Shayla Sakkakhanaune
Nov 2, 2025
An Essay by Shayla Sakkakhanaune
While buying a car or owning a home may seem like natural rites of passage in adulthood, they are luxuries that seemingly cost an arm and a leg for those who cannot easily afford them. In A.R. Tivadar's short story “Sunday Market,” money is optional in transactions, and a house can actually cost someone their limbs. Following Zamfira and her father on a shopping trip to the ‘Sunday Market’ quickly reveals how identity can be lost in a society that commodifies body parts. As Tivadar explores this commodification through dark economic satire, she skillfully exposes the grotesque underbelly of extreme capitalism and vulnerability in her short story.
In “Sunday Market,” Zamfira lives in a society that operates on a unique economic system: there are no limits on what can be physically exchanged in a transaction, and exchange is immediate. This is not a bartering system since money can still be used in transactions, as Zamfira and her father “packed some of Zamfira’s old canvases and 50 lei in 10 lei banknotes in an old wallet” before leaving for the Market (pg. 20). While this society does not explicitly identify itself as capitalistic, the interactions that take place at the Market are quite reminiscent of the exploitative nature of capitalism. By detailing exchanges where bodies can be commodities, Tivadar critiques capitalism in a way that puts herself in conversation with classical social theorists like Karl Marx, Georg Simmel, and Max Weber, but creatively deviates from their manner of discussion. She specifically illustrates physical sacrifice as a significant component of the commodification of bodies in a society, which can be interpreted using various social theories: Marx discusses how capitalism alienates workers from their labor while basing the price of a commodity on the cost of its production, Simmel posits how the extent of sacrifice in an exchange creates value for the objects being exchanged, and Weber examines how class situations can be determined by people's property.
As a character, Zamfira’s father exemplifies how bodies and identity are commodified in this story. When Zamfira’s older sister, Lăcrimioara, got married and found a house to buy with her spouse, “[t]he real estate agent asked for an arm and a leg, the standard price. Zamfira’s father haggled for only one arm and his first name” (pg. 19). He eventually gave up his arm, first name, and last name. To replace what was physically sacrificed for his daughter, Zamfira’s father found a cheap arm that “was burnt by the sun, missed 3 fingers and was marked with badly-made tattoos but otherwise functioned perfectly” (pg. 19). Given that Marx connects the price of a commodity to the cost of its production, it can be argued that people are inherently workers in the society of “Sunday Market” because their bodies are sources of production. A person’s arm and leg can be equated to the cost of a house in this society because limbs are commodities, and there is a limited amount of commodities that a body can produce. Marx’s understanding of alienation can also be applied to this commodification of bodies, as he asserts that the product of a worker’s labor becomes an alien object when “the worker puts his life into the object.” Considering how Zamfira’s father has put his life into his arms by making memories with them throughout his life– probably holding his daughters when they were babies– he has essentially sold part of his life to purchase something for Lăcrimioara. Not only that, he has lost his name. Zamfira’s father no longer has an identity of his own because of how the society he lives in has reduced his livelihood to products of equivalent value.
As Zamfira and her father continue to traverse through the Market, it becomes increasingly clear how vulnerability is taken advantage of in this society. More vulnerable people are willing to give up more of their bodies and livelihoods to acquire something they need, and Zamfira observes how “[s]ome vendors were completely shameless in their greed, knowing people could and would pay with whatever they got. A full set of teeth for a new car. A pair of eyes, or more, for an uptown house. One’s skin for a healthy heart or lungs or bones. Oh, people traded anything for health. Some vendors’ wares were themselves” (pg. 20). Using Simmel’s definition of sacrifice, it can be said that people’s bodies are valuable as commodities because a person selling parts of their body must physically give up something that provides them with greater quality of life. Incorporating Weber’s understanding of property into this interpretation means that bodies may also be considered property in this society. Some people have more property than others and subsequently have more to offer vendors, which may put them in a higher class than those with less of their body to offer. The economic dynamics that Tivadar creates in her short story implies that vulnerable people will be exploited for their bodies and stripped of their identities until they have nothing left to offer.
“Sunday Market” ends with Zamfira and her father rushing back to their car as rain begins to pour down; although they are annoyed about being stuck at the Market because of the rain, they are happy that they “managed to get some things” (pg. 22). The world they live in may be quite unnerving to readers, but the unforgiving tone that Tivadar creates with her cruel, yet distantly familiar imagery contributes to her creative critique of capitalism and its commodification of bodies and identities.