WITHOUT THE MACHINES

(Generation J Podcast)

A Liminal Moment and the Future Begins Again

For the student cast of Welcome to Nowhere, the play signals the beginning of a new chapter.

By Nicholas Li ★★★★ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is the first of unseasonably warm spring nights when last drinks are called to beckon the crowd of 20-somethings away from the Malthouse and on into the night. Hugs are exchanged with the cast, the sound of goodbyes making way for the clang of beer bottles as staff prepare for the final day of Welcome to Nowhere.

It requires a certain breed to pursue a career in the arts, always has. Indulge me and return to the moment you last heard the school bell chime through the court yard, a sound that embodied the liminal moment beckoning you towards adulthood. Year 12 exams are over. November warmth heralds the beginning of summer and of (relative) liberty. For you, there is little interest in accounting, in science, or law. The passion is theatre. You are not ignorant to a lack of opportunities; your parents have always been more than happy to remind you that what you do is a “hobby, not a job.”

So you overcome their trepidations – and finally your own – and decide “to hell with society’s expectations, I’m gonna do this!” 

…Unfortunately Australia does not make it easy. To study the arts comes with an $18,000 debt. And of course there is no guarantee of work even with your degree. Nevertheless you either have the self-confidence or blissful ignorance to take up tertiary education in the arts.  It is the logical next step. In a few years you find yourself in a familiar predicament; is this a case of the more things change, the more they stay the same? 

Welcome to Nowhere is a Melbourne Fringe Festival theatre production running from the 24th of September to the 3rd of October at the Malthouse Theatre. 5 Australian playwrights were each tasked by director Emma Valente with creating a performance based on the prompt ‘Welcome to Nowhere,’ a theme based on the idea of liminality. 

5 mini plays of no specific relation other than the prompt were produced. Performed by a cohort of final year Bachelor of Performing Arts students from Monash University, the result is an emotionally and thematically diverse experience; you would be hard pressed to find something that covers as much territory at the rest of the Fringe. 

The first play, Fleur Kilpatrick’s Inertia, centres on the fiery interactions between an aspiring mars astronaut (Emily O'Connor) and a boyish young man she appreciates only in his capacity to fulfil her sexual needs (Jordan Broadway). It sets off the play in the most ideal way. Comical yet serious enough to engage, it also features a sex scene that is part dance, part physical sequence, so simultaneously alien and sensual that it would enthral even the most experienced lover. 

Broadway’s character seems mismatched for O’Connor’s, his awfully drab clothing and awkward demeanour would inspire minimal interest in a potential sexual partner. Beth Auhl is the costume designer for Welcome, and is also in her final year of Performing Arts. She explains how the costume is aimed to draw the audience into seeing through the eyes of the aspiring astronaut. “We wanted him to look very bland because we’re seeing it through the girl’s perspective, where she’s not really interested in anything about him. It’s not his personality that she’s interested in. He’s bland. There’s nothing. There’s nothing to comment about him. All the way down to his socks.”

Across the 5 plays, Ms Auhl increased the amount of colour in slow increments to correlate with the relationship she saw between the performances. “I imagined a slider board of colour from 0-100, and to slowly the increase the amount of colour along the play. As we went along each piece got some more patterns, textures and colours, until the final piece, which was very bold and very experimental.”

Zoey Dawson’s Started From The Bottom follows and features Eliza Quinn as a glammed up young woman receiving an unspecified award. She lives in a world of self-doubt, vocalised in the form of a pestering parrot (Claire Macalister). An obscure affair, Quinn’s borderline deranged character is a convincing and multidimensional effort.

The closest the production comes to realism is its third play, Daniel Keene’s Ash, a somewhat touching exploration of sibling connection in the face of a parent’s death. Its value is detracted by having the misfortune of being sandwiched between two plays whose frenetic energy makes it seem meagre in comparison.

Indeed the last two performances evoke feelings at opposite ends of emotional spectrum. Morgan Rose’s New Bright Future explores a group of young adults discussing the disappearance of their home town. The closer, Angus Cerini’s The Curling Ribbon, is loosely inspired by the Sydney Siege and is a brutal portrayal of love in the face of a homicidal maniac. 

Jordan Broadway looked for inspiration in unusual places for the role of the gun man.

