Friday, May 6, 2011
Just three months ago we held open auditions and met a range of 13-16 year old from across the coast. Several came with friends, and some knew each other from going to Mary's after school drama workshops with S.O.D.A. Others knew no-one, but came along, interested in the idea of performing in a professional space, extending their experiences beyond the school musical (and I'm not putting down school musicals - hey I've directed about 20 of them over the years) and some had already read the script online and wanted to be part of telling this story. But it was a big risk for some of them to do this, knowing nobody and yet willing to invest their trust in us.
Over the course of two weeks we found the right people for the roles and began our explorations and interpretations, moulding the script and energising it. With 'Cleo Missing' I had wanted to create some great roles for young people, ones they could get their teeth into and to relate to... and it was so exciting to see the characters blossoming and the young actors finding new depths and sides to roles. What was also exciting to see was the way the sense of ensemble grew - when that sense of self consciousness, of being afraid of the judgement of others, of being afraid to try something totally left of field ... all of that disappeared and the young people involved were able to accept each other, to know each other and to become friends. That is not to say everyone became best buddies with everyone else, but there was this growing acceptance of others foibles and mistakes, and support for each other.
We knew it had happened when it became harder to get people back from their breaks and the noise of animated conversation filled any gaps in rehearsals, when nicknames were shared and when certain words and sayings were adopted... (I can't experience an awkward silence now without hearing Gemma's ''awkies"). There was a collective sense of support and all of a sudden we moved from little groups of one, two and three with polite exchanges and interactions, into becoming an ensemble. It doesn't always happen - sometimes the egos, the fears, the histories are hard to work through and there just isn't the will or energy to be able to do it. But when that transformation does occur, it makes the whole experience more meaningful.
And that was what I was touched by this week. I know the actual performance experience, the stagecraft and acting skills they developed were what most of them came for and that is a very important outcome from the project. However, when I asked them to identify one thing that stands out for them from across the project... they said things like this:
"I found it incredible how coming into the production I knew no-one but everyone welcomed me into their arms and now they are all amazing friends"
"the fun one can have when everyone is working well together"
"How fantastic everyone is and how well we all get along"
"The great environment created by everyone in the cast and crew".
This has been an important experience in their lives, they created something special, and their hard work and willingness to trust paid off! This is not self-congratulatory twaddle by the way - I just wanted to take the time to note the importance of these types of deeply engaging, significant experiences for young people (and the not so young)!
Thank you to (in order of appearance!!) Cameron, Harry, Brylee, Mark, Andrew, Umi, Paige, Gemma, Liam and Julia - (and the little bit older 'young at heart' people), Mary, Mark and Bruce. My dream became your dream and now your dreams feed mine!
Friday, April 8, 2011
I was invited to be one of 22 speakers at a creativity forum recently - crazy idea to have that many people speak and it did of course go right over time - but the concept is a good one and it was interesting to hear of the insights from artists, writers, librarians, musicians and many more. We had only 8-10 minutes each, so whilst I often don't write 'speeches' for these types of things, this time I decided I'd better.
Creativity in Practice – How to become more Creative
Sue Davis, Creativity & Research Forum, CQUniversity, 4 April, 2011
Who wants to be more creative? Who doesn’t? So how do you go about it? Play more suduko? Cryptic crosswords and DS Brain training games? Well it might help you improve aspects of memory (and the jury is still out on whether they even do that) but they won’t make you more creative. What does it mean to be creative?
There are many definitions of creativity, but common to many of them are words such as combinations, new-ness, originality, novelty imagination and difference. Koestler talked of the concept of bisociation – putting together concepts from different frames in new ways. Some forms of creativity are more significant and have more impact than others and that’s where the concept of little c and Big C creativity come in handy. We all make creative decisions every day. We might decide to try the carrot cake recipe with pumpkin instead of carrot. That’s a creative decision. It may or may not work and it probably won’t change the history of cake making (though you never know)… that’s little c creativity. Big C creativity, is the culture changing type of creativity, those like Picasso, T S Eliot in poetry, Beckett with absurd theatre, Steve Jobs with computer interface, these people (and those they have worked with) whose brave new combinations and experiments initiate new movements and breakthroughs.
So in my research and practice I wanted to develop my creative practice. I had been a drama teacher, writer/director mainly in school contexts but was interested in how young people were bringing technology into the classroom and performance space more and more. So I wondered what it might be like if we tried to enact the drama through the Internet – hence cyberdrama, which is what I explored in my Masters and then PhD. I found out others had already invented the name (Janet Murray) but I was able to explore new ways of taking live drama processes and exploring how they might work in mediated contexts. A bit beyond little c creativity, but not Big C perhaps – maybe more like a Middle C.
