Hau’ofa, Epeli “Our Sea of Islands”, A New Oceania: Rediscovering Our Sea Of Islands, Suva, Fiji: The University of the South Pacific, 1993, pp.2-16. Print.
The text by Hau’ofa flesh’s out an argument against what used to be (and still remains somewhat) a common presumption that the Pacific nations are small and isolated. Hau’ofa explains how this way of seeing the Pacific is a relatively recent perspective formed through the boundaries imposed by imperialism. These limitations have no historical grounding, as prior to this they saw ‘Their world was anything but tiny’ (Hau’ofa 7). They believed they were connected and part of a larger sphere which included the ocean and heavens (Hau’ofa). This demonstrates the difference between identifying the pacific as ‘islands in a far sea’ compared to a ‘sea of islands’ – ‘Smallness is a state of mind’ (Hau’ofa 7). This important distinction serves a reminder that knowledge is often only a matter of perception.
History is determined by its successors. Knowledge is not absolute, rather, it sits within a particular context and often has self-involved motivation. As time goes on, the hierarchical relationships that produced certain conceptualisations become blurred. It becomes harder to trace back and identify the beginnings of suppression once it has been deeply ingrained as the dominant view.
The text by Hau’ofa flesh’s out an argument against what used to be (and still remains somewhat) a common presumption that the Pacific nations are small and isolated. Hau’ofa explains how this way of seeing the Pacific is a relatively recent perspective formed through the boundaries imposed by imperialism. These limitations have no historical grounding, as prior to this they saw ‘Their world was anything but tiny’ (Hau’ofa 7). They believed they were connected and part of a larger sphere which included the ocean and heavens (Hau’ofa). This demonstrates the difference between identifying the pacific as ‘islands in a far sea’ compared to a ‘sea of islands’ – ‘Smallness is a state of mind’ (Hau’ofa 7). This important distinction serves a reminder that knowledge is often only a matter of perception.
History is determined by its successors. Knowledge is not absolute, rather, it sits within a particular context and often has self-involved motivation. As time goes on, the hierarchical relationships that produced certain conceptualisations become blurred. It becomes harder to trace back and identify the beginnings of suppression once it has been deeply ingrained as the dominant view.
Hau’ofa, Epeli “Our Sea of Islands”, A New Oceania: Rediscovering Our Sea Of Islands, Suva, Fiji: The University of the South Pacific, 1993, pp. 2-16. Print.
James, Sarah Edith “Photography Between the Image & the Word: An American Index of the Hidden and Unfamiliar” The Deutsche Börse Photography Prize 2009, London, England: The Photographers’ Gallery, 2009, pp. 1-3. Print.
In relation to writing style, I thought you used a great rance of sentence length to stimulate the reader. What really caught my attention is the sentence "History is determined by its successors. Knowledge is not absolute, rather, it sits within a particular context and often has self-involved motivation". Straight to the point with solid reasons for your questions.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with your saying " History is determined by its successors. Knowledge is not absolute, rather, it sits within a particular context and often has self-involved motivation."
ReplyDeleteI once heard a history lecturer say that history is not the whole truth, but merely an apparatus for the winners of history to tell their fragmented story.
As you also mentioned, art is an agent to challenge perspectives and certain "truths", allowing for us to reframe and enable new understandings to emerge with critical awareness.