THE ITAUKEI MATA SYSTEM OF KNOWING: VURAAND TU TO SOURCE AND SUPPORT A SUSTAINABLE

BULA SAUTU IN A VANUA VAKATURAGA

[AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL JOURNEY THROUGH TUBOU-LAKEBA METAPHORICAL EXPERIENCES]

by

Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai

A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

Copyright © 2014 by Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai

Oceania Centre of Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies Faculty of Arts, Law and Education The University of the South Pacific

October, 2014

DECLARATION

Statement by Author

I, Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai, declare that this thesis is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published, or substantially overlapping with material submitted for the award of any other degree at any institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text.

Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….

Name: Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai

Student ID No.: S11036795

Statement by Supervisors

The research in this thesis was performed under our supervision and to our knowledge is the sole work of Mr. Wame Jackson Peni Tabilai.

Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….

Name: Frank Thomas (PhD)

Designation……………………………………………………………………………..

Signature…………………………………. Date……………………………………….

Name: Akanisi Kedrayate (PhD)

Designation……………………………………………………………………………..�

i�

DEDICATION

life is a journey a search

a seekingfor answers

a remembering of ashes

a building of dreams of visions

life is a destination

a purpose a calling to serve

a commitment to work

an altering of ways

of the status quo

This thesis is dedicated to the loving memory of my father, Rupeni Tabilai, an exemplary civil servant of the yavusa Matanibulu of Ovea, Bau in Tailevu who, in his

life-time, taught me the value of hard work, perseverance and reliance on God.

ii�

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Research is a journey meant to be shared with others. Meeting the requirements of a Master of Arts thesis would have been impossible without the support and encouragement of people and organizations acknowledged herein. I was therefore blessed to have had two enthusiastic and creative academics to supervise my work: Dr. Frank Thomas and Dr. Akanisi Kedrayate. My sincere gratitude also goes to my sponsor: the USP’s Research Office and the very supportive Dr. Jito Vanualailai and team. On the same note, I thank the FALE’s Postgraduate Committee for funding my ‘field’ work, the UU204 team for the moral support, and all the friendly and helpful staff at the FALE’s main office, the Finance section and, the USP library.

There have also been those whose contributions, little as they may seem, can never go unacknowledged. To Shana Khan, wherever you are, and Lalita Sharma, of OCACPS, thank you so very much for directing me to research, and at the USP. The USP’s Pacific studies team: the Postgraduate research chair, Dr. Lea Lani Kauvaka and, again, Dr. Thomas, thank you for pushing me to ‘explore my space’ and invest in my ‘creativity’ – notions that have largely challenged me to dare to navigate beyond the traditional and the ordinary. Amongst these mentioned, I have my own dear brother, Waisea Tabilai, to acknowledge for the prophetic ‘voice’ throughout my journey and, together with a family friend, Livai Tukana, for always lending me their ever-attentive ears.

There were also angelic others whose encouragement, and words of wisdom, possibly unbeknownst to them, helped me put together my ideas for an MA thesis: Dr. Cresantia Koya-Vakauta, Dr. Unaisi Nabobo-Baba, Dr. Salanieta Bakalevu and Dr. Sereima Naisilisili, at different points and, for very brief moments, have influenced my thoughts. Significant also were Pacific ‘voices’ introduced to me via their writings, initially, before I was honoured to ‘meet’ three of them in person: our very own Professor (Dr.) Konai H. Thaman, Dr. David Gegeo and Dr. Kabini. F. Sanga, writers whose combined ‘stories’ gave me the conceivable ideas that developed into this research.

Last, but not least, I acknowledge the people of Tubou-Lakeba in Lau, both iVanua and iWai, in the present and of the past, the Vanua vakaTuraga whose talanoa have been represented in my thesis and, particularly, my eighty-four year old and sixty-six year old ‘grandmother’ and mother, respectively: women thoroughly socialized into the Tubou-Lakeba tradition. Many thanks go to Momo Soakai, Na Fane and cousin Levulevu, for hosting me during the two short weeks of my stay in Levuka-Lakeba; the ‘owners’ of Vunisavisavi and Katubalevu and, Kameli Vuiyasawa (of the Daulakeba) and Jone Naisara (of the Tui Tubou) and; the two divisions of the AOG Tubou church, for the open-doors, warm-hearts and constructive contributions. Finally, next to God and close to my heart, my ‘lewa ni Tubou’ Lavenia, the ‘wind beneath my wings’.

iii�

ABSTRACT The iTaukei of Viti, formerly known as Fijians, have a mata or envoy system of engaging at the intra- and inter-Vanua levels that works to keep vanua-peopleconnected as a Vanua (of a named/claimed place) whole. Theoretically, the ancient Vanua developed into Vanua vakaTuraga (lit. ‘Land/Place having Chiefs/Men’), centuries later, possibly, at the arrival of a Turaga migration that was readily ‘grafted’ into the ‘first taukei’ (first peoples to be ‘yoked-with’ the land/place) of Viti society.Essentially, the Turaga people (as active ‘explorers’ of the oceanic space, at the time) were ‘given’ land by the Vanua people who, by then, had become so land-based that ‘conquerors of the deep’ were soon recognized as vu-gods who vu-maiLagi (originate from Lagi [the heavens]). These ‘land-takers’ of the Turaga migration, theoretically, became the vulagi-stranger kings phenomenon hence, setting off what I call the iTaukei privileging system of ‘cross-cultural’ engagement. That was, as I presume, the beginning of what became the iTaukei chiefly and political system of Vanua leadership.

The iTaukei mata system of Vanua representation, as a system of knowing ‘put’ in place to facilitate knowledge sharing and the pursuit of what the Vanua conceptualizes as bula sautu (lit. ‘life [lived in] peace and plenty’, and meaning ‘well being’), will be argued as critical to the knowledge building exercise. Scientific research, therefore, becomes the vehicle whereby ‘silenced’ narratives and traditions embodying important indigenous knowledge may be ‘voiced’. Herein, time-proven notions and ‘theories’ are ‘forced’ to go through the rigorous process of scientifically validating ‘knowledge’, and which will prove useful to its traditional ‘owners’ and the institution of research itself. This constructionist research, as a re-kune (searching and conceiving, again) for the answers to the research questions framed to meet the ‘needs’ of this research project, have used a mix of qualitative methods contextualized with the view of decolonizing the methodology. Using phenomenology, ethnography and philosophical reflection, the participant-observation method was adapted for this research as veitalanoa, and employing the vakaLakeba, to bring the literature, data collected from the ‘field’ and metaphorical thought into a rara place of dialogue.

The narration of stories collected from the researched community, coupled with the linguistic and philosophical analysis of their conceptualizations of the vanua, vuravura,taukei, mata and sautu conceptions, as intrinsic to their worldview, have formed the core body of knowledge upon which a sound theory of representation is formulated. Empowering people via a “mata method” for researching indigenous peoples of the Pacific, particularly the iTaukei, becomes the critical finding that will inform future research projects, given how the privileging system of engagement it embodies works to encourage collaborative initiatives in society, and academia. A “mata way to sautu”, therefore, will boost iTaukei efforts directed at self-representation, and for liberation.

iv�

ABBREVIATIONSA.D : after death (of Christ)

AOG : Assemblies of God

BP : before present

Dr. : Doctor of Philosophy (as used in academia, unless otherwise stated)

et al. : and other people

FALE : Faculty of Arts, Law and Education

lit. : literally

MA : Master of Arts

OCACPS : Oceania Center of Arts, Culture and Pacific Studies

p : page

pp : pages

rep : representative(s)

St. : Saint

USP : University of the South Pacific

UU204 : ‘Pacific Worlds’(a generic second year degree course offered at the USP by the Pacific Studies department)

VKB : Vola ni Kawa Bula

VRF : Vanua Research Framework

v�

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dedication……………………………………………………………………………..i

Acknowledgement……………………………………………………………………ii

Abstract………………………………………………………………………………iii

Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………...iv

Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………….v

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION………………………………………………......1

1.1 Introductions: Bucini ni Veiwekani………………………………….1

1.1.1 Vanua-people (a Vei people) – Live in Mata, act as Mata……3

1.1.2 A Vuravura-Worldview – the Universal Worldview………….4

1.1.3 The Taukei-Vulagi Dichotomy – Ground for Veivakataukeitaki..6

1.1.4 The iTaukei Tamata ‘Self’ – the Human-person, the Human-

race………………………………………………………………7

1.2 The Context……………………………………………………….......9

1.2.1 Tubou-Lakeba – a Representation of historical ‘Times’……..9

1.2.2 Living at the Maliwa-Spaces and in the Gauna-Times….......11

1.2.3 Bula Sautu – the Biblically Correct Perspective………………13

1.2.4 Bula Sautu – a Possible pre-Christian Perspective……………14

1.2.5 Vura and Tu – iTaukei Ontological and Epistemological

Tools…………………………………...................................15

1.2.6 Metaphorical Experiences – Ways of Thinking, Knowing and

Being…………………………………………………………..16

1.3 The Research………………………………………………………….17

1.3.1 Motivating the Researcher……………………………………17

vi�

1.3.2 Positioning the Researcher……………………………………18

1.3.3 Preparing the Researcher……………………………………...20

1.3.4 The Problem – an Ocean, a Mountain……………………….21

1.3.5 My (and Others) Reaction…………………………………...22

1.3.6 Aim of the Study……………………………………………..23

1.3.7 Objectives of the Study……………………………………....24

1.3.8 Research Questions…………………………….....................24

1.3.9 Significance of the Study…………………………………….25

1.4 Chapter Summary……………………………………………………26

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................31

2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………..31

2.1.1 The decolonization project – establishing a humanistic

agenda…………………………………………………………31

2.1.2 The postcolonial attitude – redefining known bounds………34

2.1.3 Indigenous epistemologies – a way forward…………………37

2.2 Grounding the Construction…………………………………………40

2.2.1 Reconceptualizing Science, Empiricism and Rationality………40

2.2.2 Situating the Construction in ‘Place’ and ‘Time’……………44

2.2.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing – a System of

Representation………………………………………………..47

2.2.4 Indigenous Worldview – a basis for authentic ‘Decolonization of

the Mind’……………………………………………………..50

2.2.5 The ‘Mind’, Thought and Metaphors – Seeing, Knowing and

Knowledge……………………………………………………52

vii�

2.3 Developing the Framework…………………………………………54

2.4 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………....57

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………..60

3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….60

3.2 Epistemological and Methodological Positions……………………61

3.2.1 Theorizing ‘Vanua vakaTuraga’ as a research Framework…65

3.2.2 Positioning the Mata-rep within the Framework…………...68

3.2.3 The ‘Shifting Horizon’ of Mata navigators…………………70

3.3 Grounding the Methodology, the Interpretive Framework………72

3.3.1 Re-constructing Ethnography, the Ethnographer and her/his

Methods……………………………………………………....73

3.3.2 Re-conceptualizing ‘Talanoa’ within the vakaLakeba

Context………………………………………………………..76

3.3.3 Situating ‘Mana’ within the Indigenous Pacific Research

Agenda…………………………………………………………78

3.3.4 Theory and Methodology – Tools for ‘Seeing’, or Ways of

Knowing………………………………………………………80

3.4 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………….82

CHAPTER 4: TALI MAGIMAGI: MY COLLECTION OF TALANOA……….87

4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………..87

4.2 Home-Grown Talanoa……………………………………………….90

4.2.1 Part 1: Sisi – a Metaphor for the ‘apparent’ but ‘shifting’ iTovovakaTuraga……………………………………………………90

4.2.2 Part 2: Waliwali – a Metaphor for the ‘subtle’ but ‘settled’iValavala vakaVanua…………………………………………..96

viii�

4.3 Metaphorical Vanua Experiences…………………………………..99

4.3.1 Part 1: Lessons for Today from the Qoli of Yesterday………99

4.3.2 Part 2: Metaphors, Rhetoric and Legacies……………………103

4.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………107

4.5 Chapter Summary……………………………………………….…109

CHAPTER 5: ANSWERS, ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION…………………..114

5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………114

5.2 Answers and Analyses………………………………………………115

5.2.1 Vanua………………………………………………………...115

5.2.2 Vuravura……………………………………………………..117

5.2.3 Taukei………………………………………………………..119

5.2.4 Mata………………………………………………………….121

5.2.5 Sautu………………………………………………………….124

5.3 Further Discussion………………………………………………….126

5.3.1 Placing the Sau/Mana and Sautu Conceptions

Chronologically………………………………………………127

5.3.2 The Vanua vakaTuraga and its Informed Generation………130

5.3.3 ‘Survival of the Fittest’……………………………………….132

5.3.4 The Starting Point – Attitude Adjustment…………………133

5.4 Conclusion…………………………………………………………..135

5.5 Chapter Summary…………………………………………………...137

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION…………………………………………………….141

6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………141

ix�

6.2 Closing Discussion – ‘Plaiting’ the ‘stringed’ parts into a Vanua whole using the Sisi making analogy………………………………142

6.2.1 The iTaukei Way of Knowing – A Pathway to Sautu and Well

Being…………………………………………………………143

6.2.2 Coexistence in Place – Key to Living in Sautu…………….146

6.3.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing……………………..150

6.3.4 Space-sharing and its Implications………………………….153

6.3.5 Space, Time and Place………………………………………...155

6.3.6 The Mata method of Vanua people…………………………...157

6.4 Implications of this Research………………………………………160

6.4.1 Veitalanoa as an Inter-disciplinary Commitment………….162

6.5 Conclusion…………………………………………………………..164

6.5.1 Closing Remarks…………………………………………….167

6.6 Chapter Summary......................................................................168

BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………...173

GLOSSARY…………………………………………………………………………179

APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………….199

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Vuravura-world View (from the ‘standpoint’ of one tau-kei or “yoked-

with” place)…………………………………………………………….55

Figure 2: The Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge………………63

Figure 3: How real knowledge comes about for the enthusiastic learner………...64

Figure 4: Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei notion of a Vuravura-World………………………………………………………..70

Figure 5: An oversimplified family tree of the ‘privileged’ Vuanirewa clan…….91 Figure 6: Yaci versus Bunubunu (fish ‘hunt’ methods)…………..……………..100 Figure 7: The Qoli Kanace………………………………………………………102

x�

Figure 8: Vanua institution versus Turaga institution………………………..…148

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Chiefly language versus Ordinary language……………………………93

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Map of Viti (Fiji)……………………………………………………...199

Appendix B: Research Questions…………………………………………………...200

��

1��

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In the Pacific islands, indigenous peoples have shared their ocean, cultures, knowledges and skills for thousands of years and ‘others’ have indulged in the same, sometimes on invitation by natives, at other times without.

Unaisi Nabobo-Baba1

1.1 Introductions: Bucini ni Veiwekani2

Introductions are essentially ‘sowing of relatedness’. Bucini (sowing/planting/growing),

a concept rooted in agriculture, is creatively used by iTaukei3 to conceptualize the

‘origin’ of thought, talanoa4, relationships and engagements5. The introduction to this

inquiry, in essence, is a veivakataukeitaki6or “familiarization” between the researcher-

writer, himself an insider-researcher, and the wider readership. It is an open invitation

into a “knowledge space” constantly traversed by the researcher-navigator and,

represented to the reader-digester to inform her/his intelligence. Ultimately, the research

literate may use vanua7 (people/place) grounded mata (meaning: eye, face, front,

representative, source and group) conceptions highlighted in this research to guide their

theorizing and practice, knowing and learning, and thinking.

This project will explore what I call the iTaukei Mata System of Knowing using what

can be termed as Mata8 intelligence. A thorough understanding of the ideologies

supporting the iTaukei mata or envoy system (Williams, 1858, p. 27) will therefore

enlighten any veitalanoa9or dialogue/discussion regarding the iTaukei Mata system of

knowing and being, and which characterizes iTaukei consciousness. Insightful thinking

induced by the calculated and systematic deciphering of lingering iTaukei thought, or

metaphoric concepts and expressions forming the linguistic basis upon which

meaningful exchanges were, and are facilitated (even with neighbouring Tonga, Samoa

and Rotuma), will feature prominently throughout the chapters of this talanoa-

representation (largely one-way communication) of the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba10 (of

Lau-Fiji) metaphorical experience(s) and reality. The discussions herein initiated is

��

2��

envisioned to draw iTaukei and Pacific thinkers and academics into the conscious re-

visioning of the place for a vanua based theory on mata representation which can be

adapted to empower indigenous peoples of Fiji and the region, and facilitate fruitful

inter-Vanua11 relations at, and across, various levels of community engagement.

The thesis, therefore, is organized into six chapters: Introduction; Literature Review;

Methodology; My Collection of Talanoa; Answers, Analysis and Discussion; and

Conclusion. While the ‘Introduction’ situates the research in the context, the ‘Literature

Review’ section connects it to the wider world of the text as the ‘Methodology’

constructs the interpretive framework that guides it. Similarly, the ‘My Collection of

Talanoa’ chapter will attempt to narrate living talanoa collected from the center-world

of the researched as the chapter on ‘Answers, Analysis and Discussion’ seeks to

articulate vanua perception on indigenous concepts framed into the main research

questions, presented and analyzed thematically. This chapter, in essence, links the

chapter preceding it to the ‘Conclusion’ chapter following, in an attempt to establish

that there is harmony between indigenous iTaukei knowledge, and perspectives, with

Eurocentric knowledge (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 2). Furthermore, the ‘Conclusion’ will

draw all focus to the chosen epistemological position of “space-sharing” and its

consequent implications. In addition to these chapters, a table of content, a glossary of

iTaukei/Tubou-Lakeba words used, appendices for extra ‘reading’ and, a list of

bibliographic materials to reference, will be included to inform any future engagement

that will be ‘stirred-up’, in academia or within indigenous communities in general, and

amongst iTaukei Mata persons and groups everywhere.

Here am I, therefore, a Mata of Tubou-Lakeba by virtue of my mother’s Lakebaness.

My representation of Tubou-Lakeba way(s) of knowing and being is, to them, a serious

matter and, there is an understanding that I will tread carefully on what they consider

‘holy’ vanua ground lest I dash my feet on the rocks of research-ignorance. The

Lakeba-Fiji people, the official first to embrace the Christian religion, understand the

‘power’ of the text but, are still very aware of the ‘truth’ of the context. My

representation, therefore, is largely influenced by my mother’s talanoa-stories. One of

��

3��

those talanoa tell about how her adopted mother, a first cousin of her biological mother

and, who raised both of them, would say: ‘A meca ko rogoca iei, vavana toka ga iei!’

(Whatever [talanoa] you hear here [at home], keep it safely tucked here [at home]!).

This particular snippet of a talanoa is a gentle reminder of the necessary selective

process which must precede any attempt at documentation or representation, by insider-

researchers of her/his indigenous reality to the outside world – written or otherwise,

regardless of the motivation and/or our ‘knowledge-related power-based positions’ in

academia, or society. This is particularly true for the qualitative study of a people and

their ‘shifting’ realities, unprincipled reporting being a cause of greater uncertainty.

As an introduction, my talanoa-representation now begins, and with every additional

page and chapter, philosophical insights will unfold culminating at the presentation of a

researched solution to a perceived problem, the mechanics of which will be explicated

further in the paragraphs and chapters to follow. To begin my tala-no-a, which is

essentially the “shifting of stories to settle truths”, I will attempt to give my current

philosophical position on what I perceive to be how iTaukei conceptualize ‘place’,

‘space’, and ‘time’, and the ‘self’, the ‘other’ and ‘representation’.

1.1.1 Vanua-people (a Vei people) – Live in Mata, act as Mata

The iTaukei common word for any habitable ‘area’, place or space is vanua – habitable

by ‘life-forms’, physical or otherwise, and not necessarily ‘living’ in the western

science sense. In traditional ceremonies, vanua also represents the people, spread across

‘times’ and ‘spaces’, and spiritually tied to land or largely dry ‘places’. The question is:

‘What is the “origin” of the iTaukei vanua conception?’ or else, ‘How was the vanua

concept, and its ‘meaningful’ Polynesian variants, bucini (generated) by the Vu

(ancestors-originators) of Oceanians12?’ In answering these questions, iTaukei ways of

knowing, thinking and being will be interrogated, analyzed and articulated in an attempt

to represent the very ‘soul’ of a people found to be one with place (the vanua), and as

informed by a situated understanding of the iTaukei worldview.

��

4��

Two such phenomena, descriptive of the vanua basis of iTaukei thought and action, are

vei and mata – commonly found in linguistic expressions and phrases, and normally as

prefixes of both nouns and verbs. While vei largely reflects collectivism and two-way

interactions, mata signifies place-representation within, and by members of, localized

socio-cultural groupings. It might be worth noting from the outset that the subtlety of

using mata and vei concepts is something only native (or ‘native-ized’)13 speakers of the

iTaukei language (and dialects) can appreciate and employ effectively, and correctly. As

a vei people, therefore, the iTaukei may be distinguished as a people situated in their

mata-groups, and who are mata-representatives of their groups. This observation, in

essence, has become a lingering reality of the social life of iTaukei in general.

The vanua, conceptualized by Ravuvu (1988) as “an extension of the concept of the

individual self…[and] the group self” (p. 6), is the cultured conceptual framework

constructed by this vei people, and which reflects their worldview and their conceptions

of who and what they are in that world. Vanua, therefore, is the philosophical basis

upon which every iTaukei engaging with vanua language and culture, even

conceptually, is rooted and socialized.

1.1.2 A Vuravura-WorldView – the Universal Worldview

Vuravura is understood today as the iTaukei equivalent of ‘world(s)’ – itself an

abstraction. As such, the vuravura concept is conceived as universalistic, agreeing in

principle to the unifying conceptions of vei and mata. Rooted in the vura concept,

meaning ‘to emerge’ or ‘have emerged’ (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 38), it could be said

then that the vuravura-world is seen by iTaukei as a source of all things emerging, or

which have emerged, hence, implying origin and proving existence – the vuravura as

the ‘all-generative Oceanic space’. Breaking vura further into vu (origin/source) and ra

(under/beneath), this ideally sufficient source of all things that exist is understandably

located ‘down-under’, referring to the ancestral vanua-place where one is grounded and,

to which s/he is spiritually connected. This is not a ‘springing from nothing’ naïve

notion and, as it will be argued later, evidently stems from the very practical, empirical

and universal agriculture knowledge that ‘what one reaps is what one sows’. Herein, the

��

5��

primordial relationship between humans, the social ‘constructionists’, and Mother-

Earth, the ‘eternal’ source-sustainer, is embodied and reflected.

Unlike vuravura (world), vanua (peopled-place/placed-people) and mata (origin/source,

representative/front or eye/face) merely point to a ‘locality’. Vuravura, from a

“standpoint theory” (as cited in Gegeo, 2006, p. 8), seem to suggest a centering in the

‘self’ which extends outwards to “lagi [the heavens] place where the gods lived [and]

bulu the underworld or spirit world” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 37) of the iTaukei

spirituality. Though distinct and spiritualized, capitalized Bulu and Lagi will be

represented here, like the capitalized Vanua (being named and claimed ‘spaces’) as real

vuravura-source places of the spirits (‘speaking’ ancestors) and strangers (conquering

man-gods), respectively, in the iTaukei consciousness and experience. Essentially, any

vanua (habitable place) is both vuravura (source) and bulubulu (burial or, planting [of

‘seed’] ground) – vanua ‘seeds’ being their dead weka (relatives) and itei (planting

materials). The vanua as bulubulu and vuravura is particularly significant for this

inquiry given how it may help explain the Tubou-Lakeba conceptualization of the burial

of their Sau14 (king) as a tei (planting), and not a bulu (burying/concealing), the term

used for the burial of the tauVanua (or the lewe-niVanua)15.

The iTaukei vuravura-world(s), therefore, constitute Vanua (named/claimed places)

vakaTuraga16 (of the chiefly) – vanua (lands/places) occupied by a vanua-people who

hold the “chiefly manner” in high esteem. While the question of how the iTaukei

conceptualize the vakaTuraga lingers on at the horizon, the notion of Vanua

vakaTuraga (chiefly lands/places/peoples) will be argued as foundational to the search

for everything pertaining to vanua knowledge or ‘truths’. The Vanua vakaTuraga or

‘peopled-places privileging placed-peoples’ conception, therefore, becomes the

conceptual framework upon which philosophical questions, regarding iTaukei thought,

may be asked and answered. This is the basis upon which this research is framed.

The vanua concept, a polysemy, which iTaukei use with great ease and flexibility to

refer to the exact site of any kind of engagement, whether it be in the natural, social or

��

6��

spiritual realm and, which comprises everything cultural, will be used in this

representation, therefore, with the same creativity and enthusiasm.

1.1.3 The Taukei-Vulagi Dichotomy – Ground for Veivakataukeitaki

Two related conceptions, critical to this study, are the taukei (insider/local) and the

vulagi (outsider/visitor) concepts. While the former may be conceptualized as tau-kei,

roughly translated ‘yoked with’ (land/place), the latter is a concept evidently derived

from vu-Lagi, meaning ‘originating from Lagi-heavens, the abode of the gods’. Is it a

wonder then how vulagi people, the visiting strangers or ‘man-gods’ of old Fiji – the

daring wanderers and, possibly, lovers of the sea-space (not drifters) from the canoeing

era – were readily absorbed into the situated culture of enthusiastic taukei (native)

cultivators ‘filling’ a habitable-place (vanua) and, made chiefs over the agriculture-

based existence of their hosts? Does this taukei-vulagi (host-guest) relationship,

embedded in the vuravura worldview, not hold the key to understanding such a

“stranger-king” phenomenon, as highlighted by Scarr (2008: 21), and which is possibly

tied to the continuous knowledge-sharing process always preceded by active veiwekani

(relationship) building engagements, argued here to be a definitive feature of the

iTaukei Mata system of knowing?

The conceptualization of a vuravura-world, double-sourcing from the vanua base of the

taukei (insiders) and the lagi place (or vanua tani [‘other place’]) of vulagi (outsiders),

illustrates “the dichotomous system of alternatively opposing and complementary

cultural elements [and] thoughts” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. 265) which embody their

worldview, and characterize the iTaukei understanding of “knowledge-sharing” via

veivakataukeitaki (familiarization). To grasp this most basic knowledge, that of the

taukei-vulagi (insider-outsider) dichotomy (possibly a continuum), and which is rooted

in the iTaukei vuravura-worldview, is significant therefore for a deeper and more

meaningful engagement (potentially philosophical in nature) with the iTaukei, their

‘theories’ of knowledge, and ‘methods’ of knowing and learning.

��

7��

1.1.4 The iTaukei Tamata ‘Self’ – the Human-person, the Human-race

According to Adi Fane Sivoki, my mother:

“To refer to someone/a people (local[s] or stranger[s]) as tamata is to be disrespectful. A grown woman is not to be addressed yalewa (just female-woman) but, marama (lady-like woman). Similarly, a grown man is never to be referred to as tagane (just male-man) but, turaga (chief-like man).”

Value-laden ideas, such as these, formed the basis of my learning in the formative years

of my socialization. These were ‘experiences’ I had little control over and, their impact

on my life is only understood clearly today, after much reflection.

Tamata refers to both the individual human person and the human family as a whole.

Mata-tamata, which has been taken to mean ‘ethnicity’, is literally ‘group(s) of

individuals’ or ‘group(s) of communities’. Tamata, as ‘vu-originator’ of the vanua

concept, therefore, subsequently developed the mata (envoy) system over generations –

a system of Vanua representation from which the iTaukei notions of mata-ni (eyes/face

of/for) and mata-ki (representatives to) are derived.

When addressing one as a marama (lady-like woman) or turaga (chief-like man),

therefore, one is making the assumption that s/he comes from a Vanua vakaTuraga

(chiefly place/people) and, as such, is a mata-rep17 of her/his vanua – not just a

disconnected vanualess drifter.

The implication of that little segment from one of those many talanoa I shared with my

mother is that we are all connected beings, “part[s] of an organic unity” (Thaman, 2003,

p. 1) – belonging to some vanua-place or matanitu-state and, the greater vuravura-

world.

This means also that the iTaukei ‘accept’, therefore, that the community person who

knows her/his place in the vanua, as its mata-rep, is of more use to it then a

disconnected tamata individualist un-yoked with (or vulagi to) that place. The

��

8��

recognition that a community person deserves mata-rep status, the higher and privileged

position, is thus demonstrated in the way s/he is to be addressed as marama-lady or

turaga-sir.

In traditional ceremonies, the ‘reflector’ of iTaukei worldview (Ravuvu, 1987), the

spokespersons of the vanua chiefs involved always begin their speechmaking by first

acknowledging the Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place and its people) then, the Gone

Marama/Turaga (lit. ‘Young [titled] Woman/Man]’, the chiefly office). This situated

‘truth’ places chiefs as ‘loveable’ embodiments of the ancient vanua. Projecting the

chief as a Gone (‘young’/’child’) to be vakamenemenei (pampered) by the older, the

Vanua, is therefore a critical aspect of “the vakaTuraga concept (the chiefly manner)

and of the Fijian ethos” highlighted by Ravuvu (1987, p. 320).

In essence, the vanua (placed-people/peopled-place) is first acknowledged then, its

primary mata-rep or the high chief who embodies the mana/sau of the vanua, and by

her/his vanua title – never her/his personal or family name.

I like to think that tamata (the person/a people) should be read ta-mata (meaning [in

Lakeba-Lau] ‘not a mata-rep’). The implication thus is that iTaukei persons become ta-

mata when they are not engaging as mata-reps hence, are deemed to be un-placed. I

perceive that a ta-mata, when s/he is not a mata-rep, has indeed become the

represented. What transpires is the implicit iTaukei ‘theory’ of self upon which Vanua

representation is embedded.

Herein lies a string of iTaukei ‘truths’ upon which this whole thesis is constructed and

hangs: every tamata-individual is placed in a mata-group and is a mata-rep of her/his

tamata-people. In perceiving herself/himself as mata, such a person is acknowledging

one-ness with (taukeiness to) place. As a mere tamata (or non-mata), therefore, s/he

could be identified as vulagi to (unfamiliar with) place hence, disqualified from

speaking for oneself and one’s Vanua.

��

9��

Mata-reps and their equally significant ‘other’ – tamata, the represented – as key

players within the Vanua framework and its mata (envoy) system of representation,

therefore, exist in “the actualities of the [iTaukei] people’s past and present, and the

potentialities of their future” (Ravuvu, 1988, p. 6).

1.2 The Context 1.2.1 Tubou-Lakeba – a Representation of historical ‘Times’

Lakeba, the chiefly island of Lau, or the windward islands of the Fiji group, is located at

160 miles to the east of the capital Suva. According to Reid (1990), Captain Cook listed

Lakeba in his 1777 list of islands as “Tubou [or] Kotooboo” (p. 5), citing Tongan

informants, a name which is believed to have started from the hill fort on Kedekede.

The Tubou of today, the principal village re-located twice from Kedekede to its coastal

location, is the heart of Lau and is home to three tui-kings’: the chief-administrator Tui

Nayau (with Sau-Dominion) and the decorated but culturally significant Tui Tubou and

Tui Lakeba.

The island, according to oral traditions, was first settled by a migrant and an ‘open and

flexible’ community from the north west of Lakeba, possibly from Vanua Levu via

Taveuni and, believed to have been led by a Tui Lakeba (a deified title by 183518).

Subsequent migrations, from Kabara in southern Lau and, of the Levuka people from

Tailevu to the west, and later, the Vuanirewa from neighbouring Nayau, all had a taste

of overall Sauship (leadership) of the Vanua ko Lau based on Lakeba. It was Qilaiso,

one of the leading Kabara brothers therefore, appointed by the old Vanua ko Lakeba as

its first chief-administrator, who became the originator of the first Lakeba Sau dynasty.

The Ceiekena (lit. ‘Whose [body is it] to eat?’) name of his tribe, in essence, suggests a

turning-away of pre-Christianity Tubou-Lakeba society from expressions of antisautu

or disorder such as cannibalism.

Though the Tui Lakeba of ancient Tubou-Lakeba and their contemporaries, the Tui

Tubou, never ascended the heights of localized leadership, their ‘presence’ was felt

nonetheless in Tonga beginning with the pre-Christian “marriage of the Tu’i Tonga

��

10��

Fefine (Female Tu’iTonga) Sinaitakala i Langileka to [Tabu of Waciwaci, Lakeba] who

became Tapu’osi, the Tu’iLakepa of Vasivasi [in Tonga]” (Reid,1990, pp. 5-6). On a

much later date, a similar exchange led to the adoption of the Tubou-name, transcribed

to Tupou in Tonga and, which “[became] a personal and a generic name [for the] Tu’i

Kanokupolu” (Reid, 1990, pp. 7-8). The significance of these Fiji-Tonga connections

(and others) is there to be ‘remembered’ always in their ‘blood’ or matanikupeti19, how

they continually embody vei principles20 of relatedness and, the persistence of their

mata sense21 of existence. Therein lies chronologically placed exchanges between

eastern Fiji and Tonga, and which would have revived extensive cultural borrowing

between the two places and their peoples, particularly in the events leading up to Fiji’s

‘surrender’ to British rule in 1874, and for generations to follow.

Just as Tonga borrowed and adapted the Lakeba and Tubou names (and the Vasu22

concept, which became Fahu in Tonga), most importantly, Fiji brought home the

Tongan Hau and, possibly, made it Sau (Reid, 1990). An understanding of Sau,

therefore, will be argued here as critical to a better knowledge (and theory) of what

constitutes the “sautu [notion meaning] stability, hence peace and plenty” (Reid, 1990,

p. 35).

From this point of my talanoa onwards, Fiji and Tonga will be referred to as Viti and

Toga,23 respectively, in an attempt to situate the research within the broader context of a

Viti-Toga region that could be stretched to include Samoa, Rotuma and possibly

Vanuatu but, centering in on what I call the Tubou-Lakeba of Lau-Viti reality. This

conception of an open ‘sea of islands’ (Hau‘ofa, 2008), traditionally unbounded by

western imaginations and home to free-spirits, as far as we are willing to believe and

bula-live in it, is the cultural base upon which the navigating vei people of my talanoa

may be situated. Within this Oceanic geography, the iTaukei (natives) of Lau-Viti make

but a relatively small and significant part constituting a tamata-people whose talanoa-

stories need to be told and re-told: tamata in the sense that the community believes that

their Sau (installed chief-administrator) is their one and true mata-rep. It is now left to

storytellers, the walking repositories and recyclers of living talanoa and, in a significant

��

11��

way, indigenous researchers who will dare to conceptually re-conceive of a people’s

parallel and intersecting realities, to tell of their cultured and time-tested versions of

“indigenous truths” using modern tools of research.

1.2.2 Living at the Maliwa-Spaces and in the Gauna-Times

The iTaukei conceptualize the ‘space between’ as maliwa – the unnamed ‘space’

between ‘places’ and between ‘times’ – much like what Tuhiwai Smith (1999) describes

as “positions within time and space in which people and events are located” (p. 50).

Because ‘places’ and ‘times’ are peopled, the iTaukei tend to choose to move into and

occupy unpeopled maliwa-spaces (between ‘places’ and ‘times’). One such maliwa-

space which the iTaukei have created for veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), at the

mata-group level, has been categorically named rara24, the place for constructive

engagement and solevu (feasting). This is, ideally, neutral ground. It is the place for

dialogue – a place where differences are laid down. The rara is where the turaga-chief

and her/his matanivanua-herald, bete-priests and bati-warriors, and mataisau-carpenters

and gonedau-fishers, may temporarily relinquish their ‘power’, or sau/mana, to the

Tuirara (king of Rara [the place at the maliwa-space]). At the rara the sautu-abundance

of the vanua is often celebrated and vanua wealth-sharing takes on renewed communal

meaning. Such maliwa-spaces are places where longstanding veiwekani (relationships)

are engendered and revisited.

The iTaukei conceptualization of ‘time’ as ‘life’ or, the cyclical, seasonal and

generational gauna (life/time), depicts an understanding of life as the ‘living/existing in

purpose’ time of a tamata (person/people), vanua (place/space), ‘a thing’ or an event.

Conceiving ‘time’ as such represents an ‘entity’ as something which ‘ages’ hence, is

conceived and birthed in ‘place’, grows in ‘space’ and may die in ‘time’. There is,

therefore, the gauna (life/time) of individual tamata or a mata-tamata (group of

tamata), a single Vanua or vei-Vanua (related Vanua), simultaneously aging and

coexisting in ‘space’ and ‘time’ within a timeless ‘all-generative Oceanic space’. Such a

conceptualization of time inseparable from life reveals how connected to nature and

��

12��

society the human mind was and still is. With the present day tamata-individual at the

center of her/his current vuravura-world (or reality), gauna-time of a life once lived is

traced back to as gauna makawa (ancient time) while gauna-time of an existing life, or

a life yet to be fully realized, is seen as gauna vou (‘yet to mature’ time). The use of the

vou concept, another agriculture-related terminology, and which refers to un-mature

fruits which will mature and ripe in their gauna (lives/times), again reflects the notion

of ecological time. Essentially, the ever-maturing ‘past’ is never too old, archaic and

dispensable for in it exist the roots, trunk and branches of a living tree that bear and

support the ‘present’ and the ‘future’ in the vou (yet to mature) lives/times. Such a view

of time, therefore, can only be associated with something that is rooted, alive and

bearing – ideally timeless and deeply mysterious.

It is in light of such spiritually charged thinking that the iTaukei notion of yalomatua

(the wise, or yalo [spirit]-matua [old/wise/mature]) may have to be redefined and

appreciated. A matua (mature) spirit, therefore, found between the vou (still too young)

and dreu (far too old) stages is the desired state of being – reflecting ‘mid-life’ or ‘mid-

time’ stability and usability. Such is the matua state of being that the current vanua

reality and all its mata-reps exist in, ideally placed in a timeless ‘all-generative Oceanic

space’ and, existing for sautu-peace in the maliwa-spaces between vanua-places and

gauna-times.

In further conceptualizing a gauna (life/time) as a matanisiga (lit. eye/face-of-sun),

iTaukei thought seem to suggest that, like the sun, a bula-life (or, gauna-time) will rise,

set and rise again in their kawa (generations) to follow. This may explain why iTaukei

of old would explain any resemblance between a new born and a dead ancestor as the

return to life of the latter, the vura (emergence from down-under) of a bula-life bulu/tei

(buried/planted) on fertile vanua soil (ancestral land)25 – the rising again of a sun. By

extension, the same matanisiga conception could be used to make meaning of the

changing reality of the vuravura-world (in its natural, human and spiritual dimensions)

of the iTaukei person and people. Indigenous notions of space and time are critically

important, therefore, in how they intelligibly inform our understanding of what the

��

13��

iTaukei of Lau-Viti (and of the Viti group of islands) make of the idea of bula

veimaliwai (mutually living in the maliwa-spaces) as a prerequisite to bula sautu (the

‘all-good life’).

1.2.3 Bula Sautu – the Biblically Correct Perspective

According to the ninth chapter of the Bible’s Old Testament’s book of Isaiah (Aisea),

the sixth verse:

For unto us a child is born, Unto us a son is given: …The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Ni sa sucu mai e dua na gone me noda, Sa soli mai vei keda e dua na gone tagane:…Na Tama ni gauna tawa mudu, na Tui ni Sautu.

Defining sautu as peace using the text without reading it in context: that is, in the ‘true’

iTaukei understanding of the epistemology of sautu, can be problematic. At face value,

sautu is peace, the absence of conflict, insecurity and war. Beneath that, sautu can be

anything the iTaukei tamata-person makes it out to be, particularly when the word is

morphologically analyzable proving its rootedness in the iTaukei language and culture.

Biblical texts, if not inspiring, are revealing. They reflect iTaukei thought for in

transcribing the English versions using iTaukei coded language, their vuravura

worldview gets packaged into a biblical talanoa-story. These biblical iVola

(prints/patterns, as in kupeti) carry ‘living’ Europeanized Jewish narratives re-told using

iTaukei ‘truths’. Decoding their multiple-meanings, therefore, require reflection and

criticality.

If the iTaukei notion of sautu, or well being, is truly the “epistemological…[and]

ultimate goal of life” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 13), then the pursuit of the ‘all good life’

must be humanity’s preoccupation. Is it not believable then that any culture valuing life

would ultimately seek the attainment of their version of sautu?

��

14��

Essentially, what transpires is the construction of an understanding of sautu (peace) that

is compatible with the epistemology of bula (life) itself: the one supporting and

sustaining the other.

1.2.4 Bula Sautu – a Possible pre-Christian Perspective

“Bula (Life!)…[as an iTaukei greeting], is a reminder and an affirmation, a

blessing…the reason of all our endeavours and struggles…[the] quality life, Sautu”

(Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 13). Bula in the agricultural sense speaks of growth, in the

social sphere bula is being lively and, at the intimate level, bula is ‘sexual warmth’ or,

wanting and needing one’s partner. While strong winds are said to be bula, a sense of

being ‘well fed’ and, even freedom from oppression are also expressions of bula-life.

Bula, as conceptualized here, may indeed be appreciated by the iTaukei (insiders), or

vulagi (outsiders) made taukei (locally familiar) to the native (‘mature’ and ancient)

ways of knowing and being of the iTaukei (and possibly other indigenous peoples), the

placed-people of Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places/peoples).

Sautu, like bula, is another interesting loaded concept. ‘Re-reading’ sautu as sau-tu

gives the idea of a ‘mana-which exists’ or, a ‘power to effect-which is real’. A Tui or

king known to possess sau/mana is one whose sau-dominion over “nature, mind and

society, [tu/standing] in eternal relations of exchange [to each other]” (M�hina, 2010, p.

169) has been proven. The presence of the tangible expression(s) of sau, or sautu (peace

and prosperity) itself, proves that the sau/mana belonging to the Vanua vakaTuraga

(chiefly place/people), and as embodied by their Sau-ni-Vanua (the installed

administrator-chief), exists for real – especially to them that ‘believe’ the situated

‘truth’.

At this point, for an insider-researcher vasu of (linked maternally to) Tubou-Lakeba, I

wonder: ‘What really constitutes that sau?’ and, ‘What are its expressions in today’s

vuravura-world?’

��

15��

1.2.5 Vura and Tu – iTaukei Ontological and Epistemological Tools

Vura (emerge) and Tu (exist) are ways of describing and explaining iTaukei social

reality – “[a] world [that] is intangible and internal to their cognition” (Sanga, 2004, p.

44). In a vuravura-world, all things which exist (tu) may be explained as having

emerged (vura) from a vuravura-source and, which is a possible universal

understanding of the world (in all its dimensions) as a source. While these sources may

be external to the observer, they are often always conceptualized and defined in relation

to the observer’s embodiment and her/his group experience. In the iTaukei world, there

exists mata-sources of knowing and knowledge (more than just books, libraries,

universities and archives), as it will be argued later, which have been made alive using

mata (eye/face) conceptions, and in mata persons, mata-groups and mata places and

institutions.

An explanation of a phenomenon, therefore, in the form of knowledge or a theory,

employing vura and tu as ontological tools, will agree with the iTaukei vuravura

worldview proving it ‘believable’. This humanistic constructionist approach to the

understanding of Bula Sautu, therefore, while challenging positivism, “[will] include

discussion[s] of the metaphysical foundations that support epistemology” (Cobern,

1993, p. 6). This project, in essence, will explore the sautu (abundance) of iTaukei

“[mata] metaphors that have become part of [our] practices and way of life” (Sanga,

2004, p. 44) – the iTaukei ivalavala-ways of seeing, thinking, knowing, learning and

being.

Mata metaphors, therefore, conceptual or derived, novel or idiomatic, vura (emerged)

and now tu (exist), for real, to give us philosophical insight into iTaukei thought,

illuminate and inform the re-reading and re-writing of our narratives and, encourage

greater collaboration between the modern and tradition. Mata metaphors, essentially,

are “tools [to be used] to explain…[our] philosophy of indigenous knowledge [and] its

theorizing” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 119).

��

16��

1.2.6 Metaphorical Experiences – Ways of Thinking, Knowing and Being

Tubou-Lakeba people, like all iTaukei and indigenous peoples, are ‘guided’ by their

ivalavala ni bula vakaVanua or, customary vanua ways of ‘doing life’ that are

culturally specific and appropriate to the placed-people. While Tubou-Lakeba ivalavala

ni bula vakaVanua, expressed here as metaphorical experiences, are unique to their

cultural landscape, the overall ‘feel’ should have a ‘regionalizing’ effect given

humanity’s common embodiment, the Pacific peoples’ shared ancestry and, their

spiritual connection to the ocean (wai) and land (vanua).

To embrace the totality of the Tubou-Lakeba experience, individual and group ways of

seeing, thinking, knowing, learning and being will be investigated. This research, in

essence, will take one on a time-travel to and from maliwa-spaces of generational

moments once lived but, now preserved in collections of Tubou-Lakeba living talanoa

including tukuni-legends (lit. ‘as is told’) of origins, tuva kawa (genealogy), pesi

(traditional songs), meke (dances) and, even soisoi (gossip). The ‘reading’ and

‘remembering’ of Tubou-Lakeba talanoa and thought will extend further to the ‘faithful

observers of traditions of the times’, elements of which will be briefly discussed like the

yalofi (sitting/drinking order in yaqona26 ceremonies), the veibuli (chiefly installation)

and, the tei-niTuraga (chiefly burial). These ‘presumed silent’ observers encompass

even the vala (making) of their yaba (mats), sisi (garlands) and waliwali (body oil) and;

the planting of their iteitei (plantation), fishing of their yalava (lagoons) and,

maintenance of their koro (village).

Even if one does not get to experience these activities herself/himself, the iTaukei are

excellent story-tellers and, the researcher, as an iTaukei himself, is one socialized in the

cultural ivalavala-ways of ‘reading’, telling and relating to talanoa hence, projecting

talanoa as the epistemological basis upon which every other knowledge is embedded,

particularly in predominantly oral cultures. The secret is to muria (follow) the leading

of the wa-ni-veiwekani (lit. ‘strings’ of relatedness) and know the vanua-place one

occupies.

��

17��

The veiwekani and/or matanikupeji (relatedness, the latter implying blood-ties only) as

basis for veikilai (two-way knowing) through veivakataukeitaki (familiarization),

therefore, precedes what may be called a ‘progressive knowledge-building discourse’

and, which Bereiter (1994) suggested was “not about objectivity, but about

progressiveness” (as cited in Lee, 2010, p. 142). Herein is adopted a post-colonial

argument and one which is hoped to source and support the pursuit of a sustainable bula

sautu (the ‘all good life’).

1.3 The Research 1.3.1 Motivating the Researcher

This research topic emerged as a reaction to the assertion that indigenous peoples do not

theorize their knowledge (Gegeo, 2006) and, that there exists no such thing as the

‘Science of Pacific Island Peoples’ (Biggs, 1994, p. 1). Even if active academic

theorizing and theory testing, and philosophizing, were activities primarily reserved for

the West, no one can deny that indigenous peoples ‘conceive’ of their knowledge in

ways much like their ‘civilized’ counterparts, employing indigenous versions of what

has come to be known as Eurocentric rationalism and empiricism. Experience and

‘figuring out’ things are still critical to our human understanding, the two methods of

knowing (and inquiry) overlapping hence, inevitably drawing from and informing each

other. If the counter-argument remains that ‘truth is no truth unless scientifically proven

and written’, then timeless indigenous ivalavala (ways/customs) still count valid

because they have been proven over time to work and are ‘written’ in the ‘ancient arts’,

including the artistic use of indigenous languages. Researching ‘colonized’ peoples,

therefore, requires the expertise of placed indigenous-researchers schooled in western

education and, thoroughly socialized in their vanua (place/people) mata (source) places

of knowledge.

In the Tubou-Lakeba context, the iTaukei of this Vanua vakaTuraga often quip: ‘Ia me

vala!’ or, [(Well) let it be done!] and, at other times, ‘A meca iei a fika ga!’ [This thing

(can be solved if I/we) just ‘figure it out’!]. Evidently, the former is performance-based

��

18��

while the latter is a thinking method. In real-life experiences, therefore, whether

individual or collective, doing and thinking operate simultaneously. While some degree

of borrowing is evident in the Tubou-Lakeba fika concept (or vika in other dialects), as

it relates to mathematics (resonating the West’s idea of figures/numbers), two other

Lakeba-Lau ‘original’ conceptions associated with fika: faito (a solution) and faiwa (a

strategy), exist to prove that the iTaukei are not just passive practitioners of knowledge.

They have their time proven theories. These theories of knowledge are critical to their

survival hence, to their bula sautu, a bula-life lived in sautu-abundance.

1.3.2 Positioning the Researcher

Re-conceptualizing research in indigenous iTaukei epistemology, or the social sciences

in general, as essentially the ‘re-conceiving of indigenous concepts which need to be re-

found’, is critical for this study. This journey is largely a ‘re-searching’ or ‘searching

again’ within and around knowledge spaces and places where epistemologies and

epistemes were ‘conceived’ and ‘found’ by a people, and which has been preserved in

their cultural expressions and performances, bula-life taught ‘methods’ of knowing and

learning for bula-survival. To ground it in the iTaukei culture, I will relate the ‘search’

idea to our kune (or kunekune) concept which speaks of ‘having been found’ and ‘being

pregnant of/with’ hence, will use the idea of re-kune, time and again, when talking of

research.

This journey, in essence, places the re-searcher at the intersection of the gauna makawa

(lit. ‘time [of] old’) and the gauna vou (lit. ‘time [of] new’) – the gauna oqo (lit. ‘time

[of] here’) of the ‘moving observer-subject’ (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999) who sometimes

wills to remain immobile. Suggesting that a researcher is on a ‘re-searching’ (re-kune)

journey throughout her/his life-time, and based where s/he is placed, therefore, gives the

picture of a master navigator sandwiched at the maliwa-space between gauna/vanua

makawa (ancient times/places [and events]) and gauna/vanua vou (newer times/places

[and events]). Such a navigator, in essence, is still in control of her/his movements and,

which sometimes take her/him back to ‘spaces’, ‘places’ and ‘times’ once travelled

and/or known. A navigator ‘moving in her/his life-time’(the iTaukei view) is not to be

��

19��

confused with one ‘moving with time’ (the Eurocentric view) therefore, conceptualizing

a Mata navigator’s life-time in terms of her/his movements, pauses and ‘silences’

through space, from place to place and, from time to time (essentially, event to event).

Just as the navigator is often thought to be the ‘eye (mata) of her/his canoe’, re-

searchers will be conceptualized in this research project as Mata-navigators of their

philosophical vanua-position(s) and, within the communities they have been placed.

This conception of vanua (places and positions) as metaphorical canoes suggests,

therefore, that peopled-places actually move and carry placed-peoples. ‘Place’ as

‘peopled-place’, herein, is conceptualized to be mobile hence, not confined to the

geographical reality upon which the placed-people trace back their roots. This sense of

place may explain, in part, why most Pacific peoples who have moved away from their

‘mother-lands’ have continued, relentlessly, to embrace elements of their cultures or, at

least appreciate them from a safe distance.

