| Abstract: | The cassowary, although no longer a popular animal for possession or gift exchange in contemporary Anganen, is good to think in the Lévi-Straussian sense and good to remember. Its excessive violence may stand for the violence of which men are capable. This is the case for inter-group warfare. It also refers to intra-community hostilities, not sharing cassowary meat being a frequent cause for clan fission and an agonistic exchange called rawa where those conceptualised as brothers engage in the competitive slaughter of, ideally, cassowaries. The article primarily concerns rawa and its extraordinary character. It is typified by paradox and danger despite the displacement of anger from direct attacks on humans to the slaughter of animals. Rawa protagonists throw blood and uncleaned entrails at each other while shouting the vilest of insults in the hope the opponent will eventually not respond and lose the contest. However, while escalation of a dispute to the level of rawa is evidence of failed mediation, this competitive exchange establishes the condition for eventual intervention and, via a communal feast of the slaughtered animals, the resumption of strong community relations, including those between the former protagonists. The final ethnographic section focuses on the fact that warfare and rawa were prohibited by the Australian Administration. Anganen men feel they were disenfranchised by the Administration, in part because they were denied access to the culturally lauded male pursuits of being warriors and rawa men. As such, that cassowaries are thought to have been much more popular in the past is central to my claim they are good to remember. |
