Moderní zobrazení maorských válečníků v současných novozélandských filmech
Diplomová práce
Studijní program: N7503 – Učitelství pro základní školy
Studijní obory: 7503T009 – Učitelství anglického jazyka pro 2. stupeň základní školy 7503T045 – Učitelství občanské výchovy pro 2. stupeň základní školy Autor práce: Bc. Monika Bartoňová
Vedoucí práce: Sándor Klapcsik, Ph.D.
Liberec 2017
Modern Representation of Maori Warriors in Contemporary New Zealand Films
Master thesis
Study programme: N7503 – Teacher training for primary and lower-secondary schools Study branches: 7503T009 – Teacher Training for Lower Secondary Schools - English
7503T045 – Teacher training for lower-secondary school. Subject - Civics.
Author: Bc. Monika Bartoňová
Supervisor: Sándor Klapcsik, Ph.D.
Liberec 2017
,
Technická univerzitav Liberci
Fakulta přírodovědně-humanitní a pedagogická Akademický rok: 2Oró /2OL6
zAD^xÍ Irrpr,oMovE pnÁcp
(PROJEKTU, UMĚLECKÉHO DÍlA, UMĚLECKEHo vÝNoNU)
Jméno a příjmení:
Bc. Monika
BartoňováOsobní
číslo:
P15000626Studijní program: N7503
Učitelství
pro základní školyStudiiní
obory: Učitelství
anglického jazyka pro 2. stupeň základní školyUčitelství
občanské výchovy pro 2. stupeň základní školy Názevtématu: Moderní
zobtazení maorských válečníkův
současnýchnovozélandských fi lmech Zadávající katedra:
Katedra
anglického jazykaZásady pro vypTacování:
Práce se zabÝvá filmovým zobrazenim maorských l,álečníků v současných novozélandských fil- rnech, například Once Were Warriors (1994), What Becomes of the Broken Hearted? (1999), Crooked Earth (2001), Whale Rider (2003), River Queen (2005), Boy (2010), The Dead Lands (2014) a The Last Saint (2014), První část bude věnor,ána popisu tradičního maorského váleČ- rríka, který je členem kmenových struktur a často se účastní bojů proti britským kolonizáto- rům. Druhá část se bude zabývat analýzou různých zprisobů zobrazení maorských válečníkŮ
v současném filmu a popisem typických postav, do nichž se tito válečníci st1,,1izují.Hlavními metodami výzkumu jsou studium literatury a analýza vybraných filmů.
Rozsah grafických prací:
Rozsah pracovní zprávy:
Forma zpracování diplomové práce: tištěná/elektronická Jazyk zpracování diplomové
práce: Angličtina
Seznam odborné literatury:
ADAH,
Anthony. 2001. Post-and re-colonizing aotearoa screen: Violence and identityin
Once Were \Marriors andWhat
Becomes of the Broken Hearted?Film Criticism 25, (3) (Spring): 46-58,70, Accessed:
April
Io, 2oI4.http: f f search.proquest. com/docview / 2OO8g928 7?accountid_ 1 71 1 6 .
GOLDSMITH,
Ben a LealanGEOFF
eds. 2010. Directory of World Cinema:Austra]ia
k
New Zealand, vo1.3. Bristol: Intellect Books.ISBN
978-1-84150-373-8.KEOWN,
Michelle. 2008. 'He IwiKotahi
Tatou'?: Nationalism andCultural
Identityin Maori Film. In
ContempoIaIy New Zea]and Cinema: From New Wave toB]ockbuster, 2aO8. edited by Ian Conrich, Stuart
Murray,
L97 - 210. London: I. B.Tauris.
ISBN:
978-1-845LI-837-2.MORAN, Albert
aErrol VIETH.
2009. TheA
to Z Austra]ian and New Zea]and Cinema. TheA to Z Guide
Series, No. 48. Plymouth: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.SINCLAIR, Keith
a kol. 2003. Dějiny Nového Zélandu. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny.Vedorrcí diplomové práce: Sándor
Klapcsik,
Ph.D.Katcdra anglického jazl,ka
Datum zadání diplomové práce:
Termín odevzdání diplomové práce:
30.
30.
dubna 2016 dubna 2OI7
7 4^1
'., j,- YiceU., Cý
w.
děkan
V Liberci dne 30. dubna 2016
vedoucí katedry
Prohlášení
Byla jsem seznámena s tím, že na mou diplomovou práci se plně vzta- huje zákon č. 121/2000 Sb., o právu autorském, zejména § 60 – školní dílo.
Beru na vědomí, že Technická univerzita v Liberci (TUL) nezasahuje do mých autorských práv užitím mé diplomové práce pro vnitřní potřebu TUL.
Užiji-li diplomovou práci nebo poskytnu-li licenci k jejímu využití, jsem si vědoma povinnosti informovat o této skutečnosti TUL; v tom- to případě má TUL právo ode mne požadovat úhradu nákladů, které vynaložila na vytvoření díla, až do jejich skutečné výše.
Diplomovou práci jsem vypracovala samostatně s použitím uvedené literatury a na základě konzultací s vedoucím mé diplomové práce a konzultantem.
Současně čestně prohlašuji, že tištěná verze práce se shoduje s elek- tronickou verzí, vloženou do IS STAG.
Datum:
Podpis:
Acknowledgement
At first, I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Sandor Klapcsik, Ph.D for his valuable advice, support, enthusiasm and time dedicated to this paper. Also for being available any time I got into a troublesome phase and needed guidance.
Secondly, I would like to thank to my parents and my partner for being such a great support throughout the process of writing of this thesis and through my years of study.
Annotation:
This thesis deals with the representation of the Maori warrior in recent New Zealand films. It provides a brief overview of the historical background. In particular, the tribal way of life and the social structure of Maori is mentioned, and the features of traditional Maori warriors are presented. The paper describes the causes and consequences of changes in New Zealand after the arrival of Europeans and subsequent colonization, the urbanization which led to the loss of traditional bonds, culture and language. During the period of revival of Maori culture, the Maori renaissance, the Maori people gradually improved their status. Due to these events, two newer forms of warriors appeared in present society, the gang members and the so-called New Warriors. Further, the focus is on the depiction of these three types of warriors via analyses of the chosen New Zealand films produced over the last three decades.
Key words: New Zealand, Maori, films, warriors, gangs, New Warriors
Anotace:
Tato práce se zabývá zobrazením maorských válečníků v současných novozélandských filmech. Uvádí stručný přehled historických reálií. Především se soustředí na tradiční způsob života maorských válečníků a hierarchii v jejich společnosti, dále se věnuje příčinám a následkům v jejich životě způsobených příjezdem a následnou kolonizací Evropany, urbanizaci, která byla hlavní příčinou ztráty jejich sociálních vazeb, kultury i jazyka. Díky období oživení maorské kultury, které se nazývá maorskou renesancí, se postupně zlepšoval jejich sociální status.
