Seminar 1 - Rabbit Proof Fence PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Seminar 1 - Rabbit Proof Fence PDF

Description

Facultad de Filosofía y Letras Departamento de Filología Inglesa, Francesa y INTRODUCCIÓN CULTURAL AL MUNDO ANGLÓFONO

SEMINAR 1: Educating the Other: Rabbit-Proof Fence In settler colonies native children were educated in English and forbidden to speak their own language. This type of educational policies, devised to assimilate and destroy indigenous cultures and languages, were particularly destructive in the United States, Canada and Australia. In Australia half-caste children were forcibly removed from their homes and families, often forever, and taken to schools thousands of miles away. There they were given basic training in the 3 Rs and then sent to work at cattle stations or as household servants; only a small number of brilliant children made it into secondary school. The thousands of victims of the system have become known as the Stolen Generations. Seminar 1 will be devoted to a discussion of the colonial policies of acculturation in Australia and their depiction in Philip Noyce’s 2002 film Rabbit Proof Fence.

Rabbit-Proof Fence

 ‘Now, what is to happen to [half-caste children]? Are we to allow the creation of an unwanted third race? Should the coloureds be encouraged to go back to the black or should they be advanced to white status and be absorbed in the white population? ... Here is the answer: three generations — half-blood grandmother, quadroon daughter, octoroon grandson. Now, as you can see in the third generation, or third cross, no trace of native origin is apparent. The continuing infiltration of white blood finally stamps out the black colour. The Aboriginal has simply been bred out.’  ‘Hundreds of half-caste children have been gathered up and brought here [the Moore River settlement] to be given the benefit of everything our culture has to offer. For if we are to fit and train such children for the future, they cannot be left as they are; and in spite of himself the native must be helped.’ Kenneth Branagh as Auber Octavius Neville

Facultad de Filosofía y Letras Departamento de Filología Anglogermánica y Francesa INTRODUCCIÓN CULTURAL AL MUNDO ANGLÓFONO

1. As you watch the film, take notes and reflect on the following aspects:

Alemana

1. General themes: -

-

-

The various meanings of the fence: Metaphor of the barrier imposed by Europeans between the them and the Aborigines, white people saw themselves as a superior race and that they had a superior status so they didn’t want to be put as the same level as Aborigines, they didn’t think Aborigines belonged in their society so they were cast aside, in their eyes they weren’t the same so a figurative wall was built to send the message / Symbol of how colonizers changed the landscape as they pleased and how they saw convenient for them/ A cordon sanitaire that stops rabbits invading the farming area and destroy the crops The role of English: The film starts with the narrator talking in their native language from the Jigalong (metaphor of how were things before the colonization) then English is imposed by settlers to enforced their white culture and power, trying to erase the Aborigines languages, tradition and culture. The Australian government’s view and treatment of Aborigines: After the Aborigines Act every aspect of the life of the Australian natives were controlled by the government, limiting their way of live and having them in a hold difficult of scape. The government strip them of their rights and were treated as if they were inferior as it was how they saw them. Australia government took away (by force) Aboriginal children that were considered half-caste (that could pass as “white” enough/one progenitor was European) to educate and integrate them into the white Australia society, erasing in the process their culture, language and roots. Government renamed the children to a western European name to “integrate” them into the white society and cut any link whit their clan, a way of enforce the white culture. It was a way of own them, control them and demonstrate their white supremacy over the Aboriginal people, all of this behind the pretext of given them a better life and save them of their distress and doom, integration and hero complex typical of white colonizers. Aborigines were saw as savages so they have to be “save” from themselves. It was also a way to clean their conscience, still thinking they were the “good guys” helping the poor natives

