One of the first things I noticed while reading Gagudiju Man was the different perspective on change than the one discussed while reading Ceremony. Although these books take place in different areas of the world and are about different groups of people, they both discuss the perspectives and livelihoods of people native to the land the story surrounds, which is why I thought this difference may be important to note. In Ceremony, Betonie says, ‘Things that don’t shift and grow are dead things.” This is almost the opposite perspective than the Aboriginal people. In Gagudiju Man, page 22 reads, “Law never change, always stay same. Maybe it hard, but proper one for all people. Not like white European law, always changing. If you don’t like it, you can change. Aboriginal law never change. Old people tell us, ‘You got to keep it’ It always stays the same.” To Tayo, Betonie, and their people, things change and grow because they are living and alive. To the Aboriginal people, change is not necessary. How can the different beliefs of change be seen through practices, people, and livelihoods when looking at each culture separately?
While this reading is different from our Ceremony reading I see many of the same perspectives. Through the introduction we are introduced to the failed attempts of building native relationships. While Neidije took Lang under his wing to understand the true relationships in the spirit of the land. They focus on the ideas that the younger generation either isn’t interested or wiling to understand ancient traditions. Such as on page 26 where he states “All that. That way I explained, but young, they don’t get it. New generation no good, nobody listen.” we as part of the younger generations are breaking old traditions. I would also like to add the use of photography in the beginning. It’s showing the traditions and environment around the natives that are so wonderful.
My questions: How can we maintain the history and traditions among modern society so we don’t lose it entirely? Is there a way to save it?
Bill Neidjie, “Gagudju Man,” is a traditional aboriginal tale, set in prose. The language is plain, however many profound themes are expressed throughout the piece, indicative of most of the same tradition. Dreamtime, aboriginal lore derived from a lucid state of being, in tune with Earth’s gravitational pull begins with the universe, ending with stories told by man. On page 43 he speaks of the Environment, descriptions of trees and their life cycle, equal and no different from himself, noting “all the same as blood in my arm.” This in relation to the cutting of, one could liken as a microcosm in the dangers of deforestation as taken today. Same as the Earth, same of it’s water, the sky, clouds and the star, that which will “stay forever and ever.”
What similarities do you find, that court to the semblance of harmony between yourself and nature, in regard to your own belief?
I really enjoyed the simplicity of “Gagudju Man”. You don’t need all the extra words to get a point across. His story, although taboo to tell, was true and honest from his point of view. I believe that Bill was pointing out that everything comes from the earth – and everything will return to the earth. There is a ‘natural’ law or even a ‘natural’ occurrence of events and if you break them – there are consequences. Monetary objects don’t change the law and birth and death will come and go. What I found interesting is that the simplicity of his life was enough. I almost relate his writing to that of Gandhi and how ‘less’ doesn’t constitute a leaser way of living (IE: poverty, sadness, hunger). Less may mean happiness.
Bill understood that telling his story is ‘breaking law’ but he also understood, it might not really matter since he was the last of his tribe. I wonder if there were still more people from the same tribe, would Bill have still written his story –
When reading the story “Gagudju Man”, it seems to me like it has some opposite relation with ceremony. In ceremony, we see things are changing like how Tayo is changing to become more in tune with his culture. But when we look at “Gagudju Man” we see in the reading that things are not supposed to change. For example on page 33 it states “‘You got to keep law.”What for?’ I said.’No matter we die but that law, you got to keep it”. How can traditional culture say relevant within the younger generation of people? Is there any way to preserve it and prevent it from dying out?
In “Gagudju Man”, Bill Neidjie’s story of Aboriginal culture is not so different from “Ceremony”. In both stories, carry on the importance of storytelling, teaching, and ceremony. Neidjie tells of the loss of knowledge and traditions in younger generations. If elders do not pass on to the knowledge or if the young do not listen to elders, there is a great loss. The way things should be are forgotten. Neidjie tells us, “They tell me ‘Big catfish, we got him plenty.’ I say ‘Should be ten times size of that’” (37). The old had always carried it on. Neidjie says,
“You look now … Nobody with me. This old man here (Iyanuk, Felix Holmes) he with me, but we don’t have a dozen behind us. So, we must stay on. Look after and teach. All my uncle gone, but this story I got him. They told me. They taught me and I can feel it” (38).
In the conclusion, Neidjie continues the mantra of “blood and bone” and an unchanging law of the Earth seen throughout the story. The blood and bone is a connection amongst all people no matter their origin or place. The unchanging law of the Earth is that it prevails, we all return to it like the rotting tree. Neidjie states, “this story is important” (55). For what reason is it important? Our bodies return to ash and dust, our spirit goes on, but our stories may continue with the living. Is the audience then everyone? Is this a story of the Earth, shared with white Europeans or is it more so about them?
Neidjie mentions frequently throughout The Words of Bill Neidjie that within his culture nature is at the center of it, and when questioned about why this is, he states that this is because that’s the law. These laws that Neidjie references have always been around and never change, therefore nature has always been at the center of their society and their priorities. Niedjie states: “Law never change,
always stay same.
Maybe it hard,
but proper one for all people.”
When I was first reading this poem on laws it almost made me envious because I wish that our society had laws that focused on the well being of nature, this would lead to a more agrarian society and less climate change and natural disasters. Niedjie also mentions his displeasure for how European laws are built and how they are never constant:
“Not like white European law,
always changing.
If you don’t like it,
you can change.”
After some thought I realized that it would be horrible if our laws never changed considering what a terrible track record European society has, and that’s putting it lightly. For Neidjie’s society, keeping the same laws has worked for them, but I wonder if there are any laws that were negative that he did not mention? Prioritizing nature is very important and the laws were successful in that sense, but is this poem on laws a view through rose colored glasses? And also, would European/Western society ever be able to consistently prioritize nature though laws like this? Would Western society ever be able to empathize with nature on this level and channel that into creating laws?
One main point I’ve found very powerful thus far in reading Parable of the Sower and other works by Bill Neidjie, is the strong connection that is made throughout the writing between humans and nature and how strong of a presence nature has in the importance of these stories and these people. In Gagudju Man, there is a quote that says, “each man he stay, stay on his own country. He can’t move his country so he stay here, stay with his language. Language is different, like skin. Skin can be different but blood same” (21). This quote in particular really speaks to the importance of remaining true to one’s self and one’s origins, and even how important the land is to certain people. As we talked about in class, the quote, “Rock stays, earth stays. I die and put my bones in cave or earth. Soon my bones becomes earth, all the same” speaks even more to the importance of earth and the return of bodies to the earth where they belong (54). There were several other points made about nature and the connection between that and humans, like in saying that the trees and grass grow with your body and what you feel, and how when these bits of nature are killed you’re able to feel it. My question is whether or not Neidjie or anyone else would see the returning of yourself to the land when you die as part of repairing the land? If people are able to feel when parts of nature are being destroyed, would nature, from these perspectives, feel when it’s “gifted” a body? Are these points more separated than I’m making them, or does my question even really matter? I would think Neidjie would’ve also wanted to understand how nature feels and the full interaction between humans and nature, but am I missing the mark?
When reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie I found it interesting how the idea of law never changing was expressed. He states,
“We can’t break law.
No, we can’t break law.
That frill-neck lizard done it first,
Now look how thin he is.
That his own fault.
He spoilt ceremony.”
If we were to act like this in our society and be more precise and direct with how we do things would we have a better functioning society? Would we eat less fast food for example, or waste less? What if we held each other to such standards? I find this an interesting thing to think about because I believe that typically we hold attitudes of ‘don’t tell me how to live or what to do’. I think this is a clear side effect of the individualistic culture in which we reside. Or is a change in the law a good thing? In Ceremony, they stated that things that do not change are dead things. Or does Neidjie’s text offer another idea surrounding change and the sacredness of things’ permanence?
On pages 18- 21, the poem ‘He can’t move his country’ describes the way that Aborigine people live and how they differ from white peoples lives. The first stanza describes how Aborigine people look after the earth and that they do not consider fire to be scary thing. To Aborigine people, fire is not something to be feared, but just another element of nature and a way to maintain the environment. As the poem describes, when something is burnt, it grows again, or “new life all over.” In comparison, white people changed that. The poem continues, describing how white people have caused the loss of Aborigine culture and the population has dwindled down to only a few Aborigine people left. White people first had to go to the Aborigine people to ask them about the environment and how to live, and yet the white people made schools and forced Aborigine people to attend. In this poem, it seems that the fault of colonization is laid back onto the shoulders of white people, whereas in the story of the witches, indigenous shouldered some of the blame. Additionally, the poem continues to to explain that both white and white aborigine people have the capacity to be good. Bill finishing with saying, “I was keeping this story myself. It was secret in my mind but I see what other people doing and I was feeling sad.” This poem makes me wonder if Native, Indigenous and Aborigine people all over the world have attempted to place blame or reason why colonization happen. What kind of stories are they? Did Bill Neidjie communicate with other Indigenous people about the reasons of colonization? Other than this poem, are there other references to origin of colonization that I missed? Also, this is off topic, but what is the reference to Toyota? Does that require some context to understand?
Reading Neidjie’s writing was interesting as it is a much different style than most of what we have read this semester. Similar to sections of Ceremony, Neidjie utilizes poems to express the relationship between an individual, culture, and nature. The reading begins with the statement, “I give you this story.” Neidjie throughout his poetry emphasizes this idea that stories are what define one’s existence and connection to the living world. Neidjie mentions ceremonies but in a different context than the ones in Silko’s work. Breaking ceremony is portrayed as unlawful and an aboriginal never breaks the law. Breaking the law is something that cannot be changed, just like the ceremonies. Silko’s writing contradicts this it is often described that for one to discover the culture, the ceremonies must change as time goes on. Neidjie on the other hand says, “You break the law, you’ll be skinny, you won’t grow more. People will see you like that” (29). With both works discussing ceremonies and cultural discovery, why do you think the way to go about it is so different? Do you think that tradition can truly not be passed down if ceremonies and the law are not followed? Does Neidjie do this intentionally to demonstrate that like Earth, tradition must not go away?
Like Ceremony, Gagudju Man expresses how stories are vital for the preservation of knowledge and practices throughout generations. Particularly, Neidjie uses this story as a means to pass down Gagudju laws upon younger generations. These laws have a purpose of preserving and respecting the land, and respecting all life within it, as each person and being is a part of the Earth. “We come from earth, bones. We go to earth, ashes” (31). Yet, Neidjie tells this story due to the difficulty of younger generations following the laws. “When they get yam, leave hole. I say ‘Who leave that hole? Cover him up!’ They say ‘We forget.’ I tell them “You leaving hole. You killing yam. You killing yourself. You hang onto your country. That one I fight for. I got him. Now he’s yours. I’ll be dead, I’ll be coming to earth’” (25). Unlike Ceremony, Neidjie asserts that these laws cannot change. “Laws never change; always stay same. Maybe it hard, but proper one for all people. Not like white European law, always changing” (22). In a struggle for land rights and a changing landscape, how can these laws remain the same?
While reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie, there were some parts that stuck out to me. Specifically, the section titled “Death” had some interesting points made. It helps to see the way that people and nature are connected and talks about the way that people live on earth relative to the legacy they will eventually leave in the end. One of the quotes from it is, “When you maybe forty years, might be fifty years old, you feel pain in your back, because you cut tree” (Neidjie, p. 52). I really liked this quote because of how well it applies to the actions of humanity today. Some people may not be too concerned with the way the earth is being treated because it does not directly affect them. However, what they don’t realize is that their actions today will bring consequences to them or future generations another day in the future. This also speaks to the interconnectedness of people and nature and how harming nature is harming yourself. Another section that stood out to me was titled “land.” This part looks at the way money has such a big impact on people’s actions, and it also talked about the legacy people will leave behind on the earth for themselves as well as the generations after them. One of the best quotes from this section states, “Million no good for us. We need this earth to live because we’ll be dead, we’ll become earth” (Neidjie, p. 31). This is relevant to the way that people care so much more about making money for themselves until they die. Instead, people should focus more on their relationship with nature and how that can keep someone happy rather than trying to make a set amount of money every year.
How can we shift our culture and actions towards a stronger relationship with and/or respect for nature?
How can we better people’s understanding of the impacts they have on the environment and the future consequences they may face?
In reading Parable of the Sower I am becoming interested in the depiction of nature i relation to religion and the daily occurrences of the characters in the book. They seem connected in a lot of ways in terms of the tonality they bring to the book and the implications of foreshadowing they, as in the weather, might be trying to foreshadow. Quite obviously, a large theme in the book is the shifting climate and ecological disaster, but in Chapter 5 I seemed to pick up on a sort of parallelism between the rain and the events that were happening to the characters. Specifically, I notice climate and catastrophe anxiety in relation to cultural identity and political uncertainty. In chapter 5 we see a lot of rain occurring… but the rain is punctuated by the death of Amy Dunn. How does the mundanity of Amy’s death illuminate the rather removed and uncaring tone of the novel? In what ways is this important in framing the context of the novel and the sentiments towards life and death the characters have?
In Gagudju Man on page 31 this is quoted, “Him can make million dollars, but only last one year” and this entire section titled “Land” in general really spoke to me especially after the video we watched in class about the Alaskan natives and their fight for their land. The Land Back movement has also been something I’m very passionate about for a long time especially as I started doing research about the native lands in Appalachia. The above quote I decided to highlight because it is a good parallel to the previous book Ceremony we were reading, because of the section about Tayo criticizing the white man that put fences around his land. In relation to Gagudju Man I think Tayo would relate to this passage especially because he’d agree that Man gains, but it never enough they aren’t satisfied as ultimately leads to unhappiness and metaphorical deprivation. Later in the “Land” passage this is quoted, “Million no good for us.We need this earth to live because we’ll be dead, we’ll become earth”, and this really resonates to the idea of Ceremony as reclamation to the land and heritage is a key theme. I really like the “Environment” passage which is right after “Land” as it also highlights the significance of ancestors and the fact the environment is ever changing but also the same like using the same practices through generations and touching the same river, but it is different.
