The Henderson Poverty Report: ‘The First of its Kind’

Yichen Wang, Elizabeth Sim, Chante Mullins, & Megan Grove

The archives relating to the Henderson Poverty Report provide not only an insight into early theorisations of poverty, but also a frozen-in-time snapshot of the style of media coverage, research methods, and socio-political discourse in 1970s Australia. These archives also invite reflection on the rigorous organisation and coordination needed for data collection before the advent of modern technology.

The first of its kind in Australia, the Henderson Poverty Report emerged from the premise that to address poverty one needed first to identify who was poor and the conditions engendering it. The report identified the key demographic groups where poverty was most prevalent. These included families with no male heads and large families with four or more dependent children. From there, it recommended an increase in social service payments.

Those directing the Henderson Poverty Report encountered great difficulties in engaging members of the public at random to take part in the study. It was a similar story when it came to finding volunteers to conduct the research. Included in the research papers is a job advertisement for interviewers, as well as a thank you note, personally signed by Ronald F. Henderson, addressed to participants in the study. One health survey located in these archives noted the difficulties in data collection, stating: “the time factor by which we are bound actually precludes spending too much time on transference of facts”.

Figure 1: Incomes of Pensioners Compared to Poverty Line, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of University Of Melbourne, Institute Of Applied Economic and Social Research, 1978.0004, File: Poverty Lines, Unit 2.

Of particular interest to us was a report accompanying the Henderson Poverty Report. Conducted by the University of Melbourne’s Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research in the 1970s, this piece of research opened by establishing four categories: “age pensioners”, “invalid pensioners”, “widow pensioners” and “unemployment sickness and special benefit”. These categories were then connected to two other categories – the income each group received; “from pension or benefit and child endowment”, and the “income required to reach the poverty line”. The result was concerning. Many pensioners were earning well below the poverty line. Sadly, despite the passage of time, the plight of pensioners has scarcely improved.

The Henderson Poverty Report also documented the living circumstances of another demographic – people with disabilities. The data revealed that those with disabilities fell below or just above the poverty line in far greater numbers than those without disabilities. Elderly people with disabilities faced the greatest difficulties, followed by those belonging to families with no male head, and large families. One thing to note about this study is its interesting definition of disability. In contrast to today, where ‘disability’ generally refers to the loss of physical or mental function, the report widens this, classifying recent migrants and those with low skills as disabled. While use of the term ‘disabled’ in this manner might be considered inappropriate by some, it does nevertheless allow for a broader conception of those social groups in need of greater assistance.

Figure 2: Rough Material for Gazette Article on the Poverty Study, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of University Of Melbourne, Institute Of Applied Economic and Social Research, 1978.0004, File: Poverty Lines, Unit 2.

Running through the Henderson Poverty Report is a desire to improve living standards in Australia. Ronald F. Henderson elaborated on this aim in a draft report titled ‘Poverty’. In this report, Henderson outlined his ambitious belief that due to the small proportion of poverty in an affluent country like Australia we could afford to abolish it. As with the Henderson Poverty Report itself, the ‘Poverty’ report details measurements and examples of experiences of poverty in Australia during this period. Overall, there is an emphasis placed on continuing this work and strengthening Australia’s responses to poverty. As Henderson concluded: “we hope we have started something”. Unfortunately, the spirit underlying the Henderson Poverty Report has evaporated in the years since its publication.

Early Views of Nuclear and the Anti-Nuclear Movement

David Trevorrow, Jessica Cunnington, & Clare Thorpe

The Records of the Congress for International Cooperation and Disarmament offer a fascinating insight into the history of the anti-nuclear movement in Australia. Though the hand printed leaflets and cartoons are largely of a bygone era, the messages contained within them remain salient to the recently reignited debate about nuclear energy. There also exist interesting historical parallels. Just as the Cold War shaped the 20th century debate around nuclear energy, so too does the AUKUS pact and Australia’s plan for nuclear-powered submarines today.

Figure 1 provides an example of Australian opposition to nuclear warfare. This cartoon comes from an information sheet protesting nuclear testing by France on Australian soil and in the Pacific. It also draws attention to the U.S. Omega base, a strategic navigation system eventually constructed near Sale, Victoria.

Figure 1: Radiation Pollution across the Pacific: French Nuclear Tests, 1976-1980, University of Melbourne Archives, Consolidated Records of the Congress for International Cooperation and Disarmament, 1979.0152, file 10/14.

