|
|
The Pattern of Australian Culture
By A. L. McLeod
THE growth of an identifiable and characteristic culture in a new land is unpredictable; it follows no particular and established sequence or timetable and is governed by no known, immutable laws.
In one country art may flourish while literature languishes; in another, theatre and music may burgeon while science and philosophy remain in the fetal stage; in yet another religion may permeate -- even motivate and direct -- all creative expression that comprises culture. The only essentials for the development of an indigenous culture would appear to be the passage of time, adequate leisure, and that social permissiveness which allows relatively uninhibited development of an individual's yearning to be creatively expressive. Cultural maturation is most swift where, in addition, there is widespread and official encouragement; where the public is literate, is interested in painting and sculpture and architecture, is interested in entertaining new ideas, is inclined to discuss, is neither censorious nor self-satisfied -- where, in sum, there is a congenial atmosphere.
In matter of time, Australia has had almost too little opportunity to develop a national culture of any great originality or distinction -- just six generations. Yet what has been achieved in this short span is deserving of the attention of the remainder of at least the Englishspeaking world; it has had high commendation from disinterested critics whose authority gains respect for their opinions.
The equable climate of Australia, a short work week, and generous provision for public holidays and vacations allow considerable opportunity for those who help to create the national culture to pursue their interests and for the remainder of the society to become acquainted with what has been created. Leisure and the climate are certainly the important factors which account for the widespread popular interest in painting, especially landscapes and seascapes, and for the predominance of plein-air painters. Although there may not be the large markets and munificent rewards for creative efforts that are to be found overseas -- and hence relatively few professional men of letters, composers, independent thinkers, and nonacademic pure scientists -- there are, by way of compensation, also few salons, poseurs, dilettantes, and asocial, misunderstood "geniuses." Australian culture is, therefore, largely the product of the leisure activities of its creators; patronage is exceptional.
Generally speaking, Australians are culturally permissive. Literary censorship, such as it is, is fitful and irregular, insubstantial and not any worse than that in most countries -- though the situation in the state of Queensland is at the moment somewhat unenlightened and puritanical. Disapproval is customarily shown rather by public opinion than by legislative repression, and it should be acknowledged that at times public opinion is not at or even near the forefront of contemporary cultural endeavor. But this "cultural lag" is a universal phenomenon. Sociological evidence suggests that it has always been so.
One of the most difficult forces for the creative thinker or artist to contend with in Australia is the oppressive lack of interest of the government, except (and this has been recent) in the field of science and, to a lesser degree, in education and music. Politicians seem always to be willing to give priority, in matters of fiscal consideration, to railroad carriages and balanced budgets rather than to opera houses, libraries, and universities. There are small literary fellowships
maintained by the Commonwealth government, minimal subsidies for books for public libraries, token grants in support of symphony orchestras, and grudging endowment of art galleries by the state governments; but all of these are scandalously niggardly. Museums, art galleries, educational institutions, libraries, and research organizations all function on shoestring budgets. All give the impression that they are regarded by the government as necessary -- though hard to justify -- appendages of modern society. Government buildings are austere: there are no murals and original paintings, such as are to be seen in almost all United States public buildings, no sculpture except an occasional statue of a former viceregal or historical figure., When an opera house was finally approved for Sydney (after heated advocacy of low-rent public housing instead), it was financed principally from state-operated lotteries rather than from large-scale appropriations from the treasury. There is no Australian equivalent of the British Council, the Canada Council, the French Academy, and the numerous semiofficial cultural bodies in the United States.
If the government is not notably forward in supporting the cultural forces of Australia, neither are business, industry, and individuals. There are no great privately endowed philanthropic foundations comparable to the Carnegie Corporation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation in the United States or the Shell and Leverhulme Trusts in Britain. Though there are many persons of immense inherited and earned wealth, few have given very generously to support the institutions of public culture. The privately endowed universities of India, Europe, and the United States are not understood in Australia; and the concept of graduates (and even nongraduates) supporting their universities financially is almost alien to the established Australian custom. In few places in the world can a small donation to a cultural organization earn so remarkable a reputation for munificence as in Australia.
Source: The Pattern of Australian Culture
|
|
This website is created and designed by Atlantis International, 2006
This is an unofficial website with educational purpose. All pictures, and trademarks are the property of their respective owners and may not be reproduced for any reason whatsoever. If proper notation of owned material is not given please notify us so we can make adjustments. No copyright infringement is intended.
