inquiryBITES

Embedding New Knowledge - What's YOUR Investment?

Picture this scenario. Kids in bed, its quiet and peaceful, nothing’s happening just sitting in front of the telly, my partner and I reading the weekend papers, drinking tea. And there’s a story on the front page of the paper - a football player (or coach) has managed to get himself into trouble (a spear tackle perhaps? a real cruncher? swapped codes? jumped ship & went off to France?). Its all over the paper, there’s letters to the editor, an editorial, every-one’s got an opinion. Will he be suspended? Will he be allowed to play? Can he keep his contract? Will the club be fined? What should/should not the NRL do about it?

Inevitably, as an avid reader (though in general a sports loather), I’ll get caught up in the issue, and I’ll ask my partner questions and we’ll engage in an interesting conversation (at least for me anyway, I can’t attest to the interest level for him) about the issue. I’ll have an opinion. Then I’ll go to the arts section, and promptly forget the issue, who was involved, what it meant for the game and so on. And this scenario is repeated a couple of times every season and then again for the cricket season.

At every conversation though I’m very much aware that I frequently forget players names, the issues, the rules and my partner (bless ‘im) is forced to repeat the same information over and over again (kind of like when I’ve had a few too many & I constantly have to ask “what’s trumps again?”).

The issue is that I have not embedded new knowledge about the game. I know that any serious embedding of knowledge would require years and years of committed study. My partner has been following Rugby League since he was a boy, first as a junior player, he reads Rugby League Week & other publications, watches games (though not as many as he would like), and discusses issues with his peers. He has invested time, energy, thinking, and a little money into getting to a point where he can have an informed, meaningful and critical discussion about the issues that come up each week and each season.

I’m telling this story, because it fascinates me that many people believe that they can devote the same shallow-curiosity that I have about sport to developing their own understanding and awareness of Indigenous issues.

I am frequently asked simplistic questions in relation to Indigenous issues that indicate to me that the questioner has not given more than a passing thought to the topic. Questions like, “Do Aborigines really want an education?”, “what do Aborigines think about …..” etc etc. Prefacing your question with “I know I’m ignorant but…..” really doesn’t help. And in my experience, “I know I’m ignorant but …” folks generally already have an opinion in their mind anyway.

Of course, being a super polite person, I’ve not yet learned how to “death-stare” these people out of my existence (oh how I wish I could sometimes), and I’ll inevitably attempt to address questions that actually require hours and hours of discussion to get anywhere near to a meaningful answer. But that’s actually not fair on the questioner or me, because I quite honestly do want to answer these questions. I am deep down someone who believes that it’s the small opening of minds that will change the world.

But my request is, if you want to know about Indigenous people, if you’re really truly interested, then you need to think about what you’re willing to invest in embedding new knowledge. Think about how you’ll be challenged in addressing your assumptions, values and pre-existing ideas about Indigeneity and Australian-ness. There are thousands of books, hundreds of movies, many websites that you can use to start your journey. There are many Indigenous voices out there in EVERY level (from children’s literature through to top-tier academic works), but it ultimately is up to you to decide What’s Your Investment?

created?... what the?!?

Its a pink flower but is it really?

   

I think I talk alot about the idea of everything as/being "created". I thought I'd try to explain it a bit more. If you're confused after reading this, tell me, because this is the first time i've ever tried to write about this stuff. 

Well, basically, pretty much everything we know is "created", its not natural or truthful.

For example:

• The colour pink is only pink because there are humans who identified, distinguished and named it pink.
• A flag is really just a rag with patterns on it. It only becomes a "flag" because we make the patterns on the rag mean something.
• The noise of the mower is only noisy because I'm here to call it noisy.
• The killing of one person by another is murder and therefore a bad thing, because we say it is.

Do you get what I mean when I say created? We don't live the same way we did one thousand years ago, because as humans, we're constantly creating it (by it I mean life, society etc) as we go along.

The rules change as we change as the rules change. Its circular.

Thus, its all created, we make it up as we go along.

Another aspect of all this is that we all agree about the creation. I could suddenly start calling the pink flower blue, but its pretty useless unless other people agree with me and start calling it blue as well.

So, what's the point of this?