Characterising Nuclear Harms

The caricature of Jack and his child contains a range of emotive elements. The author gives Jack, the creator of a nuclear bomb and the unwitting distributor of fallout, an ominous smile to foreshadow the danger of his past and present actions. Jack’s unnerving smile also aims to instil in Australian readers a sense of wariness towards powerful supporters of nuclear energy and nuclear warfare. The cartoon also evinces a concern with the well-being of children and future generations, portraying them as scared, confused, and none-the wiser. The universal sanctity of children makes such depictions particularly powerful.

Not only are these cartoons social and environment statements, they also call into account those in positions of political power. Those in the crosshairs of the caricature include supporters of nuclear energy within Australia’s political establishment as well as the USA and key European powers. The broad aim of the caricature is to encourage Australian readers to band together in the face of the risks posed by nuclear energy.

While very much involved in Australia’s anti-nuclear movement, feminist political materials took a different tack. As seen in figure three, the messaging does not revolve around traditional family values. Instead, it calls for the redistribution of funds to marginalised communities and invokes explicitly feminist understandings of equality. This continues in other pamphlets, where nukes are referred to as “boys with toys”. They also planned activities accessible to children, such as kite flying, to allow mothers to participate in political activities. Feminist anti-nuclear materials also included lyrics sheets for protest chants and songs. There were parodies of classic marching songs, for example, ‘Ban the Bloody A-Bomb’ sung to the tune of ‘John Brown’s Body’. The activities of the woman-led branches of the anti-nuclear movement thus aimed to widen participation in demonstrations and related political activities.

Figure 2: Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament Letter, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of the Communist Party Of Australia. Victorian State Committee, 1992.0152, File: Women and Disarmament (PND, 1982-83), Unit 2.
Figure 3: Women Working Toward a Nuclear Free World, 1982-1985, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of the Communist Party Of Australia. Victorian State Committee, 1992.0152, File: Women and Disarmament (PND, 1982-83), Unit 2.
Figure 4: Invitation to Public Meeting on Women and Nuclear Disarmament, International Women’s Day Committee, 1982, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of the Communist Party Of Australia. Victorian State Committee, 1992.0152, File: Women and Disarmament (PND, 1982-83), Unit 2.

Interestingly, outside of the feminist wing and the Nuclear Free Pacific movement, anti-nuclear materials contain very little mention of aboriginal land rights or indigenous populations more broadly. This is somewhat peculiar given the interconnectedness indigenous self-determination and the issue of nuclear energy. Indeed, perhaps the biggest problem with the Maralinga nuclear tests were its effects on traditional owners of the land. The Ranger Report also arose during this period out of issues surrounding indigenous land rights. As such, one would have expected there to be a larger emphasis on aboriginal land rights in anti-nuclear materials.

Many of the arguments for and against nuclear energy in the 1970s parallel the contemporary debate. In a leaflet titled “Why stop uranium mining?”, the authors present the case for nuclear power as blinkered in that it insists that nuclear energy is “clean, safe and efficient”, while ignoring both the risk of major disaster and long-lasting nuclear radiation. The case against uranium mining focuses on the issues of radioactive waste, plutonium and nuclear weapons proliferation, nuclear reactor safety issues, and the risks of multinational companies controlling critical energy infrastructure.

Some aspects of the anti-nuclear argument – such as promoting fossil fuels as a better alternative to nuclear – are no longer relevant. However, the overarching appeal to instead invest in researching and deploying alternative energy options such as solar and hydrogen, and to reduce unnecessary energy usage, remain key to current conversations around the future of Australian energy. In short, the framing of nuclear energy in Australia remains heavily influenced by the nuclear debates of the 1970s. Further revitalising the protest movements of the 1970s may be necessary to thwart renewed calls for nuclear energy

Poverty Through an Archival Lens

Olivia Cobbledick, Imogen Brown, Youngeun K, & Marina Gabra

A deep dive through the dense archival material predating and informing the Henderson Poverty Report provides an insightful glance into the context, aims, and biases in which the study is grounded. Beginning in 1966, the Institute of Applied Economics embarked on the first systematic evaluation of the extent of poverty in Australia. This task grew further under the newly elected Whitlam government. Thereafter, it aimed to identify the social groups falling victim to poverty, their income needs, and related welfare and housing issues. However, the complex and often historically embedded roots of privilege and injustice shapes the definition and measurement of poverty. This becomes particularly apparent when peering into the past with contemporary eyes. Much of the material and survey format is handwritten and qualitative, allowing space for personal observations. Patriarchal, Anglo-centric, and nuclear family structures govern the measurement of ‘progress’ within these documents. With little to no mention of migrant communities hailing from non-Commonwealth countries, an ageist assessment of ability, and the prioritisation of a male ‘breadwinner’ model, these archives lay bare the cultural values and power structures existent in Australia during this period.

