Whale Rider

After watching Whale Rider, it struck me that the few reviews I'd seen had imposed narratives or labels on the film that didn't quite seem to fit. It's not that the narratives/labels were entirely wrong, but that they ironed out some of the plot's subtleties. Two examples:

• "Tradition" vs. "Modernity" (native culture vs. European culture, etc.). Interpreting the film's plot as a clash of cultures or even temporalities (in good Enlightenment fashion) doesn't really do justice to the central problem, namely, that there is no "traditional" culture as such on view here. Instead, we're in a world where the dominant language is English; where even relatively impoverished fishermen have basic modern technology, like televisions, telephones and automobiles; where everyone wears "European" clothing; and so forth. The traditional warrior accomplishments, like stick-fighting, have become the equivalent of sword-fighting or javelin-throwing, their functionality transformed into recreational activities and competitive sports. (In a comic moment of pointed equivalence, we see that Pai's uncle won a golfing trophy for his stick-fighting skills.) Moreover, if you pay attention to the peripheries of the film's inheritance plot, it appears that Pai's grandfather, Koro, seems to be the only person insisting on the male line of succession; indeed, Pai receives encouragement and assistance not just from her grandmother, but also from her uncle and the boy who, as it turns out, was her primary rival for the chieftaincy. In other words, Koro's "traditionalism" reacts against a society that is already well down the road to modernization; it's not a pure fount of native authenticity in a postcolonial European sea. While it doesn't make much sense to describe Koro's beliefs as fundamentalist in any serious way, they do share with fundamentalism the fear of "modernist cultural hegemony" (quote from linked page).

  While Koro's characterization is problematic--he's too unsympathetic most of the time for the viewer to really grasp his sheer desperation--he also serves as the film's linchpin. As the symbolism of the broken rope implies, Koro's intransigence when it comes to the chieftain's gender constitutes a rejection of both the past and his own culture. The first time the rope comes into play, Koro uses it to represent the interwoven nature of past and present, individual and society in Maori culture--but he immediately tosses his symbol aside when it breaks. Pai, by contrast, perceives that a broken rope can be knotted back together. Later, Koro will use a rope and a tractor in order to move a beached whale, but that rope breaks as well. This second instance is marked by an underlying irony: that Koro turns to modern technology (the tractor) rather than ancient wisdom in order to help the whale. In other words, Koro fails to distinguish between his own encyclopedic knowledge of tradition (which seeks to freeze it) and Pai's mystical ability to embody and live tradition in a new form. Or, to put it differently, Koro does not see how tradition might enter into dialogue with changing conditions, whereas Pai envisions tradition as a dynamic force. It's worth noting that Pai's ultimate demonstration of her worthiness, which the film represents as a new birth (not just the water imagery, but also the echo of her first vision as an infant), requires her to reverse the direction of the first Paikeia's journey.

• Feminism. That brings me to the next point. While there's an obvious feminist undercurrent to Pai's story, it doesn't function in the way that the word "feminist" might lead most audiences to think. Gender egalitarianism is only partly at issue here (of which more in a moment). While the new chieftain needs to a) master a number of technical and ritual skills (fighting, chanting), he must also b) demonstrate that he shares the first Paikeia's ability to forge verbal and emotional links with the whales. No-one can choose to possess all of the necessary abilities, which makes Pai's gender irrelevant on mystical rather than liberal grounds. Moreover, Pai seeks to be chieftain because she must, which is part of the film's implicit critique of a certain type of individualism. Her father is a rather cliched Romantic artist, a rootless and cosmopolitan "I"; even if the responsibility for his psychological trauma lies largely with Koro, the film nevertheless disallows such striving for autonomy. Instead, the film proposes gender egalitarianism as a solution for greater cultural unity, in which all members of society take on a share of the leadership responsibilities. The feminism on offer here, in other words, is oriented towards social- rather than self-development.
  

Comments

[chris graff]

if i want to cite you what is your name?