THE ITAUKEI TO SOURCE AND SUPPORT A...
Transcript of THE ITAUKEI TO SOURCE AND SUPPORT A...
THE ITAUKEI MATA SYSTEM OF KNOWING: VURAAND TU TO SOURCE AND SUPPORT A SUSTAINABLE
BULA SAUTU IN A VANUA VAKATURAGA
[AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL JOURNEY THROUGH TUBOU-LAKEBA METAPHORICAL EXPERIENCES]
by
Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai
A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
Copyright © 2014 by Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai
Oceania Centre of Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies Faculty of Arts, Law and Education The University of the South Pacific
October, 2014
DECLARATION
Statement by Author
I, Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai, declare that this thesis is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published, or substantially overlapping with material submitted for the award of any other degree at any institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text.
Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….
Name: Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai
Student ID No.: S11036795
Statement by Supervisors
The research in this thesis was performed under our supervision and to our knowledge is the sole work of Mr. Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai.
Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….
Name: Frank Thomas (PhD)
Designation……………………………………………………………………………..
Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….
Name: Akanisi Kedrayate (PhD)
Designation……………………………………………………………………………..�
i�
DEDICATION
life is a journey a search
a seekingfor answers
a remembering of ashes
a building of dreams of visions
life is a destination
a purpose a calling to serve
a commitment to work
an altering of ways
of the status quo
This thesis is dedicated to the loving memory of my father, Rupeni Tabilai, an exemplary civil servant of the yavusa Matanibulu of Ovea, Bau in Tailevu who, in his
life-time, taught me the value of hard work, perseverance and reliance on God.
ii�
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Research is a journey meant to be shared with others. Meeting the requirements of a Master of Arts thesis would have been impossible without the support and encouragement of people and organizations acknowledged herein. I was therefore blessed to have had two enthusiastic and creative academics to supervise my work: Dr. Frank Thomas and Dr. Akanisi Kedrayate. My sincere gratitude also goes to my sponsor: the USP’s Research Office and the very supportive Dr. Jito Vanualailai and team. On the same note, I thank the FALE’s Postgraduate Committee for funding my ‘field’ work, the UU204 team for the moral support, and all the friendly and helpful staff at the FALE’s main office, the Finance section and, the USP library.
There have also been those whose contributions, little as they may seem, can never go unacknowledged. To Shana Khan, wherever you are, and Lalita Sharma, of OCACPS, thank you so very much for directing me to research, and at the USP. The USP’s Pacific studies team: the Postgraduate research chair, Dr. Lea Lani Kauvaka and, again, Dr. Thomas, thank you for pushing me to ‘explore my space’ and invest in my ‘creativity’ – notions that have largely challenged me to dare to navigate beyond the traditional and the ordinary. Amongst these mentioned, I have my own dear brother, Waisea Tabilai, to acknowledge for the prophetic ‘voice’ throughout my journey and, together with a family friend, Livai Tukana, for always lending me their ever-attentive ears.
There were also angelic others whose encouragement, and words of wisdom, possibly unbeknownst to them, helped me put together my ideas for an MA thesis: Dr. Cresantia Koya-Vakauta, Dr. Unaisi Nabobo-Baba, Dr. Salanieta Bakalevu and Dr. Sereima Naisilisili, at different points and, for very brief moments, have influenced my thoughts. Significant also were Pacific ‘voices’ introduced to me via their writings, initially, before I was honoured to ‘meet’ three of them in person: our very own Professor (Dr.) Konai H. Thaman, Dr. David Gegeo and Dr. Kabini. F. Sanga, writers whose combined ‘stories’ gave me the conceivable ideas that developed into this research.
Last, but not least, I acknowledge the people of Tubou-Lakeba in Lau, both iVanua and iWai, in the present and of the past, the Vanua vakaTuraga whose talanoa have been represented in my thesis and, particularly, my eighty-four year old and sixty-six year old ‘grandmother’ and mother, respectively: women thoroughly socialized into the Tubou-Lakeba tradition. Many thanks go to Momo Soakai, Na Fane and cousin Levulevu, for hosting me during the two short weeks of my stay in Levuka-Lakeba; the ‘owners’ of Vunisavisavi and Katubalevu and, Kameli Vuiyasawa (of the Daulakeba) and Jone Naisara (of the Tui Tubou) and; the two divisions of the AOG Tubou church, for the open-doors, warm-hearts and constructive contributions. Finally, next to God and close to my heart, my ‘lewa ni Tubou’ Lavenia, the ‘wind beneath my wings’.
iii�
ABSTRACT The iTaukei of Viti, formerly known as Fijians, have a mata or envoy system of engaging at the intra- and inter-Vanua levels that works to keep vanua-peopleconnected as a Vanua (of a named/claimed place) whole. Theoretically, the ancient Vanua developed into Vanua vakaTuraga (lit. ‘Land/Place having Chiefs/Men’), centuries later, possibly, at the arrival of a Turaga migration that was readily ‘grafted’ into the ‘first taukei’ (first peoples to be ‘yoked-with’ the land/place) of Viti society.Essentially, the Turaga people (as active ‘explorers’ of the oceanic space, at the time) were ‘given’ land by the Vanua people who, by then, had become so land-based that ‘conquerors of the deep’ were soon recognized as vu-gods who vu-maiLagi (originate from Lagi [the heavens]). These ‘land-takers’ of the Turaga migration, theoretically, became the vulagi-stranger kings phenomenon hence, setting off what I call the iTaukei privileging system of ‘cross-cultural’ engagement. That was, as I presume, the beginning of what became the iTaukei chiefly and political system of Vanua leadership.
The iTaukei mata system of Vanua representation, as a system of knowing ‘put’ in place to facilitate knowledge sharing and the pursuit of what the Vanua conceptualizes as bula sautu (lit. ‘life [lived in] peace and plenty’, and meaning ‘well being’), will be argued as critical to the knowledge building exercise. Scientific research, therefore, becomes the vehicle whereby ‘silenced’ narratives and traditions embodying important indigenous knowledge may be ‘voiced’. Herein, time-proven notions and ‘theories’ are ‘forced’ to go through the rigorous process of scientifically validating ‘knowledge’, and which will prove useful to its traditional ‘owners’ and the institution of research itself. This constructionist research, as a re-kune (searching and conceiving, again) for the answers to the research questions framed to meet the ‘needs’ of this research project, have used a mix of qualitative methods contextualized with the view of decolonizing the methodology. Using phenomenology, ethnography and philosophical reflection, the participant-observation method was adapted for this research as veitalanoa, and employing the vakaLakeba, to bring the literature, data collected from the ‘field’ and metaphorical thought into a rara place of dialogue.
The narration of stories collected from the researched community, coupled with the linguistic and philosophical analysis of their conceptualizations of the vanua, vuravura,taukei, mata and sautu conceptions, as intrinsic to their worldview, have formed the core body of knowledge upon which a sound theory of representation is formulated. Empowering people via a “mata method” for researching indigenous peoples of the Pacific, particularly the iTaukei, becomes the critical finding that will inform future research projects, given how the privileging system of engagement it embodies works to encourage collaborative initiatives in society, and academia. A “mata way to sautu”, therefore, will boost iTaukei efforts directed at self-representation, and for liberation.
iv�
ABBREVIATIONSA.D : after death (of Christ)
AOG : Assemblies of God
BP : before present
Dr. : Doctor of Philosophy (as used in academia, unless otherwise stated)
et al. : and other people
FALE : Faculty of Arts, Law and Education
lit. : literally
MA : Master of Arts
OCACPS : Oceania Center of Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies
p : page
pp : pages
rep : representative(s)
St. : Saint
USP : University of the South Pacific
UU204 : ‘Pacific Worlds’(a generic second year degree course offered at the USP by the Pacific Studies department)
VKB : Vola ni Kawa Bula
VRF : Vanua Research Framework
v�
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication……………………………………………………………………………..i
Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………ii
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………iii
Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………...iv
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………….v
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………......1
1.1 Introductions: Bucini ni Veiwekani………………………………….1
1.1.1 Vanua-people (a Vei people) – Live in Mata, act as Mata……3
1.1.2 A Vuravura-Worldview – the Universal Worldview………….4
1.1.3 The Taukei-Vulagi Dichotomy – Ground for Veivakataukeitaki..6
1.1.4 The iTaukei Tamata ‘Self’ – the Human-person, the Human-
race………………………………………………………………7
1.2 The Context……………………………………………………….......9
1.2.1 Tubou-Lakeba – a Representation of historical ‘Times’……..9
1.2.2 Living at the Maliwa-Spaces and in the Gauna-Times….......11
1.2.3 Bula Sautu – the Biblically Correct Perspective………………13
1.2.4 Bula Sautu – a Possible pre-Christian Perspective……………14
1.2.5 Vura and Tu – iTaukei Ontological and Epistemological
Tools…………………………………...................................15
1.2.6 Metaphorical Experiences – Ways of Thinking, Knowing and
Being…………………………………………………………..16
1.3 The Research………………………………………………………….17
1.3.1 Motivating the Researcher……………………………………17
vi�
1.3.2 Positioning the Researcher……………………………………18
1.3.3 Preparing the Researcher……………………………………...20
1.3.4 The Problem – an Ocean, a Mountain……………………….21
1.3.5 My (and Others) Reaction…………………………………...22
1.3.6 Aim of the Study……………………………………………..23
1.3.7 Objectives of the Study……………………………………....24
1.3.8 Research Questions…………………………….....................24
1.3.9 Significance of the Study…………………………………….25
1.4 Chapter Summary……………………………………………………26
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................31
2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………..31
2.1.1 The decolonization project – establishing a humanistic
agenda…………………………………………………………31
2.1.2 The postcolonial attitude – redefining known bounds………34
2.1.3 Indigenous epistemologies – a way forward…………………37
2.2 Grounding the Construction…………………………………………40
2.2.1 Reconceptualizing Science, Empiricism and Rationality………40
2.2.2 Situating the Construction in ‘Place’ and ‘Time’……………44
2.2.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing – a System of
Representation………………………………………………..47
2.2.4 Indigenous Worldview – a basis for authentic ‘Decolonization of
the Mind’……………………………………………………..50
2.2.5 The ‘Mind’, Thought and Metaphors – Seeing, Knowing and
Knowledge……………………………………………………52
vii�
2.3 Developing the Framework…………………………………………54
2.4 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………....57
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………..60
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….60
3.2 Epistemological and Methodological Positions……………………61
3.2.1 Theorizing ‘Vanua vakaTuraga’ as a research Framework…65
3.2.2 Positioning the Mata-rep within the Framework…………...68
3.2.3 The ‘Shifting Horizon’ of Mata navigators…………………70
3.3 Grounding the Methodology, the Interpretive Framework………72
3.3.1 Re-constructing Ethnography, the Ethnographer and her/his
Methods……………………………………………………....73
3.3.2 Re-conceptualizing ‘Talanoa’ within the vakaLakeba
Context………………………………………………………..76
3.3.3 Situating ‘Mana’ within the Indigenous Pacific Research
Agenda…………………………………………………………78
3.3.4 Theory and Methodology – Tools for ‘Seeing’, or Ways of
Knowing………………………………………………………80
3.4 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………….82
CHAPTER 4: TALI MAGIMAGI: MY COLLECTION OF TALANOA……….87
4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………..87
4.2 Home-Grown Talanoa……………………………………………….90
4.2.1 Part 1: Sisi – a Metaphor for the ‘apparent’ but ‘shifting’ iTovovakaTuraga……………………………………………………90
4.2.2 Part 2: Waliwali – a Metaphor for the ‘subtle’ but ‘settled’iValavala vakaVanua…………………………………………..96
viii�
4.3 Metaphorical Vanua Experiences…………………………………..99
4.3.1 Part 1: Lessons for Today from the Qoli of Yesterday………99
4.3.2 Part 2: Metaphors, Rhetoric and Legacies……………………103
4.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………107
4.5 Chapter Summary……………………………………………….…109
CHAPTER 5: ANSWERS, ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION…………………..114
5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………114
5.2 Answers and Analyses………………………………………………115
5.2.1 Vanua………………………………………………………...115
5.2.2 Vuravura……………………………………………………..117
5.2.3 Taukei………………………………………………………..119
5.2.4 Mata………………………………………………………….121
5.2.5 Sautu………………………………………………………….124
5.3 Further Discussion………………………………………………….126
5.3.1 Placing the Sau/Mana and Sautu Conceptions
Chronologically………………………………………………127
5.3.2 The Vanua vakaTuraga and its Informed Generation………130
5.3.3 ‘Survival of the Fittest’……………………………………….132
5.3.4 The Starting Point – Attitude Adjustment…………………133
5.4 Conclusion…………………………………………………………..135
5.5 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………...137
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION…………………………………………………….141
6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………141
ix�
6.2 Closing Discussion – ‘Plaiting’ the ‘stringed’ parts into a Vanua whole using the Sisi making analogy………………………………142
6.2.1 The iTaukei Way of Knowing – A Pathway to Sautu and Well
Being…………………………………………………………143
6.2.2 Coexistence in Place – Key to Living in Sautu…………….146
6.3.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing……………………..150
6.3.4 Space-sharing and its Implications………………………….153
6.3.5 Space, Time and Place………………………………………...155
6.3.6 The Mata method of Vanua people…………………………...157
6.4 Implications of this Research………………………………………160
6.4.1 Veitalanoa as an Inter-disciplinary Commitment………….162
6.5 Conclusion…………………………………………………………..164
6.5.1 Closing Remarks…………………………………………….167
6.6 Chapter Summary......................................................................168
BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………...173
GLOSSARY…………………………………………………………………………179
APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………….199
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Vuravura-world View (from the ‘standpoint’ of one tau-kei or “yoked-
with” place)…………………………………………………………….55
Figure 2: The Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge………………63
Figure 3: How real knowledge comes about for the enthusiastic learner………...64
Figure 4: Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei notion of a Vuravura-World………………………………………………………..70
Figure 5: An oversimplified family tree of the ‘privileged’ Vuanirewa clan…….91 Figure 6: Yaci versus Bunubunu (fish ‘hunt’ methods)…………..……………..100 Figure 7: The Qoli Kanace………………………………………………………102
x�
Figure 8: Vanua institution versus Turaga institution………………………..…148
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Chiefly language versus Ordinary language……………………………93
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Map of Viti (Fiji)……………………………………………………...199
Appendix B: Research Questions…………………………………………………...200
��
1��
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In the Pacific islands, indigenous peoples have shared their ocean, cultures, knowledges and skills for thousands of years and ‘others’ have indulged in the same, sometimes on invitation by natives, at other times without.
Unaisi Nabobo-Baba1
1.1 Introductions: Bucini ni Veiwekani2
Introductions are essentially ‘sowing of relatedness’. Bucini (sowing/planting/growing),
a concept rooted in agriculture, is creatively used by iTaukei3 to conceptualize the
‘origin’ of thought, talanoa4, relationships and engagements5. The introduction to this
inquiry, in essence, is a veivakataukeitaki6or “familiarization” between the researcher-
writer, himself an insider-researcher, and the wider readership. It is an open invitation
into a “knowledge space” constantly traversed by the researcher-navigator and,
represented to the reader-digester to inform her/his intelligence. Ultimately, the research
literate may use vanua7 (people/place) grounded mata (meaning: eye, face, front,
representative, source and group) conceptions highlighted in this research to guide their
theorizing and practice, knowing and learning, and thinking.
This project will explore what I call the iTaukei Mata System of Knowing using what
can be termed as Mata8 intelligence. A thorough understanding of the ideologies
supporting the iTaukei mata or envoy system (Williams, 1858, p. 27) will therefore
enlighten any veitalanoa9or dialogue/discussion regarding the iTaukei Mata system of
knowing and being, and which characterizes iTaukei consciousness. Insightful thinking
induced by the calculated and systematic deciphering of lingering iTaukei thought, or
metaphoric concepts and expressions forming the linguistic basis upon which
meaningful exchanges were, and are facilitated (even with neighbouring Tonga, Samoa
and Rotuma), will feature prominently throughout the chapters of this talanoa-
representation (largely one-way communication) of the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba10 (of
Lau-Fiji) metaphorical experience(s) and reality. The discussions herein initiated is
��
2��
envisioned to draw iTaukei and Pacific thinkers and academics into the conscious re-
visioning of the place for a vanua based theory on mata representation which can be
adapted to empower indigenous peoples of Fiji and the region, and facilitate fruitful
inter-Vanua11 relations at, and across, various levels of community engagement.
The thesis, therefore, is organized into six chapters: Introduction; Literature Review;
Methodology; My Collection of Talanoa; Answers, Analysis and Discussion; and
Conclusion. While the ‘Introduction’ situates the research in the context, the ‘Literature
Review’ section connects it to the wider world of the text as the ‘Methodology’
constructs the interpretive framework that guides it. Similarly, the ‘My Collection of
Talanoa’ chapter will attempt to narrate living talanoa collected from the center-world
of the researched as the chapter on ‘Answers, Analysis and Discussion’ seeks to
articulate vanua perception on indigenous concepts framed into the main research
questions, presented and analyzed thematically. This chapter, in essence, links the
chapter preceding it to the ‘Conclusion’ chapter following, in an attempt to establish
that there is harmony between indigenous iTaukei knowledge, and perspectives, with
Eurocentric knowledge (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 2). Furthermore, the ‘Conclusion’ will
draw all focus to the chosen epistemological position of “space-sharing” and its
consequent implications. In addition to these chapters, a table of content, a glossary of
iTaukei/Tubou-Lakeba words used, appendices for extra ‘reading’ and, a list of
bibliographic materials to reference, will be included to inform any future engagement
that will be ‘stirred-up’, in academia or within indigenous communities in general, and
amongst iTaukei Mata persons and groups everywhere.
Here am I, therefore, a Mata of Tubou-Lakeba by virtue of my mother’s Lakebaness.
My representation of Tubou-Lakeba way(s) of knowing and being is, to them, a serious
matter and, there is an understanding that I will tread carefully on what they consider
‘holy’ vanua ground lest I dash my feet on the rocks of research-ignorance. The
Lakeba-Fiji people, the official first to embrace the Christian religion, understand the
‘power’ of the text but, are still very aware of the ‘truth’ of the context. My
representation, therefore, is largely influenced by my mother’s talanoa-stories. One of
��
3��
those talanoa tell about how her adopted mother, a first cousin of her biological mother
and, who raised both of them, would say: ‘A meca ko rogoca iei, vavana toka ga iei!’
(Whatever [talanoa] you hear here [at home], keep it safely tucked here [at home]!).
This particular snippet of a talanoa is a gentle reminder of the necessary selective
process which must precede any attempt at documentation or representation, by insider-
researchers of her/his indigenous reality to the outside world – written or otherwise,
regardless of the motivation and/or our ‘knowledge-related power-based positions’ in
academia, or society. This is particularly true for the qualitative study of a people and
their ‘shifting’ realities, unprincipled reporting being a cause of greater uncertainty.
As an introduction, my talanoa-representation now begins, and with every additional
page and chapter, philosophical insights will unfold culminating at the presentation of a
researched solution to a perceived problem, the mechanics of which will be explicated
further in the paragraphs and chapters to follow. To begin my tala-no-a, which is
essentially the “shifting of stories to settle truths”, I will attempt to give my current
philosophical position on what I perceive to be how iTaukei conceptualize ‘place’,
‘space’, and ‘time’, and the ‘self’, the ‘other’ and ‘representation’.
1.1.1 Vanua-people (a Vei people) – Live in Mata, act as Mata
The iTaukei common word for any habitable ‘area’, place or space is vanua – habitable
by ‘life-forms’, physical or otherwise, and not necessarily ‘living’ in the western
science sense. In traditional ceremonies, vanua also represents the people, spread across
‘times’ and ‘spaces’, and spiritually tied to land or largely dry ‘places’. The question is:
‘What is the “origin” of the iTaukei vanua conception?’ or else, ‘How was the vanua
concept, and its ‘meaningful’ Polynesian variants, bucini (generated) by the Vu
(ancestors-originators) of Oceanians12?’ In answering these questions, iTaukei ways of
knowing, thinking and being will be interrogated, analyzed and articulated in an attempt
to represent the very ‘soul’ of a people found to be one with place (the vanua), and as
informed by a situated understanding of the iTaukei worldview.
��
4��
Two such phenomena, descriptive of the vanua basis of iTaukei thought and action, are
vei and mata – commonly found in linguistic expressions and phrases, and normally as
prefixes of both nouns and verbs. While vei largely reflects collectivism and two-way
interactions, mata signifies place-representation within, and by members of, localized
socio-cultural groupings. It might be worth noting from the outset that the subtlety of
using mata and vei concepts is something only native (or ‘native-ized’)13 speakers of the
iTaukei language (and dialects) can appreciate and employ effectively, and correctly. As
a vei people, therefore, the iTaukei may be distinguished as a people situated in their
mata-groups, and who are mata-representatives of their groups. This observation, in
essence, has become a lingering reality of the social life of iTaukei in general.
The vanua, conceptualized by Ravuvu (1988) as “an extension of the concept of the
individual self…[and] the group self” (p. 6), is the cultured conceptual framework
constructed by this vei people, and which reflects their worldview and their conceptions
of who and what they are in that world. Vanua, therefore, is the philosophical basis
upon which every iTaukei engaging with vanua language and culture, even
conceptually, is rooted and socialized.
1.1.2 A Vuravura-WorldView – the Universal Worldview
Vuravura is understood today as the iTaukei equivalent of ‘world(s)’ – itself an
abstraction. As such, the vuravura concept is conceived as universalistic, agreeing in
principle to the unifying conceptions of vei and mata. Rooted in the vura concept,
meaning ‘to emerge’ or ‘have emerged’ (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 38), it could be said
then that the vuravura-world is seen by iTaukei as a source of all things emerging, or
which have emerged, hence, implying origin and proving existence – the vuravura as
the ‘all-generative Oceanic space’. Breaking vura further into vu (origin/source) and ra
(under/beneath), this ideally sufficient source of all things that exist is understandably
located ‘down-under’, referring to the ancestral vanua-place where one is grounded and,
to which s/he is spiritually connected. This is not a ‘springing from nothing’ naïve
notion and, as it will be argued later, evidently stems from the very practical, empirical
and universal agriculture knowledge that ‘what one reaps is what one sows’. Herein, the
��
5��
primordial relationship between humans, the social ‘constructionists’, and Mother-
Earth, the ‘eternal’ source-sustainer, is embodied and reflected.
Unlike vuravura (world), vanua (peopled-place/placed-people) and mata (origin/source,
representative/front or eye/face) merely point to a ‘locality’. Vuravura, from a
“standpoint theory” (as cited in Gegeo, 2006, p. 8), seem to suggest a centering in the
‘self’ which extends outwards to “lagi [the heavens] place where the gods lived [and]
bulu the underworld or spirit world” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 37) of the iTaukei
spirituality. Though distinct and spiritualized, capitalized Bulu and Lagi will be
represented here, like the capitalized Vanua (being named and claimed ‘spaces’) as real
vuravura-source places of the spirits (‘speaking’ ancestors) and strangers (conquering
man-gods), respectively, in the iTaukei consciousness and experience. Essentially, any
vanua (habitable place) is both vuravura (source) and bulubulu (burial or, planting [of
‘seed’] ground) – vanua ‘seeds’ being their dead weka (relatives) and itei (planting
materials). The vanua as bulubulu and vuravura is particularly significant for this
inquiry given how it may help explain the Tubou-Lakeba conceptualization of the burial
of their Sau14 (king) as a tei (planting), and not a bulu (burying/concealing), the term
used for the burial of the tauVanua (or the lewe-niVanua)15.
The iTaukei vuravura-world(s), therefore, constitute Vanua (named/claimed places)
vakaTuraga16 (of the chiefly) – vanua (lands/places) occupied by a vanua-people who
hold the “chiefly manner” in high esteem. While the question of how the iTaukei
conceptualize the vakaTuraga lingers on at the horizon, the notion of Vanua
vakaTuraga (chiefly lands/places/peoples) will be argued as foundational to the search
for everything pertaining to vanua knowledge or ‘truths’. The Vanua vakaTuraga or
‘peopled-places privileging placed-peoples’ conception, therefore, becomes the
conceptual framework upon which philosophical questions, regarding iTaukei thought,
may be asked and answered. This is the basis upon which this research is framed.
The vanua concept, a polysemy, which iTaukei use with great ease and flexibility to
refer to the exact site of any kind of engagement, whether it be in the natural, social or
��
6��
spiritual realm and, which comprises everything cultural, will be used in this
representation, therefore, with the same creativity and enthusiasm.
1.1.3 The Taukei-Vulagi Dichotomy – Ground for Veivakataukeitaki
Two related conceptions, critical to this study, are the taukei (insider/local) and the
vulagi (outsider/visitor) concepts. While the former may be conceptualized as tau-kei,
roughly translated ‘yoked with’ (land/place), the latter is a concept evidently derived
from vu-Lagi, meaning ‘originating from Lagi-heavens, the abode of the gods’. Is it a
wonder then how vulagi people, the visiting strangers or ‘man-gods’ of old Fiji – the
daring wanderers and, possibly, lovers of the sea-space (not drifters) from the canoeing
era – were readily absorbed into the situated culture of enthusiastic taukei (native)
cultivators ‘filling’ a habitable-place (vanua) and, made chiefs over the agriculture-
based existence of their hosts? Does this taukei-vulagi (host-guest) relationship,
embedded in the vuravura worldview, not hold the key to understanding such a
“stranger-king” phenomenon, as highlighted by Scarr (2008: 21), and which is possibly
tied to the continuous knowledge-sharing process always preceded by active veiwekani
(relationship) building engagements, argued here to be a definitive feature of the
iTaukei Mata system of knowing?
The conceptualization of a vuravura-world, double-sourcing from the vanua base of the
taukei (insiders) and the lagi place (or vanua tani [‘other place’]) of vulagi (outsiders),
illustrates “the dichotomous system of alternatively opposing and complementary
cultural elements [and] thoughts” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. 265) which embody their
worldview, and characterize the iTaukei understanding of “knowledge-sharing” via
veivakataukeitaki (familiarization). To grasp this most basic knowledge, that of the
taukei-vulagi (insider-outsider) dichotomy (possibly a continuum), and which is rooted
in the iTaukei vuravura-worldview, is significant therefore for a deeper and more
meaningful engagement (potentially philosophical in nature) with the iTaukei, their
‘theories’ of knowledge, and ‘methods’ of knowing and learning.
��
7��
1.1.4 The iTaukei Tamata ‘Self’ – the Human-person, the Human-race
According to Adi Fane Sivoki, my mother:
“To refer to someone/a people (local[s] or stranger[s]) as tamata is to be disrespectful. A grown woman is not to be addressed yalewa (just female-woman) but, marama (lady-like woman). Similarly, a grown man is never to be referred to as tagane (just male-man) but, turaga (chief-like man).”
Value-laden ideas, such as these, formed the basis of my learning in the formative years
of my socialization. These were ‘experiences’ I had little control over and, their impact
on my life is only understood clearly today, after much reflection.
Tamata refers to both the individual human person and the human family as a whole.
Mata-tamata, which has been taken to mean ‘ethnicity’, is literally ‘group(s) of
individuals’ or ‘group(s) of communities’. Tamata, as ‘vu-originator’ of the vanua
concept, therefore, subsequently developed the mata (envoy) system over generations –
a system of Vanua representation from which the iTaukei notions of mata-ni (eyes/face
of/for) and mata-ki (representatives to) are derived.
When addressing one as a marama (lady-like woman) or turaga (chief-like man),
therefore, one is making the assumption that s/he comes from a Vanua vakaTuraga
(chiefly place/people) and, as such, is a mata-rep17 of her/his vanua – not just a
disconnected vanualess drifter.
The implication of that little segment from one of those many talanoa I shared with my
mother is that we are all connected beings, “part[s] of an organic unity” (Thaman, 2003,
p. 1) – belonging to some vanua-place or matanitu-state and, the greater vuravura-
world.
This means also that the iTaukei ‘accept’, therefore, that the community person who
knows her/his place in the vanua, as its mata-rep, is of more use to it then a
disconnected tamata individualist un-yoked with (or vulagi to) that place. The
��
8��
recognition that a community person deserves mata-rep status, the higher and privileged
position, is thus demonstrated in the way s/he is to be addressed as marama-lady or
turaga-sir.
In traditional ceremonies, the ‘reflector’ of iTaukei worldview (Ravuvu, 1987), the
spokespersons of the vanua chiefs involved always begin their speechmaking by first
acknowledging the Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place and its people) then, the Gone
Marama/Turaga (lit. ‘Young [titled] Woman/Man]’, the chiefly office). This situated
‘truth’ places chiefs as ‘loveable’ embodiments of the ancient vanua. Projecting the
chief as a Gone (‘young’/’child’) to be vakamenemenei (pampered) by the older, the
Vanua, is therefore a critical aspect of “the vakaTuraga concept (the chiefly manner)
and of the Fijian ethos” highlighted by Ravuvu (1987, p. 320).
In essence, the vanua (placed-people/peopled-place) is first acknowledged then, its
primary mata-rep or the high chief who embodies the mana/sau of the vanua, and by
her/his vanua title – never her/his personal or family name.
I like to think that tamata (the person/a people) should be read ta-mata (meaning [in
Lakeba-Lau] ‘not a mata-rep’). The implication thus is that iTaukei persons become ta-
mata when they are not engaging as mata-reps hence, are deemed to be un-placed. I
perceive that a ta-mata, when s/he is not a mata-rep, has indeed become the
represented. What transpires is the implicit iTaukei ‘theory’ of self upon which Vanua
representation is embedded.
Herein lies a string of iTaukei ‘truths’ upon which this whole thesis is constructed and
hangs: every tamata-individual is placed in a mata-group and is a mata-rep of her/his
tamata-people. In perceiving herself/himself as mata, such a person is acknowledging
one-ness with (taukeiness to) place. As a mere tamata (or non-mata), therefore, s/he
could be identified as vulagi to (unfamiliar with) place hence, disqualified from
speaking for oneself and one’s Vanua.
��
9��
Mata-reps and their equally significant ‘other’ – tamata, the represented – as key
players within the Vanua framework and its mata (envoy) system of representation,
therefore, exist in “the actualities of the [iTaukei] people’s past and present, and the
potentialities of their future” (Ravuvu, 1988, p. 6).
1.2 The Context 1.2.1 Tubou-Lakeba – a Representation of historical ‘Times’
Lakeba, the chiefly island of Lau, or the windward islands of the Fiji group, is located at
160 miles to the east of the capital Suva. According to Reid (1990), Captain Cook listed
Lakeba in his 1777 list of islands as “Tubou [or] Kotooboo” (p. 5), citing Tongan
informants, a name which is believed to have started from the hill fort on Kedekede.
The Tubou of today, the principal village re-located twice from Kedekede to its coastal
location, is the heart of Lau and is home to three tui-kings’: the chief-administrator Tui
Nayau (with Sau-Dominion) and the decorated but culturally significant Tui Tubou and
Tui Lakeba.
The island, according to oral traditions, was first settled by a migrant and an ‘open and
flexible’ community from the north west of Lakeba, possibly from Vanua Levu via
Taveuni and, believed to have been led by a Tui Lakeba (a deified title by 183518).
Subsequent migrations, from Kabara in southern Lau and, of the Levuka people from
Tailevu to the west, and later, the Vuanirewa from neighbouring Nayau, all had a taste
of overall Sauship (leadership) of the Vanua ko Lau based on Lakeba. It was Qilaiso,
one of the leading Kabara brothers therefore, appointed by the old Vanua ko Lakeba as
its first chief-administrator, who became the originator of the first Lakeba Sau dynasty.
The Ceiekena (lit. ‘Whose [body is it] to eat?’) name of his tribe, in essence, suggests a
turning-away of pre-Christianity Tubou-Lakeba society from expressions of antisautu
or disorder such as cannibalism.
Though the Tui Lakeba of ancient Tubou-Lakeba and their contemporaries, the Tui
Tubou, never ascended the heights of localized leadership, their ‘presence’ was felt
nonetheless in Tonga beginning with the pre-Christian “marriage of the Tu’i Tonga
��
10��
Fefine (Female Tu’iTonga) Sinaitakala i Langileka to [Tabu of Waciwaci, Lakeba] who
became Tapu’osi, the Tu’iLakepa of Vasivasi [in Tonga]” (Reid,1990, pp. 5-6). On a
much later date, a similar exchange led to the adoption of the Tubou-name, transcribed
to Tupou in Tonga and, which “[became] a personal and a generic name [for the] Tu’i
Kanokupolu” (Reid, 1990, pp. 7-8). The significance of these Fiji-Tonga connections
(and others) is there to be ‘remembered’ always in their ‘blood’ or matanikupeti19, how
they continually embody vei principles20 of relatedness and, the persistence of their
mata sense21 of existence. Therein lies chronologically placed exchanges between
eastern Fiji and Tonga, and which would have revived extensive cultural borrowing
between the two places and their peoples, particularly in the events leading up to Fiji’s
‘surrender’ to British rule in 1874, and for generations to follow.
Just as Tonga borrowed and adapted the Lakeba and Tubou names (and the Vasu22
concept, which became Fahu in Tonga), most importantly, Fiji brought home the
Tongan Hau and, possibly, made it Sau (Reid, 1990). An understanding of Sau,
therefore, will be argued here as critical to a better knowledge (and theory) of what
constitutes the “sautu [notion meaning] stability, hence peace and plenty” (Reid, 1990,
p. 35).
From this point of my talanoa onwards, Fiji and Tonga will be referred to as Viti and
Toga,23 respectively, in an attempt to situate the research within the broader context of a
Viti-Toga region that could be stretched to include Samoa, Rotuma and possibly
Vanuatu but, centering in on what I call the Tubou-Lakeba of Lau-Viti reality. This
conception of an open ‘sea of islands’ (Hau‘ofa, 2008), traditionally unbounded by
western imaginations and home to free-spirits, as far as we are willing to believe and
bula-live in it, is the cultural base upon which the navigating vei people of my talanoa
may be situated. Within this Oceanic geography, the iTaukei (natives) of Lau-Viti make
but a relatively small and significant part constituting a tamata-people whose talanoa-
stories need to be told and re-told: tamata in the sense that the community believes that
their Sau (installed chief-administrator) is their one and true mata-rep. It is now left to
storytellers, the walking repositories and recyclers of living talanoa and, in a significant
��
11��
way, indigenous researchers who will dare to conceptually re-conceive of a people’s
parallel and intersecting realities, to tell of their cultured and time-tested versions of
“indigenous truths” using modern tools of research.
1.2.2 Living at the Maliwa-Spaces and in the Gauna-Times
The iTaukei conceptualize the ‘space between’ as maliwa – the unnamed ‘space’
between ‘places’ and between ‘times’ – much like what Tuhiwai Smith (1999) describes
as “positions within time and space in which people and events are located” (p. 50).
Because ‘places’ and ‘times’ are peopled, the iTaukei tend to choose to move into and
occupy unpeopled maliwa-spaces (between ‘places’ and ‘times’). One such maliwa-
space which the iTaukei have created for veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), at the
mata-group level, has been categorically named rara24, the place for constructive
engagement and solevu (feasting). This is, ideally, neutral ground. It is the place for
dialogue – a place where differences are laid down. The rara is where the turaga-chief
and her/his matanivanua-herald, bete-priests and bati-warriors, and mataisau-carpenters
and gonedau-fishers, may temporarily relinquish their ‘power’, or sau/mana, to the
Tuirara (king of Rara [the place at the maliwa-space]). At the rara the sautu-abundance
of the vanua is often celebrated and vanua wealth-sharing takes on renewed communal
meaning. Such maliwa-spaces are places where longstanding veiwekani (relationships)
are engendered and revisited.
The iTaukei conceptualization of ‘time’ as ‘life’ or, the cyclical, seasonal and
generational gauna (life/time), depicts an understanding of life as the ‘living/existing in
purpose’ time of a tamata (person/people), vanua (place/space), ‘a thing’ or an event.
Conceiving ‘time’ as such represents an ‘entity’ as something which ‘ages’ hence, is
conceived and birthed in ‘place’, grows in ‘space’ and may die in ‘time’. There is,
therefore, the gauna (life/time) of individual tamata or a mata-tamata (group of
tamata), a single Vanua or vei-Vanua (related Vanua), simultaneously aging and
coexisting in ‘space’ and ‘time’ within a timeless ‘all-generative Oceanic space’. Such a
conceptualization of time inseparable from life reveals how connected to nature and
��
12��
society the human mind was and still is. With the present day tamata-individual at the
center of her/his current vuravura-world (or reality), gauna-time of a life once lived is
traced back to as gauna makawa (ancient time) while gauna-time of an existing life, or
a life yet to be fully realized, is seen as gauna vou (‘yet to mature’ time). The use of the
vou concept, another agriculture-related terminology, and which refers to un-mature
fruits which will mature and ripe in their gauna (lives/times), again reflects the notion
of ecological time. Essentially, the ever-maturing ‘past’ is never too old, archaic and
dispensable for in it exist the roots, trunk and branches of a living tree that bear and
support the ‘present’ and the ‘future’ in the vou (yet to mature) lives/times. Such a view
of time, therefore, can only be associated with something that is rooted, alive and
bearing – ideally timeless and deeply mysterious.
It is in light of such spiritually charged thinking that the iTaukei notion of yalomatua
(the wise, or yalo [spirit]-matua [old/wise/mature]) may have to be redefined and
appreciated. A matua (mature) spirit, therefore, found between the vou (still too young)
and dreu (far too old) stages is the desired state of being – reflecting ‘mid-life’ or ‘mid-
time’ stability and usability. Such is the matua state of being that the current vanua
reality and all its mata-reps exist in, ideally placed in a timeless ‘all-generative Oceanic
space’ and, existing for sautu-peace in the maliwa-spaces between vanua-places and
gauna-times.
In further conceptualizing a gauna (life/time) as a matanisiga (lit. eye/face-of-sun),
iTaukei thought seem to suggest that, like the sun, a bula-life (or, gauna-time) will rise,
set and rise again in their kawa (generations) to follow. This may explain why iTaukei
of old would explain any resemblance between a new born and a dead ancestor as the
return to life of the latter, the vura (emergence from down-under) of a bula-life bulu/tei
(buried/planted) on fertile vanua soil (ancestral land)25 – the rising again of a sun. By
extension, the same matanisiga conception could be used to make meaning of the
changing reality of the vuravura-world (in its natural, human and spiritual dimensions)
of the iTaukei person and people. Indigenous notions of space and time are critically
important, therefore, in how they intelligibly inform our understanding of what the
��
13��
iTaukei of Lau-Viti (and of the Viti group of islands) make of the idea of bula
veimaliwai (mutually living in the maliwa-spaces) as a prerequisite to bula sautu (the
‘all-good life’).
1.2.3 Bula Sautu – the Biblically Correct Perspective
According to the ninth chapter of the Bible’s Old Testament’s book of Isaiah (Aisea),
the sixth verse:
For unto us a child is born, Unto us a son is given: …The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Ni sa sucu mai e dua na gone me noda, Sa soli mai vei keda e dua na gone tagane:…Na Tama ni gauna tawa mudu, na Tui ni Sautu.
Defining sautu as peace using the text without reading it in context: that is, in the ‘true’
iTaukei understanding of the epistemology of sautu, can be problematic. At face value,
sautu is peace, the absence of conflict, insecurity and war. Beneath that, sautu can be
anything the iTaukei tamata-person makes it out to be, particularly when the word is
morphologically analyzable proving its rootedness in the iTaukei language and culture.
Biblical texts, if not inspiring, are revealing. They reflect iTaukei thought for in
transcribing the English versions using iTaukei coded language, their vuravura
worldview gets packaged into a biblical talanoa-story. These biblical iVola
(prints/patterns, as in kupeti) carry ‘living’ Europeanized Jewish narratives re-told using
iTaukei ‘truths’. Decoding their multiple-meanings, therefore, require reflection and
criticality.
If the iTaukei notion of sautu, or well being, is truly the “epistemological…[and]
ultimate goal of life” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 13), then the pursuit of the ‘all good life’
must be humanity’s preoccupation. Is it not believable then that any culture valuing life
would ultimately seek the attainment of their version of sautu?
��
14��
Essentially, what transpires is the construction of an understanding of sautu (peace) that
is compatible with the epistemology of bula (life) itself: the one supporting and
sustaining the other.
1.2.4 Bula Sautu – a Possible pre-Christian Perspective
“Bula (Life!)…[as an iTaukei greeting], is a reminder and an affirmation, a
blessing…the reason of all our endeavours and struggles…[the] quality life, Sautu”
(Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 13). Bula in the agricultural sense speaks of growth, in the
social sphere bula is being lively and, at the intimate level, bula is ‘sexual warmth’ or,
wanting and needing one’s partner. While strong winds are said to be bula, a sense of
being ‘well fed’ and, even freedom from oppression are also expressions of bula-life.
Bula, as conceptualized here, may indeed be appreciated by the iTaukei (insiders), or
vulagi (outsiders) made taukei (locally familiar) to the native (‘mature’ and ancient)
ways of knowing and being of the iTaukei (and possibly other indigenous peoples), the
placed-people of Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places/peoples).
Sautu, like bula, is another interesting loaded concept. ‘Re-reading’ sautu as sau-tu
gives the idea of a ‘mana-which exists’ or, a ‘power to effect-which is real’. A Tui or
king known to possess sau/mana is one whose sau-dominion over “nature, mind and
society, [tu/standing] in eternal relations of exchange [to each other]” (M�hina, 2010, p.
169) has been proven. The presence of the tangible expression(s) of sau, or sautu (peace
and prosperity) itself, proves that the sau/mana belonging to the Vanua vakaTuraga
(chiefly place/people), and as embodied by their Sau-ni-Vanua (the installed
administrator-chief), exists for real – especially to them that ‘believe’ the situated
‘truth’.
At this point, for an insider-researcher vasu of (linked maternally to) Tubou-Lakeba, I
wonder: ‘What really constitutes that sau?’ and, ‘What are its expressions in today’s
vuravura-world?’
��
15��
1.2.5 Vura and Tu – iTaukei Ontological and Epistemological Tools
Vura (emerge) and Tu (exist) are ways of describing and explaining iTaukei social
reality – “[a] world [that] is intangible and internal to their cognition” (Sanga, 2004, p.
44). In a vuravura-world, all things which exist (tu) may be explained as having
emerged (vura) from a vuravura-source and, which is a possible universal
understanding of the world (in all its dimensions) as a source. While these sources may
be external to the observer, they are often always conceptualized and defined in relation
to the observer’s embodiment and her/his group experience. In the iTaukei world, there
exists mata-sources of knowing and knowledge (more than just books, libraries,
universities and archives), as it will be argued later, which have been made alive using
mata (eye/face) conceptions, and in mata persons, mata-groups and mata places and
institutions.
An explanation of a phenomenon, therefore, in the form of knowledge or a theory,
employing vura and tu as ontological tools, will agree with the iTaukei vuravura
worldview proving it ‘believable’. This humanistic constructionist approach to the
understanding of Bula Sautu, therefore, while challenging positivism, “[will] include
discussion[s] of the metaphysical foundations that support epistemology” (Cobern,
1993, p. 6). This project, in essence, will explore the sautu (abundance) of iTaukei
“[mata] metaphors that have become part of [our] practices and way of life” (Sanga,
2004, p. 44) – the iTaukei ivalavala-ways of seeing, thinking, knowing, learning and
being.
Mata metaphors, therefore, conceptual or derived, novel or idiomatic, vura (emerged)
and now tu (exist), for real, to give us philosophical insight into iTaukei thought,
illuminate and inform the re-reading and re-writing of our narratives and, encourage
greater collaboration between the modern and tradition. Mata metaphors, essentially,
are “tools [to be used] to explain…[our] philosophy of indigenous knowledge [and] its
theorizing” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 119).
��
16��
1.2.6 Metaphorical Experiences – Ways of Thinking, Knowing and Being
Tubou-Lakeba people, like all iTaukei and indigenous peoples, are ‘guided’ by their
ivalavala ni bula vakaVanua or, customary vanua ways of ‘doing life’ that are
culturally specific and appropriate to the placed-people. While Tubou-Lakeba ivalavala
ni bula vakaVanua, expressed here as metaphorical experiences, are unique to their
cultural landscape, the overall ‘feel’ should have a ‘regionalizing’ effect given
humanity’s common embodiment, the Pacific peoples’ shared ancestry and, their
spiritual connection to the ocean (wai) and land (vanua).
To embrace the totality of the Tubou-Lakeba experience, individual and group ways of
seeing, thinking, knowing, learning and being will be investigated. This research, in
essence, will take one on a time-travel to and from maliwa-spaces of generational
moments once lived but, now preserved in collections of Tubou-Lakeba living talanoa
including tukuni-legends (lit. ‘as is told’) of origins, tuva kawa (genealogy), pesi
(traditional songs), meke (dances) and, even soisoi (gossip). The ‘reading’ and
‘remembering’ of Tubou-Lakeba talanoa and thought will extend further to the ‘faithful
observers of traditions of the times’, elements of which will be briefly discussed like the
yalofi (sitting/drinking order in yaqona26 ceremonies), the veibuli (chiefly installation)
and, the tei-niTuraga (chiefly burial). These ‘presumed silent’ observers encompass
even the vala (making) of their yaba (mats), sisi (garlands) and waliwali (body oil) and;
the planting of their iteitei (plantation), fishing of their yalava (lagoons) and,
maintenance of their koro (village).
Even if one does not get to experience these activities herself/himself, the iTaukei are
excellent story-tellers and, the researcher, as an iTaukei himself, is one socialized in the
cultural ivalavala-ways of ‘reading’, telling and relating to talanoa hence, projecting
talanoa as the epistemological basis upon which every other knowledge is embedded,
particularly in predominantly oral cultures. The secret is to muria (follow) the leading
of the wa-ni-veiwekani (lit. ‘strings’ of relatedness) and know the vanua-place one
occupies.
��
17��
The veiwekani and/or matanikupeji (relatedness, the latter implying blood-ties only) as
basis for veikilai (two-way knowing) through veivakataukeitaki (familiarization),
therefore, precedes what may be called a ‘progressive knowledge-building discourse’
and, which Bereiter (1994) suggested was “not about objectivity, but about
progressiveness” (as cited in Lee, 2010, p. 142). Herein is adopted a post-colonial
argument and one which is hoped to source and support the pursuit of a sustainable bula
sautu (the ‘all good life’).
1.3 The Research 1.3.1 Motivating the Researcher
This research topic emerged as a reaction to the assertion that indigenous peoples do not
theorize their knowledge (Gegeo, 2006) and, that there exists no such thing as the
‘Science of Pacific Island Peoples’ (Biggs, 1994, p. 1). Even if active academic
theorizing and theory testing, and philosophizing, were activities primarily reserved for
the West, no one can deny that indigenous peoples ‘conceive’ of their knowledge in
ways much like their ‘civilized’ counterparts, employing indigenous versions of what
has come to be known as Eurocentric rationalism and empiricism. Experience and
‘figuring out’ things are still critical to our human understanding, the two methods of
knowing (and inquiry) overlapping hence, inevitably drawing from and informing each
other. If the counter-argument remains that ‘truth is no truth unless scientifically proven
and written’, then timeless indigenous ivalavala (ways/customs) still count valid
because they have been proven over time to work and are ‘written’ in the ‘ancient arts’,
including the artistic use of indigenous languages. Researching ‘colonized’ peoples,
therefore, requires the expertise of placed indigenous-researchers schooled in western
education and, thoroughly socialized in their vanua (place/people) mata (source) places
of knowledge.
In the Tubou-Lakeba context, the iTaukei of this Vanua vakaTuraga often quip: ‘Ia me
vala!’ or, [(Well) let it be done!] and, at other times, ‘A meca iei a fika ga!’ [This thing
(can be solved if I/we) just ‘figure it out’!]. Evidently, the former is performance-based
��
18��
while the latter is a thinking method. In real-life experiences, therefore, whether
individual or collective, doing and thinking operate simultaneously. While some degree
of borrowing is evident in the Tubou-Lakeba fika concept (or vika in other dialects), as
it relates to mathematics (resonating the West’s idea of figures/numbers), two other
Lakeba-Lau ‘original’ conceptions associated with fika: faito (a solution) and faiwa (a
strategy), exist to prove that the iTaukei are not just passive practitioners of knowledge.
They have their time proven theories. These theories of knowledge are critical to their
survival hence, to their bula sautu, a bula-life lived in sautu-abundance.
1.3.2 Positioning the Researcher
Re-conceptualizing research in indigenous iTaukei epistemology, or the social sciences
in general, as essentially the ‘re-conceiving of indigenous concepts which need to be re-
found’, is critical for this study. This journey is largely a ‘re-searching’ or ‘searching
again’ within and around knowledge spaces and places where epistemologies and
epistemes were ‘conceived’ and ‘found’ by a people, and which has been preserved in
their cultural expressions and performances, bula-life taught ‘methods’ of knowing and
learning for bula-survival. To ground it in the iTaukei culture, I will relate the ‘search’
idea to our kune (or kunekune) concept which speaks of ‘having been found’ and ‘being
pregnant of/with’ hence, will use the idea of re-kune, time and again, when talking of
research.
This journey, in essence, places the re-searcher at the intersection of the gauna makawa
(lit. ‘time [of] old’) and the gauna vou (lit. ‘time [of] new’) – the gauna oqo (lit. ‘time
[of] here’) of the ‘moving observer-subject’ (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999) who sometimes
wills to remain immobile. Suggesting that a researcher is on a ‘re-searching’ (re-kune)
journey throughout her/his life-time, and based where s/he is placed, therefore, gives the
picture of a master navigator sandwiched at the maliwa-space between gauna/vanua
makawa (ancient times/places [and events]) and gauna/vanua vou (newer times/places
[and events]). Such a navigator, in essence, is still in control of her/his movements and,
which sometimes take her/him back to ‘spaces’, ‘places’ and ‘times’ once travelled
and/or known. A navigator ‘moving in her/his life-time’(the iTaukei view) is not to be
��
19��
confused with one ‘moving with time’ (the Eurocentric view) therefore, conceptualizing
a Mata navigator’s life-time in terms of her/his movements, pauses and ‘silences’
through space, from place to place and, from time to time (essentially, event to event).
Just as the navigator is often thought to be the ‘eye (mata) of her/his canoe’, re-
searchers will be conceptualized in this research project as Mata-navigators of their
philosophical vanua-position(s) and, within the communities they have been placed.