The Henderson Poverty Report held up the nuclear family as the idea family structure. It portrayed atypical family units, whether ‘female head’ (lack of male head) or ‘large families’ (with four or more dependent children), as more likely to experience poverty or be on the poverty line. The report went so far as to class female headed households and large families as modes of ‘disability’ which could increase one’s likelihood of experiencing poverty. This definition of ‘disabilities’ highlights the patriarchal thinking underpinning this research. Although including the voices and stories of female participants, the inclusion of female researchers with lived experiences of impoverishment may have reduced the bias exhibited by tertiary educated male researchers. These were particularly evident in case notes regarding some of the elderly women interviewed.

Figure 1: Survey of Living Conditions in Melbourne, Recommendations for Pensions and Allowances, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of University Of Melbourne, Institute Of Applied Economic and Social Research, 1978.0004, File: Poverty Lines, Unit 2.

As per the criteria established by the Henderson Poverty Report, migrant and indigenous populations in Australia often lived below the poverty line. These communities constitute minorities, facing limited access to social security benefits and earning low incomes. In 1973, the purchasing power of non-white migrants paled in comparison to white migrants. Disparities also existed in the treatment of migrants with disabilities, with white migrants receiving higher amounts of income benefits. However, these disparities have narrowed in more recent times due to changing attitudes.

Figure 2: A Note on an Updated Poverty Line, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of University Of Melbourne, Institute Of Applied Economic and Social Research, 1978.0004, File: Poverty Lines, Unit 2.

The Henderson Poverty Report did not only aim to collate data on and understand the consequences of poverty on individuals and marginalised groups in Australia. Its conceivers also lobbied the government to tackle the issue of poverty. Yet the biases of those conducting the research distorted the findings of the report, hindering the realisation of these lofty ambitions. The dismissive attitudes displayed during and after interviews with elderly women are a case in point. As are the attitudes displayed towards individuals struggling with health problems such as dementia and Alzheimers. At least one thumbnail sketch in the report described one female interviewee as “confused” and incompetent. All this is to say that in order to create sustainable societies wherein all individuals are included, empathy, objectivity, and co-production must underpin the methodology shaping such research.

Fighting as a Family and the Upward Reach of an Underdog

George Fforde

Among hundreds of images in the ‘Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd’ collection, many of them promotional mug shots which rarely show the same boxer more than twice, can be found an atypically extensive set of seven photographs depicting, of all things, a family. Their presence offers a counterpoint of tenderness amidst the hundreds of combative postures.

Figure 1: The Three Cooks, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00132.

These are ‘The Three Cooks’: Mr and Mrs George Cook and their young daughter. Mrs Cook’s given name is not attached to any of the photos (even when she is the sole subject) and their child is variously named as Julia or Julie.  Nor are there any dates or related metadata for the photos. Digitised press records available through Trove and other newspaper collections help provide some background to the otherwise sparse information on this family.

Figure 2: George Cook, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00133.

The 24-year-old George arrived in London to ‘an elaborate gymnasium’ where he would train in front of spectators. Cook was reported to frequent West End dance halls directly after his matches. It was at one of these he met Emily Rides: a widow four years his senior to whom he was married in July 1922. The couple’s daughter Julia was born later that year. Based mainly out of the UK (but frequently returning to Australia) from that point in his life onwards, George Cook’s success as an international boxer was ambivalent but not insubstantial. Of his prominent fights, he lost more than he won and missed four times the coveted ‘Empire Championship’. He nonetheless succeeded in making a remarkably long career from being consistently matched with world-famous fighters regularly considered to be out of his class, and whose legacies in boxing history have outlived his. This practice, and his willingness to travel frequently and far afield as an underdog ‘challenger’ secured him not only a good income but wide popular admiration for pluck and grit.

Figure 3: Mrs. Cook and Julia Cook, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd,  1987.0094.00130.
Figure 4: George Cook and Julia Cook Aged Six Years, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00126.
Figure 5: Julie Cook Holidaying in Miami, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00129.

