Trask v. Fujikane on the term "Local"

Going off of Rob's suggestion to distinguish the differences between Fujikane's "Local" and Trask's "Local," I thought I'd pick out a passage from each article to elucidate the two women's differing perspectives.

On page thirty of "Between Nationalisms," Fujikane states: "Local identity is predicated precisely upon the fact that it is not a Native identity, and although Locals have a long history in the islands, their narratives are often marked by an uneasiness over the ways they claim an identity based on what is very specifically a Hawaiian homeland. This critical point of conflict between Native Hawaiians and Locals over land is often obscured by the ambiguity of the term 'Local,' which includes Native Hawaiians and was founded, as I've mentioned before, on alliances between Locals and Native Hawaiians."

To Fujikane, locals are inherently not related to the native Hawaiians. She highlights the fact that local identity is problematic because it does not want to capitalize on the Hawaiian homeland. Instead, locals are caught in a liminal space between wanting to identify with the land but also realizing that natives have a right to claim the land as their own. It is such a dilemma that ignites the ambiguity of a "local" Hawaiian. Furthermore, natives are technically locals as well. They struggle, then, to distinguish between which community to align themselves with. Fujikane writes, "Native Hawaiians often find themselves in the position of having to choose the identity that most urgently needs to be represented."

Ultimately, Fujikane urges the two factions to resist the imagined notions of the nation of Hawaii and to forge alliances in order to overcome deep-seeded oppression. For her, negotiations and dialogue between the two contending groups will be necessary if either wishes to regain their true identities.

Trask, on the other hand, has a more strikingly antagonistic voice about the term "local." In a particularly enraged passage, she writes: "If Hawaiians have a pre-contact, pre-invasion historical continuity on their aboriginal territories -- that is, on the land that had been ours for two thousand years -- 'locals' do not. That is, 'locals' have no indigenous land base, traditional language, culture, and history that is Native to Hawaii. Our indigenous origin enables us to define what and who is indigenous, and what and who is not indigenous. We know who the First Nations people are since we were, historically  the first people in the Hawaiian archipelago. Only Hawiians are Native to Hawaii. Everyone else is a settler."

As opposed to the "ambiguity" examined throughout Fujikane, Trask's take on the term "local" is fiercely oppositional. She, as a native, establishes a dynamic and unstable binary between locals and natives. To her, anyone who is not of Hawaiian descent is a "settler." Locals do not have the same connection to the rich and lush history of Hawaiian life. And so they should not pretend to take on the identity of "native." Trask's argument is much more plainly divided and critical. While Fujikane takes on the complexities and nuances of the term's heated debate, Trask takes an emotionally outraged stance that clearly outlines the separate identities. For Trask, any alliances between the two communities would be antithetical to those natives who perceive "locals" as impostors to the Hawaiian legacy.

-Jon Vorpe

"Dead Air," analysis.

The first time I read "Dead Air," I didn't really think about the significance of the fact that most of the characters are local, rather than native. After discussing this in Section, I re-read the story (or did for the purpose of this post...) and thought about how the the author really didn't waste any space of the text with regard to the metaphors he was creating:

So, the death of Jacob represents the final passing of one of the Natives (the spirit of the island/ birthright of the Hawaiian people), the locals have that death on all of their consciences (though they outwardly consider themselves to be just as "native" as the natives, they have a deeper sense and fear of being the intruders that they so despise in the story), and for a while simply talk about how they haven't done anything to wrong the people, and try to convince everyone around them (and themselves) that they are simply victims of this stench that they blame on the Haole's, even though they are the original criminals in the story.

The author didn't miss this opportunity to also vilify the Haole, however. In the form of a figure every bit as stereotypical as the Great White Hunter (with his pith helmet and mutton chop mustache, murdering countless endangered species): the snake oil salesman who shows up to capitalize upon the mistake of the locals, exacerbating the problems of the island. But, in a rather brilliant way, the arrival of the snake oil salesman doesn't arouse a great sense of pity for the locals, rather just a hatred for the newly introduced character. The author simultaneously introduced a new villain, without in any way humanizing the current antagonist, despite the fact that the latter is being manipulated by said new villain. The locals simply continue to travel on their path of ignorance, "getting a taste of their own medicine," so to speak.