This conception of vanua (places and positions) as metaphorical canoes suggests,
therefore, that peopled-places actually move and carry placed-peoples. ‘Place’ as
‘peopled-place’, herein, is conceptualized to be mobile hence, not confined to the
geographical reality upon which the placed-people trace back their roots. This sense of
place may explain, in part, why most Pacific peoples who have moved away from their
‘mother-lands’ have continued, relentlessly, to embrace elements of their cultures or, at
least appreciate them from a safe distance.
For the indigenous re-searcher, this canoe metaphor may be applied to her/his research
place in the community of researchers positioned in, or peopling, academia. This
analogy basically places the researcher (indigenous or, otherwise) in a ‘knowledge
space’ open for exploration but, given the humanistic nature of social science
researches, knowledge is perceived to be kune-i (found) or kunekune-taki (conceived)
by a placed vanua-people and, appropriately preserved within their ‘situated’
repositories. Any Pacific researcher in this context, perceived to be an ‘articulate’ and
knowledgeable Mata (eye-face, source-representative) of her/his vanua (place/position)
knowledge, is believed to be carrying a wealth of understanding (itself an expression of
sautu-abundance) acquired from her/his rich experience of traversing the depth and
breadth of this all-generative Oceanic ‘knowledge space’. This position, therefore, gives
the view of an unlimited ‘body’ of Pacific thought: Oceanic in origin, attitude and
purpose.
In this inquiry, the Tubou-Lakeba of Lau-Viti place the researcher is exploring for his
MA thesis project presents a minute fraction of this huge space of local (and localized)
knowledge that may still be relevant to our modern-day existence. To do justice,
��
20��
therefore, to the ‘founders’ of these ‘ancient truths’ (at least older than the researcher’s
present day reality, remembering and envisioning), it must be acknowledged that much
of what will be discovered and articulated here belongs to the iTaukei and, particularly,
the people of Tubou-Lakeba in Lau.
1.3.3 Preparing the Researcher
A Mata navigator is an expert. S/he understands currents and counter-currents. S/he
reads nature and society’s enduring signs and, responds intelligently to winds of change.
A Mata navigator carries with her/him ancient knowledge and, applies them
accordingly to present ‘developments’ in her/his vanua-place and vuravura-world. The
Mata navigator, in essence, occupies a space reserved for the yalomatua (wise/mature
spirit[s]) and the vuku (skillful knower[s]) who do not rely solely on their own kila ka
(training/learning/schooling) but, also on others’ wisdom and understanding. This
adopted position is one which propels the Mata navigator into the relatively or,
seemingly, unknown. It is the attitude of one eager to know/learn because s/he
understands that kila-knowledge is sau-power anyone keen on representing and
sourcing her/his vanua (place/people), for the sake of sautu (peace), must possess – sau-
power to raise living standards in the true spirit of tiko veisaututaki (living together for
the sautu [peace/prosperity] of all).
Mata wisdom and understanding, therefore, are attributes a researcher-navigator must
seek to own or emulate. It is in acquiring these qualities that a Mata navigator is better
equipped to implement culturally appropriate research methodologies, like Nabobo-
Baba’s Vanua Research Framework (VRF), in the ‘re-searching’ of what she found to
be four important categories of knowledge “…vanua, lotu or spirituality, [ivalavala
vakaVanua] or custom, and veiwekani or kinship” (2006, pp. 135-137). Otherwise, the
VRF may be adapted to meet the specific needs of one’s research. This research project
will therefore employ the Mata approach to research and inquiry, believed to be
embedded within the VRF and, which is consistent with humanistic approaches
designed to address the needs of social science researchers re-searching indigenous
knowledge and, theories of knowledge.
��
21��
1.3.4 The Problem – an Ocean, a Mountain
While oceans are there to be crossed, mountains exist for climbing. ‘Living below the
poverty-line’, a possible indicator of the absence of sautu or a sau/mana [knowledge]
based peace and prosperity, while undesirable, seems like an inevitable and elusive by-
product of unsustainable economic development. Living in lack when opportunities and
provisions abound is an unbelievable vanua-place to be in. Seeing able-bodied iTaukei
men and women live unfulfilled lives and, without the means or the will to persevere
and survive in our modern existence is a heart-breaking reality. How can I, as an
educator and a member of civil society, convincingly push the belief that the idealized
‘All Good Life’ is indeed available to all? Essentially I ask: ‘Is sautu an attainable
reality or, is it just a good idea?’ And if it is real, I then wonder: ‘Is the notion, given its
Vanua underpinnings, possibly cross-cultural in nature?’
A Mata navigator’s epistemological journey is therefore, one of focus, drive,
determination and resilience. Re-thinking the poverty issue in twenty-first century
Pacific societies as a navigable ocean, or a conquerable mountain, frees one from the
crippling grip of the enduring ‘poverty mentality’ prevalent in aid-dependent
communities. The iTaukei conceptualization of bula sautu as a sustainable existence
richly endowed and self-sufficient could very well be equated to what I call “self-
determination less donor dependence”. This view offers an alternative that is ‘planting-
based’, theoretically – ‘cultivating’ the land and its people and, sustainably harvesting
vanua resources in a manner based on respect for nature, humanity and, one’s own
intelligence. This seemingly insurmountable problem of ‘finding’ bula (fruitful life) and
sautu (peaceful abundance) is indeed an epistemological challenge for to thrive in a
knowledge-based existence is to be able to think, know, learn, articulate and represent
one’s reality freely and unrestrained. This free-flow of knowledge (kila) and
information (tukutuku) between two parties (at least) is really what transpires when a
taukei (local) meets a vulagi (stranger) or, in essence, when two (or more)
individuals/groups vulagi (unfamiliar) to each other’s ivalavala-ways of thinking,
knowing and being meet at junctions of their epistemological journeys.
��
22��
Could the problem be that we have not been effectively decolonized, in our minds, or
gained “epistemic independence” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 4), let alone true economic
independence? Should we continue to believe that the benefits of any exchange at the
intersection could only be one-way, if the kai-palagi (presumably English speaking
European, a foreigner), or a palagi (foreign) concept is at the opposite end of the
exchange? Would this research project, then, mark the beginning of an epistemic
commitment devoted to economic liberation given the inevitable commercializing of
even indigenous thought and knowledge? Is sautu now more than just having good
health and wealth but, also freedom from all kinds of oppression – even if that
oppression is perceived to be perpetuated from within the vanua?
The search for an iTaukei solution to a ‘situated’ problem of a conceptual nature, rooted
in an epistemic tradition, calls for an apolitical philosophical approach aimed at positive
conceptual change and the search for a ‘real’ context-specific sautu.
1.3.5 My (and Others) Reaction
I believe in the human potential. I know that intelligent beings can only be moved by
intelligent answers. I propose that knowing one’s socialized way of learning and
adapting to change is liberating and empowering. I know that sautu is as much a state of
life as it is a state of knowing and being, and possibly a state of mind. I strongly believe
in the biblical notions that “as [a man] thinketh in his heart, so is he” and, “where there
is no vision, the people perish”.
If iTaukei can ‘see’ the sense of it all, they will then seek to ‘know’, (re)name, (re)claim
and be liberated. For iTaukei, true liberation may have to begin with how the individual
perceives herself/himself in relation to her/his Vanua and vanua epistemologies and
knowledge. To know the ‘self’ (tamata-person/people) and one’s position in Vanua
representation (alternatively as mata-rep, or ta-mata the represented), and how group
thinking (experience and knowing) impacts on individual thinking (experience and
knowing), and vice-versa, the iTaukei (beginning with the insider-researcher) must
critically ‘re-visit’ their roots, the Vanua makawa, by examining the ivalavala-ways of
��
23��
their budding branches, the Vanua vou. This is then the core of my argument: that the
iTaukei may ‘know’ their indigenous ways of knowing, which I have ambitiously
grounded in the conception of a Mata System of Knowing, and how these
‘epistemologies’ may have emerged (vura) and come to exist (tu) to support their
individual and collective pursuit of the ‘All Good Life’. Being aware of how they know
(and learn), therefore, is critical in the construction of a new understanding of sautu
(well being) for the new generation of kaiViti27.
Ultimately, this research project will strive to attain positive conceptual development
and change which is conducive to ‘life-long learning’ in a rapidly globalizing Pacific.
This is the epistemological journey, which I believe, all twenty-first century learners
must passionately engage in. It is in this proactive and progressive ‘knowledge space’
and, at the crossroads of individual/group ‘knowledge routes’, where true sautu may be
realized, for whatever it is worth, to the tamata (individuals/peoples) and the mata
(groups) of which they are Mata-reps.
It is envisioned, therefore, that the findings of this inquiry will only generate further
qualitative discussions and, possibly, more focused and informed hypothesizing and
quantitative analytical studies. In essence, it is predicted that more relevant and reliable
“research [or learning] strategies that are grounded in Indigenous and Native
epistemologies” (Gegeo, 2001, p. 503) will be designed and implemented.
1.3.6 Aim of the Study
To articulate the Vanua ko Tubou-Lakeba understandings and conceptualizations of
Mata as intrinsic to their ‘worldview’ and, as lived daily in their embodied experiences;
their individual and collective perceptions on how Bula Sautu (the ‘All Good Life’)
may be pursued and, as preserved in their ivalavala (cultured ways) vakaVanua,
vakaTuraga (of the Vanua, of the chiefly).
��
24��
1.3.7 Objectives of the Study
1. To investigate the essence of living bula-life as a tamata-person of Tubou-Lakeba
and, as one ‘carrying’ Mata-rep responsibilities of her/his Vanua vakaTuraga in
twenty-first century Fijian society.
2. To experience a ‘fresh touch’ of twenty-first century Tubou-Lakeba thought and
ivalavala (customary ways) by engaging with Tubou-Lakeba people living in the
veikoro-ni-cakacaka (urban ‘villages’) and, iVanua (on their island home), relate
that ‘experience’ to my collection of ‘living talanoa’ gathered over 40 years of
regular interaction, as a Vasu, with the people of Tubou-Lakeba especially my own
dear mother.
3. To represent Tubou-Lakeba thought as it pertains to their conceptualization of what
constitutes Bula Sautu, what they consider important indigenous knowledge (veika
bibi) and, how these may be pursued and attained.
4. To construct a theoretical basis upon which indigenous iTaukei systems may be
conceptually grounded, and understood, with the view of opening up dialogue
across knowledge communities, especially in academia.
1.3.8 Research Questions
1. What is the essence of the concept of vanua?
‘A cava beka ‘a uto ni vakasama ‘a “vanua”?
2. What is your understanding of sautu?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “sautu”?
3. What is your understanding of the concept of mata?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) kila me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “mata”?
4. What is your conceptualization of the notion of vuravura?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) rai me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “vuravura”?
5. What is your understanding of the idea of taukei?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “taukei”?
��
25��
1.3.9 Significance of the Study
The ultimate goal of this re-search is freedom – the freedom to define what Bula Sautu
(the ‘All Good Life’) must mean to the iTaukei, as tamata-individuals or mata-reps of
their mata-groups and, as a tamata-people. This research is a first attempt to “name”
what is argued here as the iTaukei mata system of knowing and conceiving knowledge.
The act of naming resonates with claiming and hence, the research is boldly claiming
that iTaukei have an established and valid way of constructing, preserving and sharing
knowledge. Furthermore, the study will argue that in having such an active-pragmatic
and open-flexible system of ‘theorizing’ and ‘testing’ of knowledge and ‘theories’, the
iTaukei have become pre-conditioned to thinking regionally (possibly globally) while
rooted locally. This will be represented as a capacity that needs to be developed and
utilized and, which may hold the key to helping Pacific peoples (individuals/groups)
realize their Mata (source-rep) potential within their respective cultural settings and, as
members of a global family.
This sautu (well being) driven thirst for ‘freedom’, while instrumental in shaping
iTaukei thought and practice, can also be used to explain their movement,
interconnectivity and general sense of stability. Defining sautu therefore necessitates
that the abstraction known as sau/mana (power/efficacy) is made ‘reachable’ enough to
become ‘believable’. Essentially, de-spiritualizing the sau/mana concept will transform
it into comprehensible and usable forms of knowledge that ordinary people can employ
in extraordinary ways. This research will therefore endeavour to deconstruct, if
temporarily, vanua grounded concepts, using a vuravura worldview that will be argued
as critical to understanding the twenty-first century iTaukei person, in terms of her/his
way of thinking and how s/he relates to people and places. This study is bound to
challenge and revolutionize iTaukei thought and, further inform western thinking and
attitude towards indigenous communities in general, especially the assumption that the
‘colonized’ are naïve and may have to continue to uncritically import foreign
ideologies, methods and systems.
��
26��
Free thinkers, unbounded by oppressive systems, are what academia and civil society
need. Returning to pre-civilization thought and practice can never be the goal of
epistemological encounters. Nonetheless, there is much to be drawn from what exists as
our current ivalavala-ways of knowing and being, much of which is constantly
changing while remaining rooted in tradition. What free thinking iTaukei can do for
their vanua is to re-search their rich heritage and, document their insider-views and
representations using the tools of modern science and, from the platform of academia.
This is essentially the space and place from which we can give voice to our ‘silent
keepers of tradition’. The findings of this research will therefore encourage free
thinking Pacific peoples to explore their own yalava (lit. fishing grounds and, meaning
‘home turf’), and find ancient ‘truths’ which may still be practical in their modern-day
life, and which are reflected in their talanoa-stories captured in their chants and
weavings, legends and farming practices, lullabies and marriage rituals. Furthermore, it
is assumed that such free thinkers of the modern vuravura-world will begin by
searching the depth of their own ‘souls’ to find that place of sautu (peace and order) that
can only ‘flow’ from within the individual/group ‘self’ and, outwardly to its vanua
extension.
1.4 Chapter Summary Relationships are foundational to knowledge sharing and building. The human person,
therefore, can never exist outside of some kind of social grouping. To refuse to belong
to a group is tantamount to being silenced and marginalized. The iTaukei will always
‘remember’, as long as vei (communalism/reciprocity) and mata (seeing/representation)
concepts exist in their language and dialects, that life or survival hinges on their group
existence and situated collective ways of knowing and being. This reality is true for the
people of Tubou-Lakeba as it is for every other iTaukei community. Though schooled
and churched, the iTaukei have remained keepers of ‘ancient’ traditions like their mata
(envoy) or diplomatic system of engaging inter-Vanua. While this engagement across
Vanua (named/claimed places) or peopled-places’ boundaries is mainly observable at
the ceremonial level, its significance extends towards every other aspect of Vanua
existence. This is what I consider a norm for a people bucini (conceived/planted) in a
��
27��
reality that embraces the notion of ‘space-sharing’ for a collective well being: living
together in the spaces-between (maliwa) for a peaceful coexistence.
An insider-researcher’s entry into a familiar knowledge-space, therefore, necessitates
that her/his socialized position on the situated meanings of place, space, time, the ‘self’,
the ‘significant other’ and representation is established at the outset. For the iTaukei, the
multiple nuanced meanings of these abstractions, as they are ‘hidden’ in their
worldview and implicitly expressed in their ‘taken-for-granted’ customs and
ceremonies, are there only for the taukei-native and ‘trained’ vulagi-outsider mata-eyes
to see. My privileged position, therefore, as vasu of (with maternal roots in) Tubou-
Lakeba meant that as a vulagi-taukei (a familiarized outsider), I was free to explore
their world and still keep my outsider-ness or distance. This cultured view worked well
with the postcolonial attitude adopted for this constructionist research project hence,
framing the entire re-search within a mata framework. Essentially, this framework
embodies the notion that veitalanoa-dialogue is absolutely vital in any real effort to
vakataukeitaki-familiarize a taukei-local and a vulagi-visitor converging at the
intersection of their related but largely diverse knowledge-spaces via a process of
“familiarization” grounded in a privileging system based in reciprocity.
As far as any real effort to engage in any kind of knowledge-sharing goes, participants
of any veitalanoa-dialogue are essentially open to conceptual change hence, a truly
progressive and fruitful manner of exchange and discourse. This is the place to be if one
is to free oneself and one’s own people from destabilizing and hegemonic forces in
society that work to keep people ignorant and disempowered. This knowledge-based
capacity to be effective, conceptualized here as the inherent sau or mana (power) to get
things done, is that which must be established in the introduction chapter of this thesis
construction before searching for a situated meaning of the sautu (the ‘All Good Life’)
concept, particularly when sautu signifies the presence (tu) of that sau (power). In
setting the tone for the chapters to follow, the aim, objectives and main research
questions are clearly articulated and presented as a way of opening up dialogue between
the researcher and the researched, the author and the authored, the ‘text’ and the
��
28��
‘context’. At the deeper and more philosophical level of engagement, the researcher is
in continuous dialogue also with the ‘silent keepers of tradition’, data collected from the
‘field’ work and literature. The next chapter therefore, will attempt to bring to the fore
what I call “the known”, scientifically established ‘truths’ privileged by researchers who
have researched and written about ideas, observations and theories that relate to and
inform my research project.
������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1Refer to Nabobo-Baba (2004, p. 17). 2Veiwekani will be used here in the richest possible sense implying all kinds of relationships – intra- and inter-personal, and ‘extra-’ – ‘extra-’ making reference to relationships between people and nature, and people and the ‘gods’ and ‘spirits’. Veiwekani is the basis upon which any form of exchange is facilitated and maintained. 3The iTaukei are the indigenous people of the Fiji group of islands. They were ‘traditionally’ known as Fijians (a colonial construct). Alternatively they have been referred to as ‘kaiViti’, a concept, as I will argue later, open to interpretation. 4Talanoa (noun) are basically stories. They were traditionally (and still are) told or sung and, in this generation, written. Talanoa, as stories, are epistemological tools. As a verb, talanoa is engaged in to connect with people and share knowledge. Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 27) writes “talanoa refers to a process in which two or more people talk together, or in which one person tells a story to an audience of people who are largely listeners”. 5Engagement: as in “situated engagement” defined by “conversing, interacting, thinking [and] doing” (Howitt & Suchet-Pearson, p. 2001). 6Veivakataukeitaki, rooted in the ‘taukei’ (being familiar) concept, speaks of a relationship between two ‘unequals’ – conceptualized by the iTaukei as a dialogic engagement between one taukei (native/local) and, another, vulagi (visitor/foreigner), to place; ‘unequals’ in terms of how much of one’s own position is known to oneself or the other. 7Vanua, according to Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. x), is an “inclusive term [which] embraces a people, their chief, their defined territory, their waterways or fishing grounds, their environment, their spirituality, their history, epistemology and culture. 8A Mata is basically one who is speaking on behalf of another or an organization (including the Vanua). They are always very articulate and full of relevant knowledge. They are individuals/groups, usually members of the matanivanua clans (Huffer & Qalo, 2004, pp. 95, 96), naturally gifted with people skills and, usually very convincing when they represent/present a case. Mata, traditionally, were spokespeople of/for chiefs. In contemporary iTaukei-Fijian society, Mata potential is seen as something every iTaukei male (and ideally, female) must develop – for to ‘enter’ another Vanua, the individual must prove herself/himself capable of presenting her/his isevusevu (introduction protocol) and, similarly, receive any ‘introduction’ offered (in terms of yaqona/kava) by the hosting Vanua. Another interesting parallel phenomenon is that of Turaga (the ‘chief’). In iTaukei society, every member is Turaga of her/his domain and, when people visit with them, and the isevusevu is offered, the head of the family (sometimes a woman, in the absence of a man) gets to receive the ‘gift’, whether it be yaqona (kava roots/mixture), tabua (whales teeth) and/or other ‘valuables’. Because every iTaukei is expected to ‘sit in’ or ‘perform’ as Mata or Turaga when the situation warrants it, the Vanua (place/people) koViti can be seen as a “chiefly place/people” for they ‘know’ how to ‘behave’ as representatives of the Vanua – whether as Turaga (the head/brain-face) or, her/his Mata (the eye/ear-mouthpiece). This exchange or gifting, based
��
29��
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������in veivakaturagataki (mutual esteeming of the other), does not necessarily require that the encounter be ‘performed’ on Vanua soil hence, whether they are in another part of Fiji or, Auckland-New Zealand, the customary practice goes. 9Veitalanoa (two-way communication) is not to be confused with the usually monologic talanoa associated with story-telling. Veitalanoa is a serious discussion involving free thinkers but, is still controlled and focused. Because of the formal setting and, usually the presence of the ‘elders’/chiefs and ‘experts’, especially in veitalanoa involving a mata-group or community, ‘speeches’ are often reserved for those holding speaking rights. But for a veitalanoa involving at least two mature people and, ideally, less than ten consenting and concerned adults, the forum is usually open and facilitating. 10 The island of Lakeba has eight villages. Tubou is where the highest ranking chief – the Tui Nayau, the Sau – and his yavusa (a large group of people consisting of smaller units, sharing a common ancestor) reside. Because of the internal differences which exist between the eight villages of this one island, given their varied talanoa of origin, this research will focus on Tubou, hence my use of the conception Tubou-Lakeba. At another level, providing a kind of backdrop to this talanoa thesis construction, and constantly hanging in the horizon, is the knowing that Lakeba may have been known as Tubou prior to European contact (Reid, 1990, p. 5). 11Capitalized Vanua is used here to refer specifically to ‘named places’: named in the sense that the people ‘territorially’ or ‘spiritually’ bounded to this place share a common iCavuti, the traditional names for which places and groups of peoples are known. Note that it is by these iCavuti names that peopled-places and/or placed-peoples are referred to in traditional ceremonies, and among traditional iTaukei even at the conversational level. The iCavuti name is not the same as the common ‘map-name’. 12 Particularly of “Remote Oceania” (D’arcy, 2006, p. 9) but, which I argue later, may be socio-culturally connected to Vanuatu. 13 It is possible for a cultural outsider to learn and keep learning the ways of the iTaukei. Similarly, indigenous peoples can learn and keep learning the ways of the ‘coloniser’. The extent to which one is ‘nativised’ depends much on her/his capacity to embrace change, particularly conceptual change. As long as her/his cultured biases exist and persist, such a person will remain ‘deafened’ and ‘deadened’ to certain manner of discourse of her/his host culture. Then again the question remains: ‘Is it worth it to totally ‘lose’ oneself in one’s attempt to completely ‘read’ and understand the Other, in research? 14Sau,in this context, is the title by which the highest ranked chief of Lakeba-Lau is referred to (usually in conjunction with the Tui Nayau title). As a concept, sau is one and the same thing as mana, the “power to effect” (Ravuvu, 1983, p. 86). 15According to Scarr (2008), lewe-niVanua means “people of the land, untitled people” (p. viii). In the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, only the Sau, the vanua installed Tui Nayau, is considered ‘titled’ hence, this definition may have been used to totally set the Sau apart as one sacred and, possibly, ‘detached’ from the Vanua. Herein, I will also argue that though ‘titled’, the Sau is also a lewe (flesh) of that one Vanua body – a possible alternative to Scarr’s definition, based on my ‘stand-point’ perspective as one native to my culture and language. 16Refer to Ravuvu (1987, p. 18, 19) for another reading on the esteemed vakaTuraga concept. 17Mata representative will be henceforth shortened to mata-rep. 181835: the year the first missionaries to Fiji set foot on Lakeba. 19Matanikupeti: this concept, rooted in the word kupeji (similar to Tongan kupesi) – Lauan (of Fiji) reference to prints/designs on their masi (bark cloth of Mulberry shrub) and, Fijian and Tongan ngatu – metaphorically refers to distant veiwekani vakadra (‘blood’ relatedness). In the Tongan culture also, there exists a parallel linking of mata (eye/face) to hohoko (genealogy) to “read the genealogical connections of people on the physical features of their faces” (M�hina, 2010, p. 176). 20Vei principles: the iTaukei unstated but sensible ‘rule’ of sharedness and reciprocity which stands (tu) today as the viable indigenous alternative to “individualism”.
��
30��
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������21Mata sense: will be argued further as the iTaukei “Knowing is Seeing” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 91) metaphorical basis of learning/reasoning through their mata (eye), matamata (mind) and kete (stomach/womb). 22Vasu: “relationship of a sister’s son [or daughter], conferring privileges” (Mara, 1997, p. 266). 23Note that ‘Toga’ and ‘Viti’ have been italicized because these are not name-forms that one would find in a modern-day map. 24 ‘Rara’, today, basically refers to play-grounds and parks. This research will argue for the significance of this indigenous concept to knowledge sharing, particularly that which leads to well being (sautu) on the part of the people engaged in genuine knowledge building exercises. 25 Note that the iTaukei traditionally ‘plant’ (bury) their dead on ancestral ground for a later ‘harvest’. This is why cremating their dead or letting them ‘drift’ into the sea are not believable options. 26Yaqona: better known as kava (possibly of Vanuatu origin), “used as a ceremonial and social beverage [and, derived from] cultivated shrub, Piper methysticum or Piperaceae” (Gatty, 2009, p. 320). 27 The kaiViti phenomenon will be briefly presented here as a viable alternative to the recently altered ‘Fijian’ conception now used in reference to all citizens of the Viti group today. Herein, the kaiViti conception is consciously constructed as part of my attempt to decolonize colonial ‘thinking’ that is evidently present in iTaukei discourses, particularly the assertion that the word ‘Fijian’ must be reserved for the iTaukei (the indigenous). To my understanding, the kaiViti and Fijian concepts mean one and the same thing – differing only in that while the former is locally situated and relatively ancient, the latter is rooted in Europe and was a recent introduction. Being a kaiViti basically implies that one comes from the place called Viti. The challenge remains, therefore, in whether or not the iTaukei can accept their rightful place as ‘taukei’ (the first-peoples), as opposed to others being ‘vulagi’ (recent immigrants), and everyone’s privileged positions (regardless of race) settled here as kaiViti. This argument is framed by the Vanua vakaTuraga framework which recognizes that the land/place Viti, being ‘ancient’, was first settled by the ancestors of the iTaukei who became vanua-people and, whose way of life is characterized by their tendency to privilege whatever is vulagi (strange or new, from outside or is foreign).
31��
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The reach of imperialism into ‘our heads’ challenges those who belong to colonized communities to understand how this occurred, partly because we perceive a need to decolonize our minds, to recover ourselves, to claim a space in which to develop a sense of authentic humanity. This analysis of imperialism has been referred to…as ‘post-colonial discourse’, the ‘empire writes back’ and/or ‘writing from the margins’.
Linda Tuhiwai Smith1
2.1 Introduction 2.1.1 The decolonization project – establishing a humanistic agenda
“Indigenous Pacific research [conducted by cultural insiders]…is based on a philosophy
of human nature” (Sanga, 2004, p. 42). According to Tuhiwai Smith (2004, p. 6), the
“institution of research as well as [its] epistemological foundations need to be
decolonized” hence, humanizing the research agenda and echoing Nabobo-Baba’s
assertion that “research and its methods may mean different things to different people”
(2004, p. 26). “To decolonize our minds, recover ourselves [and] claim a space in which
to develop a sense of authentic humanity” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 23), therefore, is
the “[real] humanistic and historical task [calling for] the [colonized] to liberate
themselves [as well as] their [colonizers]” (Freire, 1972, p. 21), particularly for those
placed in academia. Such noble intentions is bound to challenge the dominant
philosophical traditions of the West because human reason, or the mind which is
supposed to be decolonized, is now proven to be embodied hence, advancing the idea
that “[human thought is] shaped crucially by the peculiarities of our [culturally situated]
human bodies” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 3). Decolonizing the mind, therefore, must
begin with a philosophy of the mind that is true to the embodiment of the ‘philosopher’
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1999): the human person embodying ‘reason’ and the relative
positioning of her/his perceiving and knowing faculties within her/his socialized
habitation.
32��
Indigenous and Western “knowledge systems [have been found to be] largely
implicit…[and overlapping and diverging] in ways important to how knowledge is
learned and applied” (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005, p. 19). The two seemingly
irreconcilable systems are known to differ mainly in the cultures they espouse: the
former a “culture of application” and the latter, a “culture of rigour” (Scott, 2010, p.
76). Though the dominant Eurocentric notions of empiricism and rationality are situated
in the West, the fact that the two traditions “to some extent…feature in any discourse on
knowledge” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 21) suggest that the east-west or north-south
divides are nothing more than political tools of western domination. The systematic
marginalizing of indigenous knowledge systems, therefore, reflect “hegemonic views
[aimed] ultimately to confine [indigenous peoples]…physically, psychologically [and
philosophically]…in tiny spaces” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 39). This progressive development
in indigenous Pacific thought and research away from ‘intellectual confinement’ is a
parallel to what transpired in eighteenth century Europe. The mobilization of the
Enlightenment movement in Europe by its philosophers – “writers and critics
who…championed [a much needed] change and reform [of the old structure]” (Kagan,
Ozment & Turner, 1983) – provided an intellectual restlessness which worked to
challenge the status quo and transform society (p. 619). Humanity, therefore, as
originator of all “[‘scientific’] views about how the natural world can be examined and
understood” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 42), owes it to itself to study and articulate the
multiple ‘truths’ which exist simultaneously in their situated, relationship-based realities
hence, exposing this project’s humanistic agenda. Seeking de-hegemonization via
epistemic decolonization, therefore, is critically important particularly “if [it is nearly
impossible to] achieve political independence…in a rapidly globalizing world” (Gegeo,
2006, p. 4). Essentially, this development opens up the notion of epistemology...as if in
a post-modern deconstruction (Burik, 2006).
In a poetic representation of the enduring postmodern ‘native knowledge systems versus
western science’ dialogue, academic Helu Thaman (1999, p. 88) wrote:
33��
“your way objective analytic always doubting the truth…
…my way subjective
gut-feeling like always sure
of the truth…”
Such abstract statements of the seemingly antithetical attitude of indigenous knowledge
and methods towards modern science, reflecting our “[epistemic struggles]
over…imperialism…[and primarily] at the level of text and literature” (Tuhiwai Smith,
1999, p. 19), though strong, represent “silenced [and alternate narratives
and]…philosophies of knowledge which are [ideally] ecologically sound” (Nabobo-
Baba, 2004, p. 17). Constructing anew using a decolonizing framework, in essence, is
the way forward for insider-researchers who would dare to “name and represent [their]
thoughts and feelings, to speak for [themselves], and to create [their] own versions of
history” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 11). Essentially, this will result in the reclaiming of
‘lost’ grounds for validating the largely implicit primordial knowledge bases that have
shaped indigenous thought, practices and discourse in a modern world. This
development is critical because Pacific research, ultimately, aims at “centering our
concerns and worldviews [as indigenous peoples of the Pacific], and then coming to
know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own
purposes” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 39). Defining theory and research, therefore, as
‘explaining the known’ and ‘journeying towards the unknown’, respectively, will prove
critical to any constructionist research.
This research project, in essence, resounds Hau‘ofa’s conviction “that all social realities
are human creations…and that if we fail to construct our own realities other people will
do it for us” (2008, p. 60). The methodological approach chosen, however, is largely
philosophical because it “encourages a disciplined attitude and builds confidence and
34��
academic credibility…[hence, purposefully adopted] to educate and instruct Pacific
researchers” (Sanga, 2004, p. 49), beginning with myself. According to Nabobo-Baba
(2004), “decolonizing research methods is a way forward to reclaiming silenced
pasts…[and this can be pursued with the intention of including] the doing of research
and writing that privileges our knowledges, our philosophies of knowledge, and
methodologies that are more culturally inclusive” (pp. 26, 30). Furthermore, citing the
book Voices in a Seashell: Education, Culture and Identity, Nabobo-Baba reiterates that
“small cultures must be safeguarded for…they give the world other views on
knowledge, the world and epistemology” (2006, p. 8). In the “carving out of spaces for
native Pacific voices” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 9), this research project will attempt, by
implication and in a small way, to represent the struggle of many iTaukei-Fijian
university students striving to reclaim their education in an ongoing process of
decolonization (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 13). Herein, decolonization is perceived as a
pathway to sustainable indigenous education and research and, one which is hoped to
lead to bula sautu, the ‘all good life’, for all who would dare to move in that direction
towards self-determination.
2.1.2 The postcolonial2 attitude – redefining known bounds
Indigenous conceptualizations of time, space, the self, self-image and attitudes towards
others are critical in talking about indigenous Pacific research (Sanga, 2004, p. 43). For
instance, any postcolonial “reconstruction and analysis of historical processes…[using]
the notion of [time as being] spiral…connot[ing] both cyclic and lineal movements”
(Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 69), may help free us from the constant worry of having to survive
comfortably as a ‘traditional’ person in a ‘modern’ world. Time notions, therefore,
remain significant to our ability, as a people, to establish that “[we] have cultural
histories that are long, authentic, and material to the well being [or sautu] of [our]
people” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12). Most of our remembered histories, preserved in
the genealogies of our chiefs, have been our only points of reference “directing our
people’s thinking and memories” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 70). However, to recover and
reclaim most of our lost vanua memories – vanua being the living organism sustaining
the iTaukei identity, and bula sautu – “indigenous [Fijian] knowledge bases must
35��
be…understood and made nationally accessible [via] a great deal more theoretical and
action research into Pacific values and worldviews” (Huffer & Qalo, 2004, p. 109).
Such a move towards decolonization, according to Helu Thaman (2003), “is about
reclaiming indigenous Oceanic perspectives, knowledge and wisdom that have been
devalued or suppressed because they were or are not considered important or
worthwhile” (p. 2).
The question of what has been marginalized, therefore, as cited in Nabobo-Baba (2006),
comprises “ways of knowing, the content of traditional knowledge or custom, and how
that knowledge is theorized and constructed, encoded, and passed on to the next
generation” (p. 2). To address the injustice created when certain knowledge and grounds
of knowledge are given preeminence over others (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 13), the issue
of power and how it relates to knowledge is again revisited. This means that the noble
task of empowering the ‘weak’ with the knowledge of constructing ‘scientific truths’
via research (Keso, Lehtimäki & Pietiläinen, 2009, p. 66) has become the inevitable
pathway or attitude to be pursued by indigenous university students of this millennium.
Proponents of this view of research, essentially, see science as the “the questioning of
the current state of knowledge” (Biggs, 1994, p. 1). Though moral and civilized, true
indigenous scientific research must refrain from attempting to authorize certain
representations about indigenous peoples hence, avoiding the reproduction of particular
social relations of power (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith, 2004, p. 6). This postcolonial
perspective, in essence, will maintain that there is never going to be any final word on
what constitutes knowledge (Lee, 2010). This position embraces the notion that
“indigenous worldviews are good for the future of university studies” (Thaman, 2003,
p. 12) hence, deserve to exist alongside the scientific worldview as equals (Burik,
2006). Seeing indigenous and scientific worldviews as compatible, therefore, is
necessary given that like “epistemology, [or] any body of knowledge…[worldviews
are] situated, communal and dialogic human social construct[s]” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 2).
While this opens up dialogue between two seemingly opposing systems of thought, any
conscious act of centering marginalized knowledge and knowledge systems, however,
36��
must take into account academic Akanisi Kedrayate’s advice to researcher Unaisi
Nabobo-Baba:
“…speak carefully, select carefully how you say what you say…do not speak without thinking carefully…protect what you hear…sieve carefully from what you hear what the world should hear and what it should not…There are things that should only remain in your heart…not for all to hear. You will have the power and resolve to achieve what you want if you think through your mind and heart towards God.” (as cited in Nabobo- Baba, 2006, p. 1)
This vei-talanoa (two-way communication) between Nabobo-Baba and Kedrayate
reflect what must concern all Pacific researchers researching their own people: an
awareness of the “very serious problem [of] subjecting/subjugating [indigenous
epistemologies] to the disfiguring discursive practices of western scientism” (Gegeo,
2006, p. 2). It is worth noting, therefore, that this culture of rigour may continue to work
against any real effort to mainstream indigenous knowledge and, particularly if
indigenous researchers are not too careful with what comes out of their writings.
Herein lies the premise that “if we are forced to work within the academic setting and
all that [it] entails, we must work to upset [the] setting from within, with the aim of
making it broader” (Burik, 2006, p. 72). Working from within a community of
researchers therefore, more so that of indigenous researchers, can only help sharpen any
“researcher’s ability to identify [her/his] own blind spots [by] learning through
reflection, [or greater] reflexivity, [facilitated by] collegial processes” (Keso et al.,
2009, p. 68). One such approach towards ‘working from within’ indigenous
communities through the university comes in the form of culturally appropriate and
decolonized research methodologies espoused by Tuhiwai Smith (1999), Meyer (2001)
and Nabobo-Baba (2006). For iTaukei research, the Vanua Research Framework, or
VRF (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, pp. 135-137), articulates admirably well with the Mata
methodology intended for this research project. Constructionist approaches to research
such as these work “much like [the] building [of] a Samoan fale (house)…significan[t]
in itself, but…first and foremost [is] of use to the community it is designed for” (Huffer
& Qalo, 2004, p. 89). Like a two edged sword, culturally appropriate methods
37��
decolonize both research as a power-based institution and research as a worthwhile all-
inclusive human activity, freeing both the authorizer and the authored. In effect, this
initiative will take indigenous research through postmodernism’s idea of “the
[progressive] scientific enterprise” (as cited in Lee, 2010, p. 142), and beyond.
2.1.3 Indigenous epistemologies – a way forward
Indigenous epistemologies, and indeed philosophies, are quickly becoming the ultimate
pursuit of indigenous researchers and their non-indigenous friends because “knowing
how we ‘know’ and ‘do’ things…may help us solve some of the age-old problems
[associated with colonialism] which still haunt us” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 8). It is a fact that
“human practices (ie. what we do) and discourses (ie. what we state about things),
wherever they take place, are based on philosophies or abstract conceptualizations”
(Huffer, 2004). It has also been observed that “all human cultures, whether simple or
complex, agrarian or industrialized, have theories of knowledge of one kind or another”
(Gegeo, 2006, p. 2). Like light at the end of a tunnel, indigenous research into
indigenous epistemologies has opened up a space, within academia, for alternate and
once silenced knowledge, value and belief systems (Nabobo-Baba, 2004) hence,
creating a place for indigenous peoples to ground their search for who and what they are
in this world.
For an indigenous researcher setting out on an epistemological journey, an appreciation
of her/his indigeneity, and what counts as her/his people’s native epistemologies will
need to be articulated at the outset hence, making Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonizing
Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (1999) an excellent launching out
point. According to Gegeo and Watson-Gegeo (2001), “how [a people] construct
knowledge…[or, do] indigenous epistemology refers to [their] cultural group’s ways of
theorizing knowledge” (p. 55). A critical issue involving indigenous researchers
researching their own people, however, is “the constant need for reflexivity” (Tuhiwai
Smith, 1999, p. 137), or the “keeping [of] a sense of distance and critical praxis” (as
cited in Burik, 2006, p. 74). This particular insider-research into the ‘silenced’ pasts of
one’s mother’s people, therefore, will draw from Tuhiwai Smith’s list of Twenty-five
38��
Indigenous Projects (1999, pp. 142-161), and which consists of ‘claiming’, ‘naming’,
‘representing’ and ‘reframing’, amongst others. These decolonizing approaches,
therefore, will then become the primary tools used to establish a theoretical basis upon
which conceptual change may be pursued, and using “efficient mechanisms such
as…analogies and explanatory models, mental models, persuasive pedagogy,
collaborative reasoning and collaboration and reflection” (Lee, 2010, p. 143). This is,
therefore, what real epistemology is: “allow[ing]…a culture…some form of [self]-
criticism and critique of its own presuppositions on knowledge [and] some second order
thought about its own ideas (Burik, 2006, p. 74), the exact kind of intelligible
engagement Gegeo and Watson-Gegeo (2001) call “indigenous critical praxis” (p. 59).
Such a dialogic process, therefore, reflects one’s “ability to synthesize from a wider and
broader perspective…suggest[ing]…a need for open-mindedness” (Lee, 2010, p. 140).
This view, in essence, is consistent with what Burik (2006) discusses as
“Auseinandersetzung [or], con-frontation…[and which equates to] a keeping apart in
togetherness, or a thoughtful appropriation that leaves the other as it is in itself” (p. 70).
The same may be conceptualized as the non-assimilating change wrought over time via
continuous situated engagement, consciously interacting with multiple knowledges
through de-centered, as opposed to self-centered, thinking and doing (Howitt & Suchet-
Pearson, 2001). Epistemologically, this will result in greater connectedness in diversity.
Such a position highlights the fact that though “difference is primordial…[it] always
includes of necessity relationality to what is other” (Burik, 2006, p. 73) hence,
predetermining a lasting engagement between the west and indigenous peoples.
Essentially, the iTaukei conceptualize this sort of engagement to involve one ‘familiar
to place’ (taukei) and her/his privileged other, vulagi (unfamiliar) with place, according
to what Nabobo-Baba (2006) frames as the “taukei/vulagi dichotomy” (p. 44). This
universal truth of the existence of ‘othering difference’ is grounds for what has been
described as “the coexistence of multiple worldviews and knowledge systems…[and]
the learning processes that occur within and at [their] intersections” (Barnhardt &
Kawagley, 2005, p. 9). An indigenous Pacific person constantly place-switching within
and around these interactive spaces, alternately between the taukei (familiar ‘One’) and
39��
vulagi (unfamiliar ‘Other’) extremes, and as embodied in any cross-cultural
engagement, therefore, may be described as “[a] Pan-Pacific Person or, [an] Islander
who [is] predominantly [a] person of multiple worlds” (as cited in Vaai, 1999, p. 33).
Researchers (or learners), essentially, as ‘thinkers’ and ‘knowers’ at the center of
Auseinandersetzung (Burik, 2006, p. 70), have been positioned as both epistemologists
and metaphysicians. This attitude is derived from the understanding that while
‘thinking’ consists the epistemological process leading to comprehension, ‘knowing’ is
the metaphysical process ultimately leading to conceptual change (as cited in Cobern,
1993, p. 6). Arendt’s (1978) observation, therefore, of how epistemologically sound
arguments lacking metaphysical grounds are ultimately rendered ‘not believable’, by
some, is critical to an appreciation of how worldviews shape thinking and knowing, and
in turn, facilitates long term conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993). Herein, the
“reciprocity between conceptual change and knowledge building…[is established] as a
platform for [student researchers] to systematically change their naïve theories, and [in
a kind of postcolonial and] progressive discourse” (Lee, 2010, p. 148).
Indigenous epistemology as part of a knowledge building or transformative discourse,
therefore, is not merely for information sharing or presentation of ideas, given how it
may be used also to construct, refine and transform knowledge (as cited in Lee, 2010, p.
144). Theorizing knowledge, therefore, as an activity human beings naturally engage in
on a regular basis, “not in some ivory-tower sense but as part of our everyday capacity
to make sense of our experience” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 9), has now become an
essential element of the knowledge-validating work researchers and academics are
involved in. This has been the trend followed by western research to “extract and claim
ownership of [indigenous] ways of knowing, [their] imagery, the things [they] create
and produce and then simultaneously reject [them]…seek[ing] to deny [them] further
opportunities” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 1). For indigenous peoples to be able to self-
represent and be self-sufficient, therefore, in a competitive environment such as this,
there may be a need to consciously and unreservedly draw in “the three most important
institutions of thinking…culture, language and institutions of…knowledge” (Burik,
40��
2006, p. 73) to the center of all research activities, the university. Indigenous
epistemology, therefore, as an area of inquiry, is bound to impact on research
methodologies or, the “theor[ies] of knowledge and the interpretive framework[s] that
guide research” (as cited in Evening, 2004, p. 110) and, as a result, what is
‘scientifically’ found to constitute “knowledge…[and the] understanding of how [that]
knowledge comes about” (Burik, 2006, p. 74).
2.2 Grounding the Construction 2.2.1 Reconceptualizing Science, Empiricism and Rationality
Modern science, as the dominant system of representation, while claiming the universal
significance of its so called scientific method, has been questioned and challenged to
“consciously make room for indigenous knowledge systems” (as cited in Helu Thaman,
2003, p. 6, 7). As cited in Turnbull (1994), the “reconceptualization of science as an
assemblage of heterogeneous local practices means there is no ‘great divide’ between
modern science and other knowledge systems” (p. 131), a position which implies the
localness of knowledge. It is the West’s critical approach to itself, via its academic
settings and education systems (Burik, 2006, p. 69), nevertheless, which has made it
possible for alternate knowledge and knowledge systems to be scientifically
investigated and established as viable alternatives to the West’s known ‘truths’.
However, the fact that “knowledge systems…[as] products of changing cultural
contexts and evolving circumstances…[are] adaptive” (Ratuva, 2009, p. 153) has
opened up a space for continuous dialogue between the West and indigenous peoples’
epistemologies.
According to Tuhiwai Smith (1999), the modernist project via “imperialism and
colonialism…came to ‘see’, to ‘name’ and to ‘know’ indigenous communities” (p. 60)
and, in the process, to re-affirm the positional superiority of western knowledge over
those belonging to the “authentic, essentialist, deeply spiritual other” (pp. 72-74). This
imperialistic agenda was not to be fully realized given indigenous peoples’ lingering
“spiritual [connection] to the universe, the landscape [and]…[things] seen and unseen”
41��
(Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 74), ironically exposing and making known to indigenous
peoples the very ‘essence’ of western knowledge, and thought, that makes it
dehumanizing and oppressive. In this postcolonial construction of what essentially
belongs to the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba, an indigenous community of the Viti group of
islands, “different worldviews and alternative ways of coming to know, and of being,
which still endure within the [‘civilized’] indigenous world” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p.
74), will be acknowledged and employed. Ultimately, this will prove that, in the native
mind, only locally derived and adapted knowledge is practical knowledge.
According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), “the same neural and cognitive mechanisms
that allow us to perceive and move around also create our conceptual systems and
modes of reason” (p. 3) hence, indefinitely linking human perception, and our
sensorimotor capacities, to thought formation and ways of thinking and knowing. What
transpires then is a philosophy of the mind (and reason) limited to our embodiment and,
to cultural empiricism3 because “once we have learned a conceptual system, it is
neurally instantiated in our brains and we are not free to think just anything” (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1999, p. 4). This explains why certain indigenous researchers and academics
have continued to push for the idea of examining worldviews with the purpose of
establishing how indigenous peoples perceive the ‘mind’, ‘intellect’ or ‘reason’ to be
associated with thinking and knowing via the entrails and other parts of the body
(Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Nabobo-Baba, 2006).
The fact that “concepts such as the mind…virtue and morality are not in
themselves…biological parts of a human body” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48), has
opened up indigenous research into native epistemologies to greater participation,
multiple interpretations and a wider audience, including the many people groups readily
accepting embodied reason. Arendt (1978), for instance, assigned reason to thinking,
comprehension and epistemology, and the intellect to knowing, apprehension and
metaphysics (as cited in Cobern, 1993). Such a systematic and ‘believable’ way of
defining ideas, through research, legitimizes their use within specified knowledge
systems, locates them in established cultural settings, and ultimately ‘speaks’ on what
42��
must constitute a particular group’s reality (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48). This notion
supports the understanding that a people’s reality is shaped, ultimately, by “conceptual
systems [that] are not totally relative and…[which carry meaning] grounded in and
through our…shared embodiment” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 5). Though self-
centered and largely dependent on “perceptual and motor inference present in ‘lower’
animals” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 3), the human race, in its various occurrences of
‘situated-ness’, is still placed ‘higher’ than animals on a continuum of ‘thinking and
knowing abilities’. Such ‘higher’ abilities comprise what cognitive science terms as
‘cognitive’, and which includes “all aspects of thought and language, conscious or
unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 10). Our common embodiment and
humanity, therefore, explains why humanistic approaches to research, such as those
espoused by this particular research project, work and are easily adopted and adapted
cross-culturally.
The three major findings of cognitive science which stand to challenge postmodernism
thinking today (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999): the embodiment of the mind, the
inaccessibility of most of what we call ‘thought’, and the notion that abstract concepts
are largely metaphorical, provide the basic theoretical assumptions upon which this
inquiry is conducted. The understanding that “metaphorical thought is the principal tool
that makes philosophical insight possible” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 6) is, therefore,
critical for any deeper philosophical engagement with indigenous peoples, and with
respect to this research, the iTaukei. The use of homonymy, metaphor and polysemy to
make sense of a people’s epistemology is a well known accepted fact among social
scientists because it has been argued that “language provides…the structure of a
people’s cultural domains” (Feinberg, 1978, p. 128). In a metaphorical representation of
language itself, Taumoefolau (2004) writes: “language is like a container…[carrying]
the set of values and beliefs that makes us what we are as a people” (pp. 64, 65). This
insider-research into the iTaukei ‘knowing-system’ via their mata (representation)
discourse, therefore, will use the notion that “we know what a word means when we
know how to use it” (Svenonius, 2004, p. 577) to analyze both the fixed and variable
meanings of the words used within a mata discourse from the standpoint of a native
43��
‘consumer’ of the language. According to Hau‘ofa (2008), “local [researchers] should
have an advantage…[given that they have] a thorough knowledge and deep appreciation
of the nuances of their own languages” (p. 9) hence, situating the discourse within the
cultural context of its local producers.
In the book Philosophy in the Flesh – the Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western
Thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999), it is enlightening to note that based on the empirical
findings of the authors’ research, the faculty of the mind and our capacity to reason are
not at all what we have been made to believe. What transpires is a philosophy that
radically challenges western thought. According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), “the
mind is…embodied in such a way that our conceptual systems draw largely upon the
commonalities of our bodies and of the environments we live in” (p. 5). On the same
note, Lee (2010) writes: “cognition should be considered in its natural habitat, social
and cultural, without denying the influence of internal mental representations” (p. 137).
This view is supported by “the [understanding] that science is produced in place, [and
which] is hardly novel or metaphysically challenging” (Withers, 2009, p. 653).
Postmodernists like Heidegger and Derrida (as cited in Burik, 2006), on the other hand,
have proposed that philosophy, as metaphysics, is just one way of thinking hence,
calling for “change of thought…from the concept of philosophy to that of thinking or
from pure epistemology to locally influenced epistemologies” (p. 72). These arguments,
while having their own merits, indicate that Western and Pacific epistemologies,
essentially, will remain at a place where continuous dialogue via Auseinandersetzung
exists as a viable alternative to all kinds of cross-cultural engagement. The view that
science is ‘culturally-placed’, therefore, renders its epistemologies and methodologies
open to various interpretations of empiricism and rationality. Nevertheless, due to the
human-factor, or our common embodiment that is, there is bound to be a greater degree
of universality in thought and in thinking between diverse knowledge systems and
cultural groups.
