 |
| The Moon Goddess Chang ‘e. Ming dynasty |
I decided earlier this year I’d pop down to Hainan for a launch, as it’s just down the road from us — we’ve even sailed there on our Xena — but of course… Covid-19.
The rocket is called the “Chang’e” (嫦娥) Pronounced like “chunk” without the “k” and then “err” as in mistake. Chaarng Err.... Close enough. (Not “Changi” as in the Singapore airport).
It’s named after the Chinese goddess of the moon. That’s her above. Wiki tells us:
Chang ‘e... is the Chinese goddess of the Moon. She is the subject of several legends in Chinese mythology, most of which incorporate several of the following elements: Houyi the archer, a benevolent or malevolent emperor, an elixir of life, and the Moon. She is married to the archer Houyi. In modern times, Chang'e has been the namesake of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program.
Now here’s the thing. No-one confuses these Chinese legends and myths with the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program. Yet that is what Australia’s CSIRO is doing, when it stretches the meaning of “astronomy" to include Aboriginal myths and fables about the night sky. That’s patronising and dishonest. The new name of the Parkes telescope, which was the first in the world to beam news of the moon landing to earth, is now Murriyang.
In the Wiradjuri Dreaming, Biyaami (Baiame) is a prominent creator spirit and is represented in the sky by the stars which also portray the Orion constellation. Murriyang represents the 'Skyworld' where Biyaami lives. [Link...]
I don’t mind at all -- in fact I fully support -- moves in Oz to name things after indigenous antecedents. Many names in Oz already have indigenous names, and many have changed, with broad public support -- like Ayers rock now commonly known as Uluru. Great. And I love what the CSIRO is doing with the Reconciliation Action Plan, to work with and respect the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. And Murriyang is a fine, euphonious name, a pleasing name. And I do like to learn what it means as an aboriginal story, a “Dreamtime” story.
But to pretend that it’s equally valid to describe, say, Cygnus X-1, a high-mass X-ray binary system rotating around a black hole, as an Aboriginal bark canoe -- because this is Aboriginal “Astronomy”, as opposed to an Aboriginal fables? To suggest that these fables gave us (unspecified) knowledge “long before us”? There’s now a whole website on Indigenous Astronomy. All of which is of the same ilk: fables and stories, starting with the “Emu in the Sky”, presented to us as “science” and now taught at schools as “astronomy”.
This is not only wrong, it is deeply and dishonestly condescending. It does nothing to develop true aboriginal astronomy, wherever that may be practiced. These are legends and myths, like the Chinese Moon Goddess, fun to learn about sure, but not astronomy. Astrology, if we wish. Just not the science of Astronomy.
LATER: I guess I seem somewhat cranky here. After all, what’s the problem with Reconciliation? The answer is “nothing”. Indeed, as I said, I support widespread renamings to recognise aboriginal heritage. It’s when it makes equivalence between fables and science — claims that they are the same — that I get tetchy. It’s part of the woke attack, via Critical Theory, of the whole edifice of science, especially of STEM. The notion that 2 plus 2 can equal 5, if I want it to. If I need it to. This is a trend in the Academy in the US and now more broadly about. So, that’s why my crankiness about this....
[Here’s the academic James Lindsay, author of Cynical Theories, talking about the origins and now influence of Critical Theories]
