Their lives a storm whereon they ride


Published on

This paper is the first draft for a component within my PhD exegetical writing and looks at the reflective practice methodology of a PhD by Artefact and Exegesis in Creative Writing

Published in: Design
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Their lives a storm whereon they ride

  1. 1. Their Lives A Storm Whereon They Ride. Lord ByronCarol-Anne Croker,PhD candidate, Swinburne University, AustraliaTheir Lives A Storm Whereon They Ride: Mad, Bad or Rad? “The great art of life is sensation, to feel that we exist, even in pain.” Lord ByronMy guiding motivations for commencing a PhD by artefact and exegesis was thequest for both pleasure found in knowledge acquisition and the pleasure to befound with creative practice. As a practicing non-fiction writer the decision towrite outside my comfort zone into fiction or as it developed faction andhybridity of genre and style allowed for differing kinds of pleasure and at timesdispleasure, where I indeed did as Wordsworth’s critics feel that there was infact no knowledge, periods of confusion and self-doubt.By choosing to undertake a PhD by Artefact and Exegesis model a candidatediscovers very early into the candidature that this is not as simple andstraightforward a choice as they had incorrectly assumed. The disciplinary areaof creative writing and indeed my chosen methodology of Practice-led researchitself led to much displeasure and loss on intrinsic motivation throughoutperiods of the candidature. These periods of feeling a ‘lack of knowledge’ orrudderless-ness inside what I had presumed to be a well-researched andestablished qualitative research methodology brought several periods of actualdespair and doubting of my own academic capacity as a doctoral scholar.
  2. 2. Inherent in this exegetical journey is the dilemma of not simply belongingwithin an interdisciplinary lack shared language, it’s more than that it is aproblem of nomenclature(Croker. 2010); the three types PLR methodologies:Pratice-led researchPractice-based researchArts-based researchVery early in the candidature I was confronted with the problems ofclassification and description, as articulated by Wright, Bennet and Blom(2009) identifying three subsidiary methodologies under the PLR paradigm.Was I intending to do Practice-based research, where my research (literaturesearches, methodological readings, theoretical frameworks, my ownepistemology as feminist scholar and lastly my genre of chosen reading forpleasure) drove my artistic practice? Was I thus to synthesise these researchesand create a working hypothesis against which to test my own artisticassumptions and practices?Or was I using Practice-led Research, where my research (again in these broadareas of knowledge and disciplinary divergence, and the my perceptions of thedifferent theory driven and methodological approaches located within the‘history of social sciences’ (Weber) which then impacted negatively on thewriting of my artefact. Bennett, Wright and Blom (2009:8) suggest that ‘oftenwithout an initial clearly defined question or hypothesis, the research may leadto a formal question or hypothesis’. Here my problem arose with the very natureof PhD candidature where w research question (thesis title is clearly articulatedat the beginning of the candidature and one is constantly attempting toreconcile shifting foci and the over-arching thesis statement of the Exegesis title.Lastly, a final choice that can be identified as Practice-as-Research appearedthe most efficient method of PhD completion. This is defined by in Australianuniversity PhD syllabi as ‘research in which artistic practice is the primaryresearch methodology’ [My emphasis].Again I made assumptions that this methodological framing would suit work inprogress such as community-based arts projects, scriptwriting, screen-writing2
  3. 3. and poetry installations, basically more along the active research model ofeducation disciplines.It also seemed to me (and still does appear to be) the suitable methodology forhighly accomplished and experienced artist practitioners who can develop theirartistic practice in tandem with their writers/artists reflective journals. Theyhave the fore-knowledge of preceding practice to compare and contrast how thisspecific artefact has been influenced by the dialogue between academic researchrequirements, differences illuminated within practitioner diary entries andknown market considerations (dealing with their own publishers and agents).I contend that a novitiate author/artist does not have that first-hand knowledgeof their craft to undertake such a rigourous and formal dialogue betweenresearch and practice, thus a self-published novelist, a blogger or a writer suchas myself, writing outside my own professional dialogue between the two texts.To my discomfort I found that this latter choice often facilitated a very rapidprogression through the candidature with the dissertation/exegesis often retro-fitted to the artistic practice.