Rebirth of an Archipelago: Sustaining a Hawaiian Cultural Identity for People and Homeland by Kekuewa Kikiloi

Main concepts:

Kikiloi wants us, as Hawaiians, to remember the ancestral legacies of the (forgotten) orally-transmitted place names of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands.  By remembering stories and traditions about our islands, he argues, we can develop a “unified cultural identity” which is grounded in the concept of aloha ‘āina, or the reciprocal love for the land.  “Hawaiian well-being,” then, is primarily fostered in a profound sense of “cultural identity that links people to their homeland” (75).  This deep insight of belonging, according to Kikiloi, is best reflected in traditional Hawaiian place names, as they reinforce aloha ‘āina, familial and genealogical ties to the land, cultural histories, memories, and identity.  Thus, through the act of remembering, Kikiloi’s main thesis is to “reawaken or ‘rebirth’ a sense of consciousness in our communities about what constitutes a Hawaiian cultural identity and fundamentally expand our notion of homeland” (77).

Research methodologies:

(1) Examining oral tradition (as a diverse pool of collective memories).  “The passing of this information is done with amazing accuracy utilizing recital, repetition, and mnemonic devices. It required specialists who were essentially living libraries of knowledge who cataloged, stored,

and kept sacred information available for retrieval upon request” (78).

(2) Verifying the above information through the “first-hand experience of observing the environment” (ibid).            

My critique of the methodologies:    

(1) Noted psychologist, Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, has argued persuasively that indeed memory contains the characteristic of plasticity; that is, memory is malleable.  Far from being a static piece of readily accessible, stored-away information, the contents of memory actually change along with experience and time.  Modern psychology refutes Kikiloi’s description of the way in which memory is recalled, therefore calling into question the accuracy of his ‘specialist’ of oral tradition.  Does recital, repetition, and mnemonic devices equate to accuracy?  I’m not sure if it does. 

(2)  Kikiloi uses his extensive first-hand observations of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as evidence to support the claims made to place names in traditional Hawaiian chants.  At first, this seemed to be ok.  But then the obvious struck me, physical geography changes along with time (i.e., erosion of a distinctive mountain peak or the ocean swallowing up land formations).  No doubt these place names are very old – they easily predate the European contact in 1778.  So how much can change in a few hundred years? Well, the traditional Hawaiian place name for Yokohama beach is Keawa‘ula, or the red bay, for the once abundant yearly migration of the red mullet fish.  Today, there is absolutely no indication that the bay was once bright red with fish.  This shows me that first-hand experience in the twenty-first century is not an accurate methodology for verifying physical attributes in the distant past. 

Other readings:         

It seems to me that the concept of remembering is a reoccurring theme in our readings.  I think I was criticized in an earlier class discussion for using the word “nostalgia.”  However, it seems fitting in this context, since Kikiloi uses aloha ‘āina as a “vital link to the glorious past.”  Remembering in order to move forward, to reconcile, and for solidarity are other reoccurring concepts.  Although I believe remembering is indeed important for shaping any identity, I think Kikiloi is trapped in traditionalism and offers a philosophy that does not promote Hawaiian creativity, novelty, and spontaneity.  I don’t know about you guys, but I’m pretty tired of being told to constantly look to the past.