Although it hasn't many pages, I'm still reading Veil in snatches. I have to keep putting it down to have a good think. It's probably decades since I've read a book about western politics and political philosophy and it's clear that the story of the headscarf controversies has ramifications beyond the mere propensity of Muslims to cover their women. Joppke looks at the French controversies in terms of a contradiction between two aspects of liberalism, that of equity, or 'ethical liberalism', and that of liberty. The two cannot be reconciled except insofar as the broad majority of French Muslims are supportive of republican secularism which, fortunately, they are.
In Germany, the controversy was (is?) between liberalism and an essentially illiberal notion of Germany as a 'Christian-occidental' state. According to Joppke the history of this paradox lies in the fact that, unlike France, Germany had no revolutionary separation of Church and state, but its secularism emerged on the basis of a continuing 'Christian-occidental' tradition. While the French derive their cultural identity from the revolution, the Germans derive theirs from their Christian tradition. Germany's 3 million Muslims therefore present the German state with a real quandary. Thus while the constitution prescribes freedom of religion, the courts have also determined that the constitution does not prevent the Lander, which control the schools, from legislating in a way that discriminates against Muslim women teachers, but not Christian nuns, wearing the headscarf in school. Most of the Lander have legislated in this way, except Berlin which banned both. 'Christian-occidentalism' in Germany has also resulted in the fact that most people of Turkish origin - even though 3rd or 4th generation and having acquired German citizenship (in a relatively recent reform), still regard themselves as 'Turks'. German Jews, apparently, while not Christian are 'occidental', but the poor Muslims are neither - even if they adhere to all the German secular values. I wonder if this will change if Turkey joins Europe (or if this is a reason it cannot). I also wondered to what extent German Jewish emigrants to Israel have influenced the nature of the state there - identifying itself as 'Jewish-occidental' in contrast to the Oriental neighbours.
The British case provides yet another contrast. I'm on this chapter at the moment, so my responses are still unformed, but at the moment things are looking bad. British liberalism is of the liberty variety. The British, according to Joppke, therefore have no real cultural identity, but a patchwork of different ones. Essentially the state has followed a path of multiculturalism, even though this is not explicit. It leads people to live in fairly separate communities in which there can be no integration because there's nothing to integrate into (the idea of integration implies something that transcends the different cultures). In the British school system, large amounts of state funding are provided to religiously based schools. Joppke, fairly persuasively I must say, clearly favours the French version in which everyone can share the values of the republic and be integrated. He doesn't seem to be arguing that it would be possible for the Germans or British to adopt the French view, considering their very different historical developments. He is just saying that the British tradition of liberalism has presented the state with a dilemma, first manifested in Northern Ireland where two illiberal Christian cultures found living together intolerable - now they live side-by-side rather than being integrated - and now in the clash between English liberalism and Muslim illiberalism. Islam, he argues, doesn't recognise the separation of the private and public spheres and while the state wants them to be liberal, the majority of the community actually want "to insulate their offspring from the virus of reflection that is implanted by a secular curriculum" (p. 87). They reject the idea of a 'westernized' or 'European' Islam that seems to be more commonly accepted in other parts of Europe. The liberal state has only begun to respond in cases of what he calls the 'extreme veil'; i.e., niqab and jilbab.
This is as far as I've got. Before Howard we had official multi-culturalism here. Then Howard tried to proclaim our 'Christian-occidental' identity and, inter alia, we got a race riot for a reward. The legacy of this shift has not yet disappeared (viz, the recent attacks on Indian students, even though on a smaller scale than the Cronulla event). Neither has the earlier legacy disappeared: when Sheik Hillaly said that an uncovered woman was like 'putting meat before the cat' - he was howled down by Muslims from all over, especially women. I'm hopeful that we have some kind of identity that transcends the varied religious/ethnic ones and we won't end up down the British or German roads. But I'm not sure.
On a tangent, since I was thinking about it today in light of the Chinese execution of a mentally ill Briton for drug smuggling and the British reaction to it ('intolerable', 'unacceptable', etc), it occurred to me that western liberalism is beginning to be an endangered species. Not only is it fraught with contradictions (tolerant of apartheid, etc.), but it seems unable to cope with the challenge of illiberalism in the form of Islam, China, etc., except by undermining itself.
In Germany, the controversy was (is?) between liberalism and an essentially illiberal notion of Germany as a 'Christian-occidental' state. According to Joppke the history of this paradox lies in the fact that, unlike France, Germany had no revolutionary separation of Church and state, but its secularism emerged on the basis of a continuing 'Christian-occidental' tradition. While the French derive their cultural identity from the revolution, the Germans derive theirs from their Christian tradition. Germany's 3 million Muslims therefore present the German state with a real quandary. Thus while the constitution prescribes freedom of religion, the courts have also determined that the constitution does not prevent the Lander, which control the schools, from legislating in a way that discriminates against Muslim women teachers, but not Christian nuns, wearing the headscarf in school. Most of the Lander have legislated in this way, except Berlin which banned both. 'Christian-occidentalism' in Germany has also resulted in the fact that most people of Turkish origin - even though 3rd or 4th generation and having acquired German citizenship (in a relatively recent reform), still regard themselves as 'Turks'. German Jews, apparently, while not Christian are 'occidental', but the poor Muslims are neither - even if they adhere to all the German secular values. I wonder if this will change if Turkey joins Europe (or if this is a reason it cannot). I also wondered to what extent German Jewish emigrants to Israel have influenced the nature of the state there - identifying itself as 'Jewish-occidental' in contrast to the Oriental neighbours.
The British case provides yet another contrast. I'm on this chapter at the moment, so my responses are still unformed, but at the moment things are looking bad. British liberalism is of the liberty variety. The British, according to Joppke, therefore have no real cultural identity, but a patchwork of different ones. Essentially the state has followed a path of multiculturalism, even though this is not explicit. It leads people to live in fairly separate communities in which there can be no integration because there's nothing to integrate into (the idea of integration implies something that transcends the different cultures). In the British school system, large amounts of state funding are provided to religiously based schools. Joppke, fairly persuasively I must say, clearly favours the French version in which everyone can share the values of the republic and be integrated. He doesn't seem to be arguing that it would be possible for the Germans or British to adopt the French view, considering their very different historical developments. He is just saying that the British tradition of liberalism has presented the state with a dilemma, first manifested in Northern Ireland where two illiberal Christian cultures found living together intolerable - now they live side-by-side rather than being integrated - and now in the clash between English liberalism and Muslim illiberalism. Islam, he argues, doesn't recognise the separation of the private and public spheres and while the state wants them to be liberal, the majority of the community actually want "to insulate their offspring from the virus of reflection that is implanted by a secular curriculum" (p. 87). They reject the idea of a 'westernized' or 'European' Islam that seems to be more commonly accepted in other parts of Europe. The liberal state has only begun to respond in cases of what he calls the 'extreme veil'; i.e., niqab and jilbab.
