1.5. Efectos Jurídicos
1.7.1. Efectos personales obligaciones recíprocas entre –
Although Puehu’s position shall be examined more closely in the forth-‐coming paragraphs, a visualisation may prove helpful. Adapting Bourdieu’s example, the following diagram outlines the field as the articulation of Māori culture online.154 Constituted by the case studies, a few of websites previously mentioned, and a handful of Māori specific or generalised sites, which hold or portray a degree of Māori related content.
Figure 16. Field of Māori cultural production online
Iwi websites are neither autonomous nor determined by heteronomous factors and centre the field of Māori cultural production online. Principally used by iwi, whether as discursive space or introduction for associated activities, they are valued but are not the arena for discussing more serious matters. Thereby they received a moderate degree of consecration. Whakamīharo Lindauer Online, like iwi sites is centrally placed
153 Oppositional as a relative implication as constituted by the field itself and not an
intentionality.
154 In an attempt to explain the field of cultural production Bourdieu examined and illustrated
the French literary scene of the 19th century as example. See Bourdieu, P. (1993). The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, p. 49.
! " # "$%" # & % ' ' ( '! # ' ' &!) ' ' ! !
but it has received a high degree of consecration. The portraits the website displays are of considerable importance to their descendents and there has been the utmost attention paid to how best illustrate this within the conventions of the internet. Gallery and museum sites, are at opposing ends due to general audience legitimisation but also receive high consecration as by-‐product of their place within the larger field of cultural production. Tourist sites, as specialist are lent to what is expected by the general mass audience, predicated upon hallmark activities and stereotypic experiences. They rarely reflect the actualities of Māori culture outside of brochures and snapshots. Each are considered creative agents in what and how they portray or articulate Māori culture via the internet. It is their relationality within this study to which the field is constructed.
Furthermore, with each field automatically constituted by its own rules and logic, and allowing for a degree of overlap, as illustrated by the positions of museums and galleries, so the field of Māori cultural production online unavoidably differentiates itself from the field of Māori cultural production. Meaning the internet as field has brought with it its own practices and rules that must be abided by. Therefore, even though the increasing use and relevance of the internet in every-‐day life has effectively eroded the online/offline dichotomy that defined early cyber discourse, the digital space and associated technologies as field define and delimit specific interactions and behaviours (Bourdieu, 1984; McLuhan, 1964).155
Under this pretence it has been argued the connection between on and offline realms has led users to produce a more honest portrayal of themselves online and those who do not are viewed with suspicion and receive heavy criticism (Back et al., 2010; Lumby, 2010; O’Carroll, 2013a; Pempek et al., 2009). Furthermore, with a collapse in context which would normally separate an agent’s various relationships, and the synchronous (performative)/asynchronous (exhibitional) modality of the internet, it has been postulated the portrayal is in actuality a moderated representation (Boyd and Heer, 2006; Hogan, 2010; O’Carroll, 2013a).156
155 Most of this research derives from interactions occurring on social media and social
networking sites (SNSs). It may be questionable whether these are transferable to practices and actions on websites run by a large organisation or institution. However, not only are institutions like Te Papa and Auckland Libraries active within SNSs but further their relationship with the audience and their heteronomous position dictates that they are required to work within determined means.
156 Collapse of context refers to practices on social networking sites where people tend to
However, it has been argued because an agent is simply unable to consider all of the potential viewers when putting content online they need only account for two groups, those whom the information is intended and those who may find it problematic (Hogan, 2010). This extends to the known audience and the potential but unknown audience. This implies that when people put content online they often do so with the “lowest common denominator” in mind (ibid.).
This moderated construction strongly aligns with Goffman’s performed self, with the denominator strictly dependent upon the specificity of the website (field) itself.157 Therefore, although Puehu is working in relative autonomous opposition to Te Papa and Auckland Libraries, when posting material it would necessarily consider its perceived audience.158 So, if it is conceded that a blog’s habitus dictates it is a source and disseminator of a personal or collective expression, then Puehu’s by-‐line of “art and culture” provides half of the story. On a more fundamental examination, the blog’s content focuses primarily on critical explorations of contemporary Māori and Pacific identities.
