<mets:mets OBJID="oai:utas.edu.au:3649" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" LABEL="Eprints Item" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/METS/ http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets.xsd http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-0.xsd" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mets="http://www.loc.gov/METS/"><mets:metsHdr CREATEDATA="2009-01-08T17:18:24Z"><mets:agent TYPE="ORGANIZATION" ROLE="CUSTODIAN"><mets:name>UTas ePrints</mets:name></mets:agent></mets:metsHdr><mets:dmdSec ID="DMD_oai:utas.edu.au:3649_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>A Reply to David Tacey's What Are We Afraid of?: Intellectualism, Aboriginality, and the Sacred</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">M</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Rolls</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:abstract>In respondin~ to my essay' critically examining his book Edge&#13;
of theSacred , David Tacey rejects my criticism that he is&#13;
imposing "alien" archetypal structures upon Aboriginal culture&#13;
on the grounds that "the claim of archetypal theory is that it&#13;
posits a universalising discourse in which no culture or time is&#13;
alien to its theoretical structures"." Well, precisely. This just&#13;
seems to restate my argument that Aborigines are yet again&#13;
being subjected to a belief system (Faith? Ideology? Theory?&#13;
Call it what you will) that is not of their making. Furthermore,&#13;
it posits a theoretical structure that often provides&#13;
interpretations of cultural practices and beliefs that differ&#13;
markedly from Aboriginal explanations of the same matters.&#13;
As I claim in my essay, this leads to the situation where nonAboriginal&#13;
'experts' are needed to explain to Aborigines the&#13;
'real' nature of their own beliefs and psyches. Archetypal&#13;
theory is just another attempt to ensnare Aborigines within a&#13;
universalising discourse, as Tacey makes explicit in his opening&#13;
rejection of my argument.&#13;
Tacey steps beyond my analysis of his text in an endeavour to&#13;
sweep me into what he sees as the leftist denial of spirituality&#13;
and/or sacredness. It should not be necessary to explain that to&#13;
query where and how Tacey quests for the sacred is not the&#13;
same thing as rejecting spirituality, but Tacey does equate these&#13;
two separate issues. Readers should note that nowhere in my</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">379902 Aboriginal Studies</mods:classification><mods:classification authority="lcc">420305 Aboriginal Cultural Studies</mods:classification><mods:classification authority="lcc">420306 Postcolonial and Global Cultural Studies</mods:classification><mods:originInfo><mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8061">2000</mods:dateIssued></mods:originInfo><mods:genre>Article</mods:genre></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:dmdSec><mets:amdSec ID="TMD_oai:utas.edu.au:3649"><mets:rightsMD ID="rights_oai:utas.edu.au:3649_mods"><mets:mdWrap MDTYPE="mods"><mets:xmlData><mods:useAndReproduction>
<p><strong>Permissions, Copyright and Authorship Statement</strong><br />
I grant the University of Tasmania permission to copy, store and
communicate this work  I declare that I either own the copyright in the
work or I am submitting this work with permission of the copyright owner
or under licence from the copyright owner. I declare that the metadata
regarding authorship are true and correct and that it complies with the
authorship requirements set down in the Joint NHMRC/AVCC Guidelines on
Research and Practice.</p>

<p>Clicking on the deposit button indicates your agreement to these 
terms.</p>
    </mods:useAndReproduction></mets:xmlData></mets:mdWrap></mets:rightsMD></mets:amdSec><mets:fileSec></mets:fileSec><mets:structMap><mets:div DMDID="DMD_oai:utas.edu.au:3649_mods" AMDID="TMD_oai:utas.edu.au:3649"></mets:div></mets:structMap></mets:mets>