At the same time it would help to reduce the risk of insulting Maori who believed that non-Maori had already taken enough from us and couldn't Whakapapa back to Ta Moko.
Now not every Moko artist today agrees, to the concept of "Kirituhi" and would prefer to call their mahi "Ta Moko" wether it is done on Maori or Non Maori and that's fine also.
I think it's important that each Ta Moko practitioner develops their own personal and ethical beliefs to adhere to, but for me personally, Kirituhi was a no brainer and ticked a lot of boxes, both culturally and ethically.
And wether we like it or not, Kirituhi has grown and developed a Mauri of its own that just seems to be getting Stronger. Just like our Reo language , Whaikorero oratory , Whakairo wood carving , Raranga weaving , Mau Rakau martial arts , Ta Moko can whakapapa to the gods and is a very important part of our culture and traditions. Ta Moko Ta Moko is the application of traditional Maori tattoo. What does contemporary Moko represent for the wearer?
Who is allowed to wear Moko? What is the Difference between Ta Moko and Kirituhi? Ta Moko Procedure Ta Moko begins with a conversation between the artist and recipient. Sunset Tattoo - Who is allowed to wear Moko? That website is christian, and I can understand why they would like to appropriate that day for all New Zealanders - but Christianity hasn't got the reputation of making peace, only talking about it.
If you meet with anger, to your celebration of Maori culture - it's because in the bank of human relations between Maori and Pakeha - Pakeha are in debit - too many withdrawals taken out - of theft, esteem-destroying practises, lies, broken oaths etc.
I believe as more deposits are put into the collective 'bank' of good will - that anger will dissipate. But it aint there for many. Although Pakeha on an individual basis as family or just decent folk get recognised I think for their own deposits, regardless.
As I said Kirituhi was given - literally it came about because some of the foremost ta moko experts went to Germany and were shocked at the literally thousands of no-hopers who were copying Goldie pictures and what have you on their face Seriously, get real.
If a thing is authentic - doesn't it have meaning? I read about a woman who raped as a child, and lost her breast to cancer, tattooed a dragon I think - over that image. To reclaim herself to herself. That's got meaning surely? Or a woman who lost her lover and put a symbol of him on her thigh.
It all has individual meaning. But Pakeha don't have that kind of culture - or a history or heritage like ours. Pakeha culture in many ways is very individualistic - and 'self-contained' it's was the many meanings of 'pakeha' referenced by the old prophecies.
If you want to give your Kirituhi meaning, it is I guess dependent on your personal authenticity. Since you are not Maori will never have authenticity based in Maori culture. To be authentic you are true to yourself, isn't that sufficent? The 'maori type' design references for many Pakeha their appreciation or 'connection' with Maori culture. But recognises though that the are Pakeha referencing Maori culture - to their personal meanings they have about it.
Often for many it's about 'tribal' and all the things that they were taught being 'tribal' about. The meanings can only come out of your own history and life.
There are too many Maori youth and people regaining or refinding their heritage, my feeling while any of those who are the rightful heir stand, none other stands in place.
Even in places where there is 'none' - let the place stand empty and call out. I was planning to get some traditional maori tattoos done before reading this artical, but it never crossed my mind that I,d be insulting anyone.
I apologize and have changed my mind, I am looking into kirituhi instead. Does anyone know of any good books that I might reference to help me stay clear of any maori symbolism to meet my non-maori background and have a similar tattoo.
Ok, first of all, appologies for causing offence with the statement about heritage. Actually, I thought heritage had a broader meaning, but actually I was using the word incorrectly. I was trying to convey the fact that Maoritanga has influenced me, from childhood, and help to shape who I am, and also the identity of my ancestors since arriving here.
That, together with the landscape and other aspects of life here, is what sets my identity apart from that of anyone who comes from other countries. It also sets me apart from Maori, of course. How can it not be a part? But if we define culture as patterns of behaviour, arts, beliefs, institutions etc, then part of my culture is learning Kapa Haka, and appreciation of whakairo, and participating in my Marae, and learning te Reo Maori.
No, of course not. I totally agree that all of these could be true. OK, I find that remark very offensive. For a start, which Pakeha culture? Secondly, inherent means permanently and inseparably attached. Yes, I totally agree that there are some bad tendencies in Pakeha culture. But I do think I have a right to have a say in matters that affect my own life. No, but it is an event that has repercussions for both Maori and Pakeha.