Is their hope for Man to learn satisfaction in a sustainable way, where he wont need a million dollars a year?
Similarities that can be drawn from Ceremony, Ch. 1-6 of Parable of the Sower, and Gagudju Man are different expressions of the relationships that exist between humans and their environments. For example, in Parable of the Sower, the main character expresses sensations of hyper-empathy that are especially triggered when confronted with the surrounding destruction and despair that is prevalent within her environment. In Gagudju Man, it is expressed, “I feel it with my body, with my blood. Feeling all these trees, all this country. When this wind blow you can feel it” (39). In Ceremony, Tayo performs rituals such as placing yellow pollen in animal tracks, and carrying with him a blue feather that belonged to his uncle. All of these examples express the idea that individuals have a profound impact on their surrounding physical environment, and similarly, that the condition of the surrounding physical environment has a strong impact on humans. Do these examples of human/environment interactions, as well as others that can be found throughout the recently assigned readings, reflect spiritual sentiments? Are human/environment interactions and identity related, if so how?
In Parable of the Sower, Butler’s choice of using journal entries to tell Lauren’s story stood out to me. In other books I’ve read, that style has mostly been reserved for nonfiction books of true accounts or suspense novels, so seeing it written in speculative fiction was new and intriguing. I am curious about what other people think of Butler’s style choice? And more specifically, the significance (if there is any) in choosing that to portray the experience of a youth character?
One thing that stood out to me while reading Gagudju Man, was the discussion between the Moon and the Native Cat. Neidjie is explaining what happens after death and how once you die you go back to be with the earth. The Moon states that “’These people will die, but they’ll come back like I do. They’ll come back to be earth again’” while the Native Cat responds with, “’No, they will be dead and never come back’”. Neidjie then states that he will become earth and how “This story for all people. Everybody should be listening. Same story for everyone, just different language” (49). Why do you think there is a strong connection/ importance in the land and going back to be earth for Neidjie? And why do you think it is meant for all people to hear?
I really like how Gagudju Man is very simple yet has a very powerful meaning. A lot of authors will put filler information but Neidjie gets the point across with little to no “fluff” information. I really like this stanza, “We must get rain.
Law says we get rain.
He come along wet season
and go dry season.
Rain come down
and give us new fresh water.
Plants coming up new.
Yam, creeper, all plants new.
Then we get fruit, honey and things to live.” (24)
This stanza makes me think about the water cycle and Earth having a system in regard to all things living and dead. Additionally, Neidjie is talking about how the Earth provides all necessities and things we need to live. Through modernization and technology we have drifted away from our necessities and are more focused on our wants. Does Earth provide you with not only any needs but wants as well?
As I was reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie, I noticed how important relationships are between humans and nature. Neidjie describes in his poems that the connectedness between everything, is what makes life, life. Neidjie says, “We come from earth, bones. We go to earth, ashes” (31) and “Same for animal. People look for food, animal look for food. Lizard look, bird look, anyone look. We all same” (23). As I started reading Parable of the Sower, I couldn’t help but think about the condition Lauren has: hyper empathy. When she sees another person experience pain, she can also literally feel that pain. As I was thinking about her connection to other human feelings, I thought about the connection Neidjie describes between humans and nature. He states, “If you feel sore, headache, sore body, that mean somebody killing tree or grass” (41). I see hyperempathy here between humans and nature. I wonder if as I read further into Parable of the Sower I will see this same hyper empathy occurring between Lauren and nature as described by Neidjie.
Is it possible to feel the pain that, for example, a tree feels as it is being cut down? Why has our world moved so far from Neidjie’s message about the interconnectedness of life? How can our society go back to where we are connected with the land and earth? Once we find this connection again, will we all experience empathy when nature is destroyed; would this empathy drive us to stop destroying life on earth?
I have two different topics/questions: my first one is short, and it is really just about Bill Neidjie’s writings as a whole. As was pointed out in class, the Gagudju people were not allowed to write down stories or the law on paper; everything was recorded orally. What, then, do you think Bill’s ancestors would think or say about his poems and his spreading of their cultural knowledge? Do you believe he did the “right” thing for his people and culture? In his poem “I Give You This Story,” he writes, “No man can growl at me for telling this story, because it will be too late. I will be dead.” And while that’s true, there remains the overarching question of whether or not his people would approve of this decision.
The second is about the connection between the Native American culture in Ceremony and the Gagudju culture. In Neidjie’s poem “Land,” he writes “If you feel sore, headache, sore body, that mean somebody killing tree or grass.” This shows the belief and practice of the Gagudju culture of interconnectedness with all of creation along with their resistance to isolated illnesses/headaches/diseases etc. This connects to Ceremony and how the medicine men told Tayo that his illness is something larger than himself and involves many different problems/misalignments. Do you believe so many people are suffering from illnesses these days because of this isolation and ignorance of a broader issue? Of course, there are tangible causes for many illnesses, like contaminants, toxins, pesticides, refined sugar, etc. And then of course the biodiversity crisis and pesticide crisis and all of that good stuff. But speaking in terms of a more spiritual and holistic approach, do you believe that our collective disconnection from (and ignorance of) the non-human world and its implications has amplified our tendency to getting sick and maybe even developing allergies? Are these illnesses more or less a result of this disconnection and the destruction we have done to the natural world?
As Neidjie emphasizes, we are also earth. While the natural world is being destroyed, we are inherently destroying ourselves: “You feel because your body in that tree or earth….Tree might be sick, you feel it. You might feel it for two or three years. You get weak, little bit, little bit. Because tree going bit by bit. Dying.”
I find it interesting Parable of the Sower is a climate-fiction novel. I hadn’t heard the term before and to think even claimed as fiction, there are lessons heeded. Grappling with climate change and social inequality is familiar in the world today. In Chapter 2, Lauren who has hyper-empathy syndrome feels for the people her and family pass by on the bikes but does nothing to help. I guess that falls in line with her idea of “God is change.” Bill Neidjie relates to Lauren in not knowing ” how to pass on what I do have. I’ve got to learn to do that. It scares me how many things I’ve got to learn. How will I learn them?” Neidje went against taboo writing so that his culture may live on. Lauren’s Earthseed principle on change is a universal constant with active participation. Community survives by working together. Think on how you grapple with change and how your community works best together. How can you expand your knowledge and apply what you have learned to teach others?
Out of everything we have read I feel like Bill has had the most connection to the land we see that everyone we have talked about has had some sort of connection but Bill lives by hit through his words and actions. He lives, speaks, and does everything for his homeland and earth. How can we take these aspects and put them into perspective in today’s time we speak of lots of therapy but how can we take these methods and apply them to practice in the world that to me would make a great amount of difference especially if we apply them to the death to make it a better place and t create a better connection as he had. Reading about his life and journey it makes me feel as if I am behind in life and for love nature because he did such a great job at it. It makes me want to take off and live from the land like the Aborigine and quit living like a White man.
