Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Sacred Grounds : Enhancing the Cultural Landscape on Mauna A Wakea Lacsina, Christopher 2020-05-12

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
42591-Lacsina_Christopher_LARC_598_Sacred_grounds_rev_2020-05-28.pdf [ 98.05MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 42591-1.0390692.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0390692-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0390692-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0390692-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0390692-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0390692-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0390692-source.json
Full Text
42591-1.0390692-fulltext.txt
Citation
42591-1.0390692.ris

Full Text

SACRED GROUNDSEnhancing the Cultural Landscape on Mauna A WakeaChristopher LacsinaGraduate ProjectRELEASE FORMLandscape ArchitectureSchool of  Architecture and Landscape ArchitectureUniversity of  British ColumbiaName: Christopher LacsinaUBC Student number:Graduate Project Title: Sacred Grounds: Enhancing the Cultural Landscape on Mauna A WakeaIn presenting this report in partial fulfillment of  the requirements for the Master of  Landscape Architecture, University of  British Columbia, I agree that UBC may make this work freely available for reference or study. I give permission for copying the report for educational purposes in accor-dance with copyright laws.________________________          ________________________          _________________________Name          Signature               DateChristopher Lacsina 11 May 2020ABSTRACTMy thesis considers the contested landscape of  Mauna Kea, a volcanic mountain on the island of  Ha-wai’i. As ground is literally being broken in the name of  astronomical scientific advancement, what breaks in tandem is the site of  cultural practice for an entire community and nation. The Mauna is currently home to 13 telescopes sponsored by public and private institutions locally and globally. The latest tele-scope, Thirty Meter Telescope or “TMT” has been approved, but its construction is being protested by the Native Hawaiian community under grounds of  continued desecration to their sacred cultural lands. While some might consider the motive of  the scientific community is for the advancement of  human civilization towards groundbreaking discoveries about the universe, others feel a threatening of  their way of  life and culture.  These tensions unfold within a landscape that holds significant meaning to the Na-tive Hawaiian culture and its people, while this exact site has been identified as the optimum location for peering into the universe. Through tracing a lineage of  the Native Hawaiian sense of  the land or “’aina” we come to understand that the landscape is a reflection of  their spiritual and physical wellbeing. The destruction of  their sacred lands through the building of  the telescopes greatly impacts the Hawaiian community and their ability to continue practicing their culture and way of  life. To Native Hawaiians the mauna is viewed as the origin spot (axis mundi) of  where life begins and a place of  great spiritual power. My consideration is that landscape architecture has a role in being a mechanism of  cultural promotion where design will give form to the complex processes of  how landscapes themselves are tied to a commu-nity’s well-being manifested through its cultural expressions and shaped through human practices. The project seeks to understand opportunities to enhance the site for cultural practice. table of contentslist of  figuresacknowledgementsGRADUATE PROJECT PART Inative hawaiian conceptions of  landscape  12native hawaiian renaissance  20precedent studies  24site  30project schedule  35GRADUATE PROJECT PART 2   36-63bibliography  64LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1: map of  Hawaiian Islands – p.6Figure 2: summit of  Mauna Kea – p.8Figure 3: Artist Kahi Ching’s paneled painting of  the Hawaiian Kumulipo (creation story) – p.12Figure 4: kalo plant – p.13Figure 5: men working in the lo’I – p.13 Figure 6: Ka’iwa, The Frigate Bird – p.14Figure 7: Makapu’u, Bulging Eye – p.14Figure 8: Koolau poko – p.14Figure 9: painting, ahupua’a – p.15Figure 10: ahupua’a depicts the native Hawaiian system of  land division – p.15Figure 11: Hawaiian activists protests native Hawaiian evictions – p.18 Figure 12: 1977, farmers protesting development of  Kalama Valley – p.18Figure 13: double hulled voyaging canoe, Hōkūleʻa – p. 19Figure 14: crew members of  the Hōkūleʻa – p. 19Figure 15: Kahoolawe – p.24Figure 16: bombing of  Kahoolawe – p.24Figure 17: activists protesting bombings – p.24Figure 18: soil of  Kahoolawe – p.24 Figure 19: Imiloa Astronomy Center – p.26Figure 20: Imiloa school children – p.26Figure 21: interior of  Imiloa – p.26 Figure 22: Mauna Kea protectors at base of  mountain, map showing base of  mountain to summit – p.28Figure 23: summit of  Mauna Kea with existing telescopes – p.29 Figure 24: timeline of  telescope construction on Mauna Kea – p.30 Figure 25: context plan Hawai’i Island 1 : 300,000 – p.36Figure 26: sacred cultural zones of  mauna kea – p.38Figure 27: protest camp at base of  mauna kea – p.40Figure 28: kupuna (elderly) before being arrested for blocking entryway – p.41Figure 29: context map of  base of  Mauna Kea 1 : 15,000 – p.42Figure 30: groundcover context map of  base of  Mauna Kea 1 : 15,000 – p.44Figure 31: cultural practices map & diagram 1 : 3,000 – p.46Figure 32: site context plan 1 : 3,000 – p.48Figure 33: site plan 1 : 800 – p.50Figure 34: view of  pu’uhonua hale, section axo of  pu’uhonua hale. – p.52Figure 35: view of  papahanoumoku viewing area, section axo of  rest area – p.54Figure 36: view of  sky father viewing area, section axo of  rest area – p.56Figure 37: view of  pahula mound, section axo of  hula mound – p.58Figure 38: site plan proposed 1:800 – p.60 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would like to acknowledge my family and friends who lifted me up throughout this process. Your support, love, and guidance has meant to so much to me. I am incredibly grateful for the continued encouragement you gave me during these three years. And to my best friend, Danny, thanks for being my biggest inspiration and keeping me going.1graduate project part i23personal narrative I want to begin by acknowledging that although I was raised in the State of  Hawaiʻi from when I was just under a year old, in many contexts, I am still considered a foreigner to the cus-toms and culural practices that define the many communities I was raised in. Hawaiʻi has a par-ticularly unique multi-cultural history apart from the larger continental United States stemming from its plantation era. Beginning in the mid-19th century (“Hawaiʻi Labor History Timeline,” n.d.) a program of  contract labor brought waves of   Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, and Filipino immigrants to work in the sugarcane industry. My family home in Waipahu, on the west side of  the island of  Oʻahu, was adjacent to one of  the last remaining sugar cane fields in the state. A consequence of  this era was a mixing of  racial groups and a rich environment of  cultural exchange (McDermott & Andrade, 2011). In contrast to the idea of  a cultural “melting pot,” in Hawaiʻi the use of  race to define groups was replaced by the concept of  ethnicity where differ-ences between ethnic groups were a thing to strive to maintain and be celebrated (McDermott & Andrade, 2011).  