Abstract: Cities and urban settlements in Australia exist on lands that are the traditional lands of Australia’s Aboriginal peoples (The focus of this article is on Aboriginal land claims in our capital cities and regional centres on mainland Australia rather than the Torres Strait, and consequently the term Aboriginal is used throughout except where the context makes it necessary to refer to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander or Indigenous.). Yet the fact of continued Aboriginal presence, ownership and stewardship of Australian territory remains unrecognized in Australian planning. As a result, the profession is yet to grapple in a just and meaningful way with the fact of Aboriginality in Australian cities. Indeed, planning persistently renders Aboriginal people invisible, and perpetuates colonial dispossession. In this paper, we argue that planning in Australia must urgently shift to appreciate these issues, and begin to make amends. This involves understanding how Australian cities and towns can be understood as Aboriginal places, and the contemporary ways in which Aboriginal people are seeking recognition of their rights in cities and towns through processes like native title claims and determinations. We analyse urban native title applications as a key example of the challenges of recognition and the responsibility this lays down to planning and we make some suggestions for how the planning profession, practitioners, scholars and educators might proceed.




Abstract: Moving on to Patrick White’s Australian novel Voss (1957), the viewpoint shifts from that of imperial conquest in Dusklands and Heart of Darkness to the complexity of place relations in the new settler nation (which we have partially touched on in Blixen’s quasisettler novel). The literature of colonial settlement is unique for the study of the relation between place and language for several interconnected reasons. On the one hand, literature of the settler experience both partakes in colonization by teaching the landscape to speak, to use Carter’s fitting expression (Carter, 1987, 58–59; see also introduction). On the other hand, the language of this literature probes deep into the existential relations between humans, language, and place (whenever it dissents from the colonial utilization of language in possessing the land, whether explicitly or implicitly so). In the 1800s, the relation between settlers and the English language was of course one of unquestioned familiarity, but the relation between the settlers’ language and the land they were settling was new and fraught with difference. It is this state of unfamiliarity, or crisis between language and land, which causes the existential significance of place to break out from the state of silence it occupies in habitual places where place-body-language routinely conjoin seamlessly through the implicitly “shared organization of the sensible” (Rancière), (as we shall see in Chapter 10, the state of crisis goes for the literature of the Caribbean as well.


Abstract: Recent scholarship on seafarers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century has tended to emphasise the mobility and diverse geographical origins of the global steamship workforce. This article, while sharing that perspective, cautions that a more nuanced view is called for, which also recognises the limits of their mobility. In doing so, it suggests, more broadly, that the period before the First World War cannot be thought of simply as an ‘Age of Acceleration’, but also needs to be seen as a period in which new kinds of limitation to mobility emerged. In the British colonial port of Durban, although there was in this period a vast increase in shipping activity, seamen were subject to an intense regime of restriction. An immigration bureaucracy initially created to exclude Indian immigrants, also shut out sailors of all nationalities and races. A particular precipitant of this policy was the hostility of Natal officials to the crews of ‘cattleboats’, ships bringing livestock to southern Africa from the Mediterranean, Argentina, Australia, the US and elsewhere. Across the globe, immigration controls in this period were in general less intense than they became after 1914, but in some places, such as Durban, new forms of limitation on mobility were being tried out. The article also highlights the vast worldwide system of labour documentation operated by the British merchant marine through Shipping Offices and Consuls in almost every significant port. Mobility in the British Empire was radically differentiated, with numerous centres of power making their own claims to control movement.