“I watched a lot of videos of animals attacking their prey, to get out of my own way of moving. Early in the process I felt like I was some sort of woodland elf floating around the stage; it wasn’t scary. I’m obviously not a huge guy, so I looked at cheetahs and wolves to see how something not physically huge could have a big presence.” 

The students are a dying breed. They are the last of their crop. Monash cut the Bachelor of Performing Arts from its curriculum in 2013, with the course merging into the Bachelor of Arts degree. It thus seems fitting that the Fringe Festival, now in its 33rd year of promoting grass roots talent, is putting its weight behind the performance. 

For the members of Welcome, the play is the final assessment before the students revisit that familiar liminal moment of not so many years ago. The feelings of insecurity that come from pursuing the dream may remain, but Jordan Broadway notes in gentle self-assuredness that the experience has brought great value to their prospects.

“It’s a really great thing to say - while I’m still at university - that I’ve had a show at the Malthouse. I can name drop the writer and the directors that were involved in the project.  A bunch of industry people have come to see the show and it’s nice to have my face and name in the back of their head.  It won’t be like, “oh I saw you in this show, come be in our headline MTC show next year.” I’ll keep doing my independent stuff with the students that I’ve met, but it’s a good thing to have on my resume.”

Similarly, Beth Auhl agrees that working at the Malthouse has been a significant stepping stone. With a touch of humour, she speaks with an acute awareness of her position. 

“It was amazing working at the Malthouse, I’ve already worked here once before and hopefully many more to come because this is what I want to do!” Welcome is a challenging experience for those not familiar with modern theatre. There are moments, such as in The Curling Ribbon, that the frenzied pace of the action and demands of the script could derail the scene; performed well, it is a sign of maturity on behalf of the cast.  Sound is used to unsettle the audience, notably in the periodical introduction of high pitched ringing during tense scenes. Intrusive sounds are also generated by the cast; piercing cries and screams will leave you very, very tense. 

By the climax of the play I could take no more aural assault.  Whilst this may suggest a poor play, it was not the case. Rather, it was reflective of the objective to un-nerve being successfully achieved. Anxiety was just one amongst a plethora of emotions. A sign of a diverse and complete theatre experience, and of a liminal moment for the cast.

The following is a transcript of Nicholas Li’s radio review of Patricio Guzman’s The Pearl Button, screened at the Melbourne International Film Festival this year.

Cinema is a medium that can remind us with such gut wrenching ability just how insignificant we and our little blue marble are when compared to the rest of the universe. Guzman is devoted to making you feel human. The Pearl Button, the follow-up documentary to 2010’s critically acclaimed Nostalgia For The Light, is an experience of emotional immersion. The film’s value is obvious and it will leave an impression on you; it just might not be what the director wholly wanted.

The film explores the connection between the waters across Chile’s vast coastline and links them to the nation’s mistreatment of its indigenous inhabitants, as well its political prisoners during the dictatorship of 1973-1990. Along with water, space and the cosmos act as a central inspiration for the way the Indigenous model their lives. Audiences familiar with Nostalgia for the Light will be right at home watching this film; indeed Guzman himself has stated that it should be considered with Nostalgia in mind.

The film begins on the premise of understanding the value of water. There is a very spiritual element to Guzman’s storytelling, as he brings you in and out of nature and into long conversations with his subjects, suddenly and un-expectantly. From the indigenous, and the distant past, the film moves to the not so distant past, and various experts are interviewed to explain the role of the coastline as grave yard for political prisoners.

Immaculately shot, The Pearl Button is at its best when it plays on the senses. Stunning point of view scenes of Chile’s landscape are captivating and position you to feel as if you are one of the indigenous, rowing past ice glaciers and jagged cliff faces in a world which seems untouched by man. The orchestral soundtrack is highly appropriate, and brings to mind the delicacy of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey in the best possible way. You can’t help but feel the blood pulsing through your chest as Guzman combines these spectacular images with lonely, expansive music and couples it with the sound of water falling on a tin roof, or with a gentle stream.

Yet, this touch of expertise is ultimately not quite matched by an ability to engage the audience in comprehending the historical depth of his subject matter. Australian audiences for the most part will be unfamiliar with the shocking and deplorable actions of the Chilean government, and Guzman’s work rightfully and importantly brings these issues to attention.