[Italics my emphasis].This led me to question why one technique appeared more effective/efficientthan the others, particularly the one I had chosen, Practice-based research or atleast at the beginning of my candidature that was what I thought, and thisapproach as suggested by senior members of my discipline was premised uponwriting both artefact and exegesis simultaneously, as if a candidate can simply‘time manage’ the shift between the academic ‘right-hemisphere brain’ logicalorderly functioning and the randomness of the ‘ left-hemisphere brain’ ofartistic creativity.It is the contention of my PhD exegesis that the periods I had earlier identifiedas periods of displeasure and knowledge-less-ness, produce severe periods ofboth academic and artistic self-doubt and potential for loss of intrinsicmotivation within the PhD candidature itself.My chosen Artefact title is Walking with Madness, a story of three womensociety deemed either mad, bad or radical. The characters are each in their ownway ‘mad’ and can be clinically diagnosed within classifications listed in theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (Spitzer(ed)3
  4. 4. c2002). However it is the supposed gender-specificity or prevalence of somedisorders within Western societies that is the ‘metanarrative’ of the story itself,and of my own exegetical writings.I have clinically diagnosed (and constantly monitored) Bi-Polar Mood Disorder,(lifetime prevalence), and can be viewed as all three descriptors; mad, bad andindeed rad, depending on circumstances and how marginalised I am positionedor position myself. Perhaps the most common acronym used in by the academyand medical institutions places me in an even less privileged position in society[and indeed within a University], Bipolar Affective Disorder (BAD).What occurs to me as a woman in academia writing about women in a popularculture genre, how incredibly apropos such an acronym actually is, as a seriousscholar I am being ‘academically’, bad not writing for the elites of the educatedmiddle classes and being forced through exegetical analysis to defend thischoice.Yet I live with this illness, it is the driving motivation behind my PhD, my noveland all my hoped for and longed-for post PhD research. It is/will be my‘contribution to new knowledge’ in the field of Creative Writing; to locate forinterrogation the nuances and ‘baggage’ hidden behind words like mad or bador even rad[ical].Snapshot of Australian Population with diagnosed Bi-polar MoodDisorder.Findings of 2007 Australian National Survey of Mental Health & Wellbeing Lifetime prevalence is 1.3% (0.7% bipolar I; 0.6% bipolar II) 12-month prevalence is 0.9% (0.5% bipolar I; 0.4% bipolar II) chose to have two journals being written alongside my artefact. The first is mywriters journal, handwritten in a series of bound lined commercially producednotebooks, which were then transcribed into word documents to be used as adata set to enable keyword searches and phrase searches within the qualitativesoftware program Nvivo .The second and the most revealing or pertinent to the progression of mycandidature and novels was supposed to be the journal detached from the4
  5. 5. academic study. It is an online Wellness Blog, charting my mood shifts acrossan entire year of my candidature, the third and supposedly final year.As the candidature progressed and life intervened, as it does in smoothacademic study progress when one has career and parental responsibilities (letalone illness issues to keep under control), it was obvious that many entriescould not be posted daily. They were too intrinsically linked to my academicperiods of self-doubt and crisis. They were indeed (if written into the publicdomain) potentially damaging to my reputation as competent scholar andindeed highly functioning professional sane person.What kept me writing was my personal inspirational academic Professor KayeRedfield Jamieson, Dalio Family Professor in Mood Disorders, Co-Director,Mood Disorders Center at the John Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, USA, andher own chronical of pursuing her academic career whist affected by this samemental illness, An Unquiet Mind.(1995)Her success (PhD and Professorship) relied heavily on a supportive workenvironment, understanding colleagues (in psychiatry departments) and herown control and agency within her periods of instability. Thus my extrinsicmotivation was to honour her influence and by successfully completing my ownPhD I could encourage other people with this medical diagnosis.My choice to write fiction/hybrid faction was to give voice, through mycharacters to the experiences of being women marginalised and at timesdisempowered by the gendered assumptions of female mental illness as hysteria,which even predates Freud’s writings in the field,( Webster, 1995) and can betraced back to earlier times when it is proposed that some doctors’ theorised(and practiced) that genital manipulation until orgasm could ‘cure’ a womanpatient her of madness or hysteria and the attitude of many of my own femalefriends who similarly recommended gratuitous sex to ‘cure’ my periods of self-doubt and illness. It is through my blog entries rather than my writer’s journalthat I discovered that my own periods of what was earlier described as ‘hysteria’is more correctly identified as labile mood states which occurredsimultaneously with periods of academic and artistic ‘displeasure’.5
