BOOKS

RELIGION AND RACE IN NEW ZEALAND by Hans Mol National Council of Churches, 15s reviewed by Ken Hills (Ken Hills was formerly Vicar of Porirua and is now Industrial chaplain in a Social Group Ministry in Birmingham.—Ed.) The first thing to be said about this small (about 80 pages) book is to welcome it, on two counts: First, because it has some very valuable things to contribute to the question of race relations generally, which should commend it to anyone seriously interested in the mass of communities which we call New Zealand. In particular a very important analysis of the (or some of the) perspectives from which the question can be viewed, and, of very special importance, the dangers of over emphasising one or other of them—which we generally do, even in official circles, and thereby set the seal of failure on our well-intentioned efforts. The second reason for welcoming this study, on general grounds, is the ‘theory of Race Relations as a basis for policy’. This is not the easiest of reading, but is undoubtedly valuable—and practical. It is a three-stage description of the movement towards and away from each other in a situation where there is a majority and a minority. I'll leave you to read it, but will pick out three things for special attention when you've grasped the general theory. One, is a summary of ‘The Reasons why N.Z. race relations are relatively good’—the usual theme for smug self-satisfaction; but this summary is realistic, and leaves no room for satisfaction with our present state. No one reading it should be left without the knowledge that they personally are involved in improving relationships. Two, is the author's statement “the negative stereotype of the Maori is an articulate and concrete expression of the values which the majority intends to protect.” I think this can be said of the Maoris negative generalisations about Pakehas too. If the reader, Maori or Pakeha, realises that when he thinks or repeats some hoary old blanket-description of the other race he is really merely saying something very revealing about his own stiffness and insecurity, he will be ready to appreciate the third thing I want to underline; when the third stage ‘Mutual Inclusion’ is reached, I quote; “Both groups (Pakeha and Maori) will have gone through a process of resocialisation (with the majority doing most of the socialising) and mutual influencing in face to face, smaller, intimate groups.” In this, general, section there are just two criticisms I would suggest. The first one is Dr Mol's persistent use of ‘westernisation’ as being the same as ‘urbanisation’. It seems to me that this is unhelpful for ‘westernisation’ carries undertones and historical connotations which might rightly be resisted. Further, ‘urbanisation’ is in most respects, in our age, a new thing which is by no means ‘western’ merely. It is the revolution of our age which is embroiling all men alike—and bewildering them regardless of race of historical background. The Pakeha is often by no means on his own home ground in the new urban revolution, and is in no position to paternalise his own country cousin let alone rural Maoris. The second criticism is that not enough is made of Ritchie's comment that the intricate structure of ‘maoritanga’ has “… an amazing similarity to the rural proletariat … in any part of the western world”. If urbanisation is inevitable, as seems to be the case, then the most important things about maoritanga will be (quoting Metge) that “adaptability has always been the real strength of Maori culture”, for Maoris with adaptability will be prized citizens of any race in the painful business of urbanisation. This brings me to the sections which deal with ‘What the Churches say they do’ and ‘What they actually do’ (which aren't as different as one might have thought). The constant criticism of the protestant and Anglican churches (who comprise his publishers, the N.C.C.) as amorphous and unable to influence the behaviour of their members is paired with the comment that they are thereby dedicated mainly to protecting old values. This could mean that they are busily preserving Maoritanga while utterly out of touch, in practice, with what is happening in the modern, urban, world. Dr Mol has a dilemma! He is writing for