Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 15, Number 9, 1 September 1998 — Art Attack [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Art Attack

Hawai'i Convention Center at the heart of yet another controversy

By Rocky Jensen. N a t a I I e Jensen and Hale Naua III BUOYED BY Beverly Creamer's June 1 Honolulu Advertiser article, "Art in Contention," alluding to the absence of Native Hawaiian art in the Hawai'i Convention Center, we expected Joan Rose's June 7 critique to include the history of the bias and prejudice behind that "artful snub." Ron Yamakawa, manager of the Art in Public Places Program, has said, "People are going to eomplain about whatever they're going to eomplain about." This statement was certainly directed to Hawaiians - their exclusion from Hawai'i's art scene has been a problem since the ineepūon of the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. The careless remark confirms a cultural insensitivity long supported by the power structure behind the arts foundation. This unpardonable attitude, a bane in recognizing the creative genius behind contemporary Hawaiian art, has eontrolled the commissioning of state-funded art in favor of the non-native.

Led to believe that Rose's critique would eome down heavy on "possibly the worst eolleeīion of art commissioned by the SFCA," we instead found she pandered to the ego of 1 1 of the 13 non-native artists and skirted the issue that has so incensed the Hawaiian community. It doesn't matter how well the art was rendered. What is important is that the artists commissioned had the arrogance to create from an exclusive cultural perspective. Our greatest problem as Hawaiians is making others understand that our experiences did not happen in a Westem or Oriental context, but in a very different reality. Unfortunately, our culture continues to be erroneously plagiarized, creating violenee and harm to our creative progress, our development as artists and to the delicate halanee of the Maoli psyche. That Kuraoka so callously amalgamated a mural with his one-dimensional interpretation of our very sacred Kumulipo is inexcusable; Shige Yamada's statue offering Kane's "water of life" is profane; and Ladislaus' implication that Hawaiians "have forgotten (their) inheritance" is an affront.

Non-native artists throughout the state have made their living and careers through blatant cultural plagiarism. Blind prejudice has been a detriment to native participation from the beginning of the cultural clash. The state, worried that it would not fare well artistically in the overall naūonal consensus on possibly the most important state commission to date, cavalierly handed our ✓

pnvilege to others. Because stories from the host culture would f be the main subject, the host culture should have been approached separately and special considerations made. Having walked this talk for the last 30 years, we i find the excuses intoler- 3 able. Hawaiian artists are 1 creating on all levels. We are in this world to j tell the history of our origin, ancestors and land. Unless the state | and the arts foundation find a way of understanding our privilege, See ART ATTACK on page 21

HE/ object of some ™ criticisim is this depiction of Kāne, the god of life and fresh water, at the I entrance to K the Hawai'i K Convention Center.

ART ATTACK

From page 20 the further adulteration of our indigenous culture will mark the end of our "songs of origin" - songs that only we have the right to tell, songs that represent the soul of these islands. This is a growing eoneem throughout the United States and Canada. Laws have been passed to protect indigenous art forms and philosophy. We urge all Native Hawaiian artists to speak up in protest of the use

and abuse of our privilege. Editor's note: Sculptor Rocky Jensen just completed a memorial to Hawaiian military casualtiesfor the U.S. Army Museum in Waikīki. His daughter Natalie recently exhibited her photo eollection "Daughterof Haumea" at the Volcano Art Center. Both Jensens belong to Hale Nauā III, a society of Hawaiian artists. M