44��
2.2.2 Situating the Construction in ‘Place’ and ‘Time’
Research has been argued as “an encounter between the West [or the human] and the
Other [or the flora and fauna, and sub-human]” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 8). This
narrow view, fueled by imperialism and carried by colonialism, was spread across the
globe, via modern science and its methods, privileging restrictive European
philosophies, ethics and worldview. In the West’s pursuit of the knowledge about the
‘Other’, its own assumptions were questioned and necessary steps have been taken, ever
since, to re-situate ‘scientific’ research, particularly that which involves Pacific cultures,
within a truly Oceanic perspective. Tuhiwai Smith’s representation of the research
agenda, conceptualized using the metaphor of ocean tides, and “situated within the
decolonization politics…[focusing] strategically on the goal of self-determination”
(1999, pp. 115,116), is one valid way of looking at how epistemic-independence may be
approached. According to Burik (2006), “upset[ting the] framework from within [the
research institution]…and showing the narrowness and one-sidedness of traditional
western epistemology” (p. 72) works. This is unlike “postmodernism’s…ahistorical
representation of social life as a continuing conflict between the colonizer and the
colonized [and which] denies Oceanic cultures a past without Europeans and their
colonizing activities” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12). Creating “that place” for indigenous
thinkers and researchers within academia, and in ways culturally appropriate, is a
positive development towards self-determination. This is particularly true given how
“humans cannot construct anything without being first in place…[hence, proving] that
place is primary to the construction of meaning and society” (as cited in Withers, 2009,
p. 642).
The search for ‘truth’ is a journey. Any search will take the seeker from place to place,
or around a “compartmentalized space” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 51) hence, through
space and time. Any research project searching for a situated Pacific ‘truth’, therefore,
must begin with the premise that “place [is] deeper than meaning and materiality,
something that could not be reduced to the social, the cultural or the natural” (as cited in
Withers, 2009, pp. 641, 642). This social constructionist approach to place, while
interested in the particularity of places, recognizes still that the culture of a peopled-
45��
place needs to be viewed as part of a broader system and not as uniquely isolated
(Withers, 2009, p. 643). For instance, though separated by miles of ocean water, Pacific
peoples, due to their shared “realities of living in [places within] an oceanic
environment, [still demonstrate and have] promulgated [an] openness to external
influences” (D’arcy, 2006, p. 2). Place, in this regard, is seen as the “situation [or the]
event [which contains] the [thinking] human being in it…[thinking as experience, that
is] or, the experience of thinking…[and which is, essentially] an experience with
language” (Burik, 2006, p. 74).
Any serious attempt to “understand…the relation between context, knowledge,
language and culture…[and as] one of the main frameworks from which Pacific
epistemologies work” (Burik, 2006, p. 74), in effect, must employ tools of “knowledge
representations…[which innovatively uses] both syntagmatic [and, to some extent],
paradigmatic relationships” (Svenonius, 2004, pp. 582, 583). To situate this research
project within what Geraghty (1994) calls “the Central Pacific region, [comprising Viti],
Rotuma…[Toga and Samoa]…[and] which [were] settled at about the same time…from
[Viti]” (pp. 59, 63), “[a] major determinant…of [linguistic] borrowing…morphology”
(p. 63) will be creatively used to analyze a string of concepts significant to this study.
As a constructionist research, the representation this research project will attempt to
offer will be carefully guided by the cautionary wisdom resounded by Hau‘ofa (2008):
“there are no final truths or falsehoods, only interpretations, temporary consensus, and
even impositions” (p. 61). The need to be able to correctly ‘read the context’ and
selectively ‘write the text’ has made it all the more necessary to employ decolonizing
research tools designed ultimately to liberate indigenous peoples hence, strengthen their
respective collective capacity to think and speak for themselves, and hopefully for
others.
Nabobo-Baba’s pioneering work, based on her Vugalei people’s way of knowing and
learning, for instance, is one such noble attempt to give voice to the silenced narratives
of one’s people, or “more specifically what [one’s own people believe] constitutes
important knowledge” (2004, p. 1). If not revealing, this iTaukei scholar’s innovation
46��
has been an inspiration. While “fanua/vanua/fonua [has been said to] denote the
land…[or a] cultural identity linked to land” (Vaai, 1999, p. 35), Nabobo-Baba’s (2006)
conceptualization of vanua as ‘place’ (p. 81), in framing iTaukei practice and discourse
(Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p.. 14), will contribute significantly to the development of a
dialogic body of iTaukei thought truly ‘grounded’ in ‘place’. Conceptualizing the vanua
to be ‘rooted’ in the past, the past being the “set of all places [‘made’] by human action
[and which should be read via ‘historical’] interpretation[s]” (as cited in Withers, 2009,
p. 648), would make an excellent platform from which the iTaukei worldview, and its
traditions, could be meaningfully related to and applied. Essentially, the construction of
a modern-day iTaukei identity rooted in the vanua-place concept may be understood
using academic Helu Thaman’s experience of creating a “philosophy…sourced from
different cultures and traditions…but rooted in [the] Tongan culture (2003, p. 2). In this
regard, “place [may be seen as] the raw material for the creative production of identity”
(as cited in Withers, 2009, p. 642), an identity that is created a posteriori.
Notions of time and space, due to our mobility and capacity to reason, are present in
every culture for “to exist is merely to be in [space] and [time]…both of which are
fundamental categories of reality” (M�hina, 2004, p. 89). The conception of lineal space
and time, for instance, is critical to the scientific project and research (Tuhiwai Smith,
1999) and, for the “reconstruction and analysis of historical processes” (Hau‘ofa, 2008,
p. 69). Even then, a lineal understanding of time is still consistent with indigenous
peoples’ notion of a circular time “tied to the regularity of seasons marked by natural
phenomena” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 67) in how both provide viable ways to make sense of
an existence that is always moving away from a ‘past’ and into a ‘future’. The ‘forward-
looking’ view of time presented here is quite contrary to what Hau‘ofa (2008) discusses
as “locating the past in front and ahead of us and the future behind, following after us”
(p. 66) because it maintains that our embodiment proves that we walk and see into what
is ahead and yet to come. It is in the ‘seeing mind’ (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 339),
nonetheless, that the past and the future re-member with us in our current reality. To
choose to forget the past, and not to hope for a better future, therefore, is suicidal and
will result in the dis-membering of my essential parts – the past, present and future. It is
47��
in our “struggle for self-determination [that remembering and envisioning prove
critical] to [the] rewriting and rerighting of [our] position in history” (Tuhiwai Smith,
1999, p. 28). Decolonized time and space thinking, therefore, helps us to put things in
perspective and create and reorganize ‘texts’ within a proper ‘context’ (Burik, 2006),
innovatively preserving the past and the present in our cultural repositories and creative
expressions as we journey into the future (Hereniko, 2000).
This talanoa construction is, therefore, grounded in the notion that “language [is] more
than just speech and writing…[and, that other] systems of symbolic
signification…[like] chants, dance, poetry [and] rituals…are equal to writing in the
conventional sense” (as cited in Burik, 2006, p. 72). This implies that it is now up to
“indigenous artists, writers, poets, film makers and others who attempt to express an
indigenous spirit, experience or worldview” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 151) to construct
true and fair representations of their realities. According to Nabobo-Baba (2004), there
is a need for “researchers [who] engage in verbal exchanges [or talanoa with
indigenous peoples]…[to commit to] the reading of [their]…silences as well” (p. 31).
Transferring the application of the concept of silence to non-conventional systems of
symbolic signification, therefore, re-presents silence as the ‘necessary break’ to life or
the ‘essential pauses’ in various forms of expressions, and which is indirectly
acknowledged in Tuhiwai Smith’s conception of “celebrating [the] survival [of our]
cultural and spiritual values and authenticity” (1999, p. 145). This talanoa, in essence,
“is a collection of individual stories, ever unfolding through the lives of the people who
share the life of [a placed] community [or mata-group]” (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith,
1999, p. 145).
2.2.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing – a System of Representation
Mata, as a noun, has been defined as the “official representative or spokes[person], [the]
ambassador [much like the iTaukei notion of a] matanivanua, or [the] traditional
spokes[person] for [a] chief” (Gatty, 2009, p. 157). The matanivanua, as
“mediator…sets in motion the principle of ‘relationship’ or relatedness…speaks and
listens, represents…[and] negotiates…[hence, presupposing that s/he] must know
48��
[her/]his vanua inside-out” (as cited in Huffer & Qalo, 2004, p. 95). Morphologically
analyzing the concept of matanivanua as ‘mata of a peopled-place’ or ‘representative of
a mata-group’, the iTaukei system of vanua (or place) representation, as it was observed
on Lakeba between 1840 and 1843, and appropriately described as diplomatic (as cited
in Reid, 1990), gives the impression of a necessary and instituted link to society. A
mata-rep, therefore, could be portrayed as the embodiment of the “views and opinions
of [the] indigenous communit[y]…[hence, depicting] the notion of representation as
[both] a political concept and…a form of voice and expression” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999,
p. 150). Mata representation, therefore, suggests a re-framing and re-defining of what
we know and how we know what we know in our struggle not to be “boxed and labeled
according to categories which we do not fit” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 153).
According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), the iTaukei conception of vanua as people, land and
place (pp. 78, 81) is what frames iTaukei thought (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 14) hence,
our systems of representation and of knowing. On the same note, Tuhiwai Smith (1999)
argues that “imperialism frames the indigenous experience” (p. 19). The Tubou-Lakeba
experience, therefore, can be summed up as an active engagement with ancient and
established vanua veiwekani (related places) reaching as far east as Toga and Samoa,
and especially among neighbouring eastern Viti chiefdoms (Reid, 1990), and well
before European and Asian ‘occupation’. Reframing iTaukei thought, from one defined
by all expressions of imperialism, ‘regional’ or otherwise, to a kind of postcolonial
freethinking spirit, maybe achieved therefore, according to Tuhiwai Smith (1999), via
the decolonization project. Essentially, a truly decolonized frame of mind “draws upon
a notion of authenticity…[from] a time before colonization [however that is defined] in
which we were intact as indigenous peoples…[and, attempts to claim ownership of the
historical analysis of our] colonized time” (p. 24).
The iTaukei envoy (mata) system and all it entails, therefore, embodies what counts as
authentic iTaukei philosophy, knowledge and practice of a peopled-place or placed-
people (vanua) representation. Rhetorical exchanges between vanua mata
(representatives of ‘places’) observed as “ceremonial ethic and procedures” (Ravuvu,
49��
1987, p. 2), for instance, make up a significant part of the ‘readable narratives’ available
for ethnographic readings of the iTaukei ways of knowing and being. The subtleties of
these wholesome ceremonial exchanges, nonetheless, is what only native speakers and
hearers of the indigenous vocabulary and symbolism can appreciate, hence correctly
and fairly represent. According to Fanon (1990), indigenous scholars researching from
among, and for, their own must progress through three critical phases of their research
journey in order to become effective social-changers: assimilate into the occupying
culture, disturb the hegemony from within and, produce a revolutionary and national
literature (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 70). Insider-researchers, therefore, may
be conceptualized by the iTaukei as mata-eyes and mata-reps of two worlds: the Vanua
ko Viti (the land and the people) and the vanua-place (institution) of research.
Essentially, their effectual use of decolonized methodologies works to bring from the
margin situated meanings constructed by the Vanua ko Viti, knowledge that can be used
to stir up change and reform, and which may be represented legitimately using
‘scientific methods’ of representation.
The study of the iTaukei people’s system of representation, therefore, is an inquiry into
what they conceptualize as “ivakarau [or ivalavala] vakaVanua (culture) [and which
has been defined as] life as it is lived on a day-to-day basis – custom and culture and
epistemology” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 72). According to Kwara’ae epistemology,
“anything born of the land and passed from generation to generation is part of [their all-
embracing concept] kastom” (Gegeo & Watson-Gegeo, 2001, p. 59). Similarly, from
iTaukei perspective, “indigenous knowledge stems from the more universal concept of
vanua [land or place]” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 73). Custom and culture, and indigenous
epistemology, being born of the vanua and orally transmitted from generation to
generation, and continuously represented as important vanua knowledge, remain the
critical factor which differentiates the vanua ‘ordained’ dau-experts from the novices,
or that which sets the tamata kila ka (knowledgeable persons), vuku (intelligent) and
yalomatua (wise) apart from the ujiriva (ignorant/foolish). According to Nabobo-Baba,
“yalomatua…[being] the appropriate application of knowledge to gain a desirable
quality of life” (2006, p. 75) is “the epitome of all knowledge categories” (2010, p. 14).
50��
An indigenous researcher, therefore, in representing her/his vanua (place) – as mata-ni
(eye/face of) or mata-ki (representative to) – must desire yalomatua (wisdom) more
than s/he seeks kila ka (just ‘gaining’ knowledge) in order to do justice to her/his vanua
role, hence correctly represent the ‘truth’ of her/his lived reality.
2.2.4 Indigenous Worldview – a basis for authentic ‘Decolonization of the Mind’
According to Arendt (1978), a learner’s worldview influences her/his thinking and
knowing abilities hence, her/his capacity to engage in meaningful and believable
learning, particularly that which results in conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993).
At a more practical level, Huffer (2004) argues that worldviews, inextricably tied to
value and belief systems, determine choices we make and shape our action and speech.
Based on a study by Bereiter and Scardamalia, it has been established that because “the
nature of knowledge [is] strongly related to measures of knowledge
building…[researchers/learners] need to understand that knowledge is subject to
inquiry, examination and improvement” (as cited in Lee 2010, p. 145). In this view, it
will be argued that what a people believes and values, in terms of what they hold to
constitute important knowledge, and their situated ‘theories’ of knowledge, have a
direct bearing on their capacity to engage in knowledge building activities, and vice-
versa. Herein lies the premise that because worldview impacts on conceptual change,
and conceptual change on knowledge building, worldview must be the ever important
underlying but adaptable body of knowledge that could lead to a true and lasting
decolonization of indigenous minds. For the iTaukei, therefore, decolonization could
begin with an appreciation of how “epistemology is governed by [their] worldview and
framed by the vanua” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 14).
In describing the scientific worldview upon which our modern civilization is grounded,
Huffer (2004) has this to say:
51��
“…man is a rational, thinking person who is free and autonomous, unbeholden to God, to the ancestors, to tradition or to the environment and who can therefore act upon the world and the environment scientifically, whose relationships with others can be essentially contractual rather than organic, and…this is [believed to be] applicable universally…”
Clearly, such a worldview is opposed to the indigenous experience. According to
indigenous worldview, we ‘think’ and ‘know’ through our entrails or, as we say, with
‘gut feeling’ and, intuitively, or with instinct (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48). The same
idea has been further developed by Nabobo-Baba (2006) in her claim that her people
“[see also] with the heart, soul and stomach [arguing that] how people view the world
influences their beliefs and philosophies as well as the nature of their knowledge and
their way of knowing” (p. 37). According to Ravuvu (1987), our indigenous worldview
is reflected in our traditional ceremonies, much of which “use presentational
symbolism, [true also for music, art and poetry]…[which] cannot be encapsulated in a
word or phrase” (Svenonius, 2004, p. 581) – often always performed and presented with
passion and a kind of spirituality. A scientific understanding of how the human ‘mind’
works, therefore, pertaining to how it constructs, views and uses our worldview, may
help illuminate further discussion in this matter and, as it will be argued, may ease our
transition from ‘colonization’ through ‘decolonization’ to self-determination (Tuhiwai
Smith, 2006).
According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), Locke’s ontology, or metaphysics of the
mind, derived from what they call “conceptual metaphors and folk theories of mind”, is
key to understanding cognition and how we make sense of the objective external reality
(p. 335). Further informed by the cognitive science’s empirically sound discovery of the
embodiment of ‘mind’ and the abstractness of metaphorical thought, Lakoff and
Johnson (1999) have set the stage for a “thorough rethinking of…Anglo-American
analytic philosophy and postmodernist philosophy” (p. 2). This research project,
therefore, will employ philosophical reflection, phenomenological analysis and the
understanding that “all of our knowledge and beliefs are framed in terms of a
conceptual system that resides mostly in the cognitive unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson,
52��
1999, pp. 11, 13), to give voice to our taken-for-granted view of our world and who we
are in it. Essentially, this research will assert that “while modern global technology
allows us to be detached from the earth and from people, indigenous wisdom…[and
knowledge] about the connectedness and interrelatedness of all things and all people”
(Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12), will continue to influence indigenous thought and practice.
The decolonization of the indigenous mind, therefore, is about reclaiming our right to
articulate what we think and know and believe – the epistemological and ontological
bases of our very existence which show up daily in our ‘utterances’ and ‘silences’,
conscious or unconscious, and in metaphors we live by (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999).
2.2.5 The ‘Mind’, Thought and Metaphors – Seeing, Knowing and Knowledge
Embodied cognition, or locating the ‘mind’ internally, is a scientifically proven fact.
The cognitive unconscious, and which exists in the realm of thought only, constitutes
ninety-five percent of all thought and includes all our automatic cognitive operations
and implicit knowledge. Lakoff and Johnson (1999), in theorizing how the ‘mind’ or
reason is embodied, argue that the workings of the cognitive unconscious are evident in
our conscious thought, speeches and actions, and especially “how we automatically and
unconsciously comprehend what we experience” (p. 13). Evidently, the particularities
of our experiences can be attributed to primordial and naturalized differences which
culturally set the taukei (native) ‘One’ apart from the vulagi (stranger) ‘Other’ hence,
differentiating what each considers to be important knowledge, and epistemological
bases of perceiving and knowing. Nonetheless, due to our common embodiment, it has
been found that our conceptual systems are not totally relative thus, grounding a kind of
universal meaning in and through our bodies (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 5). In light of
this, it could be argued, therefore, that our common embodiment is good ground for
studying and appreciating cultures, and especially how their constructed place-based
tendencies actually make provision for cross-cultural dialogue and engagements.
The very possible notion of a personified faculty of understanding which can view idea-
objects within an internal viewing space, and which presupposes the Knowing Is Seeing
metaphor, is nearly definitive of how we think about the mind (Lakoff & Johnson,
53��
1999, p. 339). In assuming the universality of this conceptual metaphor, it could be
further argued that any culture thoroughly engrossed with seeing, sight and eye
metaphors, like that of the iTaukei, is one such site given to the ancient art of ‘critical
theorizing’. This capacity to be self-critical and yet constructive, therefore, presupposes
a self-sustaining philosophy that provides realistic guidance to people at the personal,
communal and global levels (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, pp. 340-342). The assertion that
“philosophical theories are attempts to refine, extend, clarify, and make consistent
certain common metaphors and folk theories shared within a culture” (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1999, p. 340) is therefore ground for critically analyzing, understanding and
appreciating the cultures these conceptual and imaginative resources emerge in. As
shown by their study and analysis, employing the cognitive science’s theory of
conceptual metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson (1999) found that “the metaphors that
shaped the metaphysical and epistemological doctrines of the Greeks have guided
philosophical and scientific thinking ever since” (p. 344), reading and representing
philosophical thought via metaphors, and vice-versa.
Cognitive science’s conception of the cognitive unconscious, as the hidden hand that
shapes conscious thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 12), now enlightens our
understanding of what it means to ‘know’, hence what it means to ‘see’. Making
meaning of such everyday experiences, therefore, relies on unconscious thought or, the
unconscious conceptual system that resides mostly in our cognitive unconscious (Lakoff
& Johnson, 1999, p. 13), the depths of which will always remain inaccessible to
conscious thought. This deeply seated body of thought, a metaphorical pool of mental
resources, is the well-spring that sources and sustains any deep thinking and knowing
necessary for a progressive conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993), and may be
understood by studying the dialogic, situated and adaptable views of the world
individuals and communities hold. These cultural and social abstractions, according to
Helu Thaman (2003) therefore, embody our sense of self in the world. Essentially, how
a view is constructed and the foundational knowledge upon which it is grounded remain
rooted, metaphorically, in the cognitive unconscious of individuals who have culturally
“learned a conceptual system…and [who] are not free to think just anything” (Lakoff &
54��
Johnson, 1999, p. 5). This research project in articulating certain aspects of Tubou-
Lakeba ways of knowing and being, is thus grounded in the confidence that “what is
more important than what alternatives indigenous peoples offer the world is what
alternatives indigenous peoples offer each other” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 105). How
the people of Tubou-Lakeba see (perceive) and know (conceptualize) their world,
therefore, is foundational to the epistemological claim which they make: ‘Au raica ga
au kila!’ (‘I see [only] I know!’), the believable experience-based ‘truth’ proving how
epistemology is supported by metaphysical claims (Cobern, 1993).
2.3 Developing the Framework Any interpretive framework developed around a truly indigenous Pacific research
model cannot overlook the significance of the mana concept, and which is essentially
the “supernatural power associated with creativity and excellence” (Vaai, 1999, p. 28).
This timeless Oceanic concept, alternatively understood by most iTaukei of eastern Viti
as sau (Ravuvu, 1983, p. 86), the capitalized form of which, Sau, is used in reference to
the embodiment of the mana/sau of the Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place), himself the
highest ranking chief of the Vanua (Reid, 1990), embodies the very essence of
productivity. According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), “mana…the [force or spiritual] power
with which most things in the vanua are said to have life” (p. 49), has its origin in Bulu
(the underworld) and Lagi (the heavens), citing Tuwere (1992). Both these places, while
significant to iTaukei spirituality, are essential parts of their Vuravura, the “secular
world of people, plants, water, animals and spirits” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 38) and
which Ravuvu (1988) describes as the spiritual and mana sourcing dimension of what
the iTaukei conceptualize as the vanua (p. 6). Consider the diagrammatic representation
(Figure 1) below of what the iTaukei conceptualize as an all-generative vuravura-world,
and which ideally places mata-reps at the centre of her/his Vanua, native or otherwise.
Note that this vuravura-world concept consists both the Vanua taukei of one native to
place and the Vanua tani of her/his guest. What Nabobo-Baba (2006) conceptualizes as
the “theoretical [vanua] whole that embraces all people and their relationships...” (pp.
77, 78), therefore, has become the basis by which the opposite but complementary
vuravura-worlds of one taukei-familiar (with the Vanua taukei of the native) and
55��
another, vulagi-unfamiliar (with Vanua taukei, hence coming from Vanua tani), may be
viewed, analyzed and represented:
Figure 1 Vuravura-world View (from the ‘standpoint’ of one tau-kei or “yoked-with” place)
According to the iTaukei Vuravura-world view, and which is shaped by one’s sense of
‘vanua-place’, knowledge comes from and is established by how one perceives and
experiences reality. While there is abundant vanua knowledge [concerning] good and
bad spirits…and spiritually charged places and activities (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, pp. 45-
49), there remains the concept of vakamanamanataki, rooted in the mana concept and,
implying an agreeing in the spirit/heart/mind for a manifestation of what is ‘believed’ to
be the inherent mana of a thing or a person. Vakamanamana, in essence, is a yearning
or longing for the demonstration of a sacred mana-power belonging to a vanua people
or knowledge hence, asserting their place(s) in nature, society and in the mind. The
existence of a spiritual dimension, therefore, engaging the present vanua with the vanua
of the ancestors to ‘see’ into the imminent future (Ravuvu, 1988, p. 6), is something
most iTaukei would testify to. Coexisting with mana in the indigenous ‘mind’ also is
the equally significant and spiritualized tabu (tapu/taboo) concept, and which dictates
rules of engagement between the ‘sacred’ and the ‘secular’. According to Vaai (1999),
tabu are “conventions…laid down as a guide to interaction and appropriate behavior”
(Vaai, 1999, p. 46), the observance of which works to make more believable the
�� � � Physical dimension Socio-cultural dimension of Vanua Taukei of Vanua Taukei Vanua ‘Land’ of kaiViti [the native] Mata Vanua Tani (Lagi) Place ‘Other Lands’ of the kaiTani [the vulagi, ‘visitor’ or stranger]
� Physical Spiritual dimension � Socio-cultural of Vanua Taukei
� Spiritual Veivakataukeitaki (Familiarization) [for Tiko Veisaututaki or ‘Living together for Peace’]
56��
realness of an essential vanua mana, or vanua sau.4 Centering the mana and tabu
concepts in academic discourse, though far-fetched, is still characteristic of the post-
colonial or anti-colonial attitude correctly labeled as “researching back…[and which]
involve[s] a ‘knowing-ness of the colonizer’ and a recovery of ourselves, an analysis of
colonialism, and a struggle for self-determination” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 7). Re-
thinking mana/sau as ‘knowledge-based power’ and tabu as ‘social distance’, therefore,
gives the view of a kind of power (influence) that is gained by keeping relational
distances.
Functioning as a belief system shaping the iTaukei ‘mind’, thought and practice,
therefore, “traditional ceremonies continue to exist as a model…promoting and
sustaining human life, maintaining peace and achieving prosperity…[defining] the life,
peace and prosperity [concepts]…in a uniquely [iTaukei] way” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. vii).
Following the pronouncement of ‘Mana!’ (‘Be it done!), traditional ceremonies are
summed up thus: ‘Ei Dina! (‘May it truly be!’)…Amudo! Mudo!’ (with variations and
coupled with the cobo, a rhythmic clapping of cupped hands held at ninety degrees to
each other, and signifying Vanua acceptance) (Ravuvu, 1987; Williams, 1858). These
traditional exchanges, made by eloquent Mata (eyes/faces/reps of the Vanua) and
endorsed by the Turaga (embodiment of the mana/sau, the chiefly authority), are
always confirmed by the Vanua (people). In essence, these ivalavala vakaVanua
(customary practices of the land) vakaTuraga (of the chiefly) of the iTaukei function to
facilitate what Irwin (1989) describes as “[the] maritime culture of [a] people who…had
exchange [and knowledge] systems [covering] considerable distances” (as cited in
Nunn, 1998, p. 232). Herein, knowledgeable and articulate “Mata-ni-vanuas…through
[whom] the chiefs see the state of affairs” (Williams, 1858, pp. 26-28) are positioned at
the heart of veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) or “Auseinandersetzung (con-
frontation)” (Burik, 2006). Therein, they negotiate workable ‘trade’ agreements
between vanua veiwekani (related lands/peoples) in plenty and at war. Within this
Vanua vakaTuraga (otherwise, taukei-vulagi) framework, this research project will
attempt to locate what it calls the iTaukei mata system of knowing and, how that system
of representation works to bring about what the iTaukei conceptualize as sautu, the ‘All
57��
Good Life’. Represented here is a state of well-being which “cannot exist without
people, their relationships to each other and a balance with their protection and wise use
of the environment God gave them…the whole that is pivotal to [the iTaukei] Fijian
identity” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 22).
2.4 Chapter Summary Any social science research conducted by indigenous researchers among, and for, their
own communities can only do justice to that which they purport to do if the motivation
is humanistic and particularistic. Given how the West is strongly represented in
mainstream academia, indigenous researchers endeavouring to enter the university, and
the research institution, must “get in” though the gate of assimilation, intentionally “stir
it up” from within with indigenous ideas and, “give back” to their respective
communities via the production of an original and revolutionizing discourse. This, in
essence, calls for literatures that do not merely re-cycle or re-produce already ‘centered-
knowledge’, but stimulates the ‘mind’ with innovative representations and
reconstructions of ‘marginalized-knowledge’. What transpires, therefore, is a calculated
move to re-present one’s people and culture back to the West, asserting one’s
indigeneity and worldview, beliefs and values. This postcolonial attitude far surpasses
postmodernist motivations in that it moves beyond the typical ‘colonizer-colonized’
dialogue embodied by the latter to rename, reclaim and recover lost grounds. This
approach to research, in essence, is critical to the decolonization process colonized
peoples, and minds, must go through in their bid to reach self-determination.
In decolonizing the mind of the researcher, and the researched, decolonized
methodologies and established theories of the ‘mind’ and ‘thought’ provide a durable
framework to begin with. It has been found, for instance, that answers to philosophical
questions are largely metaphorical. In view of this, I have used a conceptual metaphor,
Knowing is Seeing, to seek to understand and explain an aspect of the iTaukei life or
reality: the abundance of mata metaphors and the existence of a workable mata-envoy
system of inter-Vanua engagement. My situated understandings of mata as eye(s),
face(s), front(s), representative(s), source(s) and grouping(s) have informed my insider-
58��
perspectives on what the iTaukei mata-envoy system truly embodies and perpetuates.
As such, this indigenous system of knowing is further projected as an exchange system
involving related peoples and places; a system of sharing and borrowing which has kept
a vanua-people infused with ‘raw’ intelligible ideas capable of generating greater good
for an oceanic people existing for millenniums in what I call an “all-generative Oceanic
space”. An appreciation of iTaukei ceremonies and customs, the ‘silent keepers’ of
iTaukei worldview, values and beliefs, helps position any insider-researcher of her/his
mother’s people at a philosophical place where s/he is able to draw from the riches
‘buried’ in her/his cognitive unconscious, the largely abstract and metaphorical ‘hidden
hand’ that shapes conscious thought. A clear understanding of the iTaukei worldview,
therefore, will help any future endeavour to seriously engage iTaukei learners
‘epistemologically’ and ‘metaphysically’ in what I call their “metaphorical existence”.
Engaging iTaukei learners experientially, and in their particularistic conditions of
‘situated-ness’ or ‘yoked-ness with place’, therefore, calls for a re-reading of their
vanua frame of thinking and knowing, the indigenous ‘base’ sourcing and supporting
their experienced notions of well-being, the ‘all good life’ (sautu) which have sustained
them for centuries and generations. To understand, and articulate, their
conceptualizations of ancient conceptions such as vanua (land/place/people), turaga
(chiefs/leaders), taukei (natives), vulagi (foreigners), vuravura (worlds), mata (sources)
and sautu (plenty), phenomenological inquiry would be fused with philosophical
reflection and metaphorical reasoning to ‘experience’ (think/ know/see/feel) particular
aspects of the iTaukei culture that would not have been observed otherwise. The
specifics of the methodological framework used to extract the particularistics of the
“metaphorical experiences” of iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba and, their understandings and
conceptualizations of concepts framed into the research questions, would be explicated
further, and in greater detail, in the ‘Methodology’ chapter following. This chapter,
therefore, has only opened up dialogue that will hope to despiritualize indigenous
conceptions like sau/mana and tabu (tapu/taboo), in addition to the ones highlighted
above, in an attempt to make ‘comprehensible’ and ‘believable’ conceptions embodied
59��
in the iTaukei worldview and, which will be scientifically represented in this talanoa-
construction.
������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Refer to Tuhiwai Smith (1999, p. 23). 2 Postcolonialism being the ‘antidote’ to the poison of imperialism and, as cited in Tuhiwai Smith (1999, p. 23), is a case of the empire writing back from the ‘edges’ and which is not quite anticolonial. 3 Cultural empiricism as conceived by Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 126) to involve “knowledge [which] is influenced by the mind, the heart and the soul”. 4 According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), “Tabu and mana signify the presence of God and spirits among people. All things that exist without tabu and mana are said to be ka wale (useless, common, of little impact, not profound)” (p. 59).
60 �
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
We must now all – I put it to you Oceanic people, Pacific academics and students alike – seriously consider ourselves as both producers and consumers of knowledge…[for] a consumption-led education elusively breeds educational, economic and political dependency. Dependency is itself an excellent tool of social control and effective instrument of political domination. Only in being both thinkers and doers can we – the people of the Moana Nui – liberate ourselves from the bondage of perpetual dependency, when we can fully realize our hugely common intellectual capacity and practical potential. ‘Okusitino M�hina1
3.1 Introduction Pacific or indigenous research framed by postcolonial thinking can only do justice to
that which they claim to do if they use research methods that are culturally appropriate
and qualitative in nature (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Sanga, 2004; Nabobo-Baba, 2004).
This is particularly so because for any research project grounded in the humanistic,
phenomenological tradition, quantification may be rendered inappropriate hence,
necessitating that ethnographic methods of inquiry and representation are employed in
order to guarantee the validity, the accuracy and trustworthiness of the data and research
findings (Bernard, 1995, pp. 16, 38).
This scientific inquiry into the way of life of iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba draws heavily
from Nabobo-Baba’s (2006) Vanua Research Framework or VRF (pp. 135-137), and
the four categories of knowledge she proposed: the vanua, lotu or spirituality, itovo
vakaVanua or custom, and veiwekani or kinship. The framework is further developed by
incorporating the notion of Vanua Mata (eyes, faces, sources, representatives or
communities of the Vanua), and as intrinsic to their worldview and ways of knowing
and being. The creative and liberal use of mata conceptions and concepts by the
iTaukei, collectively and individually, as conceived in the iTaukei ‘mind’ or ‘womb’,
testifies to the tu or ‘existence’ of an inherently humanistic tendency which vura or
61 �
‘emerge’ from their time-tried real life experience of ‘knowing by seeing’ via their
common embodiment.
3.2 Epistemological and Methodological Positions Epistemologically, this research is based on the premise that because abstract thought is
largely metaphorical, much of what we call philosophy and theorizing must be derived
from conceptual metaphors hence, suggesting that philosophical thinking is grounded in
embodied reason, a position thoroughly opposed to the dominant western conception of
rationality and empiricism (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999). As such, Lakoff and Johnson’s
(1999) ‘Knowing is Seeing’ metaphor, signifying a conceptualization based on
perception, or the idea of a viewing and thinking ‘mind’ influenced by the
distinctiveness of our embodiment (p. 339), will be further explored in light of how
iTaukei often believingly cite ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (meaning: ‘I see [only], I know’)
to validate how they know and what they claim to know. At face value, one is drawn to
think that this ‘seeing’ and/or ‘knowing’ involves only the use of the natural senses and
a ‘mind’ situated in the ‘head’, as Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) arguments seem to
suggest. This research project, in using the iTaukei experience, will argue that one’s
ability to ‘perceive’ and/or ‘conceptualize’ include also the use of what has been called
‘intuition’ and ‘instinct’, and a knowing that is situated in the ‘heart’, ‘stomach’ and/or
‘womb’ also; the whole body (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Nabobo-Baba, 2006). Herein is
suggested an embodied, and a holistic and genuinely humanistic approach to ‘seeing’
and ‘knowing’ that involves more than what the ‘seeing eye’ sees and the ‘knowing
mind’ can conceive. Evidently, what transpires is a new way of understanding
rationality and empiricism – a redefining of the bounds of epistemology, or philosophy,
a truly Philosophy in the Flesh (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999).
If knowing is seeing, then it would be safe to say that seeing leads to knowing, and that
knowing influences seeing. The natural conclusion would be that any entity with ‘eyes’
and a ‘mind’ has the capacity to perceive and to know. Humanity’s longstanding
experience with the use of its perceiving and conceptualizing instruments, naturally
occurring or otherwise, to survive in its changing physical and cultural landscapes, may
62 �
explain, in part, what can be termed as a “cultural syndrome” (Ananthanarayanan & St.
Clair, 2012). The iTaukei ‘fondness’ with the use of the mata concept to ‘name’2 some
very important institutions, for instance, the matanitu (government), mataniciva (a
metaphor for education or schooling), mataveitokani (a church-group fellowship) and
mataivalu (army)3, in essence, is one such cultural syndrome characteristic of the
iTaukei. Over time, these institutions developed standard procedures or methods, and
which became customs and traditions by which the iTaukei researcher, or even outsider-
researchers, may access specific categories of vanua knowledge through “participant-
observation”, or observing through practice, using the notion that ‘Keta vuli ga mai na
weta rai!’ (We merely learn from what we see!)4. Essentially, this research project will
advance the notion that the existence of what I call mata institutions, or mata places,
proves the point that to the iTaukei, seeing (hence, knowing) is as much a group activity
as it is an individual experience.
It follows, therefore, that cultural knowledge is conceptualized as something which is
socially constructed by individuals and within their cultural groupings, existing as
cultural syndromes and shaping their worldviews, and is transmissible across cultures,
as information, via the use of metaphors which build bridges to another culture’s
meaning (Ananthanarayanan & St. Clair, 2012). This research project, in essence, will
argue that metaphors – conceptual, ‘tired and old’ or novel – provide excellent
methodological directions to be followed by any inquiry focusing on cultural
knowledge, especially in the pursuit of cross-cultural engagement. Consider the model
below showing how the cultural gap between the iTaukei and the outsider-researcher,
and even the insider-visitor, a gap which often stands in the way of conducting balanced
and ethical scientific inquiries into the iTaukei culture may be bridged, and by applying
what I call the ‘Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge’:
63 �
Figure 2 The Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge
The above model represents what the iTaukei Mata (representatives) of one Vanua
vakaTuraga know full well about gaining access into another Vanua vakaTuraga, a
critical information which can be used to guide indigenous and Pacific research,
particularly among, and for, the iTaukei. The very real possibility of using this model in
cross-cultural engagements lies in the ‘vanua-mata’ relationship – vanua as peopled-
place, and mata as placed-people. This conception of Vanua (as named/claimed places)
suggests that the ‘environment’, or ‘place’, shapes the human in it, and vice-versa
hence, implying that the two are engaged in an eternal relationship and exist together to
bring out the best in each, realizing their potential as keeper of the other. Mata, on the
other hand, is conceptualized as a knowing and seeing community positioned as one
made up of ‘knowledgeable-experts’ whose articulate representations of the vanua (or
of ‘place’) not only reflect the people’s collective perspective but, also shape vanua
outlook or their worldview and what and how they know. Essentially, one enters the
vanua via the mata-mata (eye-eye) gate, or not at all. In entering, therefore, one is able
to truly raica (see), kila (know) and vakila (feel) for within the Vanua vakaTuraga
Mata-mata (Gate) [lit. Eye-Eye] via the Mata (eye/face/rep)- ni (of) Vanua and Turaga institutions Vanua vakaTuraga
[At the Abstract & Ceremonial Level]
[At the Socio-
Cultural Dimension]
vanua-land (territorial)
vanua-places (ancestral)
Placed-people
[At the Physical &
Spiritual Levels]
ANCIENT PLACE
EYES
MERGER INSTITUTION
Peopled-place
Placed-knower
�
institution (
practiced (m
all it takes to
This contin
learning, an
constitute a
to [one that
life’, therefo
the world a
Essentially,
will continu
me, this cha
come about
Figure 3
The totality
synchronize
conceptualiz
experience (
influencing
Herein is p
(constituting
me vala) – v
o ‘know’ is t
nuous lifelon
nd that which
‘knowing b
t involves] c
ore, one’s ev
around her/h
a constructi
ually inform
art summariz
for the enth
How real k
y of learnin
ed actions
zed as an ac
(perception
each other,
presented a t
g placed-peo
validating the
to ‘see’, real
ng process t
h follows po
by seeing’ th
coordinated
veryday exp
him, and how
ionist resear
her/his deci
zes how I p
husiastic lear
knowledge come
ng (vuli ka),
of ‘seeing
ctive engage
and concept
refining ‘th
truly experi
knowi(
knowing by raica (seeing)
64
ople), there
e situated cl
lly see that i
towards hig
ositive conc
hat “shift[s] f
actions” (K
perience con
w that exper
cher’s episte
sion making
erceive real
rner.
es about for the
, thus know
’, ‘feeling’
ement betwe
tualization) a
heories’ and
ence-based
ing by vakilafeeling)
knowvalata
are ivalaval
laim ‘Au rai
s.5
gher (concep
ceptual chang
from [just] a
Keso et al., 2
ntinues to inf
rience is con
emological a
g throughout
knowledge,
e enthusiastic le
wing (kila k
and ‘doin
een the head
and thought
d knowledge
approach to
wing by a (doing)
la (ways) o
ica ga, au k
ptual) and d
ge, can be c
a knowing m
2009, p. 56)
fluence her/
nceptualized
and methodo
t the research
, indigenous
earner
ka), and wh
ng’, reflect
d, the heart
(conscious a
e, and sharp
o learning a
of knowing t
kila!’ arguing
deeper (spir
conceptualiz
mind [concep
. In ‘doing
/his percepti
d, and vice-v
ological posi
h project, an
s or otherwi
hich involve
s what can
and the han
and unconsc
pening life s
and knowing
to be
g that
ritual)
zed to
ption]
bula-
on of
versa.
itions
nd for
se, to
es the
n be
nds –
cious)
skills.
g that
65 �
involves the person as a whole, and which uses the seven senses of a learner. According
to Pheloung and King (1992), these seven senses are sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch,
“the one that gives the brain messages from the joints, muscles and ligaments…[and
another which is] related to the pull of gravity, the response of our head to gravity and
movement in space” (Pheloung & King, 1992, pp. 26, 27).
3.2.1 Theorizing ‘Vanua vakaTuraga’ as a Research Framework
Vanua-lands have been given, traditionally, in the name of a marama (a woman of
noble birth from a placed-people group)6. Reconceptualizing the vanua/Vanua
conception as a marama-lady and, given that the word Turaga signifies both ‘chiefly’
and ‘manly’ essences (as opposed to mere tagane-maleness), a Vanua vakaTuraga can
be theorized, therefore, to consist of a relationship similar to that shared between a
productive ‘womb-man’ and a ‘chiefly’ or ‘manly’ person.7 This theory, at one level,
locates the vanua-land, a natural part of the vuravura-world that sources and supports
the iTaukei life, as something which can be cultivated or developed, by the people or
the ‘manly’, to produce bula sautu, a bula-living sautu-prosperity. The same theory, at
another level, positions vanua-people as potentially productive but, only in the hands of
the ‘chiefly’, those who are ‘traditionally installed’ as vanua leaders, to direct the
Vanua vakaTuraga in the pursuit of a bula sautu which is locally defined and produced.
It is when the Turaga, ‘manly-cultivators’ and ‘chiefly-leaders’, are restored to their
vanua positions and roles, “mov[ing] more or less in tune with ecology and the nature
of human relations” (Scarr, 2008, p. 13), and as ‘manly’ developers of the vanua-land
and/or ‘chiefly’ leaders of vanua-people, will the land and people continue to produce a
sustainable abundance. This theoretical framework is critical to this study because the
iTaukei mata system of representation, and which is proposed here to be a system of
knowing simplistically described as an envoy system (Reid, 1990, p. 15), can be further
theorized to have emerged over time only to connect and keep connecting a number of
distantly related Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places)8. These inter-Vanua engagements,
consequently, would have led to the emergence of a number of distinct ‘chiefly’ or
‘manly’ systems of leadership within the Central Pacific region alone.
66 �
Evidently, the relatively ancient Vanua and, the more recent Turaga institution, are seen
to be interacting here, the latter complementing the former (Hooper, 1996, p. 247),
particularly when both institutions emerged from within their vuravura-world, the
Turaga rooted in the Vanua. This view, therefore, places the Vanua institution as the
one older and wiser, relegating the Turaga to a subordinate position. Having such an
outlook is critical to this study for to understand the yalomatua (a wise spirit) concept,
an essential characteristic of everyone ‘selected’ to mata-niVanua (as in representative
of ‘place’ embodying mana/sau of that ‘place’) roles, requires a ‘deeper’ knowing of
the ancientness of ‘place’ (vanua) and the importance of ‘placed knowers’ (or mata-
reps). This assumption is foundational to my ‘selection’ as one worthy to represent both
the institution of indigenous and Pacific research, and the researched Tubou-Lakeba
community – as one grounded in the ‘knowing’ of the ancientness of the research
institution and the Vanua ko Tubou-Lakeba.9 To do justice to my ‘entrusted’ position as
mata-rep of these vanua-places of knowledge, therefore, greater reflexivity via ongoing
“researcher-material interaction” (Keso et al., 2009) will be engaged in and consciously
pursued.10
The Vanua vakaTuraga conception, as a Pacific research framework, essentially depicts
the islands and its settler communities as Vanua socially ordered and politically aligned
to a central chiefly/manly system of leadership that recognizes individual intelligence
and prowess. These communities, essentially, are largely communal, agriculture-based
and dependent on the sea to keep their connectedness with their own people, and other
related Vanua hence, consciously maintaining intra- and inter-Vanua engagement for
their collective good. This understanding may explain, in part, the appointment of
daring ‘seafarers’ to chiefly/manly titles by land-based peoples, in the past. In such
encounters, the exchange of artifacts, land, knowledge and even genetic material
became inevitable as the taukei (native) land ‘owning’ people and vulagi (peculiar
visitor[s]) ‘intermarried’ and lived together in the maliwa-spaces over many life-times
(or generations). From within these shared spaces emerged a reverence11 for the
mana/sau possessed by the ‘conqueror[s] of the deep’, the ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’ Turaga
persons/tribes.12 Note that though the Turaga (later migrations) were the more recent
67 �
‘conquerors’, the Vanua (earlier migrations) themselves braved the same oceanic
conditions. Essentially, the Vanua had become more land-based at the arrival of the
Turaga centuries later. It is in the Vanua or land-people’s sauvaki (service/worship) of
the Sau (chiefly-leader embodying the mana/sau of the land), the Turaga from a recent
migration considered not to be ‘of-the-land’, that privileging customs were conceived,
given birth to, believed in and nurtured by the merger Vanua vakaTuraga (lit. ‘Vanua
having Turaga’). Such a privileging system favouring the ‘manly’ and the ‘chiefly’ can
still be observed today in how ‘givers of the sau/mana’, the Vanua, continue to
‘worship’ the embodiment of the sau/mana that they themselves gave, the Sau (chief-
administrator). The widening ‘social distance’, between the ‘givers’ of the sau (power)
and its ‘takers’, created over time by this privileging system, is there for everyone to
‘see’, hidden in what I call the silent ‘participating-observers’ of tradition13.
In the Tubou-Lakeba context, the Vanua vakaTuraga model – an enduring ecology-
based relationship between the Vanua and the Turaga institutions, the ‘land-givers’ and
the ‘land-takers’, respectively – is clearly lived to this generation in how the yavusa
Vuanirewa/Turaga (of the chiefs, the ‘leaders’) and the yavusa Vanua (of the land-
people, the ‘led’)14 lead their daily lives. As a research framework, the Vanua
vakaTuraga conception speaks, essentially, of the ‘placed-ness’ or ‘situated-ness’ of
knowledge representation. This mata system of representation, constructed locally and
representing ‘place’, its human inhabitants and their knowledge, comprises ‘leaders’ or
‘experts’ and the ‘led’ or ‘practitioners’.15 The Vanua vakaTuraga, at another level,
demonstrates an enduring power-relation wherein power is ideally shared by the
‘electors’ (or ‘land-givers’) and the ‘elects’ (or ‘land-takers’) who are vakaunumi (made
to drink the installation cup). Essentially, the wai-ni-Vanua (referring to yaqona/kava)
presented by the Vanua at installations, and ‘authorizing’ the receiver to rule, is
nourished by a Vanua imagination older than their remembered pasts, but believably
rooted in their Vu-kalou, their ‘originators-turned-gods’. Approaching knowledge and
knowledge construction among iTaukei via a culturally appropriate framework that re-
conceptualizes ‘knowledge-places’ as more than just peopled-places privileging placed-
peoples, but also as a productive whole made up of two essential parts, the Vanua
68 �
(led/supporters) and the Turaga (leaders/protectors), is bound to encourage greater
participation in modern-day Viti given its humanistic, inclusive and culturally-sensitive
position.
3.2.2 Positioning the Mata-rep within the Framework
This approach to indigenous research sees the Vanua vakaTuraga as essentially two-
eyed: one of the ‘eyes’ being the mata-niVanua (eye of the Vanua [‘electors’]
institution), and the other, what I call the mata-niTuraga (eye of the Turaga [‘elected’]
institution). Essentially, for any ‘seeing-knowing’ (and doing) person, or group of
persons, two-eyedness is critical for keeping a right focus and, for making some real
progress – the one keeping an eye on the other. This is how the Vanua vakaTuraga
keeps a check on itself and what it constructs as important vanua knowledge.
Nonetheless, it is well noting that the mata-niVanua (eyes/reps of ‘place’) and mata-
niTuraga (eyes/reps of ‘the placed’), as roles or offices, may be ‘filled’ by the same
person, or group of persons. For the indigenous constructionist researcher, therefore,
these alternating roles would help make allowance for adequate reflexivity, as an
“insider-researcher”, positioning oneself within a knowledge (knowing/learning) system
either as mata-rep of the led (the researched/authored) or mata-rep of the leaders (the
research/authorizing institution) – all being lewe-niVanua (flesh/members of [the same]
Vanua whole), the situated human family. This understanding, in essence, re-positions
all social scientists studying human societies as “insider-researchers”: insiders as
‘members’ of the human race and outsiders as ‘members’ of the research institution.
Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei conception of a vuravura-world,
therefore, helps the insider-researcher further by giving her/him the opposite but
complementary spaces of taukei (local) and vulagi (visitor) – as one who is thoroughly
familiar with the ‘local’ but essentially positioned as an outsider. It is in following
protocol, at the traditional presentation of yaqona/kava for her/his isevusevu-
introductions to the Vanua upon arrival, to do ‘field-work’, that the insider-researcher
working among iTaukei declares her/his interests and loyalty both to the Vanua and the
academy hence, presenting herself/himself as a vulagi-taukei (visiting-native). While
69 �
working amongst her/his own people (even as a vasu [of maternal links, that is]), the
insider-researcher, whose isevusevu had been received and ‘blessed’ by the Vanua,
essentially by its mata-rep (of Vanua vakaTuraga, that is), and with the pronouncement
of the Mana! Ei dina! Amudo!, is accepted both as one taukei (who is of them) and a
vulagi (representing knowers from another place). The finality of declarations made at
traditional ceremonies, therefore, once the isevusevu is presented and received for
instance, is something true iTaukei, or one made taukei (familiar) by way of
veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), can truly appreciate and begin to make critical
research decisions upon.
This two-eyed Vanua-Turaga union, essentially, comprise generations of people rooted
in an ‘ancient vanua-place’. Place, in this regard, is the theoretical whole which
embraces a placed-people’s physical and social realities, and spirituality, dating back to
when they ‘planted’ their first ‘seed’ on vanua soil. Over time, this ‘place’ would have
grown into a stratified society whereby the highest and relatively younger branches,
though carrying the present and passing beauty of the whole, is vitally dependent upon
the life and strength of the ancient roots. This tree analogy of the Vanua vakaTuraga
implies that any present-day representation of the whole, once broken off the main body
of the Vanua, will prove incapable of surviving on its own. Nonetheless, the recent
emergence of newer branches serves to enlarge Vanua capacity by extending the reach
of the metaphorical tree into a ‘brighter’ future and ‘deepening’ the stretch of its roots
into a relatively unknown vanua past, simultaneously, in the present.