The reading from Bill Neidjie helped to further my understanding of the aboriginal perspective of the land. Over the summer we read ideas from the aboriginal perspective in Dr. Powell’s course Environmental Anthropology. We learned how a different style of writing and speaking is more typical for an aboriginal, especially when they are speaking of their land. A lot of times in Western culture we force other cultures to conform to our idea of writing and speech. But in the case of this reading they honored his speech style and Bill Neidjie did the same. Why is it important to read and hear this type of writing? How does it represent the people and the ideas that they are sharing?
I enjoyed reading “Gagudju Man” by Bill Neidjie. It’s always interesting and important to hear other people’s perspectives on the world and life. In a rapidly changing world that’s being consumed by the needs of the evergrowing populace, hearing the perspective of someone who still lives closely with the land is refreshing and unique. There are several parallels between Gagudju Man and Ceremony between the connection to the land and to animals, the disappearing culture, and the struggle to live in a non-consumerist way in a world only becoming more developed its easy to see the similarities between the two stories. As time goes on it becomes increasingly more important to preserve these ideas and ways of life. With a world so rapidly changing and facing the threat of climate change, the wisdom of those who have worked closely with nature will become invaluable. As time goes on what can we do to ensure that these ways of life continue to live on? What can we do to expand their practices into the everyday life of those outside of their culture? As our world becomes increasingly damaged by a changing climate how can we change our behavior to help the world heal and to adapt with the world as it changes?
The beginning of the novel provides very descriptive language and is very thorough when describing Bill’s upbringing and close relationship to his family members. Through this use of descriptive language, Neidjie illustrates the importance of cultural continuance, how traditions and customs are passed down from generation to generation. The teachings and proceedings of Bill’s family enabled him to garner a close relationship with nature and wisdom regarding his place in the natural world.
In many of Neidije’s poems, including this one, he emphasizes the need to research and pass on the stories of his people. Storytelling as an act of colonial resistance and rewriting of history has been an essential theme in the last two writings we have discussed. Remembrance of generational stories is a way to secure the identity and culture of indigenous peoples. His poem also discusses the ignorance of white Europeans to their stories/history. I interpreted this as him stating that this is a problem that needs to be solved by western acceptance of indigenous storytelling. I wonder in what way, besides novels and poetry, native storytelling could enter the collective consciousness and history of our society. As he alludes to in this poem, many of their stories hold the pain of genocide and assimilation, which makes them it would be challenging to listen to. I interpreted the last part of this as him saying that only aboriginal people can effectively validate their history, which is deeply intertwined with their land. This segment partially answered my question: the expanse of aboriginal stories needs to be broadcasted by only aboriginal people and coupled with the land. How can their storytelling reach new heights following these methods?
The theme of the book “Gagudju Man” is the spiritual and physical relationship that natives had with the environment. This goes not only for Australian natives, but for all natives. The relationship they have is an awakening and enlightening scope in our modern relationship with the envionment, and how climate change relates to our relationship and their relationship.
What you want to do?
If you touch,
you might get cyclone, heavy rain or flood.
Not just here,
you might kill someone in another place.
might be kill him in another country.
you cannot touch him
These very important places,
but we frightened that European might touch him.
If we tell white European story,
he slow to listen.
If we get little big wild,
he might listen. But slow.’
To what extent did colonialism and imperialism prevent the spreading of indiginous knowledge about sustainable relationships with the environemnt?
The first thing that stood out to me when reading Bill Neidjie’s poem was the simplicity of the sentence structure, the prose. I believe that the writing in prose allowed the theme of the poem the shine through and be understood by a large majority of readers, allowing the message to resonate with a lot of people. The message and idea that everyone should understand this story is outlined when Neidjie writes, “We have to keep pressure on young people to learn. They must learn these things”. There seems to be a theme of connection between all things in this story, even between young and old people, and I believe it is told this way to exhibit how an older person tells a younger person a story. My question is, did Neidjie write this story in a way was meant to resemble the storytelling and teaching methods that old people deliver to young people? I wonder if he intended to tell this story as a sort of grandfather figure, as the people of the world would be considered the learners, or children that need to hear the message.
When reading Bill Neidjes poem the spirituality really stuck out to me. My perception has always been that religion and spirituality can be related to nature but it separate from it. The poem spoke that they are one and the same for Bill. I interpret this message in the way that your spirituality and beliefs need to include that human beings will always be intermingled with the natural no matter how far science and technology develop. We are still organisms and will eventually return to the Earth. The human perogative should be exploring your own nature and beliefs. This is why i especially like Bill Neidjie’s quote, “It scares me how many things I’ve got to learn. How will I learn them?”. I admire his willingness to express his vulnerability and ignorance. We all spend a lifetime learning about ourselves and what is our purpose. My question is, what would Bill Neidjie say if you asked him how to find your purpose? What do you think the way is?
Reading the beginning of this section is incredible. It explains so much more in depth about the history of the Aborigine than anything produced by settlers. This is very important to take note of. A society that has a lot of its history written down is one that is remembered. It is important to understand that every culture has history and it matters if it is written down. Thankfully Bill Neidjie has taken time to teach us about his heritage which is beautiful and needs to be preserved not only for the white and settler classroom, but also the whole world. Do you think this collection of poems should be recommended for earlier education, maybe upper middle school or definitely highschool?
I belong to this earth.
Soon my bones become earth … all the same.
My spirit has gone back to my country … my mother.
Now my children got to hang onto this story …
I hang onto this story all my life.
My children can’t lose it.
I love this poem as it shows that we are a part of nature, always have been, and always will be, generation after generation. The spirituality in regard to nature really resonates with me, as my spirituality is very nature based. I value that this is clearly a spoken poem, as it talks about it being a story that their children must hang onto. My question is, do you have any family, origin stories?
I really enjoy how simple and straightforward Gagudju Man is. It portrays a very powerful message without a lot of unnecessary words. This is an honest story and really helped to prove the point that knowledge passed down through stories is extremely important to us today. It also emphasizes that Earth has much of what we need to survive and the focus on overconsumption of material goods has shifted our visions in the wrong direction. Do you agree with Neidjie saying that the Earth provides us with all of our needs and wants? Why or why not? Do you think we could ever shift to a society that truly only relies on the earth?
A reoccuring concept in Gagudju is the constants surrounding the desire to Not change. In most things in life, and most of our readings, change is necessary. Encouraged even in some cases. With quotes like:
We can’t break law.
No, we can’t break law…
…We can’t change it.
That’s law.
it is apparent that Neidjie values the importance of constants and sees it as necessary. I’m curious as to in a broad sense, is change good or bad? Too much change can be dangerous, as well as changes in the wrong direction. However, staying the same can be an inhibitor. When sticking to traditions, is it best to forever hold them exactly as they were held in the beginning? Or should things, even sacred, shift with time to more closely coincide with changing times and values?
