Anthropology & Aging


 

Anthropology & Aging, Vol 36, No 1 (2015), pp. 103-105 

ISSN 2374-2267 (online)    DOI 10.5195/aa.2015.65 

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 

United States License. 

 

This journal is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its 

D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program, and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. 

Book Review 

Vital Relations: Modernity and the Persistent Life of Kinship.Susan McKinnon & Fenella 

Cannell, eds.  Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press. 2013. ISBN 978-1-938645-

01-3 360 pp Price $39.95 (Paper) 

Casey Golomski, PhD 

University Research Council Postdoctoral Fellow, University of the Witwatersrand

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/
http://www.library.pitt.edu/
http://www.pitt.edu/
http://www.library.pitt.edu/articles/digpubtype/index.html
http://www.upress.pitt.edu/upressIndex.aspx


 

 

Anthropology & Aging     
Vol 36, No 1 (2015)    ISSN 2374-2267 (online)    DOI 10.5195/aa.2015.65     http://anthro-age.pitt.edu 

Book Review 

Vital Relations: Modernity and the Persistent Life of Kinship.Susan McKinnon & Fenella 

Cannell, eds.  Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press. 2013. ISBN 978-1-938645-

01-3 360 pp Price $39.95 (Paper) 

Casey Golomski, PhD 

University Research Council Postdoctoral Fellow, University of the Witwatersrand 

 

Vital Relations is an edited volume by a group of professionally senior anthropologists. 

Their major argument is that conceptualizations of Euro-American modernity have long rested 

on presuppositions about pre-modern and modern societies where kinship is central to the 

former and erased, sidelined, or subsumed by more powerful social forms in the latter. Through 

historical processes of epistemological "domaining," kinship was separated from politics, law, 

economics, science and religion. Ethnographic research confounds this separation, and the 

contributors consider how kinship has grounded, interpenetrated, and fomented social, political-

economic, and religious change. The second chapter by Susan McKinnon anchors these 

introductory claims by tracing how a quasi-evolutionary model of kinship influenced late 

nineteenth- and early twentieth-century anthropological theories, positing that pre-modern 

societies structured by kinship systems and obligations progressed toward modern, secular 

societies structured by impersonal contract. To show this, she describes how certain forms of 

kinship like cousin marriage and sibling exchange were central the expansion of Western 

corporate entities, but were increasingly stigmatized as such forms “became inappropriate—

indeed, scandalously out of place—in a world whose progressive modernity was measured by 

the standard of their presumed separation” (54-55), that is, the separation of kinship and 

economy. Like McKinnon, each of the volume’s authors’ then pays close attention to kinship in 

their respective cases so to render these categorical domains untenable and unstable.  

While the lucid writing and theoretical overview of kinship is impressive, the related 

categories of age, aging, generation, life course, and life cycle do not appear in the index, and 

none of the authors take these topics as central to their arguments. Anthropologists of aging and 

the life course, cross-cultural gerontologists, and interested practitioners will have to sift more 

carefully through each case to unearth what the authors’ claims about modernity and kinship 

might warrant for their own topical concerns. Thus, the focus of this review is to point out select 

chapters from the total eleven in Vital Relations for Anthropology and Aging readers in which 

they might find some initial ground to engage their age-related interests. These most relevant 

chapters interestingly involve thematic intersections of temporality, descent, and ethics. 

Using Mormonism as her case, Fenella Cannell critiques David Schneider’s analytic 

separation of blood and law in American kinship, “since Mormon ontology does not oppose the 

material and the immaterial to each other in any simple fashion” (225). One might read her case 

through a life course lens, to consider how social relations and family formations spiritually 

extend beyond the mortal life of an individual person. Contemporary Mormon ideas about 



Golomski | Book Review 

 

 

Anthropology & Aging     
Vol 36, No 1 (2015)    ISSN 2374-2267 (online)    DOI 10.5195/aa.2015.65     http://anthro-age.pitt.edu 

104 

 

reproduction, adoption, and marriage, for example, account for children’s premortal belonging in 

the world and the possibility of continued familial reproduction after death in the “celestial 

kingdom” (227), posing a distinctive “time horizon” (236) for intergenerational continuity within 

church families. Thus the religious temporality of Mormonism compels scholars to rethink how 

relatedness is made through time and across spiritual and physical worlds, and how people 

understand and envision themselves to change vis-à-vis others along that way.  

Similarly, Danilyn Rutherford jumps off from the cliché of “what about the children” to 

investigate a "rhetoric of descent" within popular environmental discourses, which says resource 

(mis-)management in the present will potentially undo conditions for and relations with future 

generations. Are these children and future generations doomed due to our mistakes, or are they 

our salvation? Such discourses entail ideas of potential rupture between present and the future 

populations and “elicits an intergenerational form of what David Hume called ‘sympathy’: the 

bringing of another’s passions and perspectives into intimate proximity with one’s own” (262). 