This is as far as I've got. Before Howard we had official multi-culturalism here. Then Howard tried to proclaim our 'Christian-occidental' identity and, inter alia, we got a race riot for a reward. The legacy of this shift has not yet disappeared (viz, the recent attacks on Indian students, even though on a smaller scale than the Cronulla event). Neither has the earlier legacy disappeared: when Sheik Hillaly said that an uncovered woman was like 'putting meat before the cat' - he was howled down by Muslims from all over, especially women. I'm hopeful that we have some kind of identity that transcends the varied religious/ethnic ones and we won't end up down the British or German roads. But I'm not sure.
On a tangent, since I was thinking about it today in light of the Chinese execution of a mentally ill Briton for drug smuggling and the British reaction to it ('intolerable', 'unacceptable', etc), it occurred to me that western liberalism is beginning to be an endangered species. Not only is it fraught with contradictions (tolerant of apartheid, etc.), but it seems unable to cope with the challenge of illiberalism in the form of Islam, China, etc., except by undermining itself.
Only 68% of Australians subscribe to some form of religion according to a new Nielsen poll. This is down from 100% at Federation (1901). Of these, 50% are Christian, 6% from other major religions, 6% various cults including Jedi, and the rest believe in some kind of universal spirit.
30% are non-believers, of which 24% are atheist and 6% agnostic. Most encouragingly this includes 42% of those under 25.
I presume the other 2% don't know whether they believe in something or not. Or maybe they just said 'it's none of your bloody business'.
14% of the believers, given the choice between Genesis, Design and Darwin, chose Darwin. The rest are split between creationists (23%) and those who believe the earth is old (32%).
I think I'd like to live in Sweden, where believers are now a minority of 46%.
Believers are likely to believe in miracles at roughly twice the rate they did in the 1990s. I suspect this has to do with patriotic fervour for Mary McKillop who has now officially performed two miracles since she died, which is apparently sufficient to be promoted to Saint. She will be "Our" first Saint. Cardinal Pell says that this proves that women can flourish in the Catholic Church. The increased popularity of Saints is also attributed to JP2, who is himself being fast-tracked to promotion. Although Ms McKillop was a school teacher, she has turned to performing medical miracles in the afterlife - this is something that Australians are very keen on - though one would've thought she'd be personally more interested in something like getting kids from disadvantaged suburbs into university. Or maybe getting indigenous kids to go to school at all? How about stopping some child abuse or domestic violence (that should appeal to a female saint surely?).
30% are non-believers, of which 24% are atheist and 6% agnostic. Most encouragingly this includes 42% of those under 25.
I presume the other 2% don't know whether they believe in something or not. Or maybe they just said 'it's none of your bloody business'.
14% of the believers, given the choice between Genesis, Design and Darwin, chose Darwin. The rest are split between creationists (23%) and those who believe the earth is old (32%).
I think I'd like to live in Sweden, where believers are now a minority of 46%.
Believers are likely to believe in miracles at roughly twice the rate they did in the 1990s. I suspect this has to do with patriotic fervour for Mary McKillop who has now officially performed two miracles since she died, which is apparently sufficient to be promoted to Saint. She will be "Our" first Saint. Cardinal Pell says that this proves that women can flourish in the Catholic Church. The increased popularity of Saints is also attributed to JP2, who is himself being fast-tracked to promotion. Although Ms McKillop was a school teacher, she has turned to performing medical miracles in the afterlife - this is something that Australians are very keen on - though one would've thought she'd be personally more interested in something like getting kids from disadvantaged suburbs into university. Or maybe getting indigenous kids to go to school at all? How about stopping some child abuse or domestic violence (that should appeal to a female saint surely?).
Tomorrow I'm on strike. The union has called a National Day of Action - I'm not sure that it has anything whatsoever to do with the bargaining process that we currently have underway at my university. My union rep pointed out to me today that the University is probably pleased that people will go on strike because the VC has declared the need to make cost savings. Given the nature of academic work, you have to declare to the employer that you are on strike so that they can dock a day's pay. If you don't declare, they will assume you're working and declare the strike a failure. They win.
So why am I doing it? First, I don't need the money. I can afford to lose a day's pay and, since I'm a union member, my action is protected by the law (not to mention the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, although that - since Howard - no longer seems to have any force in Australian law). Second, although I think the union often has flawed strategies and tactics, I still love it. I love the principle of unionism. I love the idea that individuals do not have to face power alone.
I'm not sure, but I think the last time we had a strike was before the Howard government. That would make it before 1996 (though it might have been in Howard's first year or two - at least before 1998). Anyway it has been a long time. I remember going on strike when I was in Wollongong (1988-93) and again some time after I moved to Sydney in 1994. Then we had this decade or more when everyone complained bitterly, but was too afraid to take action. I'm not sure how or if we can ever get back to the idea that we'll all be better off if we can make joint bargains instead of being divided and ruled. This is not just a question of individual income, it's a question of having a culture and ethics of being part of a community.
So why am I doing it? First, I don't need the money. I can afford to lose a day's pay and, since I'm a union member, my action is protected by the law (not to mention the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, although that - since Howard - no longer seems to have any force in Australian law). Second, although I think the union often has flawed strategies and tactics, I still love it. I love the principle of unionism. I love the idea that individuals do not have to face power alone.
I'm not sure, but I think the last time we had a strike was before the Howard government. That would make it before 1996 (though it might have been in Howard's first year or two - at least before 1998). Anyway it has been a long time. I remember going on strike when I was in Wollongong (1988-93) and again some time after I moved to Sydney in 1994. Then we had this decade or more when everyone complained bitterly, but was too afraid to take action. I'm not sure how or if we can ever get back to the idea that we'll all be better off if we can make joint bargains instead of being divided and ruled. This is not just a question of individual income, it's a question of having a culture and ethics of being part of a community.
I discovered that there is a lot of art deco in Canterbury. I emerged from the path along Cooks River onto Canterbury Road in front of this rather elegant building:
It's obviously a former cinema, but what on earth does "Mytilenian" mean? "My Tile Shop"? After I got home I googled and found the Mytilenian Brotherhood. Mytilene is apparently an alternative name for the island of Lesbos in the Aegean Sea (althought the Mytilenians studiously avoid transliterating the Greek B into an English b, preferring instead to render the name as Lesvos - which is, no doubt, phonetically correct). Just imagine if they'd called their society the "Lesbian Sisterhood"! Except for the fact that the Brotherhood was founded as early as 1925, I'd be tempted to think the name was a deliberate joke. I mean, why did they have to come up with "Brotherhood"?
It's obviously a former cinema, but what on earth does "Mytilenian" mean? "My Tile Shop"? After I got home I googled and found the Mytilenian Brotherhood. Mytilene is apparently an alternative name for the island of Lesbos in the Aegean Sea (althought the Mytilenians studiously avoid transliterating the Greek B into an English b, preferring instead to render the name as Lesvos - which is, no doubt, phonetically correct). Just imagine if they'd called their society the "Lesbian Sisterhood"! Except for the fact that the Brotherhood was founded as early as 1925, I'd be tempted to think the name was a deliberate joke. I mean, why did they have to come up with "Brotherhood"?
