Composing for the jubilee: whose whakataukī, whose tūpuna?
A Year 13 ākonga is composing a two-minute haka taparahi for their kura's 75th jubilee, to be performed in four weeks by a rōpū of 20. Three decisions have surfaced. First, the opening line uses a whakataukī the ākonga found online and shortened by four kupu so it fits the beat. Second, the third section names a tūpuna of the local hapū - the ākonga has whakapapa to that hapū through a grandmother but has never spoken to the whānau about using the name. Third, a Tūhoe form learnt from a visiting tutor has replaced the local form in two lines, which the kaiako says reads as 'borrowed costume'. The jubilee committee wants the programme to credit the ākonga as sole composer, and the kaiako wants the whakataukī acknowledged as coming from an identifiable source.
1. Sort the elements of the composition into those that must change, those that need consent, and those the ākonga is free to keep. Justify the sorting.
Read the worked answer
Three categories, not one list.
1. Needs consent before performance - the tūpuna name. Whakapapa through a grandmother gives a real connection, but it does not give a mandate to use a named tūpuna in a public haka. The name carries the whānau's mana, and the whānau are the ones who decide how it is spoken. This cannot be fixed by editing the line; it needs a conversation.
2. Needs correction or attribution - the whakataukī. Using someone else's words is not automatically wrong; altering them is a different matter. Four kupu removed to fit a beat can invert or narrow the meaning, and a shortened whakataukī attributed to nobody reads as the ākonga's own. Either restore the full text and rework the line, or keep the shortening with permission and clear acknowledgement.
3. Needs a decision and consistency - the dialect. Mixing dialect forms is not inherently wrong; many composers use forms from several rohe. What fails is a form dropped into an otherwise local text for flavour. Decide which voice the haka speaks in and hold it, or credit the tutor's contribution openly if the borrowed forms stay.
4. Free to keep - the creative work. The structure, the imagery, the tune, the pūkana placement, the ending. Creative licence is genuine; it just cannot be used to absorb other people's material. That is the distinction the ākonga has to be able to draw by the end of this.
2. The whakataukī is the most urgent fix. Set out the options and the trade-off each carries.
Read the worked answer
Option A - restore the full whakataukī. Rework the line: change the entry point, split the phrase across two lines, use a longer rhythmic figure, or slow the first line and let the beat re-establish on the second. Cost: rehearsal time and a rewrite of the opening. Gain: the meaning is intact and nothing is taken.
Option B - keep the shortened form with acknowledgement. Acceptable only if a speaker of the reo confirms the shortening does not change the meaning, and the source is named in the score and in the programme. Cost: the item carries a visible debt in every public outing. Gain: the beat survives.
Option C - replace it with a whakataukī from the ākonga's own hapū or iwi. Often the strongest answer. The item gains a whakapapa instead of borrowing one, and the ākonga learns how to source correctly from kaumātua. Cost: research time inside a four-week window.
Option D - compose an original line. No debt, no consent needed, though the kaiako should check it sounds like natural reo and not a translation of an English slogan.
Recommendation under this deadline: C if a kaumātua can be reached this week, A if not, B only with a confirmed meaning check. The decision criterion is not which sounds best - it is which one the ākonga can defend in five years.
3. Draft the advice you would give the ākonga about the tūpuna reference and the committee's programme wording, including how to approach the whānau.
Read the worked answer
On the programme wording. Crediting the ākonga as sole composer is incomplete and slightly misleading: the item carries a whakataukī from elsewhere and a tūpuna name from a hapū. The programme should read: composed by [ākonga]; whakataukī from [source], used with permission/adapted with permission; composed with the support of [kaumātua/whānau]. That is not a diminishment - it is how composed haka normally appear.
On approaching the whānau. Not a text message, and not a request for a yes/no. The ākonga should go with the kaiako, take the written text, explain the kaupapa of the jubilee, and ask to hear the story behind the tūpuna. Asking to hear the story is the point: it shows the name is being used as whakapapa rather than decoration, and it usually produces guidance about how the name should be framed.
If the answer is no. Remove the name, generalise the line ('ngā tūpuna o te hapū' rather than a named ancestor), thank the whānau in writing, and note the limit for next time. A no handled well keeps the door open; a yes obtained by pressure is worthless and will be remembered.
What the ākonga gains. Three things: a haka that can be performed anywhere without explaining away a debt, a relationship with kaumātua who will help with the next composition, and the skill of asking.