The Times on the Haka
November 28th, 2005 at 8:24 am by David FarrarA few days old but have to highlight this editorial in The Times which is not only upset over NZ getting the Rugby World Cup, but really does not like the Haka.
They say:
If a crazed thug drew a finger threateningly across his throat while screaming into someone
Related posts:
- Southland Times on the parliamentary fugitives
- Waikato Times endorses a delay
- Southland Times on Labour’s stop campaign
- Southland Times on Ministry for Children
November 28th, 2005 at 8:49 am
Two rules of Belt’s foreign policy:
1. Don’t judge the American people by their Government
2. Don’t judge the British people by their press
and by the way DPF…”and in last week’s news!”
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:01 am
Well actually I only saw the Editorial because the NZ Herald republished it a couple of days ago. I was surprised when I went after the source that it was now over a week old. SO Herald to blame again
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:12 am
I have no problem with the old Haka, but this new version is pathetic. The British press say the antics of the new Haka are grounds for arrest.
Vote:To me the way Tana Umanga preforms it, it looks like grounds for a trip to the nearest Mental Health Institution, with straight jacket fitted before arrival.
All the same congratulations on the win.
November 28th, 2005 at 9:18 am
(Sigh) And if you were walking down the street and someone decided to run at you, grab you around the waist and force you to the ground it would also be ‘good grounds for arrest’.
So are we now to make the tackle illegal as well?
We won. They lost. Take a chill pill.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:33 am
DPF:
No sorry, if you’re going to do the haka why not have a marginally more serious reason than “Well, it fucks off the Brits”. The AB’s could achive that by pulling a collective brown-eye while chanting “yo mama’s a dirty slut!” Which I’d find marginally more inspiring that a pack of boofheads going through the motions.
Pira Sharples has a point when he says public sector plastic Tiki tokenism – where Maori culture is wrenched out of it’s proper contexts and meaninging – may be awfully well-intentioned, but ends up doing more harm than good. I wonder if it’s time for the AB’s haka to go the same way – know what the fuck you’re doing and why or just forget it.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:34 am
DPF:
No sorry, if you’re going to do the haka why not have a marginally more serious reason than “Well, it fucks off the Brits”. The AB’s could achive that by pulling a collective brown-eye while chanting “yo mama’s a dirty slut!” Which I’d find marginally more inspiring that a pack of boofheads going through the motions.
Pira Sharples has a point when he says public sector plastic Tiki tokenism – where Maori culture is wrenched out of it’s proper contexts and meaninging – may be awfully well-intentioned, but ends up doing more harm than good. I wonder if it’s time for the AB’s haka to go the same way – know what the fuck you’re doing and why or just forget it.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:36 am
Craig – browneyes work for me also
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:04 am
To be fair Craig,
Vote:I think that was what the new Haka was all about.
November 28th, 2005 at 10:13 am
To be fair: does anyone really believe the “cutting edge of sport” bullshit?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:35 am
Who reads the Times anyway, bloody provinical rag.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:40 am
If a crazed thug drew a finger threateningly across his throat while screaming into someone
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:43 am
It is called 100 years of NZ rugby tradition. Incidentally it is 100 years since the “Originals” first started performing the Haka before each match on their 1905 British tour.
Vote:BTW the picture with Tana and Winston in the background was classic kiwiana.
November 28th, 2005 at 10:49 am
Two rules of Belt’s foreign policy:
1. Don’t judge the American people by their Government
2. Don’t judge the British people by their press
and by the way DPF…”and in last week’s news!”
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:54 am
Sadly what has been lost in the self serving hyperbole (particularly in England and with the English) is the AB’s have reserved this new haka for their most highly regarded foes. So far only RSA (I think) and England have been honoured with it. As Grant Fox said in the SST – what irks the poms so much is that they generally lose the 80 minutes following the haka.
Proof?- The completely silent (some might say respectful) Twickenham crowd on Saturday watching the Samoan “war dance” prior to the game against England. It was described by the english Sky TV commentators as the Samoan version of the New Zealand haka.
The reason for the silence – a smug england crowd believing they would win and win well. No fears.
Now we know it winds the english crowd up we should keep doing it. Drop it when it has no longer has an effect.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:03 am
Woops. Blasted RSS reader told me my previous post failed. Sorry for the double up.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:05 am
Toa Greening
“BTW the picture with Tana and Winston in the background was classic kiwiana”
Your right about that! What a classic.
They would make good Xmas presents for any National Party supporters you have associations with.