The burqini, by the way, is an Australian invention. I would just like everyone to know this. It's a sort of 'Back to the Future' invention.
I'm not sure what hygiene issues the French have discovered. Certainly they weren't yet discovered in the 19th century, when women wore this kind of outfit for swimming:
Mind you, the chlorinated swimming pool had not yet been invented and people would have just added their Germs to the Sea - if, indeed, they hadn't sunk and drowned already from the weight of all that cloth. This is surely what the French authorities have in mind. While they surely agree that the Textile itself would no longer be sufficient to cause a normal person to Sink, the chlorine simply could not cope with the Infection introduced by Islam into a French swimming pool.
I'm not sure what hygiene issues the French have discovered. Certainly they weren't yet discovered in the 19th century, when women wore this kind of outfit for swimming:
Mind you, the chlorinated swimming pool had not yet been invented and people would have just added their Germs to the Sea - if, indeed, they hadn't sunk and drowned already from the weight of all that cloth. This is surely what the French authorities have in mind. While they surely agree that the Textile itself would no longer be sufficient to cause a normal person to Sink, the chlorine simply could not cope with the Infection introduced by Islam into a French swimming pool.
Coral tree in bloom with Rainbow Lorikeet.
One of the foot bridges.
Towards late afternoon the water became like glass.
Mangroves. It's hard to believe that right behind me a bunch of teenagers were playing a game of charades or something similar. They were screeching with laughter.
Almost back at the Princes Highway. The sign says there used to be three islands and the one that's left has been considerably eroded. It is called Fatima's Island because in 1951 the Portuguese Catholics of Sydney came here to pray to Our Lady of Fatima! People do very mysterious things sometimes.
Several families having a picnic. On my way past in the late morning there were already a few men gathered with hubble bubbles. By the time I came back they were barbecueing. Reminded me of the 1950s, when I was a kid and multi-family parties used to break up into male and female groups (though not quite so deliberately structured with men's and women's "rooms" separated by a space in the park). I spent a good deal of my time as a young person battling to be accepted in the male groups because I found the women's conversation incredibly dull (truly it was about kids and shopping and stuff). It wasn't funny because if you tried to talk to the men they'd assume you were chatting them up - or they'd pretend that was what they thought so they could get rid of you! I thought we were at least half done with that battle.
I was sitting on a bench resting my aching feet when this group walked past me. It's the second time in my life here in Sydney that I've seen a woman with all of her face, except the eyes, covered. And both occasions have been in the last few weeks. You can't say hi or smile at a face that isn't there. Maybe they are visitors - there are a few airport hotels in the vicinity. If they're not, I almost can't bear to think about what it says about what's happening here.
Back at the edge of the airport.
One of the foot bridges.
Towards late afternoon the water became like glass.
Mangroves. It's hard to believe that right behind me a bunch of teenagers were playing a game of charades or something similar. They were screeching with laughter.
Almost back at the Princes Highway. The sign says there used to be three islands and the one that's left has been considerably eroded. It is called Fatima's Island because in 1951 the Portuguese Catholics of Sydney came here to pray to Our Lady of Fatima! People do very mysterious things sometimes.
Several families having a picnic. On my way past in the late morning there were already a few men gathered with hubble bubbles. By the time I came back they were barbecueing. Reminded me of the 1950s, when I was a kid and multi-family parties used to break up into male and female groups (though not quite so deliberately structured with men's and women's "rooms" separated by a space in the park). I spent a good deal of my time as a young person battling to be accepted in the male groups because I found the women's conversation incredibly dull (truly it was about kids and shopping and stuff). It wasn't funny because if you tried to talk to the men they'd assume you were chatting them up - or they'd pretend that was what they thought so they could get rid of you! I thought we were at least half done with that battle.
I was sitting on a bench resting my aching feet when this group walked past me. It's the second time in my life here in Sydney that I've seen a woman with all of her face, except the eyes, covered. And both occasions have been in the last few weeks. You can't say hi or smile at a face that isn't there. Maybe they are visitors - there are a few airport hotels in the vicinity. If they're not, I almost can't bear to think about what it says about what's happening here.
Back at the edge of the airport.
Canterbury Council has kindly provided a sketch map of their section of the cycleway. Here's the bit I did yesterday, starting just opposite the entrance to the Alexandra canal at the bottom of the picture, crossing the Princes Highway, walking along to Canterbury Road (which crosses the river at the top of the map) and back again. I set myself a target of 20,000 steps yesterday and counted 17,000 of them on this walk. I kept checking the pedometer to make sure it was just at the right position on my belt, so I'm happy this time that the count was accurate. Anyway it accords with my map that says the distance is about 4.5 km each way.
Cooks River does not have a good reputation for cleanliness. So I was surprised to see as many fish-eating birds as I did.
Later in the afternoon, when the tide was in, I found a couple of black-winged stilts at the same spot.
( more )
Canterbury Road. I had to cross it to get back to the cycleway on the other side of the river. The nearest lights were quite far in either direction and set so that when there was no traffic from your right it was coming from your left. Nothing in sight that looked like food either - however, while I was standing there trying to get across a man with very few teeth came up to me and started trying to persuade me of the benefits, to the soul (obviously not to the teeth) of onion soup. I ran across the road the instant I could risk it!
Canterbury Council has a slogan "City of Cultural Diversity". They've celebrated this by making an avenue in the park where I came out onto Canterbury Rd that is dedicated to local sports men and women. It's quite an interesting concept because if I think of one thing that provides cultural unity to about 80% of Australians (not including yours truly) then it must be sport. But, with the exception of about 3 plaques dedicated to Rugby League players and a couple of early 20th century motorbike racers, these are all people who participated in minority sports like speed skating, tae kwon do, kick boxing, synchronized swimming, weightlifting, etc. The park itself is dedicated to the beatified Mary McK, who apparently ran a school in the next street for a bit.
More later. I need to get out and do my next 10,000!
Cooks River does not have a good reputation for cleanliness. So I was surprised to see as many fish-eating birds as I did.
Later in the afternoon, when the tide was in, I found a couple of black-winged stilts at the same spot.
( more )
Canterbury Road. I had to cross it to get back to the cycleway on the other side of the river. The nearest lights were quite far in either direction and set so that when there was no traffic from your right it was coming from your left. Nothing in sight that looked like food either - however, while I was standing there trying to get across a man with very few teeth came up to me and started trying to persuade me of the benefits, to the soul (obviously not to the teeth) of onion soup. I ran across the road the instant I could risk it!
Canterbury Council has a slogan "City of Cultural Diversity". They've celebrated this by making an avenue in the park where I came out onto Canterbury Rd that is dedicated to local sports men and women. It's quite an interesting concept because if I think of one thing that provides cultural unity to about 80% of Australians (not including yours truly) then it must be sport. But, with the exception of about 3 plaques dedicated to Rugby League players and a couple of early 20th century motorbike racers, these are all people who participated in minority sports like speed skating, tae kwon do, kick boxing, synchronized swimming, weightlifting, etc. The park itself is dedicated to the beatified Mary McK, who apparently ran a school in the next street for a bit.
