Spencer and Gillen's Use of Photography in the Native Tribes Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Visual knowledge: Spencer and Gillen’s use of photography in The native tribes of Central Australia I have printed a set of the Echunpa [perentie] pictures Nicolas Peterson for Sambo and have had a neat shallow tin case made Australian National University to hold them and they are to be taken and deposited with the Churinga in the Ertnatulinga [storehouse cave] Abstract: The native tribes of Central Australia, shortly. Sam was delighted and so was your Okilya published in 1899, was by far and away the best pho- [elder brother], the King. (Gillen in Mulvaney et al. tographically illustrated ethnography up to that time. 1997:157) It has been suggested that Spencer and Gillen relied on Gillen provides no further information on this fas- photography because of the practical difficulty they had in cinating event and so one is left to speculate about communicating with the Arrernte and in understanding the surrounding circumstances and motivations. what was going on. Here it is argued that the involvement Although it is unknown whether Sambo requested with photography arose out of the intersection of the limits the ceremonial photographs spontaneously or took that face verbal communication when in the presence up an offer of the prints, it would seem likely that it of complex performance, and the significance of visual was his idea to place the photographs in the churinga information within the emerging natural-science fieldwork storehouse.1 Gillen and Spencer took a great many orientation. However, it seems that Spencer and Gillen’s ceremonial photographs, and clearly showed them intellectual understandings of Arrernte life and culture to the Aboriginal men from time to time (below), but were challenged by the photographs, leading them to deny there is no evidence that this lodging of prints in the aspects of the evidence the photographs provided. storehouses was a common practice. It might also be reasonably assumed that it was Gillen’s idea to make a tin box for the photographs since it was integral to both his and Spencer’s work that the photographs were of great archival value.2 Speculation also has to fill the gap about motivation. Gillen is clear that not forboth Sambo and his father, the King, were pleased about the whole idea.3 The acceptance of the box and the lodging of the images in the storehouse are clear evidence that the photographs were highly valued and one can only assume that that was because they were seen to be related directly to the events/people that they depicted. Because the photographs printed for Sambo recorded restricted information in an entirely com- prehensible form, they had to be restricted in the same way as the events and objects shown in them. This rational view is one that is shared by many Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal persons to the present (e.g. Kimber 1998:50–1).4 They are not concerned reproductionabout taking the simulacra for the real but recognise, as WT Mitchell (1994:284) has said, that one conno- tation of the photograph is that it is pure denotation 1 Australian Aboriginal Studies 2006/1 Spencer and Gillen's use of photography—Peterson and that is simply what it means to recognise a photo- an accomplished draughtsman and amateur sketcher graph as a photograph. But what about Spencer and and even led him to attend art school for a while Gillen: what did photography mean to them? when in Manchester (Mulvaney & Calaby 1985:28). The native tribes of Central Australia (1899, herein- He apparently used visual material in both his uni- after The native tribes) is a lavishly illustrated work, versity and public lectures to good effect (1985:28) and and it is clear both from the volume of Gillen’s letters illustrated many of his publications with his own zoo- to Spencer (Mulvaney et al. 1997), where photogra- logical drawings (1985:29). In 1894 he joined the Horn phy is by far the biggest subject entry in the index Expedition to Central Australia, not just as the expedi- other than for the key persons, and from Mulvaney tion biologist but also as the photographer (1985:118), and Calaby’s (1985) biography of Spencer that it was and in editing the expedition report not only wrote a powerful interest. Why was this? At least two views half the text himself but was the source of most of the have been expressed. Alison Griffiths (1997:29) has photographs, and supplied 23 line illustrations and suggested that the reason for the emphasis on pho- eight pages of colour drawings (1985:117). tography, particularly of the Engwura ceremony, was From Gillen’s correspondence it is clear that the in response to the practical difficulties they had