A.D.

Hope Australia

Unlike the poem entitled Terra Australia, which deals with Australia as a concept, as an
empty mould into which you can pour anything, this poem, judging by the title, will be
dealing with actual Australia, with the actual country and not only country. It begins like
this: A nation of trees nations usually consist of people, and not of trees, so why does the
poet begin like this? Why trees and not people? Are these the real trees? Of course not,
they are the very natives that constitute the whole nation. And what kind of trees are
these? Drab green and desolate grey ukasto mrko, zeleno; in the field uniform of modern
wars so this is the colour of these trees. So, what is the poet saying? How individual and
unique are Australians if they are a single nation of trees? There is some kind of uniformity,
you cannot differentiate among these trees. Apparently A.D.Hope believes that the
Australians all look alike and think alike, there is not much room left for individuality and for
originality. So, he is very critical of his country. Also, why does he involve modern wars?
Australia seems to be far from all the major tendencies and trends, far from the major
conflicts of Europe, of America, far from the wars, but is it really so? It appears to be
sheltered and protected by its very distance from European conflicts and wars, but is it
really so if there is a whole nation dressed in a uniform of modern wars? No, it appears that
it is sheltered and protected, but it is very much involved and it is not involved in the good
things but it is involved in conflicts and wars (it took part in both I and II World Wars).

Darkens her hills, those endless, outstreched paws

Of Sphinx demolished or stone lion worn away.
Why sphinx and stone lion? They are the two emblems of Egyptian and Greek culture. He
doesnt say that Australia as a land is as old as Egypt or Greece, he says this sphinx is
demolished, stone lion is worn away. How long does it take for a stone to crumble? He is
actually making the point that Australia is actually older than European oldest cultures and
he will put it explicitly in the next few lines, he will say:

They call it a young coutry, but they lie:

She is the last of lands, the emptiest,
A woman beyond her change of life, a breast
Still tender but within the womb is dry;
How is this related to the actual country? The centre of the continet is a big desert (the dry
womb).

Without songs, architecture, history:

The emotios and superstitions of younger lands.
This is the country without songs, architecture, history, but is it a good thing? He actually
believes that it is a good thing. Songs, history, architecture are simply emotions and
superstitions of younger lands, so you dont really need them; younger lands need them in
order to survive, but Australia, being so old and having survived for so long, does not really
need them.
Now again the mixture of geography and criticism, geography that functions as a criticism:
Her rivers of water drown among inland sands;
Australia is one big desert.
The river of her immense stupidity
Floods her monotonous tribes from Cairns to Perth.
Is this a real or a metaphorical river? He puts it explicitly, the river of her immense stupidity.
Monotonus tribes are synonimous to nation of trees - people who are not very imaginative,
who are not very original, who are not great thinkers.

In them at last the ultimate men arrive

Whose boast is not we live but we survive
A type who will inhabit the dying earth.
The oldest of all the countries is paradoxically the playground, or the battle-field, in his point
of view, of the ultimate men. So this oldest of all the countries actually predicts future, its
desert, its barren landscape actually predict future disaster. And the ultimate men boast
not that they live, but that they survive.

And her five cities, like five teeming sores,

Each drains her: a vast parasite robber-state
Where second-hand Europeans pullulate
Timidly on the edge of alien shores.
Teeming = full of something, full of creatures. Why are the Australians who live in cities
called second-hand Europeans? They all come from Europe, and even in Europe they were
second-hand, but why else? He is talking about modern Australians. They apparently cannot
let go of all the European assumptions, however, if they dont let go, and they live in
another country, they still cannot adjust to the new country, so they remain aliens in their
country, and also in relation to Europe, they remain second-hand Europeans. So, they are
literary in between, they are nowhere. In this country, that is supposed to be free from the
emotions and superstitions, these second-hand Europeans imitate their (European) social
orgainisation and social system and, of course, A.D.Hope is highly critical of that. Pallulate =
micati; so these shores remain alien precisely because they cannot let go of European
assumptions that do not actually correspond to the Australian geography and climate.

Yet there are some like me turn gladly home

From the lush jungle of modern thought, to find
The Arabian desert of the human mind,
Hoping, if still from the deserts the prophets come,
Such savage and scarlet as no green hills dare
Springs in that waste, some spirit which escapes
The learned doubt, the chatter of cultured apes
Which is called civilization over there.
Yet suggests that there is hope, and there is hope to be found precisely in this emptiness.
Its not only geographical, but also spiritual and intellectual emptiness. He is not critical of
Australia only, he is also critical of European culture and traditions. What is culture? What is
civilization? They are both missing from Australia, or at least, they appear as a second-hand
version. He sees European culture as the chatter of cultural apes . So, should Australians
feel sorry that they do not possess such culture? Of course not, according to A. D. Hope. He
finds hope in the emptiness of Australia, in people who are not burden with assumptions
and traditions and literary forms and so on.