The focus of critical identity exploration would be indicative of a moderated performed self (front stage). This is reinforced by the observation that posts which deal with identity directly, whether humorous, considered or contentious, are those that receive the majority of comments, reblogs and notes (likes). Conversely the specific Māori practices articulated in connection to the taonga of Pakerau are not critical explorations of identity but as latent manifestations, they would signify the dispositions (habitus or back stage) of those particular individuals. Nevertheless, facilitated through the digitality of the space, the dialogue reaffirms what was being produced aligned with the values of the audience, intended or otherwise (Goffman, 1959, p. 35).
only does it bring those normally separate relationships together but they are also privy to the agent’s general activities and social circle. And can be looked at as it happens or much later. See Boyd (2008), Boyd and Heer (2006).
157 Goffman’s theories have found a degree of favour in studies examining interaction in the
digital space. See Brock (2009), Cover (2012), Gatson (2011), Kendall (1998), Hogan (2010), Robinson (2007).
158 Arguably, if an agent were located at the autonomous end of the field, they would then be
able to constitute both positions. However, online as exhibition space necessarily implies an audience, whether real or imagined.
Corresponding, the same disposition is evident in Te Papa’s GAP, where its moderated self has opened up its collections, providing the perceived audience with what the museum thought the audience would want to look at, “art in an expanded sense” (McAloon as cited in Speer, 2012). This was exemplified by Te Papa’s inclusion of a high number from the Taonga Māori collection both to fulfil a perceived desire for Māori visual and material culture globally, and to differentiate them from other cultural institutions. Google’s spokesperson Kate Mason’s previous comment indirectly confirms this.159 By providing what was thought to be wanted and by avoiding contentious works within the selection there was consideration towards the denominator. This extends to selecting unprovenanced taonga as means to maintain safety and avoid offense.
However, in contextualising taonga as artefact suggests the denominator was considered in terms of an international rather than local audience. While there was recognition of taonga as objects of wider appreciation and respect across Māoridom, outside of unprovenanced taonga there was no interpretation of the works within mātauranga Māori, hence they did not perceive Māori as denominator (audience) within the GAP.
Furthermore, Te Papa’s online presence reveals an inherent bias towards its physical space and the physical object. Although this is to be expected as it is in accordance with the museum’s materialist Enlightenment premise (Newell, 2012; Srinivasan, 2013). Through the lack of an over-‐arching cohesion and classificational divisions evident (Māori, European, art, artefact etcetera), Te Papa revealed its habitus to the audience. Disjunctions between an organisation and its various online personae have been observed due to the practice of perceiving the online realm as something separate rather than part of an organisation’s whole (Hanna, et al., 2011). Overall this was understood to undermine the effectiveness of the online embodiments. Based upon this pretence, it would implicate Te Papa does not understand the specificities of the digital environ. But more so, by not treating the GAP as an exhibition space and exposing their predilection for collecting and classifying implicates Te Papa does not perceive the online space as legitimate locale for conveying museological practice.
159 “The cool thing, particularly for the New Zealand collection, is there are many elements of
New Zealand culture, and particularly Maori culture, that might not have got this global exposure had they not been in on the Google Art Project,” (as cited in Dickinson, 2012b).
Therefore, Te Papa has not embodied its desire to be a forum of change but rather unintentionally propagated a dislocated view of Māori culture.
This may be countered with claims of massive digitisation projects, digital access policies and an ongoing commitment to open up collections.160 However, what museums often create is nothing more than their catalogues digitally rendered.161 Fundamentally there is a failure to understand an audience expects more than images or catalogue details from a museum affiliated website. Rather, as has been documented, it is through considered reproductions that the populace is able to gain understanding of the importance of original works (Bourdieu & Darbel 1990; Cameron, 2007; Fyfe, 2004).
For Manatunga and by extension Auckland Libraries they too work within the preconditions of the internet as field and produced a moderated portrayal. Yet, what separates Manatunga from Te Papa’s GAP was there is no discordance in whether the presence is digital or physical. While as stated, libraries generally do not dictate a contextual interpretation of their objects. However, when producing an exhibition it is brought together for a particular purpose to convey a particular aspect of the collection, therefore a contextual interpretation for Manatunga was required.
