Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

Author: mascara

Writing and Complexity at the Borders of Humanity by Janet Galbraith

janet bio picJanet Galbraith is a poet living in Jaara country.  Her work has been published in academic, health and literary journals in Australia.  Her poetry collection remembering was published by Walleah Press in 2013.  Janet is founder and facilitator of Writing Through Fences: a writing group made up of people writing from within Australia’s immigration detention industry.

 

 

 

 

Writing and Complexity at the Borders of Humanity

 

I will not dance to your war drum
I will not lend my soul nor my bones to your war drum
I will not dance to that beat
I know that beat
It is life-less
I know intimately that skin you are hitting
It was alive once
I will not dance to your drummed up war
……  I will craft my own drum (1)

Writing Through Fences is a writing group made up of people who are, or have been, directly affected by the Australian immigration industry. The name refers to the ability of writers and artists to reach beyond the fences and walls that attempt to contain, define and silence them.   Each time the writers of Writing Through Fences write they are crafting their own drum.  Through the writings of this diverse group of people – linked in their experiences of immigration detention, displacement, imprisonment, and writing – language, experience, knowledge and identity, beyond reductive understandings of people as ‘detainee’, ‘asylum seeker’ ‘refugee’, are (re)affirmed and created.

’Til when will I be called ‘asylum seeker’, ‘refugee’’, asks one young woman writing from within immigration detention (2).

‘I am not only this’, says a boy incarcerated in Christmas Island.  ‘I am a boy, a brother, a son, a football player, a Hazara, a friend, a student.  I love my mother, I love my family, I love Janet, I love my friends, I love biryani’.(3)

As many readers will know, people incarcerated within immigration detention centres in Australia, on Nauru and Manus Island are referred to by a number given them upon arrival.  This number is referred to as their ID or boat numbers.  This use of numbers to replace names effects a denial of personal and cultural history.  To lose one’s name is, for many people I have spoken with, to lose a sense of self.  It removes the identity of the individual that exists prior to imprisonment in immigration detention.  The primary experience of self then becomes that of prisoner and with that the confusion of being labelled ‘illegal’ and ‘criminal’.

from Surroundings of Sadness

what have i done to deserve this situation?
is seeking asylum a crime?
what i was looking for is peace and freedom
but now it is far from me
it is like the distance between earth and sky.

—– S. Ahmed (Christmas Island)

 

This use of numbers also add to the fracturing of familial relationsips.  As one young girl of 17 explains in a post in our writing group: ’I am sick of being called [number withheld]. My mother gave me a beautiful name. It is all I have left.  But now even this is gone because I am just a number.’ (4)  In response to this post another young writer sends a poem:

One Strong Woman to Another

Let us look forward.
We will get our chance one day.
And we will be called by our beautiful names.

We didn’t come by illegal way.
We are not illegal.
We cry and cry.

No-one gives us a tissue.
We are refugees.
Flashbacks take us back

Where we cannot go.
Where can we go forward?
They will not let us settle.

Let us be strong.
Let us forget numbers
Let us call out
our beautiful names.

—– Asmine (Darwin)

 

One of the things that I find most powerful about this poem is that rather than being defined by those who would un-name and mis-name her, the writer enacts her own agency as she chooses to provide sustaining care for another young writer, encouraging the remembering and use of their beautiful names.  Against the brutal background of detention, and the belittling notions of the ‘poor refugees’,  these writers claim strength, tenderness and solidarity, asserting possession of their own histories, their own memories, thoughts, emotions, experiences and names.

To claim this is not to forget the harm being inflicted upon the bodies and psyches of people in detention.

from Rivers of Water Run Down

Years and months… weeks and days…
hours … and minutes… seconds are passing
from me … But my pain
has caused my heart to be broken
Rivers of water run down from my eyes
the thick layer of pain covers
my whole body.

—–R. (Nauru)

The experience of detention industry often produce a profound sense of isolation and dislocation:

Untitled

All the birds have flown up and gone,
a lonely cloud floats leisurely by.
We never tire of looking at each other
only the mountain and I.

—–K (Melbourne)

Alongside this, however, is the maintenance of relationship.  As the following writer writes intimately of his love for his wife, the reader is invited in to witness a deep love that has withstood much loss and withstands ongoing suffering in immigration detention.

