raise of hands: who all thought the late 60's movie they shoot horses, dont they? was a gritty western? well i know i did. the title has all the trappings – horses, guns, direct rhetorical questions...but here i come to find out its a dance drama about the great depression. you see, it was my intention to suggest that there is a perception of australia as being a rugged frontier not completely unlike the wild west. but unfortunately my delightful play on words in the title doesn't really make sense, not that it really did in the first place. and, much like my ignorance of the film's content, there seems to be a lot of international ignorance about the land down under. bam, tied it all together. relevance +1.
oh, by the way, not that anyone reading this would be struck unaware, but i'm off on my next "big adventure," this time to australia. hence the title and introductory paragraph up there. and i do think its somewhat true that not many people know very much about australia. i think everyone assumes its familiarity and that it has nice beaches and that's kind of it. or maybe i'm just projecting my own feelings about australia onto my reading audience. some people, i imagine, will be familiar with the morbid deadliness of australia's fauna. some people might be aware of the troubled race relations between australia's european settlers and its deeply indigenous peoples, the aboriginals. but these things still have a kind of other-worldly fascination about them. even the outback, with it's red dusty nothingness has a martian quality to it. but, did you know for instance, that aboriginal australians probably split off from their euro/asian ancestors some 60-70,000 years ago? and no one quite knows how they managed the trek to australia (probably by boat, but sea faring boats that long ago??)? and they have one of, if not the longest, sustained cultures in the world? that's some nifty shit. australia was a peopled country some 40,000 years before north america and yet to most people it is the land of crocodile dundee.
that's kind of what i'm talking about. the australia we know. the australia we don't. i confided in my dad shortly before leaving (i'm still leaving! i'm in the chicago airport!) that i was worried that i wouldn't quite like this trip as much as my last one. there is, to be fair, a lot stacked up against it: korea was my first trip abroad, i did it mostly alone, and it ushered in a lot of self and worldly discovery. also i love those damn asians, no lie. and even though korea was so new and different there was a foundation in place. i could squirm and flounder but that the end of the day i still had a job, a social network practically built in, and a lot of people doing the same exact thing. here i feel we are more by the seat of our pants. which is fine. we're smart young pups and i have no doubt we'll figure it out. but i also, for a lack of words and i know this term is probably degrading and awful, worry about the lack of "the other." there's something totally satisfying flying into a place and not knowing the language and kind of floating about in dazed wonder. but here i am contradicting what i said above and its that juxtaposition that i find really compelling: the australia we know, the australia we don't.
so i find myself without a lot of expectations for this trip. i still don't really feel like i'm traveling on my way to a distant land for another year, which i guess is a good sign. less anxieties, more confidence, etc. for those not in the know i will be making a 3 week pit stop in the u.k. because 1) i've never been and 2) to meet my travel buddy, a guy named jamie i met while teaching in korea. that's another thing i'm slightly worried about - traveling with someone. i've been living by myself for over 2 years now so it will be interesting to see how i adapt to the new situation. so expect photos, updates, hopefully analysis of local popular music (didgeridoo pop??).
so...first stop, london.
0 comments:
Post a Comment