Následkem těchto událostí byl zrod dvou nových typů válečníků v současné společnosti, členové gangů a takzvaní noví válečníci. Druhá část se zaměřuje na znázorňování těchto třech typů válečníků skrze analýzu novozélandských filmů vyprodukovaných v průběhu posledních třiceti let.
Klíčová slova: Nový Zéland, Maorové, filmy, válečníci, gangy, nový válečníci
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ... 9
2 Maori Warriors: Past and Present ... 10
2.1 The Social Organization ... 10
2.2 Hierarchy in Maori society ... 12
2.3 Traditional Maori warriors ... 13
2.4 Moko, the tattoo ... 14
2.5 The Causes of the Change in Maori Life ... 16
2.6 Gangs and Gang Members ... 18
2.7 Maori Renaissance ... 20
2.8 The New Warrior ... 21
3 Film Analyses ... 22
3.1 New Zealand Film Industry ... 22
3.1.1 Maori feature films ... 23
3.1.2 The images of Maori Warriors – An Overview ... 26
3.2 Films in which Traditional Warrior Dominates ... 27
3.2.1 The Dead Lands (2014) ... 27
3.2.2 Utu (1983) ... 30
3.2.3 Tracker (2010) ... 34
3.2.4 Crooked Earth (2001) ... 36
3.3 Films in which Gang Members and New Warriors Dominate ... 38
3.3.1 Once Were Warriors (1994) and What Becomes of the Broken Hearted (1999).. ... 38
3.3.2 Boy (2010) ... 46
3.3.3 The Dark Horse (2014) ... 49
4 Conclusion ... 54
Bibliography: ... 58
9
1 Introduction
The aim of this thesis is to present the depiction of Maori warriors in New Zealand films produced over the last three decades. In fact, it may be considered as a continuation to my Bachelor Thesis, which dealt with the position of Maori women in society through the analysis of recent New Zealand films. Because the topic of Maori men would have been too broad for analysis, therefore the topic is narrowed down to the warrior figure, their most common archetype.1
Three types of warriors were detected: the traditional warrior, usually set in the past, and the two new types of warriors – the gang member, who can be considered an urban warrior within the modern environment and the New Warrior who uses social skills and intellectual and mental rather than physical strength to fight for the well-being of the community. Unlike the traditional warrior, the latter two types appear in our contemporary setting. Both are usually men, especially in the films that I analyze, but in society and certain films they can be women, as well (Gilbert 2013, 126-129, Alfred 2009, 82, 84 189 Caro 2002).
The first part of the paper supplies basic information about the history of New Zealand and in particular of Maori warriors and their traditional way of life. The reason their lives changed was the arrival and influence of the Europeans, first through business, later colonization. Due to the economic growth of the country, the era of urbanization arose and an increasing number of Maori migrated to the cities.
They were treated as “second class citizens” until the late 1970s, when the Maori renaissance started and the Maori people gradually improved their status, which contributed to their acceptance in society. As a consequence of these social and
1 In this case, the word “archetype“ is used in the general sense, as a typical pattern or example, not in the Jungian theory.
10 cultural changes, a more complex image of Maori men appeared in recent New Zealand film productions. Besides the traditional warrior, which is usually romanticized, Maori started to be depicted in more complex ways and in more realistic settings.
The second part of this paper focuses on the depiction of Maori warriors in eight chosen films, made between 1983 and 2014. This way an overview of the three types was given, ranging from the traditional to the two new types of warriors. Films in which the main emphasis is on warrior characters were selected. Although in many ways Niki Caro’s Whale Rider (2002) would have given a good description of warriors, especially that of a female New Warrior, this film was excluded because I dealt with it extensively in my Bachelor Thesis (Bartoňová 2015, 30-40).
The thesis analyzes films in which the traditional warriors dominate.
Nevertheless, often even in these films the two modern types of warriors appear or are envisaged to a certain extent. Then the focus is on films in which gang members and the New Warriors dominate. Many times, these two types of characters are in conflict with each other, as both of them try to replace the role of the traditional warrior.
2 Maori Warriors: Past and Present 2.1 The Social Organization
The Maori name of New Zealand, Aotearoa, could be translated as “the land of a long white cloud,” which signalized the existence of the island by hovering above its high peaks. The Maori discovered the land long before captain Cook. Their origin
11 reaches to the Pacific Islands and, according to the legend, they came from the mythical land of Hawaiki around the 13th century.
Maori, as other indigenous people according to Kahurangi Waititi, “do have a profound history of storytelling. The history can be seen through the existence of Maori myths and legends” (Waititi 2008). They believe in mana, which is defined in Maori dictionary as “a supernatural force in a person, place or object;” it is inherited and dependent on the spiritual importance of ancestors, and can be translated as
“prestige, authority, control, power, influence, status, spiritual power, charisma“
(Maori Dictionary 2017). The higher status the event, object or person has the more it is surrounded by mana and tapu (which can be understood as being in the sphere of sacred). A person or tribe's mana can increase from successful ventures or decrease through the lack of success. The tribe give mana to their chief and empower him/her and in turn the mana of an ariki or rangatira (a chief) spreads to their people and their land, water and resources. Almost every activity has a link with the maintenance and enhancement of mana and tapu” (Maori Dictionary 2017). Mana can be increased or decreased but, most importantly, it is an inherited feature of a person. Thus, people who were born to slaves could not become, for example, chiefs.
The Maori have overcome major changes in their society; from a tribal rural one to their colonial experience and the changes it has brought to a society in which a prevailing number of its members live in urban areas. It can be considered a fast growing population whose number is, at present, more than 40 percent higher than 20 years ago, according to the data from Statistics New Zealand. The last census was conducted in 2013, in which fifteen percent of New Zealand population identified themselves as of Maori ethnicity (Statistics New Zealand 2013).
12 The people are firmly bonded to their ancestors; they derive their genealogy from the first tribal ancestor who reached the land of Aotearoa. Those were considered as gods or demigods and are worshiped even today. It springs from the fact that even living elders have always been highly respected. Each individual was also closely attached to the place where they were born. The society of Maori people has never been unified: the biggest unit, also a political one, is iwi, a tribe, sometimes cooperating militarily with other tribe’s descent from the same ancestor or canoe that first landed in New Zealand (McLintock 1966).
Nevertheless, the tribe was not the most important unit of the society. It was hapu, a sub-tribe which consisted of several highly localized whanau: interrelated, extended families. Therefore, Maori people were defined by the place where they were born and by their ancestors. The main function of hapu was to control and defend their territory, which was of great importance for its people. The territory was divided into smaller sections and each of them was under the control of one whanau.