More later. I need to get out and do my next 10,000!
I felt really, really tired this morning. In the afternoon I tried to walk around a bit, but my body lacked enthusiasm. I walked as far as the little supermarket that sells nice bread and (all important) cat litter. Then I dropped by the pub. I had a book with me - about the Murray-Darling basin and the politics of water - so I just bought a glass of wine, parked myself in a window seat and started reading. By the time I'd got to the end of chapter 1, the pub was packed with people who'd come to watch the Wallabies v. All Blacks (Bledisloe Cup). I should've known earlier because all the bar staff were wearing Wallabies shirts! When the teams came out (the match was in Auckland so it was very early evening here), I was really impressed by three things:
(a) the first verse of the NZ national anthem is in Maori; the second verse is in English. Who knows what it says, but it has to be better than "our home is girt by sea" etc.
(b) the Maori guys in the NZ team are very good looking;
(c) the Haka is sensational. A man sitting next to me said that the S. Africans are trying to do something similar, but they use spears and stuff and, besides, Union has to overcome the obstacle that it is white tradition in S Africa. The Haka is nothing but body language and voices. It is a challenge. I was most impressed by the way the white guys in the NZ team were totally into the Haka. They do it with 100% commitment. The trick for the opposing side is to try to stare them down without wishing they were part of it.
I should mention that when it comes to Rugby Union, New Zealand is the hereditary enemy. But after the Haka I totally wanted the "Men in Black" to win. Which they duly did. Score 19:16 (ETA: I was still trying to read my book so I got the score wrong. It was 22:16)
Note: Wallabies (the ones on the shirt) wear boxing gloves. This idea goes way back to when an Australian yachting team won the America's Cup in 1983 (after the NY Yacht Club had held it for 132 years). Their logo was a boxing kangaroo. Some people thought the boxing kangaroo should be the national flag. Fortunately, some individual like Alan Bond or Kerry Packer owned the IP, so the idea did not come to fruition. But if it's a wallaby and the gloves are green not red, then it must be OK.
ETA: The last time I watched a rugby match of any description (union or league) would have been before the ex departed - so at least 13 years. ago.
(a) the first verse of the NZ national anthem is in Maori; the second verse is in English. Who knows what it says, but it has to be better than "our home is girt by sea" etc.
(b) the Maori guys in the NZ team are very good looking;
(c) the Haka is sensational. A man sitting next to me said that the S. Africans are trying to do something similar, but they use spears and stuff and, besides, Union has to overcome the obstacle that it is white tradition in S Africa. The Haka is nothing but body language and voices. It is a challenge. I was most impressed by the way the white guys in the NZ team were totally into the Haka. They do it with 100% commitment. The trick for the opposing side is to try to stare them down without wishing they were part of it.
I should mention that when it comes to Rugby Union, New Zealand is the hereditary enemy. But after the Haka I totally wanted the "Men in Black" to win. Which they duly did. Score 19:16 (ETA: I was still trying to read my book so I got the score wrong. It was 22:16)
Note: Wallabies (the ones on the shirt) wear boxing gloves. This idea goes way back to when an Australian yachting team won the America's Cup in 1983 (after the NY Yacht Club had held it for 132 years). Their logo was a boxing kangaroo. Some people thought the boxing kangaroo should be the national flag. Fortunately, some individual like Alan Bond or Kerry Packer owned the IP, so the idea did not come to fruition. But if it's a wallaby and the gloves are green not red, then it must be OK.
ETA: The last time I watched a rugby match of any description (union or league) would have been before the ex departed - so at least 13 years. ago.
I was looking at the map of NSW this morning because next month I'm going to do another road trip - to Adelaide via Broken Hill. So I was looking at places I might visit on the way. Obviously I'm going to visit Broken Hill and Dubbo.
In an area north of the Barrier Highway there is a bunch of Bones: Billybingbone, Merrywinebone, Girilambone, Mumblebone Plain, Quambone, Gulargambone, Bugilbone. I can't find any of these north of the Bourke-Moree road, west of Bourke or east of the Dubbo-Moree road (Newell Hwy). Therefore I conclude that they were originally local Aboriginal names.
Billybingbone is a postal address, a homestead east of the Coolabah-Brewarrina road, but Merrywinebone seems to be nothing more than a defunct railway siding. Mumblebone Plain is marked as a settlement (which probably means there is a pub, though nothing is recorded on the web). It is easily visitable from my main route, but I'm unlikely to make it to Billybingbone or Merrywinebone on this trip.
Other places are called Boppy Mountain (near Florida!), Come By Chance, Terry Hie Hie, Wee Waa, Nevertire, The Troffs, Backwater (it is) Finger Post and Bogan Gate. Nevertire is on a stretch of the Mitchell Highway that has two bends in >300 km. I am scheduled to pass right through Nevertire and also Mullengudgery which has a nice sound to it. I could continue on the Mitchell to Bourke or turn left and go directly to Broken Hill. Any advice? I'm kind of curious about Bourke. "Back'o'Bourke" is where Nothing begins. Finger Post is also not very far off the main road, but if I go to Bourke I'll miss both Boppy Mountain and Florida. Come By Chance, Terry Hie Hie, Wee Waa, The Troffs and Backwater must all await another trip.
In amongst these interestingly named places are various boringly and completely misnamed London suburbs like Tottenham and Wandsworth. The former is halfway from Nevertire to Tullamore (no Dew to be had there). The trouble is that you can never tell how interesting a place will be by its name and yet the exoticism of the name is often what draws you there. By the law of averages Billybingbone is probably one of the most boring places on the planet!
So here's my planned route so far.
1. Sydney-Orange-Dubbo via Finger Post.
2. Dubbo-Bourke via Nevertire, Mumblebone Plain, Mullengudgery, Girilambone and others
3. Bourke-Wilcannia. I'd love to follow the dirt road along the Darling, but what if the car packs up? Alternative route is 3. Bourke to Wilcannia via Cobar. Wilcannia (pop. 759 at the last census) is on the Darling. There was a girl from Wilcannia at my school half a century ago. Needless to say she was white, although more than half the population is Aboriginal.
4. Wilcannia to BH - possible side trip to Mutawintji NP. Tour of the mines etc.
6. BH to Boolcoomata and/or Bimbowrie.
7. Pitcairn?, Peterborough, Jamestown, Adelaide.
I haven't really looked into the SA leg yet. I went to Pitcairn station as a very small child (I remember the trip clearly - "are we there yet dad?" - but not much of the place itself!). It has been sold off and broken up. I have heard that the people who bought the land have not looked after it - but what does that mean in this age of conserving native vegetation? Boolcoomata is a station that has been bought by private conservationists, the Bush Heritage Foundation, while Bimbowrie is a state park. Basically they both have grasslands and minerals. They are next door to each other so it would be interesting to see how they compare. Don't know if it's possible.
In an area north of the Barrier Highway there is a bunch of Bones: Billybingbone, Merrywinebone, Girilambone, Mumblebone Plain, Quambone, Gulargambone, Bugilbone. I can't find any of these north of the Bourke-Moree road, west of Bourke or east of the Dubbo-Moree road (Newell Hwy). Therefore I conclude that they were originally local Aboriginal names.
