The recent resurfacing of a 'new' Goldie painting has sparked a heated debate in the art world, shedding light on the complex issue of cultural rights and the legacy of colonial art. This article delves into the intricate web of legal and ethical considerations surrounding the sale of depictions of indigenous ancestors, offering a critical analysis and personal insights.
The Goldie Enigma
The discovery of a 'previously unrecognised' 1917 painting by Charles Frederick Goldie, titled 'Lost in Thought, Ngāheke, An Arawa Chieftain', has ignited a controversy that goes beyond the realm of art appreciation. The painting, which was believed to have 'disappeared from records' until its sale in Australia in 2020, has now been identified as a portrait of Patara Te Ngūngūkai, a renowned Te Arawa tohunga. This revelation raises profound questions about the rights and representation of indigenous people in colonial-era artworks.
Mana, Mauri, and the Law
The Māori concepts of 'mana' and 'mauri' are central to this discussion. Mana refers to the spiritual essence or power of a person or object, while mauri is the life force or essence that sustains it. In the context of the Goldie painting, the mana and mauri of the subject, artist, and owners are under scrutiny. The sale of such a painting prompts a deeper exploration of the legal and ethical boundaries surrounding cultural heritage and representation.
Cultural Rights and Intellectual Property
The current legal framework in New Zealand grants artists or photographers the rights to their work, including the depiction of individuals. However, these rights are extinguished 50 years after the artist's death, making the work and its likeness public domain. This raises a critical question: What rights do the descendants of the individuals depicted in these colonial-era artworks have? The case of Patara Te Ngūngūkai highlights the stark contrast between the legal status of the painting and the cultural significance of the subject.
The Dilemma of Indigenous Representation
The sale of the Goldie painting exemplifies a broader dilemma. While the artwork may be considered a valuable historical piece, the use of indigenous subjects in colonial-era paintings often perpetuates a legacy of exploitation. The descendants of Patara Te Ngūngūkai, represented by the Tūhourangi iwi, face a challenging situation. They appreciate the appreciation of their ancestor's image but are also concerned about the commercialization and potential misuse of their cultural heritage.
A Call for Cultural Recognition
The Tūhourangi iwi's struggle is not unique. Many Māori have protested the sale of images of their tūpuna, while others have attempted to purchase these images to regain control over their cultural heritage. The estimated price tag of $420,000 for the Goldie painting made it unattainable for the iwi, underscoring the financial and cultural challenges they face. The current legal framework, as noted by Lynell Tuffery Huria, a leading expert on Māori intellectual property rights, lacks the necessary legislative frameworks to address these concerns effectively.
Wai 262 and the Taonga Works Framework
The Wai 262 claim, a landmark Waitangi Tribunal inquiry, addresses Māori intellectual property rights and traditional knowledge. The Taonga Works Framework, advocated for by descendants and experts, proposes establishing a commission to oversee the development of frameworks for cultural rights. This framework would define 'taonga works', identify relevant kaitiaki (guardians), and determine the level of protection required for indigenous cultural heritage.
The Protected Objects Act and Cultural Governance
The Protected Objects Act 1975 provides some protections for culturally significant objects, but it excludes historic portraits of tangata whenua (indigenous people) produced by Pākehā (non-Māori) photographers and artists. This legal loophole further complicates the issue of cultural governance. Despite the challenges, the Tūhourangi iwi remains committed to exercising governance over their cultural heritage, emphasizing the importance of kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and the ongoing struggle for recognition and protection.
Conclusion: A Long-Term Battle for Cultural Rights
The debate surrounding the Goldie painting highlights the complex interplay between art, history, and cultural rights. While the legal framework may not provide immediate solutions, the advocacy for cultural recognition and the development of frameworks like the Taonga Works Framework offer a glimmer of hope. The battle for indigenous cultural rights is a long-term struggle, requiring intergenerational efforts and a commitment to challenging the status quo. As the discussion continues, it is essential to listen to the voices of indigenous communities and work towards a more equitable and respectful representation of their heritage.
