- What is most importantfor a vital, fertile,regenerativecul-
tural ecologyis a healthyculturaleducationsector.However,
Holdenwarnsagainsta ‘spillover’model:the idea that aca-
demicscholarshipand writingtrickledown into criticism
and talent developmentin a unidirectionalflow. Instead,he
encouragesus to understandthe complexand multifarious
feedbackloops and systemsthat work inbothdirections
between educators, scholars and critics and filmmakers.^36
Film criticism, film studies, film culture
Wheredoes this ecologicalmetaphorget those of us who
work in the film-culturesphere?On one hand, it gives us
a way to think about and articulatemore clearlythe signifi-
canceof the film-criticalwork that we do. In the academy,
this is important,as film scholarsincreasinglyneed to justify
researchand teachingin terms of the currentimpactand en-
gagementagenda.Often,scholarswill considertheir extra-
curricularactivitiesas the ‘engagement’part of their work and
their scholarshipas somethingelse; this distinctionhelps us
recognisethe importanceof the differingdiscoursesenabled
by both film criticismand film studiesand argue for them. On
theotherhand,asanacademicwhowritesacrossscholarly
and criticalgenres,I find that Holden’secologicalmodelhelps
me to think in more flexibleand open ways about what I write
and how I write. That imageof an enormous,networkedweb
of interrelationshipswith two-wayfeedbackloops reminds me
of how I both feed and am fed by those networks.
Holdenstressesthatthehealthof a systemcanbeassessed
by lookingat the ‘numberand density’of its relationshipsand
cross-fertilisationsfrom multipleinputs.As culturalecologies
are so complex– and their connections,so dense– that it
is impossibleto fully grasp them, he proposesmappingout
these flows and interdependenceson the small scale of local
ecologies.^37 This kind of mappingwouldgive a completelydif-
ferent picturethan the quantitativemethodsinformingScreen
Australia’sinvestigations.In a great exampleof this kind of
mapping(whichalso brilliantlyexposeswhat is missingfrom
theScreenCurrencyreport),a 2018 essay by film critic Adrian
MartinlaysoutthevibrantculturalecologiesofMelbournein
the 1980sand the creativeoutpouringsgeneratedby the com-
plex interactionswithin this local culturalscene.^38 Wecantrace
backtothisecologythefoundations for Film Victoria’s ongoing
prioritisingof film culture.
Given the agenda-settingrole of ScreenAustralia,it is im-
portantto questionthe terms of referenceof its milestone
cultural-valuereport,as the questionswe ask determinethe
answerswe are going to get. A standardcritiqueis that, under
the ‘tyrannyof metrification’(as Meyrickand his co-authorsde-
scribeit), resourcesare channelledto what can becounted.^39
If the assessmentof culturalvalue focuseson quantifiable
measuresof productionand distribution,and ignoresthe ways
that productionand distributioninterlockwith film education,
criticismandbroaderculturaldebate,thedefaulteconomic-
rationalistapproachwouldentail the sideliningof these fertile
screen-cultureecologies.But, as critic Peter Thompsonhas as-
serted,culture‘is not an optionalextra [...] Cultureis oxygen.’^40
Norcanweignorethemyriadwaysthatthesegovernment-set
agendasintermeshwith shiftingprioritiesin film trainingand
education,asvocationallyorientedcurriculafocusincreas-
ingly on buildingskills and product.Holden’sunderstanding
of the crucial role of complex ecologies starkly exposes theshortcomingsofsuchtendenciesbyinstitutionsdevotedto
film educationand training,whosemodelof a culturalenviron-
ment is like a petri dish – a sterile culturingsystemin a lab. Yet
whatweneedis a microbiome:a bubbling,thrivingmultitude
of complex,competitiveand symbioticinterminglingand cross-
fertilisingrelationships– a fermentof ideas. Of courseit is im-
portantto train talent,but we shouldnot think of talent without
the field, the creativeproductwithoutthe discursivesphere.
Just as a courseon writingfictionis best servedby the
requirementthat studentsread fictionand literaryanalysis,or
musictrainingis enrichedby the study of the existingmusi-
cal canonand relatedtheory,we need film curriculaunder-
pinnedby a seriousconsiderationof wherecinematicideas
come from and how they circulate.By extension,we need
to challengeany approachthat placessubstantialemphasis
on practicewithoutaccompanyingengagementwith con-
ceptualresearchand developmentas well as contemporary
discourse;this especiallyappliesto film production,distribu-
tion and exhibitiontoday.Film cultureaffordsus a diverse,
ongoingarchivethat offers filmmakersand film consumers
kernelsof future innovation,so the neglectof film culture–
of the ways that education,artisticengagement,debateand
criticismsustainthe industry– feels like an affrontto the gen-
erationsof film scholars,criticsand creativeswho, since the
beginningof cinema,have reflectedon what the artformis,
howit worksandwhatit could be: to intervene in and nurture
a dynamicfilm culture.
TheScreenCurrencyreport offers no conceptionof a film-
culturesector– of contextswithin which ideas are generated,
fermentedand disseminated– nor does it give a sense of what
an aestheticfield might be, or of the reasonsthat thecountry’s
pre-eminentscreenagencymight considerall of these impor-
tant. In our bid to value ‘Australianstorytelling’,however,
shouldwe not also be fosteringan appreciationof, better
engagementwithandinnovationwithinthemodesofstorytell-
ingthemselves?Aslongastheframeworkforunderstanding
culturalvaluefocusesonquantitativemetricsandindustryout-
comesonly, we will continueto overlookthe vital role played
by film culturein keepingthe screenindustrieshealthy.As
Holdenremindsus, the screensectoralso has a role to play
in creatingand sustainingits own audiences.Withouta vibrant
fermentof ideas about film, televisionand digitalmedia,on
theirownterms,fuelledbycriticalwriting,debate,education,
and the trainingof future film and screenworkers,we cannot
realise the full potential of Australia’s screen sector.This article has been refereed.AnneRutherfordis associateprofessorin cinemastudiesat
WesternSydneyUniversity.Sheis theauthorofWhatMakesa
FilmTick?:CinematicAffect,MaterialityandMimeticInnervation
(2011),and her publishedessaysincludework on aestheticex-
periencein cinemaandonAustraliancinema.Shewouldliketo
thanktheAFIResearchCollection for assistance with access-
ing resources for this article. mEndnotes(^1) DeloitteAccessEconomics,WhatAreOurStoriesWorth?
MeasuringtheEconomicandCulturalValueof Australia’s
ScreenSector, 2016,availableat https://www.screen
australia.gov.au/getmedia/13dceb59-0a88-432f-adb3-958fc
c04e6bb/Deloitte-Access-Economics-Screen-Currency.pdf,
accessed 2 June 2019.
124 • Metro Magazine 201 | © ATOM