Add a Comment

Comment by Tracy Evans on September 16, 2009 at 9:48

Hi all
I think the choice of change that needs to come needs to go even beyond changing our values, but does need to start with each of us....values are too culturally and individually specific....I think that as you write John 'change is happening', but the change could be seen as a shift in human consciousness, so rather than having change as a response to crisis-situation, the crisis is actually part of the wider change that is needed and happening.

Rumi wrote:
'Every need brings in what's needed.
Pian bears its cure like a child.

Having nothing produces provisions.
Ask a difficult question,
and the marvellous answer appears,
build a ship, and there'll be water
to float it. The tender-throated
infant cries and milk drips
from themother's breast.

Be thirsty for the ultimate waters,
and then be ready for what will
come pouring from the spring.'

My musings on change are:

1. you can only change yourself (you cannot change anyone else)
As Bridget points out: 'all changes in what I value and why have come from someone inspiring me'. So although the stimulus for change might come from outside us, and I guess it usually does, the power to change lies within each of us. Our theatre should be inspiring people to be fully conscious: this can be achieved in more creative ways than presenting a problem and asking them to think about it.

2. change has its own rhythm (just because we want something to change straight away doesnt mean it will happen)

3. to try to change something outside of ourselves we need to ensure we have the highest intentions (not based on the aspirations of our own egos) and accept that there are other forces at play. Wise cultures (and a not-too-distant British culture...think Elizabethan times) knew/know that our human existence works on multiple levels- not just the physical plane. We are a part of nature, and not separate from it. One of the most perfect examples in theatre are the plays of Shakespeare- all realms of existence are present.

4. everything is always changing.

Surely our art needs to go far beyond the fields where people are debating whether there is a state of crisis and how we might resolve it etc etc Because art gives tools for using the imagination. William Blake wrote “Imagination is the real and eternal world of which this vegetable universe is but a faint shadow.” Lets use the language of metaphor in theatre to sow seeds and plant flowers, to welcome others to dance in the garden of paradise that is already in bloom, if we chose to see it. This is no small task. As Gandalf says to Frodo, when he wants to give up because it is all too difficult and exhausting and unending and seems so far away: "All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world Frodo, besides the will of evil.”

I think NTW has begun this work on the level of theimagination as it based on such a huge vision, and look at how the people are coming, just on this site alone. So I trust we are in good hands, but it will be for each of us to play our part and as bridget says 'give it a lot more thought'.

Right,now that the epic is over (that was my first post on the site so I think I got a bit carried away!).

A final poem:

Archaic Torso of Apollo
by Rainer Maria Rilke

We cannot know his legendary head
with eyes like ripening fruit. And yet his torso
is still suffused with brilliance from inside,
like a lamp, in which his gaze, now turned to low,

gleams in all its power. Otherwise
the curved breast could not dazzle you so, nor could
a smile run through the placid hips and thighs
to that dark center where procreation flared.

Otherwise this stone would seem defaced
beneath the translucent cascade of the shoulders
and would not glisten like a wild beast’s fur:

would not, from all the borders of itself,
burst like a star: for here there is no place
that does not see you. You must change your life.

Comment by National Theatre Wales on September 16, 2009 at 6:59

Thanks for all these thoughts. Actually I was one of only five people (out of around a hundred) who initially went and stood in the 'change values' corner. When the question was changed from 'what do you think would be most likely to work' to 'what would you most like to see happen' a lot of people moved to this corner - reflecting the tone of some of the debate here. My feeling was that without a change in values none of the other three options could work, and I really do feel that change is happening. Yes we've passed a lot of consumerist values on to young people, but young people are also leading the climate change camps, insisting on free circulation of music, and doing many other very unconsumerist things. So I actually felt that changing values was the most likely solution, not just the most admirable one. However, ultimately I probably agree with Zoe that it's going to involve a mix of all four things. Any other thoughts on this question? Or any thoughts on how National Theatre Wales could impact on the question of sustainability and/or climate change?

Comment by bridget keehan on September 16, 2009 at 2:17

In my experience all changes in what I value and why have come from someone inspiring me usually through their audacity, courage, skill and compassion - sometimes directly, sometimes through their art. If you get a chance go and see Morag Colquhoun's work at Howard Gardens, part of the MA show. I find it inspiring that she determined from the outset to create a completely carbon neutral piece of work and the outcome is beautiful. I don't know yet if seeing her work is going to make me set myself the same challenge with the next thing I make but her work and this dialogue is going to ensure that I give it a lot more thought and I think there's value in that...