  6. 6. By chronicling these mood shifts I have now discovered they can be directlyattributed to periods of shifting identity positions; candidate/scholar,researcher/trainee academic, educator/practitioner and finally artist/creativepractitioner. I would also like to explore the idea that the much criticised chaotic and random thoughts illuminated by my writing are in fact valuable insights into how the mind of a BMD person functions. What I am always trying to do is to discover patterns and linkages across all apparently random and disparate threads of experience. (Croker [a] 2010)The content of this exegesis will develop further the idea of either madness,badness or radical-ness wrought by multiple identity shifts throughout thecandidature that I propose form the rudderless-ness subjectivity of my chosenand privileged methodology, which might indeed be intrinsic to this form ofcandidature and mitigate against smooth ‘academic sailing’ and academicnotions of ‘timely completion’. This is not the first (nor will it be the last) time that this person in authority undermines my wellness regimes. S/he already openly expresses disdain for the work of my psychiatrist... the wonderful Dr John who has kept me alive for over twenty years now (and that of the wonderful Dr Gerald for ten years before him). Again this is gross misconduct to infringe on private medical treatment in this manner. But what to do... I can only attempt to resolve the conflict in the only effective way I know... by writing. (Croker [b] 2010)By monitoring my mood states on a scale between -5 ,clinical depression, and+5 ; elation or hypermania ;both requiring periods of lengthy hospitalisation, inmy electronic Wellness Blog; I know I am onto something significant withrespect of living with Bipolar Mood Disorder and maintaining a successfulworking life.My wellness journals have provided a wealth or reflexive data from which toanalyse and make sense of my own stressful periods within the PhDcandidature. This to me is powerful writing and communication. For a creativewriter to harness the potential of post-convergence technology is a side benefit6
  7. 7. of my own study and leads me on to knowing in my heart and soul that theExegesis must pursue this topic as a primary focus also.It is my condition that drives my creativity and my productivity and is thus asmuch about the craft of writing as putting fingers to keyboards or pen topaper.(Fry, Redfield Jamieson, Styron). It is also where I feel my greatestcontribution to new knowledge within the academy might lay.Whilst the neuroscientists, especially those at Swinburne’s own Brain ScienceInstitute together with Dr Patrick Johnson’s research within his Social AndAffective Neurosciences Research Unit and Monash University’s studies intoDepression by Dr Katheryn Gilson’s HeaDON project, as well as two otherstudies investigating how music and visual stimuli affect brain functioning, areyet to completely correlate the MRI imaging of brain activity with depressive ormanic states, allows this Exegesis to be yet another piece in the scientific puzzle,albeit a qualitative and discursive data source, (my own blogging and writingjournal).Can we as PhD scholars similarly be our own research subjects and remainethically safe? Is there an inherent risk in adopting the scientific researchparadigm in this disciplinary practice? In the final year of my candidature I canfinally say most definitely there is a risk and one that needs to be confrontedand ethical procedures and safeguards put in place for the creative writer in thesame way human research participants are cared for .Anecdotally people working in the creative industries have (always) articulatedto me how ‘we’ see things differently to so-called ‘normal’ people and there is abody of research investigating whether there is an over-representation of BMDin creative arts practitioners, as yet non-definitive and contradictory (dependingupon methodology, disciplinary field and statistical instruments chosen) area ofacademic research. There are very special moments of magic for creative artists.. It is like holding our breath as a tightrope walker traverses the wire. We know they are trained and have the skill to do it... but it is the fear they might just fall that brings the frissom of excitement and expectation.(Croker [d] 2010)7
  8. 8. At present the science is undecided, but based upon my own self -identificationas creative personality type with BMD, it has been a rich vein of research toframe my own practice and to allow reflective analysis of both my journallingduring the candidature.So without recourse to empirical data I am proceeding under the statement thatI do indeed think differently to my fellow PhD candidates (as evidenced throughmany journal entries, mind maps, schematic diagrams and peer-to-peer onlinecommunications) perhaps best described as being inside the calm eye of thetornado, a temporary period of safe respite.But how through qualitatively framed research methodologies and artisticpractice can we ‘prove’ or at least evidence this correlation?Asd I scholar I see clearly, linkages between