Craig Ranapia, I think you are spot on with your post!
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:11 am
The haka is a bastion of All Black Rugby – itself a bastion of ‘mainstream’ New Zealand. Watch this space for Dr Mapp to come out and eradicate this PC English position, and those apologists that exist here.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:30 am
Pira Sharples has a point when he says public sector plastic Tiki tokenism – where Maori culture is wrenched out of it’s proper contexts and meaninging – may be awfully well-intentioned, but ends up doing more harm than good. I wonder if it’s time for the AB’s haka to go the same way – know what the fuck you’re doing and why or just forget it.
The thing is that Kapa o Pango is actually much more “in context” than Ka Mate. It was consciously created as a pan-Pacific haka, and the words have much more textual relevance than those of Ka Mate.
People make *way* too much of the throat-slitting gesture. In this morning’s Hard News post, I’ve pointed to yet another sneering effort in the Times that claims that it was deemed offensive when it was premiered in South Africa, “the country with the world’s second-highest murder rate.”
Trouble is, it has *never been performed in South Africa* and I’m not aware of a word of disquiet from the republic when it was premiered at Carisbrook in August. This is just getting stupid.
Cheers,
Vote:RB
November 28th, 2005 at 1:05 pm
I’m in agreement with David. If it shits of the whiners in England, so much the better. They could always do something of their own if they feel hard done by. Morris dancing perhaps, or singing Rule Brittania. They’re just bitter that the All Blacks have traditions. Too friggin bad. We’re not changing it just because it offends people – that’s the whole point of a war dance. It gets you fired up and scares the enemy. Adds excellent drama to rugby.
As for Pita Sharples, he’s Tiki tokenism personified, with his big bone carving and ghetto talk. Maoris love rugby too, and their allowing the misappropriation of the haka is nothing but good for them. FFS I’ve never met anyone abroad who knew some of the words of an obscure near-dead foreign language EXCEPT for the haka. How many ozzies would know even ONE aboriginal song? People are impressed by it, and attribute some of the awesome success of the All Blacks to it. Rightly so, I think. And no one overseas misses the obvious fact that the All Blacks has a lot of ‘black fellas’ in it. Whether they are maori or not it says a lot about NZ, most of it good.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:08 pm
The Times is absolutely correct. Parochial NZ’ers should try to consider their reaction was it the other side doing it to us.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 1:49 pm
I suspect our reaction would be to thrash the shit out of them on the field, rather than in the newspapers.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:13 pm
Ben:
Talking about “shitting off the whingers”, next time the Lions should revive a tradition of their own and get up in the AB’s face. Or do what the Wallabies once did and turn their backs.
Would that be suitably dramatic for you?
Personally, I’m neither here nor there about the haka – it doesn’t really offend me as long it’s not done on auto-pilot. But I don’t like much of the mindless nationalistic sentimentality it inspires, either.
And one more observation: If you’re trying to be provocative and/or intimidating, isn’t it a little rich to bitch when you get exactly the rection you’re looking for?
And yes, Russell, the British sports media are intensely parochial, and won’t let facts or good grace deflate a good head of froth. (Which is a shame, because England also has some of the best in the business.) Thank God we Kiwis never behave like that ay?
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 3:35 pm
Craig, I reckon you’re right – they Lions should face it down, as should the ozzies. Good on them. Or something of their own. Getting bitter on the haka is silly.
Rugby itself is mindless nationalistic sentimentality. It’s obviously completely irrelevant what happens between some men chasing a ball around. Doesn’t mean it’s not fun though.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 5:33 pm
I’m amazed that any opposing team who faces the All Blacks give it any regard at all.
If it was me having to face some silly kiwi bouncing up and down screaming at me, I would simply walk away, talk to one of my team mates or pretty much anything else except pay attention to it.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 8:55 pm
I think the haka is ok and I’m a proud Kiwi but we DO tend to get a wee bit precious and upset about nations who don’t give it due deference. e.g. the Wallabies in ’96 at Wellington (ignoring it) and the Poms at Old Trafford in ’97 (Cockerill telling Hewitt to get fucked). Face facts; a lot of countries DON’T give a rat’s arse about Maori culture. You can paint it as “rich”, “vibrant”, “colourful” or whatever trite words you want to call it. We just assume that everyone is just so gosh darned enamoured with haka, powhiri, poi twirling that we don’t realise that they, in fact, aren’t.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 9:49 pm
U said it. It’s all piss and wind. The All Blacks have always done it, even when they were shit. No one cared about it then, they just laugh and walk away. If they really want it gone, that’s the best approach.
