Many screenwriting experts point out that a movie’s main character need not be lovable. The audience must, however, be able to understand his or her point of view, that is, the audience must be able to see the world through the main character’s eyes.
John Locke, in his book Into the Woods, points out that “the audience has to relate to your characters, but they don’t need to approve of them. . . . Niceness tends to kill characters — if there is nothing wrong with them, nothing to offend us, then there’s almost certainly nothing to attract out attention either. Much more interesting are the rough edges, the darkness — and we love these things because though we may not consciously want to admit is, they touch something deep inside us.”
Robert McKee, in his book Story points out that “the protagonist must be empathetic; he may or may not be sympathetic. . . . Empathetic means ‘like me.’ Deep within the protagonist the audience recognizes a shared humanity. . . . A protagonist may or may not be pleasant. . . . Macbeth is a breathtaking display of the godlike power of the writer to find an empathetic center in an otherwise contemptible character.”
For example, in Shakespeare’s Henry V, the main character has his cousin beheaded when his cousin is caught plotting to assassinate him. He does not spare one of his old drinking buddies from being hanged after being caught looting. The play is preceded by Richard II, Henry IV, Part 1 and Henry IV, Part 2. The original audiences would thus have already been familiar with the title character, who was depicted in the Henry IV plays as a wild, undisciplined lad known as “Prince Harry” and by Falstaff as “Hal”. In Henry V, the young prince has become a mature man and embarks on a successful conquest of France. Sound familiar?
How, then, in the oral histories, has Lono exhibited his unsympathetic side?
One example is the young Lono’s immature and haughty dismissal of his father’s game pieces and weapons. Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes Lono’s reaction to his retainer’s explanation of the purpose of the items. Concerning pahee spears, Lono responded: “These things are worthless and have very little use; the great objection I have against them is that they are used by men for the purpose of making wagers, even to the extent of their bones, on the result of their skill after heated arguments. That is the reason they are worthless.” Concerning an olohubowling ball, Lono responded: “Throw it away; it is also worthless.” Concerning an arrow made from a sugarcane top, Lono responded “It, too, is worthless; you had better break it up and throw it away.” Concerning a wooden war club, Lono responded: “That thing is also without value. Its only use would be for a stick to turn over the stones in an imu.” “After this incident (his father) Keawenuiaumi for some time thought over the future of this boy and wondered what would become of him after he had grown up.”
Another example is Lono’s hitting Lani on the head with a stone konane (Hawaiian checkers) board when he comes to believe she has taken a lover. Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes the incident as follows:
After Lonoikiamakahiki had made out the calls, he then asked his cousin, his wife: ‘Say! Your lover Heakekoa sends you his love, I hear.’ Kaikilani did not make answer to the question put by her husband, however, but continued in her deception, by saying: ‘This here is won; that is on the run, steady progress, the top is falling, the blacks are indistinct; the whites have won.’ At this, Lonoikamakahiki took up the konane board and struck his wife on the head, inflicting painful wounds, but not severe enough, however, to kill her. Because of this, the anger of Lonoikamakahiki was aroused and his mind was greatly troubled; he then made an oath that he would never again live with Kaikilani.
Yet another example is Lono’s forsaking a good friend based on rumors within his court. He changes his mind later. Samuel Manaiakalani Kamakau in his book Ruling Chiefs described the incident as follow:
Lono made a favorite of Kapa-‘ihi-a-hilina, a person of importance before the chiefs and other members of the court, Kapa-‘ihi was made steward over all the property of the chief, but tattlers who were jealous of his being a favorite went to the chief to find fault. When Kapa-‘ihi was no longer a favorite to the chief he reminded him of their life of poverty in the wilderness of Kauai, where they wandered about hungry. Therefore great affection welled up in the chief, and Kapa-‘ihi-a-hilina became a greater favorite than he was before. Kapa-‘ihi-a-hilina composed a chant of affection for the chief, recounting their wanderings in the wilderness of Kauai. . .
.
Another example is Lono’s sleeping on the beach with a noblewoman who is on the way to the island of Hawaii to get meet her future husband after Lono thinks he has killed his wife. (One following oral history “protests too much, methinks” when it argues that he didn’t sleep with her.) Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes the incident as follows:
On the next day Ohaikawiliula arrived. She was a chiefess from Kauai, and because of the great cunning and learning displayed by Lonoikamakahiki he won Ohaikawiliula and was allowed the honor of entertaining her that night, thereby giving him further subjects with which to carry on in the game of hoopapa. After having won Ohaikawiliula for the one night, without ever having an idea of committing any sin with the chiefess from Kauai, only wishing to procure further subjects for his test with Kakuhihewa, they removed themselves to the end of the house set apart for the use of Lonoikamakahiki.
Another example is Lono’s killing members of the king of Oahu’s household when Lono wins the “inside” of the king’s house in a bet about whether Lono can recite a chant (given to him in secret by the aforementioned noblewoman). Lono thereby exhibits his skill at gambling and convinces the king of Oahu that he can be ruthless. Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes the incident as follows:
After Kakuhihewa was beaten by Lonoikamakahiki, Kakuhihewa ordered all the people to get out of the house and thus leave the house to Lonoikamakahiki, the king of Hawaii, who had won. When the order was given Lonoikamakahiki was standing just outside of the door with a war club in his hands. As soon as the order was given to vacate the house the men immediately proceeded to go out; but as soon as the first party started out they were killed by Lonoikamakahiki.
Yet another example is Lono’s allowing two of this half brothers (Kanaloakapulehu and Kanaloakaukawaiea) to be killed after they act as rebel generals during the revolt against Lono. Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes the incidents as follows:
This battle of Lonoikamakahiki at Puukohola was named the Kawaluna, because of the night strategy successfully executed by him on that occasion. Kanaloapulehu, having been made a prisoner, was killed and laid upon the alter (lele). So, died the general of the rebels.
The conquerors gave chase, meeting them on the beach at Kahua, when Pupuakea slaughtered them on the pili grass as well as on the beach, their repluse having scattered them in every direction. As for Kanaloakuakawaiea, her fled to the canoe landing and ordered the men to cover him with pebbles; the covering was only partial, however. Lonoikamakahiki and his men soon arrived upon the scene and Kanaloakuakawaiea was there slain.
A further example is Lono’s treating his younger half brother (and general!) Pupuakea or Pupukea like a servant during a trip to visit the king of Maui, Kamalalawalu, (and then slapping Pupuakea for not preparing his lunch on time). (Of course, that incident occurred before the invasion of Hawaii by the Maui king and may have been a performance to trick the Maui king that Lono was a poor ruler and the kingdom of Hawaii was vulnerable after Lono quelled the revolt by his other brothers.) Fornander, in his Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore, describes the incident as follows:
During this retirement, Kamalalawalu’s stewarts prepared food, meat, awa, and a water basin. Wherefore, Lonoikamakahiki asked Pupukea: ‘Where is our food and fish; and where is our awa?’ Pupukea answered: ‘They are near by. The meat is chicken, but it is not cooked. And as to the awa, it has not been masticated.’ Whereat, Lonoikamakahiki, infuriated by Pupukea, sprang forward and slapped his cheek. Pupukea then took the awa and chewed it. Again Lonoikamakahiki sprang forward and struck Pupukea’s cheek. Pupukea said to Lonoikamakahiki: “What! is the striking first? Why not first speak, and when the narrow openings of the ear hear the charge, then it will be just to slap?”
Counterbalancing these “there but for the grace of God go I” faults, is Lono’s allowing his older half brother (Kanaloakuaana) to live after Kanaloa leads the revolt against Lono. Lono also allowed his youngest and only full brother (Umiokalani), who fought against Lono during the revolt, to live. The oral histories do not explain how this happened. Maybe Kanaloa and Umio reached a puuhonua, or sacred place of refuge and was absolved of his crimes. Or maybe Lono could not kill his only little brother or the father of the punalua sons he shared with Kanaloa. Or maybe his older brother was so politically powerful he was “too big to flail” (pardon the pun).