This analogy is particularly critical to this study given that in the Tubou-Lakeba
tradition, the leading clan, the yavusa Vuanirewa (‘land-takers’)16 from which the
highest ranking chief on the island today is appointed, came from a neighbouring
ancient chiefdom hence, is essentially a vulagi (‘stranger’) to the Vanua ko Lakeba. By
‘intermarrying’ with the yavusa Vanua (‘land-givers’) and in the consequent transfer of
‘land-rights’, the Vuanirewa were to be effectively ‘grafted’ into the original placed-
people of Lakeba. What exists, now, is a two-way mata system of vanua representation,
connecting people within (‘land-givers’) and without (‘land-takers’). This may be
70 �
theorized further to involve the merging of the “standpoint theory” (as cited in Gegeo,
2006) of the kaiVanua (a largely land-based people) or, as according to Hocart (1929),
the ‘landsmen’ (as cited in Hooper, 1996) and, what I call the “shifting horizon
perspective” of the kaiWai (a largely sea-based people):
Figure 4 Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei notion of a Vuravura-World [from ‘Standpoint’ of a local/native viewing her/his Vanua vakaTuraga from a distance, out at sea]
Lagi-the heavens [source of lagi-rain, and origin of vulagi-stranger] Perceived dome-shaped protective cover of the vuravura-world Mata-niVanua Mata-niTuraga [Eye/Face of Vanua] [Eye/Face of Turaga] Wai-Ocean/Sea Vunilagi-horizon [Vanua ‘Other’] [Root ofLagi] Vanua [‘land-givers’] Bulu [lit. ‘bury/cover’, otherwise
known as the ‘Underworld’]17
3.2.3 The ‘Shifting Horizon’ of Mata navigators On land, vanua-people, particularly the ‘landsmen’ (women included), literally shift
their horizon by moving up to a higher altitude and/or across the breadth of their island
home. Out at sea, eastern Viti navigators of the ancient waqa vakaViti (lit. ‘canoes of
Viti’), most of which sailed inter-island on wind-power, naturally shifted their horizon
as they glided across the ocean on their sea-worthy crafts. These canoes, representing
availability of raw materials, excellent craftsmanship, time-tried canoe technologies and
ancient navigation systems, were already a commodity connecting Viti, Toga and
Samoa decades before the central Pacific waters became swathed in vulagi-strangers,
the vu-maiLagi (‘gods from Lagi’). This lived reality, presumably, would have had an
impact on how Pacific peoples view their world, the nature of the self and how they
Turaga
‘land-takers’
71 �
relate to their world and to one another. Essentially, their situated understanding of
“[‘science’ as] knowledge of particular aspects of experience” (Biggs, 1994, p. 1), and
as ‘recorded’ in their oral traditions, would have been the essential “knowledge-base”
imbued with sau/mana that preserved them and their cultures in their various
occurrences of situated-ness. As dau-experts of specialized knowledge, Pacific peoples
demonstrated their collective need to remain connected and communal. This was a
lesson learned the hard way, out at sea, where cooperation with the mata-navigator and
‘crew’ was critically important for survival, for their collective bula sautu – a bula-life
demonstrating the existence (tu) of their individual and collective knowledge-based
sau/mana to get things done.
For the Mata navigator, therefore, the indigenous researcher that is, a shift in her/his
horizon, hence her/his viewing capacity would be made possible only with adequate
horizontal and/or vertical shifts – herein conceptualized as ‘domain-space’ and ‘range-
time’ specific, respectively – horizontally with regards to knowledge and relationships,
and vertically, pertaining to efficacy and progressiveness. The iTaukei dependence on
both the sea and land spaces, and their resources, coupled with the very real existence of
the kaiVanua-kaiWai (land-people - sea-people) dichotomy within Tubou-Lakeba
discourses, is evident in the presence of both land (vanua) and sea (wai) related
concepts, knowledge, views and values which have become ‘taken-for-granted’ as mere
linguistic features. This scientific inquiry, in essence, is based on the assumption that
though “homonymy, metaphor, polysemy, and unlabelled categories preclude a precise
congruence between linguistic labels…and conceptual categories…language [still
holds] our most substantial clues as to the structure of a people’s cultural domains”
(Feinberg, 1978, p. 128).
This research project, therefore, will employ what may be regarded as the ‘changing
standpoint of a constantly moving observer’ or, otherwise, a “shifting-horizon theory”
of knowing and learning. While this theory, in essence, predisposes oceanic peoples to
‘dot-connecting’, it limits the learner’s capacity/ability to her/his conception of her/his
vuravura-world. This means that the bigger one’s awareness of her/his vuravura-world,
72 �
the greater and broader the connectivity or network, and opportunities of sharing.
Essentially, the widening of one’s network of ‘traversed places’ translates to the
expansion of her/his knowledge-base hence, her/his ‘creative-power’ and productivity.
Key to the extension of one’s vuravura-world, therefore, is rootedness in an ancestral
place and, the ability to be constantly on the move locating new ‘lands’ and
‘possibilities’. This ‘shifting horizon theory’, when applied to the notion of knowledge-
sharing, gives the idea of a sharing that is not a one-off kind of thing but, one that
lingers on over time and through space. This may help explain why indigenous peoples
spread across the globe have maintained elements of their indigenous cultures, proving
their rooted-ness in an ancient place, despite their high mobility. The indigenous
researcher, therefore, who is constantly moving between knowledge places and spaces,
and across disciplinary boundaries, will quickly find herself/himself acquiring an
attitude that embraces a progressive discourse, always “maintain[ing] a tentative
attitude towards [one’s] understanding” (Lee, 2010, p. 145) – always conceiving,
always looking, always shifting.
3.3 Grounding the Methodology, the Interpretive Framework This research project is grounded, therefore, in the assumption that “knowledge is
relativist and inseparable from the context and the social realities” (Sanga, 2004, p. 45)
of the peoples or cultures being researched. This implies that the Tubou-Lakeba
metaphorical reality, and which I am persuaded I have been ‘naturally selected’ to
journey through since my conception in the womb of a lady from the Vanua ko Lakeba,
is what they have always made it out to be, rooted and routed, culturally established and
essentially inclusive. It is further assumed that such a situated-ness of knowledge
‘constructed’ within the Tubou-Lakeba vuravura-world, hence informed by their
worldview, can only be understood and appreciated experientially before any real
‘theorizing’ can be attempted or even contemplated. My connectedness to my mother’s
land and people, for instance, through the umbilical cord phenomenon18 and in the
formative years of developing my conceptual system in her Lakeba epistemologies, has
philosophically positioned me to research and represent her people compared to a
cultural outsider, or an untrained insider.
73 �
What transpires now is the need to develop and articulate a sound methodological
position. According to Sandra Harding (as cited in Evening, 2004), a research
methodology can be conceptualized as “the theory of knowledge and the interpretive
framework that guides a particular research project” (p. 110). This constructionist
research, therefore, draws from both rationalism and empiricism using known and
learned facts to theorize a priori and a posteriori, conceiving probable effects and
possible causes of the very real socio-cultural phenomenon hereby named as the iTaukei
mata system of representation, and knowing. Data collected will be analyzed
thematically to support or negate the assumption that such a system emerged and now
exists to facilitate all manner of exchange, intra- and inter-Vanua, for the attainment of
what the iTaukei conceptualize as a sustainable bula sautu (real prosperity). Drawing
from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, therefore, the vanua frame has been further developed,
theoretically, as Vanua vakaTuraga – the ‘productive place’ comprising the mata-iAdi
(womb)19 of the Vanua (‘led’), and ‘the chiefly’ or ‘the manly’ Turaga (‘leaders’).
3.3.1 Re-constructing Ethnography, the Ethnographer and her/his Methods
According to Ravuvu (1987, p. vii):
In analyzing [iTaukei] ceremonies, a number of key elements and issues came to light. These include social integration and cooperation, allocation of power and privilege, flexibility of ceremonial functions, security and protection, productivity, redistribution and equity, continuity of life and relationships, identity and inter-[Vanua] relations, use of time and resources, participation, and the need for transformation and superordination in life.
Concisely, what Ravuvu is saying is that any valid social science inquiry into the
iTaukei life, and culture, is all about engaging with and experiencing the ceremonial. In
other words, this ambitious undertaking can never be done without active participation
in the iTaukei way of doing life. This knowledge is critical for any humanistic and
constructionist research, even by indigenous researchers on their own people, because
“participant observation [is necessary for any] scientific research about cultural groups”
(Bernard, 1995, p. 140) and, for the iTaukei, that includes an unreserved commitment to
the community under study, particularly at the ceremonial level. Though the ‘sensual’
74 �
experience of the iTaukei reality is essential, thus the need to participate, a balanced and
critical observation comes only by way of ‘distanced’ reasoning. In using the “shifting
horizon perspective”, framed by the Vanua vakaTuraga conception or the ‘productive
peopled-place’ phenomenon, the issue of objectivity can be addressed by alternately
adopting the kaiVanua (‘the taukei-insider host’ or, ‘land-giver’) and kaiWai (‘the
vulagi-outsider guest’ or, ‘land-taker’) positions to view and analyze one’s reality from
two viable perspectives.
What goes down as a legitimate ethnographic description, therefore, is not merely the
articulation of ‘dry’ narratives but, the translation hence, interpretation20 of culturally
loaded concepts. Consequently, the use of language to transmit meaning across cultures
as “socially transmitted information” (Ananthanarayanan & St. Clair, 2012) will be
employed in the understanding that, in the process, both thinking and language will be
transformed (Burik, 2006, p. 73). This view supports the notion that “our knowledge
about the world is constructed rather than a priori” (as cited in Evening, 2004, p. 110)
hence, acknowledging that “research is value-bound and influenced by researcher, the
researched, the conceptual framework used, the methodology and the context” (Sanga,
2004, p. 47). This means that though objectivity will be pursued throughout the course
of this inquiry, the knowledge extracted and represented will still be expected to reflect
iTaukei thought and, particularly, that of the Tubou-Lakeba people because “objectivity
does not mean value neutrality” (Bernard, 1995, p. 153). Nonetheless, the
transmissibility of this aspect of the iTaukei reality across cultures, via metaphors, still
stands proving the fact that indigenous researchers, as ‘learned’ human beings, are
predisposed to constructing anew from whatever knowledge they already have in their
cognitive unconscious, and in the quality of their present-day experience.
In this sense, the effective ethnographer is essentially one who is “observant, reflective
and articulate” (Bernard, 1995, p. 168). The social science insider-researcher, therefore,
as Mata (eye/face/rep) of the research institution and her/his people or the researched
community and, as one committed to the narratives, is one given to deep reflexivity,
observation by participation and contextual meaning-making. It then follows that an
75 �
iTaukei ethnographer using participant observation to study her/his own people group
will employ, at any one time, one or a mix of a number of qualitative methods like
observation (obtrusive, or otherwise), and natural veitalanoa21 conversations and semi-
structured veitalanoa group interviews. The concept of veitalanoa, therefore, may be
understood as dialogic and, especially as one which embodies the community spirit
hence, is best done involving a mata-group sharing a common interest and where there
is veidokai (two-way respect) for everyone regardless of whether or not each is the
preferred speaking mata-rep of their respective groups. Though being vocal and
articulate is the desired norm for such an encounter, attentiveness, bowed silence and
whispering, during group veitalanoa, is something insider-researchers and experienced
outsiders, by socialization and veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), respectively, have
developed the ‘ears’ for. Veitalanoa-dialogue as a methodology, therefore, works better
when researchers are also equipped with the know-how to ‘read’ the less-articulate and
the expressionless, particularly how their “silences” contribute to the general mood and
outcome of the veitalanoa. It is critical therefore that researchers learn how to
constantly engage participants in deep thinking and allow some room for occasional
jokes given that a good number of these veitalanoa conducted at the grassroots level are
done around the tanoa (yaqona/kava bowl), and into the night. This explains why the
use of voice recorders comes in handy, particularly to capture moments that would be
complicated for the dulled mind to intelligibly comprehend and remember otherwise.
Essentially, in the iTaukei consciousness, a good veitalanoa is still excellent ‘chaser’
for the yaqona.
For an iTaukei research project, therefore, only an iTaukei researcher or a thoroughly
familiarized non-iTaukei with a kind of mana (power) over the researched group will be
able to capture and hold the attention of the participants of the veitalanoa long enough
to extract valuable and relevant information from them. This is because talanoa ena bati
ni tanoa (story-telling around the kava bowl), as a research method, while culturally
appropriate for the traditional iTaukei, remains a challenging space to negotiate even for
the iTaukei researcher. To overcome research challenges faced by Pacific researchers
studying their own people, thoroughly Pacific ways of engaging people in veitalanoa
76 �
(dialogue) that demonstrate the mana/sau (efficacy) of both the researcher and the
researched may have to be implemented. A mata approach to research, philosophically
grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception and employing the veitalanoa
methodology, therefore, will prove effective only if information shared at the discussion
is believable and workable – a veitalanoa yaga (worthwhile ‘talk’) seen thus if people
will believe it to work. When put to work, the veitalanoa comes full circle and its
mana/sau is expressed, the mana/sau of the veitalanoa believed in and acted upon. This
challenges the insider-researcher to do her/his utmost to present her/his ideas back to
her/his people in practical terms which they can implement and share with others for
everyone to enjoy bula sautu (the abundant life). To extract information from people
around the tanoa only without offering them your own informed position on the
subject(s) of the veitalanoa will be seen as exploitative.22 Veitalanoa, in this regard, is
represented as a research methodology as well as it being pedagogic hence, both the
researcher and the researched must benefit from it, proving the research project and the
methodology to be valid and ethical.
3.3.2 Re-conceptualizing ‘Talanoa’ within the vakaLakeba23 Context
Morphologically analyzing the tala-no-a conception, according to the Tubou-Lakeba
worldview, may enlighten one’s understanding of what the word talanoa possibly
encompass, especially when it is used as the method by which this research project
hopes to engage a Vanua vakaTuraga in dialogue. Tala speaks of a ‘shift in place’ while
no, sometimes used in place of the word tu (stand[ing]/exist[ence]), indicates a ‘settling
in to place’. The a at the end of the word talanoa, on the other hand, could be thought of
as an indefinite or definite article, much like the English “a” or “the”, and refers to that
which has been tala-no or ‘shifted from one place and left to settle in another’. Consider
this statement for instance:
Era sa kana oji a gone. Sa tala no a kedratou a turaga. The children have eaten. The men’s food have been served [and kept aside].
77 �
Talanoa, as in story-telling, therefore, is essentially a “shifting and settling” of stories.
During the course of a talanoa, older versions or, certain aspects of one version, may be
deconstructed, at least conceptually, while newer interpretations emerge and are brought
to the fore. This explains why talanoa-stories change over time. ‘Truths’ are never
finalized as ‘story-tellers’ are truly free to situate their re-constructed ‘theories’ in the
current context. Within a decolonization framework, it is believed that story-telling
“connect[s] the past with the future, one generation with the other, the land with the
people and the people with the story” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 145). Making the story
connect with the people will therefore necessitate that elements of the story are ‘shifted’
and ‘re-settled’ in space and time for the people to ‘see’ a contextualized story they can
connect with and relate to. It must be noted that any restructuring and ‘rewriting’ of a
story will involve the incorporation of historical ‘truths’ and current observable and
believable phenomena much like how a constructionist research like this one, and which
I have called my talanoa-construction, uses literature, a ‘collection’ of narratives,
empirical data and metaphorical thought to construct anew.
The vei in veitalanoa, as my chosen research strategy, speaks of the collective will of a
people to construct a collective identity, or story, together. Veitalanoa will be used,
therefore, whatever the research situation, to engage with and extract from ‘participants’
and, in return, encourage them to hope, to will to survive, to dare to dream that bula
sautu (the ‘all good life’) can be realized for them, individually and collectively, in their
gauna life-times. In my attempt to re-kune (re-find or re-conceive) hence, re-search an
ancient knowledge vanua-space and the maliwa-spaces in between at specific vanua-
places and gauna-times, a Tubou-Lakeba method of inquiry, appropriately called the
vakaLakeba, will be employed to ‘force’ participants to engage with me at the
philosophical level of the veitalanoa-dialogue. The vakaLakeba, in essence, is a
culturally appropriate way of probing whereby the researcher is asking participants
things that s/he already knows, but only needs a second opinion on. More often than
not, newer revelations emerge. Nonetheless, the researcher must be prepared to be
interrogated herself/himself by the researched, for this is a norm when interacting with
78 �
the people of Tubou-Lakeba, especially when trying to extract socially transmitted
information from them.
Embodied within the vakaLakeba conception is the infamous ‘fika, faito, faiwa
expression’ for which the people of Lau, Tubou-Lakeba included, are mischievously
known. Fika, possibly adopted from the English ‘figures’ (as in numbers), is how they
may have translated (transformed) their conception of ‘figuring out’. Faito, speaking of
solutions, point to the existence of time proven remedies, their mana (effectiveness)
often passed down blood-lines via the vuluvulu 24 (lit. ‘hand-washing’). Faiwa, on the
other hand, points to the conscious act of strategizing, or even trickery, the culturally
appropriate ‘methods’ for achieving desired goals. When a solution is not forthcoming
and, strategies fail, the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba is often heard saying: A meca iei a fika
ga! (‘The obstacle at hand calls for a series of spontaneous smart moves!’). In a
veitalanoa involving Tubou-Lakeba people, therefore, fika, faito and faiwa become the
tools in the hands of the enthusiastic inquisitor who is fluent in the vakaLakeba and who
is determined to ‘win the argument’, conversational or not, for herself/himself and
her/his people. It is within this intense and highly interactive veitalanoa space that any
researcher (insider/outsider) working amongst the iTaukei, especially of Tubou-Lakeba
of the Lau-Viti group, will strive to navigate and safely negotiate in order to gain the
respect of the Vanua and be rewarded, ultimately, with valuable and relevant cultural
details. Interacting within such a flexible veitalanoa space, though not confined to strict
regulations, is ideally guided by rules of relationships and made reasonably easy with a
real and present mana (power/influence) to draw vanua-people into a veitalanoa-
dialogue. Such is the mana the people of Tubou-Lakeba expect to ‘see’ in community
leaders and, researchers, like the ‘chief’ and the ‘man of God’, make no exception.
3.3.3 Situating ‘Mana’ within the Indigenous Pacific Research Agenda
Knowledge is situated in place. The Pacific, as a knowledge place within the greater
vuravura-world knowledge space, is one carved out in, and defined by, its related but
diverse cultures’ context-specific conceptions of mana (power to effect). It follows,
therefore, that any research focused on Pacific peoples, and in their Pacific ways:
79 �
‘Pacific way’ being an expression with a ‘built-in flexibility’ to which Islanders can
attach new meanings (Vaai, 1999, p. 32), can never be made comprehensible and
believable without first articulating how the mana concept fits into the whole
restructuring or reconstruction. As argued by Huffer (2004), constructing a body of
Pacific thought “like building a Samoan fale…must first and foremost be of use to the
community it is designed for…shelter[ing] from the outside elements and bring[ing]
comfort to those [within]” (p. 89). I cannot see any one universal and unifying
construction of being Pacific, hence Oceanian, but the mana concept and all that it
encompasses.
Mana, therefore, is situated in the Pacific. Mana, otherwise understood as sau, in most
of eastern Viti, is closely associated with the spoken word (or vosa) of the Sau leader
and, is ‘recorded’ in the ivola or ‘writings’ of their ‘craftspeople’. The use of language,
‘written’ or otherwise, is key to the practice of vakamanamana, whereby people openly
‘articulate’ their beliefs in the supernatural, the spirits of the dead, the gods of Lagi, the
spirit of the God of creation25. Given that language is conceptually grounded, hence
largely metaphoric, much of what mana entails could be closely linked to the people’s
conceptions of place and placed-ness and, their sense of ‘power’ (otherwise, the lack of
it). It is in the articulation of their belief in the mana (effectiveness) of that supernatural
‘power’, the ancient vanua, that the iTaukei confirm and establish their customary
practice of vakatatabu (the keeping of the sacred, the tabu). Any indigenous Pacific
research, therefore, guided by the rules of vakatatabu which is rooted in the
vakamanamana (‘declaring’ of the mana [power] of the tabu [sacred] ‘place’) will
prove effective in encouraging and empowering people to live their daily lives in the
pursuit of bula sautu (the ‘all good life’).
One such case of vakamanamanataki of the vakatatabu (‘keeping’ of the observance of
the tabu), and which is significant to this inquiry into a mata system of knowing, is the
Tubou-Lakeba custom of veiwekani avoidance – the non-speaking distance kept
between distant ‘brother-sister’ relations, an indefinitely daku (as opposed to mata
[face/front]) type relationship26. Whether ‘veimataki’ or ‘veidakuni’,27 essentially ‘face-
80 �
to-face’ or ‘back-to-back’, respectively, relationships still indicate connectedness,
recent or ancient, and are important to people who acknowledge them. The vakatatabu
(avoidance) between distant ‘brother-sister’ relations, for instance, work to remind the
living members that those who observe them share a common ancestor. Though the
vakatatabu exists for such a distantly related pair, the daughters of the one and the sons
of the other, automatically, become speaking hence, marrying cousins. Similarly, the
daughters of a woman and the sons of her speaking distant ‘sister’, by tradition, will be
‘forced’ to observe the ‘brother-sister’ tabu hence, continuing the ‘memory’ of their
connectedness. Knowing one’s ‘speaking’ (mata) and ‘non-speaking’ (daku) relations
and, the mana/sau of honouring relational distances, theoretically, must continue to
direct any future engagement within the wider network of veiwekani, or ‘related’ vei
peoples, proving useful the application of cultural particularities within an indigenous
Pacific research framework.
3.3.4 Theory and Methodology – Tools for ‘Seeing’, or Ways of Knowing28
It has been said that “theory and methodology are continuous, if not one and the same
entity” (M�hina, 2004, p. 193). Given that theory is ‘tested’ and proven in real life, it
follows that methodology, “research methods and strategies…[which] focus on
obtaining contextual details, insider-perspectives [and] particularities…unfold during
investigation” (Sanga, 2004, p. 48). Developing a methodology, itself a continuous
process, will therefore involve a certain degree of theorizing, a practice as old as
humanity, and which has been ‘scientifically’ established as critical in constructionist
researches – “building the road while walking on it…construct[ing truths] through
interpretation” (Keso et al., 2009). In other words, this research project acknowledges
that indigenous and cultural knowledge, though related across Pacific cultures via our
common embodiment, shared ancestry and oceanic geography, has remained relatively
situated in ‘place’. This ‘place’, for the iTaukei, has been theorized herein as the Vanua
vakaTuraga, the theoretical productive ‘all-generative’ whole comprising eternal
relations (within the natural, social and psychological realms29) between the
dichotomous female and male parts pervasive in the myths, and represented here as
metaphors and/or allegories30 the iTaukei live by. Through the mata-veitalanoa (groups
81 �
of veitalanoa/dialogues) engaged in, and the continuous conscious act of critically
reflecting upon each phase of the research project, the reality of iTaukei of Tubou-
Lakeba will be investigated and represented. The final say, come the ‘finishing’ of this
talanoa-construction, nonetheless, is left with the story-teller, the insider-researcher.
Just as it happens in story-telling, ‘twists and turns’ to this talanoa-construction will
naturally occur as new pieces of socially transmitted information find their way into this
woven masterpiece. As stated earlier in the introduction, this research project is a re-
kune, or re-finding, of existing but marginalized ‘materials’, the knowledge of which,
when bulu/tei (buried/planted) in a productive ‘mind’, is bound to generate new ideas
and theories, and bring to surface our implicit ways of knowing and being. These
findings, in turn, will inform indigenous and Pacific research, and indigenous minds in
academia and society. Re-kune, as ‘finding and conceiving again’, is conceptualized
herein as constructing anew from raw undeveloped ideas, or from fragments of a
deconstructed idea. This epistemological journey through a people’s metaphorical
reality, therefore, is really a re-reading of iTaukei patterned symbolism encoded in the
ivosavosa vakaViti (iTaukei idioms), ivalavala vakaVanua (customs/traditions of
placed-peoples) and itovo vakaTuraga (the ‘dignified’ conduct/behaviour), and as
reflected and embodied in the native dialects, their linguistic labels and their non-
linguistic overtones. For Viti-based research, at least, the researcher must be aware of
the fact that the iTaukei are a ‘vei people’, a walking vanua totally embodying the
principle of vei, of collective ‘ownership’ and a commitment to reciprocity.
Furthermore, it must be noted that the iTaukei identify themselves strongly as members
of mata-groups: mata-veiwekani (groups of related peoples) and mata-vuvale (groups of
related families), for instance, calling for greater sensitivity to group issues, on the part
of the researcher, even if someone in the researched community is assumed to have
been totally ‘individualized’. Just as well, my mother rightly advised me on my very
first appointment to teach at the secondary school in her village, eighteen years ago,
when she said (and appropriately gesturing the underlined):
82 �
Wame, ko sa na la’ki jiko vata kei ira a qou. Ke ko rogoca e dua ni kaya jiko vaka ca e dua tale, kakua sara ni ko lialia me ko vosa. Me ko kila jiko, ni mai Tubou, a odra veiwekani esa vaka sara tu ga i(ei)! Wame, you are going to live among my own. If you hear someone saying nasty things about another, do not be so foolish to remark. Know that, in Tubou, their relatedness is like this!
Eighteen years later, going in as an insider-researcher, I take with me my mother’s
words and, what her adopted father, my Tuwa (grandfather) Peni, used to tell us when
we were young: A omu iyau ga a wekamu! (‘Your relatedness is your wealth!’), to take
another reading at what their connectedness really means to the people of Tubou-
Lakeba. Whatever method I use and theory I construct, I endeavour to encourage and
empower the veiwekani for I am persuaded that a vei people’s true wealth (itself an
expression of sautu) comes in their collective ability to retain their connectedness, to the
land and the sea and their resources, and to their Vanua and each other. This line of
thinking, somewhat characteristic of traditional mata-ni and mata-ki (Vanua
representatives), is therefore something I have not developed in isolation, and which
may be ascribed to ancient vanua wisdom. This vuku (place-smart31), in essence, is the
critical knowledge the yalomatua (wise) carries with her/him, when researching her/his
own people and culture, appreciating their veiness (connectedness) to piece together any
research project in the ‘chiefly’ manner (vakaTuraga), and which will bring about bula
sautu to the Vanua.
3.4 Chapter Summary Methodology as epistemology means that the researcher uses a framework to ‘know’
the researched better. This research project, in seeking to ‘know’ about the
particularities of what I call the iTaukei mata system of knowing and all that it entails,
and which is embodied in their ceremonies and customs, will use and adapt the notion
that Knowing is Seeing to describe and theorize situated iTaukei understandings and
conceptualizations of mata, as intrinsic to their worldview. Phenomenological analysis
coupled with ethnographic descriptions, and philosophical reflection, will be employed
to experience, document and explain Tubou-Lakeba notions of representation as
83 �
pertaining to their understanding of space and knowledge sharing, and knowledge
building for bula sautu.
Methodology, as the interpretive tool used to understand a people’s social reality, may
be conceptualized, initially, as a means to an end. Given that the privileged task of
interpreting and representing the studied aspects of the Tubou-Lakeba ‘way of life’, at
least for the thesis-construction, ends at the closing paragraph of the concluding chapter,
the methodology therefore, has become an end in itself. Whatever observations made
and theories constructed, to answer my main research questions and establish my initial
‘claim’, therefore, proves futile if the interpretive framework designed ultimately fails
to empower the researcher and the researched. In an attempt to decolonize the
methodology and make it culturally appropriate, qualitative research methods like
participant-observation, naturalized conversations and semi-structured group interviews,
were adopted and adapted. The study of the phenomena via personal experience, and
with greater reflexivity, just became more communal and dialogic employing the
veitalanoa conception, engaging the researcher and the researched, literature and all
‘readable’ elements of culture, to comprehend and prove believable an indigenous
people’s situated ways of knowing and being.
Bringing a general iTaukei conception like veitalanoa and making it more applicable to
the studied ‘sub-culture’ necessitated a further contextualizing of the dialogic process as
vakaLakeba. The application of this approach meant that any engagement with the
people of Tubou-Lakeba was essentially two-way: particularistic understandings were
extracted from the researched as much as they were enlightened with the theoretical and
philosophical framings and perspectives of the researcher. One such theory employed to
encourage greater participation is the ‘standpoint theory’, adapted specifically for this
research project as the ‘shifting horizon perspective’, and implying that though our
philosophical positions and learned experiences differ according to our relative
standpoints, opinions and conceptualizations embraced by a moving and progressive
culture are bound to change over time. These decolonized framings can only help set up
the ‘mood’ of the thesis-construction, particularly in the lead up to the unfolding of the
84 �
situated meanings of the ‘re-lived’ narratives to be highlighted in the chapter following.
The approach used in this research, while postcolonial in attitude, is decolonizing in
motivation: constructed with the view of re-naming, re-claiming and representing.
Though the research project is projected as both ‘process’ and ‘product’, the entire
exercise has been theorized and designed, and will be implemented, to empower the
author, the authored and the wider readership.
������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Refer to M�hina (2004, p. 198). 2 Naming, in this instance, refers to both formal and informal or rhetorical forms of identification and categorization. 3 Note that while mata in matanitu and mataniciva speak of eye/face, in mataveitokani and mataivalu, mata indicates ‘a grouping’. This again proves the versatility of the mata concept, the usage of which and, in all its subtleties may be understood and appreciated only, in its totality, by ‘native’ speakers of the iTaukei language – broadening the ‘native’ concept itself to accommodate even those who may not be genetically of the iTaukei, but who have learned and mastered their language. Epistemologically, at this point of the research, the iTaukei mata concept is believed to be associated with group seeing, group knowing and group representation. 4 Given here is one of my mother’s favourite lines. Note that one’s rai (sight/understanding), according to Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) Philosophy in the Flesh, uses the eyes (and other senses) and the “neural structures of our brains to produce our conceptual systems and linguistic structures” (p. 5). These captured images of the external reality feed the viewing ‘mind’ of the participant-observer with thinking materials that, together with the cognitive unconscious, aid in the conceptualization of lived experiences of the world. Influenced also by my cultured understanding of ‘seeing’ with the stomach/gut or womb (refer to Nabobo-Baba, 2006) and my new-found belief in how one’s worldview predisposes her/him to certain knowledge, this project will explore notions of ‘knowing’ and ‘learning’ associated with a ‘mind’ that is embodied by the knower/learner. 5 Note that because vala means ‘do’ or ‘done’ (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect), the word valavala may signify the continuous doing of something to the point of it becoming a tradition. These traditions practiced over many generations become what is conceptualized here as ivalavala. 6 In Tubou-Lakeba, there are at least two categories of lands known to have been given in the name of a marama-lady: the covicovi-ni-draudrau (meaning ‘land to pick leaves from’) and the wa-ni-kuna (meaning ‘cord used for strangling’). While the former went with a woman at the time she was married off, to the man’s tribe, the latter was given to the woman’s tribe at her death, by strangling and as her acceptable sacrifice, upon the death of her husband. The strangling practice, at the coming of Christianity, was to be briefly replaced by the severing of a little finger, before it was totally rejected. Evidentially, the little finger is known today as the iloloku-ni-mate (meaning ‘the sacrifice for the dead’). 7 Note that ‘womb-man’ here refers to any person, man or woman, with the capacity to be ‘impregnated’ with a dream, ambition, hope, etc. while ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’, given that they do not necessarily speak of male persons, refer to those who consciously ‘sow seeds of greatness’, the ‘empowerer’. For a constructionist research project like this one, the researcher is conceptualized as such a ‘chiefly-noble’ and ‘manly-gutsy’ person capable of ‘sowing’ connectedness and knowledge in the hearts and minds of placed-peoples everywhere ready to carry a ‘dream’, ready to hope and live. 8 Referring to the relatedness established from time immemorial, possibly around 3500 years ago following the rapid settling of Vanuatu, Viti, Toga and Samoa by the Lapita people, from the Bismarcks, and which stopped abruptly once Samoa was reached (Nunn, 1998, pp. 232-236). 9 This research assumes that being born into (or rooted in) vanua-place ‘naturally selects’ or ‘qualifies’ one to assume mata-rep roles for that place and/or its community of knowers.
85 �
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 Note that the constructionist researcher is always interacting, as in a dialogue, with the literature and empirical data while constructing her/his own position as an empowerer , deconstructing the ‘taken-for-granted’ and making visible relations of power/knowledge (Keso et al, 2009). 11 According to Hocart (as cited in Scarr 2008, p. 20), “the true religion of the Fijian [or iTaukei] is the service of the chief, if reverence, devotion and a belief in the supernatural are required to make up religion”. 12 Note that in the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, there had been a case of a conquering princess of Kedekede (the hillfort), of the name Sinate Lagi, and because of whom the Levuka people (traditionally of Bau) were ‘re-situated’ at Lakeba. It was the same Sinate who tagi-i-valu (call for war) to Bau in the time of Banuve (Vunivalu of Bau), and who brought with him a force of mercenary recruited from Ra to the war best known in the Lakeba tradition as the Puaka Loa or Black Pig (refer to Reid, 1990). This ‘conquering princess’ phenomenon may help inform an understanding of a well-known metaphor from Tubou-Lakeba which goes: Dua omu lewa ni Tubou, dua omu lewa kalou! and, which translates to ‘When you ‘marry’ a woman of Tubou, you have ‘married’ a goddess hence, be prepared to meet her every demand!’ 13 Meaning the yavu-ni-vale (raised ancestral houses’ foundations), the hierarchy of social order, the sitting at the yalofi or yaqona/kava circle, the chiefly language reserved for the Sau (king), the relative positioning in meke (traditional community dances), the qoli kanace (traditional ‘fish-hunt’ of the kanace fish or blue-spot mullet), etc. While these “systems of symbolic signification” (Burik, 2006) may seem insignificant to the vulagi-outsider and modernized taukei-insider, they continue to ‘participate’ and ‘observe’, and ‘speak’ – but only in the ‘eyes’ of the mata-niVanua yalomatua (wise mata-reps of the Vanua) who are open to vanua knowledge and responsive to its knowledge system. 14 Note that in reference to the ‘first-people’ tribe of Tubou-Lakeba who were ‘land-givers’ to every subsequent migration to the island, the capitalized and non-italicized Vanua word is used to differentiate from the vanua (italicized) and Vanua (italicized and capitalized) conceptions liberally applied throughout this research. 15 This research project assumes that everyone is a ‘practitioner’ of her/his culture, customs and traditions, at one level or another, and which may include the watchful observance (as opposed to that which may be conceptualized by cultural-outsiders as the ‘silenced-observance’) of its rituals and ceremonies. 16 Vuanirewa, literally, means ‘Fruit of the Rewa’, implying that the Rewa is a plant. As the leading yavusa, therefore, in light of my ‘Place-Knower’ (Vanua-Mata) theory, the Vuanirewa , a ‘transplanted people’, will not lose its position if it stays grounded in its new vanua-place. In fact, according to the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, the Vanua ko Lakeba sought intervention from the Vuanirewa (the ‘chiefly’, the ‘manly’), at one of its low-points in its pre-European contact ‘history’. 17 Note that the same bulu concept is used for ‘planting a seed/cutting’ and ‘burying a dead’. The place Bulu, on the other hand, is associated with where their dead have been ‘buried’, and which is not restricted to vanua-land only, hence the Bulu (underworld) place can be conceptualized to be as large as the land and sea area the iTaukei people have territorially covered or traversed over time and space. 18 The same idea is articulated in the Toga fonua concept (Vaai, 1999, p. 36) but, critically important for me in how I perceive womanhood to be worth land, as is present in the Tubou-Lakeba tradition of losing or gaining land (vanua) in the giving or receiving of a lady in ‘marriage’, especially one of rank and/or one landed. 19 There is the iTaukei saying which goes: ‘Sa tawa na mata-iAdi!’ (lit. ‘Adi’s eye is filled’ and, meaning that Adi [used in reference to a woman of rank] is with child), representing the womb as an eye. The Vanua whole, therefore, is represented here as a ‘seeing’ and ‘conceiving’ entity. 20 According to Burik (2006, p. 71), “translation is always interpretation”. 21 Veitalanoa is basically vei-talanoa. Talanoa, a verb and a noun, means ‘the telling of a story’ and ‘the story’, respectively. The prefixed talanoa (with vei, that is) makes it into a ‘two-way telling and relating to narratives’. For more on the nature of talanoa and its protocols, refer to Nabobo-Baba (2006, pp. 27-28). Note that within the Tubou-Lakeba context, where there is only one Sau (the ‘Turaga’, and almost in line with the Christian/Islamic belief in ‘only one God’), that one isevusevu (traditional and ceremonial introduction) presented at the Vale Levu (the ‘big house’, the ‘chief’s house’) literally opens the door to the whole land. There may be yaqona brought to the venues of the veitalanoa, to be served and shared amongst the participants, it does not necessarily become another isevusevu to that place for the one and
86 �
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������only isevusevu to the Vanua has been presented and received. But this does not prevent the researcher from presenting another isevusevu to the vale (house) of the host, especially if the host is one steeped in tradition and who still reverently follows the customs of the land, especially the drinking of yaqona/kava or approves of it. 22 Note that people at the grassroots level, and at any veitalanoa, will want to take something believable home at the end of the day, something which they can hold on to, ponder upon and possibly ‘ride on’. They do not anticipate publications and most will not be reading the researcher’s articles/books. The intentions of the researcher, at the outset, will prove critical in interactive moments like that. A researcher in this position must go in decided on what it is she/he will offer the participants of the veitalanoa, ideally a great idea and, more than just yaqona/kava, tobacco and ‘chasers’. Talanoa which get thrown about around the yaqona/kava bowl, though insignificant to the undiscerning, often find their way into the homes and, if they are motivational enough and full of mana, somebody may grab a hold of it, and run with it into freedom from the oppressive system(s) that had long kept them in hopelessness and subjugation. Veitalanoa, in this sense, is essentially pedagogy for the oppressed. 23 VakaLakeba, at one level, means ‘the Lakeba way’. Interestingly, Ratu Kamisese Mara, a Tubou-Lakeba person himself, the last to be installed Sau of the Vanua ko Lakeba, was the one who coined the much critiqued expression ‘The Pacific Way’ (Lawson, 1996; Mara, 1997), and which could have been read, hence conceptualized, as vakaPasifika in the iTaukei language. At another level, vakaLakeba is a method of inquiry. 24 The act of vuluvulu, the passing on of the mana (power) from an expert to a budding practitioner, is basically done with some ritualistic hand-rubbing accompanied with intelligible words spoken to affirm the latter of the transfer of power and the right to practice. 25 Capitalised God herein refers to the Christian deity, the dominant and more visibly worshipped ‘person’ other than the embodiment of the sau/mana of the vanua land/people/place, the Sau ni Vanua ko Lau, in case of the Tubou-Lakeba people, that is. 26 The mata (eye/face) system of knowing is based on a ‘talking’ relationship – ‘face-to-face’, much like the Samoan concept of fa’a’aloalo , rooted in the face (alo) concept and, which embraces the idea of faces/reps meeting (Filipo, 2004) – and is diametrically opposed to what I call ‘daku (back) types of relationship’, ‘non-talking’ and vakamanamanataki (‘kept’ tabu) by open-avoidance. All relationships, essentially, may be categorized either under mata (face/front) or daku (back) hence, ‘talking’ or ‘non-talking’. It must be noted though that the Tubou-Lakeba non-talking veiwekani (distant brother-sister) avoidance can be ‘broken’ by ‘marriage’ or friendship. I would assume that customary practices of this kind are kept to this day to preserve the memory of who your weka (distant blood relatives) are. 27 Note that veimataki and veidakuni may mean two different types of relationships to the iTaukei: veimataki (a speaking relationship) at the vanua level and, veidakuni (a non-speaking relationship) at the personal level. My interest is in the use of the dichotomous mata (face/front) and daku (back) concepts, reflecting a truly embodied reason. 28 Refer to M�hina (2004, 193). 29 Read about ‘Okusitino M�hina’s new t�-v� theory of society and which recognizes that “all things stand in relationships of exchange to one another, expressing either symmetry or asymmetry in the process…applying to all issues of natural, mental and social significance across cultures, [extending] to the local, regional and global situations” (M�hina, 2004, pp. 196, 197). 30 For more on ‘Knowledge as Allegory’, refer to Biggs (1994). 31 To be ‘place-smart’ is to be intelligent enough to survive where one is placed. This intelligence theory basically implies that an entity’s embodiment and environment dictate what survival skills it develops and acquires.
87�
CHAPTER 4
TALI MAGIMAGI: MY COLLECTION OF TALANOA
i am sending you
this ball of magimagi1
perhaps you can fashion
a rope
from it to tie
around your mast-head
so have a nice trip
and a happy birthday
but do not be surprised
if the rope
left scars
on my hands
Konai Helu Thaman2
4.1 Introduction Traditional methods of socially transmitting information, generalized here as talanoa
or dialogic ‘story-telling’, for the iTaukei, may have taken a number of forms,
depending on what the occasion was and who the audience were. Whatever the event
was or whoever the players were, talanoa had always been an art and, its form, ever
changing at the face of rapid globalization. The notion that “knowledge is relativist
and inseparable from the context” (Sanga, 2004, p. 45) is critical, therefore, to the
spatio-temporal turn which now frames modern-day talanoa, thoroughly rooted in
the particularity of Vanua vakaTuraga but richly flavoured by its many cultural and
technological borrowings. This universal phenomenon of enduring cross-cultural
engagement, reflected in linguistic and, value and lifestyle adaptations, for instance,
proves humanity’s openness to outside influences, on the one hand, and the
perseverance of our inherent sense of identity and ‘othering’ difference, on the other.
88�
This chapter of my talanoa, therefore, will ambitiously record two bodies of
knowledge, and which I call, in order of their preferred appearances within the
setting of this chapter: ‘Home-Grown Talanoa’ and ‘Metaphorical Vanua
Experiences’. While the first segment contains talanoa constructed around the
general theme of living iTaukei or Vanua appropriate attitudes cultivated in me
within the comfort of the ‘home’ environment, segment two will focus on what I call
‘ancient’ Vanua experiences that reflected Tubou-Lakeba thought and which carried
ideas that still show in a ‘modernized’ Tubou-Lakeba reality. Critically, it must be
noted that knowledge inter-woven here were extracted mainly from interaction I
enjoyed around Tubou-Lakeba people, my mother being the most engaging, and
which were committed to memory only to be harvested, ‘treated’ and arranged into
the woven piece thus presented. Whether settled off-the-island (the Lakeba iWai) or
‘permanently’ island-based (the Lakeba iVanua)3, the Tubou-Lakeba cohort is one
which seriously believes in the sauness (manafulness) of the Vanua ko Lakeba
(comprising the island of Lakeba’s land and sea space, and people), and the koro ko
Tubou (comprising people ‘placed’ in the principal village of Tubou). A belief in the
supernatural, therefore, shapes whatever manner of discourse Tubou-Lakeba tamata-
persons, mata-reps and mata-groups engage in, be it at the inter-personal or, the
intra- and inter-Vanua levels. Herein is a people whose kila (knowledge/skills) are
transmitted largely via talanoa-stories shared around group activities and, whose
reality I wish to represent using the same veitalanoa framework.
What follows then, essentially, is the continuous and conscious act of tali magimagi,
a weaving of stories – beautiful in itself, and full of good purpose. The weaving of
magimagi strings and ropes, often accompanied with ‘long and winding’ talanoa-
stories, as is the norm in the making of traditional Tubou-Lakeba art and crafts, is an
excellent occasion for expert knowers to share their kila (knowledge/skills) with a
younger but yalomatua generation (young in body, mature in ‘spirit’) socialized to
appreciate that aspect of vanua knowledge. Some of these informative gauna-times I
still enjoy to this day with my mother, are hair-cutting, the tui (stringing) of a full
Tubou-Lakeba sisi (garland), or the making of parts of it, and the tavu (‘cooking’) of
89�
fragranced waliwali (naturally perfumed body oil derived from coconut milk). Other
tali magimagi moments I have enjoyed with many other Tubou-Lakeba people
include lovo (earth oven) making, werewere (weeding, as in compound cleaning) and
teitei (vegetable/crop farming). Other social occasions whereby the Tubou-Lakeba
worldview may be observed first hand, in how they tali magimagi (weave stories), is
at the sharing of their faith (in God) and beliefs (in the Vanua), of meals (at home, or
at a soqo [gathering for a death, wedding, birthday, etc.]), of yaqona (kava)4 and,
even their home-brewed beer. Whether veitalanoa is conceptualized as ‘tali
magimagi’, ‘ucu mai duru’ (lit. ‘picking out from one’s knees’, meaning
‘fabrications’), or ‘bati ni tanoa’ (side of kava bowl), the fact they are usually funny
and nonsensical does not mean that they cannot be engaging and informative. These
moments are significant because they provide the veiwekani (related peoples) with
opportunities to regroup, celebrate bula (life) and strengthen their veiness
(connectedness) and the web that supports their collective pursuit of sautu (well
being). Talanoa, therefore, according to Tubou-Lakeba traditions, is iqa (‘food’) for
work, something that hardworking people cannot live without.
In situating this research as a talanoa construction, the thesis, from beginning to end,
may be conceptualized either as the sisi (garland) or waliwali (scented oil) making
project, and which comprise more than just the sums of their parts. From the planting
and/or harvesting of naturally occurring materials needed for such projects through
to the production of usable art forms derived from them, the veivakamenemenei
(pampering) attitude embodied in the making of these traditional ‘gifts’, and which
are fit for a gone took (beloved child), makes the production of such a practical item
significant. Whether taubeni (the wearing, as of a garland) for a day or wali (the
application, as of oil) for many days, gifting must be reciprocated with the genuine
appreciation of the attitude pervading the practices. Talanoa, in this regard, is
conceived both as a work of art5, requiring specific knowledge and skills, and a ‘gift’
that must be appreciated for the place it occupies and the purpose it serves. The
whole talanoa or thesis-construction, like a ‘sisi making’ or ‘waliwali making’
project, essentially, forms the methodological backbone around which the six
90�
chapters of my talanoa are fused and bonded. Drawing from my personal
experiences (observing, thinking, knowing, learning and doing), experiences of
others found in the literature, and data collected from the ‘field’, an essential and
functional body of knowledge is herein assembled. As with the sisi and waliwali
making projects, the blended parts of this talanoa construction have been expertly
and sustainably developed resounding my mother’s caution to use whatever I have to
selectively and sensitively.
4.2 Home-Grown Talanoa4.2.1 Part 1: Sisi – a Metaphor for the ‘apparent’ but ‘shifting’ iTovo
vakaTuraga6
Sisi making, according to my mother, is always about the gone toko (the beloved). It
is this attitude which guides her practice and hence, her sense of perfection and duty.
When I was much younger, I learned that the sisi of Lakeba, as it is known today,
was traditionally reserved for the Sau (highest ranking Tubou-Lakeba chief), and the
gone vakatubu (his children) – long before it became a commodity featuring
extensively in major graduations across the country, a national symbol, an icon.
Though the art is no longer set aside for the Gone Turaga (lit. ‘Young Chief’) the Tui
Nayau, the Sau of Lau-Viti7, my mother still believes in making sisi, even for the
market, that reflects the attitude of ‘othering’ the Sau. Older, yalomatua (wiser) and
more informed of my mother’s genealogy, I now understand and appreciate what
value she places on a traditional practice and wear that has become taken-for-
granted, given its widespread use and underrated market-driven value hence,
carrying an inherent sense of pride in, and appreciation of, the sisi. While the sisi has
been ‘sold out’, on the one hand, traditional makers like my mother, on the other,
have been perfecting the art proving themselves experts in the field. The secret to the
success of their practice, according to her, lies in the vanua attitude of
veivakamenemenei (a kind of ‘pampering’ accorded the gone toko [beloved], and/or
the Sau), an expression of veivakaturagataki (two-way giving of respect/honour).
Such itovo (manner) vakaTuraga (of the chiefly), therefore, is something that only
91�
those close to the center of any iTaukei polity would understand and appreciate.
Consider this oversimplified family tree, of my mother’s biological and adopted
parents, for an indication of what it may be like in the socialized ‘thought life’ of this
authentic Tubou-Lakeba woman. True to her people’s ivalavala vakaVanua
(relatively ancient customs/traditions associated with the ‘privileging-place’, the
Vanua) and itovo vakaTuraga (recently ‘adorned’ manner of thought and practice
associated with the ‘privileged-people’, the Turaga), my mother basically lives what
values and principles she was raised to believe in and protect.
Figure 5 An oversimplified family tree of the ‘privileged’ Vuanirewa clan
Note that Niumataiwalu and his ancestors before him, according to oral tradition, were never titled ‘Roko’, like his
son Rasolo and Rasolo’s sons after him, a ‘status-marker’, possibly, stemming from the Moala group where Roko
Rasolo’s mother, Tarau, was from and, where the Vuanirewa of Nayau had long-standing associations with (Reid,
1990). Similarly ‘Adi’ and ‘Ratu’ were introductions which came, possibly, from Bau – an ancient chiefdom
boardering western and eastern Viti (Fiji).
Niumataiwalu (ancestor of the Vuanirewa, the ‘land-takers’)
Roko Rasolo (1) (second eldest son, first Tui Nayau [from Nayau island] on Tubou-Lakeba)
Roko Malani (ancestor of MataiLakeba branch)
Roko Taliai (Tui Nayau at arrival of missionaries in 1835, ancestor of a Vatuwaqa branch)
Peni (my adopted grandfather)
Ratu Tevita (2) (Tui Nayau)
Ratu Sukuna (a vasu levu, Tui Lau)
Roko Malani
Adi Fane (2)
Taivei (my adopted grand-mother)
Salote (my biological grand-mother)
Roko Liwaki (my biological grandfather)
Ratu Mara (Tui Nayau, Tui Lau, Sau ni Vanua ko Lau)
Adi Fane (3) (my mother)
Roko Rasolo (a vasu levu)
Roko Puamau
Adi Tagici
Ratu Sikeli (a vasu levu)
Adi Maopa
Ratu Finau (Tui Nayau)
Ratu Tevita (1) (Tui Nayau) Adi Fane (1)
Roko Vuetasau
92�
Veivakamenemei as a way of life, therefore, is something my mother learned and
practiced long before she had me, her firstborn. All itovo (manner) of expressing
veivakaturagataki (chiefly respect/honour), characteristic of and appropriate for the
Turaga (‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’), is something women of the yavusa Vuanirewa, like
my mother, naturally carry and live by. Note that though a sisi (garland) fades in
beauty, the veivakamenemenei attitude with which some traditional sisi makers still
produce the artifact, today, is a lingering reality. To show gratitude, therefore, to one
who ‘pampers’ you, one ‘says’: “You well deserve the same chiefly treatment!” – not
with words, but in ‘giving’ veivakaturagataki to the giver of the ‘gift’. Further
informed of what can be termed the ‘chiefly language’, my understanding of the
depth of the Tubou-Lakeba manner of veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) accorded
their Sau (the overlord) was only to be confirmed by my biological grandfather’s
words, in one of those talanoa moments I shared with him, when he said:
Sa ‘dua-tani’ ga ko Ratu Mara ni sa unu!
