312
with one of the ’important women’ in the city, that Auntie Olga
(and he) would not reveal ’secrets’. The discussions in fact
never bore upon the secret∕sacred, nor is it likely that Auntie
Olga had secτet∕sacred knowledge. But the claim to such knowledge
was seen as important to the man as a source of his identity.
Moreover, such ’theorizing’ is important in that the Aborigine-
interacts with his theory and provides himself with a cultural
identity. ;
■ - ∙ « ?
I’m only a labourer and that is all I'm going
to be. I,m a spokesman for Aboriginal people
because in my field, which is the Aboriginal
field, I am a leader of a tribe. Once upon a
time there were 10,000 in the tribe, today there
are 7,000 but we are building up (Colbung, in Tatz,
1975:28).
Factually, this statement cannot be supported. However, when there
is interaction between the self with such theorizing, and interaction
between a group of others with this theorizing, then it can produce
a reality, and provide a basis for action,
r
In the instance quoted, one of the actions is the establishment
of an independent school, an exciting project involving a multi-
racial school, where Aboriginal culture can be studied by both
urban Aborigines and white Australians, and other racial groups
(for example Maoris) can have their culture recognized.
Theorizing about Aboriginal culture, in a positive manner,
has within it the possibility of providing a springboard to
theorizing about the construction of a positive, alternative identity.
*
It is not necessary to appropriate elements of traditional
culture for this to happen. Both learning ’about’ culture, as
well as ’learning culture* in Saunders’ words, quoted at the
beginning of this section, may find issue in positive theorizing .
about identity.
If Aboriginal people in Adelaide look for identials pertaining
to culture, it will be a ’culture’ constructed for urban Aborigines