Australian poetry

One of my brothers is on the U3A committee in his home town in the UK. Recently he was leading a discussion on poetry. He asked me about Australian poets and poetry: who were the best? which pieces would I recommend for study by an English U3A discussion group?

My immediate response was something like panic. I could name very few contemporary Australian poets (Judith Wright, Les Murray) and none of their works. The near-panic was the result of a sense of shame and disappointment. Given the time I have on my hands and the extraordinary accessibility these days of ‘information’, how could I not know about and follow certain poets?

How could I think of myself as a responsible citizen of Australia if there is no poetry in my life? Poetry is an important segment of a nation’s culture. It is a field where emotions are not just permissible but essential. There is beauty in poetry. It consists of bunches of words in particular sequences, and I have always found this fascinating.

A bit later I reflected on how my own ignorance is perhaps symptomatic of the status of the arts in Australia. (This was before I had discovered Jacket, the splendid on-line journal founded by John Tranter, recently deceased. It is now published as Jacket2.) The arts sector in Australia is underfunded and under celebrated. Whereas, as a nation, Australia punches above its weight in such things as Olympic sports and certain scientific inventions, it does not in the fine arts.

The two best-known Australian poets are still, I suppose, Henry Lawson and Banjo Paterson. They are often paired together because of the similarity of their works. Both wrote what are called ballads, with regular rhythm, scansion  and rhyming patterns. (My own doggerel uses similar rhythmic and rhyming patterns.)

Both of them wrote about ‘characters’ living in the bush. Many people are unable to distinguish their works, the one from the other. As an example, ask an Australian  whether Waltzing Matilda was written by Lawson or Paterson.

The best known works of Lawson and Paterson include: Waltzing Matilda; The man from Snowy River;  Andy’s gone with cattle; Faces in the street (a favourite of mine), Mulga Bill’s Bicycle; The drover’s wife; Clancy of the Overflow; and The Geebung Polo Club .

When it comes to the most famous (and over-used) piece of Australian poetry of all, Lawson and Paterson must give way to Dorothea Mackellar (1885-1968). Core of My Heart was first published in the London Spectator on 5 September 1908. It reappeared several times in Australia before being included as My Country in The Closed Door and Other Verses (Melbourne, 1911). The second verse reads:

I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains
Of ragged mountain ranges
Of droughts and flooding rains.

My brother and I discussed the meaning of ‘doggerel’ and whether it is distinct from poetry. We won’t go there again now. Suffice it to say that it would be brave of someone to suggest that Core of my Heart is doggerel.

Scholars would, I think, agree that Judith Wright (1915-2000)and Kenneth Slessor (1901-1971) are true Australian poets of substance.

Judith Wright was from Armidale. (There is a Wright College at the University of New England.) She is best known for The Generations of Men, the story of her family’s early days as land settlers in New South Wales and Queensland. This was published in 1959.

In the years that followed  there was a huge shift in the understanding of the white settlers’ impact on the Aboriginal people and the original landscape. Armed with what she described as “a sense of horror at what had happened”, Judith Wright wrote A Cry for the Dead, published in 1981. In that book Wright recognised the real story and the Indigenous voices of the traditional owners of the land her ancestors had settled.

This is right now a very divisive and emotive issue, centred around the Referendum on Indigenous recognition in the Constitution. Wright’s personal learning and reconciliation can be regarded as an elite example of the re-learning, or truth-telling, that is needed for all Australians.

Perhaps the fact that Judith Wright is regarded as one of Australia’s best poets but is arguably better known for her novels than her poetry says something about the standing of poetry in Australia.

One of Kenneth Slessor’s highly regarded pieces is Five Bells. I find it hard to see clear, immediate meaning in the poem, but the collection and juxtaposition of images is telling. So perhaps it would be a good piece to study?!

Les Murray, who died in 2019, was considered the leading poet of his generation. In An Absolutely Ordinary Rainbow Murray portrays a crying man as representing the ability to deeply feel and openly express emotion—something that has been stifled by the busy modern world.

 

The Referendum on The Voice was good news

The orgy of self-flagellation relating to the result of the Referendum on The Voice is surely not necessary. Neither is it productive.

Little of importance in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs has changed because of the result of the Referendum. But its existence has resulted in change which, on balance, is positive in terms of the most important outcome: improvement and catch-up of the health and wellbeing of First Nations Peoples.

The one exception – the saddest thing about the result – is the effect it has had on the reputation and morale of the many Indigenous leaders who put heart and soul into the Yes campaign.

Anyone who cares about the health and wellbeing of Australia’s First Peoples knows what the most important issues are. Put simply they add up to one thing: to challenge the status quo and close the gap in wellbeing between them and non-Indigenous Australians.

In working on this there are many important matters to be considered. They are complex – which is one of the reasons why we have so far failed as a nation in the challenge.

For instance, it has been agreed over and over again that closing the gap requires local participation and local ownership of some of the measures to be put in place. But what is the best way for local action by local people to be coupled with transparency and accountability for the use of national public funds?

Nothing frustrates local leaders and professionals more than a plethora of standardised questionnaires and forms to be filled out in the name of accountability and ‘program evaluation’.

It is agreed that the so-called ‘social determinants of health’ are critical: this includes good housing, accessible fresh food and water, early childhood education, and access to meaningful employment. If services in areas of such fundamental importance were woefully inadequate in Melbourne or Sydney there would be notice and action in five minutes.

But given the tangled web of governmental responsibility for such issues, which agency, which Minister and which funding stream should take the lead on these determinants for Indigenous people and communities?

Can Indigenous leaders and activists set aside differences, such as about the order in which the three elements of the Statement from the Heart (Voice, Treaty, Truth) are prosecuted? Can they agree that closing the gap is the most urgent challenge, and work together on it?

A number of things have happened as a result of the Referendum, by accident or design, to enhance the prospects of finding answers to these questions. We need to maintain the momentum generated by the existence of the referendum, rather than being distracted by its result.

This momentum is one of the best things that investment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander wellbeing currently has going for it. But for the momentum to last it needs to be fostered, rehearsed and regularly aired.

Every time we hear the Treasurer talk of fiscal challenges we are reminded of the congested queue of demands for government support.

It is said that one of the reasons for the lack of support for the Yes  case was that many non-Indigenous people do not appreciate the extent of the disadvantage.

The majority of Australians do not live and work among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Many have no Indigenous friends or contacts. This means they lack personal or lived experience of the disadvantages experienced by Indigenous people.

As a result of the Referendum having taken place, there must now be greater awareness of the reality of the situation.

This will reduce the political risks of investing resources in programs differentially targeted at lifestyle deficits experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

As a result of the Referendum, leadership of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community has become better known. New leaders have joined the group. There will be some generational change.

Hopefully the current excitement about analyses of the yes and no campaigns will soon pass, once it is accepted that comparing activities in a Referendum with those of an election campaign is like taste-testing chalk and cheese.

It must be said, however, that the Referendum has provided more grist for the mill of political scientists and the like to use in their work to analyse, understand and make use of the stark differences between wealthy electorates and those that are less well-off, and between rural and metropolitan areas.

Now, with greater focus and legitimacy, it’s back to the drawing board to work on  an issue that still bedevils Australia and its international reputation.