Well, I think knowing that its "all made up" helps keep things in perspective. It should make us a little less precious, give us a bit of flexibility. Like the Blak History month I posted about earlier today. It can (and I believe will) become part of our celebrations, because there will be more and more people agreeing that July and Blak History is meaningful. (And we should probably also acknowledge Web2.0 for facilitating this - though thats for another post I think)

There's probably a brilliant thinker who has a seriously meaningful quote that would really work right now. I don't know what it is. I'll look for one, if you find one, let me know hey?

Wordles #1

This is a wordle created by www.wordle.net. The text is an essay by Professor Aileen Morton-Robinson titled The Possessive Logic of Patriarchal White Sovereignty: The High Court and the Yorta Yorta Decision in Borderlands e-journal (http://www.borderlands.net.au/issues/vol3no2.html).

Doesn't really mean anything - just looks cool!

Wordles are fun and can be used in the classroom in all kinds of ways. (I created a worlde of  my son's spelling list for the term!)

 

Blak History Month (1st – 31st July)

 

All the days we know of as important and meaningful are created. Here is a worthy event to celebrate. It started small in 2008 but can grow into whatever we want it to. This announcement is from Sam Cook, founder of Kiss My Blak Arts.

Public Announcement

As we mark this day as a moment of Indigenous Survival, let us note that it has been one year to the day, that the message was sent to Australia and the World, to recognise and celebrate JULY as AUSTRALIA'S BLAK HISTORY MONTH.

From a humble grassroots pledge - to what continues to gain momentum daily - let us collectively look toward how we can each play a role in promoting a month of positive pride to share, celebrate and carry forth the history of the 1st Australians - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Please encourage more people to join the group and/or talk about it in your local community, amongst family, your mob and people of ALL backgrounds and heritage, so that they too, can Celebrate with Us.

By breathing life into BLAK HISTORY MONTH, you will each take your mark as founders of a lifelong legacy, itself a moment in BLAKISTORY.

In Unity, Strength and Pride. Sam Cook (More information about Kiss My Blak Arts available from http://www.kissmyblakarts.com/about.html)

26/01 Part 2: Out With the Old?

Mick Dodson, Australian of the Year 2009 in his acceptance speech told how he believed that 26th of January should not be Australia Day. Linda Burney, in an interview with Fran Kelly on Radio National, told how while she was unable as an Aboriginal woman to celebrate Australia Day in the past, today she believes that we should stick with the day. She argued that it is possible for the meaning of the day to evolve to one that is more inclusive of others (including Indigenous People). Her and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd are on the same page.

Is it possible to continue celebrating on the 26th of January with a clear conscience?

Today (this year in particular) has shown an increased display of patriotism. The Australia Day committee (australiaday.org.au) should be proud that they have been able to create in Australians a degree of reverence for this date. I remember when I was a kid (in the 70s), no one bothered about the 26th, it was barely worth mentioning. Mind you, we still sung God Save The Queen back then. (We should also thank the "grog" shops and newspapers that gave away car flags, as well as the "cheap" shop suppliers who mass-produced Aussie flag undies, boxers, boardies, thongs, shirts etc)

Are we just being difficult? Just being wowsers? Does it really matter that a) on the 26th of January the soveignty of our nation was stolen and b) we didn't actually become a nation, only a colony of Great Britain? Perhaps I'm just being pedantic.

Isn't it enough that the PM said Sorry, the Australian of the Year is an Indigenous person, there a numerous Indigenous politicians (in states/territories), a couple of Indigenous people have a few gold medals now. Can't we all rally around the flag?? Can't we just get over it???

Well - I guess that's the beauty of being human. We get to create our symbols. The flag, the day, everything is created. None of its natural or truthful.

So bugger it, I think I'll stick with marching on the 26th of January, and fight and wait, patiently and non-violently, for the CHANGE.

Always was, Always will be…. Aboriginal Land.

Michael at Brisbane Invasion Day 2009 march. He asked me "Mum, all the people who celebrate Australia Day, don't they know about the Aborigines?"

Appropriating Aboriginal Art: To Be Or Not To Be

Students will ask "why can't we use Aboriginal images?" Particularly if they see the work of artists like Richard Bell, who is deliberate in his appropriation of "western" artists like Lichtenstein or Tillers.

