| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
 Posted - 10/05/2007 : 05:24:30 AM
|
Quite a few of the books I have been reading lately about Hawai`i speak of Hawai`i as having a "primitive" culture. Most of these books were probably written by mainland haole, but I really am not certain about that.
What they term as primitive has in many respects a negative connotation. People may think it means unlearned, unschooled, superstitious, no organizational structure, no laws, social mores and rampant chaos. People may think it means eating bugs and worms, men taking women whenever and wherever they want, etc.
I find that to be completely false. Usuing the modern day western definitions of "primitive" cannot be further from the truth regarding pre-contact Hawaiian culture. The kapu system was well entrenched and provided guiding rules for the culture. There was an organizational structure in the ali`i, the kahu and all the support positions that provided the foundation for the social structure. Just because a society had no written language to document its history does not in my opinion, meet the modern definition for "primitive".
In my opinion, primitive merely means "one of the first" or "of the beginning".
I find the constant use pf "primitive" in these books to be a superioristic attitude and very condescending and demeaning.
Pre-contact Hawaiian culture was every bit as sophisticate, and in many ways superior to any western society.
|
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
Russell Letson
`Olu`olu
USA
504 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 05:45:22 AM
|
Can't tell much without knowing which books you're looking at and when they were written. I don't see "primitive" used these days by professional anthropologists or historians--they're more likely to use terms that describe material culture/technology or the nature of social organization. What I learned years ago had to do with what tools were made of (stone or metal), whether there was a form of writing, and the nature and importance of family, clan, and tribe structures. "Primitive" implies an evolutionary (in the general sense) view in which the writer's culture is better/higher than the one being examined--not a very sophisticated view of humanity. I wouldn't trust even the factual data in a modern book that used "primitive" to describe a complex culture that lacked metal or writing--sloppy about language, sloppy about everything. (But then I used to be an English teacher.)
|
 |
|
|
Reid
Ha`aha`a
Andorra
1526 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 07:30:23 AM
|
Actually, in all the serious anthropological literature I have read, Hawaiian *society* is described as complex, hierarchical - very much like European feudal societies (although, I bet a historian would quibble about what feudal means); sort of on a par with other societies that bloomed at about the same time ~ 800 (whatever). Roughly equivalent to Mayan, Aztec, Sumerian (which was, of course earlier, but who cares).
Don't be confused by "culture" as a synonym for "society". As Russell mentioned, "culture" is used as a code word in academic literature for "material culture" - technologically formed objects, such as tools, weapons, dwellings, pots/containers, etc. Even there, Hawaiian usage of materials available to them is considered fairly advanced.
...Reid
|
|
|
|
noeau
Ha`aha`a
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 08:27:03 AM
|
| Yah. The pre contact books are judgemental. But after contacting educated Hawaiians people respectfully stop using the term primitive and throw the the thing into the heap where noble savage was jettisoned. You know, the round filing cabinet. It is good to read stuff and sometimes you will see bias in the writing sort of like today. If you read the news you'd think Iran was an evil place the needs to be attacked and pushed into the sea. Hmmm isn't there another place that that was said about already? I also agree that the term feudal is questionable. The maka'ainana were not beholden to any one ali'i as serfs were in Europe. The evolution to constitutional monarchy was a result of Western pressure that was spurred on by the desire to develop economically in the Western model of the times. Thus I reveal my bias against non native writers and so called experts in anthropology who desecrate graves and final resting places on sacred grounds of a first inhabitants society and culture. The argument is only undertaken in the "halls of knowledge" of cultures who really don 't know Jack. So whether a slight is intended or not the offense is committed out of ignorance. It is OK to study a group but it better if comparison to one's own native society and culture were never carried out. The idea of the student being superior will always be implied when that happens. Thanks for the opportunity to grouse. I too am a contradiction in terms. A college educated Hawaiian. Go figure. |
No'eau, eia au he mea pa'ani wale nō. |
|
|
|
Reid
Ha`aha`a
Andorra
1526 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 09:52:31 AM
|
Al, I don't mean to start a discussion on "feudalism" in Europe, nor do I just mean to have "the last word" (but this will be my last word on the topic, just because it is off-topic, and I only meant there to be a rough comparison that jogged us out of the idea of "primitive":-), but the notion of a "serf" (serf is a Central and Eastern European thing) being attached to a "noble", is just simply a miniscule, and patchy, part of the very, very complex picture of European "feudal" societies in the early to late Middle Ages. The complexity, and *huge* variability, is a big part of the definitional problem. Read Marc Bloch, Feudal Society, vols. 1 and 2, if you are interested.
