This paper will talk about the makings of cross-cultural shared film in describing and or challenging hegemonic depictions of Aboriginal people; the main emphasis being above all regarding Australian Aboriginal individuals. Exercising the current film ‘Ten Canoes’ directed by Rolf De Heer (2006), produced in working together amongst the Australian- Yolngu individuals and the non-Indigenous Rolf De Heer, this paper will argue whether cross-collaborative film developments can effectively and practically give power to the Aboriginal individuals as a mode of confrontation to cultural domination and management and as well as a contemporary structure of cultural reminiscence and regeneration, as ...view middle of the document...
As Langton (1983; 33) writes, ‘Australians do not know and relate to Aboriginal people, they relate to stories told by former colonists’.
Altering depictions of Aboriginal individuals in Australia, movies have traditionally been subject to the specific programme of white film producers as well as the hegemonic philosophies, which notify and hold up their composition (Turner, 1988; 135). A lot of the postcolonial censure of movies concerning Aboriginal individuals is centred upon the more effortlessly describable racist philosophies that support these common depictions (Turner, 1988; 136).
Created in place of cross-cultural dialogue, the clearest account of the continual making and re-making of racist depictions is that they naturalise racist suppositions inside the mythology and symbols of dominant Australian culture (Langton 2003; 115: Turner 1988; 136).
However, Turner (1988; 136-137) takes an additional step than other critics with inquiring the ideological foundations of the essential calls for remedial interference that tend to describe representation as the work of precisely capturing, rather than ideologically comprising the authentic. That is to say, the hypothetical interference of white scholars who look to resolve the racist philosophies of conventional Australia culture are subject to the exact inclination to ignore their own subjectivity.
Therefore, the development of ‘Aboriginality’ in dialogue amongst non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal individuals is essential so that racist depictions of Aboriginal individuals can be disbanded. This requirement is confirmed in Faye Ginsberg’s (1994, no.pag) claim for the formation of a ‘new discursive space’ to place Aboriginal medium in Australia as Langton (1983; 36) calls it a ‘discourse’ among the leading communal forces and Aboriginal individuals.
At this point, self-depiction is a strong device for ‘speaking back’ to the forceful ideologies that have traditionally been unresponsive to Aboriginal say. Though, self-depiction might become a deception that essentialises Aboriginal individuals, if in use as the only path for Aboriginal representation in Australia (Davis, 2007; 6).
Mirroring this issue, Langton (1983; 27) claims that there is an inexperience idea that Aboriginal individuals will create ‘better’ depictions of us [Aboriginal people] merely for the reason that being Aboriginal provides ‘greater’ knowledge. This idea is sourced on an olden and common characteristic of racism, that is the supposition of ‘undifferentiated Other’. In particular, the supposition that all Aboriginal individuals are identical and uniformly know each other, with no regard to sexual preference, gender, cultural variations, history and so forth. Langton (1983; 27) also claims that is it a command for ‘censorship’ that there is a correct mode to be Aboriginal, plus whichever Aboriginal filmmaker will inevitably produce a ‘true’ depiction of ‘Aboriginality’.
Hence, in Australia the issue of Aboriginal...