After Rain

After rain
there is your smell
on the footpath
of my place.
Still, still
after rain
when everything is gone
and everywhere is clean.
I do not yet know
what can clean your name
from the wall of my heart?
No rain.
Nothing.

—–A.A (Melbourne)

The natural world too is experienced in varying ways. For one writer incarcerated on Manus Island the natural world adds to the torture he is experiencing.  ‘Here is green hell.’ (5) A young writer incarcerated on Christmas Island experiences the beauty of the natural world:

 

When the world slept

I was writing
when the rest of the world slept.

The birds were singing,
the weather was calm.
While the stars were twinkling
I sat outside
and looking at the sky
I suddenly thought:
How beautiful is Allah’s creation.

—– H. Aden (Christmas Island)

 

Whilst each person incarcerated within the detention fences will have stories of violence, trauma, loss and despair, they will also have stories of joy, attention, love, relationship and wonder.  Witnessing this requires that we recognise these writers as complex people rather than abstractions of humanity.

Another writer, who has been incarcerated in immigration detention for more than 5 years overtly demands the reader examine him/herself, our ways of seeing and our expressions and understanding of humanity:

Is it a human being that you see what you look at me?
From the depths of your soul, I ask you to give me an honest answer.

—–G. (detained 5 years Melbourne)


As I read more and more work from people writing from within Australia’s immigration detention industry I become more aware that what is needed is that we  ‘bring our own individuality more honestly to meet another’s.’ (6)

A writer, reflecting on an image published of people incarcerated in Nauru challenges us to look closely, to reach beyond the deadening and de-humanising effects of mass media.

Look at this image closely.
Take 30 seconds of your time and look closer.
Feel the pain in this image.
These people are refugee children, women and men in the camp of Nauru. You don’t have to know any of them. Just looks at their hands, faces and eyes.
The voice of the cries and shouts that burn inside people can be easily felt beyond these fences.
Look at the closed fists of these men and women. They have fled from the prison of politics, tribe discrimination, mono religiousness, religious fanaticism, insight orientation, Basij orientation, hypocrisy, dictatorship, mean fellow and motes, separation, gender discrimination, inflation and government subsidies and have been caught in the wicked sight of men with ties.
Zoom in on the tired faces of these children.  They also love freedom, they have the dream of high educational degrees like other kids.
This picture is not for recording the memory of a family picnic.  It is to show perfection of so called “human rights” in the  farthest place in the world. This is a masterpiece of the history of barbarity and abuse of human values.
This is Nauru – as prison – where all the spiritual and psychological torture tools for children are decorated and systematic.
In this image shameless immorality and terror are clearly shown – metallic fences are the borders between morality and immorality.
Watch carefully. Don’t miss this scene!
—– A.N (written once released)

Each of these writers demands that we ‘look closely’ at the images we are fed of people incarcerated in immigration detention. They invite readers outside of the fences to see beyond and despite the reductive language that circles around them both in relation to supporters of Australia’s immigration detention industry and some of it’s detractors.  We are invited to see the ‘hands, eyes and faces of these people’; to feel the ‘cries and shouts that burn inside people’; to remember their names, to recognise that people have fled their homelands for many different reasons; and that this picture tells us much about our own humanity: ‘In this image shameless immorality and terror are clearly shown’.

Fady Joudah, poet and doctor writes: ’Somehow, poetry can participate in restoring the humanity of others despite the language of the day.’ (7) It is perhaps in this way that the poetry and writing from those involved in Writing Through Fences is a larger gift than those of us outside of the fences have imagined.  It opens a space for a re-writing of the borders of humanity in a climate where, as a writer incarcerated in Manus Island writes: ‘It is the loss of your own humanity we are seeing.’ (8)

-This piece was written by Janet Galbraith in collaboration with the writers of Writing Through Fences.

NOTES

1. What I Will’, spoken-word poem by Suheir Hammad http://www.ted.com/talks/suheir_hammad_poems_of_war_peace_women_power?language=en
2. A. Mohammed
3. name withheld
4. name withheld
5. M.H
6. http://www.warscapes.com/art/cycles-art-and-healing-among-syrian-refugees
7.  http://www.aljadid.com/content/poetry-without-borders-translating-mahmoud-darwish-conversation-fady-joudah
8. Hossein Baabahmadi Squad of Death, thearrivalists.tumblr

Sputnik’s Cousin by Kent MacCarter reviewed by Dan Disney

Sputnik’s Cousin by Kent MacCarter reviewed by Dan Disney

Sputnik's-Cousin-cover-for-publictySputnik’s Cousin

by Kent MacCarter

Transit Lounge

ISBN: 9781921924675

Reviewed by DAN DISNEY

 

If you are looking for narrative sensibilities or lyric sense-making in a narrow sense, then Sputnik’s Cousin is not for you. About as far out as its Russian satellite namesake once was, this is a book of astronomically strange experiments delivered as ‘poems and non-fiction’ (back cover). MacCarter’s texts are a kind of otherly reportage fed through deviant, garbled syntax, and these little machines of momentary expressive orbit are built to record the fetishistic weirdness of their human subjects.

=================================

Sorry you must be logged in and a current subscriber to view the rest of this content.

Please login and/or purchase a subscription.

Continue reading

Ben Walter

Ben WalterBen Walter is a Tasmanian writer whose fiction has appeared in Overland, Island, Griffith Review and The Lifted Brow. His debut poetry manuscript, Lurching, was shortlisted in the 2013 Tasmanian Literary Prizes.

 

 


Winding the Land

I had felt a skin of regret at being compelled by party policy and the tidal whims of my constituency to vote against the private member’s bill tabled by David Beveridge, stemming as it did from the now-infamous arguments attributed to my former son-in-law, Ian Davey. Ian’s motives in marrying Sally had always been cloudy to me, forced as I was to acknowledge her lack of charm or beauty, but until the revelations I’d always felt a margin of gratefulness to him, tempered by concerns for his dynastic ambitions.

While Ian never sought the endorsement of the Tasmanian people, nor made inroads into my own convictions, Beveridge, the youngest member for Denison, so came under his sway as to table the bill that was to founder so spectacularly. I have searched my memories of dinner parties and summer barbecues, and I can’t recall facilitating the introduction; what’s important is that they crossed paths, and Beveridge was in the mood to make a difference.

The essence of Davey’s arguments centred on the economic and social benefits that had flowed from the Tasmanian innovation of daylight saving. Allowing for an extra hour of evening sunlight had minimised electricity usage and widening the evenings, bringing a little of the Mediterranean to our idiosyncratic local summers. Could this revolution, which had gone on to fiddle global clock faces, be applied to space as it had been to time?

How was the land to be moved? So scoffed a Braddon sinecure from my own side. Did Beveridge propose to up the ante on continental drift? Did he imagine the land would up and beg, roll over like a dachshund? Davey was quick to explain through his elected mouthpiece that just as daylight saving had not altered the movement of the Earth around the Sun or the planet’s rotation on its axis –   merely our conventions relating to it – the same could be attempted with respect to our experience of space. Was the entire population of the state to be moved to the east, the west, the south or the north over the first weekend in October, the first weekend in April? Would this lead to seaboard populations sleeping in dinghies and those nestled in the mountain valleys breakfasting on the peaks of the Wellington Range? Yes, Beveridge intoned triumphantly in parliament, that’s exactly what he was proposing – he was delighted that the honourable members had understood.

Ian was insistent, that far from attempting to dry the southern winds or cool sweaty shoulders through the brief, unexpected heat of summer days – this was popular whimsy, incidental to his goals – he was advancing the proposal as a spur to the development and innovation. Imagine, he would say, a whole second layer of infrastructure. Consider the policy revolutions for zoning and land ownership, the redistribution of wealth, energy flexibility, housing design and material efficiencies. Think of the growth of the construction industry, of the community blending and growth in social capital, of the tourism branding. Who wouldn’t want to spend and invest in the new, overwritten Tasmania?

“Just think,” he would insist, “an entirely fresh start, but one that would co-exist with all that belongs to us today. It would be a model for us. An exemplar. If anyone can sway opinion on this, you can. Support David’s bill.”

The relationship we shared rendered any help I could have offered implicitly nepotistic; it certainly wouldn’t have done me any favours in the party room. Beveridge’s own side were unwilling to support the bill; it was obvious to insiders that he had fought and lost a series of unbalanced debates. When it came to the vote the proposal was predictably defeated. Beveridge resigned his membership of the party and was bundled out of parliament at the next election; the people of Tasmania taking its revenge on the wrong sort of independent.