It is predominantly an economic unit which operates on day-to-day bases,
“cultivating its own land, fowling, fishing, and collecting raw material from within its own borders. It might also serve as the normal consumption unit, having one or more common ovens for the preparation of food” (McLintock 1966).
2.2 Hierarchy in Maori society
The traditional Maori society was structured, based on the descent and mana that the person had. The highest position a person could get was the leader; it could be either a man or a woman, but often it was a man. This person is in Maori language called ariki and possesses the greatest mana, inherited from ancestors. Further, there were basically three ranks of people. The highest rank was gentry (including ariki
13 and religious leaders), then there were the commoners who were the most numerous group in the society. The lowest class comprised of the slaves, “commonly captives taken in war or their immediate descendants, [who] had no personal rights, though in practice they appear to have been treated reasonably well, and intermarriage between them and free people of low rank was quite common, the resulting offspring being free” (McLintock 1966). Very important feature of one’s personality and his or her position in the society was the way people saw themselves. Barlow claims that the
“obligations were central to self-definition [...as well as...] conducting the self in a way that honoured the collective mode of operation enabled individuals to achieve social acceptance, a sense of purpose and meaning and indeed an identity within their social word” (Barlow 1991 in Houkamau 2009, 182).
2.3 Traditional Maori warriors
Maori warriors, “fierce, undaunted warriors who fought bravely and with honor“ (Hokihanga 2017), were gathered into hapu which usually consisted of not more than one hundred warriors who were predominantly men but also women were known to fight. They usually fought for territory or to revenge an insult or disrespect.
The warriors were prepared for the battles from their early childhood. For example, they had to prove that their exclude some foods from their diet, learn martial arts – fighting with taiaha and patu (a spare and a club) – the warfare and combat tactics and to perform the traditional haka immaculately because if they performed the haka before the battle and only one of them made a mistake, it signalled bad prophecy for the war (Mader 2017). The tribe also fought for mana: the stronger enemy they defeated, the more would their mana grow. “Defeated warriors believed that they must defeat their enemies to restore their mana or sacred energy, so war was a
14 vicious cycle” (Hokihanga 2017). Another means to strengthen their mana was by consuming their strong rival or by intertribal marriage. During and after the colonization, the Maori were viewed ambivalently – on one hand as savages, which helped to justify the act of colonization. On the other hand, they were “endowed with positive qualities such as ‘physical prowess,’ ‘nobleness’ and ‘a warrior spirit”
(Hokowhitu 2008, 117). The more respectable a warrior was, the more extensive and finer was his facial tattoo, the moko.
2.4 Moko, the tattoo
Moko is a traditional Maori tattoo which was applied on their face, torso, hips and down to their knees. “Nobody except for the highest members of the tribe was allowed to have moko on the forehead, above the upper lip and on the chin”2 (Robley 2008, 17). This usually concerns men as women did not have such exceeding tattoos – only their lips and chin.
The first mention of Maori is from Abel Tasman who visited New Zealand in 1642 but there was no reference about tattoo which indicates that moko did not exist at that time. The first person to describe it in detail was later voyager captain James Cook in 1769.
According to Robley, two explanations exist why Maori started to use the moko. The first one is to avoid repetitive application of the warrior paintings before every battle; the second one is that it was used as a cover of the whiter chiefs fighting the darker slaves. Robley also mentions that historically tattoo was associated with the aristocracy since the Herodotus times. Te Pehi Kupe, a Maori who travelled to
2 „[Ale] nikdo kromě nejvyšších členů kmene neměl právo mít tetování na čele, nad horním retem a na bradě.“
15 England in 1826 claimed that the depth and richness of moko reflects the authority of a person, which does not have to be true entirely (Robley 2008, 11).
Cook claimed that all Maori he saw had black mouth, some of them had tattoos also on their faces and their bodies and by these they gained adulthood and respect.
“Some characteristic parts of moko were a sign of identity [where they come from and to which iwi they belong], recognized as a signature by the Europeans”3 (Robley 2008, 8). There are other purposes as well: to scare the enemies in fight, to distinguish themselves, but also to raise their attractiveness for the ladies.
Sir John Lubbock mentions the painful procedure during which one could not move away or show that it hurts in any way otherwise they would be considered a coward (Robley 2008, 1-8). This shows that in Maori society bravery and resiliency were important, which are significant features of a chief and warrior.
When a warrior was killed in a fight and the enemy usually cut the head off, emaciated it and then they exhibited them in their settlement as a proof of their warrior skills. Later the tattooed heads also became subject of business with the Europeans, which resulted in decline of the moko as it caused murders only for money or that the people with rich and well tattooed were hunted as “souveniers”
(Robley 2008, 100 – 106).
To sum up, the moko was a very unique and distinctive feature for the Maori warriors.
3 „Některé charakteristické části moka na těle byly znakem identity, Evropany uznávané jako signatura.“
16
2.5 The Causes of the Change in Maori Life
The first encounter of the Maori with Europeans was in 1642 when Abel Janszoon Tasman reached the shores of New Zealand and discovered the land with not much of an impact for the Maori. This changed approximately one hundred years later by the arrival of James Cook, a British explorer who disclosed the country as a new promising destination to start up business or even a place to settle down. The goods of interest for the Maori were especially firearms, in exchange for various indigenous “souvenirs” including the Maori weapons and even the tattooed heads with moko (Sinclair 2003, 27-35). As a consequence the way of fighting changed rapidly, since the battles became faster and deadlier.
But the biggest change was yet to come, which was around 1814 when the first missionaries arrived and started “saving” the savages by Christianization. It was not only the religion they brought but they also implied a different social structure – the position of men and women changed so did some of their traditional values, such as the structure of mana system (Johson and Pihama 1994, 2, Evans 1994, 2). Literacy was introduced and became an important feature around the 1830s (Ministry for Culture and Heritage 2014).
In 1840 The Waitangi Treaty was signed between the British Crown and the Maori. It is a document still heatedly discussed as later it was proved that the Maori translation was not quite precise. The main reason was that the Maori language did not know such institutes as, for example, sovereignty, so they used the word governance instead. As a consequence “Maori believe that they kept their authority to manage their own affairs and ceded a right of governance to the Queen in return for the promise of protection” (Ministry for Culture and Heritage 2012). There were many other discrepancies within the text. A tribunal was established in 1975, which
17 deals with inquiries against the Crown for breaching the Treaty – confiscations of land, etc.
By 1896, when a census was conducted, the non-Maori population outnumbered the Maori rapidly4. Therefore, the whole society changed its character (Ministry of Culture 2014a). This trend continued steadily and reached its peak after the Second World War when the urbanization started, which was a logical consequence of economical growth in New Zealand. Numerous Maori people decided to move to the cities with a vision of bright future and sought employment.