However, in my day to day working life I mainly work with students who are training to be primary school teachers.. and when I work with them on arts units, its interesting to see what concepts of themselves as creative they bring to the university classroom. Probably around a third of them have had significant creative experiences and see themselves as creative people, around another third are probably a big ‘iffy’ about it, and another third to not see themselves as creative or as having had a lot of creative experiences. So how do we build their concept of themselves as a creative and ensure that it is backed up by something (and not just wishful thinking).
One of the things we do is talk about creativity and unpack some of the myths about creativity – the myth of creative’s as mad, gifted individuals who are touched by the muse isn’t particularly helpful. Even those born with considerable talent need to really work at what they do. And those who are most gifted don’t necessarily go on to be the most successful, creative or productive. That was the problem with much of the early creativity research. The US army actually funded a lot of the early research with Guildford and co and they developed a range of tests and tools for identifying those who demonstrated divergent and convergent thinking e.g. how many ways can use a brick? People who can come up with the most ways and were identified as most creative, didn’t go on to be the most creative in the field though. Other research indicated that the most creative students at art school also didn’t go on to become the most successful later in life or end up using their creativity in a specifically productive way. So what else does it take?
That’s where a range of creativity researchers, including Howard Garner (of multiple intelligence fame) and others including Feldman and this one Czikszentmihalyi (he says he doesn’t mind if you say ‘the chicks, they all love me’) researched the lives of many creative folk and identified what they call ‘systems’ models of creativity. These models say, yes it is about some individual characteristics and talents, it’s about persistence, focussed attention and what he calls having ‘flow’ experiences (where you are so immersed in what you are doing that all sense of time and place disappears). He also says, it is about learning a lot and practicing in a certain area or ‘domain’ and internalising the rules of the domain. It is also about interacting with and having a field of others to support, critique and recognise your work (and these can be physical or virtual interactions). There are also times and places in the world where if you are part of a group or movement a hothousing effect occurs. The Picassos of the world did not exist in a vacuum. The Brill building originally was rented to music publishers because there were no other takers. By 1962 the Brill Building contained 165 music businesses A musician could find a publisher and printer, cut a demo, promote the record and cut a deal with radio promoters, all within this one building. Hundreds of hits were created in this building and community. Other versions of systems models also include product in there. So if you want to be more creative, you need to work on or consider all these areas.
Through my research with drama students I’ve elaborated on these three components. The individual who has to commit to engagement, build their creative practice in at least one domain and interact with others including communities of practice in the field (these can be live, or of course virtual). They apply this creativity through focussed attention and engagement, practice and generating or making things – products (and products often are featured in other systems models).
So the old adages ring true – if you want to be more creative, you have to put in the hard work. To be able to combine things in new ways, you’ve got to have some things to combine. This also aligns with other popular research. Gardner identified that people like Martha Graham in Dance, Ghandi in politics, Picasso in art had generally be practising in their field for 10 years before they had a major breakthrough. Malcolm Gladwell in the book Outliers (draws on research by Anders Ericsson) to identify the 10 000 hour rule. He draws on case studies of Bill Gates, the Beatles (playing all those 8 hours shifts in Hamburg) they all had 10 000 hours of practice before their major breakthroughs.
So what do we do with our students? Well we provide them with some different art-making experiences, also engaging with the wisdom of the tribe and those masters and mistresses that have come before us. We engage in collective creative activities where they can share their knowledge with each other and offer critical feedback and support… we also encourage them to reflect on their experiences, their concept of themselves as creative and to share their arts journey through a creative form through a digital photostory. For some of them it is a gateway experience as they come to re-engage with their own creative lives and prepare them to guide those of their students. I love viewing these reflective, creative works and most students feel a real sense of achievement when they share these creative pieces.
So what I hope to do is encourage people to find some time for feeding and cultivating their own creativity, it’s both professionally and personally fulfilling, whether it ends up being little ‘c’ or Big ‘C’ creative work. A final quote that sums it up for me – from George Bernard Shaw – “Create what you will” -creativity is an act of will, if you want to do it, apply yourself feed your creativity you can and will do it!
Monday, February 7, 2011
Now the saga goes back years of course (nearly 50 to be precise), but the searching saga about five. A woman I was teaching with at the time told me how she had written to Familes Dept (Qld Govt) to get her original birth certificate. Once she received that, she then applied to find out if her birth mother had married at all in Queensland and that came through. She then had a name, searched the phone books and within a few months was playing happy families at Christmas time! She is in regular contact now with her 'other' family and they all get on fabulously. I was inspired of course, how amazing, how wondrous.. it all seemed so straight forward! I can do that!!
