The first anniversary of the Voice Referendum produced much analysis. Some of it focussed on 'why the Referendum was defeated', as if there was a single explanation, when there are as many explanations as there were voters.
Other spot-markers, like the statement from Reconciliation Australia, tried to look forward.
We will remain active in supporting and promoting truth-telling to ensure Australians understand and accept the wrongs of the past and the impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and that Australia makes amends for past policies and practices and ensures these wrongs are never repeated.
As we look forward, four recent articles remind us how rich and complex is our 65,000 years of history, not only in the problems and solutions it has thrown up, but also in influences upon today's Australia.
First, Rebe Taylor and Greg Lehman in The Conversation ask whether the visiting King should apologise to Indigenous Australians for the genocide inflicted upon them in the name of the Crown.* Their piece summarises the evidence of genocide, especially in Tasmania and concludes:
British sovereignty over Australia was imposed without the required consent of its First Nations. The result has been continued dispossession and suffering ... [T]he call for an apology from the king has immense symbolic importance. It is rooted in the desire for acknowledgement of wrongs. These include genocide and the continuing destructive effects of colonisation across Australia.
So, Australia today carries the unhealed scars of British rule. We are not alone in that respect, as Ann Curthoys shows in her review in Inside Story of a recently published book of essays, The Truth about Empire: Real Histories of British Colonialism, edited by Alan Lester.
Much of Lester's collection reruns arguments similar to those in the Windschuttle-Ryan-others 'history wars' of twenty years ago, which were triggered by histories of Tasmania. Curthoys notes that a good outcome of those wars was a new wave of evidence-based analysis, some of which upset people who complain about 'the rewriting of history'.
The other takeaway from the Lester collection is the value of international comparison. For example, the history of Britain in China, says contributor Robert Bickers, had its good aspects but 'the foundation was violence, in thought, word, and deed'. Sounds like us? Australia can learn from what other former Imperial possessions have done - or not done - to repair themselves.
Then there is Dean Ashenden, also in Inside Story, who asks whether the first anniversary of the Voice Referendum should encourage us to think differently about truth-telling. Ashenden points out that the many museums and tourist attractions in outback Queensland almost completely fail to mention the history of that country before the White Man came. To redress the balance, Ashenden calls for 'a national project to encourage and support towns and communities to work with Indigenous people and local and professional historians to audit the public telling of their story and decide whether and how it might be more fully and truthfully told'. (There is more in Ashenden's book, Telling Tennant's Story: the Strange Career of the Great Australian Silence, published 2022.)
Finally, Joanna Mendelssohn in The Conversation reviews 65,000 Years: a Short History of Australian Art, edited by Marcia Langton and Judith Ryan and published next month. Mendelssohn considers the work of many First Nations artists, but it is her quote from editor Ryan that hits hardest: the recent generation of activist artists share 'a similar sense of outrage at the politics of colonialism and their experiences of institutionalised racism and intergenerational trauma'.
Imperial roots, international comparisons, silences needing filling, art that comes from a place of pain, are all parts of our complex Australian stories.
That complexity contrasts with the simplistic rhetoric scripted for Australian War Memorial Director, Matt Anderson, at the end of the Memorial's recently released CGI fly-over video of its burgeoning extensions. Compared with Joanna Mendelssohn's 65,000 years, the video summarises the Memorial's ambition as to 'tell the story of everything from Gallipoli to Afghanistan'. That's barely 100 years.
This is the place [says Mr Anderson of the Memorial; his emphasis] all Australians should come to understand what it truly means to be Australian.
No uncertainty or doubt about all that problematic history, folks; just roll up to our (extended) War Memorial and all will become clear.
Mr Anderson's predecessor, Dr Brendan Nelson, often used a similar line: 'Every nation has its story. This [the one told at the Memorial] is our story'.
Dr Nelson's line was facile then; Mr Anderson's line is facile now.
Even if there is an essence of being Australian, it can be grasped wherever Australians gather, not just at the Memorial.
On the other hand, if the Memorial were to follow through on its Council Chair's commitments to properly recognise and commemorate the Australian (Frontier) Wars, the gap would narrow between its rhetoric and the reality of Australian history.
Australia's story needs to be told in black and white, not just khaki.
* The King's speech to the Parliament on 21 October acknowledged 65,000 years of history and mentioned the role of First Nations people in caring for the land, but it did not include an apology. Senator Lidia Thorpe's intervention provoked thoughtful articles by Lorena Allam and Sarah Collard and Celeste Liddle. Meanwhile, former Senator Nova Peris was promoting a petition seeking a royal apology for colonial wrongs.
Earlier, the King and Queen laid a wreath at the War Memorial and were shown the For Our Country memorial in the grounds. The memorial recognises the military service of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
'We are honoured that Their Majesties chose to visit For Our Country and learn a little about Australia’s proud Indigenous military service,' said Aunty Lorraine Hatton OAM, the first Indigenous female member of Council of the Australian War Memorial [who escorted them].
'Their acknowledgment is significant, especially for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, many of whom were forced to hide their Indigenous heritage last century in order to serve their country,' Aunty Lorraine said. (War Memorial media release)
We have no idea whether any private conversations ranged more widely or went further back than 1901.
The fly-over video has in the background (mark 1.11) a uniformed serviceman who is perhaps Indigenous.
Greg Lehman and Ann Curthoys AM are among Defending Country's distinguished Supporters.
Picture credit: King George III, Australia's first King. Plus ça change? (Wikipedia; Allan Ramsay)
More from
General
category
