THE ELEPHANT AND SOCIETY

New Zealand Listener, Volume 19, Issue 490, 12 November 1948, Page 7

THE ELEPHANT AND SOCIETY

b Bod talk which we reprint below was broadcast on Sunday evening, October 31, by DR. D. DAICHES RAPHAEL, M.A., D.Phil., who thas occupied the Chair of Philosophy at Otago University for the past three years. He entitled it "Some Reflections on New Zealand"+and in the belief that what he had to say merits further reflection by New Zealanders we offer our readers the full text.

HREE years ago I was appointed to the Chair of Philosophy at Otago University. I have lately resigned that position, and shall shortly be ‘leaving to take up a Lectureship at the University of Glasgow. To-night I’m going to think aloud about New Zealand, but perhaps you might like me to begin by saying why I decided to come to New Zealand and why I am now going back to Britain. Well, it was partly a matter of chance that I came to New Zealand at all. The

Chair of Philosophy at Otago University happened to be advertised at a time when the war was coming to an end and I was consequently looking forward to leaving my war work and returning to the teaching of philosophy. But that isn’t the whole of the story. I wouldn’t have applied for a philosophy job in any country, but when the Otago position was advertised, I reflected that if I wanted to visit a British Dominion, New Zealand was the one. I didn’t want to go to something very different. from ‘Britain, and New Zealand is, of course, in many ways rather like the British Isles. The climate was said to be better, and that sounded attractive. But, more important to my mind, New Zealand attracted me, first because of its progressive social legislation, and secondly, because the relations between the European population and_ the Maoris seemed so much better than the relations. between white and coloured people anywhere else in the world. So much for the reasons why I came. Why am I going back? Well, you may have noticed that I spoke of "visiting" a Dominion. I never imagined that I would want to stay there. I like Britain and Europe too much to say farewell to thém for ever, and I always anticipated that I would go back after a few years. I hadn’t expected to return quite so soon, and in some ways I am sorry that my stay in New Zealand has been so short, But the opportunity to return was offered to me, and it seemed wise to take it while it was going. I am particularly sorry that I haven't been able to see more of the New Zealand countryside and its wonderful scenery. But on the other hand, if I had stayed much} longer, I should have found myself: even more reluctant to leave than I am now.

So perhaps it is just as well that I am _ going before the pang becomes too painful; for I have no doubt that my roots are im Britain and _ in Europe. Most people

like best the places they grew up in. That, in short, is why I am going back. No Seasons Here I have mentioned to you the reasons which made New Zealand seem attractive to me when I contemplated coming here, and you may want to know whether I found that the country came up to my expectations. Broadly, yes. The climate is undoubtedly better than that at home. Mind you, it takes a bit of getting used to. I found the sudden and violent changes very trying at first. It’s true that. England is a lot colder and has less sunshine, but when it’s cold in England you know it’s cold and it stays cold. You pile on your winter woollies and you keep them on. But in New Zealand you have to be ready to change your clothes at an _ hour’s notice. In winter it can be very hot in the afternoon, and in summer it can be jolly cold at morning, noon, or night. You never can tell. There aren’t any seasons really. In England we always think of the antipodean Christmas as an affair of ice-cream on the sea shore, but I soon found that in Dunedin at least it. isn’t very different from the English Christmas. But all the same, I think the Dunedin climate is good, whatever people in the North Island may say. The summers are disappointing, but the winters are beautifully mild, and the autumns are lovely. Likewise, I find the general social

atmosphere at least as good as I had anticipated. I was glad to see a decent basic wage, good standards of housing, and, roughly speaking, as near an approach to equalitarianism as we are likely to get in this imperfect world. It was good to find the tram conductors talking to me freely about my job, and telling me about theirs, looking on me as a potential friend and expecting me to reciprocate. All this, I think, is fine. But I must confess that I was a bit disappointed in the Social Seeurity legislation. The spirit behind it is. rather different from what I expected. You see, in England, the Beveridge Report was the response to a genuine and widespread feeling of wanting to make a better society-a spirit of idealism, if you like, though I don’t want to.exaggerate its extent. Now I had expected to find an even stronger spirit of idealism behind the New Zealand social security legislation, because that hadn’t needed a war to bring it about. But in fact, it seems to me, Social Security in New Zealand has a rather individualistic, almost slightly selfish, feeliig behind it. Maybe I’m doing New Zealanders an injustice in saying this. Anyway, I consider that the effect of Social Security is on the whole good, though I do think some

