Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 Māori 370 – Māori and the Media Research Assignment | Semester 2 2013 Research Topic: Discussion of a relevant issue, analysis of relevant texts, or original research with audiences or producers of Māori media. What are the implications of the All Blacks’ use of Ka Mate on representations of Māori, Māori culture and New Zealand national identity? Rugby has a significant part in New Zealand (NZ) culture and has been described as a “national obsession, a fundamental part of the nation’s character and values, the raw material of the social fabric of society, and a national religion.” (Scherer and Jackson 4). Furthermore, NZ’s national rugby team, the All Blacks, has become a marker of NZ national identity. As Laidlaw argues, to most people outside of NZ, the All Blacks are New Zealand and New Zealand is the All Blacks (13). On the global stage, the All Blacks are known for their traditional pre-match performance of the haka, Ka Mate, and their performance of the Ka Mate haka has had great influence in shaping perceptions of Māori culture and NZ national identity. However, the intensification of the All Blacks’ corporate interests has led to the commercialisation, misinterpretation, misappropriation and abuse of the haka. Māori culture is ‘widely’ accepted as an integral part of NZ national identity and this is emphasised through the incorporation of Māori culture in the 2011 Rugby World Cup Opening Ceremony. However, there are significant 1 Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 concerns for such representation of Māori and Māori culture as there is a lack of control placed in Māori hands. Commitment to the recognition of the Ka Mate haka and of Māori culture as taonga is required, and the All Blacks play a significant role as ‘global ambassadors’ of NZ. It is important to first understand Māori participation in rugby and the way in which the All Blacks came to adopt the pre-match performance of Ka Mate. Laidlaw discusses the tensions between Pākeha and Māori, and argues that rugby is a point of convergence for Māori (14). He sees rugby as a healing force for the ethnic tensions; differences of race put aside for sport. Colonial forces suppressed Māori culture and to an extent, Māori were denied their Māori identity. However, there was a growing discourse of “colonial harmony,” with Māori involvement in rugby as proof of “assimilation, co-operation and racial harmony” (MacLean 14). Walker emphasises this and argues that “the ideology of unity and one-ness of Māori and Pākehā was used to deny the other-ness of the Māori identity” (42). This unity was displayed in the 1888- 1889 ‘Native’ Rugby team’s tour of Australia and Britain, the first national team to leave NZ. It was largely comprised of Māori players and this symbolised ‘colonial harmony’ and the success of British assimilation of the indigenous people (Hokowhitu 85). The haka was first performed during this tour and was an opportunity for NZ to “demonstrate its sporting prowess against its colonial masters” (Jackson and Hokowhitu 130). Despite the tensions and conflict between Pākehā and Māori back home, the performance of the haka by both Māori and Pākehā rugby players showed the unity of the two peoples and represented racial harmony (127). However, while the haka 2 Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 served as an expression of distinctive cultural identity, its part as an entertainment spectacle to attract British crowds reflected the misinterpretations of the meaning and purpose of the haka. The pre-colonial Māori society was portrayed as savages who were in need of civilisation and Māori were stereotyped as inherently physical and violent. While the relative success of Māori participation in sport fulfilled the stereotype of physicality, performances of the haka further perpetuated the aggressive savage warrior stereotype (Hokowhitu 87-89). The misappropriation of the haka is continued and intensified by the commercialisation of the All Blacks. With the professionalisation of rugby came the commodification of the All Blacks. The New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) sought global corporate relationships, the most significant formed in 1999 with Adidas (Scherer et al 53). The NZRU’s mandate was to globalise the All Blacks and sponsorship by a major multinational sporting company would facilitate the expansion of the All Blacks commercial potential. While the All Blacks brand is identified as a “global commodity sign,” the NZRU and Adidas stress their relationship as a ‘partnership’ as opposed to sponsorship or sporting property ownership (54). Adidas do not want to appear to be capitalising on the All Blacks, who passionate local fans consider a ‘public good’ (58). As discussed above, rugby is a significant part of NZ culture and the All Blacks are considered the pride of the nation. While Adidas does in fact commoditise the heritage, tradition and cultural identity of the All Blacks, by