182
12.42 Autonomy - causal-meaningful bonds V. spatial agglomeration
Missions and reserves which provided for Aborigines spatial
agglomeration did not, in themselves, provide a basis for unity
of purpose and a sense of autonomy. Rather, in most cases the
group was acted upon, as at Jigalong, by external forces attempting
to wean the Aborigines from the value system of the eilders.
Tonkinson (1974:67) found at Jigalong a dislike and resentment
at police intervention. He viewed the situation of Aboriginal/missionary
relationships as one of unstable accommodation,in which interests
remained to a large extent antagonistic, despite the fact that ”a
temporary adjustment occurs as the two groups adapt to immediate
realities” (Tonkinson, 1974:130).
The Aborigines at Jigalong resented the missionaries’ use of
corporal punishment, their protection of older girls from matters
which concerned tribal practice, the withholding of pension payments
for mission use (Tonkinson, 1974:132).
Nevertheless the missionaries were seen as a special species of
whitefella, and according to Tonkinson
The Aborigines have accepted the presence of whites
without question and do not seem preoccupied with
questions about having been dispossessed or exploited
by the whites (Tonkinson, 1974:112).
This is not true of the Strelley Mob, whose history was one of
striving against exploitation, who remember being taken off in
chains by police, who recall bloodshed in neighbouring towns. In
this sense Strelley differs from ,reserve,∕,mission, Aborigines,
who may be strongly motivated to retain their Law, but who are subject
to the external pressures of the reserve∕mission and its norms, both
social and economic, and who must resort to various strategies to
maintain their integrity and sense of direction1.
1Tonkinson (1974:142ff.) cites a deliberately cultivated lack of
communication as one of these strategies through which both the
missionaries and the Aborigines pursued their own ends while purporting
to pursue common aims.