They left their traditional social structure (whanau) and started their lives in the cities, although most of them did not know how to live in such an individualistic society.
Many scholars and publicly known thinkers consider this to be a negative phenomenon. The famous writer Witi Ihimaera, for example, stresses that “by the 1960s urbanisation had triggered a ‘massive discontinuity’ in Maori life, creating a new generation of urban Maori ‘removed from its roots, who did not understand their language and who had not lived the culture’” (quoted in Keown 2008, 197). This is closely connected with further problems, primarily with a “poor self-image, family violence and victimization through personal, institutional and cultural racism [...]
objective indicators of socio-economic status (e.g., education and income) and general wellbeing” (Sang and Ward 2006, 265). They had to deal with the difficulty to find a decent job, as the majority of them was employed as unqualified, semi- skilled or service workers due to lack of higher education and prevailing racism towards the Maori. The requirement of their assimilation “to mainstream ‘New
4 According to the census, there lived around 700 000 non-Maori inhabitants whereas the Maori population was just under 40 000 (Ministry of Culture 2014a).
18 Zealand’ culture and become ‘One People’ with Pakeha” was also strongly encouraged (Houkamau 2009, 182). According to Sinclair, the migration and the assimilation resulted in three and a half times higher criminal rate among the young Maori than the Pakeha in the 1950s (Sinclair 2003, 286). This criminality coincided with the widespread appearance of gang activities in the Maori population.
2.6 Gangs and Gang Members
Gilbert offers a common definition of a gang in the preface of his book Patched: “A gang can be defined as a structured group (of five or more people) that maintains an exclusive membership marked by common identifiers and formal rules that supersede the rules of the state” (Gilbert 2013, IX). The proportion of Maori in gangs in New Zealand is significant. Sinclair claims that “since the 1960s many young urban Maori associates in gangs such as Mongrel Mob and Black Power”5 whose members scarcely ever speak Te Reo Maori and who do not maintain contact with their whanau or marae (Sinclair 2003, 292).
This is confirmed by Jarrod Gilbert, who conducted an extensive research6 of New Zealand gangs. He states that in the 1950s the gangs were predominantly Pakeha, as the majority of Maori still lived in the rural areas, but with the migration wave the numbers of Maori gang members increased. The gangs in New Zealand were inspired by the American motorcycle gang Hell’s Angels. Gilbert also says that by the early 1970s the Maori gang members outweighed the Pakeha in the city gangs.
The major cause of becoming a gang member is “associated with a permanent
5 „Od šedesátých let se mnoho mladých městských Maorů sdružuje v gangy, jako Mongrel Mob či Black Power“ (Sinclair 2003, 292).
6 He lived among the gang members, building close relationships and trying to obtain internal information without becoming a member himself.
19 underclass” (Gilbert 2013, 45), problems with employment and accommodation, in general with low socioeconomic status and discrimination of all forms (45). Thus, Gilbert assigns the gang membership mainly to social and economic conditions.
It is typical for the gang members to wear leather or denim jackets or waistcoats with significant patch on their back with the name of the gang and a symbol to be well identifiable and distinctive. Also it became a common habit to never wash the set of clothes they were wearing on their initiation day, so their clothes “soon became dirty and tatty” (73), which is the desired look. One member of the Mongrel Mob stated that “to wash them would be to wipe away the memory of our conquest and history” (Isac 2007, 10 in Gilbert 2013, 73).
The members usually do not make their living by work because “the heavy drinking, partying and impulsive lifestyle of a gang member often meant that work attendance was intermittent” (112). For this reason many of them tend to commit crimes of various kinds and with different seriousness.
The similarity of a gang member with a traditional warrior is especially in their characteristics such as bravery, loyalty and fighting spirits. Also they very often use tattoos as a symbol of their identity. Also, the territorial fights are very common.
However, the difference is in the way they conduct these. As Coker states in his book The Warrior Ethos: Military Culture and the War of Terror, “gang members demand respect from others; they don’t win it. Warriors in earning it come to respect themselves all the more” (Coker 2007, 43). It is also their appearance that differs, which is due to the urban setting and era they live in and a lack of “nobleness” that is often ascribed to the traditional warriors.
20
2.7 Maori Renaissance
The Maori voice started to be heard in the late 1970s, and so this era is called the Maori renaissance. It is the time of the revival of the Maori language and culture, and Maori being involved in high politics. It was the “educated Maori [who]
challenged and attempted to reverse the effects of Maori land loss, urbanization and deculturation by advocating Maori reclaim their heritage” (Poata-Smith 1997 in Houkamau 2009, 183). The culture is awakened by establishing the traditional meeting areas – marae within the urban environment, for example Orakei in Auckland, “in an attempt to preserve traditional rituals and values. Many Maori began to resist pressure to ‘integrate’ into Pakeha society, viewing the process as a variation on earlier government policies of ‘assimilation’” (Keown 2008, 197-98).
The first Maori Party, which mainly advocated Maori autonomy, was founded in 1980.
The revival of Maori language, Te Reo Maori, was achieved by different means. Firstly, it became a language taught at schools: starting with courses at universities from the 1960s (Sinclair 2003, 291), later incorporated into school curriculum at lower grades of education, and establishing schools thoroughly for the Maori. Secondly, it was through the radio and television broadcasting. The amount of time they were given in the radio was insignificant until 1988 when the first Maori radio station was established. Also, the television broadcasting has changed: until the 1960s Maori appeared on screen very rarely and if they did, it was mostly as comedians or entertainers. After numerous protests and petitions “TVNZ created a Maori Production Unit dedicated to producing a set of Māori-language programmes”
(Dunleavy 2014) in 1980. Nevertheless, the first Maori TV channel (Te Kāea) was
21 not established until 2004. Its aim to reinforce and to bring the language and culture back to life is clear (Houkamau 2009, 183).
These efforts continue till the present when there are many festivals promoting Maori culture and language. Despite these attempts, only more than a fifth of the 600 000 people who identify themselves with Maori ethnicity is able to use Te Reo Maori and use it in conversation about everyday life and problems. There are still persisting differences in education – one third of Maori population aged 15 and more still has not reached any qualification, of which the majority are men. Only “12.3%
of Maori women and 7.4% of Maori men reached bachelor’s degree or higher. In contradiction, men are more likely to find a full time employment (52.9%) than women (35.1%). Most of them, regardless their sex, were employed in part-time jobs” (Statistics New Zealand 2013 in Bartoňová 2015, 17). In accordance with these data Royal claims that “[a]lthough more Maori are becoming educated, literacy rates are still a cause for concern, housing is poor in certain areas of the country, and unemployment rates have been consistently higher than for Pakeha” (Royal 2005).
