Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Critical Cultural Foresight: Australian Futures Studies Jason D. Ensor Accepted for Masters of Arts The University of Queensland September 2001
Acknowledgments Towards Critical Cultural Foresight could not have been completed without the assistance and support of a number of people. I wish to acknowledge and thank David Bennett, Nick Caldwell, Phil Cloran, Patricia Corness, Leigh Dale, Shirley and Rawen (Chick) Davis, Sue Ellis, Donald and Kura Ensor, Carole Ferrier, John Frow, Andrew Gilbert, Geoff and Cherrie Hancock, Annette Henderson, Roni Kelly, Kerry Kilner, Robert Lucas, Felicity Meakins, Guy Redden and the M/C Team, Elizabeth Mitchell and the English Department Office Staff, Chris Rintel, Doreen Stitt, Aileen and Amanda Taylor, Greg Taylor, Chris Tiffin, Angela Voita and Drew Whitehead. Special thanks and appreciation is reserved for Richard Fotheringham and Graeme Turner who have supported this project from conception to completion. Last, this thesis could not have been attempted without the guidance, friendship and encouragement of Richard Nile, to whom I owe the greatest debt of gratitude.
Consult not your fears but your hopes and dreams. Think not about what you have tried and failed, But what is still possible for you to do. To live is to change
Statement
of
Purpose:
The
Future
What
is
it
Meant
to
Do?
Strategic
foresight
is
the
ability
to
create
and
maintain
a
high
quality,
coherent
and
functional
forward
view,
and
to
use
the
insights
arising
in
useful
organisational
ways.1
Towards
Critical
Cultural
Foresight
addresses
the
manner
in
which
knowledge
of
the
future
(or
futurestext,
information
positioned
and
empowered
as
relevant
to
the
future
and
significant
to
the
construction
and
formation
of
the
future
subject)
is
created,
propagated
and
given
prominence
in
Australian
culture
and
Australian
studies
in
moving
from
the
second
to
the
third
millennium.
It
argues
that
the
future
can
be
positioned
as
a
text
subject
to
various
desires
and
uses
and
that
from
such
positioning
a
form
of
apocalyptic
thinking
can
be
observed
as
a
deep
cultural
process
guiding
interpretations
of
the
future
for
Australians.
Situated
within
the
discipline
of
Australian
studies,
a
field
succinctly
described
by
Ffion
Murphy
as
a
discursive
formation
and
cluster
of
theoretical
and
methodological
strategies
for
scholarly
inquiry
into
Australia,2
this
thesis
interrogates
the
politics
behind
processes
actively
inventing
the
future.
The
proposition
of
critically
approaching
the
future
as
a
text
rests
on
three
major
arguments.
First,
I
use
the
term
critical
throughout
this
project
to
1 2
Richard Slaughter, Futures for the Third Millennium: Enabling the Forward View, Ffion Murphy (ed.), Writing Australia: New Talents 21C, St Lucia, University of Queensland Press, 2000, p 11.
declare a relationship between the future and critical theory and to suggest that a reflexive sense of situatedness is needed when discussing the future. Second, the future in its various guises can be associated with the needs of relatively powerful persons or groups and can thus become skewed in favour of particular interpretations and social interests. When viewed in this manner, some futures can be identified as artificially narrowed, representing a closure rather than an expansion of options. The intention then is to bring individuals to reflect critically upon the more or less arbitrary creation of meaning in the futures around them, and the skewed power relations underlying them, in order to be able to modify them and to suggest new forms.3 Finally, while the future is of immense value in permitting a site for goals, plannings and visions which roots itself in society as a component of change and social movement, its symbolic infrastructure (its social resources of widely shared ideas, themes and concepts) remains strongly associated with a North American consciousness, particularly in the publications imported from the mid-west Bible Belt. It is therefore useful to interpret the future as a text and its selective deployment in Australia from within a tradition of enquiry grounded locally that is, Australian studies. From this perspective, a selection of deficiencies can also be identified in Australian studies and these provide a starting point for the Australian public intellectual. A related concern is to concentrate on those deficiencies which rob Australian studies of much of its contemporary effectiveness, which a more reflective approach
offered under the definition of Australian public intellectual may attempt to resolve. The major thrust is to reverse the default interpretation of the future as unworthy of critical, textual attention and to investigate the theoretical competencies required for the emerging new Australian studies scholar the public intellectual which might be further developed and applied to futures in Australian studies generally. The utility of reading the future in this way derives from moving to a position where the future may be less mythologised and more accessible. Additionally, users of the future are reflexively aware of embedded ideologies, commitments and interests. Those with ideas about what it should be like might better clarify the senses in which the future can be created or invented in some critical detail. So this argument is perhaps oriented towards an emancipation of the future using metatheoretical levels of enquiry on apocalyptic (otherwise known as doomsday) futures. From the outset, I dont suggest that apocalypse popularisation is the only alternative space of futures thinking opened up by the postmodern reconceptualisation of our historical, social and cultural practices as coded texts through which we engage in the play of writing and reading the world.4 But I do argue that apocalypse is one of the most persistent interpretative processes competing against clearly articulated and responsible vision in the Australian national imagination and Australian studies, worthy of interrogation.
Donna Haraway, A Cyborg Manifesto, Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, New York, Routledge, 1991.
This thesis then is not an exercise in forecasting, extrapolating, predicting or anticipating the near or far futures processes which stress the potential corporeality of a particular future being envisioned but which pay insufficient attention to the situatedness of both future/s-knowledge production and inscription. Instead, it is an interrogation of a selection of contemporary texts mediating foresight technologies in Australia. These texts, drawn from a literature that falls under the definition of futurestext (to be elaborated below), are linked through the word and idea future. They serve the current project as qualitative rather than quantitative forms of evidence about how Australians think about the future in the contemporary age and indicate a fraction of the entire site of futures-thinking available for interrogation. Towards Critical Cultural Foresight teases out some of the hidden processes behind this thinking. While one might sympathise with one type of future over another, we must be mindful that we are still trading in uncertain, open- ended and value-laden texts. On this point, Towards Cultural Foresight is not concerned with validating any single perspective of the future nor privileging one particular calibration or imagination of time and its unfolding over another. Rather, in perceiving the future to be structured by a set of dominant but not monolithic interests,5 it is concerned with theorising the processes of making meaning of the future and asks, when confronted with future myth, particularly western apocalyptic configurations of future myth, not is it true? but what is it meant to do?
ibid., p 211.
Chapter
One
Introduction
Language
mediates
the
interpretation
of
experience
and
is
constitutive
of
understanding.
It
follows
that
normative
statements
about
what
should,
or
should
not,
be
inevitably
reflect
the
preferences
and
interests
of
those
who
utter
them.
This
renders
the
possibility
of
objectivity
and
value-free
knowledge
extremely
problematic,
cutting
the
ground
from
under
the
feet
of
anyone
who
implicitly,
or
otherwise,
assumes
a
superior
viewpoint.
More
positively,
it
points
the
way
to
metaphors
for
communication
that
have
less
to
do
with
persuasion
and
control
than
with
dialogue
and
negotiation.6
[W]e
should
not
speak
of
correct
forecasts,
but
of
useable
ones.7
The
future
is
socially
constructed;
it
is
not
an
element
of
empirical
reality.
As
with
time
in
general,
the
future
is
constitutive
of
a
social
and
cultural
order.
Our
conception
of
time
and
modes
of
time
keeping
are
also
culturally
specific.
For
Australian
society
does
not
regard
time
nor
keep
time
in
the
same
manner
or
form
as
say
Indian
or
Chinese
cultures.
How
Australians
reckon
the
pattern
of
passing
moments
is
culturally
specific
to
a
western
scheme
of
calibration.
Similarly,
Australian
responses
and
reactions
to
6 7
ibid., p 208. Geoffrey Fletcher, The Case Against a Science of Futurology, World Futures Society Bulletin, vol 15 no 3, 1981, pp 27-32.
patterns of time reckoning are also culturally specific. In Australia, citizens are educated to react to socio-temporal cues like, say, Australia Day on January 26th or Anzac Day on April 25th. Other cultures do not respond to these cues the same way that Australians choose and are required to. Responses to socio-temporal cues are learnt. To think about the future is to draw upon a special set of determinants related to the cultural and social construction of time. These determinants direct in what ways the future can be reflected upon, imagined, envisioned, and negotiated. Behind many visions, forecasts, warnings and predictions rest the temporal relations which structure what is spoken, heard, observed, written and read in ways seldom considered or rarely reflected upon clearly.8 The meanings and imperatives within these relations and their associated time frames condition all that is proposed and attempted.9 For example, considerable contrasts in approach, interpretation and application are observable between utilising say linear or cyclic models of time. One type of timekeeping is not always compatible with another. In contemporary daily life citizens appear to manage multiple senses of timekeeping and contrasting time-frames with fluid unconscious dexterity.10 But history suggests that the modern use of time is quite alien to what it was a century or two ago. Graeme Davisons research reveals that the act of timekeeping is governed by a particular aim which has been historically
8 9
Slaughter, op. cit., p 3. S Inayatullah, Deconstructing and Reconstructing the Future, Futures, vol 22, no 4, March 1990, pp 115-141. 10 Slaughter, op. cit., p 3.
defined
by
a
gradual
(though
uneven)
elaboration
on
that
pre-eminent
virtue
of
modern
life,
punctuality.11
Slaughter
notes
that:
With
the
rise
of
mechanical
clocks
a
variety
of
social
inventions
became
universalised:
schedules,
timetables,
the
measurement
and
calculation
of
precise
periodicities.
Time
changed
from
its
previous
organic
character
and
became
highly
structured
and
differentiated.
This,
in
no
small
way,
permitted
the
co-ordination
of
increasingly
complex
activities
and
processes.
Without
this
precision,
the
industrial
revolution
would
never
have
happened;
it
was
a
product
of
the
new
time-sense
every
bit
as
much
as
it
was
of
the
new
rationality
of
the
enlightenment.12
On
a
social
level,
contemporary
Australians
are
crossing
into
a
new
threshold
of
time-consciousness.
If
the
clock-face
reinforced
cyclical
ideas
of
time,
then
the
digital
clock
in
Australia
re-presents
time
as
a
line,
or,
more
exactly,
as
a
numerical
scale,
capable
of
counting
down
as
well
as
counting
forward.
The
electronic
scoreboard
shows
the
number
of
minutes
left
to
play,
the
electric
oven
shows
the
number
of
minutes
left
to
bake,
and
the
space- centre's
launch
control
monitor
shows
the
number
of
seconds
left
to
blast- off.13
Time
has
taken
on
a
distinct
modern
character:
11
Graeme Davison, The Unforgiving Minute: How Australia Learned to Tell the Time, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993, p 2. 12 Slaughter, op. cit., pp 3-4.
Time is now money. There is a new urgency: time must be saved. There is anxiety, too, for time stretches out back and forward. It exceeds the boundaries of our own lives and may therefore appear threatening.14 This new apprehension of time as a commodity to be allotted, precision- measured, moved around, exchanged, saved and competed for, is, according to Davison, a pervasive feature of postmodern life in Australia. Notions of flexible time and competitive routines of business called just-in-time are strategies prevalent in the spheres of work and production, but these notions and routines are also diffused backward into the domestic zone, creating the techno-autoevolution of domestic products such as the kitchen microwave, the programmable video-recorder, the telephone answering machine and pre-packaged, frequently pre-cooked (just reheat) foods, to name a few.15 Equally, the social shrinking, of time and space in the domestic economy has filtered through to the hidden persuaders of Australian Society, the commercial media. Though many commercials are not national specific, that advertising mottos like Panasonic's Making the future easy or Toyota's The future is now should appear at all on Australian television serves to both reinforce Australia's ideological shift towards the certain type of futures-thinking, and stress the time-quickening/displacing or future-
13 14
saving value inherent in the products these companies are selling in Australia. This might suggest that Australians think less of the future and the past as separated by the present. Such a division of time into past, present and future does not really represent any objective feature of time itself but holds for psychological time only and frequently for the convenience of tensing knowledge. But the use of particular types of futures thinking in the domestic sphere as well as within the wider operations of Australian metropolitan culture conflicts with this conventional perspective. The new conception of psychological time, where the future underwrites the present and the present is indentured to the future, has brought about a crisis of perception. A conventional ontological sense of the future may be that of a path perpetually in the process of being constructed the horizon to which all action tends but within the modus operandi of postmodern culture, where discourses attempt to annex the future on a psychological level, the future is now. Ballard characterises particular psychological fallout from this situation, which this thesis argues is part of Australia's contemporary make-up: Increasingly, our concepts of past, present and future are being forced to revise themselves. Just as the past itself, in social and psychological terms, became a casualty of Hiroshima and the nuclear age (almost by definition a period in which we were all forced to think prospectively),
so
in
its
turn
the
future
is
ceasing
to
exist,
devoured
by
the
all- voracious
present.16
But
is
the
present
only
all-voracious?
Slaughter
argues
that
new
work
in
science
is
again
altering
our
perception
of
time,
though
not
to
an
extent
as
widely
acknowledged
as
Davisons
thesis
on
punctuality.
Rather,
in
a
way
that
has
obscured
it
from
public
view,
a
new
creation
of
the
present
has
implicated
itself
into
default
temporally
related
conceptions
and
concerns
about
time:
The
measurement
of
duration
has
become
increasingly
precise
and
has
created
a
machine
measure
of
time
which
falls
below
human
perceptual
thresholds
For
actively
structuring
our
individual
and
social
use
of
time
is
a
default
notion
of
the
present
which
arguably
interferes
with
our
ability
to
function
in
a
dynamically
interconnected
world
While
it
may
make
perfect
scientific
sense
to
measure
time
in
nano-
or
pico-
seconds,
such
fragments
are
of
no
human
value
whatsoever.17
Following
from
research
and
interaction
with
students
in
asking
how
long
is
the
present?
and
obtaining
standard
answers
of
fleeting
and
short
Slaughter
is
referring
here
to
the
minimalist
present
thesis.
Observing
descriptions
and
perceptions
of
time
as
derived
from
machine-driven
16 17
metaphors
that
misrepresent
cultural
and
empirical
reality
and
are
frequently
exchanged
between
people,
Slaughter
calls
into
disrepute
the
default
western
view
of
the
present
and
loads
it
with
considerable
dysfunction:
If
one
cannot
grasp
the
present;
if
one
is
not,
in
any
sense,
at
home
in
it;
if
it
is
too
brief
to
connect
with
wider
realities,
one
is
truly
lost
in
a
profound
way.
Here,
then,
is
a
hidden
contribution
to
the
profound
feeling
of
alienation
so
typical
of
modern
societies.
While
such
alienation
may
spring
from
a
variety
of
sources,
the
minimal
present
clearly
reinforces
notions
of
separateness
and
isolation.18
Clearly
the
minimalist
present
conflicts
with
holistic
approaches
to
global,
social,
cultural
and
environmental
problems.
As
Slaughter
puts
it,
each
individual
and
all
social
groupings
are
embedded
in
a
vast
number
of
interconnected
processes
which
extend
throughout
time
and
space.19
None
of
these
processes
are
static,
as
Charles
Birch
maintains
in
his
groundbreaking
work,
Confronting
the
Future:
Australia
and
the
World
the
Next
One
Hundred
Years:
None
of
us
lives
in
the
world
into
which
we
were
born.
The
world
changes
fast.
We
are
moving
from
the
industrial
age
into
the
post- industrial
age
or
the
age
of
information;
from
a
society
that
is
ecologically
unsustainable
into
one
that
has
to
be
ecologically
18 19
ibid. ibid.
sustainable. To live in that new world means that we need to be equipped with understanding and knowledge that changes within our generation. Life moves far more rapidly now than it ever did before. This requires a change in our attitude toward ourselves and to our relationships to the world.20 Similarly, though in darker ecologically sensitive tones, Garrett Hardin warns there is no away to throw to21 and Michael Harrington forecasts that either western man is going to choose a new society or a new society will choose and abolish him.22 Schell adds that formerly the future was given to us, now it must be achieved.23 Such insights draw our attention to Australias part within a network of relationships that involve the past, present and future and a series of dependencies (social, ecological, cultural, etc) of the future regarding choices and actions in the present, whether these involve environmental, economic or personal considerations. Slaughter argues that this interconnected reality is in fact one of the fundamental characteristics of life The decisions we make, the directions we choose, the futures we extinguish and
20
Charles Birch, Confronting the Future: Australia and the World the Next One Hundred Years, Victoria, Penguin, 1993, p 282. 21 Garrett Hardin, Paramount Positions in Ecological Economics, in Robert Constanza (ed.), Ecological Economics, New York, Columbia University Press, 1991, p 52. 22 Michael Harrington, The Accidental Century, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1967, p 218. 23 J Schell, The Fate of the Earth, London, Picador, 1982, p 174.
those
we
enable,
all
frame
and
condition
the
lives
of
our
descendants.24
But
these
relationships
have
no
meaning
no
home
in
a
minimalist
present.
The
interwoven
nature
of
life
is
obscured
from
current
temporal
structures
and
thinking.25
What
implications
then
does
the
minimalist
present
thesis
hold
for
Australias
sense
of
the
future?
It
is
generally
acknowledged
that
the
future
is
both
uncertain
and
conditional.
Its
relationship
to
the
present
is
complicated,
sometimes
frustrated
by,
a
series
of
social,
cultural
and
ideological
factors.
Nonetheless,
as
this
thesis
argues,
the
future
and
rhetoric
of
the
future
can
be
powerful
tools.
In
western
societies,
future
can
be
a
powerful
word.
With
this
word,
made
manifest
through
coded
messages,
bits
of
language,
thought
and
information
that
can
be
edited
together
to
generate
ideas,
simulations,
behaviours
and
movements,
people
strive
to
change
the
world.
With
this
word
leaders
can
design
images
of
a
different
age
beyond
the
known
present
and
compel
their
followers
to
labour
in
the
hope
of
gaining
access
to
these
images.
With
this
word
originates
the
intelligibility
and
meaning
of
a
series
of
special
activities
including
forecasting,
scenario
writing,
and
projection
and
trend
extrapolation.
With
this
word
individuals
might
think
a
prospective
world
into
imaginary
existence
and
write
it
as
an
achievable
reality.
With
this
word
Australians
have
sought
to
describe
their
nation
as
a
becoming
civilisation.
Ian
Turner
argued
in
the
1960s
that
Australia
has
always
been
a
nation
primed
for,
perhaps
consistently
engaged
with,
ideas
of
the
future.
It
is
24 25
reasonable
to
consider
then
if
the
contemporary
representation
of
the
time- regime
in
Australia
is
so
radically
different
to
previous
period
conceptions
as
to
perhaps
motivate
a
new
critical
approach
to
the
future?26
One
response
is
that
contemporary
Australian
culture
poses
time
in
a
new
way,
in
that
it
leads
the
keeper
of
time
further
towards
a
contemplation
of
their
actions
for
the
future
rather
than,
as
in
previous
historicities,
a
postulation
of
their
actions
in
the
future.
Although
this
phrasing
may
appear
something
of
a
semantic
sleight-of-hand,
substituting
the
expression
for
the
future
in
favour
of
in
the
future,
the
ideological
shift
in
responsibility
inherent
in
the
wording
is
immensely
significant.
It
implies
what
feminist
theorist
Zoe
Sofia
calls
the
collapse
of
the
future
onto
the
present,
where
our
contemporary
activities
and
behaviours
should
appear
to
suit
the
future
if
they
are
to
be
found
approving.27
In
this
sense,
the
present
is
transformed
into
the
fulfilment
of
a
future
that
Australians
aim
to
aspire
to.
The
rules
of
the
future
are
beginning
to
unfold
presently,
writes
Csicsery-Ronay
Jr.,
where
there
are
no
norms
sufficiently
for
the
here
and
now,
only
perpetual
starting
points
for
the
future.28
Yet,
to
return
to
the
minimalist
present
thesis,
if
the
present
is
regarded
as
imperceptibly
short
and
fleeting
in
which
users
of
this
form
of
thinking
are
lost,
never
quite
at
home
in
the
moment
might
it
be
argued
that
Australians
are
even
less
sure
in
their
perceptions
of
the
future?
Slaughter
seems
to
think
so
in
arguing
that
a
structural
fault
has
developed
in
present-
26 27
Ian Turner, The Australian Dream, Melbourne, Sun, 1968, p xvi. Zoe Sofia, Exterminating Foetuses: Abortion, Disarmament and the Sexo- Semiotics of Extraterrestrialism, Diacritics, Summer 1984, p 49.
day temporal thinking, which obscures the centrality of the futures dimension and therefore impedes the young in their search for meaning and purpose.29 Davison and Ballard commentate on the cultural and social fallout of this ideological shift in practice, perception and responsibility towards futures-thinking. Though writing in 1993, prior to the widespread rise and acceptance of the Internet, palm pilots and personal wireless devices, Davison is arguably correct that the present society is organised around a conglomeration of press-button punctuality, just-in-time and flexitime. His conclusions remain valid today: Australia is caught in a time- warp of blurred boundaries between past and present, present and future. In Australia of the 1990s, Davison saw the conflation of time and the deflation of space, both characteristic of post-industrial societies, the result of a technological autoevolution:30 The communications satellite, the rapid decline in the cost of international telephone calls and the proliferation of fax machines developments, incidentally, which Australians welcomed with particular enthusiasm have rapidly shrunk international distances, and collapsed local times into a single international time-regime.31
28 29
J R Lucas, The Future, Cambridge, Basil, Blackwell, 1989, p 1 Slaughter, op. cit., p 6. 30 I Csicsery-Ronay, Futuristic Flu, or, The Revenge of the Future, Fiction 2000, 1992, pp 26-45. 31 Davison, op. cit., p 146.
Davison
suggests
it
is
this
state
of
international,
instantaneous
communication,
which
has
seen
the
fulfilment
of
a
Marxist
prophecy,
namely
the
annihilation
of
space
by
time.32
Additionally,
it
has
caused
the
time-gap
that
had
long
separated
Australia
from
the
rest
of
the
world
as
a
barrier
and
buffer
to
be
attenuated
and,
with
it,
one
of
the
protective
cushions
for
our
fragile
sense
of
national
identity.33
It
is
apparent
that,
contrary
to
Geoffrey
Blaineys
Tyranny
of
Distance
thesis,
in
the
first
decade
of
the
third
millennium,
Australia
is
tethered,
ever
more
closely,
to
the
world.34
Perhaps
if
we
know
in
what
ways
the
future
is
presently
being
invented,
it
is
useful
then
to
ask:
is
Australia
any
closer
to
understanding
what
the
future
is
currently
meant
to
be?
It
soon
becomes
clear
that
there
is
no
single
answer;
perhaps
because
we
dont
fully
understand
the
question
what
is
the
future?.
Many
answers
generalise
with
words
like
change,
control,
choice,
shape,
options,
progress
and
calls
to
action
but
these
can
mean
many
different
things
in
different
settings.
Similarly,
when
claims
to
know
the
future
embody
notions
of
objective
and
value-free
knowledge,
they
can
act
to
obscure
the
political
and
ideological
dimensions
of
creating
meaning
in
the
future.
To
understand
the
nature
of
the
question
what
is
the
future?
then
depends
upon
understanding
the
implicit
frame
that
is
invoked
by
particular
assumptions
and
invested
interests.
For
example,
though
not
specifically
Australian
in
context,
leaders
of
religious
sects
whose
doctrinal
hierarchy
is
based
on
interpretations
of
the
32
Karl Marx, Grunrisse: Foundations of a Critique of Political Economy, 1857, as quoted in Davison, ibid., p 3. 33 Davison, op. cit., p 146.
Book of Revelation understand the future within a time frame that imputes ideas of divine intervention, salvation, apocalypse and endtimes. But for those planning retirement, writing wills, buying shares or investing funds, the future and associated time frames are perceived and managed quite differently. The position of the person asking the question (and the nature of the question) is as significant as that of the one answering. This implies a notion of situatedness in which the question and respondent are aware of the processes they are embedded within. It also points to the permeability of language, of the ways it is interwoven with inherited and invested meanings, locations and contexts, of how it both reveals, obscures, exposes and conceals futures intentions. This is a potential resource of innovated meaning. Hence, by extending Slaughters minimalist present thesis to include minimal or undeveloped senses of the future in Australia, the present thesis argues that it is uncertain questions of Australias future can be properly resolved without a series of innovations based on paradigmatic and hermeneutic strategies for engaging constructions of future-sense and additionally the adoption of longer-term thinking. The question then of what is time, the future, the millennium and apocalypse? is perhaps a good way to situate a thesis that examines the contemporary and active political inventions of the future and their position(ing) in Australian society.
34
ibid., p 154.
Chapter
Two
What
is
time?
To
deny
the
past
is
to
forget
the
future.35
During
the
second
half
of
the
twentieth
century,
it
was
commonly
accepted
that
we
can
chart
our
future
clearly
and
wisely
only
when
we
know
the
path
which
has
led
to
the
present.36
But
if,
as
Stambaugh
asserts,
temporality
is
...
the
occurrence,
the
taking
place
of
thinking,
where
thoughts
and
actions
in
time
are
contextualised
by
a
taxonomy
of
tense,
then
any
meaning,
significance
and
value
ascribed
to
the
epochal
moment
like
say
the
turning
of
the
millennium
is
a
mere
linguistic
and
imagined
projection
of
our
current
prejudices,
interests
and
concerns,
and
is
in
no
way
attached
in
any
real
sense
to
the
advent
itself.37
In
the
words
of
metaphysical
philosopher
J
R
Lucas,
whereas
the
present
and
past
are
real,
the
future,
as
long
as
it
is
still
future,
is
not.38
On
this
view,
it
may
be
reasonable
to
ask
why
it
was
fashionable
during
the
late
1990s
in
Australia
to
gather
futures
around
the
number
2000?
Many
scholars
asserted
that
a
new
form
of
Australian
consciousness
(individual
and
communal)
as
yet
unrealised,
though
intensely
speculated
upon,
would
replace
the
current
centre
of
mythology,
historicities,
ideologies
and
narratives
that
we
now
call
collectively
35 36
Sorry Day Anniversary poster, 26 May 2000. A Stevenson, The Guinness Encyclopedia, Middlesex, Guinness, 1990, p 359. 37 J Stambaugh, Impermanence is Bhuddha-Nature, Honolulu, Hawaii University Press, 1990, p 130. 38 J R Lucas, The Future, Cambridge, Basil Blackwell, 1989, p 1.
Australian
or
Australia
sometime
around
or
just
after
the
year
2000.
Aside
from
theoretical
speculation,
the
planned
celebration
of
0lympics
2000
in
Sydney
and
the
commemoration
of
100
years
since
Federation
in
2001
added
a
sense
of
importance
to
this
juncture
between
millenniums.
In
either
paradigm
of
theory
and
planning,
the
year
2000
was
perceived
(and
to
some
extent
still
is)
by
most
to
impose
a
new
beginning
on
Australian
activities.
Just
what
that
new
beginning
should
be,
the
possibilities
arraigned
at
the
millennial
crossroads
and
the
suggestions
directed
towards
realising
these
possibilities,
remains
open
to
considerable
conjecture.
Many
different
orders
of
thought
and
conjecture
claim
the
right
to
narrate
the
cultural
production
and
projections
of
the
Australian
people,
nation
and
culture(s)
beyond
the
year
2000.
We
shall
examine
a
selection
of
these
during
this
investigation.
But
first,
it
is
necessary
to
discuss
the
construction
of
time
in
contemporary
Australia
(or
actual-Australia
if
we
are
to
understand
the
meaning
of
the
future
today.
Along
the
formulations
of
Robin
Le
Poidevin
and
Murray
MacBeath,39
it
is
reasonable
to
maintain
that
time
is
a
commonplace
dimension
of
change.
This
means
time
is
considered
to
be
the
indicator
of
variation,
modification
and
growth
in
the
ordinary
properties
of
things,
experience,
behaviour
and
consciousness.
Without
this
fundamental
truism
that
we
all
believe
about
the
world
that
change
is
going
on
constantly,
that
changes
are
caused,
and
that
there
are
constraints
on
what
changes
are
possible
-
we
would
have
a
very
limited
conception
and
experience
of
reality,
one
in
which:
39
R Le Poidevin and M MacBeath, The Philosophy of Time, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993, p 1.
There is nothing to pick out the present now, or to give a sense of becoming, (one) in which freedom is an illusion, everything will be as it will be, and there is nothing new under the sun.40 Such a narrow understanding of time would seem out of place with our contemporary metropolitan time-orientated society, where, for example, the modern individual, full of projects is perennially up against deadlines.41 A world devoid of temporal variation would be devoid of, among other things, deadlines and change, and would have failed to view 2000AD as a potential turning/changing point. The so-called passage, flow or direction of time can be problematic. Peter Munz, a philosopher on the practice of history, writes: time is not the sort of thing that can have a definite shape and that history therefore is of necessity being constantly rewritten.42 Lucas voices a comparable difficulty in the practice of futures: We seem to be committed, if the future exists, to some sort of determinism, though of a possibly unknowable kind: so, in order to escape determinist conclusions, we feel impelled to deny existence to the future, and truth statements about it. And yet we draw back from
40 41
Lucas, op. cit., p 1. Davison, Punctuality and Progress: the Foundations of Australian Standard Time, Australian Historical Studies, vol 25, no 99, October 1992, p 172. 42 P Munz, The Shapes of Time, Connecticut, Wesleyan University Press, 1977, p 1.
denying
all
truth
to
predictions
and
speculations,
or
making
out
that
the
future
is
entirely
unknowable.43
The
debate
on
temporality
is
no
less
problematic.
McTaggart
argues
that
nothing
existent
can
possess
the
characteristics
of
being
in
time.
This
doctrine
rests
on
McTaggart's
persuasive
thesis
that
time
is
unreal,
that
the
distinctions
we
use
to
articulate
or
codify
the
passage
of
time
the
tensed
participles
of
past,
present
and
future
-
are
never
true
of
reality:
nothing
that
exists
can
be
temporal.44
This
clashes
with
Homi
K
Bhabha's
notion
that
culture
is
located
around
temporality
than
about
historicity.45
Additionally,
Lucas
refutes
McTaggart's
thesis
by
arguing
that
time
is
a
perpetual
becoming,
a
weaving
rather
than
an
unrolling
[a]
dynamic,
in
which
something
is
always
happening,
[where]
vague
possibilities
crystal(ise)
out
into
sharp
actuality.
Indeed,
for
Lucas,
reality
is
through
and
through
temporal.46
Thus,
while
I
am
unable
to
entirely
agree
with
McTaggart's
ideas
on
unreal
time
his
argument
demonstrate
the
significance,
if
vagueness,
of
tense
in
the
timing
of
thought,
utterances,
events
and
change.
It
reveals
persuasively
that
tense
is
a
social
convention,
in
fact
the
beginning
of
a
long
line
of
socio-temporal
cues.
This
concurs
with
the
apparent
arbitrary
acts
of
the
twentieth
century
in
tensing
2000AD
as
a
future
loaded
with
cultural
and
social
relevance.
Without
denying
the
validity
of
other
contending
43 44
Lucas, op. cit., p 10. J M E McTaggart, The Unreality of Time, in Poidevin and MacBeath, op. cit., p 23. 45 H K Bhabba, Dissemi-nation: Time, Narrative and the Margins of the Modern Nation, Nation and Narration, London , 1990, p 292. 46 Lucas, op. cit., p 209.
theories on time, and attempting to avoid crude reductionism, this thesis agrees with Lucas theoretical scaffolding of the relation between time and change under consideration here. That is, Lucas understanding of the temporal trajectory from past to future, and vice versa, is the conceptual basis of time referred to throughout this investigation. For the purposes of interpretation in the present inquiry, when I refer to the abstraction time I shall mean the following: Time is the passage from possibility through actuality to unalterable necessity. The present is the unique and essential link between the possible and unalterable necessary. The future and the past are modally and ontologically different, and it is natural (or logical) that there should be a direction from the one to the other. There is room for agency and freedom of action. The future is not already there, waiting, like a reel of film in a cinema, to be shown: it is, (only) in part, open to our endeavours, and capable of being fashioned by our efforts into achievements, which are our own and of which we may be proud. The chance interplay of circumstance and the implementation of our designs and purposes weave together the fabric of history.47
How
to
Define
Future?
Future,
n.
That
period
of
time
in
which
our
affairs
prosper,
our
friends
are
true
and
our
happiness
is
assured
48
Though
the
above
quote,
drawn
from
the
ironically
titled
Devils
Dictionary,
provides
an
optimistic
entry-point
into
understanding
the
meaning
of
the
future,
there
is
a
need
to
pin
down
more
precisely
how
I
will
use
the
word
future
or
futures
in
the
ensuing
discussion.
Certainly,
as
societies
tend
to
anticipate
the
future,
there
exists
a
generally
accepted
understanding
of
the
future
as
a
time
to
come.