But it was only when the national papers picked up the story that the matter took the turn that it did. Naturally, the analysis was as critical of the policy framework as the local tabloids, but their aptitude for digging led to the scandal that was to bring the family apart, and for which I am willing to share little responsibility. It had nothing to do with Beveridge, who had relocated to Melbourne to work in light consulting; it was my son-in-law who became the object of the nation’s ghoulish fascination.

It wasn’t that he had decided to embody his principles, moving five kilometres to the east at the beginning of every October, pacing out the exact distance and making a nuisance and object lesson of himself. Sleeping on the roof of an unfortunate retiree’s house, developing his status as an idiotic cause célèbre. Features on the more idle current affair shows, updates buried in the inner rings of newspapers. Nor did he radicalise an allied cause, swivelling day and night and altering the clocks by twelve hours. I was expecting something like this, a strident spectacle swiftly forgotten, a depressed, insomniac tendency justified after the fact by adaptations of his theory.

He simply seemed to disappear. Surprise gave way to genuine concern when we also lost contact with Sally; after several weeks with no response to our phone calls, no answer to our knocking at their West Hobart home, I made a call to an acquaintance in the force who uncovered the scandal just as the major newspapers began to pick up the story.

What really caught the national interest was the tattoos, tattoos that voluntarily or otherwise had been inflicted on Sally’s body. The maps overlying graphs, plans engraved against diagrams, casinos in Cremorne and brick flats jutting from the Organ Pipes. And images of Ian and Sally’s own possessions, their wedding gifts, displaced into forests and other people’s homes, crudely drawn and redrawn, carved with needles and ball-point pens, layers and layers repeated. When they finally found her, emblazoned in blue and white like dense china, she was unable to stop quivering at the thought of further redirection and displacement. What had steered Ian’s ideas in this gruesome direction? Why had he decided to map and remap his wife, my daughter?

The images left a wake of speculation and fascinated outrage; even now I am burdened by memories that set me searching of fresh appalled responses, the casting of blame and the passing of moods to the friend across the road, the stranger in Buenos Aires. I stay awake well into the night, the outline of my wife waiting at the study door, mopping myself in the outrage and confusion of others, as Sally sleeps quietly in the spare room. She has finally settled calmly in our home, quite content remaining where she is.

***

A Small Dead Thing by Luke Johnson

Luke JohnsonLuke Johnson lectures in Creative Writing and Literary Theory at the University of Technology, Sydney, and the University of Wollongong. His stories have appeared in numerous journals, and in 2014 he was shortlisted for the Josephine Ulrick Prize. He has a PhD in Lacanian Psychoanalytic Theory and Creative Writing from UTS.

 
 
 

A Small Dead Thing

Each morning Raymond’s father passes Raymond in his car on his way through to work. Often he slows down to call to the boy to hurry along now or to remember to look both ways. There is only one road between the house and the school anyway and of course Raymond knows all about looking both ways and not dawdling: he is seven years old now.

This morning when Raymond’s father leaves for work he drives from the house right past the front gates of the school without passing Raymond. When he reaches his work he calls the house to tell Raymond’s mother that he did not pass the boy on the way.

‘You did not pass him?’ Raymond’s mother says.

‘I’m sure it does not mean anything,’ Raymond’s father says, altering the tone in his voice.

‘God, what does it mean you did not pass him then, Harold?’ Raymond’s mother is not taken in by adjusted voice tones.

‘At most it means you should give the school a call to make certain he’s there. Of course he’s there. That’s all it means.’

‘God,’ Raymond’s mother says. ‘God, Harold.’

‘Look, Gloria, I can’t talk. It’s hell in here. Just ring me back if he hasn’t arrived at the school. Okay? I’m sure it does not mean anything. Most likely it means he took a shortcut through the creek again. I’m sure that’s all it means. I can’t talk. It’s busy as hell. Just ring me back, okay?’

Raymond’s father hangs up the phone and leaves Raymond’s mother standing alone in the kitchen with the handpiece rested on the top of her shoulder and her stomach feeling like it is full of coals.

It is no big thing, Raymond’s mother assures herself, putting the phone back on the receiver at her end. Raymond only left twenty-five minutes ago. Twenty-five minutes ago Raymond was standing right here in this very kitchen and surely that counts for something. Harold has it: he has wandered down through the creek again. You remember the last time he wandered down through the creek and came upon the carcass of that dead Rottweiler and it was more than an hour and a half before anyone found him. That has to count for something. Remember how you worried that day? And for what? Boys and their curiosities. That has to count for something and that makes two things that count for something.