The data stated above prove that Maori, although the first inhabitants of the island, have to deal with more difficult conditions than Pakeha as their “starting point” is habitually different. In this situation, a new type of warrior is needed.
2.8 The New Warrior
The New Warrior is a concept based on Taiaiake Alfred’s Wasáse: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom (2005), who defines the New Warriors as those who “make their own way in the world: they move forward heeding the teaching of the ancestors and carrying a creed that has been taken from the past and remade into a powerful way of being in their new world” (Alfred 2009, 29). In other words, it is a
22 person who stands up for their people, is concerned about their development and improves their wellbeing.
It is usually an intellectual leader who “is deeply committed to the regeneration of Indigenous people’s integrity and rejects stereotypes and challenges the dominant colonial discourse” (Hare et al 2011, 1). This definition does not limit the possibilities; therefore, the new warrior can take unlimited forms. The New Warrior does not reach his goals via combat or physical strength anymore, but uses different means, mostly intellectual prowess. This is what distinguishes this type of warrior from the traditional warrior and even the gang member. The similarity to a traditional warrior lies mainly in the strong leadership and emphasis on the community prosperity.
3 Film Analyses
3.1 New Zealand Film Industry
The film industry in New Zealand is not a major one; on the other hand, there are several films that managed to become well-known around the world, some of them internationally awarded. The first feature film Hinemoa was made in 1914 by George Tarr, and it is a story of love and separation. Over the next seventy years, New Zealand filmmakers were not very productive: “the tiny industry would produce forty-two features, some of them produced of directed by American companies, targeting New Zealand’s exotic location, Maori culture, and cheap production costs”
(Thompson 2003, 236).
The breakpoint was the establishment of the New Zealand Film Commission (hereafter NZFC) in 1978, whose main intention was to make New Zealand film
23 visible for the world and also “enabling the world to see New Zealanders as they see themselves” (Martin and Edwards 1997, 13 in Thompson 2003, 236). As a consequence, the whole film industry developed in New Zealand, including film criticism and film studies, as the number of films produced rose considerably (Thompson 2003, 236).
Michelle Keown claims that in the period between 1914 and late 1970s the Maori were always depicted through Pakeha perspective, since the producers were almost solely of European origin. Their portrayal varies – from completely being erased, “to various myths and fantasies of colonialist subjection and control: Maori as object of scientific, ethnographic or voyeuristic scrutiny; Maori as childlike or
‘ignorable savage’ subject to the paternalistic or ‘civilising’ guidance of the European colonising culture; Maori as ‘noble savage’ whose culture is ... lamentably but inevitably giving way to the dominant and ‘superior’ settler culture” (Keown 2008, 197).
3.1.1 Maori feature films
The depiction of Maori from the Eurocentric perspective changed with the Maori renaissance, when Maori started to participate in film-making and in culture in general. The indigenous people gained “visibility in, access to and control over the media content as well as the production, distribution and exhibition processes”
(Martens 2012, 3). In the late 1990s they accomplished that the New Zealand Film Commission declared support to the Maori projects, which also meant that they were
“included in the Commission’s decision making processes” (Waller 1996, 254 in Martens 2012, 4). Its support even strengthened in the 2000s after several international successes. At present the Maori cinema is considered “one of the, if not the, most thriving Indigenous cinemas in the world” (Martens 2012, 5). A key figure
24 in Maori film-making and in movement for social change was Mereta Mita, who herself participated in many Maori projects. Although she was frustrated by continual rejection, she managed to make two documentaries: Bastion Point: Day 507 (1980) and Patu (1983). She gave a very vocal voice for the Maori together with Barry Barclay (6). The first Maori-made dramatic feature was Barry Barclay’s Ngati (1987) (7), a film set in the late 1940s in a rural area of the North Island. It portrays the struggle of Maori dependence on Pakeha as they own the land the Maori are farming. However, they manage to negotiate acceptable conditions and buy the land together. One year later, a film by Mereta Mita followed, which was Mauri (1988) – the first dramatic feature film made by an Indigenous woman (7). It dealt with postcolonial issues like “land ownership, urban migration and birth rights” (7).
These two feature films are considered as a breakpoint because they offered the Maori perspective both on-screen and off-screen. They both intentionally included as many Maori as possible in the process of making films; they even trained them as technicians to provide them with some skills for the future (8).
The most successful Maori feature film, both nationally and internationally, was Once Were Warriors (1994) directed by Lee Tamahori (analysed later in the paper). The producers experienced troubles when applying for funding to the NZFC as they considered the film politically incorrect, showing Maori in a bad light (9).
But after its release, the NZFC “received a 327 percent return” profit (Thompson 2003, 237). The majority of cast and crew was Maori (Martens 2012, 9, Thornley 2001, 23). The film was not received well by the Maori scholars, as they claimed that it does not project the historical realities sufficiently. It has also been criticised for adopting Hollywood features (Martens 2012, 10). Yet, it became extremely popular among the mainstream audience. “Proof [...] that audiences still hold it in the highest
25 regard happened in January this year when Warriors was voted, in a local online poll, the best New Zealand film of all time, ahead of Boy, Whale Rider and Goodbye Pork Pie” (NZ Herald 2014a).
But since then there were only few films with significant Maori participation and “in early 2000s, Barclay decried the persistent exclusion of Maori from New Zealand’s state-supported film industry” (Martens 2012, 13). After 2004, when NZFC set the goal to support Maori film-makers, the number of supported Maori projects increased significantly. To mention some which made it to the theatres:
Eagle vs. Shark (2008) and Boy (2010) by Taika Waititi, A Song of Good (2008), The Rain of Children (2008) (Martens 2012, 13). At the same time, Martens states that there is a sign of “a fading interest of the new generation of Maori filmmakers in dealing with cultural differences and political concerns” (Martens 2012, 16).
Additionally, it has to be mentioned that there are many films produced and funded by the NZFC that are not (entirely) Maori made but deal with Maori issues or tell Maori stories. Usually they are made mostly by Pakeha but they have a Maori advisor on set, and the cast includes Maori actors. For example, this is the case with the film Utu (1983), The Piano (1993), Crooked Earth (2001), Whale Rider (2002), The Dark Horse (2014) and The Dead Lands (2014).
Adah claims the importance of depiction of Maori identity in the cinema in his article Post- and Re-Colonizing Aotearoa Screen: Violence and Identity in Once Were Warriors and What Becomes of the Broken Hearted?: “Like other cultural sites, cinema, as an institutional practice, has an unavoidable responsibility to the interpellation and continuity to the society it produces and is produced by” (2001, 47).