SD 3800 Voices in Sustainable Development 
One of the first things I noticed while reading Gagudiju Man was the different perspective on change than the one discussed while reading Ceremony. Although these books take place in different areas of the world and are about different groups of people, they both discuss the perspectives and livelihoods of people native to the land the story surrounds, which is why I thought this difference may be important to note. In Ceremony, Betonie says, ‘Things that don’t shift and grow are dead things.” This is almost the opposite perspective than the Aboriginal people. In Gagudiju Man, page 22 reads, “Law never change, always stay same. Maybe it hard, but proper one for all people. Not like white European law, always changing. If you don’t like it, you can change. Aboriginal law never change. Old people tell us, ‘You got to keep it’ It always stays the same.” To Tayo, Betonie, and their people, things change and grow because they are living and alive. To the Aboriginal people, change is not necessary. How can the different beliefs of change be seen through practices, people, and livelihoods when looking at each culture separately?
While this reading is different from our Ceremony reading I see many of the same perspectives. Through the introduction we are introduced to the failed attempts of building native relationships. While Neidije took Lang under his wing to understand the true relationships in the spirit of the land. They focus on the ideas that the younger generation either isn’t interested or wiling to understand ancient traditions. Such as on page 26 where he states “All that. That way I explained, but young, they don’t get it. New generation no good, nobody listen.” we as part of the younger generations are breaking old traditions. I would also like to add the use of photography in the beginning. It’s showing the traditions and environment around the natives that are so wonderful.
My questions: How can we maintain the history and traditions among modern society so we don’t lose it entirely? Is there a way to save it?
Bill Neidjie, “Gagudju Man,” is a traditional aboriginal tale, set in prose. The language is plain, however many profound themes are expressed throughout the piece, indicative of most of the same tradition. Dreamtime, aboriginal lore derived from a lucid state of being, in tune with Earth’s gravitational pull begins with the universe, ending with stories told by man. On page 43 he speaks of the Environment, descriptions of trees and their life cycle, equal and no different from himself, noting “all the same as blood in my arm.” This in relation to the cutting of, one could liken as a microcosm in the dangers of deforestation as taken today. Same as the Earth, same of it’s water, the sky, clouds and the star, that which will “stay forever and ever.”
What similarities do you find, that court to the semblance of harmony between yourself and nature, in regard to your own belief?
I really enjoyed the simplicity of “Gagudju Man”. You don’t need all the extra words to get a point across. His story, although taboo to tell, was true and honest from his point of view. I believe that Bill was pointing out that everything comes from the earth – and everything will return to the earth. There is a ‘natural’ law or even a ‘natural’ occurrence of events and if you break them – there are consequences. Monetary objects don’t change the law and birth and death will come and go. What I found interesting is that the simplicity of his life was enough. I almost relate his writing to that of Gandhi and how ‘less’ doesn’t constitute a leaser way of living (IE: poverty, sadness, hunger). Less may mean happiness.
Bill understood that telling his story is ‘breaking law’ but he also understood, it might not really matter since he was the last of his tribe. I wonder if there were still more people from the same tribe, would Bill have still written his story –
When reading the story “Gagudju Man”, it seems to me like it has some opposite relation with ceremony. In ceremony, we see things are changing like how Tayo is changing to become more in tune with his culture. But when we look at “Gagudju Man” we see in the reading that things are not supposed to change. For example on page 33 it states “‘You got to keep law.”What for?’ I said.’No matter we die but that law, you got to keep it”. How can traditional culture say relevant within the younger generation of people? Is there any way to preserve it and prevent it from dying out?
In “Gagudju Man”, Bill Neidjie’s story of Aboriginal culture is not so different from “Ceremony”. In both stories, carry on the importance of storytelling, teaching, and ceremony. Neidjie tells of the loss of knowledge and traditions in younger generations. If elders do not pass on to the knowledge or if the young do not listen to elders, there is a great loss. The way things should be are forgotten. Neidjie tells us, “They tell me ‘Big catfish, we got him plenty.’ I say ‘Should be ten times size of that’” (37). The old had always carried it on. Neidjie says,
“You look now … Nobody with me. This old man here (Iyanuk, Felix Holmes) he with me, but we don’t have a dozen behind us. So, we must stay on. Look after and teach. All my uncle gone, but this story I got him. They told me. They taught me and I can feel it” (38).
In the conclusion, Neidjie continues the mantra of “blood and bone” and an unchanging law of the Earth seen throughout the story. The blood and bone is a connection amongst all people no matter their origin or place. The unchanging law of the Earth is that it prevails, we all return to it like the rotting tree. Neidjie states, “this story is important” (55). For what reason is it important? Our bodies return to ash and dust, our spirit goes on, but our stories may continue with the living. Is the audience then everyone? Is this a story of the Earth, shared with white Europeans or is it more so about them?
Neidjie mentions frequently throughout The Words of Bill Neidjie that within his culture nature is at the center of it, and when questioned about why this is, he states that this is because that’s the law. These laws that Neidjie references have always been around and never change, therefore nature has always been at the center of their society and their priorities. Niedjie states: “Law never change,
always stay same.
Maybe it hard,
but proper one for all people.”
When I was first reading this poem on laws it almost made me envious because I wish that our society had laws that focused on the well being of nature, this would lead to a more agrarian society and less climate change and natural disasters. Niedjie also mentions his displeasure for how European laws are built and how they are never constant:
“Not like white European law,
always changing.
If you don’t like it,
you can change.”
After some thought I realized that it would be horrible if our laws never changed considering what a terrible track record European society has, and that’s putting it lightly. For Neidjie’s society, keeping the same laws has worked for them, but I wonder if there are any laws that were negative that he did not mention? Prioritizing nature is very important and the laws were successful in that sense, but is this poem on laws a view through rose colored glasses? And also, would European/Western society ever be able to consistently prioritize nature though laws like this? Would Western society ever be able to empathize with nature on this level and channel that into creating laws?
One main point I’ve found very powerful thus far in reading Parable of the Sower and other works by Bill Neidjie, is the strong connection that is made throughout the writing between humans and nature and how strong of a presence nature has in the importance of these stories and these people. In Gagudju Man, there is a quote that says, “each man he stay, stay on his own country. He can’t move his country so he stay here, stay with his language. Language is different, like skin. Skin can be different but blood same” (21). This quote in particular really speaks to the importance of remaining true to one’s self and one’s origins, and even how important the land is to certain people. As we talked about in class, the quote, “Rock stays, earth stays. I die and put my bones in cave or earth. Soon my bones becomes earth, all the same” speaks even more to the importance of earth and the return of bodies to the earth where they belong (54). There were several other points made about nature and the connection between that and humans, like in saying that the trees and grass grow with your body and what you feel, and how when these bits of nature are killed you’re able to feel it. My question is whether or not Neidjie or anyone else would see the returning of yourself to the land when you die as part of repairing the land? If people are able to feel when parts of nature are being destroyed, would nature, from these perspectives, feel when it’s “gifted” a body? Are these points more separated than I’m making them, or does my question even really matter? I would think Neidjie would’ve also wanted to understand how nature feels and the full interaction between humans and nature, but am I missing the mark?