James McAuley Terra Australis

Terra Australis the concept which European phylosophers and thinkers had had in mind
long before Australia was actually descovered, it refers to imaginary concept, ideological
construct dealing with post-colonial theory. The poem will deal less with Australia as a living
reality, and more with Australia as a concept in the European mind, and how this concept
actually clushes with the real Australia and how it affects the way Australia is seen and
interpreted (the idea that you interpret what you see accordnig to your own assumptions).

Voyage within you, on the fable ocean,

And you will find that Southern Continent,
Quiros vision-his hidalgo heart
Any mythical Australia, where reside
All things in their imagined counterpart.

Already in the first line, the word fable suggests that it is not the actuall Australia the poet is
dealing with. Fable (v.) = priati, lagati, izmiljati. You will find that Southern Continent
within you. Quiros vision the Portuguese sailor P. F. Quiros who believed that hed
discovered Australia and in his interpretation this was La Australia del espiritu santo, which
was actually a religious concept and not an actual place. Hidalgo is a Spanish nobleman.
How did the earlies representations depict Australia? Marco Polo when he got back from his
travellings, even though the never went to Australia, he started a rumour that in Australia
people legs were where heads should be, and everything was upside-down. So, Australia
was a perfect empty space for Europe to pour all its imagination into it. So far, he is very
neutral; in the second part we will see how the actual, physical reality of Australia is
interpreted in accordance with ideas of utilitarian friendship and mateship and these are
very important qualities of Australian cultures today.

It is your lend of similes: the wattle

Scatters its pollen on the doubting heart;
The flowers are wide-awake; their air gives ease.
There you come home; the magpies call you Jack
And whistle like larrkins at you from the trees.

Land of similes = an imaginary construct. Wattle = prue. One possible description of

Australia, what is Australia like? Is it threatening, hellish or just like America, a place for a
new beginning? Is it inviting? Yes, the air gives ease, its caliming, the flowers are wide-
awake, also the insistence on mateship, friendship. The magpies call you Jack what is
missing from this image? Why not Mr. Jack? Its Australian equality, everybody is treated as
equal. Larrikin = galamdija, siledija, ali ovde nije u negativnom kontekstu upotrebljeno.

There too the angophora preaches on the hillsides

With the gestures of Moses; and the white cockatoo,
Perched on his limbs, screams with demoniac pain;
And who shall say on what errand the insolent emu
Walks between morning and night on the edge of the plain?

Is the atmosphere the same or has something changed? Here he says the angophora
preaches with the gestures of Moses, what is introduced with this? Moses, Bible,
Christianity mistakes and superstitions of younger countries; so, you are not really free,
even in Australia. We are still in the same landscape, but we are not still in the same
atmosphere. There is a hint of paranoya suggesting unease, and if there is unease, are you
really at home? So, the same country, the same landscape and physical reality but
interpreted in two radically different ways. Why is this so and how is this possible? The
vision of Australia as hell is closely connected with the introduction of Christianity in
Australia. The influence of religion, especially of Christianity, that is not very fond of
difference.

But northward in valleys of the fiery Goat

Where the sun like a centaur vertically shoots
His raging arrows with unerring aim,
Stand the ecstatic solitary pyres
Of unknown lovers, featureless with flame.

Is this final version of Australia hellish or not? Pyre = lomaa. It is, there are many references
to fire, the last image is the image of fire. What complicates the idea that this is hellish?
Unknown lovers; the pyres are not frightening, they are ecstatic, solitary pyres of unkown
lovers. What would make life in Australia bearable? What would transform hell into
something that is not so hellish? LOVE! The final thought: physical reality can be interpreted
as both heaven or hell depending on your cultural burden, depending on the assumptions
that you carry with you. According to this poem Australia is not that far away from Europe;
Europe is not only out there, but it is also people who come to Australia with certain
assumptions, traditions and with certain ways of seeing and interpreting what you see. With
the introduction of religion, we enter the hellish vision of Australia.

Les Murray Sydney and the Bush

What does the title suggest? History in a nutshell, the history of a urban developement of
Australia and the decline of nature, the decline of the bush. Sydney stands for urban
civilisation, it stands for urban culture and this culture is fairly European.

When Sydney and the Bush first met

There was no open ground
And men and girls, in chains and not,
All made an urgent sound.