26 3.1.2 The images of Maori Warriors – An Overview
The paper analyzes the perspectives in which Maori warriors are depicted in the New Zealand film productions; there are three types included. The first one is a more or less traditional warrior who believes in established Maori values, lives within his whanau and hapu in a community. The second type of Maori warrior is as Keown calls them the “urban warriors” who seek the pre-colonial values of Maori in an urban environment. Therefore, they often become members of urban gangs or just petty criminals trying to persuade themselves that they are strong enough. Lastly, a type of a warrior in New Zealand films, based on Taiaiake Alfred’s Wasáse:
Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom, is the so-called “New Warrior”. In other words, the image of the traditional indigenous warrior can turn into two newer types. First, that of gang member or criminal; second, that of the “New Warrior,” an intellectual leader.
In the history of New Zealand “Traditional Warriors ‘were often referred to as the most civilized of all savages’ (Hokowhitu 2004, 265). This ambivalent representation of the Maori warrior is apparent in several recent New Zealand and co-production films: not only those that maintain the colonizer’s viewpoint, such as Utu (1983), the British–New Zealand adventure film Tracker (2010), and River Queen (2005), but also those that focus on Maori tribal life, such as The Dead Lands (2014).
In a way similar to the warrior, the portrayal of gang members is ambiguous;
sometimes even within the same film, there is a wide range of images characterizing the gangs. They can appear as a community that provides shelter, support and whanau (an extended family), a group of brutal mobsters, or can be depicted ironically as bragging small-scale criminals. Such representations come to the
27 foreground in recent New Zealand films like Once Were Warriors (1994), What Becomes of the Broken Hearted? (1999), Boy (2010), The Dark Horse (2014) and The Last Saint (2014).
The depiction of a “New Warrior” is also very common in recent New Zealand films. It is a person deeply committed to his community, concerned about their wellbeing, using traditions and traditional knowledge to achieve a positive development. They appear in various forms such as the social worker in Once Were Warriors (1994), the mentally unstable chess-player Genesis Potini, who brings purpose into the lives of the young underprivileged Maori youths in The Dark Horse (2014), and Rewi Marangai, the successful lawyer in Te Rua (1991), who eventually becomes a leader who supervises the publicity stunt against the museum in Berlin which keeps stolen Maori carvings.
It is important to note here that the New Warrior could be a woman, as well.
Paikea (Keisha Castle-Hughes) in Whale Rider (2002) becomes such a leader when she persuades her grandfather and the whole community that she deserves to become the new leader of the tribe, even though it was not acceptable before because she was a girl. She, although very young, wants to improve the general wellbeing and health of her tribe.
3.2 Films in which Traditional Warrior Dominates
3.2.1 The Dead Lands (2014)
The film is directed by Toa Fraser, who was born in 1975 in London to a British mother and Fijian father working as a seaman. He spent his childhood in England and moved to New Zealand at the age of fourteen. He and his family settled in Auckland (NZ On Screen 2017d). Same as Geoff Murphy, he is married to a
28 Maori woman, so he claims in an interview for NZ Herald: “I have a very strong sense of responsibility to them [his wife and daughters] to make this film work”
(Fraser in Baillie 2014). He co-worked with Glen Standring, a New Zealand writer and producer, who completed a first class honour in archaeology but decided to devote his talent to film and Matthew Metcalfe, a New Zealand producer. Although neither the director nor the writer or producer are of Maori origin, the whole cast is, as the film is set in Aotearoa before the Pakeha came. In addition, the whole film is in Te Reo – Maori language which adds on to its authenticity. It presents the warrior culture of Maori tribes as Hongi, the son of a Maori chief, seeks revenge after the massacre of his tribe. It is an extremely violent film with visual cruelty and much blood.
The film starts with a scene of peaceful New Zealand bush with enormously high-grown Kauri trees (which are typical for North Island). It is the beginning of a scene in which one warrior slaughters another by a traditional Maori weapon – Patu.
Wirepa (Te Kohe Tuhaka), a son of a chief of a rival clan comes to unearth the bones of his ancestors who died long ago in a battle between these two tribes, so he can finally bury them. Nevertheless, his intentions are not as pure as he claims. He goes to the sacred places where he swears to his ancestors to avenge their deaths – the whole time he is watched by the son of the chief, Tane (George Henare), and the battle starts all over again. Wirepa seeks his own profit because he wants his ancestors to glory him and sing his name. His plan is to blame them for sacrilege – he destroys a scull of his own ancestor and blames Hongi (James Rolleston), the young son of Tane as he caught him watching him defiling the bones. The chief, Tane, offers Wirepa to kill his own son in order to restore peace between the two
29 tribes as he wants no more wars. But Wirepa claims that they are “brave warriors.
War feeds our glory, there is no place for peace” (10:10 – 10:20).
At the following night Wirepa comes back to the village and slaughters everyone but Hongi as he hid himself in a forest. They take Tane’s head as a trophy.
Hongi, who is still only a boy of 15 years of age, sets on a journey for revenge.
Wirepa is on his way home and he has acquired such a self-confidence that no one can hurt him, not even the ghosts of The Dead Lands – the forbidden lands where his men do not want to set their foot. Hongi follows them and after a conversation with his dead grandmother he seeks help by the “flash-eating monster of the Dead Lands.”
He does not know if the warrior will kill him as everybody before him and eat him or if he will help him. At the end he chooses the second option. He teaches Hongi the warrior skills – using the weapons properly, to kill fast and explains many things about life.
They follow Wirepa and his brave warriors on their way, fighting them several times. At the end it is only Wirepa and Hongi who survive and Hongi has the choice of killing him or not; even though he desires to kill him he realizes that the vicious circle will never end – one revenge after another – and spares Wirepa’s life, but he makes him swear that he and his family (tribe) have debt towards him and that these wars will end.
The film presents qualities of Maori warriors as well as their faults as well as their emblematic way of fights. The warriors flicker their tongue and use the typical movement of their hand before a strike accompanied by vocal effects and shouts.
It is a film that incorporates elements of Maori spirituality, but it does not claim to be historically accurate. As the director states, “We walked a tightrope between tradition and innovation and made some bold choices about things like
30 costume, haircuts and music” (Fraser in Baillie 2014). It is obvious in the case of Wirepa’s warriors, who all have a Mohawk-cut and are well-built. “But it's also a Maori martial arts movie, a showcase for the taiaha and patu fighting skills of mau rakau”(NZ Herald 2014).
To summarize it, in spite of the discrepancies in the appearance of the warriors to make them more appealing, the film depicts thoroughly traditional Maori warriors as it goes back to pre-colonial times with their traditional way of life within tribal communities, weapons and martial arts and fights over the land and honour.