As a family, ‘the Three Cooks’ were collectively represented in accounts of George’s dogged international touring. Photos of Julia in the sporting press described her as a ‘much-travelled child’, and the positive example of Emily was often brought up in debates in the sporting papers over the influence of marriage on boxers. After over a decade of attending all his fights and travelling ‘three times around the world’, Emily made UK history in 1933 as the first woman to secure an official license as George’s trainer and manager (though she was denied permission to act as a Second). Up to this point George had had a series of official managers (one of whom sued him for breach of contract), but Emily was described by George as “a wonderful pal and a great judge of boxing… I should be lost without Emmie in my corner”.

Figure 6: Mrs Cook Manager for George Cook, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00128.

In this newly official capacity Emily continued to promote George as a challenger to rising international stars with occasional returns to Australia. By his 400th fight the 38-year-old George was considered an old man for a boxer, and his staying power in the face of ever-younger opponents became part of his popular appeal. The partnership was evidently a close one, and Emily’s decisions had real weight. After Emily was hospitalised for a serious illness, she reported that “no one could do anything with George, We had never been separated in 15 years of marriage… he used to come down to the hospital at four o’clock in the morning to bring me letters he had written to me during the night”. After a knockout loss in 1936 Emily insisted on George’s retirement, but after two years he secured her agreement to a last fight to mark his 25th year of boxing. In somewhat classic fashion this final match was a loss (apparently after George failed to hear the bell ending a round) but his performance against a man sixteen years his junior was lauded for endurance and grit.

Figure 7: George Cook, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00130.

George Cook’s longevity as a fighter (overlapping what was considered three generations of boxers) was credited to his wife and manager’s support, alongside a notably strict fitness regime. Much was made in the press about his gymnasium (at which young Julia could often be seen) and devotion to ‘the art of physical culture’. As George’s boxing career entered its twilight, the couple took advantage of George’s reputation and the prevailing fashion for athleticism by opening a ‘physical culture school’ catering for the well-to-do denizens of Belgravia, complete with a residential annex for “business-men who want to keep fit”. Accounts of the family’s settled life in London suggest a busy and prosperous existence, with Emily described as owning a hat-shop and a list of George’s properties including a public house, a snack bar, and a café. With the outbreak of the War, the 18-year-old Julia joined the Red Cross as a nurse while George devoted himself to volunteer fire-fighting during London’s Blitz. At the age of 45, George Cook passed away after ‘a short illness’. His death elicited heartfelt commemoration in the Australian and British press about an “evergreen” boxer who “never quite succeeded” but whose gameness and tenacity marked him out as an example. The sporting obituaries made little reference to Emily (especially compared to his other managers), despite what George readily described as her crucial role in his career.

Figure 8: George Cook, undated, University of Melbourne Archives, Records of Stadiums Pty Ltd, 1987.0094.00127.

George Cook fought his way from extremely humble origins in Wiradjuri Country and found freedom and joy in the Empire’s Metropole. The war-widow Emily was crucial to the unorthodox success of George’s career, but the full scale of her role was often overshadowed by how it was reported. The adult journey of Julia the ‘well-travelled child’ passes from view with her father’s obituary. In addition to the visual echoes of a remarkable set of lives, the Cook family’s photos in the UMA present an intriguing set of threads for further investigation.

George Fforde is a PhD candidate in the School of Historical and Philosophical Studies undertaking research on the KGB’s role in forced psychiatric treatment of Soviet dissenters.

References

“Big Changes at Sydney Stadium.” The Daily Telegraph (Sydney, NSW), March 15 1932. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/246543496.

“Boxer as Fire-Fighter – George Cook In London.” Kalgoorlie Miner (WA), January 16, 1941. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/95062389.

“Boxer Weds.” Chronicle (Adelaide, SA), July 1 1922. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/page/8603676

“Boxer’s Daughter.” The Sun (Sydney, NSW), February 13, 1931. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/224672764

“Boxing – Overweight Gloves: Carnera’s Offer.” Examiner (Launceston, Tas.), March 10, 1932. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/page/3291176

“By The Way – Much Travelled Child.” Smith’s Weekly (NSW), November 23, 1929. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/234412253

“Cook’s Wife His Boxing Manager: Discloses Offer By Carnera To Use Heavy Gloves.” The Advertiser (Adelaide, SA), March 10 1932. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/46845229

“Effect Of Marriage On Athletes.” Maryborough Chronicle, Wide Bay, and Burnett Advertiser (Queensland), October 19, 1937. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/151216671

“First Woman To Be Boxer-Manager – Mrs George Cook Plans Matches.” The Herald (Melbourne, Vic.), December 19, 1933. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/243218526/26385407

“George Cook Dead.” The Sun (Sydney, NSW), October 9, 1943. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/231605595?

