Part 1:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/apartment-building-featuring-portrait-of-aboriginal-leader-to-become-melbournes-newest-landmark/story-e6frf7kx-1225923026503
Part 2:
http://www.indigenous.gov.au/About/Pages/cultural_protocols.aspx
Part 3:
Initially I found an article at The Age website about the high-rise apartment building to be constructed with the portrait of William Barak, the Aboriginal leader and artist, along its sculpted façade, but the article emphasized the controversy about the construction plans, without giving any specific reasoning. I figured that the controversy must be obviously implied in the article, but because I’m an outsider, and lack much of a background in the political history of Australia I couldn’t understand it. I did some more research on it and found that the article above from the Herald Sun also alludes to the controversial aspects of the project; one man stating, ”I suspect a lot of people will read a whole lot of things into this” but it also has reader comments below the article stating the culturally insensitive nature of depicting images or names of deceased Aboriginal people. I did a bit more digging and found some more info on the protocol behind the release of this information and imaging. I found it particularly interesting that ABC airs a warning before programs that include images, voices or names of deceased Aboriginal people or Torres Strait Islanders. While I am not completely sure if this is the controversy that the article was implying (especially since the ancestors of William Barak seem to be on board with the plans to construct the building with his image,) but I definitely found the information to be very interesting and completely new to me.
WARNING - the following post contains the name of deceased Aboriginals
ReplyDeleteAnnabel,
Your research is correct - in Aboriginal culture, it is not permitted to name the dead. What generally happens is that once someone dies they are given a different name, so that they can be referred to by that.
An example you can read about is "The Palm Island Affair", when a drunken Aboriginal man was taken into custody by Police and died in custody, causing a riot on Palm Island which resulted in the police station and other buildings being burnt down. There has been a long drawn out investigation as to how he died. You can read a bit about it here -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/09/2840386.htm
You'll note that the man is referred to as "Mulrunji". That was not the name he held when he was alive, and was not the name he was referred to in the initial reporting of his death and the riots. His name when he was alive was Cameron Domadgee.
That's one of the reasons behind the controversy about the new building, but as you've noted, the ancestors of Barak themselves are OK with it, so really that's the end of the discussion as far as images or names of the dead are concerned.
I think the media might be trying to stir the pot here, trying to dig for a bit of a racist response...15 or 20 years ago there would have been a storm of protest in that vein if a building like this was proposed, but I think the country has moved on somewhat since then. Which is not to say the media won't dig up someone to complain....
Cheers,
Roger
http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/img/2005/ep07/mackinolty.pdf
ReplyDeleteI found a source on ABC Net that talks more about the tradition surrounding the prohibition against the use of personal names and images in referring to deceased Aboriginal people. The article talks about how newsrooms in the Northern Territory are being sensitive to the tradition and not reporting the name of the deceased. It states that over time the names of the deceased can be used again but that the timing usually reflects the seniority of the person and is done so out of respect. After reading the article it seems understandable why there might be some controversy surrounding the construction of a portrait of the Aboriginal leader/artist in Melbourne.