Weddings, arguably the most frequent of the ‘traditional’ celebrations,^[10] serve as a useful illustration of the way in which these new dynamics transformed these events. Over 20 years, typical weddings became larger and more expensive. Guest lists grew from around 50 to 500 people. Wedding photos during the period reflect the growth of bridal parties from four to around 16. Small, family-catered celebrations held in church halls became large, commercially-catered events held first in reception lounges, then medium-priced hotels and finally, in the early 1980s, in the banquet halls of the city’s most expensive hotels.

When there were no more exclusive venues to ‘conquer’, competition focused on more expensive menus, larger bridal parties, booking the most expensive Samoan bands and the elaboration of formal Samoan exchanges that went alongside the wedding. The role of kin moved from sewing, cooking and serving to the raising of money to purchase specialist services such as bridal gown making, limousine hire and videography of the event. Alongside the wedding formalities, were another set of ‘traditional’ activities based on the exchanges between the bride’s and groom’s families which provided further scope for elaboration.

New factors increased the size and social complexity of these events. In Samoa, guests and matai were typically from either the bride’s or the groom’s families and well-known to all involved, which meant that the necessary protocols could be planned with some confidence. In New Zealand, guests included workmates, fellow church-goers and unrelated friends, and it became increasingly difficult to plan for these. The uncertainty raised the possibility of denying unexpected guests due deference, and forced sponsoring families to raise more money to cover these possibilities to avoid appearing ignorant of Samoan etiquette.

As guest lists grew, so did the number of matai who attended the weddings in an ‘unofficial’ capacity. Each of these chiefs could claim the right to speak and could reasonably expect a gift for having contributed prestige to the event. Failure to provide appropriately generous gifts for all who claimed them left a family with a reputation for meanness or, worse still, for attempting to stage something for which they lacked the knowledge and resources. Families were forced to estimate how many might attend and to provide for the upper estimate or risk public embarrassment. There were not only more matai, but also more complex relations between those present, as social networks extended to include the increasing numbers of non-Samoans invited to weddings. The increasing number of European (Papalagi) guests attending raised questions of how they were to be integrated into ceremonial sequences and their presence acknowledged. Those controlling the events needed ever more skill to ensure that all who were entitled to either social deference or gifts were identified and acknowledged publicly.

The formal exchanges of gifts, which occurred between the bride’s and groom’s families at the conclusion of the ceremonies, also became more complex and more expensive. As the bride’s and groom’s families competed to acknowledge the importance of the other by conspicuous demonstrations of their own wealth, pressure for ever-more formal and more generous gifts grew. The numbers of fine mats, or ‘ie toga, given by women’s families at large weddings, grew from around 20 to over 2,000. The value of gifts of goods (oloa), usually food and money, given by grooms’ families to brides’ families also grew dramatically, as did the formality surrounding the exchanges.

Finally, gifts received by the representatives of the bride’s and groom’s āiga on these occasions had then to be redistributed among members of their āiga who had contributed to the wedding, as acknowledgment of their part in the proceedings. As the number of sub-lineages contributing grew, so too did the political complexity of redistribution. An un-diplomatic redistribution would mean that the family would have considerable difficulty securing support later from those whom they offended.

But despite the risks inherent in poor ‘performances’ on these occasions, āiga continued to mount larger, more complex weddings because the sociopolitical rewards of good performances were high. The same could be said of the growth of new kin-sponsored occasions which emerged in New Zealand over the period, and carried the same sociopolitical possibilities and risks.