Council for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences

Ms Sigrid Thornton
28 March 2006 - Canberra
National Press Club address

[Transcript]

Good afternoon everyone. I'm delighted to be here today to talk to you about creativity.  My life as an actor regularly engages me in creative work, but I'd like to discuss this rather slippery subject in much broader terms.

A few days ago I was driving along with my fourteen-year-old daughter Jaz and she was talking about the film of the book Looking for Alibrandi by Melina Marchetta.  Looking for Alibrandi is a contemporary Australian teen novel about coming of age and self-identity, which was made into a feature film a few years ago. Jaz was commenting that the film is much more subtle and multi-layered than American films.

Almost all films seen by Australian teens are American these days and according to Jaz, they have a standard formula - boy ignores ugly, nerdy, very intelligent girl who wears glasses. But by the end of the film she has taken off her glasses and he has fallen in love with her for her brains not her beauty. The stretch is that the ugly, nerdy, very intelligent girl is always played by a beautiful young American ingénue. And any fourteen-year-old with half a brain can see through that.

Jaz commented on how good it was to see the Looking for Alibrandi story playing out in a familiar cultural framework. I explained to her that that's why I've been involved in trying to increase support for the making of films that tell Australian stories - because they extend the part of the world we know in our imagination. They enrich our way of seeing it.

Jaz said it's not just its Australian-ness that makes this film better, it's the layers of meaning in it that aren't explored in American films. We agreed that the formulaic American films she was talking about are made for a quick market result, not imaginative depth.

We went on to discuss how wonderful it is that each person's imagination is unique and matches that of no other person in the world, ever. Here we were touching on what is special about the arts. What they present is the subjective world; that unique personal inner world. For every individual, this is where emotions and intentions, perceptions and understandings are located.

The writer of Looking for Alibrandi creates the book from her unique imagination; Jaz has to exercise her own unique imagination in reading it. The book guides Jaz in extending her imagination.

In any art, a spark passes from the artist's imagination through the art-work to ignite the imagination of the appreciator. Not just in literature, but in drama, dance, music, paintings, sculpture and so on.

Time spent with the arts either as practitioner or as appreciator is a potent kind of training in extending one's imagination in the direction of creativity.

Imagination is a basic human faculty that allows us to bring into our minds the 'maybes' and the 'what ifs?'. These 'maybes' and 'what ifs?' could take the form of visualizations or complex propositions. There are lots of ways of imagining. And imagination is not necessarily confined to human beings. Presumably a cat has some sort of imagination of what the mouse he has lost sight of might be up to. You can tell by the way he stalks it. Imagination is used in this low-key kind of way by us all, all the time, but its potential as a creative faculty is almost unlimited.

The extraordinary creativity that came from Einstein's imagination resulted in the theory of relativity. Imagining the unrealized possibilities of the world resulted in the play Hamlet and the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

But how do we work from the low end towards the high creative end of our imagination?

I was telling you about my literary conversation with my daughter mainly to emphasize that imagination is something each of us can get practice at and improve on. The direct experience of other creative minds that we receive from the arts is one of the most important ways we can develop our imagination.

So if the arts are so critical to our imaginative and creative development, we need to recognise their role in our cultural development as well. Works of art communicate in terms of long traditions and cultural settings. If a person has no entrée into the relevant traditions and culture of a particular art work, however imaginatively attentive they try to be, it is likely they'll misinterpret it.

So - if you don't speak English you'll be severely disadvantaged in understanding Patrick White or David Williamson. If you've never heard of Ned Kelly, you won't catch much of the symbolic import of Sidney Nolan's Ned Kelly paintings. This brings us to education and its role in enhancing our understanding of the culture we share with our creative artists.

In Australia in the last twenty years there has been a concerted effort in education to increase the number of people qualified to advance the economic success of our country. Economics and business studies have taken precedence - finance, banking, risk management, IT studies and so on. There has been much less concern for the development of skills which favour the flourishing of curiosity, imagination, innovative thought and action - it is fair to say there have been areas of serious decline in that kind of education. Though pure science has also suffered, I am thinking especially of the humanities, such as languages, history, philosophy, literature, music and the visual arts.

The humanities are of course the studies of cultures and their languages and arts. It is essential for this knowledge to be available to people who will contribute to our cultural life through sharing their understanding and appreciation of the arts. But (and this takes us back to my conversation with my daughter) these educational needs start well before tertiary level, indeed they should begin in the cradle and at early childhood development level.

Training and encouragement in extending the use of the imagination is the path to greater creativity not just in the humanities, but also in the science-based disciplines. In fact, imagination is the bridging faculty between the two directions. If imagination is flourishing, the bridges will be built.

Much of the recent research on policy in the humanities, arts and social sciences is concerned with what can be got out of them. How they might further economic development. What they can contribute to innovation or design excellence. What they can add to the competitive edge of Australia in the world economy.

In broad terms the answer is obviously 'a great deal'. They already contribute enormously to the Australian economy and their potential for a greater contribution is substantial. So the 'economy is the main game' approach can be used effectively in the service of strategic arguments. Arguments for policies that will ensure the continuing development of the arts, humanities and social sciences.

Indeed, if I have rightly understood, this is an area in which CHASS is already successful and is likely to become more so. But in a broader context I think it is important to be aware of the limitations of the 'economy is number one' approach. Trying to validate the arts by their contribution or potential contribution to the economy is putting the cart before the horse. We need to understand the intrinsic importance of the arts and humanities. They are an end in themselves. Without their being treated as an independently vital organism of our culture, they will lose their primary purpose. Then they will be useless even for secondary purposes. Creativity is the main game.

