The Secret River: Colonisation and Cultural Clash in Australia
This paper examines the two-part television series The Secret River, based on Kate Grenville's novel, as a lens through which to explore the cultural conflicts arising from the colonisation of Australia. Focusing on protagonist Will Thornhill and his attempts to settle land along the Hawkesbury River, the paper analyses the fundamental clash between European notions of land ownership and the deeply spiritual, social, and physical relationship Aboriginal Australians hold with the land. Drawing on concepts such as terra nullius, ethnocentrism, and xenophobia, the essay argues that mutual incomprehension — rather than simple villainy — drove the brutal violence of early colonial settlement, a legacy whose consequences persist to the present day.
- Introduction: The Secret River and Colonial Australia: Series overview, settler characters, and central conflict
- Western Land Ownership and the Terra Nullius Doctrine: Ethnocentrism, terra nullius, and colonial ideology
- Aboriginal Relationships with the Land: Spiritual and physical Aboriginal connection to land
- Will Thornhill: Neither Villain nor Hero: Will's ambivalence and clumsy cross-cultural attempts
- Violence, Conflict, and the Limits of Comprehension: Escalating violence and mutual incomprehension between settlers and Aboriginals
- Legacy of Colonisation and the Benefit of Hindsight: Lasting destruction of Aboriginal culture and land
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its cultural analysis in specific scenes and characters from the series — such as the corn-field confrontation and Will's visit to Darkey Creek — rather than making abstract claims unsupported by textual evidence.
- It maintains balance by refusing to cast Will Thornhill as a simple villain, instead using him to illustrate how systemic ethnocentrism shapes behaviour even among relatively sympathetic individuals.
- The use of academic sources (Eckermann et al., Clarke, Kingsley et al., Pettit) to contextualise the fictional narrative lends scholarly credibility to what could otherwise read as a plot summary.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates textual-cultural analysis: it reads a fictional or dramatised text as a historical and sociological document, using scenes from the series as evidence for broader claims about colonial ideology. This technique — connecting literary or screen texts to academic frameworks such as terra nullius and ethnocentrism — is a core skill in cultural studies and humanities disciplines.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens by introducing the series and its central conflict, then establishes the European ideological framework (terra nullius, ethnocentrism) before presenting the contrasting Aboriginal worldview. It uses Will Thornhill as a sustained case study of settler ambivalence, moving through escalating moments of violence to a concluding reflection on hindsight and ongoing colonial legacy. This funnel-and-escalation structure effectively builds the argument without reordering the narrative events of the source text.
Introduction: The Secret River and Colonial Australia
The two-part television series The Secret River is based on Kate Grenville's novel of the same name. The series depicts the colonisation of Australia through the story of Will and Sal Thornhill, who claim land along the Hawkesbury River. Will is a convict whose character may be seen as akin to many poor Dickensian figures. Once freed in Australia, he has an opportunity to start a new life, which he pursues on a point of land along the Hawkesbury River. It is here that the main issue of the story manifests: the cultural differences between the white settlers and the Aboriginal people, who hold very different perspectives on land ownership. The story recounts the bloody and brutal settlement of the area, with characters such as Smasher Sullivan, Saggity Birtles, and Ned perceiving the Aboriginal people as nothing more than uncivilised savages who can be freely abused.
When Will is presented as wanting to settle the land, he is full of exuberance and passion. He is portrayed as a good father and husband — effectively civilised after overcoming his criminal past. His view of the land is typical of western assumptions: if land appears unsettled, it is presumed to be unowned and therefore free for a settler to claim. His desire to own the land and make his mark is evident in the way he names it Thornhill's Point.
Western Land Ownership and the Terra Nullius Doctrine
The underlying theme of The Secret River is one of cultural misunderstanding and conflicting attitudes. Within the western world, ownership meant possessing and often actively using the land or artefact in question. Where land did not appear to be worked, and no formal ownership rights were exerted, it was assumed that the land belonged to no one. Indeed, after Captain Cook claimed Australia for the Crown, it was declared terra nullius — uninhabited — indicating that it was considered an empty continent (Eckermann et al., 2010). This attitude denied any rights or legitimacy to the Aboriginal people.
This ethnocentric approach to colonisation is clearly evident in The Secret River, particularly in the behaviour of Smasher Sullivan and Saggity Birtles, who exhibit overt stereotyping of Aboriginal people — assuming unfavourable characteristics without any attempt to understand the people on whose land they were settling. It may be argued that the ethnocentrism inherent in many settlers' attitudes frequently led to xenophobia: a fear of Aboriginal people born of incomprehension. This dynamic is typified in the way the relationship between settlers and Aboriginal people deteriorates, and in the government's decision to dispatch a military regiment to punish Aboriginal people who took Spider's crop.
Aboriginal Relationships with the Land
The core element of the cultural clash between the settlers and the Aboriginal people is the claiming and use of land. The western concept of ownership simply did not exist within Aboriginal culture. For Aboriginal Australians, land carries a completely different meaning: it has a life of its own. Rather than people belonging to the land as their possession, people belong to the land through a spiritual, social, and physical connection (Clarke, 2014). A key element is the perception of the land as a mother, with Aboriginal people holding a responsibility to care for the health of the land and its water (Pettit, 2015).
When Aboriginal people with a deep spiritual connection to the land see it being seized and then altered by settlers, a natural desire to protect it arises. Aboriginal communities had existed for countless generations without cultivating the land; the settlers' process of cultivation invariably resulted in the destruction of the natural environment. While western eyes might regard such cultivation as improvement, to the Aboriginal people it represented not only the destruction of land but the degradation of an environment that had sustained them for millennia, depriving them of their native habitat.
References
Clarke, P. A. (2014). The Aboriginal Australian cosmic landscape. Part 1: The ethnobotany of the skyworld. Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 17(3), 307–325.
Eckermann, A. K., Dowd, T., Chong, E., Nixon, L., Gray, R., & Johnson, S. M. (2010). Binan Goonj: Bridging cultures in Aboriginal health. Chatswood: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier Australia.
Kingsley, J., Townsend, M., Henderson-Wilson, C., & Bolan, B. (2013). Developing an exploratory framework linking Australian Aboriginal peoples' connection to country and concepts of wellbeing. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10, 678–698.
Pettit, E. J. (2015). Aborigines' dreaming or Britain's terra nullius: Perceptions of land use in colonial Australia. Iowa Historical Review, 5(1), 23–60.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.