‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ Indigenising settler nationalism in 1930s Australia by Dan Tout Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Swinburne University of Technology October 2018 Abstract Questions over what, whether and when the Australian nation is or might be have been of consistent concern throughout most of Australia’s settler-colonial history and remain so today. In attempting to construct a national culture and identity, settler Australians, like settlers elsewhere, have invested in the establishment of a national literary tradition. This project of national cultural construction has emphasised a dual process of acclimation and maturation to claim the settler collective’s attainment of maturity and legitimacy within the metropolitan domain of world literature and belonging to the land that provides the underlying imperative for settler colonisation itself. In the standard story of inevitably unfurling national cultural development towards these two ends, Britain has played the part of ‘the mother country’ (or parent oak), while Australia is the child (or seedling) that eventually and inevitably reaches maturity in the new soil. In Manning Clark’s famous application of Henry Lawson’s phrase, Britain was ‘the Old Dead Tree’, Australia ‘the Young Tree Green’. Yet these narratives of national maturation operate to conceal the nature and the complexity of the environment the national literary culture was supposed to be acclimatising to, and becoming expressive of. In constructing narratives of Australian national cultural development in terms of bilateral oppositions between colony and metropole, such narratives neglect the complexities of the settler-colonial, as distinct from the colonial, ‘situation’. On the contrary, this thesis is premised on the central proposition that the settler-colonial situation is fundamentally conditioned by a triangular system of relationships involving settler, metropolitan and Indigenous agencies. In this schema, the settler is compelled towards both indigenisation and neo- European replication, while both trajectories are similarly founded on the prior displacement — both literal and symbolic — of pre-existing Indigenous populations. ‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ i The 1930s was a crucial moment in the project of national identity construction, in which prevailing circumstances combined to make settler nationalism simultaneously more urgent and increasingly problematic. In particular, the demise of the ‘doomed race’ ideal, which had until then envisaged the inevitable and imminent resolution of the triadic relations of settler colonialism into the dyadic ones of ‘franchise’ or ‘dependent’ colonialism, meant that settlers, and especially settler nationalists, found themselves confronting the prospect of a persistent Indigenous presence within the boundaries of the settler nation. They were therefore compelled to negotiate the more complex — for the nationalist project, at least — trilateral relations characteristic of settler colonialism, rather than the relatively more straightforward bilateral ones of colonialism proper. This dissertation focuses on this historical and cultural context, and on three exemplary settler nationalists working within and responding to it: writer, editor and publisher, Percy Reginald ‘Inky’ Stephensen (1901–65); poet and editor, Reginald Charles (Rex) Ingamells (1913–55); and writer and polemicist, Alfred Francis Xavier Herbert (1901–84). At a historical moment marked by ambivalence in Australia’s relationship with metropolitan England, Stephensen, Ingamells and Herbert sought to establish settler Australia’s national cultural independence. In doing so, they each encountered, and responded to, the reality of a persistent and resistant Indigenous presence within the settler nation. While Stephensen posited himself and the Australian national culture he sought to construct as inheritors of both European and Indigenous traditions, and Ingamells engaged in a project of radical indigenist appropriation that separated and usurped a symbolic indigeneity from its bearers, Herbert celebrated instead the potentiality of ‘Euraustralian’ hybridity to overcome his own, and by extension his compatriots’, illegitimacy. While these approaches are ostensibly at odds, the central argument advanced in this thesis is that they share a drive towards settler indigenisation and independence as their common, overriding concerns. ii ‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor, A/Prof Lorenzo Veracini, for his exceptional combination of insight and encouragement. It has been an honour for me to work so closely with the leading scholar in my field and to find in him such an engaged and engaging supervisor. He has provided me with the perfect balance of insightful (and incisive) criticism, intellectual stimulation and moral support — and, I hope I can say it, friendship — to guide me through to the completion of this project. There have been (many) moments I have doubted the value of this project, and my ability to complete it successfully (to an even greater extent, that is, than the persistent undercurrent of self- doubt and anxiety I have experienced since my application and enrolment), and in those moments Lorenzo has offered nothing but encouragement. There have been (many) other moments where work, and family, have, more or less rightly, taken priority over my research, and in those moments Lorenzo has stepped in to insist I persevere. I feel extraordinarily grateful to have landed him as a supervisor, and to have developed what I hope will be a lifelong, personally and intellectually rewarding relationship. I would also like to thank my associate supervisors, now-Emeritus Professor Brian Costar and Dr Julie Kimber, for their support and encouragement over the course of my candidature. While our associations have been intermittent, their careful questions and comments as to the direction and progress of my project have invariably been appropriate, penetrating and exceedingly well-timed. In addition, I am deeply indebted to my Head of School at Federation University, Dr Beth Edmondson, whose steady interest and encouragement, flexibility and willingness to support my research in whatever ways possible, have been instrumental in enabling me to (finally) complete this project. And last, but precisely the opposite of least, of course, my gratitude goes to my beautiful wife, Alice. All the usual clichés apply, but it wasn’t only her unwavering intellectual and emotional encouragement, but also her constant, delicate fielding (and for the most ‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ iii part deflecting) of questions about my progress from an increasingly concerned cohort of family and friends, and, most importantly, her support in surviving family life on an everyday basis (especially as the end of my candidature approached), that helped me immeasurably through what turned out to be a more difficult period than I (but not Alice) had anticipated. In hindsight, Alice, you were right: embarking on a PhD with a newborn, first-born child was probably a mistake. And having a second child to mark mid-candidature was almost certainly one. I would never tell the children, of course, but we know the truth. More than anything else, however, your unceasing dedication to your own creative and intellectual pursuits has been a challenge and an inspiration to me as I have struggled my way through this project. It may be a truism, but in this case it’s really true: I couldn’t have done it without you. To my mistakes children: I did this in spite, but also (and I mean this literally) because, of you. I look forward to parenthood sans a dissertation to write (as I’m sure do you), and (I hope) to you (eventually) calling me — whether you like it or not — Dr Dad. A final round of acknowledgements is also in order. My gratitude goes to the anonymous reviewers of the several articles I have published on this research en route to this final destination, whose careful and considered comments led to much better publications and, I hope, a vastly improved dissertation, as well as to the editors of those publications for allowing me the opportunity to publish with them. In the current academic climate (and here I speak from personal experience), good (available) reviewers are increasingly hard to find, and I have been extremely fortunate to have been given the constructive feedback I have so far received. I would also like to acknowledge the State Library of Victoria, where I was lucky enough to engage in part of the research for this project under the aegis of an AGL Shaw Summer Research Fellowship (even if the website misstates my research, and has done for several years). iv ‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ Declaration I confirm that the following thesis: 1. Contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma; and 2. To the best of my knowledge contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. Dan Tout, 30 June 2018 ‘A gumtree is not a branch of an oak’ v Table of contents Introduction 1 A story of two Australias? 1 Two is not three (and three is not all) 13 Always almost ‘coming of age’ 21 Thesis outline 33 Terminological notes and definitions 38 1. Displacement, disavowal and replacement in Australian settler colonialism 47 Introduction 47 The emergence and consolidation of settler