Note: this was the second literature review that I’d ever written (I failed the first one when I was studying social work at UQ). For some more context, I rewrote the entire essay the day off. I didn’t realise there was an example of a good past assignment available, and when I looked at it … well …

I received 15/20 for this, which isn’t amazing, but I wonder what it might have been if I hadn’t changed it.

Literature Review: Indigenous Australian Literature

This literature review will discuss where Indigenous Australian literature stands in the Australian publishing industry, which incorrectly reflects the past and diversity of Australia, printing inaccurate histories and representations (Heiss & Minter, Aboriginal Literature, 2008). As it is dominated by non-Indigenous (or western) peoples and ideologies, it is reasonable to believe that this led/leads to the neglect of Indigenous Australian stories and lack of appropriately represented cultures and/or peoples, and thus further into the domination of western systems and methodologies of learning as what is published is integral to education (Rosas-Blanch, 2016). This paper will examine literature discussing the position of Indigenous Australian literary work over time, both regarding the reality and issues of the discussion, with consideration given to the methodology that underpins the literature. It will focus on the work of Indigenous Australian scholars: Anita Heiss, a leading author of the Wiradjuri nation, Lynore Geia, a health practitioner of the Bwgcolman people and Faye Rosas-Blanch, an educator of Yidniji/Mbarbarm descent. Their indigeneity informs their work, making them the fitting to discuss how Indigenous literature is informed by Indigenous ontology and epistemology and how this relates to Australian literature.

I locate myself as a Polynesian Australian third-year creative writing student who had a limited understanding of issues Indigenous Australians face and continue to face, despite growing up with Koori and Darug family. My knowledge is gained from the Indigenous Knowledges minor, enrolled into because I questioned the ethics behind having written a character with Noongar heritage. Since, I have questioned what has been published and what is being published. It began as ‘due-diligence’ to ensure I wrote no misrepresentations, and evolved into “am I allowed to write an Indigenous character as a non-Indigenous person?”, and finally into “is it already being done? Why?”

Pre-Invasion and Early Colonisation with Heiss and Minter

Most Indigenous Australian histories were not traditionally written but passed down orally, creating a misconception Indigenous Australian did not exist literature during early colonisation when there was a plethora, as collected by Anita Heiss and Peter Minter in Anthology of Australian Aboriginal Literature, the earliest from 1796. These pieces of literature began as a means of survival, providing a history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander experiences which the European government denied (Heiss & Minter, Aboriginal Literature, 2008). The implementation of a western system, of publishing and societal domination by non-Indigenous Australians, meant shunned First Nations stories both because western writing was foreign and the difference between “natives” and “settlers” (Sefton‐Rowston, 2017). There existed, and still exists, a divide between the medium of passing/sharing information. The most notable difference in knowledge acquisition was the engagement with the actual subject itself. Indigenous knowledges are shared, gathered and offered through engagement and discourse, whereas western information was often gathered by observing and applying a conclusion based on Eurocentric paradigms, rather than considering the variation between culture and methodology worth exploring (Geia, Hayes, & Usher, 2013). This makes Heiss and Minter’s work valuable, arguing an alternative history of ‘Australian’ literature.

Heiss and Minter (2008) discuss how Indigenous literature created in English began from the need to adapt to colonisation, to the English language. Early Indigenous Australian literature was often created in political discourse, being the foundation for the notion that Indigenous Australian art or expression may be inherently political (Heiss & Minter, Aboriginal Literature, 2008). During early eras of colonisation, attempts were made to purge First Nations People physically and culturally (Markus, 2011). When Europeans could not achieve this, they sought to control and ‘filter’ out Indigenous Australian culture and knowledges by establishing systems that had no room for them, one being the publishing industry (Smith, 2012). What was published on First Nations People was governed by Europeans who cultivated the perspectives non-Indigenous Australians had, giving no opportunity to Indigenous Australians to show their truths (Shoemaker, 2004). These additional pieces of literature support the purpose of Heiss and Minter’s body of work, their work showing the reality of early Indigenous Australian literature, and the histories embedded in them (2008).

Postcolonisation with Lynore Geia

Early literature discussing First Nations People was research that came with no reciprocity (Geia, Hayes, & Usher, 2013). Geia, Hayes & Usher’s paper on Indigenous Australian literature as an extension of Yarning, suggests that this became the foundation of literature about, rather than by, Indigenous Australians, underpinning Australia’s perspective of First Nations People, causing severe implications when it comes to national research, health and education. In a society with racially motivated systems, it became necessary to establish similar systems independently, promoting awareness and opportunity. There have been various Indigenous Australian publishing houses created since the 70s, such as IAD Press, Jukurrpa Books, Magalba Books and the Aboriginal Studies Press (Marlow, 2016). Geia, Hayes & Usher highlight the importance of not abandoning Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander customs, such as the Yarning Circle, in the pursuit of finding a voice in western culture, making recognition in differing methodologies necessary (2013).