Guzman’s lethargic narration simply does not hit home in the way that a David Attenborough type can compel an audience. The cinematography of emotional and sensual immersion just doesn't correlate to an experience that is conducive to education – in one second the audience is thrown from the depths of space to the stagnant living room of an expert; (and) whilst these experts are certainly informed, they are not presented in a means that’s engaging.

Whilst moving, the film does not explain in a coherent manner that fundamental question of why these events happened. Ultimately The Pearl Button’s strengths highlight its weaknesses; it could have been so much more. 3 stars.

DECLAN GLEESON

Constrained by a dire political situation of their own making the Prime Minister and Treasurer have handed down the only type of budget that they could; one which tries to offend no one, appeases the electorate and attempts to resuscitate business confidence. Labor's chance to seize the initiative with a more responsible alternative was passed up.

The Government has retreated to a position where it now resembles the 'no surprises', diligent Government that Abbott promised it would be. The 2015 budget is the antithesis of its predecessor in its rationale and aims. It seeks to undo the damage from the disastrous 2014 budget and restore business confidence with a range of spending initiatives.

Central to the thinking behind this budget were immediate political and economic considerations. And nowhere is this more evident than in its small business package, one of the budgets signature features.

Small business is given a 1.5% tax cut and urged by the Government to "have a go". With business confidence in a protracted slump, no thanks to the Governments largely erratic and disappointing performance to date, the economic rationale behind this measure is obvious.

The second main aspect of this package is a superfluous $20,000 instant asset write off, effective immediately. This measure in particular is one that wouldn't be out of place in the Howard Governments handout and tax cut rituals; acts of electoral appeasement to its core constituency of lower and middle income families dubbed the 'Howard battlers'.

It is no surprise then that Abbott was quick to label the big winners from this measure as 'Abbotts Tradies' as the Government seeks to sure up the support of core Liberal constituencies.

Whilst clearly being an exercise in electoral appeasement, Abbott continues to argue that his Governments two budgets are consistent in their pursuit of deficit reduction. Indeed, the budgetary projections show a return to surplus in 2019-2020. Yet this is not due to any measures included in this budget. Most of this is driven by huge projected increases in income tax revenue through bracket creep (when inflation pushes incomes into higher tax brackets).

To believe that these projections will eventuate would be too trust obscenely optimistic growth forecasts and the electorates tolerance for permanently increasing taxation - as an ever greater proportion of middle income earners are pushed into the second highest tax bracket. This is unlikely, and the salience of the bracket creep issue will grow with each passing year.

This ticking political time bomb has been kicked down the road, to be defused by a Government not concerned primarily with political survival.

Framed by the Government as 'fair' and as an affront to no one, this budget is definitive evidence that Labor was triumphant in its values-driven assault on the Government and that the body politic remains centre-left in its economic outlook.

Unburdened by the dire perceptions which has forced the Government to unveil such a reform-lite budget, there was enormous opportunity for the Labor opposition to build upon its recently released superannuation policy, reject the Governments conspicuous efforts at vote buying, and chart a more credible path back to surplus.  

Yet Bill Shortens budget reply was a disappointing and feckless display of one upmanship, and an appeal to the Labor heartland on issues such as education. He was left looking ridiculous when proposing a 5% small business tax cut with no explanation of how such a substantial reduction in revenue would be covered, and why exacerbating the inefficiencies of a two-tier company tax regime would be a responsible idea.

With the budget well received by the public, and with no substantial and credible criticism from the opposition, Abbott has been injected with a renewed sense of confidence. Having been under fire incessantly for the best part of a year the Prime Minister relished the opportunity to go on the attack against Labor's modest superannuation policy, claiming that the Government will never reform superannuation.

It's a depressing choice of tactic and an ultimately unsustainable position as superannuation tax concessions look set to overtake the pension as a percentage of Government expenditure in the coming years.

Thus the prevailing political dynamic appears to be one in which neither party believes that it can gain politically by making substantial inroads into fixing the nations worsening structural budget deficit. Yet a report commissioned by the Business Council of Australia released last month revealed a public who are aware that the nation is headed in the wrong direction and receptive to the idea of reform to the tax system. Both the Government and opposition would be wise to heed such a report.