Our
English
word
future
derives
from
the
fifteenth
century
Latin
word,
futurus,
which
is
a
form
of
the
verb
esse,
meaning,
"about
to
be."
In
this
sense,
future
has
become
a
general
word
for
the
time
yet
to
come,
regardless
of
the
particular
conditions
of
the
time
in
question.
Future
can
have
different
meaningful
qualities
dependent
on
how
it
is
used.
It
can
be
used
to
indicate:
the
time
yet
to
come;
undetermined
events
that
will
occur
in
that
time;
the
condition
of
a
person
or
thing
at
a
later
date
(eg,
the
future
of
education
is
undecided);
likelihood
of
later
improvement
or
advancement
(eg,
they
have
a
future
as
public
intellectuals);
from
now
on
(eg,
in
future);
and
a
tense
of
verbs
used
when
the
action
or
event
described
is
to
occur
after
the
time
of
utterance;
destined
to
become
(eg,
a
future
Australian
studies
scholar).
It
is
understandable
then
that
the
word
future,
in
its
most
basic
usage,
is
applied
to
a
period
of
47 48
time
imagined
beyond
the
known
present
about
which
qualitative
statements
can
be
made,
open
to
potential
verification
as
true
or
false.
Raymond
Williams
writes:
A
major
element
of
what
is
going
to
happen
is
the
state
of
mind
of
all
of
us
who
are
in
a
position
to
intervene
in
its
complex
processes,
and
at
best
to
determine
them
for
the
general
good.49
According
to
Thorstein
Veblen,
in
less
optimistic
terms,
our
imputation
of
finality
to
the
things
of
the
world,
and
our
teleological
arguments
for
an
intelligent
cause
of
the
world,
proceed
on
subjective
grounds
entirely,
and
give
no
knowledge
of
objective
fact,
and
furnish
no
proof
that
is
available
for
establishing
even
a
probability
in
favour
of
what
is
claimed.50
Williams'
and
Veblen's
locate
the
ideas
of
the
future
in
the
persistence
of
particular
ways
of
thinking.
Both
use
the
subjectivity
and
arbitrariness
of
human
cognition
as
a
vehicle
for
discussing
the
elaboration
and
utilisation
of
temporal
ordering
in
all
moment
to
moment
activities:
in
intellectual
analysis
it
is
often
forgotten
that
the
most
widespread
and
most
practical
thinking
about
the
future
is
rooted
in
human
and
local
continuities.51
Likewise,
according
to
Veblen,
objects
and
events
in
themselves
have
a
propensity
to
eventuate
in
a
given
end,
whether
this
end
or
objective
point
of
the
sequence
(of
phenomena)
is
conceived
to
be
...
given
or
deliberately
sought.52
Additionally,
to
situate
Veblen's
musings
in
the
contemporary
period,
it
is
worth
noting
that
the:
49 50
Williams, op. cit., p 5. T Veblen, Kants Critique of Judgement, in Leon Ardzrooni (ed.), Essays in Our Changing Order, New York, Viking, 1964, pp 175-193, 186. 51 William, op. cit., pp 4-5. 52 T Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York, Macmillan, 1912, p 280.
Principles
of
common-sense
and
common
information
prevalent
in
the
[last
decade]
of
the
century
are
of
an
evolutionary
...
complexion,
in
that
they
hold
the
attention
[of
the
people]
to
the
changes
that
are
going
forward,
rather
than
to
focus
it
on
that
'Natural
State
of
Man,'
as
Nassua
Senior
called
it,
to
which
the
movement
of
history
was
believed
inevitably
to
tend.53
Veblen's
theory
on
the
subjectivity
of
knowledge
and
his
work
in
general
on
civilised
barbarity
is
useful
for
its
clarity
in
thinking
about
the
relation
between
the
person
and
the
world.
Disputes
concerning
the
nature
of
Australia's
future
are
a
matter
of
philosophical
rather
than
empirical
investigation.
Where
philosophical
inquiries
into
the
future
are
open
to
a
priori
argument,
there
is
no
empirical
certification
that
the
future
actually
exists.
When
the
quantifiable
is
taken
into
account,
usually
described
as
the
hard
pole
of
futures
research,
it
often
overlooks
crucial
meanings
and
presuppositions
deriving
from
cultural
and
disciplinary
traditions.
To
quote
Istvan
Csicsery-Ronay
Jr,
We
cannot
know
what
the
future
will
bring,
but
we
get
to
pretend
that
we
know
its
possibilities.54
This
appears
to
me
to
be
a
subjective
process.
Hence,
to
appreciate
the
relevance
of
Veblen's
writings
in
understanding
the
subjectivity
of
knowledge,
one
must
deconstruct
the
concept
of
timekeeping
in
modern
Australian
civilisation
and
the
knowledge
generated
about
Australia's
inexorable
progress
towards
the
presupposed
53
T Veblen, Economic Theory in the Calculable future, in Ardzrooni, op. cit., pp 3- 15, 8. 54 Csicsery-Ronay Jr, op. cit., p 26.
reputable
future
of
post-2000
Anno
Domini.
I
take
Veblen's
theory
of
knowledge
as
exemplary
because
it
makes
explicit
the
implications
of
timekeeping,
being
progressively
ever-more
civilised
and
looking
to
the
future
as
merely
fashionable
orders
of
thought
chosen
from
an
indefinite
number
of
intellectual
paradigms
and
faiths
available
to
Australians.
We
have
annexed
the
future
into
our
own
present,
writes
Ballard,
as
merely
one
of
the
manifold
alternatives
open
to
us
in
a
world
where
options
multiply.55
Similarly,
Chakrabarty
states
that
time
is
nothing
but
a
useful
fiction,
or
a
set
of
conventions,
a
system
of
representations,
which
becomes
real
(or
achieves
its
truth-effect)
only
within
a
particular
framework
of
perception
and
practice.56
On
these
views,
in
presenting
this
thesis
use
of
time,
I
believe
that
timekeeping,
progress
and
futurity
are
equal
in
status
to
the
myths,
ideologies
and
narratives
(indeed
what
Kantian
reason
calls
the
'fictions')
that
have
invented
Australia
and
circumscribe
Australia
activity.
It
is
on
this
assumption
in
which
the
construction
of
time
in
Australia
can
be
construed
by
this
thesis
as
a
product
of
culture,
or
as
a
metaphorical
code
part
of
Australia's
cultural
DNA,
that
I
examine
Australia's
invention
of
the
millennium,
apocalypse
future
and
turning
points.
55 56
Ballard, op. cit., p 4. D Chakrabarty, Marx After Marxism; History, Subalternity and Difference, Meanjin, vol 52, no 3, Spring 1993, pp 421-434, 431.
When Did the Millennium Become Apocalyptic? Our English word millennium comes from the seventeenth century Latin words, mille and annu, which respectively mean thousand and year. Millennium has in this way become a general word for a period of one thousand years. Millennium can have different meaningful qualities dependent on how it is used: the period of one thousand years of Christ's awaited reign on earth; a cycle of one thousand years; an extended period of peace and happiness, especially in the distant future; and a thousandth anniversary. It is reasonable then that the word millennium, in its most basic usage, is applied to a period of time imagined to be equal to one thousand solar years, with no pre-determined starting point. An important question then is: if the word was invented in the seventeenth century, how did millennium today come to acquire the added meaning of biblical apocalypse? This brings us to another definition that implicates the progress of a paradise metaphor. No consideration of the millennium' is complete that does not also account for the theological and religious importance conferred on the duration of one thousand years. Primarily, the term millennium does not occur in the Bible or other related apocryphal works. But as a convenient substitute for the phrase one thousand years and as conceptual shorthand for the theocratic kingdom of God, which is supposed to reign on or above earth, the word millennium has attained the sanction of general usage for referring to the one of the closing stages of the biblical age described in the Book of Revelation. Based upon a single passage, Revelation 20: verse 1-10,
this concept has given rise to varied speculation and hopes since the first century anno Domini. According to the passage, after a seven-year tribulation and the destruction of worldly affairs, Satan would be bound for a thousand years and those who had not worshipped the beast or its image would come to life again and reign with Christ for a thousand years. Though there is considerable and intense debate between religious communities over the preferred ordering of millennial prophecies (i.e., which occurs first? Armageddon or the Second Coming? The Day of Judgement of the Earthly Paradise/Theocratic Kingdom? The Rapture or the Tribulation? etc.), the concept thousand years remains largely intact as a token of utopian symbolism and typifies the paradisaical cycles of life presupposed in the Book of Jubilees. According to this text, even the most meritable of women and men could not accede to an age of one thousand years, as expressed in the following passage from Jubilees 4: 29-30: At the end of the nineteenth jubilee, during the seventh week in its sixth year (930) Adam died. All his children buried him in the land where he had been created. He was the first to be buried in the ground. He lacked 70 years from 1000 years because 1000 years are one day in the testimony of heaven. For this reason it was written regarding the tree of knowledge: 'on the day that you eat from it you will die.' Therefore he did not complete the years of this day because he died during it.
Other passages in the Bible explain this distinction of a day for years more succinctly, for example 2 Peter 3:8: However, let this one fact not be escaping your notice that one day with Yahweh is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. The Septuagint (Greek) version of Isaiah's epistle on the holy utopia brings back the edenic tree of life as an aspect of this paradisaical distinction: The days of my people will be as the days of the tree of life. (LXX Isaiah 65:22) With the expulsion from the Garden of Eden and subsequent degeneration of the human race, no one person could attain to an age of a millennium. Psalms 90:10 qualifies that man's life expectancy was reduced to roughly threescore and ten: In themselves the days of our years are seventy years; and if because of special mightiness they are eighty years. But as the Bible's component texts and its relative versions are considered harmonious or complementary to each other in the theological community, it follows that the reference in Revelation to the thousand years' means a return to the paradisaical cycles of life. This would confirm the millennium as a restoration of the conditions of God's intended holy utopia and an apocalypse, which actually means the revealing, of God's divine plan. How has the millennium as an apocalypse then, as the completion of some divine plan, been applied? And how is it currently used? One of the fundamental doctrines in the watchwords of evangelical theology is the idea that the Bible is uniquely inspired by God. For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses have an entire book, comprising 352 pages, based on a biblical quote: All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial. The texts opening paragraph reflects a firm belief in biblical inerrancy, an
underpinning
doctrine
that
all
the
sixty-six
books
of
the
contemporary
Bible
are
literal,
true
and
supernaturally
protected
from
error,
thus
implying
that
scripture
is
entirely
trustworthy
and
uniquely
authoritative
for
a
given
community
of
faith57:
How
satisfyingly
delightful
the
inspired
Scriptures
are!
What
an
amazing
fund
of
true
knowledge
they
provide!
They
are
indeed
"the
very
knowledge
of
God"
that
has
been
sought
after
and
treasured
by
lovers
of
righteousness
in
all
ages.
Thus
the
Jehovahs
Witness
book
claims,
like
other
similar
publications,
that
God
worked
with
the
human
authors
so
that
what
they
wrote
was
his
word
and
that
it
is
intrinsically
true
in
what
it
says,
that
there
are
no
errors
or
doubts
in
what
it
affirms,
that
it's
a
cornerstone
of
contemporary
religious
belief.
This
persistence
in
interpreting
the
Bible
literally
or
without
error
has
encouraged
evangelicals
an
umbrella
term
used
here
to
refer
broadly
to
christian
fundamentalists
and
cultists,
pentecostals
and
charismatics,
who
insist
on
some
sort
of
spiritual
rebirth
as
a
criterion
for
entering
the
kingdom
of
heaven
to
be
intrigued,
even
sometimes
transfixed,
by
the
prophetic
writings
in
the
Hebrew
Bible
and
the
new
testament.
Evangelicals
are
especially
fixated
with
the
Book
of
Revelation
which,
with
its
recurring
theme
of
revealed
secrets
and
divine
intervention,
outlines
details
leading
to
an
end
57
Bruce M Metzger and Michael D Coogan, The Oxford Companion to the Bible, Oxford, Oxford Univeristy Press, 1993, p 302-5
of the world, a series of special signs of the times preceding this, the apokalupsis or a lifting of the veil of God as creator and the fearful day of judgement. Yet if the Bible is to be read literally by evangelicals, in what way is sense made of the prophecies that speak of a seven-headed and ten- horned dragon, a whore who sits on seven hills, the four horse-riders of the apocalypse, a mark of the beast and the charismatic Antichrist? Because of an insistence on the literal truth and veracity of the entire Bible, evangelicals have long regarded these prophecies as a road map for understanding the future called endtimes. Publications such as, Revelation: It's Grand Climax At Hand (by the Jehovah's Witnesses), Armageddon (by Marilyn Hickey), and The Prophetic Word Magazine (by the House of Yahweh), are examples of attempts to chart a sequence of events in contemporary settings leading to the end of the world. Some even claim that the prophecies refer to themselves specifically. Reasoning from the Scriptures, a door-to-door manual for Jehovahs Witnesses, implicates members into its definition of Armageddon: The Greek Har-Ma-ge-don, taken from Hebrew and rendered Armageddon by many translators means Mountain of Megiddo or Mountain of Assembly of Troops. The Bible associates the name, not with a nuclear holocaust, but with the coming universal war of the great day of God the Almighty (Rev. 16:14, 16). This name is applied specifically to the place to which earths political rulers are being gathered in opposition to Jehovah and his Kingdom by Jesus Christ.
Such
opposition
will
be
shown
by
global
action
against
Jehovahs
servants
on
earth,
the
visible
representatives
of
Gods
Kingdom.58
What
is
fascinating
is
the
way
in
which
these
interpretations
will
modify
and
adapt
themselves
according
to
historical
and
contemporary
circumstances.
Present
troubles
are
in
fact
birth
pangs
heralding
the
end.
Calculations,
involving
the
use
of
numerology,
demonstrate
that
soon,
very
soon,
earths
invincible
empires
will
disappear
and
be
replaced
by
Gods
eternal
rule
In
the
final
battle
the
powers
of
evil,
together
with
the
evil
nations
they
represent,
will
be
utterly
destroyed.59
The
doctrine
of
dispensationalism,
which
codified
interpretations
of
this
nature
as
a
theological
movement,
was
formed
in
America
during
the
late
nineteenth
century
in
response
to
the
civil
war
and
prevailing
social
ills.
It
was
a
belief
that
world
history
could
be
segmented
into
particular
eras
or
dispensations.
This
in
spurned
a
related
belief
that
evangelicals
were
living
in
the
last
(or
next-to-last)
dispensation
before
the
endtimes
and
the
beginning
of
God's
Kingdom.
This
permitted
evangelicals
in
effect
to
claim
control
of
the
future;
to
declare
that
they
understood
the
mind
and
purposes
of
God,
and
to
see
a
way
out
of
the
coming
end
described
by
the
prophet
Daniel
as
a
time
of
anguish,
such
as
has
never
occurred
since
nations
first
58
Reasoning from the Scriptures, Brooklyn, New York, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989, p 44. 59 Metzger and Coogan, op. cit., p 36.
came
into
existence.60
Dispensationalism
argued
that
Christ
would
come
quite
suddenly
like
a
thief
in
the
night
as
the
often-quoted
text
goes
and
that,
instead
of
society's
condition
improving
with
progressive
attitudes,
society
would,
in
fact,
continue
to
remain
bad
if
not
becoming
worse:
Christ
would
eventually
come
to
a
very
unjust
society.
In
such
beliefs
evangelicals
were
pushed
to
the
margins
of
society.
Yet
ideas
of
rapture
and
separation
allowed
them
to
place
themselves
as
God's
righteous
and
chosen
people
at
the
very
centre
of
a
divine
plan.
Since
only
the
righteous
possessed
a
future
within
this
doctrine,
everyone
else,
the
collective
unrighteous,
would
ultimately
face
the
wrath
of
an
angry
God
and
the
fate
of
no
future
during
the
apocalypse.
In
the
contemporary
age,
similar
ideas
of
separation,
either
through
the
rapture
or
through
the
removal
of
the
wicked
can
be
seen
in
contemporary
evangelical
publications.
The
February
1998
publication
of
Maranatha:
Prophetic
Alert,
written
by
Don
Stanton
and
distributed
by
the
Maranatha
Revival
Crusade
(MRC),
based
in
India
with
evangelical
communities
throughout
the
world
and
locally
in
Australia,
begins:
My
dear
reader,
loving
greetings
to
you
in
the
name
of
our
Master,
Y'shua
the
prince
of
Peace.
Yes,
He,
Y'shua,
Jesus,
is
the
One
who
is
coming
soon!
Look!
He
is
coming
with
the
clouds,
and
every
eye
will
see
Him,
even
those
who
pierced
Him;
and
all
the
tribes
of
the
earth
will
mourn
over
Him.
Even
so,
Amen!
My
regular
readers
are
aware
of
current
events
that
are
pointing
to
the
imminent
Rapture
the
60
Daniel 12:1.
catching up of all born-again believers to meet the Master in the air. Friends, the time is near. The surrounding publications in January and March equally intone that if you read the signs correctly, you will hear a thundering countdown, a countdown which is getting lower every day! and that the day of judgement is ahead! The general order of events promoted by the MRC is that after the rapture of the righteous, the world sees the emergence of a sinister global power led by a charismatic Antichrist. This Antichrist, usually identified as one who brings peace to Israel and her neighbours through a special seven-year treaty and is linked with a ten-nation European confederacy, will insist that all remaining citizens demonstrate their worldly allegiance by being marked with an indelible stamp, the Mark of the Beast. This mark, which has evolved over the ages from being an ancient roman coin through to its current incarnation a subcutaneous tracking biochip is symbolic of the number 666, a number commonly used to indicate a beastly and satanic system of enslavement as well as the personal number of the devil itself. Many have been identified with this number, from Prince Charles to Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul to Bill Gates the Third, owner of Microsoft, whose name in ascii (computer) values, adds up to 666. Those who refuse to be marked with the devil's sign face persecution and ultimately martyrdom. World Control By Injected Surveillance, a booklet promoted by the MRC at the University of Queensland Orientation Days during the early 1990s, advised of a 2000-year old prediction coming true and lives being taken by the beast:
I believe what John saw as Jesus was giving him the Book of Revelation, was a hypodermic needle, and I'll tell you why ... The whole idea behind it is identification. It is not a barcode. You can't contain enough in a barcode. I believe it is the microchip under the skin ... The Antichrist will use every bit of technology he can to keep track of you and I. Another text titled Antichrist!, anonymously distributed by an evangelical at Brisbane international airport during the late 1980s, translates contemporary manoeuvres on the political terrain and the advent of a digital economy into the vernacular of an apocalyptic scenario: In 1992, the 12 European Community trading countries will unite politically as one nation and the main office of the 666 organisation will be in Luxembourg and Brussels; these two cities are among the 12 European countries ... No one yet knows who will be the Antichrist [but] ... In Europe they are waiting for him year by year ... The Cashless Society (666) is all part of the Antichrists master plan. In Europe and America, there are books and discussions on this matter, based upon the 666 systems. When this system is fully developed and established in a few years, all money on earth will be abolished. People will be dealing and trading according to this system. This will be the only credit/trade system for anyone on earth People who are involved and working with the 666 organisation will encourage people to be stamped with this number on the forehead and/or the right
hand. This number will be invisible, not seen by the eye. No services will be available to you unless you carry this number (no shopping, no education, etc). All your transactions will be recorded in the central computer in Brussels/Luxembourg ... The people receiving this stamp (666) will automatically belong to the devil and will go to hell. Part of the system is already practised in some countries, Sweden, America and it is now newly introduced to Australia, but not many people hear about it. Similar interpretative practices are observable in Jesus Loves You!, a tract published by the religious organisation Soulwinners for Christ, based in New South Wales. With two images marked clearly as American Medical Centre offers discounts for the recipient of the Barcode and Promotional campaign for 666 Barcode, the text claims: The Lord is warning us not to receive the number, which is to be implanted in the right hand, or in the forehead for it is the Mark of the Beast, 666, as prophesied in the Bible. The Antichrist and his mark 666 are emerging as the greatest evil to mankind. Three most significantly overwhelming fulfilments of the Bible prophecies during the last 2000 years are: the coming of Jesus on earth as Messiah, Restoration of Independence to Israel and the emergence of the beast mark 666. The Antichrist shall emerge first before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ who will judge the earth with righteousness. Satan will give power to the Antichrist to control the whole world with the use of the
computerised system 666 (barcode or microchip). Bible indicates the sign of the emergence of the Antichrist as when the people fall apart from the foundation of the word of God or known as apostasy. It is quite a tragic situation to realise that many people take the meaning of seven years of great tribulation, the beast mark 666 and the 1000 year reign of Jesus on earth as symbolic. Coding of 666 has already been concealed on all consumer goods ... The last thing left to be done is for every human being to be coded with numbers on their foreheads or on their right hand. The Jehovah's Witness publication, Life: How Did It Get Here?, interweaves the two ideas of separation and Edenic restoration, incorporating a rapture- like removal of the wicked: In our day, it concludes: It is encouraging to see world events fulfilling the sign of the last days. This indicates that the time is near when God's word will have certain success. This success is certain because the all-powerful God will intervene in human affairs to see that his purposes are accomplished. Very shortly, we can expect to see the fulfilment of the prophetic psalm that says: Evildoers themselves will be cut off, but those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth. And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more ... The righteous themselves will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it. Thus, those who choose to be independent of the creator will be cut off. Those who are hoping in Jehovah will live
through the end of this system and begin the restoration of paradise. Gradually it will spread until it encompasses the entire earth. It can be observed from such texts that dispensationalism, or the expectation of the last days, retains a powerful hold over contemporary evangelicals, though the order and types of events varies from group to group as the cast of evangelicals change. These texts can be identified as apocalyptic. But, even so, granted they are derived from the dispensationalist tradition, what exactly do I mean by this categorisation as apocalyptic? Reading through the extent literature, one quickly discovers that while several definitions of apocalypse are available, two distinct strains of understanding exist. First, in biblical terminology, apocalypse is not an event. It is, according to Felix Just: A revelation that is recorded in written form: it is a piece of crisis literature that reveals truths about the past, present, and/or future in highly symbolic terms; the revelation often comes in dreams or visions, and usually needs to be interpreted with the help of an angel; it is usually intended to provide hope and encouragement for people in the midst of severe trials and tribulations.61
61
Apocalypse: Definitions and Related Terms, Felix Just, Loyola Marymount University, <http://clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust/Handouts/Apoc_Def.htm>, 20 February 2000.
This has lead to its second, more popularly known definition in which apocalypse is taken to mean disaster or a catastrophic event. Through this usage apocalyptic has accrued associative meanings outside the scriptural exegesis of the Book of Revelation, such that, in the broad senses of being predictive, climatic, disastrous or unrestrained, the events of cyclone Tracy, the Port Arthur massacre and the Y2k millennium bug, have been variously described as apocalyptic. Taking these two understandings together then, when I use the terms Apocalypse or apocalyptic interchangeably throughout this thesis, I shall refer to the mode of thinking which expects or can be aligned with religious forms of anticipating an end of things. In addition to the context of their particular referents (personal, national or global apocalypse), these terms implicate ideas of catastrophe, tribulation, destruction and upheaval in the current order as part of a popular interpretative scheme drawn from events in the Book of Revelation, though this does not necessarily always indicate biblical usage. Information and Futures The examples given above in defining millennium and apocalypse demonstrate how types of future may be ideologically committed, articulated by and through various presuppositions and invested interests. Neither text above can substantiate a claim to stand apart from these processes since what counts as information about the future requires prior judgements and validations from wider sources. In the case of the above extracts, this gives away again to recognition of situatedness, that the future offered is not
impartial but mediated through biblical resources for creating and organising prophetic meaning. These are powerful activities and the information generated can mobilise whole communities positively and negatively. A substantial level of consensus exists regarding the critical relationship between the future and the present. This is especially apparent in ecological systems of interpretation where a flow of cause and effect is apprehended in extrapolative techniques and methodologies. But outside holistic sciences there is less agreement about apprehending the future. Information about the future according to Slaughter,62 might deliver cultural production with greater accountability to next generations. It can articulate the design of civilisation (and our personal lives) beyond the predominant short-term gaze of western industrialist, capitalist, technocratic and meritocratic systems. And it can broaden societys perception of the contemporary future landscape or futurescape. That is, it can guide societys extrapolative reach into the new millennium deeper and further, shifting the nations imaginative perception from minimalist futures to long- term futures, via an intellectual framework in tune with the dynamic and developing systems (social, ecological, etc) of which civilisation is a part. The utility here is that while the future cannot be known it can be explored more usefully and responsibly. Understanding how information about the future flows and mutates, in configuring a theory of the relationship between content about the future and human responses, between futurestext and futurescape, will be useful in enabling in Australia what Slaughter has called without evangelical
associations
the
forward
view.63
That
is,
a
perceptual
system
that
aims
to
overcome
an
identifiable
defective
interpretive
order
characterising
the
current
times.
I
argue
defective
because
obscuring
questions
of
power,
value
and
purpose
behind
an
impressive
facade
of
technical
wonders
is
particularly
dysfunctional,
since
this
closes
off
futures
potentials
from
exploration
by
the
wider
public
Ideological
naivety
actually
prevents
futures
work
from
fulfilling
one
of
its
core
purposes:
the
elaboration
of
alternative
futures.64
It
is
of
enormous
practical
value,
continues
Slaughter:
To
grasp
the
way
futures
work
is
grounded
in
practical
forms
of
knowledge,
and
also
to
know
when
and
how
these
may
be
legitimately
applied
in
various
contexts
[T]here
remains
a
vast
and
unsustainable
disjuncture
between
the
needs
of
all
societies
for
conscious
commitments
to
meaningful
purposes
and
goals,
and
the
so-far
minimal
investment
in
creating
and
applying
the
forward
view
by
public
bodies
and
leading
institutions.
As
a
result
of
this
oversight
we
continue
to
plunge
into
a
most
unstable
and
difficult
time
without
the
tools
of
understanding
that
one
needed
to
deal
consciously
with
it.65
Why
should
examining
theories,
ideas
and
images
of
the
future
and
human
responses
to
these
be
important
to
contemporary
Australian
studies?
Futures-based
knowledge,
I
argue,
can
be
vulnerable
to
less
sophisticated
62 63
and socially dangerous agendas or dangerous expression. If institutionalised, this type of futures-based knowledge, if not challenged critically, can destabilise sound inquiry of the future. Configured with superficial or manipulative language, futurestext can limit senses of the present in forms of anxiety about time. These forms have been variously described by Alvin Toffler as future shock,66 by Lee Quimby as terminal cynicism,67 and by John Carroll as pneuma-phobia (dread or fear of spirit),68 At some level, maintains Slaughter, people dont want to know about tomorrow; today is quite enough.69 How then do we examine ideas, images and responses to the future?
65 66
ibid., p vii. Alvin Toffler, Future Shock, Sydney, Pan, 1980. 67 Lee Quimby, Millennial Dreams 6, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 1 March 2000. 68 John Carroll, Re-Enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. 69 Slaughter, op. cit., p 10.
Chapter Three Calling the Bluff of Anodyne Views of the Future70 For some reason the past doesnt radiate such immense monotony as the future does. Because of its plenitude, the future is propaganda 71 To make a closer study of how uses of texts about the future are implicated in the construction of futures knowledges and subjectivities, a metalanguage is needed to provide an analysis of futures-thinking beyond the insightful interpretation phase, a theorisation that brings Australian studies, text and future into new relations with each other under the field of AFS. Given the future is usually conceived as something which does not exist, how, it can be asked, might one study something that popularly lacks empirical certification? The first task in interrogating ideas of the future is configuring an appropriate language of engagement. In the past, scientific terminology has characterised international futurology; for example, Yujiro Hayashis futuro-epistemology-conceptology-engineering,72 Franois Hetmans comprehensive guarantism,73 Paul Hawkens disintermediation,74 Alvin Tofflers posumerism75 and Herman Kahns basic long-term multifold
70 71
ibid., p 135. Joseph Brodsky, 1940-1996. Less Than One. 72 Yujiro Hayashi, The Direction and Orientation of Futurology as a Science, International Future research Congress, Oslo, 12-15 September 1967. 73 Franois Hetman, Futuribles, no 24, 10 February, 1962. 74 Paul Hawken, The Next Economy, New York, Henry Colt, 1984. 75 Alvin Toffler, The Third Wave, London, Pan Books, 1981.
trend.76 But language of this type has been open to accusations of appropriating possession over a study of processes through exclusive language and concept ownership. French sociologist Alain Gras was inspired on this basis to condemn futurology as basically a technique of political domination ultimately linked with the policy of ruling elites because its hidden agenda is the reproduction of domination.77 It is important to avoid impenetrability in meaning. As a guide I follow the example given by the public intellectual (see definition, Australian Public Intellectual-Network, www.api-network.com). In this way following the imperative towards a democratisation of representation in which all citizens partake in a form of Australian public intellectualism78 I draw upon the fields of Australian, communication, critical futures and cultural studies and propose that an elementary framework for exploring the tensions between choice, choosing and futures responsibility, while not invulnerable to criticism, is to look at the relationship between three layers of futures flow in Australia. These three distinct layers, through which an Australian futures discourse might be developed and explored, can be termed and defined in order of importance: futurestext, futurescape and futurespeak.
76 77
Herman Kahn and Anthony Wiener, The Year 2000, New York, Macmillan, 1967. quoted in Dublin, op. cit., p 112.
Futurestext By futurestext, I mean any media, practice or discourse that registers, refers to and/or encourages thought along the idea of future. The possible type of futurestext can range from an evangelical tract about the endtimes (such as the Jesus Loves You example in the introduction) to an advertisement on television in 1999 claiming that if you drive a Toyota car then the future is now. I use the suffix text to indicate that a futurestext typically has a material existence, though not necessarily limited to written form but inclusive of speeches, pamphlets, architecture, broadcasts and commercial. In this respect, futurestext can include epistemological futures studies such as Charles Birchs Confronting the Future (1993) and the Commission for the Future series and at the same time contemporary advertising and broadcast programming in which the future is often mobile and, as the late 1990s demonstrated, quite millennial: Next Stop: The Future, Queensland Rail; Job Access: Your ticket to a better future, Queensland Government; As we race for the future, we havent forgotten the past, Garuda International Airlines; The Future is Genovis, Genovis Sewing Machines; If you thought the past was great, stay tuned for the future, ABC Promotion (1998); Trust an unknown future in a known God, Taringa Baptist Church; Welcome to the future, Ron Casey launching Galaxy TV; Protecting our childrens future, Sunsmart; Gold Medal 2000, Energiser Drink; Spirit 2000: Olympic
78
Alison Lee, Discourse Analysis and Cultural (re)Writing, in Alison Lee and Cate Poynton (eds), Culture and Text, Allen and Unwin, St Leonards, 2000, p 194.
Dreaming, TV Special on ABC; Shape up for the future, Shape Milk; and The future is calling, Vodaphone. But a futurestext can also be understood in addition to being textual as a product of imaginative social and fiction mapping, as part of an imaginative (sometimes national) resource. It can be an object located in a framework of concepts and propositions situated around the idea future79 and as such can become a perspectival construct informed by the historical, linguistic, political and cultural situatedness of different types of writers.80 Such writers might be managers, academics, politicians, citizens, issue- activists, journalists, or even endtimers. There are, of course, other levels of meaning to the construction of text (and writer) within the term futurestext. Futurestext and Authentication In not being persuaded that authors of futurestext are somehow independent of subjective factors and of social and cultural influences, permitting unembroidered conceptions of the future, many of the matters raised in the discussion below on futurestext take what is commonly called the textual turn, engaging in questions of creating meaning and writing and representation both inside and outside the production of futurestext. Such questions are questions of power of who it is that produces which
79
M Mulkay, Science and the Sociology of Knowledge, New South Wales, Allen and Unwin, 1979, p 34. 80 Appadurai, op. cit., pp 221-2.
account
of
the
[future]
social
world81
questions
of
pleasure
and
desire
of
which
futurestexts
persuade
and
convince,
of
whom
they
persuade
and
convince
and
to
what
desired
ends,
of
who
such
a
futurestext
will
be
talking
to
in
its
production
and
its
eventual
distribution?82
and
questions
of
social
action
what
material
change
is
the
futurestext
intended
to
produce
in
the
writer
and
reader?
Futurestext
and
Power:
Plan
or
Be
Planned
For!83
Paul
Longley
Arthur
writes
significantly
on
the
power
of
pre-colonisation
antipodean
fantasies
to
influence
the
formation
of
Australias
historical
consciousness
over
the
past
half
millennia:
[H]ypothetical
space
was
utilised
as
a
setting
for
European
utopian
fiction
long
before
there
was
any
concrete
empirical
knowledge
of
the
region
in
Europe,
Arthur
claims.