Needless to say my journey has not been quite like hers. I do know, of course, that for most adoptees, it isn't, that it's hard, difficult, uncomfortable, and even when it seems to work out, most folk don't end up meeting regularly and playing happy families in the long run. But I was just hoping mine might be a story with a (fairly immediate) happy ending.
There is such anticipation and hope at the launching of each stage of the journey - could it be just a matter of days, of weeks? Could I at last be able to answer all those doctors, hairdressers, kids at school, teachers, dieticians (and on it goes) who have asked about parental history, hereditary traits, did my parents also go grey young and where did I get those funny toes from!
So the letter went off (with the mandatory cheque of course as nothing is ever free in this game) and within weeks the birth certificate came back with letter, info on possible next steps and advice on counselling services! A name, two names actually, one for me and one for her... and a little of the tale is revealed. A 20 year old, from Melbourne, came to spend a few months in Brisbane, lived in a flat at New Farm and had a baby girl at the Royal Women's Hospital (in the private ward I recall my adoptive Mum telling me, inferring someone was paying her way). Stage I, Tick!
Stage 2, the letter to births, deaths, marriages, yes, with another cheque .. to find out whether the young woman from Melbourne ever married or died in Queensland. Not so easy. This time it was a 'sorry, we can't help you.'
Stage 3, so, she was from Melbourne, perhaps she went back there! So a few phone calls, more forms and another cheque later, off went the request to the Victorian Families folk. I must admit that time I was rather more hopeful and anxiously collected the post every day, feeling certain this time I'd find out something more. But you guessed it... a big fat NO again.
But someone sitting at their desk in administration heaven took pity on me that day and I received a phone call from a kind soul who said 'I'm not really supposed to do this, but I knew you'd be disappointed when you received our letter. I can't tell you any more, but perhaps do your next search in the ACT'. I was too shocked at the time to perhaps be as effusive in my thanks as I should have been - it was a very un-beaurocratic thing for someone to do, but such a wonderful humane action!
So.. more phone calls, another form and of course, don't forget the cheque... and off the letter went to the ACT. That time, a year, a place, a marriage and a name.... but what a name. Of all the men in the world, she married a man called .. wait for it .... John Smith. Yes, the very one, taking on not just a common name... but THE most common name and surname in the whole English language!
So I gave up for a while... months, years even - until the bug bit me again. More phone calls, web trawling, unexpected conversations with fellow adoptees and then I found myself at the state library... pouring over microfische looking through electoral records. Her complete name, even with a Smith on the end, wasn't quite as common as John Smith... and I was able to find one woman living in Melbourne at the time of the last federal elections. Within minutes the lovely lady at the desk on the state library (on the floor where heaps of folk do family searches.. so she's used to the joys and despairs of this whole painful process) found a phone number and wrote it out for me there and then. So close, I thought, could I perhaps be talking to her in just a minute or two??!! But no, I'd read all the websites and books that say don't ring, write first! The shock can be too great for the other person, a letter is better, be informative, let them know you're not after money and offer the possibility of a third person to mediate.
Now this search was turning into a bit of a saga (as is this post - not sure why I thought I could do this quite economically)! I went through several weeks of agonising, thinking through the alternatives, drafting the letter and redrafting... asking a friend (in Melbourne) to be a mediation person, asking Jigsaw in Brisbane to also be a contact point (yes just do it I hear you say) and finally i sent off the letter. Days, weeks, months went by... no response. So then I sent another letter, this time with a stamped, self addressed envelope and a request, if you are not this woman can you please let me know! Still no response.
So where to next - is it her and she doesn't want to talk - or is it not her?
So the next time we were in Melbourne - I worked up the courage ... to ask Ray to ring her. His recollection... it was a woman, yes she sounded 'older' but her response 'I'm sorry, I can't help you'. Her or not her?
So I left it again, a year or two have passed... but the questions remain. And they grow, every yeat they grow... and not just for me.. but for my boy too. I checked the phone number the other day - not connected anymore. And no listing for that name in any phone book now. MMmmmmm if it is her ... perhaps she doesn't want to be found.
So that's where we got to last week. Time to call in the professionals I thought - this is driving me crazy. If it is her I just would like to know.. even if she can't see me or talk to me... just some information, a few basics, and perhaps some inkling of why she is being so elusive. If it's not her, well then it's more forms and a few more cheques i guess. So is she or isn't she, that's the current question - I think she might be ... but I'll keep you posted!
