Reading Australian texts in India: Some problems

Nilanjana Deb
Department of English,
Jadavpur University,
Calcutta, India

Academic interactions between India and Australia have increased over the last decade, and the heightening of this exchange between two countries that were peripheral to each others' imaginations for a long time has been attributed to several factors. Australian universities have begun to woo and attract large numbers of Indian students, and, despite the relative paucity of scholarships, the prospect of a quality foreign degree coupled with lower costs of living has made Australia an increasingly preferred destination for students. A number of Indian scholars who now work in Australian universities have retained strong academic links with the subcontinent, while many Indian scholars who have returned to take up jobs in India have retained strong links with Australia. Their presence has in many ways helped to facilitate the increased exchange in recent years between the two countries, an exchange enacted both at the cultural and academic level. In addition, there has been increased interest in and government funding available for Asian and South Asian Studies within Australian Universities due to Australia's keenness to renegotiate its role in the Asia-Pacific region. In order to facilitate academic, cultural and economic exchange between the two countries, the Australia-India Council (AIC) and several Australian universities have initiated visiting fellowships, student and faculty exchanges, and funding for collaborative research and conferences between the two countries. Several Indian universities, in a pattern akin to the recent promotion of Australian Studies in other Asian countries such as the Philippines, have received seed grants and book grants for the inauguration of Australian Studies, and course readers and study materials are being developed to adapt this interdisciplinary field to the interests of Indian students. Most Indian students who pay their own way to study in Australia are oriented towards professional courses, while a small trickle of humanities and social science students are able to win scholarships to study Down Under.

This is not a new pattern - the Canadian government, like the American government, in the last two decades has invested huge funds to establish Canadian Studies at various universities across India as well as fund developmental work in Indian contexts. Like the Indian Association for the Study of Australia (IASA) and the Association for the Study of Australasia in Asia (AASA), and other Indian societies, study circles and centres for the study of Australia in India which are assisted by the Australian government through grants, sponsored lecture tours and authors tours. A number of societies for Canadian Studies such as the Indian Association for Canadian Studies (IACS) have been supported by Canadian agencies to encourage Canadian Studies in India. There has been an increased inclusion of Australian and Canadian content in university curricula in India given the prospect of funding and grants for collaborative work.

This apparent shift away from an Anglo-American focus in the humanities is read by many as a healthy development, encouraging further academic interrelationships between former colonies of the Empire without necessarily referring to a centre/ periphery involving either Britain or America. However, there is also much resistance within many Indian Universities to the inclusion of Australian or Canadian Studies as subjects in themselves, except under the restrictive nomenclature of area studies. In the face of the attractive possibilities of funding for collaborative work, the debates mostly centre around the perceived promotion of Canadian and Australian studies as part of the larger global repositioning of the two countries as players within third world economies of knowledge - as one university professor of comparative literature commented, do we have to study another set of dead middle class male white authors, this time from Australia or Canada, simply because funding is available in these areas as opposed to West Asian or African or Caribbean studies? This is a sobering question at a time when we celebrate the ongoing cultural investment of 'those sweet Canadians' (and Australians) - to borrow a term from Margaret Atwood's novel Bodily Harm about the Canadian presence in the contemporary Caribbean economy. Since these debates are enacted mainly in humanities faculties in India, many departments have opted for the middle ground of introducing courses related to Australian issues or courses that contain Australian content as additional or supplementary input to their regular syllabi. For instance, an undergraduate optional course on settler colony literatures at Jadavpur University that I teach draws on the parallels between Canadian and Australian writing, while students are allowed to specialize in either literature at the masters level. The Department of Comparative Literature at my University has a full-fledged graduate course on Canadian literature as well, and regularly brings out publications in the area. However, student interest can mainly be sustained at the level of minor or non-core courses, since the question that students ask of the curriculum - 'how will this improve my job prospects?' - is rarely answerable in the case of the literatures of countries that do not yet offer the kind of academic scholarships that British or American universities offer. Most colleagues in Indian universities that have not committed themselves to Australian studies incorporate texts by Australian authors without placing them within a reading framework that refers to their origin - the problem is compounded in the case of universities where a three-year as opposed to a semester system does not afford the flexibility of curricular change.