Visions
of
the
Antipodes
in
literature
formed
a
pre-text
that
greatly
influenced
(and
effectively
limited)
the
reality
that
Europeans
found
when
they
finally
arrived
in
Australia.
To
Europeans
landing
in
the
uncharted
Antipodes,
it
was
as
though
they
were
playing
out
a
colonial
drama
that
had
already
been
rehearsed
on
the
stage
of
the
European
imagination.84
81 82
Lee, op. cit., pp 189-90. ibid. 83 Russell Ackoof, Creating the Corporate Future: Plan or Be Planned For, New York, Wiley, 1981. 84 Longley Arthur, in Barcan and Buchanan, op. cit., p 37.
Hypothetical space, or what Simon Ryan has called blank space, worked semiotically to form the antipodal landmass as empty, unsettled and inviting European inscription.85 Exploration played a critical part in Australias coming-into-being as a place in which Europeans could be situated imaginatively. As Paul Carter has investigated elsewhere in The Road to Botany Bay, exploration effected a transformation of [hypothetical] space into [real] place.86 Exploring the fantasy was both an influential and transformative process in the creation of Australia. What is revealing of the power behind such fantasies and fictions of the future and their eventual exploration? Power is an important issue because futurestext can structure the self-constitution or imaginations of ones own future reality if not that of an entire community, sect, class, or nation. As the European fiction of blank space sanctioned a future policy of terra nullius (since Australia was effectively empty in their imagination, awaiting inscription), it can be maintained that images of the future can act (and have acted) in the service of social control. This is neither a recent observation nor a novel development in human relations. The ideological bias of projected vision is not unusual in futurology, remarks Max Dublin87 and has considerable history.
85
Simon Ryan, The Cartographic Eye: How Explorers Saw Australia, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996, p 105. 86 Tony Hughes-dAeth, A Prospect of Future Regularity: Spatial Technologies in Colonial Australia, in Ruth Barcan and Ian Buchanan (eds), Imagining Australian Space: Cultural Studies and Spatial Inquiry, University of Western Australia Press, 1999, p 48-9. 87 Dublin, op. cit., p 100.
For
example,
in
1798,
English
economist
Thomas
Malthus
published
the
treatise
An
Essay
on
the
Principle
of
Population
As
it
Affects
the
Future
Improvement
of
Society
that
revealed
the
cheerless
future
of
overpopulation
and
widespread
famine
awaiting
the
citizens
of
industrial
societies.
Malthusian
calculus
made
the
world
familiar
with
the
practice
of
prediction
and
in
so
doing
ignited
a
debate
over
the
limits
to
growth,
not
unlike
the
discussions
found
in
the
Club
of
Rome
publications
produced
during
the
1970s.
Malthus
used
mathematics
to
predict
that
a
looming
imbalance
between
population
growth
and
food
supply
would
lead
to
the
eventual
starvation
of
England.
But
the
solution
prescribed
by
Malthus
that
the
lower
classes
should
inhibit
their
rate
of
reproduction
served
less
as
futurestext
imbued
with
the
ethical
and
moral
intelligence
of
say
the
biblical
prophets
and
more
the
self-righteous
intervention
of
a
threatened
elite:
It
is
conventional
wisdom
among
historians,
offers
Max
Dublin,
that
this
prescription
vindicated
the
prejudices
of
the
dominant
elite
of
the
society
in
which
Malthus
live
who
wanted
to
blame
the
poor
for
their
misery
rather
than
take
some
of
the
responsibility
for
this
situation
on
themselves.88
Nearly
two
centuries
later,
George
Orwells
famous
and
relevant
exploration
of
the
future
in
1984
is
the
story
of
Winston
Smiths
rebellion
against
the
Party,
of
his
hatred
towards
Big
Brother
and
thoughtcrime.
Early
into
this
fictional
exploration,
Winston
reflects
on
the
perpetual
state
of
war
that
has
existed
between
Oceania
and
Eurasia:
The
Party
said
that
Oceania
88
ibid., p 99. See also Annie Vinokor, Malthusian Ideology and the Crisis of the Welfare State and John Sherwood, Engels, Marx, Malthus and the Machine, in American Historical Review, vol 90, no 4, 1985.
had never been in alliance with Eurasia ... But where did that knowledge exist? Only in his own consciousness ... if all the others accepted the lie that the party imposed if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. "Who controls the past," ran the Party slogan, "controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. "Reality control," they called it; in Newspeak, "doublethink.89 Transposing the direction of Orwells commentary, from a control of knowledge about the past to a control of future mythology, provides more than just an occasional point. To paraphrase, a modern re-configuration of Orwells argument might suggest that who controls the future controls the present, and that all is required is an unending series of victories over your imagination. Troubled by societys overwhelming willingness to be guided by futurologists (as some scientific workers of futures ideas are known as) with what he identified to be selfish goals, Max Dublin wrote in Futurehype: A well-articulated vision of the future is the natural centrepiece of most ideological systems, especially those on the farther ends of the political spectrum. He explains, extreme ideologies all envision the playing out of a great drama over time, and the final [dramatic] climax be it the withering of the state if it is an ideology of the Left, or some sort of breathtaking apocalypse in which the world will be destroyed and/or renewed if it is one on the Right is always played out at some, usually
89
unspecified,
period
in
the
future.90
Behind
contemporary
new
age
enthusiasm,
Slaughter
identifies
atavistic
conceptions
of
futures
involving
territoriality,
domination
and
conquest,
prompting
him
to
conclude
having
traced
the
military
and
strategic
roots
of
American
futurism:
behind
every
large-scale
project
of
the
future
lie
interests
that
are
served
in
the
present.91
Ivan
Illich
argued
in
1971
that
futurology
promoted
cultural
contraction
along
technocratic
lines.
He
remarked
in
Deschooling
Society
that
research
now
going
on
about
the
future
tends
to
advocate
further
increases
in
the
institutionalisation
of
values.92
Works
such
as
Tofflers
Future
Shock
trilogy
(1990),
Hazel
Hendersons
Creating
Alternative
Futures
(1978),
Lelia
Green
and
Roger
Gunerys
Framing
Technology:
Society,
Choice
and
Change
(1994),
Oliver
Markleys
Changing
Images
of
Man
(1974),
Birchs
Confronting
the
Future
(1993),
Slaughters
Future
Concepts
and
Powerful
Ideas
(1996),
and
Lynette
Hunters
Critiques
of
Knowing:
Situated
Textualities
in
Science,
Computing
and
the
Arts
(1999),
represent
attempts
to
locate
technocratic
and
meritocratic
values
within
society
and
to
distinguish
which
inherited
meanings
from
the
industrial
era
have
gone
sour.93
Taken
together,
they
mark
a
growing
widespread
movement
of
retreat
from
history,
culture
and
tradition
in
the
reconceptualisation
of
meaning
in
the
future.
Primarily
the
central
process
at
work
within
the
social
sciences
(which
these
texts
are
products
of)
is
the
growing
distrust
of
objectivity.
Post-positivist,
90 91
Max Dublin, Futurehype, Victoria, Penguin, 1989, p 104. Slaughter, op. cit., p 228. 92 Ivan Illich, Deschooling Society, New York, Harper and Row, 1971, p 2.
postmodernism,
feminist,
poststructuralist
and
interpretivist
critiques
have
eroded
the
basis
on
which
the
social
sciences
once
claimed
certainty
about
what
was
being
studied
and
said.
In
reopening
the
Australian
civilisation
debate
in
his
book
of
the
same
name,
Nile
noted
a
similar
retreat,
that
the
present
argument
was
informed
by
the
fin
de
siecle
and
fin
de
millennium,
a
period
of
extraordinary
change
and
great
communal
soul-searching.
We
are
caught
in
the
midst
of
tremendous
upheavals
in
our
social,
cultural
and
personal
relationships,
he
wrote
six
years
prior
to
the
turn
of
the
millennium,
in
an
age
when
time- honoured
intellectual,
emotional
and
economic
assumptions
neither
sustain
nor
comfort
us.
Nile
saw
the
complexion
of
the
country
to
be
transforming
before
our
eyes,
more
than
lightly
encouraged
by
the
twin
group
fantasies
of
fin
de
siecle
and
fin
de
millennium.94
It
is
useful
then
to
speak
of
the
future
as
a
situated
textuality
with
specific
invested
interests
and
a
power
to
transform
and
control.
In
this
view,
it
is
possible
to
describe
the
purpose
of
futurestext
in
media
and
media
practice
as
intending
to
produce
some
form
of
material
change,
as
elicited
by
the
more
powerful
members
of
a
society,
a
community
or
a
collective.
93 94
Slaughter, op. cit., p 226. Richard Nile, Australian Civilisation, Melbourne, Oxford University Press, 1994, p vii.
Futurestext and the Consumption of Performative Transformational Rituals Futurestext can be dispersed along different modes of communication through Arjun Appadurais mediascape or Douglas Rushkoffs datasphere. Consumption of a futurestext can be quite widespread and diverse as futures are exportable between individuals, groups and nations. The future is like a sign, or a nation (Benedict Andersons imagined community) or even a television audience (John Hartleys invisible fiction) a construct of particular institutions which, when linked to the means of both producing and organising meaning in social contexts, can be internalised widely by an audience that Toby Miller has defined to be composed of well-tempered citizens.95 This socialisation of a thing produced (that is, a futurestext) has associations with Horkheimer and Adornos theorisation of the culture industry. In a modern setting, their argument refers to the power of radio, cinema and television (and the related if less sophisticated output of advertising) to transform value into a product (or lifestyle) exchanged within a capitalist system. This account does not assume that the individual is a passive subject in the sequence of cultural administration. Yet, on terms of this projects investigation, the cultural production of a futurestext (say, the iconic 2000) at the level of mass dispersion and consumption can both embrace and constrain all humans subject to its influence. As an illustration, although celebrating millennial eve on the Sydney Harbour may benefit status from obtaining expensively priced (and therefore rare) seating at a restaurant, they were in fact as powerless before the
textual
politics
of
2000
as
non-celebrating
citizens.
Neither
group
could
effect
any
change
on
the
imminence
of
2000
as
an
event.
Why
not?
Because,
2000
had
become
more
than
another
date
on
the
anno
Domini
calendar.
It
had
become
both
a
transnational
and
translational
(to
appropriate
Arjun
Appadurais
terminology)
product
toward
the
close
of
the
1990s.
It
was
transnational
because
viewing
the
dawn
of
2000
as
it
moved
across
the
face
of
the
planet
(and
therefore
across
national
boundaries,
as
if
through
a
form
of
international
turnstiles)
during
the
24-hour
live
telecast
perhaps
best
described
as
a
moment
of
the
millennial
tuned-in
planet
confirmed
the
spatialisation
of
millennial
appearance.
A
non-existence
of
national
limits
was
made
viewable
by
global
media
technologies:
the
millennium
seemingly
travelled
everywhere.
No
nation
could
hide
from
it.
In
a
collusion
of
different
rituals
of
celebration
and
perhaps
instances
of
what
might
be
called
temporal
cross-dressing
millions
watched
and
celebrated
on
the
night
of
31
December
1999
as
representatives
of
native
epistemologies
(for
example,
the
Maori
in
New
Zealand)
welcomed
in
the
year
2000
(which
is
fundamentally
a
western
site
of
meaning
and
not
Maori
ritual)
alongside
the
competition
of
conspicuous
consumption
in
fireworks
between
western
subjects
(say,
Sydney
Harbour
and
Thames
River,
London).
The
year
2000
was
translational
because
it
became
a
broadly
disseminated
discourse
in
which
the
particularities
of
a
culture
were
subsumed
to
celebrating
the
millennium
in
a
global
framework.
Though
the
social
specificity
of
producing
meaning
in
2000
was
tied
at
times
to
western
contextual
locations
and
social
systems
of
value
(Big
Ben,
Sydney
Harbour
95
Bridge, Times Square, fireworks, dance and drink), 2000 was also translated into non-western (other) sites of culture, often with the invention of a new tradition (celebrating 2000 was not an activity usually coded within society). In other words, celebrating 2000 became a global rite de passage which marked both a transition from one stage of life to another (from the second millennium to the third) and the submission of individual societies to the collective requirements of ritualising 2000 as an event. Primetime television certainly broadcast this sense of celebratory cohesion; as a unity through incorporation of the diverse practices commemorating the year 2000. Futurestext and the Western Inscription of Time: Temporal Nullius In the closing year of the twentieth century, the world appeared, for all intents and purposes, to be engaged in anticipating the future at a millennial turning point. Yet, Australian faith in 2000AD was constituted as pre- thematic, pre-theoretical and culturally imported: pre-theoretical in that popular awareness of an imminent millennium was not largely nor actively informed by the cognitive interests of an academic discipline; pre-thematic in that 2000AD assumed a position of commonplace involvement in contemporary public dialogue; and culturally imported as belief in 2000AD was not exclusive nor indigenous to Australia. Curious questions arise as to the nature of belief in this futurestext. What did contemporary society believe in the year 2000 and why? In what way did Australian television networks and media impute the potential of 2000AD? Did the urge towards global chronometric cohesion insist (and here the project of politicising time
extends
beyond
national
boundaries)
that
other
cultures
use
this
form
of
counting
and
think
about
the
year
2000
in
the
same
regard
that
western
societies
did?
We
might
recognise
that
cultural
uses
of
time
are
never
for
minor
effects.
Gaynor
Macdonald
argues
that
notions
of
time
and
timelessness
and
the
related
phenomena
of
stasis,
tradition,
history
and
change
have
always
been
a
part
of
the
politics
of
constructing
Aboriginalities
in
Australia.96
Exploring
the
intersection
between
concepts
of
time
and
political
power
within
Aboriginal
contexts,
Macdonald
continues:
Employed
as
means
of
inclusion
and
exclusion,
notions
of
time
have
been
an
effective
medium
of
governance.
More
recently
they
have
become
part
of
Aboriginal
strategies
for
negotiating
access
to
resources.
Concepts
of
time
have
been
politicised
and
contested,
for
instance,
in
recent
native
title
and
stolen
generation
debates.97
When
we
use
the
calendar
medium
non-reflexively,
we
accept
and
reinscribe
the
belief
and
Williams
has
argued
that
it
is
nothing
more
or
less
than
an
arbitrary
collective
act
of
faith
that
it
is
our
cultural
practice
of
anno
Domini
computation
that
literally
makes
possible
continuity
into
the
secular
millennium.
Yet
the
act
of
arriving
at
the
millennium
is
a
triumph
of
collective
awareness
in
which
a
series
of
narratives
around
a
structured
and
fictional
object
of
time
(the
millennium)
converge.
Media
heraldry
of
pre-
and
post-millennial
activism
facilitates
this
semantic
innovation
and
the
96
Gaynor Macdonald, Time and the creation of Aboriginalities, In/Between, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au /history/conferences/inbetween/>. 97 ibid.
new temporal locus (2000AD plus) is brought into the world by means of language. In synthesising the heterogenous, dissimilar content within the numerous millennial narratives (including their story-tellers and audiences) is gathered together and harmonised. With print and electronic modes of communication eliciting dramatic responses of celebration, the multiplicity of events and structural features of the immediate future are seized all at once by the authorial overview of 2000AD.15 In other words, there arose a formal agreement among the communities that produce and maintain Australias timing that the millennium should assert symbolic power in various culturally accepted and novel forms. How these powers (or themes of celebration, transformation, etc) are written into the symbolic and actual life-space of our lives, how ideas, ideologies, commitments and particular ways of construing the future world are signified, legitimised and communicated, how mainstream definitions of millennium, for example, are imputed in the processes of cultural editing and social and cultural change, is worthy of serious enquiry.98 New images, admits Elise Boulding, generate new behaviour possibilities. Particular images like the millennium as signified by the symbol 2000, used often during the 1990s to structure possibilities of historical transformation (moving from the twentieth century and into the twenty-first century) are selectively empowered and explode later into the realised future. She concludes, in any cultural epoch, only certain images of the future out of a much wider pool develop enough cultural resonance to affect process,
98
and
to
move
toward
actualisation.99
In
what
way
do
certain
images
become
selected
and
written
into
the
contemporary
cultural
code?
How
is
one
future
certified
over
another?
Perhaps,
as
a
theoretical
extension
of
Ryans
blank
space,
there
exists
in
the
post
industrialised
imagination
a
blank
time
that
invites
(along
with
potent
imperialist
associations)
a
form
of
western
inscription:
a
temporal
nullius
as
it
were,
a
time
existing
in
a
blank
state
as
a
precondition
to
exploration,
that
is
ours
for
colonising.
Certainly,
exploring
the
millennium
prior
to
its
televised
revelation
seemed
to
be
something
of
a
national
obsession
in
Australia
during
the
1990s.
For
a
short
time,
dramas
imaging
the
twenty-first
century,
popular
science
docutainments
on
the
future
of
the
human
species,
social
commentators
forecasting
Australia
twenty-years
ahead,
endtimers
heralding
an
impending
apocalypse,
shops
marketing
year
2000
merchandise
(from
spectacles
to
boxers),
advertisements
using
2000
or
apocalyptic
signifiers
to
bolster
sales
all
these
things
became
centred
in
popular
and
public
consciousness.
How
was
this
possible?
Much
like
explorers
(re)spatialised
the
Australian
continent100
at
the
time
of
colonisation,
their
activities
bridging
the
gap
between
Australia
as
it
was
imagined
and
Australia
as
it
was
discovered,101
narratives
of
exploration
are
frequently
deployed
to
re-temporalise
the
future
around
moments
of
implied
public
significance.
Towards
2000
(also
a
title
of
one
such
published
narrative),
descriptive
accounts
and
imaginative
fictions
produced
by
pop
99
Elise Boulding, The Dynamics of Imaging Futures, World Future Society Bulletin, 1978, vol 12, no 5, pp 1-8. 100 Hughes-dAeth, op. cit., p 48.
futurists
and
vocal
social
elites
(scientists,
commentators,
politicians,
sporting
figures,
academics,
etc)
followed
an
imperative
to
know
the
future
surrounding
the
turn
of
the
millennium
and
beyond.
Their
fictions
were
implemented
and
recycled
via
newspapers,
dramatic
displays,
television
and
radio
broadcasts,
publications,
symposia
and
conferences
(those
mechanisms
that
Benedict
Anderson
identifies
for
providing
imaginary
links
between
citizens).
As
an
example,
the
Australian
television
program
Beyond
2000
(formerly
Towards
2000)
achieved
a
similar
aim
through
a
discourse
of
scientific
edutainment.
Throughout
each
weekly
episode,
it
sustained
an
evolving
relationship
between
the
fictional
object
(future)
and
a
new
human-centred
temporal
fact
(controllable
and
thereby
knowable),
contrary
to
the
futures
otherwise
naturalised
state
(unknowable).
Texts
like
this
direct
their
audiences
away
from
considering
that
what
is
written
or
spoken
about
the
future
is
a
human
product
or
political
fiction
supported
by
social
convention.
This
creates
a
site
of
textual
contestation
in
which
futurestexts
are
authenticated
by
their
authors
that
is,
environmental
warnings
are
proved
by
scientists,
horoscopes
are
foreseen
by
astrologists
and
even
signs
of
the
times
tracts
are
revealed
by
believers.
These
fictions
and
others
like
them
contribute
to
the
way
Australians
collectively
constru(ct)ed
a
sense
of
the
time
in
which
they
live.
In
this
manner,
the
future
around
2000
was
situated
in
the
Australian
imagination
and
moved
from
being
unknown
to
known
in
a
process
of
possessing
time.
101
Futurestext
and
Writing
In
terms
of
Paul
Carters
classic
investigation
of
exploration
texts
and
Cartesian
techniques
of
apprehending
space,
the
millennium
was
explored,
colonised
and
then
exploited.
It
was
written
into
being
and
the
future
moved
from
temporal
nullius
to
a
landscape
of
futurestexts,
a
futurescape.
The
notion
of
writing
and
signification
used
here
are
understood
as
processes
of
transformation
rather
than
representation102
and,
in
this
sense,
it
is
argued
that
futurestext
act,
that
they
produce
and
position
the
future
as
a
social
process
or
discrete
detail
to
which
citizens
respond
accordingly.103
Anne
Game,
in
her
1991
work
Undoing
the
Social:
Towards
a
Deconstructive
Sociology,
begins
with
the
basic
semiotic
assumption
that
culture
or
the
social
is
written,
that
there
is
no
extra-discursive
real
outside
cultural
systems.104
In
other
words,
the
way
an
author
conceptualises
the
future
creates
(writes)
the
text
that
is
disseminated.
There
are
no
real
futures
(text)
apart
from
what
is
perceived
that
way.
Cultural
innovation
or
transformation
can
be
closely
related
in
this
manner
with
the
production,
combination
and
utilisation
of
selected,
arguably
real,
futures
images.
Slaughter
makes
significant
claims
for
the
power
of
futures
work
in
analysing
transformation:
By
understanding
the
present
cultural
transition
102 103
Ann Game and Andrew Metcalfe, Passionate Sociology, London, Sage, 1996, p 91. Paul Rabinow, Representations are Social Facts: Modernity and Postmodernity in Anthropology, in James Clifford and George Marcus (eds), Writing Culture: the Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, University of California Press, pp 234-61. 104 Anne Game, Undoing the Social: Towards a Deconstructive Sociology, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, 1991, p 4.
less
in
terms
of
the
external
regulation
or
control
of
techniques
and
technologies,
than
as
a
transformative
process
involving
breakdowns
and
renewals
of
meanings,
we
penetrate
to
the
core
of
all
our
major
concerns.105
This
has
a
certain
resonance
with
discussions
on
culture
shift,
Mackays
age
of
redefinition,
or
Niles
becoming
civilisation
thesis.
Australia
may
very
well
be
a
text
itself,
still
in
the
process
of
being
(re)written
by
authors
whom
we
only
occasionally
get
glimpses
of.
Australia,
it
can
be
argued,
is
an
example
of
what
post-structuralists
envisage
as
the
subject-in-process.
That
is,
one
subject
out
of
many
dispersed
over
a
range
of
multiple
positions,
sites
of
struggle
and
discourses,
which
defying
what
has
been
called
the
master
narrative
nonetheless
becomes
an
optional
(and
often
dominant,
as
times
of
war
or
the
Olympics
would
indicate)
construct
of
national
identity
out
of
various
signifying
codes
and
practices.
The
move
from
monoculture
to
multicultural
and
back
during
the
1990s
reveals
that
this
is
an
ongoing
process
Yet
within
the
expanded
definition
that
futurestext
might
indicate
all
forms
of
textual
and
discursive
practice
involving
futures
thinking,
questions
of
power
and
desire
in
(futures)
textual
production
inevitably
connect
with
questions
of
public
accountability
and
the
material
effects
of
(futures)
texts.
Depending
on
ones
subjective
relation
to
any
given
futurestext,
some
constructs
of
Australias
future
appear
more
real
or
carry
greater
meaning
than
others:
not
all
futures
are
created
equal.
105
Futurestext and the Subjectivity / Objectivity Dichotomies Critical discourse analysis has in part been formative of my own understandings of the situatedness of futures thinking and futurestext. Within feminist postructuralist accounts of cultural studies and critical discourse analysis, a special reading of the term method is available through the work of Alison Lee, Cate Poynton, Sandra Harding, Patti Lather and Cleo Cherryholmes. In drawing on poststructuralist understandings of method, Lee and Poynton provide a useful metaphor for the power relations involved in textual inscription which can be applied to and instructive in describing uses of futurestext: [P]oststructuralist readings, write the editors of Culture and Text, view research and knowledge production as always and inevitably an enactment of power relations.106 Research practices viewed in this way can be construed more as: Inscriptions of legitimation than procedures [which] help us get closer to some truth that is capturable via language [This] allows an understanding of the force of textuality, its formalised strategies for convincingness, its speech acts.107 But this is not to concede the form of textualisation that Marxism and socialist feminists disapprove of in its disregard for the lived relations of
106 107
domination
that
ground
the
play
of
arbitrary
reading.108
As
a
site
of
epistemological
struggle,
what
is
at
stake
in
deconstructing
futurestext
is
the
capacity
to
depose
default
definitions
and
ideological
functions
of
the
future
that
is,
given
static
conceptions
versus
alternative
dynamic
perceptions,
business
as
usual
versus
strategic
realignment,
industrial
epistemologies
versus
critical
futures
methodologies.
It
is
to
problematise
the
understandings,
concepts
and
values
of
the
future
that
are
mistaken
as
given
and
theoretically
neutral.
It
is
to
gain
access
to
meanings
and
commitments
that
tend
to
be
hidden
precisely
because
they
frame
our
world.
The
reader
becomes
not
a
passive
observer
but
a
co-author,
fully
capable
of
calling
forth
meaning,
purpose
and
intention.109
Futurestext
and
the
Theorisation
of
Futures
Positions
The
theorisation
of
situated/positional
futures
in
Australia
and
Australian
studies
requires
a
metalanguage
concerning
the
future
for
revealing
the
potential
usefulness
of
fine-grained
futures
description
and
an
account
that
attends
to
the
connections
between
political,
social,
cultural,
linguistic,
institutional
and
theoretical
dimensions
of
futures-thinking.
The
type
of
conception
of
textual
and
cultural
practice
informing
this
theorisation
derives
principally
from
intersections
between
cultural
studies
accounts
of
situated
knowledges,
intertextuality
and
culture
and
Australian
studies
accounts
of
civilisation,
becoming
and
writing.
108 109
Taking
key
writers
in
turn
to
define
each
of
these
terms,
Lee
and
Poynton,
in
their
work
Culture
and
Text,
focus
on
a
poststructuralist
understanding
of
text:
Situated
knowledges
offers
a
way
to
think
about
the
circumstances
in
which
texts
arise
and
how
they
are
used
and
mean
[These]
knowledges
are
distributed
through
assemblages
of
texts
situated
in
appropriate
contexts,
where
text
may
involve
various
forms
of
semiosis,
not
just
language,
and
where
setting
both
is
and
is
not
context
and
certainly
involves
institution
[I]ndividuals
come
to
speak
as
particular
kinds
of
subjects
to
speak
themselves
into
being
through
speaking
the
discourses
that
enable
the
particular
institution.110
John
Frow
and
Meaghan
Morris,
following
the
work
of
Raymond
Williams,
cite
culture
as
a
way
of
life:
the
whole
way
of
life
of
a
social
group
as
it
is
structured
by
representation
and
by
power
a
network
of
representations
texts,
images,
talk,
codes
of
behaviour,
and
the
narrative
structures
organising
these
which
shapes
every
aspect
of
social
life.111
Nile
constructs
the
notion
of
Australian
civilisation
as
a
text
written
in
lies.
A
book
on
civilisation
should
very
likely
be
full
of
wonderful
lies,
opens
Australian
Civilisation,
and
a
book
on
Australia
would
seem
to
require,
almost
as
a
matter
of
course,
that
lies
be
told.
This
much,
at
least,
those
two
marvellously
loaded
words
Australia
and
civilisation
appear
to
share
in
common.
Its
all
lies.112
Yet
with
these
lies
comes
an
inevitable
tension
with
truth
and
legitimacy:
At
the
heart
of
settler
Australian
anxieties
are
110 111
Lee and Poynton, op. cit., p 5. John Frow and Meaghan Morris (eds), Australian Cultural Studies: a reader, Allen and Unwin, Sydney, p viii.
deep seeded feelings of illegitimacy Australia is a tension pulling in two directions simultaneously, of a civilisation that has not yet arrived but just about to end and the end of civilisation, as much as Australias unconventional beginnings, are with Australia much of the time.113 Similarly puzzled by what Ffion Murphy calls one of the most persistent questions connected to the study of Australia: does Australia have a unique culture in any sense of the word that may, for whatever reason, be worthy of study?, Cameron Richards searched for a methodological framework for celebrating and critiquing Australia and was compelled ultimately to make sense of Richard Whites brilliant if undeveloped and contradictory insight that it is not so important whether the images of Australia are true or false, but how they are used [It seemed] that the paradox of Australian Studies is largely a result of critics approaching the forms and discourse of Australian cultural history as if they were either literally true of false.114 With the publication of Writing Australia: New Talents 21C, Murphy responds to the 1990s silencing of the knowledge class and argues for a renewal of the public intellectual debate and a (re)writing of Australian studies. Concerned with the practices and politics of representation within Australian studies and the public sphere, Murphy problematises the active citizenship of intellectuals and mobilises a re-invigoration of the public intellectual voice:
112 113
Richard Nile (ed.), Australian Civilisation, op. cit., p 1. Richard Nile, Civilisation, in Richard Nile (ed.), The Australian Legend and its Discontents, University of Queensland Press, 2000.
With breathtaking simplicity, just about any suggestion of detailed cultural analysis could be swept aside on the basis that the questions raised were too academic, merely hypothetical, overly partisan, not dignified, lacking common sense or outside the bounds of reasonableness Linguistically, Australia moved from
reconciliation
to
the
black
armband
view
of
history,
from
multiculturalism
to
the
mainstream,
from
tolerance
to
un- Australian,
and
from
the
republic
to
the
monarchy.
Arguably,
societies
most
need
their
public
intellectuals
when
circumstances
do
not
favour
them.115
In
closing
the
introduction,
Murphy
challengingly
lays
out
the
new
canvas
of
Australian
studies,
moving
away
from
nationalistic
forms
of
Australian
studies
enquiry
to
a
more
critical,
dynamic,
pro-active
frame
of
discussion:
Writing
Australia
suggests
that
public
intellectual
inquiry
is
in
very
capable
hands.
Next
generation
researchers
and
writers
are
more
than
able
to
assume
responsibilities
for
maintaining
and
extending
studies
into
Australia
Australian
studies
may
now
mean
something
quite
different
to
traditional
practices
and
the
various
attempts
made
in
the
1970s
and
1980s
to
establish
Australian
studies
as
a
discreet
and
identifiable
academic
discipline.
It
may
also
mean
something
quite
114
Cameron Richards, The Australian Paradox(es) Revisited, in Ffion Murphy (ed.), Writing Australia: New Talents 21C, St Lucia, University of Queensland Press, 2000, p 175.
different to the classic divide and territorial disputes between Australian and cultural studies referred to by Cameron Richards.116 Futurescape This brings us to the second term of reference: futurescape. Futurestexts are the building blocks of to extend Benedict Andersons imagined community and Arjun Appadurais imagined worlds what I call the futurescape. What is a futurescape? It can be reasonably argued that we live within societies that increasingly value information, data, images and ideologies; that increasingly places emphasis on colonising intellectual territory through various novel forms of media; that seeks to empower those possessing the greater territory of knowledge; and which promotes the acquisition of information for its own sake. Social stature today is measured by how much access an individual has to the datasphere, how much interaction an individual has with differing and competing forms of data. The Internet has contributed to eroding maps and boundaries, to eroding territorial frontiers. Little space remains to conquer. One of the last places left for our societies to explore perhaps a frontier is time itself: namely the future. It might be argued that power today has very little to do with material possessions and financial assets acquired in a lifetime; power, it might be suggested, is
115 116
instead determined by the amount of control an individual can exercise over the(ir) future and the(ir) concept of the future. By this, I mean the politics of actively inventing the future and the politics of promoting a dominant future that includes one set and excludes another set of beliefs. To reason along these lines requires an examination of the link between citizen and society in the cultural construction of futures and facing some questions about the nature of belief in the social fantasy of futures. In the contemporary context of approaching the third millennium we might ask about this future: what is our relationship its conceptualisation? Which individuals have a voice in select or prominent visualisations of the future? In what way do particular groups control or influence the expression of the future? Which individuals of these groups create the icons and symbols of the future? Are these icons subject to modification? Society's perspective of the future has expanded into a true region of prime socio-temporal territory a millennium, a place of time seemingly as real and open as the world was half a millennium ago, with unknowable, unstable and dangerously competitive elements. This new space I call the futurescape. It is not an objectively defined space that appears the same from every angle of vision. Rather, the futurescape is the site of human intellectual endeavour, economic extrapolation, social trending, and political invention. As a matter of form, there are at least two distinct futurescapes at work within Australian society, though in describing them their boundaries are by no means definite. They are the theological futurescape and the secular futurescape.
Theological
Futurescapes
Youngs
argument
that
the
gazer
into
the
future
has
never
yet
found
a
really
comfortable
intellectual
position,
and
perhaps
never
should
unless,
that
is,
he
is
a
preacher,
has
wide
applicability
in
the
theological
futurescape
which
is
replete
with
preachers
of
all
types
promulgating
a
future.117
The
theological
futurescape
is
characterised
by
four
primary
features.
First,
it
is
a
thematic
area
that
anticipates
the
future
in
light
of
biblical
prophecy,
especially
the
key
text,
Revelation.
