Aboriginal Australian Heritage in the Postcolonial City: Sites of Anti-Colonial Resistance and Continuing Presence

Aboriginal Australian heritage in the postcolonial city: sites of anti-colonial resistance and continuing presence Vidhu Gandhi Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2008 Faculty of the Built Environment University of New South Wales ORIGINALITY STATEMENT ‘I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and to the best of my knowledge it contains no materials previously published or written by another person, or substantial proportions of material which have been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma at UNSW or any other educational institution, except where due acknowledgement is made in the thesis. Any contribution made to the research by others, with whom I have worked at UNSW or elsewhere, is explicitly acknowledged in the thesis. I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work, except to the extent that assistance from others in the project's design and conception or in style, presentation and linguistic expression is acknowledged.’ Signed: Date: 02 September 2008 COPYRIGHT STATEMENT ‘I hereby grant the University of New South Wales or its agents the right to archive and to make available my thesis or dissertation in whole or part in the University libraries in all forms of media, now or here after known, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. I retain all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation. I also authorise University Microfilms to use the 350 word abstract of my thesis in Dissertation Abstract International (this is applicable to doctoral theses only). I have either used no substantial portions of copyright material in my thesis or I have obtained permission to use copyright material; where permission has not been granted I have applied/will apply for a partial restriction of the digital copy of my thesis or dissertation.' Signed: Date: 02 September 2008 AUTHENTICITY STATEMENT ‘I certify that the Library deposit digital copy is a direct equivalent of the final officially approved version of my thesis. No emendation of content has occurred and if there are any minor variations in formatting, they are the result of the conversion to digital format.’ Signed: Date: 02 September 2008 Preface Studying Aboriginal Australian heritage has not been an easy task. I have been constantly questioned as to what brought about my interest in this area of research, especially as I am neither an Aboriginal nor non-Aboriginal Australian. I have consequently found it a daunting and difficult task to situate myself with regard to such an obviously sensitive and complex issue. I would like to neither defend nor justify my reasons for undertaking this research and instead outline what brought me to this juncture. Being from India I have been keenly aware of the tensions between a postcolonial nation and its deeply troubled colonial past, and have often found myself straddling the rather uncomfortable position between a ‘true’ Indian identity and a ‘westernised’ Indian identity – a situation which I feel cannot and need not be resolved. My position as an architect has been similarly complicated as I have been equally drawn to regional and vernacular Indian architecture as I have been to British colonial architecture in the Indian sub-continent. Along side this I have been acutely conscious of the struggle for an Indian sense of identity within architectural practice and education in India. It has, however, been my personal interest in colonial architecture and its impact on an indigenous fabric that existed before colonisation and which continues to be expressed on the margins of a dominant architectural and heritage practice and discourse which played a primary role in my decision to examine Aboriginal heritage in cities. Urban Aboriginal heritage rests precariously on the edges of a predominantly Eurocentric Australian heritage practice and represents the friction that continues to exist between a largely westernised practice and the concerns of a largely marginalised and neglected community. At the commencement of my research I was advised to read extensively on Aboriginal history and its neglect and misrepresentation as a part of Australian history, as well as familiarise myself with debates on Aboriginal identity, self-determination and reconciliation. I value this part of my research greatly not simply as a pre-requisite for this thesis but because it has helped me synthesise my concerns as an architect with my position as a person from a postcolonial country. It has made me aware that while colonialism is a common factor between India and Australia there are numerous differences and irregularities in the two situations. While India to a certain extent can be regarded as a postcolonial nation, to employ the same ideas and debates, in the Australian context, especially in relation to Aboriginal peoples would not only be inappropriate but also thoughtless as colonialism is over only for ‘white’ Australia. For Aboriginal peoples the struggle against the impacts of colonialism continues as they attempt to move away from largely colonial stereotypes that surround issues of Aboriginality, heritage, land ownership and management. This can be evidenced in terms of the strong anti-colonial sentiments that underline Aboriginal issues in Australia today. It has been this particularly revealing perspective which has greatly determined the course of my research in terms of the theoretical understandings I have tried to incorporate and in terms of the case studies I have chosen to examine. More importantly it has made me conscious of the fact, that while I may not really have a position, except that of an ‘outsider’, with regards to the ‘white’ Australian and Aboriginal Australian binary, I need to be aware and responsible as a participant in the intercultural dialogue that takes place between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people i Abstract Aboriginal Australian heritage forms a significant and celebrated part of Australian heritage. Set within the institutional frameworks of a predominantly ‘white’ European Australian heritage practice, Aboriginal heritage has been promoted as the heritage of a people who belonged to the distant, pre-colonial past and who were an integral and sustainable part of the natural environment. These controlled and carefully packaged meanings of Aboriginal heritage have underwritten aspects of urban Aboriginal presence and history that prevail in the (previously) colonial city. In the midst of the city which seeks to cling to selected images of its colonial past urban Aboriginal heritage emerges as a significant challenge to a largely ‘white’, (post)colonial Australian heritage practice. The distinctively Aboriginal sense of anti- colonialism that underlines claims to urban sites of Aboriginal significance unsettles the colonial stereotypes that are associated with Aboriginal heritage and disrupts the ‘purity’ of the city by penetrating the stronghold of colonial heritage. However, despite the challenge to the colonising imperatives of heritage practice, the fact that urban Aboriginal heritage continues to be a deeply contested reality indicates that heritage practice has failed to move beyond its predominantly colonial legacy. It knowingly or unwittingly maintains the stronghold of colonial heritage in the city by selectively and often with reluctance, recognising a few sites of contested Aboriginal heritage such as the Old Swan Brewery and Bennett House in Perth. Furthermore, the listing of these sites according to very narrow and largely Eurocentric perceptions of Aboriginal heritage makes it quite difficult for other sites which fall outside these considerations to be included as part of the urban built environment. Importantly this thesis demonstrates that it is most often in the case of Aboriginal sites of political resistance such as The Block in Redfern, the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra and Australian Hall in Sydney, that heritage practice tends to maintain its hegemony as these sites are a reminder of the continuing disenfranchised condition of Aboriginal peoples, in a nation which considers itself to be postcolonial. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Robert Freestone for being an articulate, generous and at times very blunt supervisor, who has constantly reminded me of the standard of a PhD. For all the input in terms of cultural geography and Aboriginality debates I thank Dr. Kevin Dunn both as a supervisor and later as a co-supervisor, as well as Dr. Chris Gibson. Dr. Catherine de Lorenzo has been kind and helpful as a postgraduate coordinator and an honest critic of my research which I feel has helped me tremendously. A special thanks to Ms. Giselle Mesnage, Brenda Palmer – members of the former NAHHC who were enthusiastic supports of this research and to Ms. Sue Green of the Nurra Gilli Aboriginal Research Centre at UNSW who took out time from a hectic schedule to talk with me and advise me at a department review. There are numerous people in the Faculty of the Built Environment who have made this process a little less difficult – previous employers Mr. Peter Murray, Mr. John Carrick, Dr. Steven King, Mr. Peter Graham, and Dr. Peter Kohane and not to forget those who are the backbone of FBE – BECU, Eddie Ward, Harry Chambers, Kelvin Hui and Edith Chu. My current employers and colleagues at Otto Cserhalmi and Partners Architects have helped me be in good spirits in the last struggling days. My parents and family in India have been very encouraging of my academic pursuits and I am grateful for their support. My friends and flatmates and fellow research students Anu, Umut and unofficially Sarp, have always been there and we each know that thanks is not needed just a successful completion is important and the biggest joy that we each wish for the other.

Load more