The film has not even been released yet and local commentators are complaining… Loudly.
Moana and Maui, the primary characters of the film Moana, credit Disney StudiosDisney’s upcoming feature film Moana features a young Polynesian girl who seeks the help of the demi-god Maui. I have not seen the film, nor has anyone else without inside access to Disney. Yet editorials have already appeared in local papers, and the conversation is already rolling in social media. Like most others all I have seen is a two minute and thirty five second trailer.
I find it somewhat questionable that such accusations can be made without even seeing the film. Editorials written not on the content of the film, but on the author’s perceived version of it based on a two minute trailer. The film simply becomes a convenient vessel into which can be poured all of the author’s pre-conceived grievances. The accusation really have nothing to do with the film, but simply become a screed against whatever they want to rail against.
Yesterday’s post stirred a blaze of comments over on Facebook, there are 50 shares and climbing fast. While there were those who took both sides of the sign, the majority seem to agree with the opinion I put forth in yesterday’s post. Most agree that the sign is inappropriate and quite possibly counterproductive.
Paul Hirst That sign annoys me, I think it’s ineffective at best, and very probably counterproductive. I too have hiked up there many times, but not since the sign appeared. Though to be honest and having given it more thought now, I don’t think the sign would stop me if I wanted to go again, though it may have dissuaded me in the past at times when I might otherwise have gone.
The sign asking for people to not hike to the true summit of Mauna KeaThe fundamental problem I have with it is that it’s completely un-enforceable, so it has the effect where now the people who do go are the ones who ignored the sign and thus perhaps less likely to respect other things like not disturbing things or leaving litter. Essentially, it reduces the number of people who go to the true summit and take care to have minimal impact on the land, and it has no impact on the number of people who will go up there and don’t care so much. So it just alienates the people who they ought to be befriending as allies in caring for the mountain.
Lynn Paul Richardson I respect cultural sites and always remain within designated walkways. This sign rings hollow to many people who would normally pause at that point.
A fair point was raised in considering the impact that foot traffic has on the summit… Erosion of the area could be an issue. Though I believe this could be mitigated with proper trail maintenance.
Matthew J D’Avella In my opinion people should stay off the true peak for several reasons. Erosion being my number one reason.
Quite a few have suggested that the sign be replaced with something that educates visitors to the importance of the site, request that the be respectful, and stay on the marked trail to minimize the impact to the area.
Chris Runnells Yeah I’m not sure I agree with that. The mountain is sacred to many people regardless of whether or not you’re of Hawaiian ancestry. It’s possible to go to the summit and be respectful without having Hawaiian blood. I think this sign should be replaced with a message to tread with care, pack out what you pack in, etc. I doubt it’s going to actually stop anyone.
I fully agree with different, better signage. This is an idea I should have thought of when writing yesterday’s post, my thanks to those who suggested it. I will probably compile the comments into a letter to Stuart at OMKM, maybe we can get the sign changed. My thanks to the many who commented on this, a productive discussion!
The kerfuffle has served to illustrate the issues that access to Mauna Kea exemplifies. This is a public land access issue. Do you set aside areas as off-limits to the public to appease a specific cultural group. Or should public land be open to everyone, the people of the State of Hawaii? Having had Hawaiian protesters yell at me “Get off our mountain!”, I have to push back. Mauna Kea belongs to all of us, we should care for it, but we can not close access to anyone like this.
The sign asking for people to not hike to the true summit of Mauna KeaNever mind that the trail to the true summit of Mauna Kea is nicely maintained and outlined in rock, the sign requests that you do not take this trail out of respect for the sacredness of the site.
How many people even pause when considering the message on the sign? The trail and the desire to stand atop the real summit of the mountain is substantial. As we pass the trail head and sign each day I usually see several people walking to or standing atop the summit.
Aloha
Maunakea is historically, culturally, and environmentally significant. Help preserve our cultural and natural landscape and show your respect by not hiking beyond this point to the summit.
I have walked this short trail to the summit several times over the years, though not since the sign appeared. There are no particularly sensitive archaeological sites at the summit. This is in contrast to Lake Waiau, which is ringed with shrines and offerings, is just as sacred, and has no such sign to deter the curious from taking the trail.
Personally I am troubled by this sign. Placing such a sign could very well be counter productive. People are going to ignore it, walking right past it to the summit of Mauna Kea. It simply teaches people to ignore boundaries that could protect sensitive sites.
The summit is public land, belonging to the people of Hawaiʻi. I have trouble with the idea that it should be accessible only to a few on the pretense of religious or cultural heritage. Certainly some might view the summit with less than ideal respect for a special place, simply a pile of rock to be conquered. I suspect most see the summit as more than that, a symbol, a place to sit and think about the world.
I am not a religious person, but still, there are places where I find myself stopping and taking a moment to contemplate our world. The summit is one of these places, a focal point of culture, history, and perhaps the future.
Update Oct 4th: Several folks have commented that a sign educating people about the significance of the place, asking them to be respectful, and asking them to stay within the marked trail would be far more appropriate and productive in terms of protecting the site. I have to agree.