When did this happen and was Sydney created at that time? It happened when the first
white settlers arrived and there was no Sydney as such, there was no Sydney as the city.
Sydney and the Bush = Europe and Australia; urban civilisation or civilisation and nature. An
open ground is not a metaphore, it represents an area without trees; nije bilo istine,
drugim reima, kakva je bila Australija? Ljudi, naroito belci. The bush dominated at the
beginning, nature dominated Australia. Why are chains introduced? Because they were
prisoners, they were convicts. Not all of the white settlers were prisoners, but the majority
was. So, some of them were, some of them were not, but they all made an urgent sound.
Why urgent sound? Because they were scared. Australia stimulated equality and working
together. American geography stimulated, encouraged high hopes whereas Australian
geography stimulated only one hope and that was the hope for survival.

Then convicts bled and warders bred,

The bush went back and back,
The men of Fire and of Earth
Became White men and Black.

So, the title refers to the relationship between urban civilisation and rural civilisation, but it
also refers to European white civilisation and the civilisation of Aboriginals. What was the
next stage? If people were breeding, that means that some ? are meant for people to
reproduce, and since this was an institution made on the basis of the European institution,
then it means that exploitation was acceptable, and in this case the people who were
exploited were convicts and the prison guards are the ones who lived on this metaphorical,
and maybe even literal, blood. What is happening with the bush? Nature and people who
belonged to nature were surpressed literary. Now there was an open ground, the open
ground being created by the hands of the convicts. Who are the men of Fire and who the
men of Earth and why are they differently labeled now? The men of Earth = the Aborigines.
So, in the early stages they were all afraid for their lives, but did this fear and this struggle
stimulate equality? They were the men of Fire and the men of Earth, they were equal
although different, but then they became White men and Black. Pay attention to this
interesting lack of the word man after Black. What does this signify? Even in this early stage
there is a hint of, well not of inequality, but a hint of different ways of seeing. White men
are men of fire fire arms. Now the white men are human beings, and these are just Black,
and their humanity is denied.

When Sydney ordered lavish books

And warmed her feet with coal
The bush came skylarking to town
And gave poor folk a soul.

To skylark = to have fun in a loud and noisy way, the opposite of behaving in a fine, civilised,
European manner. Now, the bush stands for what in this stanza? Ovde bush istovremeno
stoji za untamed nature, it also stands for the Aborigines, but it also stands for rural
Australians and now they are being mocked by their own people living in the cities. There is
again a clear distinction between Sydney and the bush. Sydney is civilised and civilisation
and culture are represented here as something extravagant, as luxury.

Then bushmen sank and factories rose

And warders set the tone
The Bush, in quarter-acre blocks,
Helped families hold their own.

How and why did the bushmen sink? Because of the industrialisation. Who are the warders
now? The actual warders and convicts are long gone, and these warders here are the British
who still influence Australia, especially Australian foreign politics. These warders are the
ones who decide, who have control. People who were endangered by industrialisation turn
to the Bush to survive, so the history of survival is constantly repeating itself.

When Sydney and the Bush meet now

There is anthipathy
And fashionable suburbs float
At night, far out to sea.

There was no open ground, now there is anthipathy meaning at the first stage of history
there was some kind of relationship, right now there is no relationship whatsoever. Why is
there anthipathy between Sydney and the Bush? Why is the greater part of the stanza
devoted to Sydney and to urban civilisation? Because, they are apparently more important
and that causes anthipathy.
When Sydney rules without the Bush
She is a warders shop
With heavy dancing overhead,
The music will not stop.

They do not take into consideration that rural aspect, people who live in rural areas. If they
do not do that, does Sydney really rule? Kad to radi, Sydney je samo radionica za ove
zatvorske uvare, samo britanska radionica i ta oni rade u toj radionici? Igraju kako im se
svira and the music will not stop.

And when the drummers want a laugh

Australians are sent up.
When Sydney and the Bush meet now
There is no common ground.

The drummers are the British, they set the rhythm. Australians are only made fun of. How?
Where? When? U svakom filmu, u svakom prikazu, Australijanci su dati kao neozbiljni, kao
neko ko slui za smejanje. What is common ground now? This is a significant change from an
open ground, to the common ground. So, you have one country and two aspects growing
increasingly apart until finally there is no common ground between them, and this is only
the influence of the British interfering in Australian politics and organisation.

Arthur Henry Adams The Australian

From Australia we move to the Australian.

Once more this Autumn-earth is ripe,

Parturient of another type.
......................................................
They watch him, as they huddle, pent,
Striding a spacious continent.