In doing so Hawaiʻi has become a beautiful place to live where remnants of  many cultural identities make their way into all facets of  public life. Some cultural objects are so engrained in the “local” hawaiian culture that it becomes difficult to discern where it originated. This is the case with many foods in the islands that have become ubiquitous with only Hawaiʻi (i.e. the spam musubi or saimin). This project is in many ways a reflection of  my cultural identity grown from living in the islands and the hopes that I have for the people and communities who live there.4567introduction The chain of  eight islands that make up the State of  Hawaiʻi are rich in geological and cultural histories and identities. This island chain is part of  a larger archipelago, the Northwest-ern Hawaiian Islands, made up of  132 uninhabited islands, atolls, and reefs stretching across 1,500 miles of  the Pacific Ocean (US Department of  Commerce, n.d.). At around 300 A.D. the ancestors of  native Hawaiians came from Tahiti and the Marquesas and sailed extraodinary distances on double-hulled canoes without navigational tools, only using the stars, wind, and cur-rents of  the ocean to discover the volcanic islands of  Hawaiʻi that we know today (McDermott & Andrade, 2011).  Since the first arrival in 1778 by British explorer Captain James Cook, the native Hawai-ians have suffered great losses to their people and land. Hawaiian ethnocultural identifcation is deeply spirtual and their geneological history is engrained through the metaphysical telling of  the Kumulipo, their creation story, which describes metaphorically their connection to the ʻaina (land) through chant. Their moʻolelo (stories or histories) describe their inherent connection to the ʻaina through tracing a geneology to the first taro or kalo plant, from which the first Hawaiian kanaka (man) descended (McDermott & Andrade, 2011). This creation story connects each native Ha-waiian as a direct descendent of  the land. Loss of  land has large implications to native Hawaiian well-being as daily life practices that fulfill a sense of  being and identity are centered around the ʻaina (McGregor, Morelli, Matsuoka, & Rodenhurst, 2003). 8fig.1: map of  Hawaiian Islands9problem statement The issue of  contested land disputes is an ongoing battle that has been fought since the time of  colonization in the islands. Early native Hawaiians had no conception of  the Western idea of  separating land. There was no notion of  private lands and all land was organized as whole systems of  resources stretching from mountain to ocean called ahupuaʻa (McGregor et al., 2003; Miller, 2016). Continued desceration of  sacred sites disrupt the core being of  native Ha-waiians and their ability to achieve wellbeing within mutliple levels of  the social strata (McGregor et al., 2003). The islands of  Hawaiʻi are home to thousands of  archaeologically and spiritually sigin-ficant sites for native Hawaiians. Wahi pana is the name for sacred cultural landscapes that are legendary sites of  spirituality (Mcgregor, 2018). For native Hawaiians these places have mana or spiritual power and visiting these places link them to their past and future. One such place, is the volcanic mountain of  Mauna Kea on the island of  Hawaiʻi, and the site that this thesis seeks to engage. This site is highly revered by native Hawaiian’s as one of  the most sacred places as their genealogy story describes Mauna a Wākea (the mountain of  the Sky Father), as the firstborn of  the union between Papahanaoumoku (Earth Mother) and Wākea (Sky Father). It is the highest point in the Pacific, described as the piko or umbilical cord, the origin spot of  where life begins. (Fujikane, 2018).  With Mauna Kea’s geographically isolated position in the middle of  the Pacific Ocean and its elevation high above the cloud layer, the conditions of  the summit lend itself  to be a site that is also of  great significance to astronomy. The low light pollution and smooth airflow make it optimal conditions for building telescopes to view the universe (LaFrance, n.d.). The mountain is currently home to 13 telescopes built since the 1960s and is the site for the proposal of  a 14th telescope, the “Thirty Meter Telescope” or TMT. On grounds of  continued mismanagement and desecration of  the sacred summit since the first telescopes in operation, the native Hawaiian com-munity has been heavily protecting the mountain from further desecration by blocking construc-tion crews from entering the summit.  As a site of  such immense importance to both native Hawaiians and equally to astrono-mers and scientists alike, this tension provides us with more universal questions of  how we value place and culture. Beyond the contention of  the site today and regardless of  the outcome of  the TMT, the use of  Mauna Kea as an observatory will eventual cease. A timeline of  decommission-ing is set, where the summit will stop functioning as a research post and the land will be returned to the state. This future point in time provides an entry for design as a driver for negotiating exist-ing space conflicts of  the site as well as the negotiation of  possible site futures that more strongly reflect the site’s cultural history and importance as an ecological and spiritual sanctuary to the native Hawaiian people. 