“澳大利亚和解时代叙事中的离奇遭遇和令人难以忘怀的殖民历史”

IF 1.1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Settler Colonial Studies Pub Date : 2023-04-13 DOI:10.1080/2201473X.2023.2200624
Travis Franks
{"title":"“澳大利亚和解时代叙事中的离奇遭遇和令人难以忘怀的殖民历史”","authors":"Travis Franks","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2023.2200624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Settler literature is haunted by the colonial past. Motifs found in the Australian literary tradition signify this haunting-Aboriginal spectrality, uncanny Aboriginal ceremonial grounds, and taboo massacre sites being the most common. Settler authors typically use these literary devices in moments of social and political upheaval that disturb the foundational myths of settler belonging. Australia's Reconciliation agenda brought realities of colonial frontier violence and the scale of Aboriginal deaths to the fore of mainstream socio-political consciousness. Literary scholars have adapted Freud's concept of the uncanny to argue that settler belonging feels imperiled or strange when confronted with the distressing knowledge of Aboriginal modernity. Overwhelmingly, the manufacture of Aboriginal haunting in Australia's Reconciliation—era signifies settler anxiety and attempts to reclaim the authority unsettled by Indigenous alterity. Works by Henry Reynolds—Why Weren't We Told? (2000)—and Alex Miller-Journey to the Stone Country (2003)—are representative of a broader literary response to Reconciliation, after which depictions of Aboriginal death and burial, as well as new settler quests for belonging, proliferated. The essay concludes by reading Noongar writer Kim Scott's novel Taboo (2017) as a subversion of works like those by Reynolds and Miller.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Uncanny encounters and haunting colonial histories in Australia’s reconciliation-era narratives’\",\"authors\":\"Travis Franks\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2201473X.2023.2200624\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Settler literature is haunted by the colonial past. Motifs found in the Australian literary tradition signify this haunting-Aboriginal spectrality, uncanny Aboriginal ceremonial grounds, and taboo massacre sites being the most common. Settler authors typically use these literary devices in moments of social and political upheaval that disturb the foundational myths of settler belonging. Australia's Reconciliation agenda brought realities of colonial frontier violence and the scale of Aboriginal deaths to the fore of mainstream socio-political consciousness. Literary scholars have adapted Freud's concept of the uncanny to argue that settler belonging feels imperiled or strange when confronted with the distressing knowledge of Aboriginal modernity. Overwhelmingly, the manufacture of Aboriginal haunting in Australia's Reconciliation—era signifies settler anxiety and attempts to reclaim the authority unsettled by Indigenous alterity. Works by Henry Reynolds—Why Weren't We Told? (2000)—and Alex Miller-Journey to the Stone Country (2003)—are representative of a broader literary response to Reconciliation, after which depictions of Aboriginal death and burial, as well as new settler quests for belonging, proliferated. The essay concludes by reading Noongar writer Kim Scott's novel Taboo (2017) as a subversion of works like those by Reynolds and Miller.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Settler Colonial Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Settler Colonial Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2023.2200624\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Settler Colonial Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2023.2200624","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

殖民时期的历史一直困扰着移民文学。在澳大利亚文学传统中发现的主题表明了这种萦绕心头的土著幽灵,不可思议的土著仪式场地和禁忌屠杀地点是最常见的。定居者作家通常在社会和政治动荡的时刻使用这些文学手段,扰乱了定居者归属感的基本神话。澳大利亚的和解议程使殖民地边境暴力的现实和土著居民死亡的规模成为主流社会政治意识的焦点。文学学者改编了弗洛伊德的神秘概念,认为当面对土著现代性的痛苦知识时,定居者的归属感会感到危险或奇怪。绝大多数情况下,在澳大利亚的和解时代,原住民闹鬼的制造表明了定居者的焦虑,并试图收回被原住民替代所动摇的权威。亨利·雷诺兹的作品——为什么我们不被告知?(2000)和亚历克斯·米勒(Alex miller)的《石乡之旅》(2003)是对和解的更广泛的文学回应的代表,在此之后,对土著居民死亡和埋葬的描写以及新定居者对归属感的追求激增。文章最后将美国作家金·斯科特的小说《禁忌》(2017)视为对雷诺兹和米勒作品的颠覆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Uncanny encounters and haunting colonial histories in Australia’s reconciliation-era narratives’
ABSTRACT Settler literature is haunted by the colonial past. Motifs found in the Australian literary tradition signify this haunting-Aboriginal spectrality, uncanny Aboriginal ceremonial grounds, and taboo massacre sites being the most common. Settler authors typically use these literary devices in moments of social and political upheaval that disturb the foundational myths of settler belonging. Australia's Reconciliation agenda brought realities of colonial frontier violence and the scale of Aboriginal deaths to the fore of mainstream socio-political consciousness. Literary scholars have adapted Freud's concept of the uncanny to argue that settler belonging feels imperiled or strange when confronted with the distressing knowledge of Aboriginal modernity. Overwhelmingly, the manufacture of Aboriginal haunting in Australia's Reconciliation—era signifies settler anxiety and attempts to reclaim the authority unsettled by Indigenous alterity. Works by Henry Reynolds—Why Weren't We Told? (2000)—and Alex Miller-Journey to the Stone Country (2003)—are representative of a broader literary response to Reconciliation, after which depictions of Aboriginal death and burial, as well as new settler quests for belonging, proliferated. The essay concludes by reading Noongar writer Kim Scott's novel Taboo (2017) as a subversion of works like those by Reynolds and Miller.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Settler Colonial Studies
Settler Colonial Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
11.10%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The journal aims to establish settler colonial studies as a distinct field of scholarly research. Scholars and students will find and contribute to historically-oriented research and analyses covering contemporary issues. We also aim to present multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research, involving areas like history, law, genocide studies, indigenous, colonial and postcolonial studies, anthropology, historical geography, economics, politics, sociology, international relations, political science, literary criticism, cultural and gender studies and philosophy.
期刊最新文献
Following the yellowcake road: exploring the colonial roots and routes of Australian radioactive minerals, 1900s–1950s ‘Legal fictions and settler colonialism: the case of the Defence (Emergency) Regulations, 1945 in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories’ Germany’s anti-antisemitic complex and the question of settler colonialism From Lady Jane Franklin to #TradWife: gender, race, and class in colonial complicity in the North American High North Whānau wellbeing: reclaiming precolonial Māori perspectives of men, fathers and parenting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1