“The role of the storyteller is to teach” – Pauline McLeod

I would like to share snippets of an interview that was published in March 1998 in “Telling Tales” (Australian storytelling magazine) and can be found on the following site: http://www.australianstorytelling.org.au/txt/mcleod.php. The interview is between Pauline McLeod, Aboriginal Storyteller and Helen McKay and is very insightful on Aboriginal storytelling traditions.
Helen: Every culture has a storyteller – how is the Aboriginal storyteller chosen?

Pauline: Traditionally, the storyteller was born into the role. There was also the opportunity for the storytellers to earn their position – learning and telling the stories – this was the traditional way stories were passed on. Everyone had stories, so it was part of the land, their totem, belief system, culture and the community they’d grown up with.

Helen: Who passes on the traditional Aboriginal stories?

Pauline: In NSW, where I grew up, the traditional stories were passed on to the children by the females in the community. Within our culture there’s a number of categories of stories: public stories, sacred stories, sacred secret stories, men’s and women’s stories. A woman cannot tell a man’s story to a group of men and men cannot tell women’s stories – I don’t know the men’s stories – I only know the female, the public, the women’s and sacred stories – stories just for women. Most of the creation stories of the dreamtime are in the general or public storytelling category and are traditionally told, sitting round a campfire. Each region in Australia has their own dreamtime stories of creation – how the animals came into being. I’d say in Australia there would be more than 700 stories about How the Kangaroo Got its Pouch.

Helen: What you are telling me convinces me that much research has to go in to Aboriginal stories before they should ever be told by tellers who don’t have a background of the Aboriginal culture.

Pauline: Yes. As I said previously – during the festivals, people shared their stories and those hearing them, would pick up a story they liked and take it home, adjusting it according to their region. And so, if the region was a swamp region, the creatures would become swamp creatures instead of creatures of the river region.

Helen: I get it. That’s how many of the stories have a similarity.

Pauline: Then you have stories which are shared, like the stories of the Darling River region, which covers the whole area from Queensland to Victoria. The Darling River has river stories, so, up and down the river there’d be twenty or more Aboriginal groups along that region and although they all spoke in different languages, they would have shared some of their stories because of the land links.

Helen: Now I see. It depends what lessons you want to have embedded in the story. Would you tell all versions of the story?

Pauline: Years ago, Aboriginal storytellers would only tell stories of their region. Because of the changes in the last 200 years in our country, especially in my culture, exceptions have been allowed, so a storyteller of one area – such as NSW – now tells stories of the swamp, the river, the desert, etc. That’s how we have changed.

I’ve always been interested in and loved stories. In effect I’ve been trained as a storyteller all my life. If a story just fitted it became quite popular in families. But the thought of becoming a storyteller never really came to me until I reached the age of 30 when the idea of taking on the role of a storyteller as a professional career choice called to me.

At this point, in 1992, I decided to become a storyteller full-on. Up until then I was learning my culture – learning how to entertain people, how to stand up in front of audiences, to shape my voices.

Helen: It was almost like an apprenticeship. What made the breakthrough for you?

Pauline: I was a removed person and when, in 1986, I met my natural family, I wanted to tell others, through drama, what had happened to me and that it wasn’t nice. But Australia wasn’t ready for it at that time. Poetry, talks and things like that were acceptable, but I was an impatient person – I wanted to make changes! We have to bring back the power, the honour and the role of the storyteller in society again. We have to teach ourselves what a storyteller is.

I believe storytelling is one of the most powerful forms of change within the modern world today. If a storyteller knows what they are doing, if they hold true to the tradition of the storyteller – whether it be Aboriginal, Anglo-Celtic, European or Black Forest storyteller, Hasidic, Asian or American storyteller – and understands the power of stories and how they can help people, they then have a credibility in the community.

Storytelling seems to have only become diminished because of the arrival of books and printing methods. The true role of the storyteller is to teach. The storyteller does recite – yes – but the true storyteller teaches the cultural values, passes on knowledge and the beliefs within the stories to the next generation.

To the international entertainers, I say – recognise yourselves as just that – entertainers – but don’t say you’re a cultural storyteller. In your telling of the Dreamtime stories, make sure you understand the background and philosophy behind them – so that when you tell these stories, you can explain all of the – say – twenty lessons for all age groups encapsulated within them. If you’re unwilling to do that research, it would be better to leave them to those who know and understand what they are doing.