Billybingbone is a postal address, a homestead east of the Coolabah-Brewarrina road, but Merrywinebone seems to be nothing more than a defunct railway siding. Mumblebone Plain is marked as a settlement (which probably means there is a pub, though nothing is recorded on the web). It is easily visitable from my main route, but I'm unlikely to make it to Billybingbone or Merrywinebone on this trip.
Other places are called Boppy Mountain (near Florida!), Come By Chance, Terry Hie Hie, Wee Waa, Nevertire, The Troffs, Backwater (it is) Finger Post and Bogan Gate. Nevertire is on a stretch of the Mitchell Highway that has two bends in >300 km. I am scheduled to pass right through Nevertire and also Mullengudgery which has a nice sound to it. I could continue on the Mitchell to Bourke or turn left and go directly to Broken Hill. Any advice? I'm kind of curious about Bourke. "Back'o'Bourke" is where Nothing begins. Finger Post is also not very far off the main road, but if I go to Bourke I'll miss both Boppy Mountain and Florida. Come By Chance, Terry Hie Hie, Wee Waa, The Troffs and Backwater must all await another trip.
In amongst these interestingly named places are various boringly and completely misnamed London suburbs like Tottenham and Wandsworth. The former is halfway from Nevertire to Tullamore (no Dew to be had there). The trouble is that you can never tell how interesting a place will be by its name and yet the exoticism of the name is often what draws you there. By the law of averages Billybingbone is probably one of the most boring places on the planet!
So here's my planned route so far.
1. Sydney-Orange-Dubbo via Finger Post.
2. Dubbo-Bourke via Nevertire, Mumblebone Plain, Mullengudgery, Girilambone and others
3. Bourke-Wilcannia. I'd love to follow the dirt road along the Darling, but what if the car packs up? Alternative route is 3. Bourke to Wilcannia via Cobar. Wilcannia (pop. 759 at the last census) is on the Darling. There was a girl from Wilcannia at my school half a century ago. Needless to say she was white, although more than half the population is Aboriginal.
4. Wilcannia to BH - possible side trip to Mutawintji NP. Tour of the mines etc.
6. BH to Boolcoomata and/or Bimbowrie.
7. Pitcairn?, Peterborough, Jamestown, Adelaide.
I haven't really looked into the SA leg yet. I went to Pitcairn station as a very small child (I remember the trip clearly - "are we there yet dad?" - but not much of the place itself!). It has been sold off and broken up. I have heard that the people who bought the land have not looked after it - but what does that mean in this age of conserving native vegetation? Boolcoomata is a station that has been bought by private conservationists, the Bush Heritage Foundation, while Bimbowrie is a state park. Basically they both have grasslands and minerals. They are next door to each other so it would be interesting to see how they compare. Don't know if it's possible.
... so says the sign in the top right of the picture. It looks like writing, but I can't read it.
Apparently not a legal graffiti wall:
Bus stop opposite Gleebooks in Glebe.
I've started reading another book!
Apparently not a legal graffiti wall:
Bus stop opposite Gleebooks in Glebe.
I've started reading another book!
Stella Bowen and Grace Cossington Smith were two painters. Bowen was born in Adelaide in 1893, went to Europe at the age of 20 and never returned. The other was born in Sydney in 1892 and, apart from a couple of 2 year trips to England (you had to go by ship in those days, so it was never a short trip), lived there all her long life. The book about their lives by Drusilla Modjeska is wonderful. Stella Bowen wrote an autobiography in 1940 Drawn from Life, left a raft of letters behind and is referred to in the papers of people like Ezra Pound, Margaret Cole (née Postgate) and Edith Sitwell, so her story is firmly based on documentary evidence. The story of Cossington Smith has a much more flimsy basis - there is way too much speculation for my rather academic taste. Nonetheless it presents an interesting puzzle, if only it could be unravelled. How could somebody produce such brilliant works and be a pioneer of modern art in Australia without ever having participated in the artistic life of London or Paris, having been taught by a Neapolitan impressionist émigré (Antonio Dattilo-Rubbo) and having lived all her life in an outer suburb (Turramurra) of Sydney? The two years living in Winchester, within a short train ride of London, must surely hold some kind of key, but there is no shred of evidence available! Moreover, in interviews given when she was 90 and in a nursing home, she denies such grand origins for her ideas. Yet in 1915 she had painted the first ever clearly modernist Australian painting . Surely you can't paint like Van Gogh or Cézanne when you’ve only ever seen reproductions of the work on the walls of your art teacher's studio?
Bowen was better known during her lifetime as the consort of Ford Madox Ford, a writer apparently well known in England and among the expatriate community in France,though his reputation never made it to the colonies. Her book is really about the difficulty of living with a man and trying to be an artist at the same time. In Modjeska's hands it makes a very gripping story and one from which Bowen emerges with huge dignity, as well as some bloody good paintings. (In her case, however, a lot of the paintings are lost). She and Ford separated in 1928 - he having spent her Australian middle-class capital already - and she struggled with poverty for the rest of her life. But it was only after the split that her painting came good. The story is a very moving one. I think Modjeska (or was it Bowen?) sets up a rather straw-mannish opposition between Love and Art, but it is surely the story of thousands of women of talent who have tried to make something of and for themselves in the face of ego-centric and demanding men.
The title of the book comes from a story of Stravinsky who,apparently, demanded total silence from his wife and kids while he was working,including during lunch!
But Love and being around to pick up the laundry are not the same thing. Cossington Smith also had a home drudge: for most of her life it was her younger sister Madge, who the parents kept at home to look after themselves and her painterly sister. Modjeska shows several pictures of Madge in which she looks unremittingly downcast. After WW2, when the parents were both dead, Madge went back to England and her pre-WW1 fiancé who, despite having married somebody else, had become single again. Of Grace, Modjeska says, "Her lack of domestic proficiency, maintained over a lifetime, was quite an achievement."
Neither woman achieved much recognition during their most productive years. Incredibly,there was a touring exhibition of modern art in 1939 (Picasso, Cézanne, Gauguin and everyone). It had to be shown in department stores because the state galleries (AGNSW and NGV) wouldn’t touch the stuff with a barge pole. In the end, all of the paintings were stored in a basement at the AGNSW for the duration of WW2. Despite protests, the Gallery refused to put them on show and not a single painting was purchased for any collection. They’re all now in major collections in Europe and North America. Modjeska quotes Robert Menzies, he was briefly Prime Minister in 1939, telling the modern artists that they would sink into oblivion because people like him (people with money) would never buy them!
