Week 2: Settler Colonialism

     After watching the two micro-lectures on settler colonialism, I think that there is a lot to compare and contrast between There, There and The Secret River. Both stories explore settler colonialism, but from very different perspectives and situations. A lot of the difference stems from perspective and how that highlights themes and lessons within the story. There, There explores the perspective of a people who have been the victim of settler colonialism, and how it has drastically affected their communities and identities within them. The Secret River offers the perspective of the settlers participating in settler colonialism, which should hopefully lead to a lesson on the dangers of colonialism and its effects. 

    There, There is not arguing against settler colonialism- the story takes place long after Americans colonized the indigenous peoples of the Bay Area. Instead, it affirms that the people colonized are still prevalent and still do matter. It offers a voice to them and is sharing their stories through the characters of the novel. It highlights the cycle of violence, poverty, and alcoholism that follows them as a result of their history.

    The Secret River is the opposite. Thornhill and his family are the ones doing the colonizing, and, as far as we are in the novel, there has been no explicit realization that what he is doing is wrong. In fact, Thornhill seems to be in denial. He sees the carving of the fish and thinks nothing of it. He does the same with the 'daisies', which he destroys without a care despite them being crops for the aboriginal people he is encroaching on. I think that the book offers an explanation for the 'before' of settler colonialism, how one can come to colonize a land without even recognizing the wrongness of their actions, whereas There, There is an examination of the 'after' of settler colonialism.

Comments

  1. Monique Cov.January 20, 2023 at 9:18 PM

    I would have to agree with you Jalen. Both of the novels have a lot to do with settler colonialism but each in different ways and places. In "There There" By Tommy Orange, the settler colonialism is well underway almost to the extent where it is not even noticeable those those looking in. While the settler colonialism in "The Secret River" is much focused on the beginning stages of it where they are just settling on the land of the aboriginals. I also like how you pointed out that in "There There" the settler colonialism is show through the eyes of the Native Americans while in "The Secret River" it's perspective focuses on the actual colonial settler there in Australia. I appreciate your insight!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Griffin JonesJanuary 23, 2023 at 10:14 AM

    While I agree that Thornhill is a colonizer and this is certainly a difference when compared to Tommy Orange's "There There", I think that it is also interesting that Thornhill is also oppressed by the systems and class divide that colonialism brings to London. He is pushed farther and farther down the socioeconomic status and permanently labeled as a felon. While this does not excuse his actions in New South Wales, it is interesting to see that the effects of colonialism on him and how he then perpetuates the wrongdoings that he endured in order to feel more powerful and in control.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week 10: Pachinko, Identity, and Family

     Pachinko  is a book so jam-packed with meaning and depth that it would be hard to say everything there is to say about the book in one blog post. The story is a deep examination of identity and belonging- something we've seen in a lot of the more contemporary texts in this class. Pachinko 's wide variety of characters all struggle to feel in place in a society catered towards heterosexual Japanese men. It almost feels cynical in this way, with Solomon and Noa returning to pachinko after working so hard to get an education and move up the social ladder. I think it could be argued that this sort of acceptance, the kind gained from working hard enough to become a model minority, is not the way to find belonging. Family is key here. Society is a hard thing to find belonging in, especially when you exist outside of the accepted and typical behaviors and identities within it. But family is a constant. When society doesn't accept us, our family often does. Noa's happie...
Read more

Week 8: Biblical References

     Pachinko has a lot of biblical references in terms of characters names (which may or not be obvious depending on how familiar you are with the bible). Characters share names with biblical figures whom they share a lot with.     Isak, for example, is very similar to Isaac from the Bible. Abraham, one of the most important patriarchal figures in both Christianity and Judaism, is the father of Isaac. Abraham and his wife have Isaac when they are both very old, as a gift from God, which they are incredibly grateful for. However, God asks Abraham to sacrifice Isaac to him, similar to how people from that time may have sacrificed an animal. Abraham is reluctant, but decides to goes through with it. Right before sacrificing his son, an angel stops Abraham. In this sense, Isak and Isaac have a lot in common. Both are 'sacrifices'- Isaac literally and Isak in terms of his selflessness in general and specifically to Sunja.      Noa is clearly a referen...
Read more

Week 3: Smasher Sullivan

     In "The Secret River" by Kate Grenville, the character of Smasher Sullivan stands out as a powerful representation of the violence and brutality inflicted upon the Indigenous people by white settlers during the colonial period. He definitely shocked me as I read the novel.      From his introduction, where he brags about hanging an Indigenous person, to the end of the novel, Smasher's character is fairly static, showing little to no mercy for the people he encounters. However, one of the most disturbing aspects of Smasher's character is his dehumanization of the Indigenous people. He views them as obstacles and issues to be dealt with, rather than as human beings. This dehumanization serves to justify the violence and exploitation that white settlers inflicted upon the Indigenous people. By removing the personhood from the Indigenous people, it makes the killing, stealing, and other atrocities less morally reprehensible.      It seemed t...
Read more