The increased focus on Australian content even within the rubric of post-colonial studies inaugurates the discussion of other serious issues related to pedagogy. The two patterns that have emerged over the last decade in Indian universities have been either to focus on oppositional, minority or ethnic cultures within Australian society, for instance, to develop comparative perspectives, or to focus heavily on canonical writers such as Patrick White, Peter Carey or Les Murray. The most obvious example of the first trend is the interest in Aboriginal Australian literature as a research area among Indian students. This has led to interesting convergences as well as dissonances - for instance, the current unease in Indian as well as Australian Aboriginal academic circles about the parallels being drawn between Dalit writing in India and Aboriginal writing in Australia. Another convergence, and I shall talk more about this in the course of my paper in the form of a case study, is the interest in South Asian Australian writing as part of a larger interest within the so-called post-colonial-diaspora studies academic network in India. The second trend has led to the development of intense study groups at certain universities revolving around White or Murray, with several PhDs being written on them. The championing of particular area studies in Indian universities revolves around individual academics who in many ways shape the research directions of students in their departments. There is no attempt as yet to develop a research network that would enable Indian research scholars, often working on the same areas in Australian or Canadian literature in different universities, to compare or update their work and prevent that marker of stasis in area studies, the duplication of research. This is, of course, to state the obvious problems in the pragmatics of the development of a new field in one country by another. The shape in India of the body of texts and paratexts known as Australian studies or even Australian literature is dependent on a variety of factors.

What concerns me in this paper is the material process of mediation through which Australian texts reach the Indian academic or reader. That this process was, till even five years ago, extremely laboured, is proven by my own case. In order to acquire texts related to Australian writing, particularly Australian Aboriginal writing, I would have to travel to JNU from Calcutta in order to photocopy texts, in an act of unashamed academic piracy, from the personal collections of Delhi-based academics and what were then the limited library holdings of DU and JNU in the field of Australian literature. These collections were in turn purchased by the academics during their infrequent visits Down Under, or received by departments as part of book grants from the AIC or the Australian High Commission. The situation has improved since then, but book grants bring in a slow trickle of books that are inadequate to satisfy the hunger of students used to a vast fund of books in other areas such as American or British literature. The question that I would like to raise is, while the gradually increasing material presence of Australian texts at Indian universities augurs well for the access of students to lesser-known non-British literatures, and the development of new courses that scrutinize them, to what extent is academic rigour at graduate and doctoral levels being compromised? An illustration would serve me well at this point. When, for instance, a student in Calcutta wishes to take up research on Xavier Herbert, he or she will have access only to texts available in the market, or acquired through other sources including online bookstores. The scholar will not have access, unless he or she manages a scholarship, to manuscripts, correspondence, biographical material, the documentation of the history of the critical reception of the books in Australia, the work of scholars in the area nor, indeed, access to the ephemera that surround the publication and marketing of Herbert's texts. What I am apprehending is the possibility, in the wake of the rise of area studies in India, of a vast body of derivative work dealing with Australian and Canadian issues, which can never compete with scholarship coming out of Australia or Canada itself. While the introduction of Australian studies as a separate field can provide a necessary generalist-oriented preparation for scholars intending to take up higher research, say in Australian literary studies, specialized research requires greater access to research resources that are not easily available outside Australia - a problem compounded by the fact that there is no system, as of now, of interlibrary book loans between Indian and Australian universities, or specialized library services within India such as are provided by the British or USIS libraries.

At a more fundamental level, and this problem is more acute in universities that are away from metropolitan centres such as Delhi, given this lack of exposure to Australian texts, how does the Indian student develop an interest in Australian writing outside of the names and catchwords that he or she picks up in literary journals or at regional or international conferences? Very often a seminar is the first time a student may hear of, say, a new South Asian writer, and the name will remain but a name because of inability to access the text. The AIC and other bodies encourage Australian academics to come to India to teach for short periods, and in addition, a number of Australian academics visit India for academic exchanges within larger frameworks that do not necessarily refer to Australia - for instance, post-colonial literatures, book history, orality, queer studies, art history and so on. This seems a comfortable arrangement to those academics who are opposed to the promotion of Australian studies as a separate field in India. Given the fact that in the frenzied world of teaching new and fast emerging postcolonial literatures where reading is often pedagogic in itself, and given the dearth of access to critical and archival material in India on Australian subjects, how many teachers in India are really equipped to teach or guide original research within the framework of Australian Studies. In most cases, Australian literature is a recent addition to the notches that the expert in 'postcolonial' literature or 'new literatures' wears on his or her proverbial belt. The universalist and oddly, also the postmodernist approaches, on the other hand, allow for the reading of a Carey or a Malouf within critical frameworks that do not particularly refer to their Australian origins. But why, then, is there the larger emphasis being placed on the promotion of Australian Studies as separate from these more assimilationist approaches within literary studies?