The Shorten Opposition, ascendant in the polls and facing a pugilist Prime Minister who is well versed in the art of scare tactics and negative campaigns, must be tempted to largely persist with a small-target strategy until the next election.

Yet Shorten would be wise to remember that Kim Beazley's persistence with a small target strategy against an unpopular first term Howard Government only culminated in defeat and perceptions of Beazley as a man who didn't carry any convictions or beliefs.

DECLAN GLEESON

The Government’s fanatical determination to repair the nations finances threw it drastically off course. Having retreated from its disastrous first budget, the Government is now resembling the cautious, diligent entity that it promised to be. Although still incredibly weak, it now has no choice but to deliver a 'dull' budget and return to square one.  

From his days as Opposition leader, to the early months of his Prime Ministership, Tony Abbott gave numerous indications that he would pursue a conventional two-term strategy. He was to lead a 'no surprises' Government: ruling out tax increases, changes to pensions, changes to university funding arrangements, cuts to health, education and public broadcasters in a now infamous election eve interview.

The Government would meet its modest commitments, act with diligence and provide an atmosphere of stability. It would build momentum for change through the release of several reviews and white papers, and take a more ambitious reform agenda to the 2016 election.

As late as March 2014, Abbott resisted pressure from a hopeful business and media, ruling out a raft of unforeshadowed changes.  This approach would be sobering to expectant advocates of immediate budget repair, and uninspiring to the public. But for a Government led by a man who would never gain the sort of widespread popularity needed to carry unpopular change, an approach with which it could earn the trust of the public would be essential.

Its commitments appeared modest, but it soon became apparent that its pledge to return the budget to surplus was anything but.

Collapsing commodity prices saw the nation's budgetary position further deteriorate, yet the Prime Minister and the Treasurer would not dampen their rhetoric. The Government, emboldened by its large parliamentary majority; and the Commission of Audits recommendations, and urged on by its media backers, moved to act, lest it be seen as a Fraser-esque 'do nothing' Government.

It abandoned all aspects of its two-term strategy in its crusade for budget repair. Unveiling a first budget which offended every major interest group, broke a plethora of promises, and prevented it from gaining any momentum or political capital from its past or future successes and met commitments.

Fast forward 11 months, and the Government  is still locked in a protracted and often clumsy retreat from its politically disastrous first budget. The Coalition and its near deposed leader remain severely weakened, and now face a slowing economy in which business and consumer confidence has been hurt by its erratic actions.

Having ditched most of the measures for which they have received such unrelenting criticism, the Government has stopped the rot. Now it is consolidating its position.

Finally we may be seeing the emergence of the pragmatic and diligent 'no surprises' Government that we expected to receive in the first place. It now says that it won't break its promise to refrain from reform to superannuation despite the Opposition indicating that it is open to the idea. But most significantly, it has now shed the zeal with which it originally sought to address the budget deficit, drastically softening its rhetoric - Abbott even going as far as saying that a debt-to-GDP ratio of 50% would be a "pretty good outcome".

It's a recognition that it gained nothing from its budget repair crusade, that the nations finances will not be brought into balance this term as the bottom line deteriorates due to declining commodity prices, and that repair will require substantial  structural reforms for which a mandate will be required.  

However, with the Government in its current state, the prospects of it preparing the public for any meaningful reform that it may take to the next election are next to none. Just take the toothless handling of last month's tax discussion paper as proof. Hockey released it, avoided starting any meaningful conversation, and ran, leaving the opposition to blow any prospects of a discussion over the GST out of the water.

The Government must use the coming budget to get itself off the back foot and regain control of the agenda, lest the upcoming white papers and other reviews go to waste like the tax discussion paper, and like so many reviews before it.

Whilst some are lamenting the idea that the Government appears set to unveil a "dull" and "almost boring" budget next month, there's really not much else it can do.  It can ill afford to offend anyone after spending the last five months healing wounds, nor can it seriously cut spending in the context of a fragile economy. Crucially, it must provide the stability and certainty that both business and consumers crave. Better a budget in deficit then an economy in recession come the 2016 election.

There are likely to be cuts, though they will probably be more symbolic than anything of substance. The budgets central measure, the childcare package, will be designed to get everyone smiling and nodding.  It's an important step in regaining the trust of a cynical electorate, tackling the perception that it is a Government addicted to unfairness, and getting the public listening again.