features of its administration weaken initiative and could be improved without any essential loss of the over-all advantages. New Zealand Has Been Lucky The relation of the New Zealander to the State is a very interesting one. He is far less suspicious of State interference than the Western European is apt to be, far more ready to turn to the State when a job needs to be done. This difference of attitude is not due to any deep-seated difference of temperament. I think it is purely the result of historical and geographical facts. The history of government in Europe is filled with memories of tyranny and oppression; the New, Zealander has been more lucky, simply because his community and its government only came into existence in the 19th Century. That is the historical factor, The geographical one is this. New Zealand is a fair-sized country inhabited by an incredibly small number of people, often scattered in tiny villages and solitary homesteads; consequently, many of those people wouldn’t get-:common services if they were not centrally planned and largely financed from central taxation; it wouldn’t pay private enterprise to provide such services. Thus a certain amount of central planning in New Zealand is inevitable, and there is no dark history to give warning of the dangers of too much centralised control. So the New Zealander takes Government control for granted, and whenever a new task is called for he looks to the Government to take it on. André Siegfried noted this in his book Democracy in New Zealand, written at the beginning of the century, but I don’t think he appreciated its causes. And likewise I don’t think they are appreciated by those people abroad who de-. scribe New Zealand as a "laboratory of social experiment." A laboratory is a place where you try out experiments with the idea of using them outside on a large scale if they are successful. Now if you jigger about with a chemical in a test-tube, it behaves in the same way as it would in a large container. But. that’s not true of people. Social institutions that work in New Zealand won't necessarily work. in other parts of the world where you don’t have the same conditions repeated. The social conditions peculiar to New Zealand are a small population in a goodsized and highly productive country, as the result of which New Zealand has to have a certain amount of central planning and can afford expensive a tration. Now of course the ordinary Nees Sian lander doesn’t bother his head much (continued on ' next page)

The Elephant and Society’ «

(continued from previous page) about thig business of the State in relation to certain aspects of his life, He takes it for granted when it works reasonably well, and no doubt wouldn’t stand for it where it worked badly. And that’s a sensible attitude to take to political and economic institutions. But there is a considerable section of the New Zealand "intelligentsia" who look ‘at these things in a doctrindire sort of way. Because State control. has worked well in some things, they think it must be right for everything, including the things that are expressions of individuality and so are best left to grow up according to individual bent with the richness that comes from variety. I mean such things as education and the arts. I always think of

the self-appointed "intelligentsia Of New Zealand as "The Elephant and Society." I expect most of you have heard the joke about the Englishman, the American; and the Frenchman who were asked to write about the elephant. The Englishman entitled his effort, "Hunting the Elephant"; the American, of course, wrote about "Bigger and Better Elephants"; while the Frenchman produced a dainty pamphlet on "The Love-Life of the Elephant." The traditional story dees not include a New Zealander in the party, but if a New Zealander were added I have no doubt what his title would be: "The Elephant and Society." Of course we are talking of the class of New Zealanders who go in for writing and such-like activities. Ask them to give a lectyre to a literary club, and they announce "Literature and Society." If they give a radio talk on the cinema, it is entitled "The Film and Society." And so on, ad nauseam, I don’t so much mind their excessive concern with society (I share that vice myself), but I wish they would show a little originality in their titles. 'As a matter of fact, the content of the lecture or talk has often little or nothing to do with society, but still the good old title pops up. It’s expected, you see, "the done thing," like wearing evening dress in Dunedin on the slightest pretext. "Creative Writing" All this is a symptom of the one-track thind, of the lack of that variety and originality which should be the essential characteristic of culture. Now just look at New Zealand writers. Instead of getting on with the job, they spend three-quarters of their time wrestling with their consciences as to whether they are producing a native culture and as to what direction New Zealand literature’ should take, Meanwhile, New

Zealand literature stands still. But it’s a serious business, is writing ("creative writing" is the current pet-phrase). And, like any’ other serious matter, they think it should come under the State. So far’ they have only got to the stage of asking for State support, but sooner or later they’ll ask the State to set up tribunals to tell them what to do. We are continually informed that a New Zealand author can’t make a living from his writing, Well, how many authors elsewhere make a living. that way? And why should they expect to do so? The really good writer writes because he has something to say, something that won’t stay bottled up but has to come out, not because he decides to earn a living by it. And in fact, if you look at the

New Zealand writers who really have sot something to say, you find that they get on with it in their spare time, while earning their living by doing an ordinary sort of job. ‘They get on with it, and don’t talk so much about it. It is generally recognised that New Zealand culture does not reach a very high standard by comparison with European countries. But at the same time I want to add that the standard of culture that is reached has a wider spread than in Europe, or at any rate wider than in England. If you took a typical small English town comparable to Dunedin, you wouldn't find anything like so many people interested in good music, higher education, and so on. You might find a few who reach higher standards of culture-though actually I doubt that too, for those higher standards are mainly confined to a few centres like London, Oxford, Cambridge, and Edinburgh. The reasons why New Zealand does not reach a higher standard .of culture are isolation and small population, You can’t do much about the isolation, but you can do something about immigration of larger numbers if you really want to. Well, of course, there’s a lot more to talk about, but I haven’t time, Although I have criticised and poked fun at one or two things, \I hope you will have gathered that my general impression of New Zealand is a very favourable one, For the ordinary man New Zealand is probably the best place on earth. I shan’t forget New Zealand, and when I get back to .England I expect I shall look at things there with new eyes, with a New Zealander’s eyes. For I have become quite a bit of 4 New Zealander myself in my three years here-and_I think I’m the better for it. : -_