This is how it’s done Down Under

I think Australian’s may take slam poetry more seriously than I thought. For example the Australian Broadcast Channel has an entire section online dedicated to the National Slam Poetry, they have online video poetry competitions and feature poetry on their radio stations and on TV

check out the rest of the Grand slam video: http://www.abc.net.au/local/features/poetryslam.
The Sydney Grand Slam Final (National Slam) has a $5000 price and is televised in front of a crowd. Is Australia way ahead of the curve by giving poets so much publicity? I am forever humbled by what poets reveal in front of an audience and the stories they share.

But I have to comment on something. I was looking through the rules of poetry slam in Australia and noticed that they are different to the rules in the USA. Maybe all slam rules are different globally? Does it even matter? The rules that stood out for me were: the performance cannot be more than 2 minutes long, the poems read in the slam must have been written in the last 12 months and employees of libraries or venues are not allowed to enter slams.

I am a little shocked by the rules because they seem a little strict to me especially the 2 minute rule. Honestly, anyone that has ever gone to a slam knows very well that limiting poets to a time below 3 minutes and 10 seconds is a futile act (act least in the states) and is like trying to tie the earth down and stop it rotating. So based on this belief, I am wondering how Australia gets this right?

Oh the drama! I am talking about the drama that comes with the time penalty. If you have never been to a slam it is worth going just to see poets and the audience respond when there is a time penalty. It is truly awesome and annoying or funny (depending on how you look at it). I, for one, have major issues with time and always feel like I have to give up breathing for 3 minutes lest my bodily needs distract from the performance at hand thereby resulting in a penalty. And I have 1 extra minute than Australian poets. What I would give to see how this drama around time plays out in Australia.

I cannot believe that there are poets out there that do not have more to say and do not enjoy standing in front of an audience longer than they have to. Even more intriguing, I think the audience does love the fact that poems are longer in length but maybe this rule actually forces poets to write to the point (??).

As for the rule that the poem performed have been written in the last 12 months. Well that is one rule I can stand behind and even start an entire revolution around. It will absolutely force poets to move beyond their comfort zone and really dig deep. Sometime last year… I was speaking to a poet who happens to perform for a living and he told me that when he was doing slams he did not feel as creative as he did now just performing. He explained that because of the pressure that slams put on him to win he tended focused more on the performance aspect of the poetry than on the writing aspect. He felt that slams sometimes limit the poet – they tend to only perform the poems that they know the audience like and very rarely perform new work.

I remember watching “Brave new voices” and one of the teams was struggling with this – whether to perform poetry that the audience would like or to perform controversial poetry that may not get rated as high. At first, I did not think much of this dilemma but as I started performing more in slams and watching them I started to notice that poets tend to perform the same poetry over and over again. I get it – this is safe and risk free; everyone knows the poetry and can get behind it but is this the role of the poet? I believe the reason that we become poets is to tell our stories and touch others with similar stories. The performance is spectacular, no doubt but a poet is also a writer. I do worry because to take the writing aspect to the next level poets have to let others hear their new work regardless of the points.

As for the other rules about venues and being unable to be part of the national slam if you work for the library. I think that is nuts. I think people are likely to work in a library if they are writers or poets (because they love books and reading and its a part time job), hell in the US librarians have their own slam sessions. What’s the relevance of this rule since the judges are chosen randomly from the crowd? Is this just an Australian thing?

Baby talk: can gaga lead to good speech?

Why does almost every culture have baby talk as a form of communicating to babies? Why is tone and emotion important when speaking and what does this have to do with babies? Why are some people good at baby talk and others not even capable of it? It has been my experience that people take a hard stance on this topic – baby talk is either good or bad.

A few days ago, I was invited to a friend’s house for lunch with her and her baby, who is just the most adorable thing I have ever seen. The last time I saw the baby he was not really into talking or saying anything but this time he was all about talking except none of us could understand him (even his mom who sometimes hazarded a guess).

It was interesting to observe how language is formed in babies – it was clear that the baby was trying to talk to us but did not have the words to put across his thoughts. I kept wondering how we must seem to him and how it must be to be in a world where you think and want something but cannot voice it because there are no words. It’s kind of like explaining fire to the first people on earth.

In my determination to help the little fellow I refused to use baby talk because I believed that it would only prolong the ordeal – it made no sense to break down and distort words that he was trying to learn. As far as I was concerned this was a sure fire way to cause confusion and also disrespect him by treating him as slow. It turns out my thinking was wrong.

