Communication and Diversity Program

Question: Discuss about the Communication and Diversity Program. Answer: Introduction: The mini-series The Secret River' is an ABC television play based on the novel going by the identical name written by Kate Grenville. However, it is adapted for play by Andrew Bovell and directed by Neil Armfield. The play is divided into two parts and depicts the disturbing basics of how Europeans settled among the Natives of Australia. The drama satirizes how the European settlers invaded, killed and grabbed the land belonging to the Native Australians (Australian Museum, 2015). Further, the drama contrasts the Aboriginals and the British conception of socio-cultural concepts such as farming, clothing, hunting, personal property, relationship to the environment, and the family relationships. The misunderstanding between the two cultures significantly contributes to the conflicts witnessed in the play. The drama also manifests how desperation, ambition, love, and fear can drive a man to commit heinous transgressions against humanity. The scope of the paper is to offer a discussion o n differing worldviews depicted in the drama. Furthermore, the discussion will highlight the communication difficulties as portrayed in the footage as well as discuss how the concept of privilege is acted out in the drama. Andrew Bovell adaptation indicates there were instances in Australian when there was potential for the two cultures to co-exist. The play manifests the cross-cultural affiliation between the Dharug's and the Thornhill's families living at the Hawkesbury River. The concept of "give a little, take a little" as propagated by Blackwood in the film manifests the relationship between the two cultures represented by the two families (Grenville, 2005). Cultural humility as the ability to be open to the cultural uniqueness that is vital to the other person is clearly depicted by Blackwood who has learned Dharug language and some elements of the Dharug traditions and culture. Through his effort to understand the Dharug culture Blackwood learns to respect the Indigenous people. As a result, he ends up marrying an Aboriginal wife who bares him a child a fact that earns him a sense of belonging among the Dharug people. Mrs. Herring is also another symbol of peaceful cultural co-existence which is illustrated by her action of turning a blind eye to belongings that are taken from her (Bovelland Grenville, 2013). In addition, the friendship between Dick Thornhill and Dharug children demonstrate peaceful co-existence and appreciation of the Dharug people way of life. However, despite the cultural humility and co-existence manifested by Mr. Blackwood, Mrs. Herring, and Dick Thornhill there exist different worldviews between the two cultures. Andrew Bovell in his adaptation illustrates a situation of people with differing worldviews especially on the concept of land use and its ownership. To the British land was meant for development and agriculture but the Indigenous people considered the land to have spiritual valuesupon which their lives depended on (Sydney Theatre Company, 2016). British, without making any effort to understand the Indigenous people connection to the land claimed sovereign ownership of the land belonging to the natives. Thornhill following the British understanding of the terra nullius was convinced that the land on the Hawkesbury River belonged to him. On the other hand, Dharug people, represented by Yalamundi believed that the whole country and all that is around the river and the ridges belonged to them (Grenville, 2005). These contrast two worldviews, the private ownership propagated by the western societies and the communal ownership perpetuated by the Indigenous people. To the British land posse ssion, ownership of houses and other material things is normally a means of exhibiting wealth, status, and power. However, for Aboriginals, the communal land symbolises theiridentification and a means of connection with their forefathers since the land has been there since the Dreaming. Hence, the land has a significant spiritual value as opposed to the western understanding of wealth and status (Haseman and O'Toole, 1986). Communication difficulties also constitute a major theme in the play and are a source of tension and fear which result in the conflict in the drama. For example, when the Aborigines assemble for their ceremonial gathering William and his family interprets it as a war cry. Thornhill is from a culture that believes weapons are meant to kill and suppress the enemy.Therefore, he has difficulty in appreciating that for Aboriginals spears are solely intended to offer rhythm in their songs. It is evident in the play that the fear and anger experienced by William's family during the Aborigines ritual ceremony is the principal cause of the violence encountered in the entire play (Daley, 2015). Power, social hierarchy, and privilege are also dominant themes that are evident throughout the drama. The status of being white men was the basis of William and other settlers to look down on the Indigenous people. Their perception shaped the white settlers conduct towards the Aborigines that the native population is inferior and thus should be dominated. This is illustrated by Smasher an alcoholic who coaches his dog to attack the Dharug people. In addition, he enslaves and rapes the native women. In another instance, he acts violently against Braniyamala for no apparent reason an indication that feeling privileged resulted to marginalization. At the onset of Act two William is seen beating up his son Dick for swimming together with the Dharug children. The action demonstrates a feeling of belonging to the higher social class thus should not associate with people of an inferior social status. These acts of marginalization perpetrated by the settlers against the indigenous populatio n eventually led to the atrocious massacre witnessed in the play (Reynolds, 2013). In conclusion, the play depicts cultural ignorance and misunderstanding as the cause of fear and consequent atrocities exhibited in the play. Further, the impacts of failure to embrace diversity and create cultural harmony and understanding are well satirized in the play. The play is, therefore, important in the history of the Australian people since it enhances reconciliation between the Aboriginals and the white settlers (Koval and Grenville, 2005). The play portrays the failure of the Australian white settlers to live cordially among the Indigenous people and thus, a vital source in understanding the Australian history. References Australian Museum. (2015). Indigenous Australians Overview. Available at: Australian Museum.net 2016. PDF. [Accessed 20 Sep. 2016] Bovell, A. and Grenville, K. (2013).Teachers Resources: The Secret River. Available at: ACM_Secret River_Teachers Resources 2016.PDF. [Accessed 20 Sep. 2016] Daley, P.(2015). The Secret River - Have we moved on? The Guardian Australia. Available at : The guardian.com 2016.PDF. [Accessed 20 Sep. 2016] Haseman, B. and O'Toole, J. (1986). Dramawise. Melbourne: Heinmann. Grenville, K. ( 2005). The Secret River. Sydney: The Text Publishing Company. Koval, R.and Grenville, K. (2005). Interview with Kate Grenville, Author of the Secret River. (Radio Broadcast episode). Books and Writing. Sydney Australia, Radio National. Reynolds, H.(2013). The Forgotten War. Sydney: NewSouth Books. Sydney Theatre Company.(2016). The Secret River Program. Sydney: Playbill.