            Raymond’s mother decides that she will wait before calling the school. She tells herself that if she calls in a fluster she will only increase her chances of hearing bad news. She sits at the kitchen table instead and puts her fingernail in one of the chip marks Raymond made with a hammer and nail when he was three years old and the table was brand new. Raymond is seven years old now and she is sure that must count for something also. Three is enough to stop counting, she tells herself. Sitting at the table, she picks at the chip mark until a little piece of grey laminex breaks away and cuts open the skin beneath her fingernail. The piece stays embedded beneath her fingernail and the blood drips out through the tiny gap and down the print-side of her finger and she blots it on the table like a child making finger drawings. She decides then that she will call the school. The blood is a good distraction for her to call the school and not bring bad luck upon the situation and she recognises this much.

Raymond’s mother has the school’s phone number stored in the phone’s speed dial. It is stored under Ray’s School. It is such a little piece of paper to have to write on, she thinks. She thinks like this because neither her nor Raymond’s father ever call Raymond Ray. Their neighbour Mr Langford calls Raymond Ray and the policeman who found him playing with that dead Rottweiler that other time called him Ray but they are the only two people Raymond’s mother has ever heard calling him Ray. She feels angry at herself for writing it Ray when she would not have said it Ray. In future you should write it like you would say it, she scolds herself. Ray-mond. The fingerprints on the table look to her like paw prints, as if a cat has come in through the window and shot across its surface. She remembers a story about birds coming in through a window once and it frightens her.

When the phone picks up at the school it is not the regular secretary but a woman calling herself Mrs Stokes. Raymond’s mother knows the regular secretary quite well and always calls her Mrs Lamb. Raymond’s mother calls all of her seniors by their polite titles. She cannot help it. Mr Langford is only seven years her senior and she calls him by his polite title, while Raymond’s father calls him Teddy. Raymond’s mother has never heard of this Mrs Stokes before.

‘May I speak with Mrs Lamb please?’ she asks.

‘I’m sorry,’ Mrs Stokes says, ‘Margaret no longer works Mondays. I’m her replacement for Mondays and Thursdays. I’m sure I can help you all the same. Is it to do with the new canteen roster?’

‘I am Raymond’s mother,’ Raymond’s mother says. She feels herself starting to cry then and she quickly hangs up the phone and puts her finger in her mouth and bites down hard until she can taste the blood coming out through the tiny cut beneath her fingernail. The piece of laminex stays lodged in there and when she pushes her tongue against the area to taste the blood more strongly, she feels the sharp edge of the laminex and makes the tip of her tongue stiff and pushes against it thinking that it will either pierce through the tip of her tongue or be pushed far enough down into her finger that nothing will be able to touch it anymore anyway. Neither happens and finally she takes her finger out of her mouth and is surprised to see that there is not any blood on it. The piece of laminex looks clean, like a shard of fibreglass, and she easily picks it away by pinching it between the thumbnail and index fingernail on her opposite hand. When she has pulled it away the finger starts to bleed again. The blood is thin and bright.

She calls Raymond’s father back at work then. She knows it is not good luck to be calling around like this and in this state with her finger bleeding like this. She thinks that any hope of putting herself out of this state seems distant and calls him anyway. She thinks if she squats herself down on the ground the balance will make up for something lost. ‘What is lost?’ she asks herself aloud. She is trying pragmatism. ‘What is lost, Gloria?’ She asks with her name and everything. Waiting for Raymond’s father to pick up she wonders why she let him convince her that it was okay for Raymond to walk by himself to school when he is only seven years old—even if there is only one road to cross. She wonders why she let herself get convinced so easily over such an important matter and why she always calls Mr Langford Mr Langford except for when Raymond’s father is around calling him Teddy and then she starts calling him Teddy too and she wonders why she lets herself get convinced like that. She thinks of a crow unbuttoning a school shirt with its black and lacquered beak. She puts her other hand on the top of her head and thinks murder is a horrible collective noun.

After nine rings Raymond’s father answers the phone at work and Raymond’s mother tells him what has just happened. She tells him about this Mrs Stokes woman whom she has never even met and she tells him about the way she started to cry and the cut on her finger and she can hear her own voice and knows the way it must sound and she says, ‘Why did I let you convince me that it would be alright for him to walk by himself when he is only seven, for God’s sake, Harold?’

