Topotactic exchange of BTP and CBTP into γγγγ -ZrP

The cultural diaspora for all Pacific Islands is dynamic and fluid, characterised by frequent travel to and from the islands for short term, longer term and lengthy settlement as well as active visiting friends and relative populations (Bedford, 2007).

The key issues for sustaining cultural uniqueness within this active diasporan context of Pacific island migration were the questions: do Pacific communities wish to be unique in the context of Waitakere/Auckland? If so, then is uniqueness pan-Pacific or ethnic–specific? How can uniqueness be safeguarded? What should be shared outside cultural communities? These questions relate to issues of identity and values.

The term ‗Pacific communities‘ assumes pluralism, thus the research approach was framed from this perspective. The mandate of the research partner, WPB, is to advocate for and on behalf of ‗separate‘ ethnicities and is structured (quasi-colonially perhaps) pluralistically, although WPB also that some features are common to all Pacific peoples and thus ‗pan-Pacific‘.

The information gathered challenges the thesis that ‗that societal marginality can be a positive position from which to develop tourism enterprise and cultural product‘.

Contained within the concept of marginality and deciding whether or not these communities are positioned at the outskirts of mainstream society contains

sub-questions such as: Are Pacific peoples marginalised? And in what ways is marginality defined?

Each of these communities spoke about being marginalised. Extant statistical and academic data confirm the minority status of Pacific communities in New Zealnd against socio-demographic and economic indicators (Chapter 3), but the extent of marginalisation (externally imposed and otherwise) is dependant upon size of population, recency of arrival in New Zealand, strength of local and trans-national diasporan flows and social cohesion, as well as others. Intentional marginalisation was noted in Chapter 2 as an empowered choice not to take part in a set of activities which might erode values, lifestyle, family composition, habitus, language and many more. In this study, Tuvalu is a small community, confident and self-assured in their distinctiveness and ability to innovate in new environments, yet wishes to remain separate from other Pacific – is that marginality? Tonga as a community is self-sufficient with hierarchical and societal clarity and an existing enterprise base, but is not wealthy. Is separateness from the mainstream, marginality or choice?

The research indicated that Samoa has three approaches vis-à-vis culture and enterprise in New Zealand. These are ‗traditional‘, transitional, and contemporary New Zealand-Pacific. Kiribati is new and tiny in population but energetic. Tokelau is not comfortable with the notion of cultural enterprise or tourism and may well not take that path. Waitakere‘s Pacific communities are, in the main, interested in learning about how to develop enterprise from cultural knowledge or resources? But the challenge of retaining knowledge, social structures, cohesive families with elders embedded and youth (or adults) not involved in other social worlds and becoming educated in both worlds is a very difficult task to achieve unaided, whilst still trying to survive at basic economic levels. One must conclude there are elements of choice shown amongst each of these, as well as lack of access to the skills to do so.

Pan-Pacific or ethnic-specific

There were commonalities between the groups about the issue of how to protect cultural uniqueness. All communities were firmly of the view that decisions on uniqueness, protection and sharing (whether inside or outside) of a culture must be made by the ethnic community, not by individuals, but there were nonetheless issues specific to the New Zealand context which affect all Pacific.

The Kiribati group, new to New Zealand, was secure in their knowledge of language, culture and social hierarchies as well as their uniqueness amongst other Pacific communities. The most treasured items to be protected are the Kiribati canoe, fishing items, and the wedding mat. They were confident of their ability to access cultural resources and felt that continuance of teaching youth, use of authentic not artificial

materials and teaching within the context of the Church were essential to retaining the perfection of Kiribati culture and language.

The Tokelauan community identified their unique items as ba (white, yellow and brown mother of pearl) used in personal decoration and fishing lures. Many designs were unique to Tokelau and to each Island such as flowers, carved walking sticks, canoe shapes and fish snares. Tokelauan pork and villages were different from other Pacific Islands.