Such rhetorical moves also push us to consider how different notions of the future are 

constructed and collocated, and she contrasts two examples of temporality using Rupert Stasch’s 

discussion of future-oriented kin relations in Korowai, West Papua, and Cormac McCarthy’s 

literature about post-apocalyptic survivorship. Her overall analysis suggests that future children 

and generations are not the only ones who are potentially doomed. “A broader vision of ethics 

and temporality” (281), she notes, forces us to acknowledge our own participation—or perhaps 

self-destruction—in shaping the world today and the world yet to come, as well as the ways our 

successors might dwell in it. 

Michael Lambek sees kinship as a series of ethical, performative acts, pointing out later in 

his chapter that these acts continue across the “life cycle.” In this account, kinship is both 

"immoderate"--meaning that it beholds a "surfeit of meaning, relations, and sentiment" and 

symbolizes a "wholeness that is always already compromised or lost" (242-243)--and "immodern"-

-meaning that while it was as certainly subsumed by modernist domains of law and economy, it 

has also been reconfigured by authority and power in historical epochs other than modernity. 

Indeed, he suggests that, “every generation looks back with nostalgia to the imagined richness 

and interaction experienced by the preceding generation” (243), pointing out how social 

differences and similarities consistently involve and are remade through kinship acts. In contrast 

to modernist, static definitions of persons or groups, difference, similarity and identity are 

relational and more fluid, and he invokes the “life cycle” to give this fluidity a temporal scope.  In 

his account, however, the life cycle is relatively undefined and seems to be taken as a given (248-

249), rather than one constructed via the intersecting forces and subjectivities of a particular 

historical era. I think, following Jason Danely and Caitrin Lynch (2013:4), this approach would 

productively ask instead how “the individual’s life-course experiences and the social, cultural, 

and historical structures and meanings that shape the life course" or kinship for that matter 

within the scope of modernity, "interact with and permeate each other."   

Finally, it is fair to offer brief descriptions of a few other chapters for their potential 

topical relevance to issues of age, life course, and generation. Sylvia Yanagisako shows how 

Italian families’ fashion businesses expand transnationally in China while maintaining lineal 

solidity, a business model their Chinese counterparts find ambiguous. Elana Shever argues that 

kinship is central to understanding modernist histories of Argentinian nationalism and oil 

industries, detailing how the political economy of paternalism assured social reproduction for 

workers’ families. Lastly, Gillian Feeley-Harnik, using the case of anthropologist Lewis Henry 



 Golomski | Book Review 

 

Anthropology & Aging     
Vol 36, No 1 (2015)    ISSN 2374-2267 (online)    DOI 10.5195/aa.2015.65     http://anthro-age.pitt.edu 

105 

 

105 

 
Morgan’s extended family, argues that professional and personal projects of genealogy emerged 

in the post-Civil War United States alongside legal concerns about who was a free person and 

who was enslaved. Besides her chapter’s wonderful use of archival images and the lovely book 

cover by the Singh Twins, other figures supplementing the rich ethnographies would be 

appreciated. 

Taking cue from the introduction’s title “The Difference Kinship Makes,” the next step 

might be to ask what “the difference aging or life course makes” to a project of rereading kinship 

through a deconstruction of modernity narratives. Lambek notes in his chapter that under 

modernity, “family” surpassed “kinship” as an object of regulatory concern, but Jennifer Cole 

and Deborah Durham (2007:2) remind us that age and generation link “world historical economic 

and social change,” like modernity, “to intimate spaces of caring and obligation within the 

family.” Indeed, as kinship and notions of it transformed under conditions of modernity, we 

might presume that similar transformations occurred surrounding ideas of aged persons, bodies 

and the life course and the practices that rendered such ideas concrete. Describing how this 

occurred through and beyond politics, economy, law and religion, as Vital Relations has asked 

for kinship, is the task set for contributors to Anthropology and Aging and similar venues. 

 

 

Cole, Jennifer, and Deborah Durham 

   2007 Age, Regeneration, and the Intimate Politics of Globalization. In Generations and Globalization: 

Youth, Age, and Family in the New World Economy. Jennifer Cole and Deborah Durham eds. Pp. 

1-28. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 

 

Danely, Jason, and Caitrin Lynch 

   2013 Transitions and Transformations: Paradigms, Perspectives, and Possibilities. In  Transitions and 

Transformations: Cultural Perspectives on Aging and the Life Course. Caitrin Lynch and Jason 

Danely, eds. Pp. 3-20.New York: Berghahn.