'ONIPA'A KA 'OIATO HEARING VOICES: LONG IGNORED INDIGENOUS-LANGUAGE TESTIMONY CHALLENGES THE CURRENT HISTORIOGRAPHY OF HAWAI'I NEI A THESIS SUBMmED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI'I IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PACIFIC ISLAND STUDIES MAY 2008 By Ronald Clayton Williams Jr. Thesis Committee: Jonathan Kay Kamakawiwo'ole Osorio, Chairperson David Hanlon Kanalu Young We certify that we have read this thesis and that, in our opinion, it is satisfactory in scope and quality as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in Pacific Island Studies. THESIS COMMmEE Chairperson ii DEDICATION This work is dedicated to all those kUpuna who continued, through everything, to tell their stories. May we be wise enough to take the time to listen. I ka wii mamua, ka wii mahope. III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Throughout this work I have been assisted, supported and loved by wonderful kopuna, kumu, colleagues and friends. Without the help of some, the work could not have been done. I start by thanking those whose voices led me here, the kopuna who wrote of their lives and told stories for us to hear. I thank Akoni Akana, for years ago letting a niele haole boy hang around and bug him for stories. I thank my first kumu, KI'ope Raymond, for helping a passion grow and for teaching me to slow down and listen. I am so grateful to Mehana Hind and all those at Kamakakookalani for welcoming me from the first moment on and for supporting me on what became a very bumpy ride. I wish to thank my thesis committee for their guidance. Any 'ike I might have gained has a genealogy. Mahalo nO to my kumu Haunani­ Kay Trask, Lilikali! Kame'eleihiwa, Jonathan K. Osorio, Kanalu Young, David Hanlon, Carlos Andmde, John Charlot and Karen Kosasa. Thanks also to my kumu Puakea Nogelmeier, whose dissertation gave foundation too much of my work. I am specifically indebted for much of the inspimtion on this thesis to Noenoe Silva. Her work, her teaching and her support were and are invaluable. The amazing and patient staffs of the archives around the islands were a tremendous help. Thank you so much Leah CaIdeim, Desoto Brown, B. J. Short, Barbam Dunn and others. A huge thanks to the great staff at the Hawaiian Pacific Floor at Hamilton Libmry, U .H. Milnoa. How many thousands of times did I come sit and ask some odd question? Nearly every time I got a helpful answer. You are all so good at what iv you do. Mahalo noho'i Joan Hori. Dore Minatodani. Stu Dawrs. Lynette Furuhashi. Karen Peacock. and Krissy Kahikina. Lastly I'd like to thank the person who is perhaps more than anyone responsible for me accomplishing this goal. Donna (Lanakila) Willard. I cannot explain the importance of the things you've shared with me. Your wise spiritual and loving guidance reminds me what this is all about. You always say just what I need to hear. Most importantly. you were perhaps the only one who never doubted I could do this. you were right. v ABSTRACf Defining this work can be best accomplished by starting with what it isn't. This is not simply a work of revisionist history. It is not merely the "other side of the story." Those things are merely answers; replies to certain histories that often devolve into "you say, I say" debates that seek to call forth choirs on each side eager to be preached to. It is not a "balancing of the scales," a "righting of a wrong" or any other work dependant on the present master process. While it does critique the previously dominant way of presenting Hawaiian history, it is at its core an attempt to highlight Hawaiian voices that have been demanding to be heard. I believe that giving platform to the Hawaiian­ language archive disables the exclusionary historiography that has demanded that we speak for those who have themselves already spoken. I do however question the dominant historiography; the foundation upon which these earlier histories are allowed to be produced. That platform is uneven, skewed. It is foundationally unsound and no amount of tinkering is going to set it right. It needs to be discarded. The national narrative that is Hawai'i has previously relied on haole sources while overtly excluding Native ones. For much of its production the lie was told that these Native sources just simply didn't exist in significant number. When the existence of a vast collection of primary source material in the Indigenous language was highlighted, the exclusionary practice rested on a new principle; the Native was not competent to record her / his own history. Over the last three-plus decades, a growing number of Native Hawaiian scholars that includes Jonothan Kamakawiwo'ole Osorio, Haunani-Kay Trask, Lilikalll. Kame'eleihiwa, Noenoe Silva, Carlos Andrade, Davianna McGregor and vi many others have begun to change that dynamic by making their voices heard on a wide variety of topics including the history of their kopuna. Students are graduating from Hawaiian Studies and Hawaiian-language programs in an ever-increasing number. The Kamakakookalani Center for Hawaiian Studies has begun a Masters program in Hawaiian Studies and is looking ahead towards producing Ph.D. gradutes. Just this recent school year the Hawaiian Studies, Hawaiian Language and Klinewai Lo'i programs came together to create their own college, Hawai'inuillkea School of Hawaiian Knowledge. There is much to be excited about. The main focus of this thesis however, is not the producers of history but rather the process. Its focus is not historians but instead. historiography. I contend that a long developed historiography, based on English-language sources continues to be the foundation for much of what we are still using and producing. My 2003 undergraduate course entitled History ofHawai'i was taught using Gawan Daws' Shoal of Time (a problematic book critiqued later in this thesis) as its text. The course, History 284, is taught with this source today. The biographies of Hawaiian-historical figures that are the basis for student and community research are almost solely derived from English­ language sources. These resources continue to form a significat portion of our new work. This argument is furthered by the understanding that history is, by far, not only produced in the halls of academia. Consumers of history today get their product from magazine articles, television and film. museum and historical place tours, the internet and many other places. Very little of this history is sourced with a historiography that is inclusive of the vast archive that exists in Hawaiian language. This thesis seeks to make blatant the repercussions of ignoring that archive and ask why it is still allowed to vii happen. It will show that within the prolific archive of Hawaiian-language material is testimony that contradicts long-held understandings of certain events. It will use two case studies. One of these describes an event from the late-nineteenth century and follows a trail of exclusion and preferenced voice that results in a universally accepted false history of that event. A second modern example of exclusion details how the process that was built and supported in the past has given us a faulty historiography that continues to be used to produce exclusionary histories that very much affect our present. Note on orthography: In this text I follow commonly accepted modern use of diacritical marks in Hawaiian words and names except in quoting original sources that did not contain them and in the case of showing respect to Mrs. Mary Kawenaulaokalaniahiiakaikapoliopelekawahineaihonua Pukui who made known the preference that her name be written without them. Note on translation: All translations within this thesis are mine except within the "Mele / Oli" section of the Survey of Archive where I have left intact the translations within the archive file: translator as noted. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................i v Abstract............................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ....................................................................................................................xii Preface ............................................................................................................................ xiii Chapter I: What's Missing? Survey of Archive .................................................. .1 A. NOpepa 'Olelo Hawai·i ...................................................................................... .3 Appropriation of the New Technology ....................................................... 5 A Change in Representation ........................................................................8 Alternate Hawaiian-Language View ...........................................................9 Summary of Examples from the Hawaiian-Language Newspapers .........12 Examples ............................................................................ 13 B. Leka 'Olelo Hawai·i .......................................................................................... 14 Kapi'olani-Kalaniana'ole Collection ......................................................... 15 Henriques Collection ................................................................................. 16 LiIi'uokalani Manuscript Collection .......................................................... 17 Leka 'Olelo Hawai'i mai nii Kiihuna Kalikiano ................................