Raymond’s father listens to her and assures her that it is probably not at all like she is making out and that it is probably all quite okay. He tells her that she should call the school again and speak to this Mrs Stokes properly this time. He says ‘damn carburettor’ right in the middle of explaining all of this to her and when she asks him what damn carburettor is supposed to mean for God’s sake, he says, ‘Hang on a minute, Gloria. I need somebody to get this damn carburettor over to Clarke’s in the next twenty minutes.’ She asks him if he is talking to her and he says, ‘Listen, it’s hell, Gloria.’ He says, ‘I’m sure this Mrs Stokes is a shipshape woman. You should give her a call and then give me a call back when you know something for certain. Alright?’ Shipshape is the expression Raymond’s father used the time Raymond was lost in the creek for an hour and half playing with that dead Rottweiler. Shipshape police constable: find him in no time, Gloria, you’ll see. Everything will be shipshape. Slap.

After speaking to Raymond’s father this second time Raymond’s mother puts on her cardigan and shoes and goes out of the house. She does not put socks on her feet and her shoes are the kind a person pulls on and off without bothering to untie the laces. As she walks along the footpath toward the school she keeps the cardigan pulled closed across her front with one hand, so as to hide her nightshirt. She starts to cry again and walks faster and there are lots of cars driving along the road.

At the vacant block Raymond’s mother stops. She looks to the back of the block where the corrugated iron fence has been kicked in and one of the panels is missing altogether. It is the entranceway to the creek. The vacant block is full of rubbish. Most of it has been set fire to. There was a house on the block once and it was set fire to by a lightning strike. Midway between Raymond’s mother and the entranceway to the creek is the skeleton of a burnt mattress. The black springs make it look like something used for trapping animals. Staring past the mattress Raymond’s mother can only picture that dead Rottweiler now, dumped with its insides coming through the side of its belly, dumped in the creek because dumping fees at the local tip were too high, or because the person who was driving the car felt too guilty to try and find the owner so it might be put to rest beneath a favourite tree or ruined flowerbed. It was Raymond who found the Rottweiler and then the police constable who found Raymond.

The day Raymond found the Rottweiler was the same day Raymond’s father hit Raymond’s mother with his closed hand. He hit her when she would not stop crying and then everything was fine and the shipshape police constable found Raymond just like Raymond’s father said he would and everything was fine. Raymond’s mother smiled and the constable smiled too standing at the door and Raymond still had the dog’s blood on his hands and on the knees of his trousers and everything was fine that day. Even the bruise that joined the corner of her mouth to her ear was fine once Raymond had been found and returned home by the shipshape police constable who said nothing just smiled.

Raymond’s mother puts her right leg through the gap in the fence first and then steps through with the rest of her body. She keeps the cardigan pulled closed in front even as she is stepping through and the wind makes the bent piece of iron move up and down along the remaining section of fence. It is loud and grating and Raymond’s mother brings her head through last and thinks of a dog waiting on the other side, ready to latch onto the side of her face like a scrap-metal guard dog.

From the entranceway Raymond’s mother can see along the creek all the way to the school now. There is no dog. The oval at the bottom end of the school backs directly onto the creek and Raymond’s mother can see all the way to the oval and the oval is empty. At first she does not see Mr Langford, since he is hidden behind the rise in the creek bank. And when he comes out from behind the rise he is no more than thirty metres away from her and he sees her standing abreast of the slope and he waves to her. She does not wave and she watches him until he is standing right in front of her.

‘Hello, Gloria,’ he says.

She does not say anything to him. Her eyes are red still and her cheeks are tight where the wind dried her tears before they could reach halfway to her lips even. She looks at Mr Langford and at his hands and she keeps her cardigan pulled modestly across her front.

‘Another dead dog,’ Mr Langford says to her, shaking his head. Mr Langford is seven years older than her and he has very white hair and a small round head. His hair is very white and his cheeks are red and his mouth is small even for his head. He bends down and wipes his hands on the grass and when he bends he keeps his back straight and his hands only just reach the ground either side of his feet. ‘Do you remember the day Ray found the Wainwrights’?’ he says, motioning to his own hands. ‘Bad street for dogs. Busy. Always busy,’ he says, shaking his head side to side. His knees are bent.

‘The policeman,’ Raymond’s mother says back to him.

Mr Langford looks up at her and she starts to cry again and when she tries to step backwards through the hole in the fence he takes hold of her wrist and her cardigan falls open and she begins to cry really.

