From: Daniel Malone
Date: 31 lipca 2009 20:01:09 GMT+02:00
To: Jackson Wood
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Regarding the exclusion of my page work from Salient ("issue 15: Te Aomarama—The Te Reo issue") and your letter of explanation.
I find both the action of the magazine and your response totally unacceptable.
Firstly I am completely baffled that you propose the' theme' of the magazine as the reason that my page work was excluded when it was clearly a response to this theme and your invitation for page works. If this work was found somehow irrelevant, or ill-informed, or even offensive, then I would rightfully expect an editorial comment to this effect, preferably with the standard intention of adjusting and publishing the work, as with any other magazine content.
The fact that such a failing in due process has taken place in a University / Student magazine, in the midst of a run of issues with the patent intention of engaging social and political questions is pathetic. Your abdication of responsibility to Ngai Tauira is cowardly as you facilitated their contribution from the same position of responsibility, as the magazines Editor, that you proposed that artists from the concurrent exhibition, The Future Is Unwritten, at the UVW's Adam Art Gallery, contribute page works. You didn't make a "Tough call", you made the quintessential easy call, and regretfully it seems you have engaged in nothing less than the censorship of an artwork for either the feeblest or the most banal of reasons: so was it avoidance of any genuine engagement, or simply laziness?
Lets give you the benefit of the doubt and look closer at the first of these which begs the question - was it simply a token gesture to hand over "95% of the content" to Ngai Tauira or was it in fact a meaningful act to facilitate a platform for some real issues, concerns and current affairs of Maori living in Aotearoa New Zealand to be engaged in?
What aspect of my page work failed to do this or compromised this process? Perhaps you didn't bother to ask this, any more than you passed such a concern on to me, but for the record while my 'New New Zealand Flag' is not a new proposition I felt it had real relevance to this issue of Salient and the present discussion around a Maori flag. It is not a proposal for a Maori flag but one that reconsiders the existing Aotearoa New Zealand flag in relation to our changing sense of ourselves as a nation and people. The text that I added for the context of this Te Reo issue was to reflect this transformation: whaka-maori / becoming-maori. It is a play on words, one that echos the Te Reo verb 'whakamaori' describing a translation or rendering into Maori, while giving air to the meanings of the single components. Whaka, with it's ubiquitous function as a stative verb prefix, a causing-to-be or change-in-process, is coupled with maori (again in it's stative form, with a small 'm', not as a noun), with its beautiful and remarkable combination of senses of belonging, of the common, and being unrestrained.
I can understand that these meanings might be considered esoteric, or misunderstood or even understood with negativity. However I also understand all of these responses to be legitimate within the realm of Art, of politics, and, call me old fashioned, within student magazines that claim to have produced 'world famous journalism since 1938'.
Mock-ironic parochialism aside, you needn't indulge your patronising concern that you have discouraged me from engaging in print media any longer. Such stupidity is precisely why I continue to do so.
The Above Is a Response To The Following Email.
On 2009-07-30, at 00:06, Jackson Wood wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> Apologies for not including your page work in this weeks edition of Salient.
> There are a few reasons for this.
> The first one is that as you know it is Te Wiki Te Reo Maori. For this week the editor of Salient gives editorial control of the magazine to the Maori Students association Ngai Tauira.
> If you've seen a copy you'll understand that 95% of the content this week was in Te Reo and about 98% was provided by NT.
> So I was making very few editorial decisions.
> The decision to include your page work was not mine, and unfortunately the representatives from NT did not want to include your work in their magazine.
> Tough call.
> I also apologize for taking so long to get back to you. As you can appreciate this is a busy job and I often forget/misplace/don't think of peoples' feelings when I don't publish their work.
> I hope this is ok and I have not discouraged you from engaging in print media again.