More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

[damontucker]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

Hiring lawyers and taking the cruise company to court is a distinctly... I dunno, Mainland way of handling things, don't you think?

I was kind of thinking the same thing... I mean is it something that can be sued over?

Who "owns" the image of Kamehameha?

[MadAzza]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

Who "owns" the image of Kamehameha?

And how do they know he wouldn't drink champagne? He was a man, not a god.

I supposed they could have depicted him spearing his enemies or herding them over the Pali or something else less ... offensive?

[pzarquon]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

And how do they know he wouldn't drink champagne? He was a man, not a god.

Well, I'm sure Mahatma Gandhi pooped, but that doesn't mean you should use his image to sell Toilet Duck.

Kamehameha was just a guy, and certainly not a saint. He probably got all the girls, roughed up all the boys, and enjoyed a naughty word or two... and yeah, pushed a few thousand folks to their deaths off a cliff (but who's counting). But he's also an icon of Hawaiian culture, an important figure to a community that has pretty good reason to be sensitive to being caricatured and exploited.

Are people being too sensitive? You could say so. And good taste is relative. It'd probably get laughs on Howard Stern (if it hasn't already). If the ad was done by Abercrombie and Fitch, I'd have said, "Figures." But I think it's pretty obvious that Celebrity goofed, and they certainly agree, and they're doing what it can to make amends.

Again, though, how suing them accomplishes anything is a mystery to me.

[oceanpacific]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

Well, Wayne Panoke thinks they ought to pay ...........

[timkona]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

It is very possibly likely that old King Kamehameha lifted a glass of French Champagne in a Glass Flute, while dining with myriad numbers of Sea Captains aboard who knows how many ships. How else do you negotiate for cannon?

I know this other culture that is upset when folks they revere are depicted in any way.

[MadAzza]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

Well, I'm sure Mahatma Gandhi pooped, but that doesn't mean you should use his image to sell Toilet Duck.

...
Again, though, how suing them accomplishes anything is a mystery to me.

Don't get me wrong, I think it is appallingly stupid to depict *any* revered historical figure in a frivolous way for marketing purposes.

But for anyone to even think about suing is ludicrous, IMO. We don't have to sue over every perceived offense -- and it is perceived, because anything that offends is, by definition, offensive. (See "hostile work environment.")

What makes it offensive is that someone was offended -- that he/she/they perceived an offense. There ain't no objectivity about it, which I find interesting in general, not just in this case.

[LikaNui]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

The cruise line took a full-page ad to apologize in today's Advertiser, too. (Not sure if it also ran in the Star-Bulletin.)
Suing the cruise line is ridiculous. The lawsuit will be immediately thrown out of court as "frivolous", since the folks suing will of course be unable to prove that they own the image of the king or that they personally or collectively suffered any financial damage from the ad.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

Hiring lawyers and taking the cruise company to court is a distinctly... I dunno, Mainland way of handling things, don't you think?

Wat? No litigation attorneys in the Islands, then? Shame on you, Ryan - perpetuation of another stereotype; you trying to carry on Kimo55's legacy?

[Miulang]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

I don't feel sorry for the cruise line at all. All their ships fly under a foreign flag (to avoid some costly US taxes) as opposed to NCL, which flies under the US flag and pays all its taxes. Their ad agency (I think they said they were on the East Coast) and the cruise line should have vetted that image with the HVB prior to using it. Now they have to look stupid and take out full page ads in both the Star Bulletin and Advertiser to apologize. I can't believe a high power advertising agency would think it was OK to portray an inconic symbol of Hawaii with a champagne glass in his hand! That would be akin to replacing the torch of freedom that the Statue of Liberty hoists with a champagne glass.

The other thing I found out about Celebrity Cruises is their ships don't land in Kahului; they have their Maui port of call in Lahaina, and their passengers are taken ashore on skiffs, whereas NCL is berthed all the time in Kahului. I know NCL-Hawaii crews (most of whom come from the Mainland), get extensive cultural sensitivity training prior to serving on the NCL cruise ships (I heard one of their recruiters explain to some interested people how extensive the training was going to be).

Miulang

[Bard]

Re: More sacrilegious commercialisation of Hawaiian culture...

That would be akin to replacing the torch of freedom that the Statue of Liberty hoists with a champagne glass.

Maybe it's just me but that image doesn't sound offensive at all. Freebirds Burritos in Texas had a statue of liberty holding up a giant burrito instead of her torch, riding a Harley that was bursting out of the wall near the ceiling.

I could see the Kamehameha ad being taken as cultural appropriation/exploitation though...