554 the contemporary pacific • 30:2 (2018) impacts. In part 2, Craig Santos talizing of American studies. In her Perez’s essay “Guam and Archipelagic trans indigenous comparative readings American Studies” challenges his read- of Māori, Haida, and Austronesian ers to listen to the “decolonial voices Taiwanese visual arts and literary of Indigenous poets” and reexamines writings, she advocates for a “mobile, the relationships between territorial- flexible, and voyaging subject who is ity and islands. He presents two new not physically or culturally circum- terms: the “auto-archipelago”—the scribed by terrestrial boundaries” idea that no island is an island because (282). These essays, which comple- it is itself an archipelago—and “ter- ment and extend work in Native ripelago,” which “highlights the American and Indigenous studies and twinned phenomena of relationality ecocriticism, make important steps and territoriality” (104). Both terms toward continuing conversations work to decenter colonial episte- between these overlapping fields. mologies and instead reassert Indig- With these powerful reinscriptions enous ones. In part 4, Brandy Nalani around territoriality, relation, and McDougall offers the term “rhetorical assemblage, Archipelagic American archipelago” to examine the symbols Studies sets an important new course and exigencies of archipelago’s politi- toward geographic, political, and cal implications.
The Contemporary Pacific – University of Hawai'I Press
Published: Aug 10, 2018