The locals then attempt to pacify the angry spirit of the Hawaiians by offering up food and drink in the native Hawaiian fashion. Such an attempt reminds me of the countless promises a child will make "to be good," when faced with the imminence of a spanking. The locals attempted to fool the natives and themselves one last time, by enacting a ritual that they have no genetic ties to. The spirits of the now gone natives laughs at this feeble attempt at deception offered up by those who simply sought to enslave them [the native Hawaiians] first.

After this it becomes a little foggy (for me) as to what happens... It seems like the author sought to show that the native Hawaiian's are truly a forgiving and benevolent people who transcend simple western morality, and so he had them forgive the locals for their transgressions... And all they wanted all along was a simple heartfelt apology from those who wronged them (that dude in the graveyard)... But this resolution still leaves the natives dead and gone, and the locals flourishing (the spur of fertility at the end of the story)... So this is where my house of cards collapses. After building up a story so pointedly around the strength, martyrdom and forgiving aspects of the Hawaiian natives, the locals triumph in the end (albeit by the compromised terms of the local spirits).

So from here I wonder whether the author is asserting that there is no way that the Natives will ever regain their lands and their former glory (a notion I wouldn't wholly disagree with), and the future of Hawaii lies with those 2nd, 3rd and so on generations of Hawaiian immigrants? But only under the pretense that they openly acknowledge the wrongs they have enacted against the islands, and openly repent? But is that it? No redistribution of lands or properties? Just apologize (and mean it!) and then it will be sweet and groovy again?

Native vs. "Native"

In South Park’s newest episode, “Going Native,” Butters is sent to his homeland to get in touch with his roots and undergo a coming-of-age ritual that will help him release his anger. This episode overall is outlandish , but this episode does, however portray the ridiculousness of white individuals claiming to be “natives” to Hawaii (who are clearly tourists, or at least descendants of the original members of the Waikiki Outrigger and Surf club) who think they are entitled to rewards for being “native” to the island, i.e. visiting Kauai every year. I don’t know if South Park used the term “native” on purpose, or got it slightly confused with the term “locals,” but it still proves a point. People who call themselves “natives” or “locals” who have no true ties to the islands, other than their golf clubs are demonstrating an extreme disrespect to the true natives and locals of Hawaii. There is a Kama‘aina rewards program for people who live on the island, and these incentives are meant to boost the economy by making restaurants and other attractions more affordable so locals will visit them more often. It is also a nice incentive for having to put up with the masses of tourists that invade the island year-round. Though a very shallow insight to the Kama’aina rewards program, South Park does illustrate the ridiculousness of having a program that is so widely available that people who barely identify with the island can have access to it. All that’s needed is some form of local identification. The people who feel entitled to these programs are often those who stay on the island purely for the attractions, and not for the Hawaiian life itself, and South Park does a great job of portraying the outrageousness of the “native” reactions that could be invoked if tighter reigns were placed on the Kama’aina program. Like the Molokai man in the movie we watched last night in class said, to the local natives life is about living and providing for their families and keeping Hawaii accessible. It’s not about the rewards or incentives. This definitely serves as a nice contrast to the true Native portrayals we’ve read about, and though it was a little over the top (and not exactly the best SP episode), I think Trey and Matt of South Park did get their point across that the Kama’aina rewards program is stupid to include the self-entitled “locals” who think they’re native because they’ve been to a luau and drank native drinks, and that people can be extremely insensitive (and uneducated) to take on a title of “local” or “native” without truly knowing what it means to be either.

-Megan Saunders

Will the Real Haole Please Stand Up?