“George Cook, Fire-Fighter.” The Argus (Melbourne, Vic.), January 15, 1941. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/8158557/610727

“George Cook. Greatly Improved Boxer.” The Register (Adelaide, SA), April 23, 1923. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/64186534

“George Cook Weds – Famous Boxer And A London Widow.” Sunday Illustrated (London, UK), April 23, 1922. British Newspaper Archive. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0003277/19220423/047/0004

“Let Me Fight – Cook’s Plea To Wife – Veteran Australian’s Ambition.” The Armidale Express and New England Daily Advertiser (NSW), July 13, 1936. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/192706019

“Memories of Evergreen Boxer, George Cook.” Sporting Globe (Melbourne, Vic.), April 12, 1947. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/178134038

Miller, W. H. “He Was The Gamest Fighter – The Golden Age Of Boxing.” Good Morning (London, UK), November 26, 1943. The British Newspaper Archive. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0002312/19431126/006/0001

“Mrs. George Cook.” Warwick Daily News (Qld.), December 20, 1933. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/177373718

“Our Letter From London… George Cook And Physical Culture.” Queensland Times (Qld.), May 28, 1938. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/115610960

“Veteran Boxer, George Cook, Passes.” Sporting Globe (Melbourne, Vic.), October 9, 1943. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/181669611

“West Melbourne Stadium. Cook Scores K.O.” Referee (Sydney, NSW), April 1, 1931. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/136749322

“The Wedding Ring. Boxer Cook’s Marriage.” The Journal (Adelaide, SA), April 19 1922. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/200913421

“Women In Boxing: Mrs. Cook Seeks A Licence.” The Daily News (Perth, WA), July 3, 1933. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/85006997

“Wife In Corner: George Cook’s Advisor.” Newcastle Morning Herald and Miner’s Advocate (NSW), March 10, 1932. Trove. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/136888995

Social and Urban Renewal – Melbourne’s Hidden Slum History

Anthony Jenkins

From his home in Fitzroy, Melbourne, the archaeologist John Lockyer O’Brien captured evidence of the inner-city’s evolving urban and social landscape, documenting a transitional stage between the overcrowded “slums” which attracted condemnation, and the construction of the Housing Commission Towers which sprung up from the razed grounds of urban renewal.1 Hidden within the collection of his photographs are vestiges of entire neighbourhoods condemned as “slums” by the Slum Abolition Board (precursor to the Victorian Housing Commission) that were consequently razed. The picture below from the roof of his own house depicts a more mixed architectural landscape taken, looking across a scene that combines the pediments of nineteenth century rooves, the first brick apartment blocks built in the 1940s, and large industrial buildings, on the horizon.

Figure 1: A View from the Roof of Number 35 Hanover Street, Fitzroy, Melbourne, c. 1958-1960, University of Melbourne Archives, Papers of Jack Lockyer O’Brien 1950-1964, 1965.0004.00359.

Ubiquitous in Melbourne’s inner suburbs today, the Housing Commission Towers are imposing in stature and form, incongruous in comparison to the suburb’s late-Victorian shops and dwellings alongside more modern cubic buildings. Despite their location in these highly-sought after, historically-rich areas in Melbourne, the enduring association of the Towers (and their residents) is of divergence from the housing profile of mainstream Australia, as was seen during their targeting for isolation during Melbourne’s lockdowns.2 Towers like Fitzroy’s Atherton Gardens Towers, are home to some of the most vulnerable in these suburbs; recent migrants from war-torn and underdeveloped countries, low-income and first nations’ people.3

For most of the twentieth century, however, Fitzroy had been regarded by a rising affluent class as impoverished, unsightly, and crime-ridden, with its houses dilapidated and home to menacing, feeble dwellers.4 Proximity to the city’s resources (markets, hospitals, childcare, employment) had always ensured high residential demand as had their proximity to work in factories in Collingwood and along the river. The late-nineteenth century economic optimism of terraced dwellings gave way to depression in the 1890s, and by the Great Depression’s concurrent housing/rental crisis in the 1930s, Fitzroy’s streets were overrun, undeveloped, and teeming with the remnants of waste, human and industrial.5 Many families were forced into overcrowded, dilapidated residences, while being charged exorbitant rents.