For the indigenous re-searcher, this canoe metaphor may be applied to her/his research

place in the community of researchers positioned in, or peopling, academia. This

analogy basically places the researcher (indigenous or, otherwise) in a ‘knowledge

space’ open for exploration but, given the humanistic nature of social science

researches, knowledge is perceived to be kune-i (found) or kunekune-taki (conceived)

by a placed vanua-people and, appropriately preserved within their ‘situated’

repositories. Any Pacific researcher in this context, perceived to be an ‘articulate’ and

knowledgeable Mata (eye-face, source-representative) of her/his vanua (place/position)

knowledge, is believed to be carrying a wealth of understanding (itself an expression of

sautu-abundance) acquired from her/his rich experience of traversing the depth and

breadth of this all-generative Oceanic ‘knowledge space’. This position, therefore, gives

the view of an unlimited ‘body’ of Pacific thought: Oceanic in origin, attitude and

purpose.

In this inquiry, the Tubou-Lakeba of Lau-Viti place the researcher is exploring for his

MA thesis project presents a minute fraction of this huge space of local (and localized)

knowledge that may still be relevant to our modern-day existence. To do justice,

��

20��

therefore, to the ‘founders’ of these ‘ancient truths’ (at least older than the researcher’s

present day reality, remembering and envisioning), it must be acknowledged that much

of what will be discovered and articulated here belongs to the iTaukei and, particularly,

the people of Tubou-Lakeba in Lau.

1.3.3 Preparing the Researcher

A Mata navigator is an expert. S/he understands currents and counter-currents. S/he

reads nature and society’s enduring signs and, responds intelligently to winds of change.

A Mata navigator carries with her/him ancient knowledge and, applies them

accordingly to present ‘developments’ in her/his vanua-place and vuravura-world. The

Mata navigator, in essence, occupies a space reserved for the yalomatua (wise/mature

spirit[s]) and the vuku (skillful knower[s]) who do not rely solely on their own kila ka

(training/learning/schooling) but, also on others’ wisdom and understanding. This

adopted position is one which propels the Mata navigator into the relatively or,

seemingly, unknown. It is the attitude of one eager to know/learn because s/he

understands that kila-knowledge is sau-power anyone keen on representing and

sourcing her/his vanua (place/people), for the sake of sautu (peace), must possess – sau-

power to raise living standards in the true spirit of tiko veisaututaki (living together for

the sautu [peace/prosperity] of all).

Mata wisdom and understanding, therefore, are attributes a researcher-navigator must

seek to own or emulate. It is in acquiring these qualities that a Mata navigator is better

equipped to implement culturally appropriate research methodologies, like Nabobo-

Baba’s Vanua Research Framework (VRF), in the ‘re-searching’ of what she found to

be four important categories of knowledge “…vanua, lotu or spirituality, [ivalavala

vakaVanua] or custom, and veiwekani or kinship” (2006, pp. 135-137). Otherwise, the

VRF may be adapted to meet the specific needs of one’s research. This research project

will therefore employ the Mata approach to research and inquiry, believed to be

embedded within the VRF and, which is consistent with humanistic approaches

designed to address the needs of social science researchers re-searching indigenous

knowledge and, theories of knowledge.

��

21��

1.3.4 The Problem – an Ocean, a Mountain

While oceans are there to be crossed, mountains exist for climbing. ‘Living below the

poverty-line’, a possible indicator of the absence of sautu or a sau/mana [knowledge]

based peace and prosperity, while undesirable, seems like an inevitable and elusive by-

product of unsustainable economic development. Living in lack when opportunities and

provisions abound is an unbelievable vanua-place to be in. Seeing able-bodied iTaukei

men and women live unfulfilled lives and, without the means or the will to persevere

and survive in our modern existence is a heart-breaking reality. How can I, as an

educator and a member of civil society, convincingly push the belief that the idealized

‘All Good Life’ is indeed available to all? Essentially I ask: ‘Is sautu an attainable

reality or, is it just a good idea?’ And if it is real, I then wonder: ‘Is the notion, given its

Vanua underpinnings, possibly cross-cultural in nature?’

A Mata navigator’s epistemological journey is therefore, one of focus, drive,

determination and resilience. Re-thinking the poverty issue in twenty-first century

Pacific societies as a navigable ocean, or a conquerable mountain, frees one from the

crippling grip of the enduring ‘poverty mentality’ prevalent in aid-dependent

communities. The iTaukei conceptualization of bula sautu as a sustainable existence

richly endowed and self-sufficient could very well be equated to what I call “self-

determination less donor dependence”. This view offers an alternative that is ‘planting-

based’, theoretically – ‘cultivating’ the land and its people and, sustainably harvesting

vanua resources in a manner based on respect for nature, humanity and, one’s own

intelligence. This seemingly insurmountable problem of ‘finding’ bula (fruitful life) and

sautu (peaceful abundance) is indeed an epistemological challenge for to thrive in a

knowledge-based existence is to be able to think, know, learn, articulate and represent

one’s reality freely and unrestrained. This free-flow of knowledge (kila) and

information (tukutuku) between two parties (at least) is really what transpires when a

taukei (local) meets a vulagi (stranger) or, in essence, when two (or more)

individuals/groups vulagi (unfamiliar) to each other’s ivalavala-ways of thinking,

knowing and being meet at junctions of their epistemological journeys.

��

22��

Could the problem be that we have not been effectively decolonized, in our minds, or

gained “epistemic independence” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 4), let alone true economic

independence? Should we continue to believe that the benefits of any exchange at the

intersection could only be one-way, if the kai-palagi (presumably English speaking

European, a foreigner), or a palagi (foreign) concept is at the opposite end of the

exchange? Would this research project, then, mark the beginning of an epistemic

commitment devoted to economic liberation given the inevitable commercializing of

even indigenous thought and knowledge? Is sautu now more than just having good

health and wealth but, also freedom from all kinds of oppression – even if that

oppression is perceived to be perpetuated from within the vanua?

The search for an iTaukei solution to a ‘situated’ problem of a conceptual nature, rooted

in an epistemic tradition, calls for an apolitical philosophical approach aimed at positive

conceptual change and the search for a ‘real’ context-specific sautu.

1.3.5 My (and Others) Reaction

I believe in the human potential. I know that intelligent beings can only be moved by

intelligent answers. I propose that knowing one’s socialized way of learning and

adapting to change is liberating and empowering. I know that sautu is as much a state of

life as it is a state of knowing and being, and possibly a state of mind. I strongly believe

in the biblical notions that “as [a man] thinketh in his heart, so is he” and, “where there

is no vision, the people perish”.

If iTaukei can ‘see’ the sense of it all, they will then seek to ‘know’, (re)name, (re)claim

and be liberated. For iTaukei, true liberation may have to begin with how the individual

perceives herself/himself in relation to her/his Vanua and vanua epistemologies and

knowledge. To know the ‘self’ (tamata-person/people) and one’s position in Vanua

representation (alternatively as mata-rep, or ta-mata the represented), and how group

thinking (experience and knowing) impacts on individual thinking (experience and

knowing), and vice-versa, the iTaukei (beginning with the insider-researcher) must

critically ‘re-visit’ their roots, the Vanua makawa, by examining the ivalavala-ways of

��

23��

their budding branches, the Vanua vou. This is then the core of my argument: that the

iTaukei may ‘know’ their indigenous ways of knowing, which I have ambitiously

grounded in the conception of a Mata System of Knowing, and how these

‘epistemologies’ may have emerged (vura) and come to exist (tu) to support their

individual and collective pursuit of the ‘All Good Life’. Being aware of how they know

(and learn), therefore, is critical in the construction of a new understanding of sautu

(well being) for the new generation of kaiViti27.

Ultimately, this research project will strive to attain positive conceptual development

and change which is conducive to ‘life-long learning’ in a rapidly globalizing Pacific.

This is the epistemological journey, which I believe, all twenty-first century learners

must passionately engage in. It is in this proactive and progressive ‘knowledge space’

and, at the crossroads of individual/group ‘knowledge routes’, where true sautu may be

realized, for whatever it is worth, to the tamata (individuals/peoples) and the mata

(groups) of which they are Mata-reps.

It is envisioned, therefore, that the findings of this inquiry will only generate further

qualitative discussions and, possibly, more focused and informed hypothesizing and

quantitative analytical studies. In essence, it is predicted that more relevant and reliable

“research [or learning] strategies that are grounded in Indigenous and Native

epistemologies” (Gegeo, 2001, p. 503) will be designed and implemented.

1.3.6 Aim of the Study

To articulate the Vanua ko Tubou-Lakeba understandings and conceptualizations of

Mata as intrinsic to their ‘worldview’ and, as lived daily in their embodied experiences;

their individual and collective perceptions on how Bula Sautu (the ‘All Good Life’)

may be pursued and, as preserved in their ivalavala (cultured ways) vakaVanua,

vakaTuraga (of the Vanua, of the chiefly).

��

24��

1.3.7 Objectives of the Study

1. To investigate the essence of living bula-life as a tamata-person of Tubou-Lakeba

and, as one ‘carrying’ Mata-rep responsibilities of her/his Vanua vakaTuraga in

twenty-first century Fijian society.

2. To experience a ‘fresh touch’ of twenty-first century Tubou-Lakeba thought and

ivalavala (customary ways) by engaging with Tubou-Lakeba people living in the

veikoro-ni-cakacaka (urban ‘villages’) and, iVanua (on their island home), relate

that ‘experience’ to my collection of ‘living talanoa’ gathered over 40 years of

regular interaction, as a Vasu, with the people of Tubou-Lakeba especially my own

dear mother.

3. To represent Tubou-Lakeba thought as it pertains to their conceptualization of what

constitutes Bula Sautu, what they consider important indigenous knowledge (veika

bibi) and, how these may be pursued and attained.

4. To construct a theoretical basis upon which indigenous iTaukei systems may be

conceptually grounded, and understood, with the view of opening up dialogue

across knowledge communities, especially in academia.

1.3.8 Research Questions

1. What is the essence of the concept of vanua?

‘A cava beka ‘a uto ni vakasama ‘a “vanua”?

2. What is your understanding of sautu?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “sautu”?

3. What is your understanding of the concept of mata?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) kila me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “mata”?

4. What is your conceptualization of the notion of vuravura?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) rai me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “vuravura”?

5. What is your understanding of the idea of taukei?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “taukei”?

��

25��

1.3.9 Significance of the Study

The ultimate goal of this re-search is freedom – the freedom to define what Bula Sautu

(the ‘All Good Life’) must mean to the iTaukei, as tamata-individuals or mata-reps of

their mata-groups and, as a tamata-people. This research is a first attempt to “name”

what is argued here as the iTaukei mata system of knowing and conceiving knowledge.

The act of naming resonates with claiming and hence, the research is boldly claiming

that iTaukei have an established and valid way of constructing, preserving and sharing

knowledge. Furthermore, the study will argue that in having such an active-pragmatic

and open-flexible system of ‘theorizing’ and ‘testing’ of knowledge and ‘theories’, the

iTaukei have become pre-conditioned to thinking regionally (possibly globally) while

rooted locally. This will be represented as a capacity that needs to be developed and

utilized and, which may hold the key to helping Pacific peoples (individuals/groups)

realize their Mata (source-rep) potential within their respective cultural settings and, as

members of a global family.

This sautu (well being) driven thirst for ‘freedom’, while instrumental in shaping

iTaukei thought and practice, can also be used to explain their movement,

interconnectivity and general sense of stability. Defining sautu therefore necessitates

that the abstraction known as sau/mana (power/efficacy) is made ‘reachable’ enough to

become ‘believable’. Essentially, de-spiritualizing the sau/mana concept will transform

it into comprehensible and usable forms of knowledge that ordinary people can employ

in extraordinary ways. This research will therefore endeavour to deconstruct, if

temporarily, vanua grounded concepts, using a vuravura worldview that will be argued

as critical to understanding the twenty-first century iTaukei person, in terms of her/his

way of thinking and how s/he relates to people and places. This study is bound to

challenge and revolutionize iTaukei thought and, further inform western thinking and

attitude towards indigenous communities in general, especially the assumption that the

‘colonized’ are naïve and may have to continue to uncritically import foreign

ideologies, methods and systems.

��

26��

Free thinkers, unbounded by oppressive systems, are what academia and civil society

need. Returning to pre-civilization thought and practice can never be the goal of

epistemological encounters. Nonetheless, there is much to be drawn from what exists as

our current ivalavala-ways of knowing and being, much of which is constantly

changing while remaining rooted in tradition. What free thinking iTaukei can do for

their vanua is to re-search their rich heritage and, document their insider-views and

representations using the tools of modern science and, from the platform of academia.

This is essentially the space and place from which we can give voice to our ‘silent

keepers of tradition’. The findings of this research will therefore encourage free

thinking Pacific peoples to explore their own yalava (lit. fishing grounds and, meaning

‘home turf’), and find ancient ‘truths’ which may still be practical in their modern-day

life, and which are reflected in their talanoa-stories captured in their chants and

weavings, legends and farming practices, lullabies and marriage rituals. Furthermore, it

is assumed that such free thinkers of the modern vuravura-world will begin by

searching the depth of their own ‘souls’ to find that place of sautu (peace and order) that

can only ‘flow’ from within the individual/group ‘self’ and, outwardly to its vanua

extension.

1.4 Chapter Summary Relationships are foundational to knowledge sharing and building. The human person,

therefore, can never exist outside of some kind of social grouping. To refuse to belong

to a group is tantamount to being silenced and marginalized. The iTaukei will always

‘remember’, as long as vei (communalism/reciprocity) and mata (seeing/representation)

concepts exist in their language and dialects, that life or survival hinges on their group

existence and situated collective ways of knowing and being. This reality is true for the

people of Tubou-Lakeba as it is for every other iTaukei community. Though schooled

and churched, the iTaukei have remained keepers of ‘ancient’ traditions like their mata

(envoy) or diplomatic system of engaging inter-Vanua. While this engagement across

Vanua (named/claimed places) or peopled-places’ boundaries is mainly observable at

the ceremonial level, its significance extends towards every other aspect of Vanua

existence. This is what I consider a norm for a people bucini (conceived/planted) in a

��

27��

reality that embraces the notion of ‘space-sharing’ for a collective well being: living

together in the spaces-between (maliwa) for a peaceful coexistence.

An insider-researcher’s entry into a familiar knowledge-space, therefore, necessitates

that her/his socialized position on the situated meanings of place, space, time, the ‘self’,

the ‘significant other’ and representation is established at the outset. For the iTaukei, the

multiple nuanced meanings of these abstractions, as they are ‘hidden’ in their

worldview and implicitly expressed in their ‘taken-for-granted’ customs and

ceremonies, are there only for the taukei-native and ‘trained’ vulagi-outsider mata-eyes

to see. My privileged position, therefore, as vasu of (with maternal roots in) Tubou-

Lakeba meant that as a vulagi-taukei (a familiarized outsider), I was free to explore

their world and still keep my outsider-ness or distance. This cultured view worked well

with the postcolonial attitude adopted for this constructionist research project hence,

framing the entire re-search within a mata framework. Essentially, this framework

embodies the notion that veitalanoa-dialogue is absolutely vital in any real effort to

vakataukeitaki-familiarize a taukei-local and a vulagi-visitor converging at the

intersection of their related but largely diverse knowledge-spaces via a process of

“familiarization” grounded in a privileging system based in reciprocity.

As far as any real effort to engage in any kind of knowledge-sharing goes, participants

of any veitalanoa-dialogue are essentially open to conceptual change hence, a truly

progressive and fruitful manner of exchange and discourse. This is the place to be if one

is to free oneself and one’s own people from destabilizing and hegemonic forces in

society that work to keep people ignorant and disempowered. This knowledge-based

capacity to be effective, conceptualized here as the inherent sau or mana (power) to get

things done, is that which must be established in the introduction chapter of this thesis

construction before searching for a situated meaning of the sautu (the ‘All Good Life’)

concept, particularly when sautu signifies the presence (tu) of that sau (power). In

setting the tone for the chapters to follow, the aim, objectives and main research

questions are clearly articulated and presented as a way of opening up dialogue between

the researcher and the researched, the author and the authored, the ‘text’ and the

��

28��

‘context’. At the deeper and more philosophical level of engagement, the researcher is

in continuous dialogue also with the ‘silent keepers of tradition’, data collected from the

‘field’ work and literature. The next chapter therefore, will attempt to bring to the fore

what I call “the known”, scientifically established ‘truths’ privileged by researchers who

have researched and written about ideas, observations and theories that relate to and

inform my research project.

������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1Refer to Nabobo-Baba (2004, p. 17). 2Veiwekani will be used here in the richest possible sense implying all kinds of relationships – intra- and inter-personal, and ‘extra-’ – ‘extra-’ making reference to relationships between people and nature, and people and the ‘gods’ and ‘spirits’. Veiwekani is the basis upon which any form of exchange is facilitated and maintained. 3The iTaukei are the indigenous people of the Fiji group of islands. They were ‘traditionally’ known as Fijians (a colonial construct). Alternatively they have been referred to as ‘kaiViti’, a concept, as I will argue later, open to interpretation. 4Talanoa (noun) are basically stories. They were traditionally (and still are) told or sung and, in this generation, written. Talanoa, as stories, are epistemological tools. As a verb, talanoa is engaged in to connect with people and share knowledge. Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 27) writes “talanoa refers to a process in which two or more people talk together, or in which one person tells a story to an audience of people who are largely listeners”. 5Engagement: as in “situated engagement” defined by “conversing, interacting, thinking [and] doing” (Howitt & Suchet-Pearson, p. 2001). 6Veivakataukeitaki, rooted in the ‘taukei’ (being familiar) concept, speaks of a relationship between two ‘unequals’ – conceptualized by the iTaukei as a dialogic engagement between one taukei (native/local) and, another, vulagi (visitor/foreigner), to place; ‘unequals’ in terms of how much of one’s own position is known to oneself or the other. 7Vanua, according to Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. x), is an “inclusive term [which] embraces a people, their chief, their defined territory, their waterways or fishing grounds, their environment, their spirituality, their history, epistemology and culture. 8A Mata is basically one who is speaking on behalf of another or an organization (including the Vanua). They are always very articulate and full of relevant knowledge. They are individuals/groups, usually members of the matanivanua clans (Huffer & Qalo, 2004, pp. 95, 96), naturally gifted with people skills and, usually very convincing when they represent/present a case. Mata, traditionally, were spokespeople of/for chiefs. In contemporary iTaukei-Fijian society, Mata potential is seen as something every iTaukei male (and ideally, female) must develop – for to ‘enter’ another Vanua, the individual must prove herself/himself capable of presenting her/his isevusevu (introduction protocol) and, similarly, receive any ‘introduction’ offered (in terms of yaqona/kava) by the hosting Vanua. Another interesting parallel phenomenon is that of Turaga (the ‘chief’). In iTaukei society, every member is Turaga of her/his domain and, when people visit with them, and the isevusevu is offered, the head of the family (sometimes a woman, in the absence of a man) gets to receive the ‘gift’, whether it be yaqona (kava roots/mixture), tabua (whales teeth) and/or other ‘valuables’. Because every iTaukei is expected to ‘sit in’ or ‘perform’ as Mata or Turaga when the situation warrants it, the Vanua (place/people) koViti can be seen as a “chiefly place/people” for they ‘know’ how to ‘behave’ as representatives of the Vanua – whether as Turaga (the head/brain-face) or, her/his Mata (the eye/ear-mouthpiece). This exchange or gifting, based

��

29��

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������in veivakaturagataki (mutual esteeming of the other), does not necessarily require that the encounter be ‘performed’ on Vanua soil hence, whether they are in another part of Fiji or, Auckland-New Zealand, the customary practice goes. 9Veitalanoa (two-way communication) is not to be confused with the usually monologic talanoa associated with story-telling. Veitalanoa is a serious discussion involving free thinkers but, is still controlled and focused. Because of the formal setting and, usually the presence of the ‘elders’/chiefs and ‘experts’, especially in veitalanoa involving a mata-group or community, ‘speeches’ are often reserved for those holding speaking rights. But for a veitalanoa involving at least two mature people and, ideally, less than ten consenting and concerned adults, the forum is usually open and facilitating. 10 The island of Lakeba has eight villages. Tubou is where the highest ranking chief – the Tui Nayau, the Sau – and his yavusa (a large group of people consisting of smaller units, sharing a common ancestor) reside. Because of the internal differences which exist between the eight villages of this one island, given their varied talanoa of origin, this research will focus on Tubou, hence my use of the conception Tubou-Lakeba. At another level, providing a kind of backdrop to this talanoa thesis construction, and constantly hanging in the horizon, is the knowing that Lakeba may have been known as Tubou prior to European contact (Reid, 1990, p. 5). 11Capitalized Vanua is used here to refer specifically to ‘named places’: named in the sense that the people ‘territorially’ or ‘spiritually’ bounded to this place share a common iCavuti, the traditional names for which places and groups of peoples are known. Note that it is by these iCavuti names that peopled-places and/or placed-peoples are referred to in traditional ceremonies, and among traditional iTaukei even at the conversational level. The iCavuti name is not the same as the common ‘map-name’. 12 Particularly of “Remote Oceania” (D’arcy, 2006, p. 9) but, which I argue later, may be socio-culturally connected to Vanuatu. 13 It is possible for a cultural outsider to learn and keep learning the ways of the iTaukei. Similarly, indigenous peoples can learn and keep learning the ways of the ‘coloniser’. The extent to which one is ‘nativised’ depends much on her/his capacity to embrace change, particularly conceptual change. As long as her/his cultured biases exist and persist, such a person will remain ‘deafened’ and ‘deadened’ to certain manner of discourse of her/his host culture. Then again the question remains: ‘Is it worth it to totally ‘lose’ oneself in one’s attempt to completely ‘read’ and understand the Other, in research? 14Sau,in this context, is the title by which the highest ranked chief of Lakeba-Lau is referred to (usually in conjunction with the Tui Nayau title). As a concept, sau is one and the same thing as mana, the “power to effect” (Ravuvu, 1983, p. 86). 15According to Scarr (2008), lewe-niVanua means “people of the land, untitled people” (p. viii). In the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, only the Sau, the vanua installed Tui Nayau, is considered ‘titled’ hence, this definition may have been used to totally set the Sau apart as one sacred and, possibly, ‘detached’ from the Vanua. Herein, I will also argue that though ‘titled’, the Sau is also a lewe (flesh) of that one Vanua body – a possible alternative to Scarr’s definition, based on my ‘stand-point’ perspective as one native to my culture and language. 16Refer to Ravuvu (1987, p. 18, 19) for another reading on the esteemed vakaTuraga concept. 17Mata representative will be henceforth shortened to mata-rep. 181835: the year the first missionaries to Fiji set foot on Lakeba. 19Matanikupeti: this concept, rooted in the word kupeji (similar to Tongan kupesi) – Lauan (of Fiji) reference to prints/designs on their masi (bark cloth of Mulberry shrub) and, Fijian and Tongan ngatu – metaphorically refers to distant veiwekani vakadra (‘blood’ relatedness). In the Tongan culture also, there exists a parallel linking of mata (eye/face) to hohoko (genealogy) to “read the genealogical connections of people on the physical features of their faces” (M�hina, 2010, p. 176). 20Vei principles: the iTaukei unstated but sensible ‘rule’ of sharedness and reciprocity which stands (tu) today as the viable indigenous alternative to “individualism”.

��

30��

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������21Mata sense: will be argued further as the iTaukei “Knowing is Seeing” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 91) metaphorical basis of learning/reasoning through their mata (eye), matamata (mind) and kete (stomach/womb). 22Vasu: “relationship of a sister’s son [or daughter], conferring privileges” (Mara, 1997, p. 266). 23Note that ‘Toga’ and ‘Viti’ have been italicized because these are not name-forms that one would find in a modern-day map. 24 ‘Rara’, today, basically refers to play-grounds and parks. This research will argue for the significance of this indigenous concept to knowledge sharing, particularly that which leads to well being (sautu) on the part of the people engaged in genuine knowledge building exercises. 25 Note that the iTaukei traditionally ‘plant’ (bury) their dead on ancestral ground for a later ‘harvest’. This is why cremating their dead or letting them ‘drift’ into the sea are not believable options. 26Yaqona: better known as kava (possibly of Vanuatu origin), “used as a ceremonial and social beverage [and, derived from] cultivated shrub, Piper methysticum or Piperaceae” (Gatty, 2009, p. 320). 27 The kaiViti phenomenon will be briefly presented here as a viable alternative to the recently altered ‘Fijian’ conception now used in reference to all citizens of the Viti group today. Herein, the kaiViti conception is consciously constructed as part of my attempt to decolonize colonial ‘thinking’ that is evidently present in iTaukei discourses, particularly the assertion that the word ‘Fijian’ must be reserved for the iTaukei (the indigenous). To my understanding, the kaiViti and Fijian concepts mean one and the same thing – differing only in that while the former is locally situated and relatively ancient, the latter is rooted in Europe and was a recent introduction. Being a kaiViti basically implies that one comes from the place called Viti. The challenge remains, therefore, in whether or not the iTaukei can accept their rightful place as ‘taukei’ (the first-peoples), as opposed to others being ‘vulagi’ (recent immigrants), and everyone’s privileged positions (regardless of race) settled here as kaiViti. This argument is framed by the Vanua vakaTuraga framework which recognizes that the land/place Viti, being ‘ancient’, was first settled by the ancestors of the iTaukei who became vanua-people and, whose way of life is characterized by their tendency to privilege whatever is vulagi (strange or new, from outside or is foreign).

31��

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

The reach of imperialism into ‘our heads’ challenges those who belong to colonized communities to understand how this occurred, partly because we perceive a need to decolonize our minds, to recover ourselves, to claim a space in which to develop a sense of authentic humanity. This analysis of imperialism has been referred to…as ‘post-colonial discourse’, the ‘empire writes back’ and/or ‘writing from the margins’.

Linda Tuhiwai Smith1

2.1 Introduction 2.1.1 The decolonization project – establishing a humanistic agenda

“Indigenous Pacific research [conducted by cultural insiders]…is based on a philosophy

of human nature” (Sanga, 2004, p. 42). According to Tuhiwai Smith (2004, p. 6), the

“institution of research as well as [its] epistemological foundations need to be

decolonized” hence, humanizing the research agenda and echoing Nabobo-Baba’s

assertion that “research and its methods may mean different things to different people”

(2004, p. 26). “To decolonize our minds, recover ourselves [and] claim a space in which

to develop a sense of authentic humanity” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 23), therefore, is

the “[real] humanistic and historical task [calling for] the [colonized] to liberate

themselves [as well as] their [colonizers]” (Freire, 1972, p. 21), particularly for those

placed in academia. Such noble intentions is bound to challenge the dominant

philosophical traditions of the West because human reason, or the mind which is

supposed to be decolonized, is now proven to be embodied hence, advancing the idea

that “[human thought is] shaped crucially by the peculiarities of our [culturally situated]

human bodies” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 3). Decolonizing the mind, therefore, must

begin with a philosophy of the mind that is true to the embodiment of the ‘philosopher’

(Lakoff & Johnson, 1999): the human person embodying ‘reason’ and the relative

positioning of her/his perceiving and knowing faculties within her/his socialized

habitation.

32��

Indigenous and Western “knowledge systems [have been found to be] largely

implicit…[and overlapping and diverging] in ways important to how knowledge is

learned and applied” (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005, p. 19). The two seemingly

irreconcilable systems are known to differ mainly in the cultures they espouse: the

former a “culture of application” and the latter, a “culture of rigour” (Scott, 2010, p.

76). Though the dominant Eurocentric notions of empiricism and rationality are situated

in the West, the fact that the two traditions “to some extent…feature in any discourse on

knowledge” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 21) suggest that the east-west or north-south

divides are nothing more than political tools of western domination. The systematic

marginalizing of indigenous knowledge systems, therefore, reflect “hegemonic views

[aimed] ultimately to confine [indigenous peoples]…physically, psychologically [and

philosophically]…in tiny spaces” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 39). This progressive development

in indigenous Pacific thought and research away from ‘intellectual confinement’ is a

parallel to what transpired in eighteenth century Europe. The mobilization of the

Enlightenment movement in Europe by its philosophers – “writers and critics

who…championed [a much needed] change and reform [of the old structure]” (Kagan,

Ozment & Turner, 1983) – provided an intellectual restlessness which worked to

challenge the status quo and transform society (p. 619). Humanity, therefore, as

originator of all “[‘scientific’] views about how the natural world can be examined and

understood” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 42), owes it to itself to study and articulate the

multiple ‘truths’ which exist simultaneously in their situated, relationship-based realities

hence, exposing this project’s humanistic agenda. Seeking de-hegemonization via

epistemic decolonization, therefore, is critically important particularly “if [it is nearly

impossible to] achieve political independence…in a rapidly globalizing world” (Gegeo,

2006, p. 4). Essentially, this development opens up the notion of epistemology...as if in

a post-modern deconstruction (Burik, 2006).

In a poetic representation of the enduring postmodern ‘native knowledge systems versus

western science’ dialogue, academic Helu Thaman (1999, p. 88) wrote:

33��

“your way objective analytic always doubting the truth…

…my way subjective

gut-feeling like always sure

of the truth…”

Such abstract statements of the seemingly antithetical attitude of indigenous knowledge

and methods towards modern science, reflecting our “[epistemic struggles]

over…imperialism…[and primarily] at the level of text and literature” (Tuhiwai Smith,

1999, p. 19), though strong, represent “silenced [and alternate narratives

and]…philosophies of knowledge which are [ideally] ecologically sound” (Nabobo-

Baba, 2004, p. 17). Constructing anew using a decolonizing framework, in essence, is

the way forward for insider-researchers who would dare to “name and represent [their]

thoughts and feelings, to speak for [themselves], and to create [their] own versions of

history” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 11). Essentially, this will result in the reclaiming of

‘lost’ grounds for validating the largely implicit primordial knowledge bases that have

shaped indigenous thought, practices and discourse in a modern world. This

development is critical because Pacific research, ultimately, aims at “centering our

concerns and worldviews [as indigenous peoples of the Pacific], and then coming to

know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own

purposes” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 39). Defining theory and research, therefore, as

‘explaining the known’ and ‘journeying towards the unknown’, respectively, will prove

critical to any constructionist research.

This research project, in essence, resounds Hau‘ofa’s conviction “that all social realities

are human creations…and that if we fail to construct our own realities other people will

do it for us” (2008, p. 60). The methodological approach chosen, however, is largely

philosophical because it “encourages a disciplined attitude and builds confidence and

34��

academic credibility…[hence, purposefully adopted] to educate and instruct Pacific

researchers” (Sanga, 2004, p. 49), beginning with myself. According to Nabobo-Baba

(2004), “decolonizing research methods is a way forward to reclaiming silenced

pasts…[and this can be pursued with the intention of including] the doing of research

and writing that privileges our knowledges, our philosophies of knowledge, and

methodologies that are more culturally inclusive” (pp. 26, 30). Furthermore, citing the

book Voices in a Seashell: Education, Culture and Identity, Nabobo-Baba reiterates that

“small cultures must be safeguarded for…they give the world other views on

knowledge, the world and epistemology” (2006, p. 8). In the “carving out of spaces for

native Pacific voices” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 9), this research project will attempt, by

implication and in a small way, to represent the struggle of many iTaukei-Fijian

university students striving to reclaim their education in an ongoing process of

decolonization (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 13). Herein, decolonization is perceived as a

pathway to sustainable indigenous education and research and, one which is hoped to

lead to bula sautu, the ‘all good life’, for all who would dare to move in that direction

towards self-determination.

2.1.2 The postcolonial2 attitude – redefining known bounds

Indigenous conceptualizations of time, space, the self, self-image and attitudes towards

others are critical in talking about indigenous Pacific research (Sanga, 2004, p. 43). For

instance, any postcolonial “reconstruction and analysis of historical processes…[using]

the notion of [time as being] spiral…connot[ing] both cyclic and lineal movements”

(Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 69), may help free us from the constant worry of having to survive

comfortably as a ‘traditional’ person in a ‘modern’ world. Time notions, therefore,

remain significant to our ability, as a people, to establish that “[we] have cultural

histories that are long, authentic, and material to the well being [or sautu] of [our]

people” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12). Most of our remembered histories, preserved in

the genealogies of our chiefs, have been our only points of reference “directing our

people’s thinking and memories” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 70). However, to recover and

reclaim most of our lost vanua memories – vanua being the living organism sustaining

the iTaukei identity, and bula sautu – “indigenous [Fijian] knowledge bases must

35��

be…understood and made nationally accessible [via] a great deal more theoretical and

action research into Pacific values and worldviews” (Huffer & Qalo, 2004, p. 109).

Such a move towards decolonization, according to Helu Thaman (2003), “is about

reclaiming indigenous Oceanic perspectives, knowledge and wisdom that have been

devalued or suppressed because they were or are not considered important or

worthwhile” (p. 2).

The question of what has been marginalized, therefore, as cited in Nabobo-Baba (2006),

comprises “ways of knowing, the content of traditional knowledge or custom, and how

that knowledge is theorized and constructed, encoded, and passed on to the next

generation” (p. 2). To address the injustice created when certain knowledge and grounds

of knowledge are given preeminence over others (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 13), the issue

of power and how it relates to knowledge is again revisited. This means that the noble

task of empowering the ‘weak’ with the knowledge of constructing ‘scientific truths’

via research (Keso, Lehtimäki & Pietiläinen, 2009, p. 66) has become the inevitable

pathway or attitude to be pursued by indigenous university students of this millennium.

Proponents of this view of research, essentially, see science as the “the questioning of

the current state of knowledge” (Biggs, 1994, p. 1). Though moral and civilized, true

indigenous scientific research must refrain from attempting to authorize certain

representations about indigenous peoples hence, avoiding the reproduction of particular

social relations of power (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith, 2004, p. 6). This postcolonial

perspective, in essence, will maintain that there is never going to be any final word on

what constitutes knowledge (Lee, 2010). This position embraces the notion that

“indigenous worldviews are good for the future of university studies” (Thaman, 2003,

p. 12) hence, deserve to exist alongside the scientific worldview as equals (Burik,

2006). Seeing indigenous and scientific worldviews as compatible, therefore, is

necessary given that like “epistemology, [or] any body of knowledge…[worldviews

are] situated, communal and dialogic human social construct[s]” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 2).

While this opens up dialogue between two seemingly opposing systems of thought, any

conscious act of centering marginalized knowledge and knowledge systems, however,

36��

must take into account academic Akanisi Kedrayate’s advice to researcher Unaisi

Nabobo-Baba:

“…speak carefully, select carefully how you say what you say…do not speak without thinking carefully…protect what you hear…sieve carefully from what you hear what the world should hear and what it should not…There are things that should only remain in your heart…not for all to hear. You will have the power and resolve to achieve what you want if you think through your mind and heart towards God.” (as cited in Nabobo- Baba, 2006, p. 1)

This vei-talanoa (two-way communication) between Nabobo-Baba and Kedrayate

reflect what must concern all Pacific researchers researching their own people: an

awareness of the “very serious problem [of] subjecting/subjugating [indigenous

epistemologies] to the disfiguring discursive practices of western scientism” (Gegeo,

2006, p. 2). It is worth noting, therefore, that this culture of rigour may continue to work

against any real effort to mainstream indigenous knowledge and, particularly if

indigenous researchers are not too careful with what comes out of their writings.

Herein lies the premise that “if we are forced to work within the academic setting and

all that [it] entails, we must work to upset [the] setting from within, with the aim of

making it broader” (Burik, 2006, p. 72). Working from within a community of

researchers therefore, more so that of indigenous researchers, can only help sharpen any

“researcher’s ability to identify [her/his] own blind spots [by] learning through

reflection, [or greater] reflexivity, [facilitated by] collegial processes” (Keso et al.,

2009, p. 68). One such approach towards ‘working from within’ indigenous

communities through the university comes in the form of culturally appropriate and

decolonized research methodologies espoused by Tuhiwai Smith (1999), Meyer (2001)

and Nabobo-Baba (2006). For iTaukei research, the Vanua Research Framework, or

VRF (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, pp. 135-137), articulates admirably well with the Mata

methodology intended for this research project. Constructionist approaches to research

such as these work “much like [the] building [of] a Samoan fale (house)…significan[t]

in itself, but…first and foremost [is] of use to the community it is designed for” (Huffer

& Qalo, 2004, p. 89). Like a two edged sword, culturally appropriate methods

37��

decolonize both research as a power-based institution and research as a worthwhile all-

inclusive human activity, freeing both the authorizer and the authored. In effect, this

initiative will take indigenous research through postmodernism’s idea of “the

[progressive] scientific enterprise” (as cited in Lee, 2010, p. 142), and beyond.

2.1.3 Indigenous epistemologies – a way forward

Indigenous epistemologies, and indeed philosophies, are quickly becoming the ultimate

pursuit of indigenous researchers and their non-indigenous friends because “knowing

how we ‘know’ and ‘do’ things…may help us solve some of the age-old problems

[associated with colonialism] which still haunt us” (Gegeo, 2006, p. 8). It is a fact that

“human practices (ie. what we do) and discourses (ie. what we state about things),

wherever they take place, are based on philosophies or abstract conceptualizations”

(Huffer, 2004). It has also been observed that “all human cultures, whether simple or

complex, agrarian or industrialized, have theories of knowledge of one kind or another”

(Gegeo, 2006, p. 2). Like light at the end of a tunnel, indigenous research into

indigenous epistemologies has opened up a space, within academia, for alternate and

once silenced knowledge, value and belief systems (Nabobo-Baba, 2004) hence,

creating a place for indigenous peoples to ground their search for who and what they are

in this world.

For an indigenous researcher setting out on an epistemological journey, an appreciation

of her/his indigeneity, and what counts as her/his people’s native epistemologies will

need to be articulated at the outset hence, making Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonizing

Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (1999) an excellent launching out

point. According to Gegeo and Watson-Gegeo (2001), “how [a people] construct

knowledge…[or, do] indigenous epistemology refers to [their] cultural group’s ways of

theorizing knowledge” (p. 55). A critical issue involving indigenous researchers

researching their own people, however, is “the constant need for reflexivity” (Tuhiwai

Smith, 1999, p. 137), or the “keeping [of] a sense of distance and critical praxis” (as

cited in Burik, 2006, p. 74). This particular insider-research into the ‘silenced’ pasts of

one’s mother’s people, therefore, will draw from Tuhiwai Smith’s list of Twenty-five

38��

Indigenous Projects (1999, pp. 142-161), and which consists of ‘claiming’, ‘naming’,

‘representing’ and ‘reframing’, amongst others. These decolonizing approaches,

therefore, will then become the primary tools used to establish a theoretical basis upon

which conceptual change may be pursued, and using “efficient mechanisms such

as…analogies and explanatory models, mental models, persuasive pedagogy,

collaborative reasoning and collaboration and reflection” (Lee, 2010, p. 143). This is,

therefore, what real epistemology is: “allow[ing]…a culture…some form of [self]-

criticism and critique of its own presuppositions on knowledge [and] some second order

thought about its own ideas (Burik, 2006, p. 74), the exact kind of intelligible

engagement Gegeo and Watson-Gegeo (2001) call “indigenous critical praxis” (p. 59).

Such a dialogic process, therefore, reflects one’s “ability to synthesize from a wider and

broader perspective…suggest[ing]…a need for open-mindedness” (Lee, 2010, p. 140).

This view, in essence, is consistent with what Burik (2006) discusses as

“Auseinandersetzung [or], con-frontation…[and which equates to] a keeping apart in

togetherness, or a thoughtful appropriation that leaves the other as it is in itself” (p. 70).

The same may be conceptualized as the non-assimilating change wrought over time via

continuous situated engagement, consciously interacting with multiple knowledges

through de-centered, as opposed to self-centered, thinking and doing (Howitt & Suchet-

Pearson, 2001). Epistemologically, this will result in greater connectedness in diversity.

Such a position highlights the fact that though “difference is primordial…[it] always

includes of necessity relationality to what is other” (Burik, 2006, p. 73) hence,

predetermining a lasting engagement between the west and indigenous peoples.

Essentially, the iTaukei conceptualize this sort of engagement to involve one ‘familiar

to place’ (taukei) and her/his privileged other, vulagi (unfamiliar) with place, according

to what Nabobo-Baba (2006) frames as the “taukei/vulagi dichotomy” (p. 44). This

universal truth of the existence of ‘othering difference’ is grounds for what has been

described as “the coexistence of multiple worldviews and knowledge systems…[and]

the learning processes that occur within and at [their] intersections” (Barnhardt &

Kawagley, 2005, p. 9). An indigenous Pacific person constantly place-switching within

and around these interactive spaces, alternately between the taukei (familiar ‘One’) and

39��

vulagi (unfamiliar ‘Other’) extremes, and as embodied in any cross-cultural

engagement, therefore, may be described as “[a] Pan-Pacific Person or, [an] Islander

who [is] predominantly [a] person of multiple worlds” (as cited in Vaai, 1999, p. 33).

Researchers (or learners), essentially, as ‘thinkers’ and ‘knowers’ at the center of

Auseinandersetzung (Burik, 2006, p. 70), have been positioned as both epistemologists

and metaphysicians. This attitude is derived from the understanding that while

‘thinking’ consists the epistemological process leading to comprehension, ‘knowing’ is

the metaphysical process ultimately leading to conceptual change (as cited in Cobern,

1993, p. 6). Arendt’s (1978) observation, therefore, of how epistemologically sound

arguments lacking metaphysical grounds are ultimately rendered ‘not believable’, by

some, is critical to an appreciation of how worldviews shape thinking and knowing, and

in turn, facilitates long term conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993). Herein, the

“reciprocity between conceptual change and knowledge building…[is established] as a

platform for [student researchers] to systematically change their naïve theories, and [in

a kind of postcolonial and] progressive discourse” (Lee, 2010, p. 148).

Indigenous epistemology as part of a knowledge building or transformative discourse,

therefore, is not merely for information sharing or presentation of ideas, given how it

may be used also to construct, refine and transform knowledge (as cited in Lee, 2010, p.

144). Theorizing knowledge, therefore, as an activity human beings naturally engage in

on a regular basis, “not in some ivory-tower sense but as part of our everyday capacity

to make sense of our experience” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 9), has now become an

essential element of the knowledge-validating work researchers and academics are

involved in. This has been the trend followed by western research to “extract and claim

ownership of [indigenous] ways of knowing, [their] imagery, the things [they] create

and produce and then simultaneously reject [them]…seek[ing] to deny [them] further

opportunities” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 1). For indigenous peoples to be able to self-

represent and be self-sufficient, therefore, in a competitive environment such as this,

there may be a need to consciously and unreservedly draw in “the three most important

institutions of thinking…culture, language and institutions of…knowledge” (Burik,

40��

2006, p. 73) to the center of all research activities, the university. Indigenous

epistemology, therefore, as an area of inquiry, is bound to impact on research

methodologies or, the “theor[ies] of knowledge and the interpretive framework[s] that

guide research” (as cited in Evening, 2004, p. 110) and, as a result, what is

‘scientifically’ found to constitute “knowledge…[and the] understanding of how [that]

knowledge comes about” (Burik, 2006, p. 74).

2.2 Grounding the Construction 2.2.1 Reconceptualizing Science, Empiricism and Rationality

Modern science, as the dominant system of representation, while claiming the universal

significance of its so called scientific method, has been questioned and challenged to

“consciously make room for indigenous knowledge systems” (as cited in Helu Thaman,

2003, p. 6, 7). As cited in Turnbull (1994), the “reconceptualization of science as an

assemblage of heterogeneous local practices means there is no ‘great divide’ between

modern science and other knowledge systems” (p. 131), a position which implies the

localness of knowledge. It is the West’s critical approach to itself, via its academic

settings and education systems (Burik, 2006, p. 69), nevertheless, which has made it

possible for alternate knowledge and knowledge systems to be scientifically

investigated and established as viable alternatives to the West’s known ‘truths’.

However, the fact that “knowledge systems…[as] products of changing cultural

contexts and evolving circumstances…[are] adaptive” (Ratuva, 2009, p. 153) has

opened up a space for continuous dialogue between the West and indigenous peoples’

epistemologies.

According to Tuhiwai Smith (1999), the modernist project via “imperialism and

colonialism…came to ‘see’, to ‘name’ and to ‘know’ indigenous communities” (p. 60)

and, in the process, to re-affirm the positional superiority of western knowledge over

those belonging to the “authentic, essentialist, deeply spiritual other” (pp. 72-74). This

imperialistic agenda was not to be fully realized given indigenous peoples’ lingering

“spiritual [connection] to the universe, the landscape [and]…[things] seen and unseen”

41��

(Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 74), ironically exposing and making known to indigenous

peoples the very ‘essence’ of western knowledge, and thought, that makes it

dehumanizing and oppressive. In this postcolonial construction of what essentially

belongs to the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba, an indigenous community of the Viti group of

islands, “different worldviews and alternative ways of coming to know, and of being,

which still endure within the [‘civilized’] indigenous world” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p.

74), will be acknowledged and employed. Ultimately, this will prove that, in the native

mind, only locally derived and adapted knowledge is practical knowledge.

According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), “the same neural and cognitive mechanisms

that allow us to perceive and move around also create our conceptual systems and

modes of reason” (p. 3) hence, indefinitely linking human perception, and our

sensorimotor capacities, to thought formation and ways of thinking and knowing. What

transpires then is a philosophy of the mind (and reason) limited to our embodiment and,

to cultural empiricism3 because “once we have learned a conceptual system, it is

neurally instantiated in our brains and we are not free to think just anything” (Lakoff &

Johnson, 1999, p. 4). This explains why certain indigenous researchers and academics

have continued to push for the idea of examining worldviews with the purpose of

establishing how indigenous peoples perceive the ‘mind’, ‘intellect’ or ‘reason’ to be

associated with thinking and knowing via the entrails and other parts of the body

(Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Nabobo-Baba, 2006).

The fact that “concepts such as the mind…virtue and morality are not in

themselves…biological parts of a human body” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48), has

opened up indigenous research into native epistemologies to greater participation,

multiple interpretations and a wider audience, including the many people groups readily

accepting embodied reason. Arendt (1978), for instance, assigned reason to thinking,

comprehension and epistemology, and the intellect to knowing, apprehension and

metaphysics (as cited in Cobern, 1993). Such a systematic and ‘believable’ way of

defining ideas, through research, legitimizes their use within specified knowledge

systems, locates them in established cultural settings, and ultimately ‘speaks’ on what

42��

must constitute a particular group’s reality (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48). This notion

supports the understanding that a people’s reality is shaped, ultimately, by “conceptual

systems [that] are not totally relative and…[which carry meaning] grounded in and

through our…shared embodiment” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 5). Though self-

centered and largely dependent on “perceptual and motor inference present in ‘lower’

animals” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 3), the human race, in its various occurrences of

‘situated-ness’, is still placed ‘higher’ than animals on a continuum of ‘thinking and

knowing abilities’. Such ‘higher’ abilities comprise what cognitive science terms as

‘cognitive’, and which includes “all aspects of thought and language, conscious or

unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 10). Our common embodiment and

humanity, therefore, explains why humanistic approaches to research, such as those

espoused by this particular research project, work and are easily adopted and adapted

cross-culturally.

The three major findings of cognitive science which stand to challenge postmodernism

thinking today (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999): the embodiment of the mind, the

inaccessibility of most of what we call ‘thought’, and the notion that abstract concepts

are largely metaphorical, provide the basic theoretical assumptions upon which this

inquiry is conducted. The understanding that “metaphorical thought is the principal tool

that makes philosophical insight possible” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 6) is, therefore,

critical for any deeper philosophical engagement with indigenous peoples, and with

respect to this research, the iTaukei. The use of homonymy, metaphor and polysemy to

make sense of a people’s epistemology is a well known accepted fact among social

scientists because it has been argued that “language provides…the structure of a

people’s cultural domains” (Feinberg, 1978, p. 128). In a metaphorical representation of

language itself, Taumoefolau (2004) writes: “language is like a container…[carrying]

the set of values and beliefs that makes us what we are as a people” (pp. 64, 65). This

insider-research into the iTaukei ‘knowing-system’ via their mata (representation)

discourse, therefore, will use the notion that “we know what a word means when we

know how to use it” (Svenonius, 2004, p. 577) to analyze both the fixed and variable

meanings of the words used within a mata discourse from the standpoint of a native

43��

‘consumer’ of the language. According to Hau‘ofa (2008), “local [researchers] should

have an advantage…[given that they have] a thorough knowledge and deep appreciation

of the nuances of their own languages” (p. 9) hence, situating the discourse within the

cultural context of its local producers.

In the book Philosophy in the Flesh – the Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western

Thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999), it is enlightening to note that based on the empirical

findings of the authors’ research, the faculty of the mind and our capacity to reason are

not at all what we have been made to believe. What transpires is a philosophy that

radically challenges western thought. According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), “the

mind is…embodied in such a way that our conceptual systems draw largely upon the

commonalities of our bodies and of the environments we live in” (p. 5). On the same

note, Lee (2010) writes: “cognition should be considered in its natural habitat, social

and cultural, without denying the influence of internal mental representations” (p. 137).

This view is supported by “the [understanding] that science is produced in place, [and

which] is hardly novel or metaphysically challenging” (Withers, 2009, p. 653).

Postmodernists like Heidegger and Derrida (as cited in Burik, 2006), on the other hand,

have proposed that philosophy, as metaphysics, is just one way of thinking hence,

calling for “change of thought…from the concept of philosophy to that of thinking or

from pure epistemology to locally influenced epistemologies” (p. 72). These arguments,

while having their own merits, indicate that Western and Pacific epistemologies,

essentially, will remain at a place where continuous dialogue via Auseinandersetzung

exists as a viable alternative to all kinds of cross-cultural engagement. The view that

science is ‘culturally-placed’, therefore, renders its epistemologies and methodologies

open to various interpretations of empiricism and rationality. Nevertheless, due to the

human-factor, or our common embodiment that is, there is bound to be a greater degree

of universality in thought and in thinking between diverse knowledge systems and

cultural groups.