the micro (personal) and the macro(nationally and globally) where others perceive none, and often this has been asource of conflict during my candidature, when I was left questioning whethermy fragmented thought- patterns were in actual fact symptoms of ‘madness’ orcould possibly be construed as academic insights. “Men have called me mad” wrote Edgar Allen Poe, “but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligence – whether much that is glorious whether all that is profound – does not spring from disease of thought – from moods of mind exalted at the expense of the general intellect,” (Jamieson 1995[b]:62)I am choosing to use myself as research subject ( in the auto-ethnographicsense), whilst framing my exegetical writing in feminist stand-point theory, as ifso am I still participating in practice-led research or evidence-based theoryresearch and practice? Thus as research subject my evaluations, perceptions andjournal entries are m y data and therefore this research data is beingrespectfully analysed as perhaps radical or even bad, and most definitely fromthe margins of academia (thus deviant) but I refute the mobilising of the termmadness within my exegetical positioning. It is a choice to address notions ofmadness within my artefact as I want to de-stigmatise andunpack the hiddendiscourses at play behind terms such as these, particularly within CreativeFaculties and Industry research clusters of academics.8
  9. 9. In the same way minority groups have adopted drerogatory terms and usedthem within their culturally stamped popular cultures and artistic genres toremove the negative power such denigration and marginalisation occurs in thebroader society.Of course with ‘madness’ there are clearly times for instance the prolongedperiods of clinical depression and hospitalisation which are periods of instabilityand the polarities of my illness which are often spoken of colloquially asmadness even by us patients at the time ,thus is is imperative for both myartefact and exegesis to find humour in the turning on the head such simplisticlabelling.It is my contention in the exegesis , however, that such colloquial labelling isreductive and devalues any insights gained throughout my PhD candidature.Ward, Thompson-Lake, Ely and Kaminski (2008:127) propose that ‘Creativityis typically defined as the ability to generate novel associations in some way.Random associations may be novel but they are not useful, meaningful orappreciated by others.’A similar hesitancy to ‘turn my analytic Eye onto my creativity’ is articulated byBarbara Young (2010:277). By recounting very personal lived experiences of heruse of photography as a creative escape that she describes thus ‘I could feel thecreative spirit entering into me. The world took on a brilliance and, like Young, Icould feel an exuberance driving my own experience in drafting the artefactwhere rationality and self-censorship, the critic voice on my shoulder’ wassilenced by the ‘noise’. For the exegesis these periods which I now know areconsidered precursors to the acute manic phase of my own illness. As Cheneysays so succinctly in her memoir Manic, “ just because I am mentally ill doesn’tmean I am crazy”. (Cheney 2008:51)The exegetical writing and research does afford me a somewhat ‘objective’position with which to revisit my journal entries and look for how they wereinfluencial in providing me pathway through my web of concepts and also aninstinctual sense of when the academics and theorists speak of creativity/lack ofcreativity linked with changes and shifts occurring with affective disorders, itmatches precisely my personal lived experiences. I am able to revsit my entriesfrom an outsider, dispassionate observer position.9
  10. 10. What I can demonstrate through my journals, blog entries and through posts instudent virtual discussion forums (including Facebook) is an often fraught andfrightening battle for many candidates with changing subjectivities andidentities through the Practice-Led-Research journey. ‘Ideas of ‘individual’,‘subject’, ‘identity’ and ‘self’ for instance are largely premised on ‘western’notions of individualism.’ (Chakravararty 2008:12)It is the very individual process of PhD candidature and scholarly isolationcoupled with the chosen solitariness of the creative writer that explains theconstant identity shifts and moments of extreme anxiety which Hecq 2008,identifies as the genesis of the creative act. She describes the anxiety arisingfrom a need for the author to recognise or realign her own self identity when ““…the process of writing itself surprises her, unearthing tensions andvulnerabilities inherent in the event of creation she herself might not be entirelyconscious of.” (Hecq,2008)It is my understanding from my own experiences of mental illness and myresearch that this is a partial explanation, and may be genre-specific, thusneeding further ongoing research. And whilst the positive value of harnessingthis anxiety moment and using the unearthed tension’ for creativitygenerativity, it is often not the case. Given my own readings of interviews withmany writers this does in fact emerge from discussions particularly poets. (Seemy discussion with Les Murray in Chapter 2). It is my contention that thiscreative impulse might be the stimulus for rising out of a uni-polar depressiveepisode, even temporarily for the act of poetry writing.This appears consistent with the findings of what to me represents the mostvaluable research into mental illness amongst creative writers, as the study useda small sample of creative writer subjects but also included a matching ‘control’group reflecting age, education, and sex from outside ‘the arts.’ (Andreasen1987) “ Dr Nancy Andreason and her colleagues at the University of Iowa were the first to undertake scientific diagnostic inquiries into the relationship between creativity and psychopathology in living writer.” (cited by Jamieson, 1993: 73).10