‘Gloria,’ he says. ‘We’re only talking now.’

In the distance a group of children come running onto the bottom oval like creatures coming in through an open window. One of them kicks a football and it sails over the fence and into the creek. Mr Langford let’s go of Raymond’s mother’s wrist and disappears through the hole in the fence himself. Raymond’s mother sits down very low to the ground and wishes Raymond’s father were there to hit some sense into her with his shipshape hand.

 

Cameron Lowe

Cameron Lowe lives in Geelong, Victoria. His two book-length poetry collections are Porch Music (Whitmore Press, 2010) and Circle Work (Puncher & Wattmann, 2013).

Cameron Lowe_The beginning

Coolie Woman: The Odyssey of Indenture by Gaiutra Bahadur reviewed by Nicole Thomas

Bahadur-CoolieWomanCoolie Woman: The Odyssey of Indenture

by Gaiutra Bahadur

HIRST

ISBN 9781849042772

Reviewed by NICOLE THOMAS

 

At the heart of Coolie Woman: The Odyssey of Indenture, is Gaiutra Bahadur’s personal quest to discover one woman’s identity amongst the mass of people relocated during the period of indenture.  Born in Guyana and immigrating to the United States at the age of six with her family, Bahadur, a former Nieman Fellow at Harvard in 2007-2008, is an American correspondent and book critic.  With journalistic scrutiny, Bahadur embarks on a journey in search of her great-grandmother, Sujaria’s story; one of many women buried deep in the history of colonial discourse.   Curious about her Indian origins, with desire to understand how her great-grandmother’s decision to cross the Indian Ocean in 1903 helped shape her destiny, she returns to India to engage with a past that has impacted on present perceptions of identity.  Her exploration of the past excavates the injustices and degradation suffered by immigrants under the power of colonial authority.

Following the Abolition Act of 1833 that ended slavery in the British Empire in 1834, the system of indenture was introduced and thereafter became a second form of servitude.  Over a million Indians were deployed and spread across the globe to work on sugar plantations, half of them transported to the Caribbean.  Surviving the horrific journey was just the beginning of a life of inequality, mistreatment, and dislocation.   Emigrants were stripped of caste and kin and turned into an indistinguishable mass of plantation labourers, forced into sub-standard social and contractual arrangements.  Unruly recruiters misled and schemed in order to induce labourers and preyed on the vulnerabilities of desperate women to serve the over-population of men.  A gender imbalance among the indentured contributed to the breakdown of families, igniting jealousy, which often lead to violence and the deaths of many coolie women.

The term “coolie” derived from the Tamil word kuli, meaning wages or hire.  Over the eight decades that “coolies” were ferried across the globe the word evolved into an ethnic slur, and spilled fluidly from tongues of plantation managers and overseers as a reminder to indentured labourers of their menial origins and lowliness in the race hierarchy.   It was “A subtle challenge to their claim to belong”, Bahadur states in the preface.   The author re-inscribes the c-word, explaining that while it may be offensive and painful for some, it is true to her subject.  “My great-grandmother was a high-caste Hindu.  That is a fact.  But she left India as a “coolie”.  That is also a fact.  She was one individual swept up in a particular mass movement of people, and the  perceptions of those who controlled that process determined her identity at least as much as she did.  To them, she was a coolie woman, a stock character possessing stereotyped qualities, which shaped who she was by limiting who she could ever be.” (p.xxi)

The struggle with identity emerges on the first page, when Bahadur takes a retrospective look at her point of departure, from her home in Guyana to a new life in America.  At the impressionable age of six, still connected to the memories of home in Guyana but disconnected by the act of leaving, Bahadur describes her sense of displacement as being severed in two.  This severing of self relates to the nature of diaspora, and a motif of connection and disconnection weaves throughout the narrative, drawing parallels to the experiences of indentured labourers severed from imaginary homelands, religion and culture.  Bahadur’s personal severance reflects on the lives of the women who were physically dismembered by acts of violence from their men.  Juxtaposition of the outside and inside spaces she inhabits expresses the diasporic struggle of trying to locate the self in the interior and exterior of new world culture.  The memory of a distant home is the vein that draws her back to the Caribbean as a young woman where she describes her arrival as “a tingling fusion of inside and out, an electric union of outside and in, a sparks-flying soldering together of the soul” (9).  The sensation describes a physical memory, expressing a psychological essence of belonging, whereby a return brings forth an imagined wholeness.   As a whole, the narrative is a process of identification that oscillates between boundaries of culture and place, exploring the uncertainty of self and belonging.