Ratu Mara is ‘one-othered’ because he’s drank!
This insight into the ‘other-ness’ of the one who has been vakaunumi (made to drink
of the traditional installation’s yaqona) by the Vanua, gave me renewed appreciation
of the manner (itovo) of sauvaki (service/worship) of the Sau, the ‘othered-one’. This
kind of ‘othering’ of the one person who embodies the mana/sau of the Vanua all, in
essence, is partly ascribed and, partly inherited. Consider the table below for a taste
of the kind of ‘chiefly language’, the language of the center-world focusing on the
person of the Sau, the embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua:
93�
Table 1 Chiefly language versus Ordinary language
vakaLakeba (of the Vanua, the ‘common people’, the ordinary)
vakaTuraga (of the Turaga, the Sau, the embodiment of the mana, the ‘one-othered’)
vakaPalagi (of the ‘English’)
Isulu imauvu (possibly archaic) clothes
Kana tauri (lit. ‘handl[ing]’) eat[ing]
Burisi toka wale (lit. ‘sitting disengaged’)
angry
mata dredredre vakase bua (lit. ‘flower[ing] frangipani’)
smiling
Moce tavo (possibly archaic) sleep[ing]
For both the ‘receiver’ and the ‘giver’ of the Tubou-Lakeba highest itovo (manner)
of veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) – the ‘young’ Turaga (the ‘worshipped’) and
the ‘old’ Vanua (the ‘worshipper’), respectively – the ‘other-ness’ of the Sau is
essentially the ‘other-ness’ of the Vanua that he represents, the Vanua that ‘appoints’
him.8 Veivakamenemenei is much like how a mothering ‘soul’ (older) spoils her/his
children (younger). S/he keeps on doing it because it makes her/him ‘feel’ good. The
Vanua, being the older of the two, is only too happy to ‘pamper’ the gone toko (the
beloved, the younger), the Gone Turaga (lit. ‘Young Chief’), their Sau. The younger
of the two, when arrogantly carrying ‘itself’, may be accused of being viavialevu (lit.
‘wanting to be bigger’, meaning ‘to be condescending’), the itovo (manner) vaKaisi
(characteristic of the less noble) and, which is unbecoming of one receiving
veivakamenemenei (chiefly ‘pampering’). The making of sisi for the ‘othered-one’,
therefore, is only a manner of expressing that chiefly Vanua attitude. To some
degree, what Taivei drummed into my mother’s consciousness, and the latter into
mine, has only begun to make sense, the conception that:
A itovo e odra ga a Turaga! (lit. ‘Manners belong only to the chiefly/manly!’)
94�
If a Vanua (named place/people) is indeed a Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly Vanua
[place]), then its people would be one given to the itovo vakaTuraga (chiefly
manner), practicing veivakamenemeni as a way of life – this is what the iTaukei
notion of veivakaturagataki (esteeming of the other) encompasses, the Vanua
extending veivakaturagataki to the Turaga, and vice-versa. Note that the Turaga (the
‘othered-one’) behaving vaKaisi (less noble) is often shunned and may even face
unfair criticism and greater discrimination, more so today with traditional systems of
‘domination’ out-of-place – systems which worked mainly to benefit powerful
chiefly elites, at least in the recent past. Essentially, a true Vanua vakaTuraga is one
such place/people whose best qualities are guided by what I call positive vei
principles 9 . This is the same communal attitude which was articulated, in no
uncertain terms, by Ratu Tevita (1) when he said at the 1875 Council of Chiefs
meeting (as cited in Scarr, 2008, p. 15):
Do not we [iTaukei] Fijians do things in companies? How could one man build his house [or vale], and plant his garden [or iteitei], and build his canoe [or waqa] and sail it all alone? To do these things we must cease to be [iTaukei] Fijian.
Note that in this one simple statement, the Tui Nayau of Lakeba around the time Viti
was ceded to Great Britain in 1874, himself the embodiment of the sau/mana of the
Vanua ko Lakeba and the esteemed vakaTuraga (chiefly manner), gave away the
iTaukei ‘secret’ to stability, and also hinted three basic categories of important
Vanua ko Lakeba knowledge. Theoretically, the house/home signifies one’s sense of
belonging to a vanua-place and a vanua-people. The garden (a parallel to burial
ground), on the other hand, represents how the iTaukei value their oneness with the
self-sustaining vanua-land and, their wider vuravura-world, their source, their
sustenance. Similarly, the canoe (metaphorically speaking of an entity’s carrying and
‘voyaging’ capacity) symbolically and prophetically points to the iTaukei language,
the carrier of their ivalavala (settled customs and culture) and their itovo (shifting
Vanua correct/appropriate behaviour) which connects them to their neighbours,
reaching as far as Toga and Samoa. This revelation or insight proves, therefore, that
95�
the indigenous iTaukei language, given its loaded-ness in meaning, cannot be taken
at face value if one is to understand the underlying assumptions that shape them,
assumptions that dictate our philosophies and ethics.
According to the family tree provided, therefore, I had been raised by a woman born
(biologically) to Roko Liwaki and Salote, and socialized (culturally) by Peni and
Taivei, into the ivalavala-ways of doing life in Tubou-Lakeba. This reality, in
essence, is centered on the Sau person and grounded in the conception that the
‘place’ itself, the koro (village) and the yanuyanu (island), are imbued with a
sau/mana. Given their relatedness and traditionally cultured way of valuing the
veiwekani (the wider network of relations), the Tubou-Lakeba people’s firm belief in
their veiness (connectedness) and the sauness (manafulness) of their Vanua
vakaTuraga, may ultimately have a bearing on how they conceptualize sautu (lit.
‘sau exists’) hence, how they define the boundaries of what sautu has been taken to
mean, the ‘all good life’ that is.
If the realness of the ‘othered-one’, the one made the ‘god’ of the people at
installation (as cited in Ravuvu, 1987, p. 5), gives meaning to the sautu (sau is
present) conception, then whatever is done in the name of veivakamenemenei
(‘pampering’) in the sauvaki (worship) of the Sau person, must be done with an
attitude that demands perfection. This explains why I continue to marvel at my
mother’s sisi making ability and capacity, her passion for the art and patience in the
making of it – beginning with the harvesting of the vau (native hibiscus) bark, a kila
(knowledge/skill) she believes she has manaful hands for. As they say in Tubou-
Lakeba: E so ga era dau ta-ta vau vinaka! (‘Only some are good [manaful] at
cutting/harvesting vau!’) The iTaukei predisposition to vakamanamana or the
‘articulation’ of one’s belief in the mana of an idea, a ritual, some object or someone;
a belief in the supernatural or in the expressive power of the mana, even in post-
Christianity Viti, and which characterizes most indigenous Pacific peoples, is
something my mother and the Tubou-Lakeba people are full of. Mana/sau, to them,
96�
is comprehensible and believable, a mark of being authentic, as I myself have
supernaturally experienced and proven on a number of occasions.
4.2.2 Part 2: Waliwali – a Metaphor for the ‘subtle’ but ‘settled’ iValavala
vakaVanua10
Another interesting parallel to ‘sisi making’ is the Tubou-Lakeba women’s art of
‘waliwali making’, also for the gone toko (beloved) and, involving the toli (selective
picking) of naturally occurring and cultivated plant products. The coconut oil
derivative known as waliwali (fragranced body oil, ‘cooked’ or sunned), something
highly regarded by island people in general, and which Tubou-Lakeba women are
known for, at least amongst the people of Lakeba, is the traditional antidote to the
salt present in sea water, and which permanently surrounds them. When the whole of
Lau converges for instance, it is often said, amongst Tubou-Lakeba women, that ‘A
iyau ga kei Lakeba a waliwali’ (‘Lakeba’s true [mark of] wealth is the waliwali’)11.
Interestingly, one other thing that had often been associated with wealth is one’s
veiwekani (relatedness), at least in the home I was raised, as I had often heard my
adopted grandfather Peni say:
A omu iyau ga a wekamu! (implying: ‘Your relatedness/connectedness is your
[source of] wealth’)
Amongst iTaukei, one could still hear the proverb ‘E dau kele ga a waqa ina toba
maravu’ (lit. ‘Canoes/ships only dock at a peaceful harbour’), meaning
‘People/relatives only come to a ‘peaceful’ home’, and highlighting an indicator of
being ‘wealthy’. Another occasion that often reflects the extensiveness of one’s
veiwekani (connectedness) hence, measure of wealth, is at her/his soqo (gatherings)
and, ultimately, her/his funeral. Veikauwaitaki (minding other’s well being) is indeed
a true ivalavala ni bula vakaVanua, vaka-iTaukei (way of living that is of the Vanua,
of the iTaukei), at least in times of sautu (peace/abundance) and, as such, calls for
bula veimaliwai (coexisting in the maliwa-spaces) and tiko veisaututaki (living in
peace). For the Tubou-Lakeba woman, my mother being one, the gifting of hard-
97�
earned waliwali (scented body oil) is the culturally appropriate way of showing
appreciation for one’s veiwekani (relatives/colleagues/friends) – a gift that only the
Tubou-Lakeba bred or accustomed, and possibly vasu (children of a local woman, a
waliwali maker herself), may truly receive for what it is worth. It is the heart-to-heart
exchange between mata or ‘speaking relations’ (sometimes for daku or ‘non-
speaking relations’), expressed only through the material culture, which makes the
gifting of waliwali significant. In a real way, the waliwali seals the bond between
‘related’ individuals/groups, at least in the ‘mind’ of the Tubou-Lakeba person –
something gifted to remind the recipient of the giver’s good intentions to refresh the
memories of their connectedness. To refuse to receive such a gift, therefore, is not to
show veidokai (respect) hence, disregarding one’s veiwekani (relatedness) and
implying a moving away from the communal.
What does waliwali making tell of the Tubou-Lakeba worldview after all?
Theoretically, deep down in the ‘minds’ of Tubou-Lakeba people, there is an
appreciation for the uniqueness of individuals ‘crushed’ and ‘chemically bonded’
under ‘intense heat’ into the Vanua whole. This is essentially what transpires in the
making of waliwali when fragrant plant products are harvested, crushed and sobu
(lit. descend, or ‘thrown’) into the hot oil vura (derived) from the boiling coconut
milk, in a mixing that is only made possible over burning charcoal or under a hot
sun. According to my mother, her first tavu waliwali (‘cooking’ oil) was when she
was already in her thirties. Prior to that, she only helped, sat and observed her
adopted mother Taivei who, in her life-time, never asked her to ‘cook’ the oil but,
only instructed her thus:
Toka iqore me ko raica! (‘Sit [and observe from] there to ‘see’!’)
Evidently, learning and knowing was associated with ‘seeing’ or observing and,
which involves the senses: sight, smelling, hearing and touch, particularly, when it
comes to waliwali making. This is essentially how iTaukei learned (previously) their
ivalavala-ways vakaVanua (of the Vanua) and know (concurrently) the itovo
98�
(manner of thought and practice) of their ivalavala-ways of being. Today, I still hear
my mother say:
Keta vuli ga mai na weta rai! (‘We learn merely from what we ‘see’!’)
This is exactly how I see my mother adapting her itovo (manner) of doing life and,
more so, the art of waliwali (and sisi) making – innovating and diversifying, meeting
the demands of the market and yet, preserving their ivalavala-ways of life. The
perpetuation of traditional customs (the ‘ancient’) is critical in the transmission of
indigenous epistemologies because I would presume that the ‘settled’ ivalavala-ways
vakaVanua (of the Vanua [place/people]) actually shape the ‘shifting’ itovo (manner)
with which they think through and experience their current reality. If ‘seeing is
knowing’ (and learning), and the cognitive unconscious shapes how we
conceptualize our experience, then it follows that how we practice (a ‘shallow’
experience) can be philosophically read to gain an insight into what forms the basis
of our thinking (a ‘deeper’ experience), and which could be grounded in the abstract,
in metaphorical thought. This implies that a people’s ivalavala vakaVanua (ways of
being in ‘place’) and itovo vakaTuraga (‘goodliness’ at its best) provide a rich mata-
source from which a better understanding of what it is like to be iTaukei can be
sought and, ultimately expressed and articulated. Essentially, an awareness of the
ivalavala tani (other ways, outsiders’ ways) and itovo vaKaisi (least esteemed
manners or tendencies) of the ignoble, and vulagi (stranger/outsider), can give the
complete picture of the iTaukei and their ‘othering’ tradition. This ‘privileging
system’ embodying a noble Vanua attitude, in essence, calls for veivakataukeitaki
(‘familiarization’), the necessary process of acculturation that leads to tiko
veisaututaki (coexisting in sautu).
99�
4.3 Metaphorical Vanua Experiences4.3.1 Part 1: Lessons for Today from the Qoli of Yesterday
A traditional way of doing island life that has quickly been replaced by modern
equipments and methods, and alternate indigenous knowledge12, is the qoli (fish
‘hunt’) – a place-specific ivalavala-way of being that guarantees survival for a
largely sea-dependent (for food and travel) people, and culture. Two methods of qoli
quickly disappearing from the modernized Tubou-Lakeba consciousness, and which
are worth highlighting, are the qoli sirovi (fish ‘hunt’ at the chief’s reserved lagoon
for the chief)13 and the qoli kanace (blue-spot mullet ‘hunt’ organized by the yavusa
Vanua, the ‘land-givers’, and for the veiwekani)14. While in both methods, the net
was used (a modern item itself), the intricacies of the qoli, or the manner at which
they were called for and carried out, reflected the vakamanamana (articulation of
their belief in the mana/workability of their methods) and vakatatabu (keeping of the
‘rules’ of the qoli). This was particularly true for the qoli kanace, and which was
carried about with a lot of secrecy. The qoli sirovi, on the other hand, was never a
secret because they were called for, solely, for the Sau (lord over land/people and
their resources), and whose sau/mana would have been shown in the harvest that was
to be expected.
The qoli sirovi was always called for whenever the Sau got back home from ‘over-
seas’, at least for the last two Sau of Lau, or whenever fish was needed for the
ivakarau (the chiefly ‘banquet’). This qoli (‘hunt’) was often always done at the
matavura iTubou (Tubou village’s foreshore), the traditional iqoliqoli (fishing
ground) of the Tui Nayau, the Sau. At the time witnessed by my mother, there was a
certain section of the foreshore area reserved for the qoli sirovi. This sustainable
practice, always guaranteeing a plentiful harvest, was an indication of the mana/sau
of the Turaga, at least to the people of Tubou-Lakeba. To this, it was often remarked
that the matavura (fishing area), indeed, was vakaitaukei (had an ‘owner’). Fish
caught in this qoli and served at the Sau’s table was always referred to as the isirovi,
distinguishing it from fish caught elsewhere, and by any other method. The qoli
100�
sirovi, whether using the yaci or bunubunu method (refer to the diagrams below),
kept the Vale Levu (‘big house’) with a steady supply of fish for the chief, the surplus
of which was always shared among the women participants of the qoli. To
participate, therefore, was always considered as an act of service to, or worship of,
the Sau-chief who embodies the mana/sau of the Vanua whole.
Figure 6 Yaci versus Bunubunu (fish ‘hunt’ methods)
The Yaci
shifting tide-line
enclosure
shifting net position
The Bunubunu
shifting tide-line
enclosure
shifting net position
The qoli kanace, on the other hand, was the more interesting of the two. The qoli
itself, to begin with, was always referred to as ivalu (war) for the early morning
‘hunt’ or the cuka (possibly related to the vacuka [‘punch’] concept) for the day
‘hunt’. The times to descend for the ‘hunt’ would coincide with the lolo (coming in
of tide) and/or the voka (going out of tide) and, the ‘assault’ was engineered totally
by the two women mata-ni-qoli (eyes of the ‘hunt’). There are ‘signs of times’, good
for the qoli kanace to go, known to Tubou-Lakeba women who have gone on the
‘hunt’. Some of these signs were the ola of the wind (a kind of ‘new’ wind
movement), the iboi (smell) of the kanace nestling near, and the ula and kora
(individual and group ‘jumping’, respectively) of the kanace before sun-down the
101�
day before the qoli indicating their ‘sleeping’ place for the night. At the observance
of these signs, the qoli chiefs (women of Taqalevu of the yavusa Vanua [‘land-
givers’], or some direct descendants), some of whom no longer go to the ‘hunt’,
would then call for the qoli to be usu (the ‘claiming’ of qoli grounds in a meeting
between the qoli chiefs). Information about the qoli was then relayed ‘secretly’ to
kanace ‘hunters’ and macawa (fishing-ground) ‘owners’, only after it had been
‘taken to’ Vale Levu (the chief’s house).
The qoli kanace, usually, would take a good part of the day unless e samu a kanace
(there is an early and a plentiful harvest). The whole village would know when the
kanace is samu (lit. ‘beaten/hit’) when the women ‘hunters’ return with singing.
This was always cause for great rejoicing, the qoli usually being a Friday or Saturday
affair, and meaning that the whole family had important roles to play. While the
young women were always assigned to gather ota (an edible fern-plant) 15 , the
preferred vegetable to go with the kanace dish, the men were responsible for the
kakana dina (true foods)16, anticipating a good kanace harvest and in preparation for
the Sunday meal. This qoli took on new meaning when a Vuanirewa woman’s ola
was done (a customary presentation of traditional valuables and food by the family
of the new ‘hunter’ to the yavusa Vanua, the ‘owners’ of the qoli) demanding that
the whole kanace harvest was taken to the Vuanirewa family concerned. Another
exciting feature of Tubou-Lakeba qoli was how women participants would, on
occasion, dress up to the event in a new puleta (shirt/dress made out of same printed
material, usually floral and colourful). This was particularly true for women and men
participants of what used to be the December yavi rau (another ‘fish-hunting’
method open to all but, like the qoli kanace, lost in time): dressed in a puleta and
adorning a sisi (garland), as was the custom. Note the interesting positioning and
‘horizontal’ movement of qoli kanace nets, therefore, relative to the tide-line, and
compare that to the two qoli methods alternately used for the isirovi (chief’s fish
‘hunted’ via the qoli sirovi from his lagoon):
102�
Figure 7 The Qoli Kanace
shifting tide-line
shifting nets positions
Particularly of interest to this study is the emphasis placed on a number of tabu
(prohibitions) that must be observed without question, by the kanace ‘hunters’, for a
guaranteed harvest that would reflect the presence of a Vanua sau/mana. The use of
ivalu/cuka (war/punch) reference and the qusi ni loa (removal of the black facial
‘paint’, derived from charcoal, after the qoli, and which is a common practice in any
kind of qoli), for instance, revealed a kind of curious and mysterious knowing
surrounding the qoli kanace that is actually charming and believable. Partners
assigned to macawa (grounds), and with their relatively shorter nets (compared to the
qoli sirovi net), upon receiving the news, would begin preparing, at least
psychologically, for the demands of the qoli. As it were, there was never going to be
any sharing or touching of persons belonging to different macawa-grounds, or even
their nets, cua (sticks) and iqa (food), during the whole course of the ‘hunt’ because
that was believed to be mana-ca (a negative ‘power’ working against the main
purpose of the ‘hunt’).
Whenever the qoli party returned empty-handed, therefore, there was always the
silent assumption that certain partners were veikau-ca (mana-ca partners), or
someone ‘touched’ the tabu, or the qoli was butuki (lit. ‘stepped on’), meaning that
one of the ‘hunters’ was concealing pregnancy. Apart from these tabu, there were
other customary practices, and which I call the tara (things allowed and ought to be
done), like the dranumi (lit. ‘washing off of excess salt’) of the nets and sticks (with
four leafy branches of the sinu gaga or poisonous sinu [Excoecaria
agallocha/Euphorbiaceae], per net, to ward off ‘evil’) prior to the qoli to bring about
the desired outcome. One peculiar and mana-vinaka (positive ‘power’ to effect)
enclosure
103�
practice, as experienced by my mother, was the rubbing of body with cooked pork
oil, after eating the meat, to cause the kanace, as it was believed, not to jump over
the net but, to behave like pigs and snuff their way around and into their net.
Essentially, the qoli kanace was open to such strategizing (faiwa) and, critically,
vakamanamanataki (‘articulation’/observance) of the tabu was the order of the day.
4.3.2 Part 2: Metaphors, Rhetoric and Legacies
It is not uncommon to hear ‘capitalistic’ Tubou-Lakeba people, especially today,
vocalize their belief in the proverbial saying ‘Cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena!’
(meaning ‘When the wind blows in from [the east of the Viti group or] Lakeba,
[move out and] strike your own [enemy targets]!) to justify their kind of
individualism, particularly when confronting ‘life-threatening’ situations. Recently,
this position had been met with strong criticism from traditional and community-
minded individuals who argue that one strikes out only for the collective good.
Whatever one’s inclination is, this ancient and supposedly dead metaphor is still
influencing Tubou-Lakeba thinking, strategizing and practice. Essentially, the
original notion has become a living legacy. According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition,
individual sau/mana is the true mark of a leader. Roko Rasolo (1), from the family
tree provided, earned his right to rule the descendants of Niumataiwalu (his father)
after he consistently proved his strength, courage and determination in a series of
‘healthy competition’ between the men of his tribe and, which ultimately led to the
final ‘leap of death’ experience, that he alone attempted and survived.
Braving the prevailing ‘Lakeba wind’ (the south-easterly, that is), therefore, was
something only sea-farers sailing upwind from the west or north-west of Lakeba
would have experienced, hence, had knowledge of. The ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ reference,
possibly from the Nayau-Cicia standpoint, lying to the north-west of Lakeba, may
have originated from back-to-back Cicia-Lakeba wars around the time of Roko
Malani, Roko Rasolo’s eldest son, and which saw the crushing defeat of Cicia by
Lakeba, on Nayau (Reid, 1990, p. 14). Though defining the phrase could be
104�
somewhat problematic, there is enough evidence, at the grassroots level, to suggest
that Tubou-Lakeba people do take it seriously enough to use it in their attempts to
explain their individual pursuits. Basically, there have been those accused of
pursuing selfish and personal agenda but, at a closer look, people still care about
their collective experience as a Vanua and, which consists of their belief in, and
commitment to, the Turaga (chiefly/privileging) system and, as a Vanua ideal. Their
individual pursuits for tu vinaka (lit. ‘standing well’), or well being, is undoubtedly
tied to an often silenced collective hope for a bula veimaliwai (a non-confrontational
living in the maliwa-spaces between gauna-times and vanua-places/spaces) that is
rooted in a lasting sautu (peace/order/prosperity).
Backtracking in time, the ‘Cagi ko Lakeba’ phenomenon, therefore, could
presumably be associated with the Nayau ‘migrants’ to pre-Vuanirewa Lakeba (but
with maternal links to the Ceiekena Sau of Kedekede on Lakeba), given their sea-
going tradition and abilities, as remembered of the legendary Nayau-based
Vuanirewa of Lakeba ancestor, Niumataiwalu. Having been established on Lakeba
(the island), this Vuanirewa (vulagi-outsider) attitude of capitalizing on ‘prevailing
winds’ would have phased in, over time, to the original and largely land-based
Vanua ko Lakeba worldview producing an interesting mix of both land and sea
thinking. Though there are no highlanders or hill-tribes, the Tubou-Lakeba reality is
clearly divided between the kaiVanua and the kaiWai, the insider-land and outsider-
sea peoples, respectively, at least unconsciously and conceptually. The collective
story of the historical ascent of the Nayau-derived and now Lakeba-based chiefdom,
therefore, a vulagi (outsider) tribe nestled within the ancient Vanua ko Lakeba, and
more recently, Vanua ko Lau confederacy17, is something which is coded in the
current yalofi (yaqona circle) arrangement of Lakeba and Lau (possibly a Roko
Malani ‘creation’). This research, in effect, will employ yalofi wisdom and
knowledge to ‘confirm’ what has been written and suggested of the pre-Christian
Tubou-Lakeba reality.
105�
The Sau of Lakeba, the Tui Nayau of the Vuanirewa, is the only ‘othered-one’ in the
Tubou-Lakeba yalofi whose yaqona gets to be coboti (ritualistic show of respect with
deep resounding cupped hand-claps) by the Vanua (everyone present who ‘knows’
the meaning of being a Sau). Nevertheless, others ‘placed’ alongside the Sau in the
yaqona circle, facing the tanoa (yaqona bowl), and those qaravi yaqona (serving the
vanua drink), are equally significant in the roles they play for the sauvaki
(reverential worship) of the Sau person and office. Essentially, the yalofi formation
comprise representatives of all Vanua-places (local communities with ‘titled
leaders’) within the greater Vanua ko Lakeba ‘space’, itself located in the maliwa-
space between neighbouring Vanua ‘places/spaces’, and which encompasses Toga
and Samoa. Negotiating this generative Oceanic space, therefore, in the name of
sautu (order and stability) is what the yalofi of Tubou-Lakeba, the council of Vanua
ko Lakeba local chiefs and its Sau, exist for hence, the conception of their mata-
envoy system of Vanua (place) representation, and natural and human resource,
knowledge and technology sharing. When advocacy failed, ‘ancient’ Lakeba,
presumably, would have used their prevailing wind advantage, or strategic location,
proficiency at sea and, their web of veiwekani (connectedness), to charge at and
strike down perceived enemies. The people at the right and left-hand sides of the Sau
in the current Tubou-Lakeba yalofi, or yaqona circle, thus represent peoples who
stood by past Sau of the Vanua ko Lakeba in times of war, as well as, in times of
peace.
In the pursuit of peace, oftentimes through war, the distinct people groups18 drawn
towards pre-Christianity Lakeba learned to share and cultivate the island’s ‘limited’
land resource, and particularly during a time of ‘maximum occupation’. This gave
rise to a culture that valued a peaceful coexistence as much as it did women and land
thus, evolving a manner of exchange involving the transfer of both land and higher
ranking women to strengthen people’s connection in a relatively volatile existence.
The Tubou-Lakeba tradition has it, therefore, that the ‘lewa ni (women of) Tubou’
are, essentially, ‘lewa kalou’ (goddesses) – demanding service/worship due a
goddess. This second metaphor does not only reveal something of the Tubou-Lakeba
106�
woman but, also its men. Tubou-Lakeba women, especially those ‘married’ to their
own men, ‘groomed’ in the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ talanoa, carry themselves with pride and
confidence as their men shower them with exaggerated attention. One interesting
observation I have made about Tubou-Lakeba women is how extravagant they are at
vakasosolo (taking anything and everything they think is important to the people
they are visiting with). This is one practice often shunned by men who are not
‘cultured’ in the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ tradition, given the often arduous task of obtaining
these goods, packing them appropriately, and seeing the shipment through,
particularly if we are considering a tradition of long sea travel in the ancient canoes.
The origin of these metaphoric thought, though somewhat vague, is well and alive in
the consciousness of modern-day Tubou-Lakeba people and contemporaries. While
the men may have been traditionally associated with the ‘dui ta kena’ (striking one’s
own [enemy in war, for honor at home])19 notion, both Tubou-Lakeba men and
women can claim ownership of the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ attitude. While the ‘lewa kalou’
(goddess) idea may be thought to apply only in describing Tubou-Lakeba women,
both its men and women take pride in the analogy for it reveals more of their
worldview, and their vakaTuraga (chiefly/manly) way of life. Tubou-Lakeba people,
therefore, value their women as much as they do their land and, to them, both are
worth dying ‘in war’ for because both are the vuravura (protective source) of their
collective sustenance and sautu (well being). The iTaukei fascination with the
conceiving and ‘recycling’ abilities of both women and land, therefore, may have
been reflected in their possibly pre-Christian tradition of ‘ceremoniously’ sharing
them, especially in Tubou-Lakeba, across Vanua and between potential ‘cultivators’.
For the Vanua ko Lakeba, this theory may help explain the conceptualization of the
chiefly burial of their Sau, the ‘othered-one’, as a tei (planting). In light of this view,
women and land may be perceived as the sacred ground where a mana-ful ‘seed’ (as
in the person of the Sau) may be ‘buried’ or ‘planted’, as itei (seed or stem/root
cutting to be planted), with a potential to bring forth new life and a harvest. Thus, the
seed of the ‘striker’, the Turaga or cultivator, and the womb of the ‘goddess’, the
Vanua or the cultivated, have continued to feature prominently and, possibly,
107�
unconsciously in all Tubou-Lakeba discourse grounded in the ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ and
‘lewa ni Tubou’ phenomena.
4.4 Conclusion The conceptualization of talanoa as the ‘shifting’ and ‘settling’ of stories, in time
and space, gives me much freedom to weave my ‘magic’ or mana/sau into and
through the stories herein ‘shifted’ and ‘settled’. Whether describing, explaining or
practicing, my talanoa is my construction. Though all the stories represented in this
chapter have been largely derived from my maternal roots, its telling is informed and
influenced by both my personal upbringing and educational training. Much like any
traditional talanoa, my representation of selected aspects of the Tubou-Lakeba
reality has been motivated, guided and focused – scientifically constructed using the
tools employed by constructionist researchers hence, is particularistic and universally
implicated.
If (vei)talanoa were indeed idle talk, I would think it a wasteful exercise. Pacific
peoples have been socialized into this way of life hence, its application by
indigenous Pacific social science researchers, in research as a methodology and,
possibly, in teaching as pedagogy, should not come as a surprise. My attempt to
represent portions of the Tubou-Lakeba way of knowing by weaving them out in a
manner that highlights both their practices and attitudes, and which gives me room to
theorize, is essentially supported by the decolonization agenda. In order to prove that
the iTaukei perceive and conceptualize their experiences via a system of knowing
that is ‘seeing-based’, given the abundance of mata metaphors in their native
dialects, the talanoa-stories herein articulated have been selected because of how
they had given me insight into iTaukei thought and practice, and particularly the
Tubou-Lakeba experience. Their collective pursuit of a sautu (peace/prosperity) that
is based on a belief in a ‘present mana’ (sau-tu), therefore, is the desirable ‘state of
being’ (bula sautu or, the ‘all good life’) conceivable only by the discerning mata:
the herald-seer, the articulate-knower, the group-representative. If the art of talanoa
108�
is to be given due recognition, the insider-researcher employing it in her/his
construction may have to be reconceptualized as a dau (an expert) of it.
This dau conception is critically important for this research because any mata-rep of
any vanua-place, traditional or otherwise, must be regarded as dau (expert) of what
s/he does. A Tubou-Lakeba woman considered to be ‘dau tui’ (expert maker [of
sisi]), ‘dau vala waliwali’ (expert maker of scented oil) or ‘dau qoli’ (expert fish-
hunter), therefore, is one who is thoroughly socialized into the Tubou-Lakeba ‘cagi
ko Lakeba’ and ‘lewa ni Tubou’ traditions. Metaphoric thought such as these are
foundational to the multiple meanings modern-day people of the Vanua vakaTuraga
ko Lakeba attach to their sense of being authentic. As cited in Withers (2009),
“humans cannot construct anything without being first in place…[and which] is
primary to the construction of meaning and society” (p. 642). Being a traditional dau
(expert) of anything, therefore, shifting the ‘settled’ ivalavala (customs/traditions)
and settling the ‘shifting’ itovo (attitudes/manners) of a people, would have been the
preoccupation, possibly, of a competent few fit to adopt mata (eye/face and/or
front/representative) roles for a native group of people. These are people with the
heart to preserve their unique vei (communal/reciprocal) attitude and way of life,
particularly with regards to diplomacy and cross-cultural engagement. Interestingly,
in the Tubou-Lakeba yalofi (yaqona circle), sits one titled the Dau-niLakeba,
otherwise known as DauLakeba or, in short, Dau. Dau, essentially, is the head of the
Levuka people of Bau residing on Lakeba. DauLakeba and his people are the expert
navigators of the Tui Nayau of Lakeba, the tribe which is now responsible for the tei
(planting) of the the kuli ni tabua (lit. ‘skin of tabua’, meaning ‘corpse of the Sau’),
and for the maintenance of the sautabu (the chiefly burial place). Theirs, therefore,
the Sau and the Dau, is the story of navigating ‘cultivators’ or vulagi sea-peoples
who became landed and privileged by taukei Vanua land-peoples.
This privileged ‘next-to-the-king’ position assigned a vulagi-outsider people (the
Levuka navigators, of the Dau) by another vulagi-outsider people (the Vuanirewa
chiefs, of the Sau) makes an interesting parallel to how marginalized knowledge and
109�
epistemologies are researched, privileged and represented by indigenous student
researchers of Pacific studies researching within a decolonization framework.
Essentially, it is the ancient ‘Place’, the institution of research, which allows and
facilitates this kind of development. Such privileging of Pacific worldviews and
perspectives and, which has created a space for native Pacific researchers, in
academia, now calls for the ‘powerful’ (the manaful, the sau; the knowledgeable, the
dau) to bring to their center-world what had been, for so long, cast to the margin.
Just as the ‘assignee’ will tei (plant) the ‘assigner’, the privileged knowledge, indeed,
will establish the researcher who privileges it. This is what being a dau (an expert) in
academia is: privileging the knowledge that will establish you as a ‘navigator-
cultivator’ of a knowledge space for hope (a ‘researcher-empowerer’), a well placed
‘outsider’ – academia being the ancient place (like Vanua) where academics (like
Turaga), people who were once outsiders, are now situated and privileged.
4.5 Chapter Summary This chapter records my initial response to the philosophical questions framed and
asked in chapter one. To read, interpret and articulate Tubou-Lakeba people’s
understandings and conceptualizations of the mata concept, as intrinsic to the
iTaukei worldview, an ethnographic account documenting situated metaphors that
shape their practices and discourses will need to be established. Grounded in the
assumption that people are mata-reps of places they are ‘yoked with’ or taukei-native
to, this chapter attempts to represent what my mother and her people, as mata-reps of
the Tubou-Lakeba metaphoric way of life, consider as important Vanua knowledge.
What has been described as a ‘chiefly’ or ‘manly’ Vanua system of representation
will be affirmed therefore as a “privileging system”: a system organized around a
form of leadership that recognizes people as dau-experts of indigenous knowledge
they keep, and which is useful to the community’s pursuit of a collective well-being.
For the people of Tubou-Lakeba, this reality is centered on the person of the Sau, the
embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua whose physical presence is critical to the
preservation of their indigenous epistemologies.
110�
Two such phenomena expressive of this Vanua culture are the people’s iValavala
vakaVanua (ancient ways associated with the Vanua [‘land-people’; ‘insiders’; ‘land-
givers’]) and iTovo vakaTuraga (‘new’ ways associated with the Turaga [‘sea-
people’; ‘outsiders’; ‘land-takers’]). While sisi (the garland) is used here as a
metaphor for what is perceived to be a people’s ‘shifting’ iTovo, waliwali (scented
oil) is similarly employed as a metaphor for their ‘settled’ iValavala. A people’s
seemingly settled iValavala, therefore, understood to be anciently placed, and
intrinsic, give the impression of something that is ‘lasting’ or truly traditional. On the
other hand, a people’s iTovo, seen as recently adapted, carry with them a sense of
temporality. Though the understandings of “settled iValavala” and “shifting iTovo”,
projected herein, represent them as uniquely distinct, a great overlap in their applied
meanings is evident in how the iTaukei tend to use them interchangeably. It is a fact
then that both iValavala (the doing of the ‘ancient’) and iTovo (the trying of the
‘new’) change over time. The rate of change in one, with respect to the other, is that
which sets them apart. Though the outward expression of attitudes influencing
behavior, and which is internal to one’s cognition, change over time in response to
changes in the environment and surroundings, what is settled in her/his conceptual
system is settled for good hence, dictating how s/he conceptualizes her/his
indigenous experience. In light of this, Tubou-Lakeba knowledge of “passing
traditions” and “enduring legacies” documented herein will serve to inform and
guide interpretations and further theorizing unfolding in the chapters following.
This brief ethnography, therefore, conceptualized as a tali magimagi (a metaphor for
‘weaving stories’) of a collection of narratives embodying the Tubou-Lakeba
experience, is my little contribution to a gradually expanding body of iTaukei
thought that is hoped to encourage greater participation in indigenous research into
Pacific epistemologies. As a tali magimagi, therefore, the chapter stands out as ‘free-
stylist’ and ‘less structured’, in nature, reflecting the situated mood always
experienced in a kind of Pacific way of talanoa or ‘story-telling’. This chapter, while
pushing conventional methods of making ethnographic descriptions, in how it
attempts to go beyond the ‘seen’ and into the ‘felt’ (the line between which could
111�
still be blurred), is placed within a research framework that embodies the
decolonized methodology of veitalanoa, and which employs the talanoa method.
The chapter’s central location in the thesis-construction, coupled with the
methodology chapter preceding it, makes it a critical element within the ‘thesis
whole’. Essentially, this chapter explores, in a little way, the power of the
‘narratives’ as mechanisms whereby a predominantly oral culture ‘shifts and settles
the known’ to construct anew a ‘story’ applicable and meaningful to the collective
reality of a people living in the now. As a result, assumptions are questioned and
‘theories’ paraphrased. By implication, this chapter reflects a kind of knowledge
sharing, via veitalanoa-dialogue, that leads to knowledge building, and ultimately,
well being. In a way, this is me ‘striking when the wind is blowing in my favour’. In
essence, I am just being pro-active and protective of ‘our women and children’. My
decision to privilege situated Tubou-Lakeba knowledge articulated herein is
envisioned to champion the cause of the marginalized and the silenced. Motivated to
empower, the chapter provides the backdrop to the discussion and analysis, of
answers to the research questions, collected from the ‘field’ and informed by
literature, and which are to be found in the chapter following.
������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Magimagi or sinnet, traditionally used as house and canoe lashings, is woven from coconut fibres derived from the coconut husk of a special breed of coconut. 2 From Helu Thaman’s poem titled ‘Magimagi’ (1999, p. 73). This poem is significant to this study because of how I relate to it: the conception that a researcher is like a Mata (eye-of-canoe/place) navigator who uses the magimagi makers’ ‘wisdom’ to ultimately set sail, the lingering iTaukei expression ‘tali magimagi’ (lit. ‘the weaving of magimagi’) and which means the artistic telling of ‘long’ stories both to amuse and to inform, while ‘busy’ at work, and my anticipated September 2014 graduation which is sure to make the perfect birthday gift for my September 14 birthday. Last but not least, this tough work of ‘weaving out an MA thesis’ will surely leave a mark on my ‘hands’ just as it has left marks on the ‘hands’ of researchers whose work has greatly informed mine. 3 Note that on any given-day Tubou-Lakeba people are categorized into either Lakeba iWai (those who are ‘over-seas’, or away from Lakeba island) and Lakeba iVanua (those living on their island home in the Lau-Viti group). 4 Henceforth written as ‘yaqona’, the iTaukei name for what is commonly called kava. 5 Art is presented here as anything and everything displaying skill or talent, whether formally studied/learned or otherwise, that the people of Tubou-Lakeba value and, whose true worth is not driven by the market. Note, especially, that the sisi market price does not reflect truly what value the Tubou-Lakeba people give this traditional wear – calling it thus given how their attire, at specific events, is considered incomplete without the sisi. 6 The iTovo vaka Turaga is ‘passing’ in the sense that because these are manners which belong to the chiefs, reigning chiefly families always bring into the Vanua culture new influences and ways of showing honour/respect to titled Vanua leaders, what they themselves think is honourable/respectable.
112�
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Note that these ‘changing traditions’ usually come about as a result of extensive cultural sharing with other chiefly peoples via ‘marriage’ alliances, trade engagements, etc. In the same manner, the sisimaking process have always been ‘warm’ towards borrowing and innovation, as is known to sisimakers, that are cost-effective and which add to the aesthetic value of the product. Though the memory of a sisi, worn today and hung up on the wall tomorrow, fades in time, that of the occasion it marks may linger on a little while longer. The worth of a sisi is quickly lost just as its beauty quickly fades after it has served its purpose. 7 Note that ancient Lau, of which the Tui Nayau is Sau (overlord), may have been much smaller, territorially, than what Lau is today on the map – possibly excluding the Vanuabalavu and the Moala groups. 8Note that in the Tubou-Lakeba reality, only men are installed paramount chiefs. There has never been a woman Sau of Lau-Viti.9 Vei principles define the iTaukei. Whether these conceptions work for good, or not, vei principles dictate the iTaukei behavior in that they predispose them to acting collectively, and hardly ever as individuals – despite all good intentions in the pursuit of positive ‘economic development’ via a strong individualistic base, for instance. Two such phenomena, highlighted by Tuwere and cited in Huffer and Qalo (2004, p. 97) are veirogoci [the capacity to allow oneself to hear the other] and veivosoti [making allowances for others]. Note that there is a plethora of vei concepts in the iTaukei vocabulary, and which are often taken-for-granted, which I submit influence iTaukei thinking, so much, towards a brand of communalism, which when politicized, can result in extreme group behavior similar to that which were observed in the coup of A. D. 2000. On the bright side though, it is the same ‘vei force’ which had always picked us up from our low-points and raised us, as a people, to higher-places of hope. 10 The ivalavala vakaVanua (culture/traditions) is lasting in the sense that it is settled in the people’s minds. It is no longer ‘wearable’, like the sisi, just for a moment’s glory, because it is now essentially who the iTaukei person is – ‘engraved’ in her/his heart, because of its practicality, carrying a sense of permanency. 11 Note that just as there are manaful vau harvesters (amongst Tubou-Lakeba sisi makers), there is a knowing that some women are liga vuqa (lit. ‘hands [that] fill’ implying that, like King Midas touch, their hands work magic and will cause more oil to be produced) than others, when it comes to waliwali making. 12 Some methods of qoli used today in the Lau-Viti group may have been borrowed from indigenous sea-based cultures spread across Oceania. One such method now common in Tubou-Lakeba, the knowledge of which is believed to have been brought there by a Rabi (Micronesians settled in Viti)doctor and his family, is known to the locals as ‘tili’. 13 Note that at other times the qoli sirovi is done from other lagoons and not from the fish ‘hunting’ ground reserved for the Tui Nayau. This qoli uses one long net or, two to three nets joined into a long one. The whole harvest is taken to Vale Levu (chief’s ‘big house’) from where the isirovi (fish) for the chief is selected and the rest is divided amongst the ‘hunters’ – consisting the women who called for the ‘hunt’ and who tended to the net(s), and the rest of them who responded to the call. 14 The qoli kanace consists of a number of shorter nets, possibly fifteen or more, each carried by two women ‘hunters’, the two who will take home anything caught in their net. Note that Vale Levu has a muri qoli (lit. ‘following the hunt’) reserved spot in the ‘hunt’, and possibly two other spots, which when not represented by Vale Levu women, are assigned to other willing partners with nets. If nothing is caught in the Vale Levu net, then they do not take ‘home’ anything unless ‘gifted’ to them by other ‘hunters’. The practice of luva ika (removing fish off of the net of another), for instance, is a privilege enjoyed by certain individuals on the grounds of their veiwekani (connectedness) to the ‘owner’ of the macawa (ground) or the itutu ni qoli (privileged position in the ‘hunt’) they can claim fish from (when they are still attached to the net). Luva ika, in essence, may still be done even if someone other than the ‘owner’ is ‘hunting’ in that macawa one can pick fish from. 15 Refer to Gatty (2009, p. 183). 16 Refer Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 13). This category of edibles includes all crops (mainly starchy foods) served with the greens (vegetables) and meat/fish. This category is often referred to as ilava ni kakana.
113�
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17 Refer discussion on Turaga and Vanua by Hooper (1966) who correctly says, when describing Tubou-Lakeba people’s understanding of the concepts, that “the term turaga, which, like vanua,causes Lauans [including Tubou-Lakeba] no confusion” (p. 247). 18 Comprising the Tui Lakeba people from the north, the Kabara brothers from the south, the Levuka people of Bau island, off the coast of eastern Viti Levu, from the west, the Vuanirewa of Nayau from the north-west, and visitors, craftspeople and veiwekani from Toga and Samoa to the east. 19 Note that the enemy struck is not eliminated or destroyed totally but, only overcome and consequently invited to partner with the victor in future exploits. In the case of the historic Cicia-Lakeba wars, Cicia was not only defeated but, became the faithful ‘right hand’ of Lakeba. In the Tubou-Lakeba yalofi (yaqona circle), the Mata-kiCicia (herald to Cicia) of Lakeba was elevated to chief mata-niVanua (eye/rep of Vanua) of its Turaga, the Tui Nayau, the Sau of the Vanua (Lakeba-Lau).
114��
CHAPTER 5
ANSWERS, ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION
While the idea of building on traditional institutions is a noble one and undoubtedly
sound, its value may be quickly lost in a situation of change; it may develop ideas based
on old patterns which may become quickly obsolete, for the people are continually
working out new patterns; alternative ways of ordering their lives, which they judge to
be more advantageous in the new conditions.
Rusiate R. Nayacakalou1
5.1 Introduction The iTaukei language, as in all indigenous cultures, has long kept encrypted, in its
clichéd metaphorical expressions, ancient truths that need fresh interpretations, and
which will prove relevant to our modern existence. What remains is a renewed
commitment, from indigenous minds, to the intelligible re-construction, possibly, of
past realities for the sole purpose of settling one’s connectedness to a ‘mythical’ past –
groundedness in place being foundational to any construction of meaning and society.
This project, while attempting to give voice to silenced narratives, will record localized
Vanua ko Lakeba conceptualizations of five critical iTaukei constructions: vanua,
vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu. Individual and group understandings of these living
‘archaic’ concepts, rooted in situated metaphorical thought, and extracted via veitalanoa
engagements with Tubou-Lakeba people, will be articulated, analyzed and discussed.
This chapter, therefore, will weave into the thesis, or my talanoa construction, multiple
interpretations gathered from the ‘field’. This will produce, ultimately, an overall
picture that depicts a social reality actively and consciously contributing to knowledge
building, and the pursuit of individual and collective well being.
The analysis and discussion, therefore, will be constructed around the five themes:
vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu – drawing from ‘field’ notes (comprising
knowledge derived from literature also), and which reflect current and influenced
115��
positions. Ideas mentioned in the chapters preceding, while providing a backdrop, will
be further employed as interpretive tools and, occasionally, to draw conclusions.
Essentially, this chapter will attempt to question the viability of these lingering
meanings and how they play into shaping who we are and, how we respond to
alternative strategies and solutions, and change. As a result, the conception that there
exists the iTaukei mata system of knowing, based on representation and ‘seeing’, will
be further explored to establish how that relates to the Tubou-Lakeba people’s sense of
well being hence, situating what they conceptualize as sautu (peace and prosperity) in
their worldview. As a mata-rep of the researched, I will endeavour to be fair and
constructive in my representation and analysis hence, to ascertain my preferred position
as a constructionist iTaukei researcher who is human enough to avoid the danger of
denying particularistic notions in the name of objectivity. Herein, being a subjective
‘encourager’ means shedding light into and shedding ‘kilos’ off of preconceived ideas
which can either work to elevate or reduce a people. To really ‘see’ and ‘know’ what
the five concepts mean and imply, according to a young mata-niVanua respondent,
therefore, is to view them as veiwekani (related) and, as ideas ‘…cokoti vata ina
vakasama ni tamata’ (‘…bound together [and bounded] by the concept of [being]
human’) – the situated human, the human-in-context.
5.2 Answers and Analyses 5.2.1 Vanua
The vanua concept (generally speaking), as agreed by every adult encountered in the
‘field’, comprises people and what they consider place; their physical environment and
its resources (flora and fauna); the human population, its ivalavala (customs/culture)
and itovo (manners/approaches). As put by an informed adult, of the chiefly clan and a
high official of the church, the Vanua (the ‘named’ or ‘claimed’ place) is vakasulumi
(dressed) in the things ‘e vakaTuraga-taki kina’ (‘of high value and, which exalt a
people embodying the chiefly manner’). From these veitalanoa, it is not too hard to
think that Tubou-Lakeba people ‘understand’ how any socio-cultural enhancement of a
Vanua is dependent, totally, on the people placed in it. A quick look over the history of
116��
the place now known as Lakeba, therefore, will give a telling story of how its ivalavala
(ways of doing life) became what it is spoken of today. First tawani (filled) by makers
of Lapita pots, approximately 3500BP and, reclaimed by their descendents about two
millenniums later, who possibly came in waves of upwind migration, Lakeba became
the ‘hotspot’ of east-west engagement between vanua people to the west and, fonua and
fanua people to the east. This colourful past of active integration between diverse
groups of anciently related peoples, therefore, would have shaped Lakeba thought into
its known form, and which was clearly anti-kanatamata (human-flesh eating) well
before the rarama (light) of the lotu (church) and vuli (schooling) hit our shores (Reid,
1990). Lakeba, therefore, was and still is a place open to outside influence and yet
rooted distinctly in vanua thinking.
What does this notion of a people’s rootedness in vanua thinking, as it pertains to their
system of knowing and their conceptualization of sautu (peace and prosperity),
therefore, imply? If the concept of vanua is inextricably tied to tradition, does that mean
that there is no room for modern alternate approaches to ‘well being’, or has the so
called ‘east-west’ divide between what works and what does not, in a modern economy,
been greatly exaggerated to benefit a few? As I will argue, vanua people welcomed and
embraced modernity because, as humans, we make room for anything promising the ‘all
good life’. The fact that the vakaTuraga (chiefly/manly) approach to inter-Vanua
engagement, in employing Vanua mata-reps, opened up their people to the influence of
the missionaries’ ‘good news’, testifies to the real possibility of engaging people cross-
culturally if the basis for that sharing is grounded in mutual respect. This argument is
based on the assumption that though we differ markedly, as cultured peoples, our
common humanity dictates that, in order to survive, we ‘fight or take to flight’. The
formation of Vanua vakaTuraga by vanua or placed-peoples, therefore, is a converging
that is parallel to taking the ‘fight’ option hence, suggesting that con-frontation is
important in order for a people to move forward. When vanua-people con-front each
other in the true spirit of Auseinandersetzung, staying apart in togetherness that is, by
moving into and occupying the maliwa-spaces between, greater understanding of the
‘Other’, hence of the vanua ‘Self’, is acquired and sustained.
117��
It is not uncommon today, amongst Tubou-Lakeba people, to hear the vanua reference
being used to describe certain customs practiced by some church people today, and
which were not associated with the kaiPalagi church, like the use of yaqona, social or
ceremonial, for instance. The common use of the vakavanua conception, and which
implies a lack of professionalism, is yet another indicator of how the true worth of the
vanua concept has been ‘devalued’. This kind of misrepresentation is something which
needs to be corrected if the concept of vanua is to be restored to its esteemed position,
amongst traditional iTaukei especially, for this is basically the foundation upon which
all foreign constructs and institutions, introduced locally and employing vanua thinking
people, have been built. By the time a child taught in the iTaukei language goes to
primary school, for instance, the vanua concept and all that it entails has been firmly
engraved in her/his cognitive unconscious shaping the way her/his experiences were to
be conceptualized. For the vanua thinking people of Lakeba, they exist in the vanua as
much as it exists in them – vanua defining both constituents and boundaries, even for
the four concepts to be discussed later.
