A Möbius Strip of knowledge

by on 週四, 24 三月 2011 8506 點擊 評論
(0 得票數)

This article below is Grant McCall's full paper: Mapping and unmapping the Pacific –nesias. Thoughts to turn over on a flowing Möbius Strip of knowledge. The paper was prepared to accompany the speech he gave on Feb.16th at National Central Library, Taiwan.

Alternative (for readers in China)

One of the most curious phenomenon in the physical world is the mathematical and mysterious Möbius Strip or Band, named after the 19th century German mathematician and astronomer, August Ferdinand Möbius.

I use the Möbius Strip as a metaphor to look at how we divide/map the world and what this means for the Pacific as the world’s largest body of water.

As an anthropologist, I am asked often about human universals; what is it that we have found that exists in all human societies. Most people say that something identifiable as the “family”, a system of socially recognisable relationships of an intimate kind that serves as the core of a social order; on a practical level for the raising of children and on an emotional one for the provision of personal identity.

Another feature of human life that is just as universal and, probably, predates a complex structure such as the family is the human drive to classify, to divide the world of experience and knowledge into categories that that have cultural meaning, often sanctioned value. Indeed, it may be that the most salient characteristic of the human brain is that it is a differentiating machine. The most systematic treatment of this drive to classification was by the late French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss in his Les structures élémentaires de la parenté (1949)[1], La pensée sauvage (1962)[2] Anthropologie structurale (1996)[3] amongst many other publications. Whilst some of my colleagues have questioned some of the detail of Lévi-Strauss’s work, his central point about classification and its importance remains. This led some supporters to propose that Lévi-Strauss had discovered Homo classificans, the classifying human.

People take their classification systems very seriously, whether they be racial categories or food preferences; what is alive and what is not; how the elements of the world are related. Love had been lost and wars have been fought to defend cherished classifications and so it is with that most political of the arts (and sciences), map making.

Let’s start with mappa mundi or how the planet we inhabit is structured.

In English and other European languages, we call our planet “Earth”, referring to the dry land on which most of us live. As a “nissological”[4] point, any portrayal of our Earth shows that over 60% of the surface area is not land[5], but water. These waters flow around the dry land continuously and without division, much in the way that the Ptotolomaic geographers mapped it over 2000 years ago.

The seas themselves are not divided into any particular number, but are one body of water, with complex systems of relations, including the Möbius Strip shaped flow of cold and warm currents, simultaneously along the same path, but in opposing directions, on the top the warm water and on the bottom of the same strip, cold water, in continuous movement. Oceanographers call this movement the Atlantic “meridional overturning circulation (MOC)” or “Thermohaline Circulation” (See e.g. Schmittner, Chiang & Hemming 2007)[6].

If we take the common definition of “island” as “land surrounded by water”, then all human beings are Islanders, a fact that few Mainland dwellers would feel comfortable to recognise in their view of the world and their place in it.

Just as we humans have incessantly divided the land into continents, tribal territories and, since the 17th century, States[7], so the waters of the world have their conceptual and political divisions into oceans and seas. Everyone knows and accepts the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans, but agreement is more difficult on politically motivated zones of influence such as “the Chilean Sea” of the South Pacific or the naming of the waters and claiming of the islands between Korea and Japan, not far from the site of our conference.

So, we come to the Pacific Ocean and how people divide and understand it.

If we accept the Requieremento of Vasco Nuñez de Balboa of 1521, who claims to have been the first European to behold this vast feature of water – one-third of the surface of the Earth – then all of it is the possession of Spain, all lands within in and all lands on which it touches! Indeed for two centuries few other European nations were regular travellers across those vast Pacific waters (e. g. Spate 2004)

Claims to Chinese naval exploits notwithstanding (Menzies 2008, 2009), the humans who first gazed covetously on the Pacific and who classified it initially were the inhabitants of coastal and insular Asia, including Taiwan. It was not long before those courageous explorers decided to set sail and move from island hopping to oceanic exploration and settlement, perhaps 4-5000 years ago, maybe even longer (See Bellwood, Fox & Tryon 2006) . The dates of their sailing may be discussable, but their navigational skills are palpable.