10Statement of thesis As larger sociopolitical issues surrounding Hawaiian land sovereignty and environmen-tal justice are bound to the site of  Mauna Kea, this project speaks to the future of  how Hawaii negotiates space conflicts across the state. This design project will explore these unique issues that will continue to persist in Hawaii and globally in sites of  equal contention. My consideration is that landscape architecture has a role in being a mechanism of  cultural promotion where design will give form to the complex processes of  how landscapes themselves are tied to a community’s well-being manifested through its cultural expressions and shaped through human practices. Using the expectation that the telescopes will be decommissioned as a starting point for design entry the project will explore possible futures of  the site and also address space conflict tensions directly. These possible futures will highlight inherent narratives tied to the conflict and values held by multiple stakeholders and leverage them as design drivers to provide opportuni-ties for multiple considerations. A goal of  this project is to explore how design can interpret and enforce cultural practice through considering how it might contribute to the negotiation of  space conflict on Mauna Kea. In this way it will give new form to constructing the ways that we value and revere landscapes that are culturally significant to us, while testing the opportunities to pro-mote a site’s ability to perform as a space for understanding local values and integrating cultural protocols.  Before deeper analysis of  the site of  Mauna Kea, I will first build an understanding of  the landscape in relationship to native Hawaiians; then a discussion on the relationship between land and wellbeing to native Hawaiian people to situate the intrinsic effect land desecration has to their wellbeing; then a brief  history of  native Hawaiian renaissance to show the build up of  re-turn to a Hawaiian sense of  pride and renewed cultural practice; and finally describe the western timeline and defining of  cultural landscape preservation and the political system that organize and indigenous lands today.11fig.2: summit of  Mauna Kea12Native Hawaiian Conceptions of  Landscape  The Kumulipo (creation story)  Malama ʻAina (care for the land), Aloha ʻAina (love for the land)   Wahi pana, wahi kapu (sacred land)  Ahupuaʻa (land division) The ways in which native Hawaiians conceive of  landscape and stewardship have much to do with their mythologies relating to how they are direct descendants of  the land. The follow-ing sections build the case for an understanding of  how native Hawaiians, pre-contact to today, view their relationship to the land. This background reinforces the intrinsic differences on how the landscape in contemporary terms is viewed very differently from Western notions of  land stewardship and the landscape in general. 1314 The kumulipo (the source in the darkness) (McDer-mott & Andrade, 2011) is the native Hawaiian genealogy chant that tells the story of  not only the Hawaiian identity but also the creation of  the known universe. It is import-ant to understanding the psyche of  native Hawaiians and how they come to understand their concept of  being. It ties them directly to the land itself  as it described how they are lineal descendants of  the Earth, sea, and sky, as well as all natural life forces (McGregor et al., 2003).  It begins with the description of  their deities: Pap-ahānaumoku (the Earth mother), Wākea (the sky father), and their daughter Hoʻohōkūkalani (to create stars in the heavens). These are the three creator gods who were the mythic parents of  the islands or ʻaina (land) (McDermott & Andrade, 2011). It was from them the first kalo (taro) plant was born as well as the first Hawaiian man or kanaka from whom all Hawaiian people descend.  As Native Hawaiians had no written language, the kumulipo was performed as a chant. The chant itself  is an evolutionary model beginning in the lipo, the deep dark-ness of  the ocean floor. From here, the male and female elements of  the universe combine to form the coral polyp from which all higher levels of  both flora and fauna come from. All life forms originated in the sea. The creation of  men , women, and gods occur when the day or ao replaces the night or pō (McDermott & Andrade, 2011).  Wākea takes Hoʻohōkūkalani, daughter of  Pap-ahānaumoku and from their pairing a stillborn male child is born. They bury him and from that location the first kalo plant grows. The kalo is the nutritional staple food of  the native Hawaiians. The kalo plant is given the name Haloanakalaukapalili. Hoʻohōkūkalani gives birth a second time to a healthy boy who is named Hāloa in honour of  his elder sibling (the kalo plant). He becomes the first kanaka (man) from whom all Kānaka Maoli (native Hawaiian peo-ple) trace their lineage. Thus, the kumulipo describes how all native Hawaiian people are related to the ʻaina and the rest of  the natural world (Fox & McDermott, 2019). The Kumulipo (creation story)fig.3: Artist Kahi Ching’s paneled painting of  the Hawaiian Kumulipo (creation story) - n.d., kahiching.com15 McGregor et al. (2003) describe principles of  Ha-waiian stewardship of  the ‘aina (land) through their Eco-logical Model of  Native Hawaiian Well-being. The model identifies and organizes multiple stratum of  the social ecology that can be useful when targeting interventions as each stratum influences one another in the larger scheme (discussed later). Within their model, McGregor et al. (2003) situate the outer-most and largest stratum as “ʻAina Wellbeing”, which describes the land and natural resources of  Hawaiʻi as the foundation of  native Hawaiian cultural and spiritual custom, belief, and practice (McGregor et al., 2003). The practice of  malama ‘aina (care for the land) is a quality inherent to Hawaiian’s stewardship of  their land. It is their concept of  conservation that ensures sustainability of  natural resources. It is a rule of  behavior tied to their be-liefs and values regarding sharing and not taking too much so as to maintain ecosystem balance and coexistence. Thus, if  one practices malama ʻaina, by virtue they will always be acting in conservation.  Furthermore, native Hawaiian spirituality teaches that the land lives as the spirits of  their ancestors who also cared for their ancestral lands. This is acknowledged in Hawaiian tradition through the recognition of  ‘aumakua or ancestral spirits and gods that take many forms in nature living and non-living. In this way land is perceived as part of  their identity and they care for it as a living member of  their ʻohana (family) (McGregor et al., 2003). Malama Aina (care for the land) Aloha Aina (love for the land) fig.4 (top): kalo plant - n.d., https://img.theculturetrip.comfig.5 (above): men working in the lo’i (taro patch) -n.d., https://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/16 Wahi pana means sacred landscape in Hawaiian. They are significant locations that Hawaiians derive mana (spiritual power) and connected the particular landscape to their past and future. These sacred places are treated with highest reverence and respect, sites typically require a protocol to enter, such as an ‘oli or chant. Wahi pana are given names, like a member of  the family, and their names typically reflect the spirit, features, and elements that make the site significant (Mcgregor, 2018).  