5.2.2 Vuravura
According to a young and creative public servant of the mata-niVanua clan, the
vuravura is the protective and all-sustaining planet Earth within which we all exist. This
is an educated opinion that has distinctly silenced the essence of the vura concept. Upon
further investigation though, it was revealed that most Tubou-Lakeba people hold that
inside this dome-like covering exist life-sustaining support systems emerging from
within (as believed by their pre-Christian ancestors, possibly), but designed from
without by an external creative power and, which is clearly a mix of both indigenous
and Christian worldviews. Evidently, the Tubou-Lakeba people’s inability to articulate
a sound indigenous position on what the vuravura concept is really all about, compared
to their proficiency in talking about vanua, may be understood in light of what has been
suggested about the impact of the human factor in how the five constructs investigated
are conceptualized by vanua people. While the vanua is clearly viewed and defined by
the tamata (human person) in it, current vuravura understanding seem to suggest a
vuravura viewed and defined from the outside – an objective reality, possibly silencing
118��
standpoint perspectives and, privileging so called non-subjective outsider views pretty
much rooted in western frameworks. Nonetheless, to extract a truly indigenous position
on the vuravura concept, one will need to think ‘outside the box’ or else, search deeper
within it.
As discussed earlier in chapter 1, the root word vura, meaning ‘emerge’ or ‘appear’ and,
which is derived from vu (origin) and ra (base), suggest that what has emerged
originates from where it is now based or grounded. Interestingly, according to the
Tubou-Lakeba worldview, there are a number of vuravura (worlds): the vuravura ni ika
(of fish), the vuravura ni yalo (of spirits) and the noda vuravura (ours), three examples
for instance. This is particularly interesting given how the understanding influences
Tubou-Lakeba ivalavala ni qoli kanace (way of hunting kanace fish). Their knowledge
of the three worlds mentioned above contributes in making any kanace hunt successful.
Fish originate from their ra (base) and the hunters from theirs. The two ra-bases,
essentially, overlap at the inter-tidal zone where the ivalu (‘war’) or cuka (‘punch’), the
fish ‘hunt’ that is, takes place. The vakamanamanataki of the tabu (faithful observance
of avoidances), like how the mata-niQoli (eyes of the hunt, ‘commanders’) use their
bent index-fingers to direct the women hunters to where the school of kanace is located,
for instance, indicates the Tubou-Lakeba knowledge of how the vuravura ni yalo (of the
spirits) occasionally interfere with the natural worlds of fish and humans. In a way,
while vanua can be conceptualized as one’s home-base, vuravura is seen to encompass
the entire inhabitable space consisting of all home-bases or ‘peopled’ places. Vuravura,
therefore, consist all ra-bases or ‘habitats’ of every living member of the Vanua; Vanua
as in its physical, socio-cultural and spiritual dimensions; Vanua in its entirety, the
Vanua taukei (familiar places) and Vanua tani (unfamiliar places). For Tubou-Lakeba
people, therefore, when they speak of going to the vuravura-world, that world,
unconsciously, exists for them far out at sea and beyond all known horizons – the ‘all-
generative Oceanic space’ of which their ra-base or vanua-place is but only the center.
In an interesting twist to one such veitalanoa discussion I had with some mata-niVanua
clan members (the heralds) and, which also hosted some Vuanirewa people (of the
119��
chiefs), it was kune-i (found/conceived) that just as the vanua concept encourages us to
settle in to a center, the vuravura notion challenges us to venture out from it. This
insight has added new meaning to my personal journey and, consequently, to this
talanoa construction – seeking both rootedness in place (vanua) and the daring
exploration of negotiable space (vuravura). The same conception has given me a new
appreciation of what the sea might have presented to early Pacific peoples everywhere. I
now have an influenced understanding of how the sea would have dared our ancestors
to push their limits beyond the known vu-niLagi (root of Lagi [heavens], the horizon),
vanua-places, and vuravura-worlds. This conception may help explain, in part, the
iTaukei patterns of migration and their resolve to hold on fast to the ivalavala-ways
which connect them to their home-bases, the vanua-places where their genealogies are
rooted, the ra (bases) from which they vu (originate). In light of this, it could be said
that the iTaukei have no sense of a faraway home-land but, that of a very real vuravura
(continuous source) out of which all things which exist vura (emerged) – existing ‘in-
place’ (as opposed to ‘out-of-place’) for their very survival.
5.2.3 Taukei
The idea of taukei resonates well with that of ‘ownership’, belonging and identity.
Essentially, land and place belong to the people in it as much as the people belong to
them. This would mean that the theoretical whole called the vanua forms a critical part
of us, a living part that wills always to remain connected to related lands (qele), places
(vanua) and peoples (veiwekani). Analyzing the word taukei, from an indigenous
perspective, one is persuaded to think of it in terms of tau-kei or, possibly, ‘yoked-with’
(using one of the many situated meanings of tau) explaining why the tamata-person
who considers herself/himself taukei (native/local) would feel a kind of restricted
oneness with the vanua-place/land. When posed with the taukei question, participants
almost always responded with the conviction that one is taukei (not an outsider that is)
if one is volai (registered in the Vola ni Kawa Bula [VKB])2 like they say: A ona ga esa
volai, esa volai! (lit. ‘Whoever is ‘written’, is ‘written!’’). This is the common argument
heard today, and as I presume, because there are now many who are volai (registered)
as vasu (descendents of a native woman of rank). There are also those whose ancestors
120��
were not on Lakeba at the time of the ‘writing’, scattered across the Lau group at the
time of pre-European contact wars, brought back into the fold, and sometimes referred
to as isolosolo. Whether one is of a male or a female line, or isolosolo, all volai
(‘written’) or Tubou-Lakeba registered taukei are land-owners, having earned or
assigned pieces of land to build a home-base on and/or cultivate.3
Another level of being taukei (insider) which I understood perfectly at the outset and,
which the volai acknowledged at the ceremonial presentation of my isevusevu
(traditional introductions), concerned people like myself who are not of the volai
(registered) but, who are familiar with the place and its customs. Even though being
taukei is open to interpretation, the people of Tubou-Lakeba interacted with were still
convinced that what counts is being registered. This position is well understood given
how a lot was at stake: power, status, landownership, belongingness and identity. On
that note, it could be said that the minds of the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba have been
thoroughly colonized with respect to believing in the legitimacy of the ‘written’ (the
‘young’ way) over what has been ‘coded’ and ‘preserved’ in their oral traditions, and
flowing in their veins (the ‘old’ way). In re-reading the making of sisi and waliwali
(garland and scented oil, respectively), the execution of the qoli or fish hunt, and the
practice of every other element of their island culture, as narratives, one needs to go
through the decolonizing process of ‘shifting and settling talanoa-stories’ with the
intention of ‘making’ them relevant and sustainable in the modern context. This project,
essentially, will have to draw from stories ‘told’ by us as well as those ‘constructed’ for
us. Being taukei (native, local, familiar), in this regard therefore, is being authentic.
The recent use of the iTaukei label to identify the indigenous, or natives of the Viti
group, previously known as Fijians, is another interesting moment in the history of our
nation (Vanua). The apparent use of the politics of inclusivity (having all citizens to be
called Fijians, that is), therefore, has also served to keep the memory of the indigenous
people’s ‘yoked-ness’ with the Vanua ko Viti, the lands and seas first tawani (filled) by
their ancestors centuries before any European or Asian set foot on our shores. In
asserting the iTaukei identity, all non-iTaukei people, and constructs, have permanently
121��
been made vulagi-outsider to ‘place’, hence alienating them further from truly ‘taking
root’. Interestingly, according to oral traditions, the taukei ni Vanua, yoked with its
land, saw themselves initially as ‘filling’ and not ‘owning’ place. Henceforth, their
continued existence on vanua-land was conceived as vakatawa koro/vanua, a
stewardship role conceptualized as the ‘continuous filling of place’ by people who are
‘yoked-with’ (tau-kei to) it. This conception may yet again help to explain the iTaukei
or taukei (native) people’s openness to outsiders or vulagi (visitors), knowing that the
strangers merely join with them in ‘filling’ and not ‘owning’ place, only to be made tau-
kei (‘yoked-with’ or ‘familiarized’) with place over time via ‘adoption’ or blood
connectedness. This view is evident in how iTaukei conceptualize Indo-Fijians as their
vasu: a people with ‘maternal’ links to the iTaukei and, who may ‘enjoy’ vasu
privileges. This privileged vulagi-taukei (outsider-insider) position for Fiji citizens of
Indian descent, the thought of which is close to what I enjoy in my vasu place, has been
‘pushed aside’ by capitalistic thinking pursuing ‘owning’ of place over the ‘filling’ of it.
This modern approach to ‘land-stewardship’, critically important to taukei ni qele/vanua
(‘land-owner’s’) given to the ideals of a cash economy, may have gradually eroded
indigenous thinking and ways of privileging vulagi-outsiders, in favour of
entrepreneurship. Modernization, in essence, is shifting iTaukei thinking and their
conceptualizations of taukeiness or ‘yoked-ness’ with place.
5.2.4 Mata
The mata concept, aside from representation or representing, means several things:
eye(s), front, face, sources and groups. Every iTaukei, therefore, is a mata of her/his
vanua-place – representing it, seeing for/through it, ‘educating’ it, and grouped into it.
This is more than just standing up for it or speaking on behalf of it. A mata is more than
just a herald, more than just a go-between the chief (Sau) and the Vanua. Mata roles,
essentially, can be performed by all because everyone, at one level or another, is Turaga
or chief over her/his ‘assigned’ place/space hence, is the best candidate to be mata
(representative) of it. The Turaga conception, commonly understood as ‘chief’,
therefore, is one interesting to analyze, and for a deeper appreciation of what it may
encompass, especially in relation to the mata concept. Another reading of the Tu-ra-ga
122��
concept may reveal a tu (standing/existence/presence) that is grounded ga (alone/only)
in the ra (base) place. In the Tubou-Lakeba center world of the Sau, the chiefly
reference for his feet is tura-tura, compared to the yava that is used for the ‘commoner’.
This knowledge has given new meaning to my perception of what or who a
Turaga/chief is – a person ‘standing only at her/his home-base’. This understanding has
helped me to appreciate what is often heard said: A turaga e turaga ni tamata! (A chief
is chief [only] of/over [his] people!). A chief’s home-base, therefore, is the theoretical
place where he stands a chance at being appointed leader of any mata-group. The
placed-people within her/his ra-base are the only ones who would extend expressions of
veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) towards her/him as the ‘othered-one’, the Sau. In the
case of Tubou-Lakeba people, their Sau is essentially the group’s representative, the
“mata (rep) of the mata (group)”, and the embodiment of all things Vanua and taukei
related.
A true embodiment of the Vanua, a mata that is, whether s/he speaks or is silent, will
continue to reflect Vanua thought in her/his ivalavala (customs) and itovo (manners) to
confirm that the ‘itovo e odra ga a Turaga’ (‘manners belong [only] to the
chiefly/manly [the mata]’). Proper and respectable conduct, learned and demonstrated
by any iTaukei, is a sign that s/he is of Turaga (chiefly) ‘blood’, possible given the
iTaukei history of wars, the opposite of sautu (peace), and which works to reorder
society elevating some and reducing others. The understanding that all iTaukei are
potentially chiefly may explain the iTaukei manner of veivakaturagataki (esteeming of
the other, or chiefly respect) extended one to another, and which is observed in the
subtle ways they carry themselves about and relate to other iTaukei people, particularly
at the ceremonial level. In this regard, a mata-rep of a Vanua vakaTuraga is one who
lives in the wisdom that people are not just tamata (persons/people) ‘belonging’ to a
Turaga (chief) but, are themselves mata embodiments of their respective Vanua
vakaTuraga. This thought is reflected every time the iTaukei engage themselves in
traditional ceremonies or veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua (lit. ‘Vanua facing Vanua’). These
traditional presentations, in essence, always acknowledge the titled Vanua offices
‘filled’ by the installed chiefs of the receiving and presenting Vanua parties. Though the
123��
primary embodiment of the sau/mana, the Sau himself, may not be present at the
ceremonies, or has been ‘planted’ (buried), the presence of vanua-people who embody
the Vanua institution to which the sau/mana ‘belongs’ is enough to warrant full
observance of their ivalavala vakaVanua (Vanua traditions) vakaTuraga (chiefly).
Nonetheless, certain customs are said to be reserved for the ‘othered-one’, the Sau.
According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition also, high ranking individuals from closer to the
center world of the Sau, on Lakeba, were often assigned ‘postings’ further out from the
center at the outlying islands in a kind of ‘indirect-rule’. These were ‘postings’ wherein
chiefly mata-kiLakeba (reps. to Lakeba) were stationed, the ‘envoys’ who bring the rule
of Lakeba to its vakataukata, the tikina (parts) of Lau qali (‘twisted together’, referring
to tributaries) to Lakeba. Understanding the qali concept is critical in order for one to
appreciate the nature of connectedness between islands qali (‘twisted together’) with
Lakeba. Island people’s situated knowledge of twisting together many coconuts to help
in ‘floating’ them across from point A to point B, prior to the development of roads and
reliable forms of transportation, is enough to make one realize how effective a manner
of moving coconuts, and people, the qali method is. Similarly, Vanua qali are meant to
‘float together’ in the middle of the raging sea – a relationship that was, possibly, not
meant to be oppressive. This is one way island groups express their dependence on one
another, ‘twisting coconuts’ being the metaphor for a much needed sense of
togetherness. Interestingly, mata and qali are concepts present also in the iTaukei
counting system, and which is based in tens: ‘10 fishes making 1 mata’ and ‘10
coconuts making 1 qali’. This is significant given how fish and coconuts form a major
part of the local diet. Furthermore, mata and qali together form the concept of mataqali
(the iTaukei land-owning unit consisting of a number of related families ‘twisted
together’) or, otherwise, as used at the daily conversational level, to speak of varieties
as in ‘mataqali ika’ (kinds of fish). In the final analysis, it could be said that mata-rep
roles can only be created for a people qali (grouped) together for survival.
124��
5.2.5 Sautu
Sautu, as in ‘times of plenty’4, according to the Tubou-Lakeba people, is connected to
the presence of an embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua. Village elders today still
speak of ways the vanua-land/sea expressed the imbued mana of the Vanua in the past,
and which were strongly evident in the days of the last ‘sitting/standing chief’ (a Sau
who was there in person). One particular elder of the chiefly yavusa (a grouping made
up of several mataqali), who served for a long while at the Vale Levu (lit. ‘big house’),
expressed how a kind of plenty used to be observed on Lakeba. The traditional practice
of presenting first fruits and the best of one’s produce gathered from the iteitei
(gardens), and which were harvesting in abundance, was an indication of such a sautu.
This observation was supported by my mother and grandmother who expressed how
plentiful the harvest of fish via the qoli sirovi had always been every time the last Sau,
Ratu Mara, would visit the island, himself settled in the city being the prime minister
and later, the president of the Vanua ko Viti. These moments of sautu, while the people
were quick to connect to a mana from an ancient past, and which they believe is
permanently present in place, were observed because people tilled the land and reserved
fishing grounds solely and wholeheartedly for the service/worship of the Sau. The
overflow from such sustainable practices, in essence, also accounted for their immediate
needs. Herein, the survival of Vanua culture was seen as critical to their personal and
collective well-being.
In an informal discussion I had with an older men of the yavusa Vanua (of the ‘land-
givers’), he was quick to point out that sautu (peace/prosperity) was a lived reality,
traditionally, because people had interpreted the ‘cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena’ (meaning
‘striking when the wind is working in your favour’) conception correctly. According to
him, the proverb meant that people individually commit themselves to taking care of
Vanua business, or their common interest, while the conditions were right, and tended
to their own in their own time, having first secured their island-base. In this regard,
Vanua business is seen to comprise the sauvaki (‘worship’) of the itutu vakaTuraga, the
chiefly place and its chiefly incumbent. Today, as he further claimed, people are more
concerned with their personal ‘needs’ and, less and less with what must matter the most,
125��
so he thought, to the iTaukei, the Vanua or the Vanua vakaTuraga. The sauvaki of the
chiefly place, the Vanua vakaTuraga, in essence, comprises the sustainable use of both
land and sea resources in the service of the ‘sitting Sau’ and, for the continuity of the
ivalavala vakaVanua (Vanua traditions). 5 One such manner of exalting the chiefly
place, never practiced when the bilo (yaqona cup) of the Vanua is cobori no (presently
turned bottoms-up)6, is what has been called lala or, the collective vala (doing) of the
chief’s garden, particularly uvi (yams) and niu (copra). These community acts of
ensuring that the chief’s house was richly ‘adorned’ with the iyau ni Vanua (wealth of
the land/people), the iyau (wealth) which gets redistributed to the Vanua, in essence,
kept the Vanua and their ‘othered-one’ enjoying the sautu (abundance) of the
land/people.
Sautu, as argued by most who sat in the veitalanoa sessions I ‘chaired’, must not be
weighed only in material terms. Tubou-Lakeba people generally think that sautu (peace)
must be experienced first within before it can ever be expressed without. While this line
of thinking may have been influenced by the teachings of the church, the conception of
sautu as a present and real sau/mana embodied by the individual, and perceived to have
an inner [spiritual or psychological] and stabilizing effect, may be reconceptualized as a
body of knowledge which grounds the person in place. This knowledge base, possibly,
is that which frames a person’s thinking, the cognitive unconscious developed in the
formative years, and which shapes human thought. This understanding assumes that to
be in place is to ‘own’ situated knowledge necessary for ‘survival’ in that given context:
the sau/mana (critical knowledge) possessed by the individual, and which s/he employs
to effect developments and changes that work to secure her/his position in place. A well
established individual, thus, is one who is able to use her/his present sau/mana to tame
the ‘forces’ of nature, mind and society employing ivalu (‘warfare’, and with reference
to the qoli kanace) tactics, in a kind of con-frontation as in Auseinandersetzung, to
accomplish desired goals and to live comfortably well with others in sautu (abundance).
This discussion implies, therefore, that sautu (peace/prosperity/order/stability) is a state
of mind as much as it is a state of being. It is in us and we live in it. Culturally grounded
and ordered, sautu is the totality of that which is believed in and hoped for: expressions
126��
of sau/mana; the near equivalent of what the Christian bible calls ‘faith’; more than just
a ‘feeling’, both abstract and tangible; and associated with the act of sincere worship
directed towards a higher ‘othered-one’ bwho embodies all things noble and authentic.
5.3 Further Discussion The question of a sautu (moments of peace/plenty) influenced by a belief in the
existence of a Vanua, or place, imbued with an effective sau/mana (power) and/or, the
presence of a Sau (chief/leader) embodying that sau/mana, remains a topic for further
discussion. Any conceptualization of peace is situated in a local culture and, for the
iTaukei, this state of being, a state of ‘mind’, is rooted in their sense of belonging to
place and, connectedness to nature and humanity. A Vanua vakaTuraga (peopled-
place/placed-people) sourced and sustained by a generative vuravura-world, therefore,
is the site for any veitalanoa-dialogue between peoples made taukei (‘familiarized’ and
‘yoked with’ place, irrespective of race) everywhere within the Viti group of islands
sharing a common need for the ‘exploration’ of their common Oceanic space.
Placing the epistemology of sau/mana and a vuravura-world (nature) based sautu
theory within a chronology of vanua/fonua/fanua life-time (gauna), rooted in the Lapita
culture, and which diversified into distinct linguistic sub-groups, one is indefinitely
drawn to research-based conceptions such as ‘Times of Plenty, Times of Less’ (Nunn et
al., 2007) for a scientific perspective. This approach, therefore, will prove critical in an
attempt to re-construct a sound iTaukei identity in the twenty-first century kaiViti
society7. Constructing a common identity, therefore, would be necessary for everyone
settled in the Viti group to come to a shared understanding of the sautu and sau/mana
conceptions. That common identity is proposed herein to be found in the fluidity of the
five general iTaukei themes discussed thus far: vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu
– conceptions which may help ‘shift and settle’, via veitalanoa/dialogue, a new
understanding of the kaiViti issue.
127��
Is the idealized kaiViti society, Viti being the place/space we are all placed in, truly a
dream worth dreaming or, are we better off identified as a plural society without the
‘social will’ to hold it together?8 Must we then develop and adopt a national culture,
rooted in the Viti-place, and which will render us all as kaiViti or, are we happy, as a
nation, named Fiji and Fijians in the ‘language’ of the privileged ‘late-comer’, the
foreigner, the colonizer? These are some questions that should challenge any iTaukei
thinker committed to making sautu (peace, plenty) the shared reality of everyone now
settled in the Viti group of islands. The kaiViti culture that is proposed here, a culture
taukei to (‘yoked with’) Viti as a vanua-place, should not perpetuate, therefore,
colonizing ideas that reduce us to mere ‘discovered others’ in the vocabulary of the
Eurocentric colonizer. Instead, we must rise above these circumstances and boldly
advocate a unifying identity that refuses to continue to give credit to vulagi-foreign
concepts and practices that once conquered and subjugated us into second and third
class citizens of our Vanua ko Viti. Historically ‘dis-placed’, at least culturally and
psychologically, true kaiViti are now challenged to deal with this reality intelligibly and
not accept it as our fate.
5.3.1 Placing the Sau/Mana and Sautu Conceptions Chronologically
According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition, the first peoples (of the Tui Lakeba migration
from the north of Lakeba, possibly from Vanua Levu through Taveuni) reached Lakeba
and settled the shores, possibly for generations (Reid, 1990), before taking to the hills of
what became the defensible Ulunikoro and Kedekede hillforts. This was confirmed by
Simon Best (as cited in Nunn et al., 2007) who noted that there is strong evidence
supporting this upslope migration story during what is now known as the A. D. 1300
Event9, and which resulted in what Nunn et al. (2007, p. 383) calls a time of “societal
collapse”. The period following, the Little Ice Age (A. D. 1450–1750), was a time of
great conflict and, for Lakeba-Lau, this was expressed in the traces of the remains of
many settlements scattered all over the island. These were possibly splinter groups from
the few larger ones that settled mostly along the coast, prior to the A. D 1300 Event,
and who were joined by later migrants only to be ‘united’ under the leadership of the
128��
Ceiekena Sau, towards the end of the Little Ice Age (late 1500s to late 1700s), on
Kedekede.
It was on Kedekede, according to Tubou-Lakeba traditions, that Lakeba appointed its
first Sau (chief-leader). Interestingly, this development from having Tui spiritual leaders
(Tu’i in Toga) to recognizing Sau administrative leaders (Hau in Toga), the temporal
shift away from the sacred, was taking place in Vanua vakaTuraga having some
intimate connections with Toga. According to Reid’s (1990, p. 6) calculations, using
Tubou-Lakeba oral accounts and the Tu’i Toga and Tu’i Kanokupolu genealogies, the
Sau of Kedekede line of the Ceiekena tribe10 was only established around the late
sixteenth century and ran on for two centuries before it was replaced by the Tui Nayau
line of the Vuanirewa from Nayau. It was also during the reign of this Ceiekena tribe on
Kedekede, around the mid 1700s, that part of the seafaring (fisherfolks) Levuka people
(now dispersed across the Viti group and carrying the Levuka and/or Korolevu names)
showed up at the Lakeba scene to return the castaway daughter of Ginigini, the Sau of
Kedekede at the time (Reid, 1990). This was how the Levuka people earned the right to
share in the times of sautu (abundance) experienced on Lakeba, times of plenty
environmentally determined, and which became an attraction to sojourners and vanua-
land seekers negotiating oceanic pathways between the Viti group, Toga and Samoa.
Lakeba, herein, is presented as a strategic location whose size and resources would have
been sufficient to support a relatively larger land-based population, and frequent
travelers commuting between distant vanua veiwekani (related places). Connecting and
re-connecting, a human tendency, proved their commitment therefore, to the
consolidating of their ancient connectedness via the constant exchange of material
wealth, human resources and expertise.
The fame of Lakeba, therefore, was one that could be credited to its ideal geographical
location (between Viti and, Toga and Samoa), the favourable south-easterly winds, its
people’s seafaring tradition and capacity, and their workable relations with their island
neighbours. Chosen by God, as they believe, to be the matamata-gateway for
civilization via the church, Tubou-Lakeba people are historically ‘placed’, therefore, as
129��
‘experts’ on how sautu may be conceptualized, at least by the chief-serving bible-
believing iTaukei. It was indeed their philosophical position, pertaining to how the
mata/envoy system worked to keep in place what they ‘know’ of the sau/mana and
sautu conceptions – the ideas, the expressions, the institutions – that I was out to re-
kune (re-find/re-conceive) aided by the ongoing veitalanoa engagement I was
committed to sharing with them.
Whether or not sau and mana mean the same thing or came from the same source
remains partially answered, particularly when the iTaukei oral tradition places mana as
something which came to Viti from the west of the group, remembered today in the
place-name Mana, a small island off the western coast of the main island of Viti Levu.
It may not be far from the truth, therefore, to assume that the sautu (plenty) conception
emerged around the same time as the environmentally determined ‘times of plenty’ that
led to the appointment of an administrative leader appropriately titled the Sau, borrowed
from Toga traditions. Understandably, the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba could only ascribe
this abundance to the Sau they see and, the sau/mana imbued place they believe in,
instead of the climate. Herein was formulated a belief that peace and prosperity were
somehow connected to the presence of a supernatural force that is activated only in the
tu (standing) of a Sau (chief-administrator), the coordinator of the Tubou-Lakeba way
of life. Over time, I would presume, the Sauship became sacred just as the Tuiship
before it did (similar to developments observed in Toga) so that by the time the Tui
Nayau of the Vuanirewa arrived on Lakeba, he was seen fit to assume both sacred roles,
Tui and Sau. As Tui-Sau (king-administrator), another iTaukei expression adapted as a
reference to the Christian God, the chief’s dominion was projected to be associated with
a personal mana/sau and supported by the gods, and as rightly observed by Hocart (as
cited in Scarr, 2008). To this day, Tubou-Lakeba elders maintain that the sauness
(manafulness) of Lakeba-island (and Tubou-village) rests on the appointment of the
next Tui Nayau and Sau of Lau. Until then, as suggested by a veitalanoa participant, the
sau and sautu of the vanua-land/place will continue to ‘thin-out’ in the long absence of
an ‘othered-one’. As argued by this vanua person, a Sau-less or leaderless Vanua will
‘lose its grip’ on the ivalavala vakaVanua (ancient customs/traditions) associated with
130��
the service/worship of a Sau, one that is agriculture-based and grounded in the
sustainable harvest of vanua resources.
5.3.2 The Vanua vakaTuraga and its Informed Generation
My last visit with the Tubou-Lakeba people iVanua (on the island) was educational as
well as alarming. While I marveled at how a significant number of people have
reorganized themselves into localized working groups (not the ‘traditional’ rigid
structure) in the pursuit of village projects, and in the absence of any installed Tui-Sau
(chief-administrator), certain individuals or groups of individuals were totally ignoring
communal causes in the name of the ‘family’. This observation tells me that people are
probably unconsciously forfeiting the original sau/mana conception, pushing it aside as
‘mythical’, in favour of the knowledge that it is in the ‘ligadra na cauravou’ (‘hands of
the young people’), a rhetorical church phrase suggesting that sautu (wealth) will come
about for the community and, for individual, via the ‘young’ people.
What I see happening here, therefore, is a reordering of society that may or may not
result in the continuation of the chiefly rule, in the form that was observed in the last
century at least. Modernization, essentially, has taught the Tubou-Lakeba people of this
millennium that the development of individual skills and talents via schooling and, the
pursuit of individual goals, matter also in one’s desire to preserve the community spirit.
What they may not see happening is how that thought is ‘eating-up’ their centralized
notion of the chiefly existence from the inside forcing them to ‘diversify’ and
‘decentralize’11 , though existing physically within the confines of the koro-village.
According to a government official of the chiefly tribe, or the Vuanirewa, the
installation of the next ‘functional’ and ‘believable’ Sau can only be ushered in by a
new ‘X’ generation, free of the old politics, and possibly decolonized.
Within these frameworks, at least, I see positive outcomes sprouting out of a kind of
plurality. This cross-pollination of multiple perspectives, presumably, would have
existed a century ahead of the A. D. 1300 Event when “sub-regional interaction”
between Vanuatu and Toga (possibly crossing the Viti waters) was something of the
131��
ordinary (Nunn et al., 2007, p. 396). This pre-1300 voyaging and trading, possibly
involving gene-sharing somewhere in the maliwa-spaces between times and places in-
between, is a possible explanation for renewed Viti-Toga voyaging centuries later, and
around the time of the Ceiekena Sau on Kedekede. Such a long history of braving less
stable oceanic conditions would have ‘birthed’ in the native people’s biological and
cultural gene-pool an ‘attitude’ for challenge which tended to favour the better endowed
who would dare break out of the comfort of the vanua-land to explore the unknown
bounds of their wider vuravura-world. Descendents of these ‘dare-devils’, therefore, in
their ancestors’ show of bravery over nature, society and the mind, have now ascended
the heights of localized leadership, as chiefs of mainly maritime chiefdoms. Essentially,
they have become the subject of the popularized ‘stranger-kings’ phenomenon.
By way of colonization through modernization, most Pacific peoples today have been
‘freed’ from the totality of their old ecology-based spirituality to one that recognizes a
reliance on a heaven-based personal deity and/or, talents and skills, knowledge and
expertise acquired individually. The expansion of the boundaries of knowledge and its
possible applications and implications, therefore, has bred a generation so challenged, at
least conceptually, that it would be impossible to imagine it keeping their unique sense
of indigeneity in an age where information is gold. In the midst of rapid material and
technological change, what has not altered much is that which has kept us together as a
people, our geography and our language. These two factors, strongly influencing our
thinking, therefore, will continue to shape our identity and our sense of place in an
interactive multi-kai12 environment. This generation, more so of the Tubou-Lakeba
people, ‘knows’ that sautu is in their hands, and also in the hands of an independent, yet
personal, higher power. This observation indicates that there is a general weakening of
the Tubou-Lakeba people’s reliance on a sautu generating earth-based sau (‘power’)
and/or the Sau-chief embodiment of that sau. The question is: ‘How do they ‘know’ that
this sau-power has ‘changed hands’?’ For now, only time will tell what this “generation
X” will do about it.
132��
5.3.3 ‘Survival of the Fittest’13
Survival is the ultimate goal of existence. The fittest individuals, groups and cultures
often always survive regardless of whether they choose to fight or, take it to flight. The
Pacific cultures today have survived because they chose to ‘flee’, possibly, from some
kind of ‘threat’. Alternatively, the ancestors of Pacific peoples chose to ‘fight’ their way
through the raging sea to lands of greater voyaging opportunities. Once landed and
decidedly settled, they have developed, over time, a way of life that opts for con-
frontation, Auseinandersetzung or veivakataukeitaki – a ‘keeping apart in togetherness’
living in the maliwa-spaces between times and places and, making the vulagi-strangers
taukei to (‘yoked/familiar with’) the ivalavala (ancient ways) 14 and itovo (practice of
the ‘now’ generation) of the host Vanua. For the iTaukei, what I have argued as a way
of knowing, essentially, is a mata system that involves seeing and knowing, and
representation and knowledge transfer.
At the center of this Vanua system, believed to have vura (emerged) from within the
‘vanua-place’ where it now tu (stands), exist well-placed knowledgeable and articulate
Mata persons (seers/knowers, representatives, envoys, heralds, ‘embodiments of
popular opinion’). As people gifted in the art of negotiating space and places in their
life-times, they themselves ‘shift their horizons’ (broaden their scope) by consulting
Mata of places they are not too informed about. In listening to fellow Mata, they are
acknowledging that they are experts only of certain domains of knowledge, and are
open to multiple perspectives. Naturally, they perceive themselves as dau-ni-
veivakameautaki or expert negotiators who use the medium of veitalanoa-dialogue, or
the group ‘shifting and settling’ of issues, to engage people in ‘peace-talks’ and
motivate them to pursue sautu (stability/prosperity) via tiko veisaututaki (living together
for peace). This, in essence, is the methodology used to facilitate the needs of this
postcolonial constructionist research.
To annihilate the iTaukei identity, therefore, and their persisting culture, is to do two
things: remove every single one of them, physically and permanently, from the land that
had shaped their sense of place, and rob them of the language that carries the memories
133��
of who they are and what they can be. Having that done, no longer will there be the vei
(collectivity/reciprocity) principles they live by, the vanua concept upon which their
vakaTuraga (chiefly temperament) and mata representations are rooted, and their sense
of taukei or being ‘yoked with’ place. Similarly, life-skills like fish-hunting and
scented-oil making associated with living by the sea for centuries will be forfeited
together with their ‘shifting horizon’ perspective and outlook, grounded on their
familiarity with their ancestral home-base, and which keeps them mobile and active.
While this undesirable scenario is highly unlikely, in the twenty-first century that we
live in, dis-placement has come to us by way of ‘colonization’, specifically, the
colonization of our ‘minds’ and way of life via language replacement. To preserve the
iTaukei language and culture, negative developments and change must be well guarded
against and, iTaukei research of its culture by its people (an off-shoot of indigenous
Pacific research) is just one way language loss may be reversed. This is particularly
critical given that the number of living iTaukei language speakers, compared to
speakers of Hindi, Mandarin Chinese and English, is far too small by comparison.
5.3.4 The Starting Point – Attitude Adjustment
To activate the iTaukei Mata attitude of veivakataukeitaki (two-way familiarization)
expressed in knowledge sharing, a Mata-rep must adopt two other vei attitudes that tend
to complement any peace-making project aimed at bridging the gap between one’s
familiar space/place and that of others – veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki.
Veivakamenemenei (pampering) is an attitude and practice accorded by one
older/stronger/wiser to another who is younger/weaker/inexperienced. This is
theoretically how the older and powerful Vanua relate with, and to, a younger and
relatively ‘weaker’ Turaga: weak in the sense that the sau/mana and privileges s/he
enjoys are given to her/him by the Vanua that installs her/him, and which he now
rules.15 Essentially, the one who is vakamenemenei (pampered) would have been duty-
bound to return the favour. After the traditional installation, the one empowered would
have had the entire length of her/his rule to vakamenemenea (pamper) the Vanua in
reciprocation. Veivakamenemenei, therefore, is a kind of ‘one good turn deserves
another’.
134��
Veivakaturagataki (two-way chiefly respect), on the other hand, is a practice and a
relationship extended and enjoyed by two proud equals. The recognition that the ‘other’
may be as chiefly (smart or powerful) as oneself is the attitude/practice that one Turaga
would be expected to accord another. Around the yaqona circle, the yalofi, for instance,
a chief may alter the drinking order by allowing the first cup to be redirected to another
chief (usually from another place) of the same rank who is present in their midst, in
recognition of his status. When high chiefs interact, it would not be uncommon to see
them exercising chiefly deference – the esteeming of the other as ‘bigger’ or ‘better’
and, which is often always reciprocated unless the ‘other’ has not been groomed from
‘home’ in the veivakaturagataki. Observing veivakaturagataki at the ordinary level is
again something to admire, simple untitled people respecting one another as equals.
This reality, as I argue, reflects the iTaukei unconscious and unarticulated
understanding that everyone is a potential Turaga (chief) and Mata (representative) of
her/his Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place). A common iTaukei ‘chief-rep’ potential, and
its implications, would have emerged as a result of the constant shifting and settling of
power-bases during the very unstable ‘era of less’ preceding, and even following, the
environmentally determined ‘birth’ of sau/mana and sautu (sau/mana-exists)
conceptions. Veivakaturagataki, therefore, is an honourable attitude of respect accorded
someone recognized as Turaga because of her/his placed-ness in a Vanua vakaTuraga
(a chiefly place). Essentially, a Turaga is a well-placed mata-rep of her/his Vanua, not a
vanualess wanderer.
The Vanua vakaTuraga, therefore, must not be seen as one where the Vanua is to be
exploited by the installed Turaga. The Vanua (taukei ‘land-givers’) and the Turaga
(vulagi ‘land-takers’), ideally, exist alongside each other today as equals, one propping
up the other, in a relationship that is built on veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki.
Any other manner of engagement between the two institutions constructed around
exploitation is bound to collapse, especially now when people are beginning to slowly
understand that the Vanua and Turaga institutions exist because the placed-peoples of
Viti wanted them to. If, for their sentimental values, the true nature of the institutions,
and which may possibly be lying dormant, need reactivation, then such noble vei
135��
attitudes must be revived and revisited. These positive vei attitudes, being ideals, are
best cultivated in places where the people inside them actually prefer to live by their
high standards, and not just believe in their significance – the family, workplace,
community, etc. This is iTaukei thought, philosophy and ethics at their best. To aspire
to live by them, therefore, is to adopt Mata responsibility of one’s Vanua, taking care of
Vanua business above personal agenda. Herein, the individual understands that s/he is
well-placed and, as such, must prove her/his worth in representing community interest.
5.4 Conclusion Any Mata, to be sure, will listen to her/his head, heart and hands: what s/he raica (sees),
kila (knows) and valata (performs). The mind of a Mata, therefore, consists of her/his
whole body. A Mata sees and knows using her/his mind and the minds of other Mata,
especially Mata (persons) who represent what I call mata institutions: mata-niVanua
(the people, na vanua), mata-niTuraga (government, na matanitu), mata-veitokani (the
church, na lotu) and mata-niCiva (education or schooling, na vuli [metaphorically]). It
is from within these institutions that knowledge is created, practiced and theorized.
Mata of these institutions, specialized in certain aspects of knowledge within a specific
domain, therefore, would be expected to demonstrate a higher degree of competency in
the knowledge area of their specialization. They are the ones who will then
vakataukeitaki (familiarize) those placed further away from the center of their
knowledge systems as pertaining to what knowledge or categories of knowledge they
privilege, including their epistemological persuasions. For instance, the university,
placed within the mata-niCiva institution, advocates the scientific method of knowing
while the church and the vanua have their own ways of knowing. Because “divergent
systems coexist in the same person, organization or community” (Barnhardt &
Kawagley, 2005, p. 9), any one Mata, essentially, would be carrying knowledge of
certain things regarding the vanua, the church, government and/or schooling at any one
given time hence, a placed-privilege to represent the institutions and, in matters they are
conversant with.
136��
The iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba of the eighteenth century would have had a system of
knowledge-sharing in place before Christianity was cabe (ascended or ‘washed
ashore’)16, in 1835 on its shores, to have readily embraced the ‘good news’ and the vuli
(learning opportunities) that came with it. This would have been the same system upon
which they welcomed the early forms of government and the leadership introduced by
the infamous Ma’afu of Toga, the first Tui Lau (‘king’ of Lau) who came to Viti
‘following’ his dra ni veiwekani (‘blood of relatedness’) to the chiefs of Nayau and
Lakeba (Reid, 1990; Spurway, 2002). It was upon this foundation also that Great Britain
was repeatedly sought and received, and with ‘gladness’. The implication here is that
the iTaukei generally ‘know’ what ‘voice’ to listen to or, which Mata person (hence
mata institution) to open their doors and hearts to, when their ‘guts’ tell them to – even
if the engagement seemed unsanctioned, forced and exploitative. The iTaukei
expression ‘Sa lewe dina ni ketequ’ (‘It is truly in the members of my stomach/womb’),
used when vocalizing one’s concern for someone or something, reveals that the ‘mind’
is perceived to feel for (not just think about) the well-being of others and, conceive of
ways to reach out and make a difference. Other similar notions of knowing with one’s
entrails speak of the ‘ora’ (choking) of the ‘loma’ (inside) or, of ‘one’s liver being
chewed on’ (‘kania a yatequ’) hence, supporting the idea that the iTaukei perceive the
function of the ‘mind’ to involve the whole body. This is basically how they tell which
Mata person or mata institution to welcome into the Vanua and listen to. These are
Mata who follow proper Vanua protocol and, who ‘know’ their mata-niKatuba (‘eyes
of doors’ by which they enter a Vanua), isema vaka-dra (‘blood ties’), veiwekani
(relatedness) and veikilai (‘mutual friendships’). This indigenous way of knowing
where to be and who to engage is both intelligible and sensible.
Any Mata of the place Viti, essentially a kaiViti carrying a vuravura-world view, should
not have a problem, therefore, in viewing her/his world as a vuravura-source, given
how all things foreign can be conceptualized to vura (appear) from beyond their known
‘horizon’. Similarly, the notion of vanua as place and, of being a placed-people in the
Vanua ko Viti, have implications in how recent migrants may progress through the
veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) process of making one taukei to, or ‘yoked-with’, the
137��
Viti place. As far as being a vulagi (stranger) goes, the understanding that everyone is
taukei to (familiar with/being certain of) her/his own place/space and vulagi to
(unfamiliar with/being uncertain of) others’ should help anyone not to be unreasonably
overwhelmed when engaging in knowledge sharing. Exploring what has been called the
taukei-vulagi dichotomy as a continuum, therefore, assists in placing the relative
positioning of anyone actively engaging in knowledge sharing anywhere between the
taukei (familiar) and vulagi (unfamiliar) extremes hence, help gauge her/his progress
through the intercourse and strategize for her/his next moves. Similarly, the Vanua-
Turaga (represented-representative) dichotomy, when reconceptualized as a continuum,
opens up the possibility of continuously engaging more and more indigenous peoples in
research, knowledge sharing and knowledge building. Essentially, they will ‘grow’
beyond just ‘being represented’ (or ‘boxed’) and start ‘representing’ their worlds and
realities and what knowledge they know is important to their collective survival and
well-being. This is how the ‘colonized’ may be initiated into life-long learning and,
ultimately, become ‘decolonized’.
5.5 Chapter Summary Articulating just what vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu mean to the iTaukei of
Tubou-Lakeba is not enough. What is important is understanding how their perceptions
impact on their behavior and, eventually, their participation in knowledge building
exercises. This is critical given how the sau/mana to acquire things and be effective is
now conceptualized as the necessary situated knowledge-base that determines how one
strategizes for survival in place. Sautu as peace, stability, order and prosperity is a
universal ideal. The iTaukei persistently pursuing sautu, therefore, can only expect to
achieve it by ‘seeding’ (as in sowing/planting) what little, but important knowledge,
s/he carries in the fertile ground of “life-long learning” to see it grow, multiply and
bring in a plentiful harvest. In answering the research questions, participants proved that
they were not only knowledgeable but, capable of engaging in deep thinking. This is the
kind of philosophical engagement that will help people ask and answer the “big
questions” – the kinds of questions that lead to conceptual change and, eventually,
138��
knowledge building. My questions, in essence, have helped situate the research in the
iTaukei understanding, and sense of ‘place’, as a specific positioning in a
compartmentalized space, in their vuravura-world conception (worldview) and, their
relative placements in it with respect to their significant other.
The first major step, therefore, in making sense of these concepts, is to identify the
philosophical basis that frames iTaukei or Vanua thinking and thought. Conceptualizing
vanua as the center and vuravura as the negotiable ‘knowledge space’ traversed by the
learner/researcher is an excellent initial step towards trying to draw iTaukei mata-reps
carrying leadership (Turaga) potential to a place of con-frontation that recognizes
others’ capacity to become productive members of society. This realization keeps one
well rooted in her/his ‘birth place’ (of origin) while daring to venture out to the
relatively unknown waiting beyond the horizon. Here is a story of ‘settled-ness’ that
embraces change. Here is someone open to the conscious ‘shifting and settling’ of
her/his own ‘theories’ and understandings in the pursuit of the idealized sautu. This
kind of openness, therefore, comes about only with the certainty of how one stands in
relation to another at the place of veitalanoa-dialogue and veivakataukeitaki
(familiarization) – of being taukei (familiar) only with one’s own and vulagi
(unfamiliar) with another’s. This attitude, in essence, is what keeps people at that place
of Auseinandersetzung open to alternatives and multiple perspectives.
In analyzing the answers gathered from the ‘field’, viewing them against what iTaukei
scholars have written or spoken about with greater reflexivity, I have found the Tubou-
Lakeba people’s situated conceptualizations of the five concepts herein highlighted to
be thoroughly comprehensible and readily believable. Placing the sau/mana and sautu
conceptions chronologically using scientific research findings, for instance, was
significant because it gave a kind of credibility to the views ‘harvested’ from the people
on the ground. Whatever I have collated and represented in this chapter, therefore, will
serve to emphasize how the environment plays a vital part in shaping thought. In light
of this, I now conclude that ‘place’, consisting of the natural, human and spiritual
dimensions, will continue to mold thinking and behavior, and influence knowing and
139��
learning. It is imperative, therefore, to say at this point that how the Vanua ko Lakeba
conceptualizes the vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu concepts today have been
shaped largely by its geographical realities, through historical processes and by its oral
traditions. These Vanua understandings, produced at the conceptual junctions of
lingering and dominant constructions, indigenous or otherwise, have been been
influential in shaping Vanua practices and discourses. What additional contribution I
have made to a deeper understanding of the concepts, nonetheless, has come about via
serious philosophical reflection, analyzing the concepts linguistically and using
metaphorical thought. This chapter, therefore, in answering the main research questions,
is setting up the thesis-construction for the articulation of my main research findings,
and of their implications, in the concluding chapter that is to follow.
������������������������������������������������������������1 Cited in Lawson (1996, pp. 41-42). 2 The VKB is what was known as the Fijian Registry of Births. A person can be volai (‘written’) into the father’s lineage (or mother’s lineage for those born out of wedlock). The VKB, a colonial idea, has been taken by the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba to be the final authority on ‘who is in’ and, ‘who is out’. 3 Land on Lakeba is owned by families, and not mataqali (a group of related families, possibly sharing a common ancestor), following Toga traditions. At the time of the last Sau or “othered-one”, his half brothers and sisters were ‘systematically’ denied ‘ownership’ of land belonging to their father hence, leaving them and their descendents, down to four generations, practically ‘landless’. This was ‘justifiable’ given that the last Sau, as eldest, and particularly as the only Vanua installed chief to be given ‘absolute’ sau/mama dominion over the land and people, became the only ‘legitimate’ inheritor of it all. 4 Refer to Nunn et al. (2007) for a scientific perspective that may help enlighten one’s understanding of sautu as ‘times of plenty’. 5 Note that the ‘ivalavala’ concept, rooted in the word vala (do/done/doing), speaks of a ‘doing-doing’ or, the continuous conscious doing of something hence, pointing to what we may refer to as traditions. 6 Meaning that there is no ‘sitting chief’ in place, no installed/recognized Sau. Note that there had been chiefs, not installed traditionally, but who were recognized by the Vanua nonetheless. 7 The ‘kaiViti’ (‘from Viti’) phenomenon, possibly conceived from time immemorial to refer to kinsmen from the Vanua ko Viti, and which is used today in reference to native Fijians, sometimes in a belittling way, may have to be re-conceptualized to accommodate everyone settled in Fiji. Herein, the ‘kaiViti society’ construction is used inclusively and, notably, without any racial connotation to refer to all who have made the Viti islands their ra-base.8 Refer to Lawson (1996, pp. 42-44) for an in-depth discussion. 9 The A. D. 1300 Event (A. D. 1250–1350), according to Nunn et al. (2007), was “a time of rapid cooling, sea-level fall, and cultural change…[a] societal disruption associated with the A. D. 1300 Event [which] was due largely to a massive and rapid reduction of the food resource base”. 10 The first leader of this tribe and, who became the first Sau on the Kedekede hillfort, was a Qilaiso. The Qilaiso (Pukuni and Tokairabe) delegation just shifted base from Kabara-Lau and, their place on an already divided Lakeba population just became secure in the Qilaiso and Pukuni (brothers) marriages to daughters of the then Tui Lakeba. Tokairabe, who was the priest in that delegation, soon became prominent on the island serving the Sau. The priestly descendents of Tokairabe strategically changed sides in the ‘handover’ to the Nayau chiefs who came on the island two centuries later, serving the Vuanirewa chiefs as mata-niVanua (‘go-between’ the Vanua ko Lakeba and the Turaga the [sacred] Tui Nayau who was also the [new administrative] Sau of the Vanua ko Lau).
140��
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������11 The average adult male (especially fathers/husbands) may ‘know’ basic carpentry, plumbing and electrical wiring, first-aid, basic arithmetic and English and, catering to name a few. These comprise skills that are both school-taught and life-taught. In the olden days, I would presume that adult males were preoccupied with the business of the Sau then they were with the immediate needs of the family. This is what I regard to encompass diversification. As a result, it could be said that indigenous thought has decentralized away from the Sau being the center, focusing in on the family. 12 ‘Kai’ is used, as a prefix, placed infront of a place-name denoting that the person(s) referred to originally come from that place. For example, a kai-Idia is one who is originally from India. Such references do not necessarily have to be seen as offensive. They merely point out matter of factly the place of origin of an individual/group. A multi-kai Viti, therefore, is a multicultural one. 13 Survival of the fittest, in this regard, draws from Darwin’s theory on natural selection and, which favours people (and presumably cultures) that have adapted better to the environment. According to Brandon (1990), “if a is better adapted than b to their mutual environment E, then (probably) a will have greater reproductive success than b in E” (as cited in Lennox, 2010) 14 The ivalavala has to do with the ‘old nature’ practised generation after generation for many generations. 15 According to a Tui Tubou (as cited in Hooper, 1996, p. 262), “the paramount chief’s sau was a power which came from the people”. It could even be argued that here was developing an indigenous iTaukei notion of a kind of ‘democratic’ method of selecting the leader who is to be installed. Tyranny, on the other hand, would have developed naturally because of the extent of the power vested on the chief-elect, and the ineffectiveness of the mata-niVanua (eye/voice of land/people) institution. This mata system of engagement, therefore, would have kept the Vanua away from anti-sautu practices (expressions of disorder) that tend to break up society. In Tubou-Lakeba oral traditions, society-tearing instability occurred twice, in their remembered past at least, causing a turning away of the people of Lakeba from leaders who were corrupted by cannibalism. This proved that the Lakeba society, then, was already developing into a kind of organized state where popular opinion mattered, before the arrival of western influences. 16 The conceptualization that Christianity was ‘vakacaberi’ (brought ashore), from the ‘cabe’ concept, meant that the in-coming (the church) came in, from beyond the horizons, looking up to the ‘gods’ of the Vanua. After the church had grown roots, over years of missionization, the Vanua and its ‘gods’ were now admonished to ‘cabe’ to the God of the church – a reversal of power. Today, government has made it compulsory for all children to ‘cabe’ to school while church attendance is pretty much left for the individual to decide – yet another reversal of power.