We do not have records of how these early Oceanic explorers divided the Pacific over which they so competently travelled, but we can imagine that their mapping concerned, both water and wind currents that were the propulsion of their sturdy ancient craft. We can see how more recent Pacific folk combine current, wind and destination in the famous Micronesian stick charts, used even in recent times in the sailing academies of the Carolinian Islands, such as Satawal[8] and neighbouring places, encompassed by the modern Federated States of Micronesia.

Sticks charts show wind and water directions, with shells standing for landing places. Other versions of this show directions from the starting place of the navigator, with destinations spread out in a circular array, each named. One of the great lacunae in our knowledge of the Austronesian Pacific came about with the death of a Polynesian navigator-priest, Tupaia (Druett 2010) on James Cook’s first voyage to the Pacific (1768-1771). His chart as written down by Joseph Banks and Cook, survives only as a fragment in the Beaglehole Library in Wellington, New Zealand, never completed. Had Tupaia not died on the way to England, he could have told us much more how he knew the location of more than 5,000 landing places around the Pacific, according to Banks and Cook.

Whilst Spanish galleons ranged from Callao to Manila to Acapulco in their trading circuit, they did little to collect, much less classify, the diverse cultures they happened to encounter. Antonio Pigafetta’s (Pigafetta 1994) notes on his sixteenth century voyage with Magellan’s fleet often involved acute observations of the Pacific’s original inhabitants, but there was little follow up to this until the competitive voyages of empire, exploration and exploitations of the (especially late) 18th century.

It was a Frenchman, Jules-Sébastien-César Dumont d’Urville, who first attempted to classify the diversity of Pacific Islands as they are commonly understood today (Tchérkezoff 2003). His scheme divided the Oceanic world into four great culture areas that were true to the geographic beliefs of the day: that the land on which a person lived influenced how they lived and thought. So, a “Polynesian” coming from many islands would think differently and have a culture different from someone who came from, say, “Micronesia”, a place of small islands. Perhaps the furthest development of this scheme was Marshall Sahlins’s link between island size, resources and social organisation in his pioneering Social stratification in Polynesia (Sahlins 1955). He extended this further in a later article where he proposed that Polynesia and Melanesia, owing to their  resource base, had different forms of leadership. Polynesia has inherited, hierarchical chiefs (such as “Ariki”), whilst the more egalitarian and resource blessed Melanesia had the concept of “Big Man”, or leader who arose owing to his own qualities (Sahlins 1963).

Since the 1980s, there have been an increasing number of scholars (e.g. Thomas 1989) who have questioned the now tri-partite division of Melanesia, Polynesia and Micronesia, most particularly the split between Melanesia and Polynesia.

It seems to me, though, that there is a very real division in the Pacific, but it is not based on geography, but history: specifically colonial history: it is a linguistic one.

I propose that our current map of the Pacific is divided according to dominant metropolitan language into six great divisions or –nesias:

Anglonesia (English speaking and writing)

Franconesia (French speaking and writing)

Malaynesia (Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines)

Nipponnesia (Japanese speaking and writing)

Sinonesia (Chinese speaking and writing)

Hispanonesia (Spanish speaking and writing)

These great languages overlay the 1500 or so indigenous tongues of the region, roughly a quarter of the existing communication systems today, but spoken by only around one percent of the world’s population.

Hispanonesia was the first imposition in historic times, pressing European Spanish on the Austronesian original inhabitants of Guam. After two centuries of sailing their galleons to and fro across the Pacific, the Spanish interest waned as did the language in the Philippines and elsewhere. In those areas, there was a short period of Germanonesia (also in New Guinea) that persists only in scholarly literature today.

Later, in the 18th century notably, English came by canon and Bible, establishing both colonies of exploitation and colonies of residence in the Pacific region. Numerically, both in terms of places and numbers, Anglonesia prevails as the common Pacific Island metropolitan language of the educated and the scholarly.

Franconesia was late in occupancy in the Pacific Islands, possibly owing to Napoleonic ambitions in Europe, but that France fitted around claims made already by Britain to produce a linguistic patchwork, the two overlapping in the famous case of the “condominium” of Vanuatu, formally called New Hebrides.

Nipponnesia continues in terms of a scholarly interest in the Trust Territories Japan had before World War II in the Pacific Islands, where they administered what are called today Palau, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia.

Sinonesia is represented principally where we are today, Taiwan, the location of the Austronesian home bases is. A considerable amount of scholarship is produced in Chinese and there is, of course, the famous and well-designed Museum of Prehistory in Taitung with its superb galleries of Austronesian studies.

