Soap and reconciliation
Oct 31st 2006Jess::Politics & ::History & ::Activism & ::Lifestyle & ::Human Rights & ::Culture
Imperial LeatherOriginally uploaded by jessums04.
Hello out there!
I recently wrote a paper on an artwork by Aboriginal artist Julie Gough called ‘Imperial Leather’. Its an amazing artwork of a bloody red union jack with a kitsch wax iconic Aboriginal ‘heads’ hung over the imperial flag by cotton nooses.
What do you think about this artwork as a response to the colonial/imperial past in Australia (or elsewhere in the world)? Especially from an Aboriginal perspective….
If you feel so inclined check out an exerpt from my essay about the artwork as response to history, or feel free to leave a comment about the artwork:
‘Firstly, the title of the piece, “Imperial Leather”, there is an obvious reference to the well known soap company, may be the first thing to strike the reader. It denotes cleanliness and cleansing, which reminds the reader of the shameful policies of our past which envisioned a society cleansed of aboriginal people, indeed a process of “breeding out the colour” was accepted as a national goal in 1937 (Manne, 2002 para 29). Taken on their own the two particular words of the title also add to the experience of the piece. The word ‘Imperial’ relates to that belonging to the empire and the exercising of supreme authority (Hanks, 1985 p. 627) which reminds us of the imperial invasion into Australia and the belief of the Europeans that they were superior to the aboriginal people. The word leather too is also rich in meaning here, Julie Gough mentions that the leather in the title suggests ‘whipping, punishment and control’ (Gough, 2006 para. 2). However added meaning may be sought by the reader as they consider the fact that the tanning of aboriginal skins was a practice carried out on a small scale early in Australia’s colonial history. Indeed, William Lanney, a man known as the last full-blood aboriginal in Tasmania was dismembered upon death in 1869 and his scrotum made into a tobacco pouch (T.A.H.S, 2000-2003 para. 14). When Gough was asked if she was conscious of this when creating her piece she said ‘William Lanney wasn’t any conscious part of the creation of that work.’ (J. Gough, pers. comm., 25 October 2006 for full transcript of personal communication see Appendix 2). Nevertheless, if the reader has an understanding of Aboriginal history in Tasmania, this knowledge may add to their experience of the work.
The ‘hanging’ aboriginal heads on the flag is an image worth 1000 words. The ‘heads’ were cast from an original aluminum mould of the kitsch ‘Aboriginal boy’ ‘head’ commonly found suspended in the lounge rooms of Australians in the 1950’s (Gough, 2006 para 2). In relation to the layout and repetition of the ‘heads’ it is important to remember that the European settlers were utterly ignorant; they believed that the aboriginal people were totally Other, rendering them incapable of even comprehending the aboriginal people. Thus the Europeans self righteously concluded the only way to comprehend the ‘natives’ was to make them conform to colonialism. Gough illustrates the conformity Europeans enacted upon Aboriginal people through the repetition of the same ‘head’ in the piece and through her use of white wax. In addition, the layout of the ‘heads’ in mathematical regularity speaks of the ‘order, control and containment’ (Gough, 2006 para 3) over aboriginal people by the Europeans. However, as Gough illustrates, this coming of order meant death for the aboriginal people, as illustrated by the nooses attached to each ‘head’ on the flag. It may be important to note that the heads of wax in the installation could easily be mistaken for heads of soap, especially with regards to the title of the piece. Through this assumption the viewer may see added meaning in the work, the ‘sterilization’, ‘purification’ and ‘making-clean’ of aboriginal people so they can may fall within the limited understanding of the Europeans. – Jessica V’s essay (Deakin 500170186)