141��
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
Change of itself need not imply instability. Change is always present in greater or lesser
degree in every culture and society. Stability is not. Stability lies in orderly
change and finds expression in a continuing successful adaptation to habitat and in
non-violent shifts in the pattern of social organization.
Alexander Spoehr1
6.1 Introduction This phase of my journey is coming to an end. It started off with questions for which I
am certain I have found the answers, or at least put some kind of closure to, much like
how kanace fish-hunters conceptualize a plentiful harvest as a samu (thrashing). Like in
any piece of living art, the final touch is the ‘touch down’, the moment to relish, the
finale. In essence, every experience intelligibly engaged on, on and off the ‘field’, is a
kind of re-living of the past in the constant ‘re-telling’ of, and relating to, enduring
‘narratives’. These talanoa-stories, as they persist in the indigenous world and mind, are
understandably told, sung and danced to, printed, woven, and carved out, performative
and expressive, communally engaging and dialogic. Continuous engagement in these
situated talanoa, over time, can only result in the activation of the ‘shifting and settling’
of one’s conceptual framework, worldview and philosophical position hence, the nature
of her/his practices and discourses. This is what has happened to me after allowing the
literature, my mother’s stories and personally observed Vanua ko Lakeba customs, and
my own theorizing and talanoa (thesis) construction to dialogue: conceptual change
and, that which now shapes my own conceptualization of new and re-lived experiences.
In the sharing of knowledge, therefore, new ideas have emerged building on things
previously known and, possibly, while attempting to explain observations and/or make
predictions. The iTaukei mata (envoy) system of representation, in connecting people
intra- and inter-Vanua (within place and across places), is one such idea that was
142��
birthed in the peculiarities of the Vanua ko Viti, its physical landscape and placed-
people. The vuravura-world concept, for instance, may have emerged at the post-1300
era of less which coincided with a drop in sea-level (Nunn et al., 2007) that would have
caused the emergence (vura) of ‘places’ once submerged. Coupled with tectonic related
up-lift (Nunn, 1998) such a period of emergence would have been significant enough to
shape a people’s view of their world, particularly that of the socio-cultural/spiritual,
given how the vura concept feature prominently in iTaukei traditional ceremonies.To
place the emergence of the Lakeba envoy system2 within a linear vanua time frame,
therefore, one can only speculate that it was culturally conceived around the late 1500
A. D in the lead up to the selection of the first Sau of Kedekede (chief/administrator) on
Lakeba decades later, according to Reid’s (1990) calculations. This would have
coincided with renewed voyaging between Toga and Viti following the marriage of the
eldest sister of a Tu’i Tonga to a chief of Lakeba (Nunn et al., 2007), and signifying an
ordering of society under leadership ‘known’ to possess a mana/sau that would keep the
then Lakeba community together.
6.2 Closing Discussion – ‘Plaiting’ the ‘stringed’ parts into a Vanua
whole using the Sisi making analogy A Vanua vakaTuraga, in essence, is a peopled-place privileging its own placed-peoples.
This implies that ‘spiritual’ and ‘administrative’ leaders (the ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’,
respectively) placed within it, and places and positions they occupy, in space through
time, are indeed privileged. Representation within and across Vanua vakaTuraga,
therefore, is critical in the development of society given that progress can only come by
way of sharing – the sharing of space, potential, ideas and resources. Such a sharing
platform must be constructed around a solid base grounded in enduring relationships.
The iTaukei have been described here as a vei people: sharing a collective existence in
reciprocity, and which is the principled way of life that has had an impact on their
‘shifting’ manner of conduct (itovo) and ‘settled’ traditions (ivalavala). This way of
being (in place), therefore, has been argued herein as a way of knowing (that place).
Essentially, this had always been the basis upon which knowledge was created or
143��
constructed: situated in the vanua-place, communally owned and shared by a vei people,
and dialogic enough to contribute to knowledge building. In this regard, the Vanua
vakaTuraga can be conceptualized as an active site for learning through dialogue. This
is where Mata (representatives) play the critical role of bridging the gap between the
known and the unknown – constructing and ‘theorizing’ to connect right practice to
philosophical assumptions upon which they are grounded.
Positive growth and development is argued here to be engineered by knowledgeable
Mata, of the Turaga (the leaders, the elected) and of the Vanua (the led, the electors):
leaders, chiefs and administrators privileged by ‘place’ hence, its placed-peoples.
Cultivating the right attitude in Mata (articulate representatives) of places, therefore,
will require more than intra-relatedness within the confines of place. Relating across
places and spaces is what opens up doors of opportunities for the knowers, as well as
the learners, in the constructive exchange of knowledge, indigenous or otherwise, for
the construction of meaning. This research, for instance, has borrowed widely from the
indigenous iTaukei culture and language as well as scientific knowledge and
perspectives. Critical to an informed understanding and appreciation of the iTaukei way
of knowing, therefore, is the assumption that the development of an authentic identity
must be preceded by a thorough decolonization of the mind. Being decolonized, in this
sense, refers to the freeing of a people from a dependence on theories constructed from
the outside, by outsiders, to define what constitutes humanity for the insiders living on
the inside. This is why the conscious creation of a place for indigenous minds in
academia, as in Pacific studies, is one way placed knowledge and knowers may be
privileged – researching their own from both western and indigenous lenses hence,
proving for themselves and others that ‘two-eyedness’ is critical to the kind of
objectivity which gives due credit to the subjectivity of interpretations.
6.2.1 The iTaukei Way of Knowing – A Pathway to Sautu and Well Being
The iTaukei, like all indigenous peoples, are ‘yoked-with’ or taukei (native) to place
hence, their knowledge and ways of knowing. According to Popper, no matter how one
argues against traditions, it cannot be ignored that there is a need for them in social life
144��
(as cited in Lawson, 1996, p. 16), and particularly if ‘yoked-ness with place’ can be
considered a human tradition. For an insider-researcher, therefore, the biggest challenge
would be to accept that tradition is not immune to criticism and change (Lawson, 1996,
p. 16), the kind that is produced by people and influenced by the environment, physical
or otherwise. The iTaukei social science researcher within a taukei-vulagi (insider-
outsider) framework of engagement that is grounded in the assumption that the kila ka
(knowers), vuku (smart) and yalomatua (wise) are people privileged by nature and
place, therefore, is well positioned to articulate the particularities of her/his own
people’s indigenous epistemologies while keeping a culturally appropriate safe distance
for critique. At the outset, in the presentation of the isevusevu (traditional introduction)
to the Vanua of the researched, insider-researchers like myself are often always
represented as ‘vulagi-taukei’ (visitors who are familiar with place) hence, positioned
both as people who know and yet, are still searching. Essentially, such a one is taukei
(insider) by way of her/his veiwekani (relatedness) and socialization and, vulagi
(outsider) as representative of the institution of research scientifically studying the
people.
It is in this knowledge that both a kaiVanua (taukei-native to place [of the ‘land/place-
givers’ or ‘land people’], an insider) and a kaiWai (vulagi-stranger to place [of the
‘land/place-takers’ or ‘sea people’], an outsider) are seen as privileged and well-
positioned to receive veivakaturagataki (chiefly respect) and veivakamenemenei
(‘pampering’), expressions of veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) highlighted herein.
Essentially, the iTaukei researcher using this culturally appropriate Vanua vakaTuraga
(taukei-vulagi) research framework, derived from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, will be
empowered with a kind of sau/mana, conceptualized here as a specific body of
knowledge, and which will get the work done. These noble and lived Vanua or vei
attitudes3, ‘locked’ into the iTaukei conceptual system, and which privilege
communalism and reciprocity over extreme individualism, in a kind of ‘self-
centeredness’ centered on their Sau (chief/administrator), is the principal indicator of
the authenticity of the iTaukei conception of ‘group-self’. This reality necessitated that
people lived and operated ordered lives, and within the ‘dictates’ of their mata-groups –
145��
matavuvale (family), mataqali (group of families ‘twined’ or ‘twisted’ together),
mataveiwekani (group of related families/clans/associates), etc. To protect mata-group
interest, therefore, inquisitive and critical insider-researchers using culturally
appropriate approaches to research consciously vavana (keep aside for later) certain
knowledge best to be vavani (kept aside). This is the way of the iTaukei Mata,
socialized to privilege and protect the Vanua, Vanua knowledge and Vanua knowers.
In order for the iTaukei researcher to keep the critical distance, s/he must first seek to be
thoroughly ‘yoked-with’ the practices of academia and the research institution, and the
rigors of academic research, before setting out to explore her/his own home-base.
Essentially, this will make the indigenous researcher taukei to (familiar with) seemingly
opposing worldviews, epistemologies, ethics and philosophies. To be familiarized with
significant ‘Others’ in one’s attempt to know more of, and appreciate, the ‘Self’,
therefore, is to be comfortable at weaving out a middle-ground (rara) philosophical
position that will allow continuous dialogue hence, contribute to greater knowledge
sharing and positive knowledge building. A first step forward, therefore, may have to be
the re-conceptualization of objectivity as a ‘tested interpretation’, an ‘educated’ opinion
shaped by multiple perspectives formed via the ‘Shifting HorizonTheory’ of knowing
taukei (familiar) to navigators, or travellers in general. Furthermore, the third person
dimension of knowing which creates that safe critical distance between the participant-
observer and the observed events, gauna life-times, places and people, may be achieved
through what the Tubou-Lakeba people can conceptualize as the ‘Tokairabe Eye
View’4. A ‘bird’s eye view’, therefore, represented herein as a kind of believable
ancient wisdom5 that ‘sees’ the broader picture of things, and in ‘right’ perspective, is
the ‘detached’ position necessary for a more ‘objective’ analysis of a personally
experienced reality. This is a kind of distancing that understands how any body of
knowledge is situated in place and shared between placed-peoples constantly engaging
in veitalanoa-dialogues. At these rara sites for interactive engagement, therefore, there
is a re-membering (uniting) of the past and future in a people’s current reality. Herein,
‘theories’ and practices are seen to be grounded in the past while presently placed-
peoples negotiate their ways into a sautu (peaceful/prosperous) future. Privileged
146��
peoples in this rara place of ‘con-frontation’, therefore, do not re-kune (re-search or re-
conceive) knowledge to disprove but, only to improve and empower.
This is, essentially, how iTaukei today ‘see’ and ‘know’ through knowledgeable Mata,
or informed ‘seers’ (knowers), representing mata places (institutions). Given the very
real possibility of representing multiple-perspectives, any iTaukei Mata trained in
research, and thoroughly familiar with the views of the Vanua, government, church and
educational institutions, have become well positioned to speak in matters pertaining to a
progressive knowledge discourse geared towards empowering people to live sustainably
for sautu (peace/prosperity). This Mata position for representation is also critical for
critique and reflexivity. Essentially, these are places occupied by observant and
participating ‘eyes’, ‘ears’, ‘mouthpieces’ and ‘minds’ of the Vanua vakaTuraga.
These are places peopled by privileged groups of individuals, a modern version of
which is academia. A quick look over the iTaukei history of privileging ‘strange’ ideas
and carriers of such ideas, therefore, will prove how open to change and believable
alternatives they can be, or have become, and suggesting a sense of readiness to
embrace veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) as a way of pursuing bula veimaliwai
(living in the maliwa-spaces between places and times) and, ultimately, tiko
veisaututaki (coexisting in peace).
6.2.2 Coexistence in Place – Key to Living in Sautu
Place, contextualized here as Vanua vakaTuraga, is where sautu is pursued and
attained. At one level, place is a mind-set. At another level, place is the habitat. In the
mind, and in a reality subjected to change, values and knowledge systems coexist hence,
proving their compatibility. What people can do is to locate the maliwa-spaces, much
like the rara common grounds, between which they can navigate their way around the
Vanua. At these cross-roads and active sites for engagement, negative developments are
mitigated by gathering support for greater networking in the name of sautu. This is how
a diverse population, like what we have in Viti, may be rallied behind a common cause
hence, mobilized to go to their communities, as Mata of the new idea, and draw in more
of their people to the rara middle-ground for dialogue. With ‘one voice’, the voice of
147��
veitalanoa-dialogue, and as kaiViti (of the Viti multi-cultural space consisting of people
representing their unique cultural lands of origin)6 of the twenty-first century, all may
be reminded that, though we differ culturally, we had been sharing a common space
hence, proving that our respective indigenous positions are compatible. In this regard, a
sautu derived from an orderedness that privileges both the Turaga and the Vanua,
‘leaders’ and the ‘led’, or the vulagi (foreign/foreigner) and taukei (familiar/native),
may be pursued as a common goal.
Paternalism and equality, for instance, though western in construction, are two attitudes
expressed in the iTaukei culture as veivakamenemenei (pampering between unequals,
the greater over the lesser) and veivakaturagataki (respect between equals),
respectively. These attitudes, in essence, have coexisted from time immemorial.
Consider the diagram below to clarify how the people of Tubou-Lakeba today have
created that clear distinction between the Vanua and the Turaga institutions hence,
establishing grounds for veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki, attitudes embodied
in the veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) process. Veivakataukeitaki, as the mata-mata
(lit. ‘eye-eye’ and, meaning ‘gateway’) ‘bridging’ any serious engagement between one
taukei (of the ‘land’, an insider) and a vulagi (from the ‘sea’, an outsider), therefore, is
an institution constructed to facilitate knowledge sharing and knowledge building in the
pursuit of a sautu (order/stability/abundance) benefitting both the Vanua and Turaga:
148��
Figure 8 Vanua institution versus Turaga institution
Turaga Institution (the elevated/privileged vulagi [‘land-taker’])
Represented by their mata-rep, the mata-
niTuraga [who became the matanitu
-government, possibly], the ‘representative of the
Turaga institution’, himself the ‘othered-one’ who
is the chief embodiment of the sau of the
Vanua, and addressed as the Sau ni Vanua
Veiqaravi (lit. ‘facing each other’)7 within a Mata system
Veiqaraqaravi (referring to the ceremonial, centering on yaqona-filled tanoa)
[CCeremonies as a ‘MModel of Life’]8
Represented by their mata, the mata-
niVanua or ‘representative(s) of the Vanua
institution’, the head(s) of the land-people’s
mataqali-clan(s) who sit as counsellors, ideally,
to the Sau ni Vanua
Vanua Institution (the taukei [‘land-giver’] ra-base)
Though the Turaga (chiefly/manly) institution is privileged, within the vakaTuraga
framework, the Vanua institution is also acknowledged as ‘powerful’, being the ‘giver
of land, liga-hands and sau’. While at one level, the Sau (chief-administrator) is the
possessor of power, at another level, power belongs to the Vanua which ‘owns’ the
land, its sau/mana and the hands which cultivate it – elements continuously ‘given’ to
the Turaga (the tribe) at the ‘installations’9 of chief-elects. Note also that embodied in
the vakaTuraga (the chiefly behaviour) is respect for women, appropriately called the
veivakamaramataki (rooted in the marama-woman concept), and which I have
acknowledged in my writing in how I have put the female reference ahead of the male,
much like how the Vanua (a kind of female) comes before the Turaga (a kind of male)
in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception.10 This female-emphasis is counter-balanced in the
parallel conception of Turaga vakaVanua (chiefs/leaders/men with Vanua support, and
land), otherwise conceived by Tubou-Lakeba people as Turaga vakaTamata (chief/the
chiefly having a strong people following), again confirming that Vanua (land/place) is
congruent with Tamata (people). The Vanua vakaTuraga, therefore, is a place of mutual
Made up of the most recent outsider
group [the Vuanirewa] to have been given
‘power’, by the ‘first-peoples’, to rule the
‘land’ – the group whose prominence was
confirmed by the colonial administration
Consists pre-Vuanirewa ‘first-peoples’ to
have settled the island: comprising two
major land-based groups and, a third
which was more sea-based and which
became expert navigators of the chiefs.
149��
respect and sharing, a place where relationships are considered critical to the pursuit of
a communal sense of well-being. This is the kind of relationship and commitment that
may be characterized as a sacred union between two interdependent opposites, like that
of a woman and her husband, and which must be honoured by both parties to ensure the
survival of both and their ‘offsprings’.
While one’s good conduct (iTovo vakaTuraga) ideally expresses her/his manner of
respect for another’s membership with existence (more than just her/his humanity),
her/his iValavala vakaVanua (traditions/customs ‘yoked with’ place) are that which
ideally embody the primordial attitude of veivakamenemenei (pampering). Ancient
iValavala, therefore, range from sisi and waliwali making, and traditional fish-hunting,
to expressions of lala (group vala-doing of chief’s garden, home, canoe, etc.) for the
gone toko (the beloved), the Gone Marama/Turaga (‘child’ chief) at the Vanua center,
the group-self’s center. Essentially, matters pertaining to the chiefly-place are attended
to first before one’s own. This is the ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ (or ‘wind-favour’) attitude which
shapes Tubou-Lakeba thinking towards the vakamenemenei (pampering) of their Sau
(chief-administrator), and their ‘lewa kalou’ (women/‘goddesses’) and their children.
This is how veivakaturagataki and veivakamaramataki (the chiefly respect for one’s
humanity), itself an expression of veivakamenemenei (pampering), is nurtured in
Tubou-Lakeba society at the center close to where the Sau resides. The coexistence of
diverse systems of thought, in the rara middle-ground of dialogue and sharing,
therefore, may be an indicator of the ancientness of ‘place’. On Lakeba, the presence of
diverse knowledge and knowledge systems representing the dominant voices of the
Vanua, church, modern-science and borrowed systems of leadership and governance, is
proof of the Tubou-Lakeba people’s readiness to embrace ordered change, and that
which leads to a sense of stability centered around their Sau and the conception of an
attainable sautu. The Tubou-Lakeba reality, therefore, is one that is continuously
negotiating at the rara-ground of con-frontation where opportunistic equals converge to
‘shift and settle’ issues of dominance and influence over a shared space. Theoretically,
such a ‘transferrable’ power-sphere, as an active site for Auseinandersetzung11, is the
150��
place where ‘current owners’ (leading thought, practice, discourse, expertise) naturally
contend with possible alternatives.
6.3.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing
Situated within the taken for granted iTaukei concept of vanua (land/place/people) are a
number of Vanua vakaTuraga12 or chiefly places, otherwise conceptualized as ‘ancient’
places ‘filled’ with chiefly/manly people. These communitarian13 vei peoples, made up
of privileged knowers who represent every area of vanua knowledge, are themselves
recognized as mata or ‘eyes’ of their respective Vanua. Each one of them, as an ‘eye’, is
a lewe-niVanua (lit. ‘flesh of the Vanua’ and, signifying membership), a member of one
‘living’ Vanua body ‘yoked-with’ its past and future in the present, and headed by the
Sau (chief-administrator). Essentially, each member is a representative of her/his vanua-
place thus, positioned to speak for elements of vanua knowledge her/his ancestors and
people had been keepers of. Together, a vei people contructs and owns their vuravura-
world or reality – the environmentally supported ‘all-generative Oceanic (cultural)
space’ which provides for and sustains every Vanua vakaTuraga. These iTaukei ‘eyes’
or mata (seers/knowers/representatives), over a number of generations, have been part
of an ordered system of knowing which assigns specialized tasks to skilled related-
groups of knowers: the heads, administrators and leaders (Turaga); the mouthpieces and
faces/fronts (mata-ni [‘eyes of’] and mata-ki [‘reps to’]); and the hands (bati-warriours,
gonedau-fishers, mataisau-builders and bete-priests/pastors). These Vanua roles,
performed in the service/worship (sauvaki) of the chiefly place (Vanua vakaTuraga),
make up the ‘glue’ which holds the Vanua (placed-peoples, or named/claimed places)
together as they go about their daily lives – mending their houses/canoes, tending their
flocks, fishing their lagoons, planting their gardens, attending to veiwekani or related
people’s businesses and managing their homes.
The average ‘eye’ of the Vanua today, therefore, is one who has been schooled, is a
member of a local church, pays tax and votes, a consumer of goods and services and, of
information filtering into their homes via the media, mobile phones and home-theatre
systems, and a potential ‘producer’ of knowledge. Some of these ‘eyes’ are themselves
151��
academics and researchers, business owners and government officials who regularly go
back to their respective communities (roots) and communicate their ‘theories’, ideas and
learning, through their cultured way of sharing information via veitalanoa-dialogues
and, within and around culturally appropriate frameworks and buturara (ground, floor
or deck) of veitalanoa. Whether converging at the tanoa or congregating in church and
village meetings, such forums exist to facilitate knowledge sharing and knowledge
building. In the pursuit of a bula vakaibalebale (meaningful life) within the maliwa-
spaces between (comprising places, times, people and events), therefore, one seeks to
live in a kind of sautu (abundance) that can be enjoyed in the present and still carry a
‘living’ hope for the future. This is a sautu (peace/prosperity/stability) that
acknowledges the presence (tu) of an imbued mana/sau (power to effect) in the Vanua
(land/place/people), and which is effective in getting things done in and through orderly
societal change.
Within this iTaukei mata system of knowing, there are mata institutions which may be
further divided into mata places peopled by mata-representatives who belong to mata-
groups. People, therefore, have been historically placed and dis-placed hence,
continuously re-placed where their ancestors, from one generation or another, were
probably most effective, particularly, during the transitional period away from the less
stable post 1300 Event’s ‘times of less’. It was in the next era of “continuing successful
adaptation to [place] and in [more friendlier] shifts in the pattern of social organization”
(as cited in D’arcy, 2006, p. 170) that this system of knowledge representation and
exchange may have re-emerged. A pre-European contact re-engagement in inter-island
long-distance voyages, such as those which featured prominently in pre-1300 Event
oceanic societies (Nunn et al., 2007), therefore, was a clear indication of the existence
of an open system of cross-cultural engagement in the central Pacific. This development
may have had a bearing on the construction of what this research has identified as
“mata metaphors”: situated expressions prevalent in the languages and cultures of the
region. It could only be assumed, therefore, that the central Pacific was once a center of
trading activities which attracted ambitious sea-farers who, possibly unconsciously,
became agents of change and whose dealings necessitated that a workable envoy (mata)
152��
system of inter-Vanua exchange was put in place. The eastern Viti group, being the
probable center of this center and, ‘standing’ in the maliwa-space between what has
been inappropriately described as the ‘black islands of Melanesia’ and the ‘many
islands of Polynesia’, in time, developed a strong linguistic and material connection to
its neighbours, Toga and Samoa to the east, and Vanuatu to the west – particularly in
their overlapping yaqona (kava) and chiefly traditions. The iTaukei mata (envoy)
system, ceremoniously centered in the wai-niVanua (yaqona/kava) and the Turaga who
gets to drink the first cup, is one such indicator of the ancientness of the cross-cultural
sharing that have shaped Pacific thought and attitudes, particularly in the Viti group.
The question now is: ‘Who are the Turaga?’ I argue that true Turaga (‘elites’) are those
who have been privileged by ‘place’, the Vanua. They did not appoint themselves. They
earned their people’s respect.14 Turaga, therefore, are themselves Mata (representatives)
of the Vanua (named/claimed places) which they are ‘yoked with’, or taukei to. In view
of this understanding, mata-reps of all places must see themselves privileged, endowed
and deserving to learn about and know the social world which they have helped created
hence, philosophically conceive of ways to correctly represent that reality. In essence,
they ‘speak’ to (are mata-ki) the outside world of the vulagi (stranger) as the ‘voice’
of/for (mata-ni) their taukei (native) people at the Vanua center. What transpires is a
system of knowing that generally holds mata-reps of all knowledge places/spaces in
high regard based on the assumption that they, as mata-eyes of institutions they
represent, have the ability to perceive and correctly conceptualize their world and how
they experience it. Furthermore, it is assumed that these mata-reps have the capacity to
conceive, carry and deliver their conceptualizations of that reality, being sensible,
critical and articulate members of the Vanua whole. Those who see themselves as
privileged Turaga (leaders) of their Vanua (places) must challenge themselves,
therefore, with the understanding that they have been ‘selected’ to ‘self-represent’ their
Vanua, the extension of the individual and group ‘self’ hence, equating “place-
representation” to “self-representation”. An appreciation of the iTaukei people-
privileging (hence, communitarian) mata system of knowing is bound to decolonize
iTaukei minds, heal their hearts, transform their lives and mobilize them through the
153��
survival, recovery and development stages, to self-determination – a perceived outcome
of the “indigenous reserch agenda” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 117).
6.3.4 Space-sharing and its Implications
The research institution is a shared space. The iTaukei rara conception, the culturally
appropriate platform of engagement, is one also. Shared spaces naturally call for
dialogue, herein contextualized as veitalanoa. Indigenous researchers researching
within situated, dialogic and communal frameworks, therefore, have been well-
positioned, as mata-reps of places they are ‘yoked-with’, to negotiate rara platforms of
veitalanoa located within their sphere. In essence, new ideas and carriers of ideas
converge at these shared spaces to engage with their keepers, the Tuirara of the rara
places, themselves mata-reps of the rara spaces they keep (as opposed to ‘occupy’), and
which are physically situated within their Vanua (named/claimed places). ‘Control’
over these potentially ‘transferable’ shared spaces, when ‘lost’, may be conceptualized
as lave rara (lit. ‘lifting [the] rara’), by the iTaukei. Like traditional mata-reps,
participants in any veitalanoa organized around a rara platform or framework, enter
knowing whose space they have entered and their relative positionings inside it. Once
the (butu)rara of veitalanoa has been ‘opened’, following the presentation of the
traditional introduction (isevusevu or an equivalent), two-way exchanges begin to take
place, slow at first and, intensifying after participants have been well acquainted via an
ongoing process of veivakataukeitaki or familiarization. Subsequent veitalanoa,
therefore, are often more engaging and less structured as participants become more
familiar with others’ positions relative to their own hence, creating a space for the
exchange of critical thought that often impinges on people’s philosophical framings and
assumptions.
By implication, therefore, any platform for dialogue is, theoretically, a rara – a shared-
space ‘kept’ by a dominant ‘voice’. One such place is academia, shared by multiple
perspectives yet dominated by western thought and traditions. The keepers of this rara,
in encouraging greater collaboration between diverse systems, have kept the dominant
worldview and its scientific methods as the privileged theoretical position. While open
154��
to challenge from apparently divergent systems of thought and philosophical traditions,
this rara platform may never be ‘lifted’, the metaphorical lifting of which signifies the
highly unlikely silencing of the dominant ‘voice’ and influence. Nevertheless, because
conceptual change is expected to follow intense and ongoing con-frontation or
Auseinandersetzung, opinions and positions are bound to shift and get re-settled.
Traditional keepers of indigenous rara places of exchange, therefore, may have to keep
their spaces, indefinitely, unless such a space had been seriously contested by a rigorous
system of thought, such as that espoused by western science, and found to be wanting.
In this regard, indigenous Pacific researchers, as mata navigators, must learn to smartly
negotiate this relatively ‘ancient’ research space, the university wherein they have been
placed and privileged (as one Turaga [chiefly-elite]), not to weaken or shut it down,
even if that was possible, but to effectively use its ‘scientifically’ established tools to
bring to the fore indigenous knowledge belonging to their people. These time-tested
indigenous “truths”, though historically and systematically silenced, exist to inform and
to be critically analyzed hence, proving their compatibility with western thought, and
usefulness in a modern world.
Key to understanding the differences in opinions and attitudes towards knowledge
sharing and knowledge building, in the pursuit of a collective well-being, therefore, is
the knowledge that participants of any veitalanoa come to the rara place of dialogue
with differing conceptualizations of communitarianism. While individualism has proven
to work in some communities, communalism has also been proven successful in
indigenous societies. These situated “truths” must be given fair and equal emphasis,
therefore, in academia, the place of Auseinandersetzung (con-frontation) or
veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) that embraces continuous dialogue between diverse
knowledge systems. Nevertheless, this must not be done with the intent of ‘forcing’
blind or unquestioned submission to the ‘dominant voice’, though a strong desire to
change the ‘Other’, for the ‘greater good’, may be a natural bias carried by the
yalomatua (wise) and kila ka (knowledgeable), regardless of the culture ‘placed’ in.
Critical to this understanding, therefore, is the iTaukei knowledge that vuku
(intelligence) is a capacity creditable to both humans and animals, but with varying
155��
degrees – our shared abilities to be jointly aware of our environment, develop
meaningful relationships with nature and each other, ‘fill’ and regularly enjoy both the
land and sea spaces and, even be trained and entertaining. What sets us apart, though, is
our human capacity to dialogue, share and build knowledge of our world and, construct
anew for a sautu (peace/prosperity/stability) that is real and lasting benefitting both the
natural world and its ‘inhabitants’, humans or otherwise.
6.3.5 Space, Time and Place
Throughout this journey, I have had to constantly check my informed philosophical
position on the notions of space and time, and place. This was particularly significant
given how any mata-rep ‘speaking’ for a people must do so from a platform that is fully
informed of its relative positioning in space and time, and within place. Time, as
discussed in chapter 1, is conceptualized by iTaukei as gauna or ‘life-time’ hence, all
things which are real are taken to have a definite origin and, possibly, an end. The
origin of the all-encompassing vuravura-world that contains all vanua-places occupied
by placed-peoples, and the vuravura-spheres of other ‘beings’, for instance, though
unknown, may be placed to a time so ‘ancient’ that the linear concept of historical time
was needed to make sense of the ancientness of the vuravura concept. It is against this
understanding that all generational ‘life-times’ may be positioned, in space and time,
somewhere between the makawa (old) of the past and the vou (new) of the now. But
like the tree analogy, the present (newer branches and roots) continues to ‘move’
laterally away from a past placed in the core of the ‘tree-self’ itself, and towards a
future existing always in space and time in the outer reaches. The tree analogy of a
‘time’ (as in ‘life-time’) ‘growing’ in all directions, therefore, gives the impression of a
‘capacity’ (created by the growing ‘tree-self’) that is ever enlarging ‘filling’ (as opposed
to ‘owning’) space within the vuravura-sphere that supports and sustains it. Similarly,
the Vanua (place/people) conception is ever-maturing, established, productive and
progressive.
With this tree analogy, therefore, a revolutionizing conceptualization of the vanua
conception is arrived at. A vanua-people is ‘planted’ on vanua-land claiming a vanua-
156��
place. This vanua-people grows into and begins to occupy a vanua-space reaching
deeper into the vanua-land’s ‘life-time’ towards Bulu (the vanua-place of the ‘fallen’),
into the vanua-time of Bulu, and stretching further out towards a Lagi (the vanua-place
of greater influences and opportunities), into the vanua-time of Lagi. This placed-
people then devised ways of conquering the deep and the unknown, the vuravura-
worlds of the wild and the tamed, the free and the bound. To engage with neighbouring
vanua-peoples, themselves ‘planted’ on selected vanua-lands or claimed vanua-places,
a support and sharing system based on the concepts of “self- and cross-pollination”, and
which is facilitated by ‘environmental’ agents, begins to see the metaphorical tree grow,
become fruitful and multiply. This analogy, in essence, has shed new light into the
vanua concept giving it renewed meaning. Herein is presented a vanua interpretation
that encompasses place, space and time.
With this renewed understanding, it could be said, therefore, that all Vanua vakaTuraga
have their origin and are ‘planted’ (or placed) on a piece of land to which they will be
forever indebted. Like the Vuanirewa of Tubou-Lakeba, there is a real chance of being
‘transplanted’ across vanua-land or even ‘grafted’ into a host vanua-people. The
memory of this “change-of-place” from Nayau to Lakeba, for the Vuanirewa, is only
too recent to forget, given how western civilization has taught us to ‘remember’ who we
once were, at least at the coming of the transformative power of the gospel, preached to
the natives by the church. This development, in essence, may have resulted in the
construction of a history that denied us the ‘memory’ of a past without the ‘colonizer’ in
it, permanently replacing most of our talanoa from the pre-Christian iTaukei era
regardless of whether the ‘colonizer’ came from within or without. This is evident, in
the Tubou-Lakeba context, in how they have clearly lost their ‘ancient’ chants and, now
sing fairly recent compositions from within the Christian and ‘colonial’ eras, telling
stories derived from ‘myths’ originating from the “occupying cultures” of Polynesia,
western Viti and Europe. The persisting presence of the lakalaka (the meke from Toga),
for instance, completely sung in the vosa vakaToga (language of the Toga people), in
Tubou-Lakeba, reflects the colonising influence of the culture of the Toga people. In an
interesting twist, new initiatives have proven that there are local ‘talents’ capable of
157��
reviving the iTaukei meke, in the iTaukei language. In one such instance, the ‘creator’
of a meke has drawn from both historical accounts and archeological evidences to
compose a meke that attempts to re-tell their history in light of scientific findings. This
innovation, in turn, has given the people of Tubou-Lakeba a ‘deeper’ sense of
indigeneity tracing their ‘roots’ back to the Lapita migrations. As a result, there is now a
silent openness to “science” as a method of knowing and, for the Tubou-Lakeba people,
there is a reckoning that the myths need to be contested afterall, at least when it comes
to stories of origin. Even then, such a deepened understanding can only serve to
strenghten their vanua roots and identity. Consequently, this has opened up greater
opportunities for the kind of cross-cultural engagement that embodies knowledge
sharing and building for sautu-peace and plenty, order and stability.
6.3.6 The Mata method of Vanua people
For this segment of the closing discussion, I would presume that the vanua world is way
bigger than it is known to the iTaukei.15 Given their proven connectedness, these
scattered peoples would have developed a manner of engagement to sustain their
oceanic way of life, at least sub-regionally. This is what I have dared to call a mata
(eye) system of knowing and which basically works, as we would experience bodily,
when intimately engaging face-to-face. This kind of engagement is usually built on trust
and commitment, and is proven to last given how communication becomes the critial
part of it hence, is grounded on enduring and not contractual relationships. This system
of exchange, traditionally crossing miles of open sea, normally followed established
blood-linked routes thus, were probably centered around gifting. Unconsciously,
possibly, the gifting grew into active knowledge sharing and which was essential in the
sustenance of their remotely constructed unique island realities, differing in many ways
but, evidently overlapping. Upon these assumptions, I have formulated an approach to
indigenous research appropriately called the Mata method and, as I perceive, which
when engaged in, leads to the knowledge of what sautu (well being) is to us,
individually and collectively. In retrospect, this was the method I basically followed,
methodologically grounded in the concept of veitalanoa (dialogue) between mata-reps
of Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places of privileged peoples). The mata method or
158��
approach herein articulated forms a major part of my research findings, and which is
bound to influence future endeavours undertaken at the university, particularly for
indigenous Pacific research:
1. Know the space and time which you are entering into: the people therein and
their relationships within and without – particularly to you as researcher and to
the ideas embodied in your research. This accounts for protocol and cultural
appropriateness. It also considers their connectedness to the ancient place, the
natural world and its ‘inhabitants’, and their spiritualities. An understanding and
appreciation of a people’s conceptualization of space, and time, will prove
critical, therefore, in one’s attempt to engage them, particularly at the
philosophical level.
2. Know the place you are setting foot on: your relative vulagi (unfamiliar but
privileged) position to that of your host, and theirs to yours – particularly in light
of their veiness (sense of community) and taukeiness (sense of ‘yoked-ness’ to
place). This accounts for pathways to follow, gateways to enter and platforms of
veitalanoa to participate in hence, how to navigate your way around veitalanoa
circles. This culturally appropriate natural group veitalanoa formation, for the
more traditional iTaukei at least, is inevitably centered on the tanoa (yaqona
bowl) and the vakaTuraga. Note that certain brands of indigenous Christianity
do not value yaqona thus, any engagement with them will have to go without it.
3. Be open to listen to their philosophically informed positions before submitting
your own, even for insider-researchers. Openness to dialogue is what defines
them, particularly when that includes genuine respect for their ways of knowing
and being. To do otherwise is to face a ‘shut-down’ and lose your connectedness
to source. This is an ongoing process which begins well before you enter the
researched community and, which may continue as long as you choose to be the
mata-rep to represent their ‘silenced’ and ‘silent’ indigenous knowledge in
academia hence, to the world.
159��
4. Be prepared to clearly articulate your current informed position at the outset,
even with that which pertains to the very questions you seek answers for but,
clearly indicate that there is still much more to learn and know. This attitude to
research comes with the assumption that participants in any veitalanoa are not
naïve. They may know much more than they are willing to disclose, initially –
even knowledge that may still be raw or unfiltered. In observing your conviction
and passion, particurlarly when employing decolonizing methodologies, they
will be encouraged and persuaded to try and articulate their own unique
positions hence, keeping them engaged.
5. Understand that veitalanoa is indeed conceptual engagement and, as such, is
bound to sway opinions. Be careful to leave the veitalanoa open to multiple
perspectives, taking into account that participants’ shifting standpoints will
differ according to the multiplicity of their experience and the “breadth of their
vision”. Particularly critical to any veitalanoa is the understanding that closure
will kill the dialogue. Nonetheless, rest in the hope that there will be a
converging of ideas, and that a common place of agreement will be found, even
if temporarily. Remember that to be challenged, conceptually, is good.
The method discussed above, grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga framework of
engagement, embodies the taukei-vulagi relationship between the ‘familiar One’ (the
Vanua, the ‘host’) and the privileged ‘unfamiliar Other’ (the Turaga, the ‘guest’),
engaging as mata-reps of their respective realities. This mata system of engaging cross-
culturally, in essence, employs the expertise of mata-envoys engaging via the mata
approach. Through veitalanoa-dialogue, therefore, people’s sense of place, or “placed-
ness”, change in proportion to the conceptual change wrought in them, and usually
accomodating vulagi (foreign/strange/new) ideas in the hope that change will work out
for good, for sautu. This believable state of being, and of mind, expressed in plenty, is
proof that a real sense of sau/mana (power) exists for those who will seek to expand
their knowledge-base via life-long learning. This implies, therefore, that one’s personal
power (sau/mana) to rawa ka (get things [done]) is directly proportional to her/his
160��
measure of learning, and of knowing. In light of this understanding, ‘Ia me vala!’ (‘So
get it done!’) may be conceptualized as “getting the knowledge to get the power to get
things done”. So for one who says: ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (‘I see [only], I know!’), the
challenge is to be empowered. According to my research findings, therefore,
empowerment will come about for enthusiatic learners/knowers eager to share their
knowlegde spaces with others hence, simultaneously grow in their personal, and
collective, knowledge of their worlds. This was the attitude of our ancestors before us
who knew life beyond the horizons and carved out for us a mata system of knowing and
being, a mata system of representation.
6.4 Implications of this Research Face-to-face engagements or mata-to-mata communications work, even online, citing
social networks. In this information age, one’s ability to get information is directly
linked to her/his ability to put it to good use. Researchers researching indigenous
communities need to understand that there are culturally appropriate ways of engaging
indigenous peoples that are compatible with scientific knowledge and methods, and
which are relevant to modern iTaukei society. When these cultured views are carefully
extracted, critically analyzed and meaningfully applied, the researched indigenous
communities benefit as much as the research institution, and the rapidly globalizing
world at large.
Academia and academics will testify to this: con-frontation helps to ‘shift and settle’
opinions and worldviews, philosophical positions and the practices guided by them.
Findings of this research should boost the confidence of iTaukei social science
researchers researching their own people, and particularly with the knowledge that the
iTaukei, possibly other Pacific peoples, are culturally open to dialogue, knowledge
sharing and knowledge building. Though there exists the danger of politicizing the mata
concept, given how mata-envoys make the first points of contact between Vanua,
nation-states, ideologies and communities of practice, mata are still conceptualized here
as more than just the faces or fronts of places they represent. This research project has
161��
identified, and continues to argue, that as ‘seers’, mata have been strategically placed
within their own communities to be that link between knowledge seekers and the
knowledge which they seek. Furthermore, it should be noted that every lewe
(flesh/member) of any Vanua (place/community) is indeed a mata-rep of it, representing
various aspects of knowledge from within that knowledge space and in varying degrees
thus, must be listened to and not silenced.
This understanding is bound to challenge current practices within postcolonial
ethnography opening up that space to a thoroughly collaborative network of mata
knowers – a development that will take knowledge construction to new heights, making
it a truly community project. Essentially, such a development is consistent with the
notion of communally existing in a shared space giving back to those you take from in
the true spirit of sharing. The question is: how often do social science researchers go
back to researched communities, after they have graduated or published, not just to say
‘thank you’ but, to continue exploring the changing dynamics of the researched-
cultures? This is what I belive is embodied in the veitalanoa (dialogue) concept.
Embedded in “relationship-building”, a true veitalanoa may be conceptualized as an
eternal commitment reaching out to as far as the dra ni veiwekani (blood of relatedness)
leads. This explains why veitalanoa, methodologically, should work well with
researchers researching their own people.
Outsider researchers, nonetheless, may still find right footing given that the veitalanoa
approach to knowledge sharing, employed by mata-reps of Vanua vakaTuraga (named
places privileging ‘strangers’), is one that is open also to forging lasting relationships
with vulagi-outsiders. The findings of this research, therefore, is hoped to impact inter-
place engagements at all levels. Researchers, as representatives of their disciplines,
universities, funding organisations, publishing houses and researched communities,
should be challenged, therefore, with the knowing that engagements which promote
knowledge sharing and building, for the pursuit of well being (sautu), actually matter to
the indigenous peoples of the Pacific. The responsibility is on them to re-kune
(find/conceive) the maliwa-spaces between their own educated positions and those of
162��
their researched communities – maliwa-spaces to ‘fill’ (not ‘own’) and bucibucini (sow
seeds) from. Finding that maliwa-space, therefore, is critical for no real veitalanoa can
begin without it. The findings of this research, as I perceive, will prove useful in
education, development and governance, diplomacy, consultancy and research –
wherever people are, the human in the ‘sciences’, people who know what it is like to be
‘yoked-with’ place and, be frustrated at being silenced and mis-represented.
6.4.1 Veitalanoa as an Inter-disciplinary Commitment
This research project began with a vision: promoting inter-disciplinary engagement at
all levels. As a secondary school teacher, I experienced first hand the rivalry between
teachers of different subject areas. From my standpoint, I perceived that such hostility
could never produce balanced individuals who would embrace the nobel conception of
‘freeing the oppressed mind’ via a holistic form of education. Unfortunately, at the post-
graduate level, I have found the same to be, at least, half true. Graduates tend to
zealously guard their disciplinary boundaries, much like traditional experts/knowers
who claim exclusive rights to knowledge within their traditional communal roles.
Thankfully, I observed my mother’s people freely sharing essentially specialized
knowledge, like healing ‘powers’ for instance – particularly when well being, of self
and of the Vanua, is a much desired collective goal. Similarly, for the iTaukei of Tubou-
Lakeba, group activities have continued to be excellent open learning spaces for young
enthusiasts.
Pacific studies, as a discipline which recognizes the credibility of inter-disciplinary
engagements, drawing also from traditional or indigenous knowledge systems, their
philosophies and culture-sensitive approaches, therefore, has personally become the
fertile ground where I can now sow my novel ideas and patiently wait for a plentiful
harvest. It is my hope that my people, or at least my children, will not have to go
through a full twelve years of basic education shut out from being authentically
themselves – free to re-name, re-claim, re-tell and re-represent their stories, narratives
birthed in a truly multi-cultural environment and grounded, permanently, in the iTaukei
culture. This is where, I believe, the true spirit of veitalanoa and, within a taukei-vulagi
163��
(place-rep or Vanua-mata) framework of engagement, will be able to bring together
diverse cultures to that place of Auseinandersetzung – the rara place of inter-
disciplinary commitment that is guaranteed to give voice to a people struggling through
decolonization towards self-determination.
Defining what sautu (the ‘all good life’) is for me is one thing. Locating the knowledge
that will enhance my personal mana/sau to ‘get things [done]’ is another. Constant
veitalanoa across all disciplinary boundaries may hold the key to arriving at one’s ‘aha’
moment of realization. If learned scholars need to ‘search’ widely before constructing
anew, how much more ordinary people who are just getting by. To deny the grassroots
people the privilege to access constructive veitalanoa within communities of
experts/knowers, therefore, is to rob them of the opportunity to be informed, learn ‘new
tricks’, be motivated and get going. This view purports that sautu is attainable but, at a
cost – allowing others access into the ‘personal’ spaces of information-carriers, the
knowledgeable mata-reps. To implement this ambitious undertaking calls for the
mobilization of reliable and influential community leaders who are committed to the
knowledge-sharing and knowledge-building exercises, and via a veitalanoa platform.
Given its cultural underpinnings, veitalanoa within the taukei-vulagi framework must
be used as the main strategy of engagement among Pacific peoples, supplemented only
by the media and the internet, not vice-versa but, definitely supported by information
and communication technological apparatus.
Veitalanoa, in essence, is not the exact same thing as talanoa. While the former can be
conceptualized as ‘work’, a kind of tara koro (lit. ‘constructing a village/town’; a
metaphor for ‘story-telling’), the latter comprises the stories one brings to the activity
and, their consequent telling or re-telling. To come to a veitalanoa (a kind of
‘colloquium’ for constructive engagements) is to come prepared with a ‘talanoa-story’
to tell. In the ‘hearing’ of participants’ talanoa, individual positionings are communally
negotiated as participants continue to re-work their personal rara spaces: platforms
from which future engagements are to be facilitated. Veitalanoa, therefore, must not be
interpreted as idle talk. While the interaction, overall, may seem silly to the vulagi
164��
(outsider), particularly when engaging ordinary people, the insider-researcher,
undoubtedly, will be thoroughly engaged given her/his privileged position, her/his
capacity to be able to ‘read’ the subtleties and the silences, the mood swings and the
distractors, features of such cultural engagements that non-native and/or untrained
researchers may find incomprehensible and unbelievable. Veitalanoa within a cultural
setting, therefore, for indigenous researchers, is a forum richly adorned with a readable
multiplicity full of learning opportunities. This was in fact the attitude which I adopted
while interacting with the Tubou-Lakeba people, whatever the occasion was. Whether it
was for a death, marriage, birthday, or welcome home party, veiwekani (relatives) ‘dos’
are too numerous and ongoing for the iTaukei researcher researching her/his own
people not to find what or who s/he is looking for. I would simply go in to observe as a
participant, ‘work’ with them in the flow of the veitalanoa and return enlightened and
charged to get back to my tali magimagi or thesis construction, even if that cultural
space I am made to ‘work’ in is here in academia.
6.5 Conclusion If stability lies in orderly change and, sautu is stability, then orderly change must be the
primary goal of any knowledge sharing and building project aimed at empowering the
iTaukei people, and Oceanians in general, to become creative and productive members
of society. Such a change, essentially, must begin conceptually, and be philosophically
sound. The understanding too that orderly change, in society, is directly linked to the
environment and its ability to source, support and sustain development, makes it even
the more urgent to pursue environmental-friendly solutions to our problems. Such a
nobel cause may be effectively engaged in via a workable diplomacy program and
effective and accountable leadership. These are notions truly embodied in the idealized
iTaukei mata/envoy system connecting related Vanua vakaTuraga, and which I present
here as proof for the existence of indigenous knowledge, wisdom and practices that are
relevant in our modern world.
165��
The challenge remains that engaging iTaukei people conceptually must be informed by
theories of knowing and learning that work. If the mind is truly embodied, and thought
is largely metaphorical, then reality must be experienced to be appreciated, for its
symbolism and meaning. The conceptual metaphor that ‘Knowing is Seeing’, outwardly
expressed by the iTaukei as ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (‘I see only, I know!’), and
suggesting that ‘seeing’ is synonymous with ‘knowing’, may just be the knowlegde that
will inform future projects directed at empowering individuals and communities. By
implication, this means that if people can perceive (experience) something, they can
then conceptualize it – proving how the mind is located in the body, and not outside of
it. This is what makes new knowledge, indigenous or otherwise, comprehensible and
believable. Such basic understanding, in essence, produce conceptual change, influence
worldview, and modify behaviour. Empowerment, via life-long learning, is therefore
critical in the pursuit of well being: the state of mind and being conceptualized by the
iTaukei as sautu. Herein, one’s personal mana/sau is seen to be connected to that
‘place’ s/he is ‘yoked-with’, a ‘power’ believed to be embodied by true Mata of all
knowledge places. Around this conception, of a sau/mana that is always present, is
constructed the iTaukei social reality: their iValavala (traditional ways of knowing and
being) and iTovo (acceptable manner of conduct). Such appropriate behaviour, existing
today as social phenomena, therefore, have been conceived by a people whose
“knowledge and beliefs are framed in terms of a conceptual system that resides mostly
in the cognitive unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 12) – a ‘seeing’ and
‘knowing’ system that privileges situated-ness in place, and the self-representation of
that place.
It is therefore within this kind of orderedness, sourcing, supporting and sustaining
diplomacy and sharing, that stability will find a home to nestle, a ground for breeding.
The Tubou-Lakeba reality, shaped by their Vanua bred perceptions and sensibilities, is
observable and, nearly predictable, given how the conceptualizations of their daily
experiences, expressed in culturally correct codes of conduct and ethics, are firmly
rooted in the vakaTuraga, the chiefly, the higher values, the principled life. It is against
this backdrop that the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba have constructed a reality centered on
166��
their Sau, and the sauvaki (service/worship) of the chiefly place – cultivating and
harvesting the wealth of the Vanua in the pursuit of a sautu (stability) that is preserved
in the vakamanamanataki (‘articulation’) of their belief in a mana/sau (power) inherent
to ‘place’, the peopled-place. This very real belief in the presence of a ‘power to effect’
characterizes the iTaukei, a placed-people living the vei (communal/reciprocating) life.
In representing this way of knowing and being, one is called to systematically defend
the iTaukei right and privilege to be mata-reps of their own environmentally determined
constructions (social realities), and which is a responsibility of every iTaukei mata
(‘eye’) in academia. Indigenous thinkers placed within and privileged by the research
institution have been well positioned and thoroughly equipped, therefore, to pursue that
goal via culturally appropriate methodologies and methods – much like the
decolonizing veitalanoa methodology embodied in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception,
and which frames and guides this research.
An approach towards the reconceptualizing of the pursuit of individual and collective
well-being, via an exchange and sharing platform situated in place, is what I call the
“mata way to sautu”. Herein, one is invited to the active perceiving, viewing,
conceiving, conceptualizing, representing, re-claiming and re-naming of one’s position
in place, and space through time, in order to take ownership of one’s own reality and,
the ongoing construction and reconstruction of elements of it, in the pursuit of the ‘all
good life’. Grounded in Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, the iTaukei “mata way to sautu” may be
conceptualized as an indigenous version to what constitutes ‘science’ and the ‘scientific
method’ hence, presenting a notion that could very well guide future indigenous
research, particularly by iTaukei scholars on their people. To embed this indigenous
conception, the “mata way to sautu”, in academia, therefore, is to consciously create a
privileged place for it. This compromise can be easily negotiated given that both
systems, indigenous and scientific, value greater collaboration and, knowledge sharing
and building hence, share an appreciation for the notion that ‘knowledge is power’. The
“mata way to sautu”, in essence, is clearly one way of empowering mata-reps in their
journey towards establishing what sautu (peace, order, stability, plenty) means for
themselves, and their people. To empower mata-reps, therefore, is to empower a people.
