THE INTERPRETATION OF AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE SITES: KAKADU AND PORT ARTHUR A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Law, Business and Arts, Charles Darwin University. By JUDY OPITZ (BA Hons. NTU) DECLARATION I declare that the work herein, now submitted as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Charles Darwin University, is original and the result of my own investigations. All references to the ideas and work of others have been specifically acknowledged. I certify that the work has not been submitted in any form for another degree or diploma at any university or other institution of tertiary education. JUDY OPITZ April 2008 Abstract i ABSTRACT This thesis studies the presentation of Indigenous and non-Indigenous archaeological/heritage sites in Australia, exploring the ideology and management practices behind their presentation. The aim of the thesis is to critically examine, by means of comparison, the proposition that there may be discordance in the public understanding of the material fabric of Indigenous and settler sites in Australia. Two sites are used as case studies: Port Arthur Historic Site on the Tasman Peninsula in Tasmania, and Anbangbang Rockshelter situated in Nourlangie Rock in Kakadu National Park, Northern Territory. These sites were specifically chosen for the dissimilarity in the approach taken to their presentation, a presentation which hinges on the culturally based management of the site. Port Arthur Historic Site is a well preserved penal colony which acts as a reminder of Australia’s history from the time of European colonisation of Van Diemen’s Land in the early nineteenth century. The changing nature of the interpretation of the Historic Site as a tourist venture, ranging from the cessation of transportation to present times, is considered in conjunction with the extent to which the social moods and memories of the so-called “hated stain” have dictated past styles of presentation. Anbangbang Rockshelter dates back some 20,000 years and contains an extensive gallery of rock art. Although the site has been archaeologically excavated with stone artefacts indicating the prehistoric use of the shelter, this aspect is minimised for public presentation. The unifying theme running through the thesis is the exploration of the culturally- based reasons for the disparate presentations of the two sites and their changes over time. In the case of the Indigenous site, it particularly looks at whether the constrained style of presentation precludes or enhances a deeper understanding of the Aboriginal heritage. Acknowledgments ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My thanks to my first Supervisor, Doctor Clayton Fredericksen, who, until his departure from Charles Darwin University halfway through my PhD candidature, initiated me into the complexities and pitfalls of thesis writing. My enduring thanks to Associate Professor Harry Allen who, by email contact from New Zealand, took over and gently and firmly shepherded me to completion. Thanks also to Professor David Carment for his supervision and for easing all the University administrative problems as they occurred along the way. Grateful thanks to Professor Allan Powell who was always ready to lend an ear to help with historical knowledge and to Doctor David Mearns and Doctor Ian Walters who provided assistance in their own inimitable way. I am very grateful to the Traditional Owners of Kakadu National Park and to Terry Bailey, Chris Haynes, Greg Miles, and all other staff members of the Bowali Visitor Centre who unfailingly assisted in the distribution of the questionnaires and with my many queries. Those who particularly helped were – in alphabetical order - Kathie Bannister, Eve Chaloupka, Bob Collins, Alex Dudley, Rob Muller, Ken Mulvaney, Jeanette Rosendahl, Kylie Websdale, Peter Wellings, and Susan Wellings. I am also deeply grateful to Julia Clark, Sue Hood, Steven Large, Ken Lee, Greg Jackman and all those other kind staff members at the visitor’s front counter at Port Port Arthur Historic Site, for their assistance in countless ways. I am especially grateful to tour guides Peter Grindle, Macca MacDonald and Wallie Pridmore who let me trail along on their tours. My thanks to