Reflection One: Media and Race.
I struggled with ‘Daughters of the Dust’, it did not resonate and although it was quite beautiful and because of that, mesmerising, I did not understand it, the dialect difficult to comprehend and the narrative, unfamiliar (Dash, 1991). In response to this I attempted to decipher this text in two ways. Firstly, through transforming what I was seeing by placing it within a context that I felt I understood; a Maori history, a story of opressed people, one closer to home. Secondly, due to the lack of personal connection I analysed it as a film student; using what I was seeing on screen to unearth deeper themes, migration, cultural tensions, past and present.
I was aware this film was “not for me”, initially …show more content…
Discussing my own cultural identity is complex. Bell’s discussion of a sense of no cultural identity was a familiar feeling, initially (Bell, 147). This bothered me, in order to decipher my identity I considered my ancestors, birthplace and sense of belonging. Cultural identity exists as an individual and collective, in the past and present Kelly suggested that she never discussed culture or who she was, mine is intertwined with heritage(Ibid, 153) .
My father’s side has Scottish roots.
I am a Pakeha Settler according to Bell’s definitions. The concept of Routes was familiar, the historical and geographical journeys that my family has experienced (Ibid, 155) Some statements from Bell’s respondents resonated with me; Even, not knowing his culture and why it was different as well as Kim’s answer suggesting that “we were all . . . brought here” and intermingled, the idea that there is no one set culture was poignant (Bell, 154). Either way, both point to a lack of cultural ‘substance’ that they can identify with. The idea of ‘double orientation’ of the settler subject is relevant, New Zealand is my home, yet I was born in Australia and my ancestors are from overseas, Scotland, Poland, France, and other European places (Ibid,
I struggled with ‘Daughters of the Dust’, it did not resonate and although it was quite beautiful and because of that, mesmerising, I did not understand it, the dialect difficult to comprehend and the narrative, unfamiliar (Dash, 1991). In response to this I attempted to decipher this text in two ways. Firstly, through transforming what I was seeing by placing it within a context that I felt I understood; a Maori history, a story of opressed people, one closer to home. Secondly, due to the lack of personal connection I analysed it as a film student; using what I was seeing on screen to unearth deeper themes, migration, cultural tensions, past and present.
I was aware this film was “not for me”, initially …show more content…
Discussing my own cultural identity is complex. Bell’s discussion of a sense of no cultural identity was a familiar feeling, initially (Bell, 147). This bothered me, in order to decipher my identity I considered my ancestors, birthplace and sense of belonging. Cultural identity exists as an individual and collective, in the past and present Kelly suggested that she never discussed culture or who she was, mine is intertwined with heritage(Ibid, 153) .
My father’s side has Scottish roots.
I am a Pakeha Settler according to Bell’s definitions. The concept of Routes was familiar, the historical and geographical journeys that my family has experienced (Ibid, 155) Some statements from Bell’s respondents resonated with me; Even, not knowing his culture and why it was different as well as Kim’s answer suggesting that “we were all . . . brought here” and intermingled, the idea that there is no one set culture was poignant (Bell, 154). Either way, both point to a lack of cultural ‘substance’ that they can identify with. The idea of ‘double orientation’ of the settler subject is relevant, New Zealand is my home, yet I was born in Australia and my ancestors are from overseas, Scotland, Poland, France, and other European places (Ibid,