"If he's apppropriating, why can't we*?

Well there are a couple of responses you can offer that may assist students to get to the core of the issue:

1. Firstly, Aboriginal art was never "given" to the western art industry as a school of art to be appropriated. Picasso knew what he was doing when he first exhibited cubism - he was well aware of the impact of his use of this style and what it meant. However Aboriginal artists, when their work was first being installed as art objects into galleries (and out of museums as ethnographic cultural objects), in the last quarter of the century, would have very little idea about the Western art market and its conventions. Many "traditional" artists still are not aware of their rights (and responsibilities).
2. Secondly, the imagery/iconography may have spiritual significance and by re-producing the image you may inadvertently "call-up" something you're not meant to.
3. Thirdly, why use the image in the first place? The fact that the image is not from your country, your people, your culture, your heritage, meants that you have completely de-contextualised it. You would be hard pressed to create a new meaning for existing cultural icons that would "hold-up" to a critical analysis.

Above all, CREATE FROM WHAT YOU KNOW - don't look for inspiration in the foreign exotic interesting native. 

"Be responsible for your aesthetic." Vernon Ah Kee, 2008

* Yes I have assumed that the "enquirer" is non-Indigenous.

The Australia Book Part 2: Hopeless Romantic by Tony Albert

Thinking further about "The Australia Book" Written by Eve Pownall, it might be worth exploring the artwork of Aboriginal artist Tony Albert. Tony originally comes from Cardwell but now lives and works in Brisbane. He is a member of ProppaNOW artist collective. His work shown at Gallery Smith in Melbourne in 2008, is a re-positioning of imagery from the period Pownall grew up, worked and lived in. You can see the link here:

http://www.gallerysmith.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=34

The Australia Book Part 1: How it should & should not be used.

The "Australia Book" written by Eve Pownall and Illustrated by Margaret Senior is an Australian history book with quite a standing amongst older book lovers, teachers & librarians. Written in 1952, it's obvious to see why, its colourful, it doesn't hark back to Mother Britain. It attempts to capture Australia from an Australian perspective. And this is where my concern lies.

It is white Australian in its perspective, assumptions and values.  Aboriginal people are romanticised in the beginning section, portrayed as savage, simplistic and even helpless in the middle, and have disappeared by the end of the book. And while New Guinea is mention, the Torres Strait Islands are completely invisiable.

This book should NOT be used as an accurate account of Australian history. 

• The portrayal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is offensive;
• New Guinea people are seen in the illustrations as simple village folk while in the text are hostile; 
• South Sea Islanders are said to have "not always treated properly" but are afforded no other explanation of their presence on the continent;
•  Chinese peoples and other nationalities are completely invisible (though there is a mention at the end how new immigrants to Australia don't always speak English.

At this point, one might argue, that I'm being a bit harsh "we didn't think of those things in the old days". And I absolutely accept that. And I'm not really questioning that. I question how we might use the book today.

The book should be used as a text to analyse how White Australia used to see itself - herioc, hardworking, stoic, rough & tumble. All of those adjectives that are visualised in the symbolism of our nation - Simpson on his donkey, the digger on his horse, the shearer, the drover etc.

Thee symbols of White masculinity are reaffirmed in Eve Pownall's book. It is an excellent study of Australia - though perhaps not how Australian's think they see themselves today.

26/01 Part 1: What will you teach about the 26th of January?

In our house, the 26th of January is Invasion Day. We do not celebrate or recognise Australia Day. We live in Brisbane, so each year we march.

• We march to remember those who have marched before us and made our world a better place.
• We march to remember those who were not able to march.
• We march to remind others that soverignty has not been ceded.
• We march to keep clear the vision of what we have and what we do not have.

This position is neither right nor wrong, better or worse than anothers. It simply is. In your classroom you should recognise this, celebrate it and respect it. Do not force your young students to colour in the Australian flag. Give them a choice of flag to colour - respect their heritage and their identity.

Welcome to inquiryBITES.com

Welcome to inquiry BITES. Have a look at the BITEme page for more information about this blog – who we are, what we are and where we want to be.

We'll always be in "beta" mode - never finished, never done, always trying to improve (even if we get it wrong). Look foward to your feedback.

Cheers, Leesa Watego