My point in discussing this metropolitan linguistic mapping is that not only does it make scholarly connections difficult to establish and maintain, but that even news and current affairs of this divided Pacific basin do not circulate between the -nesias.

The example of this is from my own work: I live in Anglonesia and regularly read in English. But I have done much of my work in Franconesia and, especially, Hispanonesia, the latter being Rapanui, as the people of Easter Island call their land, themselves and their language.

As is the case with the other –nesias, there is a good deal of scholarly material published in Spanish that passes unknown to scholars in the rest of the Pacific. This is so especially of publications from Chile itself, where books and journals do not normally circulate outside that South American country. That is not to say that it is not possible to obtain those books in Chile: they are freely available, but in limited quantities and rarely for export.

Coupled with Hispanonesia’s scholarly isolation from speakers of languages other than Spanish, is the separation through news and current affairs. Here, Hispanonesia is far from the other –nesias, even though many periodical from Chile are online, such as El Mercurio, possibly the world’s oldest Spanish language newspaper, founded in 1827 (http://www.elmercurio.cl).

One of the most famous Islands in the world is Rapanui, as the people of Easter Island call themselves, their language and their land[9]. The moai or megalithic stone busts that dot the landscape amount to about a thousand, at various stages of completion. The image of the moai is well-known as a symbol of the exotic “tiki” culture, even for people who have no idea from where it comes (Kirsten 2003). If we continue down that path, whilst there are many millions who would recognise the moai, there were would many millions who would know about Rapanui, but would have no idea that it has been a part of Chile since 1888.

There is a considerable scholarly literature on Rapanui, most of it not in Spanish, with explorers making a point to visit the place since Spanish (Gonzalez 1770), English (Cook 1774) and French (La Pérouse 1786) expeditions travelled there to inspect the place that even then was starting to inspire wonder.

But Hispanonesia blocks unintentionally contemporary events on the island, since that all news, quite naturally, is published in Spanish. For example, since the middle of last year, Rapanui have been occupying government buildings and the privately owned Hotel Hanga Roa. There has been some coverage in the Chilean press and some small notes in overseas publications. Mostly, though, the ins and outs of that conflict have gone un-noticed outside Hispanonesia in spite of a vigorous campaign by supporters of the Islander protest for their land.

The dispute goes back to the beginning of the relationship between Rapanui and Chile, in 1888 and follows through a series of inexorable steps to the present day. When Chile annexed Rapanui, both sides had a different understanding of what was taking place. The Rapanui thought that Chile was going to establish a Protectorate over their home to keep it safe from the marauding slavers that had attacked the place a little over two decades before. The Chileans thought they were acquiring a colony and joining the ranks of important nations that had such overseas territories to bolster their prestige.

From and before, the Rapanui continued their own form of government until their (elected) king was assassinated by Chilean commercial interests in 1900. Those same commercial interests tried to claim that they were the only true owners of Rapanui and the whole matter came to a Chilean Government commission in the 1930s when to protect the islanders and their lands, the whole island was set down as being the property of the state “until such time as the true owners can make their claims” (Vergara 1939).

For much of the 20th century, the Rapanui were unable to leave their island without Chilean permission. In fact, they were unable to leave their village in a corner of the island. Whilst the inscription of all land on Rapanui was done to protect the island and its people, governments and administrators took it to be a literal truth, leading to the virtual enslavement of the Rapanui and their imprisonment on their lonely island in Hispanonesia, far from the contemporary eyes of the world. Some of this opening up occurred with the visit of the expedition led by Thor Heyerdahl in 1955-6 (Heyerdahl 1958). But it was the education of Rapanui in Chile that taught them that what was happening in their land was not what happened in the rest of Chile: that their rights were being denied and as a result, there was a revolt against the Chilean Naval authority that had been ruling them for so long. The result was that Rapanui became an integral part of the Chilean state and the rights enjoyed by Chilean citizens on the Mainland came to what people began to call “Oceanic Chile”, again another reference that is unknown outside Hispanonesia.