  11. 11. By looking at the findings from this study, 80% of the writers experienced anyaffective disorder, (30% for control group) and 47% respectively for Anybipolar disorder, (10% for control group). Alcoholism and major depressionwere also reported by 37 and 30 % of writers, compared to 17 and 7 % for thecontrol group.The interesting correlation her is the ‘any bipolar disorder’ category, whichwould include both unipolar affective disorder or mania. Yet in the colloquialreports and memoirs of manic people the ideas flow thick and fast but remainless formed and controlled, that would tend to be counter-indicative of thehigher level of functioning required by the rigors of poetry composition.After examining several other major research projects investigatingpsychopathology and artists, Dr Jamieson states that the indication is ; “[T]hat when elevated mood of the treatment group also probably reflects more true hypermania (that is greater distractability, irritability, increases in seeking out other people, and alcohol abuse) than does just an expansive, elevated and creative mood; this phase might well lead to less productivity in the acute phase.” (Jamieson: 139)Thus, for me as a PhD candidate and research scholar, my different polaritiesand mood- states drive both periods of productivity, logical analytical andobsessive self-indulgent periods of navel gazing. The depressive end is a twosided coin in and of itself, one that that generates the anxiety and in this stage itis not possible to be ‘creative’ yet because of this experience of unipolarity itdrives subsequent periods of extreme and almost uncontrollable creativity andrandonmness of mind-mapping and ideological linkages and framings.So is it possible to harness the restraint of this ‘down’ period, can I edit andperform mechanical process, at a satisfactory level of academic or creativenormal quality control which are so reliant upon from higher order thinkingskills? Is the ‘down’ simply a necessary ‘time out’ space demanding pyshichealing and attention to self above all else?11
  12. 12. Can we literally ride the energy of the hypermanic state as a creativelygenerative state or similarly is objectivity in this state simply impossible toachieve? Is this the time to play fast and loose, freeing the impulse to writewithout the editor on the shoulder examining and questioning the what or howof the writing produced. Can this be a time to trust that from the maelstromemerges the necessary narrative devices and imagery?Thus for me the choice of practice-based researched involved numerous identityshifts with corresponding subjectivities:Myself as creative writing tutor and educatorMyself as academic writerMyself as academic scholar/researcherMyself as creative writer/researcherWith each apparent identity shift or clash throughout the candidature I turnedfor solace to those who had gone before, however unlike scholars of Thesis-based PhD’s there exists a comparatively sparse and very disparate body ofavailable successfully completed exegesis. For my purposes the awarding ofPhDs by Artefact and Exegesis has a three decade ontology derived initiallyfrom Visual Arts disciplinary fieldsIn Australia, there still exists no one model of Artefact and Exegetical PhD withdiffering institutions insisting on differing percentage weighting for Artefact andExegesis, and disparity about their needing to be bound together or separatelyfor submission and examination, which preoccupies to this day the annualConferences of the Australian Association of Writing Programs and theirstudent scholar, and the resulting academic articles within the online journal,Text; which in often addresses, debates and questions the logic of internaldialogue between the two documents when divided. (Carey, Webb and Brien,2008).Not only is there no standard definition of what the exegetical componentshould or must contain, there are no clear concise definitions on the actualpractice within the term PLR. Is it years of expertise and a reservoir ofprofessional crafting of creative works, or is it a work in progress being12
