‘I Have Māori in Me’: Shades of Commitment and Negotiation of Subjectivity in an Aotearoa/New Zealand School

Defiant Memory and the Infrastructure of Intimacy: The Thriving Homes of Māori Jews in Aotearoa, New Zealand

“…The idea of 'home' as a multidimensional space that is reconstituted by memories that express contradicting emotions in this paper focuses on the dimension of ancestral-familial connections with whakapapa that expresses kinship relationships. The great importance of whakapapa as remembered and lived relationship that make up a feeling of being 'at home' is supported by previous research that highlights affirmative identities, success and a sense of security for Māori groups (Doerr 2015;Houkamau 2011;Tamaira 2007;Te Rito 2007;Webber 2008Webber , 2011.…”

“…Thus in this paper I ask how this group of Māori deal and cope with racial tension. My investigation considers the increasing number of studies that demonstrate the contribution of the resurging interest in whakapapa and the growing recognition of the importance of whānau for the affirmation of the success and well-being of contemporary Māori in Aotearoa, New Zealand (Doerr 2015;Houkamau 2011;Tamaira 2007;Te Rito 2007;Webber 2008Webber , 2011. My analysis builds on the literature that acknowledges variation in Māori experiences based on diversity, which derives in part from a long history of intermarriage between Māori and non-Māori (Callister 2003;Wanhalla 2009;Webber 2008).…”

Introduction to the Special Issue, Commitment to Alterity and Its Disavowal: The Politics of Display of Belonging

“…Using the notion of performativity 'not as an act by which a subject brings into being what she/he names, but rather, as that reiterative power of discourse to produce the phenomena that it regulates and constrains (1993: 2),' Butler argues that individuals suggest meaningful categories to view the world through citing a particular matrix (regime) of difference (also see Meek & Messing 2007). Drawing on this framework, I have argued elsewhere (Doerr 2009) that experiencing multiple and competing regimes of difference allows individuals to choose among regimes of difference, creating metaregime awareness about their subject positions. There, one ceases to see one's subjectivity as the inevitable one; instead, one sees various possible subjectivities for oneself and chooses one or some from them in various contexts (also see Dufva & Alanen 2003;Heller 2005).…”

“…Much research in the 1990s, inside and outside anthropology, focused on the intersections of systems of representation (similar ideas are called in various ways such as the structure of difference by Wilk 1995, chain of signification by Hall 1985, schemata of classification by Bourdieu 1989, matrices of difference by Butler 1993, schemata of co-figuration by Sakai 1997, or regimes of difference by Doerr 2009. I use here the term 'regime of difference' to be consistent), especially race, class, and gender, and how those intersections inform and shape meanings of categories in each regime of difference (hooks 1989;1992;Roediger 1991;Crenshaw 1992;Frankenberg 1993;Lott 1995;McClintock 1995;Stoler 1995;Wiegman 1995).…”