Gary Pak, author of The Valley of the Dead Air, is a descendant of immigrants from Korea, making him haole. This is interesting because his writing is a kind of homage to Native Hawaiians and their past. The main conflict in The Valley of the Dead Air is a malodor that settles in the valley following the death of a community elder, Jacob Hookano. The malodor is actually part of a joke being played on the farmers, who are haole themselves, by Native Hawaiians of the past, represented by the soil and Hookano. Pak references the native impression of Hawaii’s annexation with elements throughout his story.

The U.S. government’s swindling of Hawaii is a motif that appears several times. During their conversation about the malodor or hauna, Joseph Correa says to Bobby Ignacio:

“I betchu one day dah gov’ment goin’ come down heah and dey goin’ brag how dey can take dis hauna away. And den they goin’ take ‘em away. But I betchu little while aftah dat, dey goin’ come back and try to ask us for do dem one favor” (p.38).

Correa is a retiree who bases his attitude towards the new Hawaiian government, headed by the Japanese at the time, on what they have done to natives in the past. Two farmers, Darryl Mineda and Earl Fritzhugh, talk about how invaders came and imposed taxes on Hookano’s family as a method of taking away their land when taxes weren’t paid:

“Somebody tol’ me all dah land in dis valley used to be his family’s land, long time ago. Den dah Cox family wen come in and take dah land away from his family. Somet’ing ‘bout Jacob’s family not paying dah land tax or water tax or somet’ing li’ dat, and dah haole wen pay instead” (p.38).

If these examples weren’t clear enough, Pak uses a smooth talking haole salesperson to bring his message home. This salesperson slips up and says, “They say that if you can’t see it, then you can surely smell it” (p.40). The character, Harriet Sugimura, asks him exactly who’s saying it belonged to since it isn’t a Hawaiian saying. The story leaves the reader to understand that it’s an American saying, and it refers to the smokescreen created by Americans during the takeover process.

- Francis Miguelino

Jackie_Valley of the Dead Air

The Valley of Dead was a piece that I felt was very loaded, metaphorically. From what I understood and analyzed of the piece was that after the death of Jacob Hookano, the stench that remained was deemed a curse by the Natives, a cursed placed by Jacob to all that hurt him while he was alive. I feel that the stench or the curse alluded to the American settlement. There was a part in Gary's piece where a Haole businessman goes to sell air fresheners to Hawaiian homes as a "quick fix." Although it wouldn't fix the problem it would make it in the meantime bearable. I feel that that was something the United States did with their Apology yo Hawaii, it was a stalling tactic to meanwhile do nothing about the injustice the U.S. has committed to the Hawaiian nation. Plagued by their presence, their commerce and their greed for wealth and power, Natives may have not known how to react to the annexation of their lands, but then there was an awakening. It was in the instance where Joseph Correa goes to apologize to Jacob's tomb which made me think again of the apology the U.S. wrote to the Hawaiians. Even though there was celebration and back to the norm in Gary Pak's piece, in real place and time the Hawaiians are not back to normal. The land is still claimed by the United States and they have no intention of giving it back to Hawaii. It seems from a US mainlander's perspective that Hawaiians have conformed and resignated to the idea that they are part of the United States. But being in this class has made me realize the Hawaiians have been trying to fight back but they are not being heard.  

                  The Valley of the Dead Air was an interesting piece of work. At times quite comedic, but at the same type opened up an empathetic outlook for me particularly as an audience member. This particular short story opened up my train of thought when it came to the realization of the "local people," because they were involved in the process of self-cleansing. The land itself was not only the grand subject matter, but the people within themselves coming to a realization in the entirety of rejuvenation. The land in the beginning was taken for granted and in the process the people had not only taken the land for selfishness, but also each other. The importance of understanding the wrongdoings each and everyone of them had committed for me brought back a sense of stability. Due to an abundance of chaos and instability they were able to magnifying the a broader sense of community, which they had diminished along the way. Spirituality playing a massive role among these people was an important justification to their actions when it came to serving the old man Jacob Hookano. In a sense they had brought back what they took for granted, Jacob being this isolated man in the end forming unity throughout these localities.