Besides, a question that needs to be asked as we venture into a greater truck with Ozlit is - to what extent will the research produced as a result of Indo-Australian ventures in India be taken seriously in Australia in the absence of the research resources I referred to earlier? Or are the research papers and dissertations being produced by Indian scholars in India meant only for an incestuous community of Indian Australianists and sympathetic Australian academics? Not many, if any, Indian Australianists writing on Ozlit have been published in major refereed Australian journals. Apart from the publication of seminar proceedings, collections of unlinked essays or edited anthologies for Indian students, there has not been much rigorously scholarly output in the area. There are newsletters that publish book reviews, but no journals devoted to publishing exclusively in the area (although the first issue of the Indian Journal of Australian Studies appeared in 200). The reason for this paucity needs to be analysed in the context of the fact that for many Indian academics and students, the contingencies of the transnational book trade, that is, the circulation and availability of Australian texts within the academic economy, determine the reception of texts. How Australian texts reach Indian universities needs to be considered, because the mediating factors in this process in a way determine the pedagogy adopted to teach these texts in the classroom. The acuteness of the problem can be gauged from the fact that I have been asked by a colleague to help compile a list of Australian texts for the National Library, since it has very few books in this area, and demand far outstrips supply. Unless this issue is addressed in earnest, serious and original research about Australia in India will be possible mainly in cases where there is a bifocal approach to transnational cultural reception. For instance, collaborative research that examines the processes of production and reception of cultural artifacts that circulate in the Australasian region, with intensive research into reception studies being conducted by teams or individuals on both sides specific to each context - for instance, the reception of Bollywood movies in Australia, Australian venues in Bollywood cinema and the perception of Australia as depicted in the electronic and film media in India. Culture studies provides the flexibility for this sort of intercultural research, but as someone grounded in literary studies, my concern is with the possibility of original and valuable research with reference to the literary text as well.

How are certain books from Australia incorporated into the Indian book market, within which I include the university buyership as well? A number of book grants by the AHC/AIC and purchases made by Indian scholars visiting Australia for seminars or fellowships, or gifts by Australian scholars visiting India, have sustained and updated the acquisition process, and this as well as the worldwide web has kept students informed as to what was 'important' to read in Ozlit, 'now'. Author tours aided by government funding, publishers and foundations such as Asialink are often the occasion for small print runs of contemporary Australian authors - since events such as these (in the case of Kolkata, happily coinciding with the largest retail book fair in the world) stir interest in the book-buying public through lectures, book releases, and media coverage including book reviews. Most university courses then incorporate Australian literature based on the perceived importance of these and earlier texts in the Australian canon based on secondary material such as literary histories, critical essays, overviews, and even the models suggested by other international university curricula. As for the average Indian student, it is rarely the case that the prescription of a text in the syllabus occasions the purchase of it - the photocopier creates a shadow economy of the literary text, as it were, unless the text is a cheap Indian edition or an affordable slim volume. The circulating library is but one of the institutions through which such new writing is read but not purchased by Indian readers. The kind of reception given to Indian editions of select Australian texts, the size of print runs, the selection of genres and the reasons for the selection of certain authors to be released in the Indian book market has much to do with the market perceptions of multinational book publishers, such as Penguin, as to what would sell. Invariably, the niche university market is kept in mind, a market already preconditioned with literary expectations about post-colonial or new writing. In the absence of extensive library holdings in the area, a mechanism for curricula development would be to prescribe texts based on what standard literary histories have to say about an Australian canon. In turn, given the newness of the texts, very often the path of least resistance within the Indian university is to apply established reading practices drawn from post-colonial theory and that amorphous body known as diaspora theory, completing a benign and intellectually uninspiring circle. One might suggest in the wake of this trajectory a study of the marketing, reception and publishing of Australian writing in India, complemented by a study of the publishing marketing and reception of the same texts within the Australian market, in the sort of bifocal framework that I mentioned in the case of collaborative cultural studies research. This would provide the necessary complement to the more established practices of content analysis of these texts based on universalist as well as post-colonial/post-modern paradigms. The reason for this approach will be clear if I examine the case of one particular category of writing from Australia which is being dealt with increasingly in classrooms and seminars by Indian academics, South Asian Australian writing, which often is seen as fitting conveniently into existing categories for reading South Asian diasporic writing. There seems to be, at present, no problem reading South Asian writing emerging from Australia as part of the global post-colonial diaspora literature that covers everything from Naipaul to Mootoo, and it is precisely this easy fitting into stock categories that I would like to contest in order to stress a more rigorous approach to this body of writing, if we may refer to it as a single body at all.