Introduced
in
its
first
chapter
as
'the
revelation
of
Jesus
Christ,
which
God
gave
unto
Him
to
show
his
servants
things
which
must
occur
shortly
come
to
pass',
at
the
cusp
of
2000
years
of
the
Common
Era,
evangelical
groups
are
still
proclaiming
shortly
but
with
ever
greater
conviction.
It
is
of
scholarly
interest
that
evangelist
groups
mediate
the
book
of
Revelation
often
through
complicated,
sometimes
unrecognised
links
to
the
secular
world
-
and
shape
the
communication
of
this
text
to
Christian
readers
in
a
way
that
no
two
Christian
groups
connect
us
to
the
text
in
the
same
process.
Yet
all
claim
that
their
reading
of
Revelation
and
contemporary
times
is
true
and
accurate.
Hence,
the
theological
futurescape
is
competitive
where
the
prime
currency
is
membership
numbers,
adherents
to
prophetic
doctrine.
Second,
modern-day
evangelist
groups
tend
to
make
distinctions
between
scholarly
and
faithful
approaches
to
biblical
prophecy.
The
scholarly
approach
does
not
view
biblical
prophecy
as
self-contained
or
self-
117
M Young, Forecasting and the Social Sciences, Heinnemann, 1968, as quoted in Slaughter, op. cit., p 212.
authenticating. Contemporary evangelist groups are aware of this and so seek to uncover the connections in prophecy that are not apparent on the surface, the latent connections, the hidden structures and the invisible systems of biblical prophecy of which the secular world is a part. In this sense, theological chronologies that 'prove' the prophetic faculty of biblical prophecy, that 'prove' the end of the world is tomorrow, have become a fad of our age. Considerable effort is expended in establishing the truth behind a chronology and the identification of Endtime signs alongside the legitimisation of biblical codes of conduct. In effect, the theological futurescape is prophecy-driven. Third, in present-day evangelism, biblical prophecy takes on distinctive hues, shapes and qualities reflective of the contemporary society the evangelist inhabits. The approach of the year 2000 seems to evoke excess response from evangelist groups throughout the world and such communities respond strongly to new technologies, political patterns and manoeuvring on the global stage, and the turn of the millennium. Whereas the secular futurescape, it can be said, is being funnelled down to a key calendar point, that is the turning of the millennium, the sheer inability to pinpoint biblical prophecy to a specific timeline that every evangelist group agrees upon has cultivated a theological futurescape of competing chronologies and contested Endtime interpretations. The Theological Futurescape is conspicuous for its lack in homogeneity. Finally, the Futurescape is inhabited by evangelists, an umbrella term used here to refer broadly to Christian fundamentalists, evangelicals, Pentecostals, charismatics and Christian cultist who insist on some sort of spiritual rebirth
as a criterion for entering the kingdom of heaven, who often impose exacting behavioural standards on the faithful and intense pondering on the outworking of prophecy in our time, and whose doctrines, organisations, publications and activities comprise the theological futurescape. Secular Futurescapes The concerns and inhabitants of the Secular Futurescape are politically different to those of the theological persuasion. For example, within the Australian secular futurescape, probing questions flourish about our collective national direction, questions posed by, for example, politicians, social commentators, secularists, academics, and issue-activists: What will be Australia's orientation within the proposed new international order? Will Australia in the twenty-first century still be responsible for its own well-being and self-reliant development based upon national sovereignty and the creative utilisation of its resources? What role will ecological sustainability play in the make-up of future Australian society? Will Australia have self- assured and self-confident control over its own destiny? Or will Australia's development as an autonomous entity be jeopardised by other nation's decisions? Will the international forces that have to date greatly influenced Australian politics, economic development, foreign policy and cultural tastes, take over completely? For the Australian seeking to colonise the futurescape with their own intellectual flag, exploration of these questions involves reconsideration of what it means to be "Australian" today and consideration of the alternative
scenarios for future Australia which have emerged in recent years (of which the Ecologically Sustainable Society and the Multicultural Republic are the most controversial, ambitious and far-reaching). In a substantial respect, there is a growing, albeit intensifying, call for a millennial dimension, or at any rate some millennial potential, to such scenarios (a quick example would be that Australia should be a Republic for the Sydney 2000 Olympics) and within secular futures-thinking itself, moreso than any corresponding period of prospective thought that has gone before. Such intersections between Australian-futures rhetoric and the millennial motif repertoire are enhanced by the chronological "fact" of the secular millennium "being so close". Among the projections and planning of future Australia, 2000AD is so charged with profound symbolic connotations that it has become the cornerstone of both our signifying practices of futurity and our chronological framework for the future. From this vantage point, popular and "official" futurists seek to identify the images of post-2000AD Australia that are "possible", "desirable" or "necessary" and outline the current objectives under way to achieve and relate the future image of society to the present. However, these explorations and scenarios do not exist as pure abstract imaginings or in an ideological vacuum totally disassociated from contemporary culture and the rhythms of civilisation. Instead, they are anchored quite strongly within: a generated context of great communal anticipation towards this moment named the turn(ing) of the millennium; for example, the Australian newspapers running articles that ask, how will you celebrate 2000AD? on the assumption that Australians will or should; a manufactured context of importance about our modes of signification and
identification in the future through invalidating current symbols; for example, those with a public voice seek to ask Does the Australian flag adequately represent our future identity? (But what are the cultural implications of throwing Australia's symbols and identity into question, specifically when related to the necessity and practicability of shaping the future?); and an existing hierarchy of political power where those who seek and are able to influence the direction of our culture do so by infusing and grafting new ideas onto our chronological framework (for example, prime minister Paul Keating often linked the political call for an Australian republic with the year 2000. Like any landscape, it has different features that arouse our attention and distract us: these range from mainstream representations of the secular futurescape, particularly those sci-fi entertainments exported to Australia from America, to home-grown advertisements which market the future as a flexible but attainable commodity. Futurespeak Futurespeak is the language and discursive strategies used to talk and think about the future. Typically, there are three primary metaphoric paradigms for sensing/tensing the future: the future as where; the future as when; and the future as what. The future as where or elsewhere began with Thomas Moores Utopia. Speculation about a more just society and sensational fabulations about unusual peoples and cultures, tended for a considerable period to be set on remote islands and great southern continents, presented as hearsay,
dialogues or traveller's tales. The grand archetype of traveller's tales is Gulliver's Travels by virtue of Gulliver's voyages to places where he has encounters with strange creatures. In contemporary times, the spatial metaphor of where, as some kind of place, had the effect of locating the future in some direction forwards, as derived from the scouting party or the ship of traveller's tales. Such metaphors of where' and its rhetorical answer forwards as the direction in which we would like to encounter the future, condition people to think time in terms of a linear direction, with the future down the track, and implies that we are advancing towards it. Certainly, visions of the near future, authenticated by the secular mythology of physical and social progress forward, are pervasive in contemporary futurestext. Second, metaphors implying that the future is in some manner forward sense the future simply at a later and somewhat flexible date. In this sense, the future is located in some future time, and in the conversion of elsewhere to elsewhen, contemporary futurespeak locates the future at some forward date like, say, the twenty-first century. And third, there is the future as what. In this framework, the future may be understood in terms of metaphors deriving from conditions, values, beliefs, the governing order, etc. In the contemporary society this can include the exchange of references to the new world order, the ecologically sustainable society, the pacific century, the multicultural republic of Australia, a return to a prior golden age, and a theocratic kingdom.
Chapter Four Against the Mainstream: Alternative (Pre-Apocalypse) Styles of Futures- thinking Through this investigation of contemporary futurestext I argue that fragmentation of Australias future perspective along apocalyptic fault lines is most visible during the last decade of the twentieth century. Indeed, apocalyptic subjects exercise a strong influence over Australias internal styles of thinking about the future towards the close of the 1990s. During this period, many religious organisations through their publishing arms provided an intellectual justification and articulated account of their apocalyptic and endist positions that usually always opposed dominant cultural values of progress. The default view is to regard their accounts as positioned on the margins of society. Yet their styles of futures-thinking which suggested a form of apocalyptic anticipation towards the times ahead were produced and expressed within a specific historical, cultural and symbolic conjuncture of late twentieth century globalisation, postmodernism and pre-millennial apocalyptic expectation inclusive of society. Richard Landes, director of the Centre for Millennial Studies in Boston and close observer of millennial movements and moments in recent American history, has explored uses of the relationship between the first apocalypse (1000 anno Domini) and contemporary millennium activities around 2000AD for understanding approaches to the third millennium. Drawing on the social effects of the calendar shift in the year 1000, he argues that although apocalyptic, millennial discourse is usually studied as a marginal occurrence,
staying at the fringes of mainstream society, producing minor, mostly ineffectual communities that attract small numbers of adherents and occasionally arouse wider public attention in their habits of setting a date for the end of the world, it can occupy positions of centrality in society from time to time. Landes calls the infrequent but nonetheless intense instances of public curiosity around announced dates of Armageddon as media apocalypses. Media apocalypses are unique events in which the brief public broadcast of marginal styles of apocalyptic thinking can galvanise the appeal of an end-of the-world-as-we-know-it (shorthanded in internet circles as teotwawki) date on a broader, less marginal scale, albeit until the customary prophetic no show. In general terms, this configuration between apocalyptic margin and secular centre is reproduced quite significantly within Australian media and scholarship. Australia has not been immune from short-lived but intense moments of media apocalypse in an otherwise secularised journey through time. On 19 January 1976, the preferred place to be in Australia was anywhere but Adelaide, which was prophesied by a housepainter to be washed away by a tsunami Gods watery revenge on Adelaide for becoming a sin city. It made local headlines and popular history: Hamish Robertson: Good morning. I'm Hamish Robertson, this is AM. And first, let's say a cheery Good Morning, Adelaide, nice to see you're still with us. Today of course is The Day, January 19th, which if an Adelaide housepainter-cum-clairvoyant can be believed, is the day the city could meet its doom. There's to be an earthquake and tidal wave.
No hard, or even soft, scientific facts mind you, just a feeling. But Adelaide has taken heed, it seems, and their King Canute, Premier Don Dunstan, is down at Glenelg Jetty today to prove there's nothing to worry about. Also watching the water lap around the jetty is Jim Bonner. Jim Bonner: The Glenelg Jetty at this moment probably looks the same as it does at this time of the day every summer, with the first few tourists and would-be swimmers just starting to turn up. I don't know if any of them are taking the day off work, but they might be here for the party that is meant to get under way soon. A pastry-cook is going to sell pasties and orange juice in anticipation of a big crowd. He'll be dressed for the occasion in case anything unusual occurs: in a bow tie, bathers, flippers and snorkel. There's also a report of insurance company employees walking to work wearing wetsuits and underwater diving gear. But job absenteeism is one of the big worries as a result of what Mr Dunstan describes as the 'quite nonsensical hysteria arising from the earthquake and tidal wave prediction.' Don Dunstan: There is absolutely no basis for it at all. And I would not make a statement about it because I think it's such nonsense, but for the fact that it has already caused a very great deal of community damage, and is likely to cause more from the reports and complaints that have been made to me. There have been families that have put themselves into debt to move out of South Australia at that time, there
are other families who have sold their houses when they couldn't afford to do so. That sort of thing has happened amongst some poorer sections of the community. I'm trying to see to it that there is no more damage, and trying to reassure people that there is absolutely nothing in this at all.118 In Australian scholarship, apocalyptic styles of approaching the future are conventionally read as strategies of individuation (expecting an end of things) resisting dominant, mainstream forms of futures thinking (anticipating a progress of things). That is, users of apocalyptic styles are commonly situated at the margins of society; they are seen to resist a centre of social-humanist ideas including notions of progress, secularism, technophilia and scientific extrapolation; and their associated literature, usually apocalyptic in nature, both arises from and continues the situation of struggle between margin and centre. For example, texts like the Watchtower Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom or Awake! magazines, produced by the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society (official publishing arm of the Jehovahs Witnesses sect), were the objects of 10,279,163 hours of home-based tutoring and door-knocking activities. These texts were the required reading in 19,368 separate Jehovahs Witness-led Bible-study sessions in Australia 1998, an increase of 1 per cent over 1997.119 These texts give voice
118
Re-aired 23 January 2000 in Millennial Dreams Four, Rachael Kohn, The Spirit of Things, Radio National. 119 1999 Yearbook of Jehovahs Witnesses, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Philadelphia, 1999, pp 32-3.
to the combination of Watchtower millennial dreams and apocalyptic expectation. Such literatures serve to maintain sectarian communitarian (as an illustration, all Jehovahs Witnesses congregations throughout the world are synchronised to study the same weekly tract at the same time) and doctrinal cohesion. Additionally, in filtering mainstream news and events through a signs of the endtimes sieve, magazines like the Watchtower examples, assist in framing strategies of interpretation and resistance. At least, this is the conventional view that apocalyptic literature is mostly something external to the truths of society that can be studied outside mainstream concepts of the Australian nation. Yet this view denies I think the power of apocalypse styles of interpretation and disallows recognising their wider hold over and distribution throughout the Australian national imagination. Granted, as discussed below, Australians are encouraged by mainstream media and social elites to conceptualise apocalyptic anticipation in contemporary society as fundamentally a misreading of the future; that is, a form of sacred thinking lacking the Enlightenment-based non-apocalyptic century consciousness that situates the citizen as a subject within a specific secular history and identity (say, for example, the construction of the 19th Century as Victorian or the 20th century as barbaric). Apocalypse then, associated more with fin de millennium than fin de siecle, is regarded as the intellectual home of marginal thinkers who position themselves in relation to a deity or sacred history but who are positioned separate from the larger society in thought and practice like goats from sheep. But curiously, as Landes observes, millennial moments are moments where this stuff [sacred history, apocalyptic
expectation, etc] moves to the centre of the culture and one of the things that we want to do at the centre is follow the path.120 Did Australia experience such a millennial moment in 1999? Is it indeed relevant to ask whether a millennial moment existed in Australia around the late 1990s? To what uses were such a moment put to? Is there a history or sequence to the moment? Did Australia move from a possessive form of century-consciousness (our century type television shows and newspaper lift-outs) to an apocalyptic awareness (Y2K gloom and doom publications, broadcasts, warnings)? Was there a symbiotic relationship between the two? I think it is possible to argue that apocalypse occupies a less marginal position in Australia today than usually thought but I wonder if it has ever occupied a marginal position? If Australians might think ourselves into the place,121 in what way did we think ourselves into the (apocalyptic) future? If, according to Nile, Australian civilisation does not go that way, which way in fact does (or did) it go?122 In discovering some of the paths into Australias sense of the future, I examine whether apocalyptic styles of futures thinking represent, within a responsive differentiated form of signification, a particular set of circumstances for all Australians around the millennial moment that Mackay has defined as turning point. I argue, for these reasons, that the raw
120
Richard Landes, interview by Rachael Kohn, in Millennial Dreams One, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, 4 April 1999. 121 Richard Nile, Civilisation in Richard Nile (ed.), The Australian Legend and Its Discontents, op. cit. 122 Richard Nile, Introduction, in Richard Nile (ed.), Australian Civilisation, op. cit., p 3.
material123
that
links
together,
at
a
symbolic
level,
Australias
anticipation
of
the
millennium
the
contemporary
specificity
of
the
calendars
countup
to
2000,
the
unprecedented
(r)evolution
within
all
social
and
cultural
strata,
the
historical
momentum
of
millennial
prognostication
frames
countercultural
pictures
of
the
future
as
much
as
it
does
mainstream.
In
this
respect,
it
can
be
maintained
that
countercultural
senses
of
the
future
do
not
affirm
only
those
blocked
readings
excluded
from
the
airwaves
and
the
newspapers
they
also
articulate,
to
a
greater
or
lesser
extent,
some
of
the
preferred
meanings
and
interpretations124
available
to
Australians.
The
apocalyptic
styles,
though
not
privileged
forms,
can
serve
contradictory
purposes,
finding
both
a
marginalising
voice
and
an
echo
in
the
signifying
practices
of
Australian
media.
The
Socially
Cohesive
Future
On
the
one
hand,
a
credible
broadcast
image
of
social
cohesion
about
what
the
millennium
really
should
mean
to
Australia
was
manufactured
through
the
media
appropriation
of
countercultural
subjects
awaiting
apocalypse
(say,
Y2K
survivalists)
and
redefining
them
as
extremists
as
The
Today
Show,
A
Current
Affair,
and
Sixty
Minutes
frequently
expressed
in
their
journalistic
rhetoric.
Newspapers
similarly
would
print
investigative
exposes
of
socially
dangerous
activities
within
cults,
emphasising
their
difference:
123
Dick Hebdige, The Function of Subculture, in Subculture: The Meaning of Style, London, Methuen, 1979p 448. 124 ibid., p 449.
Preying on the innocent,125 In the hands of God126, and Gas attack cult on revival trial127. Sometimes this was through satirical or tongue-in-cheek example: As it happens, remarked Phillip Adams January 1999, Im privy to significant information. Y2C has already occurred, as evidenced by the contact Ive had with no less than three Christs. Two of them in Australia one in Queensland and one in Tasmania and another turned up in France wearing long white robes. He was accompanied by a bimbo-style Mary, Magdalene rather than Virgin. Whats a young columnist to do in such circumstances? How was I to pick the right Saviour? Will the real one please stand up? I chose to tell about the others and asked them to sort it out among themselves issuing an invitation to the surviving Saviour to give me a call. Nothing has happened so far; Ill keep you posted.128 Leading up to the turn of the millennium, mainstream media presented Australians with images of other groups (eg, Magnificat Meal Movement, Jehovahs Witnesses, Gods Executioners) and differentiated them as unstable and irrational while relaying back an image of the national (celebratory) expectation in our lives, framed ideologically as safe, secular and rational. The millennium became not only an (epochal) element in chronological time as the many media countdowns implicated, but it was also thought of as a plunge into a field of social relations within which the turn
125 126
John Beveridge, Courier Mail, 2 October 1999, p 30. Graham Lloyd, Courier mail, 5 June 1999, p 27. 127 Peter Hadfield, Sunday Mail, 5 April 1998, p 91. 128 Phillip Adams, Millennium, Weekend Australian, 2-3 January 1999.
of
the
millennium
brought
about
some
specific
effects.129
In
a
sense
the
rituals
of
observing
the
passing
of
time,
especially
celebrations
involving
the
millennial
moment,
are
unremarkable,
except
that
the
millennium
has
acted
not
as
a
formative
influence
on
humans.
This
millennial
moment
permitted
moderated
eulogies
of
the
twentieth
century
and
a
modicum
of
secular
visionary
engagement,
neither
of
which
rose
above
being
more
than
analogous
commentary
but
which
paid
rhetorical
service
to
notions
of
change,
transformation
and
inevitability.
Examples
include:
A
prophetic
rivalry:
from
prediction
to
truth,130
The
vision
splendid:
the
world
is
on
the
brink
of
a
new
millennium,
and
Queensland
has
to
take
its
place
on
the
starting
blocks,131
Dark
Reflections
on
screen:
facing
our
fears
,132
and
Year
of
the
high-flying
porker:
nothing
is
more
certain
than
change.133
On
the
other
hand,
apocalyptic
senses
of
the
future
can
be
observed
manifesting
a
broader
(and
perhaps
stronger)
ideological
effect
as
well
in
various
mediums
within
Australia,
progressively
colonising
the
cultural
and
ideological
sphere
of
Australias
future
perspective.134
This
intensified
around
closer
to
the
millennial
turn.
In
1999,
network
television
broadcast
peak-hour
contemplative
programming
such
as
Doomsday:
What
Can
We
Do?,
Prophecies
of
the
Millennium,
Signs
from
God,
Christs
Second
129
Michel Foucault, Space, Power and Knowledge, an interview with Paul Rabinow, translated by Christian Hubert, in Paul Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader, New York, Pantheon, 1984. 130 Polly Wilson, Weekend Review, 14-15 September 1996, p 4. 131 Dennis Atkins, Courier Mail, 5 June 1999, p 30. 132 Calvin Wilson, Courier Mail, 29 may 1999, p 12. 133 David Bentley, Courier Mail, 31 December 1998, p 9+. 134 Hebdige, op. cit., p 448.
Coming, Nostradamus, Miracles and Visions and Prophecy: Threat or Warning?. These entertainment products doubled as vehicles of apocalyptic civil values because their context of reception was that of a more widespread millennial expectation. While in the service of broadcast capital that is, ratings these presentations provided opportunities for alternative readings (or apocalyptic decoding) and were packaged with an ideological warning in fine print: The following program is based on speculation and conjecture. Viewers should explore all sources of information before reaching their own conclusions. But real life is increasingly indistinguishable from representations of real life and it is argued that apocalyptic senses of the future were consumed through the conjectural filter of 45-90 minute programs such as these with little space for reflection. Considering television is pitched to mainstream audiences, with mainstream readings and warnings, the implied social effect apocalyptic thinking is exclusive to none but is shared by all alike.135 In like manner, a seemingly obsessive but packaged courtship exists with disaster-related, mini-apocalyptic docutainment, where as one advertisement goes we witness mass destruction and awesome terror via graphic and dramatic footage (Storm Warning, 3 Minutes to Impact, etc). Likewise, in registering the consumption of a millennial future teetering on the Y2K technological collapse, newspaper articles were replete with
135
Theodor Adorno and Max Horkhiemer, The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception, Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans John Cumming, New York, Seabury Press, 1972.
endtimes-related headlines: Apocalypse ... soon,136 Apocalypse now(ish): Why are we all being so good, so correct, so righteous, so healthy? Is it a form of repentance for our '80s sins? Do we know subconsciously, as Shane Danielsen does, that the end is nigh?,137 Global leaders brace for casualties: millennium bug, a special report,138 Children of the Apocalypse: The approach of the new century is filling many of us with great fear for the economy, Australia's social fabric and the environment. But what do the children foresee? Paola Totaro asked a group of 11-year-olds and got some surprising answers,139 Apocalypse next week,140 Apocalypse soon, say forecasters,141 and Apocalypse Now (-ish): The visionary position ... down under,142 No need to panic just yet, but were all doomed!,143 and Is the end nigh?.144 Religious or alternative spirituality movements spread their apocalyptic messages via, for example, printed matter,145 mail-order videos,146 conferences and tours,147 and electronic publications.148
136 137
Sydney Morning Herald, 10 October 1992, p 39. Shane Danielsen, Sydney Morning Herald Metro, 2 October 1992, pp 1-2. 138 Mark Hollands (ed.), Australian, 7 April 1998, p 1+. 139 Paola Totaro, Sydney Morning Herald, 29 December 1990, p 29. 140 Sun-Herald Sunday Life!, 20 December 1998, p 34. 141 Sydney Morning Herald, 28 October 1995, p 1. 142 Agenda, Sydney Morning Herald, 12 October 1994, p 15. 143 Rodney Chester, Courier Mail, 13 March 1998, p 5. 144 Tom Skotnicki, News Extra, Sunday Mail, 15 march 1998, p 14. 145 For example, A New World Order Is Coming! A expose of covert moves toward a new world order and the destruction of our freedoms, The Sunday Law Times: An Australasian Publication in Defence of Our Freedoms, Strathpine, Queensland, Patriotic Christian Distributors, circa 1991; or Antichrist and the Battle of Armageddon, The Second Coming of Christ, Signs of the Times, Turkey, Russia and
Apocalypse as a Way of Life? Lee Quinby, feminist author of Millennial Seduction: A Sceptic Confronts Apocalyptic Culture, observed the emergence of apocalyptic groups in the late twentieth century as necessarily dividing and sub-dividing, becoming more profuse closer to the turn of the millennium. Implicit in Quinbys work is the contemporary notion that people are reporting identification with apocalyptic thought and groups more and more: Some are very diluted in their form, others are much more focused and geared toward political change themselves.149 The persistence of apocalypse as a significant interpretative practice within Australian culture is not generally acknowledged. Yet an Australian history of apocalypse is possible. Judith Webster at the department of history, University of Adelaide, addressed the shape and multiplicities of apocalyptic narratives in post-war Australian
the Time of the End, to name a few booklets from the local Christadelphian/Gospel Furtherance Committee library. 146 For example, 1999: The Rapture, the Meltdown and the Coming World War; The Day God Shakes the Heavens and the Earth; The Coming World Economic Crash; Countdown to the New World Order and the Mark of the Beast, titles available from Maranatha Revival Crusade, Nanango, Queensland; or Countdown to Armageddon and Beyond: Astonishing Predictions of the Future, Charmhaven, New South Wales, The Family, Aurora Productions, 1996. 147 For example, 1996 Australian International UFO Symposium, Queensland UFO Network; Benny Hinn Prophecy Tour and Conference 1998, Inner-Faith Propriety Limited, Nerang, Queensland; World in Crisis, Endtimes Ministries Seventh Seminar, Landsborough, Queensland, 1996. 148 The Magnificat Meal Movement, Toowoomba, Queensland, <http://homepages.iol.ie /~magnific/>. 149 Interview with Lee Quinby by Rachel Kohn, Millennial Dreams 6, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, 6 February 2000.
society
in
the
search
for
a
definition:
how
did
Australia
imagine
the
apocalypse
in
the
new
atomic
era?
Optimism
for
the
peaceful
development
of
atomic
technology
and
the
benefits
it
would
bring
coexisted
with
fears
of
nihilistic
self-destruction
Christian
writers
incorporated
both
the
new
atomic
threat
and
the
massive
destruction
of
world
war
two
into
their
warnings
about
the
apocalypse.
[Secondly],
secular
discourse,
from
politicians
and
scientists,
to
writers
and
artists
,
while
at
odds
with
Christian
views
that
the
fate
of
the
world
was
preordained
by
biblical
prophecy,
appropriated
aspects
of
Judeo-Christian
mythology,
most
importantly
the
themes
of
survival,
rebirth
and
regeneration
of
society.
At
the
same
time,
another
strain
[of
secular
discourse]
used
these
eschatological
images
while
uncharacteristically
positing
an
end
to
all
earthly
life,
without
rebirth
or
renewal,
something
that
the
arrival
of
nuclear
weapons
had
recently
made
a
real
possibility
for
the
first
time.150
An
assumption
underpinning
Websters
examination
is
that
Australian
life
outside
the
religious
frame
can
be
affected
by
the
mixing
of
nonetheless
religious
apocalyptic
thought
and
images
with
contemporary
social,
cultural
and
technological
development.
This
suggests
that
Australian
national
150
Judith Webster, A Man-Made Apocalypse?, How Australians imagined the end of the world in the new atomic era, In/Between: Negotiating Time and Space, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/history/conferences /inbetween/>.
culture
and
apocalypse
can,
in
some
way,
be
linked.
This
connection
may
at
first
seem
tenuous,
but
there
is
more
to
it
than
symbolism.
Endtime
expectants
are
tied
to
doctrines
of
theology
that
define
the
end
in
very
specialised
terms.
These
terms
can
be
contradictory
across
theologica
one
spiritual
movement
may
understand
Sunday
worship
to
mark
a
sign
of
the
end
whereas
another
religious
organisation
might
perceive
something
more
immediate
and
apocalyptic
in
the
ascendancy
of
smart
cards
but
for
endtimes
believers
their
interpretative
home
resides
along
a
single
intellectual
path:
the
end
of
the
future
is
theological.
The
apparent
explosion
of
apocalyptic
thinking
about
the
future
during
the
1990s
did
encourage
other
writers
to
talk
of
the
countercultural
agents
of
apocalyptic
concepts
as
being
like
a
new
Australian
class
of
undifferentiated
consumers
of
doom.
Responding
to
a
poster
that
appeared
throughout
major
Australian
towns
in
1992
The
Final
Warning
of
God:
Jesus
is
Coming
1am
29th
October
1992,
in
the
air
(Its
the
Rapture)
David
Bennett
from
the
Bible
Society,
an
interdenominational
agency
in
Brisbane,
was
prompted
to
ask
whether
the
end
of
the
is
world
is
near,
or
is
it?.
Bennett
concluded
that
apocalypse
was
not
in
fact
imminent
but
(reiterating
the
misreading
argument)
was
rather
another
misinterpreted
theological
narrative
motivated
by
misguided
characters
unfamiliar
with
sound
scriptural
inquiry.
With
the
layperson
in
mind,
Bennett
marked
out
the
theological
landscape
used
to
represent
and
define
the
apocalypse
in
Australia
in
his
1996
publication
The
End
of
the
World
is
Near.151
However,
in
a
paper
written
two
151
David Bennett, The End of the World or Is It?, Boolarong Press, Camp Hill, Queensland, 1996.
months
before
the
turn
of
the
millennium,
Bennett
introduced
a
hidden
class
of
character
in
the
armageddon
script,
the
Endtimer,
and
argued
that
prophecy
popularisation
in
Australia,
if
less
visible
than
our
western
counterparts,
remained
alive
and
well
in
1999.152
Rehabilitating
the
Future
I
have
seen
the
future
and
it
was
being
repaired.153
He
is
a
bad
man
who
does
not
pay
to
the
future
at
least
as
much
as
he
has
received
from
the
past.154
The
politics
of
applying
and
interpreting
the
future
are
subject
to
an
expanding
range
of
social,
cultural
and
economic
factors.
Efforts
to
recalculate
the
future
anew,
beyond
the
reach
of
apocalypse,
exist
but
appear
minimal
and
stretched.
Recent
examples
are
distinctly
non-Australian
Matt
Gronens
Futurama
and
Arthur
C
Clarkes
3001:
The
Final
Odyssey
evidently
shift
conceptions
of
the
future
from
2000AD
to
3000AD.
Collections
of
conferences
have
considered
how
the
intersections
between
Australian
culture,
history,
time
and
millennium
should
invite
(in
an
critical
sense)
a
more
articulated
and
institutionalised
shaping
of
futures
thinking.
152
David Bennett, That Year 2000: The End or a Beginning? , in Jason Ensor and Felicity Meakins (eds), End M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, vol 2, no 8, 8 December 1999, <http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/9912/edit.html>. 153 Mel Calman, 1931-94, cartoon caption in The Times, 30 December 1986. 154 A W Pollard, 1859-1944, Observer, Sayings of the Week, 31 July 1927.
The 1997 Start Trek and Endgame: Millennial / Politics / Narratives/Images conference encouraged papers with the blurb: As we move toward the millennium, some consideration of its cultural significance and its possible effects is not only relevant but also timely. Does the year 2000 signal the end of (a) tradition? The beginning of a new one? In what ways might the cultures own projects be seen to be transforming themselves? What continuities from one millennium to the next might there be? What, if anything, might postmodernity hail? [poster]. Millennial Encounters: Time, Millennia and Futurity conference in Victoria 1998 repeated a like-minded concern examining a variety of cultural and epochal responses to millennia in a panel format since the approach of a millennium inevitably generates discussions, visions and negotiations of time, past, and the possibilities of futurity. In similar fashion, articles in Australian newspapers published post-Y2K new years eve reinforce the original projected meaning of millennium as hopeful but tend to draw on technological, celebratory, revisionist and spatial metaphors, language that is inspirational but when viewed from within the emerging field of futures studies are somewhat impractical. As an illustration, Queensland Times triumphant Future in our hands155 implies that we have relations of power over the future the future as an object is graspable. Yet the special section in the same paper, titled Into tomorrow:
how
your
life
will
change
in
the
new
millennium,156
shifts
readers
front
page
hold
on
the
future
away
from
any
discourse
of
control:
life
will
be
changed
radically
by
the
autonomous
forces
(technological,
social,
scientific)
of
tomorrow,
external
forces
that
leave
individuals
amazed.
Jean-Franois
Lyotard
wrote
about
this
technological
modern
neurosis
in
his
discussions
of
postmodernism:
[w]e
can
no
longer
call
this
development
by
the
old
name
of
progress.
This
development
seems
to
be
taking
place
by
itself,
by
an
autonomous
force
or
motricity.
It
doesnt
respond
to
a
demand
coming
from
human
needs.
His
work
contained
a
warning
that
human
entities,
individual
or
social,
seem
always
to
be
destabilised
by
the
results
of
this
development.157
And
about
time:
Welcome
to
the
start
of
the
new
millennium
or
is
it?
What
can
history,
other
cultures
and
the
role
of
the
new
decade
(the
noughties)
add
to
this
passage
of
time?158
broods
on
the
problem
of
millennial
calibration
and
the
arbitrary
activity
of
celebration.
A
thousand
memories,159
A
new
era
dawns,160
and
The
time
of
our
lives161
all
mix
century-nostalgia
with
Y2K-partying.
The
latter
article
begins
a
metaphor
of
spatialisation
in
describing
the
millennium,
as
if
one
was
looking
across
an
unviolated,
virgin
scape.