The Samoan groups emphasised that cornerstones of the distinctive 'Samoan Way' were the values of ‗giving, gifting and loving‘ in terms of exchange, reciprocity and respect as well as shared leadership that extends into community networks. Specific items unique to Samoa in New Zealand include the language, Samoan cultural hierarchy, designs for tapa and tattoos, everyday and decorative items, seafaring and fishing, house building, and natural medicines, song, stories and many others. The food was considered unique, as was the talent for dancing.

The Tongan community said that for them, uniqueness of culture was expressed through community cohesion, well defined values, the separate roles of men and women in society and the cultural hierarchies that pervade Tongan traditional customs. Tongan culture is intangible, expressed in song, dance, language and stories and yet tangible in such things as the designs, patterns, arts and crafts specific to men (rope making and tying, carving canoes, tattoos) and to women (tapa, fine mats, costumes).

The Tuvaluan groups were confident that their eight islands stand uniquely amongst other Pacific cultures. Tuvalu uses many bright contrasting colours in its traditional arts and crafts as well as modern clothing and dance, music costumes and performance styles. These are distinctive amongst other Pacific ethnicities for which natural materials and few colours predominate in traditional items. Items that could be used for a uniquely Tuvalu enterprise niche might include hats, sitting mats, model outrigger canoes, bags, baskets, fans, fishing equipment, coconut tree climbers, coconut de-husking sticks and brooms.

Contextual distinctions were made by each group however between the issues that surround cultural knowledge in New Zealand compared to those that occur in the Island yet their effects spill over into New Zealand. For instance indigenous lands were a very important issue in Samoa, and the civil unrest in Tonga had affected many New Zealand-based Tongan families.

To safeguard?

Pan-Pacific Entrepreneurs thought that each ethnicity would have a different approach to this issue. Entrepreneurs identified a widely felt fear of appropriation,

copying and mass production of Pacific arts, design and natural materials by non-Pacific peoples. But apart from consensus on that issue, views differed about how protections should be enacted. For instance some believed that if items were made to be shared, then they could also be sold (Samoa) but if they were treasures, then they should not ever be seen in the marketplace (Tokelau). Others said that the best way to protect the treasures was to keep the knowledge a secret or never to sell an item so that others cannot appropriate the designs. Yet others thought perhaps it was alright to show the process if you kept some parts aside either as family or individual knowledge, that way you could protect the craft and its skills from being exploited by others. However, some were happy that families within a community came together to prepare items for sale or brought their elders from the islands to help teach the youth and second-generation New Zealand-Pacific (supported by government funds).

This actively protects culture, since knowledge is passed on within the processes.

Entrepreneurs said that a great deal of work was needed however about how to use western systems of intellectual property, patents and copyright effectively and easily.

Yet there was a strong sense of concern in the discussion groups about the apparent disinterest in learning from young people, who were apathetic about treasures and gifts of knowledge given to them by their elders (All Ethnicities). Yet when they become parents they want to regain the traditions and culture to pass their special identity to their children. The mothers became interested in learning to weave baskets, young women too if there were costumes to be made. But there were not many elders to pass on the knowledge and many would not disclose the process of beginning a mat, basket or other cultural items because the beginning can involve prayers and methods unique to each culture, or even to a specific artisan. Also, it can require uniquely prepared raw materials and ways of placing and tying together the strands to be woven. While the desire to protect cultural knowledge and resources was common to all of the ethnicities, the means of protection differed slightly between them.

Kiribati consists of three island clusters, scattered over more than 3,400 km. Each island has developed its own ways of doings things particular to that location and family, so family-specific traditions passed on through elders were most important.

If an object was made for market then it should be started at home to protect the beginning. It may however be completed in public, the process tacitly shared at that point, but the most important part of the cultural knowledge was preserved intact.