in two men constantly exchanged prints of photographs communicating with the Arrernte and in understand- they had taken. As early as September 1894, Gillen ing what was going on. She specifically refers to the wrote (Mulvaney et al. 1997:52):6 debate on the extent to which Gillen had command I am sending you a few Prints this mail, most of which of the Arrernte language and the over-reliance on you and I developed…Have not yet had time to try young Aboriginal men as translators (Mulvaney & silver printing but hope to have some results to send Calaby 1985:174). Others have seen the ethnographic you next mail. Have taken a number of Corroboree emphasis on photography in this period as part of the pictures since you left and shall get some more in a colonial gaze that, in the case of Aboriginal peoples, few days. If I am successful in printing you shall have was dedicated to demonstrating their place in the a copy of anything I consider sufficiently interesting. evolutionary hierarchy (e.g. Maxwell 1999:142; Willis If there is any picture that you would specially like to 1988:205). have you can let me know. In this paper I argue that these, and other views (e.g. Wolfe 1999) on Spencer and Gillen’s involvement In November 1894 he sent Spencer 34 plates, that with photography, are limiting half-truths that fail to is negatives, which he described as ‘all the best I have engage photography on its own terms and are anach- on hand’ (Mulvaney et al. 1997:58), and later wrote to ronistic in their understanding of Spencer and Gillen, Spencer: ‘Make whatever use you like of the plates and indeed of other ethnographers of the period.5 and return them thro Winnecke7 when you have finished with them’ (Mulvaney et al. 1997:61). He also allowed Stirling to use his photographs, as selected by Involvement with photography not forSpencer (Mulvaney et al. 1997:81). In return, Spencer sent copies of his photographs Spencer and Gillen were both interested in photog- to Gillen (Mulvaney et al. 1997:67, also 70, 71, 124, raphy, quite independently of their collaboration. 151, 188, 258).8 Gillen was much struck by the time Mulvaney and Calaby (1985:165) recorded that Gillen Spencer put into printing and toning the photographs was already a keen photographer before meeting and commented that his Glen of Palms picture was Spencer but that, following their meeting, he increased ‘the most beautiful photograph I have ever seen’ the number of ethnographic subjects and paid greater (Mulvaney et al. 1997:124). This makes it clear, as attention to the technical aspects of camera use and Mulvaney comments, that precise attribution of par- developing. The level of commitment is suggested ticular images to one or other of the men has to be by the fact that, in April 1896, Gillen had half a ton of done with care (Mulvaney et al. 1997:239). Indeed, in photographic materials arriving in Alice Springs by October 1895 Gillen wrote to Spencer (1997:82, also camel (Mulvaney et al. 1997:114). 239) saying: Spencer himself had a commitment to photogra- phy before he came to Australia, having taken photo- The Negatives in your possession are not to be used...[by graphs during a holidayreproduction in the Alps in 1884 (Mulvaney Stirling for making lantern slides] until after publica- & Calaby 1985:50). His interest in photography went tion...Of course if you want slides for yourself take them along with a strong visual imagination that made him by all means, I look upon these negatives as our joint Australian Aboriginal Studies 2006/1 13 Spencer and Gillen's use of photography—Peterson property—You can tell Stirling, if you like, that we are joint owners, you possess your interest by right virtue, or in consideration, of having supplied me with an instantaneous lens and shutter. By comparing published images with unpub- lished images and original negatives, and drawing on old and new archival sources, Philip Jones (2005) has gone some considerable way to disentangling the work of these men, and he thinks that more can be done; he demonstrates that the pictorial contribution to The native tribes was about 50-50. For the purposes of this paper, however, unless otherwise specified, the attitudes of Spencer and Gillen to photography will be taken to be similar and no attempt will be made to distinguish between them.9 Use of the photographs Two broad public uses were made of the photo- graphs taken up to the time of the publication of the 1899 volume. They were used in publications such as newspapers and articles and some of them were made into lantern slides. It was Spencer who made the greater use of lantern slides for lectures, giving no less than 60 public lectures with them from the time of the Horn Expedition onwards (Mulvaney & Calaby 1985:181).