Enter F. Oswald Barnett, reformer extraordinaire. A Methodist motivated to clean up the “slums,” Barnett distributed a collection of emotive photographs of inner-city alleys and residences in the 1930s to newspapers and ran an emotional campaign about the need to reform living conditions as a form of social improvement.6

Figure 2: ‘Carlton. Entrance to a Slum Pocket.’, Photograph gelatin silver (irregular) mounted on card (State Library of Victoria: F. Oswald Barnett Collection, c. 1930). 7
Despite ostensibly impassioned intentions, slum clearance campaigns contained unconcealed condescension towards the inhabitants.8 The residents’ character was critiqued as being faulty, and any proposed planning lacked considerations of the effects of housing shortages, high rents, and poverty upon this inner-city neighbourhood.9

Figure 3: ‘Carlton. Two Mothers.’, Photograph gelatin silver mounted on card (State Library of Victoria: F. Oswald Barnett Collection, c. 1935). 10
As these two pictures in the State Library collection show, Barnett’s photography served to titillate audiences with sordid descriptions of poverty, and slum abolition projects made little account for where the displaced “dwellers” would go.11

Beginning in the years following WWII, the campaign for ‘slum clearance’ began again and journalists gave expression to moral outrage about living conditions in Fitzroy.

Figure 4: Lindsay Mudge, ‘Unhappy Folk Herded into Fitzroy Hovels,’ The Argus, 11 October 1955. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/71700577?searchTerm=Unhappy%20Folk%20Herded%20into%20Fitzroy%20Hovels

With new models of social housing arriving from Europe, plans were in place to modernise the inner city. A newly formed Housing Commission oversaw the razing of condemned areas, as this photo from the O’Brien collection graphically shows – a weatherboard house torn apart that with its four rooms would have substantially provided shelter and a home to a family.

Figure 5: A House Being Demolished in Hanover Street, Fitzroy, Melbourne, c. 1959, University of Melbourne Archives, Papers of Jack Lockyer O’Brien 1950-1964, 1965.0004.00366.

Having cleared a large block below Gertrude Street, between Brunswick and Napier Streets, the Atherton Gardens Estate was erected between 1965 and 1971.12 With 800 flats, and twenty stories high, it became home to thousands of low-income families and immigrants and is so to this day.13

Figure 6: Housing Commission of Victoria, ‘Atherton Gardens Estate,’ Architectuul, 1970, https://architectuul.com/architecture/atherton-gardens-estate.

Their history has however been intrinsically linked with larger, timeless forces of social mobility, urban renewal, and community solidarity. Eventually, the patriarchal slum clearance policymakers were faced with fierce resistance by residents, in Melbourne and beyond, and community groups successfully campaigned against further demolitions of homes.14 Many houses which have survived and are now likely investment properties, or leased sharehouses are the later twentieth century product of middle-class migration to the inner-city with consequent renovation and gentrification of the once-condemned properties. The lovely row of brick buildings pictured below were not considered the lucrative, bohemian, cosmopolitan dwellings of today and were in fact, houses in Atherton street that were demolished to make way for the Towers.15

Figure 7: Houses in Atherton Street, Fitzroy, Melbourne, c. 1958, University of Melbourne Archives, Papers of Jack Lockyer O’Brien 1950-1964, 1965.0004.00167.

The O’Brien collection provides invaluable insight into the Fitzroy of the Barnett and post-war era. Research possibilities are wide-ranging and multidisciplinary; one can visually track the physical transformation of urban renewal on a single address, from terrace house to “hovel” to Commission tower, with supplementary information gleaned from ‘Social Surveys’ maintained in the University of Melbourne Library. Stories associated with inhabitants in the photographed abodes could be uncovered by incorporating personal and familial databases like Ancestry.com or street directories.

With the current rental and housing crises in Melbourne and beyond, it is vital to examine the different methods that communities have used historically to cope with larger economic forces which constrain the ability to find safe, affordable habitation. In a strange historical repetition, between first writing this blog and finishing it, recent news from the State Government has announced that 44 Housing Commission towers will be demolished by 2051. Once again, the language surrounding the condemned buildings is critical and emotive, stressing the unsightly nature of the Towers, and once again, residents will be left without rooves over their heads.16 As urban landscapes change, a greater understanding of how buildings, streets, suburbs come to create neighbourhoods is worthwhile, as they might not be the same for long. Perhaps we need a new O’Brien to document the next transitions taking place in Fitzroy.