2. 1’ 30’’ – 1’ 50”: How does the arrival of the white fence-builders affect the Jigalong community? The arrival of the settlers changed the way people from Jigalong lived. Before the arrival they were free to roam along their land and live the way they pleased with their culture intact, but with the fence-builders came the white culture and it was imposed over them like for example with the opening of the storehouse and the selling of European goods. Aborigines weren’t free to wander their land anymore, they were encased by the settlers, confined to their camp. Why do the Aboriginals keep going to the storehouse? Because on ration day they were given clothes, food and other things. They weren’t free anymore on their land and needed to survive so they keep going there for resources. 3. 5’ 35”: What is A. O. Neville’s job title, and his duties? What does it reveal about the Australian government’s view of the Aborigines? His job title was The Chief Protector of Aborigines in Perth, Western Australia, the title was created after de Aborigines Act. His duties were the removal of “half-caste” Aborigines children from their families and communities, then give the children to white families to educate and integrate them in the white Australian society. It was a way of controlling the Aboriginal community from clothes, marriage to even when the mothers could see their children. They wanted to stop the Aborigines for being “fullblood” as they called it, wanted to prevent the continuity of their race so they mixed it and separated them. The Aborigines were a burden for the government and didn’t know what to do with. 4. 11’ 55’’: Evaluate Neville’s plans to prevent the creation of an ‘unwanted third race’. Why is he explaining this plan to an audience of well-dressed, tea-drinking ladies? Third race= half-caste children. He wants to “breed out” the Aboriginal blood from the half-caste future generations, so their descendants don’t have a trace of aboriginal blood or physical featured

and pass entirely as white population. It is white supremacy ideology; he is determined to carry out a cultural and racial genocide without a second though. His audience are wealthy white women that are the perfect target for the adoptions of the Aborigines children. Also, those women are probably connected with Christian institutions, schools, or are interested in getting married with a half-caste, in addiction of being supporters of the Moore River institution. He is enrolling them to his cause, leading them on towards his beliefs of erasing the Aboriginal race. 5. 13’ 25’’: Note the function of the Moore River Settlement. What jobs were half-caste children being trained for? Moore River was a Christian institution where half-caste children were taken when they were abducted from their families to be trained as domestic servants and farm labour. It was a camp where the children assimilated the white Australian culture, language, religion and traditions. The children with lighter skin are the ones up for adoption.

6. 15’ 20” -20’ 40”: Evaluate Moore River rules about daily routines, religion and language, and the teachers’ style of discipline. The institution has a deeply strict daily routine. The nuns are harsh and cruel with the children, unabashed of using violence against them as a way of punishment. The children have to do the chores such as make the bed, sew, clean the barracks. The older ones have to take care of the younger ones, they have to pray (Christian religion) and are obliged to speak only in English. 7. 19’ 20”: Evaluate the attitude of the black caretaker towards the English language and enforcement of Moore River rules. He is aggressive and harsh, enforcing the rules and his power strictly. It is probably the result of him being force to the same rules as a kid, he assimilated the importance of speaking only in English. The institution giving him a position of power it’s just a strategic move, to used him as an example of what the children must do because he is half-caste to and is one of the people working to change them. The government is selling the idea to the children that what they are doing is the best for them and they worry about their well-being, they are saying “if you’re good and follow the rules, you could be like him”. He is just a tool in the hands of the government that has been sadly manipulated into a false belief of being the one in power, forgetting his roots in the process. It is all smoke and mirrors, propaganda of the white Australian government. 8. 20’ 35”: Food for thought. Why do you think this is Neville’s favourite song? It is the official state song of Florida. Original was sing by white singers in blackface. It is a racist song. The song talks about slavery and a slave’s nostalgia for the old plantation. I think is Neville’s favourite song because of the connotations about slavery and how the slave misses the plantation showing that he liked it there and it was his place. The song romanticizes slavery. It could also resonate with him the feeling of missing home, also how this poetic persona “roam around” like him. 9. 21’ 40”: What is the connection between skin colour and educational prospects within the system? The ones with fair skin colour are chosen for adoption and to go to a proper school to given them a proper education so they blend with the white Australian population. White people considers them more smart than the others. Neville wants them to “breed out” the aboriginal blood better. 10. 41’ 08”: What are Neville and the Police Inspector arguing about? They’re arguing because Neville’s department doesn’t have the money to pay for the research party. The budget is not enough to cover the cost and therefor he asks the Police Inspector to use his men to