According to scientists (Thiessen’s study) stretching words and singing them and breaking them up actually helps babies learn words more quickly than if you spoke to them like an adult. Babies actually prefer this and develop faster because of it. Why is this?

Have you ever said something to someone and then have them turn around and be sully because of the way that you said it? Well that’s because of your tone and this is something babies are sensitive too as well. When adults speak to babies in baby talk they tend to be extremely emotional, more involved and less monotone. Babies respond to the tone of the speaker and from this tone start to learn how to analyze human emotion, except babies tend to prefer tones that are pleasant and happy; they do not respond well to depressed people that speak to them.

The monotonous nature and lack of passion or hyper emotion in grown up conversations is also what makes it hard to learn a new language as an adult – because you cannot hear the pronunciation.

The lesson from this lunch was that it’s not what you say but how you say it that matters. Emotion and passion are everything if you want to make an impact, even on babies.

"There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come"

I quoted Victor Hugo above because I keep thinking that in the world over people are discussing hope and freedom and there appears to be a need to believe in the best outcome for everyone. I think maybe the idea whose time has come is the idea of a better world filled with respect, freedom and boundless hope. I found a website today that has some amazing Aboriginal poems (the reference is at the bottom) and I wanted to share one poem with everyone because it spoke of the things that I feel sometimes… The quest for hope is universal and is something anyone can appreciate on some level. It was in Matrix that I first heard the quote: “Hope is the most futile of all human emotions”; as I continue through life I learn that it is hope that keeps me going.

A Song of Hope by Kath Walker

Look up, my people,
The dawn is breaking
The world is waking
To a bright new day
When none defame us
No restriction tame us
Nor colour shame us
Nor sneer dismay.

Now brood no more
On the years behind you
The hope assigned you
Shall the past replace
When a juster justice
Grown wise and stronger
Points the bone no longer
At a darker race.

So long we waited
Bound and frustrated
Till hate be hated
And caste deposed
Now light shall guide us
No goal denied us
And all doors open
That long were closed.

See plain the promise
Dark freedom-lover!
Night’s nearly over
And though long the climb
New rights will greet us
New mateship meet us
And joy complete us
In our new Dream Time.

To our fathers’ fathers
The paid, the sorrow;
To our children’s children
the glad tomorrow.

Ref: http://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/arts/aboriginal-poems.html

And we all came to testify our sins and seek absolution

On Sunday I went to a Baptist church and it was interesting for me because I do not think I have ever been in a Baptist church before, bearing in mind of course that I very rarely go to church and can count on my hand the number of times I went in the last decade, but on the times that I do go I happen to get a lot out of the service and sometimes feel like the preacher is talking to me. And this past Sunday was no different.

Anyway, I went to church because a friend of mine (she had also never been to a Baptist Church) asked me to go and well, I was delighted because it was something new. Anyway, I am glad I did because it gave me an opportunity to observe the old fashioned religious form storytelling better known as testifying. Understand, I love people testifying because I love inspirational life stories and hearing about the way dismal situations were turned around for the better always gives me shivers and makes me want to do something great in turn (of course this only happens if the story is relayed really well). Yeah, I have some crazy outlooks!

This Sunday though was different because when the time came for people to go up and testify, my friend who had never seen anything like it before turned to me afterwards and said, “Van, its the concept of Speak 2B Free only in church.” I was amazed because I had not even thought about it but then she explained that the people testifying were speaking 2B free of all that they were fighting and had fought and were releasing all that pent up suffering and pain and sharing it with others to be light and receive healing energy. She explained that the Speak 2B Free website was going to give a virtual performance arena and that people would do the story telling through poetry. To be honest that was profound because I don’t think I would ever have made the connection (at least not in the next few months).

That’s because I see testifying as sacred – it’s almost like there is a physical exchange of energies – negative energy leaves the body through the voice and positive energy is drawn from the congregation. It is interesting but this is true. Even when you think of confession – it is speaking 2B free or 2B forgiven but both boil down to the fact that we are taught to use the art of speaking as a way to lighten our burdens and cleanse our souls and even rid our sins. But then that begs the question: does the act of speaking literally release us from our demons? Why? Apart from what we have been taught- why do we believe (even I do after all i was raised catholic even if I am Buddhist now) that telling (through speech) a priest our sins absolves us?

Login