First Contacts in Polynesia: The Samoan Case (1722–1848) Western Misunderstandings about Sexuality and Divinity

Abstract

's familiarity with Samoan studies (colonial history, political science) was of great help to me. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr Bruce Harding, Research Associate, who was kind enough to take a deep interest in my Samoan studies and who offered to undertake the heavy task of editing the awful Frenglish of the first draft of almost the whole book, and of designing, together with Moana Matthes, the cover. In all matters his generosity was beyond imagining. Many thanks to Moana Matthes for her hospitality towards the incoming scholars, as the administrative officer with responsibility for the Centre: it was much more than administrative hospitality, it was, every day, friendship and hospitality in the 'Pacific way'. My special thanks go to The Journal of Pacific History, Brij Lal, Peter Hempenstall, and Karen Nero who made possible the publication of this study, and to the various people who, in addition to Dr Harding, helped with translating and editing; in France, Karin Johnson-Sellato who did a preliminary editing of Part One and carefully translated into English the quotations from Lafond de Lurcy and from Dumont d'Urville; in Canberra, Dr Stephanie Anderson who translated chapter 9, and parts of chapter 10 and the Conclusion, all of which I had written in French, and then edited the whole final manuscript before it went to the JPH board; Jennifer Terrell for the final checking and formatting.

The “Fateful Hoaxing” of Margaret Mead

“…The now obvious problems in conducting, reporting, and interpreting the interviews with Fa'apua'a were dismissed by Freeman as he continued to assure bis audience about tbe accuracy of Fa'apua'a's memory, her role as Mead's principal informant, and the unassailable cbaracter of her sworn testimony about Mead. When Gôté, Orans, and Tcherkézoff published tbeir critiques of the hoaxing argument (Gôté 1994:25-29, 2000fl, 2000b, 2000^ Orans 1996:90-100, 2000Tcherkézoff 2001), Freeman responded swiftly and sharply, while keeping the problems v^ath Fa'apua'a's testimony to bimself (2000fl, 2000b, 2001). Tbe interviews were filed away and, contemplating the significance of the boaxing argument, he observed "tbat the 'youthful jollity' and 'wanton wiles' of two high-spirited young Samoan women could have led to such an outcome is one of the more bemusing marvels of twentieth century anthropology" (Freeman 1999:162).…”

“…This is quite understandable from an emic perspective. Since tbe eigbteentb century the West has cherished romantic images of Polynesian sexuality (see Tcherkézoff 2004), and in 1928 Mead gave these preconceptions scholarly credence, depicting Samoa as a land devoid of sexual anxiety and inhibition (just as Robert Flaberty in 1926 bad provided suggestive visual images for such notions in his carefully staged film Moana). However, Samoans are mostly discomfited by sucb perceptions.…”

“…For this reason, there has been no independent verification of Freeman's interpretation of their overall content by other scholars. Although there has been discussion of the one published section from the first interview by James Côté (1994Côté ( ,2000c, Martin Orans (1996,2000, Serge Tcherkézoff (2001), and myself (Shankman 2009b), previously unexamined material from the first interview, as well as the other two interviews, suggests that much of what we thought we knew about this part of the Mead-Freeman controversy has been based on Freeman's misrepresentation of Fa'apua'a and her testimony.^ In retrospect, had Freeman published or otherwise made available the entire first interview from 1987, the hoaxing argument might never have gained the widespread acceptability that it has.…”

Science, Voyages, and Encounters in Oceania, 1511–1850

“…Anne Salmond (1991Salmond ( , 1997 probed the double entendres of local and imperial stories in Aotearoa New Zealand, adding sustained archival research to her deep expertise in Māori language, ethnography, and oral histories. Serge Tcherkézoff (2008) did much the same with respect to '"first contacts"' in Samoa. Salmond (2003:xx-xxi) subsequently charted the 'impact of Polynesia' on Cook in the course of 'cross-cultural encounters, in which Europeans and Pacific Islanders alike were historical agents'.…”

Museum Performativity and the Agency of Sacred Objects

“…Similarly, the encyclopaedic museum approach is also related to the development of human science and research of the unknown "others", with specific interest in so-called primitive cultures, whose sacred objects and human remains were usually held in private collections during "the cabinet of curiosities" period that can be traced back to the 16 th century (Hall, 1997;Delbourgo, 2007;Curtis, 2012;Knell, 2012). Thus, upon a historical review (Peiser, 2005;Tcherkézoff, 2008;Young, 2012;Seelenfreund & Mardones, 2018), we could argue that, while some native cultures such as the Rapa Nui were "discovered" or allegedly first contacted by Europeans such as Jacob Roggeveen in 1722, universal museums like the British Museum were being established (1753). Nonetheless, it was not until 1868 that both parties crossed fates in a deeply colonialist relationship, when the crew of the English frigate H.M.S.…”