This
follows
three
other
metaphors:
one,
a
minimal
measure
of
the
present
(imperceptibly
short,
fleeting,
below
155 156
Erin ODwyer, Queensland Times, 1 January 2000, p 1. Queensland Times, 1 January 2000, pp 10-12. 157 Jean-Franois Lyotard, Defining the Postmodern, in During, op. cit., p 144-5. 158 Ron Brunton, Weekend, Courier Mail, 1 January 2000, p 1+. 159 Hedley Thomas, Courier Mail, 31 December 1999, p 1. 160 front page, Sunday Mail, 2 January 2000. 161 Wayne Smith, Courier Mail, 1 January 2000.
human perceptual thresholds, nano-like162); two, a veiled reference to the conspicuous consumption of blatant million-dollar cash investments in fireworks celebrations; and three, an implication of unparalleled historical rupture: In the blink of an eye, in a blaze of colour, the 20th century passed into history last night, giving way to a new year, a new century, a new millennium, unspoiled and sparkling with hope and promise. International writers, however, (in the world sections of Australian media) mediate western disappointment with our imaginative capacity (or rather lack of) for critical futures thinking. For example, Boris Johnson labels expectants of negative trends as gloomadon-poppers and contests: So here it is, the New Millennium, and I have to tell you it is not what we were led to expect The future has turned out to be a lot less futuristic than we once imagined is it conceivable that people will stick to the old ways, and that your vision [of the future] will remain as ludicrous as Woody Allens orgasmatron?.163 Similarly, Susan Levine offers with the byline faulty visions that this was the future that isnt: prognostication aint what it used to be, which is why Boswash was hogwash.164 Clear vision, it seems, is the most impermanent of imaginative forms. Contemporary apocalyptic conceptions and uses of endism permeate Australian secular society quite significantly by 1999 and remain effective combatants against disciplined futures study within Australian psyche beyond
162 163
Slaughter, op. cit. Boris Johnson, In Our Fantasies and Prophesies We Overlook Human Nature: Still Waiting, Sydney Morning Herald, 1 January 2000, p 19. 164 Susan Levine, Sydney Morning Herald, 1 January 2000, p 19.
January
2000.165
It
is
usually
the
extreme,
argue
the
editors
in
the
December
1999
End
issue
of
M/C:
Journal
of
media
and
Culture
Studies:
Often-dangerous
forms
of
endist
belief
that
the
media
popularly
exploit
to
define
other
forms
of
endist
fundamentalism.
Reading
about
the
apocacidal
(suicides
for
the
apocalypse)
tendencies
of
various
cults
and
sects
horrifies
us
in
their
acts
of
forcible
manipulation.
Yet
apocaholicism
(a
mental
state
of
intoxication
on
the
endtimes)
cannot
be
limited
to
the
extra-societal
gathering
in
the
outer
suburbs
that
awaits
an
end
with
grim
but
enthusiastic
anticipation
and
which
makes
the
occasional
evening
news
headline
or
Sixty
Minutes
exposure.
Nor
can
a
keen
sense
of
apocalypse
be
situated
as
being
primarily
a
characteristic
of
religious
fundamentalism.
[Australian]
Secular
society
itself
is
drunk
on
different
meditations
of
the
end.166
This
spread
of
apocalyptic
epistemology
throughout
the
1990s
universalised
a
view
within
secular
and
religious
Australia
that
the
approach
of
the
third
millennium
involved
an
ending
of
the
world,
be
it
a
technological
or
Christian
Armageddon.
With
the
benefit
of
hindsight,
writing
in
January
2000,
it
is
true
that
none
of
the
doomsday
scenarios
then
held
proved
to
be
165
Douglas Rushkoff, Media Virus: Hidden Agendas in Popular Culture, Sydney, Random House, 1994. 166 Jason Ensor and Felicity Meakins, Editorial: End, in Jason Ensor and Felicity Meakins (eds), End M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, vol 2, no 8, 8 December 1999, <http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/9912/ edit.html>, bit 1.
valid and the non-event of a Y2K date-verification crisis has undermined the world of apocalyptic certainty that many newspaper reports implied at the time: 1998, 99, countdown to chaos,167 The birth of a computer catastrophe,168 Computer bug may bite early,169 City gets taste of Y2K chaos,170 The day the world shuts down,171 Computers in trouble: stop the millennium bug before it stops your business,172 Shutdown offers a taste of 2000 havoc,173 Y2k bill doubles to $10 billion,174 and The bug that ate business: a 2000 horror story.175 Realising that Australias futures perspective in the 1990s tends less toward [future] achievement [and goals] and more toward avoidance176 is to begin examining the theories, ideas and images of the future and the effectual life of Australian responses to them. This is an important and worthwhile activity. Defective, impractical senses and visions of the future lock-up the human perceptual system in closed, unproductive loops, leading ever further [away] from an active engagement with the world.177 By contrast, properly implemented critical futures inquiry can prefigure more
167 168
NZ Herald, 23 November 1996. Larry Gonick, Bulletin, 3 June 1998, p 71. 169 Sonia Madigan, Sunday Mail, 11 October 1998, p 26. 170 Chris Newton, Australian, 6 October 1998, computer supplement, p 5. 171 Steven Levy and Katie Hafner, Bulletin, 3 June 1997, p 73. 172 National Australia Bank pamphlet. 173 John MacLeay, Australian, 29 September 1998, p 8. 174 Sue Ashton-Davies, Australian, 22 September 1998, p33. 175 Sally Jackson and John MacLeay, Australian, 31 December 1997, p 1. 176 Slaughter, op. cit., p 57. 177 ibid., p 53.
advanced
stages
of
civilised
life178
to
which
we
can
productively
work
towards.
A
Lifestyle
of
Becomings
Australian
studies
scholars
and
mainstream
commentators
agree
that
there
is
an
urge
for
culture
shift
in
Australia.
But
how
the
nation
arrives
at
this
and
what
kind
of
culture
shift
should
be
encouraged
is
the
subject
of
intense
debate.
For
Hugh
Mackay,
a
widely-read
commentator
for
the
mainstream,
the
postmodernism
argument
subspeciates
into
either
an
argument
about
the
diversity
of
choices
or
an
argument
about
the
difficulty
of
choosing:
We
construct
our
social
reality
and
then
operate
as
if
it
is
the
reality.
Some
want
to
make
us
feel
uncomfortable
about
that,
as
if
every
reality
we
construct
is
a
mere
delusion
that
will
somehow
limit
and
constrict
us;
others
are
perfectly
content
for
us
to
adopt
our
reality
and
stick
with
it
[The]
crucial
point
is
that
we
have
to
choose.
But
how
do
we
choose?.179
Mackay
ties
the
value
of
choice
to
the
relationship
between
cultural
heterogenisation
/
synthesis
or
postmodernist
relativism
(which
he
collectively
describes
as
shopping
at
the
cultural
bazaar)
and
absolutes:
It
might
be
possible
to
be
open
to
all
kinds
of
new
ideas,
new
fashions,
new
constructs,
yet
remain
grounded
in
a
core
belief
or
a
core
system
of
thought
that
sustains
us.
It
might
be
possible,
after
all,
to
shop
at
the
cultural
bazaar
and
even
to
178 179
ibid., p viii. Hugh Mackay, Turning Point: Australians Choosing Their Future, Sydney, Macmillan, 1999, p 171.
pluck
bits
and
pieces
from
a
wide
range
of
stalls
while
still
operating
within
a
serviceable
framework
of
enduring
attitudes,
values
and
beliefs
that
we
have
discovered,
from
our
own
experience,
will
give
meaning
and
purpose
to
our
lives
Acting
as
if
you
believe
in
something
is
the
first
step
towards
believing
it,
and
once
you
believe
it,
you
are
on
the
way
to
a
sense
of
purpose.180
But
what
these
arguments
fail
to
consider
is
the
temporally- related
concerns
structuring
the
outcome
of
choice
and
determining
positive
options
from
negative
directions:
the
decisions
we
make,
the
directions
we
choose,
the
futures
we
extinguish
and
those
we
enable,
all
frame
and
condition
the
lives
of
our
descendants.181
Slaughter
calls
this
tension
between
choice,
choosing
and
futures
responsibility
the
civilisational
challenge
that
confronts
the
world
of
nations
and
not
just
Australia
alone.
The
dynamics
of
these
tensions
have
begun
to
be
explored
in
a
sophisticated
manner
as
a
critical
field
of
enquiry
within
the
emerging
discipline
of
futures
studies.
But
in
Australian
studies,
much
needs
to
be
done
to
situate
futures
as
providing
both
a
viable
framework
forward
and
a
real
ground
for
hope,
insight,
empowerment
and
social
and
organisational
innovations
of
many
kinds.182
For
the
moment,
however,
let
us
note
the
current
problems
in
Australia
and
Australian
studies
as
the
You
Are
What
You
Foresee
dynamic
(from
the
same
family
as
the
popularised
you
are
what
you
eat,
consumer
societys
you
are
what
you
buy183
or
Mackays
you
are
what
you
believe).
From
this
point,
we
can
acknowledge
180 181
an
Australian
cultural
industry
of
prognostication
that
through
a
combination
of
commercial
appropriation
and
consumption
of
futures
metaphors,
a
minimalist
perceptual
apparatus
of
time,
and
a
postmodern
rupture
in
absolutes
and
tradition
promotes
less
a
particular
direction
to
a
viable
future
and
more
a
consciousness
or
lifestyle
of
becomings.
Futures
in
Australian
Studies
I
take
my
lead
from
Carolyn
Steedmans
re-positioning
of
cultural
studies
and
pose
a
series
of
questions
directed
at
Australian
studies
around
the
above
point.184
I
dont
propose
to
address
all
these
but
the
activity
of
asking
has
directed
my
line
of
enquiry
significantly.
The
questions
are
by
no
means
exhaustive
but
they
cover
sufficient
ground
to
encourage
a
model
of
critical
thinking
about
Australian
studies
and
its
relation
to
the
future
and,
perhaps
in
considering
possible
answers,
attempt
to
increase
the
critical
power
of
the
field.
My
additional
guide
has
been
an
extract
from
Slaughters
work
which,
though
applied
elsewhere,
is
relevant
to
the
utility
of
Australian
studies
and
the
notion
of
public
intellectualism:
To
be
more
effective
[Australian
studies
might]
begin
to
clarify
its
use
of
guiding
concepts
and
metaphors,
relating
these
to
cultural
presuppositions
and
traditions
of
inquiry
that
can
be
easily
mistaken
as
183 184
Charlene Spretnak, States of Grace, San Francisco, Harper, 1993. Carolyn Steedman, Culture, Cultural Studies and the Historians, in Lawrence Grossberg et al, eds, Cultural Studies, New York, Routledge, 1992.
inevitable,
neutral
and
value
free.
One
result
will
be
a
more
accessible
style
of
discourse.
In
this
regard,
it
should
emphatically
disown
the
hectoring,
insistent
tone
adopted
by
some
in
the
past
and
consciously
develop
strategies
of
communication
based
more
on
dialogue
and
negotiation.
It
should
also
seek
a
more
credible
balance
between
stability
and
change,
recognising
the
mutual
existence
of
each
other
rather
than
tending
to
overstress
the
latter.
Above
all,
it
must
seek
to
develop
a
better
understanding
of
its
own,
often
obscured,
ideological
commitments.185
How
futurical
then
is
Australian
studies?
If
it
is
futurical,
what
futures
methodologies
does
it
use?
Can
it
take
account
of
futures-related
text
(information
positioned
and
empowered
as
relevant
to
the
future
or
representative
of
future
reality)
and
language
(or
futurespeak,
metaphorical
frameworks,
closed
and
open
visionary
structures)?
Is
it
possible
to
construct
a
national
picture
of
the
future
that
does
not
resort
to
metaphors
involving
human
life-cycles
(adolescent,
maturing,
growing,
evolving)
and
technology?
Is
the
problem
in
creating
a
coherent
and
intelligent
national
conception
of
the
future
related
to
political,
contradictory
uses
of
futurespeak?
Can
Australian
studies
in
its
current
form
take
issue
with
the
governance
of
epochal
futures
(say
2000AD)
over
the
national
imaginary?
Can
it
critically
investigate
the
political
renderings
of
time
and
change
through
which
the
millennium
(as
an
example)
was
deployed
and
prefigured
as
an
intervention
into,
and
a
revolution
of,
contemporary
Australian
history?
185
What
other
tropes
of
temporal
transformation
have
punctuated
Australian
futures?
Would
the
move
to
a
new
form
of
critical
engagement
with
Australian
culture,
involving
critical
futures
in
the
theory
and
action
of
its
imagining,
mediate
the
tensions
between
choice
and
responsibility?
Is
Australian
studies
extrapolative
narrativisation
of
the
present
a
sign
that
the
field
is
methodologically
crippled
in
futures,
with
uneven
investment
in
consciousness-raising
rather
than
in
truth-telling?186
Can
Australian
studies
adequately
consider
the
current
poverty
of
national
foresight
and
the
rise
of
surrogate
apocalyptic
thinking
as
part
of
the
underlying
systems
of
value
and
meaning
(reductionism,
industrial
epistemology,
instrumental
rationalism,
etc)
circulating
within
Australian
society?
How
today
should
critical
futures
engage
the
present
and
vice
versa
in
productive,
sensitive
ways?
What
has
futures
to
do
with
Australian
studies?
It
is
in
this
particular
historical
moment
at
the
turn
of
the
millennium,
given
the
destabilising
conditions
of
the
last
century
and
the
problematic
outlook
of
the
early
twenty-first
century,
that
Australian
studies
requires
a
critical
futures
sense
to
respond
to
the
contemporary
civilisational
challenge
ahead.
A
new
body
of
enquiry,
I
argue,
integrating
the
methodologies
of
critical
futures
and
Australian
studies
Australian
futures
studies
(AFS)
would
equip
substantively
the
(political,
cultural
and
social)
struggle
to
find,
defend
and
enable
optimistic
and
responsible
futures
against
the
superficial
and
destabilising
futures
seducing
the
national
imagination.
That
is,
Australian
futures
studies
would
be
sensitive
to
the
flows,
ruptures
and
effectual
life
of,
and
responses
to,
futures
thinking.
186
Chapter
Five
Turning
the
Point:
New
Ways
and
Becomings
One
would
expect
people
to
remember
the
past
and
to
imagine
the
future.
But
in
fact
they
imagine
[history]
in
terms
of
their
own
experience,
and
when
trying
to
gauge
the
future
they
cite
supposed
analogies
from
the
past;
till,
by
a
double
process
of
repetition,
they
imagine
the
past
and
remember
the
future.187
Hugh
Mackay
in
Turning
Point:
Australians
Choosing
Their
Future
(1999)
writes
that
Attitudes
are
the
symptoms
of
a
societys
state
of
mind.
They
reveal
our
responses
to
the
things
that
have
happened
to
us
and,
occasionally,
they
offer
a
glimpse
of
the
kind
of
future
we
are
hoping
for.188
Using
a
selection
of
personal
interviews
and
group
discussions
which
form
the
1994
edition
of
The
Mackay
Report
as
representations
of
these
attitudes
and
interests
of
society,
Mackay
explores
the
notion
that
contemporary
Australians
are
participants
within
a
radical
form
of
culture
shift,
one
that
amounts
to
the
discovery
of
a
new
way
of
thinking
about
Australia.189
Mackays
identification
and
use
of
contradiction
within
these
collective
beliefs
and
evaluations
of
Australian
citizens
develops
the
theme
of
a
turning
point,
that
the
dissonance
existing
between
our
value
judgements
about
Australian
socialisation
articulates
an
emergent
cultural
identification
with
187 188
Lewis Namier, 1888-1969, Conflicts, pp 69-70. Mackay, op. cit., p vii. 189 ibid.
resolution
or
turning
point.
Such
a
turning
point
is
enacted
by
active
citizenship:
This
is
the
time,
Mackay
writes
in
an
inspirational
tone,
for
setting
our
goals
and
directions,
but
theres
no
short
cut
to
depth
and
maturity.
We
are
still,
in
cultural
terms,
in
our
adolescence
[But]
whats
wrong
with
being
young?
Why
not
relish
the
chance
to
shape
our
future;
to
create
this
Australia
in
our
own
image?.190
Australian
culture
is
not
easily
defined
and
located
and
Mackay
admits
this
later
in
chapter
twenty-five,
Young
and
Free:
Give
Us
Time,
as
a
consequence
of
adolescent
political
and
societal
immaturity
having
more
energy
than
focus.191
The
sense
that
Australian
maturity
is
analogous
to
the
maturity
of
an
individual
permits
easy
comparisons
to
adolescence,
that
biological
period
characterised
(in
Mackays
terms)
by
a
tumult
of
turbulent
emotions
and
conflicting
goals.192
In
this
way,
it
is
possible
(and
maybe
useful)
to
define
the
logics
and
structures
underpinning
popular
ideas
of
Australian
culture
as
insecure,
slippery
and
open
to
radical,
emotional
(as
opposed
to
its
antithesis:
mature
and
rational)
modification.
Turning
Point
subjects
Australian
attitudes
to
considerable
scrutiny
to
draw
out
this
point.
Mackay
surmises
that
although
Australians
have
created
something
wonderfully
robust,
diverse
and
vibrant
were
still
deeply
unsure
of
our
identity
and
we
dont
yet
have
a
clear
vision
of
who
or
what
we
want
to
be.193
Contrary
to
the
senses
of
cultural
fragmentation
and
social
disharmony
that
Turning
Points
analysis
of
premillennial
Australia
seems
to
190 191
otherwise evoke, Mackays dominant theme is that this amounts to the discovery of a new way of thinking about Australia.194 His We are at a turning point thesis has a certain resonance with tropes of hope and escape from the present environment. Does it make sense to speak about our contemporary cultural and social environment, as Mackay and other commentators do, that a new way of imagining Australia is being formed at the cusp of an identifiable turning point? What in fact is this new way being presented as different and desirable to the present way? Is this turning point the source or respondent or both to an emerging conceptual apparatus? Dancing with the Devil: Mainstreaming the Future [There are] those who claim to have particular or special understanding of the national psyche, those who claim the authority of the ethnographer in speaking for all of us This claim to be able to represent the nation, even to be emblematic of Australianness, rests on a claim to knowledge of real values, attitudes and experience [But] any acknowledgment of cultural diversity is quickly countered by a firm emphasis on the rights and needs of the mainstream, a tidal surge of opinion and belief that brings the ordinary to the centre of
193 194
social
and
cultural
life
and
sweeps
aside
the
ugly
debris
of
difference.195
To
write
convincingly
about
futures
we
must
know
who
we
are,
where
we
are
from
and
whose
interests
we
are
pursuing.196
A
feature
of
contemporary
public
dialogue
that
flows
directly
from
a
loss
of
objectivity
and
critical
engagement
is
the
invested
nature
of
much
privileged
modern-day
social
analysis.
By
this
I
mean
that
some
cultural
observations
or
analyses,
given
a
position
of
centrality
in
the
arguments
of
Australia,
are
necessarily
popularised,
reflecting
shrewd
insight
and
marketing
know-how.
Mackay
whose
credentials
are
adduced
alongside
reflective
interpretation
in
his
1999
publication
which
describes
him
as
Australias
leading
social
researcher
providing
the
definitive
analysis
of
contemporary
Australia
for
anyone
who
cares
about
Australias
future197
suggests
that:
Times
of
uncertainty
especially
when
linked
with
a
half-formed
sense
of
expectancy
have,
in
the
past,
been
fertile
breeding
grounds
for
religious
revivals
though
that
seems
unlikely
in
our
case
Is
there
going
to
be
a
mass
movement
of
some
other
kind,
in
which
we
will
define
ourselves
by
some
new-found
sense
of
purpose?198
195 196
Leigh Dale, Mainstreaming Australia, JAS, no 53, 1997, pp 1-2. Richard Slaughter, Futures for the Third Millennium, p 227. 197 Mackay, op. cit., back cover blurb.
This position implies a certain rhetorical foresight about what is likely to happen but rejects other possibilities and ignores the considerable pentecostal, charismatic and millennial religious revivals that have already occurred in Australia in favour of an anonymous, unanchored but self- defining movement. It is an example of inspirational futurism, never quite freeing itself from the temporal provincialism of the spirit of [our] times (Mackays Zeitgeist) to pursue Australia along, say, the lines of enquiry offered by Elise Bouldings 200-year present or Frank Hopkins 150-year historical perspective.199 In effect, it doesnt extend a sense of the present beyond a minimalist setting. That which is just beyond the minimal present the uncertain is instead to be embraced as a conventional feature of modern life. This is an example of profundity as an illusion of particular language uses and appeals to powerful institutions: Social theories that merely rationalise existing conditions and thereby serve to promote repetitive behaviour, the continuous reproduction of established social practices, do not fit the definition of critical theory. They may be no less accurate with respect to what they are describing, but their rationality (or irrationality, for that matter) is likely to be
198 199
ibid., p 302. Frank Hopkins, The Senior Citizen as Futurist, in F Feather (ed.), Through the 80s, World Futures Society, 1980, p 388.
mechanical,
normative,
scientific,
or
instrumental
rather
than
critical.200
At
the
heart
of
Turning
Point,
without
adequately
defining
who
we,
our
and
us,
there
are
incidents
of
reductionism
All
we
have
to
remember
is
that
each
of
us
wants
to
be
taken
seriously.
Each
of
us
wants
to
be
heard.
Each
of
us
wants
our
needs,
our
values,
and
our
points
of
view
to
be
taken
into
account.
That
is
all
reconciliation
has
ever
been
about.
The
challenge
is
actually
tiny
and
it
has
little
to
do
with
past
generations
201
bias
Was
John
Howard
sensing
this
mood
when
he
suggested
in
1997
that
most
people
simply
wanted
the
native
title
debate
off
the
agenda?
It
sounded
heartless
at
the
time,
but
perhaps
it
was
just
another
sign
of
our
desire
to
retreat,
to
disengage,
and
to
regroup.
Perhaps
we
needed
a
break
from
issue:
we
didnt
mean
to
dismiss
native
title
as
unimportant
202
subjectivity
Unless
Im
misreading
the
signs
203
and
elitism
The
issue
of
reconciliation
needs
to
be
understood
in
the
context
of
the
demographic
fact
that
Aborigines
represent
about
two
per
cent
[Mackays
emphasis]
of
the
Australian
population.
This
is
not
America.
We
do
not
have
a
race
problem
that
is
numerically
large.
Aborigines
are
one
of
the
smallest
cultural
and
ethnic
minorities
in
our
society.204
These
deny
Mackays
work
a
200
Edward Soja, History: Geography: Modernity, Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory, London, Verso, 1989, as extracted in During, op. cit., p 117. 201 Mackay, op. cit., p 130. 202 ibid., p 30. 203 ibid., p 300. 204 ibid., p 129.
sense
of
proper
critical
engagement
along
the
Edward
Sojas
line
of
enquiry,
concepts
such
as
reductionism,
bias
and
elitism
de-focus
important
questions.
Mackays
recent
work
seems
committed
to
maintaining
the
status
quo.
Arguably
written
in
the
mode
of
pop
futurist
enquiry
in
which
existing
social
relations
are
taken
as
given,
support
is
given
for
the
status
quo
and
the
future
appears
externally
constructed
via
technology,
overall
tending
to
be
diversionary
tract205
Turning
Point
avoids
epistemological
questions
over
power
relationships,
ideology,
transformation
and
the
reconceptualising
of
meanings.
As
David
Tacey
describes:
Theyre
in
touch
with
the
breakdown,
the
destruction,
the
sense
of
an
ending,
but
they
are
not
especially
good
on
the
other
aspect,
which
has
to
do
with
re-enchantment,
renewal.
Maybe
they
are
not
post- Modern
at
all,
in
the
sense
that
they
have
gone
beyond,
or
post,
the
modern
logic
of
modernity.
They
are
merely
extending
the
disenchanted
logic
of
modernity
into
its
late
phase
[As
most
modernists]
they
have
turned
breakdown
and
destruction
into
an
art
form.
The
myths,
legends
and
religions
of
the
past
are
all
blown
to
smithereens,
deconstructed
in
an
atmosphere
of
frenzy.
An
the
deconstructionalist
looks
for,
and
finds,
historical
prejudices,
political
values
and
out
of
date
attitudes
at
the
centre
of
these
exploded
myths,
T
S
Eliots
heap
of
broken
images.206
205 206
Slaughter, op. cit., pp145-6. David Tacey, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999.
Why quote Mackay in a thesis interrogating present-day constructs of the future and generally advocating the formation of a public intellectual line of interrogation? Certainly, other names associated more deeply with futures thinking invite analysis of the type suggested by this thesis. Barry Jones would be a candidate, given his early work in the Commission for the Future. But, in the contemporary age, Jones is not as massively consumed by the media and public as Mackay. Considered widely as having a finger on the pulse of Australia, Mackay is the first port of call for social attitudes. In this respect, there is a consumption component involved in selecting Mackays work over say Jones. The work of Mackay promotes collaboration and dialogue with an abstract, imagined institution called the mainstream while at the same time attempting to embody notions of objective and value free ethnographic knowledge: as a social researcher who has spent his life listening to Australians talking about life in Australia, boasts Mackay when discussing reconciliation, I have been driven to an additional conclusion about the matter.207 Authority here resides in the apparently humble act of listening, in which the object of discussion (that is, the group consensus of ordinary mainstream Australians) follows a text-commentary relation of speaking for itself during Mackays play of ethnomethodological indifference motivated
207
by the implied mass of opinion driving him.208 But the mainstream in keeping with John Hartleys work on the imaginary construction of television audiences,209 Leigh Dales scholarship on Mainstreaming Australia and Toby Millers analysis of the well-tempered citizen is perhaps a citizen- audience imagined empirically, theoretically and politically to be the dominating form of citizenship in Australia. It is assumed to be privileged through sheer numerical mass and vocality or opinion. Yet this citizen-audience is an invisible fiction that serves the need of the imagining institution, in this instance, Hatzimanolis assimilationist liberalism: others must become like us, my present is your future.210 At no point of this discussion is the audience real or external to its discursive construction. It does not lie beyond its production as a category, which is merely to say that audiences are only ever encountered per se as representations.211 In this view, Mackay is correct (without realising it I think in this sense) when he admits in a chapter on diversity that to talk of the mainstream misses the point.212 It can be argued that Mackays text is a representation of the Australian mainstream and not in fact mainstream itself. Hence, the commentarial domination of Mackay (akin to Jackie
208
see Gillian Fuller, The Textual Politics of Good Intentions: Critical theory and Semiotics, in Lee and Poynton, op. cit., pp 81-98. 209 John Hartley, in Frow and Morris, op. cit. 210 Efi Hatzimanolis, Timing Differences and Investing in Futures in Multicultural (Womens) Writing, in Sneja Gunew and Anna Yeatman (eds), Feminism and the Politics of Difference, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1993, p 128. 211 Hartley , op. cit., p 166. 212 Mackay, op. cit., p 35.
Cooks location of Stan Zemaneks talk in talkback radio213) as coloniser of the object-text (in this instance, the opinions of ordinary Australians) is displaced but not in any sense removed. It is perhaps instructive then to examine Mackays Turning Point as a futurestext itself. This is to suggest ways in which the consumption of his angle on the future and others might be directed more reflexively towards [Mackays] representational practices of the mainstream future, including his will to truth or to mastery.214 Ann Game, for example, contends that sociological works produce sociological fictions rather than analysing what actually occurs in society.215 Thus, to use Mackays contemporary writing on the future is not an attempt to incorporate distinctly mainstream, motivated-by-market cultural research (what von Wright has otherwise called non-intrusive sociology216) into a comprehensive and unified theory of how the nation perceives the future. Rather, the work of Mackay and other commentators who have appropriated speaking positions of national and cultural significance as ethnographers (though how much ethnographer exists in practices of ethnography has been intensely debated by James Clifford, Kevin Dwyer, Allan Luke, Robert Hodge and Alec McHoul) is to briefly stage some public voices and/or fictions directing Australias modern- day mainstreamed vision quest as massively consumed by the Australian public.
213
see Jackie Cook, Dangerously Radioactive: the Plural Vocalities of Radio Talk in Lee and Poynton, op. cit., pp 59-80. 214 Lee, op. cit., pp 194-5. 215 Game, op. cit., pp 3-5.
Australias Continuing Vision Quest: What Kind of Fiction is the Future Imagined to Be? The Australian land mass was an alluring enigma in the European imagination centuries before its discovery and colonisation. So when British settlers finally arrived in 1788, they brought with them a vast store of prior expectations and images, based both on actual reports of explorers and on historical myths, which persuasively moulded their way of seeing the unfamiliar land and its people. Australias nebulous reality began to be formed and measured against these powerful historical images and they continue to have a clear bearing on perceptions of Australia even now.217 Mackay presents his sense of late twentieth-century Australian cultural dissonance not simply as contemporary social phenomenon but also as a matter of cultural identity which, on account of various disintegrations within social, financial, and political relations and institutions, implies a near-future and necessary transformation to a more sophisticated, harmonised society: At the turn of the century, Australians believe that our potential as a prosperous, fair and decent society has not yet been realised, and they hope that, like an awkward adolescent on the verge of adulthood, Australia might
216
quoted in Robert Hodge and Alec McHoul, The Politics of Text and Commentary, Textual Practice, vol 6, no 2, pp 189-209, 194. 217 Paul Longley Arthur, Fantasies of the Antipodes, op. cit., p 37.
be
about
to
discover
its
destiny.218
Mackay
suggests
that
we
each
know
Australia,
in
the
end,
will
come
good.219
Similarly,
David
Carter
in
Becoming
Australia:
The
Woodford
Forum
argues
that
recent
developments
in
fashioning
Australian
history
reveal
shifting
attitudes
to
Australia
and
being
Australian,
to
ways
of
being
at
home
here
and
situating
ourselves
in
time
and
place.220
These
are
not
isolated
views.
During
the
1990s,
commercial
and
popular
media
often
enunciated
an
effect
of
millennial
time
on
cultural
life,
from
colour-spreads
of
2001
Fashion
Odyssey221
through
picking
the
Name
of
the
Millennium,222
to
2000:
Date
with
Destiny.223
Increasingly,
millennial
time
mixed
politics
with
the
betterment
of
cultural
identity:
The
celebrations
for
the
millennium
and
the
centenary
of
Federation
should
be
the
culmination
of
a
giant
corporate
plan.
Its
the
perfect
opportunity
to
recognise
the
dreams
and
aspirations
of
all
of
us
for
a
better
understanding
of
what
it
means
to
be
Australian.224
Halfway
through
the
last
year
of
the
twentieth
century,
the
Courier
Mail
printed:
Something
inevitable
is
that
as
the
world
faces
a
new
millennium,
there
will
be
an
unending
parade
of
vision
Queensland
Premier
218 219
Mackay, op. cit., p ix. ibid., p xix. 220 David Carter, Working on the Past, Working on the Future, in Richard Nile and Michael Peterson, Becoming Australia: The Woodford Forum, University of Queensland Press, 1998, pp 6-25, 7. 221 Courier Mail, 12 March 1999. 222 Courier Mail, 9 June 1999. 223 Courier Mail, 7 March 1998.
[Peter Beattie] reckons there has been a huge change in political and social attitudes in recent years as people reject negativity in public life. People want a vision, they want a future, he says. Beattie is joined by a band of optimists who have a shared vision for Queensland. Like a civic cheer squad, they are cheering on the new and urging through persuasion and direct action new players on to the field instilled with a will to win The consensus about the future is that one big transformation is needed.225 Even Mackay in an earlier work, Reinventing Australia, embraces this future as the dream of a third chance: A sure sign of millennium madness was the inability to come up with at least one substantial dream of the future. All the emphasis in the interpretation of dreams was placed on catching a glimpse of the third Chance as the new millennium was coming to be called.226 However, within Australian studies there is a characteristic awkwardness towards the future social imaginary. The space for opening up new forms of identification which often typifies contemporary Australian studies especially those examinations that mix the temporal opportunism of end of century revisionism with utopian metaphors can confuse the continuity of historical temporalities, confound the ordering of cultural symbols, [and]
224 225
Wendy McCarthy, Summer Agenda, Sydney Morning Herald, 5-8 January 1993. The Vision Splendid, Courier Mail, 5 June 1999. 226 Reinventing Australia, Pymble, Angus and Robertson, 1993.
traumatise
tradition.227
Vision
may
abound
with
inspirational
language
and
uplifting
prediction
within
our
popular
publications
(which
peaked
the
days
following
31
December
1999)
but
this
is
not
to
be
confused
with
sound
methodological
inquiry
into
the
future.
Australian
studies
present-day
internal
struggle
with,
for
example,
the
political
logics
of
Pauline
Hansons
One
Nation,
the
1999
failure
of
the
Republic
Referendum
and
the
continuing
disempowerment
of
Aboriginality
as
it
were,
David
Carters
battle
lines
drawn
across
the
nation228
these
events
or
non-eventualities
contest
the
conclusion
of
the
present
way
and
block
the
progress
of
a
new
way
to
perceive,
interrogate
and
respond
to
the
future.