those many others, all of whom helped to make my several stays on site very knowledge rewarding, particularly Dorothy and Mike Evans who own and run as an Inn the Norfolk Bay Convict Station. At the Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory (MAGNT) in Darwin, I would particularly like to thank Pina Giuliani and George Chaloupka for their contribution to my knowledge of rock art and I thank the many staff members who assisted in other ways. Acknowledgments iii In England, I thank Chris Chippindale of the Cambridge Archaeological Museum for his archaeological words of wisdom, and also Ann and Mike Eastham who took a particular interest in my work. I particularly thank my office companion, Dan Dwyer, for his keen sense of humour and wit in getting me back on track when the going got a bit tough. And I thank Uni. colleagues Sylvano Jung, Julie Mastin, and Patricia Puig, likewise engaged in their thesis writing, all of whom helped to boost my confidence or listened to my moans and groans. In various locations, my thanks to Baiba Berzins and Peter Loveday, Peter and Sheila Forrest and Yvonne Forrest, who helped in many ways to enlighten me on a range of tourism and historical matters. And, of course, I could not have done it without my family in England, especially my brother-in-law, Doctor Anthony Twist and my sister Julia Twist, who took such a keen interest in what I was hoping to achieve, and provided support in so many ways. Finally, I should like to thank Charles Darwin University for providing such excellent facilities for pursuing my thesis writing in comfort and space. Costs in this research operation were partially covered from the Internal Faculty Research Grant allowance, and I was also helped through the assistance of an Australian Postgraduate Award. This Scholarship commenced in January, 2001, and ran until end December, 2002, with a three month extension granted until end March 2002, which greatly eased the usual financial burdens. Abbreviations iv ABBREVIATIONS ANCA Australian Nature Conservancy Agency ANPWS Australian National Park Wildlife Service NPWS National Park Wildlife Service PAHSMA Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority PAHSMP Port Arthur Historic Site Management Plan TALC Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council Table Of Contents v THE INTERPRETATION OF AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE SITES: KAKADU AND PORT ARTHUR TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract i Acknowledgments ii Abbreviations iv Table of Contents v List of Figures, Plates and Tables viii List of Appendices xi Chapter One - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Aim of the Thesis 1 1.2 Australian History and Interpretations of Heritage Sites 6 1.2.1 Heritage Management and its Problems 8 1.2.2 Cultural Heritage Management and Tourism 13 1.2.3 Interpretation 17 1.2.4 Indigenous Heritage Site Interpretation 21 1.2.5 Non-Indigenous Heritage Site Interpretation 24 1.3 Studies on Public Attitudes to Archaeology 29 1.4 Methodology 34 1.4.1 Permission for Research 34 1.4.2 Passive Observation and Research 36 1.4.3 Kakadu National Park 36 1.4.4 Port Arthur Historic Site 37 1.5 The Questionnaire 38 1.5.1 Rationale for the Questionnaire 42 1.5.2 Analysis of the Questionnaire Data 48 1.6 Structure of the Thesis 48 Chapter Two – KAKADU NATIONAL PARK: TOURISM IN A CULTURAL LANDSCAPE 2.1 Introduction 51 2.2 The Natural and Cultural Landscape of Kakadu National Park 54 2.3 European Impact 59 2.4 Archaeology and Rock Art 71 Table Of Contents vi 2.4.1 Archaeology in the Region 71 2.4.2 Function and Meaning of Rock Art 75 2.5 The Rise of Tourism in the Alligator Rivers Region 80 2.6 Mining and the Creation of Kakadu National Park 90 2.7 Kakadu as a Tourist Drawcard 96 2.8 Management Plans - Kakadu National Park 98 2.9 Aboriginal Landowners and Cultural Tourism in Kakadu National Park 102 2.10 Conclusion 107 Chapter Three – KAKADU NATIONAL PARK: VISITOR CENTRES AND ANBANGBANG ROCKSHELTER 3.1 Introduction 112 3.2 Bowali Visitor Centre 122 3.3 Warradjan Aboriginal Cultural Centre 140 3.4 Anbangbang Rockshelter 145 3.4.1 Archaeology 145 3.4.2 The Site as a Visitor Attraction 148 3.4.3 On-site Interpretation 154 3.5 Expanding the Cultural Resource Concept 164 