Making gifts from contracts: symbolic resources and resanctification in officers’ language

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Andrew Gibson
{"title":"Making gifts from contracts: symbolic resources and resanctification in officers’ language","authors":"Andrew Gibson","doi":"10.1080/23337486.2022.2094069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Officers of the Irish Defence Forces have studied at civilian university since 1969, with the introduction of a policy referred to as the University Service Academic Complement (USAC) scheme. In attending university through USAC, officers are obliged to sign a contract stipulating that they will repay the full costs of their time at university. This paper draws on a study of 46 retired and serving officers, to analyse how they discussed their career and the military officer’s experience of civilian higher education. While the agreement officers are obliged to sign is a legal contract, interviewees consistently characterised their experience of the USAC scheme in terms that omitted this economic reality of the financial implications of attending higher education. Instead, they favoured terms that almost exclusively excluded such a perspective, and instead made the USAC scheme appear to be a ‘gift’ in Marcel Mauss’s terms. This paper illustrates how and why this is the case, in that the use of ‘gift language’ is a type of ‘resanctification’ of the military profession by individual officers in the face of the threat to cohesion and their symbolic universe. Beyond and at the societal level, resanctification through gift language also implies a political 'double-bind' for officers in terms of their relationship with civilian military authorities and the military organisation itself. This paper concludes with an overview of some of the implications of a gift analysis for militaries and their surrounding societies.","PeriodicalId":37527,"journal":{"name":"Critical Military Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Military Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23337486.2022.2094069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Officers of the Irish Defence Forces have studied at civilian university since 1969, with the introduction of a policy referred to as the University Service Academic Complement (USAC) scheme. In attending university through USAC, officers are obliged to sign a contract stipulating that they will repay the full costs of their time at university. This paper draws on a study of 46 retired and serving officers, to analyse how they discussed their career and the military officer’s experience of civilian higher education. While the agreement officers are obliged to sign is a legal contract, interviewees consistently characterised their experience of the USAC scheme in terms that omitted this economic reality of the financial implications of attending higher education. Instead, they favoured terms that almost exclusively excluded such a perspective, and instead made the USAC scheme appear to be a ‘gift’ in Marcel Mauss’s terms. This paper illustrates how and why this is the case, in that the use of ‘gift language’ is a type of ‘resanctification’ of the military profession by individual officers in the face of the threat to cohesion and their symbolic universe. Beyond and at the societal level, resanctification through gift language also implies a political 'double-bind' for officers in terms of their relationship with civilian military authorities and the military organisation itself. This paper concludes with an overview of some of the implications of a gift analysis for militaries and their surrounding societies.
从合同中制造礼物:军官语言中的象征资源与圣化
自1969年以来,爱尔兰国防军的军官在平民大学学习,引入了一项被称为大学服务学术补充(USAC)计划的政策。通过USAC就读大学,官员有义务签署一份合同,规定他们将偿还在大学期间的全部费用。本文通过对46名退役现役军官的调查,分析了他们如何讨论自己的职业生涯和军官的平民高等教育经历。虽然官员有义务签署的协议是一份法律合同,但受访者在描述他们在USAC计划中的经历时,总是忽略了接受高等教育的经济现实。相反,他们喜欢的条款几乎完全排除了这种观点,反而使USAC计划看起来像是马塞尔·莫斯所说的“礼物”。本文阐明了这种情况是如何以及为什么会出现的,因为“礼物语言”的使用是军官个人在面对凝聚力和他们的象征世界的威胁时对军事职业的一种“重新圣化”。在社会层面之外,通过礼物语言的再圣化也意味着军官在他们与文职军事当局和军事组织本身的关系方面的政治“双重束缚”。本文最后概述了礼物分析对军队及其周围社会的一些影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical Military Studies
Critical Military Studies Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Critical Military Studies provides a rigorous, innovative platform for interdisciplinary debate on the operation of military power. It encourages the interrogation and destabilization of often taken-for-granted categories related to the military, militarism and militarization. It especially welcomes original thinking on contradictions and tensions central to the ways in which military institutions and military power work, how such tensions are reproduced within different societies and geopolitical arenas, and within and beyond academic discourse. Contributions on experiences of militarization among groups and individuals, and in hitherto underexplored, perhaps even seemingly ‘non-military’ settings are also encouraged. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and, if found suitable for further consideration, to double-blind peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. The Journal also includes a non-peer reviewed section, Encounters, showcasing multidisciplinary forms of critique such as film and photography, and engaging with policy debates and activism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信