Davis’s play is both a condemnation of white rule and a celebration of Aboriginal survival. Disscuss.
P1. ( condemnation/criticism of white rule)Neal and Neville – both based on real figures which creates a sense of realism making no sugar a highly political social realist drama. They are condemned when rumours of Neal’s abuse are confirmed when he leers at mary and when he whips her. Both symbolise abuse of power( use their power to bend people to their will) handkerchiefs, rations (nevillle)
their attempts to “civilise” them
sister Eileen’s attempts to educate the kids are not welcomed by Neal who states that “ a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”
p2. Condemnation of the white rule- constable Kerr and sergeant Carol
Gran and Milly are told that “ if they want luxury items such as soap they should perchuse them themselves”
split scenes – trivial matters discussed by juxtaposed with hardship of obtaining basic necessitates
kerr symbolises future of injustice/ continuation of injustice or perhaps gradual changes.
P3. This play condems the white rule but also celebrates the resilience and resourcefulness of Aboriginal people that has enabled them to survive for generations.
Joe and Mary’s baby is an example of resourcefulness and unity and their joice to name him jimmy and Magpie.
Evidence of resilience is shown when mary’s baby is born- gran challenges matron by saying that ‘ shes brought plenty of babies into this world’ and ‘don’t need powder, use me own’.
Jimmy’s death can be interpreted as proof the white authorities are successful in eradicating the spirit of Aboriginal people and their culture.
Billy confirms the Aboriginal culture capacity to survive when everything (people, identity, culture) is taken away from him.
Jimmy’s death and Jimmy’ (joe and Mary’s son) birth demonstrates that the aboriginal culture will be carried on into the next generation.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document