Colonization alienated Hawaiians from the sacred lands through deconstructing their concept of  land divi-sion ʻahupuaʻa (discussed later) replacing it with a capitalist structure of  land ownership, a concept foreign to native Hawaiians as land was never conceived as private (Mcgre-gor, 2018). Wahi pana, wahi kapu (sacred land) fig.6 (left): Ka’iwa, The Frigate Bird - Photographs by Anne Kapulani Landgraf  fig.7 (middle): Makapu’u, Bulging Eyefig.8 (right): Koolau poko17 The ahupuaʻa is the basic unit of  land and resource management. It considers an ecological system that runs from the sea to the mountains and everything inbetween. Each ahupuaʻa was managed by a chief. The court of  the Hawaiian Kingdom described the ahupua’a principle of  land use in the case In Re Boundaries of  Pulehunui, 4 Haw. 239, 241 (1879) as follows:“A principle very largely obtaining in these divisions of  territory [ah-upua’a] was that a land should run from the sea to the mountains, thus affording to the chief  and his people a fishery residence at the warm seaside, together with products of  the high lands, such as fuel, canoe timber, mountain birds, and the right of  way to the same, and all the varied products of  the intermediate land as might be suitable to the soil and climate of  the different altitudes from sea soil to mountainside or top.” An island was divided into districts called moku, and then further into ahupuaʻa. The land is divided from mauka to makai (mountain to ocean). This method allowed for more easily manageable resources across the island. Ahupuaʻa were centered around fresh water resources and overseen by a konohiki. The land was further divided into ‘ili, and this land belonged to makaʻainana (common families). The concept of  private land ownership was non-existent to the native Hawaiians and anyone living in one ahupuaʻa was free to move to a different one if  they were unhappy with the way it was managed or wanted to access other resources. To enforce the sustainable use of  resources, rules and prohibitions called kapu were enforced. This functioned much like a protocol of  ethical and moral conduct (“Connection to Land,” n.d.; MacKenzie, Serrano, & Kaulukukui, 2007)Ahupuaa (land division)fig.9 (left): painting, ahupua’a - n.d., https://www.sustainhawaii.org/fig.10 (right): ahupua’a depicts the native Hawaiian system of  land division - n.d., http://energy.hawaii.gov/18Native Hawaiian Renaissance  A Cultural Renaissance  Polynesian Voyaging Society  Native Hawaiian Environmental Justice1920 Western colonization in the 18th and 19th centuries changed Hawaiian relationship to the land. The ahupuaʻa system was abolished and Hawaiian lands were divid-ed, confiscated, and sold away. Along with them, native Hawaiian cultural practices were banned. The sovereign Hawaiian nation was illegally overthrown in 1893 by U.S. businessmen supported by the U.S. military. As Hawaiians were physically separated from their land this also severed their deep spiritual connection to the ‘aina (MacKenzie et al., 2007).  The Hawaiian Renaissance movement began in the 1960s through action of  individuals and groups who called on Hawaiians to participate in political decisions of  the federal and state governments. The Hawaiian Renais-sance movement was an effort to preserve Hawaiian culture through preserving land and reinstating native cultural practices, particularly Hawaiian language. Hawaiian lan-guage immersion schools and programs were established in 1987 when only 2,000 native speakers existed. From this renaissance also came a revival of  cultural activities ranging from music, dance, crafts, sports, and religion (Beyer, 2018). Hawaiian music and hula flourished in the 1970s and 1980s as well as the revival of  lāʻau lapaʻau (Hawaiian herbal heal-ing) (McGregor, 2010). A Cultural Renaissancefig.11 (left): Hawaiian activists protests native Hawaiian evictions - n.d., http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/ fig.12 (right): 1977, farmers protesting development of  Kalama Valley21 A major event catalyzed by this renaissance was a return of  the teaching and practice of  traditional naviga-tional skills that had been lost to Hawaiians by the time of  statehood in 1959. The Polynesian Voyaging Society (PVS) was created to demonstrate how Polynesians migrated many centuries earlier from islands in the South Pacific. They reconstructed a traditional double-hulled canoe called the Hōkūleʻa. In 1976 it sailed a 4,000 kilometre voyage to Tahiti without maps or modern navigational instruments relying solely on traditional wayfinding skills. The Hōkūleʻa still voyages today to continue passing on these navigational skills (Miller, 2016). This resurgence in learning the tradi-tional skill of  Polynesian wayfinding would later also serve as a larger discussion on the role of  astronomy in Hawaiian culture both in the past and in contemporary terms provid-ing a key argument for a camp of  Native Hawaiian sup-porters of  the Mauna Kea Observatories. Polynesian Voyaging Societyfig.13 (left): double hulled voyaging canoe, Hōkūleʻa - n.d., https://explore-magazine.defig.14 (right): crew members of  the Hōkūleʻa  - n.d., https://whc.unesco.org/fr/actualites/165322 MacKenzie et al. (2007) describes a new framework for looking at environmental justice for native Hawaiians. In their essay, they explored how traditional environmen-tal justice models “fail to comprehend complex issues of  indigenous peoples’ spiritual, social, and cultural connec-tions to the land and natural environment..and disregards the history of  Western colonization and indigenous groups’ ongoing attempts to achieve cultural and economic self-de-termination” (MacKenzie et al., 2007). Their new model of  “restorative environmental justice” takes into account the particular experience of  indigenous native Hawaiians who may see issues of  environmental justice as expanded beyond issues of  discrimination and ill health but also that of  denial of  group sovereignty. Restorative environmental justice in the Hawaiian sense is about justice through acts of  recla-mation and restoration of  land and culture (MacKenzie et al., 2007; Yamamoto & Lyman, 2001). Native Hawaiian Environmental Justice The term “cultural landscape” was coined by cul-tural