look for the girls. The Police Inspector call out Neville’s decision, but in the end he follows Neville’s orders. 11. 44’ 45”: Why does Molly decide to speak? What is the new meaning of the fence? Because the woman mentioned the fence, the same fence that was close to her home so that spike her interest as it could bring them home. It gives her the idea to follow the fence to go home. Also the woman was good with them, given them food and clothes so she decides is ok to talk with her. The fence now is a connexion with her home, like a life line for her. It is also implied when we see how her mother touch the fence at the same time as her. That scene shows us the connexion. 12. 48’ 33”: Evaluate Neville’s reaction on discovering Molly’s plan. What ‘lesson’ does he extract from it? He is surprised of their cleverness of following the fence to get home because he thought Aborigines were like “Neolithic” people, undeveloped and savages. But he thinks of himself as superior than them so he thought I would be easy to caught them, like he is one step ahead of the girls. 13. 52’ 49”: Compare the experience of the former Moore River girl with these testimonies. They all were abused, ripped of their home and family to take them to institutions that were like jails and were treated as “inmates” and 'like bullocks in a paddock' as Netta one of the survivors says. They all have scars impossible of heal and memories of that time impossible to forget. The coping mechanism to bear their suffering usually are drugs, alcohol, medication and in the worst cases, suicide. The majority of the children taken were renamed and lost all connexion to their families becoming difficult for them to find their mothers years later. 14. 1h 01’: Note the various reasons why Neville is concerned to find the girls. He is fearful of the problem of “the third race” and is angry because he doesn’t want his plan of “breeding out” the Aboriginal blood be jeopardized. He feels ridiculed and outsmarted by the girls because they couldn’t catch them. He feels like his public image and the Department reputation are suffering “looking like fools”, also the chase of the girls is costing them a lot of money. He tries to trick them by saying that one girl’ s mother is in another city so they change their route and don’t go into a harder terrain, where the policemen don’t suffer. 15. 1h 18’: What is the ‘women’s business’? What does it reveal about Western understanding of Aboriginal culture? The “women business” are the noises and singing they are doing. For Western people is a nonsense and they don’t understand why they do it or the meaning behind because they are not interested in learning it. They see it as something this underdeveloped people do, like the Aborigines were crazy and couldn’t expect nothing more of them. But the reality is that the noises the women were making was a call to the girls to bring them home. 16. 1h 23’ 40”: Why is Neville suspending the search for the girls? How does he feel about it? They don’t have enough money to go after them, but he feels that he would be able to get them some time in the future, and still thinks that he is in a sort of battle with the girls. He feels that he is trying to protect the Aboriginal people from themselves

2. Complement your analysis of the film with information gathered from the following sources:

o

Reconciliation

Network:

https://www.reconciliation.org.au/wp-

content/uploads/2017/11/150520-Sorry-Day.pdf o

‘Walkabout to Freedom’, The Guardian, 27 October 2002: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2002/oct/27/features.review1

o

The National Centre for History Education: ‘ Rabbit-Proof Fence: the question of intent in history’ [uploaded to Campus Virtual] SEMINAR TASK

In some Indigenous communities across Australia schooling is conducted in languages other than English, as teachers think it best for children and their culture. However, other Indigenous and non-Indigenous people are campaigning for a literacy project, as they think that being fluent in English is the only way those children may have equal opportunities. Read the sample articles below, find additional information, and reflect on your own position in the debate. ‘Bilingual debate rages in NT’: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-0914/bilingual-debate-rages-in-nt/1428522 ‘Anderson calls for schools to be made equal’: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012- 10- 24/anderson-on - bilingual-schooleducation-indigenous-schools/4331158

o o

Next, answer the debate questions you will find on the next page, and be ready to hand your answers to your tutor after the seminar.