This is the idea, this is the national identity, this is how the Australians would like to see
themselves and would like to be seen. First of all, who is the Australian? He is the product of
the dying earth, the last product, the last child. What is his relationship with other nations?
He is not the same as the other nations, he is distinct, unique because his orientation is
towards the future whereas all the other nations are obsessed with their past and precisely
because of that they do not have future, unlike the Australians. So, the Australian is the
future leader of the world itself. How do they regard him? The Australian is not unimportant
in the eyes of the other nations, he is very important, and they all observe his every move
because he is the future. This is a national fantasy. Why are they huddling? Children,
when they are scared, huddle. Children, scared, obsessed with their past, they know for fear
in their lives and he is, unlike them, proud, masculine, strong, he is striding a spacious
continent.

Above the level deserts marge

Looming in his aloofness large.
Aloofness so he really is separate from all of them, he really is unique and he is great. So,
from these images that suggest greatness, power, physical strength the poet moves on to
say that he is no flower with fragile sweetness graced; nije on cveti neki .

No flower with fragile sweetness graced

A lank weed wrestling with the waste;
But he is still something from nature, and this something is a lank weed. Why? What are the
associations of the word flower, and what of the word weed? The flower sth fragile,
artificial, used for ornament, comes from Europe, sth that is feminine and he is not any of
these things. Lank weed this refers to his physical appearance because he is taugh, not
ornamental and he can survive anywhere. So, again, a point on his endurance and physical
power.

Pallid of face and gaunt of limb,

The sweetness withered out of him;
Sombre, indomitable, wan,
The juices dried, the glad youth gone.
A little weary from his birth,
His laugh the spectre of a mirth,
Bitter beneath a bitter sky,
To Nature he has made no reply.
Pallid = pale; gaunt of limb = long limbs, a tall man. This man is not a sweet flower. Why did
sweetness withere out of him? The line bitter beneath a bitter sky holds the key to this
question; he is not sweet because he struggles to survive, he fights against nature, against
Australian landscape and this struggle draws all the juices out of him. Why doesnt he laugh?
His laugh is the spectre of a mirth because his life is so hard. So, he is a stranger in a strange
land because he struggles with nature, struggles for survival and he still hasnt made any
meaningful relationship with nature. To nature he has made no reply even though nature
assaults him on the daily basis. There is no dialogue but all his troubles are attributed to
nature.

Wanton, perhaps, and cruel. Yes,

Is not his sun more merciless?
..................................................
His heart a sudden tropic flower.
He loves and loathes within an hour.

So this is about his eating and drinking habits. How does he eat? How does he drink? When
there is food, he eats fast, when there is drink, he drinks fast. Again, that is the direct
outcome of his way of life which is mainly the survival in nature. What about his emotions?
This kind of life also affects his emotions. He is not consistent in his emotions, he is very
impulsive which is not the same as very emotional.

Yet you who by the pools abide,

Judge not the man who swerves aside;
Who are the people who abide by the pools? The pools are here the metaphor. He lives on
the land which is practically a desert, so everybody who has water is considered rich. He is
adressing Europeans, they are the people who abide by the pools.
He sees beyond your hazy fears;
He roads the desert of the years;
Rearing his cities in the sand,
...............................................
With paths the distances he snares:
His eyes of steel the great plain wears.

This man is not refine, this man is not sophisticated, he doesnt have good table manners,
but this man is powerful because he is doing Gods work in wilderness he builds civilisation
in wilderness, he even challenges nature, he challenges even God; thats how powerful he
is, thats how unstoppable and fearless he is.

A child who takes a world for toy,

To build a nation or destroy,
...........................................
One white and peace encompassed State.
His features are childish, again he is pallid, weary, tall which doesnt go well with childish
features. His ultimate task and the ultimate prove of his masculinity is to build a state and
this state is white, the state of white Australians (white settlers).

But if there be no goal to reach?

.........................................................
He slouches down the centuries.
Hope, despair, fantasy; if he doesnt manage, if he outgrows his goal. To build a white state
is a small goal for this kind of man. And if he achieves all goals, if there be no goal to reach
then the whole world is his, he will be even greater, so great that they are undreamt of.