geographers in the 1920s and adopted by landscape architects in the 1980s (Goetcheus, Karson, & Park, 2016). In this view the landscape became more identified as a set of  relationships and interactions between human and na-ture. Landscapes are viewed as “living places” and as sites of  historical and ongoing natural processes with cultural activities that have shaped terrains and ecosystems up to the present. Linked to the cultural concept of  landscape is a need for a sense of  identity and belonging and how we find identity in landscape and place (Taylor & Lennon, 2012). Western Constructs of Cultural Landscape Preservation2324Precedent Studies  Kahoʻolawe  ‘Imiloa Astronomy Center of  Hawaiʻi  2526 Kahoʻolawe is the smallest island within the eight main islands of  the Hawaiian archipelago. Ancient Ha-waiians dedicated the island to the god, Kanaloa, the god of  the ocean, ocean currents, and navigation. The island was considered to be the physical embodiment of  Kanaloa, whose mana or spiritual power was believed to be stored within the island’s soil. After Western colonization the island was used for sheep ranching, which contributed to erosion an degradation. Kahoʻolawe was ceded to the Unit-ed States after its annexation of  Hawaiʻi. It was then used as a bomb testing site for the U.S. military in the 1920s. The bombings continued for over half  a century (MacKenzie et al., 2007).  In the 1970s at the time of  the Hawaiian Renais-sance, a group of  young native Hawaiians founded the Protect Kahoʻolawe ‘Ohana organization to stop the bomb-ing and reclaim the island. In 1976, nine people landed on the restricted island as a form of  protest. In 1977, two leaders of  ‘Ohana, George Helm and Kimo Mitchell, pad-dle-surfed between Maui and Kahoʻolawe in search of  two other members who stayed on the island, but while trying to paddle back to Maui they were lost at sea (MacKenzie et al., 2007).  The ‘Ohana organization went into direct negoti-ations with the navy and while the navy did not agree to cease live-fire training, they agreed to lessen the impact of  ordnance on land and surrounding waters, while cleared areas were agreed to be reserved for religious, cultural, scientific, and educational purposes. In March of  1981 the entire island was listed on the National Register for His-torical Places and designated an Archaeological District. It was made into state law that the island would perpetually be preserved for: native Hawaiian cultural practice; pres-ervation of  islands archaeology; rehabilitation, revegeta-tion, habitat restoration, and preservation; and education (MacKenzie et al., 2007).  This precedent provides a local parallel to the project site’s historical use. The reclamation efforts and institutionalized policies seen on Kahoʻolawe provide a framework for addressing the possible design directions that may be considered for Mauna Kea. Kahoʻolawe’s history of  desecration in this example has a more violent and destruc-tive pattern of  use than Mauna Kea, but the case study’s is significant to the outcomes of  preserving a sacred site for continued traditional practice. precedentKahoolawe(Kahoolawe, Hawaii)Top to Bottom: fig.15 - Kahoolawe - n.d., https://www.milliyet.com.tr/; fig.16 - bombing of  Kahoolawe - n.d., https://pilotscholars.up.edu/; fig.17 - activists protesting bombings; fig. 18 - soil of  Kahoolawe2728 The ‘Imiloa Astronomy Center of  Hawaiʻi was cre-ated in 2006. The center was formed in collaboration with educators, scientists, and community leaders who wanted a way to bridge the connection between the research being conducted on Mauna Kea and the traditions of  native Ha-waiian culture (Miller, 2016).  The goal of  the center was to provide a space of  learning and forum for discussion for people conflicted on the issues of  science and culture. ʻImiloa is translated to mean the pursuit of  new knowledge and  ʻone who ex-ploresʻ. The center represents a camp of  people who identi-fy both as cultural practioners and as proponents for contin-ued telescope research the Mauna (“About ʻImiloa,” n.d.).  The center merges experiences of  traditional Ha-waiian story-telling, dance, and navigation with the latest data or results from the Mauna Kea Observatory tele-scopes. The kumulipo or Hawaiian genealogy chant and creation story is paired with images of  the Big Band theory. Content also ties in the traditional history of  Polynesian wayfinding using the stars as navigation. Beyond that, the centre is situated within an extensive garden that references Hawaiian flora such as the ohia lehua blossom and native hibiscus and ʻcanoe cultureʻ plants such as the kalo (taro), ʻulu (breadfruit), and maiʻa (banana) (Miller, 2016).  ʻImiloa has become what Miller (2016) calls “a place of  safe disagreement”. The site provides a platform for the open dialogue and fostering of  communicating different values of  Mauna Kea. The strength in this precedent comes from the idea that it shows one exmaple the form that such space negotiations can take. The center itself  being offsite, is a form of  conservation and preservation. precedentImiloa Astronomy Center of Hawaii(Big island, Hawaii)Top to Bottom: fig.19 - Imiloa Astronomy Center; fig.20 - Imiloa school children; fig.21 - interior of  Imiloa2930 The contested landscape of  Mauna Kea, a volcanic mountain on the island of  Hawaii. As ground is literally being broken in the name of  astrological scientific advancement, what breaks in tandem is the site of  cultural practice for an entire community and nation. The Mauna is currently home to 13 telescopes sponsored by public and private institutions locally and globally. The latest telescope, Thirty Meter Telescope or “TMT” has been approved, but its construction is being protested by the Native Hawaiian community under grounds of  continued desecration to their sacred cultural lands. While some might consider the motive of  the scientific communi-ty is for the advancement of  human civilization towards groundbreaking discoveries about the universe, others feel a threatening of  their way of  life and culture. These tensions unfold within a landscape that holds significant meaning to the Native Hawaiian culture and its people, while this exact site has been identified as the optimum location for peering into the universe. Through tracing a lineage of  the Native Hawaiian sense of  the land or “ʻaina” we come to understand that the landscape is a reflection of  their spiritual and physical wellbeing. The destruction of  their sacred lands through the building of  the telescopes greatly impacts the Hawaiian community and their ability to continue practicing their culture and way of  life. To Native Hawaiians the mauna is viewed as the origin spot (axis mundi) of  where life begins and a place of  great spiritual power.  