167��
6.5.1 Closing Remarks
If the mind has been scientifically proven to be embodied and, embodied reason,
passionate and universal, given our common embodiment (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999),
then indigenous thinkers and postcolonial writers must not shy away from representing
their cultured worldviews, and situated metaphorical thought, in academia. The research
platform, therefore, is the right place where their situated assumptions, and knowledge,
may be put through veitalanoa forums to prove, or otherwise disprove, the usefulness
and relevance of their time-tested values, ideas and institutions in twenty-first century
indigenous societies hence, ‘shifting and settling’ both the ‘taken-for-granted’ and the
veika bibi (heavier/denser ‘stuff’) their knowledge is made of. Though the application
of indigenous knowledge and wisdom may have to adapt in a rapidly changing
environment – physical, socio-cultural and spiritual – their philosophical underpinnings,
and which may have universal significance, make up the ‘heavier matter’ that needs to
be surfaced. This is where scientific research, informed by western thought and aided
by western tools, make the ideal starting point from which indigenous researchers must
launch their re-kune (searching/conceiving again) of indigenous ways of knowing and
being (‘theories’ and practices) that have sustained them, as a people, and which they
have preserved in their iValavala (‘settled’ traditions) and iTovo (‘shifting’ methods).
The future of indigenous research, therefore, relies on indigenous scholars’ collective
ability (an expression of sautu) and capacity (a kind of innate sau/mana) to creatively
explore ancient vanua-spaces, re-claim and re-name ‘peopled’ vanua-places, re-tell their
talanoa-narratives and re-represent enduring constructions perpetuated over generations
to deny certain sections of the Vanua whole (community) their humanity, their
privileged positions to ‘choose’ their representatives, otherwise understood as a kind of
‘self-representation’ (privileging the ‘Vanua-all’, their group-self). Though the
conceptions explored here ‘belong’ to the iTaukei of Viti, particularly of Lakeba-Lau,
their cross-cultural significance is something that could be further explored in in-depth
studies focusing on indigenous Pacific peoples’ situated philosophies, thought and
ethics. One such philosophical assumption which I picked up from my mother, in the 40
years I have spent with her (still going), and which has been a thought that makes me
168��
persevere in everything I am ‘tasked’ to do, given how it is forever settled in my ‘spirit’,
is the straight-forward vakaLakeba ‘question’ that has become the concluding remark I
make every time an ‘assigned’ task is completed:
E dua a meca ena ta oji?! Is there a ‘thing’ that will not come to an end?!
While this ‘statement’, posed as a question, highlights the settled universal ‘truth’ that
‘in everything there is a season’, it also encourages us to diligently persevere in our
current engagements, and courageously anticipate future challenges, proving that
determination leads to sautu (orderly change, stability and plenty). On this note,
therefore, I end this phase of my research journey, but with great hope and enthusiasm
for the next ‘task’ life, and research, will throw at me.
6.6 Chapter Summary This voyage, after many a suns, is finally touching vanua-land. What started off as a
‘groping’ has now turned into a ‘landing’, not just for me but, also for the researched.
Together nu (used in reference to a people group) is slowly va (lit. ‘treading’) on ‘solid’
philosophical ground. Essentially, the exploration has only just begun. The end of this
journey merely marks the beginning of the next. What have I found, therefore, in the
maliwa-space between my initial ‘take-off’ point and now? How do I bring my findings
to bear on my future research projects? Whatever questions I ask now, I must take a
breather, and just bathe in the ‘warmth’ called vanua-place. At long last, I have found a
philosophical niche. I am initiating a mata discourse, in academia, and I am truly
honoured. I can now charge myself with the responsibility of empowering people with
that thought: everyone is a mata of some place or places hence, no one is just a mere ta-
mata (doomed to be ‘silenced’ tamata-person). What do I do next with people
empowered with this noble thought? Herein I submit that the honourable task of
motivating and equipping people to strengthen and enlarge their knowledge-base, via
greater participation in life-long learning, awaits enthusiastic learners/researchers
persuaded of their mata potential. As briefly charted out in this chapter, the “mata way
169��
to sautu” (or pathway to ‘well being’) is the ‘walk-way’ of the mata (seer/knower) via
other mata (seers/knowers). Together, therefore, mata-reps form a “society of mata”.
This community of mata, made up of intelligent and articulate knowers who believe in
the true worth of a ‘life’ positioned in-place (not out-of-place) and carrying mata
responsibility to ‘speak’ freely about, and for, knowledge from that familiar space, is a
community of ‘experts’. Essentially, each one of them is duty-bound to “search again”
from around the known bounds within their respective knowledge-spaces and,
“conceive again” of intelligible ways of making sense of their experiences, and reality.
To be effective, therefore, and prove one’s mana/sau (‘given powers’) over hegemonic
‘forces’ (of nature, society and of the mind), one needs to learn to collaborate with other
knowers (and learners/researchers). This is the secret to survival. It is no big secret.
Collaborative learning and knowing is what characterizes resilient communities. A
network of like-minded people is just too tough to break. For a smart mata-rep,
therefore, there exists a mata approach/method to ‘searching and conceiving again’. It
basically requires one to know spaces and times entering, and places treading.
Furthermore, one needs to acknowledge that people interacting with are not naïve, and
as human beings, they can only be encouraged to engage with us if we respect their
spaces and positions, philosophical or otherwise. For researchers out in the ‘field’, the
‘trick’ is not to ‘kill’ the dialogue by listening more and talking less. No assertion
whatsoever is to be made. ‘Knowledge’ brought to the ‘floor’ must be viewed with a
sense of temporality, even if coming from the researcher. The only thing permanent is
people’s mata roles, from the greatest down to the very least. As such, everyone’s view
must be respected. These raw and often unfiltered opinions, in essence, hold ‘secret
windows’ through which the researcher may access their deepest thoughts. All the good
ideas suggested here are useless, nonetheless, if traditional protocol of seeking entry
into an indigenous community is not followed, even if going in as an insider-researcher.
To engage them is to earn their trust. This is the most difficult aspect of ‘field’ work,
and the trickiest, given how ceremonies, like the iTaukei traditional isevusevu
introductions, are often just taken-for-granted.
170��
The mata method or approach to indigenous Pacific research articulated herein, and
which is derived from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, when used to explore the iTaukei world,
will prove effective given how it is based on the iTaukei people’s cultured privileging
system of engagement. Within this system of inter-Vanua (‘cross-cultural’) exchange
and interaction, any researcher, insider or otherwise, is deemed worthy of
veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’), particularly as a vulagi (‘outsider’ representing the
research institution), if s/he is seen to embody the vakaTuraga (the highest manner of
respect). Outsider-researchers, therefore, will find it useful to be well briefed about
culturally appropriate practices prior to seeking entry into the Vanua. If possible, and
whenever necessary, proper protocol must be followed even upon entry into individual
homes of mata-groups availing themselves for veitalanoa, particularly in the first
instance. A researcher’s sensitivity to indigenous thought, way of thinking, behaviour
and sensibility, particularly when working with the iTaukei, will be duly reciprocated.
At the rara platform of engagement, veitalanoa is serious. Occasionally, the seriousness
will be broken with some light moments but, overall, the researcher must be open to
non-verbal forms of communication, which when left to go unchecked, can end the
dialogue prematurely, particularly if engaging non-yaqona drinkers. On the other hand,
keeping kava consuming groups engaged is not a problem if the researcher can ensure
that good quality kava keeps flowing, and the ‘chasers’ are plentiful. It must be noted
that getting people to ‘talk’ can be costly, and this was the price I had to pay when
engaging ‘traditional’ people with a ‘thirst’. For me, this strategy worked, perfectly,
because I was prepared to sit long hours, and into the night, in their midst enduring the
torment of over-exposure to excessive cigarette smoke and, sometimes, foul language.
Whatever the cost, I was adamant not to return ‘empty-handed’. I had to find answers to
my research questions, and more. I wanted to be sure I was getting things right, and this
was the only way to do it. Essentially, working as a mata ethnographer meant that I
genuinely immerse myself in the culture of the researched, singing their songs and
feeling their heart-beats. Must I continue in this kind of engagement after the thesis-
construction? What if I choose a non-kava drinking life-style, and particularly when
traditional iTaukei expect their menfolks to be active users of the substance? Who will I
then engage, if a change in life-style translates to limited access to traditional knowers?
171��
Does that mean a change in strategies employed? If this is a “mata way to sautu” for my
people given to the unrelenting culture of excessive yaqona drinking, then this is one of
the effective pathways to be followed, to reach and influence them. My task now is to
identify other practical ways of empowering the iTaukei with the knowledge that our
days of just waiting to be represented are over. It is time to stand up and be counted.
How so? In re-writing and re-righting our ‘stories’ from our ‘shifting horizon’
perspectives, and as mata-reps of our knowledge spaces well rooted in the peculiarities
of our placed-experiences.
������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1As cited in D’arcy (2006, p. 170). 2 Present in Lakeba today are the mata-kiBau (herald to Bau), mata-kiCicia (herald to Cicia) and mata-kiCakaudrove (herald to Cakaudrove) – heralding offices to/forVanua vakaTuraga which had distant relations with Lakeba. As for other Vanua which came under the Lakeba rule, what they have are ‘mata-nikatuba’ (‘eyes of door’) or ‘icabecabe’ (places to ‘cabe’ [ascend] to) when coming to Lakeba – their ‘doorway’ into the Vanua vakaTuraga. 3Note that there are also less noble Vanua attitudes. While idealizing the best of the ‘vei’ values, negative ‘vei’ attitudes are not to be totally ignored. Whether for good or evil, the iTaukei see almost all causes as a community ‘project’ explaining why they are often always interested in additional information about a person’s veiwekani (relatives), yavusa (tribe), koro (village), etc. when they hear of such a person’s accomplishments, downfalls, etc. 4Tokairabe is the priestly ancestor of the mata-kiCicia clan, the mata-niVanua (herald, ‘right-hand’) of the TuiNayau of Lakeba. His ‘presence’ is always ‘felt’ by the Tubou-Lakeba people when the ‘taiseni’(Circus approximans, a bird of prey) soars above the chiefly village – the bird in the ‘Bird’s Eye View’ expression hereby conceptualized as Tokairabe. This is a kind of ‘vakamanamana’ or, the open articulation of their confidence in the mana/sau of something or someone, particularly from their ‘old’ religion/spirituality and, which could be interpreted by some brand of Christianity as ‘evil’ and ‘un-Christian’. 5 Ancient wisdom, in this regard, refers to the ‘wisdom of old’ drawn from humanity’s many standpoint perspectives, documented or otherwise, but which has been continuously and systematically extracted and represented (harvested and harnessed), via research activities and outcomes, informing knowledge sharing and knowledge building. At this point, the realization is that not one knowledge system can do ‘life’ alone hence, multiplicity is critical for survival. 6A space saturated with a strong presence of compatible ideas, comprising the best of indigenous and western values, mixed together to ‘taste’ – much like how pounded yaqona from Kadavu is ‘mixed in’ mainland VitiLevu water and, consumed by a mixed group of Fijians watching a televised Viti-Samoa rugby match in an urban Suva home, played live in Wellington, New Zealand. Note also that there is a higher probability that pre-1300 Event Viti society was never homogenous. The kaiViti concept, even then, would have been one concerned with a mixed ‘race’. 7 For another reading, refer to Hooper (1996, p. 249). 8 For the iTaukei, ceremonies “reflect their worldview, and define the social and political structures, religious beliefs, values and practices inherent in [iTaukei] Fijian communities” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. vii). 9Not necessarily the celebrated and elaborate occasions warranting the presence of ‘all’ from across the land. Some of these installations were done with a lot of secrecy, witnessed only by a privileged few, like the one done for RatuTevita, the father of Ratu Mara.
172��
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 According to Hooper (1996, p. 249), the mother is the land and the father is the chief. This view embodies the notion that one is unproductive without the other. 11Note that for iTaukei today, the ‘rara’ is but a playing ground. Conceptualizing it as a place for dialogue and con-frontation is significant here given how this study has found that sautu(peace/prosperity) is attainable, for the greater part, via the Mata (representative/eye-mind [seer-knower]) way. 12Any Vanua vakaTuraga would have a ‘icavuti’, a traditional/ceremonial name by which its people are known and which connects them to their center, the chief and the chiefly place. These names are not found on any map showing place names hence, they connect such a place to a pre-colonial past – colonial, in this case, referring to the colonizing power of Europe’s influence. 13 Refer to Sanga and Walker (2005, p. 73). 14 This view is opposed to the idea of installing one as Turaga (chief) or Sau, the ‘one-othered’, only by birthright. It therefore goes that the criteria for selection of Vanua leaders must take into account one’s personal sau/mana expressed, perhaps, in her/his ability to ‘rawa ka’ (lit. ‘get things’), suggesting an achievement-oriented position compatible with the modern idea of a performance-based selection, and which is ultimately demonstrated in a personal ‘sautu’ (peace, prosperity, stability and order) that is of communal good. 15 Given that the vanua concept and its many variants (Campbell, 1990, 15) are found throughout the vastness of Polynesia’s oceanic geography.
173 �
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ananthanarayanan, V., & St. Clair N.S. (2012). Building bridges: Contextualizing
worldviews through cultural syndromes and the importance of expressing
metaphorical perspective. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8 (5), 1-7.
Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A.O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska
native ways of knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36 (1), 8-23.
Battiste, M. (2000) (ed.) Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision. British Columbia,
Canada: University of British Columbia Press.
Bernard, H.R. (1995). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches (2nd ed.). Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press.
Biggs, B. (1994). Knowledge as allegory. In J. Morrison, P. Geraghty & L. Crowl
(Eds.), Science of Pacific Island Peoples: Education, Language, Patterns and
Policy, Vol. 4 (pp. 1-11) Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the
South Pacific.
Burik, S. (2006). Thinking through the West towards Indigenous Epistemologies. In M.
Prasad (Ed.), Proceedings of the Pacific Epistemologies Conference, Pacific Writing
Forum (pp. 69-75). Suva, Fiji: University of the South Pacific.
Campbell, I. C. (1990). A History of the Pacific Islands. St. Lucia, Australia: University
of Queensland Press.
Cobern, W. W. (1993). World View, Metaphysics, and Epistemology. Scientific
Literacy and Cultural Studies Project, Paper 7. Retrieved from
http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/science_slcsp/7
D’arcy, P. (2006). The People of the Sea: Environment, Identity, and History in
Oceania. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Evening, L. L. (2004). Why girls don’t do physics – the Fiji experience. In T. Baba, O.
M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific and
Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Perspectives (pp. 105-125). Auckland, New
Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.
Feinberg, R. (1978). Anutan epistemology: the roots of “knowledge” on a Polynesian
outlier. Micronesia, 14, 127-137.
174 �
Ferguson, M. J., & Bargh, J. A. (2004). How social perception can automatically
influence behaviour. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8 (1), 33-39.
Filipo, S. L. (2004). In search of a culturally appropriate approach to research: a
Samoan case. In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.),
Researching the Pacific and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Perspectives (pp. 179-
185). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London, England: Penguin.
Gatty, R. (2009). Fijian-English Dictionary: With Notes on Fijian Culture and Natural
History. Suva, Fiji: Ronald Gatty.
Gegeo, D.W. (2001). Cultural rupture and indigeneity: the challenge of (re)visioning
“place” in the Pacific. The Contemporary Pacific,13 (2), 491-507.
Gegeo, D.W. (2006). Our islands of knowledge: (re)visioning the “place” of Pacific
epistemologies in a rapidly globalizing world. In M. Prasad (Ed.), Proceedings of
the Pacific Epistemologies Conference, Pacific Writing Forum. Suva, Fiji:
University of the South Pacific.
Gegeo, D. W., & Watson-Gegeo, K. (2001). “How we know”: Kwara‘ae rural
villagers doing indigenous epistemology. The Contemporary Pacific, 13, 55-88.
Hau‘ofa, E. (2008). We are the ocean: Selected works. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University
of Hawai‘i Press.
Helu Thaman, K. (1999). Songs of love: New and selected poems (1974 – 1999). Suva,
Fiji: Mana Publications.
Helu Thaman, K. (2003). Decolonising Pacific studies: Indigenous perspectives,
knowledge and wisdom in higher education. The Contemporary Pacific, 15, 1-17.
Hereniko, V. (2000). Indigenous knowledge and academic imperialism. In R.
Borofsky (Ed.), Rememberance of Pacific pasts: An invitation to remake history
(pp. 78-91). Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i Press.
175 �
Hooper, S. (1996). Who are the chiefs? Chiefship in Lau, eastern Fiji. In R. Feinberg
& K. A. Watson-Gegeo (Eds.), Leadership and change in the western Pacific,
Essays presented to Sir Raymond Firth on the Occasion of his 90th Birthday,
Monographs on Anthropology, 66 (pp. 239-271). London, England: London School
of Economics.
Howitt, R & S. Suchet-Pearson (2001). Spaces of knowledge: ontological pluralism
in contested cultural landscapes. In K. Anderson, M. Domosh, S. Pile & N. Thrift
(Eds.), Handbook of Cultural Geography. Sydney, Australia: Macquarie University.
Huffer, E. (2004, October). Reinventing government in the Pacific: From values to
institutions. Commissioned paper presented at the UNDESA/UNDP/East-West
Centre Regional Forum on Reinventing Government in the Pacific. Apia, Western
Samoa.
Huffer, E., & Qalo, R. (2004). Have we been thinking upside down? The
contemporary emergence of Pacific theoretical thought. The Contemporary
Pacific, 16, 87-116.
Kagan, D., Ozment, S., & Turner, F. M. (1983). The Western Heritage. New York:
Macmillan Publishing.
Keso, H., Lehtimäki, H., & Pietiläinen, T. (2009). Engaging in reflexive acts: Sharing
experiences on reflexivity in empirical qualitative research. Tamara Journal,
7 (3), 51-70.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Lawson, S. (1996). Tradition verses democracy in the South Pacific: Fiji, Tonga and
Western Samoa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, C. B. (2010). Generating synergy between conceptual change and knowledge
building. Human Development, 53, 134-152.
Lennox, J. (2010). Darwinism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Standford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. Retrieved from <http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-
bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=Darwinism>
176 �
M�hina, O. (2004). Issues and challenges in Pacific research: Some critical comments.
In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams and U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the
Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives (pp. 186-200). Auckland,
New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.
M�hina, H.O. (2010). Ta, va, and moana: Temporality, spatiality, and indigeneity.
Pacific Studies, 33 (2/3), 168-202.
Mara, K. (1997). The Pacific way: A memoir. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i
Press.
Meyer, M. A. (2001). Our own liberation: Reflections on Hawaiian epistemology. The
Contemporary Pacific, 13, 124-148.
Nabobo-Baba, U. (2004). Research and Pacific indigenous peoples: Silenced pasts and
challenged futures. In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba
(Eds.), Researching the Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives
(pp. 17-32). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of
Auckland.
Nabobo-Baba, U. (2006). Knowing and learning: An indigenous Fijian approach.
Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.
Nabobo-Baba, U. (2010). The epistemological and philosophical basis of sustainable
development practices among indigenous Pacific peoples: A Fiji case study. In U.
Nabobo-Baba, C. F. Koya & T. Teaero (Eds.), Education for Sustainable
Development: Continuity and Survival in the Pacific, Vol. 1 (pp. 13-25). Suva and
Tokyo: School of Education, University of the South Pacific and Asia/Pacific
Cultural Centre for UNESCO.
Nunn, P. D. (1998). Pacific island landscapes. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies,
University of the South Pacific.
Nunn, P. D., Hunter-Anderson, R., Carson, M. T., Thomas, F., Ulm, S., & Rowland,
M. J. (2007). Times of plenty, times of less: Last millennium societal disruption in
the Pacific basin. Hum Ecol, 35, 385-401.
Pheloung, B., & King, J. (1992). Overcoming learning difficulties: How you can help a
child who finds it hard to learn. Sydney, Australia: Doubleday.
177 �
Ratuva, S. (2009). Commodifying cultural knowledge: Corporatized western science
and Pacific indigenous knowledge. International Social Science Journal, 60,
153-163.
Ravuvu, A. (1983). Vaka iTaukei: The Fijian way of life. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific
Studies, University of the South Pacific.
Ravuvu, A. D. (1987). The Fijian ethos. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies,
University of the South Pacific.
Ravuvu, A. D. (1988). Development or dependence: The pattern of change in a Fijian
village. Suva, Fiji: University of the South Pacific.
Reid, A. C. (1990). Tovata I & II. Suva,Fiji: Fiji Museum.
Sanga, K. F. (2004). Making philosophical sense of indigenous Pacific research. In T.
Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific
and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives (pp. 41-52). Auckland, New
Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.
Sanga, K. F. & Walker, K. D. (2005). Apem Moa Solomon Islands Leadership.
Wellington, New Zealand: He Parekereke Institute for Research and Development
in Maori and Pacific Education, Victoria University.
Scarr, D. (2008). Tuimacilai: A Life of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara. Adelaide, Australia:
Crawford House Publishing.
Scott, S. (2010). Drawing on indigenous ways of knowing: Reflections from a
community evaluator. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23 (2),
73-92.
Spurway, J. (2002). Hiki mo e faliki: Why Ma’afu brought his floor mats to Fiji in
1847. The Journal of Pacific History, 37 (1), 5-23.
Svenonius, E. (2004). The epistemological foundations of knowledge representations.
Library Trends 52 (3), 571-587.
Tuhiwai Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising methodologies: Research and indigenous
peoples. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
178 �
Tuhiwai Smith, L. (2004). Building research capability in the Pacific, for the Pacific
and by the Pacific peoples. In T. L. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-
Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and
Perspectives (pp. 4-16). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies,
University of Auckland.
Turnbull, D. (1994). Comparing knowledge systems: Pacific navigation and western
science. In J. Morrison, P. Geraghty & L. Crowl (Eds.), Science of Pacific islands
peoples: Ocean and coastal studies, Vol. 1 (pp. 129-144). Suva, Fiji: Institute of
Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.
Tuwere, I. (1992). Making sense of vanua (land) in the Fijian context: A theological
exploration. (PhD thesis, Melbourne College of Divinity, Melbourne, Australia).
Vaai, S. (1999). Literary representations in western Polynesia: Colonialism and
indigeneity. Apia, Samoa: National University of Samoa.
Williams, T. (1858). Fiji and the Fijians, Vol.1: The islands and their inhabitants.
London, England: Alexander Heylin.
Withers, C. W. J. (2009). Place and the “spatial turn” in geography and in history.
Journal of the History of Ideas, 70 (4), 637-658.
179��
GLOSSARY
Adi title used by women of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first- names
A itovo e odra ga a turaga! Manners belong only to the chiefly!
A iyau ga kei Lakeba a waliwali! The true mark of Lakeba wealth is the waliwali!
A meca iei a fika ga! This ‘thing’ [can be solved if I/we] just ‘figure’ it out!
A meca ko rogoca iei, vavana toka ga iei! Whatever [talanoa] you hear [in this place], keep it safely tucked here!
Amudo! Mudo! (archaic ceremonial language) signifying Vanua acceptance of blessings made by the ‘presenter’ (a Vanua representative) at the receiving end of one particular ceremonial exchange marking the conclusion of that ceremonial segment.
A omu iyau ga a wekamu! Your relatedness is your wealth! (herein, connectedness is equated to wealth)
A ona ga esa volai, esa volai! Whoever is registered, is registered!
A turaga e turaga ni tamata! A chief is chief [only] of/over people!
Au raica ga, au kila! I see [only], I know!
bati [as used here] traditional warriors
bete traditional priests
bilo cup(s) [traditionally made out of coconut shells]
bucini/bucibucini sowing/generating of
bula life/live/living; expressions of being alive
bula vakaibalebale a meaningful life
bulu bury, cover, conceal
bulubulu burial place
Bulu the under-world, the abode of the dead
180��
bunubunu a fish hunt method, using a long net, that traps the fish inside an enclosure formed by bringing the two ends of the net together forming a circle that is further constricted by taking the net ends right around in a wrap-around manner limiting fish movement and strengthening the netted-barrier
burisi angry (used to describe everyone else’s anger response except that of the Sau)
butuki literally meaning stepped/walked on and, in the context of the qoli kanace, the qoli is said to be butuki when the lack of harvest
is suspected to be a result of concealed pregnancy, by one/some of the ‘hunters’
buturara ground, floor, deck
cabe the rising of (the sun, etc.), coming up from/out of (the sea, etc.)
Cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena! A proverbial saying, possibly rooted in the pre-European contact war period, literally meaning ‘When the wind blows in from Lakeba, each warrior must strike his own!’ and understood, today, to mean that for the collective good of Lakeba, and with conditions favouring it, each member must remain active and keep pushing forward with the ‘conquering’ spirit. [To gain communal well being, each individual member must be a fighter, that is.]
cakacaka work, employment, vocation (noun); to do work (verb)
Cei-e-kena the clan from which the first Sau of Lakeba was appointed in pre- Christian and pre-Vuanirewa days [literally meaning ‘whose to eat’]
cobo the rhythmic clapping of cupped hands held at ninety degrees to each other particularly at the end of ceremonial presentations (always done sitting [in ceremonies], or stooping [elsewhere], signifying respect for the ‘chiefs’ present)
cobori no currently faced downwards (as of a cup, etc.)
coboti referring to the individual and collective act of cobo or ritualistic ‘clapping’ following the drinking of yaqona/kava, particularly of chiefs
181��
cokoti vata bound together (and bounded) by
cua the two sticks secured to the two ends of a fishing net that helps fish ‘hunters’ to hold it up in water and, likewise, drag it ashore
cuka this is what the early morning kanace fish hunt is called [may be linked to the vacuka concept which means ‘to punch’ hence, cuka is possibly archaic (not a common expression, that is)]
daku the back of (as opposed to ‘front of’)
dau placed before an action word to refer to a person/people skilled at it [an expert, that is]
Dau the yavusa of traditional fishers of the Tui Nayau, and is short for Dau-ni-Lakeba [otherwise, DauLakeba]; also the title for their
leader
dau-ni-veivakameautaki expert negotiators
dra-ni-veiwekani literally meaning ‘blood of relatedness’
dranumi to wash off salt left on the body in fresh water [in the context of the qoli kanace, the equipments are dranumi with some special leaves in the belief that this will ward off ‘evil’ that causes fish- hunters to return empty-handed]
dreu ripe [as used in reference to fruits]
duatani is different, special or unique (morphologically analysed as dua- tani [‘one-other’])
E dau kele ga a waqa ina toba maravu. Canoes only dock at peaceful harbours. [an iTaukei idiom]
E dua a meca ena ta oji?! Is there a ‘thing’ that will not come to an end?!
Ei Dina! (a ceremonial language) rooted in the ‘dina’ (true/truth/truthful) concept and, meaning ‘May it truly be!
E samu a kanace. There has been a plentiful harvest of the kanace fish.
E so ga era dau ta-ta vau vinaka! Only some are good at cutting or harvesting vau!’
faito a solution
182��
faiwa a strategy
fika calculation, logic, manipulation (vika in other dialects)
gauna time; times/seasons
gone a child or children, the young
gonedau traditional fisherfolks [particularly their men]
Gone Turaga used in reference to the chief (literally meaning ‘child-king’)
gone vakatubu used in reference to the chief’s children (literally meaning ‘children who are being raised’ [for a purpose, that is])
Ia me vala! So get it done!
iboi the distinct smell of something
ilava ni kakana the kakana dina which goes with the vegetables and the meat/fish in a meal
imauvu clothes (possibly archaic and used specifically in reference to clothes belonging to the Sau)
iqa food prepared from home to take to one’s work place; a metaphor for talanoa shared amongst workers while working
iqoliqoli the sea area from which the iTaukei ‘hunt’ their fish
isema vakadra blood ties/relatedness
isevusevu the traditional presentation of yaqona upon arrival at a VanuavakaTuraga as an introduction and, seeking entrance
isirovi fish harvested from the qoli sirovi and served at the chief’s table
isolosolo used in reference to once displaced people brought back, generations later, to be registered with one’s own group
isulu clothes (as generally used to refer to everyone else’s clothes except the Sau)
iTaukei indigenous Fijians; land ‘owners’
itei planting material
iteitei garden, plantation
183��
itovo present code of conduct (may be seen as a temporary fix, and which is negotiable)
itutu one’s relative position
ivakarau the manner of doing something [often used interchangeably with ivalavala]
ivalavala relatively ancient but persisting traditions and customs (may be seen as permanently fixed)
ivalu war, battle
ivola a letter (as in correspondence), a book, an article, a printed/written piece
ivosavosa manner of speaking (focusing on the spoken)
ivosavosa vakaViti iTaukei idioms
ivakarau the chiefly banquet
iVanua residing on one’s island home-base
iWai residing off one’s island home-base
iyau wealth, valuables
kai referring to the place of origin someone came from
kaiPalagi a person who comes from Palagi (overseas), particularly Europeans
kaiTani a person who is from another place [meaning ‘not one of us’]
kaiVanua a person who is ‘originally’ of the land (vanua)
kaiViti a person whose place of origin is Vit
kaiWai a person who is ‘originally’ of the sea (wai)
kakanadina starchy food crops (edibles) like cassava and taro [literally meaning ‘true foods’]
kana to eat
kanace blue-spot mullet fish
184��
kana-tamata human-flesh eating
kania a yatequ chewing on my liver [an expression indicating worry]
kawa genealogy
Keta vuli ga mai na weta rai! We learn [merely] from what we see!
kete stomach, gut, womb; abdomen
kila know (verb); knowledge (noun)
kila ka learned knowledge
kora group ‘jumping’ of kanace fish [usually observed before sun- down]
koro village
kuli ni tabua used in reference to the dead body of the Tui Nayau [literally meaning ‘skin of the tabua’]
kune discovered, found, seen [alternatively: kune-i]; is pregnant
kunekune when a woman is conceiving a child, or a person, an idea; used also in relation to an on-going search for something
kunekune-taki referring to the thing which is conceived
kupeti a stenciling (cut-out) pattern for printing masi, etc.
lagi rain (in the Lauan dialect)
Lagi the heavens, the abode of the gods, the origin of the vulagi
lakalaka the meke now danced to in Tubou-Lakeba by both women and men and, which is completely sung in the Toga language
Lakeba the island (hence, the people) under study [Lakeba today comprises eight villages of which Tubou is the primary village]
lala the communal act of working at the chief’s iteitei (garden) on assigned days involving the village menfolk
lave rara literally ‘lifting of the rara-ground’, a metaphor used to signify loss at one’s home-ground
lewa kalou goddess(es)
185��
lewa ni Tubou women of Tubou
lewe-niVanua flesh/members of the Vanua body
liga hands
ligadra na cauravou the hands of the young people
lolo the coming in of the tide
loma the inside of
lotu prayer, worship; the church (as Lotu)
lovo a method of cooking using an earth oven, and the food cooked in it
macawa the ground (fore/back/side) belonging to a house [in the qoli kanace context, the macawa is the space permanently allocated to significant individuals who are of the ‘qoli owners’ house’ or, ‘members’ of the Taqalevu clan]
magimagi strings and ropes made from coconut husks and which was traditionally used as house and canoe lashings
makawa old, ancient
maliwa space between places/times
maliwa lala lit. ‘empty space between’ and, used in reference to the ‘outer space’ of the celestial bodies
mana a kind of spiritualized ‘power’ to effect
mana-ca bad mana (negative ‘power’ to effect)
mana-vinaka good mana (positive ‘power’ to effect)
marama female person(s) [formal], women of the chiefly yavusa
masi bark cloth of Mulberry shrub
mata eye, face, front (of an entity); representative of/to; a source; a group
mata dredredre smiling; rooted in the dredre (laugh) concept
186��
mata-iAdi literally meaning ‘eye of Adi (woman)’; a metaphor for the womb
mataisau traditional carpenters [canoe or house builders]
mataivalu armed forces
mata-ki representative to
matamata gateway
mata-ni eye/face/representative of
mataniciva pearl; a metaphor for education and schooling
matanikatuba the door [literally meaning ‘the eye/face of the door’]
matanikupeti distinct sets of geometrical patterns used in masi printing; a metaphor for recognizing distant blood relations in facial features
mataniqoli the ‘commander’ of the kanace fish-hunt (literally meaning ‘eyes of the qoli’) [the two mataniqoli are in-charge of this particular fish hunt and, the ‘hunters’ charge only when the two give the ‘bent pointer-finger’ indication]
matanisiga the sun
matanitu state, government
mata-niTuraga literally meaning ‘representative of the turaga’ [a ‘new’ construction – a theory attempting to make sense of the matanitu concept]
matanivanua [otherwise written here as mata-niVanua and literally meaning ‘eye/face of the Vanua’] the chief’s herald or spokesperson
mataqali the land-owning unit consisting of related families; one of a kind
mata-tamata ethnic group(s)
mataveitokani a church-group fellowship usually comprising unmarried young men and women
mataveiwekani a group of related groups [eg. the members of a koro]
matavura the foreshore area between the high-tide line and the low-tide line
187��
matavuvale a group of related families
matua ready for harvest [as used in reference to plant products]; the elders/mature
meke dance (focusing on the body movements, but including the singing/chanting and clapping/beating [rhythm making] that goes with it)
moce sleep (as used for everyone except the Sau)
muria to follow a lead
niu coconut(s)
no settled/sitting in place [used interchangeably, by some, with tu(present/standing)]
noda vuravura our world (vuravura)
ola a kind of wind movement observed in Tubou village that ‘predicts’ the ideal time to go on a kanace fish hunt; customary presentation of valuables and food by a Vuanirewa (of the chiefs) woman’s family to the Taqalevu clan (the ‘owners’ of the qoli)because their daughter has just been to her first qoli kanace
oqo this, here
ora choke on something
ota an edible fern-plant
palagi used in reference to Europeans/Europe (Caucasian and speaking a foreign language) [Note that Pacific languages are not entirely foreign]
pesi a distinctly Lauan kind of story-telling in songs
puleta shirts/dresses made from the same printed material (usually floral and colourful) and worn by a group at a special function
qali used in reference to traditional tributaries to a chiefdom [literally meaning ‘twisted together’]
188��
qaravi yaqona referring to the mixing and serving of the yaqona drink and the people tasked with it, particularly the three men seated at the tanoa in more traditional ceremonies
qase the older/mature, elders
qele earth, soil, land
qoli fish hunt
qoli sirovi the fish hunt done using a long net at the fishing ground reserved for the chief, the Sau [involving the women who serve at the chief’s house and other village women who may avail themselves for what is perceived as an honourable task]
qoli kanace the fish hunt done, using a number of shorter nets, to harvest kanace [involving the women of the Taqalevu clan and Tubou-
Lakeba women with Taqalevu connection]
qusi ni loa the removal of the black facial paint usually derived from crushed charcoal
ra base, down-under, beneath
raica see, look at
rara playing-field, open-ground
rarama light
Ratu title used by men of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first- names
rawa ka acquiring things, getting things done
Roko title which may be used by both women and men of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first-names (particularly chiefs associated with the Vanua vakaTuraga ko Moala, Totoya and Matuku lying to the south-west of Lakeba
Sa lewe dina ni ketequ! It is truly in the members of my stomach/womb! (knowing via the ‘gut-feeling’)
samu hit, beaten, thrashed
189��
Sa tawa na mata-iAdi! The ‘eye’ (womb) of the woman is ‘filled’ (with child)! [implying that she is pregnant]
sau dominion over [often used interchangeably with mana]
Sau the ‘installed’ chief-administrator of a Vanua
Sau ni Vanua ko Lau One of the three titles of the resident high-chief on Tubou- Lakeba. This title indicates his supreme rule over ancient Lau, comprising about one-third of what Lau is today and, consisting mainly islands to the south of Lakeba. The title was around generations before the pre-Christianity Nayau chiefs arrived on Lakeba.
sautabu the chiefly burial ground
sautu peace, prosperity/abundance/plenty, order/stability
sauvaki the practice of exalting the Sau (or God, for Christians)
sinu gaga poisonous sinu (Excoecaria agallocha/Euphorbiaceae)
sisi garland (distinctly Tubou-Lakeba)
sobu to consciously descend upon or lower
soisoi gossip (the conscious act of gossiping)
solevu communal feasting
soqo the gathering of people to celebrate for a worthy cause
tabu forbidden, sacred, set apart
tabua the ‘treated’ and stringed teeth of whales considered by the iTaukei as their ulu ni yau (‘head’ of all their traditional valuables; the most important, that is)
tagane male person(s)[informal]
tala shift from one place to another
talanoa stories; telling of stories
Talanoa ena bati ni tanoa. Story-telling at the edges of (around) the yaqona/kava bowl.
190��
tali to weave
Tali magimagi. The weaving of magimagi (literally) and, as a metaphor, it speaks of the art of ‘weaving’ stories.
tamata person(s), people(s), human(s)
tanoa yaqona/kava bowl
Taqalevu a kaiVanua clan residing on Tubou village and, whose traditional leader is the Tui Tubou [‘owners’ of the qoli kanace]
tara allowed by law/rule (stated or otherwise)
tara koro literally meaning ‘building villages/towns’ and, used as a metaphor for talanoa
tau refers to the letting down of a load on the shoulders to carry it (essentially, the load and its carrier become ‘yoked’ into one entity/body) [Note that this is the applied meaning used in this research.]
taubeni to wear a garland
taukei the native/local/insider; owner of
taukei ni qele the land-owner
tauri literally means ‘to handle’ and, specifically used in reference to when the Sau is consuming food, yaqona or alcohol
tauVanua the ordinary, the non-chiefly
tavo (possibly archaic) used to describe when the Sau is sleeping or resting in bed
tavu to cook in open fire
tawani to be settled (as of a place) [literally meaning ‘is filled’]
tei to plant
teitei crop farming
tikina administrative districts comprising several Vanua coming under the rule of a Sau (overlord/chief-administrastor) or Tui (king) [literally means ‘parts of’]
191��
tiko stay/live/present in
tobe the plaiting together of stringed-elements of a garland
Toga the iTaukei version for the place-name ‘Tonga’
Toka iqore me ko raica! Sit [and observe from] there to ‘see’!
toka wale literally means ‘sitting down disengaged’ and used specifically in reference to the Sau’s anger
toko a beloved
toli the picking of flowers, leaves, fruits, roots either for garland or body-oil making
tu stand; exist, present
Tubou this is what the village of the resident high-chief of Lakeba, the Tui Nayau, the Sau of Lau, is called today [Tubou may have been
the reference for the island in oral-history time. There is also indication that 19th century Tubou may have been the section of the village occupied by the Taqalevu people today]
Tubou-Lakeba this is the reference used in this research for the researched community situated/rooted in the Tubou village/Lakeba island culture [the Tubou-Lakeba conception does not limit the study to those ‘registered’ in the Tubou ‘books’ hence, leaving open the boundaries creating endless possibilities]
tui king(s), chief(s) [as in capitalized Tui]; stringing of fragrant flowers/leaves/fruits in garland-making
Tui Lakeba ‘King of Lakeba’, one of the two decorated titles having cultural/historical significance and, belonging to one of three descendent groups of the first-peoples settled on Tubou-Lakeba. Tui Lakeba’s people, today, live on the north-west end of Tubou village.
192��
Tui Lau ‘King of Lau’, one of the three titles of the resident high-chief of Tubou-Lakeba. A mid A. D 1900 addition to the ancient Sau ni Vanua ko Lau and Tui Nayau titles inherited from the infamous Ma’afu, a chief of Toga vasu levu to the chiefs of Nayau, and who was the first Tui Lau in post-Christianity eastern-Vitisociety.
Tui Nayau ‘King of Nayau’, one of the three titles the resident high-chief on Tubou-Lakeba was, and is, known by [Nayau is his tribes’ place of origin, an island lying close-by to the north-west of Lakeba and, the Tui Nayau title was obviously the title their ancestors brought with them to Lakeba]
tuirara understood today as the person in charge of the church treasury; a possible pre-Christian understanding lingers on and, speaks of a traditional role which has to do with the communal distribution of
Vanua wealth celebrating the sautu-productivity of the land
Tui Tubou ‘King of Tubou’, one of the two decorated titles having cultural/historical significance and, belonging to one of three descendent groups of the first-peoples settled on Tubou-Lakeba. Tui Tubou’s people, today, live on the south-east end of Tubou village.
tukuni legends and myths
tukutuku information (noun); inform (verb)
turaga male person(s) [formal]; chief(s) [‘elected’]; chiefly yavusa [all-inclusive, non-gendered]
Turaga vakaTamata chief/the chiefly having strong people support
Turaga vakaVanua chiefs/men/leaders with Vanua support and land
turatura used in reference to the chief’s feet/legs
tuva ordering, arranging
tu vinaka
tuwa grandfather (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect)
Ucu mai duru! To pick from one’s knees (literally) but, referring to fabricated stories one quickly comes up with just to amuse.
193��
ujiriva a foolish person (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect)
ula individual ‘jumping’ of kanace fish [usually observed before sun-down]
usu a meeting called by the ‘owners’ of the qoli kanace whereby potential hunters gather, the night before, to confirm their participation in the qoli, the day after [literally, usu means ‘to forcefully occupy a space that was possibly going to another’]
uvi yam(s)
vaKaisi unbecoming of chiefs and their vakaTuraga ways or, behaving like a Kaisi, an ignoble
vakaitaukei has a traditional ‘owner’ (when speaking of land/sea areas)
vaka-iTaukei of the iTaukei people and culture (associated/identified with)
vakaLakeba of the place Lakeba and its culture; the Lakeba way of engaging people in a veitalanoa (whereby the ‘seeker’ knowingly asks to confirm and, asking an audience only too willing to pass on the information)
vakamanamana rooted in the mana concept and signifying a settled confidence in the mana (effective power) of a thing, someone, a practice, etc.
vakamanamanataki when the vakamanamana confidence is articulated or expressed
vakamenemenei pampered (from vakamenemenea, to pamper a beloved)
vakaPalagi of the English (generally European) people and culture, the palagi or kaiPalagi (someone ‘originally’ from Palagi and, presumably England [particularly for the indigenous of Viti, the place being a former colony of the Great Britian, the English speaking])
vakasama an idea, a concept; thought
vakase bua literally means ‘flowering frangipani’ and, used specifically to describe the Sau’s smile/laughter
194��
vakasosolo the practice, common to Lakeba people, of taking anything and everything one considers important to those one is visiting with [they do not go, even to the place of a close relative, empty- handed]
vakasulumi clothed/dressed, covered
vakatatabu the keeping of the tabu; the manner of acknowledging God and the chiefs when making a public statement
vakataukata used in reference to places (Vanua) from which the Lakeba chiefdom (in the past) would extract valuables, foods and services, places that used to pay tribute to the Lakeba chiefs
vakataukeitaki familiarize
vakatawa to fill up space, to occupy place
vakaTuraga having chiefly leaders; the noble chiefly manner, of turaga people (of chiefly birth) and their culture
vakaTuraga-taki to be given chiefly/royal treatment
vakaunumi made to drink (particularly of the installation cup of yaqona)
vakaVanua/vakavanua of the Vanua people and culture, identifiable with the Vanua (associated with the idea of an ‘authentic’ pre-Christian or
pre-civilization existence); lacking professionalism
vakaViti of the place Viti and its culture
vakila feel/felt
vala/valata to do, to be done, the doing of
vale house
Vale Levu the chief’s house (literally meaning ‘Big House’)
vanua land, people, culture, place
Vanua a peopled-place with a form of local government [assumed to be grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception]
vanua tani some other place, overseas
195��
Vanua vakaTuraga a Vanua governed by chiefs, chiefly institutions and the chiefly way of life
vasu a person’s relationship to her/his mother’s brothers and their families/yavusa/Vanua
vasu levu a vasu to the highest ranked chiefly family, particularly children of a chief’s sister older than the chief
vau the naturally occurring native hibiscus plant (Hibiscus tiliaceus)
vavana/vavani tucked underneath (a mat, mattress, etc.)
vei a prefix indicating collectivity and reciprocity
veibuli installation of chief
veidakuni a ‘back-to-back’ relationship, at a personal level, where the people concerned are in non-speaking terms (particularly between a woman and her brother-in-law, or vice-versa) [used here as a generalization]
veidokai treating one another highly (rooted in the doka concept meaning ‘roof’, as that of a house) [in so doing, one is saying: ‘You are more chiefly than I.’]
veika bibi important things
veikau-ca used in reference to qoli (fish hunt) partners who often always return without any catch [veikau means ‘to go/travel together’ and ca means ‘bad’]
veikauwaitaki minding one another’s well-being
veikilai mutual knowing/understanding of one another
veimaliwai coexisting in space [proving compatibility of personalities]
veimataki a ‘face-to-face’ relationship, at the Vanua level, where parties concerned are in speaking terms [used here as a generalization]
veiqaravi facing each other
veiqaraqaravi shorter reference to veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua
196��
veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua used in reference to the ceremonial, traditional ceremonies involving Vanua exchanges (literally meaning ‘Vanua facing Vanua’)
veisaututaki the collective effort of keeping order/stability and peace
veitalanoa dialogue, discussion
veivakamaramataki the chiefly way of honouring women of chiefly birth (or generally of respecting women)
veivakamenemenei communally organized ‘pampering’ of a beloved child/chief (ideally reciprocated) [in so doing, one is saying: ‘You are like a daughter/son to me.’]
veivakataukeitaki familiarization between a vulagi and a taukei
veivakaturagataki the chiefly way of giving and receiving honour and respect, treating others as ‘chiefs’ as one would herself/himself expect and want to be treated [in so doing, one is saying: ‘We are chiefly equals.’]
veiwekani relatedness, relatives, being acquainted; a non-speaking distant ‘brother-sister’ relationship (particularly in Tubou-Lakeba)
veiwekani vakadra blood related
viavialevu literally meaning ‘wanting to be bigger’ and used to describe condescending attitudes and behaviours
Viti the ‘original’ place-name from which ‘Fiji’ [the English version] was derived
voka the going out of the tide
volai written, registered
Vola ni Kawa Bula the iTaukei Fijian registry of births
vosa the spoken/written word (noun); to speak (verb)
vosa vakaToga the language spoken by Toga people
vou new, recent; immature [as used in reference to fruits]
Vu ancestor, originator
197��
Vuanirewa the chiefly yavusa on Tubou-Lakeba, and originally from Nayau, from which the Tui Nayau is selected and installed
Vu-kalou ancestor-god
vuku a smart and skillful person (or animal); intelligence
vulagi the stranger/foreigner/outsider
vuli learn, study; education, schooling
vuli ka learning/acquiring knowledge
vuluvulu the washing of hands; a metaphor for the passing-on of the mana to heal, particularly from an expert ‘healer’ to someone keen on acquiring the ‘gift’
vu-maiLagi originate from Lagi (otherwise, ‘gods from Lagi’)
vunilagi the horizon
vura emerged/appeared/derived from
vuravura earth, world, reality
vuravura ni ika world of fishes (ika)
vuravura ni yalo world of spirits (yalo)
wa string, rope
wai water, the sea, liquid
wai-ni-vanua used in reference to yaqona/kava (lit. ‘water/juice of the land’)
wali the application of waliwali on the body
waliwali body oil derived from coconut milk
waqa canoe, boat
waqa vakaViti canoes of Viti
weka relatives; a woman’s non-speaking distant ‘brother’ or a man’s non-speaking distant ‘sister’
werewere the clearing of grasslands for farming or just general cleaning
198��
yaba mats
yaci a fish hunt method, using a long net initially placed parallel to the shore, that traps the fish by grounding the two ends of the net to shore
yaga worthwhile, is of value
yalava lagoon
yalewa female person(s) [informal]
yalomatua a wise/intelligent person; spiritual maturity
yalofi the Lauan yaqona drinking circle comprising the heads (mata) of Vanua/yavusa and in their prescribed drinking order (with the
Sau/chief at the center of the arc)
yanuyanu island
yaqona kava (the plant, the elements, the mixture)
yava one’s feet, as used for non-chiefs
yavi rau a fish hunt method using a long line of inter-twining forest vines and coconut leaves as a scare-line, manned by many people (women, men and children), that encircles the fish before they are hauled in
yavusa the largest vanua ‘family’ grouping comprising smaller mataqali‘family’ units and, even smaller tokatoka ‘family’ sub-units which are further sub-divided into matavuvale nuclear families [members of a yavusa usually share a common male ancestor]
�
Source: Map
Majo
Of th
Of th
Qila
Of th
Nay
Of th
with
Of th
on L
Of th
p retrieved o
r Migration
he Tui Lakeb
he Qilaiso, P
aiso who beca
he Levuka p
au and, ‘han
he Vuanirew
h roots in the
he Toga mig
Lakeba, Roko
he Samoa bu
APPENDI
on 7th of Ma
ns to Tubou
ba group, th
Pukuni and T
ame the first
people who o
ndlers’ of the
wa chiefs and
e Moala grou
grants who c
o Rasolo [po
uilders who c
199�
X A: MAP
ay, 2014 from
u-Lakeba [in
e first peopl
Tokairabe gr
t Sau on Lak
once settled B
e Kuli-ni-Tab
d their leader
up) [late 170
ame via the
ossibly aroun
came in the
OF VITI (F
m http://www
n chronologi
e
roup: the
keba
Bau: they w
bua [mid 17
r, the Tui Na
00s, approx]
wife of first
nd same tim
time of Rok
FIJI)
w.scaruffi.co
ical order (R
Became the
(taukei) pri
‘young’ Tu
which became
700s, approx
ayau (from N
t Tui Nayau
e as their Vu
ko Rasolo’s s
om/travel/fij
Reid, 1990)]
e ‘old’ Vanu
ivileging the
raga (vulagi
e fishers to T
.]
Nayau island
to become S
uanirewa ho
son
ji.gif
a
e
i)
Tui
d and
Sau
sts]
200��
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What is the essence of the concept of vanua?
‘A cava beka ‘a uto ni vakasama ‘a “vanua”?
2. What is your understanding of sautu?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “sautu”?
3. What is your understanding of the concept of mata?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) kila me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “mata”?
4. What is your conceptualization of the notion of vuravura?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) rai me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “vuravura”?
5. What is your understanding of the idea of taukei?
‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “taukei”?