44��

2.2.2 Situating the Construction in ‘Place’ and ‘Time’

Research has been argued as “an encounter between the West [or the human] and the

Other [or the flora and fauna, and sub-human]” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 8). This

narrow view, fueled by imperialism and carried by colonialism, was spread across the

globe, via modern science and its methods, privileging restrictive European

philosophies, ethics and worldview. In the West’s pursuit of the knowledge about the

‘Other’, its own assumptions were questioned and necessary steps have been taken, ever

since, to re-situate ‘scientific’ research, particularly that which involves Pacific cultures,

within a truly Oceanic perspective. Tuhiwai Smith’s representation of the research

agenda, conceptualized using the metaphor of ocean tides, and “situated within the

decolonization politics…[focusing] strategically on the goal of self-determination”

(1999, pp. 115,116), is one valid way of looking at how epistemic-independence may be

approached. According to Burik (2006), “upset[ting the] framework from within [the

research institution]…and showing the narrowness and one-sidedness of traditional

western epistemology” (p. 72) works. This is unlike “postmodernism’s…ahistorical

representation of social life as a continuing conflict between the colonizer and the

colonized [and which] denies Oceanic cultures a past without Europeans and their

colonizing activities” (Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12). Creating “that place” for indigenous

thinkers and researchers within academia, and in ways culturally appropriate, is a

positive development towards self-determination. This is particularly true given how

“humans cannot construct anything without being first in place…[hence, proving] that

place is primary to the construction of meaning and society” (as cited in Withers, 2009,

p. 642).

The search for ‘truth’ is a journey. Any search will take the seeker from place to place,

or around a “compartmentalized space” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 51) hence, through

space and time. Any research project searching for a situated Pacific ‘truth’, therefore,

must begin with the premise that “place [is] deeper than meaning and materiality,

something that could not be reduced to the social, the cultural or the natural” (as cited in

Withers, 2009, pp. 641, 642). This social constructionist approach to place, while

interested in the particularity of places, recognizes still that the culture of a peopled-

45��

place needs to be viewed as part of a broader system and not as uniquely isolated

(Withers, 2009, p. 643). For instance, though separated by miles of ocean water, Pacific

peoples, due to their shared “realities of living in [places within] an oceanic

environment, [still demonstrate and have] promulgated [an] openness to external

influences” (D’arcy, 2006, p. 2). Place, in this regard, is seen as the “situation [or the]

event [which contains] the [thinking] human being in it…[thinking as experience, that

is] or, the experience of thinking…[and which is, essentially] an experience with

language” (Burik, 2006, p. 74).

Any serious attempt to “understand…the relation between context, knowledge,

language and culture…[and as] one of the main frameworks from which Pacific

epistemologies work” (Burik, 2006, p. 74), in effect, must employ tools of “knowledge

representations…[which innovatively uses] both syntagmatic [and, to some extent],

paradigmatic relationships” (Svenonius, 2004, pp. 582, 583). To situate this research

project within what Geraghty (1994) calls “the Central Pacific region, [comprising Viti],

Rotuma…[Toga and Samoa]…[and] which [were] settled at about the same time…from

[Viti]” (pp. 59, 63), “[a] major determinant…of [linguistic] borrowing…morphology”

(p. 63) will be creatively used to analyze a string of concepts significant to this study.

As a constructionist research, the representation this research project will attempt to

offer will be carefully guided by the cautionary wisdom resounded by Hau‘ofa (2008):

“there are no final truths or falsehoods, only interpretations, temporary consensus, and

even impositions” (p. 61). The need to be able to correctly ‘read the context’ and

selectively ‘write the text’ has made it all the more necessary to employ decolonizing

research tools designed ultimately to liberate indigenous peoples hence, strengthen their

respective collective capacity to think and speak for themselves, and hopefully for

others.

Nabobo-Baba’s pioneering work, based on her Vugalei people’s way of knowing and

learning, for instance, is one such noble attempt to give voice to the silenced narratives

of one’s people, or “more specifically what [one’s own people believe] constitutes

important knowledge” (2004, p. 1). If not revealing, this iTaukei scholar’s innovation

46��

has been an inspiration. While “fanua/vanua/fonua [has been said to] denote the

land…[or a] cultural identity linked to land” (Vaai, 1999, p. 35), Nabobo-Baba’s (2006)

conceptualization of vanua as ‘place’ (p. 81), in framing iTaukei practice and discourse

(Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p.. 14), will contribute significantly to the development of a

dialogic body of iTaukei thought truly ‘grounded’ in ‘place’. Conceptualizing the vanua

to be ‘rooted’ in the past, the past being the “set of all places [‘made’] by human action

[and which should be read via ‘historical’] interpretation[s]” (as cited in Withers, 2009,

p. 648), would make an excellent platform from which the iTaukei worldview, and its

traditions, could be meaningfully related to and applied. Essentially, the construction of

a modern-day iTaukei identity rooted in the vanua-place concept may be understood

using academic Helu Thaman’s experience of creating a “philosophy…sourced from

different cultures and traditions…but rooted in [the] Tongan culture (2003, p. 2). In this

regard, “place [may be seen as] the raw material for the creative production of identity”

(as cited in Withers, 2009, p. 642), an identity that is created a posteriori.

Notions of time and space, due to our mobility and capacity to reason, are present in

every culture for “to exist is merely to be in [space] and [time]…both of which are

fundamental categories of reality” (M�hina, 2004, p. 89). The conception of lineal space

and time, for instance, is critical to the scientific project and research (Tuhiwai Smith,

1999) and, for the “reconstruction and analysis of historical processes” (Hau‘ofa, 2008,

p. 69). Even then, a lineal understanding of time is still consistent with indigenous

peoples’ notion of a circular time “tied to the regularity of seasons marked by natural

phenomena” (Hau‘ofa, 2008, p. 67) in how both provide viable ways to make sense of

an existence that is always moving away from a ‘past’ and into a ‘future’. The ‘forward-

looking’ view of time presented here is quite contrary to what Hau‘ofa (2008) discusses

as “locating the past in front and ahead of us and the future behind, following after us”

(p. 66) because it maintains that our embodiment proves that we walk and see into what

is ahead and yet to come. It is in the ‘seeing mind’ (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 339),

nonetheless, that the past and the future re-member with us in our current reality. To

choose to forget the past, and not to hope for a better future, therefore, is suicidal and

will result in the dis-membering of my essential parts – the past, present and future. It is

47��

in our “struggle for self-determination [that remembering and envisioning prove

critical] to [the] rewriting and rerighting of [our] position in history” (Tuhiwai Smith,

1999, p. 28). Decolonized time and space thinking, therefore, helps us to put things in

perspective and create and reorganize ‘texts’ within a proper ‘context’ (Burik, 2006),

innovatively preserving the past and the present in our cultural repositories and creative

expressions as we journey into the future (Hereniko, 2000).

This talanoa construction is, therefore, grounded in the notion that “language [is] more

than just speech and writing…[and, that other] systems of symbolic

signification…[like] chants, dance, poetry [and] rituals…are equal to writing in the

conventional sense” (as cited in Burik, 2006, p. 72). This implies that it is now up to

“indigenous artists, writers, poets, film makers and others who attempt to express an

indigenous spirit, experience or worldview” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 151) to construct

true and fair representations of their realities. According to Nabobo-Baba (2004), there

is a need for “researchers [who] engage in verbal exchanges [or talanoa with

indigenous peoples]…[to commit to] the reading of [their]…silences as well” (p. 31).

Transferring the application of the concept of silence to non-conventional systems of

symbolic signification, therefore, re-presents silence as the ‘necessary break’ to life or

the ‘essential pauses’ in various forms of expressions, and which is indirectly

acknowledged in Tuhiwai Smith’s conception of “celebrating [the] survival [of our]

cultural and spiritual values and authenticity” (1999, p. 145). This talanoa, in essence,

“is a collection of individual stories, ever unfolding through the lives of the people who

share the life of [a placed] community [or mata-group]” (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith,

1999, p. 145).

2.2.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing – a System of Representation

Mata, as a noun, has been defined as the “official representative or spokes[person], [the]

ambassador [much like the iTaukei notion of a] matanivanua, or [the] traditional

spokes[person] for [a] chief” (Gatty, 2009, p. 157). The matanivanua, as

“mediator…sets in motion the principle of ‘relationship’ or relatedness…speaks and

listens, represents…[and] negotiates…[hence, presupposing that s/he] must know

48��

[her/]his vanua inside-out” (as cited in Huffer & Qalo, 2004, p. 95). Morphologically

analyzing the concept of matanivanua as ‘mata of a peopled-place’ or ‘representative of

a mata-group’, the iTaukei system of vanua (or place) representation, as it was observed

on Lakeba between 1840 and 1843, and appropriately described as diplomatic (as cited

in Reid, 1990), gives the impression of a necessary and instituted link to society. A

mata-rep, therefore, could be portrayed as the embodiment of the “views and opinions

of [the] indigenous communit[y]…[hence, depicting] the notion of representation as

[both] a political concept and…a form of voice and expression” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999,

p. 150). Mata representation, therefore, suggests a re-framing and re-defining of what

we know and how we know what we know in our struggle not to be “boxed and labeled

according to categories which we do not fit” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 153).

According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), the iTaukei conception of vanua as people, land and

place (pp. 78, 81) is what frames iTaukei thought (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 14) hence,

our systems of representation and of knowing. On the same note, Tuhiwai Smith (1999)

argues that “imperialism frames the indigenous experience” (p. 19). The Tubou-Lakeba

experience, therefore, can be summed up as an active engagement with ancient and

established vanua veiwekani (related places) reaching as far east as Toga and Samoa,

and especially among neighbouring eastern Viti chiefdoms (Reid, 1990), and well

before European and Asian ‘occupation’. Reframing iTaukei thought, from one defined

by all expressions of imperialism, ‘regional’ or otherwise, to a kind of postcolonial

freethinking spirit, maybe achieved therefore, according to Tuhiwai Smith (1999), via

the decolonization project. Essentially, a truly decolonized frame of mind “draws upon

a notion of authenticity…[from] a time before colonization [however that is defined] in

which we were intact as indigenous peoples…[and, attempts to claim ownership of the

historical analysis of our] colonized time” (p. 24).

The iTaukei envoy (mata) system and all it entails, therefore, embodies what counts as

authentic iTaukei philosophy, knowledge and practice of a peopled-place or placed-

people (vanua) representation. Rhetorical exchanges between vanua mata

(representatives of ‘places’) observed as “ceremonial ethic and procedures” (Ravuvu,

49��

1987, p. 2), for instance, make up a significant part of the ‘readable narratives’ available

for ethnographic readings of the iTaukei ways of knowing and being. The subtleties of

these wholesome ceremonial exchanges, nonetheless, is what only native speakers and

hearers of the indigenous vocabulary and symbolism can appreciate, hence correctly

and fairly represent. According to Fanon (1990), indigenous scholars researching from

among, and for, their own must progress through three critical phases of their research

journey in order to become effective social-changers: assimilate into the occupying

culture, disturb the hegemony from within and, produce a revolutionary and national

literature (as cited in Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 70). Insider-researchers, therefore, may

be conceptualized by the iTaukei as mata-eyes and mata-reps of two worlds: the Vanua

ko Viti (the land and the people) and the vanua-place (institution) of research.

Essentially, their effectual use of decolonized methodologies works to bring from the

margin situated meanings constructed by the Vanua ko Viti, knowledge that can be used

to stir up change and reform, and which may be represented legitimately using

‘scientific methods’ of representation.

The study of the iTaukei people’s system of representation, therefore, is an inquiry into

what they conceptualize as “ivakarau [or ivalavala] vakaVanua (culture) [and which

has been defined as] life as it is lived on a day-to-day basis – custom and culture and

epistemology” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 72). According to Kwara’ae epistemology,

“anything born of the land and passed from generation to generation is part of [their all-

embracing concept] kastom” (Gegeo & Watson-Gegeo, 2001, p. 59). Similarly, from

iTaukei perspective, “indigenous knowledge stems from the more universal concept of

vanua [land or place]” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 73). Custom and culture, and indigenous

epistemology, being born of the vanua and orally transmitted from generation to

generation, and continuously represented as important vanua knowledge, remain the

critical factor which differentiates the vanua ‘ordained’ dau-experts from the novices,

or that which sets the tamata kila ka (knowledgeable persons), vuku (intelligent) and

yalomatua (wise) apart from the ujiriva (ignorant/foolish). According to Nabobo-Baba,

“yalomatua…[being] the appropriate application of knowledge to gain a desirable

quality of life” (2006, p. 75) is “the epitome of all knowledge categories” (2010, p. 14).

50��

An indigenous researcher, therefore, in representing her/his vanua (place) – as mata-ni

(eye/face of) or mata-ki (representative to) – must desire yalomatua (wisdom) more

than s/he seeks kila ka (just ‘gaining’ knowledge) in order to do justice to her/his vanua

role, hence correctly represent the ‘truth’ of her/his lived reality.

2.2.4 Indigenous Worldview – a basis for authentic ‘Decolonization of the Mind’

According to Arendt (1978), a learner’s worldview influences her/his thinking and

knowing abilities hence, her/his capacity to engage in meaningful and believable

learning, particularly that which results in conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993).

At a more practical level, Huffer (2004) argues that worldviews, inextricably tied to

value and belief systems, determine choices we make and shape our action and speech.

Based on a study by Bereiter and Scardamalia, it has been established that because “the

nature of knowledge [is] strongly related to measures of knowledge

building…[researchers/learners] need to understand that knowledge is subject to

inquiry, examination and improvement” (as cited in Lee 2010, p. 145). In this view, it

will be argued that what a people believes and values, in terms of what they hold to

constitute important knowledge, and their situated ‘theories’ of knowledge, have a

direct bearing on their capacity to engage in knowledge building activities, and vice-

versa. Herein lies the premise that because worldview impacts on conceptual change,

and conceptual change on knowledge building, worldview must be the ever important

underlying but adaptable body of knowledge that could lead to a true and lasting

decolonization of indigenous minds. For the iTaukei, therefore, decolonization could

begin with an appreciation of how “epistemology is governed by [their] worldview and

framed by the vanua” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 14).

In describing the scientific worldview upon which our modern civilization is grounded,

Huffer (2004) has this to say:

51��

“…man is a rational, thinking person who is free and autonomous, unbeholden to God, to the ancestors, to tradition or to the environment and who can therefore act upon the world and the environment scientifically, whose relationships with others can be essentially contractual rather than organic, and…this is [believed to be] applicable universally…”

Clearly, such a worldview is opposed to the indigenous experience. According to

indigenous worldview, we ‘think’ and ‘know’ through our entrails or, as we say, with

‘gut feeling’ and, intuitively, or with instinct (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 48). The same

idea has been further developed by Nabobo-Baba (2006) in her claim that her people

“[see also] with the heart, soul and stomach [arguing that] how people view the world

influences their beliefs and philosophies as well as the nature of their knowledge and

their way of knowing” (p. 37). According to Ravuvu (1987), our indigenous worldview

is reflected in our traditional ceremonies, much of which “use presentational

symbolism, [true also for music, art and poetry]…[which] cannot be encapsulated in a

word or phrase” (Svenonius, 2004, p. 581) – often always performed and presented with

passion and a kind of spirituality. A scientific understanding of how the human ‘mind’

works, therefore, pertaining to how it constructs, views and uses our worldview, may

help illuminate further discussion in this matter and, as it will be argued, may ease our

transition from ‘colonization’ through ‘decolonization’ to self-determination (Tuhiwai

Smith, 2006).

According to Lakoff and Johnson (1999), Locke’s ontology, or metaphysics of the

mind, derived from what they call “conceptual metaphors and folk theories of mind”, is

key to understanding cognition and how we make sense of the objective external reality

(p. 335). Further informed by the cognitive science’s empirically sound discovery of the

embodiment of ‘mind’ and the abstractness of metaphorical thought, Lakoff and

Johnson (1999) have set the stage for a “thorough rethinking of…Anglo-American

analytic philosophy and postmodernist philosophy” (p. 2). This research project,

therefore, will employ philosophical reflection, phenomenological analysis and the

understanding that “all of our knowledge and beliefs are framed in terms of a

conceptual system that resides mostly in the cognitive unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson,

52��

1999, pp. 11, 13), to give voice to our taken-for-granted view of our world and who we

are in it. Essentially, this research will assert that “while modern global technology

allows us to be detached from the earth and from people, indigenous wisdom…[and

knowledge] about the connectedness and interrelatedness of all things and all people”

(Helu Thaman, 2003, p. 12), will continue to influence indigenous thought and practice.

The decolonization of the indigenous mind, therefore, is about reclaiming our right to

articulate what we think and know and believe – the epistemological and ontological

bases of our very existence which show up daily in our ‘utterances’ and ‘silences’,

conscious or unconscious, and in metaphors we live by (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999).

2.2.5 The ‘Mind’, Thought and Metaphors – Seeing, Knowing and Knowledge

Embodied cognition, or locating the ‘mind’ internally, is a scientifically proven fact.

The cognitive unconscious, and which exists in the realm of thought only, constitutes

ninety-five percent of all thought and includes all our automatic cognitive operations

and implicit knowledge. Lakoff and Johnson (1999), in theorizing how the ‘mind’ or

reason is embodied, argue that the workings of the cognitive unconscious are evident in

our conscious thought, speeches and actions, and especially “how we automatically and

unconsciously comprehend what we experience” (p. 13). Evidently, the particularities

of our experiences can be attributed to primordial and naturalized differences which

culturally set the taukei (native) ‘One’ apart from the vulagi (stranger) ‘Other’ hence,

differentiating what each considers to be important knowledge, and epistemological

bases of perceiving and knowing. Nonetheless, due to our common embodiment, it has

been found that our conceptual systems are not totally relative thus, grounding a kind of

universal meaning in and through our bodies (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 5). In light of

this, it could be argued, therefore, that our common embodiment is good ground for

studying and appreciating cultures, and especially how their constructed place-based

tendencies actually make provision for cross-cultural dialogue and engagements.

The very possible notion of a personified faculty of understanding which can view idea-

objects within an internal viewing space, and which presupposes the Knowing Is Seeing

metaphor, is nearly definitive of how we think about the mind (Lakoff & Johnson,

53��

1999, p. 339). In assuming the universality of this conceptual metaphor, it could be

further argued that any culture thoroughly engrossed with seeing, sight and eye

metaphors, like that of the iTaukei, is one such site given to the ancient art of ‘critical

theorizing’. This capacity to be self-critical and yet constructive, therefore, presupposes

a self-sustaining philosophy that provides realistic guidance to people at the personal,

communal and global levels (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, pp. 340-342). The assertion that

“philosophical theories are attempts to refine, extend, clarify, and make consistent

certain common metaphors and folk theories shared within a culture” (Lakoff &

Johnson, 1999, p. 340) is therefore ground for critically analyzing, understanding and

appreciating the cultures these conceptual and imaginative resources emerge in. As

shown by their study and analysis, employing the cognitive science’s theory of

conceptual metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson (1999) found that “the metaphors that

shaped the metaphysical and epistemological doctrines of the Greeks have guided

philosophical and scientific thinking ever since” (p. 344), reading and representing

philosophical thought via metaphors, and vice-versa.

Cognitive science’s conception of the cognitive unconscious, as the hidden hand that

shapes conscious thought (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 12), now enlightens our

understanding of what it means to ‘know’, hence what it means to ‘see’. Making

meaning of such everyday experiences, therefore, relies on unconscious thought or, the

unconscious conceptual system that resides mostly in our cognitive unconscious (Lakoff

& Johnson, 1999, p. 13), the depths of which will always remain inaccessible to

conscious thought. This deeply seated body of thought, a metaphorical pool of mental

resources, is the well-spring that sources and sustains any deep thinking and knowing

necessary for a progressive conceptual change (as cited in Cobern, 1993), and may be

understood by studying the dialogic, situated and adaptable views of the world

individuals and communities hold. These cultural and social abstractions, according to

Helu Thaman (2003) therefore, embody our sense of self in the world. Essentially, how

a view is constructed and the foundational knowledge upon which it is grounded remain

rooted, metaphorically, in the cognitive unconscious of individuals who have culturally

“learned a conceptual system…and [who] are not free to think just anything” (Lakoff &

54��

Johnson, 1999, p. 5). This research project in articulating certain aspects of Tubou-

Lakeba ways of knowing and being, is thus grounded in the confidence that “what is

more important than what alternatives indigenous peoples offer the world is what

alternatives indigenous peoples offer each other” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 105). How

the people of Tubou-Lakeba see (perceive) and know (conceptualize) their world,

therefore, is foundational to the epistemological claim which they make: ‘Au raica ga

au kila!’ (‘I see [only] I know!’), the believable experience-based ‘truth’ proving how

epistemology is supported by metaphysical claims (Cobern, 1993).

2.3 Developing the Framework Any interpretive framework developed around a truly indigenous Pacific research

model cannot overlook the significance of the mana concept, and which is essentially

the “supernatural power associated with creativity and excellence” (Vaai, 1999, p. 28).

This timeless Oceanic concept, alternatively understood by most iTaukei of eastern Viti

as sau (Ravuvu, 1983, p. 86), the capitalized form of which, Sau, is used in reference to

the embodiment of the mana/sau of the Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place), himself the

highest ranking chief of the Vanua (Reid, 1990), embodies the very essence of

productivity. According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), “mana…the [force or spiritual] power

with which most things in the vanua are said to have life” (p. 49), has its origin in Bulu

(the underworld) and Lagi (the heavens), citing Tuwere (1992). Both these places, while

significant to iTaukei spirituality, are essential parts of their Vuravura, the “secular

world of people, plants, water, animals and spirits” (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, p. 38) and

which Ravuvu (1988) describes as the spiritual and mana sourcing dimension of what

the iTaukei conceptualize as the vanua (p. 6). Consider the diagrammatic representation

(Figure 1) below of what the iTaukei conceptualize as an all-generative vuravura-world,

and which ideally places mata-reps at the centre of her/his Vanua, native or otherwise.

Note that this vuravura-world concept consists both the Vanua taukei of one native to

place and the Vanua tani of her/his guest. What Nabobo-Baba (2006) conceptualizes as

the “theoretical [vanua] whole that embraces all people and their relationships...” (pp.

77, 78), therefore, has become the basis by which the opposite but complementary

vuravura-worlds of one taukei-familiar (with the Vanua taukei of the native) and

55��

another, vulagi-unfamiliar (with Vanua taukei, hence coming from Vanua tani), may be

viewed, analyzed and represented:

Figure 1 Vuravura-world View (from the ‘standpoint’ of one tau-kei or “yoked-with” place)

According to the iTaukei Vuravura-world view, and which is shaped by one’s sense of

‘vanua-place’, knowledge comes from and is established by how one perceives and

experiences reality. While there is abundant vanua knowledge [concerning] good and

bad spirits…and spiritually charged places and activities (Nabobo-Baba, 2006, pp. 45-

49), there remains the concept of vakamanamanataki, rooted in the mana concept and,

implying an agreeing in the spirit/heart/mind for a manifestation of what is ‘believed’ to

be the inherent mana of a thing or a person. Vakamanamana, in essence, is a yearning

or longing for the demonstration of a sacred mana-power belonging to a vanua people

or knowledge hence, asserting their place(s) in nature, society and in the mind. The

existence of a spiritual dimension, therefore, engaging the present vanua with the vanua

of the ancestors to ‘see’ into the imminent future (Ravuvu, 1988, p. 6), is something

most iTaukei would testify to. Coexisting with mana in the indigenous ‘mind’ also is

the equally significant and spiritualized tabu (tapu/taboo) concept, and which dictates

rules of engagement between the ‘sacred’ and the ‘secular’. According to Vaai (1999),

tabu are “conventions…laid down as a guide to interaction and appropriate behavior”

(Vaai, 1999, p. 46), the observance of which works to make more believable the

�� � � Physical dimension Socio-cultural dimension of Vanua Taukei of Vanua Taukei Vanua ‘Land’ of kaiViti [the native] Mata Vanua Tani (Lagi) Place ‘Other Lands’ of the kaiTani [the vulagi, ‘visitor’ or stranger]

� Physical Spiritual dimension � Socio-cultural of Vanua Taukei

� Spiritual Veivakataukeitaki (Familiarization) [for Tiko Veisaututaki or ‘Living together for Peace’]

56��

realness of an essential vanua mana, or vanua sau.4 Centering the mana and tabu

concepts in academic discourse, though far-fetched, is still characteristic of the post-

colonial or anti-colonial attitude correctly labeled as “researching back…[and which]

involve[s] a ‘knowing-ness of the colonizer’ and a recovery of ourselves, an analysis of

colonialism, and a struggle for self-determination” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 7). Re-

thinking mana/sau as ‘knowledge-based power’ and tabu as ‘social distance’, therefore,

gives the view of a kind of power (influence) that is gained by keeping relational

distances.

Functioning as a belief system shaping the iTaukei ‘mind’, thought and practice,

therefore, “traditional ceremonies continue to exist as a model…promoting and

sustaining human life, maintaining peace and achieving prosperity…[defining] the life,

peace and prosperity [concepts]…in a uniquely [iTaukei] way” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. vii).

Following the pronouncement of ‘Mana!’ (‘Be it done!), traditional ceremonies are

summed up thus: ‘Ei Dina! (‘May it truly be!’)…Amudo! Mudo!’ (with variations and

coupled with the cobo, a rhythmic clapping of cupped hands held at ninety degrees to

each other, and signifying Vanua acceptance) (Ravuvu, 1987; Williams, 1858). These

traditional exchanges, made by eloquent Mata (eyes/faces/reps of the Vanua) and

endorsed by the Turaga (embodiment of the mana/sau, the chiefly authority), are

always confirmed by the Vanua (people). In essence, these ivalavala vakaVanua

(customary practices of the land) vakaTuraga (of the chiefly) of the iTaukei function to

facilitate what Irwin (1989) describes as “[the] maritime culture of [a] people who…had

exchange [and knowledge] systems [covering] considerable distances” (as cited in

Nunn, 1998, p. 232). Herein, knowledgeable and articulate “Mata-ni-vanuas…through

[whom] the chiefs see the state of affairs” (Williams, 1858, pp. 26-28) are positioned at

the heart of veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) or “Auseinandersetzung (con-

frontation)” (Burik, 2006). Therein, they negotiate workable ‘trade’ agreements

between vanua veiwekani (related lands/peoples) in plenty and at war. Within this

Vanua vakaTuraga (otherwise, taukei-vulagi) framework, this research project will

attempt to locate what it calls the iTaukei mata system of knowing and, how that system

of representation works to bring about what the iTaukei conceptualize as sautu, the ‘All

57��

Good Life’. Represented here is a state of well-being which “cannot exist without

people, their relationships to each other and a balance with their protection and wise use

of the environment God gave them…the whole that is pivotal to [the iTaukei] Fijian

identity” (Nabobo-Baba, 2010, p. 22).

2.4 Chapter Summary Any social science research conducted by indigenous researchers among, and for, their

own communities can only do justice to that which they purport to do if the motivation

is humanistic and particularistic. Given how the West is strongly represented in

mainstream academia, indigenous researchers endeavouring to enter the university, and

the research institution, must “get in” though the gate of assimilation, intentionally “stir

it up” from within with indigenous ideas and, “give back” to their respective

communities via the production of an original and revolutionizing discourse. This, in

essence, calls for literatures that do not merely re-cycle or re-produce already ‘centered-

knowledge’, but stimulates the ‘mind’ with innovative representations and

reconstructions of ‘marginalized-knowledge’. What transpires, therefore, is a calculated

move to re-present one’s people and culture back to the West, asserting one’s

indigeneity and worldview, beliefs and values. This postcolonial attitude far surpasses

postmodernist motivations in that it moves beyond the typical ‘colonizer-colonized’

dialogue embodied by the latter to rename, reclaim and recover lost grounds. This

approach to research, in essence, is critical to the decolonization process colonized

peoples, and minds, must go through in their bid to reach self-determination.

In decolonizing the mind of the researcher, and the researched, decolonized

methodologies and established theories of the ‘mind’ and ‘thought’ provide a durable

framework to begin with. It has been found, for instance, that answers to philosophical

questions are largely metaphorical. In view of this, I have used a conceptual metaphor,

Knowing is Seeing, to seek to understand and explain an aspect of the iTaukei life or

reality: the abundance of mata metaphors and the existence of a workable mata-envoy

system of inter-Vanua engagement. My situated understandings of mata as eye(s),

face(s), front(s), representative(s), source(s) and grouping(s) have informed my insider-

58��

perspectives on what the iTaukei mata-envoy system truly embodies and perpetuates.

As such, this indigenous system of knowing is further projected as an exchange system

involving related peoples and places; a system of sharing and borrowing which has kept

a vanua-people infused with ‘raw’ intelligible ideas capable of generating greater good

for an oceanic people existing for millenniums in what I call an “all-generative Oceanic

space”. An appreciation of iTaukei ceremonies and customs, the ‘silent keepers’ of

iTaukei worldview, values and beliefs, helps position any insider-researcher of her/his

mother’s people at a philosophical place where s/he is able to draw from the riches

‘buried’ in her/his cognitive unconscious, the largely abstract and metaphorical ‘hidden

hand’ that shapes conscious thought. A clear understanding of the iTaukei worldview,

therefore, will help any future endeavour to seriously engage iTaukei learners

‘epistemologically’ and ‘metaphysically’ in what I call their “metaphorical existence”.

Engaging iTaukei learners experientially, and in their particularistic conditions of

‘situated-ness’ or ‘yoked-ness with place’, therefore, calls for a re-reading of their

vanua frame of thinking and knowing, the indigenous ‘base’ sourcing and supporting

their experienced notions of well-being, the ‘all good life’ (sautu) which have sustained

them for centuries and generations. To understand, and articulate, their

conceptualizations of ancient conceptions such as vanua (land/place/people), turaga

(chiefs/leaders), taukei (natives), vulagi (foreigners), vuravura (worlds), mata (sources)

and sautu (plenty), phenomenological inquiry would be fused with philosophical

reflection and metaphorical reasoning to ‘experience’ (think/ know/see/feel) particular

aspects of the iTaukei culture that would not have been observed otherwise. The

specifics of the methodological framework used to extract the particularistics of the

“metaphorical experiences” of iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba and, their understandings and

conceptualizations of concepts framed into the research questions, would be explicated

further, and in greater detail, in the ‘Methodology’ chapter following. This chapter,

therefore, has only opened up dialogue that will hope to despiritualize indigenous

conceptions like sau/mana and tabu (tapu/taboo), in addition to the ones highlighted

above, in an attempt to make ‘comprehensible’ and ‘believable’ conceptions embodied

59��

in the iTaukei worldview and, which will be scientifically represented in this talanoa-

construction.

������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Refer to Tuhiwai Smith (1999, p. 23). 2 Postcolonialism being the ‘antidote’ to the poison of imperialism and, as cited in Tuhiwai Smith (1999, p. 23), is a case of the empire writing back from the ‘edges’ and which is not quite anticolonial. 3 Cultural empiricism as conceived by Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 126) to involve “knowledge [which] is influenced by the mind, the heart and the soul”. 4 According to Nabobo-Baba (2006), “Tabu and mana signify the presence of God and spirits among people. All things that exist without tabu and mana are said to be ka wale (useless, common, of little impact, not profound)” (p. 59).

60 �

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

We must now all – I put it to you Oceanic people, Pacific academics and students alike – seriously consider ourselves as both producers and consumers of knowledge…[for] a consumption-led education elusively breeds educational, economic and political dependency. Dependency is itself an excellent tool of social control and effective instrument of political domination. Only in being both thinkers and doers can we – the people of the Moana Nui – liberate ourselves from the bondage of perpetual dependency, when we can fully realize our hugely common intellectual capacity and practical potential. ‘Okusitino M�hina1

3.1 Introduction Pacific or indigenous research framed by postcolonial thinking can only do justice to

that which they claim to do if they use research methods that are culturally appropriate

and qualitative in nature (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Sanga, 2004; Nabobo-Baba, 2004).

This is particularly so because for any research project grounded in the humanistic,

phenomenological tradition, quantification may be rendered inappropriate hence,

necessitating that ethnographic methods of inquiry and representation are employed in

order to guarantee the validity, the accuracy and trustworthiness of the data and research

findings (Bernard, 1995, pp. 16, 38).

This scientific inquiry into the way of life of iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba draws heavily

from Nabobo-Baba’s (2006) Vanua Research Framework or VRF (pp. 135-137), and

the four categories of knowledge she proposed: the vanua, lotu or spirituality, itovo

vakaVanua or custom, and veiwekani or kinship. The framework is further developed by

incorporating the notion of Vanua Mata (eyes, faces, sources, representatives or

communities of the Vanua), and as intrinsic to their worldview and ways of knowing

and being. The creative and liberal use of mata conceptions and concepts by the

iTaukei, collectively and individually, as conceived in the iTaukei ‘mind’ or ‘womb’,

testifies to the tu or ‘existence’ of an inherently humanistic tendency which vura or

61 �

‘emerge’ from their time-tried real life experience of ‘knowing by seeing’ via their

common embodiment.

3.2 Epistemological and Methodological Positions Epistemologically, this research is based on the premise that because abstract thought is

largely metaphorical, much of what we call philosophy and theorizing must be derived

from conceptual metaphors hence, suggesting that philosophical thinking is grounded in

embodied reason, a position thoroughly opposed to the dominant western conception of

rationality and empiricism (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999). As such, Lakoff and Johnson’s

(1999) ‘Knowing is Seeing’ metaphor, signifying a conceptualization based on

perception, or the idea of a viewing and thinking ‘mind’ influenced by the

distinctiveness of our embodiment (p. 339), will be further explored in light of how

iTaukei often believingly cite ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (meaning: ‘I see [only], I know’)

to validate how they know and what they claim to know. At face value, one is drawn to

think that this ‘seeing’ and/or ‘knowing’ involves only the use of the natural senses and

a ‘mind’ situated in the ‘head’, as Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) arguments seem to

suggest. This research project, in using the iTaukei experience, will argue that one’s

ability to ‘perceive’ and/or ‘conceptualize’ include also the use of what has been called

‘intuition’ and ‘instinct’, and a knowing that is situated in the ‘heart’, ‘stomach’ and/or

‘womb’ also; the whole body (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999; Nabobo-Baba, 2006). Herein is

suggested an embodied, and a holistic and genuinely humanistic approach to ‘seeing’

and ‘knowing’ that involves more than what the ‘seeing eye’ sees and the ‘knowing

mind’ can conceive. Evidently, what transpires is a new way of understanding

rationality and empiricism – a redefining of the bounds of epistemology, or philosophy,

a truly Philosophy in the Flesh (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999).

If knowing is seeing, then it would be safe to say that seeing leads to knowing, and that

knowing influences seeing. The natural conclusion would be that any entity with ‘eyes’

and a ‘mind’ has the capacity to perceive and to know. Humanity’s longstanding

experience with the use of its perceiving and conceptualizing instruments, naturally

occurring or otherwise, to survive in its changing physical and cultural landscapes, may

62 �

explain, in part, what can be termed as a “cultural syndrome” (Ananthanarayanan & St.

Clair, 2012). The iTaukei ‘fondness’ with the use of the mata concept to ‘name’2 some

very important institutions, for instance, the matanitu (government), mataniciva (a

metaphor for education or schooling), mataveitokani (a church-group fellowship) and

mataivalu (army)3, in essence, is one such cultural syndrome characteristic of the

iTaukei. Over time, these institutions developed standard procedures or methods, and

which became customs and traditions by which the iTaukei researcher, or even outsider-

researchers, may access specific categories of vanua knowledge through “participant-

observation”, or observing through practice, using the notion that ‘Keta vuli ga mai na

weta rai!’ (We merely learn from what we see!)4. Essentially, this research project will

advance the notion that the existence of what I call mata institutions, or mata places,

proves the point that to the iTaukei, seeing (hence, knowing) is as much a group activity

as it is an individual experience.

It follows, therefore, that cultural knowledge is conceptualized as something which is

socially constructed by individuals and within their cultural groupings, existing as

cultural syndromes and shaping their worldviews, and is transmissible across cultures,

as information, via the use of metaphors which build bridges to another culture’s

meaning (Ananthanarayanan & St. Clair, 2012). This research project, in essence, will

argue that metaphors – conceptual, ‘tired and old’ or novel – provide excellent

methodological directions to be followed by any inquiry focusing on cultural

knowledge, especially in the pursuit of cross-cultural engagement. Consider the model

below showing how the cultural gap between the iTaukei and the outsider-researcher,

and even the insider-visitor, a gap which often stands in the way of conducting balanced

and ethical scientific inquiries into the iTaukei culture may be bridged, and by applying

what I call the ‘Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge’:

63 �

Figure 2 The Mata-Mata Model of Accessing Vanua Knowledge

The above model represents what the iTaukei Mata (representatives) of one Vanua

vakaTuraga know full well about gaining access into another Vanua vakaTuraga, a

critical information which can be used to guide indigenous and Pacific research,

particularly among, and for, the iTaukei. The very real possibility of using this model in

cross-cultural engagements lies in the ‘vanua-mata’ relationship – vanua as peopled-

place, and mata as placed-people. This conception of Vanua (as named/claimed places)

suggests that the ‘environment’, or ‘place’, shapes the human in it, and vice-versa

hence, implying that the two are engaged in an eternal relationship and exist together to

bring out the best in each, realizing their potential as keeper of the other. Mata, on the

other hand, is conceptualized as a knowing and seeing community positioned as one

made up of ‘knowledgeable-experts’ whose articulate representations of the vanua (or

of ‘place’) not only reflect the people’s collective perspective but, also shape vanua

outlook or their worldview and what and how they know. Essentially, one enters the

vanua via the mata-mata (eye-eye) gate, or not at all. In entering, therefore, one is able

to truly raica (see), kila (know) and vakila (feel) for within the Vanua vakaTuraga

Mata-mata (Gate) [lit. Eye-Eye] via the Mata (eye/face/rep)- ni (of) Vanua and Turaga institutions Vanua vakaTuraga

[At the Abstract & Ceremonial Level]

[At the Socio-

Cultural Dimension]

vanua-land (territorial)

vanua-places (ancestral)

Placed-people

[At the Physical &

Spiritual Levels]

ANCIENT PLACE

EYES

MERGER INSTITUTION

Peopled-place

Placed-knower

�

institution (

practiced (m

all it takes to

This contin

learning, an

constitute a

to [one that

life’, therefo

the world a

Essentially,

will continu

me, this cha

come about

Figure 3

The totality

synchronize

conceptualiz

experience (

influencing

Herein is p

(constituting

me vala) – v

o ‘know’ is t

nuous lifelon

nd that which

‘knowing b

t involves] c

ore, one’s ev

around her/h

a constructi

ually inform

art summariz

for the enth

How real k

y of learnin

ed actions

zed as an ac

(perception

each other,

presented a t

g placed-peo

validating the

to ‘see’, real

ng process t

h follows po

by seeing’ th

coordinated

veryday exp

him, and how

ionist resear

her/his deci

zes how I p

husiastic lear

knowledge come

ng (vuli ka),

of ‘seeing

ctive engage

and concept

refining ‘th

truly experi

knowi(

knowing by raica (seeing)

64

ople), there

e situated cl

lly see that i

towards hig

ositive conc

hat “shift[s] f

actions” (K

perience con

w that exper

cher’s episte

sion making

erceive real

rner.

es about for the

, thus know

’, ‘feeling’

ement betwe

tualization) a

heories’ and

ence-based

ing by vakilafeeling)

knowvalata

are ivalaval

laim ‘Au rai

s.5

gher (concep

ceptual chang

from [just] a

Keso et al., 2

ntinues to inf

rience is con

emological a

g throughout

knowledge,

e enthusiastic le

wing (kila k

and ‘doin

een the head

and thought

d knowledge

approach to

wing by a (doing)

la (ways) o

ica ga, au k

ptual) and d

ge, can be c

a knowing m

2009, p. 56)

fluence her/

nceptualized

and methodo

t the research

, indigenous

earner

ka), and wh

ng’, reflect

d, the heart

(conscious a

e, and sharp

o learning a

of knowing t

kila!’ arguing

deeper (spir

conceptualiz

mind [concep

. In ‘doing

/his percepti

d, and vice-v

ological posi

h project, an

s or otherwi

hich involve

s what can

and the han

and unconsc

pening life s

and knowing

to be

g that

ritual)

zed to

ption]

bula-

on of

versa.

itions

nd for

se, to

es the

n be

nds –

cious)

skills.

g that

65 �

involves the person as a whole, and which uses the seven senses of a learner. According

to Pheloung and King (1992), these seven senses are sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch,

“the one that gives the brain messages from the joints, muscles and ligaments…[and

another which is] related to the pull of gravity, the response of our head to gravity and

movement in space” (Pheloung & King, 1992, pp. 26, 27).

3.2.1 Theorizing ‘Vanua vakaTuraga’ as a Research Framework

Vanua-lands have been given, traditionally, in the name of a marama (a woman of

noble birth from a placed-people group)6. Reconceptualizing the vanua/Vanua

conception as a marama-lady and, given that the word Turaga signifies both ‘chiefly’

and ‘manly’ essences (as opposed to mere tagane-maleness), a Vanua vakaTuraga can

be theorized, therefore, to consist of a relationship similar to that shared between a

productive ‘womb-man’ and a ‘chiefly’ or ‘manly’ person.7 This theory, at one level,

locates the vanua-land, a natural part of the vuravura-world that sources and supports

the iTaukei life, as something which can be cultivated or developed, by the people or

the ‘manly’, to produce bula sautu, a bula-living sautu-prosperity. The same theory, at

another level, positions vanua-people as potentially productive but, only in the hands of

the ‘chiefly’, those who are ‘traditionally installed’ as vanua leaders, to direct the

Vanua vakaTuraga in the pursuit of a bula sautu which is locally defined and produced.

It is when the Turaga, ‘manly-cultivators’ and ‘chiefly-leaders’, are restored to their

vanua positions and roles, “mov[ing] more or less in tune with ecology and the nature

of human relations” (Scarr, 2008, p. 13), and as ‘manly’ developers of the vanua-land

and/or ‘chiefly’ leaders of vanua-people, will the land and people continue to produce a

sustainable abundance. This theoretical framework is critical to this study because the

iTaukei mata system of representation, and which is proposed here to be a system of

knowing simplistically described as an envoy system (Reid, 1990, p. 15), can be further

theorized to have emerged over time only to connect and keep connecting a number of

distantly related Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places)8. These inter-Vanua engagements,

consequently, would have led to the emergence of a number of distinct ‘chiefly’ or

‘manly’ systems of leadership within the Central Pacific region alone.

66 �

Evidently, the relatively ancient Vanua and, the more recent Turaga institution, are seen

to be interacting here, the latter complementing the former (Hooper, 1996, p. 247),

particularly when both institutions emerged from within their vuravura-world, the

Turaga rooted in the Vanua. This view, therefore, places the Vanua institution as the

one older and wiser, relegating the Turaga to a subordinate position. Having such an

outlook is critical to this study for to understand the yalomatua (a wise spirit) concept,

an essential characteristic of everyone ‘selected’ to mata-niVanua (as in representative

of ‘place’ embodying mana/sau of that ‘place’) roles, requires a ‘deeper’ knowing of

the ancientness of ‘place’ (vanua) and the importance of ‘placed knowers’ (or mata-

reps). This assumption is foundational to my ‘selection’ as one worthy to represent both

the institution of indigenous and Pacific research, and the researched Tubou-Lakeba

community – as one grounded in the ‘knowing’ of the ancientness of the research

institution and the Vanua ko Tubou-Lakeba.9 To do justice to my ‘entrusted’ position as

mata-rep of these vanua-places of knowledge, therefore, greater reflexivity via ongoing

“researcher-material interaction” (Keso et al., 2009) will be engaged in and consciously

pursued.10

The Vanua vakaTuraga conception, as a Pacific research framework, essentially depicts

the islands and its settler communities as Vanua socially ordered and politically aligned

to a central chiefly/manly system of leadership that recognizes individual intelligence

and prowess. These communities, essentially, are largely communal, agriculture-based

and dependent on the sea to keep their connectedness with their own people, and other

related Vanua hence, consciously maintaining intra- and inter-Vanua engagement for

their collective good. This understanding may explain, in part, the appointment of

daring ‘seafarers’ to chiefly/manly titles by land-based peoples, in the past. In such

encounters, the exchange of artifacts, land, knowledge and even genetic material

became inevitable as the taukei (native) land ‘owning’ people and vulagi (peculiar

visitor[s]) ‘intermarried’ and lived together in the maliwa-spaces over many life-times

(or generations). From within these shared spaces emerged a reverence11 for the

mana/sau possessed by the ‘conqueror[s] of the deep’, the ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’ Turaga

persons/tribes.12 Note that though the Turaga (later migrations) were the more recent

67 �

‘conquerors’, the Vanua (earlier migrations) themselves braved the same oceanic

conditions. Essentially, the Vanua had become more land-based at the arrival of the

Turaga centuries later. It is in the Vanua or land-people’s sauvaki (service/worship) of

the Sau (chiefly-leader embodying the mana/sau of the land), the Turaga from a recent

migration considered not to be ‘of-the-land’, that privileging customs were conceived,

given birth to, believed in and nurtured by the merger Vanua vakaTuraga (lit. ‘Vanua

having Turaga’). Such a privileging system favouring the ‘manly’ and the ‘chiefly’ can

still be observed today in how ‘givers of the sau/mana’, the Vanua, continue to

‘worship’ the embodiment of the sau/mana that they themselves gave, the Sau (chief-

administrator). The widening ‘social distance’, between the ‘givers’ of the sau (power)

and its ‘takers’, created over time by this privileging system, is there for everyone to

‘see’, hidden in what I call the silent ‘participating-observers’ of tradition13.

In the Tubou-Lakeba context, the Vanua vakaTuraga model – an enduring ecology-

based relationship between the Vanua and the Turaga institutions, the ‘land-givers’ and

the ‘land-takers’, respectively – is clearly lived to this generation in how the yavusa

Vuanirewa/Turaga (of the chiefs, the ‘leaders’) and the yavusa Vanua (of the land-

people, the ‘led’)14 lead their daily lives. As a research framework, the Vanua

vakaTuraga conception speaks, essentially, of the ‘placed-ness’ or ‘situated-ness’ of

knowledge representation. This mata system of representation, constructed locally and

representing ‘place’, its human inhabitants and their knowledge, comprises ‘leaders’ or

‘experts’ and the ‘led’ or ‘practitioners’.15 The Vanua vakaTuraga, at another level,

demonstrates an enduring power-relation wherein power is ideally shared by the

‘electors’ (or ‘land-givers’) and the ‘elects’ (or ‘land-takers’) who are vakaunumi (made

to drink the installation cup). Essentially, the wai-ni-Vanua (referring to yaqona/kava)

presented by the Vanua at installations, and ‘authorizing’ the receiver to rule, is

nourished by a Vanua imagination older than their remembered pasts, but believably

rooted in their Vu-kalou, their ‘originators-turned-gods’. Approaching knowledge and

knowledge construction among iTaukei via a culturally appropriate framework that re-

conceptualizes ‘knowledge-places’ as more than just peopled-places privileging placed-

peoples, but also as a productive whole made up of two essential parts, the Vanua

68 �

(led/supporters) and the Turaga (leaders/protectors), is bound to encourage greater

participation in modern-day Viti given its humanistic, inclusive and culturally-sensitive

position.

3.2.2 Positioning the Mata-rep within the Framework

This approach to indigenous research sees the Vanua vakaTuraga as essentially two-

eyed: one of the ‘eyes’ being the mata-niVanua (eye of the Vanua [‘electors’]

institution), and the other, what I call the mata-niTuraga (eye of the Turaga [‘elected’]

institution). Essentially, for any ‘seeing-knowing’ (and doing) person, or group of

persons, two-eyedness is critical for keeping a right focus and, for making some real

progress – the one keeping an eye on the other. This is how the Vanua vakaTuraga

keeps a check on itself and what it constructs as important vanua knowledge.

Nonetheless, it is well noting that the mata-niVanua (eyes/reps of ‘place’) and mata-

niTuraga (eyes/reps of ‘the placed’), as roles or offices, may be ‘filled’ by the same

person, or group of persons. For the indigenous constructionist researcher, therefore,

these alternating roles would help make allowance for adequate reflexivity, as an

“insider-researcher”, positioning oneself within a knowledge (knowing/learning) system

either as mata-rep of the led (the researched/authored) or mata-rep of the leaders (the

research/authorizing institution) – all being lewe-niVanua (flesh/members of [the same]

Vanua whole), the situated human family. This understanding, in essence, re-positions

all social scientists studying human societies as “insider-researchers”: insiders as

‘members’ of the human race and outsiders as ‘members’ of the research institution.

Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei conception of a vuravura-world,

therefore, helps the insider-researcher further by giving her/him the opposite but

complementary spaces of taukei (local) and vulagi (visitor) – as one who is thoroughly

familiar with the ‘local’ but essentially positioned as an outsider. It is in following

protocol, at the traditional presentation of yaqona/kava for her/his isevusevu-

introductions to the Vanua upon arrival, to do ‘field-work’, that the insider-researcher

working among iTaukei declares her/his interests and loyalty both to the Vanua and the

academy hence, presenting herself/himself as a vulagi-taukei (visiting-native). While

69 �

working amongst her/his own people (even as a vasu [of maternal links, that is]), the

insider-researcher, whose isevusevu had been received and ‘blessed’ by the Vanua,

essentially by its mata-rep (of Vanua vakaTuraga, that is), and with the pronouncement

of the Mana! Ei dina! Amudo!, is accepted both as one taukei (who is of them) and a

vulagi (representing knowers from another place). The finality of declarations made at

traditional ceremonies, therefore, once the isevusevu is presented and received for

instance, is something true iTaukei, or one made taukei (familiar) by way of

veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), can truly appreciate and begin to make critical

research decisions upon.

This two-eyed Vanua-Turaga union, essentially, comprise generations of people rooted

in an ‘ancient vanua-place’. Place, in this regard, is the theoretical whole which

embraces a placed-people’s physical and social realities, and spirituality, dating back to

when they ‘planted’ their first ‘seed’ on vanua soil. Over time, this ‘place’ would have

grown into a stratified society whereby the highest and relatively younger branches,

though carrying the present and passing beauty of the whole, is vitally dependent upon

the life and strength of the ancient roots. This tree analogy of the Vanua vakaTuraga

implies that any present-day representation of the whole, once broken off the main body

of the Vanua, will prove incapable of surviving on its own. Nonetheless, the recent

emergence of newer branches serves to enlarge Vanua capacity by extending the reach

of the metaphorical tree into a ‘brighter’ future and ‘deepening’ the stretch of its roots

into a relatively unknown vanua past, simultaneously, in the present.