– Hayden Hill
When reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie I found it interesting how the idea of law never changing was expressed. He states,
“We can’t break law.
No, we can’t break law.
That frill-neck lizard done it first,
Now look how thin he is.
That his own fault.
He spoilt ceremony.”
If we were to act like this in our society and be more precise and direct with how we do things would we have a better functioning society? Would we eat less fast food for example, or waste less? What if we held each other to such standards? I find this an interesting thing to think about because I believe that typically we hold attitudes of ‘don’t tell me how to live or what to do’. I think this is a clear side effect of the individualistic culture in which we reside. Or is a change in the law a good thing? In Ceremony, they stated that things that do not change are dead things. Or does Neidjie’s text offer another idea surrounding change and the sacredness of things’ permanence?
On pages 18- 21, the poem ‘He can’t move his country’ describes the way that Aborigine people live and how they differ from white peoples lives. The first stanza describes how Aborigine people look after the earth and that they do not consider fire to be scary thing. To Aborigine people, fire is not something to be feared, but just another element of nature and a way to maintain the environment. As the poem describes, when something is burnt, it grows again, or “new life all over.” In comparison, white people changed that. The poem continues, describing how white people have caused the loss of Aborigine culture and the population has dwindled down to only a few Aborigine people left. White people first had to go to the Aborigine people to ask them about the environment and how to live, and yet the white people made schools and forced Aborigine people to attend. In this poem, it seems that the fault of colonization is laid back onto the shoulders of white people, whereas in the story of the witches, indigenous shouldered some of the blame. Additionally, the poem continues to to explain that both white and white aborigine people have the capacity to be good. Bill finishing with saying, “I was keeping this story myself. It was secret in my mind but I see what other people doing and I was feeling sad.” This poem makes me wonder if Native, Indigenous and Aborigine people all over the world have attempted to place blame or reason why colonization happen. What kind of stories are they? Did Bill Neidjie communicate with other Indigenous people about the reasons of colonization? Other than this poem, are there other references to origin of colonization that I missed? Also, this is off topic, but what is the reference to Toyota? Does that require some context to understand?
Reading Neidjie’s writing was interesting as it is a much different style than most of what we have read this semester. Similar to sections of Ceremony, Neidjie utilizes poems to express the relationship between an individual, culture, and nature. The reading begins with the statement, “I give you this story.” Neidjie throughout his poetry emphasizes this idea that stories are what define one’s existence and connection to the living world. Neidjie mentions ceremonies but in a different context than the ones in Silko’s work. Breaking ceremony is portrayed as unlawful and an aboriginal never breaks the law. Breaking the law is something that cannot be changed, just like the ceremonies. Silko’s writing contradicts this it is often described that for one to discover the culture, the ceremonies must change as time goes on. Neidjie on the other hand says, “You break the law, you’ll be skinny, you won’t grow more. People will see you like that” (29). With both works discussing ceremonies and cultural discovery, why do you think the way to go about it is so different? Do you think that tradition can truly not be passed down if ceremonies and the law are not followed? Does Neidjie do this intentionally to demonstrate that like Earth, tradition must not go away?
Like Ceremony, Gagudju Man expresses how stories are vital for the preservation of knowledge and practices throughout generations. Particularly, Neidjie uses this story as a means to pass down Gagudju laws upon younger generations. These laws have a purpose of preserving and respecting the land, and respecting all life within it, as each person and being is a part of the Earth. “We come from earth, bones. We go to earth, ashes” (31). Yet, Neidjie tells this story due to the difficulty of younger generations following the laws. “When they get yam, leave hole. I say ‘Who leave that hole? Cover him up!’ They say ‘We forget.’ I tell them “You leaving hole. You killing yam. You killing yourself. You hang onto your country. That one I fight for. I got him. Now he’s yours. I’ll be dead, I’ll be coming to earth’” (25). Unlike Ceremony, Neidjie asserts that these laws cannot change. “Laws never change; always stay same. Maybe it hard, but proper one for all people. Not like white European law, always changing” (22). In a struggle for land rights and a changing landscape, how can these laws remain the same?
While reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie, there were some parts that stuck out to me. Specifically, the section titled “Death” had some interesting points made. It helps to see the way that people and nature are connected and talks about the way that people live on earth relative to the legacy they will eventually leave in the end. One of the quotes from it is, “When you maybe forty years, might be fifty years old, you feel pain in your back, because you cut tree” (Neidjie, p. 52). I really liked this quote because of how well it applies to the actions of humanity today. Some people may not be too concerned with the way the earth is being treated because it does not directly affect them. However, what they don’t realize is that their actions today will bring consequences to them or future generations another day in the future. This also speaks to the interconnectedness of people and nature and how harming nature is harming yourself. Another section that stood out to me was titled “land.” This part looks at the way money has such a big impact on people’s actions, and it also talked about the legacy people will leave behind on the earth for themselves as well as the generations after them. One of the best quotes from this section states, “Million no good for us. We need this earth to live because we’ll be dead, we’ll become earth” (Neidjie, p. 31). This is relevant to the way that people care so much more about making money for themselves until they die. Instead, people should focus more on their relationship with nature and how that can keep someone happy rather than trying to make a set amount of money every year.
How can we shift our culture and actions towards a stronger relationship with and/or respect for nature?
How can we better people’s understanding of the impacts they have on the environment and the future consequences they may face?
In reading Parable of the Sower I am becoming interested in the depiction of nature i relation to religion and the daily occurrences of the characters in the book. They seem connected in a lot of ways in terms of the tonality they bring to the book and the implications of foreshadowing they, as in the weather, might be trying to foreshadow. Quite obviously, a large theme in the book is the shifting climate and ecological disaster, but in Chapter 5 I seemed to pick up on a sort of parallelism between the rain and the events that were happening to the characters. Specifically, I notice climate and catastrophe anxiety in relation to cultural identity and political uncertainty. In chapter 5 we see a lot of rain occurring… but the rain is punctuated by the death of Amy Dunn. How does the mundanity of Amy’s death illuminate the rather removed and uncaring tone of the novel? In what ways is this important in framing the context of the novel and the sentiments towards life and death the characters have?
In Gagudju Man on page 31 this is quoted, “Him can make million dollars, but only last one year” and this entire section titled “Land” in general really spoke to me especially after the video we watched in class about the Alaskan natives and their fight for their land. The Land Back movement has also been something I’m very passionate about for a long time especially as I started doing research about the native lands in Appalachia. The above quote I decided to highlight because it is a good parallel to the previous book Ceremony we were reading, because of the section about Tayo criticizing the white man that put fences around his land. In relation to Gagudju Man I think Tayo would relate to this passage especially because he’d agree that Man gains, but it never enough they aren’t satisfied as ultimately leads to unhappiness and metaphorical deprivation. Later in the “Land” passage this is quoted, “Million no good for us.We need this earth to live because we’ll be dead, we’ll become earth”, and this really resonates to the idea of Ceremony as reclamation to the land and heritage is a key theme. I really like the “Environment” passage which is right after “Land” as it also highlights the significance of ancestors and the fact the environment is ever changing but also the same like using the same practices through generations and touching the same river, but it is different.