Friday, January 28, 2011
But I felt the need for somewhere to post my thoughts and developments as this year seems to be shaping up to be a big one ... and yes it is a big one birthday wise by the end too.
So the first major develoment is that I've decided to follow some creative callings of my own and with fellow coastal drama afficiendo Mary Eggleston am setting up a production company to stage some high quality performances for and with young people. We're calling it 2Muse Productions and we will be auditioning for our first performance next week. I met Mary last year and we worked together on a script/performance I developed based on the Eliza Fraser story 'Figments of Eliza' (see another blog I set up for that project for more info on that one). We worked togther and found a real synergies of interests and expertise in our collaborating, so I decided it was time to put my money where my mouth is and take the creative plunge. There'll be more to come on this development you can be sure.
Professionally, there's some applications and expressions of interest already submitted and others in development for some exciting research and creative projects. I'll wait until I know which of them might come off before posting more.
Personally, well I've decided that as I'm reaching one of those birthdays that is quite significant that I need to once more delve into the depths and attempt to find out a bit more about who I am and where I came from. Well of course I know the obvious, but there is a limit to what I know beyond that. Being one of the thousands adopted as babies in the 1960s, information about our birth parents was hard to come by for many years. When legal restrictions were reduced and it was possible to apply for some identifying information, I did so, but my quest was not so readily realised and my forays to date have stalled time and again. So this year I've decided to dig through the files again and to consider engaging other services to assist me in the search. I'm not sure how long it will take or if the result will be what I anticipate but it really is time to find out once and for all! And so I thought I might share some of the developments (if there are any) as we go.
Friday, April 30, 2010
So back to more creative work a I've a couple of creative projects on the boil again. At present, particularly involved in all things tree like with an education project as part of the regional TreeLine art and environment program. Our project is called TreeMappa, and we are researching and creating arts-based digital content about significant trees in the region and will sharing that through a number of formats. So far I've been taking quite a lot of pics of trees, initiated some work in a coastal primary school and we've started the project with our first year students. I'm gradually getting them used to the concept of working in role and participating in an online space.... it takes a bit of encouragement though. We've set up a Ning space and wiki. Then eventually we're going to embed content on google maps and share them. It's taken a while to get things moving but I think we're getting there. I've been working on the story of the Eumundi Memorial trees and last weekend took quite a few pics at the local Anzac Day ceremony and created a short video clip.
Now there is anohter reason i've come back to the blog - and that is becuase my boy asked me this week if I'd set up a blog for him. He has serious issues with writing but the ideas just flow out of him. He wanted a space where he could 'get these ideas out of me and share them with the world'. So basically he directs (as usual) and I scribe, but over time i'm hoping he'll do more of the actual writing. That's the plan anyway. .. and so far he is very excited about it. He's focussing on reviewing movies and games and so forth ... Kids View & Reviews - quite an interesting read I think you'll find!
Friday, February 27, 2009
Last weekend’s paper found me reading about the impact of the Ballet-Russe in Australia (and worldwide) 100 years ago (formore information about this project overall see the national library). In particular I was impressed with the sheer connective power of Diaghilev. He wasn’t a dancer, he wasn’t the choreographer of these new works… he wasn’t the designer… no position so mundane. In the article Michelle Potter calls him an ‘orchestrator of events’ – really he was a very talented kind of producer, a collector and curator… not just of art works, but of very talented people. People he worked with included Stravinsky, Cocteau, Picasso, Satie, Balanchine, Matisse, de Chirico, Nijinsky, Pavolva and so the list goes on. … what a potent mix for potential brilliance or chaos - one can only imagine the scale of behind the scenes dramas, catfights and histrionics. He is described as an alchemist, an innovator, a risk-taker with artistic courage and manipulative powers… one can only contemplate these powers in awe!