The Tokelauan groups also said that families were specific to an island and the family unit was responsible for protection of cultural knowledge and reluctant to share knowledge beyond the family. Links to each island in the homeland group were also very important, but regular contact with elders of their communities (and thus protection and preservation of the culture) was exacerbated by distances and the

high cost of travel to these islands, remote from the major tourist travel routes. The Tokelauan community protects their treasures by not disclosing the beginning of an item and also by passing knowledge on only within a family. The Church plays a pivotal role in the active preservation of culture, traditions and language and in the social cohesion of the Tokelauan communities. Many more people live in New Zealand than in Tokelau, so the issue of cultural continuance and protection is particularly poignant. Some of its members longed for more frequent travel home for extended periods to learn the old ways and hoped that elders could come to here to teach the Tokelauan grandchildren born here in New Zealand as well as for closer ties to other Tokelauan living locally in this country.

The Tuvaluan community placed emphasis on proactive strategies to protect and preserve Tuvalu identity here in New Zealand. While they thought that traditions were safeguarded within families specific to each island of Tuvalu that these, however, were not being shared widely enough within the Tuvaluan community.

Additionally, they were aware of a growing rift between older, island-born Tuvaluan, confident of their heritage and younger New Zealand-born, unsure of what was precious to their culture. Another concern was appropriation of design, for example the distinctive, local innovation of brightly coloured baskets made from airline freight tape is now mass-produced in large numbers offshore and sold in discount stores. As a result, many at the meetings felt that the only way to preserve the culture was not to sell their goods or share them with anyone outside the community or family.

The Samoan community believed the issue of protection of cultural knowledge and resources was central to identity. If the treasures are protected, the elders are also protected and thus Samoa‘s distinctiveness amongst other Pacific communities is safeguarded. Another way to protect the treasures was to only make them available (gifted or sold) in the Samoan community, amongst people who understand the value and meanings inherent in each item. Enduring attachment of cultural meaning was extremely important to these elders, even when a cultural item goes outside the Samoan community – whether gifted, exchanged or sold. Community discussions to identify and develop the features of the unique Samoan identity would be a proactive step towards protection of Samoan culture for the future, and that the community should plan to demonstrate its distinctiveness to other Pacific groups in Auckland.

Another strategy was to encourage communities and families to keep planning for and making cultural items for sale. In the process of gathering, cooperating and working together for extended periods elders pass the knowledge down to younger people. Further, culture would be protected if Samoan youth learned the maternal language, were strong in the Samoan Way and did not adopt the ways of other cultures. The Church was considered to be active in preserving Samoan culture and

traditions, but some community members‘ thought that this activity could be increased.

The Tongan group also said that cultural knowledge should be protected by passing knowledge down through the generations but using the separate routes of established hierarchies within (not between) communities of nobles and commoners, men and women. Further, they said, that the act of writing down stories or recording songs was a way of preserving cultural traditions, albeit in new forms, to enable wider distribution. Nonetheless, they thought that traditional materials should be kept aside to make the ceremonial treasures. Authentic designs could be used for sale, but only if they were produced in non-traditional materials such as local New Zealand materials with similar properties to the originals (e.g. harakeke, flax) or synthetics.

Traditional materials could be used, but only if made as scaled down replicas of the treasure. The important thing was not to produce the actual treasures, in form, design or materials. In general terms, other issues specific to the protection issue in this New Zealand context were, leverage of western laws such as copyright and patent, cultural diffusion and borrowing (amongst Pacific), appropriation by other cultures (non-Pacific), rapidly changing identities, intergenerational dynamics and the emergence of new forms of Pacific cultural expression evolving onshore.

All communities have experienced the diffusion of their culture to greater or lesser extent. Samoan and Tongan communities have lived in New Zealand for several generations and cultural diffusion has occurred amongst New Zealand-born children, most of who had been educated in mainstream schools and child care centres.

However a new trend towards the establishment of ethnic-specific language nests had begun to address the issue of language and cultural loss. The Tokelauan and Tuvaluan communities were encountering first and some second generation effects.

Kiribati however, a relative newcomer to Auckland had not yet experienced much change. The increased incidence of intermarriage between Pacific, Maori, Asian and European cultures also had contributed to diffusion as well as to identity confusion, exacerbated by increasing proportions of New Zealand-born youth of multiple ethnic origins.