Though some literature is dominated by non-Indigenous thoughts on Indigenous culture, First Nations People have strived to communicate culture and life stories through western literature, adapting to a foreign language, writing system and epistemology (Geia, Hayes, & Usher, 2013). Concurring with Heiss & Minter’s overview of early Indigenous Australian literature and Geia, Hayes & Usher’s stance on the importance of promoting Indigenous methodology, Sefton-Rowston writes about a surge of Indigenous Australian writing in the 1990s, most which contained themes regarding self-empowerment and identity in a colonised landscape, birthing a new genre referred to as “reconciliatory literature” (2017). Heiss and Minter also claimed this, stating “Aboriginal women… found in literary writing a vehicle for both authorial independence and cultural responsibility” (pg. 7, 2008). Representation of Indigenous Australians in literature during these eras were still controlled by non-Indigenous Australian perspectives and agendas (Heiss, Dhuuluu-Yala: To Talk Straight, 2003). What is distributed in literature and prioritised reflects the values of a nation and impacts the representation of people who live in this country. Geia, imparts different methodologies into the paper using her experience, looking at the development of research literature on Indigenous Australians as a whole, branching across many diverse aspects (Geia, Hayes, & Usher, 2013).

“Post-colonisation” with Faye Rosas-Blanch

One of the misconceptions the Australian publishing industry has perpetuated is that colonisation is a ‘thing of the past’ belonging in history books, though not actually appearing in them, developing a need for specialised units in tertiary education (Rosas-Blanch, 2016). In Rosas-Blanch’s paper, hierarchal theory is presented as a cause of European domination, contributing to racially discriminative policies and ideologies, extending into systems such as the publishing industry. This axiology, epistemology and methodology of the western publishing industry means that Indigenous Australian voices are undervalued (Tur, Blanch, & Wilson, 2010), with Indigenous literature sometimes being regarded as suitable only for children (O’Neill, 2011).

Rosas-Blanch heads university classes on “Teaching Indigenous Australian Students, as well as… Critical Indigenous Pedagogies”. This paper discusses the way she, as an Indigenous Australian woman, feels when teaching in a western space, with a western language, to people whose perceptions of Indigenous Australians were informed by the absence of First Nations’ literature in the national curriculum. Much like what the aforementioned literature has suggested, she outlines a hybrid of traditional methodology present in Indigenous Australian literature, a new way of presenting culture and stories for non-Indigenous Australians, existing in the cultural interface (Rosas-Blanch, 2016).

Though major publishing houses may overlook them, First Nations People have always published literature and challenged western notions of literature by writing pieces in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages, “challenging the status quo” (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies with Bruce Pascoe, 2018). Indigenous Australian literary support has also been established, such as the Indigenous Writers’ Prize and the Indigenous Literacy Foundation, actively promoting the need for better diversity in a western world, a literary world, bringing light to First Nations’ authors and voices, providing opportunity in Australia’s institutionally discriminatory literary field. However, awards and prizes have not gone without exploitation, with instances in history where non-Indigenous Australians have claimed them through deceptive means (Heiss, Dhuuluu-Yala: To Talk Straight, 2003).

Conclusion

The current state of the Australian publishing industry is reflective of the systems that first sought to commit genocide against Indigenous Australians, or to be put simply: little has changed. The prevalence of systems that exclude different methodologies and knowledges, or neglect to represent the whole of the nation supports coloniser ideologies. Much literature found during the construction of this review were authored by non-Indigenous Australians, about First Nations People for non-Indigenous people by non-Indigenous people. Heiss, Geia and Rosas-Blanche often provided many citations of other Indigenous Australian scholars, indicating that there either is a more focused approach on ensuring the content of the work connects with who it concerns, or that the research methodologies of the scholars differed from their non-Indigenous counterparts, allowing them to gain more information because they understand the epistemology of First Nations People. If the literary narrative is continually controlled by non-Indigenous People, then what are the implications for Indigenous People, who these narratives directly affect?

References

Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies with Bruce Pascoe. (2018). The Little Red Yellow Black Book: An introduction to Indigenous Australia. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.

Davis, M. (2017). The “Cultural Mission” in Indigenous Non-fiction Book. Journal of Australian Studies, 41(4), 450-471.

Geia, L. K., Hayes, B., & Usher, K. (2013, December). Yarning/Aboriginal storytelling: Towards an understanding of an Indigenous perspective and its implications for research. Contemporary Nurse, 46(1), 13-17.

Heiss, A. (2003). Dhuuluu-Yala: To Talk Straight. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.

Heiss, A., & Minter, P. (2008). Aboriginal Literature. In A. Heiss, P. Minter, & N. Jose, Anthology of Australian Aboriginal Literature (pp. 1-8). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Markus, A. (2011). Genocide in Australia. Aboriginal History Journal, 25, 57-69. doi:http://doi.org/10.22459/AH.25.2011

Marlow, K. (2016, September 6). Indigenous publishing: telling and owning our stories. Retrieved from NITV: https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2016/09/06/indigenous-publishing-telling-and-owning-our-stories

O’Neill, A. (2011). Aboriginal Australian and Canadian First Nations Children’s Literature. Comparative Literature and Culture, 13(2).

Rosas-Blanch, F. (2016). Teaching Indigenous Studies: Considering racialized assemblages and the Indigenous educator’s body in tutoring spaces. International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, 9(1), 50-57.

Sefton‐Rowston, A. (2017). Sovereignty as a State of Craziness: Empowering Female Indigenous Psychologies in Australian “Reconciliatory Literature”. Hypatia, 32(3), 644-659.

Shoemaker, A. (2004). Black Words White Page. Melbourne: ANU E Press.

Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. United Kingdom: Zed Books.

Tur, S. U., Blanch, F. R., & Wilson, C. (2010, January). Developing a Collaborative Approach to Standpoint in Indignenous Australian Research. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 39, 58-67.