Diaghilev was obviously a master when it came to managing jostling egos and reputations – perhaps his ego was just so enormous others knew to back off. But he also obviously was able to manage the delicate art of true collaboration. The term collaboration is freely bandied around these days, everyone’s working in collaborative groups and teams… or are they? Collaborative work is more than just having different people working together – putting people into a group, or having them reside in the same building, faculty or city is not enough. In exploring the nature of collaborative relationships I’ve found the writings of Vera John-Steiner and Seana Moran of value. They discuss three characteristics of effective collaboration:
* Complementarity – collaborators have different perspectives, expertise, conceptualisations and so on and the interaction of these forms the foundation for the dynamics of collaboration
* Tension – collaboration is not about consensus (which may not actually lead to learning or challenge). Tensions are not necessarily eliminated but taken advantage of as a ‘mechanisms for bringing out latent opportunities of the domain’…. ‘Collaboration is not absence of tension, but fruitful cultivation of tension’
* Emergence – collaboration can lead to outcomes greater than the additive power of the group. These relationships often develop over time with the collaborators becoming more interdependent across stages of the creative process, with different contributions being made to the process, the working methods, the roles and the products. (paraphrased from Moran & John-Steiner, 2004: 13)
That’s all well and good when you have been working with the same people over time and you’ve worked out your strengths and how you can complement each other. Very tricky stuff in new groups where you’ve got to work out who can do what, where there are overlaps, what are the gaps someone needs to fill, where are the rough surfaces and jagged edges. You can try and speed through this process and assign roles and tasks… and you might just get things done, however that’s not actually collaboration and you may very well end up with a servicable but not particularly inspiring creation. To work through this stuff takes time… and I reckon you all need to be in the same place at the same time for a good part of it. It’s very hard to achieve the same collaboration on-line with new collaborators and even harder if some participants are meeting face to face and others aren’t. I’ve experienced this in the most personal of ways. (Mmm so this is looking like being a longer post than I thought... my apologies... but let's go with it)!
You see it’s not so long ago ‘Pollyanna’ was talking to some local friends about why they should get involved in some collaborative community ventures and said friends were vowing and declaring that creative work with others was just too hard. “Oh no,” claimed Pollyanna, “not if you understand how groups work and how you can work together in complementary ways. You can work through group problems if you know how.”
Mmm… really… Well in fact the answer is that knowledge is not necessarily any protection from the slings and arrows of 'new group' dynamics. You can know everything there is to know about groups and how they work, but if you don’t actually form the group properly and reach some state of shared purpose, confidence and trust in the group, then things can turn from nice to nasty in the blink of an eye. For example if some members meet face to face and one member is not part of some of those meetings…. or if that member tries to ring other members to find out what’s going on and they don’t take their calls or ring them back… and so if that member finally resorts to saying things on email that are could then be seen as directive, obstructive or bossy … well then… all the more reason not to invite that member to the next meeting or ring them on the phone. We'll just email them ... and we know where that can lead! While the ‘insider’ discussions might all be very productive and innocent (you’re probably thinking…. unlikely) the ‘outsider’ starts to imagine all kinds of reasons why they’ve been excluded and their actions start to appear more desperate or anti-social. They might search for possible allies in the group, or express their frustration outside the group, or finally… just tell the group to f….. off. Dynamics and tension emerge all right, but not of the most fruitful kind.
I think this kind of less than ideal outcome is more likely in new groups where the participants don’t really know each other – where they come with sets of overlapping skills and lack of clarity of roles. It’s much easier if you enter something… say for example a collaborative performance project, knowing who is director, who is the producer, writer, actors etc… but if you start from scratch where everyone could do everything in a particular process… that’s actually much harder… what if three people want to be director, how to you work out who does it? The one with the biggest ego, the loudest voice, the most experience, or should it be the one with the least experience who needs a break? How do you decide? Vote, talk about it and try and arrive at consensus or just start working and see who triumphs? I reckon often the biggest ego wins out especially if it’s combined with charisma, charm and a dash of chutzpa… that’s probably what happened with Diaghilev. He was the central ego around whom others were drawn and their roles were somewhat defined on entry to the collaboration, even if they shifted throughout.
For most of us… I guess we often stick to collaborating with those we know and trust, just go and do our own thing … or like my friends, avoid collaborations like the plague. I’m still Pollyanna enough to put my faith in a good creative collaboration… as long as there’s time to build trust and engage in constructive dialogue! Phew ... got that out of my system!
Saturday, February 14, 2009
It seems Years of Creativity are not all that original though, with Europe having an even bigger and better one this year - not just confined to one state, nor one ministry alone. Theirs is called the European Year of Creativity and Inovation and their launch was in Prague in January... not sure what minor celebrities were at that one.. but it sounds like there were lots of political types, perhaps their ministerial advisers weren't so craft with the invite list. They too have come up with the idea of "Ambassadors for the Year", ooh, another great chef in there - Ferran Adria Acosta, plus some pretty big names including Richard Florida & Ken Robinson (I've met both but I'm sure they might not recall the same about me) and some interesting sounding creatives including Philip Starck. So a big year for creativity coming up... will follow developments and hope that the invitation to something in Europe comes in soon - mmmm September would be nice!