This analogy is particularly critical to this study given that in the Tubou-Lakeba

tradition, the leading clan, the yavusa Vuanirewa (‘land-takers’)16 from which the

highest ranking chief on the island today is appointed, came from a neighbouring

ancient chiefdom hence, is essentially a vulagi (‘stranger’) to the Vanua ko Lakeba. By

‘intermarrying’ with the yavusa Vanua (‘land-givers’) and in the consequent transfer of

‘land-rights’, the Vuanirewa were to be effectively ‘grafted’ into the original placed-

people of Lakeba. What exists, now, is a two-way mata system of vanua representation,

connecting people within (‘land-givers’) and without (‘land-takers’). This may be

70 �

theorized further to involve the merging of the “standpoint theory” (as cited in Gegeo,

2006) of the kaiVanua (a largely land-based people) or, as according to Hocart (1929),

the ‘landsmen’ (as cited in Hooper, 1996) and, what I call the “shifting horizon

perspective” of the kaiWai (a largely sea-based people):

Figure 4 Situating the Vanua vakaTuraga within the iTaukei notion of a Vuravura-World [from ‘Standpoint’ of a local/native viewing her/his Vanua vakaTuraga from a distance, out at sea]

Lagi-the heavens [source of lagi-rain, and origin of vulagi-stranger] Perceived dome-shaped protective cover of the vuravura-world Mata-niVanua Mata-niTuraga [Eye/Face of Vanua] [Eye/Face of Turaga] Wai-Ocean/Sea Vunilagi-horizon [Vanua ‘Other’] [Root ofLagi] Vanua [‘land-givers’] Bulu [lit. ‘bury/cover’, otherwise

known as the ‘Underworld’]17

3.2.3 The ‘Shifting Horizon’ of Mata navigators On land, vanua-people, particularly the ‘landsmen’ (women included), literally shift

their horizon by moving up to a higher altitude and/or across the breadth of their island

home. Out at sea, eastern Viti navigators of the ancient waqa vakaViti (lit. ‘canoes of

Viti’), most of which sailed inter-island on wind-power, naturally shifted their horizon

as they glided across the ocean on their sea-worthy crafts. These canoes, representing

availability of raw materials, excellent craftsmanship, time-tried canoe technologies and

ancient navigation systems, were already a commodity connecting Viti, Toga and

Samoa decades before the central Pacific waters became swathed in vulagi-strangers,

the vu-maiLagi (‘gods from Lagi’). This lived reality, presumably, would have had an

impact on how Pacific peoples view their world, the nature of the self and how they

Turaga

‘land-takers’

71 �

relate to their world and to one another. Essentially, their situated understanding of

“[‘science’ as] knowledge of particular aspects of experience” (Biggs, 1994, p. 1), and

as ‘recorded’ in their oral traditions, would have been the essential “knowledge-base”

imbued with sau/mana that preserved them and their cultures in their various

occurrences of situated-ness. As dau-experts of specialized knowledge, Pacific peoples

demonstrated their collective need to remain connected and communal. This was a

lesson learned the hard way, out at sea, where cooperation with the mata-navigator and

‘crew’ was critically important for survival, for their collective bula sautu – a bula-life

demonstrating the existence (tu) of their individual and collective knowledge-based

sau/mana to get things done.

For the Mata navigator, therefore, the indigenous researcher that is, a shift in her/his

horizon, hence her/his viewing capacity would be made possible only with adequate

horizontal and/or vertical shifts – herein conceptualized as ‘domain-space’ and ‘range-

time’ specific, respectively – horizontally with regards to knowledge and relationships,

and vertically, pertaining to efficacy and progressiveness. The iTaukei dependence on

both the sea and land spaces, and their resources, coupled with the very real existence of

the kaiVanua-kaiWai (land-people - sea-people) dichotomy within Tubou-Lakeba

discourses, is evident in the presence of both land (vanua) and sea (wai) related

concepts, knowledge, views and values which have become ‘taken-for-granted’ as mere

linguistic features. This scientific inquiry, in essence, is based on the assumption that

though “homonymy, metaphor, polysemy, and unlabelled categories preclude a precise

congruence between linguistic labels…and conceptual categories…language [still

holds] our most substantial clues as to the structure of a people’s cultural domains”

(Feinberg, 1978, p. 128).

This research project, therefore, will employ what may be regarded as the ‘changing

standpoint of a constantly moving observer’ or, otherwise, a “shifting-horizon theory”

of knowing and learning. While this theory, in essence, predisposes oceanic peoples to

‘dot-connecting’, it limits the learner’s capacity/ability to her/his conception of her/his

vuravura-world. This means that the bigger one’s awareness of her/his vuravura-world,

72 �

the greater and broader the connectivity or network, and opportunities of sharing.

Essentially, the widening of one’s network of ‘traversed places’ translates to the

expansion of her/his knowledge-base hence, her/his ‘creative-power’ and productivity.

Key to the extension of one’s vuravura-world, therefore, is rootedness in an ancestral

place and, the ability to be constantly on the move locating new ‘lands’ and

‘possibilities’. This ‘shifting horizon theory’, when applied to the notion of knowledge-

sharing, gives the idea of a sharing that is not a one-off kind of thing but, one that

lingers on over time and through space. This may help explain why indigenous peoples

spread across the globe have maintained elements of their indigenous cultures, proving

their rooted-ness in an ancient place, despite their high mobility. The indigenous

researcher, therefore, who is constantly moving between knowledge places and spaces,

and across disciplinary boundaries, will quickly find herself/himself acquiring an

attitude that embraces a progressive discourse, always “maintain[ing] a tentative

attitude towards [one’s] understanding” (Lee, 2010, p. 145) – always conceiving,

always looking, always shifting.

3.3 Grounding the Methodology, the Interpretive Framework This research project is grounded, therefore, in the assumption that “knowledge is

relativist and inseparable from the context and the social realities” (Sanga, 2004, p. 45)

of the peoples or cultures being researched. This implies that the Tubou-Lakeba

metaphorical reality, and which I am persuaded I have been ‘naturally selected’ to

journey through since my conception in the womb of a lady from the Vanua ko Lakeba,

is what they have always made it out to be, rooted and routed, culturally established and

essentially inclusive. It is further assumed that such a situated-ness of knowledge

‘constructed’ within the Tubou-Lakeba vuravura-world, hence informed by their

worldview, can only be understood and appreciated experientially before any real

‘theorizing’ can be attempted or even contemplated. My connectedness to my mother’s

land and people, for instance, through the umbilical cord phenomenon18 and in the

formative years of developing my conceptual system in her Lakeba epistemologies, has

philosophically positioned me to research and represent her people compared to a

cultural outsider, or an untrained insider.

73 �

What transpires now is the need to develop and articulate a sound methodological

position. According to Sandra Harding (as cited in Evening, 2004), a research

methodology can be conceptualized as “the theory of knowledge and the interpretive

framework that guides a particular research project” (p. 110). This constructionist

research, therefore, draws from both rationalism and empiricism using known and

learned facts to theorize a priori and a posteriori, conceiving probable effects and

possible causes of the very real socio-cultural phenomenon hereby named as the iTaukei

mata system of representation, and knowing. Data collected will be analyzed

thematically to support or negate the assumption that such a system emerged and now

exists to facilitate all manner of exchange, intra- and inter-Vanua, for the attainment of

what the iTaukei conceptualize as a sustainable bula sautu (real prosperity). Drawing

from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, therefore, the vanua frame has been further developed,

theoretically, as Vanua vakaTuraga – the ‘productive place’ comprising the mata-iAdi

(womb)19 of the Vanua (‘led’), and ‘the chiefly’ or ‘the manly’ Turaga (‘leaders’).

3.3.1 Re-constructing Ethnography, the Ethnographer and her/his Methods

According to Ravuvu (1987, p. vii):

In analyzing [iTaukei] ceremonies, a number of key elements and issues came to light. These include social integration and cooperation, allocation of power and privilege, flexibility of ceremonial functions, security and protection, productivity, redistribution and equity, continuity of life and relationships, identity and inter-[Vanua] relations, use of time and resources, participation, and the need for transformation and superordination in life.

Concisely, what Ravuvu is saying is that any valid social science inquiry into the

iTaukei life, and culture, is all about engaging with and experiencing the ceremonial. In

other words, this ambitious undertaking can never be done without active participation

in the iTaukei way of doing life. This knowledge is critical for any humanistic and

constructionist research, even by indigenous researchers on their own people, because

“participant observation [is necessary for any] scientific research about cultural groups”

(Bernard, 1995, p. 140) and, for the iTaukei, that includes an unreserved commitment to

the community under study, particularly at the ceremonial level. Though the ‘sensual’

74 �

experience of the iTaukei reality is essential, thus the need to participate, a balanced and

critical observation comes only by way of ‘distanced’ reasoning. In using the “shifting

horizon perspective”, framed by the Vanua vakaTuraga conception or the ‘productive

peopled-place’ phenomenon, the issue of objectivity can be addressed by alternately

adopting the kaiVanua (‘the taukei-insider host’ or, ‘land-giver’) and kaiWai (‘the

vulagi-outsider guest’ or, ‘land-taker’) positions to view and analyze one’s reality from

two viable perspectives.

What goes down as a legitimate ethnographic description, therefore, is not merely the

articulation of ‘dry’ narratives but, the translation hence, interpretation20 of culturally

loaded concepts. Consequently, the use of language to transmit meaning across cultures

as “socially transmitted information” (Ananthanarayanan & St. Clair, 2012) will be

employed in the understanding that, in the process, both thinking and language will be

transformed (Burik, 2006, p. 73). This view supports the notion that “our knowledge

about the world is constructed rather than a priori” (as cited in Evening, 2004, p. 110)

hence, acknowledging that “research is value-bound and influenced by researcher, the

researched, the conceptual framework used, the methodology and the context” (Sanga,

2004, p. 47). This means that though objectivity will be pursued throughout the course

of this inquiry, the knowledge extracted and represented will still be expected to reflect

iTaukei thought and, particularly, that of the Tubou-Lakeba people because “objectivity

does not mean value neutrality” (Bernard, 1995, p. 153). Nonetheless, the

transmissibility of this aspect of the iTaukei reality across cultures, via metaphors, still

stands proving the fact that indigenous researchers, as ‘learned’ human beings, are

predisposed to constructing anew from whatever knowledge they already have in their

cognitive unconscious, and in the quality of their present-day experience.

In this sense, the effective ethnographer is essentially one who is “observant, reflective

and articulate” (Bernard, 1995, p. 168). The social science insider-researcher, therefore,

as Mata (eye/face/rep) of the research institution and her/his people or the researched

community and, as one committed to the narratives, is one given to deep reflexivity,

observation by participation and contextual meaning-making. It then follows that an

75 �

iTaukei ethnographer using participant observation to study her/his own people group

will employ, at any one time, one or a mix of a number of qualitative methods like

observation (obtrusive, or otherwise), and natural veitalanoa21 conversations and semi-

structured veitalanoa group interviews. The concept of veitalanoa, therefore, may be

understood as dialogic and, especially as one which embodies the community spirit

hence, is best done involving a mata-group sharing a common interest and where there

is veidokai (two-way respect) for everyone regardless of whether or not each is the

preferred speaking mata-rep of their respective groups. Though being vocal and

articulate is the desired norm for such an encounter, attentiveness, bowed silence and

whispering, during group veitalanoa, is something insider-researchers and experienced

outsiders, by socialization and veivakataukeitaki (familiarization), respectively, have

developed the ‘ears’ for. Veitalanoa-dialogue as a methodology, therefore, works better

when researchers are also equipped with the know-how to ‘read’ the less-articulate and

the expressionless, particularly how their “silences” contribute to the general mood and

outcome of the veitalanoa. It is critical therefore that researchers learn how to

constantly engage participants in deep thinking and allow some room for occasional

jokes given that a good number of these veitalanoa conducted at the grassroots level are

done around the tanoa (yaqona/kava bowl), and into the night. This explains why the

use of voice recorders comes in handy, particularly to capture moments that would be

complicated for the dulled mind to intelligibly comprehend and remember otherwise.

Essentially, in the iTaukei consciousness, a good veitalanoa is still excellent ‘chaser’

for the yaqona.

For an iTaukei research project, therefore, only an iTaukei researcher or a thoroughly

familiarized non-iTaukei with a kind of mana (power) over the researched group will be

able to capture and hold the attention of the participants of the veitalanoa long enough

to extract valuable and relevant information from them. This is because talanoa ena bati

ni tanoa (story-telling around the kava bowl), as a research method, while culturally

appropriate for the traditional iTaukei, remains a challenging space to negotiate even for

the iTaukei researcher. To overcome research challenges faced by Pacific researchers

studying their own people, thoroughly Pacific ways of engaging people in veitalanoa

76 �

(dialogue) that demonstrate the mana/sau (efficacy) of both the researcher and the

researched may have to be implemented. A mata approach to research, philosophically

grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception and employing the veitalanoa

methodology, therefore, will prove effective only if information shared at the discussion

is believable and workable – a veitalanoa yaga (worthwhile ‘talk’) seen thus if people

will believe it to work. When put to work, the veitalanoa comes full circle and its

mana/sau is expressed, the mana/sau of the veitalanoa believed in and acted upon. This

challenges the insider-researcher to do her/his utmost to present her/his ideas back to

her/his people in practical terms which they can implement and share with others for

everyone to enjoy bula sautu (the abundant life). To extract information from people

around the tanoa only without offering them your own informed position on the

subject(s) of the veitalanoa will be seen as exploitative.22 Veitalanoa, in this regard, is

represented as a research methodology as well as it being pedagogic hence, both the

researcher and the researched must benefit from it, proving the research project and the

methodology to be valid and ethical.

3.3.2 Re-conceptualizing ‘Talanoa’ within the vakaLakeba23 Context

Morphologically analyzing the tala-no-a conception, according to the Tubou-Lakeba

worldview, may enlighten one’s understanding of what the word talanoa possibly

encompass, especially when it is used as the method by which this research project

hopes to engage a Vanua vakaTuraga in dialogue. Tala speaks of a ‘shift in place’ while

no, sometimes used in place of the word tu (stand[ing]/exist[ence]), indicates a ‘settling

in to place’. The a at the end of the word talanoa, on the other hand, could be thought of

as an indefinite or definite article, much like the English “a” or “the”, and refers to that

which has been tala-no or ‘shifted from one place and left to settle in another’. Consider

this statement for instance:

Era sa kana oji a gone. Sa tala no a kedratou a turaga. The children have eaten. The men’s food have been served [and kept aside].

77 �

Talanoa, as in story-telling, therefore, is essentially a “shifting and settling” of stories.

During the course of a talanoa, older versions or, certain aspects of one version, may be

deconstructed, at least conceptually, while newer interpretations emerge and are brought

to the fore. This explains why talanoa-stories change over time. ‘Truths’ are never

finalized as ‘story-tellers’ are truly free to situate their re-constructed ‘theories’ in the

current context. Within a decolonization framework, it is believed that story-telling

“connect[s] the past with the future, one generation with the other, the land with the

people and the people with the story” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 145). Making the story

connect with the people will therefore necessitate that elements of the story are ‘shifted’

and ‘re-settled’ in space and time for the people to ‘see’ a contextualized story they can

connect with and relate to. It must be noted that any restructuring and ‘rewriting’ of a

story will involve the incorporation of historical ‘truths’ and current observable and

believable phenomena much like how a constructionist research like this one, and which

I have called my talanoa-construction, uses literature, a ‘collection’ of narratives,

empirical data and metaphorical thought to construct anew.

The vei in veitalanoa, as my chosen research strategy, speaks of the collective will of a

people to construct a collective identity, or story, together. Veitalanoa will be used,

therefore, whatever the research situation, to engage with and extract from ‘participants’

and, in return, encourage them to hope, to will to survive, to dare to dream that bula

sautu (the ‘all good life’) can be realized for them, individually and collectively, in their

gauna life-times. In my attempt to re-kune (re-find or re-conceive) hence, re-search an

ancient knowledge vanua-space and the maliwa-spaces in between at specific vanua-

places and gauna-times, a Tubou-Lakeba method of inquiry, appropriately called the

vakaLakeba, will be employed to ‘force’ participants to engage with me at the

philosophical level of the veitalanoa-dialogue. The vakaLakeba, in essence, is a

culturally appropriate way of probing whereby the researcher is asking participants

things that s/he already knows, but only needs a second opinion on. More often than

not, newer revelations emerge. Nonetheless, the researcher must be prepared to be

interrogated herself/himself by the researched, for this is a norm when interacting with

78 �

the people of Tubou-Lakeba, especially when trying to extract socially transmitted

information from them.

Embodied within the vakaLakeba conception is the infamous ‘fika, faito, faiwa

expression’ for which the people of Lau, Tubou-Lakeba included, are mischievously

known. Fika, possibly adopted from the English ‘figures’ (as in numbers), is how they

may have translated (transformed) their conception of ‘figuring out’. Faito, speaking of

solutions, point to the existence of time proven remedies, their mana (effectiveness)

often passed down blood-lines via the vuluvulu 24 (lit. ‘hand-washing’). Faiwa, on the

other hand, points to the conscious act of strategizing, or even trickery, the culturally

appropriate ‘methods’ for achieving desired goals. When a solution is not forthcoming

and, strategies fail, the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba is often heard saying: A meca iei a fika

ga! (‘The obstacle at hand calls for a series of spontaneous smart moves!’). In a

veitalanoa involving Tubou-Lakeba people, therefore, fika, faito and faiwa become the

tools in the hands of the enthusiastic inquisitor who is fluent in the vakaLakeba and who

is determined to ‘win the argument’, conversational or not, for herself/himself and

her/his people. It is within this intense and highly interactive veitalanoa space that any

researcher (insider/outsider) working amongst the iTaukei, especially of Tubou-Lakeba

of the Lau-Viti group, will strive to navigate and safely negotiate in order to gain the

respect of the Vanua and be rewarded, ultimately, with valuable and relevant cultural

details. Interacting within such a flexible veitalanoa space, though not confined to strict

regulations, is ideally guided by rules of relationships and made reasonably easy with a

real and present mana (power/influence) to draw vanua-people into a veitalanoa-

dialogue. Such is the mana the people of Tubou-Lakeba expect to ‘see’ in community

leaders and, researchers, like the ‘chief’ and the ‘man of God’, make no exception.

3.3.3 Situating ‘Mana’ within the Indigenous Pacific Research Agenda

Knowledge is situated in place. The Pacific, as a knowledge place within the greater

vuravura-world knowledge space, is one carved out in, and defined by, its related but

diverse cultures’ context-specific conceptions of mana (power to effect). It follows,

therefore, that any research focused on Pacific peoples, and in their Pacific ways:

79 �

‘Pacific way’ being an expression with a ‘built-in flexibility’ to which Islanders can

attach new meanings (Vaai, 1999, p. 32), can never be made comprehensible and

believable without first articulating how the mana concept fits into the whole

restructuring or reconstruction. As argued by Huffer (2004), constructing a body of

Pacific thought “like building a Samoan fale…must first and foremost be of use to the

community it is designed for…shelter[ing] from the outside elements and bring[ing]

comfort to those [within]” (p. 89). I cannot see any one universal and unifying

construction of being Pacific, hence Oceanian, but the mana concept and all that it

encompasses.

Mana, therefore, is situated in the Pacific. Mana, otherwise understood as sau, in most

of eastern Viti, is closely associated with the spoken word (or vosa) of the Sau leader

and, is ‘recorded’ in the ivola or ‘writings’ of their ‘craftspeople’. The use of language,

‘written’ or otherwise, is key to the practice of vakamanamana, whereby people openly

‘articulate’ their beliefs in the supernatural, the spirits of the dead, the gods of Lagi, the

spirit of the God of creation25. Given that language is conceptually grounded, hence

largely metaphoric, much of what mana entails could be closely linked to the people’s

conceptions of place and placed-ness and, their sense of ‘power’ (otherwise, the lack of

it). It is in the articulation of their belief in the mana (effectiveness) of that supernatural

‘power’, the ancient vanua, that the iTaukei confirm and establish their customary

practice of vakatatabu (the keeping of the sacred, the tabu). Any indigenous Pacific

research, therefore, guided by the rules of vakatatabu which is rooted in the

vakamanamana (‘declaring’ of the mana [power] of the tabu [sacred] ‘place’) will

prove effective in encouraging and empowering people to live their daily lives in the

pursuit of bula sautu (the ‘all good life’).

One such case of vakamanamanataki of the vakatatabu (‘keeping’ of the observance of

the tabu), and which is significant to this inquiry into a mata system of knowing, is the

Tubou-Lakeba custom of veiwekani avoidance – the non-speaking distance kept

between distant ‘brother-sister’ relations, an indefinitely daku (as opposed to mata

[face/front]) type relationship26. Whether ‘veimataki’ or ‘veidakuni’,27 essentially ‘face-

80 �

to-face’ or ‘back-to-back’, respectively, relationships still indicate connectedness,

recent or ancient, and are important to people who acknowledge them. The vakatatabu

(avoidance) between distant ‘brother-sister’ relations, for instance, work to remind the

living members that those who observe them share a common ancestor. Though the

vakatatabu exists for such a distantly related pair, the daughters of the one and the sons

of the other, automatically, become speaking hence, marrying cousins. Similarly, the

daughters of a woman and the sons of her speaking distant ‘sister’, by tradition, will be

‘forced’ to observe the ‘brother-sister’ tabu hence, continuing the ‘memory’ of their

connectedness. Knowing one’s ‘speaking’ (mata) and ‘non-speaking’ (daku) relations

and, the mana/sau of honouring relational distances, theoretically, must continue to

direct any future engagement within the wider network of veiwekani, or ‘related’ vei

peoples, proving useful the application of cultural particularities within an indigenous

Pacific research framework.

3.3.4 Theory and Methodology – Tools for ‘Seeing’, or Ways of Knowing28

It has been said that “theory and methodology are continuous, if not one and the same

entity” (M�hina, 2004, p. 193). Given that theory is ‘tested’ and proven in real life, it

follows that methodology, “research methods and strategies…[which] focus on

obtaining contextual details, insider-perspectives [and] particularities…unfold during

investigation” (Sanga, 2004, p. 48). Developing a methodology, itself a continuous

process, will therefore involve a certain degree of theorizing, a practice as old as

humanity, and which has been ‘scientifically’ established as critical in constructionist

researches – “building the road while walking on it…construct[ing truths] through

interpretation” (Keso et al., 2009). In other words, this research project acknowledges

that indigenous and cultural knowledge, though related across Pacific cultures via our

common embodiment, shared ancestry and oceanic geography, has remained relatively

situated in ‘place’. This ‘place’, for the iTaukei, has been theorized herein as the Vanua

vakaTuraga, the theoretical productive ‘all-generative’ whole comprising eternal

relations (within the natural, social and psychological realms29) between the

dichotomous female and male parts pervasive in the myths, and represented here as

metaphors and/or allegories30 the iTaukei live by. Through the mata-veitalanoa (groups

81 �

of veitalanoa/dialogues) engaged in, and the continuous conscious act of critically

reflecting upon each phase of the research project, the reality of iTaukei of Tubou-

Lakeba will be investigated and represented. The final say, come the ‘finishing’ of this

talanoa-construction, nonetheless, is left with the story-teller, the insider-researcher.

Just as it happens in story-telling, ‘twists and turns’ to this talanoa-construction will

naturally occur as new pieces of socially transmitted information find their way into this

woven masterpiece. As stated earlier in the introduction, this research project is a re-

kune, or re-finding, of existing but marginalized ‘materials’, the knowledge of which,

when bulu/tei (buried/planted) in a productive ‘mind’, is bound to generate new ideas

and theories, and bring to surface our implicit ways of knowing and being. These

findings, in turn, will inform indigenous and Pacific research, and indigenous minds in

academia and society. Re-kune, as ‘finding and conceiving again’, is conceptualized

herein as constructing anew from raw undeveloped ideas, or from fragments of a

deconstructed idea. This epistemological journey through a people’s metaphorical

reality, therefore, is really a re-reading of iTaukei patterned symbolism encoded in the

ivosavosa vakaViti (iTaukei idioms), ivalavala vakaVanua (customs/traditions of

placed-peoples) and itovo vakaTuraga (the ‘dignified’ conduct/behaviour), and as

reflected and embodied in the native dialects, their linguistic labels and their non-

linguistic overtones. For Viti-based research, at least, the researcher must be aware of

the fact that the iTaukei are a ‘vei people’, a walking vanua totally embodying the

principle of vei, of collective ‘ownership’ and a commitment to reciprocity.

Furthermore, it must be noted that the iTaukei identify themselves strongly as members

of mata-groups: mata-veiwekani (groups of related peoples) and mata-vuvale (groups of

related families), for instance, calling for greater sensitivity to group issues, on the part

of the researcher, even if someone in the researched community is assumed to have

been totally ‘individualized’. Just as well, my mother rightly advised me on my very

first appointment to teach at the secondary school in her village, eighteen years ago,

when she said (and appropriately gesturing the underlined):

82 �

Wame, ko sa na la’ki jiko vata kei ira a qou. Ke ko rogoca e dua ni kaya jiko vaka ca e dua tale, kakua sara ni ko lialia me ko vosa. Me ko kila jiko, ni mai Tubou, a odra veiwekani esa vaka sara tu ga i(ei)! Wame, you are going to live among my own. If you hear someone saying nasty things about another, do not be so foolish to remark. Know that, in Tubou, their relatedness is like this!

Eighteen years later, going in as an insider-researcher, I take with me my mother’s

words and, what her adopted father, my Tuwa (grandfather) Peni, used to tell us when

we were young: A omu iyau ga a wekamu! (‘Your relatedness is your wealth!’), to take

another reading at what their connectedness really means to the people of Tubou-

Lakeba. Whatever method I use and theory I construct, I endeavour to encourage and

empower the veiwekani for I am persuaded that a vei people’s true wealth (itself an

expression of sautu) comes in their collective ability to retain their connectedness, to the

land and the sea and their resources, and to their Vanua and each other. This line of

thinking, somewhat characteristic of traditional mata-ni and mata-ki (Vanua

representatives), is therefore something I have not developed in isolation, and which

may be ascribed to ancient vanua wisdom. This vuku (place-smart31), in essence, is the

critical knowledge the yalomatua (wise) carries with her/him, when researching her/his

own people and culture, appreciating their veiness (connectedness) to piece together any

research project in the ‘chiefly’ manner (vakaTuraga), and which will bring about bula

sautu to the Vanua.

3.4 Chapter Summary Methodology as epistemology means that the researcher uses a framework to ‘know’

the researched better. This research project, in seeking to ‘know’ about the

particularities of what I call the iTaukei mata system of knowing and all that it entails,

and which is embodied in their ceremonies and customs, will use and adapt the notion

that Knowing is Seeing to describe and theorize situated iTaukei understandings and

conceptualizations of mata, as intrinsic to their worldview. Phenomenological analysis

coupled with ethnographic descriptions, and philosophical reflection, will be employed

to experience, document and explain Tubou-Lakeba notions of representation as

83 �

pertaining to their understanding of space and knowledge sharing, and knowledge

building for bula sautu.

Methodology, as the interpretive tool used to understand a people’s social reality, may

be conceptualized, initially, as a means to an end. Given that the privileged task of

interpreting and representing the studied aspects of the Tubou-Lakeba ‘way of life’, at

least for the thesis-construction, ends at the closing paragraph of the concluding chapter,

the methodology therefore, has become an end in itself. Whatever observations made

and theories constructed, to answer my main research questions and establish my initial

‘claim’, therefore, proves futile if the interpretive framework designed ultimately fails

to empower the researcher and the researched. In an attempt to decolonize the

methodology and make it culturally appropriate, qualitative research methods like

participant-observation, naturalized conversations and semi-structured group interviews,

were adopted and adapted. The study of the phenomena via personal experience, and

with greater reflexivity, just became more communal and dialogic employing the

veitalanoa conception, engaging the researcher and the researched, literature and all

‘readable’ elements of culture, to comprehend and prove believable an indigenous

people’s situated ways of knowing and being.

Bringing a general iTaukei conception like veitalanoa and making it more applicable to

the studied ‘sub-culture’ necessitated a further contextualizing of the dialogic process as

vakaLakeba. The application of this approach meant that any engagement with the

people of Tubou-Lakeba was essentially two-way: particularistic understandings were

extracted from the researched as much as they were enlightened with the theoretical and

philosophical framings and perspectives of the researcher. One such theory employed to

encourage greater participation is the ‘standpoint theory’, adapted specifically for this

research project as the ‘shifting horizon perspective’, and implying that though our

philosophical positions and learned experiences differ according to our relative

standpoints, opinions and conceptualizations embraced by a moving and progressive

culture are bound to change over time. These decolonized framings can only help set up

the ‘mood’ of the thesis-construction, particularly in the lead up to the unfolding of the

84 �

situated meanings of the ‘re-lived’ narratives to be highlighted in the chapter following.

The approach used in this research, while postcolonial in attitude, is decolonizing in

motivation: constructed with the view of re-naming, re-claiming and representing.

Though the research project is projected as both ‘process’ and ‘product’, the entire

exercise has been theorized and designed, and will be implemented, to empower the

author, the authored and the wider readership.

������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Refer to M�hina (2004, p. 198). 2 Naming, in this instance, refers to both formal and informal or rhetorical forms of identification and categorization. 3 Note that while mata in matanitu and mataniciva speak of eye/face, in mataveitokani and mataivalu, mata indicates ‘a grouping’. This again proves the versatility of the mata concept, the usage of which and, in all its subtleties may be understood and appreciated only, in its totality, by ‘native’ speakers of the iTaukei language – broadening the ‘native’ concept itself to accommodate even those who may not be genetically of the iTaukei, but who have learned and mastered their language. Epistemologically, at this point of the research, the iTaukei mata concept is believed to be associated with group seeing, group knowing and group representation. 4 Given here is one of my mother’s favourite lines. Note that one’s rai (sight/understanding), according to Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) Philosophy in the Flesh, uses the eyes (and other senses) and the “neural structures of our brains to produce our conceptual systems and linguistic structures” (p. 5). These captured images of the external reality feed the viewing ‘mind’ of the participant-observer with thinking materials that, together with the cognitive unconscious, aid in the conceptualization of lived experiences of the world. Influenced also by my cultured understanding of ‘seeing’ with the stomach/gut or womb (refer to Nabobo-Baba, 2006) and my new-found belief in how one’s worldview predisposes her/him to certain knowledge, this project will explore notions of ‘knowing’ and ‘learning’ associated with a ‘mind’ that is embodied by the knower/learner. 5 Note that because vala means ‘do’ or ‘done’ (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect), the word valavala may signify the continuous doing of something to the point of it becoming a tradition. These traditions practiced over many generations become what is conceptualized here as ivalavala. 6 In Tubou-Lakeba, there are at least two categories of lands known to have been given in the name of a marama-lady: the covicovi-ni-draudrau (meaning ‘land to pick leaves from’) and the wa-ni-kuna (meaning ‘cord used for strangling’). While the former went with a woman at the time she was married off, to the man’s tribe, the latter was given to the woman’s tribe at her death, by strangling and as her acceptable sacrifice, upon the death of her husband. The strangling practice, at the coming of Christianity, was to be briefly replaced by the severing of a little finger, before it was totally rejected. Evidentially, the little finger is known today as the iloloku-ni-mate (meaning ‘the sacrifice for the dead’). 7 Note that ‘womb-man’ here refers to any person, man or woman, with the capacity to be ‘impregnated’ with a dream, ambition, hope, etc. while ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’, given that they do not necessarily speak of male persons, refer to those who consciously ‘sow seeds of greatness’, the ‘empowerer’. For a constructionist research project like this one, the researcher is conceptualized as such a ‘chiefly-noble’ and ‘manly-gutsy’ person capable of ‘sowing’ connectedness and knowledge in the hearts and minds of placed-peoples everywhere ready to carry a ‘dream’, ready to hope and live. 8 Referring to the relatedness established from time immemorial, possibly around 3500 years ago following the rapid settling of Vanuatu, Viti, Toga and Samoa by the Lapita people, from the Bismarcks, and which stopped abruptly once Samoa was reached (Nunn, 1998, pp. 232-236). 9 This research assumes that being born into (or rooted in) vanua-place ‘naturally selects’ or ‘qualifies’ one to assume mata-rep roles for that place and/or its community of knowers.

85 �

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 Note that the constructionist researcher is always interacting, as in a dialogue, with the literature and empirical data while constructing her/his own position as an empowerer , deconstructing the ‘taken-for-granted’ and making visible relations of power/knowledge (Keso et al, 2009). 11 According to Hocart (as cited in Scarr 2008, p. 20), “the true religion of the Fijian [or iTaukei] is the service of the chief, if reverence, devotion and a belief in the supernatural are required to make up religion”. 12 Note that in the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, there had been a case of a conquering princess of Kedekede (the hillfort), of the name Sinate Lagi, and because of whom the Levuka people (traditionally of Bau) were ‘re-situated’ at Lakeba. It was the same Sinate who tagi-i-valu (call for war) to Bau in the time of Banuve (Vunivalu of Bau), and who brought with him a force of mercenary recruited from Ra to the war best known in the Lakeba tradition as the Puaka Loa or Black Pig (refer to Reid, 1990). This ‘conquering princess’ phenomenon may help inform an understanding of a well-known metaphor from Tubou-Lakeba which goes: Dua omu lewa ni Tubou, dua omu lewa kalou! and, which translates to ‘When you ‘marry’ a woman of Tubou, you have ‘married’ a goddess hence, be prepared to meet her every demand!’ 13 Meaning the yavu-ni-vale (raised ancestral houses’ foundations), the hierarchy of social order, the sitting at the yalofi or yaqona/kava circle, the chiefly language reserved for the Sau (king), the relative positioning in meke (traditional community dances), the qoli kanace (traditional ‘fish-hunt’ of the kanace fish or blue-spot mullet), etc. While these “systems of symbolic signification” (Burik, 2006) may seem insignificant to the vulagi-outsider and modernized taukei-insider, they continue to ‘participate’ and ‘observe’, and ‘speak’ – but only in the ‘eyes’ of the mata-niVanua yalomatua (wise mata-reps of the Vanua) who are open to vanua knowledge and responsive to its knowledge system. 14 Note that in reference to the ‘first-people’ tribe of Tubou-Lakeba who were ‘land-givers’ to every subsequent migration to the island, the capitalized and non-italicized Vanua word is used to differentiate from the vanua (italicized) and Vanua (italicized and capitalized) conceptions liberally applied throughout this research. 15 This research project assumes that everyone is a ‘practitioner’ of her/his culture, customs and traditions, at one level or another, and which may include the watchful observance (as opposed to that which may be conceptualized by cultural-outsiders as the ‘silenced-observance’) of its rituals and ceremonies. 16 Vuanirewa, literally, means ‘Fruit of the Rewa’, implying that the Rewa is a plant. As the leading yavusa, therefore, in light of my ‘Place-Knower’ (Vanua-Mata) theory, the Vuanirewa , a ‘transplanted people’, will not lose its position if it stays grounded in its new vanua-place. In fact, according to the Tubou-Lakeba tradition, the Vanua ko Lakeba sought intervention from the Vuanirewa (the ‘chiefly’, the ‘manly’), at one of its low-points in its pre-European contact ‘history’. 17 Note that the same bulu concept is used for ‘planting a seed/cutting’ and ‘burying a dead’. The place Bulu, on the other hand, is associated with where their dead have been ‘buried’, and which is not restricted to vanua-land only, hence the Bulu (underworld) place can be conceptualized to be as large as the land and sea area the iTaukei people have territorially covered or traversed over time and space. 18 The same idea is articulated in the Toga fonua concept (Vaai, 1999, p. 36) but, critically important for me in how I perceive womanhood to be worth land, as is present in the Tubou-Lakeba tradition of losing or gaining land (vanua) in the giving or receiving of a lady in ‘marriage’, especially one of rank and/or one landed. 19 There is the iTaukei saying which goes: ‘Sa tawa na mata-iAdi!’ (lit. ‘Adi’s eye is filled’ and, meaning that Adi [used in reference to a woman of rank] is with child), representing the womb as an eye. The Vanua whole, therefore, is represented here as a ‘seeing’ and ‘conceiving’ entity. 20 According to Burik (2006, p. 71), “translation is always interpretation”. 21 Veitalanoa is basically vei-talanoa. Talanoa, a verb and a noun, means ‘the telling of a story’ and ‘the story’, respectively. The prefixed talanoa (with vei, that is) makes it into a ‘two-way telling and relating to narratives’. For more on the nature of talanoa and its protocols, refer to Nabobo-Baba (2006, pp. 27-28). Note that within the Tubou-Lakeba context, where there is only one Sau (the ‘Turaga’, and almost in line with the Christian/Islamic belief in ‘only one God’), that one isevusevu (traditional and ceremonial introduction) presented at the Vale Levu (the ‘big house’, the ‘chief’s house’) literally opens the door to the whole land. There may be yaqona brought to the venues of the veitalanoa, to be served and shared amongst the participants, it does not necessarily become another isevusevu to that place for the one and

86 �

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������only isevusevu to the Vanua has been presented and received. But this does not prevent the researcher from presenting another isevusevu to the vale (house) of the host, especially if the host is one steeped in tradition and who still reverently follows the customs of the land, especially the drinking of yaqona/kava or approves of it. 22 Note that people at the grassroots level, and at any veitalanoa, will want to take something believable home at the end of the day, something which they can hold on to, ponder upon and possibly ‘ride on’. They do not anticipate publications and most will not be reading the researcher’s articles/books. The intentions of the researcher, at the outset, will prove critical in interactive moments like that. A researcher in this position must go in decided on what it is she/he will offer the participants of the veitalanoa, ideally a great idea and, more than just yaqona/kava, tobacco and ‘chasers’. Talanoa which get thrown about around the yaqona/kava bowl, though insignificant to the undiscerning, often find their way into the homes and, if they are motivational enough and full of mana, somebody may grab a hold of it, and run with it into freedom from the oppressive system(s) that had long kept them in hopelessness and subjugation. Veitalanoa, in this sense, is essentially pedagogy for the oppressed. 23 VakaLakeba, at one level, means ‘the Lakeba way’. Interestingly, Ratu Kamisese Mara, a Tubou-Lakeba person himself, the last to be installed Sau of the Vanua ko Lakeba, was the one who coined the much critiqued expression ‘The Pacific Way’ (Lawson, 1996; Mara, 1997), and which could have been read, hence conceptualized, as vakaPasifika in the iTaukei language. At another level, vakaLakeba is a method of inquiry. 24 The act of vuluvulu, the passing on of the mana (power) from an expert to a budding practitioner, is basically done with some ritualistic hand-rubbing accompanied with intelligible words spoken to affirm the latter of the transfer of power and the right to practice. 25 Capitalised God herein refers to the Christian deity, the dominant and more visibly worshipped ‘person’ other than the embodiment of the sau/mana of the vanua land/people/place, the Sau ni Vanua ko Lau, in case of the Tubou-Lakeba people, that is. 26 The mata (eye/face) system of knowing is based on a ‘talking’ relationship – ‘face-to-face’, much like the Samoan concept of fa’a’aloalo , rooted in the face (alo) concept and, which embraces the idea of faces/reps meeting (Filipo, 2004) – and is diametrically opposed to what I call ‘daku (back) types of relationship’, ‘non-talking’ and vakamanamanataki (‘kept’ tabu) by open-avoidance. All relationships, essentially, may be categorized either under mata (face/front) or daku (back) hence, ‘talking’ or ‘non-talking’. It must be noted though that the Tubou-Lakeba non-talking veiwekani (distant brother-sister) avoidance can be ‘broken’ by ‘marriage’ or friendship. I would assume that customary practices of this kind are kept to this day to preserve the memory of who your weka (distant blood relatives) are. 27 Note that veimataki and veidakuni may mean two different types of relationships to the iTaukei: veimataki (a speaking relationship) at the vanua level and, veidakuni (a non-speaking relationship) at the personal level. My interest is in the use of the dichotomous mata (face/front) and daku (back) concepts, reflecting a truly embodied reason. 28 Refer to M�hina (2004, 193). 29 Read about ‘Okusitino M�hina’s new t�-v� theory of society and which recognizes that “all things stand in relationships of exchange to one another, expressing either symmetry or asymmetry in the process…applying to all issues of natural, mental and social significance across cultures, [extending] to the local, regional and global situations” (M�hina, 2004, pp. 196, 197). 30 For more on ‘Knowledge as Allegory’, refer to Biggs (1994). 31 To be ‘place-smart’ is to be intelligent enough to survive where one is placed. This intelligence theory basically implies that an entity’s embodiment and environment dictate what survival skills it develops and acquires.

87�

CHAPTER 4

TALI MAGIMAGI: MY COLLECTION OF TALANOA

i am sending you

this ball of magimagi1

perhaps you can fashion

a rope

from it to tie

around your mast-head

so have a nice trip

and a happy birthday

but do not be surprised

if the rope

left scars

on my hands

Konai Helu Thaman2

4.1 Introduction Traditional methods of socially transmitting information, generalized here as talanoa

or dialogic ‘story-telling’, for the iTaukei, may have taken a number of forms,

depending on what the occasion was and who the audience were. Whatever the event

was or whoever the players were, talanoa had always been an art and, its form, ever

changing at the face of rapid globalization. The notion that “knowledge is relativist

and inseparable from the context” (Sanga, 2004, p. 45) is critical, therefore, to the

spatio-temporal turn which now frames modern-day talanoa, thoroughly rooted in

the particularity of Vanua vakaTuraga but richly flavoured by its many cultural and

technological borrowings. This universal phenomenon of enduring cross-cultural

engagement, reflected in linguistic and, value and lifestyle adaptations, for instance,

proves humanity’s openness to outside influences, on the one hand, and the

perseverance of our inherent sense of identity and ‘othering’ difference, on the other.

88�

This chapter of my talanoa, therefore, will ambitiously record two bodies of

knowledge, and which I call, in order of their preferred appearances within the

setting of this chapter: ‘Home-Grown Talanoa’ and ‘Metaphorical Vanua

Experiences’. While the first segment contains talanoa constructed around the

general theme of living iTaukei or Vanua appropriate attitudes cultivated in me

within the comfort of the ‘home’ environment, segment two will focus on what I call

‘ancient’ Vanua experiences that reflected Tubou-Lakeba thought and which carried

ideas that still show in a ‘modernized’ Tubou-Lakeba reality. Critically, it must be

noted that knowledge inter-woven here were extracted mainly from interaction I

enjoyed around Tubou-Lakeba people, my mother being the most engaging, and

which were committed to memory only to be harvested, ‘treated’ and arranged into

the woven piece thus presented. Whether settled off-the-island (the Lakeba iWai) or

‘permanently’ island-based (the Lakeba iVanua)3, the Tubou-Lakeba cohort is one

which seriously believes in the sauness (manafulness) of the Vanua ko Lakeba

(comprising the island of Lakeba’s land and sea space, and people), and the koro ko

Tubou (comprising people ‘placed’ in the principal village of Tubou). A belief in the

supernatural, therefore, shapes whatever manner of discourse Tubou-Lakeba tamata-

persons, mata-reps and mata-groups engage in, be it at the inter-personal or, the

intra- and inter-Vanua levels. Herein is a people whose kila (knowledge/skills) are

transmitted largely via talanoa-stories shared around group activities and, whose

reality I wish to represent using the same veitalanoa framework.

What follows then, essentially, is the continuous and conscious act of tali magimagi,

a weaving of stories – beautiful in itself, and full of good purpose. The weaving of

magimagi strings and ropes, often accompanied with ‘long and winding’ talanoa-

stories, as is the norm in the making of traditional Tubou-Lakeba art and crafts, is an

excellent occasion for expert knowers to share their kila (knowledge/skills) with a

younger but yalomatua generation (young in body, mature in ‘spirit’) socialized to

appreciate that aspect of vanua knowledge. Some of these informative gauna-times I

still enjoy to this day with my mother, are hair-cutting, the tui (stringing) of a full

Tubou-Lakeba sisi (garland), or the making of parts of it, and the tavu (‘cooking’) of

89�

fragranced waliwali (naturally perfumed body oil derived from coconut milk). Other

tali magimagi moments I have enjoyed with many other Tubou-Lakeba people

include lovo (earth oven) making, werewere (weeding, as in compound cleaning) and

teitei (vegetable/crop farming). Other social occasions whereby the Tubou-Lakeba

worldview may be observed first hand, in how they tali magimagi (weave stories), is

at the sharing of their faith (in God) and beliefs (in the Vanua), of meals (at home, or

at a soqo [gathering for a death, wedding, birthday, etc.]), of yaqona (kava)4 and,

even their home-brewed beer. Whether veitalanoa is conceptualized as ‘tali

magimagi’, ‘ucu mai duru’ (lit. ‘picking out from one’s knees’, meaning

‘fabrications’), or ‘bati ni tanoa’ (side of kava bowl), the fact they are usually funny

and nonsensical does not mean that they cannot be engaging and informative. These

moments are significant because they provide the veiwekani (related peoples) with

opportunities to regroup, celebrate bula (life) and strengthen their veiness

(connectedness) and the web that supports their collective pursuit of sautu (well

being). Talanoa, therefore, according to Tubou-Lakeba traditions, is iqa (‘food’) for

work, something that hardworking people cannot live without.

In situating this research as a talanoa construction, the thesis, from beginning to end,

may be conceptualized either as the sisi (garland) or waliwali (scented oil) making

project, and which comprise more than just the sums of their parts. From the planting

and/or harvesting of naturally occurring materials needed for such projects through

to the production of usable art forms derived from them, the veivakamenemenei

(pampering) attitude embodied in the making of these traditional ‘gifts’, and which

are fit for a gone took (beloved child), makes the production of such a practical item

significant. Whether taubeni (the wearing, as of a garland) for a day or wali (the

application, as of oil) for many days, gifting must be reciprocated with the genuine

appreciation of the attitude pervading the practices. Talanoa, in this regard, is

conceived both as a work of art5, requiring specific knowledge and skills, and a ‘gift’

that must be appreciated for the place it occupies and the purpose it serves. The

whole talanoa or thesis-construction, like a ‘sisi making’ or ‘waliwali making’

project, essentially, forms the methodological backbone around which the six

90�

chapters of my talanoa are fused and bonded. Drawing from my personal

experiences (observing, thinking, knowing, learning and doing), experiences of

others found in the literature, and data collected from the ‘field’, an essential and

functional body of knowledge is herein assembled. As with the sisi and waliwali

making projects, the blended parts of this talanoa construction have been expertly

and sustainably developed resounding my mother’s caution to use whatever I have to

selectively and sensitively.

4.2 Home-Grown Talanoa4.2.1 Part 1: Sisi – a Metaphor for the ‘apparent’ but ‘shifting’ iTovo

vakaTuraga6

Sisi making, according to my mother, is always about the gone toko (the beloved). It

is this attitude which guides her practice and hence, her sense of perfection and duty.

When I was much younger, I learned that the sisi of Lakeba, as it is known today,

was traditionally reserved for the Sau (highest ranking Tubou-Lakeba chief), and the

gone vakatubu (his children) – long before it became a commodity featuring

extensively in major graduations across the country, a national symbol, an icon.

Though the art is no longer set aside for the Gone Turaga (lit. ‘Young Chief’) the Tui

Nayau, the Sau of Lau-Viti7, my mother still believes in making sisi, even for the

market, that reflects the attitude of ‘othering’ the Sau. Older, yalomatua (wiser) and

more informed of my mother’s genealogy, I now understand and appreciate what

value she places on a traditional practice and wear that has become taken-for-

granted, given its widespread use and underrated market-driven value hence,

carrying an inherent sense of pride in, and appreciation of, the sisi. While the sisi has

been ‘sold out’, on the one hand, traditional makers like my mother, on the other,

have been perfecting the art proving themselves experts in the field. The secret to the

success of their practice, according to her, lies in the vanua attitude of

veivakamenemenei (a kind of ‘pampering’ accorded the gone toko [beloved], and/or

the Sau), an expression of veivakaturagataki (two-way giving of respect/honour).

Such itovo (manner) vakaTuraga (of the chiefly), therefore, is something that only

91�

those close to the center of any iTaukei polity would understand and appreciate.

Consider this oversimplified family tree, of my mother’s biological and adopted

parents, for an indication of what it may be like in the socialized ‘thought life’ of this

authentic Tubou-Lakeba woman. True to her people’s ivalavala vakaVanua

(relatively ancient customs/traditions associated with the ‘privileging-place’, the

Vanua) and itovo vakaTuraga (recently ‘adorned’ manner of thought and practice

associated with the ‘privileged-people’, the Turaga), my mother basically lives what

values and principles she was raised to believe in and protect.

Figure 5 An oversimplified family tree of the ‘privileged’ Vuanirewa clan

Note that Niumataiwalu and his ancestors before him, according to oral tradition, were never titled ‘Roko’, like his

son Rasolo and Rasolo’s sons after him, a ‘status-marker’, possibly, stemming from the Moala group where Roko

Rasolo’s mother, Tarau, was from and, where the Vuanirewa of Nayau had long-standing associations with (Reid,

1990). Similarly ‘Adi’ and ‘Ratu’ were introductions which came, possibly, from Bau – an ancient chiefdom

boardering western and eastern Viti (Fiji).

Niumataiwalu (ancestor of the Vuanirewa, the ‘land-takers’)

Roko Rasolo (1) (second eldest son, first Tui Nayau [from Nayau island] on Tubou-Lakeba)

Roko Malani (ancestor of MataiLakeba branch)

Roko Taliai (Tui Nayau at arrival of missionaries in 1835, ancestor of a Vatuwaqa branch)

Peni (my adopted grandfather)

Ratu Tevita (2) (Tui Nayau)

Ratu Sukuna (a vasu levu, Tui Lau)

Roko Malani

Adi Fane (2)

Taivei (my adopted grand-mother)

Salote (my biological grand-mother)

Roko Liwaki (my biological grandfather)

Ratu Mara (Tui Nayau, Tui Lau, Sau ni Vanua ko Lau)

Adi Fane (3) (my mother)

Roko Rasolo (a vasu levu)

Roko Puamau

Adi Tagici

Ratu Sikeli (a vasu levu)

Adi Maopa

Ratu Finau (Tui Nayau)

Ratu Tevita (1) (Tui Nayau) Adi Fane (1)

Roko Vuetasau

92�

Veivakamenemei as a way of life, therefore, is something my mother learned and

practiced long before she had me, her firstborn. All itovo (manner) of expressing

veivakaturagataki (chiefly respect/honour), characteristic of and appropriate for the

Turaga (‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’), is something women of the yavusa Vuanirewa, like

my mother, naturally carry and live by. Note that though a sisi (garland) fades in

beauty, the veivakamenemenei attitude with which some traditional sisi makers still

produce the artifact, today, is a lingering reality. To show gratitude, therefore, to one

who ‘pampers’ you, one ‘says’: “You well deserve the same chiefly treatment!” – not

with words, but in ‘giving’ veivakaturagataki to the giver of the ‘gift’. Further

informed of what can be termed the ‘chiefly language’, my understanding of the

depth of the Tubou-Lakeba manner of veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) accorded

their Sau (the overlord) was only to be confirmed by my biological grandfather’s

words, in one of those talanoa moments I shared with him, when he said:

Sa ‘dua-tani’ ga ko Ratu Mara ni sa unu!

Ratu Mara is ‘one-othered’ because he’s drank!