Mary Gilmore Old Botany Bay

The speaker is a composite character, the Australian legend, the father of nation to be more
precise. Who is he addressing? He is addressing present days and modern Australians who
seem to be forgetting all about their brave and heroic past in the sense that these brave
men were sent to the desert to survive, he moves to the present, and then to the past
summerizing the history of Australian settlers. Little to say is actually precious according to
she. He says: I worked hard so that you may be above work.
The summery of the song is in the lines: I bore the heat, I blazed the track. To blaze the track
means to create a path where there is no any, both literary and metaphorically. The price
for this blazing the track was his health, his body. So, these settlers are creating the nation,
they are creating the living well in the desert, they are supposed to be creating something,
but they are actually destroying (I split the rock, and I felled the tree). As a result of all these
destructions, the nation was born.
What about the last stanza? Why is it separated from the rest of the poem? The speaker in
this part is the poetess, now she dares to use her own voice. Is she adding anything new or
is she merely reminding that the new generations have forgotten everything about their
glorious ancestors? These ancestors and warriors are glorious because they survived and
created the nation which took a lot of effort and thats why their hands are knotted and
they are set high. Unlike the modern Australian, she is mindful of her nations past.
 The wild colonial boy

This is an Australian balad. Colonial refers to a period in Australian history.

How is he wild? He is wild in the sense that he doesnt like authority. So, what happened to
him? This is the story of his life, the story begins with his origin, with his birth and parents.
Was he born like a criminal? No! He was born in Ireland, but in the age of 16 he did
something and was sentenced to go to Australia as a convict. His parents were poor but
honest which is a perfect recepie for troubles. Why is this chorus? Who is speaking and what
is he doing? The speaker is the wild colonial boy himself as slightly older and he is
addressing his friends, and if it is a refrain than it is meant to be repeated, and if it is meant
to be repeated than it is important. Why? Because these four lines contain typical Australian
legend: hatred of the authority, defiance, love of freedom. He knows what the price is for
his being an outcome for his breaking the law. When he mentions iron chains he is not
metaphorical, he is speaking about literal iron chains. Iron Gang because they were all
chained together. But nothing could restrain him, he is a wild colonial boy, he loves freedom
too much. Who are squatters? In Australia, squatters are great land owners. Again, nothing
can catch him, he is slippery, he loves freedom.
Why is he given such a death? So, he is defiant till the end and he dies of the bullet in his
heart. The author is deliberately romanticizing this wild colonial boy turning him into one of
those legendary figures that constitute Australian national identity. He dies talking about his
parents, why? Because he is still a boy, still a child which is not a very nice comment on the
police.

Andrew Barton Banjo Peterson The Man from Snowy River

Whats going on in this poem? There is a horse missing, the owner offers a huge reward,
many skillful and powerful riders compete, but there is also one man from Snowy River, he
is weak, small, but he is also given a chance because the Australians are all equal.

There was movement at the station, for the word had passed around
That the colt from old Regret had got away,
And had joined the wild bush horses - he was worth a thousand pound,
So all the cracks had gathered to the fray.
All the tried and noted riders from the stations near and far
Had mustered at the homestead overnight,
For the bushmen love hard riding where the wild bush horses are,
And the stockhorse snuffs the battle with delight.
Colt = drebe. So, what is the speaker saying? Why were there so many riders? Were they all
greedy for the money or did they simply gathered for the sake of riding, in order to test their
skills? They gathered for the sake of riding.

There was Harrison, who made his pile when Pardon won the cup,
The old man with his hair as white as snow;
But few could ride beside him when his blood was fairly up -
He would go wherever horse and man could go.
And Clancy of the Overflow came down to lend a hand,
No better horseman ever held the reins;
For never horse could throw him while the saddle girths would stand,
He learnt to ride while droving on the plains.
And one was there, a stripling on a small and weedy beast,
He was something like a racehorse undersized,
With a touch of Timor pony - three parts thoroughbred at least -
And such as are by mountain horsemen prized.
He was hard and tough and wiry - just the sort that won't say die -
There was courage in his quick impatient tread;
And he bore the badge of gameness in his bright and fiery eye,
And the proud and lofty carriage of his head.
But still so slight and weedy, one would doubt his power to stay,
And the old man said, "That horse will never do
For a long a tiring gallop - lad, you'd better stop away,
Those hills are far too rough for such as you."
He was so small and weak, and they thought that he should be eleminated from the
competitions, but the Australians, being the Australians , decided to be fer and give him a
chance.

