title: Introduction and dedication to Matiu Dickson

authors: Te Aho, Linda

subjects: Dickson, Matiu

abstract: This edition of the Waikato Law Review is dedicated to our dear friend and colleague, Matiu Dickson, and we thank Judge Craig Coxhead for his wonderful tribute to Matiu. The morning of the 7th of April 2016 will forever be imprinted in our minds and hearts. Matiu passed away that morning having just delivered the final speech in the opening ceremony for our new Law Building here at Waikato University. It was said at his tangi that this was a high price to be paid for such a building. A price that we would never have chosen to pay. That price brings an obligation to honour and respect the legacy that Matiu has left us, his commitment to the Faculty’s founding goals and, in particular, the promotion of a bicultural legal education for Māori and non-Māori alike; that tikanga is recognised as the first law of Aotearoa New Zealand and continues to form a central part of our curriculum. Matiu personified the bicultural mission of Te Piringa Faculty of Law; that, through its curriculum, research activities and its structures, the Faculty would be the forefront of the development of a bicultural legal philosophy. Matiu worked hard to ensure this mission remained a stated goal of the Faculty and to give it meaning over his 20 year tenure. He constantly worked to infuse it into the structures and processes of this Law Faculty. He worked and campaigned for years, and successfully so, to make sure the name gifted to the Faculty by Dame Te Atairangikaahu at its founding, “Te Piringa”, became our Faculty’s officially recognised name. He was passionate about the use of te reo Māori in assessment. He encouraged and facilitated the use of te reo Māori mooting. It was our colleague, Ani Mikaere, who, during her time here as a legal academic, first publicly articulated tikanga Māori as the first law of Aotearoa. Through the years, Matiu and our academic colleagues, including Stephanie Milroy, Craig Coxhead, Caren Fox (all now Māori Land Court judges), Leah Whiu, Harata Paterson, Nan Seuffert, Ruth Bush, Wayne Rumbles, Robert Joseph, Valmaine Toki and ourselves, reaffirmed tikanga as the first law of Aotearoa in our teaching and research. Years later, the article “Lex Aotearoa: An Heroic Attempt to Map the Māori Dimension in Modern New Zealand Law” by Justice Joseph Williams2 developed the idea further and is currently the leading piece on the weaving of tikanga and Anglo-New Zealand law.3 Matiu Dickson was an expert in tikanga, the first law of Aotearoa. He lived it every day. He created and taught courses on it and made sure it was integrated throughout the curriculum. In Matiu’s honour, it is entirely appropriate that there are a number of contributions in this Review that have a Māori or Indigenous theme, and we hope future issues will likewise assure such a balance.

text: Introduction and dedication to Matiu Dickson This edition of the Waikato Law Review is dedicated to our dear friend and colleague, Matiu Dickson, and we thank Judge Craig Coxhead for his wonderful tribute to Matiu. The morning of the 7th of April 2016 will forever be imprinted in our minds and hearts. Matiu passed away that morning having just delivered the final speech in the opening ceremony for our new Law Building here at Waikato University. It was said at his tangi that this was a high price to be paid for such a building. A price that we would never have chosen to pay. That price brings an obligation to honour and respect the legacy that Matiu has left us, his commitment to the Faculty’s founding goals and, in particular, the promotion of a bicultural legal education for Māori and non-Māori alike; that tikanga is recognised as the first law of Aotearoa New Zealand and continues to form a central part of our curriculum. Matiu personified the bicultural mission of Te Piringa Faculty of Law; that, through its curriculum, research activities and its structures, the Faculty would be the forefront of the development of a bicultural legal philosophy. Matiu worked hard to ensure this mission remained a stated goal of the Faculty and to give it meaning over his 20 year tenure. He constantly worked to infuse it into the structures and processes of this Law Faculty. He worked and campaigned for years, and successfully so, to make sure the name gifted to the Faculty by Dame Te Atairangikaahu at its founding, “Te Piringa”, became our Faculty’s officially recognised name. He was passionate about the use of te reo Māori in assessment. He encouraged and facilitated the use of te reo Māori mooting. It was our colleague, Ani Mikaere, who, during her time here as a legal academic, first publicly articulated tikanga Māori as the first law of Aotearoa. Through the years, Matiu and our academic colleagues, including Stephanie Milroy, Craig Coxhead, Caren Fox (all now Māori Land Court judges), Leah Whiu, Harata Paterson, Nan Seuffert, Ruth Bush, Wayne Rumbles, Robert Joseph, Valmaine Toki and ourselves, reaffirmed tikanga as the first law of Aotearoa in our teaching and research. Years later, the article “Lex Aotearoa: An Heroic Attempt to Map the Māori Dimension in Modern New Zealand Law” by Justice Joseph Williams2 developed the idea further and is currently the leading piece on the weaving of tikanga and Anglo-New Zealand law.3 Matiu Dickson was an expert in tikanga, the first law of Aotearoa. He lived it every day. He created and taught courses on it and made sure it was integrated throughout the curriculum. In Matiu’s honour, it is entirely appropriate that there are a number of contributions in this Review that have a Māori or Indigenous theme, and we hope future issues will likewise assure such a balance.

