays within Urapmin Christianlty.First, for the Urapmln,questlons ahoutthe natureof desire aboutwhat ls desirable and how deslres should be acted upon are one of the primary forces driving their Christianbelief and practice. While classic accounts of cargo cultism always acknowledge the very intense desires that drive these movements, they tend 299
l995)o * . .

ETHNOLOGYvol. 37 no. 4, Fall 1998, pp. 299-316. ETHNOLOGY, c/o Deparanentof Anthropology,The University of Pittsburgh,PittsburghPA 15260 USA Copyrighte 1998 The University of Pittsburgh.All rights reserved.

300

ETHNOLOGY

people are seeking political and unproblematic: to treat these desires as H1xed with (Worsley1968),moralequivalence in thefaceof colonialdomination autonomy in 1971 11964]) or cognitiveconsistency 1960;Lawrence the colonizers(Burridge in detail of considering 1971 [1964]).Instead change(Lawrence of radical situations such desires, these authors(with the partialexceptionof how people formulated theirgoals It is the way peoplego aboutachieving investigate primarily Burridge) the means employedin cargo cults (the ritualsthat mimic colonial routines,the thanthe desiresthatputthesemeansin motion, etc.), rather left abandoned, gardens by contrast,it is desire itself that religious In Urapmin, thatrequireexplanation. control. and activityseeks to understand Second, the Urapmindif:ferfrom canonicalcargo cultists in the way their itself. As the community religiousconcernsare largelyfocusedwithinthe Urapmin cargo abovemakesevident,traditional presented motivations cargoist list of standard to transform order in movements these in engage people that cult theory suggests goalsdo not leadin this direction, Urapmin colonizers.2 withWestern theirrelations relationsbetween individual however, but are insteadfocused on transforming (tUtUp3). personality Urapminand betweendifferentaspectsof each individual's andas community tendsto cast peopleas individuals Christianity HencesUrapmin politicalregime. thanas subjectsof a colonialor postcolonial members,rather of cargo understandings accepted theuntilrecently between Giventhe differences in to be understood clearlydemands rellglon,the latter millenn1al cultsandUrapm1n the former. I suggest that Urapmin terms other than tllose used to understand modelof the roleof desire to an indigenous in relation mustbe examined Christianity Christianisocialstructure. to Urapmin thatis closelylinked motivation in individual of desirewithoutgreatly understanding alteredthe indigenous ty has significantly uponthe earliermodelfor its perpetuathatdepended the social structure changing of betweenthe demands tion. The tensionthat has resultedfrom the contradiction taken have andthe new ideasaboutdesirethatthe Urapmin social structure Urapmin social lite andgives impetus Urapmin ls centralto contemporary from Christianity thiss the article to their concernswith the natureof desireoHavingdemonstrated collectivepossessionritualbothdisplaysand examineshow one recentlydeveloped to some extent mediatesbetweenthe conflictingmodels of desire that exist in culture. Urapmin contemporary THE URAPMIN area groupof about375 peopleliving in the WestSepikProvince The Urapmin has been, with one spectacular experience of PapuaNew Guinea Theirpostcontact exceptlon,much like that of othergroupsliving in remoteregionsof PapuaNew walk to Telefomin,the strenuous seventeen-mile Guinea Facingan approximately life revolveslargely Urapmin servicedairstrip, DistrlctOffice, andclosestregularly religiouspractice.The one hunting,and Christian aroundsubsistenceagriculture, New Guinean the moldof Papua life thatdoes not Elt aspectof Urapmin exceptional

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

301

rural routine is the experience they have of the huge Ok Tedi mine located in the town of Tatubil; a two-and-a-half-daywalk from Urapmin, or a short plane flight from Telefomin. Many Urapmin men worked to build the town of Tabubil in the early 1980s and in recent years there have always been a handful of Urapmin employed there. By the early 1990s a routinehad developed in which many Urapmin visit Tabubil at least once every two or three years, and more often for some leading men and their families. In the context of the argumentto be developed here, Tabubil figures most importantlyas a place where people 1) become aware of the wide range of consumer goods one might desire, and 2) can seek some refuge from the demands for sharing ones resources that village life makes (see Jorgensen 1981). From the mid-196Osthroughthe mid-1970s many Urapminconverted to a form of Christianitybrought to them by Telefomin and Urapminpastors who had trained at the Australian Baptist Mission in Telefomin. Although no expatriate missionary ever lived in Urapmin, an extensive local effort to teach people the rudiments of Christianityand to train them to read the Bible in Tok Pisin (the lingua franca) led by the mid-1970s to a situation in which this small rural community was possessed of a fair number of very lcnowledgeableChrlstians. A revival movement that began in the Solomon Islands and subsequentlyswept throughmany parts of the PapuaNew Guinea hlghlands reached Urapmin in 1977. Within a year. most people in the community had been zkickedn by the Holy Spirit and everyone had converted to Christianity. From the time the rebaibal (as it is known locally) commencedz Urapmin Christianity began to take on a distinctly charismatic cast; by the early 1990s it featured a well-developed focus on healing, possession, constant prayer, confession, and frequent, lengthy church services. Two linked themes dominatedUrapminChristianityin the early 1990s. One was the imminent coming of the last days (las de), when Jesus would return and take tigin) (see Robbins 1997*In press) The tllose who followed his law to heaven (abEil other, upon which this article focuses? concerns the ethical necess1tyto live a good However, since only those who live such a life will be Christian life (Kristin ). able to go tO heaven, Urapminmillennialism also focuses intensely on ethical issuesw Thus the two areas of Christian concern are tightly tied together and the heat of Urapminmillennial worry does much to fuel their constantethical self-examination. The most importantfeature of a good Christianlife is a very high sensitivity to the needs of others and the dictates of the law of the governmentand the Bible (taken to be the same in most cases; see RobbinsIn press) combined with a consistent effort tO control one9s own desires. Pastors, big men, parents, and youth leaders never tire of haranguingtheir varlous charges about the1rmoral failings and the need for them tc) rlght themselves. Sermons can beg1nwith seemingly any Bible passage and still resolve lnto a plea for people to control their desires and obey the law. In general a strong moralizing tone that turns on issues of the law and self-control is probably the most marked feature of both everyday and religious discourse in Urapmin. Currently,these discourses are completely Christianized.But it is also clear thatthese themes were important in traditional life as well. In order to understandhow the