At
the
conclusion
of
Turning
Point,
Mackay
retreats
significantly
from
the
methodological
implications
of
the
adolescent
association,
qualifying
it
with
the
properties
of
a
rough
kind
of
sense
that
is
not
an
absolutely
valid
analogy
and
which
doesnt
amount
to
self-criticism.229
Yet
it
positions
his
argument
within
the
useful
context
that
Australia
is
still
growing
up.
In
examining
the
deficiencies
of
the
historical
consciousness
surrounding
the
1950s
and
1960s,
David
Carter
warns
that
we
need
to
commit
ourselves
to
an
interesting
history
in
the
future,
however
dangerous
and
difficult
that
might
prove
to
be.230
By
bringing
these
two
studies
together,
the
question
is:
in
what
way
could
the
future
be
dangerous
and
difficult
and
is
Australian
studies
grown-up
enough
to
deal
with
this
apparent
new
uncertainty
of
the
227
Homi K Bhabha, The Postcolonial and the Postmodern: The Question of Agency, The Location of Culture, New York, Routledge, 1994, extracted in During, op. cit., p 196. 228 Carter, op. cit., p 8. 229 Mackay, op. cit., p 296.
future? To resituate Dick Hebdiges question to the study of youth subculture as a question put to the quality and character of contemporary Australian studies, is there something historically specific missing from present-day accounts of Australian society, perhaps an explanation of why certain forms of cultural myopia (Hansonism, Republic non-vote, etc) should occur at this particular time, a moment positioned as a special turning point but which in practice seems to act less significantly on the civic body as an agent of change?231 In Mackays analysis, the term new way signals a move away from the model of conceiving Australia as set and instead a shift towards sites of cultural creation which embrace uncertainty: Australia is becoming a truly postmodern society a place where we are learning to incorporate uncertainty into our view of the world. The absolute is giving way to the relative; objectivity to subjectivity; function to form. In the modern worldview of the twentieth century, seeing was believing; in the postmodern world of the turn of the century, believing is seeing. Conviction yields to speculation; prejudice to a new open-mindedness; religious dogma to a more intuitive, inclusive spirituality.232
230 231
Carter, op. cit., p 25. Hebdige, op. cit. 232 Mackay, op. cit., pp xix-xx.
According to Mackay, the old order was theorised as a practice of cultural relations within which differences of opinion were triggers for conflict: in the new way of Australia, differences of opinion are accepted as part of the richness of our social, cultural, intellectual and religious tapestry.233 But this, it might be argued, is a linguistic slight of hand, presupposing as it does that the new way is in fact new for Australia. The formation of the new way, Mackay recognises, can be traced essentially to particular conceptions made by the Europeans and their descendants about Australia, first clearly evident during the discovery and colonisation period of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Australia is still the New World, Mackay asserts: The place where the mistakes of the past might be corrected; where ancient hostilities might finally be forgotten; where class divisions might yet be realised So we still believe that the faith invested in us by those who came here by choice will ultimately be justified. Thats the bedrock truth about Australia at the turn of the century: we believe that, given time, we will become what the European dream always said we would become a kind of antipodean utopia.234
233 234
This visionary theatre for manifesting Australia as a culture of collective becoming,235 it would seem from Mackays disclosure, is in fact an old way, a theoretical hidden imperative that is now after 30 years of confusion and uncertainty reasserting itself as a cultural enunciative within Australian studies and socialisation.236 Can what mainstream commentators like Mackay and Australian studies scholars propose as the new way within postmodernism transformation and sophistication at the site of Australian cultural creation be really understood theoretically as a return to the old way, unlocking the perceived immobility of the present way? Philosophically, the answer actually is no. Michel Foucault has denied return, arguing that history preserves us from the ideology of return, that it is impossible to go back to the very circumstances culture, society and politics are escaping: ie, the past.237 Granted, some Australian politicians such as John Howard or Pauline Hanson do seek out cheap form[s] of archaism or some imaginary past forms of happiness that people did not, in fact, have at all238 to add a mythologised sense of returning to an Australian Eden (often located in the 1950s) in their speeches and policies Foucault identifies this as a facile tendency.239 But current Australian studies argue that it has no courtship with archaisms or falsehood. However, this new way remains not so new.
235
Michael Peterson, Introduction, in Richard Nile and Michael Peterson, Becoming Australia: The Woodford Forum, University of Queensland Press, 1998, p 4. 236 Mackay, op. cit., p xviii. 237 Foucault, op. cit. 238 ibid. 239 ibid.
Perhaps
then
the
new
way
that
Mackay
speaks
of
is
more
properly
understood
in
the
direction
opposite
to
return:
as
an
referent
to
the
form
of
cultural
experience
and
identity240
envisaged
in
the
contemporary
theoretical
description
of
Australian
social
experience
as
becoming?
Though
the
theory
of
a
coming
Australia
is
a
solidly
observed
tradition,
from
the
works
of
Manning
Clark
to
Richard
White,
Becoming
is
gaining
new
theoretical
status
for
articulating
the
nation
as
a
continuous
site
of
emergent
cultural
identity.
It
is
a
term
that
represents
Australia
as
just
beyond
immediate
cultural
authorisation.
In
this
usage,
Australia
is
to
(eventually)
become
the
culture
it
is
currently
meant
to
be.
Contingent
on
perceiving
a
lack
in
contemporary
social
experience,
becoming
permits
viable
contestation,
revision
and
new
vision
within
Australian
studies
analyses.
Australian
civilisation,
advances
Nile
in
his
account
on
the
terms
sometimes
oxymoronic
status
(are
Australian
and
civilisation
compatible
terms?),
is
never
quite
an
achieved
state
it
is
always
developing
but
not
quite
yet
developed
but
a
primary
process
towards
achievable
and
practical
goals.241
This
constant
state
of
creation
is
given
a
particular
edge
and
focus
on
account
of
the
turn
of
the
millennium
or
for
that
fact
any
turning
point.
For
Mackay,
this
implicates
or
invites
a
new
way
to
conceive
ourselves
a
primary
process
that
has
perhaps
always
been
the
way,
I
suspect,
of
Australia
for
over
two
centuries
but
which
has
appeared
in
different
guises
and
political
forms
reflective
of
the
times.
As
an
illustration,
on
2
October
240 241
Bhabha, op. cit., p 196. Richard Nile (ed.), Australian Civilisation, op. cit., p 6.
1911, Joseph McCabe writes in The Lone Hand, under the heading, Australia as a Forecast of the Future: From the biological point of view Australia is a medieval paradise, a dip into the earth of at least five million years ago; from the human point of view it is a dip into the future, an illustration of a stage in the history of men which Europe and America will reach to-morrow, and Asia and Africa the day after. That is the profound and supreme interest of Australia'.242 Move forward nearly nine decades and, for Nile and Michael Peterson in Becoming Australia, this continuing creative process of actively conceiving Australia as a site or experiment of the future sews the thread of an evolving consciousness throughout (post) modern Australian studies, weaving a fabric of cultural analysis orientated towards becoming. The problem of the becoming thesis, it would seem, is the problem of immateriality in the sense that it cannot be easily charted or empirically related. Images of the future tend to be visual or abstractly symbolic.243 Consider Bob Hawkes clever country or no child will live in poverty speech, or The Lucky Country from the book of the same name.244 These have focused Australias collective attention on the type of country it aspires to be. First, imagining a nation where distributive injustice gives way to wisdom within the then emerging information age; and second, in face of an adversarial natural environment, a nation in which the politics of surviving the sentence of history from convicts to farmers, from displacement,
242
Joseph McCabe, Australia as a Forecast of the Future, The Lone Hand, 2 October 1911, pp 483-9. 243 Slaughter, op. cit., p 57. 244 Donald Horne, The Lucky Country, Ringwood, Victoria, Penguin, 1964.
subjugation, [and] domination245 to homeland, independence and diversity confer a self-certainty about our fate as lucky and Australian individuation as country. In the particular case of The Lucky Country, though the book was an ironic comment on Australias development as involving more luck than design, the entrance of the title into the Australian vernacular is indicative of a community willing to misconstrue the phrase in its favour. Grand visions of the type described above, which have often evoked active and proud citizenship, are steadily fading from Australias national imagination. The transmission of a culture of becoming rarely occurs in Australian national politics and claims of moving towards a living future, to borrow an organicist term, hardly figure in the public imagination beyond infrequent calls for an ecologically sustainable society. Commentators tend to remember Well may we say God save the queen because nothing will save the governor-general,246 or Run over the bastards247 or This is the recession Australia had to have248 before recalling an Australian equivalent (if any) to Martin Luther Kings I have a dream or John F Kennedys We choose to go to the moon . Likewise, while Australias national anthem Advance Australia Fair survived New South Wales premier Bob Carrs 1996 attempt to replace it, Australians retain an affinity for Waltzing Matilda, a national song about an unemployed, suicidal sheepstealer.249 Contrary to
245 246
Bhabha, op. cit., p 190. Gough Whitlam, 11 November 1975. 247 Sir Robert Askin on anti-Vietnam war protestors, 1967. 248 Paul Keating, 1991. 249 Mackay, op. cit., pp 293-4.
the
dawn
of
new
era
rhetoric
splashed
across
the
front
pages
of
all
Australian
newspapers
on
1
January
2000,
vision
is
waning
and
imprecise.
Could
the
question
be
put
then,
not
controversially
or
blasphemously
but
rather
critically,
that
contemporary
Australian
studies
does
not
adequately
represent
the
triumphant
expression
or
confident
statement
of
a
clear,
articulated
vision
but
rather
a
desperate,
even
manic,
attempt
at
reassurance?250
Is
Australia
indeed
a
culture
of
becoming
in
spite
of
inadequate
planning,
incompetent
leadership
and
uncommitted
populace.
Or
is
this,
as
MacKay
quietly
poses
before
a
wave
of
positivist
reappraisal,
an
empty
hope?251
Perhaps
a
definitive
answer
is
still
not
yet
possible
but
it
is
inventible:
Where
it
has
come
from
and
where,
if
anywhere,
[Australia]
is
going
[b]ecoming
Australia
is
challenging
and,
frequently,
exhilarating.
And
not
entirely
without
hope.
Perhaps,
despite
all
the
evidence
of
disintegration,
including
the
recent
outbursts
of
bigotry,
we
are
still
involved
in
nation
building.252
250 251
Slaughter, op. cit., p 57. Mackay, op. cit., p xvi. 252 Philip Adams, Becoming Australia, foreword.
A Role for Australian futures studies and the Re-enchantment of the Cultural Imagination And yet we suffer, as so many former colonies do, from feelings of smallness. We believe, somehow, that real life, the life that really counts, is happening elsewhere We are buffeted now by new and frightening forces we do not understand. Globalisation. New ways of selling. Ravenous corporate imperialism. The death of small town life. The competition of Asian wage slaves. The jobs lost to computers. The feeling daily that each day of paid work may be our last. A generation of university graduates who can look forward at best to lives of busking, market research or waiting on tables. A feeling that our competitors may be too big and wealthy, and we are in a race we are losing. How much of this is colonial cringe and how much is realism is hard to say. But we do not seem to be thinking of the future any more, just sharing out what the dying Don Dunstan called the spoils of defeat.253 [H]ardness is creeping into our soul, because we havent been ready or we dont know how, to defend the fairness that makes us Australians. Australians dont mind change; they will look change in the eye any day of the week, confident that they have its measure. What Australians dont like is unfairness. And lately its been hard to tell what is
253
Bob Ellis, Visions of Australia, Weekend Courier Mail, 22 January 2000, pp 1-4
inevitable
change
and
what
is
plain
unfair.
A
lot
of
things
have
been
called
inevitable
when
they
are
really
negotiable.254
A
new
generation
of
Weet-Bix
kids
are
on
the
move.
Full
of
energy,
and
vitality,
our
countrys
future
is
written
in
their
faces.
Fuelled
on
Weet-Bix
goodness
they
are
set
to
lead
Australia
into
a
new
Millennium.
Our
kids
are
Weet-Bix
kids
and
our
future
is
off
to
a
great
start.255
It
is
a
reasonable
claim
that
behind
futures
thinking
and
its
related
material
and
symbolic
output,
futurestext
and
futurespeak
are
authors.
People
invent
futures
and,
on
terms
of
the
thesis,
this
is
considered
an
act
of
authorship.
Such
an
approach
has
a
two-fold
investigative
angle:
it
seeks
to
assess
the
worth
of
futurestexts
in
not
breaking
from
the
evaluative
models
of
traditional
literary
criticism
and
authorial
intention;
and
it
seeks
to
understand
the
processes
through
which
futurestext
become
socially
meaningful,
variously
interpreted
and
politically
used.
This
approach
to
the
subject
characterises
futures
as
purely
human
constructs
and
works
through
not
only
the
relationship
of
text
to
objects
(or
imagined
objects)
but
also
through
the
relations
of
class
and
political
struggle.
For
although
all
members
of
a
society
might
share
in
moments
of
history
common
senses
of
the
future,
different
classes
will
appropriate
signs
and
languages
of
futures
to
254
Kim Beazley, Ashfield United Church, Sydney, 11 December 1999, reported in John Cleary, Millennial Visions, The Religion Report, Radio National, 15 December 1999.
different
political
uses.
Culturally
specific
evaluations
of
the
future
can
be
associated
with
the
distribution
of
power
within
society,
so
that,
in
the
two
following
examples
say,
the
association
of
control
in
the
term
choice
with
vision,
goals
and
aims
is
indicative
of
a
secular
democratic
society
whereas
the
linking
of
providence
in
the
term
prophecy
with
religion,
scriptural
writings
and
God
indicates
a
theocratic
(ruled
by
a
deity)
community.
In
practice,
no
sign
or
text
of
the
future
is
apolitical.
To
choose
to
communicate
a
vision
of,
say,
goal
rather
than
aim
places
a
small
but
significant
distinction
on
what
is
written
or
spoken
about
that
future.
Likewise,
a
trajectory
of
religious
politics
is
discernible
in
the
theological
example
of
preaching
salvation
by
work
as
opposed
to
salvation
by
faith.
In
the
first,
a
future
safe
from
the
tribulations
prophesied
to
descend
upon
the
world
is
secured
through
the
efforts
of
improving
the
conditions
of
ones
fellow
neighbours
in
the
second,
it
is
granted
through
belief
alone.
Uses
of
futurestext
and
futurespeak
thus
call
forth
the
value-system
of
the
culture
or
community
within
which
the
text
is
used
and
interpreted.
On
this
account,
futures
mythology
grows
out
of
a
need
to
define
goals
and
desires,
to
explain
perhaps
restraining
behaviours
today
for
the
hope
of
gain
tomorrow,
to
distribute
relations
of
power
over
activities
of
organisation,
planning
and
internal
social
structures
of
the
nation,
and
to
account
for
directions
of
progress
or
egress.
This
view
draws
its
strength
from
decentralising
the
position
of
futures
in
western
and
Australian
temporal
thinking.
It
moves
towards
an
255
epistemological break with the various kinds of naturalised, mythologised and commonsense forms of futures-thinking which pass themselves off as true but which in fact encode the cultural values of a socio-political order. That is to say, in order for the future to be defined from the outside, its commandeering of the national imagination through short-term paradigms needs to be competently disengaged to make such a perspective assignable the future can be grasped through its defamiliarisation. Post-mythological and post-structural models are suggested by this angle of investigation though these are not easily reached and can become untenable if poorly implemented. Models of enquiry into the future and about the future must take account of the inter-relatedness of all subject positions regarding the future in question. The text, its author, the analyst, the culture, the audience, the citizen all provide a colour within envisaging the future as a subject in process, as important parts of the becoming thesis. Public Becoming: Planned Obsolescence and (Re)Discovery For the future has been habitually confused with being a denotable construct about which true or false statements could these be in the family of Niles national lies? can be made rather than as a connotative artefact of human thought dependent upon widely accepted interpretative practices. To consider the future as an artificial social product with constructed cultural intention is to open a way beyond this current temporal thought. Much influenced by Michel Foucaults argument that truth is always and everywhere an element of vested power-interests, by redefining its
contemporary categories, concepts and applications as perhaps social control in action, the future can be reconceived, recovered and re-explained in radically different ways from conventional reasoning. This can lead to the creation of a new intellectual site a public intellectual network to rethink Australias national possibilities. If this methodology is taken on board within Australian Studies, the future as Australians know it in the early twenty-first century might be significantly questioned and may become obsolete. And the subject-position of futurists within society might be re- evaluated or at least re-placed and recast to responsibly and socially accountable positions. Granted, in attributing considerable power to the media and complementarily presupposing the well-tempered citizen audience to be active, engaging receivers of the messages directed at it,256 fictions of the future in Australian society are frequently mapped through advertising and popular publication by various types of futurists. Business as usual, progress is profit, time is short, the future is now, embrace uncertainty, live for the moment these compact forms of ideological code or philosophy (conceptual equivalents to what genetic research calls the meme), conflate senses of the future to profit-delimited patterns of capitalism and industrialism and dominate common dialogues within twenty- first century society. Yet it is these same conceptual memes that, under the diagnosis available to what I have called Australian futures studies, require a rethinking of the future and a dispossession of present-day imaginary mis- recognitions. That is, there is a need to unmask social futures mapping of
this kind and other kinds as products of specific forward-thinking enterprises. In this way, to return to the above-mentioned ideological memes, it can be alternatively conceived that business is not in fact usual and progress is not always profitable when environmental discourse (with its warnings of ecological collapse) is incorporated into commercial tropes of industrialism. Likewise, time is not short and the future is not actually now if citizens extend their sense of the present beyond entrenched short-sightedness. And embracing uncertainty encourages anxiety rather than contentment, but living for life not merely the moment may prove to be more fulfilling. Here then, I suggest, is a pressing intellectual agenda for Australian studies. Unless Australianists257 probe our (historical and contemporary) attempts to harness the future to social ends, the theorisation of Australia as a becoming culture will be inadequate to the task of Australian studies and will lack the methodological support through which Australian scholars seek theoretical validation and approval. After all, as Roland Barthes puts it, method certifies.258 But this is not in any way to concede a new form of Australian studies orthodoxy within which alternative futures are (re)packaged or recycled in safe academic forms. Nor is it to argue that a privileged discourse of Australian futures studies could somehow speak the truth of the future and rank other interests in the future on a specific scale of priority. Indeed, the challenge Im suggesting is not entirely academic; it
256 257
Miller, op. cit. A term describing Australian studies scholars as used by Maynard in an Australian Public Intellectual Network chat forum, Next Generation Postgraduate Australian Studies, www.api-network.com, 24 May 2000.
can
be
political
as
well.
For
the
call
to
a
reinvigorated
form
of
Australian
studies
assuredly
finds
no
allegiance
in
the
liberal
governments
compression
of
arts
funding
and
university
departments
during
the
year
2000.
Yet,
in
addition
to
requiring
new
research
tools
to
understand
Australias
conception
and
uses
of
the
future
in
the
past
and
present
and
in
approaching
the
future
as
itself
becoming,
Australia
needs
to
create
a
new
knowledge
institution
Australian
futures
studies,
perhaps
for
guaranteeing
that
these
tools
are
implemented
and
these
questions
are
investigated.
Australia
needs,
from
the
perspective
offered
by
public
intellectualism,
an
ombudsperson
of
temporal
fiction
mapping
who,
in
effect,
can
act
at
times
as
a
liberator
of
the
national
imagination
from
politicised,
religious
or
other
totalising
forms
of
futures-thinking.
It
requires
a
democratisation
of
futures
as
it
were,
a
way
of
seeing
the
future
as
a
subject
mobilised
by
humans
over
a
progression
of
multiple
situations,
sites
of
contestation,
discourses
and
desires,
with
little
certainly
no
master
narrative
that
would
justify
any
single
claim
to
be
mediating
the
future
on
behalf
of
particular
interest- groups,
communities
or
societies.
It
requires
recognition
that
some
narratives,
which
recommend
a
future,
are
frequently
aligned
with
profitable,
political
and
commercial
interests
rather
than
responsible
and
reasoned
critical
inquiry
on
the
fate
of
the
human
experiment
and
the
projects
of
civilisation.
Assuredly,
in
western
societies
a
basic
criterion
for
filtering
out
certain
futures
and
applying
others
remains
economic
profitability.
The
implications
of
a
close
relationship
between
futures-related
activities
and
258
Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text, trans by Stephen Heath, Oxford, Fontana, 1977, p 196.
the
existing
centres
of
social
and
economic
power
are
an
area
of
concern.259
Significantly
then,
Australian
studies
requires
a
multiaccentuated
sense
of
futures
to
balance
the
more
base
elements
of
popular,
corporate
and
political
futurism.
What
is
at
issue
is
not
necessarily
diffusion
but
discovery,
not
application
but
invention,
not
vision
but
critical
foresight.
One
of
the
tasks
of
next
generation
Australian
studies
scholars,
I
argue,
will
be
to
create
the
new
public
intellectual
technologies
for
reflexively
understanding
cultural
uses
of
the
future
and
to
involve
society
as
a
collective
in
the
working
out
of
these
processes.
The
features
that
will
ground
these
technologies
in
culture
exist
already
as
natural
elements
of
higher-order
human
capacities
for
speculation,
foresight,
modelling
and
choice.
Slaughter
describes
the
elegant,
complex
ways
in
which
human
beings
are
fundamentally
capable
of
applied
foresight,
forward
thinking
and
responsible
behaviour
mindful
of
potential
long-term
consequences:
[H]uman
beings
are
able
to
think
not
only
about
the
future
but
futures
plural.
Unlike
the
human
body,
which
is
necessarily
constrained
in
time
by
the
close
coordination
of
biology
(respiration,
digestion,
protein
synthesis),
the
human
mind,
imagination
and
spirit
are
free
to
roam
at
will
among
a
stunning
array
of
different
worlds
and
world-views,
past,
present
and
future
Crudely
put,
the
wiring
of
the
brain/mind
system
is
sufficiently
complex
and
inclusive
to
permit
consideration
of
past
environments
that
the
body
and
perceptual
259
apparatus
were
never
present
to
experience
directly.
It
supports
knowledge
and
understanding
of
significant
contexts
in
the
historical
present
that
are
displaced
in
space
(for
example,
Chernobyl,
Bosnia,
Okalahoma
City),
and
it
enables
the
forward
view
a
potentially
panoramic
outlook
on
a
vast
span
of
alternative
futures.260
Can
we
theorise
the
group
consciousness
and
fantasies
of
our
Australian
cultures
as
equally
adaptive?
Does
the
Australian
national
imagination
roam
consciously
throughout
a
rich,
complex
extended
present,
to
understand
responsibilities
and
consequences,
and
to
speculate
on
futures
to
come?261
Where
do
we
locate
the
common
dreams
of
the
nation?
Ombudsperson
of
Fiction
Mapping
This
thesis
has
established
the
link
between
text
and
time
in
defining
the
essential
elements
of
futurestext.
Text
can
be
a
powerful
conveyer
of
time
and
our
relationship
to
times
unfolding.
Text
in
this
role
can
perform
interesting
functions.
For
example,
text
can
capture
time.
In
her
paper
Diaries,
Time
and
Subjectivity,
Julia
Martin
reasons
that
particular
texts
like
the
diary
relate
special
and
unique
senses
of
being
in
time
from
one
day
to
the
next.
Diaries
speak
of
a
subject
that
is
fragmented,
secretive
and
discontinuous,
yet
they
enable
a
complicated
weaving
of
available
narratives.
For
this
reason,
argues
Martin,
the
diary
is
simultaneously
260 261
representative and non-representative of the time in which it is written and explores whether it is possible to access real life [experience] through narrative.262 On the point of this thesis, texts can also create time and it is these particular texts that have concerned the present Australian studies analysis. Certain texts, like the religious and secular examples discussed above, do claim to access future life through narrative. I have argued that Australian studies might become engaged not only with the assemblage of these futures within the target society but also in reflexive discussions about its own futures knowledge-producing and representational practices within social, political, cultural and imaginative contexts. Couched within the writing Australia debate enjoined by Ffion Murphy and next generation scholars in New Talents, I have speculated that the Australian studies commentator might consider their practices of speaking about Australia to a community of other commentators and question the positionality of such analysis indeed, the writing of Australia studies in relation to the meaning of representation: interpretation, communication, visualisation, translation and advocacy.263 The production and reception of Australian studies may be innovated in this way and resituated in the public domain. The producer of Australia studies the scholar, the writer, the researcher, the advocate might no longer be an insider or practitioner of field-building, comfortable in the lofty white towers of James Jupps Chardonnay socialism, but instead a
262
Julia Martin, Diaries, Time and Subjectivity, In/Between: Negotiating Time and Space, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/history/conferences /inbetween/>.
citizen
democratised
as
public
intellectual,
a
voice
that
speaks
in
circumstances
which
do
not
favour
them.264
The
call
for
the
public
intellectual
as
a
type
of
ombudsperson
of
the
future
and
culture
has
prominent
supporters.
From
the
pulpit
of
the
Ashfield
Uniting
Church
in
Sydney,
mixing
state
and
religious
concerns
in
a
presentation
overlooked
by
the
media
of
the
day,
Kim
Beazley
redirected
a
question
posed
by
Mark
in
the
new
testament
what
shall
it
profit
a
man
if
he
gain
the
whole
world
but
lose
his
own
soul?265
from
citizen
to
society
to
fellow
citizens:
What
does
it
profit
a
nation
if
it
gains
the
whole
world
but
loses
its
soul?
I
worry
that
ideas
like
the
knowledge
nation,
ideas
I
see
as
essential
to
the
future,
have
become
a
clich
at
the
very
time
we
most
need
them
to
mean
something
to
people.
Changing
that
is
a
job
for
me,
but
it
is
also
a
job
for
those
who
believe
in
a
fair
future
for
our
country
...
Ultimately
and
appropriately
for
today,
this
is
a
question
of
belief.
Do
we
really
believe
in
fairness
in
this
country?
Not
just
the
word,
but
for
what
it
demands
of
us
all.
Are
we
really
prepared
to
make
the
investment
in
our
fellow
citizens
that
is
needed?266
263
Alison James, Jenny Hockey and Andrew Dawson (eds), After Writing Culture, London, Routledge, 1997, p 2. 264 Murphy, op. cit. 265 Gospel of Mark 8:36. 266 Beazley, op. cit.
Adaptive
Value
in
Australian
futures
studies
I
have
suggested
that
this
emerging
breed
of
Australian
studies
scholar,
perhaps
equipped
with
the
tools
available
under
Australian
futures
studies
or
public
intellectualism,
might
better
account
for
the
set
of
relationships
and
dialogues
between
futures,
text
and
culture.
In
accounting
reflexively
for
the
textuality
of
their
own
texts,
Australian
public
intellectuals
would
be
situated
self-consciously
in
the
relations
of
power
operating
about,
within
and
around
(futures)
text.
In
engaging
histories
of
debates
concerning
the
politics
of
representing
and
signifying
the
future,
Australian
futures
studies
might
become
a
project
that
focuses
significantly
on
the
making,
the
becomings
of
Australian
society,
on
the
generative
nature
of
the
meaning
of
[Australian]
texts,
the
process
and
the
metaphor
of
performativity.267
In
reviewing
the
active
political
invention
of
the
future,
the
notion
of
advocacy
in
this
way
would
be
placed
alongside
the
issue
of
agency,
the
politics
and
poetics
of
speaking
for,
about
and
to,
others;
that
is,
the
question
of
addressivity
in
relation
to
[Australian
studies]
disciplinary
formation.268
In
drawing
the
threads
of
this
discussion
together
then,
the
search
for
responsibility
and
methodology
in
Australian
futures
brings
a
corresponding
set
of
arguably
important
questions
to
the
fore.
When
confronted
with
future
mythology
whether
this
takes
the
form
of
an
image
or
vision
of
the
future,
an
advertisement
marketing
futures
alongside
the
pursuit
of
267
Alison Lee, Discourse Analysis and Cultural (Re)Writing, in Lee and Poynton, op. cit., p 200. 268 ibid., p 202.
consumption (where citizens exchange capital for a consumable promising shares in a future), a sectarian community sermonising salvation and redemption from the apocalypse via a franchise of commitment, or political elites seeking to re-enchant their electorates with visionary speech acts we need to be more critically aware of our invention. As I opened this project, we must ask ourselves not is it true? but what is it meant to do? This approach to futures recognises the textual element inherent in constructing the future. Such a mode of analysis is clearly complex when considered in terms of exposing the penetration of particular types of futures thinking into culture and social life but it is a move towards proposing more positive, critically self-aware forms of realistically and practically approaching the future. In this respect, an ideology of futures-thinking may be analysed, where the writing of futures and the consumption of futures representations are perceived as meaningful practices locating cultural strategies of foresight in action. There is value in this kind of analysis. Different patterns of futures construction and reception convey distinctive styles of thought and distribution. Some represent an attraction to exotic, strange and new re- conceptions of present-day social relations; some create an opportunity to renegotiate, even re-evaluate or ridicule, the choices of the past (and thereby recast choices of the present in a different perspective). Edelman distinguishes the adaptive value of these kinds of activity: The freeing of parts of conscious thought from the constraints of an immediate present and the increased richness of social communication allow for the anticipation of future states and for planned behaviour.
With
that
ability
comes
the
abilities
to
model
the
world,
to
make
explicit
comparisons
and
to
weigh
outcomes;
through
such
comparisons
comes
the
possibility
of
reorganising
plans.269
Slaughter
describes
a
responsible
interpretation
and
use
of
the
present
in
relation
to
understanding
the
past
and
future,
though
not
without
a
warning:
There
is
no
past
in
the
sense
of
a
completed
totality,
split
off
from
the
present.
Equally,
there
is
no
future
that
stands
alone,
unaffected
by
what
has
gone
before.
Both
are
constitutive
of
the
present
in
a
process
of
unending
mediation
and
change.
It
follows
that,
to
the
extent
such
mediation
becomes
increasingly
conscious,
and
motivated
by
the
highest
(emancipatory)
interests,
we
may
indeed
aspire
to
an
ethic
of
improvement
and
human
fulfilment.
Equally,
by
adhering
uncritically
to
understandings,
ideologies
and
commitments
of
earlier
periods,
and
therefore
failing
to
engage
in
this
process,
we
may
miss
the
chance
to
counteract
the
forces
that
lead
to
dystopian
futures
and
the
end
of
the
human
experiment.270
269
G Edelman, Bright Air, Brilliant Fire, Basic Books, New York, 1992, as quoted in Slaughter, ibid., p 307. 270 Slaughter, op. cit., p 220-221.
Sham Futures As with Georg Simmels analysis of the manner by which conspicuous consumption cultivates sham individuality, other futurestext can express status (a promising future, your ticket to better future) and fashionability which can be accounted for (if left unchallenged) as containing a Simmellian sham value on the basis of their artificiality.271 These futures, implying status, often have their origins in the same language and conceptual apparatus, marketed as distinctive only in brand. The sophisticated, even saturated, advertisement of one future containing a greater degree of cultural capital or competence over another future is not perhaps to distinguish genuine, viable futures from impractical, critically-unworthy futures but is rather one salvo among many in a border war between choice and restriction for the average citizen.272 For example, the difference between Vodaphones The future is calling and Toyotas The future is now, or Genovis The future is Genovis and Galaxy TVs Welcome to the future, reflect marketing practices invoking a common, fashionable metaphor rather than useful commentary on the future per se: status is conferred on the innovated product possessing an innovated future. Similarly, the quarrels in which the citizen becomes involved in with government, institute, organisation, council or committee over a future going beyond the bounds of acceptability (for example, a proposed highway cutting through ones
271
Georg Simmel, Essays on Culture: Selected Writings, D Frisby and M Fetherstone (eds), London, Sage, 1997.
property
to
cater
to
anticipated
increased
traffic
flow)
are
evidence
not
so
much
of
an
internal
conceptual
tension
about
the
future
(traffic
flow
will
likely
increase)
as
of
a
divergence
of
interests
between
choice
and
restriction
(the
proposed
highway,
argue
the
directly
affected,
should
cut
through
somewhere
else).
Even
the
activities
of
recognising
the
advertised
millennium
were
itself
part
of
a
unified
project
encouraging
and
harmonising
fashionabilities
associated
with
forms,
styles
and
content
of
celebration.
The
differentiation
of
celebrating
the
millennium
into
activities
such
as
viewing
the
25-hour
television
broadcast,
participating
in
the
Woodford
Festival,
taking
the
family
to
the
Southbank
fireworks
spectacular,
raving
in
millennium
parties,
booking
tickets
at
an
expensive
restaurant
or
picking
a
spot
for
first
dawn
watching,
to
name
a
few
was
marketed
quite
broadly.
The
distinctions
between
choices
were
emphasised.
On
a
surface
level,
this
was
due
to
their
ranging
content
and
the
opportunities
opened
up
by
popular
and
official
culture
for
all
kinds
of
individual
and
social
creativity
and
decoding
of
the
idea
millennium.