Furthermore, for Robert Eruera as Pou Ārahi Taonga, a moderated identity (or idealised in the Goffmanian sense), Manatunga needed to be produced in accordance to what he and the audience expected. As Māori were principally the audience and subject of the exhibition, it can be argued Māori would constitute both positions that required consideration; those whom the information was for and those who may find it problematic. Thus, based upon the moderated identity, there was no other way Manatunga could have been produced, except in the way it was; one that attempted to align with Māori practices and perceptions.
160 Indeed, with an update to Collections Online Te Papa has seized the opportunity to open its
digital image collection further by allowing high-‐resolution downloads of material under Creative Commons licensing. See Kingston, A. (2014, June 3). Free, downloadable [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://blog.tepapa.govt.nz/2014/06/03/free-‐downloadable-‐images-‐ from-‐te-‐papas-‐collections/
161 This is particularly evident in online collections that utilise platforms that derive from
collection management systems such as Vernon. From a practical sense these systems are of great benefit but from a non-‐industry perspective they produce a reductive perception based around classificational divisions. For example see Puke Ariki (n.d.) Heritage collections. Retrieved from http://www.pukeariki.com/Heritage/Heritage.
Through their respective products each case study has been located with the field of Māori cultural production online. Tied to their ontological origins each produced subjectivity constituted outcomes in accordance with their position within the field. This took into account the reflective nature of identity as discussed through Bourdieu’s habitus and Goffman’s self, which implicated an engagement with a perceived audience as a means to produce a moderated product. For Puehu and Manatunga there was little disconnection between the perceived audience expectations and the products produced. However, it has been argued that Te Papa’s GAP did not consider the necessarily denominators and thereby articulated Māori culture ineffectively. This in turn is suggestive that Te Papa as museum does not consider the online environment as a legitimate museological space.
Taonga in the age of digitality
The three case studies of Māori culture online examined here all derive from different areas of cultural production. Each are not so much responding to each other as they producing what is in accordance with what is presumed from their respective positions. This objective determinism seemingly limits the actuality of production to that, which on its projection upon the field could be seen as expected or predictable.
This is not the case, as Bourdieu clearly states, “The meaning of a work […] changes automatically with each change in the field within which it is situated for the spectator or reader” (1993, pp. 30-‐31). Harking to the objective relationality inherent in the field, it recognises the ability of the subjectively (unpredictably) produced object to enter the field from which other objects are now in relation to. This is demonstrated in New Zealand’s post Te Maori cultural scene, where with the breaking free of the limiting “primitive contextualisation” Māori art was then seen as part of the global art discourse, and therefore in relation to Western perceptions of art. This had a marked effect across Aotearoa’s cultural production, delineating traditional from contemporary, taonga from taonga-‐derived, Māori from Pākehā. The statement of dualities is not to exemplify the division of New Zealand creative production, historical or otherwise. Rather, it is the introduction or acknowledgement of objects into the field where relationships are induced.162
Therefore, what is being proposed is that these three case studies have acknowledged the digital space in varying degrees of legitimacy predicated upon their habitus. Their relative acceptance of the online realm is reflected into their articulation of Māori culture through their acknowledgement of the specificities of the space via its digitality. Thus, as constitutional elements of the field of Māori cultural production online within this study Te Papa’s GAP, Puehu and Manatunga’s results will be explicated with the intention of informing the effectiveness of future articulations.
162 Bourdieu sees these relationships delimited by agents that occupy opposing or negative
positions within the field. Although admitting that this is often not an intentionality but merely a product of the field as field itself. The apparent necessary binarism of position predicated on post-‐structural tenets of difference appears a might to formulaic. Instead, it is pertinent to perceive these objects in terms of sameness (as presumed in the manifestation of the field). Thus it is through their sameness that relationships are formed. This is exactly what Jahnke (2006) posited in his continuum of Māori art at the dawn of the new millennium.