This insight into the ‘other-ness’ of the one who has been vakaunumi (made to drink

of the traditional installation’s yaqona) by the Vanua, gave me renewed appreciation

of the manner (itovo) of sauvaki (service/worship) of the Sau, the ‘othered-one’. This

kind of ‘othering’ of the one person who embodies the mana/sau of the Vanua all, in

essence, is partly ascribed and, partly inherited. Consider the table below for a taste

of the kind of ‘chiefly language’, the language of the center-world focusing on the

person of the Sau, the embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua:

93�

Table 1 Chiefly language versus Ordinary language

vakaLakeba (of the Vanua, the ‘common people’, the ordinary)

vakaTuraga (of the Turaga, the Sau, the embodiment of the mana, the ‘one-othered’)

vakaPalagi (of the ‘English’)

Isulu imauvu (possibly archaic) clothes

Kana tauri (lit. ‘handl[ing]’) eat[ing]

Burisi toka wale (lit. ‘sitting disengaged’)

angry

mata dredredre vakase bua (lit. ‘flower[ing] frangipani’)

smiling

Moce tavo (possibly archaic) sleep[ing]

For both the ‘receiver’ and the ‘giver’ of the Tubou-Lakeba highest itovo (manner)

of veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) – the ‘young’ Turaga (the ‘worshipped’) and

the ‘old’ Vanua (the ‘worshipper’), respectively – the ‘other-ness’ of the Sau is

essentially the ‘other-ness’ of the Vanua that he represents, the Vanua that ‘appoints’

him.8 Veivakamenemenei is much like how a mothering ‘soul’ (older) spoils her/his

children (younger). S/he keeps on doing it because it makes her/him ‘feel’ good. The

Vanua, being the older of the two, is only too happy to ‘pamper’ the gone toko (the

beloved, the younger), the Gone Turaga (lit. ‘Young Chief’), their Sau. The younger

of the two, when arrogantly carrying ‘itself’, may be accused of being viavialevu (lit.

‘wanting to be bigger’, meaning ‘to be condescending’), the itovo (manner) vaKaisi

(characteristic of the less noble) and, which is unbecoming of one receiving

veivakamenemenei (chiefly ‘pampering’). The making of sisi for the ‘othered-one’,

therefore, is only a manner of expressing that chiefly Vanua attitude. To some

degree, what Taivei drummed into my mother’s consciousness, and the latter into

mine, has only begun to make sense, the conception that:

A itovo e odra ga a Turaga! (lit. ‘Manners belong only to the chiefly/manly!’)

94�

If a Vanua (named place/people) is indeed a Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly Vanua

[place]), then its people would be one given to the itovo vakaTuraga (chiefly

manner), practicing veivakamenemeni as a way of life – this is what the iTaukei

notion of veivakaturagataki (esteeming of the other) encompasses, the Vanua

extending veivakaturagataki to the Turaga, and vice-versa. Note that the Turaga (the

‘othered-one’) behaving vaKaisi (less noble) is often shunned and may even face

unfair criticism and greater discrimination, more so today with traditional systems of

‘domination’ out-of-place – systems which worked mainly to benefit powerful

chiefly elites, at least in the recent past. Essentially, a true Vanua vakaTuraga is one

such place/people whose best qualities are guided by what I call positive vei

principles 9 . This is the same communal attitude which was articulated, in no

uncertain terms, by Ratu Tevita (1) when he said at the 1875 Council of Chiefs

meeting (as cited in Scarr, 2008, p. 15):

Do not we [iTaukei] Fijians do things in companies? How could one man build his house [or vale], and plant his garden [or iteitei], and build his canoe [or waqa] and sail it all alone? To do these things we must cease to be [iTaukei] Fijian.

Note that in this one simple statement, the Tui Nayau of Lakeba around the time Viti

was ceded to Great Britain in 1874, himself the embodiment of the sau/mana of the

Vanua ko Lakeba and the esteemed vakaTuraga (chiefly manner), gave away the

iTaukei ‘secret’ to stability, and also hinted three basic categories of important

Vanua ko Lakeba knowledge. Theoretically, the house/home signifies one’s sense of

belonging to a vanua-place and a vanua-people. The garden (a parallel to burial

ground), on the other hand, represents how the iTaukei value their oneness with the

self-sustaining vanua-land and, their wider vuravura-world, their source, their

sustenance. Similarly, the canoe (metaphorically speaking of an entity’s carrying and

‘voyaging’ capacity) symbolically and prophetically points to the iTaukei language,

the carrier of their ivalavala (settled customs and culture) and their itovo (shifting

Vanua correct/appropriate behaviour) which connects them to their neighbours,

reaching as far as Toga and Samoa. This revelation or insight proves, therefore, that

95�

the indigenous iTaukei language, given its loaded-ness in meaning, cannot be taken

at face value if one is to understand the underlying assumptions that shape them,

assumptions that dictate our philosophies and ethics.

According to the family tree provided, therefore, I had been raised by a woman born

(biologically) to Roko Liwaki and Salote, and socialized (culturally) by Peni and

Taivei, into the ivalavala-ways of doing life in Tubou-Lakeba. This reality, in

essence, is centered on the Sau person and grounded in the conception that the

‘place’ itself, the koro (village) and the yanuyanu (island), are imbued with a

sau/mana. Given their relatedness and traditionally cultured way of valuing the

veiwekani (the wider network of relations), the Tubou-Lakeba people’s firm belief in

their veiness (connectedness) and the sauness (manafulness) of their Vanua

vakaTuraga, may ultimately have a bearing on how they conceptualize sautu (lit.

‘sau exists’) hence, how they define the boundaries of what sautu has been taken to

mean, the ‘all good life’ that is.

If the realness of the ‘othered-one’, the one made the ‘god’ of the people at

installation (as cited in Ravuvu, 1987, p. 5), gives meaning to the sautu (sau is

present) conception, then whatever is done in the name of veivakamenemenei

(‘pampering’) in the sauvaki (worship) of the Sau person, must be done with an

attitude that demands perfection. This explains why I continue to marvel at my

mother’s sisi making ability and capacity, her passion for the art and patience in the

making of it – beginning with the harvesting of the vau (native hibiscus) bark, a kila

(knowledge/skill) she believes she has manaful hands for. As they say in Tubou-

Lakeba: E so ga era dau ta-ta vau vinaka! (‘Only some are good [manaful] at

cutting/harvesting vau!’) The iTaukei predisposition to vakamanamana or the

‘articulation’ of one’s belief in the mana of an idea, a ritual, some object or someone;

a belief in the supernatural or in the expressive power of the mana, even in post-

Christianity Viti, and which characterizes most indigenous Pacific peoples, is

something my mother and the Tubou-Lakeba people are full of. Mana/sau, to them,

96�

is comprehensible and believable, a mark of being authentic, as I myself have

supernaturally experienced and proven on a number of occasions.

4.2.2 Part 2: Waliwali – a Metaphor for the ‘subtle’ but ‘settled’ iValavala

vakaVanua10

Another interesting parallel to ‘sisi making’ is the Tubou-Lakeba women’s art of

‘waliwali making’, also for the gone toko (beloved) and, involving the toli (selective

picking) of naturally occurring and cultivated plant products. The coconut oil

derivative known as waliwali (fragranced body oil, ‘cooked’ or sunned), something

highly regarded by island people in general, and which Tubou-Lakeba women are

known for, at least amongst the people of Lakeba, is the traditional antidote to the

salt present in sea water, and which permanently surrounds them. When the whole of

Lau converges for instance, it is often said, amongst Tubou-Lakeba women, that ‘A

iyau ga kei Lakeba a waliwali’ (‘Lakeba’s true [mark of] wealth is the waliwali’)11.

Interestingly, one other thing that had often been associated with wealth is one’s

veiwekani (relatedness), at least in the home I was raised, as I had often heard my

adopted grandfather Peni say:

A omu iyau ga a wekamu! (implying: ‘Your relatedness/connectedness is your

[source of] wealth’)

Amongst iTaukei, one could still hear the proverb ‘E dau kele ga a waqa ina toba

maravu’ (lit. ‘Canoes/ships only dock at a peaceful harbour’), meaning

‘People/relatives only come to a ‘peaceful’ home’, and highlighting an indicator of

being ‘wealthy’. Another occasion that often reflects the extensiveness of one’s

veiwekani (connectedness) hence, measure of wealth, is at her/his soqo (gatherings)

and, ultimately, her/his funeral. Veikauwaitaki (minding other’s well being) is indeed

a true ivalavala ni bula vakaVanua, vaka-iTaukei (way of living that is of the Vanua,

of the iTaukei), at least in times of sautu (peace/abundance) and, as such, calls for

bula veimaliwai (coexisting in the maliwa-spaces) and tiko veisaututaki (living in

peace). For the Tubou-Lakeba woman, my mother being one, the gifting of hard-

97�

earned waliwali (scented body oil) is the culturally appropriate way of showing

appreciation for one’s veiwekani (relatives/colleagues/friends) – a gift that only the

Tubou-Lakeba bred or accustomed, and possibly vasu (children of a local woman, a

waliwali maker herself), may truly receive for what it is worth. It is the heart-to-heart

exchange between mata or ‘speaking relations’ (sometimes for daku or ‘non-

speaking relations’), expressed only through the material culture, which makes the

gifting of waliwali significant. In a real way, the waliwali seals the bond between

‘related’ individuals/groups, at least in the ‘mind’ of the Tubou-Lakeba person –

something gifted to remind the recipient of the giver’s good intentions to refresh the

memories of their connectedness. To refuse to receive such a gift, therefore, is not to

show veidokai (respect) hence, disregarding one’s veiwekani (relatedness) and

implying a moving away from the communal.

What does waliwali making tell of the Tubou-Lakeba worldview after all?

Theoretically, deep down in the ‘minds’ of Tubou-Lakeba people, there is an

appreciation for the uniqueness of individuals ‘crushed’ and ‘chemically bonded’

under ‘intense heat’ into the Vanua whole. This is essentially what transpires in the

making of waliwali when fragrant plant products are harvested, crushed and sobu

(lit. descend, or ‘thrown’) into the hot oil vura (derived) from the boiling coconut

milk, in a mixing that is only made possible over burning charcoal or under a hot

sun. According to my mother, her first tavu waliwali (‘cooking’ oil) was when she

was already in her thirties. Prior to that, she only helped, sat and observed her

adopted mother Taivei who, in her life-time, never asked her to ‘cook’ the oil but,

only instructed her thus:

Toka iqore me ko raica! (‘Sit [and observe from] there to ‘see’!’)

Evidently, learning and knowing was associated with ‘seeing’ or observing and,

which involves the senses: sight, smelling, hearing and touch, particularly, when it

comes to waliwali making. This is essentially how iTaukei learned (previously) their

ivalavala-ways vakaVanua (of the Vanua) and know (concurrently) the itovo

98�

(manner of thought and practice) of their ivalavala-ways of being. Today, I still hear

my mother say:

Keta vuli ga mai na weta rai! (‘We learn merely from what we ‘see’!’)

This is exactly how I see my mother adapting her itovo (manner) of doing life and,

more so, the art of waliwali (and sisi) making – innovating and diversifying, meeting

the demands of the market and yet, preserving their ivalavala-ways of life. The

perpetuation of traditional customs (the ‘ancient’) is critical in the transmission of

indigenous epistemologies because I would presume that the ‘settled’ ivalavala-ways

vakaVanua (of the Vanua [place/people]) actually shape the ‘shifting’ itovo (manner)

with which they think through and experience their current reality. If ‘seeing is

knowing’ (and learning), and the cognitive unconscious shapes how we

conceptualize our experience, then it follows that how we practice (a ‘shallow’

experience) can be philosophically read to gain an insight into what forms the basis

of our thinking (a ‘deeper’ experience), and which could be grounded in the abstract,

in metaphorical thought. This implies that a people’s ivalavala vakaVanua (ways of

being in ‘place’) and itovo vakaTuraga (‘goodliness’ at its best) provide a rich mata-

source from which a better understanding of what it is like to be iTaukei can be

sought and, ultimately expressed and articulated. Essentially, an awareness of the

ivalavala tani (other ways, outsiders’ ways) and itovo vaKaisi (least esteemed

manners or tendencies) of the ignoble, and vulagi (stranger/outsider), can give the

complete picture of the iTaukei and their ‘othering’ tradition. This ‘privileging

system’ embodying a noble Vanua attitude, in essence, calls for veivakataukeitaki

(‘familiarization’), the necessary process of acculturation that leads to tiko

veisaututaki (coexisting in sautu).

99�

4.3 Metaphorical Vanua Experiences4.3.1 Part 1: Lessons for Today from the Qoli of Yesterday

A traditional way of doing island life that has quickly been replaced by modern

equipments and methods, and alternate indigenous knowledge12, is the qoli (fish

‘hunt’) – a place-specific ivalavala-way of being that guarantees survival for a

largely sea-dependent (for food and travel) people, and culture. Two methods of qoli

quickly disappearing from the modernized Tubou-Lakeba consciousness, and which

are worth highlighting, are the qoli sirovi (fish ‘hunt’ at the chief’s reserved lagoon

for the chief)13 and the qoli kanace (blue-spot mullet ‘hunt’ organized by the yavusa

Vanua, the ‘land-givers’, and for the veiwekani)14. While in both methods, the net

was used (a modern item itself), the intricacies of the qoli, or the manner at which

they were called for and carried out, reflected the vakamanamana (articulation of

their belief in the mana/workability of their methods) and vakatatabu (keeping of the

‘rules’ of the qoli). This was particularly true for the qoli kanace, and which was

carried about with a lot of secrecy. The qoli sirovi, on the other hand, was never a

secret because they were called for, solely, for the Sau (lord over land/people and

their resources), and whose sau/mana would have been shown in the harvest that was

to be expected.

The qoli sirovi was always called for whenever the Sau got back home from ‘over-

seas’, at least for the last two Sau of Lau, or whenever fish was needed for the

ivakarau (the chiefly ‘banquet’). This qoli (‘hunt’) was often always done at the

matavura iTubou (Tubou village’s foreshore), the traditional iqoliqoli (fishing

ground) of the Tui Nayau, the Sau. At the time witnessed by my mother, there was a

certain section of the foreshore area reserved for the qoli sirovi. This sustainable

practice, always guaranteeing a plentiful harvest, was an indication of the mana/sau

of the Turaga, at least to the people of Tubou-Lakeba. To this, it was often remarked

that the matavura (fishing area), indeed, was vakaitaukei (had an ‘owner’). Fish

caught in this qoli and served at the Sau’s table was always referred to as the isirovi,

distinguishing it from fish caught elsewhere, and by any other method. The qoli

100�

sirovi, whether using the yaci or bunubunu method (refer to the diagrams below),

kept the Vale Levu (‘big house’) with a steady supply of fish for the chief, the surplus

of which was always shared among the women participants of the qoli. To

participate, therefore, was always considered as an act of service to, or worship of,

the Sau-chief who embodies the mana/sau of the Vanua whole.

Figure 6 Yaci versus Bunubunu (fish ‘hunt’ methods)

The Yaci

shifting tide-line

enclosure

shifting net position

The Bunubunu

shifting tide-line

enclosure

shifting net position

The qoli kanace, on the other hand, was the more interesting of the two. The qoli

itself, to begin with, was always referred to as ivalu (war) for the early morning

‘hunt’ or the cuka (possibly related to the vacuka [‘punch’] concept) for the day

‘hunt’. The times to descend for the ‘hunt’ would coincide with the lolo (coming in

of tide) and/or the voka (going out of tide) and, the ‘assault’ was engineered totally

by the two women mata-ni-qoli (eyes of the ‘hunt’). There are ‘signs of times’, good

for the qoli kanace to go, known to Tubou-Lakeba women who have gone on the

‘hunt’. Some of these signs were the ola of the wind (a kind of ‘new’ wind

movement), the iboi (smell) of the kanace nestling near, and the ula and kora

(individual and group ‘jumping’, respectively) of the kanace before sun-down the

101�

day before the qoli indicating their ‘sleeping’ place for the night. At the observance

of these signs, the qoli chiefs (women of Taqalevu of the yavusa Vanua [‘land-

givers’], or some direct descendants), some of whom no longer go to the ‘hunt’,

would then call for the qoli to be usu (the ‘claiming’ of qoli grounds in a meeting

between the qoli chiefs). Information about the qoli was then relayed ‘secretly’ to

kanace ‘hunters’ and macawa (fishing-ground) ‘owners’, only after it had been

‘taken to’ Vale Levu (the chief’s house).

The qoli kanace, usually, would take a good part of the day unless e samu a kanace

(there is an early and a plentiful harvest). The whole village would know when the

kanace is samu (lit. ‘beaten/hit’) when the women ‘hunters’ return with singing.

This was always cause for great rejoicing, the qoli usually being a Friday or Saturday

affair, and meaning that the whole family had important roles to play. While the

young women were always assigned to gather ota (an edible fern-plant) 15 , the

preferred vegetable to go with the kanace dish, the men were responsible for the

kakana dina (true foods)16, anticipating a good kanace harvest and in preparation for

the Sunday meal. This qoli took on new meaning when a Vuanirewa woman’s ola

was done (a customary presentation of traditional valuables and food by the family

of the new ‘hunter’ to the yavusa Vanua, the ‘owners’ of the qoli) demanding that

the whole kanace harvest was taken to the Vuanirewa family concerned. Another

exciting feature of Tubou-Lakeba qoli was how women participants would, on

occasion, dress up to the event in a new puleta (shirt/dress made out of same printed

material, usually floral and colourful). This was particularly true for women and men

participants of what used to be the December yavi rau (another ‘fish-hunting’

method open to all but, like the qoli kanace, lost in time): dressed in a puleta and

adorning a sisi (garland), as was the custom. Note the interesting positioning and

‘horizontal’ movement of qoli kanace nets, therefore, relative to the tide-line, and

compare that to the two qoli methods alternately used for the isirovi (chief’s fish

‘hunted’ via the qoli sirovi from his lagoon):

102�

Figure 7 The Qoli Kanace

shifting tide-line

shifting nets positions

Particularly of interest to this study is the emphasis placed on a number of tabu

(prohibitions) that must be observed without question, by the kanace ‘hunters’, for a

guaranteed harvest that would reflect the presence of a Vanua sau/mana. The use of

ivalu/cuka (war/punch) reference and the qusi ni loa (removal of the black facial

‘paint’, derived from charcoal, after the qoli, and which is a common practice in any

kind of qoli), for instance, revealed a kind of curious and mysterious knowing

surrounding the qoli kanace that is actually charming and believable. Partners

assigned to macawa (grounds), and with their relatively shorter nets (compared to the

qoli sirovi net), upon receiving the news, would begin preparing, at least

psychologically, for the demands of the qoli. As it were, there was never going to be

any sharing or touching of persons belonging to different macawa-grounds, or even

their nets, cua (sticks) and iqa (food), during the whole course of the ‘hunt’ because

that was believed to be mana-ca (a negative ‘power’ working against the main

purpose of the ‘hunt’).

Whenever the qoli party returned empty-handed, therefore, there was always the

silent assumption that certain partners were veikau-ca (mana-ca partners), or

someone ‘touched’ the tabu, or the qoli was butuki (lit. ‘stepped on’), meaning that

one of the ‘hunters’ was concealing pregnancy. Apart from these tabu, there were

other customary practices, and which I call the tara (things allowed and ought to be

done), like the dranumi (lit. ‘washing off of excess salt’) of the nets and sticks (with

four leafy branches of the sinu gaga or poisonous sinu [Excoecaria

agallocha/Euphorbiaceae], per net, to ward off ‘evil’) prior to the qoli to bring about

the desired outcome. One peculiar and mana-vinaka (positive ‘power’ to effect)

enclosure

103�

practice, as experienced by my mother, was the rubbing of body with cooked pork

oil, after eating the meat, to cause the kanace, as it was believed, not to jump over

the net but, to behave like pigs and snuff their way around and into their net.

Essentially, the qoli kanace was open to such strategizing (faiwa) and, critically,

vakamanamanataki (‘articulation’/observance) of the tabu was the order of the day.

4.3.2 Part 2: Metaphors, Rhetoric and Legacies

It is not uncommon to hear ‘capitalistic’ Tubou-Lakeba people, especially today,

vocalize their belief in the proverbial saying ‘Cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena!’

(meaning ‘When the wind blows in from [the east of the Viti group or] Lakeba,

[move out and] strike your own [enemy targets]!) to justify their kind of

individualism, particularly when confronting ‘life-threatening’ situations. Recently,

this position had been met with strong criticism from traditional and community-

minded individuals who argue that one strikes out only for the collective good.

Whatever one’s inclination is, this ancient and supposedly dead metaphor is still

influencing Tubou-Lakeba thinking, strategizing and practice. Essentially, the

original notion has become a living legacy. According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition,

individual sau/mana is the true mark of a leader. Roko Rasolo (1), from the family

tree provided, earned his right to rule the descendants of Niumataiwalu (his father)

after he consistently proved his strength, courage and determination in a series of

‘healthy competition’ between the men of his tribe and, which ultimately led to the

final ‘leap of death’ experience, that he alone attempted and survived.

Braving the prevailing ‘Lakeba wind’ (the south-easterly, that is), therefore, was

something only sea-farers sailing upwind from the west or north-west of Lakeba

would have experienced, hence, had knowledge of. The ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ reference,

possibly from the Nayau-Cicia standpoint, lying to the north-west of Lakeba, may

have originated from back-to-back Cicia-Lakeba wars around the time of Roko

Malani, Roko Rasolo’s eldest son, and which saw the crushing defeat of Cicia by

Lakeba, on Nayau (Reid, 1990, p. 14). Though defining the phrase could be

104�

somewhat problematic, there is enough evidence, at the grassroots level, to suggest

that Tubou-Lakeba people do take it seriously enough to use it in their attempts to

explain their individual pursuits. Basically, there have been those accused of

pursuing selfish and personal agenda but, at a closer look, people still care about

their collective experience as a Vanua and, which consists of their belief in, and

commitment to, the Turaga (chiefly/privileging) system and, as a Vanua ideal. Their

individual pursuits for tu vinaka (lit. ‘standing well’), or well being, is undoubtedly

tied to an often silenced collective hope for a bula veimaliwai (a non-confrontational

living in the maliwa-spaces between gauna-times and vanua-places/spaces) that is

rooted in a lasting sautu (peace/order/prosperity).

Backtracking in time, the ‘Cagi ko Lakeba’ phenomenon, therefore, could

presumably be associated with the Nayau ‘migrants’ to pre-Vuanirewa Lakeba (but

with maternal links to the Ceiekena Sau of Kedekede on Lakeba), given their sea-

going tradition and abilities, as remembered of the legendary Nayau-based

Vuanirewa of Lakeba ancestor, Niumataiwalu. Having been established on Lakeba

(the island), this Vuanirewa (vulagi-outsider) attitude of capitalizing on ‘prevailing

winds’ would have phased in, over time, to the original and largely land-based

Vanua ko Lakeba worldview producing an interesting mix of both land and sea

thinking. Though there are no highlanders or hill-tribes, the Tubou-Lakeba reality is

clearly divided between the kaiVanua and the kaiWai, the insider-land and outsider-

sea peoples, respectively, at least unconsciously and conceptually. The collective

story of the historical ascent of the Nayau-derived and now Lakeba-based chiefdom,

therefore, a vulagi (outsider) tribe nestled within the ancient Vanua ko Lakeba, and

more recently, Vanua ko Lau confederacy17, is something which is coded in the

current yalofi (yaqona circle) arrangement of Lakeba and Lau (possibly a Roko

Malani ‘creation’). This research, in effect, will employ yalofi wisdom and

knowledge to ‘confirm’ what has been written and suggested of the pre-Christian

Tubou-Lakeba reality.

105�

The Sau of Lakeba, the Tui Nayau of the Vuanirewa, is the only ‘othered-one’ in the

Tubou-Lakeba yalofi whose yaqona gets to be coboti (ritualistic show of respect with

deep resounding cupped hand-claps) by the Vanua (everyone present who ‘knows’

the meaning of being a Sau). Nevertheless, others ‘placed’ alongside the Sau in the

yaqona circle, facing the tanoa (yaqona bowl), and those qaravi yaqona (serving the

vanua drink), are equally significant in the roles they play for the sauvaki

(reverential worship) of the Sau person and office. Essentially, the yalofi formation

comprise representatives of all Vanua-places (local communities with ‘titled

leaders’) within the greater Vanua ko Lakeba ‘space’, itself located in the maliwa-

space between neighbouring Vanua ‘places/spaces’, and which encompasses Toga

and Samoa. Negotiating this generative Oceanic space, therefore, in the name of

sautu (order and stability) is what the yalofi of Tubou-Lakeba, the council of Vanua

ko Lakeba local chiefs and its Sau, exist for hence, the conception of their mata-

envoy system of Vanua (place) representation, and natural and human resource,

knowledge and technology sharing. When advocacy failed, ‘ancient’ Lakeba,

presumably, would have used their prevailing wind advantage, or strategic location,

proficiency at sea and, their web of veiwekani (connectedness), to charge at and

strike down perceived enemies. The people at the right and left-hand sides of the Sau

in the current Tubou-Lakeba yalofi, or yaqona circle, thus represent peoples who

stood by past Sau of the Vanua ko Lakeba in times of war, as well as, in times of

peace.

In the pursuit of peace, oftentimes through war, the distinct people groups18 drawn

towards pre-Christianity Lakeba learned to share and cultivate the island’s ‘limited’

land resource, and particularly during a time of ‘maximum occupation’. This gave

rise to a culture that valued a peaceful coexistence as much as it did women and land

thus, evolving a manner of exchange involving the transfer of both land and higher

ranking women to strengthen people’s connection in a relatively volatile existence.

The Tubou-Lakeba tradition has it, therefore, that the ‘lewa ni (women of) Tubou’

are, essentially, ‘lewa kalou’ (goddesses) – demanding service/worship due a

goddess. This second metaphor does not only reveal something of the Tubou-Lakeba

106�

woman but, also its men. Tubou-Lakeba women, especially those ‘married’ to their

own men, ‘groomed’ in the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ talanoa, carry themselves with pride and

confidence as their men shower them with exaggerated attention. One interesting

observation I have made about Tubou-Lakeba women is how extravagant they are at

vakasosolo (taking anything and everything they think is important to the people

they are visiting with). This is one practice often shunned by men who are not

‘cultured’ in the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ tradition, given the often arduous task of obtaining

these goods, packing them appropriately, and seeing the shipment through,

particularly if we are considering a tradition of long sea travel in the ancient canoes.

The origin of these metaphoric thought, though somewhat vague, is well and alive in

the consciousness of modern-day Tubou-Lakeba people and contemporaries. While

the men may have been traditionally associated with the ‘dui ta kena’ (striking one’s

own [enemy in war, for honor at home])19 notion, both Tubou-Lakeba men and

women can claim ownership of the ‘lewa ni Tubou’ attitude. While the ‘lewa kalou’

(goddess) idea may be thought to apply only in describing Tubou-Lakeba women,

both its men and women take pride in the analogy for it reveals more of their

worldview, and their vakaTuraga (chiefly/manly) way of life. Tubou-Lakeba people,

therefore, value their women as much as they do their land and, to them, both are

worth dying ‘in war’ for because both are the vuravura (protective source) of their

collective sustenance and sautu (well being). The iTaukei fascination with the

conceiving and ‘recycling’ abilities of both women and land, therefore, may have

been reflected in their possibly pre-Christian tradition of ‘ceremoniously’ sharing

them, especially in Tubou-Lakeba, across Vanua and between potential ‘cultivators’.

For the Vanua ko Lakeba, this theory may help explain the conceptualization of the

chiefly burial of their Sau, the ‘othered-one’, as a tei (planting). In light of this view,

women and land may be perceived as the sacred ground where a mana-ful ‘seed’ (as

in the person of the Sau) may be ‘buried’ or ‘planted’, as itei (seed or stem/root

cutting to be planted), with a potential to bring forth new life and a harvest. Thus, the

seed of the ‘striker’, the Turaga or cultivator, and the womb of the ‘goddess’, the

Vanua or the cultivated, have continued to feature prominently and, possibly,

107�

unconsciously in all Tubou-Lakeba discourse grounded in the ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ and

‘lewa ni Tubou’ phenomena.

4.4 Conclusion The conceptualization of talanoa as the ‘shifting’ and ‘settling’ of stories, in time

and space, gives me much freedom to weave my ‘magic’ or mana/sau into and

through the stories herein ‘shifted’ and ‘settled’. Whether describing, explaining or

practicing, my talanoa is my construction. Though all the stories represented in this

chapter have been largely derived from my maternal roots, its telling is informed and

influenced by both my personal upbringing and educational training. Much like any

traditional talanoa, my representation of selected aspects of the Tubou-Lakeba

reality has been motivated, guided and focused – scientifically constructed using the

tools employed by constructionist researchers hence, is particularistic and universally

implicated.

If (vei)talanoa were indeed idle talk, I would think it a wasteful exercise. Pacific

peoples have been socialized into this way of life hence, its application by

indigenous Pacific social science researchers, in research as a methodology and,

possibly, in teaching as pedagogy, should not come as a surprise. My attempt to

represent portions of the Tubou-Lakeba way of knowing by weaving them out in a

manner that highlights both their practices and attitudes, and which gives me room to

theorize, is essentially supported by the decolonization agenda. In order to prove that

the iTaukei perceive and conceptualize their experiences via a system of knowing

that is ‘seeing-based’, given the abundance of mata metaphors in their native

dialects, the talanoa-stories herein articulated have been selected because of how

they had given me insight into iTaukei thought and practice, and particularly the

Tubou-Lakeba experience. Their collective pursuit of a sautu (peace/prosperity) that

is based on a belief in a ‘present mana’ (sau-tu), therefore, is the desirable ‘state of

being’ (bula sautu or, the ‘all good life’) conceivable only by the discerning mata:

the herald-seer, the articulate-knower, the group-representative. If the art of talanoa

108�

is to be given due recognition, the insider-researcher employing it in her/his

construction may have to be reconceptualized as a dau (an expert) of it.

This dau conception is critically important for this research because any mata-rep of

any vanua-place, traditional or otherwise, must be regarded as dau (expert) of what

s/he does. A Tubou-Lakeba woman considered to be ‘dau tui’ (expert maker [of

sisi]), ‘dau vala waliwali’ (expert maker of scented oil) or ‘dau qoli’ (expert fish-

hunter), therefore, is one who is thoroughly socialized into the Tubou-Lakeba ‘cagi

ko Lakeba’ and ‘lewa ni Tubou’ traditions. Metaphoric thought such as these are

foundational to the multiple meanings modern-day people of the Vanua vakaTuraga

ko Lakeba attach to their sense of being authentic. As cited in Withers (2009),

“humans cannot construct anything without being first in place…[and which] is

primary to the construction of meaning and society” (p. 642). Being a traditional dau

(expert) of anything, therefore, shifting the ‘settled’ ivalavala (customs/traditions)

and settling the ‘shifting’ itovo (attitudes/manners) of a people, would have been the

preoccupation, possibly, of a competent few fit to adopt mata (eye/face and/or

front/representative) roles for a native group of people. These are people with the

heart to preserve their unique vei (communal/reciprocal) attitude and way of life,

particularly with regards to diplomacy and cross-cultural engagement. Interestingly,

in the Tubou-Lakeba yalofi (yaqona circle), sits one titled the Dau-niLakeba,

otherwise known as DauLakeba or, in short, Dau. Dau, essentially, is the head of the

Levuka people of Bau residing on Lakeba. DauLakeba and his people are the expert

navigators of the Tui Nayau of Lakeba, the tribe which is now responsible for the tei

(planting) of the the kuli ni tabua (lit. ‘skin of tabua’, meaning ‘corpse of the Sau’),

and for the maintenance of the sautabu (the chiefly burial place). Theirs, therefore,

the Sau and the Dau, is the story of navigating ‘cultivators’ or vulagi sea-peoples

who became landed and privileged by taukei Vanua land-peoples.

This privileged ‘next-to-the-king’ position assigned a vulagi-outsider people (the

Levuka navigators, of the Dau) by another vulagi-outsider people (the Vuanirewa

chiefs, of the Sau) makes an interesting parallel to how marginalized knowledge and

109�

epistemologies are researched, privileged and represented by indigenous student

researchers of Pacific studies researching within a decolonization framework.

Essentially, it is the ancient ‘Place’, the institution of research, which allows and

facilitates this kind of development. Such privileging of Pacific worldviews and

perspectives and, which has created a space for native Pacific researchers, in

academia, now calls for the ‘powerful’ (the manaful, the sau; the knowledgeable, the

dau) to bring to their center-world what had been, for so long, cast to the margin.

Just as the ‘assignee’ will tei (plant) the ‘assigner’, the privileged knowledge, indeed,

will establish the researcher who privileges it. This is what being a dau (an expert) in

academia is: privileging the knowledge that will establish you as a ‘navigator-

cultivator’ of a knowledge space for hope (a ‘researcher-empowerer’), a well placed

‘outsider’ – academia being the ancient place (like Vanua) where academics (like

Turaga), people who were once outsiders, are now situated and privileged.

4.5 Chapter Summary This chapter records my initial response to the philosophical questions framed and

asked in chapter one. To read, interpret and articulate Tubou-Lakeba people’s

understandings and conceptualizations of the mata concept, as intrinsic to the

iTaukei worldview, an ethnographic account documenting situated metaphors that

shape their practices and discourses will need to be established. Grounded in the

assumption that people are mata-reps of places they are ‘yoked with’ or taukei-native

to, this chapter attempts to represent what my mother and her people, as mata-reps of

the Tubou-Lakeba metaphoric way of life, consider as important Vanua knowledge.

What has been described as a ‘chiefly’ or ‘manly’ Vanua system of representation

will be affirmed therefore as a “privileging system”: a system organized around a

form of leadership that recognizes people as dau-experts of indigenous knowledge

they keep, and which is useful to the community’s pursuit of a collective well-being.

For the people of Tubou-Lakeba, this reality is centered on the person of the Sau, the

embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua whose physical presence is critical to the

preservation of their indigenous epistemologies.

110�

Two such phenomena expressive of this Vanua culture are the people’s iValavala

vakaVanua (ancient ways associated with the Vanua [‘land-people’; ‘insiders’; ‘land-

givers’]) and iTovo vakaTuraga (‘new’ ways associated with the Turaga [‘sea-

people’; ‘outsiders’; ‘land-takers’]). While sisi (the garland) is used here as a

metaphor for what is perceived to be a people’s ‘shifting’ iTovo, waliwali (scented

oil) is similarly employed as a metaphor for their ‘settled’ iValavala. A people’s

seemingly settled iValavala, therefore, understood to be anciently placed, and

intrinsic, give the impression of something that is ‘lasting’ or truly traditional. On the

other hand, a people’s iTovo, seen as recently adapted, carry with them a sense of

temporality. Though the understandings of “settled iValavala” and “shifting iTovo”,

projected herein, represent them as uniquely distinct, a great overlap in their applied

meanings is evident in how the iTaukei tend to use them interchangeably. It is a fact

then that both iValavala (the doing of the ‘ancient’) and iTovo (the trying of the

‘new’) change over time. The rate of change in one, with respect to the other, is that

which sets them apart. Though the outward expression of attitudes influencing

behavior, and which is internal to one’s cognition, change over time in response to

changes in the environment and surroundings, what is settled in her/his conceptual

system is settled for good hence, dictating how s/he conceptualizes her/his

indigenous experience. In light of this, Tubou-Lakeba knowledge of “passing

traditions” and “enduring legacies” documented herein will serve to inform and

guide interpretations and further theorizing unfolding in the chapters following.

This brief ethnography, therefore, conceptualized as a tali magimagi (a metaphor for

‘weaving stories’) of a collection of narratives embodying the Tubou-Lakeba

experience, is my little contribution to a gradually expanding body of iTaukei

thought that is hoped to encourage greater participation in indigenous research into

Pacific epistemologies. As a tali magimagi, therefore, the chapter stands out as ‘free-

stylist’ and ‘less structured’, in nature, reflecting the situated mood always

experienced in a kind of Pacific way of talanoa or ‘story-telling’. This chapter, while

pushing conventional methods of making ethnographic descriptions, in how it

attempts to go beyond the ‘seen’ and into the ‘felt’ (the line between which could

111�

still be blurred), is placed within a research framework that embodies the

decolonized methodology of veitalanoa, and which employs the talanoa method.

The chapter’s central location in the thesis-construction, coupled with the

methodology chapter preceding it, makes it a critical element within the ‘thesis

whole’. Essentially, this chapter explores, in a little way, the power of the

‘narratives’ as mechanisms whereby a predominantly oral culture ‘shifts and settles

the known’ to construct anew a ‘story’ applicable and meaningful to the collective

reality of a people living in the now. As a result, assumptions are questioned and

‘theories’ paraphrased. By implication, this chapter reflects a kind of knowledge

sharing, via veitalanoa-dialogue, that leads to knowledge building, and ultimately,

well being. In a way, this is me ‘striking when the wind is blowing in my favour’. In

essence, I am just being pro-active and protective of ‘our women and children’. My

decision to privilege situated Tubou-Lakeba knowledge articulated herein is

envisioned to champion the cause of the marginalized and the silenced. Motivated to

empower, the chapter provides the backdrop to the discussion and analysis, of

answers to the research questions, collected from the ‘field’ and informed by

literature, and which are to be found in the chapter following.

������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1 Magimagi or sinnet, traditionally used as house and canoe lashings, is woven from coconut fibres derived from the coconut husk of a special breed of coconut. 2 From Helu Thaman’s poem titled ‘Magimagi’ (1999, p. 73). This poem is significant to this study because of how I relate to it: the conception that a researcher is like a Mata (eye-of-canoe/place) navigator who uses the magimagi makers’ ‘wisdom’ to ultimately set sail, the lingering iTaukei expression ‘tali magimagi’ (lit. ‘the weaving of magimagi’) and which means the artistic telling of ‘long’ stories both to amuse and to inform, while ‘busy’ at work, and my anticipated September 2014 graduation which is sure to make the perfect birthday gift for my September 14 birthday. Last but not least, this tough work of ‘weaving out an MA thesis’ will surely leave a mark on my ‘hands’ just as it has left marks on the ‘hands’ of researchers whose work has greatly informed mine. 3 Note that on any given-day Tubou-Lakeba people are categorized into either Lakeba iWai (those who are ‘over-seas’, or away from Lakeba island) and Lakeba iVanua (those living on their island home in the Lau-Viti group). 4 Henceforth written as ‘yaqona’, the iTaukei name for what is commonly called kava. 5 Art is presented here as anything and everything displaying skill or talent, whether formally studied/learned or otherwise, that the people of Tubou-Lakeba value and, whose true worth is not driven by the market. Note, especially, that the sisi market price does not reflect truly what value the Tubou-Lakeba people give this traditional wear – calling it thus given how their attire, at specific events, is considered incomplete without the sisi. 6 The iTovo vaka Turaga is ‘passing’ in the sense that because these are manners which belong to the chiefs, reigning chiefly families always bring into the Vanua culture new influences and ways of showing honour/respect to titled Vanua leaders, what they themselves think is honourable/respectable.

112�

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Note that these ‘changing traditions’ usually come about as a result of extensive cultural sharing with other chiefly peoples via ‘marriage’ alliances, trade engagements, etc. In the same manner, the sisimaking process have always been ‘warm’ towards borrowing and innovation, as is known to sisimakers, that are cost-effective and which add to the aesthetic value of the product. Though the memory of a sisi, worn today and hung up on the wall tomorrow, fades in time, that of the occasion it marks may linger on a little while longer. The worth of a sisi is quickly lost just as its beauty quickly fades after it has served its purpose. 7 Note that ancient Lau, of which the Tui Nayau is Sau (overlord), may have been much smaller, territorially, than what Lau is today on the map – possibly excluding the Vanuabalavu and the Moala groups. 8Note that in the Tubou-Lakeba reality, only men are installed paramount chiefs. There has never been a woman Sau of Lau-Viti.9 Vei principles define the iTaukei. Whether these conceptions work for good, or not, vei principles dictate the iTaukei behavior in that they predispose them to acting collectively, and hardly ever as individuals – despite all good intentions in the pursuit of positive ‘economic development’ via a strong individualistic base, for instance. Two such phenomena, highlighted by Tuwere and cited in Huffer and Qalo (2004, p. 97) are veirogoci [the capacity to allow oneself to hear the other] and veivosoti [making allowances for others]. Note that there is a plethora of vei concepts in the iTaukei vocabulary, and which are often taken-for-granted, which I submit influence iTaukei thinking, so much, towards a brand of communalism, which when politicized, can result in extreme group behavior similar to that which were observed in the coup of A. D. 2000. On the bright side though, it is the same ‘vei force’ which had always picked us up from our low-points and raised us, as a people, to higher-places of hope. 10 The ivalavala vakaVanua (culture/traditions) is lasting in the sense that it is settled in the people’s minds. It is no longer ‘wearable’, like the sisi, just for a moment’s glory, because it is now essentially who the iTaukei person is – ‘engraved’ in her/his heart, because of its practicality, carrying a sense of permanency. 11 Note that just as there are manaful vau harvesters (amongst Tubou-Lakeba sisi makers), there is a knowing that some women are liga vuqa (lit. ‘hands [that] fill’ implying that, like King Midas touch, their hands work magic and will cause more oil to be produced) than others, when it comes to waliwali making. 12 Some methods of qoli used today in the Lau-Viti group may have been borrowed from indigenous sea-based cultures spread across Oceania. One such method now common in Tubou-Lakeba, the knowledge of which is believed to have been brought there by a Rabi (Micronesians settled in Viti)doctor and his family, is known to the locals as ‘tili’. 13 Note that at other times the qoli sirovi is done from other lagoons and not from the fish ‘hunting’ ground reserved for the Tui Nayau. This qoli uses one long net or, two to three nets joined into a long one. The whole harvest is taken to Vale Levu (chief’s ‘big house’) from where the isirovi (fish) for the chief is selected and the rest is divided amongst the ‘hunters’ – consisting the women who called for the ‘hunt’ and who tended to the net(s), and the rest of them who responded to the call. 14 The qoli kanace consists of a number of shorter nets, possibly fifteen or more, each carried by two women ‘hunters’, the two who will take home anything caught in their net. Note that Vale Levu has a muri qoli (lit. ‘following the hunt’) reserved spot in the ‘hunt’, and possibly two other spots, which when not represented by Vale Levu women, are assigned to other willing partners with nets. If nothing is caught in the Vale Levu net, then they do not take ‘home’ anything unless ‘gifted’ to them by other ‘hunters’. The practice of luva ika (removing fish off of the net of another), for instance, is a privilege enjoyed by certain individuals on the grounds of their veiwekani (connectedness) to the ‘owner’ of the macawa (ground) or the itutu ni qoli (privileged position in the ‘hunt’) they can claim fish from (when they are still attached to the net). Luva ika, in essence, may still be done even if someone other than the ‘owner’ is ‘hunting’ in that macawa one can pick fish from. 15 Refer to Gatty (2009, p. 183). 16 Refer Nabobo-Baba (2006, p. 13). This category of edibles includes all crops (mainly starchy foods) served with the greens (vegetables) and meat/fish. This category is often referred to as ilava ni kakana.

113�

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17 Refer discussion on Turaga and Vanua by Hooper (1966) who correctly says, when describing Tubou-Lakeba people’s understanding of the concepts, that “the term turaga, which, like vanua,causes Lauans [including Tubou-Lakeba] no confusion” (p. 247). 18 Comprising the Tui Lakeba people from the north, the Kabara brothers from the south, the Levuka people of Bau island, off the coast of eastern Viti Levu, from the west, the Vuanirewa of Nayau from the north-west, and visitors, craftspeople and veiwekani from Toga and Samoa to the east. 19 Note that the enemy struck is not eliminated or destroyed totally but, only overcome and consequently invited to partner with the victor in future exploits. In the case of the historic Cicia-Lakeba wars, Cicia was not only defeated but, became the faithful ‘right hand’ of Lakeba. In the Tubou-Lakeba yalofi (yaqona circle), the Mata-kiCicia (herald to Cicia) of Lakeba was elevated to chief mata-niVanua (eye/rep of Vanua) of its Turaga, the Tui Nayau, the Sau of the Vanua (Lakeba-Lau).

114��

CHAPTER 5

ANSWERS, ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION

While the idea of building on traditional institutions is a noble one and undoubtedly

sound, its value may be quickly lost in a situation of change; it may develop ideas based

on old patterns which may become quickly obsolete, for the people are continually

working out new patterns; alternative ways of ordering their lives, which they judge to

be more advantageous in the new conditions.

Rusiate R. Nayacakalou1

5.1 Introduction The iTaukei language, as in all indigenous cultures, has long kept encrypted, in its

clichéd metaphorical expressions, ancient truths that need fresh interpretations, and

which will prove relevant to our modern existence. What remains is a renewed

commitment, from indigenous minds, to the intelligible re-construction, possibly, of

past realities for the sole purpose of settling one’s connectedness to a ‘mythical’ past –

groundedness in place being foundational to any construction of meaning and society.

This project, while attempting to give voice to silenced narratives, will record localized

Vanua ko Lakeba conceptualizations of five critical iTaukei constructions: vanua,

vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu. Individual and group understandings of these living

‘archaic’ concepts, rooted in situated metaphorical thought, and extracted via veitalanoa

engagements with Tubou-Lakeba people, will be articulated, analyzed and discussed.

This chapter, therefore, will weave into the thesis, or my talanoa construction, multiple

interpretations gathered from the ‘field’. This will produce, ultimately, an overall

picture that depicts a social reality actively and consciously contributing to knowledge

building, and the pursuit of individual and collective well being.

The analysis and discussion, therefore, will be constructed around the five themes:

vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu – drawing from ‘field’ notes (comprising

knowledge derived from literature also), and which reflect current and influenced

115��

positions. Ideas mentioned in the chapters preceding, while providing a backdrop, will

be further employed as interpretive tools and, occasionally, to draw conclusions.

Essentially, this chapter will attempt to question the viability of these lingering

meanings and how they play into shaping who we are and, how we respond to

alternative strategies and solutions, and change. As a result, the conception that there

exists the iTaukei mata system of knowing, based on representation and ‘seeing’, will

be further explored to establish how that relates to the Tubou-Lakeba people’s sense of

well being hence, situating what they conceptualize as sautu (peace and prosperity) in

their worldview. As a mata-rep of the researched, I will endeavour to be fair and

constructive in my representation and analysis hence, to ascertain my preferred position

as a constructionist iTaukei researcher who is human enough to avoid the danger of

denying particularistic notions in the name of objectivity. Herein, being a subjective

‘encourager’ means shedding light into and shedding ‘kilos’ off of preconceived ideas

which can either work to elevate or reduce a people. To really ‘see’ and ‘know’ what

the five concepts mean and imply, according to a young mata-niVanua respondent,

therefore, is to view them as veiwekani (related) and, as ideas ‘…cokoti vata ina

vakasama ni tamata’ (‘…bound together [and bounded] by the concept of [being]

human’) – the situated human, the human-in-context.

5.2 Answers and Analyses 5.2.1 Vanua

The vanua concept (generally speaking), as agreed by every adult encountered in the

‘field’, comprises people and what they consider place; their physical environment and

its resources (flora and fauna); the human population, its ivalavala (customs/culture)

and itovo (manners/approaches). As put by an informed adult, of the chiefly clan and a

high official of the church, the Vanua (the ‘named’ or ‘claimed’ place) is vakasulumi

(dressed) in the things ‘e vakaTuraga-taki kina’ (‘of high value and, which exalt a

people embodying the chiefly manner’). From these veitalanoa, it is not too hard to

think that Tubou-Lakeba people ‘understand’ how any socio-cultural enhancement of a

Vanua is dependent, totally, on the people placed in it. A quick look over the history of

116��

the place now known as Lakeba, therefore, will give a telling story of how its ivalavala

(ways of doing life) became what it is spoken of today. First tawani (filled) by makers

of Lapita pots, approximately 3500BP and, reclaimed by their descendents about two

millenniums later, who possibly came in waves of upwind migration, Lakeba became

the ‘hotspot’ of east-west engagement between vanua people to the west and, fonua and

fanua people to the east. This colourful past of active integration between diverse

groups of anciently related peoples, therefore, would have shaped Lakeba thought into

its known form, and which was clearly anti-kanatamata (human-flesh eating) well

before the rarama (light) of the lotu (church) and vuli (schooling) hit our shores (Reid,

1990). Lakeba, therefore, was and still is a place open to outside influence and yet

rooted distinctly in vanua thinking.

What does this notion of a people’s rootedness in vanua thinking, as it pertains to their

system of knowing and their conceptualization of sautu (peace and prosperity),

therefore, imply? If the concept of vanua is inextricably tied to tradition, does that mean

that there is no room for modern alternate approaches to ‘well being’, or has the so

called ‘east-west’ divide between what works and what does not, in a modern economy,

been greatly exaggerated to benefit a few? As I will argue, vanua people welcomed and

embraced modernity because, as humans, we make room for anything promising the ‘all

good life’. The fact that the vakaTuraga (chiefly/manly) approach to inter-Vanua

engagement, in employing Vanua mata-reps, opened up their people to the influence of

the missionaries’ ‘good news’, testifies to the real possibility of engaging people cross-

culturally if the basis for that sharing is grounded in mutual respect. This argument is

based on the assumption that though we differ markedly, as cultured peoples, our

common humanity dictates that, in order to survive, we ‘fight or take to flight’. The

formation of Vanua vakaTuraga by vanua or placed-peoples, therefore, is a converging

that is parallel to taking the ‘fight’ option hence, suggesting that con-frontation is

important in order for a people to move forward. When vanua-people con-front each

other in the true spirit of Auseinandersetzung, staying apart in togetherness that is, by

moving into and occupying the maliwa-spaces between, greater understanding of the

‘Other’, hence of the vanua ‘Self’, is acquired and sustained.

117��

It is not uncommon today, amongst Tubou-Lakeba people, to hear the vanua reference

being used to describe certain customs practiced by some church people today, and

which were not associated with the kaiPalagi church, like the use of yaqona, social or

ceremonial, for instance. The common use of the vakavanua conception, and which

implies a lack of professionalism, is yet another indicator of how the true worth of the

vanua concept has been ‘devalued’. This kind of misrepresentation is something which

needs to be corrected if the concept of vanua is to be restored to its esteemed position,

amongst traditional iTaukei especially, for this is basically the foundation upon which

all foreign constructs and institutions, introduced locally and employing vanua thinking

people, have been built. By the time a child taught in the iTaukei language goes to

primary school, for instance, the vanua concept and all that it entails has been firmly

engraved in her/his cognitive unconscious shaping the way her/his experiences were to

be conceptualized. For the vanua thinking people of Lakeba, they exist in the vanua as

much as it exists in them – vanua defining both constituents and boundaries, even for

the four concepts to be discussed later.

