I have never enjoyed plays, but have never looked at them as ethical texts elucidating the most significant themes of Australia’s colonial past. In The Secret River, the author Andrew Bovell has designed the play, which symbolize different perspectives on Australia’s past. Stylistic features have been employed dominating the play. Emulating our notorious past, Andrew Bovell’s stage adaptation of The Secret River is the story of two families one settler and one Indigenous while exploring the opposition that exists between the two. According to the Wilette (2013) – Edward Said Theory, “The European encounter with the alien culture was not only a cultural clash but also a meeting between unequals. European colonial domination and imperialist exploitation put European scholars in the position to gaze upon the exotic other and to study this alien otherness for European purposes.” This is how Colonialism came in to place though the settlement, control of land though power and the establishment of colonies with the aim of civilizing natives. Andrew Bovell’s The Secret River employs stylistic features such as metaphor, syntax and characterization to offer modern perspectives like environmental awareness on Australia’s colonial past.
One modern perspective on Australia’s colonial past is the environmental impact. The Secret River challengers the colonial assumptions of terra nullius – which the land belonged to no one due to no signs of cultivation. This is clearly delusional, however the decision of the British government to declare New South Wales terra nullius refused to acknowledge or recognize any Indigenous land. There was no need for the settlers to neither learn the Dharug language nor understand their method of land use or form of government. The idea that Aborigines are not interested in producing useful things like extra food, clothing or houses is prominent within the play. Smasher Sullivan is a disruptive and ignorant settler who is insensitive of other residents by disregarding the fine practices and history of the Indigenous Australians by burning the oysters – there is a clear distinction between the custodians of the land versus destructors of the land. Act One, Scene 9, Pg.33: Dhirrumbin says, “ The fires for the lime burned day and night. The block had been cleared of all timber, used for fuel, and sat like a gash in the forest. He had worked through the empty layers of oyster shells that had been lain there for a thousand years, and more. He’d dug out the midden until there was only black mud left. Now he was burning the live oysters, not bothering with the meat inside. The man smelt of burning flesh.”
The use of a simile “like a gash” is effective as it portrays the image of violence corresponding as wound inflicts on the landscape, which is also symbolic of brutality and violence. “The man smelt of burning flesh” draws our attention to the line and the sensory imagery of smell. The imagery of the setting, “ The water is as black as the mirror” is entirely foreboding. The repetition and rhythms of ‘he’ is symbolic of the damage Smasher is inflicting to the environment that belongs to the Indigenous Australians, the custodians of the land. Alliteration is used with repetition of the ‘s’ sound, which hangs in the air powerfully imitating the effect of the smoke. It is through lines with techniques like these that, The Secret River was written to convey the excruciating environmental impact on Australia’s colonial past through a modern perspective.
The orientation of the play clearly establishes prejudice against the rural indigenous with a post-colonial perspective on Australia’s colonial past. It recognizes the language employed by the colonized to maintain cultural identity and to subvert the language of the oppressor in order to achieve a degree of power. The description of the indigenous is as being as far from the industrialized world as a third world country. The indigenous were seen as an entire different specie unwilling to adopt Europeans cultural patterns or behavior. This was a common idea therefore labeling them as ‘wild’ due to a conflict of representation. The Europeans were threatened by ‘new’ behavior therefore since the indigenous were not like them they were thought of as evil therefore colonialism came into place aiming to civilize the natives implying the indigenous were not civilized beforehand. Act Two, Scene 3, Pg. 51: Dick says, “ It’s Ngalamalum, Da. Say it enough and it gets easy. Ngalamalum. Thornhill replies, “All the same I might call him Jack for short, seeing how he’s got such a bleeding mouthful of moniker.” The word “bleeding” is used for emphasis to express annoyance and to associate such a word with a name has connotations of oppression of culture. Renaming of the indigenous is made clear when Thornhill says, “All the same I might call him Jack for short…” which is symbolic of rewriting our own identity. The repetition of “Ngalamalum” from Dick is used to emphasis the line and the meaning that children are not born judgmental where it is more something to learn. Dick’s words reveal that the nature of prejudice doesn’t exist between children but mainly adults. Dick has an understanding nature, he understands how the two group could live harmoniously side by side, integrating together and live without prejudice however conflict between groups prevent that. Through techniques such as these, The Secret River promotes the prejudice against the Indigenous offering a post-colonial perspective on Australia’s colonial past.
Andrew Bovell of The Secret River offers modern perspective on the inequality of class. It is commonly under stood that class is the structure that unequally distributes wealth, power, and cultural capital, which, in turn, translates into different life chances. According to Arneson (2002) currently in the 21st Century there is a trend for egalitarian values. There is a common idea that everyone has opportunities if they work hard, however this is considered a myth. Often the family you are born into will determine you’re outcome. The indigenous are capable to achieve the same as the white settlers yet their life situation won’t let them achieve the same. Your life situation has a lot to do with how far you will go in life and the opportunities you will have. The idea that we can all be successful if we work hard is continuously proven wrong through society. Epilogue, Pg.89: Thornhill says, “Too good for my offer of help, are you? Then I wish you’d take your sorry black arse away from here. You got to learn to help yourselves now. Can’t just be sitting around in the dirt all day, like bludgers.”
Symbolism is used to express the habitual representation of the Indigenous as primitive and savage in “Can’t just be sitting around in the dirt all day.”
“Too good for my offer of help, are you?” is a rhetorical question emphasizing Indigenous Australians as ignorant and therefore unwilling or unable to adopt Europeans cultural patterns or behavior. “Can’t just be sitting around in the dirt all day, like bludgers.” describes the Indigenous as idle which is clearly a simile.
It is lines like these that offer modern perspectives on the inequality of class as an evil thing that takes real people’s lives.
The Secret River employs stylistic features to offer modern perspectives like environmental awareness on Australia’s colonial past. Metaphors, connotation and similes have been incorporated into The Secret River revealing the juxtaposing beliefs and attitudes by different characters. The text reinforces the fundamental idea that disagreeing perspectives, shaped by an individual’s historical and social context, have prevented a peaceful coexistence, resulting in a history marked by a sense of calamity and gloom. Plays are written texts and as a result, all their messages are felt up close.