Toward the Trans-Indigenous Pacific: Islanding Perspectives

Abstract

81 Codex A Collaborative Review of Trans-­Indigenous: Methodologies for Global Native Literary Studies by Chadwick Allen InmemoriumofTeresiaTeaiwa(August12,1968–­March21,2017).Weshallremember her strength, the power of her words, and her infinite wisdom, which have shaped our visions of a trans-­Indigenous Oceania. We sweat and cry salt water, so we know that the ocean is really in our blood. —­ Epile Hau’ofa, “The Ocean in Us” Toward the Trans-­ Indigenous Pacific: Islanding Perspectives Hsinya Huang Chadwick Allen’s 2012 monograph Trans-­Indigenous proposes impressive tactics and practices for cross-­cultural comparative studies of Indigenous cultural and literary (con)texts, specifically from Maori and Native North American peoples, a project he encapsulates in the idea of the “trans-­ Indigenous.” As a response to contemporary debate on “transnationalism ,” “trans-­Indigenous” questions the construct of the “transnational,” “in its orthodox conceptions and in its typical attachments to dominant formations,” such as the U.S.-­based discipline of American studies, which “necessarily implies both a binary opposition and a vertical hierarchy of the Indigenous (always) tethered to (and positioned below) the settler-­ invader” (“A Transnational Native American Studies? Why Not Studies that are Trans-­ Indigenous?” 3). Replacing vertical Indigenous–­ settler (nation–­ state) relations with lateral Indigenous connections and challenging the borders of contemporary nation-­ states, Allen opens up the 82 Codex possibility of center-­to-­center conversations among Indigenous Nations and, ultimately, the possibility of a comparative critical methodology for global Indigenous literatures and arts. This review evaluates the success of Allen’s proposed methodologies and examines the ways to extend trans-­ Indigenous methodologies to new contexts, moving from Native American and Maori traditions to the broader context of debates surrounding global Indigeneity. In 2013, at the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association annual meeting in Saskatoon, Canada, Hsinya Huang, David Stirrup, and James Mackay, with Chadwick Allen as the commentator, presented a panel to acknowledge Allen’s breakthrough in global Indigenous studies. Allen’s rejection of transnational, (post)colonial, and multiethnic reading strategies in favor of Indigenous-­specific methodologies is explicitly framed in activist terms, providing powerful counternarratives and critiques to oppose the ideology and practices of colonial and imperial fencing and mapping. In addition, Allen emphasizes the mobility, continuity, flow, interactions, and solidarity among Indigenous peoples in global contexts, arguing along a similar line to Epeli Hau’ofa’s (2008) signature trope “our sea of islands” and Édouard Glissant’s (1990) “poetics of relations.” His logics also inform the revolutionary development for Native American and Indigenous studies advanced by Robert Warrior (2009) and others. In bringing Maori texts into his comparative framework, Allen furthermore challenges the spread of English-­ only ideology in relation to cultural imperialism and racial inequality. The cumulated effect of down-­to-­earth practice, close reading, and textual analysis is impressive, through which Allen recovers/interprets Indigenous genre, orature, linguistic mechanism, aesthetics, and technologies to subvert the writing culture of Euro-­American colonialism. Allen’s critical focus, however, falls within Indigenous literary studies in English. The limitation in his selection of comparative cases exclusively devoted to Indigenous literature in English runs the risk of reaffirming settler state logics. The panelists in “Transindigeneity? Assessing the Possibility of a Comparative Critical Methodology for Global Indigenous Literatures” moved beyond the specific English-­speaking settler colonial parameters of Allen’s Fourth World model and set it in the broader context of debates in Scandinavia, northern Russia, central and southern Africa, and Asia Pacific to examine how definitions of Indigeneity transform and become unsettled. They suggested replacing the essentialist appeal inherent to trans-­(as opposed to purely local) Indigenous discourse itself and bringing trans-­Indigenous studies into conversation with the growing interest in transcolonial cultural movement. Can we prompt more radical deviation from orthodox shadows of literature in English, taking Codex 83 into account, for instance, Indigenous inheritance in Scandinavia, Asia Pacific, and so on, as aforementioned? Nevertheless, this moving away from the English-­only ideology and practice can be a project of staggering proportions. How to implement the value of “trans-­ Indigenous” practically and manageably as we move beyond the English texts? We need to ensure that we ask important questions and seek answers within a framework of relevant issues. We...