With enthusiasm, Rapanui in 1966 welcomed a secular school (to replace the Catholic Church operated one) and a variety of Chilean government institutions, including the first commercial hotel, that was operated by the government to promote tourism. The Rapanui were excited by what was happening and when various Chilean government institutions asked for a piece of land on which to establish their offices that would bring benefits, Islanders agreed, although no money changed hands. The Rapanui were scarcely aware of property rights as they had been isolated on their lonely place for such a long time (1888 to 1966, under Chilean rule). There was no concept of how long such an arrangement might last or what might be the long-term benefits or disadvantages.

One of those plots was allocated in 1971 for a government owned and operated hotel, part of a chain of such establishments throughout Chile to promote tourism in remote areas. Popularly known as the HONSA (from the acronym in Spanish for “National Hotels – HOteles Nacionales Sociedad Anonima) it was the largest and most luxurious establishment on the island for a few years, until Rapanui entrepreneurs were able to gather capital and build even larger and grander properties on their own or traded/purchased land from other Rapanui.

In the Easter Island Law (Nº 16,441) brought into force in June 1966 giving Rapanui its special place in Chile, there is a strict provision that no one except a Rapanui may own, much less sell land on the island.

The smooth flow of development was interrupted in Chile by a bloody military coup on 9 September 1973 that turned the country upside down and inside out as what was legitimate citizen activity became forbidden criminal acts, punishable by imprisonment, torture and often death.

In the course of this turmoil and following a neo-liberal economic policy that the State should own as little as possible, the national hotel chain was sold to private interests in 1978. Chile’s oldest and most prestigious newspaper, El Mercurio, details what happened:

The history of the lands protested against the Hotel Hanga Roa

The Hotel Hanga Roa, the main and most luxurious on the island, is going through a reconstruction and renovation since December 2007. With an investment of 30 million dollars, the entrepreneur Christoph Schiess hopes that his establishment will answer the requirements of the most demanding tourists in the world.

The Hito family protest the ownership of the land. Their spokesperson, Verónica Hito, notes that in 1969 her grandmother Verónica ceded that piece of land to Corfo[10] in exchange for the construction of a house, with the proviso that when she died, the plot should return to her clan as an inheritance.

In 1979, Corfo sold the land to a private party, Hugo Salas[11], who in 1990 passed it over to Hotelera Panamericana[12]. This latter, when it associated with the Schies [family] group, transferred the property to the current owners. The Hito family affirms that according to the Indigenous Law[13] land ownership transfers only can be made between Rapanui, so that the sale by Corfo to Salas suffers from a legal error. El Mercurio 09 September 2010: C8

Land tenure on Rapanui, along with the uncontrolled admittance of Chilean citizens who wish to benefit from the 70,000 or so tourists who come to Easter Island each year, has been the subject of complaints and petitions since the 1970s, shortly after the place’s freedom of 1966. There have been numerous commissions of enquiry from various levels of government and promises to fix these problems but, then, the status quo prevails and nothing seems to happen. Just after the large and well-attended solar eclipse on Rapanui on 11 July 2010[14], anger began to mount at the lack of government action and Islanders staged a peaceful occupation of government buildings whose lands are in dispute and, most especially, the Hotel Hanga Roa as a focus for resentment, especially by the Hito family.

As the months moved on, there was little in either the Hispanonesian Chilean, much less the world press, about the occupations. And there was nothing much either about the build up of police troops on Rapanui. On 6 December 2010 in the early hours, police troops attacked the Rapanui protesters, firing rubber bullets and swinging batons, under orders, ultimately, of the newly elected conservative President of Chile, Sebastian Piñera Echenique, a wealthy businessman who approved fully of the police action as upholding “public order”, as quoted on the Chilean radio station, Cooperativa on 7 December[15]. Police numbers continued to increase with reinforcements as the occupied places were surrounded by the troops, threatening further and even more brutal action. On 29 December, there was further police charging of occupied places, reported in videos, mostly in Spanish, but on such websites as YouTube and Facebook.

There is one particularly elegant and informative video lasting but 4 minutes, twenty seconds that incorporates historical and legal documents with the Schiess plans for renovation of their illegally acquired property[16], but it is in Spanish, the language of Hispanonesia.

At the moment, the Hito family cowers in their occupation of the Hotel Hanga Roa, surrounded by armed police, barricading  the place, so that no one (and nothing) can go either in or out.