The arts have always and everywhere had some level of dependence on patronage, sponsorship or government support. So in demanding or imagining market success we may well be structuring a negative economic effect on the arts rather than a positive arts effect on the economy. These are important questions of Australian public policy, and I stand for increased public support for the arts.

I have been talking about creativity and the necessary conditions for its development at quite a general level. It's an extremely broad topic that sends tentacles in all directions, so I though I'd continue the discussion by defining what I have to say in terms of a few particular issues relevant to my own experience.

Which brings us to the film and television industry. Although it is no exaggeration to say that the industry is in dire straights, and particularly that our television drama is dying on the vine, I believe the industry is nevertheless a particularly poignant example of the interaction of market forces and artistic effort.

On the one hand it actually is an industry, which employs large numbers of people in a sophisticated and varied skills base.  It also has a wide market with most of the population paying to see films screened and watching the small screen. But on the other hand it is deeply concerned with those intrinsic values that belong to the creative arts. The work of production is a complex collaboration of artists, technical experts and people with skills in administration, finance, risk management. It is a microcosm of the interaction of and tension between art and finance.

And there is the pressure to flatten out the content of a film to cater to overseas markets. An example would be to change words in dialogue to get rid of something Australian that an American audience (the audience that makes the biggest market) might not follow; to cut out some Australian practice or joke that wouldn't 'travel'.

It doesn't take a lot of this till the audience has little sense of the story happening in any particular place or the characters belonging to any specifiable cultural identity. The colour is bleached out. When my daughter commented on how good it was to see scenes happening in familiar places, she could have added 'with characters that belong to our familiar culture'.

The idea of a 'global village' sounds warm and inclusive, but do we really want a flattened imagination, a sort of Basic English or even Esperanto way of looking at the world? Cultural diversity, both within our own country and in what we are able to see of the wider world, is a powerful stimulus to imagination and creativity. Some of the most civilizing effects in world history have come from openness and communication between differing and distinctive cultures.

Over the years I have been involved in many documentary productions. They have drawn on diverse areas of specialized expertise including pure science disciplines, technologies, Aboriginal cultures and social sciences.

Documentary film occurs to me as an area well worthy of attention by CHASS. Many dedicated independent documentary makers do very valuable work in making fields of specialization accessible to non-experts. Their work is an art form in itself and it often constitutes the cross-over between arts and sciences which is at the centre of CHASS's work. Yet it is extremely difficult for these independent producers to make a living in any way commensurate with their skills, not to mention the difficulty in distributing their films.

Despite the commercial pressures, at its best, film and television production is a poignant example of what can be achieved creatively when people reach out across the barriers between their different professions, expertise and mindsets. When a unity of understanding and purpose is achieved to good effect. At these times, film-making process could act as a model for symbiosis which dissolves barriers, for creativity across the disciplines.

How is it that the barriers between disciplines, mindsets and professions can be so powerful? One reason is that in this time-poor world, rapid career advancement has become a higher priority and over-specialization is the most expedient means to achieving it.

Another reason is that academic institutions can encourage the preservation of these disciplinary barriers. Relaxing the definition of any given discipline can represent a career threat to the old guard.

Earlier this year I launched Tim Flannery's book The Weather Makers; it's a book I have taken a particular interest in. Itreaches across disciplines, nations, economies, cultures. The Weather Makers is about the human role in climate change, where that is leading us, and how it might be possible to change direction and avert disastrous consequences for humans and other species. This very complex topic demands high levels of cross-over and lateral and innovative thinking about some fundamental issues. Science, technology, economics and social and cultural development are all involved. A topic of critical importance has found in Tim a person of unusually flexible mind. He is able to cut through technical talk to express central scientific concepts in language accessible to non-expert curious readers. This gives him a freedom to move between sciences which don't always talk to one another and to explore how they can be fitted together to answer hard questions. His is an imagination which seems to see paths that cross over as clearly as paths that diverge. He is able to draw on literary and Aboriginal sources as happily as political and social ones.

It is a very timely book, and yet in spite of Tim's international reputation as a scientist, he has not escaped the entrenched prejudice against the creative person who is a hard-line boundary-crosser. Although The Weather Makers has created a lot of interest in Australia, I have the impression that its importance has been more generously recognized overseas where Tim is now touring and speaking to large audiences. In fact Tim recently appeared together with David Attenborough in front of an audience of 2,000 at St. Paul's Cathedral. Attenborough is also a boundary-crosser and obviously recognizes a kindred spirit.

It's important that we cherish, encourage and socially validate successful efforts in exploring symbiosis. I've at times been privileged in film and stage work to experience the creative rush it brings.

And there are hopeful signs. Glyn Davis, the recently appointed Vice Chancellor of the University of Melbourne, has announced that he hopes to introduce a generalist degree which will be taken by all undergraduates before they move on to their specialist studies - whether based in the sciences or in humanities, social sciences or arts. Developing young talents would hopefully form friendships and understanding of others who were to embark on different professional paths. And everyone would have the opportunity to gain an entrée into the imaginative bases of our culture.

The initiatives being promoted by CHASS will also help to bridge the disciplinary boundaries. At the same time they can provide a much-needed impetus for a knowledge-based economy and society. If they are able to achieve this, they will enrich the lives of all Australians and help preserve our distinctive Australian culture, imagination and creativity.

 

Ms Sigrid Thornton
28 March 2006

Download this transcript   [PDF file size: 24.25 kB]   REF: SPE20060328ST

 

For more information, please contact:

Toss Gascoigne

Executive Director

Council of the Humanties, Arts and Social Sciences

Phone: +61 2 6249 1995

director@chass.org.au