Ordinarily, a text by Lokuge or Gooneratne or Khan would be read in Indian classrooms in one of several ways. The more conventional readings of South Asian Australian writing that exist are in the mould of what Margaret Atwood has termed thematic criticism, and while teaching If the Moon Smiled to my Indian students (luckily, there is a Penguin Indian edition available) I found them most comfortable presenting papers on themes such as 'madness', 'ritual', 'feminism' and 'intergenerational conflict' in the text. This apart, the conventional litcrit approach, focusing on form, characterization and point of view (an approach that is extremely comforting for most Calcutta students of literature), seemed to be a path of least resistance both for myself as teacher and my students burdened by overweight syllabi and lack of resources in the area. However, one recognizes that implicit in the thematic approach is the assumption that the 'South Asian text' is culturally representative. Developing one's reading approach beyond the thematic with this assumption would mean, then, reading the text and its events in the light of historical and sociological accounts of the Sinhalese Buddhist community (in the case of Lokuge) or the Bangladeshi Muslim community (in the case of Khan) and the political events that led to nation building and political rupture in Sri Lanka or Bangladesh. While this is a useful approach, and complicates in a healthy way the more conventional readings of the novels, it ignores the fact that the novel, as a modern cultural artifact, privileges self-reflexivity and individual subjectivity, and need not be read as representative of an entire culture.

What is also often overlooked are the Australian components of the novel, such as the Melbourne episodes in Khan's writing, or the nature of South Asian acculturation patterns in Adelaide in If the Moon Smiled, about which the Indian reader and teacher may not know much. The dual nature of the experience described and the dual audience addressed require a joint reading, as it were, without which readings of and research on the text remain nebulous, ignoring the fact of the text as material object produced and marketed for a transnational arena. Here, a complementary study of the marketing and reception of the text in Australia as well as among readers and academics in South Asia would provide a fuller understanding of the content and shape of the text, written as it is for audiences in the Indian sub-continent as well as Australia and the global market for 'new literatures'. The vagueness that dogs much of the study of post-colonial and diaspora literature may yet be righted in the case of South Asian Australian writing if one picks up on the lessons learnt in the case of the study of South Asian Canadian writing.

In 'How shall we read South Asian Canadian texts?' a critique of the use of the notion of a post-colonial literature bound to stock notions of in university curricula in the USA and Canada, Arun Prabha Mukherjee points out the problems with reading the literature of the South Asian diaspora in Canada. [1] Mukherjee rues the way in which 'fashionable' terms such as hybridity, resistance, marginality and minority discourse are used to refer to literature both originating within the sub-continent as well as literature by writers of South Asian origin who have settled in the west, without any thought for historical, political or cultural specificity. In many ways, both the movements that she cites in the development of the journal TSAR in Toronto co-exist today in Indian universities with reference to the critical reception of South Asian Australian writing. There is, on one hand, the tendency to read the writing of Chandani Lokuge, Adib Khan, Satendra Nandan, Meena Abdulla and Hanifa Deen as part of a continuum of global South Asian writing. In 1982, MG Vassanji editor of TSAR journal suggested a 'certain shared history' [2] when he posited that 'people of a South Asian origin are found in all corners of the world, speak a large number of languages and English dialects, and possess traits from many other cultures. Many have passed through two or three continents within a few generations and have witnessed enormous historical changes. This diversity in background and experiences will naturally be reflected in a dynamic and vital way in the contents of this journal'. [3] An originary and simultaneously achronological topos, based, as it were, on a notion of unity in diversity, thus comes to define South Asiannness. In the second movement, reflecting a stance that also exists in contemporary Indian academic discourse about writing by people of communities geographically originating in the Indian subcontinent, Vassanji prudently drops the term 'South Asian' from the title of the journal in 1993, asserting, in contrast to his earlier stance:

