#also why did the writers forget Barbara is a victim of a home invasion why would she support selina w this shit

[swimmingferret]

me @ the entirety of the Batman/Catwoman War comic storyline

[sammyj-me-blog]

My computer notes for my class presentation

Summary of the reading:

·         Snugglepot and Cuddlepie in the ghost gum (https://sydneyreviewofbooks.com/snugglepot-and-cuddlepie-in-the-ghost-gum-evelyn-araluen/ )has multiple narratives over the 10 pages. Overall, it feels like it is a personal account of the author about her Indigenous culture, land, memory, and Australia’s cruel treatment of the Indigenous through history.

·         The first part, the ghost gum sequence, has the character travelling the land via roads to Sydney. It goes into detail the characters connection and consideration to the land. It very quickly takes a turn into the government’s control of the land, where they ‘close off every path to leave without paying’ (p. 2), and then into the Stolen Generation, where ‘Governor Macquarie gathered up the precious children … to teach them God and Civilisation’ (p. 2).

·         There’s a very succinct passage that demonstrates how the Indigenous and white Australians see the land very differently. ‘Why don’t they build something there, a sunset profile picture asks on the community Facebook where we gather to buy and sell and complain. There’s nothing in that field but a tree’ (p. 2).

·         Afterwards, she touches on memory and childhood, through the characters from the childhood book Snugglepot and cuddlepie. She then considers, ‘they want me to write about them—or maybe they don’t, and they just want to be left where they are’ (p. 2). This line almost speaks to me to say that she wasn’t sure if she should write about this content.

·         The last paragraphs touches on the history of Australia. “The Cumberland Plains of Blacktown and the Hawkesbury are drenched in a history of settler violence and forgetting that goes unspoken when we squabble over heritage”. But despite this, without having to be taught, they know the land. “In the way I know all times are capable of being, Tench’s gaze is still there – but so is ours, staring back”

A nest of auspoes:

·         She appears to be telling a metaphorical story from the point of view of animals. The Auspoes are white Australians who are ‘an invasive species’ that ‘suffocate the native species’ (2019, p. 2). The entire paragraph points to this conclusion, but it is through reading the previous paragraph where the themes were introduced, that allows us to think this way. As Walker states about the braided essay: it ‘lets [her] pop in and out of different realties—not so much manipulating the facts but instead to pace them out, allowing [her] to digest reality in drops’ (2017, p. 3). And I think that’s what the rest of the other piece is doing by separating them into sections. It’s like everything is too much to deal with all at once, so separating them helps.

·         And another link to do with this paragraph, is that she talks about the children’s book snugglpot and cuddelpie. And maybe, for some reason, she is taking the approach as if writing a story for kids.

Playing in the pastorals:

·         This paragraph talks about peoples view of the Australian bush from what seems is a bit more academic approach.

·         “The environmental conditions of the land being incompatible with European modes of agricultural practice, nineteenth-century poets such as Charles Harpur and Henry Kendall necessarily emphasised Gothic-Romantic themes of hostility and hardship in early Australian pastoral poetics, while Henry Lawson and Barbara Baynton staged forbidding prose tales of estrangement and annihilation against the backdrop of a land fundamentally opposed to humanity and civilisation”

·         “Hodge and Mishra have explored this double premise as the ‘Aboriginal archipelago’ of simultaneously refusing to acknowledge Aboriginal presence in social space while conjuring up emblematic tropes of Aboriginal spiritual presence in disembodied forms”

·         She also touches on how the eucalyptus was misused in settler text; how settlers wrote about it however they saw fit. These all highlight how settlers had no connection to the land and used and abused it along with the Indigenous people.

·         About children’s literature. “Affrica Taylor extends this notion in her argument that for the white children of this literature, native animals functioned as guides or mentors through their ‘journey towards indigenisation’, naturalising their claim to the land as both entitlement and inheritance”

·         She talks about a native/settler binary towards children is that they are only ever safe at the homestead. And that the books cast out Aboriginal people through negative representation.

To the poets

·         This section is different yet again. It seems more emotional and passionate. Summing up, the narrator talks to the white settlers; about the differences between them and the Indigenous. How they are “puppeting your hands through ancestors, through relations”

·         “But I want to know what it means to lose the world you’re still standing in.”

To the parents

·         Is more of a straight talk about settler views and control of the land. As well as the influence of children’s literature depicting Australian lands.

·         It changes back to the first narrative where it seems like it’s present day narrator. They talk about land and animals and we can feel their connection. They ‘write poetry here, and about here’

·         “I can name the colonial complexes and impulses which structure these texts but it doesn’t change the fact that I was raised on these books too. They tell me they never chose them to hurt us, and I never thought they did. They both grew up surrounded by the bush in country New South Wales towns”. They can’t change the fact that they’re part of the ‘new’ world as well.

·         Shen then talks about her parents and how hard they worked to just afford books to read.

·         Her dad however read to them with “salt grains and disputations”. To say to scrutinise everything, don’t just believe off the bat. He told his own stories, but let them join in too.

·         She then describes that it was too easy to see Indigenous Australians as victims, but this disregards all their hard work and effort.

·         To finish that paragraph, she arrives home, where everything belongs.

The dropbears poetic

This appears to be a narrative that combines all of the settler myths that were mentioned throughout the story.

Why did you choose it?

·         Besides it being one of the last ones to choose from. But because the structure of the piece was different, and after having read it, I just found it very interesting. It’s hard though.

Discuss what practical applications this reading had--what did you gain from reading it that will inform your writing practice going forward? What do you disagree with, and why?

·         I’m looking at this piece in a braided essay lens. By switching between different narratives that detail the same story, it lets you look at it from different angles. The writer uses a few different narratives. Like through the personal, through the influence of children’s literature, in a metaphorical sense, through a parent generation. However by including so many different perspectives, I lose the sense of the specific thing she is talking about. I feel that there are so many elements that I get a little lost. Although I feel I got the bigger picture, I lost the nuances she was telling.

Question: Do you think that the use of subheadings and separate sections added additional meaning? Or perhaps do you think it is too much? They lose the sense of what’s happening? Has anyone does something like this before?

 Discuss the reading in relation to the piece/s of writing you have chosen from the ‘Community of Practice’ folder--why did you choose to discuss these pieces together? Do these pieces demonstrate lessons that the piece of theory has to offer?

https://www.theliftedbrow.com/liftedbrow/2019/2/28/blossom-by-leah-jing?rq=leah%20jing

·         I’m looking at Blossom from a braided essay lens, as well. I found Blossom was easier to understand because it just uses two narratives and it’s clear what she is talking about. They both write about personal narratives overarched with a wider concern.

·         jing switches between concern for writers of colour and how their bodies are perceived, then abruptly to a personal love story between her and H. She flips between these two narratives, yet it is still about bodies. Her body and how her lover treats it, and as a wider concern, bodies of coloured people, particularly how people view hers, and how she views it herself. By having two different narratives of the body, adds a deeper meaning when the reader is engaged in the text.

·         Although they both look very different in structure they both have an interweaved narrative that lets us see multiple sides of the writer.

Last question:

·         I’ve been looking at this from a braided essay point of view. Is this a limiting view? Or perhaps not a quite right way to look at it? How did other’s read it?