Is their hope for Man to learn satisfaction in a sustainable way, where he wont need a million dollars a year?
Similarities that can be drawn from Ceremony, Ch. 1-6 of Parable of the Sower, and Gagudju Man are different expressions of the relationships that exist between humans and their environments. For example, in Parable of the Sower, the main character expresses sensations of hyper-empathy that are especially triggered when confronted with the surrounding destruction and despair that is prevalent within her environment. In Gagudju Man, it is expressed, “I feel it with my body, with my blood. Feeling all these trees, all this country. When this wind blow you can feel it” (39). In Ceremony, Tayo performs rituals such as placing yellow pollen in animal tracks, and carrying with him a blue feather that belonged to his uncle. All of these examples express the idea that individuals have a profound impact on their surrounding physical environment, and similarly, that the condition of the surrounding physical environment has a strong impact on humans. Do these examples of human/environment interactions, as well as others that can be found throughout the recently assigned readings, reflect spiritual sentiments? Are human/environment interactions and identity related, if so how?
In Parable of the Sower, Butler’s choice of using journal entries to tell Lauren’s story stood out to me. In other books I’ve read, that style has mostly been reserved for nonfiction books of true accounts or suspense novels, so seeing it written in speculative fiction was new and intriguing. I am curious about what other people think of Butler’s style choice? And more specifically, the significance (if there is any) in choosing that to portray the experience of a youth character?
One thing that stood out to me while reading Gagudju Man, was the discussion between the Moon and the Native Cat. Neidjie is explaining what happens after death and how once you die you go back to be with the earth. The Moon states that “’These people will die, but they’ll come back like I do. They’ll come back to be earth again’” while the Native Cat responds with, “’No, they will be dead and never come back’”. Neidjie then states that he will become earth and how “This story for all people. Everybody should be listening. Same story for everyone, just different language” (49). Why do you think there is a strong connection/ importance in the land and going back to be earth for Neidjie? And why do you think it is meant for all people to hear?
I really like how Gagudju Man is very simple yet has a very powerful meaning. A lot of authors will put filler information but Neidjie gets the point across with little to no “fluff” information. I really like this stanza, “We must get rain.
Law says we get rain.
He come along wet season
and go dry season.
Rain come down
and give us new fresh water.
Plants coming up new.
Yam, creeper, all plants new.
Then we get fruit, honey and things to live.” (24)
This stanza makes me think about the water cycle and Earth having a system in regard to all things living and dead. Additionally, Neidjie is talking about how the Earth provides all necessities and things we need to live. Through modernization and technology we have drifted away from our necessities and are more focused on our wants. Does Earth provide you with not only any needs but wants as well?
As I was reading Gagudju Man by Bill Neidjie, I noticed how important relationships are between humans and nature. Neidjie describes in his poems that the connectedness between everything, is what makes life, life. Neidjie says, “We come from earth, bones. We go to earth, ashes” (31) and “Same for animal. People look for food, animal look for food. Lizard look, bird look, anyone look. We all same” (23). As I started reading Parable of the Sower, I couldn’t help but think about the condition Lauren has: hyper empathy. When she sees another person experience pain, she can also literally feel that pain. As I was thinking about her connection to other human feelings, I thought about the connection Neidjie describes between humans and nature. He states, “If you feel sore, headache, sore body, that mean somebody killing tree or grass” (41). I see hyperempathy here between humans and nature. I wonder if as I read further into Parable of the Sower I will see this same hyper empathy occurring between Lauren and nature as described by Neidjie.
Is it possible to feel the pain that, for example, a tree feels as it is being cut down? Why has our world moved so far from Neidjie’s message about the interconnectedness of life? How can our society go back to where we are connected with the land and earth? Once we find this connection again, will we all experience empathy when nature is destroyed; would this empathy drive us to stop destroying life on earth?
I have two different topics/questions: my first one is short, and it is really just about Bill Neidjie’s writings as a whole. As was pointed out in class, the Gagudju people were not allowed to write down stories or the law on paper; everything was recorded orally. What, then, do you think Bill’s ancestors would think or say about his poems and his spreading of their cultural knowledge? Do you believe he did the “right” thing for his people and culture? In his poem “I Give You This Story,” he writes, “No man can growl at me for telling this story, because it will be too late. I will be dead.” And while that’s true, there remains the overarching question of whether or not his people would approve of this decision.
The second is about the connection between the Native American culture in Ceremony and the Gagudju culture. In Neidjie’s poem “Land,” he writes “If you feel sore, headache, sore body, that mean somebody killing tree or grass.” This shows the belief and practice of the Gagudju culture of interconnectedness with all of creation along with their resistance to isolated illnesses/headaches/diseases etc. This connects to Ceremony and how the medicine men told Tayo that his illness is something larger than himself and involves many different problems/misalignments. Do you believe so many people are suffering from illnesses these days because of this isolation and ignorance of a broader issue? Of course, there are tangible causes for many illnesses, like contaminants, toxins, pesticides, refined sugar, etc. And then of course the biodiversity crisis and pesticide crisis and all of that good stuff. But speaking in terms of a more spiritual and holistic approach, do you believe that our collective disconnection from (and ignorance of) the non-human world and its implications has amplified our tendency to getting sick and maybe even developing allergies? Are these illnesses more or less a result of this disconnection and the destruction we have done to the natural world?
As Neidjie emphasizes, we are also earth. While the natural world is being destroyed, we are inherently destroying ourselves: “You feel because your body in that tree or earth….Tree might be sick, you feel it. You might feel it for two or three years. You get weak, little bit, little bit. Because tree going bit by bit. Dying.”
I find it interesting Parable of the Sower is a climate-fiction novel. I hadn’t heard the term before and to think even claimed as fiction, there are lessons heeded. Grappling with climate change and social inequality is familiar in the world today. In Chapter 2, Lauren who has hyper-empathy syndrome feels for the people her and family pass by on the bikes but does nothing to help. I guess that falls in line with her idea of “God is change.” Bill Neidjie relates to Lauren in not knowing ” how to pass on what I do have. I’ve got to learn to do that. It scares me how many things I’ve got to learn. How will I learn them?” Neidje went against taboo writing so that his culture may live on. Lauren’s Earthseed principle on change is a universal constant with active participation. Community survives by working together. Think on how you grapple with change and how your community works best together. How can you expand your knowledge and apply what you have learned to teach others?
Out of everything we have read I feel like Bill has had the most connection to the land we see that everyone we have talked about has had some sort of connection but Bill lives by hit through his words and actions. He lives, speaks, and does everything for his homeland and earth. How can we take these aspects and put them into perspective in today’s time we speak of lots of therapy but how can we take these methods and apply them to practice in the world that to me would make a great amount of difference especially if we apply them to the death to make it a better place and t create a better connection as he had. Reading about his life and journey it makes me feel as if I am behind in life and for love nature because he did such a great job at it. It makes me want to take off and live from the land like the Aborigine and quit living like a White man.
