The First Review of My Work

Someone has finally reviewed something I wrote.  Although there have been general reviews of Always Speaking (e.g. the post by Dr Matthew Palmer in the Maori Law Review), this is the first time someone has actually engaged with my writing specifically.  In academia, reviews of your work are an indicator of its influence.  Like politicians and celebrities, if nobody's talking about you, you're not really working.

The reviewer, Prof Michael Belgrave, is an historian here at Massey.  I learnt he was doing a review of some Huia books, including Always Speaking, last year during a video conference.  His face appeared to squish uncomfortably when he realised I was in the audience.  I was a little worried that the result would be bad (like REALLY bad), but the result wasn't too terrible. 

Here's the one sentence:

"In one of the few debates between authors in these collections, and almost at a footnote level, Gray-Sharp in Always Speaking, explores different interpretations of sovereignty and rangatiratanga and distinguishes herself from Mutu in seeing self-determination and rangatiratanga as claims for shared sovereignty with the Crown or self-determination against the Crown."

I do not actually distinguish myself at all, because I take no specific conception of tino rangatiratanga as primary.  But Prof Belgrave flatters me no end by putting me in the same sentence as Prof Margaret Mutu.  And finally somebody is talking!

CITATION
Belgrave, M. P.  (2013). Review article. Journal of New Zealand & Pacific Studies, 1(2), 203-211.