Comment by zoe mills on September 15, 2009 at 23:10

hm... tricky... All of the above?
i'd really like to believe 'change in values' would work, but people don't like changing their values unless they have to; unless their lives are directly affected by it. carbon rationing sounds like the most immediate one that would really work but without all the others ,people would be outraged with government and it would just be turned into even more of a political tool by the opposition...basically we need a bit of all of them surely?! if you just pick one without any of the others it won't work at all.
I think James is right too, self-interest and greed need to be harnessed to the good for once! All that lovely clever marketing spin that gets used to subtly push us towards a hundred and one products we don't need to use now, could be used to get people to live more sustainably. oh dear this all sounds very cynical doesn't it? but realistically people who are comfortable in their lives for the most are very reluctant to change anything massively like getting rid of their car ( i wouldn't want to at the moment to be honest, my life would be even more chaotic!), conversely people who don't have a great quality of life are quite reasonably more preoccupied wiht things that they need here and now, like money to live. So here we are back to square one- basically you need a bit of everything to get change people's behaviour to change and help people feel personal responsibility, otherwise people won't be intersted enough until climate change is definately and directly affecting their own lives.hm... i wish it wasn't true though all sounds very cyncical- On a personal level I'm opting for -lets change our values:) I like to believe i'm free to choose.

Comment by James Doyle-Roberts on September 15, 2009 at 13:50

I'm going for the free market.
Consumer demand is the quickest way to make those greedy little corporation piggies snuffle around for what's most likely to deliver profits.

The trick is to create genuine consumer demand, that isn't conviced by bogus Greenwash, market targetting. How do we do that? By encouraging subtle changes in our choices, in a way that isn't demanding that We Must Change Our values.

Comment by Louise Osborn on September 15, 2009 at 10:47

Whilst I like the sentiment contained in Catherine's comment and would like to see a change in our values I think this unlikely to happen without either 1. An ecological disaster which impacts us personally or 2. An equally massive change in political leadership and ideology, where long term interests prevail over short term ones.... Either of these would take too much time; and that's something we don't have.
I would therefore go with the urgent and draconian option of Carbon Rationing, with fat penalties for those who drive around in those absurd gas guzzling four wheelers, and the low cost airlines, whose pollution levels are terrifying... I think this is possibly the only way to really raise awareness and for us to take personal responsibility... there would also have to be a way of avoiding a corrupt black market, where rich cats were able to 'acquire' more rations! But, more than anything we have to perceive looking after the environment as being in our own interest, and something to do with each of us. For many young people there are such levels of disengagement, loss of hope and despair that it probably doesn't even touch their radars...until we have a much more just and inclusive society, any kind of 'value change' just feels like a liberal sentiment?
My experience with my own kids is, that despite parental efforts against the tide, theirs is a generation that have been seriously groomed to consume.... the impact of advertising and new media has been huge, and they have been sold the idea that everything is disposable and a commodity.... including people, education, health care and even politics!
Having said all this, I think that any measures that begin to address this issue are urgent and desirable!

Comment by john norton on September 15, 2009 at 8:22

change in values ...? how does that come about? ...where do 'values' come from? what has the highest value? what's the best value? marvin gaye made what's going on in 1971... which for my money is both one of the great works of art, and one of the great works of environmentalist art... how far forward did we come? are my hands clean?

Comment by Catherine Paskell on September 14, 2009 at 23:38

I think that A change in our values so that we have less need of consumer goods is the most likely to achieve the right effect, but I do think it is the most difficult one to achieve! If we can do this one, then the other 3 will follow... if we change our values then businesses and by natural law, the free market, will automatically limit their carbon use because there will be a natural fall in demand and therefore a fall in carbon output. We wouldn't need enforced rationing (the 3rd point).

I read somewhere that it's possible that the last 40 years of consumer culture has just been a blip on society's radar and that maybe, after this last recession people's values will change. The wider consciousness will realise we no longer need the biggest car/fridge/mp3 player because other things are much more important. Like environmental and social care. And that this is being lead by a much more aware younger generation. But maybe they were just an idealist?

Comment by Ellie Carter on September 14, 2009 at 23:36

Good question...I don't know which is right but I would go with a change in our values.