In Cossington Smith's case there were extremely antagonistic reviews by male defenders of 'true art'. She and a handful of colleagues were virtually alone trying to do modern art in this country (and only she and Roland Wakelin didn’t really have the option or desire to escape abroad like Bowen). It wasn't until the Second World War that a new generation of male artists found modernism.They, of course, didn't acknowledge the legacy of their female forbears, but commanded attention as the pioneers of modern art in Australia. Cossington Smith's only champion before 1967 was a female art critic, Edith Anderson, who had access to the press because of her husband's position in the NSW Governor's office. But Anderson was also a lone voice among a chorus of anti-modernist male critics. GCS was by no means the only female modernist whose work had to overcome the male prejudices - there were also Grace Crowley, Dorrit Black, Margaret Preston (Bowen's teacher in Adelaide before the First War), Clarice Beckett, Thea Proctor and Nora Heysen. Roland Wakelin and Roy de Maistre got more attention, but the latter also felt he could survive better in Europe.
I wonder why it is that such a high proportion of these female modernists - Bowen, Preston, Black and Heysen - came from Adelaide?
Edith Anderson and her ear trumpet (from the book). I couldn't resist this - I thought ear trumpets were a myth.
Cossington, the house in Turramurra named after Grace's father's English home village. I drove up there this afternoon to have a look.
The street, Kuring-gai Avenue.
Added to my list:
Stella Bowen, Drawn from Life
VirginiaWoolf, To the Lighthouse
Christina Stead, For Love Alone
Bowen was better known during her lifetime as the consort of Ford Madox Ford, a writer apparently well known in England and among the expatriate community in France,though his reputation never made it to the colonies. Her book is really about the difficulty of living with a man and trying to be an artist at the same time. In Modjeska's hands it makes a very gripping story and one from which Bowen emerges with huge dignity, as well as some bloody good paintings. (In her case, however, a lot of the paintings are lost). She and Ford separated in 1928 - he having spent her Australian middle-class capital already - and she struggled with poverty for the rest of her life. But it was only after the split that her painting came good. The story is a very moving one. I think Modjeska (or was it Bowen?) sets up a rather straw-mannish opposition between Love and Art, but it is surely the story of thousands of women of talent who have tried to make something of and for themselves in the face of ego-centric and demanding men.
Ford never understood why I found it so difficult to paint whilst I was with him. He thought I lacked the will to do it at all costs. That was true, but he did not realise that if I had had the will to do it at all costs, my life would have been oriented quite differently. I should not have been available to nurse him through the daily strain of his own work; to walk and talk with him whenever he wanted, and to stand between him and circumstances. Pursuing an art is not just a matter of finding the time – it is a matter of having a free spirit to bring to it.
The title of the book comes from a story of Stravinsky who,apparently, demanded total silence from his wife and kids while he was working,including during lunch!
But Love and being around to pick up the laundry are not the same thing. Cossington Smith also had a home drudge: for most of her life it was her younger sister Madge, who the parents kept at home to look after themselves and her painterly sister. Modjeska shows several pictures of Madge in which she looks unremittingly downcast. After WW2, when the parents were both dead, Madge went back to England and her pre-WW1 fiancé who, despite having married somebody else, had become single again. Of Grace, Modjeska says, "Her lack of domestic proficiency, maintained over a lifetime, was quite an achievement."
Neither woman achieved much recognition during their most productive years. Incredibly,there was a touring exhibition of modern art in 1939 (Picasso, Cézanne, Gauguin and everyone). It had to be shown in department stores because the state galleries (AGNSW and NGV) wouldn’t touch the stuff with a barge pole. In the end, all of the paintings were stored in a basement at the AGNSW for the duration of WW2. Despite protests, the Gallery refused to put them on show and not a single painting was purchased for any collection. They’re all now in major collections in Europe and North America. Modjeska quotes Robert Menzies, he was briefly Prime Minister in 1939, telling the modern artists that they would sink into oblivion because people like him (people with money) would never buy them!
In Cossington Smith's case there were extremely antagonistic reviews by male defenders of 'true art'. She and a handful of colleagues were virtually alone trying to do modern art in this country (and only she and Roland Wakelin didn’t really have the option or desire to escape abroad like Bowen). It wasn't until the Second World War that a new generation of male artists found modernism.They, of course, didn't acknowledge the legacy of their female forbears, but commanded attention as the pioneers of modern art in Australia. Cossington Smith's only champion before 1967 was a female art critic, Edith Anderson, who had access to the press because of her husband's position in the NSW Governor's office. But Anderson was also a lone voice among a chorus of anti-modernist male critics. GCS was by no means the only female modernist whose work had to overcome the male prejudices - there were also Grace Crowley, Dorrit Black, Margaret Preston (Bowen's teacher in Adelaide before the First War), Clarice Beckett, Thea Proctor and Nora Heysen. Roland Wakelin and Roy de Maistre got more attention, but the latter also felt he could survive better in Europe.
I wonder why it is that such a high proportion of these female modernists - Bowen, Preston, Black and Heysen - came from Adelaide?
Edith Anderson and her ear trumpet (from the book). I couldn't resist this - I thought ear trumpets were a myth.
Cossington, the house in Turramurra named after Grace's father's English home village. I drove up there this afternoon to have a look.
The street, Kuring-gai Avenue.
Added to my list:
Stella Bowen, Drawn from Life
VirginiaWoolf, To the Lighthouse
Christina Stead, For Love Alone
Last night, drifting in and out of sleep listening to various things on the radio, I heard an American visitor to this country say "I still think the US is the greatest country on earth..." He said it in an apologetic sort of tone that made me think he felt guilty of failing the patriotism test (and I feel bound to point out that in the context - he had said something mildly critical of his country - the word "greatest" was not intended to convey the meaning of "most powerful"). What I'm fairly sure never occurred to him was that what he'd just said was highly offensive to just about everybody on the globe. Because what he'd actually said was: "My country is better than your country." Fortunately, he said it on a radio program which has the sort of listeners who are likely (a) to take such assertions with a grain of salt; (b) to understand the issues Americans are all too likely to have with patriotism (viz Obama's "patriotism tour"); and (c) to realize that he probably forgot the audience was foreign.
Of course there is also a minority who would have agreed with him, but only because what they admire about the US negatively correlates to what they loathe about their own country. This view represents the problem in reverse - a sort of colonial cringe which seems to dominate the Australian attitude to anything except sport. For everything else, going overseas seems to be essential to success. We are nothing, if not globalized.
Of course there is also a minority who would have agreed with him, but only because what they admire about the US negatively correlates to what they loathe about their own country. This view represents the problem in reverse - a sort of colonial cringe which seems to dominate the Australian attitude to anything except sport. For everything else, going overseas seems to be essential to success. We are nothing, if not globalized.
We stopped at some important tourist spots on the way. First up was the Big Merino at Goulburn. We had some food and coffee (but not at the Subway which had a weird smell about it).
At Gundagai we stopped to look at the Dog on the Tuckerbox. There is a song about this dog and, according to the blurb explaining the legend, it is not very clear exactly what the dog is supposed to have been doing on the tuckerbox. However, its owner was definitely having a day of bad luck. The statue was actually unveiled by a Prime Minister, Joe Lyons, in 1932 and was obviously an important thing back in its day. Nowadays you actually have to turn off the highway to see it.
