Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

This paper explores Noel Pearson's concept of bi-cultural 'orbiting', drawing on ethnographic and historical material from his hometown of Hope Vale.

Paper long abstract:

In the debate about remote Indigenous futures, the question of how people should live or should be allowed to live is primarily a question of where. While the 'left' support the maintenance of distinctly-Indigenous practices on far-flung outstations, the 'right' encourage mainstream economic engagement in towns and cities. Noel Pearson, who's positioned himself in the "radical centre", has offered an appealing compromise: by "orbiting" in and out of remote settlements for education and work, Aboriginal people can "walk in two worlds and enjoy the best of both" (2009: 34).

Anthropologists have questioned the assumptions underlying Pearson's compromise. Burke (2013) argues that the orbiting model rests on a narrow definition of Indigenous 'culture', focused on tangible things (such as languages, stories and art) at the expense of less easily objectified practices (such as kin connectedness, localism and demand sharing). A "fairly lengthy disembedding" from these latter aspects of remote life would in fact be required before "bicultural adepts" could engage in the kind of physical and social mobility that Pearson both embodies and prescribes (2013: 316).

This paper builds on Burke's argument, drawing on ethnographic and historical material from Pearson's hometown of Hope Vale. I'll show that he's one of many Guugu Yimidhirr people who have embraced opportunities outside of the ex-mission since the 1960s, and returned temporarily or permanently. However this group's willingness and ability to orbit was preceded by and produced social changes that differentiated them from those who remained deeply embedded in the town's "Blackfella domain" (Trigger, 1986).