I just thought the website was interesting, because I think it would be good if more people understood what happened at Parihaka, and it would have a lot more relevance than Guy Fawkes. Has been in Europe since the 8th century. Seems to be a worldwide phenomenon, throughout history. The combination of the two? Is important in dozens of cultures. Regarding kitituhi, ta moko: I believe these treasures are beautiful thus the imitatations by those who appreciate how beautiful they look so that is a compliment isnt it?
However, it seems the "keepers" of these treasures also choose who can and cannot ornament their skin and it is this I find overbearing. Its a big drawback and another cause of division for those who are proud of their maori association, but have not lived in NZ for a long time and by personal choice want something to identify they are Maori out their in this Ao nui.
Ka mutu te korero mo tenei wa. Basically my roots come from Ruatoria and I've been in OZ for most of my life. I have limited knowledge of my family tree. I identify with my Maori heritage but am pretty much ignorant of customs and pratices. I would like to find out my own TA MOKO not for tattooing myself but to learn basic design and what each shape represents.
Since when is Maori culture ever a subset of Pakeha culture? You can swing pois, learn the lingo and karakia all you want but this is not an authentic part of who you are. For Maori these things are representative of connections to family, history and land.
And it will never be so to you. Because you are not family, your family histories to Aotearoa is different entirely and your heritage is rooted to another culture entirely. Like I said in the beginning, I can eat as much fromage, wear a beret and a stripped black and white t-shirt. I suppose I am sensitive to your talk, simply because too often when Pakeha do get involved in Maori pursuits they strive to take ownership.
And I think essentially this is really what you are on about. Whether you like it or not, Pakeha have a culture too. I wish you lot would bloody well start working it out what it is. Some respond by striving to stomp on it, or just use it to sell product. Where the influence of Maori culture is impacting more and more the Pakeha world. Of that generation, I can understand how there experience of Maori culture is unlike any generation before it.
Because Maori in one form or another is impacting every part of their lives. I stand back and watch these ones. However, if you think European spirituality and tattooing is the same as Maori? Please, point out to me in Europe or any country that your ancestors have come from Fionaigh sp that have the same culture as Maori? Show me where the pattern and meaning and type of tattooing they engage in is the same as what Maori do?
Or show me where the spirituality matches any one of our iwi? Actually, I think it is. Do you get the difference? Regardless there are things which typify the larger Maori cultures, iwi cultures, whanau cultures, or an individual. It irritates me, that Pakeha don't get that they do in fact have a culture. And it interests me that what many Maori see is so obviously "pakeha' never gets commented on by Pakeha. So I am going to share just two observations about 'pakeha culture'. But it is a useful analogy for a tendency of Pakeha culture; that is to think of the world in terms of opposites even though these opposites are simply two sides of the same thing.
By making an artificial split he divides the world against itself by living out this illusion of opposition as if it were true. In explanation; underlying untold EVERY day Pakeha dialogue is the tendency to see much of the world in terms of pairs like mind and body,black and white, or male and female but describe these things in terms of divisions or barriers between them eg; mind versus body, spirit versus matter, male versus female, good versus bad.
And with this there's always a sense of this or that one being better, preferred or superior to it's matching pair. There's also along with this a tendency to see these things in oppositon, if you support one thing an automatic assumption is made that you oppose the other, whether you do or not. This thinking has a tendency to automatically lend itself to an antagonistic or adversarial way of approaching the world and communicating.
Which was observed and commented on by many Maori of old and to this present day. Or the underlying assumption that one thing must dominate the other the other must be in submission to it.
Eg mind over matter, heaven above earth, spirit over matter, teacher over pupil, leader over subject, boss over employee, etc. You can see this cock-eyed kind of thinking dominate the courts, politics,talk shows.
It gets a bit loopy loo because where you have anyone do anything that's different to the 'norm' than those people who are 'different' are automatically perceived to be attacking or opposing the other - because that's what that kind of thinking gives you. A most obvious example, how many times you open the paper and someone's saying gay people wishing to live a married lifestyle are attacking 'the family' or an 'affront' for merely being.
I watched another example, on 60 minutes a while back seeing zillions of people get bent out of shape with those married couples that don't intend to have children criticised for 'attacking family life'. And much of that is tied down to another Pakeha cultural characteristic I call for want of better phrase being 'tui-eyed'.
The Church I used to belong to came down very heavily on women who 'challenged' the Priesthood by showing any form of leadership or authority.
A sister missionary who was the best missionary on the field could not be praised publicly as this 'challenged' Priesthood dominance. According to Pakeha view of the world which by the way is not the way every other culture views the world.
Basically anything that is different must be opposed, must be the enemy or must be controlled, subdued or made subordinate to the 'norm'. Along with this thinking is the tendency to put things in camps obviously and to assume that you are either 'all this' or 'all that'. I was talking to this White American who married a coloured woman of some kind. He was insistent that his daughter had to choose between 'white' or 'black' you had to be one or the other.
Leaving aside the obvious point that the traits you inherit are from your mum and dad rather from your white or black side With this thinking there is a tendency for them when they decide to negotiate peace or compromise they approach it by "looking at both sides" as if there were 'two opposing sides'. Here's another observation and again remember when I say Pakeha - I am referring to Pakeha cultural traits I am saying those traits that typify Pakeha culture.
That is the case, but even so, these notions didn't come out of Maori cultural perspectives. Here's another example of one - I can't help but share it, coz it's one that I think is a really really real 'baddie'.
And that the Pakeha viewed the world in the same way through a 'one' or 'mono' perspective. Trying to make sense of Pakeha culture when I was growing up. Because the larger culture Pakeha always assumes that it's 'norm' that it 'is' and because I was operating in two world - It so obviously to me was not the 'norm', nor was there a 'norm'. BTW I'll comment that most white people don't really get they even have a culture - they often think other people do, but not them. I've even heard it from their lips "we don't have a culture".
ANYhoo, I figured when I was 15 that maybe the Pakeha psyche has some underlying belief that all processes, structures and relationships can be reduced to a single element, that everything can eventually be explained by one governing principle. Because they act like it does. For example in conversations, dialogues in real life or on BBs, when a person asks a question, I notice that people often assume that there must be only one answer, and thus that if there's more than one answer then their task is not finished and the question's not really answered.
I notice it generates endless debates on the nature of "This" versus "That". Because there can be only "one" answer. That you haven't got it 'right' unless you brought it down to 'one answer' or 'standardized' things so we have got it 'straight'.
And in saying this, I am saying it's not something they consciously do. They just act that was as if it's a given. Regarding Ta Moko, a well-known Moko expert Mark Kopua was making comment on David Simmons interpretation of Ta Moko David's a Pakeha who's a self appointed Maori expert on ta moko Mark was using him as an example of Pakeha who love to standardize our [quote] "various tribal ways" to their "one and only way" thinking, who should look in the bloody mirror and ask if they should be tampering with our stuff.
If he wants to contribute - he should slash at his own culture"[unquote]. Is another example of pakeha mono-one-culturalism; the need to take diversity and 'standardize' it to one way which they put a label as "THIS is the REAL way of doing it -what it's about - what it IS". A way of thinking that is jest gonna make for trouble - because there is never ONE true way, and the world is a fluid open changing system. To set it apart from that which doesn't - it's like they have the whole world organised around boxes with labels on it.
And if things don't conform to that definition everyone is getting it wrong. And if some of things in one box is in another box as well, then you have upset about the 'real nature' of that thing. I'll give you a classic example. I went to a Dyke karoke night. I thought if there was ever a group of people who hated-isms it would be gay. Coz they cop a lot of stuff that Maori get.
And yet - I was listening in on conversations - and it was the same ol. In the dyke karoke night for example that conversation was debating 'real butches' etc.
Until those two had found another label for her - she was looking a bit 'fake' for not fitting the proper label. When I look at how at how Pakeha run their relationships and families, for example, 'mono-eyeism' is expressed in the belief that there is some single best way, some ideal marriage, some perfect partner, some perfect way to look or act to get there, and the goal is to get as close to that ideal as possible.
Therefore all possibilities are ranked on a hiearchy - good, better, best --and that only the best one counts. There is a constant comparison of lives; people, things and themselves to a single ideal, and points are taken off for any way in which a person differs from that ideal.
Open up your newspaper, magazines turn on your radio or telly and it's everywhere the 'one way of being' your supposed to aspire or look to. The racist has this one standard eg a set of beliefs, goals, objectives and descriptions under the catorgory of 'white' for example. It's like a 'white ruler' that he uses to measure all other people by. And everyone else is assessed on a sliding scale of how well they approximate this 'standard'of 'white and all that's associated with White' which is of course the only way one should be.
EG: In the old days they classified the races according to their 'evolutionary development' on this scale of white is 'best'; Chinese and Jews were ranked higher on the scale than blacks which were at the other spectrum. It's dangerous this 'one eyeism' of course when you have only one set of values as the 'norm' than other important values are ignored simply because they are not listed under the 'one way'.
