Abstract

On the morning of the 5 November 1881, my great-grandfather stood alongside 1588 other military men, waiting to commence the invasion of Parihaka pā, home to the great pacifist leaders Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi and their people. Having contributed to the military campaign against the pā, he returned some years later as part of the agricultural campaign to complete the alienation of Taranaki iwi from their land in Aotearoa New Zealand. None of this detail appears in any of the stories I was raised with. I grew up Pākehā (i.e., a descendant of people who came to Aotearoa from Europe as part of the process of colonisation) and so my stories tend to conform to orthodox settler narratives of ‘success, inevitability, and rights of belonging’. This article is an attempt to right that wrong. In it, I draw on insights from the critical family history literature to explain the nature, purposes and effects of the (non)narration of my great-grandfather’s participation in the military invasion of Parihaka in late 1881. On the basis of a more historically comprehensive and contextualised account of the acquisition of three family farms, I also explore how the control of land taken from others underpinned the creation of new settler subjectivities and created various forms of privilege that have flowed down through the generations. Family histories shape the ways in which we make sense of and locate ourselves in the places we live, and those of us whose roots reach back to the destructive practices of colonisation have a particular responsibility to ensure that such narratives do not conform to comfortable type. This article is an attempt to unsettle my settler family narrative.

Highlights

  • My great-grandfather, Andrew Gilhooly, was one of the 1589 men who invadedParihaka, in Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa), on the 5 November 1881

  • Acknowledging that privilege begs a final question: What is the nature of the obligation incumbent upon those of us who have benefited from colonisation? The politics of apology are necessarily an element of any response to that question

  • Buchanan (2012, 2018) has traced that history, identifying fully nine occasions on which the Crown has officially apologised for te pahua

Read more

Summary

A Tale of Two Stories

Acknowledging that privilege begs a final question: What is the nature of the obligation incumbent upon those of us who have benefited from colonisation? The politics of apology are necessarily an element of any response to that question. These initiatives have emerged from a constructive process in which Parihaka was closely involved, including in deciding upon the content of and ceremonial aspects surrounding the apology It did not meet all of the tests for a meaningful political apology (see Buchanan 2012; Thompson 2002) but it is an improvement on previous efforts. It would be contemptible were I to continue to peddle my ‘tacit silences’ (Connerton 2008); deeply offensive if I was to resist the incursions of the ‘big’ stories of colonisation on my ‘little’ one of settlement (Wright 2010; cited in Buchanan 2018) In this respect, perhaps critical settler family histories make best sense as a necessary but insufficient precondition to decolonisation; as ways of transforming people’s understandings of their family histories, the better to shine torches into the heart of colonial darkness.

Introduction
The Sound of Silence
From Kilteely to the Coast
Section 44
The Farm on the Opourapa Road
Parihaka A
The Politics of Forgetting
It’s a Long Way from Ballynagreenage 1
What Is Gained by Forgetting?
It’s a Long Way from Ballynagreenage 2
Of Power and Privilege
Findings
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call