There are a good deal more details that I could include, but I wanted to present this concrete example of how important and dramatic events can be obscured and hidden owing to the existence of the –nesias of today’s Oceania. There is no doubt that human rights are being violated, as members of the Chilean Congress have declared in their chambers and the Chilean press has proclaimed loudly, not to mention many sympathetic Chilean citizens, but it is closed to anyone not speaking and reading Spanish, behind the barrier of Hispanonesia.

The divide into the –nesias is not forever and it is not something that we cannot penetrate, whether it be for scholarly or social reasons.

At conferences such as the one we are attending it is possible to bridge the –nesias; for us to discover the complexity of Oceania today and to exchange ideas across –nesia barriers. The organisers and sponsors of this conference about “Mapping and unmapping the Pacific” are to be congratulated as they are moving in the direction of establishing links; indeed, of changing the barrier –nesia map to a flow of information and knowledge throughout the Oceanic Continent.

Just as the waters of Oceania and, indeed, the world, flow freely as a Mobius-like ribbon “conveyer belt” around the globe, so will conferences such as the one we are attending serve to power a conveyer belt of knowledge and understanding, moving our consciousness to a new vista of how interconnected all of us really are.


Bellwood, Peter, James J. Fox & Darrel Tryon, eds. The Austronesians. Historical and comparative perspectives. Canberra, Australian National University epress. URL: http://epress.anu.edu.au/austronesians/austronesians/pdf_instructions.html

Bryden, Harry L, Hannah R. Longworth & Stuart A. Cunningham. 2005. “Slowing of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 25º N”. Nature 438 (1 December): 655-657

Cutler, A. Claire. 2001. "Critical Reflections on the Westphalian Assumptions of International Law and Organization: A Crisis of Legitimacy", Review of International Studies 27: 133–150.

Druett, Joan. 2010. Tupaia, Captain Cook’s Polynesian navigator. London, Praeger.

El Mercurio. 2010. Historia de los terrenos que reclaman al Hotel Hanga Roa”. El Mercurio (Seccion Nacional), 9 September. P. C-8.

Heyerdahl, Thor. 1958. Aku Aku. The secret of Easter Island. London, Allen & Unwin.

Kirsten, Sven A. 2003: The Book of Tiki. Cologne, Taschen.

Lévi-Strauss, Claude 1996. Anthropologie structurale. Paris, Plon.

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1949. Les structures élémentaires de la parenté. Paris, Presses universitaires de France.

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1962. La pensée sauvage. Paris, Plon.

McCall, Grant. 1981. Rapanui. Tradition and survival on Easter Island. Honolulu, University of Hawai‘i Press & Sydney, Allen & Unwin.

McCall, Grant. 1993. Rapanui. Tradition and survival on Easter Island. Revised Second Edition. Honolulu, University of Hawai‘i Press & Sydney, Allen & Unwin.

McCall, Grant. 1994. “Nissology: The study of islands”. Journal of the Pacific Society 17, (Nº 2–3, Nº 63–64, October): 1–14.

McCall, Grant. 1996. “Clear confusion in a disembedded world: The case for Nissology”. Geographische Zeitschrift 84(2): 74-85.

Menzies, Gavin. 2008. 1421: The year the Chinese discovered America. New York, Harper Perennial.

Menzies, Gavin. 2009. 1434: The year a magnificent Chinese fleet sailed to Italy and ignited the Renaissance. New York, Harper Perennial.

Pigafetta, Antonio. 1994. Magellan’s voyage: A narrative account of the first circumnavigation. London, Dover Publications.

Sahlins, Marshall. 1955. Social stratification in Polynesia. American Ethnological Monographs Nº 29). Reprint New York, AMS Press, 1989.

Sahlins, Marshall. 1963. “Poor man, rich man, big man, chief: Political types in Melanesia and Polynesia”. Comparative Studies in Society & History 5: 285-303.

Schmittner, Andreas, John C. H. Chiang & Sidney R. Hemming. 2007. Ocean Circulation: Mechanisms and impacts. Geophysical Monographs Series 173. Washington DC, American Geophysical Union. URL: http://www.agu.org

Seed, Patricia. 1995. Ceremonies of possession: Europe’s conquest of the New World, 1492-1640. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Spate, Oscar. 2004. The Spanish Lake. Canberra, Australian National University e-press publication. http://epress.anu.edu.au/spanish_lake_citation.html

Tcherkézoff, Serge. 2003. “A long and unfortunate voyage towards the ‘Invention’ of the Melanesia/Polynesia distinction 1595-1832”. The Journal of Pacific History 38(2): 175-288.