  13. 13. discussed or analysed post-production? Could it be a concurrent dialoguebetween the two identities academic and practitioner. The answer to thesequestions and the inherent privileging of one identity/subjectivity over anotherremains an area for further investigation and beyond the realm of this exegesisdespite it being the main thesis question articulated at the beginning of mycandidature. To which piece of work does the fiction or faction section of thetitle apply? And where is the author’s voice positioned? My work suggests hervoice, my voice is situated in many different spaces and within the gaps andsilences between what is articulated within this very text.Reflecting on my journal entries throughout the period grappling with thestructuring and content of the exegesis, and sharing these ‘moments offrustration’ with other candidates I see that there are practices which must beresearched. We need to build archives of strong anecdotal evidence of suchresearch journeys and creative writing endeavours through PhD programsglobally, not just within Australia.Gazing in hope at the shelves of ‘How to write a PhD thesis’ titles did little toilluminate my way through the exegetical labyrinth (Carthew 2009). Whilst ableto discern that periods of data- overload and lack of clarity in ways ahead, aresimilar for both styles of doctoral candidature , I propose that is the constantshifting between the identities listed above , most specifically betweenpractitioner and scholar that form the moments of panic and crisis out of whichseemingly random connections of ideas develop and produce a ‘creative’ wayforward for a student with Bipolar Mood Disorder. One distinguishing feature ofthis idiosyncratic illness is how for me within my hypermanic periods I see linksacross so many apparently unconnected and discipline distinct areas of study. Iperceive a type of ‘semantic web’ of connectivity intra/inter and cross academicdisciplinary fields. The ideas all reflect on each other and the debates andcounter positioning creates a ‘new’ view for me as a Phd candidate. “I constantly see connections where others see none, and this has meant at times I have felt that my own readings and research is growing exponentially and pulling me in too many different directions. Yet in mind (and on paper in my writer’s journal) I have mind maps and venn diagrams seeking to represent the intersections where there exists no usual space for dialogue” (Croker 2009).13
  14. 14. The likelihood of this occurring for me in a PLR research paradigm I contend, ispredicated on the notion that an exegesis is used to reflect on all aspects of craftand writing practice. In my artefact alone I have researched so many disparatefields ranging from psychiatric diagnoses to popular culture theories of thetimes and socio-political tracts and discourses. All form part of the researchphase and inveigle their way into either or both the artefact and exegsis atcertain points. This is where much confusion and scholarly self-doubt can belocated during the candidature.In my own readings ( and Endote libraries) I have journal articles, bookchapters and research notes (over 900) within the following areas ofdisciplinary and professional industry knowledge. All research has beenreflected upon in my research notes within my Endnote library and at timesdemanded a place even in my writer’s journals and blog entries!  feminism and feminist  postmodernism epistemology  phallocentricism  feminist theory and  gynesis scholarship  feminine writing and  feminist research authorship methodologies  madness and Creativity  qualitative research  mediation of text methodologies and theories  authorial subjectivity  ethnography  fictocriticism  autoethngraphy  Creative Industries and  psychology Practice  mythology  Creative Arts within the  literary studies Higher Education Sector  cultural studies  Australian (and UNESCO)  genre studies Creative Industry and higher  market demographics and Education policies publishing ownership  magazine clips , book  popular literature debates reviews, cartoons on Chick  post-structuralism Lit14
  15. 15. Their Lives A Storm Whereon They Ride. Lord ByronFrom these expansive and divergent disciplinary readings an Exegesis needs tosynthesis the affect/effect this has on the actual craft and practice of writing mynovel in no more than 30,000 words. For me this has turned out to be, at theend of the candidature and write up phase the most challenging and frustratingintellectual engagement of PhD study. Why have twenty seven A4 folderarchives of academic theoretical writings just to back up my own evidence andexperience documented first hand. Is this a simply a gate-keeper game left overfrom older models of what constitutes academic doctoral research and if so howcan we as Creative Writing students , practitioners and academics not call intothe question the possibly paralysing effect this ‘hard’ data might have for thecandidate/writer suffering from affective disorders?The ‘shining light’ of breakthrough with the exegetical write up arose out ofwhat now seems like a never-ending period of displeasure and complete self-doubt to my own intellectual capabilities. By stumbling upon the Chakravartytext and Bennet, Wright and Blom’s article I could suddenly see how I as awoman writer working in what remains a masculist institution, the University,within a marginalised and underprivileged disciplinary field how my earliestmotivation of making the personal political has been rekindled and now drivesthe candidature from final drafts through to submission and examination.Freedom arrived with the liberty to no longer feel compelled in this text tojustify PLR as valid qualitative research methodology for the gatekeepers of theAcademe. And in recognition of the first ERA (Excellence in Research Australia)project am I compelled to justify my creative writing and indeed my creative yetexegetical writing tone and style.Freedom also arrived with the acceptance that my creative writing is mine, andits validity not pre-determined by a mass-market globalised publicationindustry and a smaller and vibrant independent group of small publishinghouses. The notion of the Artefact being of ‘publishable standard’ now allowedme the artistic choice to write in the much maligned field of popular genre