But
in
another
sense,
the
differentiation
between
choices
reflected
the
classification,
organisation
and
categorisation
of
citizens
within
a
collective
conceived
to
consume
the
millennium
fiction
at
a
specified
time
(new
years
eve).
As
Theodor
Adorno
argued
on
the
culture
industry
in
a
different
tense,
something
was
provided
for
everyone
so
that
none
would
escape.273
Certainly,
the
hierarchical
range
of
patterns
for
celebrating
the
272
The term border war is borrowed from Donna Haraways penetrating A Cyborg Manifesto, op. cit. 273 Adorno, op .cit., p 34.
millennium was of varying quality and advanced Adornos rule of complete quantification. Everybody must behave (as if spontaneously) in accordance with [their] previous determined and indexed level, and choose the category of mass product turned out for [their] type differentiated products prove to be all alike in the end.274 Thus in the lead up to 2000AD Australian newspapers ran articles that asked, How will you celebrate 2000AD? on the basic assumption that Australians would or should. Where the market failed to locally finance the celebration of the future, tropes of transaction between investment, profit and millennial moments appeared in advertisements inviting capital within the promise of profitable return. The business community of Mallacoota argued that it was among the prestigious locations in Australia to receive first dawn light from the rising 1 January 2000 sun. Why light from that particular sunrise and not any other should be prestigious was not taken up in significant debate but the potential profit of capitalising on this event through those persons who understood first dawn to be important was, as evidenced by the Mallacoota First Dawn internet home page: You can sponsor the Sunrise and Virtual Celebrations by purchasing banner ads that link back to your web site. With the immense
exposure that Virtual First Dawn in Mallacoota is receiving from National and International media outlets, television, cable and radio as well as thousands of hits on a daily basis, your web site will be in a position to harvest all those visitors. Please use the contact form to express your interest in advertising your business on the very popular First Dawn Mallacoota On-Line multimedia web site. There are several sponsorship packages available.275 Commercially Opportunistic Futures Consumerisms and addictions are the tragic symptoms of unlived spiritual life. When we are connected to spirit through public enchantment, spirit has a creative outlet. But when this outlet is blocked, or lost then we become enslaved to what I would call fake questing for spiritual fulfilment. When our public spirit is broken down and offers no enchantment, there is a terrible, mad and destructive rush towards private or [purchasable] personal enchantments. And countless predatorial industries and businesses arise to supply us with the goods and services to help us fill the void that we sense at the heart of our lives.276
274 275
What
is
remarkable
about
this
millennial
urge
to
commercial
opportunism?
In
a
consumer
world,
the
preaching
of
millennial
prosperity
finds
enthusiastic
ears
and
the
moral
argument
of
reaping
what
society
has
sown
finds
it
sponsors
not
necessarily
in
social
fabric
but
in
profit,
a
sentiment
well
exploited.
Hawking
preferred
forms
of
recognising
and
celebrating
the
millennium,
businesses,
councils,
governments
and
organisations
clamoured
for
millennial
attention.
The
Millennium
Society
boasted
that
the
Big
2000
might
be
capitalisms
best
invention
since
Christmas277
and
Fortune
magazine,
writing
on
the
merchandising
of
the
millennium,
claimed
that
undoubtedly,
the
turning
of
the
millennium
will
be
one
of
the
largest
commercial
events
of
our
lifetime.278
Political
jousting
for
the
most
profitable
event
was
a
feature
of
the
1990s
and
characterised
millennial
planning.
Perceiving
a
commercial
opportunity
in
first
light
of
the
millennium
prominence,
thirteen
pacific
island
nations
including
Samoa,
Fiji,
Kiribati,
Tonga
and
the
Cook
Islands
formed
in
1996
a
joint
planning
and
marketing
alliance
called
the
South
Pacific
Millennium
Consortium.
This
consortium
was
established
for
coordinating
millennial
celebrations,
maximising
promotional
exposure
and
augmenting
the
influx
of
tourist
capital.
It
was
an
attempt
to
avoid
any
clashes
and
rivalries
between
pacific
states
likely
to
undermine
promotional
hopes
while
at
the
same
time
capitalising
on
their
claims
to
being
the
first
locations
in
the
world
to
greet
the
year
2000.
A
number
of
significant
developments
arose
from
this
arrangement.
Proposals
were
put
forth
to
boost
coconut
economies
with
277 278
Tom Huth, on the merchandising of the millennium in Fortune magazine. Millennium Society cochairperson Cathleen Magennis Wyatt.
capital drawn from tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of visitors intent on being members of the exclusive, apparently prestigious, millennial first dawn club. Several pitches used the regions bisection by the dateline as a ploy to market dual New Year celebrations. In this scenario, a millennial tourist would celebrate first dawn in Fiji just west of the dateline and then fly east 620 miles to Samoa where it would still be 31 December 1999 and welcome in a second new year. Other motions were legislated by respective government cabinets. In 1997, Kiribati President Teburoro Tito moved the international dateline from central Kiribati (otherwise known as Christmas Island) to the pacific nations far eastern border. In this way Kiribati was under one time regime when the millennium arrived previously the dateline had divided the island into two different time zones. Caroline Island, southeast of Hawaii and a member of Kiribatis Line Islands, was officially renamed Millennium Island to promote a series of events planned to mark 2000 and to invite both development and population of the uninhabited island. Yet despite much vaunting, the consortium collapsed in November 1998 after a series of disputes regarding inadequate tourist infrastructure and continuing rivalry over third millennium prominence. But efforts to capitalise on the conjuncture between geographical location and millennial appearance continued in diverse, sometimes extravagant ways. While the exclusive island resort of Vatulele in Fiji offered an ultimate millennium holiday package for US $500 000, other pacific states looked to the guarantee of global television exposure during a planned 25-hour third millennium broadcast organised by the British Broadcasting Corp, Cable News Network
and
thirty-eight
additional
television
networks.
In
the
mobilisation
of
human
resources,
the
millennial
turn
in
its
secular
tropes
of
New
Years
Eve
countdown
and
first
dawn
viewing
was
conceived
as
a
moment
primed
with
capital-raising
opportunities.
The
businesses
that
owned
the
rights
to
claim
elements
of
the
millennium
as
their
own
maintained
the
competitive
edge
in
the
transaction
of
cash
for
memorable
millennial
time.
The
Salvation
Franchise
Lord
we
pray
that
Jesus
will
be
exalted
today.
Lord
we
pray
for
Australia.
Lord
we
do
believe
in
the
potential
of
this
nation.
Lord
we
see
you
as
being
the
hope
for
this
nation.
Lord
I
pray
in
the
name
of
Jesus
that
the
cause
of
Christ
will
continue
to
go
forward
in
our
country
and
the
unifying
gospel
of
Jesus
is
the
answer
for
the
nation,
and
we
speak
your
name
again
over
Australia
today.
We
thank
you
Lord
that
our
hope
is
in
you
and
I
pray
father
that
people
can
finance
us
in
Jesus
Christ
in
your
precious
name.279
A
politics
of
business
can
be
sensed
too
within
many
forms
of
religious
differentiation,
as
in
the
above
prayer
by
Brian
Houston
spoken
at
the
launch
of
a
coalition
of
pentecostal
churches
the
Australian
Christian
Church.
It
is
no
accident
that
the
narrower
the
definition
of
salvation,
the
more
specialised
the
rituals
for
attaining
it,
the
qualifications
for
distributing
it
and
279
Brian Houston, at the launch of the Australian Christian Church, New Beginnings, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 23 February 2000.
the exclusivity for keeping it. Such restrictions place the power of salvation into the hands of a small number of people who make available upon specialised or ritualised request the means to lease it. I use the word 'lease' because salvation is never fully settled. Instead, a symbolic contract is achieved between the franchise and the seeker in which salvation is conveyed to the seeker for a specified period but usually in exchange for membership and often mental and financial obligation. If the seeker breaks the contract, salvation is lost. Jehovah's Witnesses call this act of severance 'disfellowshipping' and the seeker is designated by continuing followers of Watchtower as an 'apostate', a term redeployed to mean an individual who has lost the faith and is additionally against the almighty creator. Many ex- witnesses are emotionally scarred by this devastating, violent act of seemingly removing salvation and have setup international support services. In this sense, a small elite using exclusive language and narrow definitions and who therefore monopolise the forms and the senses of achieving salvation habitually frames salvation and the rituals of being saved from a monstrous future. Who benefits and who is disempowered by the agenda being set in this manner? Why are only selected people able to lease directions to the road of salvation with maps that periodically imply the master planner has changed compass, be it the secular salvation from ecological doom or theological salvation from the damnable mark of the beast? Saving a person from the antichrist has become a robust industry. Religious entrepreneurs proliferate their scriptural shandies and spiritual quick fixes to the middle-class disheartened with the expertise of
experienced confidence tricksters and the finesse of door-to-door salespeople. Subscribe to a local salvation franchise of the gospel of wealth variety found marketing in the early morning hours of Australian televangelism and a continual stream of ministrations will arrive in the mail replete with US postage markings and external messages warning you and your postie: This envelope contains important information the devil hopes you will never find out!, Eight things you need to know before the new millennium, Has Y2K plunged us into a countdown to chaos? Don't panic prepare and trust God! or Unleash the power of your faith!. Content will vary across a range of marketable approaches. Two recent postings I received from the same franchise respectively presented a 4-5 page personalised letter requesting I purchase dynamic ministry materials like Your Y2K New Millennium Survival Personal Library Kit for an appropriate seed harvest of $165.99. This reflected fair market value on powerful items including The Antichrist: 666 video, a three audio tape set called End Time Signs and the Book of Revelation Comic Book. An explanation sheet was also included for explaining the rituals required to activate an enclosed miracle touch 2-inch square cloth, apparently anointed touched in a supernatural way by a special class of persons self-identified as prayer warriors. Some packages have reflected telegram-style formatting to emphasise the great URGENCY felt by a pastor that many of you may be on the verge of falling apart or feeling absolutely overwhelmed by fear, anger, depression, rejection, worry and who desperately require a newly-released powerful book of wisdom to overcome personal tribulation and to successfully rebuke the devil. Often, correspondence signed from the
pastor displays these excesses of individual concern, claims of divine new revelation blended with unbiblical doses of numerological deduction, and a persistent problem with capitalisation. The accompanying letter to the Y2K Personal Request Sheet begins with direct address, encouraging its reader to perceive the year ahead in the interpretative scheme suggested by the pastor understanding the year in this way would bring status and benefit: Dear Jason, you are now reading a letter that HAD TO BE sent to you. From the moment I felt prompted to begin, I knew in my heart, I HAD NO OTHER CHOICE ... Yes, the Lord told me to prepare this ... He gave me a vivid, supernatural glimpse of the miracle difference this one letter could make in your life ... especially in this year of 1999 ...You and I are now living in the year 1999. When you study Biblical numbers and their significance in end-time prophecy, patterns and plans ... you quickly learn that the NUMBER 9 is the number which signifies FRUITFULNESS! Jason, God wants you to see your year of 99 ... in a special way. 99 ... {NINE NINE} SEE it as your YEAR OF DOUBLE FRUITFULNESS. Clearly subscribing to a future thats perceived to promise more choice and less restriction (while entailing risk) permits the citizen (or governments, nations, businesses, and communities) to differentiate themselves from their fellow citizens whom they identify with less choice and more restriction in other futures.
Loading the Future with Symbolic Software As with the case with the Millennium Consortium, future-conscious citizens often consolidate their membership to a particular future as they distinguish themselves from the mass. The form this takes is not limited to the example provided by the above-mentioned pact of pacific islands. Some consolidations are new and expect to wield political power: Australian Christian Churches really wants to impact the fibre of the country, the heart of Australia. I genuinely believe that the church is the answer of the nation in the future. I think Australias got a great future and I think the church has got a great part to play in it.280 Others are quite long-lived and doctrinally deep. As an illustration, Australian Jehovahs Witnesses demonstrate a pronounced satisfaction and sense of organisational structure in a future grounded on the impending theocracy of their god while displaying a clear avoidance of tainted worldliness outside their respective congregations: Why, though, does the Society construct new buildings when the world is in such an uncertain state? Brother Barry explained that Jehovah's organisation expects to survive these troubled times. God's people are getting equipped and organised to give the greatest witness possible in these final years before Armageddon brings an end to this system of
things. And they hope that many of their new facilities will be used in the great post-Armageddon reorganisation work.281 The Watchtower Society characterises present-day Jehovahs Witnesses activities as formative of a supreme mission implicated in a hope for the future: The purpose of The Watchtower is to exalt Jehovah God as Sovereign Lord of the universe. It keeps watch on world events as these fulfil Bible prophecy. It comforts all peoples with the good news that Gods kingdom will soon destroy those who oppress their fellowmen and that it will turn the earth into a paradise It adheres to the Bible as authority.282 The wonderful apocalypse hope is still alive! For their part, Jehovahs Witnesses are convinced that the wonderful promises in connection with the Millennium will be fulfilled Jehovahs Witnesses are engaged in a worldwide Bible educational work to enable as many people as possible to embrace this hope As heralds of these glad
280 281
ibid. You CAN take it with you (Organisation survive), in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 1 November 1983, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, p 30. 282 Inside cover statement in its current form as it appears in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 1 December 1999, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, p 1.
tidings, Jehovahs Witnesses are really the mouthpiece of a symbolic heavenly messenger whose mission is also described in Revelation.283 In this respect, Jehovahs Witnesses amalgamate around the creeds and doctrines of the Watchtower Society by observing proper conduct and directing their thinking along a required, arguably inflexible pattern: Fight against independent thinking! As we study the Bible we learn that Jehovah has always guided his servants in an organised way. And just as in the first century there was only one true Christian organisation, so today Jehovah is using only one organisation. (Ephesians 4:4, 5; Matthew 24:45-47) If we get to thinking that we know better than the organisation, we should ask ourselves: "Where did we learn Bible truth in the first place? Would we know the way of the truth if it had not been for guidance from the organisation? Really, can we get along without the direction of God's organisation?" No, we cannot! (Compare Acts 15:2, 28, 29;16:4, 5) When we consider the mighty spirit forces that are fighting against us, we must acknowledge that on our own we could not possibly win. Yet with God's backing, and with the help and support of his organisation our worldwide
283
The Apocalypse To be Feared or Hoped For? and Glad Tidings from the Apocalypse, in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 1 December 1999, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, pp 5-8, 9-14.
association
of
brothers
we
cannot
lose.
(Psalm
118:6-12;
1
Peter
5:9)284
Indeed,
from
one
end
of
Australia
to
the
other,
a
theological
tug-or-war
today
pits
the
mainstream
manufacturers
of
Christian
salvation
like
Catholicism
and
Anglicanism,
once
the
apex
rivals
of
the
religious
hierarchy,
against
the
less
historically-entrenched
franchises,
lead
by
charismatic
ego- theologists
I
am/You
are
God
like
Benny
Hinn
and
Kenneth
Copeland
or
ruling
councils
of
elders
such
as
Watchtowers,
that
push
their
products
into
the
seekers
homes.
Fought
at
the
television
set,
the
Internet
browser
(a
new
Bible-highway),
the
front
gate
or
door
and
every
Queen
Street
corner
in
Australian
cities,
it
is
a
battle
of
abstractions.
The
emerging
heavy-weights
of
salvation,
for
example
The
Watchtower
Bible
and
Tract
Society,
send
their
thousands
across
Australia
each
congregations
house-to-house
pattern
administered
by
the
resident
map-servant
to
call
on
locals
and
push
their
current
book,
pamphlet,
and
magazines
relevant
to
the
degree
of
invitation.
Each
day,
negotiations
in
theological
abstractions
for
Jehovahs
Witnesses
and
their
listeners
takes
place
on
a
scale
of
hundreds
of
thousands
in
Australia
alone.
284
Deciding for Yourself What You Want to Believe is PRIDE!, in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 15 January 1983, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, p 27.
Explore / Choose Your Future: Choice and Restriction It is not problematic, however, to argue that sites dealing with futures in the secular domain work through a similar play between consolidation, distribution, differentiation, pride, inflexibility and avoidance. For example, how formalised is the differentiation of options in the future within, say, contemporary meanings of employment? Citizens I argue are encouraged at various stages of interaction with society that not every future should be perceived equal. Australian business Careers-Onlines presents employment as an open landscape awaiting a type of exploration with its leading motto, explore your future. The University of Queensland, in a tone less exploratory and more selective, promotes on its student website the imperative choose your future. What temporal relations between the citizen and future can it be asked are being de-focused or directed in this manner? Here I would consider that the possibility of dialogue between citizens and their futures as respectively job-seekers and students in the Careers-online and the University of Queensland examples is pre-empted by framing and presenting (perhaps wholly unproblematic) options as preordained alternatives. These alternatives offered at face value invite selection based on (implicit) pride and (avoiding) restriction but not revision, re-creation or reinterpretation. The debate over which future best suits the job seeker or the student, in appraising their respective skills and talents, perpetuates a semblance of competition and the range of choice.
Not
all
contemporary
futures
avoid
a
full
consciousness
of
responsibility.
In
Niles
becoming
thesis,
the
national
conception
of
the
future
often
promises
to
make
or
reveal
Australia
as
the
nation
it
is
conceptually
meant
to
be
and
the
strive
in
the
emerging
new
talents
of
Australian
studies
is
to
become
aware
of
this
very
trope
of
becoming.
Yet
other
futures
are
less
sophisticated
and
baser
in
their
outcomes.
Some
may
be
interpreted
as
an
ideological
distraction
from
contemporary
social
tensions
or
at
least
a
manifestation
of
unfulfilment
in
the
mental
life
of
citizens.
These
types
of
invention
find
an
echo
in
the
marketing
of
purchasable
enchantments
like
crystals,
stones,
self-help
publications,
tapes
and
new
age
sacralised
paraphernalia.
A
similarity
in
purpose
is
also
found
in
the
theological
architecture
of
salvation
franchises
that
offer
solutions
to
the
discontents,
decisional
stresses
and
cognitive
overloads
of
(present
and
future)
life
via
an
escape
route
common
to
the
apocalyptic
Christian
mindset:
[V]irtually
every
person
who
comes
with
some
sort
of
message
of
imminent
redemption
of
the
world
makes
it
clear
to
his
audience
that
there
is
still
just
at
least
a
little
bit
of
time
left.
And
they
would
like
to
use
that
little
bit
of
time
thats
left
in
order
to
encourage
as
many
people
as
possible
to
make
the
commitment
to
join
their
community
so
that
they
will
be
ready
when
the
end
of
days,
which
is
near
at
hand,
actually
unfolds.285
285
Al Baumgarten, Millennial Dreams One, The Spirit of Things, Radio National broadcast, 4 April 1999.
As
might
be
evident
from
the
present
enquiry,
there
is
a
temptation
to
reduce
the
aims
of
this
project
to
simply
a
matter
of
acquiring
the
appropriate
language
or
terminology
to
describe
the
features
of
futures
thinking
commonly
at
play.
This
might
be
a
valid
criticism
but
there
is
more
at
stake
than
the
work
of
excavating
a
grammar
for
describing
contemporary
futures
mythology,
perhaps
I
would
characterise
a
more
ambitious
duty.
Language
after
all
does
not
bear
a
clear
and
unambiguous
relationship
to
the
real
world,
though
frequently
institutions
have
tried
to
capitalise
on
promoting
such
a
link
(for
example,
the
Queensland
University
of
Technologys
motto,
a
university
for
the
real
world).286
But
to
redirect
a
lateral
glance
made
by
Foucault
at
the
projects
of
spacialisation
and
history,
what
is
crucial
is
to
begin
writing
the
story
of
futures
(or
temporal
relations),
which
would
concurrently
be
about
a
story
of
forward-thinking
power:
from
the
political
strategies
of
visionary
speech,
through
the
invested
capital
interests
of
salvation
franchises,
to
the
cultural
creation
of
the
national
future.287
Within
Australian
futures
studies,
commissioned
with
writing
the
near
and
far
histories
of
becoming,
we
might
probe
the
social,
ethical,
political,
commercial
and
vocational
levels
of
the
various
futures
that
populate
a
citizens
relationship
to
the
future
with
a
variety
of
images,
meanings
and
possibilities.
Of
these
acts
in
imaginative
invention,
we
might
ask
several
questions.
286 287
Slaughter, op. cit., p 207. Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge, New York, Pantheon, 1980, p 149.
Twenty-Four Questions Does the futurestext serve the community or the community serve the futurestext? What aspects of society and its relation to time does it reflect or invent? Are there identifiable trajectories of temporal thinking that it mirrors (cyclical, linear, minimalist, cosmic, spiritual, determinist, prophetic, timeless)? Does it privilege one sense of time over the erasing of another? Does it serve to commodify time, knowledge and relationships for some form of profit? Does the text empower community members and, if so, whom does it benefit and what is its purpose? What kind of constitutive interests are embodied in the futurestext? Does the futurestext enhance or depress cultural life? Does it concentrate, centralise or equalise the power of choice? How does the futurestext affect the perception of our needs and social relations? What does it persuade citizens to ignore? Is it consistent with the creation of responsible, critical options in the future? What are its effects on relationships within and without the community? Does it foster a diversity of forms of knowledge, perhaps keeping in tune with Kim Beazleys dream of the knowledge nation, or a contraction of options, perhaps portioning out shares of Don Dunstans spoils of defeat? Is this future a desirable place, even in imagination? Does it create or institute a knowledge elite? Is this elite required for its perpetuation? What beliefs does its use foster and encourage? Can its value system be directly apprehended or are its ideologies and commitments implicit and submerged? Is the futurestext totalitarian? Has it been objectified and made viable before debate over it (if any) begins? Does it invigorate, reform, weaken or deaden human creativity?
What kind of capital (for example, labour, sacrifice, profit) does it require for its social or individual activation and realisation? What cultural resources is a reader of the futurestext required to utilise? And does it contribute to (de)mystifying the public, confusing purpose or inhibiting progress toward greater effectiveness?
Conclusion Unfinished Optimism? King Solomon once wrote that where there is no vision the people perish.288 It is arguable that vision is a strong and necessary foundation stone in the building up of society, its members and the projects of civilisation. From this viewpoint it is not unreasonable to say that the future envisioned differentiates the citizen, community or society from its peers. Different visions modify emotion, intellect, politics, vocation, ethics and behaviour in different ways. To act as an ombudsperson of these processes of modification to ensure an expansion of options rather than an artificial narrowing is an ambitious task. It is prudent then to expect generalisations of many kinds collecting around vision and future where critical and reflexive thinking of the kind described in previous chapters is not utilised. For example, statements of the nature below gather much attention in newspapers, radio broadcasts and publications. Inspirational opinionising of this kind and its related call to action is well known, often well received and widely consumed: [W]hen the present flawed unfinished adventure began [a] day of invasion for some of us it might have been, the start of a brutal conquest it certainly was [But] from brutal beginnings, the
288
Proverbs 29:18.
experiment,
with
great
sad
gaps,
has
worked.
There
is
much
to
rejoice
in.
And,
of
course,
much
to
do.
Let
us
do
it,
in
good
heart.289
Like
others,
the
above
excerpt
reflects
perhaps
a
sense
of
the
unfinished
optimism
(or
Niles
perpetual
provisionality)
central
to
the
becoming
thesis.290
But
how
useful
is
this
attitude
really
when
the
call
to
action
might
be
under-developed
or
vague?
In
digesting
Bob
Elliss
Visions
of
Australia
on
22
January
2000,
we
might
ask
how
do
Australians
actually
(re)invent
a
future
in
good
heart?
And
what
is
it
that
according
to
Ellis
needs
much
doing?
Kim
Beazley,
in
a
parallel
sermon
of
optimism,
articulates
the
widely
shared
pre-millennial
vision
that
if
we
as
a
generation
can
use
our
voice,
a
voice
accepting
responsibility,
responsibility
to
protect
the
fairness
that
is
this
countrys
soul,
then
future
generations
will
truly
be
able
to
rise
up
and
call
us
blessed.291
Is
it
clear
in
Beazleys
extract
from
the
pulpit
how,
or
in
exactly
what
sense,
the
Australian
citizen
might
begin
to
accept
responsibility
or
protect
fairness?
Perhaps
not.
I
would
argue
that
under
closer
consideration,
of
the
kind
advocated
by
the
present
thesis,
commentaries
of
this
nature
contain
some
significant
deficiencies
that
can
be
identified
as
starting
points
for
enquiry.
As
an
illustration,
statements
like
Beazleys
when
set
up
against
a
contemporary
social
stage
of
tribulation
may
stir
our
sympathies.
This
is
289 290
Ellis, op. cit. Richard Nile, Civilisation, The Australian Legend and its Discontents, University of Queensland Press, forthcoming, 2000.
not without intention. Beazleys speech forms part of the political strategy to renegotiate local electoral allegiance with a Labour party that promises what Beazley envisions to be a fair future. To achieve this, Beazley relates contemporary Australian experience not with essential criterions of identifying who is Australian but with his use of the collective we and its connection with national knowledge: We have known war and peace, poverty and plenty, drought and flood; we have known all these things.292 This experience becomes a potent political fiction, a myth, in which the shared nouns of catastrophe (war, poverty, drought, and flood) motivate identification in this collectivity. Who counts as we in this rhetoric? It is the we who have knowledge (though not necessarily direct experience) of these things. Fairness rests on the construction of the consciousness, the imaginative apprehension, of present existing plain unfairness within this experience and therefore of possibilities beyond unfairness. Beazleys speech is then a border war between inevitable and negotiable in which the fair future is represented as seductively and realistically as possible. The stakes in this battle are choice and restriction, in which the desired choice a responsible selection of the Labor party for re-election is presented as the option of less restriction, less unfairness in the future. But, to resituate Theodor Adornos famous phrase, these are two halves of a whole that do not add up.293 There is, it would seem, a need for conceptual explicitness
291 292
and
practical
clarity
in
these
self-effacing
approaches
to
the
future.
Slaughter
continues:
Regardless
of
whether
the
view
expressed
is
optimistic
or
pessimistic,
whether
the
task
is
to
create
utopia
or
merely
to
avoid
dystopia,
something
is
missing.
People
who
are
deeply
involved
in
particular
ways
of
life,
values,
logics-in-use,
traditions,
and
so
on
people
whose
world-views
differ
in
many
substantial
ways
from
those
quoted
are
being
asked
to
co-operate
from
a
great
distance
in
a
demanding
series
of
more
or
less
well-define
tasks
that
lack
historical
precedent,
or,
so
far
as
they
are
concerned,
contemporary
sanction.
Thus,
generalised
calls
to
action
may
be
a
very
ineffective
way
of
communicating
[a
change
in
the]
substance
of
social
life
and
social
being.294
Wholeness
Hunger
Beazleys
call
is
not
without
merit
nor
isolated.
But
in
this
peculiar
era
of
contradictions
and
broken
images,295
in
which
Australians
simultaneously
hold
profound
doomsday
views
and
millennial
notions
of
a
complete
change,
it
seeks
a
problematic
engagement
redefinition
and
recuperation:296
294 295
Slaughter, op. cit., p 206. Tacey, ibid. 296 Quimby, op. cit.
[O]ne
idea
has
held
true
for
Australians:
it
is
the
idea
we
like
to
think
defines
the
soul
of
our
nation.
It
is
the
idea
that
each
of
us
is
valued,
that
we
each
have
a
right
to
our
own
dreams
for
the
future,
and
especially
in
a
country
like
this
one,
an
equal
chance
to
fulfil
them.
In
other
words,
it
is
fairness.297
To
mobilise
the
fair
future
to
the
centre
of
culture
requires
a
sensitive,
critically
self-aware
reworking
of
Australias
connection
with
time
and
citizen,
a
recuperation
as
it
were
of
a
new
dreaming
which
breeds
the
connected
self.298
The
world
comes
into
being
through
this
web
of
connections
which
sustain
life;
that
our
origins
and
our
future
are
within
this
web;
that
the
meaning
of
our
lives
is
within
this
web;
that
the
histories
of
our
bodies
and
our
minds
are
within
this
web;
that
the
meaning
of
death
is
here
too;
that
the
generations
on
which
we
ride
the
waves
of
time
are
of
and
in
this
web
the
world
is
not
in
need
of
a
new
story,
it
is
we
who
are
in
need.299
This
should
invite
both
a
ruthless,
penetrating
practicality
in
reinvigorating
Australias
soul
and
the
humility
to
undo
the
self-interest
which
has
till
297 298
Beazley, op. cit. John Cleary, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. 299 Deborah Rose Bird, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999.
now
only
rewarded
the
isolated
and
competitive
and
dominating
self.300
It
calls
for
a
rupture
with
existing
epistemological
structures
of
meaning.
Without
fetishising
other
cultures
of
connection
such
as
indigenous
(or
the
popularly
labelled
wisdom)
cultures,
it
invites
Australian
society
to
break
down
the
proverbial
unfair
future,
question
its
nature,
unmask
its
implicit
investments
and
flaws,
and
remake
a
site
for
fair
futures.
There
is
value
in
this
process.
Our
connections
with
the
world
outside
will
be
more
evident,
sustainable,
real
and
responsible.
But
there
is
resistance
too.
The
current
industrial
and
capital
forms
of
social
relations
and
imaginings
continue
to
work
against
diversification,
enchantment
and
connection:
For
settler
descendants
connections
are
ruptured
almost
daily.
Towns
are
flooded,
suburban
streets
erased,
farms
repossessed,
pastures
blown
away,
forests
stripped,
historical
sites
bulldozed,
relationships
of
care
subverted
to
the
rule
of
profit.
Here
in
Australia,
and
around
the
world,
economic
rationalism,
global
economic
treaties
and
a
culture
of
social
worth
defined
by
consumer
power,
reward
the
isolated
and
dominating
self.
So
it
seems
that
despair
often
appears
before
us
as
our
destiny,
as
well
as
being
a
daily
temptation.301
These
destructive
forces
are
not
abstract
nor
without
perpetrators.
Deborah
Rose
Bird
suggests
that
our
common
dreams
are
losing
to
the
same
destructive
forces
that
have
worked
their
violence
on
Aboriginal
culture.
We
300 301
ibid. ibid.
know
violence
under
the
name
of
colonisation
and
we
know
it
under
the
name
of
development.
Today
were
learning
to
know
it
under
the
name
of
globalisation.302
Argues
Rose
Bird:
Wholeness
hunger
is
itself
part
of
modernity
and
it
slips
into
longing
for
a
world
that
one
can
only
encounter
in
dreams.
Here
in
Australia
and
in
other
settler
societies
one
form
of
wholeness
hunger
manifests
itself
as
the
desire
to
attribute
to
indigenous
people
a
reality
that
conforms
to
the
very
dreams
of
wholeness
that
are
themselves
brought
into
being
by
our
own
fragmentation.
So
these
dreams
get
framed
by
reversals.
Modernity
fragments,
therefore
indigenous
reality
must
be
whole.
Modernity
destroys,
indigenous
people
must
conserve.
Modernity
impels
us
towards
instrumental
relationships
with
others
and
requires
of
us
an
extreme
callousness;
indigenous
people
must
be
kind,
thoughtful
and
knowing.
In
this
kind
of
reversal,
indigenous
people
are
configured
as
a
sort
of
us
as
we
dream
of
being,
when
we
recoil
from
the
pitiless
alienation
that
is
the
experience
of
modernity.303
302 303
ibid. ibid.
Apocalypse
Is
a
Way
of
Western
Life!
Themes
of
apocalypse
then
(multiple)
destruction,
destinies
of
despair,
increasing
disconnection,
disenchantment
and
impending
collapse
are
working
their
corrosive
way
through
Australias
social
order
in
many
forms.
This
has
been
the
concern
of
the
present
project
over
the
past
three
years,
respectively
pre
and
post
millennium
apocalyptic
senses.304
At
the
time
of
writing
this
closing
chapter,
I
must
conclude
that
apocalypse
remains
a
significant,
if
largely
unacknowledged,
interpretative
practice
of
contemporary
Australian
mental
life.
On
23
April
2000,
when
Sixty
Minutes
promoted
its
lead
article,
The
Doomsday
Machine,
with
graphic
title
splashes
of
Armageddon:
Cold
War
Chills,
it
continued
in
a
mainstream
channel
of
communication
the
formal,
almost
mechanical
relationship
that
exists
between
apocalypse
and
Australian
society.305
When
considered
on
the
terns
of
this
thesis,
it
is
an
unusual
headline
to
appear
in
mainstreamed
presentations
and
invites
questioning
of
the
type
encouraged
under
Australian
futures
studies
or
public
intellectualism.
That
typologies
of
armageddon
should
be
perceived
in
the
contemporary
events
of
history
is
common
to
religions
like
Jehovahs
Witnesses,
the
Maranatha
Revival
Crusade
and
the
Christadelphians
but
just
how
resonate
theologically,
socially
and
politically
are
such
ideas
in
the
climate
of
secular
Australia
today?