With Mauna Kea’s geographically isolated position in the middle of  the Pacific Ocean and its elevation high above the cloud layer, the conditions of  the summit lend itself  to be a site that is also of  great significance to astronomy. The low light pollution and smooth airflow make it optimal conditions for building telescopes to view the universe (LaFrance, n.d.). On grounds of  continued mismanagement and desecration of  the sacred summit since the first telescopes in op-eration, the native Hawaiian community has been heavily protecting the mountain from further desecration by blocking construction crews from entering the summit. Mauna kea - Site Descriptionfig.22 - Mauna Kea protectors at base of  mountain, map showing base of  mountain to summit protectors(at base of Mauna Kea)Mauna KeaObservatories31fig.23: summit of  Mauna Kea with existing telescopes32fig.24: timeline of  telescope construction on Mauna Kea33Cultural practice Enhance the site for cultural practices, this includes access routes, wayfinding, clear and appro-priate markers delineating spaces that are acceptable to enter or not. Provide material resources to maintain altars as well as consider offsite locations to cultivate materials used to in spiritual practice.Ecological enhancementConsider the habitat of  the endemic Wekiu bug, found only at the summit of  Mauna Kea. The bug has seen declines in populations in recent years in the midst of  climate change. Consider habitat qualities and restoration. Learning center as boundary objectLearning from the concept of  site as boundary object, consider offsite locations that can also serve to address the issue of  space conflict on Mauna Kea. Similar to the case study analysis of  ‘Imiloa, the center can function and operate as support for continued dialogue and practices on the mauna whether related to astronomy or cultural practice. Consider how the center can en-gage and integrate lessons in cultural protocols, old and new. Astronomical resourceConsidering the materials in the decommissioning of  the telescopes and the sites they leave be-hind. What repurposing can be used to enhance the site to address other programmatic issues. Mauna kea - Site Descriptionprogrammatic issues341Investigate myth of  the site as generative design toolThe site’s cultural and spiritual significance is captured in the rich mythologies told to describe the meaning and function of  the site to Native Hawaiians. Consider how a deeper understanding of  mythologies acting on the site can interpret design ideas. 2Practices of  cultural mappingEmploy new ways of  mapping the site that more accurately cap-tures the site’s cultural histories and integrates narrative storytelling of  myths. Employ ways of  mapping cultural values that extend beyond the site.3Offsite opportunitiesThrough additional mapping first locate offsite opportunities to support the programmatic issues. initial design methodology35    NOV  DEC  JAN  FEB  MAR APRGP1____________________________Refine writing   _____________(add new research)Site Analysis                 _______________________Schematic Design.                ________________Design Details              ______________Progress Review        ___Substantial Review         ____Production       _______________________Final Review         ___Project Schedule36graduate project part II37381245637HAWAI’I ISLAND PLAN 1 : 300 000VOLCANOES3 - Kohala (extinct)URBAN1 - Kailua-Kona2 - Hilo6 - Kilauea (active)4 - Hualalai (active) 7 - Mauna Kea (dormant)      SITE5 - Mauna Loa (active)Major County RoadsThe Island of  Hawai’I is the largest island of  the Hawaiian archipelago. The Mauna is most revered by the native Hawaiian people as told by their oral histories and genealogical chant that refers to the mountain as the progenitor of  the Hawaiian people. Mythologies describe the mountain as both the first born of  the Hawaiian islands and the site of  creation of  the first Hawaiian man. Wakea, or Sky Father and Papa-hanoumoku, Earth mother, were created the island chain producing Mauna A Wakea (mountain of  Wakea). Wakea and Papa conceived of  a stillborn child, whose body was buried at the summit of  the mauna. Where their firstborn was buried, a kalo (taro) plant grew. This import-ant genealogical oral story (most often told through chant and hula) describes how Hawaiian people come directly from the land itself. All fig.25: context plan Hawai’i Island 1:300,000391245637HAWAI’I ISLAND PLAN 1 : 300 000VOLCANOES3 - Kohala (extinct)URBAN1 - Kailua-Kona2 - Hilo6 - Kilauea (active)4 - Hualalai (active) 7 - Mauna Kea (dormant)      SITE5 - Mauna Loa (active)Major County Roads4041Native Hawaiians revere the mountain as sacred. Among the sacred resources found by archeolo-gists are: cinder cones, where burials occurred; hundreds of  historic shrines and altars constructed; and a prehistoric adze quarry used by ancient native Hawaiians to construct stone tools. Tradition-ally, commoners of  Native Hawaiian society were not allowed to travel to the summit. The summit was reserved for royalty or on some rare occasions kanako maoli (Hawaiian people) were allowed to travel to the summit for ceremonial rites or to pay homage to deities, otherwise, the mauna’s summit was feared by most of  Hawaiian society, and considered “kapu” or forbidden. The map to the left shows a few of  the major delineating categorical zones of  the mountain. The first zone, wao nahele, was were people were allowed to inhabit. It is where resources were collected and grown. Moving upward, the zones turn to more sacred uses, either used for experienced and sanctioned hunters or remained the domains of  the gods. fig.26: sacred cultural zones of  mauna kea42fig.27: protest camp at base of  mauna kea43The base of  the mountain continues to be protested today by Native Hawaiians who fight for the right to control their ancestral lands. They fight for their right to continue to practice their culture and revere the Mauna as their ancestors did and under their own terms. Astronomical uses of  the mountain have only marginally benefitted the Native Hawaiian people. As the astronomy activity begins to slowly leave the mountain, land leases are being renegotiated. Their stipulations provide that land is to be restored as much as can be, to its natural state, pre-astronomical uses. In addition management is to be returned to the state. It is through this process of  decommissioning astrono-my’s insfrastructure, that Native Hawaiians hope to gain greater control over management of  their mountain. This project positions and aligns itself  at this resetting of  the protocol on the mountain. fig.28: kupuna (elderly) before being arrested for blocking entryway44The base of  mauna kea has unique landforms and a diversity of  groundcover. This 1 to 15,000 map shows the major landforms that influence the site characteristics. Pu’u or cinder cones were once exit points of  lava during erutions. Their soft smooth reddish forms scattered from base to summit uniquely characterize the site. They were used in ancestral times for burial and the goddess poliahu, takes the form of  a cinder cone closer to the summit.             