The reading from Bill Neidjie helped to further my understanding of the aboriginal perspective of the land. Over the summer we read ideas from the aboriginal perspective in Dr. Powell’s course Environmental Anthropology. We learned how a different style of writing and speaking is more typical for an aboriginal, especially when they are speaking of their land. A lot of times in Western culture we force other cultures to conform to our idea of writing and speech. But in the case of this reading they honored his speech style and Bill Neidjie did the same. Why is it important to read and hear this type of writing? How does it represent the people and the ideas that they are sharing?
This is Audrey Ditmore’s
I enjoyed reading “Gagudju Man” by Bill Neidjie. It’s always interesting and important to hear other people’s perspectives on the world and life. In a rapidly changing world that’s being consumed by the needs of the evergrowing populace, hearing the perspective of someone who still lives closely with the land is refreshing and unique. There are several parallels between Gagudju Man and Ceremony between the connection to the land and to animals, the disappearing culture, and the struggle to live in a non-consumerist way in a world only becoming more developed its easy to see the similarities between the two stories. As time goes on it becomes increasingly more important to preserve these ideas and ways of life. With a world so rapidly changing and facing the threat of climate change, the wisdom of those who have worked closely with nature will become invaluable. As time goes on what can we do to ensure that these ways of life continue to live on? What can we do to expand their practices into the everyday life of those outside of their culture? As our world becomes increasingly damaged by a changing climate how can we change our behavior to help the world heal and to adapt with the world as it changes?
The beginning of the novel provides very descriptive language and is very thorough when describing Bill’s upbringing and close relationship to his family members. Through this use of descriptive language, Neidjie illustrates the importance of cultural continuance, how traditions and customs are passed down from generation to generation. The teachings and proceedings of Bill’s family enabled him to garner a close relationship with nature and wisdom regarding his place in the natural world.
In many of Neidije’s poems, including this one, he emphasizes the need to research and pass on the stories of his people. Storytelling as an act of colonial resistance and rewriting of history has been an essential theme in the last two writings we have discussed. Remembrance of generational stories is a way to secure the identity and culture of indigenous peoples. His poem also discusses the ignorance of white Europeans to their stories/history. I interpreted this as him stating that this is a problem that needs to be solved by western acceptance of indigenous storytelling. I wonder in what way, besides novels and poetry, native storytelling could enter the collective consciousness and history of our society. As he alludes to in this poem, many of their stories hold the pain of genocide and assimilation, which makes them it would be challenging to listen to. I interpreted the last part of this as him saying that only aboriginal people can effectively validate their history, which is deeply intertwined with their land. This segment partially answered my question: the expanse of aboriginal stories needs to be broadcasted by only aboriginal people and coupled with the land. How can their storytelling reach new heights following these methods?
The theme of the book “Gagudju Man” is the spiritual and physical relationship that natives had with the environment. This goes not only for Australian natives, but for all natives. The relationship they have is an awakening and enlightening scope in our modern relationship with the envionment, and how climate change relates to our relationship and their relationship.
What you want to do?
If you touch,
you might get cyclone, heavy rain or flood.
Not just here,
you might kill someone in another place.
might be kill him in another country.
you cannot touch him
These very important places,
but we frightened that European might touch him.
If we tell white European story,
he slow to listen.
If we get little big wild,
he might listen. But slow.’
To what extent did colonialism and imperialism prevent the spreading of indiginous knowledge about sustainable relationships with the environemnt?
The first thing that stood out to me when reading Bill Neidjie’s poem was the simplicity of the sentence structure, the prose. I believe that the writing in prose allowed the theme of the poem the shine through and be understood by a large majority of readers, allowing the message to resonate with a lot of people. The message and idea that everyone should understand this story is outlined when Neidjie writes, “We have to keep pressure on young people to learn. They must learn these things”. There seems to be a theme of connection between all things in this story, even between young and old people, and I believe it is told this way to exhibit how an older person tells a younger person a story. My question is, did Neidjie write this story in a way was meant to resemble the storytelling and teaching methods that old people deliver to young people? I wonder if he intended to tell this story as a sort of grandfather figure, as the people of the world would be considered the learners, or children that need to hear the message.
When reading Bill Neidjes poem the spirituality really stuck out to me. My perception has always been that religion and spirituality can be related to nature but it separate from it. The poem spoke that they are one and the same for Bill. I interpret this message in the way that your spirituality and beliefs need to include that human beings will always be intermingled with the natural no matter how far science and technology develop. We are still organisms and will eventually return to the Earth. The human perogative should be exploring your own nature and beliefs. This is why i especially like Bill Neidjie’s quote, “It scares me how many things I’ve got to learn. How will I learn them?”. I admire his willingness to express his vulnerability and ignorance. We all spend a lifetime learning about ourselves and what is our purpose. My question is, what would Bill Neidjie say if you asked him how to find your purpose? What do you think the way is?
Reading the beginning of this section is incredible. It explains so much more in depth about the history of the Aborigine than anything produced by settlers. This is very important to take note of. A society that has a lot of its history written down is one that is remembered. It is important to understand that every culture has history and it matters if it is written down. Thankfully Bill Neidjie has taken time to teach us about his heritage which is beautiful and needs to be preserved not only for the white and settler classroom, but also the whole world. Do you think this collection of poems should be recommended for earlier education, maybe upper middle school or definitely highschool?
My favorite poem in this reading is as follows:
I belong to this earth.
Soon my bones become earth … all the same.
My spirit has gone back to my country … my mother.
Now my children got to hang onto this story …
I hang onto this story all my life.
My children can’t lose it.
I love this poem as it shows that we are a part of nature, always have been, and always will be, generation after generation. The spirituality in regard to nature really resonates with me, as my spirituality is very nature based. I value that this is clearly a spoken poem, as it talks about it being a story that their children must hang onto. My question is, do you have any family, origin stories?
I really enjoy how simple and straightforward Gagudju Man is. It portrays a very powerful message without a lot of unnecessary words. This is an honest story and really helped to prove the point that knowledge passed down through stories is extremely important to us today. It also emphasizes that Earth has much of what we need to survive and the focus on overconsumption of material goods has shifted our visions in the wrong direction. Do you agree with Neidjie saying that the Earth provides us with all of our needs and wants? Why or why not? Do you think we could ever shift to a society that truly only relies on the earth?
A reoccuring concept in Gagudju is the constants surrounding the desire to Not change. In most things in life, and most of our readings, change is necessary. Encouraged even in some cases. With quotes like:
We can’t break law.
No, we can’t break law…
…We can’t change it.
That’s law.
it is apparent that Neidjie values the importance of constants and sees it as necessary. I’m curious as to in a broad sense, is change good or bad? Too much change can be dangerous, as well as changes in the wrong direction. However, staying the same can be an inhibitor. When sticking to traditions, is it best to forever hold them exactly as they were held in the beginning? Or should things, even sacred, shift with time to more closely coincide with changing times and values?