This is a case study of the Santa Fe mining cooperative in Guanajuato, Mexico, the sole survivor of the several mining cooperatives established during the radical 1930s, which now ekes out a difficult existence in a world of volatile market capitalism. The experiences of the cooperative, being unusual, cannot be easily generalized, and the author’s opening gambit (“I propose a new perspective for understanding the composition and negotiation of power in Mexico” [p. 20]) seems slightly hubristic. The claim is, however, partly validated by the deployment of the central organizing concept of “patrimony”: the inherited resources of the mine, which the miners, unlike workers in conventional capitalist firms, seek to preserve for future generations. (“Unlike” should perhaps read “to a greater degree than,” because similar patrimonial concerns are apparent even in private enterprises, particularly those associated with nonrenewables.) The notion of “patrimony,” contrasting with conventional market economics, underpins cooperative thinking and practice, which the author deftly and sensitively analyzes, drawing on extensive 1990s fieldwork. There are valuable discussions of work, home, gender, recreation, religion, and (more cursorily) cooperative politics, which, in turn, are enlivened by life histories, vignettes, and some choice quotations.

Although the empirical data are rich and illuminating, the marriage between data and theory sometimes has a shotgun quality. The author stresses the importance of patrimony and the contradiction—not confined, of course, to mining—between the imperatives of the market and the moral economy of the workers: “In order to keep patrimonial possessions and pass them on, the Cooperative must continue to extract and sell the exhaustible resources of the mines” (p. 82). The argument tends to be assertive (and rather repetitive), and the evidence adduced is often discursive (and a little strained). For example, a flyer illustrating the circularity of silver production and exchange—from mine to market and back—does not depict a circle, but a one-way street (p. 181). Similarly, the patrimonial label is widely scattered: On payday—and here the author is presenting emic perceptions—“the Cooperative patrimony, now in the form of money, is given over to the individual worker. Will he convert it into another patrimonial substance, such as a house, or will he spend it foolishly on drinking and women?” (p. 44). City bank clerks also scrimp and save to buy houses, which their children will inherit: “patrimonial” thinking, readers might conclude, is pervasive, especially if the term is sufficiently diluted. (I did not find the author’s initial definition of “patrimony”—“the ethnographic instantiation of the analytical concept of inalienability” [p. 13]—entirely helpful, but, I should fess up, I am a historian, not an ethnographer. I should add, too, that Ferry’s pre-1990s history is thin and, in places, factually inaccurate [e.g., President Cárdenas’s dates are confused, (pp. 62, 210)]; but this is not a serious problem.)

In addition to the rich empirical data, the author deploys a wide range of theoretical and comparative references (Henry Sumner Maine, Pierre Bourdieu, Karl Polanyi, Victor Turner, Eric Wolf, C. B. McPherson, N. D. Fustel de Coulanges, etc.). These references tend to be allusive and passing: They are dropped into the pool; they generate some ripples, and then they are heard and seen no more. The reader, therefore, has some difficulty keeping up with the shifting conceptual landscape, especially when the concepts (“root metaphors” and “mnemonic” notions [pp. 10, 88]) come and go, and when, occasionally, they mutate (“vectors of power” suddenly become “vectors of authority” [pp. 142, 185]; you do not have to be a paid-up Weberian to believe that “power” and “authority” are different). The ethnographic comparisons, although often interesting and no doubt apposite, are also casually introduced. The “hau of mineral specimens” is mentioned on page 172, but the Mauss–Maori meaning of the term is not explained until page 187. Sudden segues from Mexico to Bolivia to Africa (pp. 118–119) can leave the reader—perhaps the plodding, less-than-expert reader—slightly giddy.

The style of the book tends to reflect its two voices, empirical and theoretical. Discussions of daily life—the greater part of the book—are clear, informative, and engaging. Theoretical passages can be hard going. Readers encounter the usual suspects (“re-presents”, “palimpsest”, and “synecdoche” [pp. 11, 112, 118]); more important, the presentation of complex ideas is sometimes compromised by a wordy style and, it seems, indifferent proofreading (p. 160 para. 3 is a mess; and the source citations in the text often do not correspond to the bibliography). The book is enriched by a good many Spanish quotations; but the translations and accenting are rather hit-and-miss (sirio [p. 26] does not mean “candle,” and sindicato, passim, should be translated as “union” and not “syndicate”).

These minor defects aside, this is an interesting and original study from which anthropologists, ethnographers, and students of cultural, labor, and gender history will benefit; perhaps they will also find the marriage of theory and data more convincing than I did.

[photographs, tables, references, index.]