5.2.2 Vuravura

According to a young and creative public servant of the mata-niVanua clan, the

vuravura is the protective and all-sustaining planet Earth within which we all exist. This

is an educated opinion that has distinctly silenced the essence of the vura concept. Upon

further investigation though, it was revealed that most Tubou-Lakeba people hold that

inside this dome-like covering exist life-sustaining support systems emerging from

within (as believed by their pre-Christian ancestors, possibly), but designed from

without by an external creative power and, which is clearly a mix of both indigenous

and Christian worldviews. Evidently, the Tubou-Lakeba people’s inability to articulate

a sound indigenous position on what the vuravura concept is really all about, compared

to their proficiency in talking about vanua, may be understood in light of what has been

suggested about the impact of the human factor in how the five constructs investigated

are conceptualized by vanua people. While the vanua is clearly viewed and defined by

the tamata (human person) in it, current vuravura understanding seem to suggest a

vuravura viewed and defined from the outside – an objective reality, possibly silencing

118��

standpoint perspectives and, privileging so called non-subjective outsider views pretty

much rooted in western frameworks. Nonetheless, to extract a truly indigenous position

on the vuravura concept, one will need to think ‘outside the box’ or else, search deeper

within it.

As discussed earlier in chapter 1, the root word vura, meaning ‘emerge’ or ‘appear’ and,

which is derived from vu (origin) and ra (base), suggest that what has emerged

originates from where it is now based or grounded. Interestingly, according to the

Tubou-Lakeba worldview, there are a number of vuravura (worlds): the vuravura ni ika

(of fish), the vuravura ni yalo (of spirits) and the noda vuravura (ours), three examples

for instance. This is particularly interesting given how the understanding influences

Tubou-Lakeba ivalavala ni qoli kanace (way of hunting kanace fish). Their knowledge

of the three worlds mentioned above contributes in making any kanace hunt successful.

Fish originate from their ra (base) and the hunters from theirs. The two ra-bases,

essentially, overlap at the inter-tidal zone where the ivalu (‘war’) or cuka (‘punch’), the

fish ‘hunt’ that is, takes place. The vakamanamanataki of the tabu (faithful observance

of avoidances), like how the mata-niQoli (eyes of the hunt, ‘commanders’) use their

bent index-fingers to direct the women hunters to where the school of kanace is located,

for instance, indicates the Tubou-Lakeba knowledge of how the vuravura ni yalo (of the

spirits) occasionally interfere with the natural worlds of fish and humans. In a way,

while vanua can be conceptualized as one’s home-base, vuravura is seen to encompass

the entire inhabitable space consisting of all home-bases or ‘peopled’ places. Vuravura,

therefore, consist all ra-bases or ‘habitats’ of every living member of the Vanua; Vanua

as in its physical, socio-cultural and spiritual dimensions; Vanua in its entirety, the

Vanua taukei (familiar places) and Vanua tani (unfamiliar places). For Tubou-Lakeba

people, therefore, when they speak of going to the vuravura-world, that world,

unconsciously, exists for them far out at sea and beyond all known horizons – the ‘all-

generative Oceanic space’ of which their ra-base or vanua-place is but only the center.

In an interesting twist to one such veitalanoa discussion I had with some mata-niVanua

clan members (the heralds) and, which also hosted some Vuanirewa people (of the

119��

chiefs), it was kune-i (found/conceived) that just as the vanua concept encourages us to

settle in to a center, the vuravura notion challenges us to venture out from it. This

insight has added new meaning to my personal journey and, consequently, to this

talanoa construction – seeking both rootedness in place (vanua) and the daring

exploration of negotiable space (vuravura). The same conception has given me a new

appreciation of what the sea might have presented to early Pacific peoples everywhere. I

now have an influenced understanding of how the sea would have dared our ancestors

to push their limits beyond the known vu-niLagi (root of Lagi [heavens], the horizon),

vanua-places, and vuravura-worlds. This conception may help explain, in part, the

iTaukei patterns of migration and their resolve to hold on fast to the ivalavala-ways

which connect them to their home-bases, the vanua-places where their genealogies are

rooted, the ra (bases) from which they vu (originate). In light of this, it could be said

that the iTaukei have no sense of a faraway home-land but, that of a very real vuravura

(continuous source) out of which all things which exist vura (emerged) – existing ‘in-

place’ (as opposed to ‘out-of-place’) for their very survival.

5.2.3 Taukei

The idea of taukei resonates well with that of ‘ownership’, belonging and identity.

Essentially, land and place belong to the people in it as much as the people belong to

them. This would mean that the theoretical whole called the vanua forms a critical part

of us, a living part that wills always to remain connected to related lands (qele), places

(vanua) and peoples (veiwekani). Analyzing the word taukei, from an indigenous

perspective, one is persuaded to think of it in terms of tau-kei or, possibly, ‘yoked-with’

(using one of the many situated meanings of tau) explaining why the tamata-person

who considers herself/himself taukei (native/local) would feel a kind of restricted

oneness with the vanua-place/land. When posed with the taukei question, participants

almost always responded with the conviction that one is taukei (not an outsider that is)

if one is volai (registered in the Vola ni Kawa Bula [VKB])2 like they say: A ona ga esa

volai, esa volai! (lit. ‘Whoever is ‘written’, is ‘written!’’). This is the common argument

heard today, and as I presume, because there are now many who are volai (registered)

as vasu (descendents of a native woman of rank). There are also those whose ancestors

120��

were not on Lakeba at the time of the ‘writing’, scattered across the Lau group at the

time of pre-European contact wars, brought back into the fold, and sometimes referred

to as isolosolo. Whether one is of a male or a female line, or isolosolo, all volai

(‘written’) or Tubou-Lakeba registered taukei are land-owners, having earned or

assigned pieces of land to build a home-base on and/or cultivate.3

Another level of being taukei (insider) which I understood perfectly at the outset and,

which the volai acknowledged at the ceremonial presentation of my isevusevu

(traditional introductions), concerned people like myself who are not of the volai

(registered) but, who are familiar with the place and its customs. Even though being

taukei is open to interpretation, the people of Tubou-Lakeba interacted with were still

convinced that what counts is being registered. This position is well understood given

how a lot was at stake: power, status, landownership, belongingness and identity. On

that note, it could be said that the minds of the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba have been

thoroughly colonized with respect to believing in the legitimacy of the ‘written’ (the

‘young’ way) over what has been ‘coded’ and ‘preserved’ in their oral traditions, and

flowing in their veins (the ‘old’ way). In re-reading the making of sisi and waliwali

(garland and scented oil, respectively), the execution of the qoli or fish hunt, and the

practice of every other element of their island culture, as narratives, one needs to go

through the decolonizing process of ‘shifting and settling talanoa-stories’ with the

intention of ‘making’ them relevant and sustainable in the modern context. This project,

essentially, will have to draw from stories ‘told’ by us as well as those ‘constructed’ for

us. Being taukei (native, local, familiar), in this regard therefore, is being authentic.

The recent use of the iTaukei label to identify the indigenous, or natives of the Viti

group, previously known as Fijians, is another interesting moment in the history of our

nation (Vanua). The apparent use of the politics of inclusivity (having all citizens to be

called Fijians, that is), therefore, has also served to keep the memory of the indigenous

people’s ‘yoked-ness’ with the Vanua ko Viti, the lands and seas first tawani (filled) by

their ancestors centuries before any European or Asian set foot on our shores. In

asserting the iTaukei identity, all non-iTaukei people, and constructs, have permanently

121��

been made vulagi-outsider to ‘place’, hence alienating them further from truly ‘taking

root’. Interestingly, according to oral traditions, the taukei ni Vanua, yoked with its

land, saw themselves initially as ‘filling’ and not ‘owning’ place. Henceforth, their

continued existence on vanua-land was conceived as vakatawa koro/vanua, a

stewardship role conceptualized as the ‘continuous filling of place’ by people who are

‘yoked-with’ (tau-kei to) it. This conception may yet again help to explain the iTaukei

or taukei (native) people’s openness to outsiders or vulagi (visitors), knowing that the

strangers merely join with them in ‘filling’ and not ‘owning’ place, only to be made tau-

kei (‘yoked-with’ or ‘familiarized’) with place over time via ‘adoption’ or blood

connectedness. This view is evident in how iTaukei conceptualize Indo-Fijians as their

vasu: a people with ‘maternal’ links to the iTaukei and, who may ‘enjoy’ vasu

privileges. This privileged vulagi-taukei (outsider-insider) position for Fiji citizens of

Indian descent, the thought of which is close to what I enjoy in my vasu place, has been

‘pushed aside’ by capitalistic thinking pursuing ‘owning’ of place over the ‘filling’ of it.

This modern approach to ‘land-stewardship’, critically important to taukei ni qele/vanua

(‘land-owner’s’) given to the ideals of a cash economy, may have gradually eroded

indigenous thinking and ways of privileging vulagi-outsiders, in favour of

entrepreneurship. Modernization, in essence, is shifting iTaukei thinking and their

conceptualizations of taukeiness or ‘yoked-ness’ with place.

5.2.4 Mata

The mata concept, aside from representation or representing, means several things:

eye(s), front, face, sources and groups. Every iTaukei, therefore, is a mata of her/his

vanua-place – representing it, seeing for/through it, ‘educating’ it, and grouped into it.

This is more than just standing up for it or speaking on behalf of it. A mata is more than

just a herald, more than just a go-between the chief (Sau) and the Vanua. Mata roles,

essentially, can be performed by all because everyone, at one level or another, is Turaga

or chief over her/his ‘assigned’ place/space hence, is the best candidate to be mata

(representative) of it. The Turaga conception, commonly understood as ‘chief’,

therefore, is one interesting to analyze, and for a deeper appreciation of what it may

encompass, especially in relation to the mata concept. Another reading of the Tu-ra-ga

122��

concept may reveal a tu (standing/existence/presence) that is grounded ga (alone/only)

in the ra (base) place. In the Tubou-Lakeba center world of the Sau, the chiefly

reference for his feet is tura-tura, compared to the yava that is used for the ‘commoner’.

This knowledge has given new meaning to my perception of what or who a

Turaga/chief is – a person ‘standing only at her/his home-base’. This understanding has

helped me to appreciate what is often heard said: A turaga e turaga ni tamata! (A chief

is chief [only] of/over [his] people!). A chief’s home-base, therefore, is the theoretical

place where he stands a chance at being appointed leader of any mata-group. The

placed-people within her/his ra-base are the only ones who would extend expressions of

veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’) towards her/him as the ‘othered-one’, the Sau. In the

case of Tubou-Lakeba people, their Sau is essentially the group’s representative, the

“mata (rep) of the mata (group)”, and the embodiment of all things Vanua and taukei

related.

A true embodiment of the Vanua, a mata that is, whether s/he speaks or is silent, will

continue to reflect Vanua thought in her/his ivalavala (customs) and itovo (manners) to

confirm that the ‘itovo e odra ga a Turaga’ (‘manners belong [only] to the

chiefly/manly [the mata]’). Proper and respectable conduct, learned and demonstrated

by any iTaukei, is a sign that s/he is of Turaga (chiefly) ‘blood’, possible given the

iTaukei history of wars, the opposite of sautu (peace), and which works to reorder

society elevating some and reducing others. The understanding that all iTaukei are

potentially chiefly may explain the iTaukei manner of veivakaturagataki (esteeming of

the other, or chiefly respect) extended one to another, and which is observed in the

subtle ways they carry themselves about and relate to other iTaukei people, particularly

at the ceremonial level. In this regard, a mata-rep of a Vanua vakaTuraga is one who

lives in the wisdom that people are not just tamata (persons/people) ‘belonging’ to a

Turaga (chief) but, are themselves mata embodiments of their respective Vanua

vakaTuraga. This thought is reflected every time the iTaukei engage themselves in

traditional ceremonies or veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua (lit. ‘Vanua facing Vanua’). These

traditional presentations, in essence, always acknowledge the titled Vanua offices

‘filled’ by the installed chiefs of the receiving and presenting Vanua parties. Though the

123��

primary embodiment of the sau/mana, the Sau himself, may not be present at the

ceremonies, or has been ‘planted’ (buried), the presence of vanua-people who embody

the Vanua institution to which the sau/mana ‘belongs’ is enough to warrant full

observance of their ivalavala vakaVanua (Vanua traditions) vakaTuraga (chiefly).

Nonetheless, certain customs are said to be reserved for the ‘othered-one’, the Sau.

According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition also, high ranking individuals from closer to the

center world of the Sau, on Lakeba, were often assigned ‘postings’ further out from the

center at the outlying islands in a kind of ‘indirect-rule’. These were ‘postings’ wherein

chiefly mata-kiLakeba (reps. to Lakeba) were stationed, the ‘envoys’ who bring the rule

of Lakeba to its vakataukata, the tikina (parts) of Lau qali (‘twisted together’, referring

to tributaries) to Lakeba. Understanding the qali concept is critical in order for one to

appreciate the nature of connectedness between islands qali (‘twisted together’) with

Lakeba. Island people’s situated knowledge of twisting together many coconuts to help

in ‘floating’ them across from point A to point B, prior to the development of roads and

reliable forms of transportation, is enough to make one realize how effective a manner

of moving coconuts, and people, the qali method is. Similarly, Vanua qali are meant to

‘float together’ in the middle of the raging sea – a relationship that was, possibly, not

meant to be oppressive. This is one way island groups express their dependence on one

another, ‘twisting coconuts’ being the metaphor for a much needed sense of

togetherness. Interestingly, mata and qali are concepts present also in the iTaukei

counting system, and which is based in tens: ‘10 fishes making 1 mata’ and ‘10

coconuts making 1 qali’. This is significant given how fish and coconuts form a major

part of the local diet. Furthermore, mata and qali together form the concept of mataqali

(the iTaukei land-owning unit consisting of a number of related families ‘twisted

together’) or, otherwise, as used at the daily conversational level, to speak of varieties

as in ‘mataqali ika’ (kinds of fish). In the final analysis, it could be said that mata-rep

roles can only be created for a people qali (grouped) together for survival.

124��

5.2.5 Sautu

Sautu, as in ‘times of plenty’4, according to the Tubou-Lakeba people, is connected to

the presence of an embodiment of the sau/mana of the Vanua. Village elders today still

speak of ways the vanua-land/sea expressed the imbued mana of the Vanua in the past,

and which were strongly evident in the days of the last ‘sitting/standing chief’ (a Sau

who was there in person). One particular elder of the chiefly yavusa (a grouping made

up of several mataqali), who served for a long while at the Vale Levu (lit. ‘big house’),

expressed how a kind of plenty used to be observed on Lakeba. The traditional practice

of presenting first fruits and the best of one’s produce gathered from the iteitei

(gardens), and which were harvesting in abundance, was an indication of such a sautu.

This observation was supported by my mother and grandmother who expressed how

plentiful the harvest of fish via the qoli sirovi had always been every time the last Sau,

Ratu Mara, would visit the island, himself settled in the city being the prime minister

and later, the president of the Vanua ko Viti. These moments of sautu, while the people

were quick to connect to a mana from an ancient past, and which they believe is

permanently present in place, were observed because people tilled the land and reserved

fishing grounds solely and wholeheartedly for the service/worship of the Sau. The

overflow from such sustainable practices, in essence, also accounted for their immediate

needs. Herein, the survival of Vanua culture was seen as critical to their personal and

collective well-being.

In an informal discussion I had with an older men of the yavusa Vanua (of the ‘land-

givers’), he was quick to point out that sautu (peace/prosperity) was a lived reality,

traditionally, because people had interpreted the ‘cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena’ (meaning

‘striking when the wind is working in your favour’) conception correctly. According to

him, the proverb meant that people individually commit themselves to taking care of

Vanua business, or their common interest, while the conditions were right, and tended

to their own in their own time, having first secured their island-base. In this regard,

Vanua business is seen to comprise the sauvaki (‘worship’) of the itutu vakaTuraga, the

chiefly place and its chiefly incumbent. Today, as he further claimed, people are more

concerned with their personal ‘needs’ and, less and less with what must matter the most,

125��

so he thought, to the iTaukei, the Vanua or the Vanua vakaTuraga. The sauvaki of the

chiefly place, the Vanua vakaTuraga, in essence, comprises the sustainable use of both

land and sea resources in the service of the ‘sitting Sau’ and, for the continuity of the

ivalavala vakaVanua (Vanua traditions). 5 One such manner of exalting the chiefly

place, never practiced when the bilo (yaqona cup) of the Vanua is cobori no (presently

turned bottoms-up)6, is what has been called lala or, the collective vala (doing) of the

chief’s garden, particularly uvi (yams) and niu (copra). These community acts of

ensuring that the chief’s house was richly ‘adorned’ with the iyau ni Vanua (wealth of

the land/people), the iyau (wealth) which gets redistributed to the Vanua, in essence,

kept the Vanua and their ‘othered-one’ enjoying the sautu (abundance) of the

land/people.

Sautu, as argued by most who sat in the veitalanoa sessions I ‘chaired’, must not be

weighed only in material terms. Tubou-Lakeba people generally think that sautu (peace)

must be experienced first within before it can ever be expressed without. While this line

of thinking may have been influenced by the teachings of the church, the conception of

sautu as a present and real sau/mana embodied by the individual, and perceived to have

an inner [spiritual or psychological] and stabilizing effect, may be reconceptualized as a

body of knowledge which grounds the person in place. This knowledge base, possibly,

is that which frames a person’s thinking, the cognitive unconscious developed in the

formative years, and which shapes human thought. This understanding assumes that to

be in place is to ‘own’ situated knowledge necessary for ‘survival’ in that given context:

the sau/mana (critical knowledge) possessed by the individual, and which s/he employs

to effect developments and changes that work to secure her/his position in place. A well

established individual, thus, is one who is able to use her/his present sau/mana to tame

the ‘forces’ of nature, mind and society employing ivalu (‘warfare’, and with reference

to the qoli kanace) tactics, in a kind of con-frontation as in Auseinandersetzung, to

accomplish desired goals and to live comfortably well with others in sautu (abundance).

This discussion implies, therefore, that sautu (peace/prosperity/order/stability) is a state

of mind as much as it is a state of being. It is in us and we live in it. Culturally grounded

and ordered, sautu is the totality of that which is believed in and hoped for: expressions

126��

of sau/mana; the near equivalent of what the Christian bible calls ‘faith’; more than just

a ‘feeling’, both abstract and tangible; and associated with the act of sincere worship

directed towards a higher ‘othered-one’ bwho embodies all things noble and authentic.

5.3 Further Discussion The question of a sautu (moments of peace/plenty) influenced by a belief in the

existence of a Vanua, or place, imbued with an effective sau/mana (power) and/or, the

presence of a Sau (chief/leader) embodying that sau/mana, remains a topic for further

discussion. Any conceptualization of peace is situated in a local culture and, for the

iTaukei, this state of being, a state of ‘mind’, is rooted in their sense of belonging to

place and, connectedness to nature and humanity. A Vanua vakaTuraga (peopled-

place/placed-people) sourced and sustained by a generative vuravura-world, therefore,

is the site for any veitalanoa-dialogue between peoples made taukei (‘familiarized’ and

‘yoked with’ place, irrespective of race) everywhere within the Viti group of islands

sharing a common need for the ‘exploration’ of their common Oceanic space.

Placing the epistemology of sau/mana and a vuravura-world (nature) based sautu

theory within a chronology of vanua/fonua/fanua life-time (gauna), rooted in the Lapita

culture, and which diversified into distinct linguistic sub-groups, one is indefinitely

drawn to research-based conceptions such as ‘Times of Plenty, Times of Less’ (Nunn et

al., 2007) for a scientific perspective. This approach, therefore, will prove critical in an

attempt to re-construct a sound iTaukei identity in the twenty-first century kaiViti

society7. Constructing a common identity, therefore, would be necessary for everyone

settled in the Viti group to come to a shared understanding of the sautu and sau/mana

conceptions. That common identity is proposed herein to be found in the fluidity of the

five general iTaukei themes discussed thus far: vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu

– conceptions which may help ‘shift and settle’, via veitalanoa/dialogue, a new

understanding of the kaiViti issue.

127��

Is the idealized kaiViti society, Viti being the place/space we are all placed in, truly a

dream worth dreaming or, are we better off identified as a plural society without the

‘social will’ to hold it together?8 Must we then develop and adopt a national culture,

rooted in the Viti-place, and which will render us all as kaiViti or, are we happy, as a

nation, named Fiji and Fijians in the ‘language’ of the privileged ‘late-comer’, the

foreigner, the colonizer? These are some questions that should challenge any iTaukei

thinker committed to making sautu (peace, plenty) the shared reality of everyone now

settled in the Viti group of islands. The kaiViti culture that is proposed here, a culture

taukei to (‘yoked with’) Viti as a vanua-place, should not perpetuate, therefore,

colonizing ideas that reduce us to mere ‘discovered others’ in the vocabulary of the

Eurocentric colonizer. Instead, we must rise above these circumstances and boldly

advocate a unifying identity that refuses to continue to give credit to vulagi-foreign

concepts and practices that once conquered and subjugated us into second and third

class citizens of our Vanua ko Viti. Historically ‘dis-placed’, at least culturally and

psychologically, true kaiViti are now challenged to deal with this reality intelligibly and

not accept it as our fate.

5.3.1 Placing the Sau/Mana and Sautu Conceptions Chronologically

According to Tubou-Lakeba tradition, the first peoples (of the Tui Lakeba migration

from the north of Lakeba, possibly from Vanua Levu through Taveuni) reached Lakeba

and settled the shores, possibly for generations (Reid, 1990), before taking to the hills of

what became the defensible Ulunikoro and Kedekede hillforts. This was confirmed by

Simon Best (as cited in Nunn et al., 2007) who noted that there is strong evidence

supporting this upslope migration story during what is now known as the A. D. 1300

Event9, and which resulted in what Nunn et al. (2007, p. 383) calls a time of “societal

collapse”. The period following, the Little Ice Age (A. D. 1450–1750), was a time of

great conflict and, for Lakeba-Lau, this was expressed in the traces of the remains of

many settlements scattered all over the island. These were possibly splinter groups from

the few larger ones that settled mostly along the coast, prior to the A. D 1300 Event,

and who were joined by later migrants only to be ‘united’ under the leadership of the

128��

Ceiekena Sau, towards the end of the Little Ice Age (late 1500s to late 1700s), on

Kedekede.

It was on Kedekede, according to Tubou-Lakeba traditions, that Lakeba appointed its

first Sau (chief-leader). Interestingly, this development from having Tui spiritual leaders

(Tu’i in Toga) to recognizing Sau administrative leaders (Hau in Toga), the temporal

shift away from the sacred, was taking place in Vanua vakaTuraga having some

intimate connections with Toga. According to Reid’s (1990, p. 6) calculations, using

Tubou-Lakeba oral accounts and the Tu’i Toga and Tu’i Kanokupolu genealogies, the

Sau of Kedekede line of the Ceiekena tribe10 was only established around the late

sixteenth century and ran on for two centuries before it was replaced by the Tui Nayau

line of the Vuanirewa from Nayau. It was also during the reign of this Ceiekena tribe on

Kedekede, around the mid 1700s, that part of the seafaring (fisherfolks) Levuka people

(now dispersed across the Viti group and carrying the Levuka and/or Korolevu names)

showed up at the Lakeba scene to return the castaway daughter of Ginigini, the Sau of

Kedekede at the time (Reid, 1990). This was how the Levuka people earned the right to

share in the times of sautu (abundance) experienced on Lakeba, times of plenty

environmentally determined, and which became an attraction to sojourners and vanua-

land seekers negotiating oceanic pathways between the Viti group, Toga and Samoa.

Lakeba, herein, is presented as a strategic location whose size and resources would have

been sufficient to support a relatively larger land-based population, and frequent

travelers commuting between distant vanua veiwekani (related places). Connecting and

re-connecting, a human tendency, proved their commitment therefore, to the

consolidating of their ancient connectedness via the constant exchange of material

wealth, human resources and expertise.

The fame of Lakeba, therefore, was one that could be credited to its ideal geographical

location (between Viti and, Toga and Samoa), the favourable south-easterly winds, its

people’s seafaring tradition and capacity, and their workable relations with their island

neighbours. Chosen by God, as they believe, to be the matamata-gateway for

civilization via the church, Tubou-Lakeba people are historically ‘placed’, therefore, as

129��

‘experts’ on how sautu may be conceptualized, at least by the chief-serving bible-

believing iTaukei. It was indeed their philosophical position, pertaining to how the

mata/envoy system worked to keep in place what they ‘know’ of the sau/mana and

sautu conceptions – the ideas, the expressions, the institutions – that I was out to re-

kune (re-find/re-conceive) aided by the ongoing veitalanoa engagement I was

committed to sharing with them.

Whether or not sau and mana mean the same thing or came from the same source

remains partially answered, particularly when the iTaukei oral tradition places mana as

something which came to Viti from the west of the group, remembered today in the

place-name Mana, a small island off the western coast of the main island of Viti Levu.

It may not be far from the truth, therefore, to assume that the sautu (plenty) conception

emerged around the same time as the environmentally determined ‘times of plenty’ that

led to the appointment of an administrative leader appropriately titled the Sau, borrowed

from Toga traditions. Understandably, the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba could only ascribe

this abundance to the Sau they see and, the sau/mana imbued place they believe in,

instead of the climate. Herein was formulated a belief that peace and prosperity were

somehow connected to the presence of a supernatural force that is activated only in the

tu (standing) of a Sau (chief-administrator), the coordinator of the Tubou-Lakeba way

of life. Over time, I would presume, the Sauship became sacred just as the Tuiship

before it did (similar to developments observed in Toga) so that by the time the Tui

Nayau of the Vuanirewa arrived on Lakeba, he was seen fit to assume both sacred roles,

Tui and Sau. As Tui-Sau (king-administrator), another iTaukei expression adapted as a

reference to the Christian God, the chief’s dominion was projected to be associated with

a personal mana/sau and supported by the gods, and as rightly observed by Hocart (as

cited in Scarr, 2008). To this day, Tubou-Lakeba elders maintain that the sauness

(manafulness) of Lakeba-island (and Tubou-village) rests on the appointment of the

next Tui Nayau and Sau of Lau. Until then, as suggested by a veitalanoa participant, the

sau and sautu of the vanua-land/place will continue to ‘thin-out’ in the long absence of

an ‘othered-one’. As argued by this vanua person, a Sau-less or leaderless Vanua will

‘lose its grip’ on the ivalavala vakaVanua (ancient customs/traditions) associated with

130��

the service/worship of a Sau, one that is agriculture-based and grounded in the

sustainable harvest of vanua resources.

5.3.2 The Vanua vakaTuraga and its Informed Generation

My last visit with the Tubou-Lakeba people iVanua (on the island) was educational as

well as alarming. While I marveled at how a significant number of people have

reorganized themselves into localized working groups (not the ‘traditional’ rigid

structure) in the pursuit of village projects, and in the absence of any installed Tui-Sau

(chief-administrator), certain individuals or groups of individuals were totally ignoring

communal causes in the name of the ‘family’. This observation tells me that people are

probably unconsciously forfeiting the original sau/mana conception, pushing it aside as

‘mythical’, in favour of the knowledge that it is in the ‘ligadra na cauravou’ (‘hands of

the young people’), a rhetorical church phrase suggesting that sautu (wealth) will come

about for the community and, for individual, via the ‘young’ people.

What I see happening here, therefore, is a reordering of society that may or may not

result in the continuation of the chiefly rule, in the form that was observed in the last

century at least. Modernization, essentially, has taught the Tubou-Lakeba people of this

millennium that the development of individual skills and talents via schooling and, the

pursuit of individual goals, matter also in one’s desire to preserve the community spirit.

What they may not see happening is how that thought is ‘eating-up’ their centralized

notion of the chiefly existence from the inside forcing them to ‘diversify’ and

‘decentralize’11 , though existing physically within the confines of the koro-village.

According to a government official of the chiefly tribe, or the Vuanirewa, the

installation of the next ‘functional’ and ‘believable’ Sau can only be ushered in by a

new ‘X’ generation, free of the old politics, and possibly decolonized.

Within these frameworks, at least, I see positive outcomes sprouting out of a kind of

plurality. This cross-pollination of multiple perspectives, presumably, would have

existed a century ahead of the A. D. 1300 Event when “sub-regional interaction”

between Vanuatu and Toga (possibly crossing the Viti waters) was something of the

131��

ordinary (Nunn et al., 2007, p. 396). This pre-1300 voyaging and trading, possibly

involving gene-sharing somewhere in the maliwa-spaces between times and places in-

between, is a possible explanation for renewed Viti-Toga voyaging centuries later, and

around the time of the Ceiekena Sau on Kedekede. Such a long history of braving less

stable oceanic conditions would have ‘birthed’ in the native people’s biological and

cultural gene-pool an ‘attitude’ for challenge which tended to favour the better endowed

who would dare break out of the comfort of the vanua-land to explore the unknown

bounds of their wider vuravura-world. Descendents of these ‘dare-devils’, therefore, in

their ancestors’ show of bravery over nature, society and the mind, have now ascended

the heights of localized leadership, as chiefs of mainly maritime chiefdoms. Essentially,

they have become the subject of the popularized ‘stranger-kings’ phenomenon.

By way of colonization through modernization, most Pacific peoples today have been

‘freed’ from the totality of their old ecology-based spirituality to one that recognizes a

reliance on a heaven-based personal deity and/or, talents and skills, knowledge and

expertise acquired individually. The expansion of the boundaries of knowledge and its

possible applications and implications, therefore, has bred a generation so challenged, at

least conceptually, that it would be impossible to imagine it keeping their unique sense

of indigeneity in an age where information is gold. In the midst of rapid material and

technological change, what has not altered much is that which has kept us together as a

people, our geography and our language. These two factors, strongly influencing our

thinking, therefore, will continue to shape our identity and our sense of place in an

interactive multi-kai12 environment. This generation, more so of the Tubou-Lakeba

people, ‘knows’ that sautu is in their hands, and also in the hands of an independent, yet

personal, higher power. This observation indicates that there is a general weakening of

the Tubou-Lakeba people’s reliance on a sautu generating earth-based sau (‘power’)

and/or the Sau-chief embodiment of that sau. The question is: ‘How do they ‘know’ that

this sau-power has ‘changed hands’?’ For now, only time will tell what this “generation

X” will do about it.

132��

5.3.3 ‘Survival of the Fittest’13

Survival is the ultimate goal of existence. The fittest individuals, groups and cultures

often always survive regardless of whether they choose to fight or, take it to flight. The

Pacific cultures today have survived because they chose to ‘flee’, possibly, from some

kind of ‘threat’. Alternatively, the ancestors of Pacific peoples chose to ‘fight’ their way

through the raging sea to lands of greater voyaging opportunities. Once landed and

decidedly settled, they have developed, over time, a way of life that opts for con-

frontation, Auseinandersetzung or veivakataukeitaki – a ‘keeping apart in togetherness’

living in the maliwa-spaces between times and places and, making the vulagi-strangers

taukei to (‘yoked/familiar with’) the ivalavala (ancient ways) 14 and itovo (practice of

the ‘now’ generation) of the host Vanua. For the iTaukei, what I have argued as a way

of knowing, essentially, is a mata system that involves seeing and knowing, and

representation and knowledge transfer.

At the center of this Vanua system, believed to have vura (emerged) from within the

‘vanua-place’ where it now tu (stands), exist well-placed knowledgeable and articulate

Mata persons (seers/knowers, representatives, envoys, heralds, ‘embodiments of

popular opinion’). As people gifted in the art of negotiating space and places in their

life-times, they themselves ‘shift their horizons’ (broaden their scope) by consulting

Mata of places they are not too informed about. In listening to fellow Mata, they are

acknowledging that they are experts only of certain domains of knowledge, and are

open to multiple perspectives. Naturally, they perceive themselves as dau-ni-

veivakameautaki or expert negotiators who use the medium of veitalanoa-dialogue, or

the group ‘shifting and settling’ of issues, to engage people in ‘peace-talks’ and

motivate them to pursue sautu (stability/prosperity) via tiko veisaututaki (living together

for peace). This, in essence, is the methodology used to facilitate the needs of this

postcolonial constructionist research.

To annihilate the iTaukei identity, therefore, and their persisting culture, is to do two

things: remove every single one of them, physically and permanently, from the land that

had shaped their sense of place, and rob them of the language that carries the memories

133��

of who they are and what they can be. Having that done, no longer will there be the vei

(collectivity/reciprocity) principles they live by, the vanua concept upon which their

vakaTuraga (chiefly temperament) and mata representations are rooted, and their sense

of taukei or being ‘yoked with’ place. Similarly, life-skills like fish-hunting and

scented-oil making associated with living by the sea for centuries will be forfeited

together with their ‘shifting horizon’ perspective and outlook, grounded on their

familiarity with their ancestral home-base, and which keeps them mobile and active.

While this undesirable scenario is highly unlikely, in the twenty-first century that we

live in, dis-placement has come to us by way of ‘colonization’, specifically, the

colonization of our ‘minds’ and way of life via language replacement. To preserve the

iTaukei language and culture, negative developments and change must be well guarded

against and, iTaukei research of its culture by its people (an off-shoot of indigenous

Pacific research) is just one way language loss may be reversed. This is particularly

critical given that the number of living iTaukei language speakers, compared to

speakers of Hindi, Mandarin Chinese and English, is far too small by comparison.

5.3.4 The Starting Point – Attitude Adjustment

To activate the iTaukei Mata attitude of veivakataukeitaki (two-way familiarization)

expressed in knowledge sharing, a Mata-rep must adopt two other vei attitudes that tend

to complement any peace-making project aimed at bridging the gap between one’s

familiar space/place and that of others – veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki.

Veivakamenemenei (pampering) is an attitude and practice accorded by one

older/stronger/wiser to another who is younger/weaker/inexperienced. This is

theoretically how the older and powerful Vanua relate with, and to, a younger and

relatively ‘weaker’ Turaga: weak in the sense that the sau/mana and privileges s/he

enjoys are given to her/him by the Vanua that installs her/him, and which he now

rules.15 Essentially, the one who is vakamenemenei (pampered) would have been duty-

bound to return the favour. After the traditional installation, the one empowered would

have had the entire length of her/his rule to vakamenemenea (pamper) the Vanua in

reciprocation. Veivakamenemenei, therefore, is a kind of ‘one good turn deserves

another’.

134��

Veivakaturagataki (two-way chiefly respect), on the other hand, is a practice and a

relationship extended and enjoyed by two proud equals. The recognition that the ‘other’

may be as chiefly (smart or powerful) as oneself is the attitude/practice that one Turaga

would be expected to accord another. Around the yaqona circle, the yalofi, for instance,

a chief may alter the drinking order by allowing the first cup to be redirected to another

chief (usually from another place) of the same rank who is present in their midst, in

recognition of his status. When high chiefs interact, it would not be uncommon to see

them exercising chiefly deference – the esteeming of the other as ‘bigger’ or ‘better’

and, which is often always reciprocated unless the ‘other’ has not been groomed from

‘home’ in the veivakaturagataki. Observing veivakaturagataki at the ordinary level is

again something to admire, simple untitled people respecting one another as equals.

This reality, as I argue, reflects the iTaukei unconscious and unarticulated

understanding that everyone is a potential Turaga (chief) and Mata (representative) of

her/his Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly place). A common iTaukei ‘chief-rep’ potential, and

its implications, would have emerged as a result of the constant shifting and settling of

power-bases during the very unstable ‘era of less’ preceding, and even following, the

environmentally determined ‘birth’ of sau/mana and sautu (sau/mana-exists)

conceptions. Veivakaturagataki, therefore, is an honourable attitude of respect accorded

someone recognized as Turaga because of her/his placed-ness in a Vanua vakaTuraga

(a chiefly place). Essentially, a Turaga is a well-placed mata-rep of her/his Vanua, not a

vanualess wanderer.

The Vanua vakaTuraga, therefore, must not be seen as one where the Vanua is to be

exploited by the installed Turaga. The Vanua (taukei ‘land-givers’) and the Turaga

(vulagi ‘land-takers’), ideally, exist alongside each other today as equals, one propping

up the other, in a relationship that is built on veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki.

Any other manner of engagement between the two institutions constructed around

exploitation is bound to collapse, especially now when people are beginning to slowly

understand that the Vanua and Turaga institutions exist because the placed-peoples of

Viti wanted them to. If, for their sentimental values, the true nature of the institutions,

and which may possibly be lying dormant, need reactivation, then such noble vei

135��

attitudes must be revived and revisited. These positive vei attitudes, being ideals, are

best cultivated in places where the people inside them actually prefer to live by their

high standards, and not just believe in their significance – the family, workplace,

community, etc. This is iTaukei thought, philosophy and ethics at their best. To aspire

to live by them, therefore, is to adopt Mata responsibility of one’s Vanua, taking care of

Vanua business above personal agenda. Herein, the individual understands that s/he is

well-placed and, as such, must prove her/his worth in representing community interest.

5.4 Conclusion Any Mata, to be sure, will listen to her/his head, heart and hands: what s/he raica (sees),

kila (knows) and valata (performs). The mind of a Mata, therefore, consists of her/his

whole body. A Mata sees and knows using her/his mind and the minds of other Mata,

especially Mata (persons) who represent what I call mata institutions: mata-niVanua

(the people, na vanua), mata-niTuraga (government, na matanitu), mata-veitokani (the

church, na lotu) and mata-niCiva (education or schooling, na vuli [metaphorically]). It

is from within these institutions that knowledge is created, practiced and theorized.

Mata of these institutions, specialized in certain aspects of knowledge within a specific

domain, therefore, would be expected to demonstrate a higher degree of competency in

the knowledge area of their specialization. They are the ones who will then

vakataukeitaki (familiarize) those placed further away from the center of their

knowledge systems as pertaining to what knowledge or categories of knowledge they

privilege, including their epistemological persuasions. For instance, the university,

placed within the mata-niCiva institution, advocates the scientific method of knowing

while the church and the vanua have their own ways of knowing. Because “divergent

systems coexist in the same person, organization or community” (Barnhardt &

Kawagley, 2005, p. 9), any one Mata, essentially, would be carrying knowledge of

certain things regarding the vanua, the church, government and/or schooling at any one

given time hence, a placed-privilege to represent the institutions and, in matters they are

conversant with.

136��

The iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba of the eighteenth century would have had a system of

knowledge-sharing in place before Christianity was cabe (ascended or ‘washed

ashore’)16, in 1835 on its shores, to have readily embraced the ‘good news’ and the vuli

(learning opportunities) that came with it. This would have been the same system upon

which they welcomed the early forms of government and the leadership introduced by

the infamous Ma’afu of Toga, the first Tui Lau (‘king’ of Lau) who came to Viti

‘following’ his dra ni veiwekani (‘blood of relatedness’) to the chiefs of Nayau and

Lakeba (Reid, 1990; Spurway, 2002). It was upon this foundation also that Great Britain

was repeatedly sought and received, and with ‘gladness’. The implication here is that

the iTaukei generally ‘know’ what ‘voice’ to listen to or, which Mata person (hence

mata institution) to open their doors and hearts to, when their ‘guts’ tell them to – even

if the engagement seemed unsanctioned, forced and exploitative. The iTaukei

expression ‘Sa lewe dina ni ketequ’ (‘It is truly in the members of my stomach/womb’),

used when vocalizing one’s concern for someone or something, reveals that the ‘mind’

is perceived to feel for (not just think about) the well-being of others and, conceive of

ways to reach out and make a difference. Other similar notions of knowing with one’s

entrails speak of the ‘ora’ (choking) of the ‘loma’ (inside) or, of ‘one’s liver being

chewed on’ (‘kania a yatequ’) hence, supporting the idea that the iTaukei perceive the

function of the ‘mind’ to involve the whole body. This is basically how they tell which

Mata person or mata institution to welcome into the Vanua and listen to. These are

Mata who follow proper Vanua protocol and, who ‘know’ their mata-niKatuba (‘eyes

of doors’ by which they enter a Vanua), isema vaka-dra (‘blood ties’), veiwekani

(relatedness) and veikilai (‘mutual friendships’). This indigenous way of knowing

where to be and who to engage is both intelligible and sensible.

Any Mata of the place Viti, essentially a kaiViti carrying a vuravura-world view, should

not have a problem, therefore, in viewing her/his world as a vuravura-source, given

how all things foreign can be conceptualized to vura (appear) from beyond their known

‘horizon’. Similarly, the notion of vanua as place and, of being a placed-people in the

Vanua ko Viti, have implications in how recent migrants may progress through the

veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) process of making one taukei to, or ‘yoked-with’, the

137��

Viti place. As far as being a vulagi (stranger) goes, the understanding that everyone is

taukei to (familiar with/being certain of) her/his own place/space and vulagi to

(unfamiliar with/being uncertain of) others’ should help anyone not to be unreasonably

overwhelmed when engaging in knowledge sharing. Exploring what has been called the

taukei-vulagi dichotomy as a continuum, therefore, assists in placing the relative

positioning of anyone actively engaging in knowledge sharing anywhere between the

taukei (familiar) and vulagi (unfamiliar) extremes hence, help gauge her/his progress

through the intercourse and strategize for her/his next moves. Similarly, the Vanua-

Turaga (represented-representative) dichotomy, when reconceptualized as a continuum,

opens up the possibility of continuously engaging more and more indigenous peoples in

research, knowledge sharing and knowledge building. Essentially, they will ‘grow’

beyond just ‘being represented’ (or ‘boxed’) and start ‘representing’ their worlds and

realities and what knowledge they know is important to their collective survival and

well-being. This is how the ‘colonized’ may be initiated into life-long learning and,

ultimately, become ‘decolonized’.

5.5 Chapter Summary Articulating just what vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu mean to the iTaukei of

Tubou-Lakeba is not enough. What is important is understanding how their perceptions

impact on their behavior and, eventually, their participation in knowledge building

exercises. This is critical given how the sau/mana to acquire things and be effective is

now conceptualized as the necessary situated knowledge-base that determines how one

strategizes for survival in place. Sautu as peace, stability, order and prosperity is a

universal ideal. The iTaukei persistently pursuing sautu, therefore, can only expect to

achieve it by ‘seeding’ (as in sowing/planting) what little, but important knowledge,

s/he carries in the fertile ground of “life-long learning” to see it grow, multiply and

bring in a plentiful harvest. In answering the research questions, participants proved that

they were not only knowledgeable but, capable of engaging in deep thinking. This is the

kind of philosophical engagement that will help people ask and answer the “big

questions” – the kinds of questions that lead to conceptual change and, eventually,

138��

knowledge building. My questions, in essence, have helped situate the research in the

iTaukei understanding, and sense of ‘place’, as a specific positioning in a

compartmentalized space, in their vuravura-world conception (worldview) and, their

relative placements in it with respect to their significant other.

The first major step, therefore, in making sense of these concepts, is to identify the

philosophical basis that frames iTaukei or Vanua thinking and thought. Conceptualizing

vanua as the center and vuravura as the negotiable ‘knowledge space’ traversed by the

learner/researcher is an excellent initial step towards trying to draw iTaukei mata-reps

carrying leadership (Turaga) potential to a place of con-frontation that recognizes

others’ capacity to become productive members of society. This realization keeps one

well rooted in her/his ‘birth place’ (of origin) while daring to venture out to the

relatively unknown waiting beyond the horizon. Here is a story of ‘settled-ness’ that

embraces change. Here is someone open to the conscious ‘shifting and settling’ of

her/his own ‘theories’ and understandings in the pursuit of the idealized sautu. This

kind of openness, therefore, comes about only with the certainty of how one stands in

relation to another at the place of veitalanoa-dialogue and veivakataukeitaki

(familiarization) – of being taukei (familiar) only with one’s own and vulagi

(unfamiliar) with another’s. This attitude, in essence, is what keeps people at that place

of Auseinandersetzung open to alternatives and multiple perspectives.

In analyzing the answers gathered from the ‘field’, viewing them against what iTaukei

scholars have written or spoken about with greater reflexivity, I have found the Tubou-

Lakeba people’s situated conceptualizations of the five concepts herein highlighted to

be thoroughly comprehensible and readily believable. Placing the sau/mana and sautu

conceptions chronologically using scientific research findings, for instance, was

significant because it gave a kind of credibility to the views ‘harvested’ from the people

on the ground. Whatever I have collated and represented in this chapter, therefore, will

serve to emphasize how the environment plays a vital part in shaping thought. In light

of this, I now conclude that ‘place’, consisting of the natural, human and spiritual

dimensions, will continue to mold thinking and behavior, and influence knowing and

139��

learning. It is imperative, therefore, to say at this point that how the Vanua ko Lakeba

conceptualizes the vanua, vuravura, taukei, mata and sautu concepts today have been

shaped largely by its geographical realities, through historical processes and by its oral

traditions. These Vanua understandings, produced at the conceptual junctions of

lingering and dominant constructions, indigenous or otherwise, have been been

influential in shaping Vanua practices and discourses. What additional contribution I

have made to a deeper understanding of the concepts, nonetheless, has come about via

serious philosophical reflection, analyzing the concepts linguistically and using

metaphorical thought. This chapter, therefore, in answering the main research questions,

is setting up the thesis-construction for the articulation of my main research findings,

and of their implications, in the concluding chapter that is to follow.

������������������������������������������������������������1 Cited in Lawson (1996, pp. 41-42). 2 The VKB is what was known as the Fijian Registry of Births. A person can be volai (‘written’) into the father’s lineage (or mother’s lineage for those born out of wedlock). The VKB, a colonial idea, has been taken by the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba to be the final authority on ‘who is in’ and, ‘who is out’. 3 Land on Lakeba is owned by families, and not mataqali (a group of related families, possibly sharing a common ancestor), following Toga traditions. At the time of the last Sau or “othered-one”, his half brothers and sisters were ‘systematically’ denied ‘ownership’ of land belonging to their father hence, leaving them and their descendents, down to four generations, practically ‘landless’. This was ‘justifiable’ given that the last Sau, as eldest, and particularly as the only Vanua installed chief to be given ‘absolute’ sau/mama dominion over the land and people, became the only ‘legitimate’ inheritor of it all. 4 Refer to Nunn et al. (2007) for a scientific perspective that may help enlighten one’s understanding of sautu as ‘times of plenty’. 5 Note that the ‘ivalavala’ concept, rooted in the word vala (do/done/doing), speaks of a ‘doing-doing’ or, the continuous conscious doing of something hence, pointing to what we may refer to as traditions. 6 Meaning that there is no ‘sitting chief’ in place, no installed/recognized Sau. Note that there had been chiefs, not installed traditionally, but who were recognized by the Vanua nonetheless. 7 The ‘kaiViti’ (‘from Viti’) phenomenon, possibly conceived from time immemorial to refer to kinsmen from the Vanua ko Viti, and which is used today in reference to native Fijians, sometimes in a belittling way, may have to be re-conceptualized to accommodate everyone settled in Fiji. Herein, the ‘kaiViti society’ construction is used inclusively and, notably, without any racial connotation to refer to all who have made the Viti islands their ra-base.8 Refer to Lawson (1996, pp. 42-44) for an in-depth discussion. 9 The A. D. 1300 Event (A. D. 1250–1350), according to Nunn et al. (2007), was “a time of rapid cooling, sea-level fall, and cultural change…[a] societal disruption associated with the A. D. 1300 Event [which] was due largely to a massive and rapid reduction of the food resource base”. 10 The first leader of this tribe and, who became the first Sau on the Kedekede hillfort, was a Qilaiso. The Qilaiso (Pukuni and Tokairabe) delegation just shifted base from Kabara-Lau and, their place on an already divided Lakeba population just became secure in the Qilaiso and Pukuni (brothers) marriages to daughters of the then Tui Lakeba. Tokairabe, who was the priest in that delegation, soon became prominent on the island serving the Sau. The priestly descendents of Tokairabe strategically changed sides in the ‘handover’ to the Nayau chiefs who came on the island two centuries later, serving the Vuanirewa chiefs as mata-niVanua (‘go-between’ the Vanua ko Lakeba and the Turaga the [sacred] Tui Nayau who was also the [new administrative] Sau of the Vanua ko Lau).

140��

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������11 The average adult male (especially fathers/husbands) may ‘know’ basic carpentry, plumbing and electrical wiring, first-aid, basic arithmetic and English and, catering to name a few. These comprise skills that are both school-taught and life-taught. In the olden days, I would presume that adult males were preoccupied with the business of the Sau then they were with the immediate needs of the family. This is what I regard to encompass diversification. As a result, it could be said that indigenous thought has decentralized away from the Sau being the center, focusing in on the family. 12 ‘Kai’ is used, as a prefix, placed infront of a place-name denoting that the person(s) referred to originally come from that place. For example, a kai-Idia is one who is originally from India. Such references do not necessarily have to be seen as offensive. They merely point out matter of factly the place of origin of an individual/group. A multi-kai Viti, therefore, is a multicultural one. 13 Survival of the fittest, in this regard, draws from Darwin’s theory on natural selection and, which favours people (and presumably cultures) that have adapted better to the environment. According to Brandon (1990), “if a is better adapted than b to their mutual environment E, then (probably) a will have greater reproductive success than b in E” (as cited in Lennox, 2010) 14 The ivalavala has to do with the ‘old nature’ practised generation after generation for many generations. 15 According to a Tui Tubou (as cited in Hooper, 1996, p. 262), “the paramount chief’s sau was a power which came from the people”. It could even be argued that here was developing an indigenous iTaukei notion of a kind of ‘democratic’ method of selecting the leader who is to be installed. Tyranny, on the other hand, would have developed naturally because of the extent of the power vested on the chief-elect, and the ineffectiveness of the mata-niVanua (eye/voice of land/people) institution. This mata system of engagement, therefore, would have kept the Vanua away from anti-sautu practices (expressions of disorder) that tend to break up society. In Tubou-Lakeba oral traditions, society-tearing instability occurred twice, in their remembered past at least, causing a turning away of the people of Lakeba from leaders who were corrupted by cannibalism. This proved that the Lakeba society, then, was already developing into a kind of organized state where popular opinion mattered, before the arrival of western influences. 16 The conceptualization that Christianity was ‘vakacaberi’ (brought ashore), from the ‘cabe’ concept, meant that the in-coming (the church) came in, from beyond the horizons, looking up to the ‘gods’ of the Vanua. After the church had grown roots, over years of missionization, the Vanua and its ‘gods’ were now admonished to ‘cabe’ to the God of the church – a reversal of power. Today, government has made it compulsory for all children to ‘cabe’ to school while church attendance is pretty much left for the individual to decide – yet another reversal of power.

141��

CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSION

Change of itself need not imply instability. Change is always present in greater or lesser

degree in every culture and society. Stability is not. Stability lies in orderly

change and finds expression in a continuing successful adaptation to habitat and in

non-violent shifts in the pattern of social organization.

