Samuel Peralta
HAW 261 Spring Break paper on: Moʻokūʻauhau versus Colonial Entitlement in English Translations of the Kumulipo.
In the published work of Brandy McDougall called “Moʻokūauhau verses Colonial Entitlement in English Translations of the Kumulipo”, McDougallʻs intention is to inform the reader the vast difference between Beckwith translation of the Kumulipo and the translation of the kumulipo done by Queen Liliuokalani. McDougall identifies the fundamental issue she has between both translations, and brings attention to her points regarding colonial entitlement. It seems to me that the fundamental argument McDougall asserts (and with great reason) is that Liliuokalaniʻs translation has not been given its proper place in history and in contrast Beckwith's translation of the Kumulipo, as the “standard edition”, is an example of colonial entitlement. Liliuoklaniʻs translation of the Kumulipo is dense with cultural understanding and through the Kumulipo is able to trace her genealogy respectively to the throne. On the other hand Beckwith's translation is critically examined and explained by McDougall to be part of the problem when it comes to perpetuating colonial mentalities. McDougall highlights the sacredness and the rights to indigenous intellectual property and criticizes Beckwith's insensitivity to neglect those rights and sacredness of the Kumulipo in exchange for her own uses and intellectual endeavors.
“Nothing is sacred or forbidden where colonial entitlement is concerned; rather, colonial entitlement asserts itself as a kind of unapologetic academic freedom, and despite often being exercised at the expense of Indigenous peoples’ rights and sovereignty, colonial entitlement goes largely unquestioned by its wielder.” pg. 750
Colonial entitlement is a subtle and dangerous. It is subtle because most of the time it goes unnoticed by the common person and dangerous because it is becomes common. Colonial entitlement seeks to have its own way, by its own powers, without regards for the indigenous or sacred. One example of this can come from Beckwith's translation of the Kumulipo. Beckwithʻs translations secularize the sacred Kumulipo which latter is used to question the legitimacy of the biological, political, and spiritual connections to the Queen and the ʻāina. Furthermore McDougall questions Beckwith and her stance of loyalty to the Queen because of her lack of respect for the authoritative genealogy in her translation. This is a prime example where a “colonial” mindset takes indigenous intellectual property and uses it to divide the indigenous people against others. Whether intentional or not intentional, Beckwith manipulates, distorts, and even decimates holy text (according to McDougall). As Beckwith plants seeds of misinformation the cultural environment, authenticity, and Hawaiian people take the collateral damage.
“Finally, I compare both translations to show how they conflict with each other ideologically and politically. I argue that while Lili‘uokalani’s translation concretizes an active relationship to lived experience and political resistance, Beckwith’s translation asserts an objective distance from the act or effects of translating and aestheticizes to depoliticize.” pg. 751
Continuing on, McDougall stresses the importance of the Kumulipo in the genealogies of Aliʻi. Before the 1920ʻs there were no printing presses. Hawaii passed on its politics, science, sociology, biology, spirituality through the oral tradition. It is how generations and generations of the Hawaiian people have structured order from the chaos. There was a direct connection to the realm of the gods and kanaka. And there was order, hierarchy, and balance. Coded within the Kumulipo was the Moʻokūʻauhau (the geneology), this was the order, the authority in which Queen Liliʻuoklani used to solidify the status of the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi and her family line as the representatives of the Gods as the caretakers of this land. With this perspective Liliʻuoklani translates the Kumulipo.
“Lili‘uokalani emphasizes Indigenous historical and cultural preservation as her motives:
There are several reasons for the publication of this work, the translation of which pleasantly employed me while imprisoned by the present rulers of Hawaii. . . . The folk-lore or traditions of an aboriginal people have of late years been considered of inestimable value; language itself changes, and there are terms and allusions herein to the natural history of Hawaii, which might be forgotten in future years without some such history as this to preserve them to posterity. Further, it is the special property of the latest ruling family of the Hawaiian Islands.” pg. 755
In short Liliʻuoklani writes and establishes her descent from a long succession of monarchs who have ruled Hawaii that comes from a long history. She connects this idea during the time of the unlawful occupation, and drives the point to the occupiers; that Hawaii is a sovereign holy land and have always been so.
In contrast Beckwith's story is quite obscure. Some of the history highlighted in McDougalls paper regarding Beckwith's history was her history in Massachusetts as a child, parents that were both school teachers, and had family ties with the ABCFMʻs first missions to Hawaii in the 1820ʻs. Here McDougall quickly ties Beckwith with the overthrow through Thurston and the Bayonet constitution and the sugar plantation though her father and the purchasing of the plantation by Alexander and Baldwin. And if that wasnʻt enough Beckwith's ties with Castle and Cook becomes quickly known as well. Off of McDougalls paper Beckwith seems to have a disadvantage with cultural upbringing and understandings. Even more so, the list of people associated with Beckwith are ones that can be quite questionable when it comes to the benefit of the Hawaii Kingdom. Here I think McDougall drives her point of colonial entitlement even deeper within the characters who personified colonialism themselves (A&B, Castle and Cook, Thruston, etc.) making contributions to Hawaii's most sacred of text though Beckwith. Here I find myself at a pause. I would like to think that Beckwith was not a part of any colonial agenda, and her intentions and purposes of translating the Kumulipo were mostly justified. On the other hand could Beckwithʻs Kumulipo have been a catalyst for many of the unseen injustices and prejudices that have been overlooked by history? I can now see how that could be a possibility.
“I think the idea must be abandoned that these earlier genealogies represent a succession of generations rather than of events arranged. . . . Historical accuracy just does not exist as we understand the term, and the painstaking toil of our own scholars in calculating dates far into the past from these oratorical recitations must certainly be abandoned.” -Beckwith pg. 761
Maybe it is ignorance or a naiverity. But as Beckwith asserts that the Kumulipo is a simple metaphor and cannot be analyzed intellectually therefore does not have “historical accuracy”. With those words comes the colonial entitlement of their version of intellectualism as the superior.
A comparison of the translations:
McDougall reveals the Queens proficiency in Hawaii thought, understanding, and application of the Hawaiian language and translation. The translation and interpretation of Hawaiian can be quite complex and very puzzling. Dept of understanding in koana (word meanings and layers), places and chiefs, and even the many meanings of singular words come into the interpretation process that cannot be left to the layman. When it comes to the translation and interpretation of the Kumulipo McDougall suggest that the Queen's version represents the interpretation with cultural authenticity and genuineness. On the other hand, Beckwith's translation of the Kumulipo has its shortcomings as McDougall writes :
“Beckwith’s translations have been described in the Leib and Day bibliog- raphy as “awkward” and “literal,” and thus failing to fully convey the original Hawaiian poeticisms within the English language. In this way, her translation skills diminish the rhetorics and aesthetics of the Kumulipo, and therein distance readers and depoliticize the text.” pg. 767
As Beckwith learns to settle in Hawaii with a mindset of entitlement that comes from colonialism (perhaps), we have Queen Liliouklaniʻs version of the Kumulipo that comes down from a long succession of Aliʻi and the experience and understanding that has been bestowed on her by the Gods. In a debate of whoʻs Kumulipo translation would be the “better one”, after reading McDougallʻs paper I would highly consider none other than Hawaii's Queen to be the one who translates and interprets the mysteries and secrets of Hawaii though the Kumulipo.
Sources:
- Moʻokūʻauhau versus Colonial Entitlement in English Translations of the Kumulipo. By Brandy McDougall
- HWN 261 Lectures by Kiope Raymond
- www.hawaiianhistory.org (cosmology)
- HWN Political History Lectures by Kalekoa Kaʻeo (on colonialism)