From Guyana’s national archives, Bahadur exhumes an artefact that catalogues only a few details of her great-grandmother’s indentured life.  In 1903, Sujaria, four-months pregnant and travelling alone, sailed with 560 adults on The Clyde, from Calcutta to the Caribbean.  Bahadur’s exploration shifts from the potholed roads of Bihar to archives in England, where she locates a documented plethora of coolie sufferings from the shadowy repository of history.  While the narrative exposes the power struggles that existed between indentured men and the repressive legal system that convicted and imprisoned them for minor labour violations, it engages a wider focus on the more nuanced stories of women; those who escaped the oppressions of their country and their men, for the social leverages that immigrating offered, only to meet with adversity.   Through invoking place and reconstructing the trauma of indenture, the voices of coolie women speak against the colonial context and act as a collective narrative for subalterns who have been written out of history.  We hear of Maharani, who at the age of five married a much older man, and was widowed at the age of twelve.  Forced to cook and clean for her in-laws, she endured eight-years of beatings before escaping and crossing oceans to flee India:  And later, from Doolarie, a remarried widower whose new partner beat her with a hoe for talking to another man, scarring her for life.  Sujaria, however, remains silent, but her absence is a defining presence in the narrative.  She appears fleetingly as an apparition.  Bahadur attempts to locate her with the summoning of rhetoric questioning, “Did she look back over her shoulder as she boarded the ship? Was there regret in her glance?” (47).  Through Bahadur’s speculations and conjectures the reader is able to imagine Sujaria, shifting between the alternate scenarios, inhabiting the shared spaces and experiencing similar injustices of indentured life, though this is only speculation on the moments that make up Sujaria’s life.  While her exploration fails to excavate her great-grandmother’s story, her journey and research finds the suspended voices of other coolie women, who like Sujuaria, left their villages and travelled the middle passage, to reinvention in a new world.  This new narrative gleaned from research and the stories of other coolie women is restorative literary practise, re-addressing the histories of coolie women suspended and forgotten.  The writing functions as a restorative and reformative agent for memory, preventing the history of coolies from vanishing with the past.

The book shifts the balance of power from official colonial archives, to the unauthorised versions of indenture told by the memory keepers whose stories descended generations.  Bahadur articulates the relationship between stories and the unreliable nature of memory.  “The will to remember the past is undermined by an equally formidable will to forget” (18), and the stories that did descend often reveal as much about how families choose to see their histories as they do about the actual histories” (48).  What emerges from the narrative is an exploration of story and its power to shape identity.  “Unravelled, they began, ever so slowly, to spin the threads of a novel identity” (62).  The style of the narrative relies on metaphor and figurative elements of language to weave what rests on the bare skeleton of story.  The Ramayan, an ancient Hindu epic with religious and allegorical meaning, coursed through the veins of displaced Hindus’ and was their “lifeblood”, says Bahadur.  “The epic, like the diaspora that identifies with it, is preoccupied with women who break the codes of accepted sexual behaviour” (108).  While the adoption and telling of The Ramayan forged a sense of belonging and provided a social life for the indentured, it may have influenced men in their actions of violence against Indian women, serving as a powerful reminder to women of consequent punishment for uncontrolled sexuality.  The stories that Bahadur weaves into her narrative show the power of story and language to generate meaning and provide a sense of reality.

Coolie Woman: The Odyssey of Indenture traces the history of Indian migration, down the Hooghly river, around the Cape, and across the Atlantic to the Caribbean, trawling through the complex lives of a generation of Indian women who sought exile from their country and their men, and delving into the depths of Indian diaspora and the struggle for identity.  Gaiutra Bahadur does not return with the story that belonged to her great-grandmother but she brings home the acknowledgement that identity is as much about lived experience as it is about self-creation and what one believes to be true.  The narrative proffers that the self is forever adapting, that identity is not anchored to the past but is perpetually shifting in order to belong.

 

NICOLE THOMAS lives on the South Coast of NSW and holds a Bachelor of Creative Arts with Distinction from the University of Wollongong.  She was awarded The UoW Centre for Canadian Australian Studies (CCAS) Award.