3.2.2 Utu (1983)
A well received film, both in New Zealand and also worldwide, as it was the first New Zealand film included in the main programme of the Cannes Film Festival in 1983. The film was directed by New Zealand author Geoff Murphy, who cooperated on the script with Keith Aberdein, a British writer and producer who moved to New Zealand in the 1960s. Geoff Murphy is not a Maori author;
nevertheless, he was married to Merata Mita, who can be considered “a key figure in the story of Māori filmmaking” (NZ On Screen 2017b). She was also involved in Maori renaissance through public speaking and numerous interviews. “She was a passionate voice for Māori, and an advocate for social change” (NZ On Screen 2017b). Her participation took also the form of acting in the films: here it was the part of Matu, a woman who was part of the rebels but wanted to kill Te Wheke at the end for breaching the family ties for his own honour.
The title of the film Utu is understood in Maori language as “reciprocity” – given the context in this case, it can be translated as “revenge”. It is set in the time of Te Kooti’s war, which was one of the last conflicts during the New Zealand wars
31 which took place in the period between 1845 and 1872 (Keenan 2012). Te Kooti was a Maori soldier who originally served in the British army but was suspected of helping the enemy and imprisoned without a trial. (He was not the only Maori who experienced this). He escaped from prison and started a guerrilla war against the British (Todd 2016).
The film is primarily intended for the local teenage market as there is action and violence, but it also offers “a powerfully political treatment of the Maori history and whakapapa (lineage or oral tradition) directly applicable to the racial tensions and conflicts which usually lie beneath the surface of an apparently egalitarian multiracial society” (Mitchell 1984, 48).
Numerous Maori actors appeared in the film and an interesting fact is that the main character Te Wheke was performed by Anzac Wallace, who had almost no experience with acting. He stated that he could truly identify himself with the character of Te Wheke: “I can relate to that Te Wheke. It could have been me. The same anger and frustration. It is only the attitude to revenge that would have been different” (Wallace in Mitchell 1984, 49). The film is set in the 1870s, the time of New Zealand Land Wars in which the Maori fought for their land after signing the Treaty of Waitangi which transferred the sovereignty of New Zealand to the Brits – the problem with the treaty was that the Maori do not have such word, therefore they claim that they did not understand its actual meaning.
At the beginning of the film, Te Wheke serves as a captain in the army until he discovers that his own troops destroyed his home village and slaughtered his loved ones. At this point, he feels strong desire for utu, he calls to the gods that he must kill the Pakeha, which foreshadows his restoration to his traditional Maori warrior role including the procedure of the moko. He forms a rebel guerrilla army and decapitates
32 a Pakeha priest during a sermon the priest holds for a Maori congregation. To enter the church unseen he hangs the old man sitting by the back door. His vengeance continues by a raid on the Williamson’s house, which is completely destroyed and Mrs. Williamson is killed. This starts another vicious circle as Williamson seeks revenge for Te Wheke’s actions.
Many people are killed on both sides, the Pakeha and the Maori. Every time Te Wheke kills someone he performs a specific tongue movement accompanied also by a sound. Another interesting moment of juxtaposition is when the Maori soldiers who still serve in the army perform the haka in British uniform with the rifles. It foreshadows the inner battle each of them has to fight – to join the rebels or to fight for the British, the dilemma of where they belong to. One of these moments is captured when Wiremu, an army scout, and one of the Maori soldiers talk. The soldier who decided to join the Te Wheke’s army asks: “Why do we fight tribe against tribe? Thirty years ago, they dug a Maori bullet from my grandfather’s leg – on and on it does. It’s always the Pakeha side with those who best advance his cause.
Will we still face each other cross the battle lines in 100 years?” (Murphy 1983, 53:30 - 53:50).
Towards the end of the film, the rebels plan to attack the provisory base of the army, but at this point Williamson who has been tracking them comes in and warns the officers. The rebels attack the site and destroy most of it. Nevertheless, the army follows them and Te Wheke is captured. On the run he proves to be very heartless as he kills his own cousin because he was injured and would slow down the rebel group. Previously, he also killed Kura, a young girl who he blamed from revelation of their plans to a Pakeha officer with whom she had an affair. He executed her with an axe.
33 The film ends with Te Wheke’s trial, which is held in a forest where he is sentenced to death by a firing squad. There are several people who wish to be the one to trigger the gun. The first one is Matu, a Maori woman who lived with the rebels;
she wants to revenge the death of several members of her family who were killed by Te Wheke. Lieutenant Scott (Kelly Johnson) tells her that she cannot kill him as it is a military court; nevertheless, she refuses to obey and explains her reasons. But when she presses the trigger, nothing happens – they take it as a sign. The second person who desires to kill Te Wheke is Mr. Williamson (Bruno Lawrence), who is also warned by Lieutenuat Scott that it is a military court. He refuses to listen but he is not able to kill Te Wheke as he listens to a lizard on his necklace which was given to him by his Maori friend (it is believed to have a special power). Te Wheke seems to be acquiesced with his fate and execution, although he does not show any sign of regrets for what he has done.
An interesting thought presented by Robert Burgoyne in his text The Epic Film in World Culture, which correlates with the claim of this paper, is that the film can be interpreted as the metaphorical description of the 1980s New Zealand. This is the time when Maori gangs became powerful and widespread to compensate for losing the traditional bonds within Maori society as a consequence of colonisation.
Burgoyne states that the film can be taken as a reconstruction of the situation of the nineteenth-century with its references to the 1980s. In particular, it is Te Wheke’s hairstyle and clothing which remind him of those seen in the streets of New Zealand worn by the “street gang garb” (Burgoyne 2010, 250). Further, “Te Wheke’s assumption of a facial moko (tattoo) in a painful ritual also suggests the growing use of tattoos by urban Maori gangs” (250). Another link to the situation mentioned in the film was Te Wheke’s remark that 20 000 people could gather on the streets of
34 Auckland in hours, which may refer to the strikes of the 1980s. Lastly, Burgoyne suggests that Te Wheke’s literacy – demonstrated in the film in a scene where after plundering the William’s house he sits down and takes pleasure in reading Shakespeare’s Macbeth with great joy – indicates the fact that it was the university graduates who were engaged in the protest movement (250).
His statement reveals that the film reflects the situation of 1980s and the peak of Maori renaissance, when they fought for their rights to produce films and books, radio broadcasting, being involved in politics, being educated and to present their culture as the original culture of New Zealand. The film’s director Geoff Murphy himself states that it was his intention to make a connection between the conflicts of the past and those happening at present in New Zealand (NZ On screen 2017a).
In the documentary Making Utu (1982), Merata Mita explicitly states the similarities between what was happening in New Zealand in the 1870s and 1980s.