Alexander Spoehr1

6.1 Introduction This phase of my journey is coming to an end. It started off with questions for which I

am certain I have found the answers, or at least put some kind of closure to, much like

how kanace fish-hunters conceptualize a plentiful harvest as a samu (thrashing). Like in

any piece of living art, the final touch is the ‘touch down’, the moment to relish, the

finale. In essence, every experience intelligibly engaged on, on and off the ‘field’, is a

kind of re-living of the past in the constant ‘re-telling’ of, and relating to, enduring

‘narratives’. These talanoa-stories, as they persist in the indigenous world and mind, are

understandably told, sung and danced to, printed, woven, and carved out, performative

and expressive, communally engaging and dialogic. Continuous engagement in these

situated talanoa, over time, can only result in the activation of the ‘shifting and settling’

of one’s conceptual framework, worldview and philosophical position hence, the nature

of her/his practices and discourses. This is what has happened to me after allowing the

literature, my mother’s stories and personally observed Vanua ko Lakeba customs, and

my own theorizing and talanoa (thesis) construction to dialogue: conceptual change

and, that which now shapes my own conceptualization of new and re-lived experiences.

In the sharing of knowledge, therefore, new ideas have emerged building on things

previously known and, possibly, while attempting to explain observations and/or make

predictions. The iTaukei mata (envoy) system of representation, in connecting people

intra- and inter-Vanua (within place and across places), is one such idea that was

142��

birthed in the peculiarities of the Vanua ko Viti, its physical landscape and placed-

people. The vuravura-world concept, for instance, may have emerged at the post-1300

era of less which coincided with a drop in sea-level (Nunn et al., 2007) that would have

caused the emergence (vura) of ‘places’ once submerged. Coupled with tectonic related

up-lift (Nunn, 1998) such a period of emergence would have been significant enough to

shape a people’s view of their world, particularly that of the socio-cultural/spiritual,

given how the vura concept feature prominently in iTaukei traditional ceremonies.To

place the emergence of the Lakeba envoy system2 within a linear vanua time frame,

therefore, one can only speculate that it was culturally conceived around the late 1500

A. D in the lead up to the selection of the first Sau of Kedekede (chief/administrator) on

Lakeba decades later, according to Reid’s (1990) calculations. This would have

coincided with renewed voyaging between Toga and Viti following the marriage of the

eldest sister of a Tu’i Tonga to a chief of Lakeba (Nunn et al., 2007), and signifying an

ordering of society under leadership ‘known’ to possess a mana/sau that would keep the

then Lakeba community together.

6.2 Closing Discussion – ‘Plaiting’ the ‘stringed’ parts into a Vanua

whole using the Sisi making analogy A Vanua vakaTuraga, in essence, is a peopled-place privileging its own placed-peoples.

This implies that ‘spiritual’ and ‘administrative’ leaders (the ‘chiefly’ and ‘manly’,

respectively) placed within it, and places and positions they occupy, in space through

time, are indeed privileged. Representation within and across Vanua vakaTuraga,

therefore, is critical in the development of society given that progress can only come by

way of sharing – the sharing of space, potential, ideas and resources. Such a sharing

platform must be constructed around a solid base grounded in enduring relationships.

The iTaukei have been described here as a vei people: sharing a collective existence in

reciprocity, and which is the principled way of life that has had an impact on their

‘shifting’ manner of conduct (itovo) and ‘settled’ traditions (ivalavala). This way of

being (in place), therefore, has been argued herein as a way of knowing (that place).

Essentially, this had always been the basis upon which knowledge was created or

143��

constructed: situated in the vanua-place, communally owned and shared by a vei people,

and dialogic enough to contribute to knowledge building. In this regard, the Vanua

vakaTuraga can be conceptualized as an active site for learning through dialogue. This

is where Mata (representatives) play the critical role of bridging the gap between the

known and the unknown – constructing and ‘theorizing’ to connect right practice to

philosophical assumptions upon which they are grounded.

Positive growth and development is argued here to be engineered by knowledgeable

Mata, of the Turaga (the leaders, the elected) and of the Vanua (the led, the electors):

leaders, chiefs and administrators privileged by ‘place’ hence, its placed-peoples.

Cultivating the right attitude in Mata (articulate representatives) of places, therefore,

will require more than intra-relatedness within the confines of place. Relating across

places and spaces is what opens up doors of opportunities for the knowers, as well as

the learners, in the constructive exchange of knowledge, indigenous or otherwise, for

the construction of meaning. This research, for instance, has borrowed widely from the

indigenous iTaukei culture and language as well as scientific knowledge and

perspectives. Critical to an informed understanding and appreciation of the iTaukei way

of knowing, therefore, is the assumption that the development of an authentic identity

must be preceded by a thorough decolonization of the mind. Being decolonized, in this

sense, refers to the freeing of a people from a dependence on theories constructed from

the outside, by outsiders, to define what constitutes humanity for the insiders living on

the inside. This is why the conscious creation of a place for indigenous minds in

academia, as in Pacific studies, is one way placed knowledge and knowers may be

privileged – researching their own from both western and indigenous lenses hence,

proving for themselves and others that ‘two-eyedness’ is critical to the kind of

objectivity which gives due credit to the subjectivity of interpretations.

6.2.1 The iTaukei Way of Knowing – A Pathway to Sautu and Well Being

The iTaukei, like all indigenous peoples, are ‘yoked-with’ or taukei (native) to place

hence, their knowledge and ways of knowing. According to Popper, no matter how one

argues against traditions, it cannot be ignored that there is a need for them in social life

144��

(as cited in Lawson, 1996, p. 16), and particularly if ‘yoked-ness with place’ can be

considered a human tradition. For an insider-researcher, therefore, the biggest challenge

would be to accept that tradition is not immune to criticism and change (Lawson, 1996,

p. 16), the kind that is produced by people and influenced by the environment, physical

or otherwise. The iTaukei social science researcher within a taukei-vulagi (insider-

outsider) framework of engagement that is grounded in the assumption that the kila ka

(knowers), vuku (smart) and yalomatua (wise) are people privileged by nature and

place, therefore, is well positioned to articulate the particularities of her/his own

people’s indigenous epistemologies while keeping a culturally appropriate safe distance

for critique. At the outset, in the presentation of the isevusevu (traditional introduction)

to the Vanua of the researched, insider-researchers like myself are often always

represented as ‘vulagi-taukei’ (visitors who are familiar with place) hence, positioned

both as people who know and yet, are still searching. Essentially, such a one is taukei

(insider) by way of her/his veiwekani (relatedness) and socialization and, vulagi

(outsider) as representative of the institution of research scientifically studying the

people.

It is in this knowledge that both a kaiVanua (taukei-native to place [of the ‘land/place-

givers’ or ‘land people’], an insider) and a kaiWai (vulagi-stranger to place [of the

‘land/place-takers’ or ‘sea people’], an outsider) are seen as privileged and well-

positioned to receive veivakaturagataki (chiefly respect) and veivakamenemenei

(‘pampering’), expressions of veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) highlighted herein.

Essentially, the iTaukei researcher using this culturally appropriate Vanua vakaTuraga

(taukei-vulagi) research framework, derived from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, will be

empowered with a kind of sau/mana, conceptualized here as a specific body of

knowledge, and which will get the work done. These noble and lived Vanua or vei

attitudes3, ‘locked’ into the iTaukei conceptual system, and which privilege

communalism and reciprocity over extreme individualism, in a kind of ‘self-

centeredness’ centered on their Sau (chief/administrator), is the principal indicator of

the authenticity of the iTaukei conception of ‘group-self’. This reality necessitated that

people lived and operated ordered lives, and within the ‘dictates’ of their mata-groups –

145��

matavuvale (family), mataqali (group of families ‘twined’ or ‘twisted’ together),

mataveiwekani (group of related families/clans/associates), etc. To protect mata-group

interest, therefore, inquisitive and critical insider-researchers using culturally

appropriate approaches to research consciously vavana (keep aside for later) certain

knowledge best to be vavani (kept aside). This is the way of the iTaukei Mata,

socialized to privilege and protect the Vanua, Vanua knowledge and Vanua knowers.

In order for the iTaukei researcher to keep the critical distance, s/he must first seek to be

thoroughly ‘yoked-with’ the practices of academia and the research institution, and the

rigors of academic research, before setting out to explore her/his own home-base.

Essentially, this will make the indigenous researcher taukei to (familiar with) seemingly

opposing worldviews, epistemologies, ethics and philosophies. To be familiarized with

significant ‘Others’ in one’s attempt to know more of, and appreciate, the ‘Self’,

therefore, is to be comfortable at weaving out a middle-ground (rara) philosophical

position that will allow continuous dialogue hence, contribute to greater knowledge

sharing and positive knowledge building. A first step forward, therefore, may have to be

the re-conceptualization of objectivity as a ‘tested interpretation’, an ‘educated’ opinion

shaped by multiple perspectives formed via the ‘Shifting HorizonTheory’ of knowing

taukei (familiar) to navigators, or travellers in general. Furthermore, the third person

dimension of knowing which creates that safe critical distance between the participant-

observer and the observed events, gauna life-times, places and people, may be achieved

through what the Tubou-Lakeba people can conceptualize as the ‘Tokairabe Eye

View’4. A ‘bird’s eye view’, therefore, represented herein as a kind of believable

ancient wisdom5 that ‘sees’ the broader picture of things, and in ‘right’ perspective, is

the ‘detached’ position necessary for a more ‘objective’ analysis of a personally

experienced reality. This is a kind of distancing that understands how any body of

knowledge is situated in place and shared between placed-peoples constantly engaging

in veitalanoa-dialogues. At these rara sites for interactive engagement, therefore, there

is a re-membering (uniting) of the past and future in a people’s current reality. Herein,

‘theories’ and practices are seen to be grounded in the past while presently placed-

peoples negotiate their ways into a sautu (peaceful/prosperous) future. Privileged

146��

peoples in this rara place of ‘con-frontation’, therefore, do not re-kune (re-search or re-

conceive) knowledge to disprove but, only to improve and empower.

This is, essentially, how iTaukei today ‘see’ and ‘know’ through knowledgeable Mata,

or informed ‘seers’ (knowers), representing mata places (institutions). Given the very

real possibility of representing multiple-perspectives, any iTaukei Mata trained in

research, and thoroughly familiar with the views of the Vanua, government, church and

educational institutions, have become well positioned to speak in matters pertaining to a

progressive knowledge discourse geared towards empowering people to live sustainably

for sautu (peace/prosperity). This Mata position for representation is also critical for

critique and reflexivity. Essentially, these are places occupied by observant and

participating ‘eyes’, ‘ears’, ‘mouthpieces’ and ‘minds’ of the Vanua vakaTuraga.

These are places peopled by privileged groups of individuals, a modern version of

which is academia. A quick look over the iTaukei history of privileging ‘strange’ ideas

and carriers of such ideas, therefore, will prove how open to change and believable

alternatives they can be, or have become, and suggesting a sense of readiness to

embrace veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) as a way of pursuing bula veimaliwai

(living in the maliwa-spaces between places and times) and, ultimately, tiko

veisaututaki (coexisting in peace).

6.2.2 Coexistence in Place – Key to Living in Sautu

Place, contextualized here as Vanua vakaTuraga, is where sautu is pursued and

attained. At one level, place is a mind-set. At another level, place is the habitat. In the

mind, and in a reality subjected to change, values and knowledge systems coexist hence,

proving their compatibility. What people can do is to locate the maliwa-spaces, much

like the rara common grounds, between which they can navigate their way around the

Vanua. At these cross-roads and active sites for engagement, negative developments are

mitigated by gathering support for greater networking in the name of sautu. This is how

a diverse population, like what we have in Viti, may be rallied behind a common cause

hence, mobilized to go to their communities, as Mata of the new idea, and draw in more

of their people to the rara middle-ground for dialogue. With ‘one voice’, the voice of

147��

veitalanoa-dialogue, and as kaiViti (of the Viti multi-cultural space consisting of people

representing their unique cultural lands of origin)6 of the twenty-first century, all may

be reminded that, though we differ culturally, we had been sharing a common space

hence, proving that our respective indigenous positions are compatible. In this regard, a

sautu derived from an orderedness that privileges both the Turaga and the Vanua,

‘leaders’ and the ‘led’, or the vulagi (foreign/foreigner) and taukei (familiar/native),

may be pursued as a common goal.

Paternalism and equality, for instance, though western in construction, are two attitudes

expressed in the iTaukei culture as veivakamenemenei (pampering between unequals,

the greater over the lesser) and veivakaturagataki (respect between equals),

respectively. These attitudes, in essence, have coexisted from time immemorial.

Consider the diagram below to clarify how the people of Tubou-Lakeba today have

created that clear distinction between the Vanua and the Turaga institutions hence,

establishing grounds for veivakamenemenei and veivakaturagataki, attitudes embodied

in the veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) process. Veivakataukeitaki, as the mata-mata

(lit. ‘eye-eye’ and, meaning ‘gateway’) ‘bridging’ any serious engagement between one

taukei (of the ‘land’, an insider) and a vulagi (from the ‘sea’, an outsider), therefore, is

an institution constructed to facilitate knowledge sharing and knowledge building in the

pursuit of a sautu (order/stability/abundance) benefitting both the Vanua and Turaga:

148��

Figure 8 Vanua institution versus Turaga institution

Turaga Institution (the elevated/privileged vulagi [‘land-taker’])

Represented by their mata-rep, the mata-

niTuraga [who became the matanitu

-government, possibly], the ‘representative of the

Turaga institution’, himself the ‘othered-one’ who

is the chief embodiment of the sau of the

Vanua, and addressed as the Sau ni Vanua

Veiqaravi (lit. ‘facing each other’)7 within a Mata system

Veiqaraqaravi (referring to the ceremonial, centering on yaqona-filled tanoa)

[CCeremonies as a ‘MModel of Life’]8

Represented by their mata, the mata-

niVanua or ‘representative(s) of the Vanua

institution’, the head(s) of the land-people’s

mataqali-clan(s) who sit as counsellors, ideally,

to the Sau ni Vanua

Vanua Institution (the taukei [‘land-giver’] ra-base)

Though the Turaga (chiefly/manly) institution is privileged, within the vakaTuraga

framework, the Vanua institution is also acknowledged as ‘powerful’, being the ‘giver

of land, liga-hands and sau’. While at one level, the Sau (chief-administrator) is the

possessor of power, at another level, power belongs to the Vanua which ‘owns’ the

land, its sau/mana and the hands which cultivate it – elements continuously ‘given’ to

the Turaga (the tribe) at the ‘installations’9 of chief-elects. Note also that embodied in

the vakaTuraga (the chiefly behaviour) is respect for women, appropriately called the

veivakamaramataki (rooted in the marama-woman concept), and which I have

acknowledged in my writing in how I have put the female reference ahead of the male,

much like how the Vanua (a kind of female) comes before the Turaga (a kind of male)

in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception.10 This female-emphasis is counter-balanced in the

parallel conception of Turaga vakaVanua (chiefs/leaders/men with Vanua support, and

land), otherwise conceived by Tubou-Lakeba people as Turaga vakaTamata (chief/the

chiefly having a strong people following), again confirming that Vanua (land/place) is

congruent with Tamata (people). The Vanua vakaTuraga, therefore, is a place of mutual

Made up of the most recent outsider

group [the Vuanirewa] to have been given

‘power’, by the ‘first-peoples’, to rule the

‘land’ – the group whose prominence was

confirmed by the colonial administration

Consists pre-Vuanirewa ‘first-peoples’ to

have settled the island: comprising two

major land-based groups and, a third

which was more sea-based and which

became expert navigators of the chiefs.

149��

respect and sharing, a place where relationships are considered critical to the pursuit of

a communal sense of well-being. This is the kind of relationship and commitment that

may be characterized as a sacred union between two interdependent opposites, like that

of a woman and her husband, and which must be honoured by both parties to ensure the

survival of both and their ‘offsprings’.

While one’s good conduct (iTovo vakaTuraga) ideally expresses her/his manner of

respect for another’s membership with existence (more than just her/his humanity),

her/his iValavala vakaVanua (traditions/customs ‘yoked with’ place) are that which

ideally embody the primordial attitude of veivakamenemenei (pampering). Ancient

iValavala, therefore, range from sisi and waliwali making, and traditional fish-hunting,

to expressions of lala (group vala-doing of chief’s garden, home, canoe, etc.) for the

gone toko (the beloved), the Gone Marama/Turaga (‘child’ chief) at the Vanua center,

the group-self’s center. Essentially, matters pertaining to the chiefly-place are attended

to first before one’s own. This is the ‘cagi ko Lakeba’ (or ‘wind-favour’) attitude which

shapes Tubou-Lakeba thinking towards the vakamenemenei (pampering) of their Sau

(chief-administrator), and their ‘lewa kalou’ (women/‘goddesses’) and their children.

This is how veivakaturagataki and veivakamaramataki (the chiefly respect for one’s

humanity), itself an expression of veivakamenemenei (pampering), is nurtured in

Tubou-Lakeba society at the center close to where the Sau resides. The coexistence of

diverse systems of thought, in the rara middle-ground of dialogue and sharing,

therefore, may be an indicator of the ancientness of ‘place’. On Lakeba, the presence of

diverse knowledge and knowledge systems representing the dominant voices of the

Vanua, church, modern-science and borrowed systems of leadership and governance, is

proof of the Tubou-Lakeba people’s readiness to embrace ordered change, and that

which leads to a sense of stability centered around their Sau and the conception of an

attainable sautu. The Tubou-Lakeba reality, therefore, is one that is continuously

negotiating at the rara-ground of con-frontation where opportunistic equals converge to

‘shift and settle’ issues of dominance and influence over a shared space. Theoretically,

such a ‘transferrable’ power-sphere, as an active site for Auseinandersetzung11, is the

150��

place where ‘current owners’ (leading thought, practice, discourse, expertise) naturally

contend with possible alternatives.

6.3.3 The iTaukei Mata System of Knowing

Situated within the taken for granted iTaukei concept of vanua (land/place/people) are a

number of Vanua vakaTuraga12 or chiefly places, otherwise conceptualized as ‘ancient’

places ‘filled’ with chiefly/manly people. These communitarian13 vei peoples, made up

of privileged knowers who represent every area of vanua knowledge, are themselves

recognized as mata or ‘eyes’ of their respective Vanua. Each one of them, as an ‘eye’, is

a lewe-niVanua (lit. ‘flesh of the Vanua’ and, signifying membership), a member of one

‘living’ Vanua body ‘yoked-with’ its past and future in the present, and headed by the

Sau (chief-administrator). Essentially, each member is a representative of her/his vanua-

place thus, positioned to speak for elements of vanua knowledge her/his ancestors and

people had been keepers of. Together, a vei people contructs and owns their vuravura-

world or reality – the environmentally supported ‘all-generative Oceanic (cultural)

space’ which provides for and sustains every Vanua vakaTuraga. These iTaukei ‘eyes’

or mata (seers/knowers/representatives), over a number of generations, have been part

of an ordered system of knowing which assigns specialized tasks to skilled related-

groups of knowers: the heads, administrators and leaders (Turaga); the mouthpieces and

faces/fronts (mata-ni [‘eyes of’] and mata-ki [‘reps to’]); and the hands (bati-warriours,

gonedau-fishers, mataisau-builders and bete-priests/pastors). These Vanua roles,

performed in the service/worship (sauvaki) of the chiefly place (Vanua vakaTuraga),

make up the ‘glue’ which holds the Vanua (placed-peoples, or named/claimed places)

together as they go about their daily lives – mending their houses/canoes, tending their

flocks, fishing their lagoons, planting their gardens, attending to veiwekani or related

people’s businesses and managing their homes.

The average ‘eye’ of the Vanua today, therefore, is one who has been schooled, is a

member of a local church, pays tax and votes, a consumer of goods and services and, of

information filtering into their homes via the media, mobile phones and home-theatre

systems, and a potential ‘producer’ of knowledge. Some of these ‘eyes’ are themselves

151��

academics and researchers, business owners and government officials who regularly go

back to their respective communities (roots) and communicate their ‘theories’, ideas and

learning, through their cultured way of sharing information via veitalanoa-dialogues

and, within and around culturally appropriate frameworks and buturara (ground, floor

or deck) of veitalanoa. Whether converging at the tanoa or congregating in church and

village meetings, such forums exist to facilitate knowledge sharing and knowledge

building. In the pursuit of a bula vakaibalebale (meaningful life) within the maliwa-

spaces between (comprising places, times, people and events), therefore, one seeks to

live in a kind of sautu (abundance) that can be enjoyed in the present and still carry a

‘living’ hope for the future. This is a sautu (peace/prosperity/stability) that

acknowledges the presence (tu) of an imbued mana/sau (power to effect) in the Vanua

(land/place/people), and which is effective in getting things done in and through orderly

societal change.

Within this iTaukei mata system of knowing, there are mata institutions which may be

further divided into mata places peopled by mata-representatives who belong to mata-

groups. People, therefore, have been historically placed and dis-placed hence,

continuously re-placed where their ancestors, from one generation or another, were

probably most effective, particularly, during the transitional period away from the less

stable post 1300 Event’s ‘times of less’. It was in the next era of “continuing successful

adaptation to [place] and in [more friendlier] shifts in the pattern of social organization”

(as cited in D’arcy, 2006, p. 170) that this system of knowledge representation and

exchange may have re-emerged. A pre-European contact re-engagement in inter-island

long-distance voyages, such as those which featured prominently in pre-1300 Event

oceanic societies (Nunn et al., 2007), therefore, was a clear indication of the existence

of an open system of cross-cultural engagement in the central Pacific. This development

may have had a bearing on the construction of what this research has identified as

“mata metaphors”: situated expressions prevalent in the languages and cultures of the

region. It could only be assumed, therefore, that the central Pacific was once a center of

trading activities which attracted ambitious sea-farers who, possibly unconsciously,

became agents of change and whose dealings necessitated that a workable envoy (mata)

152��

system of inter-Vanua exchange was put in place. The eastern Viti group, being the

probable center of this center and, ‘standing’ in the maliwa-space between what has

been inappropriately described as the ‘black islands of Melanesia’ and the ‘many

islands of Polynesia’, in time, developed a strong linguistic and material connection to

its neighbours, Toga and Samoa to the east, and Vanuatu to the west – particularly in

their overlapping yaqona (kava) and chiefly traditions. The iTaukei mata (envoy)

system, ceremoniously centered in the wai-niVanua (yaqona/kava) and the Turaga who

gets to drink the first cup, is one such indicator of the ancientness of the cross-cultural

sharing that have shaped Pacific thought and attitudes, particularly in the Viti group.

The question now is: ‘Who are the Turaga?’ I argue that true Turaga (‘elites’) are those

who have been privileged by ‘place’, the Vanua. They did not appoint themselves. They

earned their people’s respect.14 Turaga, therefore, are themselves Mata (representatives)

of the Vanua (named/claimed places) which they are ‘yoked with’, or taukei to. In view

of this understanding, mata-reps of all places must see themselves privileged, endowed

and deserving to learn about and know the social world which they have helped created

hence, philosophically conceive of ways to correctly represent that reality. In essence,

they ‘speak’ to (are mata-ki) the outside world of the vulagi (stranger) as the ‘voice’

of/for (mata-ni) their taukei (native) people at the Vanua center. What transpires is a

system of knowing that generally holds mata-reps of all knowledge places/spaces in

high regard based on the assumption that they, as mata-eyes of institutions they

represent, have the ability to perceive and correctly conceptualize their world and how

they experience it. Furthermore, it is assumed that these mata-reps have the capacity to

conceive, carry and deliver their conceptualizations of that reality, being sensible,

critical and articulate members of the Vanua whole. Those who see themselves as

privileged Turaga (leaders) of their Vanua (places) must challenge themselves,

therefore, with the understanding that they have been ‘selected’ to ‘self-represent’ their

Vanua, the extension of the individual and group ‘self’ hence, equating “place-

representation” to “self-representation”. An appreciation of the iTaukei people-

privileging (hence, communitarian) mata system of knowing is bound to decolonize

iTaukei minds, heal their hearts, transform their lives and mobilize them through the

153��

survival, recovery and development stages, to self-determination – a perceived outcome

of the “indigenous reserch agenda” (Tuhiwai Smith, 1999, p. 117).

6.3.4 Space-sharing and its Implications

The research institution is a shared space. The iTaukei rara conception, the culturally

appropriate platform of engagement, is one also. Shared spaces naturally call for

dialogue, herein contextualized as veitalanoa. Indigenous researchers researching

within situated, dialogic and communal frameworks, therefore, have been well-

positioned, as mata-reps of places they are ‘yoked-with’, to negotiate rara platforms of

veitalanoa located within their sphere. In essence, new ideas and carriers of ideas

converge at these shared spaces to engage with their keepers, the Tuirara of the rara

places, themselves mata-reps of the rara spaces they keep (as opposed to ‘occupy’), and

which are physically situated within their Vanua (named/claimed places). ‘Control’

over these potentially ‘transferable’ shared spaces, when ‘lost’, may be conceptualized

as lave rara (lit. ‘lifting [the] rara’), by the iTaukei. Like traditional mata-reps,

participants in any veitalanoa organized around a rara platform or framework, enter

knowing whose space they have entered and their relative positionings inside it. Once

the (butu)rara of veitalanoa has been ‘opened’, following the presentation of the

traditional introduction (isevusevu or an equivalent), two-way exchanges begin to take

place, slow at first and, intensifying after participants have been well acquainted via an

ongoing process of veivakataukeitaki or familiarization. Subsequent veitalanoa,

therefore, are often more engaging and less structured as participants become more

familiar with others’ positions relative to their own hence, creating a space for the

exchange of critical thought that often impinges on people’s philosophical framings and

assumptions.

By implication, therefore, any platform for dialogue is, theoretically, a rara – a shared-

space ‘kept’ by a dominant ‘voice’. One such place is academia, shared by multiple

perspectives yet dominated by western thought and traditions. The keepers of this rara,

in encouraging greater collaboration between diverse systems, have kept the dominant

worldview and its scientific methods as the privileged theoretical position. While open

154��

to challenge from apparently divergent systems of thought and philosophical traditions,

this rara platform may never be ‘lifted’, the metaphorical lifting of which signifies the

highly unlikely silencing of the dominant ‘voice’ and influence. Nevertheless, because

conceptual change is expected to follow intense and ongoing con-frontation or

Auseinandersetzung, opinions and positions are bound to shift and get re-settled.

Traditional keepers of indigenous rara places of exchange, therefore, may have to keep

their spaces, indefinitely, unless such a space had been seriously contested by a rigorous

system of thought, such as that espoused by western science, and found to be wanting.

In this regard, indigenous Pacific researchers, as mata navigators, must learn to smartly

negotiate this relatively ‘ancient’ research space, the university wherein they have been

placed and privileged (as one Turaga [chiefly-elite]), not to weaken or shut it down,

even if that was possible, but to effectively use its ‘scientifically’ established tools to

bring to the fore indigenous knowledge belonging to their people. These time-tested

indigenous “truths”, though historically and systematically silenced, exist to inform and

to be critically analyzed hence, proving their compatibility with western thought, and

usefulness in a modern world.

Key to understanding the differences in opinions and attitudes towards knowledge

sharing and knowledge building, in the pursuit of a collective well-being, therefore, is

the knowledge that participants of any veitalanoa come to the rara place of dialogue

with differing conceptualizations of communitarianism. While individualism has proven

to work in some communities, communalism has also been proven successful in

indigenous societies. These situated “truths” must be given fair and equal emphasis,

therefore, in academia, the place of Auseinandersetzung (con-frontation) or

veivakataukeitaki (familiarization) that embraces continuous dialogue between diverse

knowledge systems. Nevertheless, this must not be done with the intent of ‘forcing’

blind or unquestioned submission to the ‘dominant voice’, though a strong desire to

change the ‘Other’, for the ‘greater good’, may be a natural bias carried by the

yalomatua (wise) and kila ka (knowledgeable), regardless of the culture ‘placed’ in.

Critical to this understanding, therefore, is the iTaukei knowledge that vuku

(intelligence) is a capacity creditable to both humans and animals, but with varying

155��

degrees – our shared abilities to be jointly aware of our environment, develop

meaningful relationships with nature and each other, ‘fill’ and regularly enjoy both the

land and sea spaces and, even be trained and entertaining. What sets us apart, though, is

our human capacity to dialogue, share and build knowledge of our world and, construct

anew for a sautu (peace/prosperity/stability) that is real and lasting benefitting both the

natural world and its ‘inhabitants’, humans or otherwise.

6.3.5 Space, Time and Place

Throughout this journey, I have had to constantly check my informed philosophical

position on the notions of space and time, and place. This was particularly significant

given how any mata-rep ‘speaking’ for a people must do so from a platform that is fully

informed of its relative positioning in space and time, and within place. Time, as

discussed in chapter 1, is conceptualized by iTaukei as gauna or ‘life-time’ hence, all

things which are real are taken to have a definite origin and, possibly, an end. The

origin of the all-encompassing vuravura-world that contains all vanua-places occupied

by placed-peoples, and the vuravura-spheres of other ‘beings’, for instance, though

unknown, may be placed to a time so ‘ancient’ that the linear concept of historical time

was needed to make sense of the ancientness of the vuravura concept. It is against this

understanding that all generational ‘life-times’ may be positioned, in space and time,

somewhere between the makawa (old) of the past and the vou (new) of the now. But

like the tree analogy, the present (newer branches and roots) continues to ‘move’

laterally away from a past placed in the core of the ‘tree-self’ itself, and towards a

future existing always in space and time in the outer reaches. The tree analogy of a

‘time’ (as in ‘life-time’) ‘growing’ in all directions, therefore, gives the impression of a

‘capacity’ (created by the growing ‘tree-self’) that is ever enlarging ‘filling’ (as opposed

to ‘owning’) space within the vuravura-sphere that supports and sustains it. Similarly,

the Vanua (place/people) conception is ever-maturing, established, productive and

progressive.

With this tree analogy, therefore, a revolutionizing conceptualization of the vanua

conception is arrived at. A vanua-people is ‘planted’ on vanua-land claiming a vanua-

156��

place. This vanua-people grows into and begins to occupy a vanua-space reaching

deeper into the vanua-land’s ‘life-time’ towards Bulu (the vanua-place of the ‘fallen’),

into the vanua-time of Bulu, and stretching further out towards a Lagi (the vanua-place

of greater influences and opportunities), into the vanua-time of Lagi. This placed-

people then devised ways of conquering the deep and the unknown, the vuravura-

worlds of the wild and the tamed, the free and the bound. To engage with neighbouring

vanua-peoples, themselves ‘planted’ on selected vanua-lands or claimed vanua-places,

a support and sharing system based on the concepts of “self- and cross-pollination”, and

which is facilitated by ‘environmental’ agents, begins to see the metaphorical tree grow,

become fruitful and multiply. This analogy, in essence, has shed new light into the

vanua concept giving it renewed meaning. Herein is presented a vanua interpretation

that encompasses place, space and time.

With this renewed understanding, it could be said, therefore, that all Vanua vakaTuraga

have their origin and are ‘planted’ (or placed) on a piece of land to which they will be

forever indebted. Like the Vuanirewa of Tubou-Lakeba, there is a real chance of being

‘transplanted’ across vanua-land or even ‘grafted’ into a host vanua-people. The

memory of this “change-of-place” from Nayau to Lakeba, for the Vuanirewa, is only

too recent to forget, given how western civilization has taught us to ‘remember’ who we

once were, at least at the coming of the transformative power of the gospel, preached to

the natives by the church. This development, in essence, may have resulted in the

construction of a history that denied us the ‘memory’ of a past without the ‘colonizer’ in

it, permanently replacing most of our talanoa from the pre-Christian iTaukei era

regardless of whether the ‘colonizer’ came from within or without. This is evident, in

the Tubou-Lakeba context, in how they have clearly lost their ‘ancient’ chants and, now

sing fairly recent compositions from within the Christian and ‘colonial’ eras, telling

stories derived from ‘myths’ originating from the “occupying cultures” of Polynesia,

western Viti and Europe. The persisting presence of the lakalaka (the meke from Toga),

for instance, completely sung in the vosa vakaToga (language of the Toga people), in

Tubou-Lakeba, reflects the colonising influence of the culture of the Toga people. In an

interesting twist, new initiatives have proven that there are local ‘talents’ capable of

157��

reviving the iTaukei meke, in the iTaukei language. In one such instance, the ‘creator’

of a meke has drawn from both historical accounts and archeological evidences to

compose a meke that attempts to re-tell their history in light of scientific findings. This

innovation, in turn, has given the people of Tubou-Lakeba a ‘deeper’ sense of

indigeneity tracing their ‘roots’ back to the Lapita migrations. As a result, there is now a

silent openness to “science” as a method of knowing and, for the Tubou-Lakeba people,

there is a reckoning that the myths need to be contested afterall, at least when it comes

to stories of origin. Even then, such a deepened understanding can only serve to

strenghten their vanua roots and identity. Consequently, this has opened up greater

opportunities for the kind of cross-cultural engagement that embodies knowledge

sharing and building for sautu-peace and plenty, order and stability.

6.3.6 The Mata method of Vanua people

For this segment of the closing discussion, I would presume that the vanua world is way

bigger than it is known to the iTaukei.15 Given their proven connectedness, these

scattered peoples would have developed a manner of engagement to sustain their

oceanic way of life, at least sub-regionally. This is what I have dared to call a mata

(eye) system of knowing and which basically works, as we would experience bodily,

when intimately engaging face-to-face. This kind of engagement is usually built on trust

and commitment, and is proven to last given how communication becomes the critial

part of it hence, is grounded on enduring and not contractual relationships. This system

of exchange, traditionally crossing miles of open sea, normally followed established

blood-linked routes thus, were probably centered around gifting. Unconsciously,

possibly, the gifting grew into active knowledge sharing and which was essential in the

sustenance of their remotely constructed unique island realities, differing in many ways

but, evidently overlapping. Upon these assumptions, I have formulated an approach to

indigenous research appropriately called the Mata method and, as I perceive, which

when engaged in, leads to the knowledge of what sautu (well being) is to us,

individually and collectively. In retrospect, this was the method I basically followed,

methodologically grounded in the concept of veitalanoa (dialogue) between mata-reps

of Vanua vakaTuraga (chiefly places of privileged peoples). The mata method or

158��

approach herein articulated forms a major part of my research findings, and which is

bound to influence future endeavours undertaken at the university, particularly for

indigenous Pacific research:

1. Know the space and time which you are entering into: the people therein and

their relationships within and without – particularly to you as researcher and to

the ideas embodied in your research. This accounts for protocol and cultural

appropriateness. It also considers their connectedness to the ancient place, the

natural world and its ‘inhabitants’, and their spiritualities. An understanding and

appreciation of a people’s conceptualization of space, and time, will prove

critical, therefore, in one’s attempt to engage them, particularly at the

philosophical level.

2. Know the place you are setting foot on: your relative vulagi (unfamiliar but

privileged) position to that of your host, and theirs to yours – particularly in light

of their veiness (sense of community) and taukeiness (sense of ‘yoked-ness’ to

place). This accounts for pathways to follow, gateways to enter and platforms of

veitalanoa to participate in hence, how to navigate your way around veitalanoa

circles. This culturally appropriate natural group veitalanoa formation, for the

more traditional iTaukei at least, is inevitably centered on the tanoa (yaqona

bowl) and the vakaTuraga. Note that certain brands of indigenous Christianity

do not value yaqona thus, any engagement with them will have to go without it.

3. Be open to listen to their philosophically informed positions before submitting

your own, even for insider-researchers. Openness to dialogue is what defines

them, particularly when that includes genuine respect for their ways of knowing

and being. To do otherwise is to face a ‘shut-down’ and lose your connectedness

to source. This is an ongoing process which begins well before you enter the

researched community and, which may continue as long as you choose to be the

mata-rep to represent their ‘silenced’ and ‘silent’ indigenous knowledge in

academia hence, to the world.

159��

4. Be prepared to clearly articulate your current informed position at the outset,

even with that which pertains to the very questions you seek answers for but,

clearly indicate that there is still much more to learn and know. This attitude to

research comes with the assumption that participants in any veitalanoa are not

naïve. They may know much more than they are willing to disclose, initially –

even knowledge that may still be raw or unfiltered. In observing your conviction

and passion, particurlarly when employing decolonizing methodologies, they

will be encouraged and persuaded to try and articulate their own unique

positions hence, keeping them engaged.

5. Understand that veitalanoa is indeed conceptual engagement and, as such, is

bound to sway opinions. Be careful to leave the veitalanoa open to multiple

perspectives, taking into account that participants’ shifting standpoints will

differ according to the multiplicity of their experience and the “breadth of their

vision”. Particularly critical to any veitalanoa is the understanding that closure

will kill the dialogue. Nonetheless, rest in the hope that there will be a

converging of ideas, and that a common place of agreement will be found, even

if temporarily. Remember that to be challenged, conceptually, is good.

The method discussed above, grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga framework of

engagement, embodies the taukei-vulagi relationship between the ‘familiar One’ (the

Vanua, the ‘host’) and the privileged ‘unfamiliar Other’ (the Turaga, the ‘guest’),

engaging as mata-reps of their respective realities. This mata system of engaging cross-

culturally, in essence, employs the expertise of mata-envoys engaging via the mata

approach. Through veitalanoa-dialogue, therefore, people’s sense of place, or “placed-

ness”, change in proportion to the conceptual change wrought in them, and usually

accomodating vulagi (foreign/strange/new) ideas in the hope that change will work out

for good, for sautu. This believable state of being, and of mind, expressed in plenty, is

proof that a real sense of sau/mana (power) exists for those who will seek to expand

their knowledge-base via life-long learning. This implies, therefore, that one’s personal

power (sau/mana) to rawa ka (get things [done]) is directly proportional to her/his

160��

measure of learning, and of knowing. In light of this understanding, ‘Ia me vala!’ (‘So

get it done!’) may be conceptualized as “getting the knowledge to get the power to get

things done”. So for one who says: ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (‘I see [only], I know!’), the

challenge is to be empowered. According to my research findings, therefore,

empowerment will come about for enthusiatic learners/knowers eager to share their

knowlegde spaces with others hence, simultaneously grow in their personal, and

collective, knowledge of their worlds. This was the attitude of our ancestors before us

who knew life beyond the horizons and carved out for us a mata system of knowing and

being, a mata system of representation.

6.4 Implications of this Research Face-to-face engagements or mata-to-mata communications work, even online, citing

social networks. In this information age, one’s ability to get information is directly

linked to her/his ability to put it to good use. Researchers researching indigenous

communities need to understand that there are culturally appropriate ways of engaging

indigenous peoples that are compatible with scientific knowledge and methods, and

which are relevant to modern iTaukei society. When these cultured views are carefully

extracted, critically analyzed and meaningfully applied, the researched indigenous

communities benefit as much as the research institution, and the rapidly globalizing

world at large.

Academia and academics will testify to this: con-frontation helps to ‘shift and settle’

opinions and worldviews, philosophical positions and the practices guided by them.

Findings of this research should boost the confidence of iTaukei social science

researchers researching their own people, and particularly with the knowledge that the

iTaukei, possibly other Pacific peoples, are culturally open to dialogue, knowledge

sharing and knowledge building. Though there exists the danger of politicizing the mata

concept, given how mata-envoys make the first points of contact between Vanua,

nation-states, ideologies and communities of practice, mata are still conceptualized here

as more than just the faces or fronts of places they represent. This research project has

161��

identified, and continues to argue, that as ‘seers’, mata have been strategically placed

within their own communities to be that link between knowledge seekers and the

knowledge which they seek. Furthermore, it should be noted that every lewe

(flesh/member) of any Vanua (place/community) is indeed a mata-rep of it, representing

various aspects of knowledge from within that knowledge space and in varying degrees

thus, must be listened to and not silenced.

This understanding is bound to challenge current practices within postcolonial

ethnography opening up that space to a thoroughly collaborative network of mata

knowers – a development that will take knowledge construction to new heights, making

it a truly community project. Essentially, such a development is consistent with the

notion of communally existing in a shared space giving back to those you take from in

the true spirit of sharing. The question is: how often do social science researchers go

back to researched communities, after they have graduated or published, not just to say

‘thank you’ but, to continue exploring the changing dynamics of the researched-

cultures? This is what I belive is embodied in the veitalanoa (dialogue) concept.

Embedded in “relationship-building”, a true veitalanoa may be conceptualized as an

eternal commitment reaching out to as far as the dra ni veiwekani (blood of relatedness)

leads. This explains why veitalanoa, methodologically, should work well with

researchers researching their own people.

Outsider researchers, nonetheless, may still find right footing given that the veitalanoa

approach to knowledge sharing, employed by mata-reps of Vanua vakaTuraga (named

places privileging ‘strangers’), is one that is open also to forging lasting relationships

with vulagi-outsiders. The findings of this research, therefore, is hoped to impact inter-

place engagements at all levels. Researchers, as representatives of their disciplines,

universities, funding organisations, publishing houses and researched communities,

should be challenged, therefore, with the knowing that engagements which promote

knowledge sharing and building, for the pursuit of well being (sautu), actually matter to

the indigenous peoples of the Pacific. The responsibility is on them to re-kune

(find/conceive) the maliwa-spaces between their own educated positions and those of

162��

their researched communities – maliwa-spaces to ‘fill’ (not ‘own’) and bucibucini (sow

seeds) from. Finding that maliwa-space, therefore, is critical for no real veitalanoa can

begin without it. The findings of this research, as I perceive, will prove useful in

education, development and governance, diplomacy, consultancy and research –

wherever people are, the human in the ‘sciences’, people who know what it is like to be

‘yoked-with’ place and, be frustrated at being silenced and mis-represented.

6.4.1 Veitalanoa as an Inter-disciplinary Commitment

This research project began with a vision: promoting inter-disciplinary engagement at

all levels. As a secondary school teacher, I experienced first hand the rivalry between

teachers of different subject areas. From my standpoint, I perceived that such hostility

could never produce balanced individuals who would embrace the nobel conception of

‘freeing the oppressed mind’ via a holistic form of education. Unfortunately, at the post-

graduate level, I have found the same to be, at least, half true. Graduates tend to

zealously guard their disciplinary boundaries, much like traditional experts/knowers

who claim exclusive rights to knowledge within their traditional communal roles.

Thankfully, I observed my mother’s people freely sharing essentially specialized

knowledge, like healing ‘powers’ for instance – particularly when well being, of self

and of the Vanua, is a much desired collective goal. Similarly, for the iTaukei of Tubou-

Lakeba, group activities have continued to be excellent open learning spaces for young

enthusiasts.

Pacific studies, as a discipline which recognizes the credibility of inter-disciplinary

engagements, drawing also from traditional or indigenous knowledge systems, their

philosophies and culture-sensitive approaches, therefore, has personally become the

fertile ground where I can now sow my novel ideas and patiently wait for a plentiful

harvest. It is my hope that my people, or at least my children, will not have to go

through a full twelve years of basic education shut out from being authentically

themselves – free to re-name, re-claim, re-tell and re-represent their stories, narratives

birthed in a truly multi-cultural environment and grounded, permanently, in the iTaukei

culture. This is where, I believe, the true spirit of veitalanoa and, within a taukei-vulagi

163��

(place-rep or Vanua-mata) framework of engagement, will be able to bring together

diverse cultures to that place of Auseinandersetzung – the rara place of inter-

disciplinary commitment that is guaranteed to give voice to a people struggling through

decolonization towards self-determination.

Defining what sautu (the ‘all good life’) is for me is one thing. Locating the knowledge

that will enhance my personal mana/sau to ‘get things [done]’ is another. Constant

veitalanoa across all disciplinary boundaries may hold the key to arriving at one’s ‘aha’

moment of realization. If learned scholars need to ‘search’ widely before constructing

anew, how much more ordinary people who are just getting by. To deny the grassroots

people the privilege to access constructive veitalanoa within communities of

experts/knowers, therefore, is to rob them of the opportunity to be informed, learn ‘new

tricks’, be motivated and get going. This view purports that sautu is attainable but, at a

cost – allowing others access into the ‘personal’ spaces of information-carriers, the

knowledgeable mata-reps. To implement this ambitious undertaking calls for the

mobilization of reliable and influential community leaders who are committed to the

knowledge-sharing and knowledge-building exercises, and via a veitalanoa platform.

Given its cultural underpinnings, veitalanoa within the taukei-vulagi framework must

be used as the main strategy of engagement among Pacific peoples, supplemented only

by the media and the internet, not vice-versa but, definitely supported by information

and communication technological apparatus.

Veitalanoa, in essence, is not the exact same thing as talanoa. While the former can be

conceptualized as ‘work’, a kind of tara koro (lit. ‘constructing a village/town’; a

metaphor for ‘story-telling’), the latter comprises the stories one brings to the activity

and, their consequent telling or re-telling. To come to a veitalanoa (a kind of

‘colloquium’ for constructive engagements) is to come prepared with a ‘talanoa-story’

to tell. In the ‘hearing’ of participants’ talanoa, individual positionings are communally

negotiated as participants continue to re-work their personal rara spaces: platforms

from which future engagements are to be facilitated. Veitalanoa, therefore, must not be

interpreted as idle talk. While the interaction, overall, may seem silly to the vulagi

164��

(outsider), particularly when engaging ordinary people, the insider-researcher,

undoubtedly, will be thoroughly engaged given her/his privileged position, her/his

capacity to be able to ‘read’ the subtleties and the silences, the mood swings and the

distractors, features of such cultural engagements that non-native and/or untrained

researchers may find incomprehensible and unbelievable. Veitalanoa within a cultural

setting, therefore, for indigenous researchers, is a forum richly adorned with a readable

multiplicity full of learning opportunities. This was in fact the attitude which I adopted

while interacting with the Tubou-Lakeba people, whatever the occasion was. Whether it

was for a death, marriage, birthday, or welcome home party, veiwekani (relatives) ‘dos’

are too numerous and ongoing for the iTaukei researcher researching her/his own

people not to find what or who s/he is looking for. I would simply go in to observe as a

participant, ‘work’ with them in the flow of the veitalanoa and return enlightened and

charged to get back to my tali magimagi or thesis construction, even if that cultural

space I am made to ‘work’ in is here in academia.

6.5 Conclusion If stability lies in orderly change and, sautu is stability, then orderly change must be the

primary goal of any knowledge sharing and building project aimed at empowering the

iTaukei people, and Oceanians in general, to become creative and productive members

of society. Such a change, essentially, must begin conceptually, and be philosophically

sound. The understanding too that orderly change, in society, is directly linked to the

environment and its ability to source, support and sustain development, makes it even

the more urgent to pursue environmental-friendly solutions to our problems. Such a

nobel cause may be effectively engaged in via a workable diplomacy program and

effective and accountable leadership. These are notions truly embodied in the idealized

iTaukei mata/envoy system connecting related Vanua vakaTuraga, and which I present

here as proof for the existence of indigenous knowledge, wisdom and practices that are

relevant in our modern world.

165��

The challenge remains that engaging iTaukei people conceptually must be informed by

theories of knowing and learning that work. If the mind is truly embodied, and thought

is largely metaphorical, then reality must be experienced to be appreciated, for its

symbolism and meaning. The conceptual metaphor that ‘Knowing is Seeing’, outwardly

expressed by the iTaukei as ‘Au raica ga, au kila!’ (‘I see only, I know!’), and

suggesting that ‘seeing’ is synonymous with ‘knowing’, may just be the knowlegde that

will inform future projects directed at empowering individuals and communities. By

implication, this means that if people can perceive (experience) something, they can

then conceptualize it – proving how the mind is located in the body, and not outside of

it. This is what makes new knowledge, indigenous or otherwise, comprehensible and

believable. Such basic understanding, in essence, produce conceptual change, influence

worldview, and modify behaviour. Empowerment, via life-long learning, is therefore

critical in the pursuit of well being: the state of mind and being conceptualized by the

iTaukei as sautu. Herein, one’s personal mana/sau is seen to be connected to that

‘place’ s/he is ‘yoked-with’, a ‘power’ believed to be embodied by true Mata of all

knowledge places. Around this conception, of a sau/mana that is always present, is

constructed the iTaukei social reality: their iValavala (traditional ways of knowing and

being) and iTovo (acceptable manner of conduct). Such appropriate behaviour, existing

today as social phenomena, therefore, have been conceived by a people whose

“knowledge and beliefs are framed in terms of a conceptual system that resides mostly

in the cognitive unconscious” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999, p. 12) – a ‘seeing’ and

‘knowing’ system that privileges situated-ness in place, and the self-representation of

that place.

It is therefore within this kind of orderedness, sourcing, supporting and sustaining

diplomacy and sharing, that stability will find a home to nestle, a ground for breeding.

The Tubou-Lakeba reality, shaped by their Vanua bred perceptions and sensibilities, is

observable and, nearly predictable, given how the conceptualizations of their daily

experiences, expressed in culturally correct codes of conduct and ethics, are firmly

rooted in the vakaTuraga, the chiefly, the higher values, the principled life. It is against

this backdrop that the iTaukei of Tubou-Lakeba have constructed a reality centered on

166��

their Sau, and the sauvaki (service/worship) of the chiefly place – cultivating and

harvesting the wealth of the Vanua in the pursuit of a sautu (stability) that is preserved

in the vakamanamanataki (‘articulation’) of their belief in a mana/sau (power) inherent

to ‘place’, the peopled-place. This very real belief in the presence of a ‘power to effect’

characterizes the iTaukei, a placed-people living the vei (communal/reciprocating) life.

In representing this way of knowing and being, one is called to systematically defend

the iTaukei right and privilege to be mata-reps of their own environmentally determined

constructions (social realities), and which is a responsibility of every iTaukei mata

(‘eye’) in academia. Indigenous thinkers placed within and privileged by the research

institution have been well positioned and thoroughly equipped, therefore, to pursue that

goal via culturally appropriate methodologies and methods – much like the

decolonizing veitalanoa methodology embodied in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception,

and which frames and guides this research.

An approach towards the reconceptualizing of the pursuit of individual and collective

well-being, via an exchange and sharing platform situated in place, is what I call the

“mata way to sautu”. Herein, one is invited to the active perceiving, viewing,

conceiving, conceptualizing, representing, re-claiming and re-naming of one’s position

in place, and space through time, in order to take ownership of one’s own reality and,

the ongoing construction and reconstruction of elements of it, in the pursuit of the ‘all

good life’. Grounded in Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, the iTaukei “mata way to sautu” may be

conceptualized as an indigenous version to what constitutes ‘science’ and the ‘scientific

method’ hence, presenting a notion that could very well guide future indigenous

research, particularly by iTaukei scholars on their people. To embed this indigenous

conception, the “mata way to sautu”, in academia, therefore, is to consciously create a

privileged place for it. This compromise can be easily negotiated given that both

systems, indigenous and scientific, value greater collaboration and, knowledge sharing

and building hence, share an appreciation for the notion that ‘knowledge is power’. The

“mata way to sautu”, in essence, is clearly one way of empowering mata-reps in their

journey towards establishing what sautu (peace, order, stability, plenty) means for

themselves, and their people. To empower mata-reps, therefore, is to empower a people.