So he waited sad and wistful - only Clancy stood his friend -

"I think we ought to let him come," he said;
"I warrant he'll be with us when he's wanted at the end,
For both his horse and he are mountain bred.
"He hails from Snowy River, up by Kosciusko's side,
Where the hills are twice as steep and twice as rough,
Where a horse's hoofs strike firelight from the flint stones every stride,
The man that holds his own is good enough.
And the Snowy River riders on the mountains make their home,
Where the river runs those giant hills between;
I have seen full many horsemen since I first commenced to roam,
But nowhere yet such horsemen have I seen."
So he went - they found the horses by the big mimosa clump -
They raced away towards the mountain's brow,
And the old man gave his orders, "Boys, go at them from the jump,
No use to try for fancy riding now.
And, Clancy, you must wheel them, try and wheel them to the right.
Ride boldly, lad, and never fear the spills,
For never yet was rider that could keep the mob in sight,
If once they gain the shelter of those hills."
So Clancy rode to wheel them - he was racing on the wing
Where the best and boldest riders take their place,
This man comes from the mountains. So, they are trying to reach the horse, who has already
reached the hills, so theyll run to the hills.

And he raced his stockhorse past them, and he made the ranges ring
With the stockwhip, as he met them face to face.
Then they halted for a moment, while he swung the dreaded lash,
But they saw their well-loved mountain full in view,
And they charged beneath the stockwhip with a sharp and sudden dash,
And off into the mountain scrub they flew.
Then fast the horsemen followed, where the gorges deep and black
Resounded to the thunder of their tread,
And the stockwhips woke the echoes, and they fiercely answered back
From cliffs and crags that beetled overhead.
And upward, ever upward, the wild horses held their way,
Where mountain ash and kurrajong grew wide;
And the old man muttered fiercely, "We may bid the mob good day,
No man can hold them down the other side."
When they reached the mountain's summit, even Clancy took a pull,
It well might make the boldest hold their breath,
The wild hop scrub grew thickly, and the hidden ground was full
Of wombat holes, and any slip was death.
But the man from Snowy River let the pony have his head,
And he swung his stockwhip round and gave a cheer,
And he raced him down the mountain like a torrent down its bed,
While the others stood and watched in very fear.
So, the man from the Snowy river is identify as the man who never gives up. The horse has
run away, and when they reach the mountain, he still continues, he never gives up, he
reaches the summit and then he has to come down and it is dangerous because there are
holes into which his horse can fall, and break his leg and of course the rider is in danger of
breaking his neck but this rider is so brave that he doesnt care. He allows his pony to take a
lead, he trusts his horse and he continues and ends up.. ? he raced him down the mountain
like a torrent down its bed, he still raced despite the danger, and this is supposed to be
courage.

He sent the flint stones flying, but the pony kept his feet,
He cleared the fallen timber in his stride,
And the man from Snowy River never shifted in his seat -
It was grand to see that mountain horseman ride.
Through the stringybarks and saplings, on the rough and broken ground,
Down the hillside at a racing pace he went;
And he never drew the bridle till he landed safe and sound,
At the bottom of that terrible descent.
He was right among the horses as they climbed the further hill,
And the watchers on the mountain standing mute,
Saw him ply the stockwhip fiercely, he was right among them still,
As he raced across the clearing in pursuit.
Then they lost him for a moment, where two mountain gullies met
In the ranges, but a final glimpse reveals
On a dim and distant hillside the wild horses racing yet,
With the man from Snowy River at their heels.
And he ran them single-handed till their sides were white with foam.
He followed like a bloodhound on their track,
Till they halted cowed and beaten, then he turned their heads for home,
And alone and unassisted brought them back.
But his hardy mountain pony he could scarcely raise a trot,
He was blood from hip to shoulder from the spur;
But his pluck was still undaunted, and his courage fiery hot,
For never yet was mountain horse a cur.
And down by Kosciusko, where the pine-clad ridges raise
Their torn and rugged battlements on high,
Where the air is clear as crystal, and the white stars fairly blaze
At midnight in the cold and frosty sky,
And where around The Overflow the reed beds sweep and sway
To the breezes, and the rolling plains are wide,
The man from Snowy River is a household word today,
And the stockmen tell the story of his ride.
Gullies = jaruga. Spur = mamuza. This is a poem about riders, actually about one particular
rider, his courage and his horse, the poem celebrating his courage. But is there anything
paradoxical? So, this is yet another Australian type, and the Australian type is all about
hatred towards the authority, love of freedom, and egalitarianism. Is there anything
paradoxical? What is the subject matter of this poem? The paradox is that they are trying to
capture the horse who also has the Australian characteristics such as love of freedom and
defiance. How does the poem end? This man becomes a legend and these values are retold
in this legend. But is there anything missing from this description of the man from Snowy
river? So, he is brave, a skillful rider, reckless, not very kind to animals, focused on his goal,
eager to prove himself and his masculinity to his peers and mates. So, what is missing from
this picture? Is there anything else that we learn about this man? No, we learn nothing
about his personal life, which proves that mateship is not...? because you constantly need to
prove yourself and prove yourself in very limited ways.

