Bott - Wilson

The idea of indefinite family networks is an interesting one and one supported by what Bott describes as clearly-defined roles in a family--clear notions of who does what (36-7). Imagine this: there are very pronounced tasks within a household but no one available to be responsible for them, either because the family member is ill-equipped or non-existent. Who then is tasked with keeping the family going and how is the outsider incorporated into the unit? The network could grow to encompass the new member, who brings their talents and own network. In this image of the family, I am reminded of a description of a very effective social climber in the sixth Harry Potter book: "a great swollen spider, spinning a web around it, twitching a thread here and there to bring its large and juicy flies a little closer" (75). The flies are either new members or Bott's "final product," though I am unsure if the spider would be a specific member of the family, the head of the household for example, because all members are tasked with maintaining the family in some way and so all would be keen to bring in new talent or support.

All families exist in association with other families. The disturbing, the dysfunctional, the ordinary families: the contrast with each is what forms a partial-definition for a family of itself. When discussing the genealogies collected from the families interviewed in their study, Bott wrote that the genealogies "not only provided useful information for the analysis of kinship, but also gave the field worker an idea of the couple's feelings about their past and their place in society" (21). How does the family, limited by social labels and other boundaries, expand? Is periodicity a boundary?