About this video

• Video Title: Mea Noʻeau - Art, Composition, Expression
• Channel: Noah (Keola) Ryan
• Speakers: Noah (Keola) Ryan
• Duration: 00:28:03

Overview

This video explores the concept of "Mea Noʻeau," which translates to skillfully made or crafted items, distinguishing it from Western "Fine Art." It delves into the functional and spiritual aspects of Hawaiian art, contrasting it with art created solely for aesthetic appreciation. The video showcases various examples of Mea Noʻeau, including tools, religious artifacts, featherwork, and bark cloth, highlighting their creation, materials, and cultural significance. It also touches upon contemporary Hawaiian art that blends traditional and modern elements.

Key takeaways

• Mea Noʻeau vs. Fine Art: Mea Noʻeau items are skillfully crafted and often possess a functional or spiritual purpose, unlike Fine Art, which is primarily appreciated for its aesthetic value.
• Mana in Creation: The process of creating Mea Noʻeau imbues the objects with "mana" (spiritual power) derived from the natural world, the artisan's effort, and the object's use.
• Examples of Mea Noʻeau: The video illustrates Mea Noʻeau through examples like ʻAʻūʻa (tools for preparing food), Kīʻi (statues for worship), Mahiole (feathered helmets denoting rank), ʻAhuʻula (feathered capes), and Kapa (bark cloth with intricate designs).
• Featherwork and Kapa: Hawaiian featherwork is renowned for its vibrant colors from endemic birds, while Kapa making is a labor-intensive process involving beating and meshing fibrous bark to create intricate textiles.
• Contemporary Hawaiian Art: A growing movement of "native Hawaiian art" exists, creating pieces that are aesthetically appreciated like Fine Art but carry a distinct Hawaiian perspective, bridging traditional and modern artistic expressions.

Artists distinguish between "Native Hawaiian Art" and Fine Art because the former carries a unique cultural significance and perspective beyond mere aesthetics. While Fine Art is primarily appreciated for its beauty and composition, Native Hawaiian Art is rooted in cultural identity, historical context, and a specific worldview. This art form often expresses a distinct voice or perspective embedded within the pieces, reflecting the artist's connection to their heritage and environment. Even when these contemporary art pieces might appear similar to Fine Art in their intention for display, their underlying cultural narrative and expression differentiate them.

That's an interesting observation. The video does discuss how contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art" is distinct from traditional Mea Noʻeau and Western Fine Art. It mentions that these contemporary pieces are made with the intention of being displayed, like Fine Art, and are appreciated for their aesthetics and physical qualities. However, it also emphasizes that they are not Mea Noʻeau because they don't have a functional value.

The video states that Native Hawaiian Art "express[es] a uniquely Hawaiian point of view or or um or perspective." While the examples you provided (hula, hoe waʻa, lawaiʻa) are certainly traditional Hawaiian cultural practices, the video itself doesn't explicitly state that contemporary Native Hawaiian Art exclusively focuses on depicting these specific practices. Instead, it describes them as carrying a "unique native voice or perspective that is embedded within these pieces." This could encompass a broader range of themes and expressions that are culturally significant to Hawaiians, not limited to direct depictions of activities.

Yes, that's a core distinction highlighted in the video. Even though both Fine Art and contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art" are appreciated for their physical qualities and are intended for display, the key difference lies in the unique cultural perspective embedded in Native Hawaiian Art. The video emphasizes that this art expresses a "uniquely Hawaiian point of view or perspective," which sets it apart from art that might not carry such specific cultural or historical roots.

Contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art" differs from Mea Noʻeau primarily in its intention and function.

While both are skillfully made and can be appreciated for their aesthetic and physical qualities, Mea Noʻeau was traditionally created with a specific functional or spiritual purpose. For example, tools were made to be used, religious statues were for worship, and feather cloaks denoted rank.

Contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art," on the other hand, is made with the intention of being put on display and appreciated for its aesthetic value, much like Fine Art. It does not have a functional value in the way traditional Mea Noʻeau items did. The video describes these contemporary pieces as existing in a "hybrid space" – they are not Mea Noʻeau because they aren't functional, but they are also distinct from pure Fine Art due to the unique cultural perspective and voice they express.

You've captured the essence of the distinction well! The video explains that contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art" indeed expresses a unique Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiian) point of view, which is a significant differentiator.

Crucially, as you noted, it lacks the functionality that is inherent in Mea Noʻeau. While Mea Noʻeau was created for use (as tools, religious objects, etc.), "Native Hawaiian Art" is primarily designed for display and aesthetic appreciation. This places it in a category separate from both traditional functional art and purely Western Fine Art, occupying a unique space that blends cultural expression with artistic presentation.

The video touches upon the unique aspects of Native Hawaiian Art, stating it expresses a "uniquely Hawaiian point of view or or um or perspective" and that these artisans are "recreating some old uh traditional uh or ancient styles of of pieces with a um a more contemporary um what do you call uh contemporary elements." This strongly suggests a focus on Hawaiian cultural motifs.

However, the transcript does not explicitly state that Mea Noʻeau incorporates designs from around the Pacific. The focus is more on the materials and the functionality of Mea Noʻeau, rather than its design influences being exclusively Pacific-wide. While it's possible that Mea Noʻeau did have influences from across the Pacific, the video doesn't make that specific claim to contrast it with Native Hawaiian Art. The primary difference highlighted is the functionality versus display-focused nature and the unique cultural perspective.

The video does indicate that contemporary "Native Hawaiian Art" is created by artisans today, often incorporating "contemporary elements" and using "different materials." This suggests a connection to current aspects of Hawaiʻi, which could include its landscapes and scenes.

However, the transcript does not explicitly state that contemporary Native Hawaiian Art focuses on current landscapes and scenes from Hawaiʻi. While this is a plausible interpretation of "contemporary elements" and "unique Hawaiian point of view," it's not directly stated in the text.

Regarding Mea Noʻeau, the video mentions it was made "from elements in the natural world" and gives examples like wood, shark teeth, and vines. It also shows images of carved wooden tools (ʻAʻūʻa) and stone (Kīʻi), which aligns with your description of "traditional wood or stone medium" and ancient practices. But again, the direct comparison regarding landscapes and scenes versus ancient art practices isn't explicitly drawn in the provided text. The main contrast presented is between functional art (Mea Noʻeau) and art for display with a cultural perspective (Native Hawaiian Art).