                 "But I t'ink you right. We gotta get to the bottom of this. Find all the person's responsible for him cursing the valley. Then make them offer somet'ing to the old man's spirit. Or somet'ing like that. Whachu t'ink?" (Gary Pak, The Valley of the Dead Air, 16). Here the locals conversing among each other in pidgin is sets up an aesthetic distance which is much more closer per say verses when the narrator speaks. As an audience member I am able to understand psychologically through their native tongue much more vs. when things are said ordinarily in English via the narrator. It brings an exciting closeness for me as a reader to able to dive into the situation along with the characters.

Portrayal of "Haoles" in Dead Air

-Jessica St.Martin

When a Hawaiian native, Correa, talks about the government, he speaks "in a voice shaded ominously," as if the mere action of bringing up a haole deserves suspicion. The generalize the white men, referring to them as "the government," "the salesman," or "the haole" never once offering the mans  name or identity. On page 12, Bobby and Correa even blatantly blame the "hauna" stink on the government and its plans to take something from the Hawaiians. They are even critical of the haoles clean, white, air conditioned car as if the ability to obtain such possessions is a wrong thing in their culture. The native Hawaiians are very distrustful of Americans  and in this story they have every right to be. The portrayal of the salesman as a thief and a liar persuades the reader that white haoles always treat Hawaiians in this way. The salesman is charming, conniving  and incessantly convincing. An interesting theme brought up in this passage is the Hawaaian portrayal of white american men in a negative way. Is it acceptable for them to treat another race in the same way that observer literature portrayed native Hawaiians?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUj5t4YevDs

Lecture Notes - Week 4

Rob's updated notes through week 4

Rob in Bali Hai

Also check out Rob's "Seven Tourist Sonnets", placed in Hawaii and the greater Pacific here.

Surprise, Surprise?

In class tonight Rob made an interesting point when he spoke about Queen Liliuokalani’s observations of American land as it passed by her train. Rob mentioned that the Queen, while looking out of her train window pondered why America must exploit Hawaii’s small amount of far away land when they have so much left uncultivated at home? Rob pointed out that her perspective of the underutilization of American land was similar to that of American colonialist and expansionist thinking. The Queen remarks, “the vast extent of unoccupied land is so enormous. I thought what splendid sugar plantations might here be established, how easily and profitably rice might be grown, and in some other spots with what good returns coffee could be planted.”(P309) Clearly the queen is not some complete savage who has been using coconuts for currency and has no conceptual understanding of the world around her. Throughout the Queen’s memoir it’s evident she’s extraordinarily bright and outside of being a little sheltered in her royal upbringing, she has quite a clear understanding of politics and the trending ideologies of foreign lands. In this previous quote we see that she looks at a piece of uncultivated land and immediately thinks about what changes can be made to turn a profit. While the quote is coming from a place of sadness and is intended to highlight American rapaciousness, still it can be interpreted that she understood the principles of colonial thinking and wasn’t completely opposed to it. Which leads me to my question, do you think that the Queen was really surprised by the events as they unfolded toward Hawaiian annexation? With her premiere education she must have learned about the never satisfied and indefatigable attitude of the American people. In a little over a hundred years The United States had turned from a small colony owned by Great Britain to an emerging world power that had already displaced/killed millions of Native American’s in order to take over their land and had gone toe to toe with Mexico, Great Britain, and Spain amongst others on their way to extending the American Empire all the way to the Pacific edge of North America. So, when the Americans slowly started working their way into the political system of Hawaii, did somebody as Intelligent as the queen really have no way of predicting the possible outcome of America turning Hawaii into land for themselves? It’s easy for me to say in hindsight and from an outsider’s perspective, but I’m wondering if The Queen and her people were blindsided, or if they knew that American colonization was coming and faced the inevitability? (I copy and pasted this from word and for some reason I can't get it to break into paragraphs in this blog format, sorry for the big chunk of writing.)

Why Hawaii Doesn't Vote

Here's a great CNN piece (I know that seems like an oxymoron) looking at why Hawaii's voter turnout is the lowest in the country.

Hawaii - The State That Doesn't Vote