Thomas, Nicholas. 1989. “The force of ethnology: Origins and significance of the Melanesia/Polynesia division”. Current Anthropology 30(1): 27-41.

Vergara, M. de la Plata, Victor M. 1939. La isla de Pascua. Dominacion y dominio. Santiago de Chile, Academia Chilena de la Historia

[1] Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1949. Les structures élémentaires de la parenté. Paris, Presses Universitaires de France.

[2] Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1962. La pensée sauvage. Paris, Plon.

[3] Lévi-Strauss, Claude 1996. Anthropologie structurale. Paris, Plon.

[4] Nissology is the study of islands on their own terms, a concept developed by McCall (1994, 1996).

[5] However scientifically accurate, I think there would be little support for re-mapping and re-naming our planet as “Water” or, more poetically, “Acqua”.

[6] Although not strictly relevant to this paper, there is evidence that this ancient geophysical engine of climate stability has slowed by 30% in the last few decades, no doubt a part of the climate change that is such a threat to small islands. See Bryden, Longworth & Cunningham 2005.

[7] Most scholars accept that the creation of the modern concept of the Nation State came out of the European Treaty (or Peace) of Westphalia (1648) and developments since (Cutler 2001).

[8] A useful summary biography of Mau Piailug provides an introduction to how Micronesian navigation became today’s experimental Polynesian one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mau_Piailug

[9] For details about Rapanui, its history and culture, please see McCall 1981; 1993

[10] CORFO, Corporacion de Fomento, or “Development Corporation” is a Chilean government entity with the mission to assist in the planning, finance and operation of new economic initiatives. The national hotel chain was one of those.

[11] Most people agree that he acquired this cheaply owing to his support for and friendship with the dictator at the time, Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, whose actions one questioned at risk of imprisonment or worse punishment. Pinochet came to power in a violent military coup in 1973 and was in office until voted out by referendum in 1990.

[12] A Chilean based hotel chain with branches throughout the country. Please see their website: http://www.panamericanahoteles.cl/

[13] The Ley Indígena or Indigenous Law (Nº 19,253) is designed to protect lands held by Chile’s indigenous population, divided into Mapuche in the south, Aymara in the North, urban dwelling descendants of those peoples and the Rapanui. The law established a special government body to deal with indigenous affairs called CONADI, an acronym for the Spanish Corporación Nacional de Desarrollo Indígena, National Corporation for Indigenous Development. Please see for a Spanish version: http://www.conadi.cl

[14] One of the many websites and video uploads dedicated to this event is http://www.rapanui-eclipse.cl/

[15] The URL for this story is http://www.cooperativa.cl/pinera-y-desalojos-en-rapa-nui--el-gobierno-debe-cumplir-su-obligacion-con-el-estado-de-derecho/prontus_nots/2010-12-07/162648.html. There are other news reports of the President’s satisfaction with the bloody events.

[16] For Spanish speakers, the source is http://www.polinesia-chilena.blogspot.com

最後修改於 週三, 08 一月 2014 17:34
Grant McCall

Grant McCall是一位社會人類學家,研究太平洋群島的民族與文化,特別是東波里尼西亞,從庫克群島的曼加伊(Mangaia)到復活島的Rapanui。他最近的研究是全球化、記憶和殖民主義的”Matamu‘a”研究──這個字在Rapanui是用來指涉歷史。

Grant McCall is a social anthropologist who studies the peoples and cultures of the Pacific Islands, most especially those of Eastern Polynesia from Mangaia, in the Cooks group, to Rapanui (Easter Island).
Research Areas Current research examines globalisation, memory and colonialism as is to be a book called Matamu‘a, the word the Rapanui use to mean history. The theoretical innovation in Matamu‘a is to link the global with the local using time structuration as the core device.
Future plans include the making of short ethnographic films for research and teaching as lived experience and an enquiry into the Pacific Islands as an “Oceanic Empire”.

網站: unsworks.unsw.edu.au





« 二月 2019 »
星期一 星期二 星期三 星期四 星期五 星期六 星期日
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28      

目前有 4315 個訪客 以及 沒有會員 在線上