The funniest one is the submarine at Holbrook. As you drive through this village 300 or more km from the sea, you come across a submarine by the roadside (turns out actually to be only the top half of it). The reason for this absurdity is apparently that the town wanted to change its name during WWI because until then it was Germanton. So they chose the name of a submarine commander who had sailed through the Dardanelles and sunk a Turkish ship at Istanbul. I had no idea there were any submarines back in that war.
We stopped here again to get some coffee and more food. And I. started his new tradition of playing his trumpet at important tourist spots. Here he tootled a few bars of some Beatles' song in honour of submarines.
Holbrook otherwise has little to offer, unless you're into trucks.
My companions, who are all quite recent immigrants, were very disappointed by the River Murray (the border between NSW and Victoria). They expected a more important looking river!
At Gundagai we stopped to look at the Dog on the Tuckerbox. There is a song about this dog and, according to the blurb explaining the legend, it is not very clear exactly what the dog is supposed to have been doing on the tuckerbox. However, its owner was definitely having a day of bad luck. The statue was actually unveiled by a Prime Minister, Joe Lyons, in 1932 and was obviously an important thing back in its day. Nowadays you actually have to turn off the highway to see it.
The funniest one is the submarine at Holbrook. As you drive through this village 300 or more km from the sea, you come across a submarine by the roadside (turns out actually to be only the top half of it). The reason for this absurdity is apparently that the town wanted to change its name during WWI because until then it was Germanton. So they chose the name of a submarine commander who had sailed through the Dardanelles and sunk a Turkish ship at Istanbul. I had no idea there were any submarines back in that war.
We stopped here again to get some coffee and more food. And I. started his new tradition of playing his trumpet at important tourist spots. Here he tootled a few bars of some Beatles' song in honour of submarines.
Holbrook otherwise has little to offer, unless you're into trucks.
My companions, who are all quite recent immigrants, were very disappointed by the River Murray (the border between NSW and Victoria). They expected a more important looking river!
Bloody hell! This is really getting out of hand.
Police have now visited the Newcastle Regional Art Gallery, and the National Gallery of Victoria. In the case of the latter they said they'd received a complaint about a Henson photo. After looking at it for 15 minutes they said the complaint was unsubstantiated and went away. They did not ask to look at the 93 other Henson works in the gallery's collection. The Albury Regional gallery has taken its Hensons down pending an outcome of the Sydney "investigation".
The AGNSW, meanwhile, bravely keeps its Hensons on show and yesterday they were still being studied by school children. As the curator of photography said, the allegations that these photos are somehow criminal suggests that the people making the charges are carrying around some unsavoury baggage. I think this comment gets to the nub of the matter far more effectively than the worries about censorship because any community will censor words or images that people feel are causing harm. The problem here is that it's not the pictures that are causing harm, it's the people who find them "revolting".
Meanwhile, I've seen several statements of this nature:
Dr Smith seems to miss the point entirely (though it's true that she may have been quoted out of context). What is "unsafe" about being depicted in a work of art? What does the damage to the children is the not the depiction of their bodies, but the sleazy, prurient attitude of those creating the outcry. This is actually a version of the old view that says women are asking to be raped because they've dressed sexily. It's a version of the argument that says that women should be in purdah, that women should not go out of the house in case they're attacked or even looked at by a stranger. Now we're applying the same double standards to children, especially of course, girl children. It's not the women/children who are the problem it's that percentage of men/adults who carry around the unsavoury baggage who are the problem.
In this way, neither women nor children are permitted to see their bodies in any light other than as mere objects of male desire and male domination. And then they wonder why teenage girls have so many eating disorders!
Henson has been doing photos like this for 30 years and they've been all over the internet for 15. There is no evidence that any of his models have been harmed by the process. My mind is just boggling at the damage that is being done right now, by the police and the "child protectors."
Police have now visited the Newcastle Regional Art Gallery, and the National Gallery of Victoria. In the case of the latter they said they'd received a complaint about a Henson photo. After looking at it for 15 minutes they said the complaint was unsubstantiated and went away. They did not ask to look at the 93 other Henson works in the gallery's collection. The Albury Regional gallery has taken its Hensons down pending an outcome of the Sydney "investigation".
In an open letter released today,43 people [including the lovely Cate] who were part of the creative stream at the federal government's 2020 Summit in April declared their support for Henson's work and warned of the effects of censorship.
The AGNSW, meanwhile, bravely keeps its Hensons on show and yesterday they were still being studied by school children. As the curator of photography said, the allegations that these photos are somehow criminal suggests that the people making the charges are carrying around some unsavoury baggage. I think this comment gets to the nub of the matter far more effectively than the worries about censorship because any community will censor words or images that people feel are causing harm. The problem here is that it's not the pictures that are causing harm, it's the people who find them "revolting".
Meanwhile, I've seen several statements of this nature:
Royal Australasian College of Physicians child health expert Dr Anne Smith said child welfare was more important than art. "At 13 years old, the girl in question is a minor. Her guardians have a responsibility to keep her safe," Dr Smith said.
Dr Smith seems to miss the point entirely (though it's true that she may have been quoted out of context). What is "unsafe" about being depicted in a work of art? What does the damage to the children is the not the depiction of their bodies, but the sleazy, prurient attitude of those creating the outcry. This is actually a version of the old view that says women are asking to be raped because they've dressed sexily. It's a version of the argument that says that women should be in purdah, that women should not go out of the house in case they're attacked or even looked at by a stranger. Now we're applying the same double standards to children, especially of course, girl children. It's not the women/children who are the problem it's that percentage of men/adults who carry around the unsavoury baggage who are the problem.
In this way, neither women nor children are permitted to see their bodies in any light other than as mere objects of male desire and male domination. And then they wonder why teenage girls have so many eating disorders!
Henson has been doing photos like this for 30 years and they've been all over the internet for 15. There is no evidence that any of his models have been harmed by the process. My mind is just boggling at the damage that is being done right now, by the police and the "child protectors."
My post about Bill Henson has been cited in a strange blog run by the ABC. The ABC sees itself as required to provide 'balance' rather than 'truth', though here the balance seems weigh slightly towards the artist rather than to those who are 'revolted'.
The dominant thread running through the commentary that I've read so far is related to the hypocrisy of this kind of censorship. Somebody called melbourne art critic wrote:
The point was echoed by Cecilia Fogelberg, who recently had an exhibition of her own work shut down by Melbourne City Council on account of the depiction of naked males:
Fogelberg also points to the 'blame the victim' mentality that prevails when it comes to the naked body:
Australian culture contains a strongly prurient streak. The people who know what's best for us have at various times banned Freud and D.H. Lawrence (Lady Chatterly's Lover was banned for decades - I had to wait until I got to London in 1970 to be able to read it!). And this case is really not much different from all the others. It is particularly fascinating that the images are from an art gallery. The moral conservatives find art threatening, precisely because it provokes thought instead of certainty.
More of the photos are available here (thanks to![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
tcpip for the link). Apart from the black bars, I think they are rather beautiful. I suspect that anyone who has ever been a teenage girl could relate to them. Blogger Sauer-Thompson thinks that some of them are erotic: I think that's stretching it a bit - unless you find vulnerability erotic or you're the same age as the girl and just as uncertain about life. But who knows what goes on in the mind of the male! The fact that the Prime Minister found them "absolutely revolting" tells us more about the Prime Minister than it does about the pictures.