167��

6.5.1 Closing Remarks

If the mind has been scientifically proven to be embodied and, embodied reason,

passionate and universal, given our common embodiment (Lakoff & Johnson, 1999),

then indigenous thinkers and postcolonial writers must not shy away from representing

their cultured worldviews, and situated metaphorical thought, in academia. The research

platform, therefore, is the right place where their situated assumptions, and knowledge,

may be put through veitalanoa forums to prove, or otherwise disprove, the usefulness

and relevance of their time-tested values, ideas and institutions in twenty-first century

indigenous societies hence, ‘shifting and settling’ both the ‘taken-for-granted’ and the

veika bibi (heavier/denser ‘stuff’) their knowledge is made of. Though the application

of indigenous knowledge and wisdom may have to adapt in a rapidly changing

environment – physical, socio-cultural and spiritual – their philosophical underpinnings,

and which may have universal significance, make up the ‘heavier matter’ that needs to

be surfaced. This is where scientific research, informed by western thought and aided

by western tools, make the ideal starting point from which indigenous researchers must

launch their re-kune (searching/conceiving again) of indigenous ways of knowing and

being (‘theories’ and practices) that have sustained them, as a people, and which they

have preserved in their iValavala (‘settled’ traditions) and iTovo (‘shifting’ methods).

The future of indigenous research, therefore, relies on indigenous scholars’ collective

ability (an expression of sautu) and capacity (a kind of innate sau/mana) to creatively

explore ancient vanua-spaces, re-claim and re-name ‘peopled’ vanua-places, re-tell their

talanoa-narratives and re-represent enduring constructions perpetuated over generations

to deny certain sections of the Vanua whole (community) their humanity, their

privileged positions to ‘choose’ their representatives, otherwise understood as a kind of

‘self-representation’ (privileging the ‘Vanua-all’, their group-self). Though the

conceptions explored here ‘belong’ to the iTaukei of Viti, particularly of Lakeba-Lau,

their cross-cultural significance is something that could be further explored in in-depth

studies focusing on indigenous Pacific peoples’ situated philosophies, thought and

ethics. One such philosophical assumption which I picked up from my mother, in the 40

years I have spent with her (still going), and which has been a thought that makes me

168��

persevere in everything I am ‘tasked’ to do, given how it is forever settled in my ‘spirit’,

is the straight-forward vakaLakeba ‘question’ that has become the concluding remark I

make every time an ‘assigned’ task is completed:

E dua a meca ena ta oji?! Is there a ‘thing’ that will not come to an end?!

While this ‘statement’, posed as a question, highlights the settled universal ‘truth’ that

‘in everything there is a season’, it also encourages us to diligently persevere in our

current engagements, and courageously anticipate future challenges, proving that

determination leads to sautu (orderly change, stability and plenty). On this note,

therefore, I end this phase of my research journey, but with great hope and enthusiasm

for the next ‘task’ life, and research, will throw at me.

6.6 Chapter Summary This voyage, after many a suns, is finally touching vanua-land. What started off as a

‘groping’ has now turned into a ‘landing’, not just for me but, also for the researched.

Together nu (used in reference to a people group) is slowly va (lit. ‘treading’) on ‘solid’

philosophical ground. Essentially, the exploration has only just begun. The end of this

journey merely marks the beginning of the next. What have I found, therefore, in the

maliwa-space between my initial ‘take-off’ point and now? How do I bring my findings

to bear on my future research projects? Whatever questions I ask now, I must take a

breather, and just bathe in the ‘warmth’ called vanua-place. At long last, I have found a

philosophical niche. I am initiating a mata discourse, in academia, and I am truly

honoured. I can now charge myself with the responsibility of empowering people with

that thought: everyone is a mata of some place or places hence, no one is just a mere ta-

mata (doomed to be ‘silenced’ tamata-person). What do I do next with people

empowered with this noble thought? Herein I submit that the honourable task of

motivating and equipping people to strengthen and enlarge their knowledge-base, via

greater participation in life-long learning, awaits enthusiastic learners/researchers

persuaded of their mata potential. As briefly charted out in this chapter, the “mata way

169��

to sautu” (or pathway to ‘well being’) is the ‘walk-way’ of the mata (seer/knower) via

other mata (seers/knowers). Together, therefore, mata-reps form a “society of mata”.

This community of mata, made up of intelligent and articulate knowers who believe in

the true worth of a ‘life’ positioned in-place (not out-of-place) and carrying mata

responsibility to ‘speak’ freely about, and for, knowledge from that familiar space, is a

community of ‘experts’. Essentially, each one of them is duty-bound to “search again”

from around the known bounds within their respective knowledge-spaces and,

“conceive again” of intelligible ways of making sense of their experiences, and reality.

To be effective, therefore, and prove one’s mana/sau (‘given powers’) over hegemonic

‘forces’ (of nature, society and of the mind), one needs to learn to collaborate with other

knowers (and learners/researchers). This is the secret to survival. It is no big secret.

Collaborative learning and knowing is what characterizes resilient communities. A

network of like-minded people is just too tough to break. For a smart mata-rep,

therefore, there exists a mata approach/method to ‘searching and conceiving again’. It

basically requires one to know spaces and times entering, and places treading.

Furthermore, one needs to acknowledge that people interacting with are not naïve, and

as human beings, they can only be encouraged to engage with us if we respect their

spaces and positions, philosophical or otherwise. For researchers out in the ‘field’, the

‘trick’ is not to ‘kill’ the dialogue by listening more and talking less. No assertion

whatsoever is to be made. ‘Knowledge’ brought to the ‘floor’ must be viewed with a

sense of temporality, even if coming from the researcher. The only thing permanent is

people’s mata roles, from the greatest down to the very least. As such, everyone’s view

must be respected. These raw and often unfiltered opinions, in essence, hold ‘secret

windows’ through which the researcher may access their deepest thoughts. All the good

ideas suggested here are useless, nonetheless, if traditional protocol of seeking entry

into an indigenous community is not followed, even if going in as an insider-researcher.

To engage them is to earn their trust. This is the most difficult aspect of ‘field’ work,

and the trickiest, given how ceremonies, like the iTaukei traditional isevusevu

introductions, are often just taken-for-granted.

170��

The mata method or approach to indigenous Pacific research articulated herein, and

which is derived from Nabobo-Baba’s VRF, when used to explore the iTaukei world,

will prove effective given how it is based on the iTaukei people’s cultured privileging

system of engagement. Within this system of inter-Vanua (‘cross-cultural’) exchange

and interaction, any researcher, insider or otherwise, is deemed worthy of

veivakamenemenei (‘pampering’), particularly as a vulagi (‘outsider’ representing the

research institution), if s/he is seen to embody the vakaTuraga (the highest manner of

respect). Outsider-researchers, therefore, will find it useful to be well briefed about

culturally appropriate practices prior to seeking entry into the Vanua. If possible, and

whenever necessary, proper protocol must be followed even upon entry into individual

homes of mata-groups availing themselves for veitalanoa, particularly in the first

instance. A researcher’s sensitivity to indigenous thought, way of thinking, behaviour

and sensibility, particularly when working with the iTaukei, will be duly reciprocated.

At the rara platform of engagement, veitalanoa is serious. Occasionally, the seriousness

will be broken with some light moments but, overall, the researcher must be open to

non-verbal forms of communication, which when left to go unchecked, can end the

dialogue prematurely, particularly if engaging non-yaqona drinkers. On the other hand,

keeping kava consuming groups engaged is not a problem if the researcher can ensure

that good quality kava keeps flowing, and the ‘chasers’ are plentiful. It must be noted

that getting people to ‘talk’ can be costly, and this was the price I had to pay when

engaging ‘traditional’ people with a ‘thirst’. For me, this strategy worked, perfectly,

because I was prepared to sit long hours, and into the night, in their midst enduring the

torment of over-exposure to excessive cigarette smoke and, sometimes, foul language.

Whatever the cost, I was adamant not to return ‘empty-handed’. I had to find answers to

my research questions, and more. I wanted to be sure I was getting things right, and this

was the only way to do it. Essentially, working as a mata ethnographer meant that I

genuinely immerse myself in the culture of the researched, singing their songs and

feeling their heart-beats. Must I continue in this kind of engagement after the thesis-

construction? What if I choose a non-kava drinking life-style, and particularly when

traditional iTaukei expect their menfolks to be active users of the substance? Who will I

then engage, if a change in life-style translates to limited access to traditional knowers?

171��

Does that mean a change in strategies employed? If this is a “mata way to sautu” for my

people given to the unrelenting culture of excessive yaqona drinking, then this is one of

the effective pathways to be followed, to reach and influence them. My task now is to

identify other practical ways of empowering the iTaukei with the knowledge that our

days of just waiting to be represented are over. It is time to stand up and be counted.

How so? In re-writing and re-righting our ‘stories’ from our ‘shifting horizon’

perspectives, and as mata-reps of our knowledge spaces well rooted in the peculiarities

of our placed-experiences.

������������������������������������������������������������Notes 1As cited in D’arcy (2006, p. 170). 2 Present in Lakeba today are the mata-kiBau (herald to Bau), mata-kiCicia (herald to Cicia) and mata-kiCakaudrove (herald to Cakaudrove) – heralding offices to/forVanua vakaTuraga which had distant relations with Lakeba. As for other Vanua which came under the Lakeba rule, what they have are ‘mata-nikatuba’ (‘eyes of door’) or ‘icabecabe’ (places to ‘cabe’ [ascend] to) when coming to Lakeba – their ‘doorway’ into the Vanua vakaTuraga. 3Note that there are also less noble Vanua attitudes. While idealizing the best of the ‘vei’ values, negative ‘vei’ attitudes are not to be totally ignored. Whether for good or evil, the iTaukei see almost all causes as a community ‘project’ explaining why they are often always interested in additional information about a person’s veiwekani (relatives), yavusa (tribe), koro (village), etc. when they hear of such a person’s accomplishments, downfalls, etc. 4Tokairabe is the priestly ancestor of the mata-kiCicia clan, the mata-niVanua (herald, ‘right-hand’) of the TuiNayau of Lakeba. His ‘presence’ is always ‘felt’ by the Tubou-Lakeba people when the ‘taiseni’(Circus approximans, a bird of prey) soars above the chiefly village – the bird in the ‘Bird’s Eye View’ expression hereby conceptualized as Tokairabe. This is a kind of ‘vakamanamana’ or, the open articulation of their confidence in the mana/sau of something or someone, particularly from their ‘old’ religion/spirituality and, which could be interpreted by some brand of Christianity as ‘evil’ and ‘un-Christian’. 5 Ancient wisdom, in this regard, refers to the ‘wisdom of old’ drawn from humanity’s many standpoint perspectives, documented or otherwise, but which has been continuously and systematically extracted and represented (harvested and harnessed), via research activities and outcomes, informing knowledge sharing and knowledge building. At this point, the realization is that not one knowledge system can do ‘life’ alone hence, multiplicity is critical for survival. 6A space saturated with a strong presence of compatible ideas, comprising the best of indigenous and western values, mixed together to ‘taste’ – much like how pounded yaqona from Kadavu is ‘mixed in’ mainland VitiLevu water and, consumed by a mixed group of Fijians watching a televised Viti-Samoa rugby match in an urban Suva home, played live in Wellington, New Zealand. Note also that there is a higher probability that pre-1300 Event Viti society was never homogenous. The kaiViti concept, even then, would have been one concerned with a mixed ‘race’. 7 For another reading, refer to Hooper (1996, p. 249). 8 For the iTaukei, ceremonies “reflect their worldview, and define the social and political structures, religious beliefs, values and practices inherent in [iTaukei] Fijian communities” (Ravuvu, 1987, p. vii). 9Not necessarily the celebrated and elaborate occasions warranting the presence of ‘all’ from across the land. Some of these installations were done with a lot of secrecy, witnessed only by a privileged few, like the one done for RatuTevita, the father of Ratu Mara.

172��

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 According to Hooper (1996, p. 249), the mother is the land and the father is the chief. This view embodies the notion that one is unproductive without the other. 11Note that for iTaukei today, the ‘rara’ is but a playing ground. Conceptualizing it as a place for dialogue and con-frontation is significant here given how this study has found that sautu(peace/prosperity) is attainable, for the greater part, via the Mata (representative/eye-mind [seer-knower]) way. 12Any Vanua vakaTuraga would have a ‘icavuti’, a traditional/ceremonial name by which its people are known and which connects them to their center, the chief and the chiefly place. These names are not found on any map showing place names hence, they connect such a place to a pre-colonial past – colonial, in this case, referring to the colonizing power of Europe’s influence. 13 Refer to Sanga and Walker (2005, p. 73). 14 This view is opposed to the idea of installing one as Turaga (chief) or Sau, the ‘one-othered’, only by birthright. It therefore goes that the criteria for selection of Vanua leaders must take into account one’s personal sau/mana expressed, perhaps, in her/his ability to ‘rawa ka’ (lit. ‘get things’), suggesting an achievement-oriented position compatible with the modern idea of a performance-based selection, and which is ultimately demonstrated in a personal ‘sautu’ (peace, prosperity, stability and order) that is of communal good. 15 Given that the vanua concept and its many variants (Campbell, 1990, 15) are found throughout the vastness of Polynesia’s oceanic geography.

173 �

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ananthanarayanan, V., & St. Clair N.S. (2012). Building bridges: Contextualizing

worldviews through cultural syndromes and the importance of expressing

metaphorical perspective. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8 (5), 1-7.

Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A.O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaska

native ways of knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36 (1), 8-23.

Battiste, M. (2000) (ed.) Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision. British Columbia,

Canada: University of British Columbia Press.

Bernard, H.R. (1995). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative

Approaches (2nd ed.). Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press.

Biggs, B. (1994). Knowledge as allegory. In J. Morrison, P. Geraghty & L. Crowl

(Eds.), Science of Pacific Island Peoples: Education, Language, Patterns and

Policy, Vol. 4 (pp. 1-11) Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the

South Pacific.

Burik, S. (2006). Thinking through the West towards Indigenous Epistemologies. In M.

Prasad (Ed.), Proceedings of the Pacific Epistemologies Conference, Pacific Writing

Forum (pp. 69-75). Suva, Fiji: University of the South Pacific.

Campbell, I. C. (1990). A History of the Pacific Islands. St. Lucia, Australia: University

of Queensland Press.

Cobern, W. W. (1993). World View, Metaphysics, and Epistemology. Scientific

Literacy and Cultural Studies Project, Paper 7. Retrieved from

http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/science_slcsp/7

D’arcy, P. (2006). The People of the Sea: Environment, Identity, and History in

Oceania. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i Press.

Evening, L. L. (2004). Why girls don’t do physics – the Fiji experience. In T. Baba, O.

M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific and

Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Perspectives (pp. 105-125). Auckland, New

Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.

Feinberg, R. (1978). Anutan epistemology: the roots of “knowledge” on a Polynesian

outlier. Micronesia, 14, 127-137.

174 �

Ferguson, M. J., & Bargh, J. A. (2004). How social perception can automatically

influence behaviour. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8 (1), 33-39.

Filipo, S. L. (2004). In search of a culturally appropriate approach to research: a

Samoan case. In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.),

Researching the Pacific and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Perspectives (pp. 179-

185). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.

Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London, England: Penguin.

Gatty, R. (2009). Fijian-English Dictionary: With Notes on Fijian Culture and Natural

History. Suva, Fiji: Ronald Gatty.

Gegeo, D.W. (2001). Cultural rupture and indigeneity: the challenge of (re)visioning

“place” in the Pacific. The Contemporary Pacific,13 (2), 491-507.

Gegeo, D.W. (2006). Our islands of knowledge: (re)visioning the “place” of Pacific

epistemologies in a rapidly globalizing world. In M. Prasad (Ed.), Proceedings of

the Pacific Epistemologies Conference, Pacific Writing Forum. Suva, Fiji:

University of the South Pacific.

Gegeo, D. W., & Watson-Gegeo, K. (2001). “How we know”: Kwara‘ae rural

villagers doing indigenous epistemology. The Contemporary Pacific, 13, 55-88.

Hau‘ofa, E. (2008). We are the ocean: Selected works. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University

of Hawai‘i Press.

Helu Thaman, K. (1999). Songs of love: New and selected poems (1974 – 1999). Suva,

Fiji: Mana Publications.

Helu Thaman, K. (2003). Decolonising Pacific studies: Indigenous perspectives,

knowledge and wisdom in higher education. The Contemporary Pacific, 15, 1-17.

Hereniko, V. (2000). Indigenous knowledge and academic imperialism. In R.

Borofsky (Ed.), Rememberance of Pacific pasts: An invitation to remake history

(pp. 78-91). Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i Press.

175 �

Hooper, S. (1996). Who are the chiefs? Chiefship in Lau, eastern Fiji. In R. Feinberg

& K. A. Watson-Gegeo (Eds.), Leadership and change in the western Pacific,

Essays presented to Sir Raymond Firth on the Occasion of his 90th Birthday,

Monographs on Anthropology, 66 (pp. 239-271). London, England: London School

of Economics.

Howitt, R & S. Suchet-Pearson (2001). Spaces of knowledge: ontological pluralism

in contested cultural landscapes. In K. Anderson, M. Domosh, S. Pile & N. Thrift

(Eds.), Handbook of Cultural Geography. Sydney, Australia: Macquarie University.

Huffer, E. (2004, October). Reinventing government in the Pacific: From values to

institutions. Commissioned paper presented at the UNDESA/UNDP/East-West

Centre Regional Forum on Reinventing Government in the Pacific. Apia, Western

Samoa.

Huffer, E., & Qalo, R. (2004). Have we been thinking upside down? The

contemporary emergence of Pacific theoretical thought. The Contemporary

Pacific, 16, 87-116.

Kagan, D., Ozment, S., & Turner, F. M. (1983). The Western Heritage. New York:

Macmillan Publishing.

Keso, H., Lehtimäki, H., & Pietiläinen, T. (2009). Engaging in reflexive acts: Sharing

experiences on reflexivity in empirical qualitative research. Tamara Journal,

7 (3), 51-70.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.

Lawson, S. (1996). Tradition verses democracy in the South Pacific: Fiji, Tonga and

Western Samoa. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, C. B. (2010). Generating synergy between conceptual change and knowledge

building. Human Development, 53, 134-152.

Lennox, J. (2010). Darwinism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Standford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Retrieved from <http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-

bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=Darwinism>

176 �

M�hina, O. (2004). Issues and challenges in Pacific research: Some critical comments.

In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams and U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the

Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives (pp. 186-200). Auckland,

New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.

M�hina, H.O. (2010). Ta, va, and moana: Temporality, spatiality, and indigeneity.

Pacific Studies, 33 (2/3), 168-202.

Mara, K. (1997). The Pacific way: A memoir. Honolulu, Hawai‘i: University of Hawai‘i

Press.

Meyer, M. A. (2001). Our own liberation: Reflections on Hawaiian epistemology. The

Contemporary Pacific, 13, 124-148.

Nabobo-Baba, U. (2004). Research and Pacific indigenous peoples: Silenced pasts and

challenged futures. In T. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba

(Eds.), Researching the Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives

(pp. 17-32). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of

Auckland.

Nabobo-Baba, U. (2006). Knowing and learning: An indigenous Fijian approach.

Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.

Nabobo-Baba, U. (2010). The epistemological and philosophical basis of sustainable

development practices among indigenous Pacific peoples: A Fiji case study. In U.

Nabobo-Baba, C. F. Koya & T. Teaero (Eds.), Education for Sustainable

Development: Continuity and Survival in the Pacific, Vol. 1 (pp. 13-25). Suva and

Tokyo: School of Education, University of the South Pacific and Asia/Pacific

Cultural Centre for UNESCO.

Nunn, P. D. (1998). Pacific island landscapes. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies,

University of the South Pacific.

Nunn, P. D., Hunter-Anderson, R., Carson, M. T., Thomas, F., Ulm, S., & Rowland,

M. J. (2007). Times of plenty, times of less: Last millennium societal disruption in

the Pacific basin. Hum Ecol, 35, 385-401.

Pheloung, B., & King, J. (1992). Overcoming learning difficulties: How you can help a

child who finds it hard to learn. Sydney, Australia: Doubleday.

177 �

Ratuva, S. (2009). Commodifying cultural knowledge: Corporatized western science

and Pacific indigenous knowledge. International Social Science Journal, 60,

153-163.

Ravuvu, A. (1983). Vaka iTaukei: The Fijian way of life. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific

Studies, University of the South Pacific.

Ravuvu, A. D. (1987). The Fijian ethos. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies,

University of the South Pacific.

Ravuvu, A. D. (1988). Development or dependence: The pattern of change in a Fijian

village. Suva, Fiji: University of the South Pacific.

Reid, A. C. (1990). Tovata I & II. Suva,Fiji: Fiji Museum.

Sanga, K. F. (2004). Making philosophical sense of indigenous Pacific research. In T.

Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific

and indigenous peoples: Issues and perspectives (pp. 41-52). Auckland, New

Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies, University of Auckland.

Sanga, K. F. & Walker, K. D. (2005). Apem Moa Solomon Islands Leadership.

Wellington, New Zealand: He Parekereke Institute for Research and Development

in Maori and Pacific Education, Victoria University.

Scarr, D. (2008). Tuimacilai: A Life of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara. Adelaide, Australia:

Crawford House Publishing.

Scott, S. (2010). Drawing on indigenous ways of knowing: Reflections from a

community evaluator. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23 (2),

73-92.

Spurway, J. (2002). Hiki mo e faliki: Why Ma’afu brought his floor mats to Fiji in

1847. The Journal of Pacific History, 37 (1), 5-23.

Svenonius, E. (2004). The epistemological foundations of knowledge representations.

Library Trends 52 (3), 571-587.

Tuhiwai Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising methodologies: Research and indigenous

peoples. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.

178 �

Tuhiwai Smith, L. (2004). Building research capability in the Pacific, for the Pacific

and by the Pacific peoples. In T. L. Baba, O. M�hina, N. Williams & U. Nabobo-

Baba (Eds.), Researching the Pacific and indigenous peoples: Issues and

Perspectives (pp. 4-16). Auckland, New Zealand: Centre for Pacific Studies,

University of Auckland.

Turnbull, D. (1994). Comparing knowledge systems: Pacific navigation and western

science. In J. Morrison, P. Geraghty & L. Crowl (Eds.), Science of Pacific islands

peoples: Ocean and coastal studies, Vol. 1 (pp. 129-144). Suva, Fiji: Institute of

Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific.

Tuwere, I. (1992). Making sense of vanua (land) in the Fijian context: A theological

exploration. (PhD thesis, Melbourne College of Divinity, Melbourne, Australia).

Vaai, S. (1999). Literary representations in western Polynesia: Colonialism and

indigeneity. Apia, Samoa: National University of Samoa.

Williams, T. (1858). Fiji and the Fijians, Vol.1: The islands and their inhabitants.

London, England: Alexander Heylin.

Withers, C. W. J. (2009). Place and the “spatial turn” in geography and in history.

Journal of the History of Ideas, 70 (4), 637-658.

179��

GLOSSARY

Adi title used by women of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first- names

A itovo e odra ga a turaga! Manners belong only to the chiefly!

A iyau ga kei Lakeba a waliwali! The true mark of Lakeba wealth is the waliwali!

A meca iei a fika ga! This ‘thing’ [can be solved if I/we] just ‘figure’ it out!

A meca ko rogoca iei, vavana toka ga iei! Whatever [talanoa] you hear [in this place], keep it safely tucked here!

Amudo! Mudo! (archaic ceremonial language) signifying Vanua acceptance of blessings made by the ‘presenter’ (a Vanua representative) at the receiving end of one particular ceremonial exchange marking the conclusion of that ceremonial segment.

A omu iyau ga a wekamu! Your relatedness is your wealth! (herein, connectedness is equated to wealth)

A ona ga esa volai, esa volai! Whoever is registered, is registered!

A turaga e turaga ni tamata! A chief is chief [only] of/over people!

Au raica ga, au kila! I see [only], I know!

bati [as used here] traditional warriors

bete traditional priests

bilo cup(s) [traditionally made out of coconut shells]

bucini/bucibucini sowing/generating of

bula life/live/living; expressions of being alive

bula vakaibalebale a meaningful life

bulu bury, cover, conceal

bulubulu burial place

Bulu the under-world, the abode of the dead

180��

bunubunu a fish hunt method, using a long net, that traps the fish inside an enclosure formed by bringing the two ends of the net together forming a circle that is further constricted by taking the net ends right around in a wrap-around manner limiting fish movement and strengthening the netted-barrier

burisi angry (used to describe everyone else’s anger response except that of the Sau)

butuki literally meaning stepped/walked on and, in the context of the qoli kanace, the qoli is said to be butuki when the lack of harvest

is suspected to be a result of concealed pregnancy, by one/some of the ‘hunters’

buturara ground, floor, deck

cabe the rising of (the sun, etc.), coming up from/out of (the sea, etc.)

Cagi ko Lakeba, dui ta kena! A proverbial saying, possibly rooted in the pre-European contact war period, literally meaning ‘When the wind blows in from Lakeba, each warrior must strike his own!’ and understood, today, to mean that for the collective good of Lakeba, and with conditions favouring it, each member must remain active and keep pushing forward with the ‘conquering’ spirit. [To gain communal well being, each individual member must be a fighter, that is.]

cakacaka work, employment, vocation (noun); to do work (verb)

Cei-e-kena the clan from which the first Sau of Lakeba was appointed in pre- Christian and pre-Vuanirewa days [literally meaning ‘whose to eat’]

cobo the rhythmic clapping of cupped hands held at ninety degrees to each other particularly at the end of ceremonial presentations (always done sitting [in ceremonies], or stooping [elsewhere], signifying respect for the ‘chiefs’ present)

cobori no currently faced downwards (as of a cup, etc.)

coboti referring to the individual and collective act of cobo or ritualistic ‘clapping’ following the drinking of yaqona/kava, particularly of chiefs

181��

cokoti vata bound together (and bounded) by

cua the two sticks secured to the two ends of a fishing net that helps fish ‘hunters’ to hold it up in water and, likewise, drag it ashore

cuka this is what the early morning kanace fish hunt is called [may be linked to the vacuka concept which means ‘to punch’ hence, cuka is possibly archaic (not a common expression, that is)]

daku the back of (as opposed to ‘front of’)

dau placed before an action word to refer to a person/people skilled at it [an expert, that is]

Dau the yavusa of traditional fishers of the Tui Nayau, and is short for Dau-ni-Lakeba [otherwise, DauLakeba]; also the title for their

leader

dau-ni-veivakameautaki expert negotiators

dra-ni-veiwekani literally meaning ‘blood of relatedness’

dranumi to wash off salt left on the body in fresh water [in the context of the qoli kanace, the equipments are dranumi with some special leaves in the belief that this will ward off ‘evil’ that causes fish- hunters to return empty-handed]

dreu ripe [as used in reference to fruits]

duatani is different, special or unique (morphologically analysed as dua- tani [‘one-other’])

E dau kele ga a waqa ina toba maravu. Canoes only dock at peaceful harbours. [an iTaukei idiom]

E dua a meca ena ta oji?! Is there a ‘thing’ that will not come to an end?!

Ei Dina! (a ceremonial language) rooted in the ‘dina’ (true/truth/truthful) concept and, meaning ‘May it truly be!

E samu a kanace. There has been a plentiful harvest of the kanace fish.

E so ga era dau ta-ta vau vinaka! Only some are good at cutting or harvesting vau!’

faito a solution

182��

faiwa a strategy

fika calculation, logic, manipulation (vika in other dialects)

gauna time; times/seasons

gone a child or children, the young

gonedau traditional fisherfolks [particularly their men]

Gone Turaga used in reference to the chief (literally meaning ‘child-king’)

gone vakatubu used in reference to the chief’s children (literally meaning ‘children who are being raised’ [for a purpose, that is])

Ia me vala! So get it done!

iboi the distinct smell of something

ilava ni kakana the kakana dina which goes with the vegetables and the meat/fish in a meal

imauvu clothes (possibly archaic and used specifically in reference to clothes belonging to the Sau)

iqa food prepared from home to take to one’s work place; a metaphor for talanoa shared amongst workers while working

iqoliqoli the sea area from which the iTaukei ‘hunt’ their fish

isema vakadra blood ties/relatedness

isevusevu the traditional presentation of yaqona upon arrival at a VanuavakaTuraga as an introduction and, seeking entrance

isirovi fish harvested from the qoli sirovi and served at the chief’s table

isolosolo used in reference to once displaced people brought back, generations later, to be registered with one’s own group

isulu clothes (as generally used to refer to everyone else’s clothes except the Sau)

iTaukei indigenous Fijians; land ‘owners’

itei planting material

iteitei garden, plantation

183��

itovo present code of conduct (may be seen as a temporary fix, and which is negotiable)

itutu one’s relative position

ivakarau the manner of doing something [often used interchangeably with ivalavala]

ivalavala relatively ancient but persisting traditions and customs (may be seen as permanently fixed)

ivalu war, battle

ivola a letter (as in correspondence), a book, an article, a printed/written piece

ivosavosa manner of speaking (focusing on the spoken)

ivosavosa vakaViti iTaukei idioms

ivakarau the chiefly banquet

iVanua residing on one’s island home-base

iWai residing off one’s island home-base

iyau wealth, valuables

kai referring to the place of origin someone came from

kaiPalagi a person who comes from Palagi (overseas), particularly Europeans

kaiTani a person who is from another place [meaning ‘not one of us’]

kaiVanua a person who is ‘originally’ of the land (vanua)

kaiViti a person whose place of origin is Vit

kaiWai a person who is ‘originally’ of the sea (wai)

kakanadina starchy food crops (edibles) like cassava and taro [literally meaning ‘true foods’]

kana to eat

kanace blue-spot mullet fish

184��

kana-tamata human-flesh eating

kania a yatequ chewing on my liver [an expression indicating worry]

kawa genealogy

Keta vuli ga mai na weta rai! We learn [merely] from what we see!

kete stomach, gut, womb; abdomen

kila know (verb); knowledge (noun)

kila ka learned knowledge

kora group ‘jumping’ of kanace fish [usually observed before sun- down]

koro village

kuli ni tabua used in reference to the dead body of the Tui Nayau [literally meaning ‘skin of the tabua’]

kune discovered, found, seen [alternatively: kune-i]; is pregnant

kunekune when a woman is conceiving a child, or a person, an idea; used also in relation to an on-going search for something

kunekune-taki referring to the thing which is conceived

kupeti a stenciling (cut-out) pattern for printing masi, etc.

lagi rain (in the Lauan dialect)

Lagi the heavens, the abode of the gods, the origin of the vulagi

lakalaka the meke now danced to in Tubou-Lakeba by both women and men and, which is completely sung in the Toga language

Lakeba the island (hence, the people) under study [Lakeba today comprises eight villages of which Tubou is the primary village]

lala the communal act of working at the chief’s iteitei (garden) on assigned days involving the village menfolk

lave rara literally ‘lifting of the rara-ground’, a metaphor used to signify loss at one’s home-ground

lewa kalou goddess(es)

185��

lewa ni Tubou women of Tubou

lewe-niVanua flesh/members of the Vanua body

liga hands

ligadra na cauravou the hands of the young people

lolo the coming in of the tide

loma the inside of

lotu prayer, worship; the church (as Lotu)

lovo a method of cooking using an earth oven, and the food cooked in it

macawa the ground (fore/back/side) belonging to a house [in the qoli kanace context, the macawa is the space permanently allocated to significant individuals who are of the ‘qoli owners’ house’ or, ‘members’ of the Taqalevu clan]

magimagi strings and ropes made from coconut husks and which was traditionally used as house and canoe lashings

makawa old, ancient

maliwa space between places/times

maliwa lala lit. ‘empty space between’ and, used in reference to the ‘outer space’ of the celestial bodies

mana a kind of spiritualized ‘power’ to effect

mana-ca bad mana (negative ‘power’ to effect)

mana-vinaka good mana (positive ‘power’ to effect)

marama female person(s) [formal], women of the chiefly yavusa

masi bark cloth of Mulberry shrub

mata eye, face, front (of an entity); representative of/to; a source; a group

mata dredredre smiling; rooted in the dredre (laugh) concept

186��

mata-iAdi literally meaning ‘eye of Adi (woman)’; a metaphor for the womb

mataisau traditional carpenters [canoe or house builders]

mataivalu armed forces

mata-ki representative to

matamata gateway

mata-ni eye/face/representative of

mataniciva pearl; a metaphor for education and schooling

matanikatuba the door [literally meaning ‘the eye/face of the door’]

matanikupeti distinct sets of geometrical patterns used in masi printing; a metaphor for recognizing distant blood relations in facial features

mataniqoli the ‘commander’ of the kanace fish-hunt (literally meaning ‘eyes of the qoli’) [the two mataniqoli are in-charge of this particular fish hunt and, the ‘hunters’ charge only when the two give the ‘bent pointer-finger’ indication]

matanisiga the sun

matanitu state, government

mata-niTuraga literally meaning ‘representative of the turaga’ [a ‘new’ construction – a theory attempting to make sense of the matanitu concept]

matanivanua [otherwise written here as mata-niVanua and literally meaning ‘eye/face of the Vanua’] the chief’s herald or spokesperson

mataqali the land-owning unit consisting of related families; one of a kind

mata-tamata ethnic group(s)

mataveitokani a church-group fellowship usually comprising unmarried young men and women

mataveiwekani a group of related groups [eg. the members of a koro]

matavura the foreshore area between the high-tide line and the low-tide line

187��

matavuvale a group of related families

matua ready for harvest [as used in reference to plant products]; the elders/mature

meke dance (focusing on the body movements, but including the singing/chanting and clapping/beating [rhythm making] that goes with it)

moce sleep (as used for everyone except the Sau)

muria to follow a lead

niu coconut(s)

no settled/sitting in place [used interchangeably, by some, with tu(present/standing)]

noda vuravura our world (vuravura)

ola a kind of wind movement observed in Tubou village that ‘predicts’ the ideal time to go on a kanace fish hunt; customary presentation of valuables and food by a Vuanirewa (of the chiefs) woman’s family to the Taqalevu clan (the ‘owners’ of the qoli)because their daughter has just been to her first qoli kanace

oqo this, here

ora choke on something

ota an edible fern-plant

palagi used in reference to Europeans/Europe (Caucasian and speaking a foreign language) [Note that Pacific languages are not entirely foreign]

pesi a distinctly Lauan kind of story-telling in songs

puleta shirts/dresses made from the same printed material (usually floral and colourful) and worn by a group at a special function

qali used in reference to traditional tributaries to a chiefdom [literally meaning ‘twisted together’]

188��

qaravi yaqona referring to the mixing and serving of the yaqona drink and the people tasked with it, particularly the three men seated at the tanoa in more traditional ceremonies

qase the older/mature, elders

qele earth, soil, land

qoli fish hunt

qoli sirovi the fish hunt done using a long net at the fishing ground reserved for the chief, the Sau [involving the women who serve at the chief’s house and other village women who may avail themselves for what is perceived as an honourable task]

qoli kanace the fish hunt done, using a number of shorter nets, to harvest kanace [involving the women of the Taqalevu clan and Tubou-

Lakeba women with Taqalevu connection]

qusi ni loa the removal of the black facial paint usually derived from crushed charcoal

ra base, down-under, beneath

raica see, look at

rara playing-field, open-ground

rarama light

Ratu title used by men of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first- names

rawa ka acquiring things, getting things done

Roko title which may be used by both women and men of chiefly birth, placed in front of their first-names (particularly chiefs associated with the Vanua vakaTuraga ko Moala, Totoya and Matuku lying to the south-west of Lakeba

Sa lewe dina ni ketequ! It is truly in the members of my stomach/womb! (knowing via the ‘gut-feeling’)

samu hit, beaten, thrashed

189��

Sa tawa na mata-iAdi! The ‘eye’ (womb) of the woman is ‘filled’ (with child)! [implying that she is pregnant]

sau dominion over [often used interchangeably with mana]

Sau the ‘installed’ chief-administrator of a Vanua

Sau ni Vanua ko Lau One of the three titles of the resident high-chief on Tubou- Lakeba. This title indicates his supreme rule over ancient Lau, comprising about one-third of what Lau is today and, consisting mainly islands to the south of Lakeba. The title was around generations before the pre-Christianity Nayau chiefs arrived on Lakeba.

sautabu the chiefly burial ground

sautu peace, prosperity/abundance/plenty, order/stability

sauvaki the practice of exalting the Sau (or God, for Christians)

sinu gaga poisonous sinu (Excoecaria agallocha/Euphorbiaceae)

sisi garland (distinctly Tubou-Lakeba)

sobu to consciously descend upon or lower

soisoi gossip (the conscious act of gossiping)

solevu communal feasting

soqo the gathering of people to celebrate for a worthy cause

tabu forbidden, sacred, set apart

tabua the ‘treated’ and stringed teeth of whales considered by the iTaukei as their ulu ni yau (‘head’ of all their traditional valuables; the most important, that is)

tagane male person(s)[informal]

tala shift from one place to another

talanoa stories; telling of stories

Talanoa ena bati ni tanoa. Story-telling at the edges of (around) the yaqona/kava bowl.

190��

tali to weave

Tali magimagi. The weaving of magimagi (literally) and, as a metaphor, it speaks of the art of ‘weaving’ stories.

tamata person(s), people(s), human(s)

tanoa yaqona/kava bowl

Taqalevu a kaiVanua clan residing on Tubou village and, whose traditional leader is the Tui Tubou [‘owners’ of the qoli kanace]

tara allowed by law/rule (stated or otherwise)

tara koro literally meaning ‘building villages/towns’ and, used as a metaphor for talanoa

tau refers to the letting down of a load on the shoulders to carry it (essentially, the load and its carrier become ‘yoked’ into one entity/body) [Note that this is the applied meaning used in this research.]

taubeni to wear a garland

taukei the native/local/insider; owner of

taukei ni qele the land-owner

tauri literally means ‘to handle’ and, specifically used in reference to when the Sau is consuming food, yaqona or alcohol

tauVanua the ordinary, the non-chiefly

tavo (possibly archaic) used to describe when the Sau is sleeping or resting in bed

tavu to cook in open fire

tawani to be settled (as of a place) [literally meaning ‘is filled’]

tei to plant

teitei crop farming

tikina administrative districts comprising several Vanua coming under the rule of a Sau (overlord/chief-administrastor) or Tui (king) [literally means ‘parts of’]

191��

tiko stay/live/present in

tobe the plaiting together of stringed-elements of a garland

Toga the iTaukei version for the place-name ‘Tonga’

Toka iqore me ko raica! Sit [and observe from] there to ‘see’!

toka wale literally means ‘sitting down disengaged’ and used specifically in reference to the Sau’s anger

toko a beloved

toli the picking of flowers, leaves, fruits, roots either for garland or body-oil making

tu stand; exist, present

Tubou this is what the village of the resident high-chief of Lakeba, the Tui Nayau, the Sau of Lau, is called today [Tubou may have been

the reference for the island in oral-history time. There is also indication that 19th century Tubou may have been the section of the village occupied by the Taqalevu people today]

Tubou-Lakeba this is the reference used in this research for the researched community situated/rooted in the Tubou village/Lakeba island culture [the Tubou-Lakeba conception does not limit the study to those ‘registered’ in the Tubou ‘books’ hence, leaving open the boundaries creating endless possibilities]

tui king(s), chief(s) [as in capitalized Tui]; stringing of fragrant flowers/leaves/fruits in garland-making

Tui Lakeba ‘King of Lakeba’, one of the two decorated titles having cultural/historical significance and, belonging to one of three descendent groups of the first-peoples settled on Tubou-Lakeba. Tui Lakeba’s people, today, live on the north-west end of Tubou village.

192��

Tui Lau ‘King of Lau’, one of the three titles of the resident high-chief of Tubou-Lakeba. A mid A. D 1900 addition to the ancient Sau ni Vanua ko Lau and Tui Nayau titles inherited from the infamous Ma’afu, a chief of Toga vasu levu to the chiefs of Nayau, and who was the first Tui Lau in post-Christianity eastern-Vitisociety.

Tui Nayau ‘King of Nayau’, one of the three titles the resident high-chief on Tubou-Lakeba was, and is, known by [Nayau is his tribes’ place of origin, an island lying close-by to the north-west of Lakeba and, the Tui Nayau title was obviously the title their ancestors brought with them to Lakeba]

tuirara understood today as the person in charge of the church treasury; a possible pre-Christian understanding lingers on and, speaks of a traditional role which has to do with the communal distribution of

Vanua wealth celebrating the sautu-productivity of the land

Tui Tubou ‘King of Tubou’, one of the two decorated titles having cultural/historical significance and, belonging to one of three descendent groups of the first-peoples settled on Tubou-Lakeba. Tui Tubou’s people, today, live on the south-east end of Tubou village.

tukuni legends and myths

tukutuku information (noun); inform (verb)

turaga male person(s) [formal]; chief(s) [‘elected’]; chiefly yavusa [all-inclusive, non-gendered]

Turaga vakaTamata chief/the chiefly having strong people support

Turaga vakaVanua chiefs/men/leaders with Vanua support and land

turatura used in reference to the chief’s feet/legs

tuva ordering, arranging

tu vinaka

tuwa grandfather (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect)

Ucu mai duru! To pick from one’s knees (literally) but, referring to fabricated stories one quickly comes up with just to amuse.

193��

ujiriva a foolish person (in the Tubou-Lakeba dialect)

ula individual ‘jumping’ of kanace fish [usually observed before sun-down]

usu a meeting called by the ‘owners’ of the qoli kanace whereby potential hunters gather, the night before, to confirm their participation in the qoli, the day after [literally, usu means ‘to forcefully occupy a space that was possibly going to another’]

uvi yam(s)

vaKaisi unbecoming of chiefs and their vakaTuraga ways or, behaving like a Kaisi, an ignoble

vakaitaukei has a traditional ‘owner’ (when speaking of land/sea areas)

vaka-iTaukei of the iTaukei people and culture (associated/identified with)

vakaLakeba of the place Lakeba and its culture; the Lakeba way of engaging people in a veitalanoa (whereby the ‘seeker’ knowingly asks to confirm and, asking an audience only too willing to pass on the information)

vakamanamana rooted in the mana concept and signifying a settled confidence in the mana (effective power) of a thing, someone, a practice, etc.

vakamanamanataki when the vakamanamana confidence is articulated or expressed

vakamenemenei pampered (from vakamenemenea, to pamper a beloved)

vakaPalagi of the English (generally European) people and culture, the palagi or kaiPalagi (someone ‘originally’ from Palagi and, presumably England [particularly for the indigenous of Viti, the place being a former colony of the Great Britian, the English speaking])

vakasama an idea, a concept; thought

vakase bua literally means ‘flowering frangipani’ and, used specifically to describe the Sau’s smile/laughter

194��

vakasosolo the practice, common to Lakeba people, of taking anything and everything one considers important to those one is visiting with [they do not go, even to the place of a close relative, empty- handed]

vakasulumi clothed/dressed, covered

vakatatabu the keeping of the tabu; the manner of acknowledging God and the chiefs when making a public statement

vakataukata used in reference to places (Vanua) from which the Lakeba chiefdom (in the past) would extract valuables, foods and services, places that used to pay tribute to the Lakeba chiefs

vakataukeitaki familiarize

vakatawa to fill up space, to occupy place

vakaTuraga having chiefly leaders; the noble chiefly manner, of turaga people (of chiefly birth) and their culture

vakaTuraga-taki to be given chiefly/royal treatment

vakaunumi made to drink (particularly of the installation cup of yaqona)

vakaVanua/vakavanua of the Vanua people and culture, identifiable with the Vanua (associated with the idea of an ‘authentic’ pre-Christian or

pre-civilization existence); lacking professionalism

vakaViti of the place Viti and its culture

vakila feel/felt

vala/valata to do, to be done, the doing of

vale house

Vale Levu the chief’s house (literally meaning ‘Big House’)

vanua land, people, culture, place

Vanua a peopled-place with a form of local government [assumed to be grounded in the Vanua vakaTuraga conception]

vanua tani some other place, overseas

195��

Vanua vakaTuraga a Vanua governed by chiefs, chiefly institutions and the chiefly way of life

vasu a person’s relationship to her/his mother’s brothers and their families/yavusa/Vanua

vasu levu a vasu to the highest ranked chiefly family, particularly children of a chief’s sister older than the chief

vau the naturally occurring native hibiscus plant (Hibiscus tiliaceus)

vavana/vavani tucked underneath (a mat, mattress, etc.)

vei a prefix indicating collectivity and reciprocity

veibuli installation of chief

veidakuni a ‘back-to-back’ relationship, at a personal level, where the people concerned are in non-speaking terms (particularly between a woman and her brother-in-law, or vice-versa) [used here as a generalization]

veidokai treating one another highly (rooted in the doka concept meaning ‘roof’, as that of a house) [in so doing, one is saying: ‘You are more chiefly than I.’]

veika bibi important things

veikau-ca used in reference to qoli (fish hunt) partners who often always return without any catch [veikau means ‘to go/travel together’ and ca means ‘bad’]

veikauwaitaki minding one another’s well-being

veikilai mutual knowing/understanding of one another

veimaliwai coexisting in space [proving compatibility of personalities]

veimataki a ‘face-to-face’ relationship, at the Vanua level, where parties concerned are in speaking terms [used here as a generalization]

veiqaravi facing each other

veiqaraqaravi shorter reference to veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua

196��

veiqaraqaravi vakaVanua used in reference to the ceremonial, traditional ceremonies involving Vanua exchanges (literally meaning ‘Vanua facing Vanua’)

veisaututaki the collective effort of keeping order/stability and peace

veitalanoa dialogue, discussion

veivakamaramataki the chiefly way of honouring women of chiefly birth (or generally of respecting women)

veivakamenemenei communally organized ‘pampering’ of a beloved child/chief (ideally reciprocated) [in so doing, one is saying: ‘You are like a daughter/son to me.’]

veivakataukeitaki familiarization between a vulagi and a taukei

veivakaturagataki the chiefly way of giving and receiving honour and respect, treating others as ‘chiefs’ as one would herself/himself expect and want to be treated [in so doing, one is saying: ‘We are chiefly equals.’]

veiwekani relatedness, relatives, being acquainted; a non-speaking distant ‘brother-sister’ relationship (particularly in Tubou-Lakeba)

veiwekani vakadra blood related

viavialevu literally meaning ‘wanting to be bigger’ and used to describe condescending attitudes and behaviours

Viti the ‘original’ place-name from which ‘Fiji’ [the English version] was derived

voka the going out of the tide

volai written, registered

Vola ni Kawa Bula the iTaukei Fijian registry of births

vosa the spoken/written word (noun); to speak (verb)

vosa vakaToga the language spoken by Toga people

vou new, recent; immature [as used in reference to fruits]

Vu ancestor, originator

197��

Vuanirewa the chiefly yavusa on Tubou-Lakeba, and originally from Nayau, from which the Tui Nayau is selected and installed

Vu-kalou ancestor-god

vuku a smart and skillful person (or animal); intelligence

vulagi the stranger/foreigner/outsider

vuli learn, study; education, schooling

vuli ka learning/acquiring knowledge

vuluvulu the washing of hands; a metaphor for the passing-on of the mana to heal, particularly from an expert ‘healer’ to someone keen on acquiring the ‘gift’

vu-maiLagi originate from Lagi (otherwise, ‘gods from Lagi’)

vunilagi the horizon

vura emerged/appeared/derived from

vuravura earth, world, reality

vuravura ni ika world of fishes (ika)

vuravura ni yalo world of spirits (yalo)

wa string, rope

wai water, the sea, liquid

wai-ni-vanua used in reference to yaqona/kava (lit. ‘water/juice of the land’)

wali the application of waliwali on the body

waliwali body oil derived from coconut milk

waqa canoe, boat

waqa vakaViti canoes of Viti

weka relatives; a woman’s non-speaking distant ‘brother’ or a man’s non-speaking distant ‘sister’

werewere the clearing of grasslands for farming or just general cleaning

198��

yaba mats

yaci a fish hunt method, using a long net initially placed parallel to the shore, that traps the fish by grounding the two ends of the net to shore

yaga worthwhile, is of value

yalava lagoon

yalewa female person(s) [informal]

yalomatua a wise/intelligent person; spiritual maturity

yalofi the Lauan yaqona drinking circle comprising the heads (mata) of Vanua/yavusa and in their prescribed drinking order (with the

Sau/chief at the center of the arc)

yanuyanu island

yaqona kava (the plant, the elements, the mixture)

yava one’s feet, as used for non-chiefs

yavi rau a fish hunt method using a long line of inter-twining forest vines and coconut leaves as a scare-line, manned by many people (women, men and children), that encircles the fish before they are hauled in

yavusa the largest vanua ‘family’ grouping comprising smaller mataqali‘family’ units and, even smaller tokatoka ‘family’ sub-units which are further sub-divided into matavuvale nuclear families [members of a yavusa usually share a common male ancestor]

�

Source: Map

Majo

Of th

Of th

Qila

Of th

Nay

Of th

with

Of th

on L

Of th

p retrieved o

r Migration

he Tui Lakeb

he Qilaiso, P

aiso who beca

he Levuka p

au and, ‘han

he Vuanirew

h roots in the

he Toga mig

Lakeba, Roko

he Samoa bu

APPENDI

on 7th of Ma

ns to Tubou

ba group, th

Pukuni and T

ame the first

people who o

ndlers’ of the

wa chiefs and

e Moala grou

grants who c

o Rasolo [po

uilders who c

199�

X A: MAP

ay, 2014 from

u-Lakeba [in

e first peopl

Tokairabe gr

t Sau on Lak

once settled B

e Kuli-ni-Tab

d their leader

up) [late 170

ame via the

ossibly aroun

came in the

OF VITI (F

m http://www

n chronologi

e

roup: the

keba

Bau: they w

bua [mid 17

r, the Tui Na

00s, approx]

wife of first

nd same tim

time of Rok

FIJI)

w.scaruffi.co

ical order (R

Became the

(taukei) pri

‘young’ Tu

which became

700s, approx

ayau (from N

t Tui Nayau

e as their Vu

ko Rasolo’s s

om/travel/fij

Reid, 1990)]

e ‘old’ Vanu

ivileging the

raga (vulagi

e fishers to T

.]

Nayau island

to become S

uanirewa ho

son

ji.gif

a

e

i)

Tui

d and

Sau

sts]

200��

APPENDIX B: RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is the essence of the concept of vanua?

‘A cava beka ‘a uto ni vakasama ‘a “vanua”?

2. What is your understanding of sautu?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “sautu”?

3. What is your understanding of the concept of mata?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) kila me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “mata”?

4. What is your conceptualization of the notion of vuravura?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) rai me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “vuravura”?

5. What is your understanding of the idea of taukei?

‘A cava beka ‘a omu(nu) nanuma me baleta ‘a vakasama ni “taukei”?