I have never sensed any passion behind that term 'South Asian' - no political front, not even a loosely defined conscious aesthetic or the probing for one: it seemed to be simply a very convenient and the least discomfiting umbrella to fit under. . . Perhaps 'South Asians' feel close enough to the mainstream to feel that goal achievable - and so everyone for himself, scrambling to get out of the hole and into the sun of recognition. [4]

If South Asian Australian texts straddle both cultures, then not only their reception in both needs to be scrutinized, but their function in both cultures as well. A greater emphasis on the study of immigration patterns, and intercommunity and intracommunity stress before and after immigration, would help to locate the contents of the texts within a larger sociological movement. The very notion of 'South Asian' identity in Australia has to be read in the light of how the term is defined against the categories of Asian or East Asian in Australia, something that Tseen Khoo is careful to delineate in the introduction to Banana Bending, her book on Asian Canadian and Asian Australian writing. Arun Mukherjee, like Vassanji in his 1993 statement, shows how the state views South Asians as a single category for the purpose of managing multicultural diversity. But the ways in which a common South Asian identity is expressed in Australian public culture - cricket matches, voting patterns, the establishment of religious congregations and intercommunity interaction - is not clearly documented, and hampers our understanding of the way in which the category perpetuates itself. Does a 'collective voice' exist at all in the context of a 'South Asian' Australian literary corpus? Moreover, even if one does read the work of Adib Khan or Chandani Lokuge as culturally representative, then the emotional affiliation to the land the protagonist has left behind is not at the level of nation or even community, but extremely localised - the city or the village is the repository of memories to which the immigrant returns repeatedly. This localised affiliation is borne out by the nature of reinvestment or the formation of associations by expatriates settled in Australia and Canada, who refer to specific districts or villages as their 'home'. In some cases, the link between diasporas and homeland is powerful because of the perceived threat to the homeland from a dominant culture, as in the case of the Tamil Eelam, where the notion of Eelam is dependent on the Tamil diaspora and vice versa.

Alternately, religion and one's constant negotiations with it may become the source of a continuing dialogue with one's former home, or in the transnational logic of today's highly mobile diaspora, religion may become home. Here again, the texts are in danger of being read and taught at a superficial level, without a thorough understanding of the religious symbolism or grassroots belief systems that are deployed as part of the narrative fabric. The work of Hanifa Deen, an Australian of Pakistani origin, indicates for instance how Islam in Australia is itself heterogeneous, and takes on various forms at various points in time, responding to regional, national and international events. In addition, to adapt Vijay Mishra's notion of old and new diasporas to the Australian context, the time at which particular communities immigrated determines the extent of their assimilation or adaptation to the new land. In addition Mishra's assertion that contemporary diasporas define themselves not so much through an imaginary homeland but international networks of business, family and property ownership needs to be kept in mind when reading about characters who travel, like their authors, between countries with ease.

These are sociological and cultural factors that need to be explored, even if South Asian fiction is read not in terms of truth value but as aesthetic production - since for white Australians, as well as South Asian readers from communities different from the ones being written about, the novel is perceived and even marketed as a glimpse into a culturally and often temporally different world. Lokuge's If the Moon Smiled, for instance was released in 2000 by both Penguin Australia and Penguin India, and it would be worthwhile, apart from the usual universalist readings, to compare the reader responses to the trope of strangeness in both contexts. Otherwise, the absence of cultural glossing through scholarly work would replicate the situation Jamaica Kincaid refers to where students of English literature in the colonies studied Wordsworth without knowing what a daffodil was - the student of post-colonial literature will blissfully study the text and pass his exams without knowing what the cultural significance of araliya or nelum flowers is, though the text draws heavily on these for its symbolism.

