‘Pissed Off and Confused’/‘Grateful and (Re)Moved’: Affect, Privilege and National Commemoration in Aotearoa New Zealand

Abstract

This article explores affect, colonial privilege, and the cultural politics of national commemoration in Aotearoa New Zealand. Based on focus‐group interviews around two major national days, we examine means through which feelings and emotions are deployed in ways that enable the reproduction of social advantage. Situating affect within patterns of relationship, four interrelated affective‐discursive practices are explored. In relation to Waitangi Day, agents tend to work under the rubric of anger and confusion. For Anzac Day, being grateful and moved shapes the interaction, although participants often indicate preferences towards “having a day off.” Given the colonial context in which these practices circulate, analysis observes the associated freedom and ease by which affective‐discursive privilege is (re)produced. Often incongruent and rarely challenged, privilege allows associated actors to do what they want, when they want, however they want. This affective climate authorizes the ongoing reproduction of, and justification for, membership to a higher‐status ethnic group of which unearned opportunities and entitlements remain its everyday, expected currency.

The cost of doing politics: A critical discursive analysis of Australian liberal politicians’ responses to accusations by female politicians of bullying and intimidation

“…In this sense, a key analytic tool is the notion of interpretative repertoires or “coherent ways of speaking that form over time, becoming easily recognisable arguments, assumptions, metaphors, figures of speech, and images” (Van Der Merwe & Wetherell, 2020, p. 230). Such repertoires reflect collectively shared understandings of social life, and talk is understood as drawing on rhetorically persuasive strategies that have currency in a particular culture (McConville et al, 2020). The current analysis focuses on identifying the discursive repertoires mobilised by politicians when making sense of accusations of bullying and intimidation, and how these discursive framings functioned to achieve particular versions of (political) reality.…”

“Deal me in”: Hillary Clinton and gender in the 2016 US presidential election

“…CDP also examines the inconsistent nature of accounts that are routinely produced in everyday talk (Edley & Wetherell, 1997). Within this framework, accounts are understood as drawing on the rhetorically persuasive strategies available in a particular culture at a particular time and place, organised in ways that achieve particular social actions (McConville et al., 2020). The analysis focused on identifying the discursive repertoires mobilised in media discussions pertaining to Clinton’s references to gender, and how these discursive framings functioned to achieve particular versions of reality.…”

‘Time for a troll’; the standard story propping up the colonial state

“…We're one people (…) and we don't want 'Maori' rights (…) privileging them and dividing our country. (McCreanor 2020, p. 9) Like the numerous variants studied (Tuffin 2008;Phelan and Shearer 2009;Moewaka Barnes et al 2012;McConville et al 2020;Stewart 2020;Wetherell et al 2020) the narrative outlined presumes the rightness of the colonising institutions, practices, and beliefs creating a context for negative portrayals and criticisms of 'Maori' actions and culture. Constantly recycled by media (Ballara 1986;Nicholson 1988;Barclay and Liu 2003;Phelan 2009;Phelan and Shearer 2009) and talk (McCreanor and Nairn 2002;Wetherell and Potter 1992) the standard story provides a form of 'collective unconscious' or 'settler commonsense' (Nairn and McCreanor 1991, pp.…”