James Lister Cuthebertson The Bush

GIVE us from dawn to dark

Blue of Australian skies,
Let there be none to mark
Whither our pathway lies.

Give us when noontide comes

Rest in the woodland free
Fragrant breath of the gums,
Cold, sweet scent of the sea.

Give us the wattles gold

And the dew-laden air,
And the loveliness bold
Loneliest landscapes wear.

These are the haunts we love,

Glad with enchanted hours,
Bright as the heavens above,
Fresh as the wild bush flowers.

The speaker is the poet himself. What is he talking about? He is talking about the bush
rural Australia, the countryside, something that is separated from the city. Give us why
doesnt he speak in his own person? He is referring to collectivism, to collective identity of
Australians and he is trying to prove that Australia is a beautiful country and the country
that is separate from England and that it is the country that has the separate identity from
England and from the British. So, where is the joke? He, in trying to insert separate and
distinct Australian identity and separate and distinct Australian landscape, he is borowing
freely from English conventions of writing about nature. Without a title we would never be
able to guess about which country he talks. There are the references that he is talking about
Australia, but the form itself is definitely European. The landscape is seen and described
with love. So, this is an author who will not look back to England, he, as a representative of
the nation (thats why he insists on US), he is learning to love every aspect of the landscape
but the aspects of the landscape that he loves and mentions are not typically Australian, he
does not mention kangaroos, or anything typically Australian. How specific is he actually?
Not at all. Loveliness bold loneliest landscapes wear first of all how can a lonely landscape
be lovely, and they are lonely. Haunt is the place that is haunted. This seems to be a
European poem but there are a few words taken from Australia in order to celebrate
Australian landscape.
 Henry Lawson A Song of the Republic

He is not European anymore, still he is not fully Australian; so how can you solve such a
problem? You can solve it by creating a national myth, or you create a national figure and
that is the figure of typical Australan and also by insisting on nationalism. This was written
and published in 1887 after he arrived in Sydney. Henry Lawson was a great nationalist, and
a great spokesman of the white Australian policy whereas the British was against it.

Sons of the South, awake! arise!

Sons of the South, and do.
Banish from under your bonny skies
Those old-world errors and wrongs and lies.
Making a hell in a Paradise
That belongs to your sons and you.
Sons of the south refers to the southern continent or Australia. Who is he addressing? He is
addressing men exclusively. He is mentioning European traditions and he summerizes
European traditions in wrongs and lies and errors, he doesnt recognize anything good in
European traditions. This, of course, is not an objective evaluation. Again, he is mentioning
the making of a hell in a Paradise that belongs to your sons and you, but who is he excluding
from the picture? Women, daughters and Aborigines are excluded.

Sons of the South, make choice between

(Sons of the South, choose true),
The Land of Morn and the Land of E'en,
The Old Dead Tree and the Young Tree Green,
The Land that belongs to the lord and the Queen,
And the Land that belongs to you.
What about this second stanza? Which metaphors does he use now in order to force his
fellow-country men to choose the Republic, to choose the separation from the British
Empire? In the first stanza, the metaphors were hell and paradise, here the metaphors are
the land of the morning, the land of the evening, the old dead tree and the young tree
green. Which of these metaphors refer to Australia, and which to Britain? Morning and the
young tree to Australia. The last two lines are important, so, he is drawing attention to the
difference in social organisation and this difference can come down to possession. Until
now, they lived in the country that is possessed by the queen, but now they will live in the
country that is in their possession. But basically, the two systems operate on the
assumptions of possession and the greatest irony is that he is not aware that there is not the
difference between these two systems. But if you repeat a lie often enough, it will inevitably
come true. So, he constantly repeats: the land belongs to you, but why on Earth would
that land belong to you?!

Sons of the South, your time will come

Sons of the South, 'tis near
The "Signs of the Times", in their language dumb,
Fortell it, and ominous whispers hum
Like sullen sounds of a distant drum,
In the ominous atmosphere.
Is he really convinced in the truth of his own words and does he really believe that people
will easliy be led by his ideals? So, from somewhat rational arguments, now he moves to
mysticism: the signs, the sullen sounds, the ominous atmosphere. It becomes messy. He
seems like a mad man and this is a mad ideology.

Sons of the South, aroused at last!