SADDLE ROAD                    SADDLE ROADMAUNA KEA ACCESS ROADPu’u (cinder cones)Pu’uhuluhuluto Mauna Loa Observatoriesto Mauna Kea Observatories45            SADDLE ROAD                    SADDLE ROADMAUNA KEA ACCESS ROADPu’u (cinder cones)Pu’uhuluhuluto Mauna Loa Observatoriesto Mauna Kea Observatoriesfig.29: context map of  base of  Mauna Kea 1 : 15,00046cinder cone mixed rangelandSITE 1herbaceous rangelandbare exposed lava rockshrub + brush rangelandThe base of  mauna kea has unique landforms and a diversity of  groundcover. This 1 to 15,000 map shows the major landforms that influence the site characteristics. Pu’u or cinder cones were once exit points of  lava during erutions. Their soft smooth reddish forms scat-tered from base to summit uniquely characterize the site. They were used in ancestral times for burial and the goddess poliahu, takes the form of  a cinder cone closer to the summit. 47cinder cone mixed rangelandSITE 1herbaceous rangelandbare exposed lava rockshrub + brush rangelandfig.30: groundcover context map of  base of  Mauna Kea 1 : 15,0004849fig.31: cultural practices map & diagram 1 : 3,000This map and diagram shows the main cultural prac-tices that are associated with the site. For some native Hawaiians, mauna kea’s summit still represents a place only for the gods or high ruling alii’I. (chiefs). This is why most cultural practitioners center around the base when revering the mountain. This road is also the only main access to the summit by car. Its construction was for the telescopes that started appearing in the 60s. Nonetheless, this piece of  infrastructure has become a central gath-ering point for many cultural practitioners. The large vegetated mound to the south of  the site is called a kipuki (hill surrounded by see of  lava). It sticks out like a green gem in a sea of  grays and black. Currently it is a popular hiking spot and a bird and tree sanctuary.The parking lot access to this hill (pu’uhuluhulu) is used quite often when cultural practitioners come to pule (pray) or give offering through the construction of  an ahu (shrine). A permanent shrine sits the top left of  the kipuki. Spiritual and ceremonial practices occur at this site, both old and contemporary practices. More recently this site was transformed into a massive camp of  protesters where kupuna were arrested sparking a major regeneration of  native Hawaiian culture and solidarity sparked , some calling it a 2nd native Hawaiian renaissance). The forms of  cultural practice most performed here are oli (chant-ing) which is a customary way of  introducing yourself  to the land and calling out your reasoning for entering this realm, hula traditional and contemporary story telling through dance, pule (praying) to family deities or to ances-tors, making offering, and more notably, teaching, as the site has become a makeshift community classroom on a wide range of  topics relating to the health and wellbeing of  native Hawaiians. The forms of  cultural practice most performed here are oli (chanting) which is a customary way of  introducing yourself  to the gods and spirits and calling out your rea-soning for entering this realm, hula traditional and con-temporary story telling through dance, pule (praying) to family deities or to ancestors, making offering, and more recently, teaching, as the site has become a community classroom with university professors locally and on neigh-boring islands lecture on a wide range of  topics relating to overall health and wellbeing of  native Hawaiians. 5051This context plan summarizes the main existing cultural uses of  the site, although just a small parking lot and highway, the site’s orientation at the base of  Mauna Kea marks a significantly valuable site for cultural practitioners. The main design move of  this project is to support the rich cultural practices that are historically tied to the site through re-envisioning the base and entry of  the mountain to position it as a site of  cultural practice and learning. fig.32: site context plan 1 : 3,00052papahanoumoku viewing area(earth mother)parking lot and rest areapu’uhuluhulu access trail and rest areawakea viewing area(sky father)pahula lo’i viewing area (mauna A wakea)Pu’uhonua - place of refugepu’uhuluhulu  hale(gathering + learning area)pu’uhonua hale(entry plaza)50m1:80053papahanoumoku viewing area(earth mother)parking lot and rest areapu’uhuluhulu access trail and rest areawakea viewing area(sky father)pahula lo’i viewing area (mauna A wakea)Pu’uhonua - place of refugepu’uhuluhulu  hale(gathering + learning area)pu’uhonua hale(entry plaza)50m1:800fig.33: site plan 1 : 800Pu’uhonua means place of  peace and refuge, this status was most recently dedicated to the site amidst the protests and arrests. This classification by community leaders and granting it as a puuhonua meant that it became a site of  dialogue and learning. In the spirit of  this, the proposal aims to support existing cultural practices through greater access and resources for gathering and learning both between cultural practitioners, locals and tourists seeking to visit the site. It begins through setting a protocol of  entering the site by creating a dialogue about the landscape that reflects the genealogical history of  native Hawaiians.  Through a procession of  viewing and being in the landscape, visitors learn more deeply why the mountain is important to the com-munity, while more physical space is added to support existing cultural practice at the mountain. The first consideration was in reorienting the road to allow for parking. 