In 2000, the noted scholar James Clifford delivered an address entitled 'Indigenous Articulations' in which he challenged dichotomies of authenticity/inauthenticity that plague theories of indigeneity in the Pacific region. Today, 'Indigenous Articulations' has travelled far beyond its original audience, and some Taiwanese scholars who analyse the literature/culture of Taiwan's indigenous peoples have adopted this work. Yet, in contrast to Clifford, these scholars have used 'Indigenous Articulations' to simultaneously explain indigenous and Han Taiwanese populations, positing Han-indigenous creolisation as preferable to indigenous self-determination. In this paper, I adopt travelling theory to examine 'Indigenous Articulations' and its movement to Taiwan studies. I then consider the works of Kuei-fen Chiu and Hueichu Chu to show how they use 'Indigenous Articulations' to support a creolised existence for Han and indigenous populations on Taiwan. Finally, I explore tensions between theoretical and ethical sustainability in Taiwan studies and possibilities for recognising indigenous rights in this field.