3.6 Problems of Opposition in Interpretation 167 3.7 Examining the Oppositional Problem 170 3.8 Conclusion 175 Chapter Four – PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE TASMANIA 4.1 Introduction 181 4.2 Port Arthur Historic Site – The Penal Settlement (1830-1877) 184 4.3 Rise of Port Arthur as a Tourist Precinct (1877-1884) 188 4.4 Carnarvon Period (1884-1927) 190 4.5 The Reassertion of Tourism (1927-1971) 192 4.6 National Park (1971-1986) 193 4.7 Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority (1987-present) 197 4.8 Changes in the Interpretation of Port Arthur 199 4.9 1996 and its Aftermath 206 4.10 Public Interest in Archaeology at Port Arthur 209 4.11 Conclusion: Port Arthur’s Layers of Meaning 211 Chapter Five – EXPERIENCING AND DEBATING PORT ARTHUR 5.1 Introduction 215 5.2 Visitor Experiences – Interpretation Gallery 216 5.3 The On-Site Experience 222 5.4 Observing the Visitor 233 5.5 Archaeology and the Public 235 Table Of Contents vii 5.6 Debates about Historic Interpretation at Port Arthur and Other Places of Incarceration 246 5.7 Tourism of Incarceration 249 5.8 Ghost Tours and Historical Lessons 255 5.9 Conclusion: Opposing Views of Historical Presentation 260 Chapter Six – ANBANGBANG ROCKSHELTER VISITOR PERCEPTIONS ANALYSED 6.1 Introduction 266 6.2 Problems Encountered 266 6.3 Responses to Questionnaires 269 6.4 Analysis of Main Responses to Questionnaires 278 6.5 Cross-Relational Analysis 282 6.6 Conclusion 293 Chapter Seven – PORT ARTHUR HISTORIC SITE VISITOR PERCEPTIONS ANALYSED 7.1 Introduction 298 7.2 Problems Encountered 298 7.3 Analysis of Main Responses to Questionnaires 305 7.4 Cross Relational Analysis 309 7.5 Conclusion 318 Chapter Eight – SYNTHESISING THE ANALYSES 8.1 Introduction 320 8.2 Main Responses from Visitors to Both Sites 320 8.3 Summary of Analyses 328 8.4 Conclusion 340 Chapter Nine – DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 9.1 Recapping the Aim of the Thesis 344 9.2 Kakadu National Park and Tourism 350 9.3 Anbangbang Rockshelter 351 9.4 Port Arthur 359 9.5 Visitors at Port Arthur and Debates about its Presentation 371 9.6 Kakadu National Park and the Impact of Site Interpretation on the Visitor 383 9.7 Port Arthur Historic Site and the Impact of Site Interpretation on the Visitor 387 9.8 Different Approaches to Management Plans of the Two Sites 392 9.9 Postscript and the Future for Kakadu 396 Figures, Plates and Tables viii LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Location of Kakadu National Park 3 1.2 Location of Port Arthur Historic Site 4 2.1 Location of Kakadu National Park 52 2.2 Map Showing Archaeological Areas and Art Sites 72 2.3 Sites of Safari Ventures 81 2.4 Stages of Development – Kakadu National Park 92 3.1 Map Showing Nourlangie Rock Area 119 3.2 Video Program 125 3.3 Location of Warradjan Aboriginal Cultural Centre 140 4.1 Map of Tasmania Showing Location of Major Penal Settlements 182 4.2 Map of Tasman Peninsula Showing East Bay Neck and Eaglehawk Neck 184 4.3 Map Showing Location of Point Puer 186 4.4 Promotion of Visitation to Port Arthur Notice 199 4.5 Outer Cover of Tourist Map Tasmanian Tourist Council 1982 201 5.1 Copy of Both Sides of a Playing Card Issued to Visitors 219 LIST OF PLATES 3.1 Visitor Information Counter 123 3.2 Topography of the Region 123 3.3 Library/Reading Room 124 3.4 Display Rock Depicting Seasons at Kakadu 135 3.5 Telling the Story 135 3.6 Following the Snake Trail (1) 136 3.7 Following the Snake Trail (2) 136 3.8 Ceiling Display – Crocodile 137 3.9 Floor Display – Canoe 137 3.10 Floor Display – Skeleton 138 3.11 Sub-floor Display – Archaeological Finds 138 3.12 Display – European Contact (1) 139 3.13 Display – European Contact (2) 139 3.14 Rocky Stairway Leading to Shelter 148 3.15 Wooden Stairway Leading to Shelter 149 3.16 Welcome Display Sign 150 3.17 Meet Your Hosts Display Sign 151 3.18 Display Sign Showing Location of Art Sites 151 3.19 Anbangbang Shelter Display Sign What Was It Like Outside? 152 3.20 Anbangbang Shelter Display Sign History At Your Feet 152 3.21 Revisiting the Past (1) 153 3.22 Revisiting the Past (2) 153 3.23 Display Sign – Painting For A Purpose 159 3.24 Display Sign – Modern Art 159 3.25 Tour Guide Giving a Talk 160 3.26 Rock Art – Dancing Figures 160
Description: