As Andreas Huyssen noted about the āboomā in memory studies, diasporic memory has been āseriously understudiedā in comparison with national memory.1 This remains so, even in an overtly migrant nation such as Australia. In 2013, we identified the experiences of migration and settlement since World War II as a key area (alongside the Anzac tradition and the impact of European colonization on Indigenous peoples) of the oral history collecting undertaken by Australian cultural institutions, scholars and the community.2 These oral histories have been utilized in a multitude of memory practices including research projects, books, radio and television documentaries, memoirs, films and websites, and are a central feature of specialist migration or community museum exhibitions and heritage sites. Digital technologies have also contributed to the increasing range of memory work and first-person testimony relating to migration heritage circulating in the public sphere.
Yet despite renewed interest from scholars in the historical dimensions of migration, there is a serious shortfall in the analysis of its remembrance.3 In addition, many collections of migrant testimoniesāas well as the built fabric and material culture associated with migrationālack adequate cohesion or interpretation and are not always meaningfully situated within mainstream histories of Australia. This is a notable absence given the changing demography of Australiaās people from the mid-twentieth century. In the 2016 census, the Australian Bureau of Statistics found 33.3 per cent of the population was born overseas, an additional 34.4 per cent had both parents born overseas and a further 11.1 per cent had one parent born overseas.4 The majority of Australians today have direct personal or parental knowledge of the experiences of migration from more than 100 different cultures and countries of origin. This is evident in a plethora of everyday ways, from the linguistic and belief systems practised in diasporic communities through to the emergences of cross-cultural forms, such as āfusionā cooking, that are often celebrated as successful and distinctive outcomes of a multicultural Australia.
It is now timely to examine the evolving and disparate ways that migration to Australia has been recorded and commemorated. The first waves of migrants who arrived after World War II from across Europe, as well as the large numbers who came from Britain, are now elderly. A suitcase is often used to symbolize their arrival in Australia with few goods. The dominant narrative trajectory of their experience is one of hard work followed by economic success and social mobility, despite the endemic prejudice against non-British migrants. For many, too, the freedom from oppression and the opportunities available have strengthened this pervasive and positivist interpretation of the migrant experience for those who settled in Australia in the late 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. The nuances and disappointments of individual experiences have often been left to this generationās children and grandchildren, who grew up in very different political and social contexts, to interpret publicly as well as within more closed family circles.
The 1970s brought about the end of the racially restrictive White Australia Policy and ushered in the official policy of multiculturalism. Some bold government provisions recognized the nationās cultural diversity, such as the establishment of the multilingual Special Broadcasting Service (SBS). However, the profile of migrants was changing and the arrival of humanitarian refugees from Vietnam, China and later the Middle East became more pronounced in public understandings of immigration policy and practice. By the 2000s, Australia was actively protecting its coastal borders from those arriving illegally and had introduced contentious policies of off-shore processing and mandatory detention centres for asylum seekers. The reputation of Australia as a welcoming haven for those fleeing famine, poverty and war has been replaced by that of a nation strictly guarding its migrant intake, with government policy focusing on attracting skilled migrants whilst maintaining a small humanitarian programme. These circumstances have influenced the memories of recent migrants and have been central to ongoing political debate and public perceptions of some cultural groups.
Key events in the history of post-World War II migration include, among many others, the arrival in 1947 of the first displaced persons from the Baltic states as well as Central and Eastern Europe, the āBeautiful Baltsā from Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia; the celebration in 1955 of the millionth post-war migrant, British woman Barbara Porritt; the landing of the first boatload of Vietnamese refugees in Darwin Harbour in 1976; and the Tampa affair of 2001, which led to Australiaās āborder protectionā policy. Such historical moments have been captured in press and official photographs; some are now iconic images. Indeed, the way that migration has been remembered is highly visual, with millions of family photographs and video footage recording personal stories of life in a new country, and keeping connections with the old one. The intertwining of oral history and photography is key to the methodologies, analysis and forms of commemorating migration in Australia.5 So too is the collation and exhibition of objects and the material culture of migrant mobility, and, increasingly, efforts to memorialize sites of migration history, such as former government and community spaces associated with settlement.
Recognition of migrant heritage and experience has often been emotionally difficult and politically fraught. First-person testimonies have played a central role in inquiries that address past wrongs, as seen in relation to the 7000 child migrants who came to Australia, primarily from the United Kingdom, under a state-sanctioned scheme. Placed in government and religious institutions, many were neglected and abused. The testimonies of survivors underpinned an unqualified national apology in 2009, delivered by the Prime Minister, to the Forgotten Australians and Former Child Migrants. Some of the accounts of former child migrants also contributed to the evidence collected for a subsequent Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, which led to a National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse in 2018.6 In a somewhat different way, the publication of several books of oral histories and memoirs collected from asylum seekers held in detention has alerted the Australian public to their plight. As scholars such as Kelly Jean Butler have argued, such witnessingālistening to the voices of asylum seekers and acting on their behalfāhas been an influential tool of political advocacy within the public sphere over the past two decades.7
Drawing on rich case studies, detailed research and cross-disciplinary approaches, the chapters in Remembering Migration: Oral Histories and Heritage in Australia examine how individuals, communities and the nation have commemorated and recorded the experiences of migration to Australia over the past 70 years. These contributions are divided into two parts: the first exploring the role of oral histories, and the second examining the complexity of migrant heritage, and the sources and genres of memory writing. Each part is split between chapters that raise broader thematic issues and questions, and those that focus on detailed case studies of migrant remembrance and memory in contemporary Australia.
Oral Histories and Migration
The practice of oral history developed in Australia in parallel with post-war social and economic change, incorporating migration. From the early 1950s, for instance, sociologist Jean Martin compiled the life stories of displaced persons, tracking their integration into an Australian way of life.8 In subsequent decades, the stories which migrants tell about the experiences have changed markedly, just as the public debates and the framework for questions pursued by oral historians have also shifted.
As the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur has argued, āpersonal testimony in the archiveā is the āthreshold documentā between memory and the writing of history.9 Today, there are many thousands of interviews with and by migrants held by collecting and cultural institutions, from major repositories such as the National Library of Australia and state libraries, archives and museums, through to municipal libraries and community organizations. These interviews have been commissioned or donated, usually as part of specific projects undertaken by migrant groups, or commissioned by government organizations. Another body of oral histories is held in university libraries, the result of student work on migrant-related topics, including for doctoral degrees. On occasion, collections have been driven by individuals, as in the case of Leonard Janiszewski and Effy Alexakis who have conducted oral histories in English and Greek since 1982, and which now number over 2000, held at Macquarie University, Sydney.10
The diverse provenance of these collections indicates the valuable but somewhat haphazard and serendipitous nature of preserving the oral narratives of migration. Indeed, the issue of sources and collecting objectives for national institutions is a key one for migrant heritage and is examined by contributions to this collection. There have been attempts at ...