2

Facultad de Filosofía y Letras Departamento de Filología Anglogermánica y Francesa INTRODUCCIÓN CULTURAL AL MUNDO ANGLÓFONO

EDUCATING THE OTHER IN AUSTRALIA SEMINAR DEBATE

Please print this page SEPARATELY for submission to your tutor after the debate.

Name:

1. Should the Australian government make it a priority to foster native languages and cultures? Why/why not?

I think the Australian government should make an effort to protect and nurture the native languages and cultures that expended years trying to destroy with policies such as the Aborigines Protection Act.

Aborigines are part of Australia; they are the ones who were already there in the first place, so after years of being neglected and mistreated by the government it seems fair that they make amends. Moreover, this is a way to preserve the native languages and cultures in regards of not being erased for good in the future, as there’s a possibility that the white culture dominant in the country ends up being the only one surviving time because it was made the “strong” one.

In conclusion, the idea of the Australian government aiding to foster native languages and cultures is beneficial to not lose those things from their community. It could be a good demonstration that what former PM Kevin Rudd said about being sorry and apologising in his speech about former Australian policies is true as well as meaningful and not just words.

2. Should the Aboriginal culture be taught in English-language schools to nonnative children?

Yes, it definitely should be taught in schools as Aboriginal culture is part of Australia too. It is important for any population to learn about its diversity and multiculturalism; educate people about the other cultures that form their country

plus doing it with veracity is necessary to put an end to violence, to racism and to discrimination. It could be a good way to teach people to be more tolerant and to also learn to be more open minded and broaden their sights. Made a society more inclusive of others. However, the reality of the situation is that the dominant culture (usually the white one) of a place, in this case Australia, is the one that is widely taught in schools, leaving the not white ones as an optative subject or not taught at all. The aftermath of this is the invisibility and invalidation of Aboriginal culture that culminates in disrespectful acts towards the native community. Diversity enriches any society and so does knowing the history of your country from another point of view that is not the one of the white colonizer. Despite the fact that non-native students can’t completely understand the Aboriginal culture because they see it from the newcomer’s side, this knowledge could only be advantageous for them. In addition, this could help to create a healthier and more comfortable environment for natives, facilitating integration.

3. Should Australian Aborigines be provided for in the same way as other disadvantaged minorities (e.g. Asian immigrants), or are they entitled to special attention?

Aborigines were stripped of their land, their culture and their languages. They had suffered through hurtful and arduous policies from the colonizers government in their own land, so instead of special attention I think is time they are treated equally as the rest of the citizens, they are Australians too.

The problem is that privileged people see equality as oppression because it takes away their advantages therefore they rebel against it, a thing that happens in all societies, so in order to give Aboriginal people their rightful place in the Australian society the government should step up their game and give example. Although they had acknowledged and apologized for their past actions against Aborigines with the Bring Them Home Report, they still have ways to go in order to achieve equality between the two cultures.

As it happens in other countries like USA and Canada, native people are left behind and the unemployment ratio is higher in this communities, going hand in hand with an educational gap between natives and non-native students caused by

the lack of a good environment for education. Thus, the Australian government should make policies to help with this situation. Furthermore, I strongly believe that the help given to disadvantaged communities is not enough and should be improved, we mustn’t forget about them because they are suffering and being mistreated too.

4. Considering emotional, educational and economic factors, is it better for Aboriginal children to be educated in their own native languages, or in English?

They should be educated in both languages. In English because is better for their integration with the white Australian population, it helps them find employment and secure it and it broadens their opportunities in life. Furthermore, nowadays is used worldwide as a lingua franca so being fluent in English is a useful tool to have. However, their native languages are part of their culture and history, part of who they are and how Aborigines express themselves so they should fight to protect...