The following is Henson's own rationale for his choice of subject (with yet more photos), from a three year old interview:
The dominant thread running through the commentary that I've read so far is related to the hypocrisy of this kind of censorship. Somebody called melbourne art critic wrote:
It is not surprising that nudity in art is being regularly censored in Australia as it helps maintaining the failed illusion of decency.
The point was echoed by Cecilia Fogelberg, who recently had an exhibition of her own work shut down by Melbourne City Council on account of the depiction of naked males:
our entire media world is overloaded with intentionally sexual images; and often women wearing until nothing as the bait for the consumer in advertising, and further more the nonchalant acceptance of advertising of brothels around town on mobile billboards.
Fogelberg also points to the 'blame the victim' mentality that prevails when it comes to the naked body:
This has in it’s turn provoked me with questions regarding what can be read into the actual artwork and how clear the artist’s intentions ever can be, and how much is read into the artwork by the viewer, and how the interpretation of the work can be colored by the viewer’s (in this case I must say) ‘dirty minds’.
Australian culture contains a strongly prurient streak. The people who know what's best for us have at various times banned Freud and D.H. Lawrence (Lady Chatterly's Lover was banned for decades - I had to wait until I got to London in 1970 to be able to read it!). And this case is really not much different from all the others. It is particularly fascinating that the images are from an art gallery. The moral conservatives find art threatening, precisely because it provokes thought instead of certainty.
More of the photos are available here (thanks to
tcpip for the link). Apart from the black bars, I think they are rather beautiful. I suspect that anyone who has ever been a teenage girl could relate to them. Blogger Sauer-Thompson thinks that some of them are erotic: I think that's stretching it a bit - unless you find vulnerability erotic or you're the same age as the girl and just as uncertain about life. But who knows what goes on in the mind of the male! The fact that the Prime Minister found them "absolutely revolting" tells us more about the Prime Minister than it does about the pictures.The following is Henson's own rationale for his choice of subject (with yet more photos), from a three year old interview:
The reason I like working with teenagers is because they represent a kind of breach between the dimensions that people cross through. The classical root of the word “adolescence” means to grow towards something. I am fascinated with that interval, that sort of highly ambiguous and uncertain period where you have an exponential growth of experience and knowledge, but also a kind of tenuous grasp on the certainties of adult life..
Yesterday we had a Welcome to Country ceremony, acknowledging the fact that Indigenous people never gave up their land or their rights to occupancy of it.
Today we did the Sorry Business. The Prime Minister apologized without reservation for the grief and pain caused by two centuries of legislation in colonial, state and federal parliaments. The hankies were out in the public gallery, full of Stolen Generations. Instead of asking all those in favour to say 'aye' the Speaker asked everyone in favour to stand in support of the motion. Everyone did. Nobody could escape being seen to vote for the motion. Brilliant.
Tomorrow we have to start the Healing Business or as Kev calls it the Unfinished Business. We will have a kind of War Cabinet on this one issue of closing the gap between indigenous and immigrant Australians. Brendan Nelson, the Opposition Leader, had to agree to it - I think his personal instincts would be for it, but the rest of his party are going to give him a lot of trouble. I wouldn't be in his shoes for anything on earth, and I don't think he will last very long as leader (except that the only alternative is Malcolm Turnbull who won't support the racists either). Judging by Rudd's speech two things are top of his agenda: housing and pre-school. The first of these drew applause from the masses outside.
The only thing missing was the question of compensation. Rudd didn't mention it, but Nelson did, in order to reject it. That was unfortunate, because as Mick Dodson said there is still a job of persuasion to be done if the Stolen Generations are not to have to spend decades plugging through the courts (some of these cases have been going for years already and some, in the absence of acknowledgement that the policy was wrong, have been lost). The fact that Rudd didn't mention it suggests that, for him, this question is still open.
I was wrong yesterday. Old Silver was there too. Every Labor and Liberal PM since 1972 except one.
The Federation Mall outside was lined with beautiful banners incorporating the indigenous flag. So much more attractive than the stupid official flag. I was sitting there watching all this and thinking that indigenous culture is really becoming a huge part of mainstream Australian culture - one of the few things that really distinguishes us from other predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon cultures. It's not just the Welcome to Country ceremonies that happen everywhere these days, or the fact that every major event opens with an acknowledgement of the traditional owners, but the importance of Aboriginal arts. Painting especially, which most people recognize as the most important modern art we have and is also borrowed heavily in other national 'branding' - the painting of Qantas aircraft, for example - but also dance groups like Bangarra, popular musicians and even so-called 'serious' music which makes use of didgeridoo and clapsticks alongside classical European instruments. The fact that terms like 'sorry business' have become part of everyday language.
Today we did the Sorry Business. The Prime Minister apologized without reservation for the grief and pain caused by two centuries of legislation in colonial, state and federal parliaments. The hankies were out in the public gallery, full of Stolen Generations. Instead of asking all those in favour to say 'aye' the Speaker asked everyone in favour to stand in support of the motion. Everyone did. Nobody could escape being seen to vote for the motion. Brilliant.
Tomorrow we have to start the Healing Business or as Kev calls it the Unfinished Business. We will have a kind of War Cabinet on this one issue of closing the gap between indigenous and immigrant Australians. Brendan Nelson, the Opposition Leader, had to agree to it - I think his personal instincts would be for it, but the rest of his party are going to give him a lot of trouble. I wouldn't be in his shoes for anything on earth, and I don't think he will last very long as leader (except that the only alternative is Malcolm Turnbull who won't support the racists either). Judging by Rudd's speech two things are top of his agenda: housing and pre-school. The first of these drew applause from the masses outside.
The only thing missing was the question of compensation. Rudd didn't mention it, but Nelson did, in order to reject it. That was unfortunate, because as Mick Dodson said there is still a job of persuasion to be done if the Stolen Generations are not to have to spend decades plugging through the courts (some of these cases have been going for years already and some, in the absence of acknowledgement that the policy was wrong, have been lost). The fact that Rudd didn't mention it suggests that, for him, this question is still open.
I was wrong yesterday. Old Silver was there too. Every Labor and Liberal PM since 1972 except one.
The Federation Mall outside was lined with beautiful banners incorporating the indigenous flag. So much more attractive than the stupid official flag. I was sitting there watching all this and thinking that indigenous culture is really becoming a huge part of mainstream Australian culture - one of the few things that really distinguishes us from other predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon cultures. It's not just the Welcome to Country ceremonies that happen everywhere these days, or the fact that every major event opens with an acknowledgement of the traditional owners, but the importance of Aboriginal arts. Painting especially, which most people recognize as the most important modern art we have and is also borrowed heavily in other national 'branding' - the painting of Qantas aircraft, for example - but also dance groups like Bangarra, popular musicians and even so-called 'serious' music which makes use of didgeridoo and clapsticks alongside classical European instruments. The fact that terms like 'sorry business' have become part of everyday language.