What
audience
does
the
Sixty
Minutes
headline
appear
to
be
talking
304 305
ibid. Armageddon: Cold War Chills, Dan Rather (reporter), 60 Minutes, George Crile (producer), CBS, aired channel nine, 23 April 2000.
to? What are the assumptions made by its producer and their itinerary of meaning in constructing this particular headline as it relates to the continuing nuclear proliferation between nations? In the programming of the Sixty Minutes lead article, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the imagined identity of the target television audience is tied up in the expectation of climatic ends to civilisation? How so? Television current affairs are more than a representational text broadcast among other productions via a technology of delivery.306 Current affairs programming has developed strategies which can simultaneously familiarise and defamiliarise its subject content in ways not always immediately perceptible.307 Over the course of twenty-one years, Sixty Minutes has tested and proven distinctive techniques for selection, regulation and transformation of its subject. Simultaneously, it has constructed myths about its own internal processes as according to current promotional material Australia's most successful current affairs television program, which continues a tradition of excellence in reporting, camerawork and editing, that presents a mixture of headline-grabbing investigative reports, interviews, profiles and stories on the issues facing Australians and relates stories through the eyes of those involved by writing in a relaxed, contemporary fashion.308 It is these dimensions of current affairs as a consistent and coherent practice bring[ing] the world back home in techniques of production publicly
306 307
deployed
as
fair,
truthfully
representative
and
astutely
aware
of
the
real
story
that
Sixty
Minutes
invites
approval
of
its
continued
broadcast.
That
is,
Sixty
Minutes
is
a
multilayered
textual
structure,
continuous
with
those
broader
social
discursive
patterns
which
Fairclough
identifies
as
contributing
to
the
establishment
and
maintenance
of
specific
orders
of
discourse,309
whose
effectivity
is
intensified
by
publicly
advised
(and
sanctioned
by
ratings)
processes
of
broadcasting
production.
Or
on
terms
of
Sixty
Minutes
investigative
imperative
which
curiously
relies
upon
some
knowledge
of
ancient
biblical
history
in
its
public
relations
don't
cover
the
Great
Flood,
interview
Noah!310
This
is
mind,
what
contemporary
fashion
or
order
of
discourse
is
being
related
by
The
doomsday
machine
or
Armageddon:
Cold
War
Chills?
It
is
the
aforementioned
sense
of
apocalypse
that
is
particularly
manifest
in
the
Sixty
Minutes
article
as
well
as
Australian
society
and
culture
at
the
turn
of
the
millennium.
308
The Team, Sixty Minutes, website, <http://www.sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au>, accessed 25 April 2000. 309 Cook, op. cit., p 61.
The
Twenty-Fifth
Question:
How
Do
We
Depoliticise
Australian
Futures?
unless
every
present
reworks
its
own
archetypes,
its
own
sacred
stories,
brings
them
alive
in
terms
that
speak
to
the
new
times,
then
its
going
to
find
itself
in
deep
trouble,
as
is
the
case
in
the
modern
west.311
That
to
find
the
grand
meta-narrative
or
the
common
dream
of
a
culture
which
allows
that
culture
to
give
itself
universals
by
which
it
operates,
to
have
shared
dreams,
is
distinctly
what
the
entire
project
of
the
moment
is
not
about.
It
is
saying
that
common
dreams,
shared
dreams,
tend
to
be
impositions
of
power
elites
and
potentially
totalitarian
and
we
shouldnt
have
them.312
As
noted
earlier,
newspapers
frequently
use
metaphors
of
shift
and
change
and
re-placement
in
time
when
reporting
millennial
activities
during
the
1990s
and
early
2000.
Commercial
and
popular
media
often
mixes
political
innovation
with
visions
of
a
better
cultural
life.
The
unstated
assumption
behind
this
political
rhetoric,
then
and
now,
is
that
we
cannot
understand
the
forces
and
necessity
of
cultural
change
unless
we
appreciate
the
special
significance
of
certain
(powerful)
moments
in
and
generations
of
time.
310 311
The Team, Sixty Minutes, op. cit. Carroll, op. cit. 312 Cleary, op. cit.
This suggests that Australian national culture and polity is, in some important way, linked to time. This connection might seem obvious in the coverage given to the 1999 Republican movements Its time for a change campaign or in the celebration of national and popular events as they relate to time passed (Australia Day, Anzac Day, New Years Day), but there is more to it than this. When the 31 October 1999 Sunday Show program attempted to manufacture opinion in favour of the republican president model through a 2005 hypothetical scenario, the connection between polity and time is not just a matter of rhetoric or linguistic innovation. It actually describes a key feature of the way culture and cultural change is created, propagated, enjoyed and modified. National forms of time, and the opportunities they create, help shape the culture that is produced. And national politics plays its part in this process, by the support given and the opportunities denied in manufacturing cultural time and change and in the sites allowed for civic response. If experienced time is public, then cultural time is political. The formation and deployment of cultural time acts as a technology of change over a civic body. Australian futures studies would be concerned with what relations of power operate to manufacture millennial polity and culture. In the close of 1999, capital-industrialist ideas of time and tropes of political innovation converged to influence the production, distribution and consumption of culture and polity and cultural and political change in Australia. How does time politicised as millennial affect what is seen and heard, what is composed and created? How do Australian political ideas and values, institutions and interests, interact with notions of time through
mainstream and popular media to manufacture cultural shift and opinion? What networks operate to form millennial anticipation? Can we theorise cultural time in 1999 as Australian millennial time? Is it possible to theorise the political conditions that exercise this formation of Australian millennial time? And did the millennium-future exist before Australian polity certified the fact? These questions like the others are important because of the implications they have for the role of time in the quality and character of Australian cultural life and for the use of cultural time in politics. To understand the ways in which the millennial cultural time of 1999 and contemporary Australian politics converged in an effort to reshape cultural life and polity is to understand in what way the nation builds and rebuilds itself. It has been commonplace to locate responsibility for western cultural time in the date appearing on a calendar because of the associated tendency to decipher the place of temporal meaning as contained in the calendars systemised logic and a popular willingness to view such configuration as sequentially sound and socially relevant. But this tends to downgrade other forces shaping and generating authentic time. If time is thought to be the product of time- keeping practices, it is easy to see how cultural uses of time (in this instance, millennial) come to be viewed as being pre-thematic and pre-theoretical backgrounds to cultural life rather than agencies of it pre-thematic in that the future sense of 2000ad assumed a position of commonplace involvement in contemporary public dialogue and pre-theoretical in that popular
awareness
of
an
imminent
millennium
was
not
largely
nor
actively
informed
by
the
cognitive
interests
of
an
academic
discipline.313
But
cultural
uses
of
time
are
never
for
minor
effects.
For
example,
the
act
of
arriving
at
the
millennium
was
a
triumph
of
collective
awareness
whereby
a
series
of
narratives
around
a
structured
and
fictional
event
converged.
Media
heraldry
of
pre-
and
post-millennial
activism
facilitated
this
semantic
innovation
and
the
new
temporal
locus
(2000AD
plus)
was
brought
into
the
world
by
means
of
language.
In
synthesising
the
heterogeneous,
dissimilar
content
within
the
numerous
millennial
narratives
(including
their
story- tellers
and
audiences)
was
gathered
together
and
harmonised.
With
print
and
electronic
modes
of
communication
eliciting
dramatic
responses
of
celebration,
the
multiplicity
of
events
and
structural
features
of
the
immediate
future
were
seized
all
at
once
by
the
authorial
overview
of
2000AD.
In
other
words,
there
arose
a
formal
agreement
among
the
cultural
and
political
bodies
that
produce
and
maintain
Australias
timing
that
the
millennium
should
assert
symbolic
power
in
various
culturally
accepted
forms.
In
interrogating
the
religious
and
secular
politics
used
within
this
millennial
semantic
shelter,
consider
the
ways
in
which
politicised
time
can
indeed
have
a
profound
impact
upon
the
cultural
life
of
a
nation.
Why
do
political
authorities
become
involved
in
the
organisation
of
cultural
time,
such
as:
the
encouragement
of
millennium
celebrations
or
festivals
by
local
and
federal
councils;
the
push
for
a
millennial
republic
because
Its
time
for
a
change;
the
production
of
policy
papers
like
the
SEQ2001
Project;
or
the
313
David Carr, Time, Narrative and History, Indianapolis, Indianapolis University Press, 1986, p 18.
creation of a Millennium Office within the Department of Internal Affairs? In what way did the 31 October 1999 Sunday Show broadcast of a hypothetical future in 2005 serve political interests? The answer does not lie simply with the political will of individual politicians; it lies both with the changing political economy of culture and time and with the cultural exchange and politicised uses of time. How useful then is it to link millennial apocalyptic time to Australian culture and to make political and media practice the engine of such connections? And in theorising this apocalyptic millennial subjectivity as Australian time, what might be recuperated, re-enchanted, reconciled, reinvigorated and recovered? Australia, the Foresight-Driven Culture? [Each citizen should] participate in the process of taking the[ir] vulnerability into a direction of enhanced activism about creating [their] own history in a just society use the millennium for that kind of opportunity.314 More and more people see the need to talk, to act, in order to create a sustainably better quality of life, not only for ourselves but for our children and our grandchildren. I am constantly talking to people now who are asking not How do we meet our material needs? but rather How do we arrange our activities so that our quality of life improves, rather than just our material wealth? I think the world is moving
towards
a
new
set
of
social,
political
and
economic
realities,
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
much
better
prepared
to
face
this
radically
different
future.
We
have
to
shift
our
emphasis
from
economic
efficiency
and
materialism
towards
a
sustainable
quality
of
life
and
to
healing
of
our
society,
of
our
people
and
our
ecological
systems.315
Do
not
model
yourselves
on
the
behaviour
of
the
world
around
you,
but
let
your
behaviour
change,
modelled
by
your
new
mind.316
What
role
does
'future-thinking'
play
in
Australian
hope
and
expectation?
Can
we
establish
a
discourse
of
ethics
regarding
the
use
or
misuse
of
future
mythology?
And
how
might
we
engage
studies
of
the
future
in
the
historical
and
sociological
disciplines
that
would
see
the
future
as
itself
a
theory
with
very
particular
ideological
and
metaphysical
investments,
an
address
to
the
present,
transforming
it
into
the
fulfilment
of
the
future
we
aim
to
aspire
to?
This
thesis
has
raised
a
number
of
questions
about
the
nature,
direction
and
control
of
futures
thinking
and
it
may
seem
unorthodox
to
close
this
project
with
more
questions.
Yet
it
is
problematic
I
think
to
offer
complete
closure
where
little
is
perhaps
available.
For
this
thesis
has
addressed
the
manner
in
which
futures
knowledge
is
created,
propagated
and
given
prominence
in
Australian
culture,
that
is,
symbolic
processes
of
meaning- making
which
have
been
deeply
ingrained
over
generations.
As
I
opened
this
314 315
Quimby, op. cit. Janet Holmes aCourt, Sambell Oration, The Republican Prophet: John Dunmore Lang, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 25 August 1999.
thesis,
we
must
be
mindful
that
we
are
dealing
with
uncertain,
open-ended
and
value-laden
texts.
This
requires
a
qualitative
examination
rather
than
a
quantitative
analysis.
The
task
at
hand
is
to
become
critically
suspicious
of
futures
thinking
and
to
acknowledge
that
there
are
no
simple
answers.
In
this
sense,
I
have
declared
throughout
the
thesis
a
relationship
between
the
future
and
critical
theory
and
to
suggest
that
a
reflexive
sense
of
situatedness
is
needed
when
discussing
the
future.
When
investigated
in
this
manner,
some
futures
can
be
usefully
identified
as
artificially
narrowed,
representing
a
closure
rather
than
an
expansion
of
options.
Reversing
default
interpretations
of
the
future
is
to
invite
critical
and
textual
attention.
I
have
argued
this
is
a
worthy
activity.
Considerable
utility
can
be
derived
from
positioning
the
future
as
a
text
subject
to
various
desires
and
uses.
In
the
case
of
the
present
study,
from
such
positioning
a
form
of
apocalyptic
thinking
can
be
observed
as
a
deep
cultural
process
guiding
interpretations
of
the
future
for
Australians.
This
springs
from
the
view
that
apocalypse
is
a
persistent
interpretative
process
competing
against
clearly
articulated
and
responsible
vision
within
the
Australian
national
imagination.
In
conclusion,
to
answer
any
question
about
the
future
requires
the
analysts
to
place
themselves
in
a
position
to
see
something
of
the
design
and
construction
of
contemporary
futures.
In
effect,
the
analyst
must
probe
beneath
the
surface
of
hidden
ideologies,
commitments
and
interests
and
unravel
popularly
consumed
futures
and
their
futurespeak
like
future,
2000,
2001,
and
millennium
from
their
contemporary
frames
of
expression
with
full
consciousness
of
being
participants
in
the
same
cultural
316
Romans 12:2.
processes creating them. What this means in practice is paying careful attention to internalised and external processes of socio-cultural framing and editing, inherited world-views, invested meanings, unquestioned assumptions, habits of perception and embedded presuppositions which obscure fuller accounts of social reality, social change and, more importantly, social potential. This is not an unambiguous activity but rather a deep epistemological play in the fields of culture and time.317 It is, in effect, a pursuit of the critically aware, foresight-driven society that is not merely past-driven but reflexively aware of its becoming.
317
Primary Sources 20 Volumes of contemporary theological futurestext comprising 2500+ pages collected from throughout Australia and New Zealand. 4 Volumes of newspaper clippings: secular futurestext comprising 250+ pages. Complete contemporary library of Jehovah's Witnesses publications from 1966-2000 including in-house material not publicly available [200+]. Complete contemporary library of Maranatha Revival Crusade (MRC) publications from 1985-200 [100+]. Complete contemporary library of Christadelphian publications from 1980- 2000 [100+]. Complete contemporary library of Word-faith publications from 1990-2000 [including Benny Hinn, Marilyn Hickey, Kenneth Copeland, Crystal Palace Ministries, Joyce Meyer]. Complete contemporary library of House of Yahweh publications from 1995- 2000.
Bibliography Ackoof, Russell, Creating the Corporate Future: Plan or Be Planned For, New York, Wiley, 1981. Adorno Theodor, and Max Horkhiemer, The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception, Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans John Cumming, New York, Seabury Press, 1972. Afanasyev, V, Social Information and the Regulation of Social Development, Moscow, Progress Publishers, 1978. Alisjahbana, S T, Values as Integrating Forces in Personality, Society and Culture, Kuala Lumpur, University of Malaya Press, 1966. Amis, M, Time's Arrow or the Nature of the Offence, London, Penguin, 1991. Antze, P, Lambek, M (eds), Tense Past: Cultural Essays in Trauma and Memory, London, Routledge, 1996. Appel, W, Cults in America, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1983. Arnold, B, 'The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany', Antiquity, no 64, pp 464-78, 1990.
Auerbach, E, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1953. Austin, J, How to do Things with Words, New York, Oxford University Press, 1965. Bailey, G, Armageddon in Prime Time, New York, Avan, 1984. Baldock, J, Christian Symbolism, London, Elements Books, 1990. Ballard, J, Crash, New York, Vintage, 1985. Balmer, R, Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989. Barnes, Robert, 'Apocalypse Sometime', The Bulletin, 24 January 1995, pp 42- 3. Barthes, Roland, Image, Music, Text, trans by Stephen Heath, Oxford, Fontana, 1977. Baumgarten, Al, Millennial Dreams One, The Spirit of Things, Radio National broadcast, 4 April 1999.
Beazley, Kim, Ashfield United Church, Sydney, 11 December 1999, reported in John Cleary, Millennial Visions, The Religion Report, Radio National, 15 December 1999. Bennett, David, The End of the World or Is It?, Boolarong Press, Camp Hill, Queensland, 1996. Bennett, David, That Year 2000: The End or a Beginning?, in Jason Ensor and Felicity Meakins (eds), End M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, vol 2, no 8, 8 December 1999, <http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/9912/edit.html>. Bhabha, H K, Dissemi-nation: Time, Narrative and the Margins of the Modern Nation, Nation and Narration, London , 1990. Birch, Charles, Confronting the Future: Australia and the World the Next One Hundred Years, Victoria, Penguin, 1993. Black, M, Models, Myths and Metaphors, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1962. Block, M, 'The Past and the Present in the Present', Man 12, pp 278-92, 1977. Block, N, Imagery, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1982.
Boulding, Elise, The Dynamics of Imaging Futures, World Future Society Bulletin, 1978, vol 12, no 5, pp 1-8. Boyarin, J (ed.), Remapping Memory, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1994. Cameron, P, Fundamentalism and Freedom, Sydney, Doubleday, 1995. Carr, David, Time, Narrative and History, Indianapolis, Indianapolis University Press, 1986. Carroll, John, Re-Enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. Casey, E, 'Toward a Phenomenology of Imagination', Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, vol 5, no 1, 1974. Chakrabarty, D, Marx After Marxism; History, Subalternity and Difference, Meanjin, vol 52, no 3, Spring 1993. Clark, I F, The Pattern of Expectation 1644-2001, London, Bok Club Associates, 1979. Clark, Manning, The Beginning of an Australian Intelligentsia, Sydney, Wentworth Press, 1973.
Clark, Manning, The Discovery of Australia, Sydney, ABC, 1976. Cleary, John, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. Coleridge, Damien, 'The Future of the Apocalypse', 21C, Autumn, 1993, pp 50-2. Crawford, Ashley, 'The Ecstasy of the Apocalypse', 21C, Autumn, 1993, pp 48- 52. Crompton, R, Counting the Days to Armageddon, Cambridge, James Clarke and Co, 1996. Csicsery-Ronay, I, Futuristic Flu, or, The Revenge of the Future, Fiction 2000, 1992. Cunningham, Stuart and Turner, Graeme (eds), The Media in Australia: Industries, Texts, Audiences, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1993. Dale, Leigh, Mainstreaming Australia, JAS, no 53, 1997. Dark, K, Theoretical Archaeology, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1995.
Duncan, D E, The Calendar: The 5000-Year Struggle to Align the Clock and the Heavens and What Happened to the Missing Ten Days, London, Fourth Estate, 1998. Davison, G, Punctuality and Progress: the Foundations of Australian Standard Time, Australian Historical Studies, vol 25, no 99, October 1992. Davison, Graeme, The Unforgiving Minute: How Australia Learned to Tell the Time, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993. De Jouvenel, B, Futuribles, Santa Monica, Rand, 1965. Dodgeshon, R, Society in Time and Space: A Geographical Perspective on Change, Cambridge, Cambridge Studies in Historical Geography no 27, 1998. Dublin, Max, Futurehype, Victoria, Penguin, 1989. Edelman, G, Bright Air, Brilliant Fire, Basic Books, New York, 1992. Ekman, P, Telling Lies, New York, W W Norton, 1985. Elias, N, Time: An Essay, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1992.
Ensor, Jason, and Meakins, Felicity, Editorial: End, in Jason Ensor and Felicity Meakins (eds), End M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, vol 2, no 8, 8 December 1999, <http://www.uq.edu.au/mc/9912/ edit.html>. Enzensberger, H M, The Consciousness Industry, New York, Seabury Press, 1974 Fiske, John, Hodge, Bob and Turner, Graeme, Myths of Oz: Reading Australian Popular Culture, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1987. Fletcher, Geoffrey, The Case Against a Science of Futurology, World Futures Society Bulletin, vol 15 no 3, 1981. Foucault, Michel, The Archaeology of Knowledge, New York, Harper and Row, 1972. Foucault, Michel, Power, Truth and Strategy, Sydney, Feral Publications, 1979. Foucault, Michel, Power/Knowledge, New York, Pantheon, 1980. Foucault, Michel, Space, Power and Knowledge, an interview with Paul Rabinow, translated by Christian Hubert, in Paul Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader, New York, Pantheon, 1984.
Frow, John, and Meaghan Morris (eds), Australian Cultural Studies: a reader, Allen and Unwin, Sydney, 1993. Frow, John, Cultural Studies and Cultural Value, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1995. Gabor, D, Inventing the Future, New York, Alfred A Knopf, 1969. Game, Anne, Undoing the Social: Towards a Deconstructive Sociology, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, 1991. Game, Ann, and Andrew Metcalfe, Passionate Sociology, London, Sage, 1996. Gelatt, H B, 'Future Sense: Creating the Future', The Futurist, September- October 1993, pp 9-13. Gimpel, J, The End of the Future: The Waning of the High-Tech World, London, Adamantine Press, 1996. Gould, J, Questioning the Millennium, London, Johnathon Cape, 1997. Grachev, A and Yermoshkin, N, A New Information Order or Psychological Warfare?, Moscow, Progress Publishers, 1984.
Green, L and Guinery, R, Framing Technology: Society, Choice and Change, St Leonards, Allen and Unwin, 1994. Hannerz, U, Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organisation of Meaning, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1992. Haraway, Donna, A Cyborg Manifesto, in Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, New York, Routledge, 1991. Hardin, Garrett, Paramount Positions in Ecological Economics, in Robert Constanza (ed.), Ecological Economics, New York, Columbia University Press, 1991. Harrington, Michael, The Accidental Century, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1967. Hatzimanolis, Efi, Timing Differences and Investing in Futures in Multicultural (Womens) Writing, in Sneja Gunew and Anna Yeatman (eds), Feminism and the Politics of Difference, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1993. Hawken, Paul, The Next Economy, New York, Henry Colt, 1984. Hayashi, Yujiro, The Direction and Orientation of Futurology as a Science, International Future Research Congress, Oslo, 12-15 September 1967.
Hebdige, Dick, The Function of Subculture, in Subculture: The Meaning of Style, London, Methuen, 1979. Heidegger, M, Being and Time, New York, Harper and Row, 1962. Heidegger, On the Way to Language, New York, Harper and Row, 1971. Heilbroner, R, The Future as History, New York, Grove press, 1959. Hetman, Franois, Futuribles, no 24, 10 February, 1962. Holmes aCourt, Janet, Sambell Oration, The Republican Prophet: John Dunmore Lang, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 25 August 1999. Hopkins, Frank, The Senior Citizen as Futurist, in F Feather (ed.), Through the 80s, World Futures Society, 1980,. Horne, Donald, The Lucky Country, Ringwood, Victoria, Penguin, 1964. Hughes-dAeth, Tony, A Prospect of Future Regularity: Spatial Technologies in Colonial Australia, in Ruth Barcan and Ian Buchanan (eds), Imagining Australian Space: Cultural Studies and Spatial Inquiry, University of Western Australia Press, 1999.
Hunter, L, Critiques of Knowing: Situated Textualities in Science, Computing and the Arts, London, Routledge, 1999. Illich, Ivan, Deschooling Society, New York, Harper and Row. Inayatullah, S, Deconstructing and Reconstructing the Future, Futures, vol 22, no 4, March 1990. Interview with Lee Quinby by Rachel Kohn, Millennial Dreams 6, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, 6 February 2000. James, Alison, Jenny Hockey and Andrew Dawson (eds), After Writing Culture, London, Routledge, 1997, p 2. Jones, S, In the Blood: God, Genes and Destiny, London, Bath Press, 1996. Judge, Anthony J N, 'Metaphors and the Language of Futures', Futures, April 1993, pp 275-88. Kahn, Herman, and Anthony Wiener, The Year 2000, New York, Macmillan, 1967. King, Johnathon, 'Ticking Down: 1000 Days to Millennium Mania', The Australian Magazine, 5-6 April 1997, pp 12-18.
Kreuziger, F, Apocalypse and Science Fiction: A Dialectic of Religious and Secular Soteriologies, California, Scholars Press, 1989. Kuna, Franz and Turner, Graeme, Studying Australian Culture: An Introductory Reader, Hamburg, Verlag Dr Kovac, 1994. Landes, Richard, interview by Rachael Kohn, in Millennial Dreams One, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, 4 April 1999. Laszlo, E et al, Changing Visions: Human Cognitive Maps, Past, Present, Future, London, Adamantine Press, 1996. Le Poidevin, R, and M MacBeath, The Philosophy of Time, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1993. Lee, Alison, Discourse Analysis and Cultural (re)Writing, in Alison Lee and Cate Poynton (eds), Culture and Text, Allen and Unwin, St Leonards, 2000. Lucas, J R, The Future, Cambridge, Basil Blackwell, 1989. Lucas, J R, The Future: An Essay on God, Temporality and Truth, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1989. Macdonald, Gaynor, Time and the creation of Aboriginalities, In/Between, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au /history/conferences/inbetween/>.
Mackay, Hugh, Reinventing Australia: The Mind and the Mood of Australian in the 90s, Pymble, Angus and Robertson, 1993. Mackay, Hugh, Generations, Sydney, Pan Macmillan, 1997. Mackay, Hugh, Turning Point: Australians Choosing Their Future, Sydney, Macmillan, 1999. Martin, Julia, Diaries, Time and Subjectivity, In/Between: Negotiating Time and Space, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/history/conferences
/inbetween/>. Martin, W, The Kingdom of the Cults, Minneapolis, Bethany House, 1996. McCabe, Joseph, Australia as a Forecast of the Future, The Lone Hand, 2 October 1911, pp 483-9. McCarthy, Wendy, Summer Agenda, Sydney Morning Herald, 5-8 January 1993. McGinn, B, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil, San Francisco, Harper Collins, 1994. Miles, J, God: A Biography, London, Simon and Shuster, 1998.
Mulkay, M, Science and the Sociology of Knowledge, New South Wales, Allen and Unwin, 1979. Munz, P, The Shapes of Time, Connecticut, Wesleyan University Press, 1977. Murphy, Ffion, (ed.), Writing Australia: New Talents 21C, St Lucia, University of Queensland Press, 2000. Murray, E (ed.), Imagination and Phenomenological Psychology, Pennsylvania, Duquesne University Press, 1987. Murray, P, Christian Art and Architecture: The Key to Western Art's Most Potent Symbolism, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1998. Nelson, B, 'Self-Images and Systems of Spiritual Direction in the History of European Civilisation', The Quest for Self-Control, S Klausner (ed.), New York, Free Press, 1965. Nietzsche, F, Ecce Homo, in The Philosophy of Nietzsche, translated by Clifton P Fadiman, New York, 1958,. Nile, Richard, Australian Civilisation, Melbourne, Oxford University Press, 1994. Nile, Richard, and Michael Peterson, Becoming Australia: The Woodford Forum, University of Queensland Press, 1998.
Nile, Richard (ed.), The Australian Legend and its Discontents, University of Queensland Press, 2000. O'Neill, M, 'The Anthropology of Ambiguity and the Image of God', R Mason (ed.), The Pedagogy of God's Image: Essays on Symbol and the Religious Imagination, California, Scholars Press, 1981. Papworth, J, Small Is Powerful: The Future As If People Really Mattered, London, Adamantine Press, 1996. Pate, C Marvin and Haines Jr., Calvin B, 'When Prophecy Fails: Doomsday Preaching and the Question of Interpretation' and 'The Signs of the Times: Doomsday Prophecy and Theological Balance', Doomsday Delusions: What's Wrong with Predictions about the End of the World, Illinios, Intervarsity Press, pp 15-57. Pipes, D, Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From, Sydney, The Free Press, 1997. Quimby, Lee, Millennial Dreams 6, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 1 March 2000. Rabinow, Paul, Representations are Social Facts: Modernity and Postmodernity in Anthropology, in James Clifford and George Marcus (eds),
Writing Culture: the Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkeley, University of California Press, pp 234-61. Richards, Cameron, The Australian Paradox(es) Revisited, in Ffion Murphy (ed.), Writing Australia: New Talents 21C, St Lucia, University of Queensland Press, 2000. Ricoeur, P, 'The Function of Fiction in the Shaping of Reality', Man and the World, vol 2, pp 123-141, 1979. Rose Bird, Deborah, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. Rushkoff, Douglas, Media Virus: Hidden Agendas in Popular Culture, Sydney, Random House, 1994. Ryan, Simon, The Cartographic Eye: How Explorers Saw Australia, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996. Sarbin, R, and Juhasz, J, 'Toward a Theory of Imagination', Journal of Personality, no 38, pp 52-76, 1970. Sarte, J, The Psychology of Imagination, New York, Washington Square Press, 1966. Schell, J, The Fate of the Earth, London, Picador, 1982.
Schultz, T (ed.), The Fringes of Reason, New York, Harmony Books, 1989. Simmel, Georg, Essays on Culture: Selected Writings, D Frisby and M Fetherstone (eds), London, Sage, 1997. Sjoo, M, New Age and Armageddon, London, The Women's Press, 1992. Slaughter, Richard, The Foresight Principle: Cultural Recovery in the 21st Century, London, Adamantine Press, 1995. Slaughter, Richard, Futures Tools and Techniques, Melbourne, Futures Study Centre, 1995. Slaughter, Richard, Futures Concepts and Powerful Ideas, Melbourne, Futures Study Centre, 1996. Slaughter, Richard, Futures for the Third Millennium: Enabling the Forward View, St Leonards, Prospect, 1999. Spretnak, Charlene, States of Grace, San Francisco, Harper, 1993. Steedman, Carolyn, Culture, Cultural Studies and the Historians, in Lawrence Grossberg et al, eds, Cultural Studies, New York, Routledge, 1992.
Armageddon: Cold War Chills, Dan Rather (reporter), 60 Minutes, George Crile (producer), CBS, aired channel nine, 23 April 2000. The Team, Sixty Minutes, website, <http://www.sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au>, accessed 25 April 2000. Sofia, Zoe, Exterminating Foetuses: Abortion, Disarmament and the Sexo- Semiotics of Extraterrestrialism, Diacritics, Summer 1984. Soja, Edward, History: Geography: Modernity, Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory, London, Verso, 1989. Stambaugh, J, Impermanence is Bhuddha-Nature, Honolulu, Hawaii University Press, 1990. Stevenson, A ,The Guinness Encyclopedia, Middlesex, Guinness, 1990. Strozier, C, Apocalypse: On the Psychology of Fundamentalism in America, Boston, Breacon Press, 1994. Tacey, David, Re-enchantment, The Spirit of Things, Radio National, broadcast, 11 August 1999. Teichmann, R, The Concept of Time, London, Macmillan, 1995.
Tenner, E, Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences, New York, Alfred A Knopf, 1997. Terdiman, R, Present Past: Modernity and the Memory Crisis, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1993. Tiffin, Chris and Lawson, Alan, De-Scribing Empire: Post-colonialism and Textuality, London, Routledge, 1994. Toffler, A, Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century, Sydney, Bantam Books, 1990. Toffler, Alvin, Future Shock, Sydney, Pan, 1980. Toffler, Alvin, The Third Wave, London, Pan Books, 1981. Turner, Graeme, British Cultural Studies: An Introduction, Sydney, Unwin Hyman, 1990 Turner, Graeme, National Fictions: Literature, Film and the Construction of Australian Narrative, St Leonards, Allen and Unwin, 1993. Turner, Graeme (ed.), Nation, Culture, Text: Australian Cultural and Media Studies, London, Routledge, 1993.
Turner, Graeme, Making It National: Nationalism and Australian Popular Culture, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1994. Turner, Ian, The Australian Dream, Melbourne, Sun, 1968. Urban, L, A Short History of Christian Thought, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Veblen, T, The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York, Macmillan, 1912. Veblen, T, Kants Critique of Judgement, in Leon Ardzrooni (ed.), Essays in Our Changing Order, New York, Viking, 1964. Vinokor, Annie, Malthusian Ideology and the Crisis of the Welfare State and John Sherwood, Engels, Marx, Malthus and the Machine, in American Historical Review, vol 90, no 4, 1985. Wagar, W, The Next Three Futures: Paradigms of Things to Come, London, Adamantine Press, 1995. The Apocalypse To be Feared or Hoped For? and Glad Tidings from the Apocalypse, in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 1 December 1999, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, pp 5-8, 9-14.
Deciding for Yourself What You Want to Believe is PRIDE!, in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 15 January 1983, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, p 27. 1999 Yearbook of Jehovahs Witnesses, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Philadelphia, 1999. Reasoning from the Scriptures, Brooklyn, New York, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989. You CAN take it with you (Organisation survive), in The Watchtower: Announcing Jehovahs Kingdom, 1 November 1983, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Denham Court, New South Wales, p 30. Watkins, M, Invisible Guests: The Development of Imaginal Dialogues, Boston, Sigo Press, 1986. Webster, Judith, A Man-Made Apocalypse?, How Australians imagined the end of the world in the new atomic era, In/Between: Negotiating Time and Space, <http://www.arts.usyd.edu.au/history/conferences /inbetween/>. White, Richard, Inventing Australia: Images and Identity 1688-1980, Sydney, Allen and Unwin, 1981. Young, M, Forecasting and the Social Sciences, Heinnemann, 1968.