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 10:39 pm
When I saw the first throat-slitting haka performed I happened to be with some South African friends. We maintain a friendly rivalry and they know that two out of three times the All Blacks beat the Springboks. So, I was concerned and embarrassed to witness the stupid throat-slitting gesture at the end of an otherwise well-performed, new haka. Then they did it again, this time against England.
For heavens’ sake. Those who think it’s a suitable gesture should get a life outside their massive inferiority complex. Rugby Union is a sporting game – get over it – not a life or death struggle. Sure, it’s great to see the AB’s win, especially through superior ability and teamwork – but it’s not the end of the world if they don’t. And they shouldn’t have to resort to the sort of vicious intimidation before each game that this latest nonsense is clearly intended to engender.
The throat-slitting is an especially stupid and insensitive gesture when we realise that we live in an age where innocent people have had their throats slit and heads removed by some of history’s most vicious thugs. If the All Blacks want to be associated with that kind of behaviour – even if they claim that it means nothing (like the rest of the haka??), then they can leave me out of their supporters’ club.
Some say it’s a mark of respect as it’s only performed against the best opposition – I say it’s a sign of arrant cowardice (just like the modern-day terror merchants who literally engage in the practice).
Vote:November 28th, 2005 at 11:32 pm
What did the africans think? They’re not playing marbles out there!
Throat slitting is a gesture meaning ‘we will kill you’. Which is what a war dance is about too. It’s in keeping with the message and getting intimidated is the real sign of cowardice. And I can’t see that cutting people’s throats is any less vicious then beating them over the head with a club and then eating them, the tradition from which all this war dancing descends.
It’s intimidation, sure. That’s par for the course in contact sports. Why do you think Mohammed Ali always used to carry on at his opponents? Rugby is a metaphor for a pitched battle. That’s why we like it. Sorry.
Are you suggesting that perhaps they should all sit around and hold hands before the game to dispel any violent thoughts?
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 7:35 am
Ben:
“Rugby is a metaphor for a pitched battle. That’s why we like it. Sorry.”
Thats like suggesting Soccer return to its roots and start using a human head for the ball again.
Without question the Haka has been a great piece of NZ Rugby History, though these days it just looks as embrassing. How many other teams preform outdated native dances at the begining of their rugby games? Do we see the Scots bringing out a piper and the team walking onto the pitch with claymores and sheilds? Do we see the South Africian’s coming out doing a Zulu war dance?
No, only little old NZ insists on making this silly gesture. I honestly wish the IRB would simply ban the Haka and like and be done with it.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 8:19 am
You guys just don’t get it. The Haka is 100 years of sporting tradition. It is a Kiwi tradition and part of the Kiwi culture. Who cares what the rest of the world think of the Haka, it is our tradition and we should be proud of it. To get rid of the Haka to appease the PC brigade would be a travesty.
Have any of you performed a Haka at the start of a rugby match?
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 8:47 am
“How many other teams preform outdated native dances at the begining of their rugby games?”
…ummm, those cringing renditions of the God-awful national anthems with the sincere hand-on-heart etc etc – how are these any different? Go on and ban the haka just as soon as you ban the wailing of the anthem.
100 years of tradition – international (not just all black) rugby would be a poorer sport without it.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 8:52 am
I can’t see how it’s relevant what everyone else does. We do the haka, it’s our thing. If you think it’s silly then tell me why rugby itself isn’t.
And last time I played soccer I was shocked at how feisty everyone gets. Fisticuffs were not uncommon, and I’m sure that if heads could be kicked around, they would be. A bit of overt silliness can get that out of your system.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 10:55 am
Sam I don’t mind so much how a teams National Anthem actually sounds, they’re professional rugby players not professional singers and me of all people would never complain about another persons singing ability. I do however hate it when these professionals don’t have enough pride in the their country (which they’re meant to be representing) don’t even know the words and you watch them humming, sing nothing etc etc.
But right at the moment both teams sing their anthems but only one team in the world does the Haka.
The problem isn’t so much of whether we do the Haka or not but our insistance that everybody else must take it seriously and simply accept it.
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 11:23 am
Well, from where I sit, the
Vote:November 29th, 2005 at 11:29 am
We accept listening to ‘Waltzing Matilda’ for the same reason. The ozzies want their own tradition. Fine. What’s the problem?
Vote: