The ‘HSFG’ shrine is said to be "a fitting tribute to the Aboriginal people who originally owned the land on which the Cathedral is built. As well it acknowledges the Aboriginal people’s search for God." The shrine is an example of ‘installation’ art, comprising seven panels and their surrounds. The surrounds also include stonework comprising subtly outlined figures of a kind readily recognizable to those familiar with Aboriginal rock art. The shrine is the work of well-known Koori ‘Fraser Island/urban’ artist and sculptor Ms Fiona Foley. The art also speaks to a white audience familiar with ‘conceptual’ or ‘idea’ art and the techniques of ‘bricolage’ and ‘pictogram’. In both its Aboriginal and in its western dimensions, this is art which is meant to be read. The key to ‘reading’ it is an understanding of the symbols and representations contained in the shrine – the ‘visual language’ which Ms Foley employs.

The Story So Far …

For some time now, ‘News From The Pews’ (NFTP) has been asking questions about the HSFG shrine, which was installed in St Stephen’s Cathedral in 1989 in the time of Archbishop Bathersby’s predecessor. NFTP has shown that the installation of the art was in breach of the first commandment and of Church law, Canon 1210. NFTP_6 detailed the coded, phonetic ‘black cock/a_too’ (or_two) word play in panel 2. NFTP_7 detailed, to use the words of the critic Olu Oguibe, the ‘fist-in-the-face’ ‘Eliza Heads For Trouble’ coding. NFTP_8 detailed two further codes, including the over-the-top ‘L_u_c_i_f_e_r’ reading. Via the official 1989 St Stephen’s Book, the Church itself tells us the hidden meanings are there, but has not specified them. Concerning the above claims, the church has denied nothing.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

NFTP_9 is concerned with indigenous cultural and ownership issues involved in the St. Stephen’s Cathedral shrine ‘The Human Search For God’, (HSFG). In particular, we look at the question of rights relating to what are known as "ritual knowledge" and the Aboriginal "secret/sacred" domain. These are matters of significant sensitivity in Aboriginal law and culture.

As we will see, the Aboriginal content of the shrine includes elements related to "Kunapipi". If there were any doubts that the content relates at least in part to Kunapipi, the artist has removed them by encoding the identifying information in literal form into the four ‘female fertility’ panels.

Readers of NFTP_8 will recall the following word play drawn from the four ‘female fertility’ panels:

• Panel 5, a "sea" scene. Phonetically: ‘C’;

• In panel 4, the pipi shells and leaves formed the ‘U’ shape;

• Panels 3 & 6 bore reference to the artist’s experiences in the Northern Territory. Respectively: ‘N’ and ‘T’.

This yielded:

In the specifically Aboriginal dimension, these panels also yield a second word play:

• the ‘sea’ scene is again read phonetically as ‘c’, as before a hard ‘c’, phonetically equivalent to ‘k’: ‘K’

• the ‘u’ shape is read as before: ‘U’

• the ‘Northern Territory’ panels are read here as ‘North Arnhem’: ‘N’ ‘A’

• For the rest of this word, the ‘pipi shells’ in the bottom two panels (4&5), give us: ‘PIPI’.

Reading clockwise and starting from panel 5 - as with the ‘c-word’ reading - we have ‘KUNA-PIPI’.

So, who or what is Kunapipi?

Kunapipi is "an All-Mother deity who is the centre of an intensive corpus of rites and ceremonies. The sacred (Kunapipi) ceremonies are extremely secret today, but from published accounts there appear to be linkages with the Tantric cults of India, which in the sixth century AD spread to Java and Sumatra and from there to Arnhem Land". See Aboriginal Mythology, by Mudrooroo.

In The Elements Of The Aborigine Tradition, J. Cowan says, "The Kunapipi rites of Northern Australia are a significant example of ritualized sexual activity devoted to the celebration of the .. concept of the Great Mother." Cowan goes on to describe the Kunapipi rites, quoting at length from other published accounts.

In I, The Aboriginal, Douglas Lockwood tells the story of Waipuldanya, Kunapipi Headman or ‘Djungayi’: "Kunapipi is devotedly pagan yet deeply religious, and the bane of all Christian missionaries."

In reference to the myths of the ‘Great Mother’, in The Complete Book of Spells, Ceremonies and Magic, M. Gonzalez-Wippler says, "Another variation of this myth is the widespread cult of the mother Kunapipi, the ritual of which has striking parallels to elements of the classical mystery religions of Europe."

Curiously, in St Stephen’s the artist has embedded the ‘Kunapipi’ reading in a mutually inter-twined triple word play also involving, as set out in NFTP_8, the ‘c-word’ and ‘L_u_c_i_f_e_r’ readings. This is an example of cross-cultural "appropriation" of a type known to give offence to some if perhaps not all traditional owners, and no doubt also to many Aboriginal Christians. This is not made less sensitive by the fact that "Kunapipi" is a word taken from the "secret/sacred" domain. The use of Kunapipi in art is subject to strict customary rules.

Of course, Aboriginal people take exception to any unauthorized appropriation of their ritual knowledge. As to cross-cultural appropriation practices, some idea of the sensitivities involved can, by way of example, be seen in the position taken by the Nyoongah people, who have nominated such offenders as the ‘New Age Movement’, the ‘Women’s Movement’ and ‘Neo-Pagan Cults’. The Nyoongah Internet statement, at www.dumbartung.org.au/report0, declares a "stand of belligerent confrontation on all people who for their own interests with no respect, dignity or integrity continually exploit our culture and spirituality."

From the Aboriginal point of view, indigenous ritual knowledge could only have been used ("appropriated") in St Stephen’s if any necessary permissions had been sought and gained from relevant traditional owners. Given the coded "Kunapipi" appropriation, one must wonder whether appropriate processes and protocols were observed.

From the Aboriginal point of view, obvious questions include:

5. Is the church in a position to give an assurance that the shrine does not offend indigenous culture and sensitivities?

Naturally, questions of the type listed above can not be left unanswered by a church which respects Aboriginal culture. No doubt the responsible parties within the Church will be anxious to provide the necessary documentation and assurances to Archbishop Bathersby, to the people of St Stephen’s Cathedral and to any indigenous or other inquirers.

Tim Pemble-Smith
3 – 111 Central Avenue
Indooroopilly Q 4068
after hours: (07) 3871 2047