...Reid |
|
|
|
hapakid
Luna Ho`omalu
USA
1533 Posts |
Posted - 10/05/2007 : 09:56:42 AM
|
I've always thought that ancient Hawaiian society was very complex and organized when compared with the limited technology available to Hawaiians. Many civilizations that came before and existed at the time of contact were based on the present of iron and other metals, for weapons, tools, machines and fasteners, like nails.
What someone labeled primitive might have been unconsciously based on the simplicity of the lifestyle and a lack of knowledge of the family and society system.
My two cents,
Jesse Tinsley |
|
|
|
noeau
Ha`aha`a
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 10/06/2007 : 9:37:01 PM
|
| Reid you are right but I wasn't opening a can of worms. I was just was saying it is not accurate to even mention feudal when discussing Hawaiian culture. It is apples and oranges and I only touched on one of many myriad aspects myself. So thanks for sharing. It is just from my experience that comparing Hawaiian society to feudalism paints a very inaccurate picture and European stuff right now does not hold my attention. I;m not trying to insult anyone but western academics should leave the Hawaiian stuff alone if they cannot keep on making comparitives that have nothing to do with the analysis of something that could stand alone. The study of hawaiian culture is difficult without a written history but one need not make all kinds of conjecture through the comparison of one's own alien culture or biases and apply it to the ideas of what Hawai'i was all about. One of the main thrusts of Hawaiian Studies today is to write a more accurate account without bias of Western thought and experience. And while we are at it the term primitive to me just means a low level of tecnological standards. The Hawaiian of pre-contact society was indeed a stone age culture since there was no wide spread use of metal. How ever there is some anecdotal evidence that Hawaiians were no stranger to the concept of metal especially when it comes to knives and perhaps swords. David Kalakaua wrote of a samurai ship wrecked in Hawai'i and the man's sword became an object of contention among the ali'i nui of the time. It was supposed to be way before the English explorer ever set foot on Hawaii's shores. |
No'eau, eia au he mea pa'ani wale nō. |
|
|
|
Hula Rider
Lokahi
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2007 : 5:58:04 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by wcerto
Quite a few of the books I have been reading lately about Hawai`i speak of Hawai`i as having a "primitive" culture. Most of these books were probably written by mainland haole, but I really am not certain about that. . .
I'd have to read the books to know what they mean bythe term. Would you mind posting author, copyright date, publisher, and excerpts? Most of the more scholarly works with which I am familiar use terms such as "pre-industrial," "indigenous," "pre-European contact" and such. I think "primitave" as a cultural description went out of vogue around the 50s. But then, I've not kept up with a lot of stuff, so it may be back!
Malama pono,
Leilehua |
|
|
|
thumbstruck
Ahonui
USA
2168 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2007 : 03:39:55 AM
|
| Humans tend to fall into the trap of thinking that they personally are on the cutting edge and that what happened in the past was of lesser quality. I remember a bit on Letterman: "Anthropologists have found a tribe in New Guinea so primitive that they had "New Tide" but not "New Tide With Lemon Fresh Borax". |
|
|
|
Hula Rider
Lokahi
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 2:46:00 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by thumbstruck
Humans tend to fall into the trap of thinking that they personally are on the cutting edge and that what happened in the past was of lesser quality. I remember a bit on Letterman: "Anthropologists have found a tribe in New Guinea so primitive that they had "New Tide" but not "New Tide With Lemon Fresh Borax".
Too funny! |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