Anthony Jenkins is a PhD candidate in the new field of Public Health Humanities, studying the history of Australian smoking cultures and anti-cancer advocacy.

References

  1. Anne O’Brien, ‘Housing the Homeless: How Revisiting the 1940s Assists the Struggle’, Australian Journal of Social Issues 57, no. 4 (2022): 800-802, https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.225. ↩
  2. Kristian Silva, ‘Hard Times to Hard Lockdowns: Melbourne’s Endless Housing Challenges’, ABC News, 11 July 2020, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-12/century-of-challenges-for-melbourne-public-housing/12445604. ↩
  3. Fitzroy History Society, ‘Remembering Fitzroy: A Walk Along the Lost Streets of the Atherton Precinct’ (Fitzroy History Society, 22 April 2017), https://fitzroyhistorysociety.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/atherton-walk.pdf. ↩
  4. Alan Mayne, ‘A Just War: The Language of Slum Representation in Twentieth-Century Australia,’ Journal of Urban History 22, no. 1 (1995): 79, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/009614429502200104 ↩
  5. Tony Birch, ‘”These Children Have Been Born in an Abyss”: Slum Photography in a Melbourne Suburb,’ Australian Historical Studies 35, no. 123 (2004): 3-6, https://doi.org/10.1080/10314610408596269. ↩
  6. E. W. Russell, ‘Barnett, Frederick Oswald (1883–1972)’, in Australian Dictionary of Biography, 18 vols (Canberra: National Centre of Biography, Australian National University, 1979), https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/barnett-frederick-oswald-5138. ↩
  7. F. Oswald Barnett and Housing Investigation and Slum Abolition Board, ‘Carlton. Entrance to a Slum Pocket.’, Photograph gelatin silver (irregular) mounted on card (State Library of Victoria: F. Oswald Barnett Collection, c. 1930), H2001.291/12, https://find.slv.vic.gov.au/permalink/61SLV_INST/1dukq3j/alma9917771903607636. ↩
  8. Grahame Shaw, ‘Slum Clearance and Urban Renewal,’ Royal Australian Planning Institute Journal 3, no. 5 (1965): 170–74, https://doi.org/10.1080/00049999.1965.11509842. ↩
  9. Birch, ‘“These Children Have Been Born in an Abyss,” 1–15. ↩
  10. F. Oswald Barnett and Housing Investigation and Slum Abolition Board, ‘Carlton. Two Mothers.’, Photograph gelatin silver mounted on card (State Library of Victoria: F. Oswald Barnett Collection, c. 1935), H2001.291/9, https://find.slv.vic.gov.au/permalink/61SLV_INST/1dukq3j/alma9917771763607636. ↩
  11. Birch, ‘“These Children Have Been Born in an Abyss,” 1–15. ↩
  12. Mayne, ‘A Just War’, 92; Silva, ‘Hard Times to Hard Lockdowns,’ ABC News, 11 July 2020. ↩
  13. Julie Szego and Christopher Hopkins, ‘“A Completely Different World”: The Rich and Resilient Communities inside Melbourne’s Towers’, The Guardian, 8 July 2020, sec. Australia news, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jul/09/a-completely-different-world-the-rich-and-resilient-communities-inside-melbournes-towers. ↩
  14. Renate Howe, ‘New Residents—New City. The Role of Urban Activists in the Transformation of Inner City Melbourne,’ Urban Policy and Research 27, no. 3 (1 September 2009): 243–51, https://doi.org/10.1080/08111140903159781. ↩
  15. Andrew Sells, ‘The Gentrification of Inner Melbourne: An Integrative Framework for Explanation’ (Bachelor of Arts (Honours), Melbourne, University of Melbourne, 1991), 32. ↩
  16. Margaret Simons, ‘Australia’s Public Housing Towers Are Regarded as Dated and Ugly. But What Will Happen When They’re Gone?’, The Guardian, 2 October 2023, sec. Housing, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/02/australia-public-housing-towers-are-regarded-as-dated-and-ugly-but-what-will-happen-when-theyre-gone. ↩

Number of posts found: 379

Post type

Previous posts