54Pu’uhonua HaleThe structural forms and spaces reference traditional hale or home/gathering spac-es. They are often simple structures with just a roof  and foundation for multipurpose indoor/outdoor recreation. Hales are traditionally built with ti leaves thatched together to make a roof  and the technique of  lashing to hold it all together. Today in Hawaii they take many forms. Circles and curves are used in this proposal because they reflect the form of  the many pu’u (cinder cones) that are often seen to have ting enclosures. The entry to the site, takes the form of  an outdoor hale and is aligned with the location of  the former site of  protesters. A raised planting bed of  kalo or taro (lo’I kalo) surrounds the circular hale symbolizing native Hawaiian people and opportunities for teaching and learning about its meaning and how to cultivate it. The planted lo’i bed marks a thresh-old into the site representing the days during protest when every visitor had to speak with kupuna (elderly) before continuing on. 55Pu’uhonua Halefig.34: view of  pu’uhonua hale, section axo of  pu’uhonua hale1 : 10056Papahanoumoku - viewing earth motherThe story of  the Hawaiian people begins with the story of  Papahanoumoku (Earth Mother) and (Sky father) Wakea. The trail is made from lava rock, crushed into a gravel. The first stop immerses you into a sea of  lava bed where in the distance a grouping of  smooth curves emerge from a cluster of  pu’u or cinder cone. The Pu’u represent many myths and stories of  the mountain. The landscape you gaze into are the stories of  how the islands were born. The path materials are naturally graded paths that switch be-tween black or lighter colored gravel. Exploring the landscape more, the  lava bed can be anywhere from a couple inches to a couple meters in thickness. The path materials are naturally graded paths that switch between black or lighter colored gravel. Exploring the landscape more, the  lava bed can be anywhere from a couple inches to a couple meters in thickness. 57Papahanoumoku - viewing earth mother1 : 100fig.35: view of  papahanoumoku viewing area, section axo of  rest area58Wakea - viewing sky fatherThe procession continues to a second viewing area which frames a gaze up to the sky. A concrete circle 2m tall  hides your peripheral and pulls your attention to wakea (sky father). On a cooler day the mist and fog fills the room. The view of  the sky brings atten-tion to the heavens, the second heavenly entity that created Mauna Kea.59Wakea - viewing sky father1 : 50fig.36: view of  sky father viewing area, section axo of  rest area60Mauna A Wakea - viewing the sacred summitThe final element of  the walk through the landscape takes you to a pahula mound with another lo’i kalo (taro patch) planted in front. The scene frames the marriage of  earth and sky to produce the first man (in Hawaiian mythology) who came from a a kalo plant and also to create the mountain itself. The hula mound provides a direct dialogue with the natural elements, as Hawaiian was not a written language, they kept memories and stories through hula and mele (song). This stage provides the context for these stories to be told. 61Mauna A Wakea - viewing the sacred summit1 : 100fig.37: view of  pahula mound, section axo of  hula mound62papahanoumoku viewing area(earth mother)parking lot and rest areapu’uhuluhulu access trail and rest areawakea viewing area(sky father)pahula lo’i viewing area (mauna A wakea)Pu’uhonua - place of refugepu’uhuluhulu  hale(gathering + learning area)pu’uhonua hale(entry plaza)50m1:800fig.38: site plan proposed 1:80063Beyond the pahula mound is a second hale meant to commemorate the site as a Ha-waiian place of  learning. During the protests, the kipuka mound became the site of  a community led classes, calling it the puuhuluhulu university. The gathering hale provides access to a sheltered space for facilitating instruction or an area for preparing kalo after being harvested. The proposal aims to create space for open dialogue about ways of  revering the site that may be unique to an individual or a community. It provides a context to understand new protocols and ways of  learning a site’s meaning to a community and to oneself. 64BIBLIOGRAPHYAbout Imiloa. (n.d.). Retrieved December 19, 2019, from Imiloa Astronomy Center website: https://imiloaha-waii.org/new-pageBeyer, C. K. (2018). COUNTER-HEGEMONY IN HAWAI’I: The Success of  the Hawaiian Language Immer-sion Movement. American Educational History Journal, 45(1/2), (Sp)55-(Sp)71.Connection to Land. (n.d.). Retrieved December 17, 2019, from Hawaii—Open Data Portal website: /stat/goals/single/Fox, K. M., & McDermott, L. (2019). The Kumulipo, Native Hawaiians, and well-being: How the past speaks to the present and lays the foundation for the future. Leisure Studies, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2019.1633680Fujikane, C. (2018). Mapping abundance on Mauna a Wākea as a practice of  Ea. Hūlili: Multidisciplinary Re-search on Hawaiian Well-Being, 11, 23–54.Goetcheus, C., Karson, R., & Park, E. (2016). Designing Living Landscapes: Cultural Landscapes as Landscape Architecture. Landscape Journal: Design, Planning, and Management of  the Land, 35(2), vi–xv.Hawaiʻi Labor History Timeline. (n.d.). Retrieved December 18, 2019, from https://www.hawaii.edu/uhwo/clear/home/Timeline.html#1870LaFrance, S. by A. (n.d.). What Makes a Volcano Sacred? The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/10/what-makes-a-volcano-sacred/413203/MacKenzie, M. K., Serrano, S. K., & Kaulukukui, K. L. (2007). Environmental Justice for Indigenous Hawai-ians: Reclaiming Land and Resources. Natural Resources & Environment, 21(3), 37–79. Retrieved from JSTOR.McDermott, J. F., & Andrade, N. N. (2011). People and cultures of  Hawaii: The evolution of  culture and ethnic-ity. University of  Hawai’i Press.McGregor, D. P. (2010). STATEHOOD: Catalyst of  the Twentieth-Century Kanaka ’Oiwi Cultural Renais-sance and Sovereignty Movement. Journal of  Asian American Studies; Baltimore, 13(3), 311-326,412.Mcgregor, D. P. (2018). Honoring and Preserving Hawaiian Cultural Landscapes. Forum Journal, 32(3), 22–29.McGregor, D. P., Morelli, P. T., Matsuoka, J. K., & Rodenhurst, R. (2003). An ecological model of  Native Ha-waiian well-being. Pacific Health Dialog, 10(2), 106.65BIBLIOGRAPHYMiller, S. (2016). Mauna Kea: Two Cultures and the ’Imiloa Astronomy Center. Interdisciplinary Science Re-views, 41(2–3), 222–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2016.1223589Taylor, K., & Lennon, J. (2012). Managing Cultural Landscapes. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubc/detail.action?docID=957555US Department of  Commerce, N. O. and A. A. (n.d.). How did the Hawaiian Islands form? Retrieved Decem-ber 18, 2019, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/hawaii.htmlYamamoto, E. K., & Lyman, J.-L. W. (2001). Racializing Environmental Justice. University of  Colorado Law Review, 72(2), 311–360.66

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0390692/manifest

Comment

Related Items