302

ETHNOLOGY

Christianity, of Urapmin withthedevelopment of theseissueshas changed character life. Urapmin we needto considerthe formthey took in pre-Christian STRUCTURE DESIRE,AND SOCIAL LAWFULNESS, societiesseem to have long pointedout thatmanyMelanesian Anthropologists On the one hand,people valuesin roughlythe sameesteeme holdtwo contradictory in war or in more see a willingnessto aggressivelyimpose ones willS wlnether successandthat as a qualitythatconfersindividual situationsS leadership quotidian hand,those other the On community. of the member key a as to act allowsa person to the sensitive be same people are equallylikely to stressthe need for peopleto and to the personwho is quickto compromise needs of others, and to applaud For example, harmony. of community controlhis or her own desiresin the interest valuesof strength" and zequivalencetin Read(1959) refersto the contradictory (1975:92)discussesthe tensionbetweenaself-willednessX Burridge Gahuku-Gama. amongthe Tangu while White(1980) considersthe values of and "self-restraint" the welterof Beneath amongthe A9ara. andsocial wdominanceX i'socialharmony" it is clearthat as Brison(1995) howeverS termsusedby ethnographersz descriptive when they discusswhat she situations comparable has shown, they are describing in andzsocialsensitivity" strengthX calls the clashbetweenthe idealsof zaggressive cultures. Melanesian But if the values themselvesregularlybreakdown into versionsof the same thatgets thingsdonein egalitarian betweenthe kindof willfulimposition opposition that makesone a popularneighbor, societies and an almostpassivesolicitousness there is great variety in the ways differentcultureslink these values to speciE1c for example leadersareexpected positionswithinthe socialfield. In Gahuku-Gama, (Read1959). White(1980) hypothesizes to embodyboth qualitiesin theirbehavior thatthe situationwas similarfor A'ara leadersin the past. In othersocieties the in womenandthe other by valuingone kindof behavior aremediated contradictions in men: hence Kwangamen are seen as aggressiveand women as co-operative, arethe opposite(Brison1995;Kulick expectations whereasin Gapun,the gendered thatthese varieddatasuggestis generalization One 1985). 1992;see also Harrison kindsof behavior two contradictory thatthe tensionthatfollowsfromhighlyvaluing is generallycontainedin one of two ways. Eitherthe conflictingbehaviorsare arewillingto take expectedonly of a very limitedclass of big men,who presumably (Young 1983; Robbins clrcumstances on the difficultyof living ln contradictory by gender 1994), or the two valuesare segregated in whlchthe contradiction Eltthe pattern not does however, caseS The Urapmln only to those in a few social positionsor is avoidedaltogether. ls eitherpertinent their theirwillfulnessagainst holdthateveryonemustbalance the Urapmin Instead? themto be sensitiveto others. withthe zlaw"thatenjoins abilityto act in accordance modelof desire these two types of Urapmin In whatmay be calledthe traditional andbothare withone another relationship a dialectical in be to actionareunderstood

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

303

of sociallife. Callingthis modeltraditional for the construction necessary considered social with the Urapmin becauseit was (and is) very well articulated is warranted ritual system. partsof theirtraditional in important andit flndsexpression structure, oppositionbetween discussthese two values in termsof a traditional Urapmin and followingthe law (awem)or obeyingthe demandsof willfulness(futabemin) lit. tO hearspeech).Peoplearewillfulwhenthey actdirectly others(wengsankamln; by a persons on theirdesireswithoutconcernfor others.Suchbehavioris initiated will or desire (san, laik), which is locatedin the heart(aget) but is distinguished fromthe processesof thought(agetfukanin)whichare also lodgedthere. Desire is in the heart.For also closely linkedto severalemotions,all of whicharise(tabemin) person whose in the example, desire frequentlyleads to anger (aget atal), both in pursuitof and in those whomthe willful persondisregards wishes are frustrated by motivated his or her own ends. In othercases desireexpressesitself in behavior is solicitousof othersandinvariably by contrast. envy orjealousy.Lawfulbehaviors is so (Smith1994;Brison1991). Lawfulbehavior createsor bolsterssocialharmony tO desireat all, but is said distinctfromwillful actionthatit is not usuallyattributed (agetfutunintangbal). to springfromgood thinking rather (in areasof their life thatbearon their social structure In the moretraditional the Urapmin and production) residence, kinship, of their system as such domains thatholdsbothto betweenwillfulnessandlawfillness relation recognizea dialectical nevertalk aboutactionin these fields in termsof be socially necessary.Urapmin (Pitt-Rivers1971:xviistructures people following laws or rules or instantiating by exercisingtheir illtO relationships xviii). Instead,they say peopleputthemselves are recognizing wills (san)andfollowingtheirdesires.In sayingthis, the Urapmin their badly underdetermines that as a set of rules or norms,their social structure relationships about howto carryoutdifferent injunctions sociallife: no set of speciiSlc andswithalmost is cognatic kinship thewaypeoplelive theirlives. Urapmin explains mostpeoplecan and of the community, withinthe conE1nes occurring all marriages with almostevery otherUrapmin.Moreover, do claim significantkin connections becausepeople very often shift residenceby movinghouses betweenvillages and houses in more thanone village they are likely to activatea large even maintain their lives. Hence the kinship and numberof these kin connectionsthroughout residence structuresshift constantly. Furthermore,neither of the structures areain whichchange of workgroups,whichis another the composition determines paintis largelyaccurate: takesplace. In short,the picturethe Urapmin frequently peoplechooseon the basisof theirdesireswithwhomto lives affiliatemostclosely andwork. on occasionalmostseem to arguethat if peopledid not exercise The Urapmin and co-operative of kinship,residenceS their wills in orderto createrelationships wouldcease. Two examplesof the ways labor,thenmostformsof socialassociation this point. on the basisof theirwills illustrate in whichpeoplecreatesocialrelations is not given by villages of The composition institutions. are fragile villages Urapmin in a varietyof wayscanreside andpeoplerelated idealsencodedin linship relations,

304

ETHNOLOGY

together in a village But there is no guaranteethat they will come together. Single families (usually consisting of a mother, father, their adult male children, and those children's wives and offspring) sometimes build a house on a clearing set apartfrom any of the villages, and the possibility of solitary living is always available to those even though most Urapmin who tire of the demandsof village sociality. Furthermore? of thelr t1me living in much spend they do 11avea house in at least one -village, solitary bush houses, andthis meansthatthe existence of a physical village of several houses does not ensure the existence of a functioningsocial village (Jorgensen 1981). who labor to put Against all the attractionsof solitary living? it is big men (karnok) refers to the (daptemin) this describes that verbs people into villages. One of the two people into villages; coaxing them to leave other villages or way big men '4arrange" solitary dwellings tO come together in a larger social unit. And it is big men who struggle to keep the people of a village interactingand working together by settling disputes and haranguingthem aboutthe need for co-operation.When a big man dies, his village residents scatter in several directions. At any given moment, then, the residential situation in Urapmin is dependenton the wills of the big men. The Urapmin understandingof marriagesimilarly evidences the importantrole they give to people's desires in creatingtheir social structure.Urapminmarriagesare always initiated by women. Ideallys no one should attemptto influence a woman's decision of whom to marry. In reality, a womanvsparents, her sisters and brothers, and various suitors may all try to guide her choice. Urapmin feel very strongly, however, that the decision is the woman's alone. When a woman has indicatedthat she has made a choiceS an older male relative will ask her what her will (san) is in the matter. While the man she chooses, or his family can refuse her proposal, a marriage can only begin with an act of will on a woman's part Men whose names are never called live out their lives as bachelors. Urapmin tend to see a woman's '4calling the name' of a man as something of an exemplary act of creative with the kind of willfulness, and the event of asking a woman her will is approached anxiety and ritualized indirectionthat befits a moment when a culture reveals itself to itself in a particularlynaked form. Revealed at this moment is the extent to which Urapmin society relies on the exercise of individualwills to give it shape 4 Big men and marriageablewoman exercise their wills in highly markedways in are ways all Urapm1n tlle creation of social relations. But in less publicly recogn1zed engaged in creat1ngtheir own social worlds throughacts of will. Ordinarymen must draw people (such as sons-in-law) into their householdsSand must work to keep their sons from leaving. Women must see to it that in-marryingdaughters-in-lawobey their wills in the organizationof householdtasks. Young people exercise their wills units in Urapmin),while in puttingtogether sportsteams (significantsoeial structural children, the paragons of willful big-headedness tantrumhysterically until someone handy ilfills the parental role in an acceptablefashion. In all of these cases, it is willful behavlor that establishes the relationshipsthat give Urapmin social life its shape.

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

30s

As the foregoing suggests, the Urapminhave a healthy respect for the power of the will as a tool to use in the creation of sociality. Yet this respect is balanced by an equally high value the Urapminplace on the good behavior or lawfulness (kakup tangbaD that follows from good thinling and from zhearingX(weng sankamin)the demands of others. Good behavior is evaluated in relation to several ethical codes, all of which require that people control their own desires. The most basic of these in all relationships. codes enjoins reciprocity and mutual support (dangdagalin) Expectations are high that people will give to those who give to them, and that they will be forthcoming with donations of labor when friends or relatives call for them. As in many Melanesiansocieties, those who eat alone (feg inin)are condemnedwhile the ideal person always lets others eat from his or her hand (sigil). Beyond this general code? there existed until recently a second that consisted of an elaborate set of taboos (awem)that dictatedwho could eat what foods use what land, touch what presentedpeople with a objects, and know what information.This system of tabooos fine structure of rules that shaped their everyday lives (Robbins 1995). It also supportedthe code of generalized reciprocity by demandingthat people share foods that they themselves could not eat. A final code, also called awem but clearly different from the code of taboos, consists of a generalized set of social prohibitions or "laws" (as they are now called in Tok Pisin) forbidding adultery, angerzfighting, theft, and other actions that threaten social harmony (tenamintangbal, zutpela sindaun). These three codes together interpolatean ideal subjectwho completely subsumes his or her will under a welter of rules that take much of the choice out of daily life. The kind of willful activity mentioned ahove (activity that frequently leads to anger and fighting and that is premised on ignoring or asking others to ignore the demands of reciprocity and mutual support that inhere in established relationships) conflicts starkly with action that is guided by these codes. Indeed, it often thi-eatensto tear apartthe social structurethat is in place and it is on this basis that it is condemned. Urapmin have been willing to live with these contradictory images of ideal behavior because they recognize that both kinds of behavior are necessary for the creation and maintenanceof their social life. Without indigenous models of social structure as-a net of interwoven rules hung on a scaffolding of pregiven kinship relations, only willful action can establish social relationships; it is akin to the startingmechanismsought by theorists of reciprocity. Once those relations have been established, however, norms of lawfulness enjoining reciprocity, sensitivity, and respect always apply to them. Having chosen to live in a particularvillage, it would be willful in a negative sense for me to disregard attempts to co-ordinate action among village members. Similarly, it would be an act of unsanctionedwillfulness to secretly kill a pig and not share its meat with those with whom I usually share. After a young woman willfully initiates a marriage, any act of adultery on her part stands as an unacceptabledisplay of willfulness. And so on. In sum, all relatlons sev up expectations olElawful behavior which constrain desire, but those relatlons are inltlally created hy people acting on their desires; willful hehavior is necessary to

306

ETHNOLOGY

in which the law applies, while lawful behavioris establish the relationships the two kindsof behavior are to continue.Ideally? necessaryif those relationships andfortheir of relations thatallowsfor boththecreation balance exist in a dialectical
maintenance.

That ideal balanceis fragile, and is one that the Urapminadmit is rarely statemostof the time. achieved.Indeed,the systemis likelyto be in an unbalanced This is so becausethe willful personneverconfrontsa blanksocial field, and so every act of social creationalso undercutsthe lawful demandsof some prior For example if big man X zpullsbpersonY to his village?he and Y relation.5 village Y's former support andmutual of reciproclty violatetheexpectations together follow every disputesregularly matesexpectedfrom him or her. For this reason? changeof residence(or of sportsteam). And even for those wllo do not seek to social field, but insteadonly wish ways on the Urapmin imposetheirwills in major valuesare (isi, kwiet)way?thetwo contradictory to live theirown lives in a wquiet" towardsomeone whereeveryturning hardto keep in balance.In a smallcommunity awayfromsomeoneelse, whatis lawfulfromthe as turning registers simultaneously boundto be perceivedby othersas an act of is relationship point of view of one 1980).Everypiece (Leroy1979;Munn1986;Biersack themselves against willfulness of meat sharedwith one's sister is a piece takenfrom one's wife. A man who to them, to the fullesthis obligations choosesto live with his affines,thushonoring makea gardenand is seen as willfulby his own family.A womanhelpsherbrother havebeen to them. Urapmin herobligations see heras willfullyignoring heraffilnes it caughtin these kindsof snares.By theirown reckoning, andare todayregularly makes theirs an unusuallyfractiouscommunity,prone to disputes, fights, and frequentreweavingsof the social fabricas peoplemove from village to village in life. searchof a "quietX constitute andalliance of residence patterns shifting strifeandregularly Frequent the price the Urapminpay for basing their social life on the valuationof two was culture Urapmin modelsof action.Butit is alsotruethattraditional contradictory of clash by the caused havoc the with dealing for mechanisms well stockedwith from stateof imbalance andfor keeplngthe predictable willful and lawfulbehavlor life lntolerable. makingcommunity was by a varietyof ritualswhosepurpose life was marked Urapmin Traditional rituals by acts of willfulness.Dispute-resolution to smoothover relationsharmed alongwith the customsof buying the angern(aget exchange? basedon equivalent (fitom sanin) of peoplewho havebeen injured atul sunin) and zbuyingthe shameX of disputes(Robbins1996) by one's acts of willfulness,allowedfor the settlement thatit would not Therewere also ritualsto removeangerfromthe body, ensuring cause sickness in those at whom it was aimed.The fact that almostevery family who were not gardenhousealso alloweddisputants owneda more (r less Isolated from the themselves to absent rituals of these one readytO undertake immediately village for a cooling-offperiod (Jorgensen1981). Finally, the extensiveuse of secreteating)oftenallowedpeople of secrecy(including practices enjoined culturally

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

307

to avoid slighting others as they went about their daily activities (Robbins 1987; Bercovitch 1994). To summarize, the traditionalmodel of desire in Urapminis one in which people are expected to act on their own wills in constructingnew social relationships. At the same time, however, people are also expected to constraintheir wills in the interests of maintaininggood relations. By virtue of this model, the Urapminpresenteveryone with the task of living within a contradictionthat in other cultures is confrontedonly by big men, or ls avo1dedaltogetherby splitting willfulness and lawfulness between the genders. The model handlesthe contradictionby suggesting a dialectical relation between the two modes of action such that the law applies to relations created by the will while the will creates new relations out of pieces taken from previous lawful relationships. Against the backgroundof this traditionalunderstanding,Urapmininterpretations of Christianityhave producedtwo new models of desire and of the broader relation between willfulness and lawfulness. Along with these new understandings, the Urapminhave developed a set of new ritualsto control the problems desire raises for them In both of the new Christianmodels of desire, however, the dialectical relation between willfulness and lawfulness is sundered. The result is a situation in whicl people have no opportunityto negotiate a worleablebalance hetween the two types of action that shape their social existence. Insteads as I will show, they find themselves tO he contlnually in breach of the norms they set for themselves. They call this state of breach zsin" (sin, yum; lit. debt). New rituals for the control of desire and the creation of lawfulness correspondinglyfocus on the removal of sin. It is to these new models and the ritualsthat they have called forth that we now turn. CHRISTIANMODELS OF DESIRE of desire in Urapminhas been to vilify all The effect of Christlanunderstandings willful behavior. Paradoxicallyz Chrlstianity accomplishes this ln part through a model of desire that promotesunfetteredwillfulness in opposition to traditionalideas abouttaboo. This model is complemented, however, by a second one that condemns all desire and celebrates good thinking and good behavior exclusively. The burden of this section is to show that these two models, although apparently opposed, actually support one another; both of them force the Urapmin to attend to their desires and to treat them as problematically undefined (in the Elrst model) or uncontrolled(in the second). Together, the two models constructthe Urapminperson that promotes willfulness. as a sinner. I turn first to the Christianunderstanding As noted above, althoughthe Urapmlnhave very few expliclt rules applying to social structural matters? they until recently had a host of rules about religious hehav1orand a great many taboos (especially on eating and land use) that were an importantpart of what they see as their indigenous law. Christianity is understood to oppose all practices of taboo, and in the late 1970s, when Urapmin became a traditionalreligious practicesand completely Christiancommunity,people abandoned

308

ETHNOLOGY

abrogated almost all food taboos. Urapmin see this as very liberating. They are relieved to have given up the initiations in which they had to beat their sons. And they are especially happy to be done with the system of tabc)osthat regulated their land use and food consumption.They constantlyproclaimthat now they live in i'free time" (_ taim) in which most foods can be eaten by everyone and most ground is available for gardening and hunting. In these areas formerly hedged with taboos, Urapminhave come tO see themselves not only as perfectly free tO, but also (as good Christianswho do not fear retributionfrom indigenous spirits) compelled to realize their desires without anv regardfor former standardsof lawfulness (Rohhlns 1995) While the toppllng of traditionalreligion and taboos has led to a model in which Christianityis a championof desire, pushing for its unfetteredrealization,the second reading Urapmintake from Christianitygoes to the opposite extreme and vilifies all desire except that for salvation. Only lawful behavior (here glossed as virtually passive behavior that disturbsno one and pursues only minimal goals of subsistence and reproduction)can assure one?s salvation. Under this model, the goal is always to follow God's will and never to impose oneSsown. Those who follow God's will not only avoid olrvious sins suclhas theft, adulterysand lying, but they also remain peaceful in all situations9do not pusll (puslm) tllemselves or others to bend to their desires, and do not make others angry. Together, these two Christianmodels make desire a continualfocus of Urapmin attention. Foucault (1978) has noted that the modernconcern to repress sexuality led paradoxicallyto an intensely exploratoryattitudetoward every aspect of sex and to an explosion of the number of discourses concerned with sexuality. SimilarlySthe Christianconcern to guide and extinguish desire in Urapminhas led people there to attend assiduously to their desires and to talk about them constantly. The model of desire as always evil 1s of course a maJorcause of this heightened interest in it; people intent on controlling their desires must first learn to recognize them. But the model of desire as completely free also contributesto the Urapmin preoccupation with the ways of their wills; for in removing all guidelines for expression of the will, this model has left the Urapmin in the situation of having to worl out a new set of notions about what it is appropriateto desire and how it is appropriateto satisty specif1c desires (Hollan 1988:283-84). The evidence that desire has in fact become a preoccupationfor the Urapmin is expressed in many areas of their lives. In regular confessions ideally held at least once a month, people list their angers9jealousies? envies, attractions?emotional outbursts, and petty thefts. Some llterateUrapmlneven leep lists of thelr s1nsso that they will not forgel: to confess them. It should be noted that the Urapmin have organized such contessions on thelr own, in response to thelr sense that deslre needs constant management.In the highly institutionalizedform in which they practice it, it is not an aspect of the Baptist Churchto which they belong. Outside of confession, pastors, big men, and other leaders highlight problems of desire in haranguing lectures (wengkem)in which they tell people to watch out for the trouble that their eyes and mouths (both organs of desire) get them into.

THE URAPMIN AND DESIREAMONG CHRISTIANITY

309

eyes and mouths,which the Urapminconstantly The symbolismsurrounding deploy, is yet anotherarena in which the Urapmindevelop their ideas about express willfilness. Mouthsboth consumewhat is desiredand, more importantly, for desiresandmakethemsociallyrealin speech.Eyes areeven moreproblematic, keeptheir people say the Urapmin, it is whatthe eyes see thatthe will wants.Gc)od eyes on the road when they are away from their village, iest they should see a potentialsexual partneror a ripe taro that might lead tllem into desire and sin. jumping(ver the fencesthatshouldhold misbehave, Domesticpigs thatcontinually sinning),havetheireyes put thatalso refersto human banis,a phrase them(kirapim culture, beingsin Urapmin pigs andhuman of domestic out. Giventhe identification eyes of how deeplyhuman as anexpression it is hardnot to see this severediscipline there are also in the problemsof humanwillfulness.Furthermore are implicated idiomsthatconjoinboththe oralandocularaspectsof desire.Tc)covetor wantbadly withyoureyesX(tEinlawt inin). Whenpeople is to 4'steal andconsume in Urapmin desire,theysay thatthey aswallowtheir see withtheireyes thingsthatthey intensely usedbv leadersandothersandconvey spitv (mok inin)^Theseidiomsareregularly desires are ln need of constant own and othersS a very visceral sense that onews mouths andcontroltheireyes watch thelr telling people to andcontrol.In detinition leadersdraw on the power of these idioms to reinforcetheir incessantpleas that peopleset theirown desiresasideandobey only the will of God. discourseon desireconcernsthe emotionstc) Anotheraspectof this Christian as notedearlier,see anger,envySjealousy, and which desire leads. The UrapminS modelof desire, shameas emotionsthataretightlylinkedto desire.Inthetraditional anger, were both welcomedand feared;that is, Urapmin emotions, particularly desireitself. toward toward themthattheyexpressed expressed the sameambivalence all of the emotionsthat are linkedto desire have an termsn howeverz In Christian negativevalence.6Regulardiscussionof tlle need to controlthese unambiguously Urapmln. of desirein contemporary aspectof the discourse emotionstormsanother models has also led to a of desireby the two Christian The problematization as sinners.In part,this havecometo see themselves situation in whichthe Urapmin modelof desirehas failedto of the traditional follows fromthe way a re-evaluation that would allow the Urapminto forgo producea new model of social structure into practice.It will be recalledthat in the social structure puttingtheirtraditional social acts of willfulnessinitiate important traditionalmodel of social structure of lawSillness expectatlons carry their own relations but once initiated,relations which constrainwillfillness. This model has changedlittle in lts operation,as the exercise muchthe sameandstill requires itselfremains Urapmin social structure of individualwills to give it shape. As noted above, life underthis traditionalmodelt
even without the influence of the two Christian models, was not without its frustrations.Acts of willfulnessSwhile necessaryfor the creation of sociality are also prone to lead to anger envy and charges of unlawful hehavior. This is still the case. But in their Christianunderstanding,the Urapmin have come to see the anger and jealousy that of necessity accompanya life lived balancingwillfillness and lawfulness

3 10

ETHNOLOGY

as sins that are damning to the individual and the community. Hence, the normal costs of doing the business of social life have under Christianity come to seem ruinously high. in which the normal functioning of the social structure To this systemic taailuren makes sinners of those wllo inhabit it, are added the difficulties to self-creation presentedby the natureof the Christianmoral code the Urapminhave adopted. This code holds that all prohibitionson exercising one's desire in regardto a speciflc item (e.g., a kind of food a piece of land) i.e., prohibitions that take the form of taboos-are illegitimate. At the same time, this code defines desire in general andthe mere experience of the emotions attachedto it as evil. A moral code of specific rules that one could successfillly follow is condemned,while at the same time a broadcode which is largely impossible to follow is promoted. In place of the filnelywoven net of taboos in which they could securely wrap their moral selvesz the Urapmin now have only a verv broad net of rules throughwhose huge gaps they continually fall. By leaving only unobservablerules in place. the Chrlstiancode has made sinners of all Urapmin.7 Current Urapmin thinking about desire is thus beset by contradictions. Willful action is now expected where taboos once defined the law, and a certain measure of willfblness remains necessary to establish social relations. Yet Urapmin now to be sinful and to lead ultimatelyto damnation. understandall desire and williFulness The next section discusses how some of these contradictoryideas are expressed and religious practicethe Urapmincall [Q some extent worked throughin a contemporary zspirit disco' (spirit disko). DESIRE AND RITUAL IN CONTEMPORARYURAPMIN Some of the ritualmeansthe Urapminused to settle the problemsthat arose when the contradictionsin their traditionalrelationof desire to lawfulnessfound expression ill disputes, fights and dangerous fits of anger continue to exist in their original form. The Urapminstill buy each other's anger and shame and undertakeequivalent exchanges to end disputes. Other rituals have persisted in modified form: angerremoval rituals, for example, now center on prayers in which participantsask God to take their anger from them. But the Urapminhave also developed a set of wholly novel (for them) ritualsthatturn on their perceptlonof themselves as sinners, forever violating their Christianmoral codes. In the absence of a system of taboos that they can successfully follow, participationin these rituals has become the paramount lawful practice in Urapminculture.8 These rituals range from participationin church services to embarking with traveling evangelical ;;teams"that go to neighboring communities to astrengthenX their churches. In tact, any activity that expressly follows the will of God can come to constltute such a ritual. But within this category of rituals designed to control the none are more importantthan those connected with confession Of these the two most importantare private confession and the spirit disco. The tWO are tightly
W1119