Many of the discussion groups highlighted that language and cultural traditions remain strong in their families as long as children were in the home, prior to attending mainstream school, but that changes occur rapidly once children mixed with a wider range of nationalities. Changes included speaking the first language with a ‗New Zealand‘ accent, replying in English to the Pacific language spoken by an elder at home and not able to spell words correctly. The smaller communities, Kiribati, Tokelau and Tuvalu in particular, mentioned their concerns about the adoption of language and borrowing of cultural practices from longer established and larger Pacific groups such as Cook Island Maori, Samoa and to a lesser extent,

Tonga. As well, they mentioned the politicised power-base that older-established groups had developed in terms of dominance of pan-Pacific and pan-urban community organisations, non-governmental and quasi-governmental bodies.

The issue of changing ethnic identities in the New Zealand context was a key issue amongst all of the ethnic groups, in both positive and negative terms but it seemed most problematic for smaller communities (Kiribati, Tokelau, Tuvalu). Nevertheless the larger Samoan and Tongan groups were also experiencing change. Oral traditions were being lost, language use and accuracy was decreasing, and youth were losing their culture in New Zealand without frequent or extended stays in the Islands and were being influenced by other Pacific as well as mainstream cultures. Globalised influences such as North American ‗gangster‘ culture have had a big effect amongst youth through music, hip hop dance and music styles, television, film and virtual gaming. Indeed expertise in hip hop is gaining such a large amount of ground in Pacific Auckland that local groups are winning international competitions.

The sense of loss through appropriation by other cultures was a raw nerve for all of the discussion groups. This applied to music, food, language, designs, patterns and forms and their inappropriate use in personal and business environments. For example Island-style foods such as raw fish, are being made for sale in food outlets such as the Valentines restaurant chain by people who were not Pacific. ‗All Black‘

rugby players and rock stars wearing Pacific tattoos without permission, gifting or hereditary rights. However, some people felt that these changes were positive for Pacific in that they promote and show the strength of Polynesian cultures as infiltrators, influencers ‗taking over‘ the identity of New Zealand mainstream.

Intergenerational dynamics also emerged as significant issues with regard to protection of cultural uniqueness. A perceived disconnect between older Island-born and younger New Zealand-born Pacific was reportedly growing in scale and impact, in part because of relatively small numbers of elders compared to a very large youthful population, but also because value systems were undergoing rapid change.

However, the pan-Pacific entrepreneurs noted the emergence of new forms of Pacific culture and values. These they said reflect the position of each culture in the new cultural context, each of which have their own integrity, worth and validity. For instance local images such as landscapes, birds, plants and other ethnicities are now used to express traditional stories and meanings. Local materials were used as cheaper, pragmatic equivalents for traditional materials by master craftsmen and women, substitute synthetic materials were sought. Professional artists in particular were the most obvious expression of this new and vibrant contemporary commentary on the life experience of being Pacific in New Zealand.

A few of the pan-Pacific Entrepreneurs talked about the importance of their businesses being grounded in cultural values (respect, reciprocity, exchange, networks) and knowledge (Pacific foods, design, patterns and forms) but that practical necessities such as the cost of freight, inaccessibility of Pacific raw materials, import restrictions, etc., had meant that local innovations had occurred and would continue for the future. For example, many cultural enterprise items were now being made in new materials or formats such as screen-printing, quilting, carving, tattooing, weaving, appliqué, pottery, clothing, t-shirts and furniture. This they felt

A few of the pan-Pacific Entrepreneurs talked about the importance of their businesses being grounded in cultural values (respect, reciprocity, exchange, networks) and knowledge (Pacific foods, design, patterns and forms) but that practical necessities such as the cost of freight, inaccessibility of Pacific raw materials, import restrictions, etc., had meant that local innovations had occurred and would continue for the future. For example, many cultural enterprise items were now being made in new materials or formats such as screen-printing, quilting, carving, tattooing, weaving, appliqué, pottery, clothing, t-shirts and furniture. This they felt