• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Senate Enquiry into Funding for the Arts and the National Programme for Excellence in the Arts.. Honourable Senators: I do humbly submit the following: 1. Look first at the title of the proposed new Arts body: the NPEA. Some submissions (in particular that from the Australian Music Centre) have drawn attention to what they see as the lack of clarity in the intentions behind the NPEA. Contrary to that, two words in the title make the intention abundantly clear. They are the words ‘excellence’ and ‘programme’. 2 The word ‘excellence’. In the present context, the need for a new Arts body devoted to excellence implies a present shortage of excellence in the Arts in Australia. This is not the case. By any normal criterion, Australian Arts abound in excellence. To speak of music only: The Australian Chamber Orchestra, The Brandenburg Orchestra, the Australian Opera, the State Symphony Orchestras, the Goldner String Quartet, The Flinders String Quartet, The Macquarie Trio, The Astra Chamber Choir, Ensemble Gombert…and even, say, the Marryatville High School Choir from Adelaide, which won an International Competition held in Europe a few years ago. There are so many others that it feels envidious to stop the list there; but perhaps enough has been said for present purposes. And, of course, we have mentioned only music. The list of accomplishments at an absolutely top level is no less in the other Arts, ballet, drama, sculpture, painting. Honourable Members can fill out their own examples. 3. {Still on the word ‘excellence’.) Although excellence has some role as a criterion in the Arts, it is not a primary criterion. Were I to come out of a deeply moving performance of Mozart’s Requiem, for example, my only response being: “My! What an excellent piece of composition that is!” I would be missing something. In fact, to describe a musical work as ‘excellent’ would, in general be a put-down…damning with faint praise. We do not pay to go to a concert in order to perceive excellence. We go in order to be transformed, to be touched by what we hear, to feel that life has been made, somehow, more worthwhile, or more bearable. We do not go in order to hear the excellent, we go for our lives to be redeemed in some way. ‘Excellence’ is fairly low on the scale of values in the Arts. Excellence serves the other values, (though not always: an ‘excellent’ performance may be deadly dull) but it is not the primary value. Moreover, it is the higher artistic values that are the driving force behind the achievement of excellence. 4. What are these higher values? Let me give two exemplars. The Actor, Songwriter, Storyteller and poet, Peter Fernon, worked for some years amongst youth victims of autism, cerebral palsy and the like in an organisation known as Windarring, in Gisborne, Victoria. He showed a particular gift for drawing out songs from those he worked with, transcribing their melodies and teaching them to perform them…we might say as best they could…for their performances fell far short of any normal criteria of excellence…yet they were amongst the most moving. Why were they moving? Because they forced us to let go of the barriers we set up between ourselves and the disabled and enabled us to begin to perceive them fully as human beings, like unto ourselves. Peter had made the journey before: we were then able to follow. Peter’s work is little known, but the work of Jonathon Welch in developing the Choir of Hard Knocks entered the public domain and brought, and still brings pleasure to thousands of people. They perform really well and their performances are heart-warming, but they have yet to enter the world of excellence implied by competitive success in the International Arena. Even as I write those last words, do they not show the poverty of that concept of excellence alongside the sense of identity and self-worth that choir has brought to street-dwellers and those in like difficulty? And, again, the breakdown of the social barriers that we set up between ourselves, the homeless and other disadvantaged souls. It is here that the value of this work principally lies. To try to bring formal, Eisteddfod-type, or competitive criteria to bear upon it would be irrelevant and an insult. Their work is inspiring on every level, social and musical, if the two can be separated. 5. The previous paragraph drew attention to extreme cases where the socio-dynamic value of Art is obviously primary, having little to do with criteria of ‘excellence’. Implicit in paragraph 3 above is the suggestion that the same principle applies right to the top. It is absurd to speak of the work of the Masters as excellent. Is “La Guernica’ an ‘excellent’ painting? Or is it a profound work penetrating deeply into sensibilities surrounding the Spanish Civil War, and around war in general? Sure! The painting is excellently executed (although, even in the great masters we can find weaknesses in brushwork, line and colour). The primary values lie elsewhere, they are socio-dynamic and spiritual. It should be obvious that this is the very reason for the existence of Art: not “excellence”, but sustaining and transformative power. For this reason, a proposal for National Happiness, as in the Kingdom of Bhutan, in the measure of which the arts play an integral role, would be much more to the point. What a wonderful idea: The Arts and National Happiness! The ANH! Let us put that to the Abbott Government! 6. Let us note that all of the above remarks, with slightly different inflections, apply to the world of sport. The primary value does not lie in winning the World Cup, or the Ashes. It lies fundamentally in Sunday cricket and netball on the beach. 7. The word ‘programme’. The problem with the word should be obvious from what has been said already. The title NPEA suggests that the Government wants to set up something like the National Curriculum for education within the Arts. The fear of those, like the Australian Music Centre, is that the title suggests a programme for centralising power in the Arts, in the service of Government interests. The submission from the AMC appeals to two vital and related concepts, democratisation of the Arts and finding the voice of the people, two concepts to which a National Programme seems inimical. 8. The AMC submission, whilst acknowledging faults in the present system, frequently uses the word ‘diversity’ to express a desirable feature of the life of the Arts in Australia. Now diversity, like excellence, is, by itself a secondary value. But, looked at in depth, it can be seen that the diversity referred to is a consequence of encouraging Australians, at every level, State and Local, to find their voice through the Arts. The AMC is correct in suggesting this goal is substantially achieved under present conditions, but might not be achieved by the implementation of a National Programme combined with funding cuts that threaten smaller, local arts instrumentalities at present flourishing. Anything at all like the National Curriculum for Education, would clearly impede this democratisation. The fear is that it is precisely this democratisation that is threatened by the proposals of the Government. 9. Paragraph 8 explains why there is such a call for clarity of purpose behind the NPEA. But, ironically, the fear is there because of the clarity: the clarity lies in the title, NPEA. It reeks of centralisation of power and government control. It seems to be of a piece with the attacks on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and shows little understanding of the nature and true value of the Arts or of democracy. Your Humble Petitioner, Melvyn Cann .

Load more

  2

Copy Link