Update Oct 5th: I have posted a follow up article. The response to this article has been impressive, with a lot of heartfelt comments. How we view and respect true summit of Mauna Kea is obviously a subject very important to may people.
In light of recent events I have been re-reading the history of the early 1930’s Weimar Republic again. The parallels we can see in the current presidential election are simply frightening. A populist leader arising to manifest the resentments and fears of a large segment of our population that feels dis-empowered and threatened. The issues have inspired me to consider again the history of our own country, what it really means to be American.
First page of the US constitutionIt is not so much Donald Trump I am worried about. He is merely a con man who’s game has grown out of all control. No, it is what Trump enables and represents that I am truly worried about. A basic disrespect for the institutions of government put in place by the founding fathers two centuries ago. Trump and his followers do not want to work to improve our government, they want to take a hammer to it and destroy two centuries of success.
Trump has repeatedly indicated his contempt for many of the functions of the federal government. Worrisome proposals by Trump include significantly reducing the freedom of the press, allowing more participation of religious organizations in politics, slashing environmental protections, and repudiating many longstanding international treaties. While the candidate is extreme, a good portion of his political supporters go far further in expressing their desire for slashing at core functions of the federal government.
This weeks news that human remains had been placed within the TMT construction site was a surprise to many. Apparently a well known protester, Palikapu Dedman, had placed an iwi, human remains, into an ahu constructed last year on the site. He did this twice! Apparently the first set of remains had vanished, so he replaced them with a second set.
An ancient ahu (shrine) atop Mauna Kea with the summit in the backgroundOutrage was quickly expressed at this revelation in various online forums, the conversation on Facebook was particularly scathing. Condemnation being particularly intense from other Hawaiian commentators that can not fathom how traditional values could be violated like this. The use of ancestral bones as political playing pieces is something many found utterly disgraceful, a sentiment I share.
While much of the local community was quick to express disapproval of this action, notable TMT opponents do not appear to have condemned this outrageous action. Indeed I have yet to see any condemnation for the act on any of the opposition sites or Facebook pages. Yes, I have looked. They link the article, but there are no comments. Even more telling, it appears that many in the local Hawaiian community were aware of this for some time now, but have been silent on the issue.
In addition to the recent revelations in the papers concerning the iwi in the TMT site ahu. There is a claim of another burial in a contested case filing. Dated Sept 2nd, we have document 252 “Fergerstrom Notice of Family Burial Claim Under the Proposed TMT Site” filed by Harry Fergerstrom claiming that a family burial is located “on the access road to the TMT”. The filing is accompanied by a DLNR Burial registration form application.
It seems to be a common belief that the summit is a burial ground. it is certainly an idea that those protesting the TMT are trying to push, they have made this claim in the past. The most recent push may be an attempt to capitalize on the Standing Rock DAPL pipeline controversy that has so much media attention.
It’s important to remember that Mauna Kea is a burial ground – Kealoha Pisciotta quoted in Civil Beat
Mauna Kea is site of mass burial of iwi for centuries. – Pohaku Keaau comment on the Hilo Tribune website
The problem with this argument is that the summit does not appear to have ever been a significant burial ground. There are only a handful of confirmed burials on the mountain and a couple dozen suspected burials, mostly at lower elevations (below 10,000 feet) and none within a mile of the TMT site.
An ahu built in the downhill lane of the Mauna Kea summit access roadThere are a couple old references that mention burials at the summit, but there is scant on the ground evidence to support this, it is very possible that they are referring to the lower elevation areas that are known. Hawaiian burials are very common along coastlines that were heavily populated in pre-contact times, there is little mystery in how the ancient Hawaiians buried their dead.
The TMT site itself is mostly solid rock outcropping, there is scant place to hide a burial. The TMT site has been repeatedly examined for burials by various parties, none has been found, at least nothing historical, discounting these recent planted burials. And while the proposed access road to the TMT does cross the lower edge of a cinder cone, this particular path has been previously disturbed by an older road and is unlikely to hide anything.
What a lot of people do not realize is how much the cinder moves about, slowly slumping down the sides of the pu’u under the power of frost heaving and solifluction. If there were “mass burials” of iwi secreted on the summit over the centuries they would not be a secret any longer. We would have beautifully preserved bones appearing out of the cinders on a routine basis. In my decade on the summit I have never seen or heard of such an event.
No doubt the burial ground argument will have traction with those inclined to believe despite the lack of any evidence to the contrary. We will be hearing more on this issue, a new and utterly disgraceful maneuver by TMT opponents.
A radio telescope of the Very Long Baseline Array stands in the background of an ancient ahu atop Mauna KeaThe construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope has become a symbol of the many issues that swirl in these islands. It is an argument that touches the fundamental question as to who we are and where we are going.
While many frame the argument as one between science and culture, others frame it as one of development versus culture. Their premise is that somehow building another telescope is destroying local culture. They overlook the opportunity the telescopes represent, that the right economic development can support a community, preserve a culture.
Supporters of TMT highlight the jobs that the telescope will bring… “It is not about the jobs!” is the reply from opponents. Of course it is. You cannot maintain a culture in poverty. You cannot maintain a culture when your keiki leave to seek opportunity elsewhere. Leave the island behind… Leave the culture behind. Economic struggle is the greatest single threat to a local culture, a threat that cannot be overstated.
The lack of economic opportunity has an enormous impact on a local community. The stress of struggling for a living, of getting by on a low paying service industry job can be destructive to families and individuals. Drugs use, family abuse, all of the social ills so often identified in low income areas are as destructive to the culture as they are to the person. The statistics tell the story… Hawai’i Island routinely tops rest of the state in numbers that are not good…. Lowest per capita income, highest number of children living in poverty, unemployment and more.
Like so many with a Native American heritage I have been watching the protests at Standing Rock, trying to figure out which side of the issue I am on. I find I can not automatically support the tribal side of this as some of my relatives have, the issue is not so clear cut. I have been reading both sides to see where the issue lies.
The incident has much in parallel with the issues here on our mountain. Native people protesting a project that takes place on a purported sacred site. There is also the element of environmentalism in protesting an oil pipeline, and entirely different issue than a clean project like an observatory.
I have not had a chance to attend any of the contested case meetings, they are taking place in Hilo on workdays. Following along by reading all of the court documents is almost as good, maybe better. Big Island Video news has also posted quite a few videos of the proceedings where you can watch and get a feel for the tone and process of the hearings.
An overhead view of the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope, credit TMT Observatory CorporationAll of the filings are available online, posted to the DLNR website. There are now over two hundred filings, with at least a few added almost every day. They detail the legal maneuverings of all of the parties as they make claims and counterclaims over every issue in the case.
It is clear that the telescope opponents have a couple basic strategies, neither of which address the issues. First is simply to delay and obstruct. Every decision is appealed and contested, from who is party to the case, to the selection of the hearing officer herself. Attempts to limit the discussion to the issue at hand have been vigorously contested by those who have other agendas.
One observation is that witness lists of telescope opponents are extensive, 39 persons on the Mauna Kea Anaina Hou (Doc-103 and Doc-104) list alone. To be fair, many of the the opponents do only have a few witnesses to call, but the sheer number of participants makes the resulting numbers a bit excessive. Reading through the various lists I fail to see where each witness will bring unique testimony to the case. In contrast the University and other supporters have very brief witness lists with only a handful of witnesses requested. Certain names do stand out… Dr. Sai, a well known sovereignty proponent. UH Chancellor David Lassner is present. Even Governor Ige has been listed, a request that is already subject to extensive legal wrangling.
A common theme in both the hearing room behavior and in the document opponents claim that they have been subject to personal attacks or harassment. Claims are made that they are “under duress” despite the fact that participation in this proceeding is entirely voluntary. Judge Amano has gone out of her way to explain methods by which opponents could participate in the hearings without being full parties in the process and subject to the associated paperwork and attendance burdens.
A culture is defined by many things.. A language, a religion, a way of life, a racial identity, these and more tie together in an identity that define us. As these ideas are shared by a worldwide communications network, as so many emigrate from homelands wracked by war or economic strife these cultural identities are increasingly mixed and exchanged. Increasingly our modern world is converging on a single common culture.
While this process has been slowly occurring since the Age of Exploration and the dawn of worldwide trade, it has more recently been pushed into hyper-drive by the communications revolution created by the internet. In a historical instant almost anyone, living anywhere has access to and can interact with people across the globe. For recent generations this is now taken for granted and not just available, but a regular occurrence that is an integral part of everyday life.
The internet backbone, Wikimedia imageWhile many may see a set of dominant cultures developing, I would argue that there is really a single globe spanning culture that will result. There are a number of poles within this culture, driven by the major regional cultures, but increasingly there is a common set of values that are beginning to define a single entity.
The first culture to enter this new sphere was Anglo-American, home to the developing communications technologies that began the worldwide net. Being first on the scene allowed American culture to set the ground rules, to perform the first experiments in how these new communications possibilities could be used.
American culture is still dominant, but is increasing rivaled by the other major cultures. European, Latin American, and several Asian cultures have created their own spheres within the network. While somewhat isolated by language, or deliberate governmental restrictions, there is a great deal of interaction. Good, or often bad ideas that originate in one sphere spread to the entire network with increasing rapidity.
What is modern? What is traditional? What is different about these two words and what they mean? Is there any real difference? I would argue that there is not and never has been any real difference, except in the minds of those who want to see it. A sort of golden age idealism, that somehow things were better back whenever.
A Hawaiian double hulled canoe awaiting a crew below Pu’ukohala HeiauToo many seem to think there is some massive disconnect between the traditional and modern. They make an artificial distinction between our modern way of life, our current way of doing things and the ancient traditional way of living. Those who take a better look at the past know this to be false.
We are human, ancient humans were far more modern than many seem to envision. Many think of the past and see some cartoon version of people who are somehow less than we are today. A view of the past created by so many movies, so many bad historical melodramas.
If one were able to stroll down a street in ancient Rome you would see a city every bit as complex as a modern metropolis. All of the people you would meet completely recognizable in their roles. No cars or electric lights, but there are police and politicians, barbers and butchers, a world quite similar to our own.