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

311

it is successful linked.Whileprivateconfessionis the basis of lawfulpersonhood, withtheproofthattheyhave individuals possession duringa spiritdiscothatprovides achievedsuch personhood. hold in their church Spiritdiscos are grouppossessiondaneeswhich Urapmin begin by jumpingup anddown and movingin buildings.Maleandfemaledancers a circle to the rhythmof Christiansongs sung by women. This stage of the proceedingsis ealled zpullingthe tHoly] spiritn(pulim spirit). Eventually,in a successfulspiritdisco, some peoplewill "getthe spiritb(kisimspirit)andbeginto around the dancefloor withoutregardfor others shakeandflail violently,careening of the dancing. or for the circular pattern withcelehratory whoopsfromthecrowdas a few Eachnewpossession1sgreeted peoplequicklymove in to controlthe possessed,allowingthemto move mostlyas intoothersor intothe walls. As theywill but struggling to keepthemfromcrashing sins, however,the violence of this the Holy Spiritflghtswith a possessedpersonSs cannotfully witha strength thathis or herhandlers conflicthurlsthepossessedabout constrain.Onceseveralpeoplebecomepossessed,bodiesfly wildly andpeopleget barkfloor breakunderthe dancers' bumped andbanged.Largeslatsof the churchSs poundingand the possessedisstompingand flailing and deaconsand otherswho noticethe pointedshardshurlthem out of the church'sopen windows. The floor on whichpeoplecantrip.Thefeelingof intense increasingly gapeswith openpatches by an equallystrongawareness energythatpervades the danceis thusaccompanied lose of physicaldanger.Afteran houror moreof possesslon,a personwill 61nally floor. Onceno the spiritandcollapse,limpandradianton whatis left of the church even one is any longerpossessed,the singingstopsand with a prayer.andperhaps the spiritdisco ends. a Bible readinganda sermonif it is still earlyS The link betweenthe spirit disco and confessionis obviousto the Urapmin. to People mustgo to privateconfessionwith a pastoror deaconbeforeattempting akinto physicalobjects sinsto exist as something pullthe spirit.Urapmin understand (ilum). Duringconfession,a persongives in the body thatmakethe body "heavyX hls or her sins to God andasks him tO acceptthem. But the act of makingthis gift of sin from the body. It is does not by itself removethe physicalmanifestations duringthe periodof possessionin the spiritdisco thatthe Holy Spiritthrowsthe confessedsins out of one's body so thatone can once againbe zlightb (fong) (cf. thatone is at Clarkl992:22). On a personallevel, becomingpossessedguarantees spiritdiscoswheremanypeopleget the leastmomentarily free of sin, andsuccessfill thatthe Holy Spirithas smiledon the whole spiritarealso takenas some indication community.The flnal dispositionof the possessed, Iying limp on the floor, is a paradigmatic image of the personbeyonddesire and the sinful willfulnessthat it orlngsln ltStralnv desire is not the only themeof the spiritdisco. But suppressed or transcended desirels alsoevldentin theritual.For one thing,there Indeeds partlcularly voracious spiritdiscos: some are oftenaccusations thatillicit sexualitygoes on in andaround claim that young people run off to the bush while their elders are engagedin the
11 0 (I J , *

3 12

ETHNOLOGY

of the spiritdisco as an dance, or that men take the physicalchaos and darkness do not say this Urapmln the thougll And breastsZ women's to touch opportunity lookvery possessed ecstasyandthefinalcollapseof the explicitly,boththe phys1cal sexual (Gardella1985), pointingto the possibilitythat illicit physicaldesire finds way, desirealso makes in the ritualitself. In a secondandmoreprofound expression behavior anddangerous in the spiritdisco. The violent, destructive, its appearance the resist of willfulness sins their As of willfulness. of thepossessedis itselfa picture Holy Spirit's efforts to banish them from their home in the humanbody, the to andfro? floor, dragtheirhandlers thechurch possessedsmashintoothers,destroy beforethey succumbto and in generalembodythe terrorof willfulnessunleashed causedby the Holy Spirit do not call this hehavior exllaustlon Whilethe Urapmin of theirworsl fantasles a reallzation in its confllctwith s1nwillful, it is nonetheless for others.Thepossessedviolentlylash regard without of a personactingcompietely they have with those who might be their out withoutregardfor the relationships desireand itself, to heighten victims.Thus the spiritdisco seems, like Christianity them. transcends allow tor tl1eexpressionof willfulnessat the same time that it sense that willfulness is Ultimately,too, the spirit disco echoes the traditional necessaryandpotenteven as it seeks to finallypurgewillfulnessin the exhaustion thatfollows its expressiom ritual. There is For the Urapmin,the spirit disco is a completelyChristian of tradition (thereis no indigenous nothingahoutit thatstrikesthemas syncretistic Lookingat the spirltdisco as a Christiarl or unorthodox. possessionin IJrapmin) of desireit andcondemnation heightening ritual,it is clearthatin its contradictory about messages conflicting the bodies Urapmin in mediate to mirrorsand attempts them.Thespiritdiscoultimately among hasset in dialogue desirewhichChristianity who do notget possessed,and for all of thosein the majority endswithoutresolution manyof themdo seriouslywonderif theirfailureto hecomepossessedis a sign (f Havethey desiredtoo muchsor actedtoo willfullyon those desires?Is damnatioll. its hackon them?Forthosewllo werepossessed thiswhy tlle FIolySpirithasturned and are llOW light they have managedafter a paroxysm of unself-conscious is a state whichfor Urapmin of thatsalvation finallyto achievea foretaste vvilltulness free of desire. exceptto the goodpersonis one who desiresnothing Urapmin, In contemporary of sucha statefree fromdesireis for the mostpart do God'swill. The achievement andbecause social structure of the Urapmin impossible.hothhecauseof the nature thatthey lahorunder. desiresandemotions of prohihited definition of the verylbroad even as it allowsa glimpseof whatsuccess The spiritdisco reflectsthis predicament of would look like; that strikingcombination in the quest tor moralpersonhood person lpostpossession heaming and limp the characterizes thav passivityandsatiation we haveto askwhatkindof futurethe floor. In conclusion. collapsed0n the church are tryingto createon the hasisof this modelof the moralpersonandhis Urapmin of desire. or her relationto the experience