The burgeoning post-colonial industry within the university system in both the sub-continent and Australia can easily typecast immigrant writing. As Arun Mukherjee says in the South Asian-Canadian context,

the white Canadian response to these texts is to see them as immigrants writing 'home'. In Vassanji's opinion, when a writer is categorized as 'immigrant' he or she, 'may seem irrelevant to the ongoing dialectic'. . . as to the Indian response, (they speak) of South Asian Canadian writing as 'immigrant sensibility', 'caught between two worlds', 'nostalgic' about India and unable to 'become' fully Canadian. This stereotyping of the immigrant then is done both by Indian and Canadian readers. Immigrant writing, it seems, is always about longing for homes lost, about the pain of transportation, about adjustment and not about the 'ongoing dialectic' of a society . [5]

Thus, the immigrant's writing can be misread as having nothing beyond the function of showcasing an exotic culture and belief systems for its multiple readerships. This is not only a dismissal of the crucial role the text may play in the dialogue within multicultural Australia, but, according to Mukherjee, is a 'denial of the possibility that the 'immigrant's book' may also have some relevance to readers in India. . . that (it)may have something valuble to say about Indian life. . . '. [6] Hanifa Deen's newest book, Broken Bangles, subsequent to her exploration of Australian Islam in Caravanserai: A Journey Among Australian Muslims, looks at the class, cultural and ideological diversity among Muslim women in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and bears out my argument about the bifocal approach to South Asian Australian writing, as something that impacts or affects public culture both in the subcontinent and Australia, though in differing degrees. Another factor that is often ignored in the study of these texts is their reception through time. Thus, first, second and third generation South-Asian Australian readers may respond differently to texts about the subcontinent, as will different generations of Indian students in classrooms, as the position of Australian studies changes over time within the spectrum of post-colonial literary studies. A further question that needs to be asked is what effect the texts have on the forging, and I use forging in both senses of the word, of a South Asian identity within South Asia, where it has never existed except at the level of SAARC bureaucracy or specific transborder communities such as the Tamil, Punjabi or Bengali communities, each with their own set of complicated notions about those on the other side of the border. Thus, my Kolkata friends responded with skepticism to the Calcutta portrayed by Adib Khan, seeing it as exoticisation of a locale for a western audience, but many were curious about both the depictions of village life in Bangladesh and the 'other' Muslim Calcutta of Solitude of Illusions. The book was thus the occasion for debates about the cultural dis-continuities between epaar bangla and opaar bangla.

Matthew Arnold's ghost keeps haunting English literature classrooms in all former colonies. A recurring question that in my opinion is very relevant to Australian writing, that I am asked by students when we discuss the selection of Australian texts within the post-colonial studies courses, is whether the texts are included for their historical and cultural value as vehicles for transnational cultural translation or as good literature that they can sink their teeth into. Thus, the universalist approach creeps back into the fray, and rightly so. While emerging South Asian writing may provide a platform within Australian public culture for expatriates to identify with, and even occasion the establishment of small publishing houses devoted to publishing ethnic writing, it may not necessarily be literature of a high order that students in India need to study within the curriculum, though reading these works alongside the syllabus may provide insight into the issues that face specific South Asian communities. The same question of aesthetic merit brings me to my concluding example. When I included Kate Grenville's Joan Makes History in the graduate syllabus on post-colonial literature in 2005, I was impressed by the critiques that my students made of the text based on their readings of it and the few interviews and secondary materials available on the web. They found the text episodic and somewhat naïve in its attempt to create an Australian herstory. A few were able to buy or borrow and read Grenville's book, The Idea of Perfection, which was released in the city during her author tour of India in late 2004, and correlated the idea of history in the two novels. They repeatedly asked for other novels by Grenville such as Lillian's Story, which the internet promised was a more exciting read than these two, but could not access them, subsequently losing interest, and graduating with a profound sense of dissatisfaction about Australian literature in general. The inclusion of Joan was because of its availability through textual piracy, not its literary merit. To cut a long story short, the absence of student resources at the graduate and doctoral level that enable a fuller reading of text and intertext rendered the teacher and the student incapable of developing original readings beyond a certain limit. Their questions as to why there were no Asian Australian women in Grenville's herstories and whether there were texts that inscribed Asian herstories into Australian literature remain unanswered till wider collaborative transnational research is undertaken and the promotion of Asian studies within Australia acquires the same sense of urgency that Australian studies in India appears to be acquiring.

[1] 'How shall we read South Asian Canadian texts?' in Arun Mukherjee, 'Post-colonialism: My Living', Toronto: TSAR, 1998
[2] ibid p.31
[3] ibid pp.30-31
[4] ibid p.31
[5] ibid p. 35-36
[6] ibid, p 36