Sons of the South are few!
But your ranks grow longer and deeper fast,
And ye shall swell to an army vast,
And free from the wrongs of the North and Past
The land that belongs to you.
What about this last stanza? He starts with the idea that sons of the south will make a
paradise out of hell, or that they will simply eliminate the British and the land will instantly
turn into a paradise. But in the first stanza, there are already signs that he is not so certain
and thats why he relies on mysticism and then in the 4th stanza he clearly loses this
certainty. How can they make paradise in hell? How without repeating all the errors and
mistakes? They cannot, they will make the same errors as the Europeans. He mentiones the
aggretion to the Britihs, to the North and again points out that the land belongs to them.
This is an example of Australian nationalism and republicanism in the 19th century. He
supports the white Australian policy, and he supports it so much and believes in it that he
doesnt even have to mention it.

(Kath Walker) Oodgeroo Noonucal We are going

The story is about an Aboriginal man trying to find water, he finds just a few drops of water
and these drops represent the hope. In the exam, you can write his English name (Kath
Walker), and the second name is actually his real Aboriginal name.
What does the title tell us? We the Aborigine people. Where are they going? We are going
to fight back, we are going to start the war or we are deserted, we have to leave? We still do
not know cause we cannot judge from the title only. Interestingly enough, the title is We are
going, and you get the impression that he is talking about the Aborigines, but then the story
begins and the poet starts talking about They, he is talking from the third person
perspective. This we are going is actually reportive.

They came in to the little town

A semi-naked band subdued and silent
All that remained of their tribe.
They came here to the place of their old bora ground
Where now the many white men hurry about like ants.
Bora ground is the sacred ground. White men are compared to ants, why? Because there
are so many of them, they are hard working and they are also fast.

Notice of the estate agent reads: 'Rubbish May Be Tipped Here'.

Its a very obvious contrast, it used to be a sacred ground and with the arrival of the white
settlers it becomes rubbish.

Now it half covers the traces of old boraxing.

They sit and are confused, they cannot say their thoughts:
They have many thoughts but they cannot say them, especially they cannot say them in a
foreign language which does not mean that they are primitive, savage or less intelligent.
Now, the poet who speaks some English will transcribe their thoughts into English.
'We are as strangers here now, but the white tribe are the strangers.
The statement that summarizes their history: we are as strangers here now but they used
to be natives of this landscape and it used to be familiar to them. Remember when we talk
about two aspects of Australia, one that is desolation, and the other that is hope, these two
aspects refer to the white settlers. For the Aborigines there is the third aspect and that is
that Australia is simply their home, there is nothing too strange nor too exotic, it is simply
the place where they live, the place to which they actually belong. They have this radical
idea that they cannot own the land, the land owns them. We are AS strangers the
implication is that they are not really strangers, they are turned into strangers by the white
people, but they still belong to the land.

We belong here, we are of the old ways.

We are the corroboree and the bora ground,
We are the old ceremonies, the laws of the elders.
We are the wonder tales of Dream Time, the tribal legends told.
We are the past, the hunts and the laughing games, the wandering camp fires.
We are the lightening bolt over Gaphembah Hill
Quick and terrible,
And the Thunderer after him, that loud fellow.
We are the quiet daybreak paling the dark lagoon.
We are the shadow-ghosts creeping back as the camp fires burn low.
Pay attention to how they, in their culture, way of life, accept everything. The natural
ground consists of all these aspects and they actually have to counterpart with the spirits
and they move easily between the two worlds precisely because they have this totalizing
myth that explains everything. When they have that myth that explains everything they feel
at ease in this landscape and they feel at ease with all the bodily functions. So, birthgiving is
not strange, death is not strange, terrifying, life is not terrifying. They are actually very, very
lucky, they havent encountered post-modernism, they havent encountered post-
structuralism, they still have this firm fate in the great story which combines the natural
world and the spirit world. It is a great sign of imagination to imagine the spirits, to imagine
the ghosts. They identify themselves to the natural world (we are the quiet daybreak), but also
we are the shadow-ghosts creeping back they identify themselves with the spirit world. And they
feel at home with the both places.

We are nature and the past, all the old ways

Gone now and scattered.
They, unlike the Europeans, do not have the notion of history, the past is contained within
the present.

The scrubs are gone, the hunting and the laughter.

The eagle is gone, the emu and the kangaroo are gone from this place.
The bora ring is gone.
The corroboree is gone.
And we are going.'
They are going they are disappearing. Is there any hope? No, there is not. Danijela read
somewhere that this poem also contains a warning, but is it really so? Danijela doesnt see it
as a warning, but, since he mentions the emu, the kangaroo, the scrubs, the hunting, it
might be seen as a warning that the white men are also destroying the eco system and, if
they want to survive, they should make some kind of compromise with the Aborigines. But
even that means accepting white peoples rights to do that, if that accept to negotiate with
the white men, that would also be a sign of defeat.