CHRISTIANITYAND DESIRE AMONG THE URAPMIN

313

CONCLUSION This articlebeganby summoning up the perhaps rather tiredflgureof the cargo cult. This HIgure has long dominated anthropological thinkingabout Melanesian desires. By assuming that the intensity and nature of these desires are well understood, studiesof cargocultshaveencouraged scholars to focus theireffortson explaining the myriadritualistic ways Melanesians havegone abouttryingto realize them. Two aspectsof Urapmin culturecould easily lead us to subsumetheir case underthe general rubricof the cargo cult. First, their Christianity is intensely millennial.The Urapminfairly often engage in activities that seem part of a millennial movement builtaround Jesus'simminent return,andeven whenthey are not involvedin movement-like activitythey continue to dwell on the nearness of the comingapocalypse (Robbins 1997).Second,the Urapmin sometimes quiteexpressly say to whitepeople, aWewantto be just like you"(Robbins1997).Takentogether, these two pieces of datasuggestthatthe Urapmin expectJesus'scomingto allow themto reacha primary goal of becominglike whites. It seems reasonable thento see theirChristianity as little morethana cargocult withoutancestors. This interpretation is to be resistedshowever.The mistakecomes in assuming thatthe Urapmin imaginethe postapocalyptic worldto be one ln wh1ch they will be just like whitesandthatachieving this stateis theirultimate goal. tIeaven,the place Urapminhope to gain when Jesus returns,is not a place the Urapminpicturein detail. They do expect that heavenwill be a place where everyonewill have the permanent housesandeasy accessto air travelthatwhitesnow enjoy. But they do not elaborate on it as a placewheretheywill own enormous suppliesof the kindsof everyday goodscargocultistsarewaitingto receive.Instead, heavenmostmarkedly seemsto be a placewheredesirewill not be an issue. Sinnershavingbeen keptout, no one will misbehave. Therewill be no fightingor theft, andno adultery (indeed, on one account, no genderdifferences outof whichto generate heterosexual passion) Peoplein heavenwill be satisfied.not simplybecausethey havea surfeitof goods, but becausethey will haveflnallyachleved the stateof deslrelessness thatUrapmin seek in their spiritdiscos. Urapmin would like to be just like whites on this earth, for whitesobviouslyhave, fromthe Urapmin pointof view, an easiertime of things here. But theirultimategoal, the one they prayto God to help them achieve, is a moreambitious one thathasto do withrealizing a Christian modelof personhood in whichmost desiresandall material objectsare insignificant. Forthe Urapmina largepartof fulEllling theirdesireswouldbe knowing clearly whatthey shouldwant in daily life, how muchit is rightto want it, and how they mightgo aboutlearning how not to wantit at all If the paradigmatic cargocultists arestanding on a beachsomebrightmorning feelinglike new menandwomenwhen the tinnedfiISh andgalvanized roofingsheetscome in on a shippilotedby ancestors, the Urapminmoralhero is collapsedin a heapin a darkchurch,temporarily (but onlytemporarily) exhausted beyondworrying aboutall of the conflicted questions of desirethatrunthrough his or her social life (Burridge 1969).

3 14

ETHNOLOGY

These are starkly different pictures. Burridge Lawrences and those who 11ave built on their insights in elaboratingthe anthropologicalnotion of the cargo cult are probablyright to say that cargo cultists imagine that on that brightmorning they will again feel themselves swell with a sense of potency and equivalencethat the colonial andpostcolonial world has strippedfrom them. The Urapmin,thoughsseem humbled beyond such grand hopes Perhaps we can say that via Christianity they have lnternalizedall the problems of their contemporaryworld and made them personal rather than political, that they confuse living on the postcolonial per1pheryof the world-system in difElculttimes wlth living ln sin. In any cases their hope 1s not for the fulElllmentof their desires but only for the domination of them in pursuit of a new person for whom the issue is not satiationbut a salvation beyond wanting.
NOTES 1. This article was originally presented at the 1994 annualmeeting of the American Anthropological Association. It is based on field researchconducted from January1991 to February 1993 supportedby the Wenner-Gren Foundation (Grant 5026), the National Science Foundation, and the University of Virginia. l thanli Karen Brison. Stephen Leavitt, LeonardPlotmcov, and RupertStasch for particularly detailedcomments on earlierdrafts. SandraBamford,John Barker,Fred Damon, Dan Jorgensen, Bruce Koplin, Bruce Knauft, Susan McKinnon, Rebecca Popenoe, Margo Smith, and Roy Wagner also provided helpful comments on all or part of earlier versions. I thank them all while reserving final responsibility for myself. 2. I owe this point and much of the previous paragraphto very helpful comments John Barker provided on an earlier draft. 3. In this article terms in the Urapminlanguage are given in italics while those in Neo-Melanesian (Tok Pisin), the most prevalent lingua franca in Papua New Guinea and the language of much of Urapmin Christianity, are underlined. 4. In many parts of Papua New Guinea, and among the Urapmin'sTelefomin neighbors in particular bilong merl) in marrlage is assoc1atedwith the the custom of following the desire of the woman ( coming of the colonial government (Jorgensen 1993:68). The Urapmin, lbycontrast, consider this one of the1rlong-standing cusloms and the elaborate ritual that surroundsit along with the way it E1gures in the1rrecounting of genealogies and maritalhistories suggest no reason to doubt that. 5. In Urapminat least this representsthe dark side of the process of creating relationsout of relations that has been a focus of recent theoretical accounts of Melanesian sociality (Wagner 1977; Strathern 1988). 6. Shame is a partial exception, but not in any way that contradictsthe point being developed here. 7. It is important to point out how this analysis of Urapmin problems with desire differs from a psychological one. Hollan (1988:285) reports that the Torajans of Indonesia are "ambivalent"about Christianity'smodel of sin and punishmentbecause it has compromised "the degree of Eltbetween . . institutions and the personal needs and concerns of individual actors.' My argument is that the personal needs and concerns of the Urapmm(whateverthey might be) are of necessity always caught up ln the cultural contradictionsthat hold between tlle several models of desire and the understanding of social structurewith which they must work; such needs and concerns cannot be deEmedapart from these collective representationsthat shape them. Perhaps this is why a situation of change that makes the Torajans ambivalent about Christianityleaves the Urapminambivalentabout themselves. 8. Hollan (1988:284) describes the "dis-ease"that beset the converted Toraja when they abandoned their traditionalexpiation rituals without developing Christianreplacements.