year: 2016

title: Te Raupatu o Tauranga Moana = The confiscation of Tauranga lands. [Volume 1]

authors: Stokes, Evelyn

subjects: Tauranga lands

abstract: A report providing a historical and geographical overview on the confiscation of Tauranga lands. In two volumes, volume one comprises a narrative of the events described as the raupatu, the confiscation of lands in the Tauranga Moana tribal area under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863.  Volume two is a collection of documents, edited and annotated which were compiled in support of the report. These documents include personal accounts, tribal history, land purchases, lands returned and crown transactions.

text: Te Raupatu o Tauranga Moana = The confiscation of Tauranga lands. [Volume 1] A report providing a historical and geographical overview on the confiscation of Tauranga lands. In two volumes, volume one comprises a narrative of the events described as the raupatu, the confiscation of lands in the Tauranga Moana tribal area under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863.  Volume two is a collection of documents, edited and annotated which were compiled in support of the report. These documents include personal accounts, tribal history, land purchases, lands returned and crown transactions.

year: 1990

title: 'He is a gentleman. I am a gentleman’s daughter. So far we are equal’: Gender performance in twenty-first century adaptations of Jane Austen’s Emma and Pride and prejudice

authors: Hodgson, Laura

abstract: The core focus of this thesis is gender performance in two of Jane Austen’s novels, Pride and Prejudice and Emma, and twenty-first-century adaptations of these novels. The thesis revolves around six key texts: Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice, its 2005 film adaptation of the same name directed by Joe Wright, and the transmedia modernisation, The Lizzie Bennet Diaries; as well as Austen’s novel Emma, its 2020 film adaptation of the same name directed by Autumn de Wilde, and the transmedia web series, Emma Approved. There have undoubtedly been shifts in gender performance over the two hundred years since Austen published her novels, but these are not always reflected in the adaptations. In part this is due to the surprisingly progressive nature of some of Austen’s meditations on gender, with Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice presenting as a pre-feminist and George Knightley from Emma performing as a pre-feminist man. These aspects of gender performance are extended by Keira Knightley’s portrayal of Elizabeth Bennet in Wright’s film, which reframes the character as a Romantic feminist, and Johnny Flynn’s performance of Mr. Knightley as a hero positioned under the female gaze in de Wilde’s film. 

Yet, the thesis also reveals that Austen’s feminist precursors are not always developed in contemporary adaptations. Indeed, Lizzie Bennet in The Lizzie Bennet Diaries is a postfeminist who is far from being an autonomous twenty-first century woman and is dependent on family and male suitors to provide her with opportunities. Likewise, the opportunity to reimagine Austen’s characters in a twenty-first-century gender context is also ignored in some adaptations, particularly the transmedia web series, with Emma in Emma Approved continuing to endorse patriarchal structures in the same way that she does in Austen’s original novel. The dandyism of Frank Churchill in Austen’s Emma is also undercut in Emma Approved through a performance of heteronormativity that sidelines the queer potential initiated by previous adaptations, such as the 1995 film Clueless. Most striking is the stagnant gender performance of Mr. Darcy from Pride and Prejudice who remains the embodiment of hegemonic gentry masculinity in both the film and the web series. This thesis reveals that the lack of change in gender performance in some contemporary Austen adaptations demonstrates the persistence of hegemonic masculinity in the twenty-first century, while postfeminist performances of gender at times seem regressive.

text: 'He is a gentleman. I am a gentleman’s daughter. So far we are equal’: Gender performance in twenty-first century adaptations of Jane Austen’s Emma and Pride and prejudice The core focus of this thesis is gender performance in two of Jane Austen’s novels, Pride and Prejudice and Emma, and twenty-first-century adaptations of these novels. The thesis revolves around six key texts: Austen’s novel Pride and Prejudice, its 2005 film adaptation of the same name directed by Joe Wright, and the transmedia modernisation, The Lizzie Bennet Diaries; as well as Austen’s novel Emma, its 2020 film adaptation of the same name directed by Autumn de Wilde, and the transmedia web series, Emma Approved. There have undoubtedly been shifts in gender performance over the two hundred years since Austen published her novels, but these are not always reflected in the adaptations. In part this is due to the surprisingly progressive nature of some of Austen’s meditations on gender, with Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice presenting as a pre-feminist and George Knightley from Emma performing as a pre-feminist man. These aspects of gender performance are extended by Keira Knightley’s portrayal of Elizabeth Bennet in Wright’s film, which reframes the character as a Romantic feminist, and Johnny Flynn’s performance of Mr. Knightley as a hero positioned under the female gaze in de Wilde’s film. 

Yet, the thesis also reveals that Austen’s feminist precursors are not always developed in contemporary adaptations. Indeed, Lizzie Bennet in The Lizzie Bennet Diaries is a postfeminist who is far from being an autonomous twenty-first century woman and is dependent on family and male suitors to provide her with opportunities. Likewise, the opportunity to reimagine Austen’s characters in a twenty-first-century gender context is also ignored in some adaptations, particularly the transmedia web series, with Emma in Emma Approved continuing to endorse patriarchal structures in the same way that she does in Austen’s original novel. The dandyism of Frank Churchill in Austen’s Emma is also undercut in Emma Approved through a performance of heteronormativity that sidelines the queer potential initiated by previous adaptations, such as the 1995 film Clueless. Most striking is the stagnant gender performance of Mr. Darcy from Pride and Prejudice who remains the embodiment of hegemonic gentry masculinity in both the film and the web series. This thesis reveals that the lack of change in gender performance in some contemporary Austen adaptations demonstrates the persistence of hegemonic masculinity in the twenty-first century, while postfeminist performances of gender at times seem regressive.

year: 2023