“What’s [...] in the film is what’s happening today. We have that. We have Maori fighting Maori. We have Maori fighting Pakeha. We have Pakeha fighting Pakeha in New Zealand and it’s very hard to draw the line in New Zealand along the terms of racial conflict” (Preston 1982, 4:33 – 4:49). Later on in the documentary Anzac Wallace expresses a similar view (Preston 1982, 10:20 – 10:54).
3.2.3 Tracker (2010)
The film, set in New Zealand in 1903, is a New Zealand and United Kingdom coproduction and was directed by Ian Sharp, who is of British origin. The screenplay was written by Dutch writer Nicolas van Pallandt, who has lived in New Zealand since 1994. The film tells a story of a South African veteran from the Boer War, Arjan van Diemen, who immigrates to New Zealand after his farm was destroyed
35 and his family killed by the soldiers. He was known to the British soldiers as a
“butcher” who cut a trigger finger of the bravest high officers they captured as a sign of respect and sent it to the headquarters or the monarch. On the same day there is an incident in the port, when the Maori seafarer Kereama is having sex with a local prostitute Lucy in the stable. Three men, Sergeant Saunders and two corporals walk past after a good night in a bar and see the light. They go inside to check what is happening and start a fight. Kereama is very skilful in fighting and the men become more and more frustrated, so Sergeant Saunders grabs a hay-fork and tries to stab him, but he misses and kills one of the corporals. Immediately he accuses Kereama of the murder, who has no other choice than to run away. The army hires two trackers to find him; one of them is Arjan van Diemen. Eventually the two trackers divide and van Diemen finds him, captures him and takes him back to the port. On the way back they slowly get to know each other and van Diemen discovers that Kereama is innocent as he had a chance to kill him on numerous occasions. This persuades him and, at the end, he helps Kereama to escape by cutting his own finger off as a proof that Kereama is dead.
Kereamu is a traditional Maori warrior with certain features of the New Warrior. On his neck he has a pouch with dust from his grandfather’s land. When he was a boy he was forced to witness the execution of his grandfather and father, as the British hanged them and did not even bury them. Before his grandfather died he called at him that now it is up to him to seek revenge.
After the execution he ran away, he was taught by the missionary school;
therefore he can read and knows the Bible by heart. His grandfather, who also knew the whole Bible by heart, told him that “to know your enemy, you have to know his God” (Sharp 2010, 36:06). The missioners taught them to read – all of them, so they
36 are not illiterate savages any more. As van Diemen states, the ability to read means that a man is educated and that education is what distinguishes a savage from a civilized man. Thus, Kereama can be considered to a certain extent already a “New Warrior” as he is already a somewhat sophisticated warrior, a mixture of the two types, a person who fights with intellectual means.
Furthermore, it is particularly interesting that although he possesses traditional Maori knowledge as tracking and the healing power of certain plants, he has lost the ability to kill, which is so significant for a traditional Maori warrior. He shows this several times during the film – the first opportunity is when van Diemen is taking a
“bath” in a lake but instead of killing and letting him to drown, Kereama pulls him out of the water and saves his life. A similar situation happens later in the film with the same result. In both occasions, Kereama claims that he is not a murderer.
3.2.4 Crooked Earth (2001)
Crooked Earth (2001) made by Sam Pillsbury, an American born director who moved to New Zealand (Loewenstien 2001). It is another Western genre film set in the Auckland region in the late 1990s. The main plot tells a story of a rivalry between two brothers – one of them, Kahu (Lawrence Makoare), who has a gang riding on the horsebacks and involved in marihuana growing business, who desires to become the new leader of his tribe after his father’s death. On the other hand, there is Will (Temuera Morrison), who comes back to his marae for his father’s funeral after being dishonourably dismissed from the army after twenty years of service, the only thing he seeks at present is peace and quiet. He is the older brother who is entitled to become the next leader by tradition but is not interested in the leadership. However,
37 he changes his mind when he sees what has his brother has done to the place and to the people he loves.
There are many scenes which focus on the fights between the white establishments represented by the police forces and the tribe. The police is trying to convict Kahu and his compotators of being involved in the marihuana and arm business. According to Barclay, What Becomes of the Broken Hearted (1999) and Crooked Earth (2001) were “imitative Maori films’ made by ‘the white film establishment’ while ‘Maori applications are being mysteriously blocked” (Barclay in Martens 2012, 12). Remarkably, it was not until 2002 that another feature film made by a Maori director and a predominantly Maori team found its way to the theatres – The Maori Merchant of Venice (2002) directed by Don Selwyn (Barclay in Martens 2012, 12).
Kahu is a mixture of a traditional warrior and a gang member. He desires power and leadership of his people, so he takes it. It is symbolized by the sacred patu, made of the precious green stone he gets possession of at his father’s funeral.
He is fluent in Te Reo Maori and when there are negotiations whether to sell their land to Pakeha he and his comrades perform traditional haka to demonstrate their disagreement. All they are wearing is a traditional “skirt” made of flax so their tattoos are visible, as well (except for Kahu who is wearing trousers). They claim that the land belongs to the tribe in contrary to Will and the tribal priest who are open to discussion with the government.
On the other hand, he does not show any respect to his father by not participating in the funeral ceremony to which he only emerge to get hold of the patu, unlike the “party” that he organizes in the marae later that day. The marae is also very different to a traditional one which has carved statues of their ancestors.
38 This one evokes more of a drug den with sprayed portraits of contemporary Maori.
Moreover, he is also involved in crime – growing marihuana, disposing of their concurrence and the arms trade. Will is forced to fight against his brother and to shoot him at the end, but they depart in peace as his brother hands him the patu before he dies. Will accepts this to improve the situation of the tribe.
To summarize, one of the main characters is depicted as the mixture of a gang member and a traditional warrior. Kahu is to a certain extent immoral, fights for power, and he is involved in criminal activities. Yet, he is seeking leadership and fights for the land rights of his tribe. The other main character, Will, is a mixture of the New Warrior and a traditional one. He is a person who distanced himself from the tribal way of life and he lives a more modern lifestyle. Nevertheless, he still believes in the traditional values, and he is ready to fight for them. The film mixes the traditional and modern way of life – tribal society, horse riding, inheriting leadership and traditions versus helicopters, limousines, guns, marihuana business and cell phones.
3.3 Films in which Gang Members and New Warriors Dominate
3.3.1 Once Were Warriors (1994) and What Becomes of the Broken Hearted (1999)The film, which is considered the first New Zealand world-wide known indigenous blockbuster (Thompson 2003, 230), was directed by a famous New Zealand director Lee Tamahori, whose origins are half Maori (from his father’s side).
He grew up in Wellington, in New Zealand. Alan Duff, the writer of the eponymous novel which is the film based on and who also assisted in the film as a screenwriter (Moran and Vieth 2009, 335-336), also comes from a mixed marriage. In his early childhood he was raised by his Maori uncle and later on by his uncle of British