AND DESIREAMONGTHE URAPMIN CHRISTIANITY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

315

Bercovitch, E. 1994. The Agent in the Gift: Hidden Exchange in Inner New Guinea. Cultural Anthropology 9(4):498-536 Biersacli, A. 1980. The Hidden God: Communication, Cosmology, and Cybernetics among a Melanesian People. Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor. Brison, K. 1991^ Community and Prosperity: Social Movements among the Kwanga of Papua New Guinea. The ContemporaryPacific 3(2):325-55. 1995. Changing Constructionsof NIasculinitym a Sepik SocietyOEthnology 34(3):155-75. Burridge, K. 1960. Mambu:A Study of Melanesian Cargo Movements and their Social and Ideological Background. New York. 1969. New Heaven, New Earth: A Study of MillenarianActivities. New York. 1975. The Melanesian Manager. Studies in Social Anthropology, eds. J. Beattie and R. Lienhardt, pp. 86-104. Oxford. Clark, J. 1992. Madness and Colonisation:The Embodimentof Power in Pangia. Oceania 63(1): 15-26. Foucault, M. 1978. The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An Introduction,transl. R. Hurley. New York. Gardella,P. 1985. InnocentEcstasy: How ChristianityGave America an Ethic of Sexual Pleasure. New York. Gibbs, P. J. 1977. Tlle Cult from Lyeimi and the Ipili. Oceania 48(1):1-25. Guiart, J. 1970. The MillenarianAspect of Conversion to Chrlstiamtym the South Pacific. Millennial Dreams in Action: Studies in RevolutionaryReligious Movements, ed. S. L. Thrupp,pp. 12238. New York. Harrison, S. 1985. Concepts of the Person in Avatip Religious Thought. Man (n.s.) 20(1):115-30. Hollan, D. 1988. Pockets Full of Mistakes: The Personal Consequences of Religious Change in a Toraja Village. Oceania 58(4):275-89. Jorgensen, D 1981. Taro and Arrows: Order, Entropy, and Religion among the Telefolmin. Ph.D. Vancouvere thesist University of British ColumbiaO 1993. Money and NIarriagein Telefomm: From Sister Exchange to Daughteras Trade Store. The Business of Marriage: Transformationsin Oceanic Matrimony, ed. R. Marksbury, pp. 57-82. Pittsburgh. Kaplan, M. 1995. Neither Cargo Nor Cult: Ritual Politics and the Colonial Imagination in Fiji. Durham. Kempf, W. 1992. "The Second Coming of the Lord": Early Christianization,Episodic Time, and the Cultural Constructionof Continuityin Sibog. Oceania 63(1):72-86. Kulick, D. 1992. Language Shift and CulturalReproduction:Socialization, Self, and Syncretism in a Papua New Guinea Village. New York. Lattas, A. 1992. Introduction. Hysteria, Anthropological Discourse and the Concept of the Unconscious: Cargo Cults and the Scientisation of Race and Colonial Power. Oceania 63(1):1-14. Lawrence, P 1971 (1964). Road Belong Cargo: A Study of the Cargo Movement in the Southern Madang District New Guinea. Atlantic Highlands NJ. and M. J. Meggitt. 1965. Introduction. Gods Ghosts and Men in Melanesia: Some Lawrence, Rellgions of Australian New Gumea and the New Hebrides, eds. P. Lawrence and M. J. Meggitt, pp. 1-26. Melbourne. Leroy, J. D. 1979. The Ceremonial Pig Kill of the South Kewa. Oceania 49(3):179-209. Lindstrom, L. 1993. Cargo Cult: Strange Stories of Desire from Melanesia and Beyond. Honolulu. McDowell, N. 1988. A Note on Cargo Cults and Cultural Constructions of Change. PaciElcStudies 11(2):121-34. Munn, N. 1986. The Fame of Gawa: A Symbolic Study of Value Transformationin a Massim (Papua New Guinea) Society. Cambridge. Pitt-Rivers, J. A. 1971. The People of the Sierra. Chicago.
P.9

3 16

ETHNOLOGY

Read, K. E. 1959. Leadership and Consensus in a New Guinea Society. American Anthropologist 61 (3):425-36. Robbins, J. 1987. Keeping to Oneself in Melanesia: Secrecy, Not-Reciprocity, and CulturalTheory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Amerlcan AnthropologlcalAssociation. 1994. Equality as a Value: Ideology in Dumont, Melanesia and the West Social Analysis 36:21-70. of Desire and Ecology among the 1995. Dispossesslng the Spirits: ChristianTransformatlons Urapmin of Papua New Guinea. Ethnology 34(3):211-24. 1996. Between Apology and Compensation:Equivalent Exchange as Ritual Reconciliation among the Urapmin of Papua New Guinea. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Social Anthropology in Oceania. 1997. When Do You Think the World Will End? Globalization, Apocalypticism, and the Moral Perils of Fieldwork in "Last New Guinea." Anthropologyand Humanism22(1):6-30. In Press. On Reading "World News": Apecalyptic Narrative, Negative Nationalism, and TransnationalChristianityin a Papua New Guinea Soclety. Social Analysis. Ryan D. 1969. Christianity,Cargo CultsSand Politics among the Toaripi of Papua. Oceania 40(2):99118^ Smith, M. F. 1994. Hard Times on Kainru Island: Poverty, Developmenlt,and Morality in a Papua New Guinea Village. Honolulu. Strathern, M. 1988. The Gender of the Gift: Problems with Women and Problems with Society in Melanesia. Berkeley. Swatridge, C. 1985. Delivering the Goods: Educationas Cargo in Papua New Guinea. Manchester. Wagner, R. 1977. Analogic Kinship: A Daribi Example. American Ethnologist4(4):623-42. Walter, M. A. H. B. 1981. Cult Movement, and CommunityDevelopment Associations: Revolution and Evolution m the Papua New Guinea Countryside. Road Belong Development: Cargo Cults, Community Groups and Self-Help Movements in Papua New Gumea, eds. R. Gerritsen, R. May, and A. Walter, pp. 81-105 Canberra. White, G M 1980. Social Images and Social Change in a Melanesian Society. American Ethnologist 7(2):352-70. Cults m Melanesla New Yvrk. Worsley, P 1968 The TrumpetShall Svund: A Study of Young M. W. 1983. Magicians of Manumanua:Livmg Myth in Kalauna. Berkeley.
;'Cargo9