labelling their relationship with the NZRU as a ‘partnership’ they are able to mask their commercial mandate. Instead, Adidas focuses on their commitment to providing leading 3 Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 technology to the All Black players as well as financial support to the NZRU and NZ grassroots rugby. However, regardless of what Adidas terms its relationship with the NZRU as, the corporate relationship cannot be denied. Adidas are a multinational sporting company who capitalise on the All Blacks as an advertising platform. Adidas has commoditised the All Blacks in various ways. However of greatest significance and relevance is their use of the Ka Mate haka. The All Blacks have a “long-standing sporting legacy” (Scherer and Jackson 38). They are deep in heritage and tradition, and this is the value Adidas sees in the All Blacks. Corporate sponsors create advertisements that draw on historical moments and mythologised aspects of sporting tradition and heritage. Scherer and Jackson explain this re-imagining of national cultures, mythologies and traditions as ‘corporate nationalism’ as it capitalises on the collective identity and memory of a nation (39). Adidas is reliant on the myths of the All Blacks sporting history and this is illustrated by their use of the Ka Mate haka. While the All Blacks’ pre-match performance of Ka Mate is a “cultural tradition and long-standing ritual,” Adidas’ use of the haka is commercial appropriation of Ka Mate and exploits Māori culture (Scherer 45). This is shown in the television commercial, produced by advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi and released by Adidas in 1999 entitled “Black”. This commercial took various aspects of Māori culture, merging images of the All Blacks and Māori warriors performing Ka Mate. The haka is interspersed with dramatised high impact 4 Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 tackles, to capture the “raw power and intensity of the game” (46). According to industry documents, the commercial was designed as a “primal, scary ad.” Saatchi & Saatchi wanted to create an entertaining commercial spectacle of the All Blacks performing Ka Mate (46). The issue lies with the acceptance, by Saatchi & Saatchi, Adidas and the NZRU, of Ka Mate as a generic symbol of NZ national identity. The NZRU argue that Ka Mate is not owned by the NZRU or by the All Blacks, but rather by all New Zealanders (Scherer and Jackson 123). There is no recognition of Ka Mate as being composed by Te Rauparaha of Ngāti Toa. The NZRU no longer sees Ka Mate as a cultural element of a specific iwi, but rather simply as a “part of the collective heritage of all New Zealanders” (Scherer 45). Scherer argues that the haka has been “naturalised as a dominant cultural symbol of the national imaginary that mythically unites Māori and Pākeha in postcolonial NZ via the All Blacks” (47). He applies Stanley Fish’s term of ‘boutique multiculturalism’ to the on-going commodification of Ka Mate and Māori culture. Ka Mate has become a “generic signifier of NZ national identity” (Scherer 46). The NZRU may justify their use of Ka Mate by claiming it as being part of NZ’s common culture. However, there is difficulty in accepting this claim as there is a lack of understanding of Ka Mate and of Māori culture amongst New Zealanders. How can it be part of NZ’s common culture when it is misinterpreted; understandings based on the (mis)representations by the All Blacks? Furthermore, the misrepresentations of Māori culture form global perceptions of Māori. 5 Michele Qun-Yeo LEE 2992920 The continued commodification of Ka Mate reinforces the stereotypes of indigenous Māori as “violent noble savages” (Jackson and Hokowhitu 133). The dramatisation of the All Blacks as warriors, with tribal tattoos on their faces, ‘protruding their tongues,’ ‘bulging their eyes,’ performing a war dance and challenging their opposition, further reinforces global stereotypes of Māori. Scherer and Jackson discuss the ways in which stereotypical images of Māori exist as representations where non-Māori gaze on Māori (129). It is this decontextualised use of such images without knowledge and understanding of Māori culture. Those unfamiliar with Māori culture (global audiences, Pākeha and Māori included) would view the ‘Black’ commercial and understand the Ka Mate haka to be a war challenge. However, war dances are performed with weapons when warriors confront their enemy. Ka Mate is a ‘ngeri’ which is short haka to “stiffen the sinews, to summon up the blood” (Scherer and Jackson 143). Similarly, it is unlikely that the cultural meanings of movements in Ka Mate, including ‘pūkana’ and ‘whetero’ and the meanings of ‘moko’ that communicates mana, tradition and whakapapa, would be understood (130). Many New Zealanders do not understand the literal meaning of Ka Mate or that it originally had no connection with sport, but has become socially constructed as a part of NZ sporting identity (Jackson and Hokowhitu 129).