their businesses, leaving only wage workers relatively distant from binding, hierarchi cal relations and intersubjective agency, and hence able to make some performative claim(mostly through consumption habits)to individual agency The growing gap between the individualising national and international imaginary and the anti-individualistic local power structure haunts many city dwellers. Younger people with aspirations to this structure must negotiate the contradiction between their generational interest in personal expression and their institutional imperative to cultivate the intersubjective skills without which success is not possible. In Luzhou, cultural imaginary and style have begun to shift without either a change in economic structure itself or a shift in this structure's gatekeeping intersubjective habitus, leav ing a segmented political economy whose flashpoint-and means of advancement- remaIns ritual feasting. I propose a modification to Yans formulation of disembedment and re-embed- ment: social mobility is indispensable to the recognition of claims to individual agency. Due to the state's continued domination of the economy, however, and the state's personalistic institutional culture, the need to submit to ritual discipline is an inescapable part of urban social mobility. Therefore, many aspirants to individualit find themselves participating, willy-nilly, in de-individuating ritual feasting. The fol- lowing sections address three of Yans features mentioned above, with special atten tion to feastings role in each field: potential individuals' need to ' re-embed', the uncivil individual, and social mobility's priority in individualisation. But first, I briefly define feasting and its ritual cultural habitus. WHAT IS FEASTING? I regard feasting as both a social event where relationships are made and kept up, and as a socialising model and habitus for negotiating power relationships that builds on and amplifies other socialising processes(most notably, familial linguistic socialis tion)and which ramifies very broadly across society Put most simply, feasting is the practice of inviting others to eat and drink. Eti- quette and morality are merged in feasts; proper ritual procedures(etiquette, or li) express and create moral sentiments of generosity and harmony which themselves serve as a basis for relationships. Skilled feasters read the context and find just the right words to engage other participants, 'getting the atmosphere going(daidong ifen)and enlivening participants emotional engagement. Each action by the host such as making the invitation, seating the guest, etc -and counter-action by the guest, express in some measure an agonistic element that is relatively muted in formal, hierarchical feasts and emphasised in informal, egalitarian feasts. Playful struggle points up the radical criss-crossing of agency central to feasting Dramatic acts of self-sacrifice for others, especially offering to drink strong spirits, function as moral examples meant to shame one's partner into matching ones action Effective performance of such acts enhances a persons social power. This person ritu- ally taps into an agency not originating in the individual self, however, but in others @2014 Australian Anthropological Socety 61their businesses, leaving only wage workers relatively distant from binding, hierarchi￾cal relations and intersubjective agency, and hence able to make some performative claim (mostly through consumption habits) to individual agency. The growing gap between the individualising national and international imaginary and the anti-individualistic local power structure haunts many city dwellers. Younger people with aspirations to this structure must negotiate the contradiction between their generational interest in personal expression and their institutional imperative to cultivate the intersubjective skills without which success is not possible. In Luzhou, cultural imaginary and style have begun to shift without either a change in economic structure itself or a shift in this structure’s ‘gatekeeping’ intersubjective habitus, leav￾ing a segmented political economy whose flashpoint—and means of advancement— remains ritual feasting. I propose a modification to Yan’s formulation of disembedment and re-embed￾ment: social mobility is indispensable to the recognition of claims to individual agency. Due to the state’s continued domination of the economy, however, and the state’s personalistic institutional culture, the need to submit to ritual discipline is an inescapable part of urban social mobility. Therefore, many aspirants to individuality find themselves participating, willy-nilly, in de-individuating ritual feasting. The fol￾lowing sections address three of Yan’s features mentioned above, with special atten￾tion to feasting’s role in each field: potential individuals’ need to ‘re-embed’, the uncivil individual, and social mobility’s priority in individualisation. But first, I will briefly define feasting and its ritual cultural habitus. WHAT IS FEASTING? I regard feasting as both a social event where relationships are made and kept up, and as a socialising model and habitus for negotiating power relationships that builds on and amplifies other socialising processes (most notably, familial linguistic socialisa￾tion) and which ramifies very broadly across society. Put most simply, feasting is the practice of inviting others to eat and drink. Eti￾quette and morality are merged in feasts; proper ritual procedures (etiquette, or li) express and create moral sentiments of generosity and harmony which themselves serve as a basis for relationships. Skilled feasters read the context and find just the right words to engage other participants, ‘getting the atmosphere going’ (daidong qifen) and enlivening participants’ emotional engagement. Each action by the host— such as making the invitation, seating the guest, etc.—and counter-action by the guest, express in some measure an agonistic element that is relatively muted in formal, hierarchical feasts and emphasised in informal, egalitarian feasts. Playful struggle points up the radical criss-crossing of agency central to feasting. Dramatic acts of self-sacrifice for others, especially offering to drink strong spirits, function as moral examples meant to shame one’s partner into matching one’s action. Effective performance of such acts enhances a person’s social power. This person ritu￾ally ‘taps into’ an agency not originating in the individual self, however, but in others. © 2014 Australian Anthropological Society 361 Feasting and individuation in China