A people that had a goal of maintaining the earth - is inferior to one that had a goal of changing the earth. Because 'whites change the earth' therefore that is 'advanced' and the other people are 'backward'. It doesn't matter what you use as the 'ruler', it can be any race, any age, any sex, any sub culture, any liking - any ANYthing.
But the design of that thinking always the same. Rac-ist, sex-ist, age-ist or whatever-ist actions and thinking are just different choice of colours for the same kind of ruler. It's one cultural trait - that could stand being dropped - and the alternative Maori perspectives be explored. Because unlike the above - they're sane. I like what your comments are. They are extremely articulate and close to your heart. That attracts me. I like when ideas are given a forum to be shuffled around and challenged.
I am personally very interested in multiculturalism and diversity. Is it possible to bridge the gaps of communication between groups of people where there has been so many hurts in the past? Or, for that matter, where there has been little or no common ground? Maybe that question is too broad. I am first of all interested in my part-- how I can bridge the gaps between myself and other cultures, but I am also interested in if there is a process that everyone who coexists alongside people who are different, can enter into, to abide together harmoniously.
When you speak from the strength of your family, your heritage, your cultural rights, it is beautiful, inspiring, and easy to agree with. But when you start talking about "Paheka culture" as one huge entity and make generalizations based on what you've experienced in your own life, I'm just kind of baffled. Not that I don't have criticism for myself or my ancestors, or the country I live in.
I do have a lot of criticism. It leaves me with nothing to grasp on to for footing. And, like you, I want to be grounded, healthy, and whole.
So, if you'll allow me to take a paragraph from what you wrote and mull over it:. What exactly is the translation of the word "Paheka"? Does it boil down to the colour of one's skin? If this is Paheka culture then I want no part of it. If this is Paheka culture, then I'd rather live as an individual with no roots.
I'd rather that's how people who meet me would see me, anyway, and that's how I try to treat everyone I meet-- as an individual first, rather than as a part of a group. I think if I treated people as one part of a group, when I am not within that group , rather than as an individual, I am in danger of being pre-judice in my attitude and thoughts.
I don't want to pre-judge the individual based on what I know about the group. I don't want others to treat me this way either. Some small part of me wonders if you are really saying what you think in these emails or if there is more. Perhaps what you are thinking does not translate well. At least, to me reading it, it sounds like you are more interested in seeing yourself as part of a strong cultural group, and others in the same way Paheka as a part of a strong cultural group that you don't like.
You mentioned the good versus evil way that Paheka sees the world-- but it sounds like this is the way you see Paheka-- as the embodiment of evil, that you don't want a part of. I'm trying to understand. I am just an outsider who is not even from New Zealand so maybe what I am writing is not relevant at all.
And my reasons for writing are not because I want something from the Maori culture, but because I enjoy other cultures. I live in a very culturally diverse society where unfortunately there is still oppression and injustice ingrained in every system. I long for the day when there is more justice and I know that those who have been oppressed must arise in their own power and fight it.
I cannot speak as an indiginous person, but I can say that I do want empowerment for the oppressed all over the world even if it takes away my comfort and my privelage.
But I hope that in the process of fighting for some power back, that you and others would resist the urge to be cruel in your deeds, words, or perceptions. My question for you is, what do you want ultimately? Is it possible for us all to strive towards peace and harmony with each other?
That is what I am interested in. How can we dialogue together in a way that doesn't harm our future dialogues, but promotes peace. That's all for now. It is out of uncertainty and questioning that I write. I know that the less I try to answer my own questions and the more I'm open to answers outside of myself, the more likely I am to learn something new, and to grow in wisdom. Looking for a book about moko which I saw in NZ when I was there over Christmas but failed to buy and am now desperate to get Ta Moko, the bodily artform of the indigenous Maori of New Zealand.
An artform that traditionally marked status, social standing and now embodies a culture, history and family. One superfan who has been around a lot longer is Moko, who is a native of Senegal but lives in France. Ta Moko, the bodily artform of the indigenous Maori of New Zealand. Ta Moko is primarily for those of Maori blood and descent, while Kirituhi is for those of non Maori heritage.
Ta Moko and Kirituhi tell a story, the story of the person wearing the tattoo. In summary: No Pakeha will ever get Ta Moko because no Maori could justifiably recognise and proclaim the status over them.
0コメント