  16. 16. fiction. I no longer feel the pressure to write capital ‘L’ literary fiction in thehope of garnering prestigious Industry Awards and professional approbationfrom the literati for my University to use as marketing material and nichemarketing for our discipline.Whereas I had spent much of the candidature felling that I was an acolytekneeling at the feet of my supervisor and esteemed colleagues within mydisciplinary fields, I have positioned myself as expert in my field. I recognisemyself to be an exemplary and respected scholar presenting on national andinternational conference stages, speaking in panels alongside Professors andAssociate Professors in the Creative Writing disciplines. I am no longermarginalised to the non-refereed or general stream of papers and PhD studentpresentations. Similarly, I now referee for one A, B, and C ranked journals (twointernational and one national), and am proud to be writing in the area ofpopular fiction where women of , shall we say, ‘a certain age’ read for pleasureand fantasy fulfilment. Barthe’s obvious intention in writing The Pleasure of the Text was to associate a theory of the text with a concept which had been totally neglected during the apogee of structuralism. That of pleasure. Recently Barthes appears to have exceeded the systematics of his earlier studies (S?Z, Système de la mode, etc) to affirm the pleasure one should take in reading as against the “indifference of (mere) knowledge. (Barthes 1975 cited by McGraw: 943)Another conscious and political choice is tine and voice used for the exegeticalwriting. I propose that by using simple, clear and consider language devoid ofwhat I describe as ‘academese’ it will allow a brooder readership for theexegesis and similarly a broader range of publication opportunities for this textalso.I have discovered that within the last decade corresponding with the ‘newhumanities debates’ and ‘the history wars’ the role of the academic has seen there-emergence as expert commentators, ‘dial an expert listed in corporate homepages, newspaper columnist and public intellectual. Like professional writers inthe marketplace , the academics are now known as talent (as it is known in the16
  17. 17. media industry) and are valued commodities for University branding andmarketing. Thus we must speak in a language that is inclusive and reaches abroader potential student body than ever before, in this era of mass tertiaryeducation provision.It is an attempt to shift the discourse of the exegesis from one of subjective‘naval gazing’ as many critics of the exegesis model have called these texts (Holt2003, as cited in Hemmingson 2008:8), to that of expert commentary andindeed even step into the role of public spokesperson; a person with BD who canand does function at an extremely advanced level of cognitive functioning, withan insight into the subject position of patient/deviant and the authority positionof academic expertise. Thus I am situated both within and outside my ownresearch as is/are my authorial voice/s. I think that some research on creativity and mental illness can certainly help – but psychologists who are interested in these areas should make sure they are not glorifying illness, stigmatizing creative people, or generally causing havoc in the name of truth or headlines whichever comes first. (Kaufman, 2009: 130)Underpinning what I perceive to be simple English writing, is a thorough andfully researched investigation into my own writing practice, as well as criticalreflection on the PLR methodology itself in order to demonstrate forexamination purposes the much-valued and demanded academic rigour, whilstspeaking primarily to an audience of readers who like myself positionthemselves as outsider ’or óther’. Hibernate, rug up and enjoy the peace of winter. I would if I could guarantee avoidance of SADS (seasonal adjustment disorder). Yep, you got it, I am one of those lucky few who were in the same mental health line when the divine being gave out this disorder also. Not bad, huh... I am becoming and ACRONYM... I hear you laughing K & S.... "typical".So I am BMDSADS afflicted or is that blessed? I guess it all depends on how my brain chemistry is settling. (Croker [e] 2010)Within the Artefact, my novel, Walking with Madness I have chosen to privilegethe language of the mass market genre novels rather than the eclectic, poetic17
  18. 18. and allegory found within large ‘l’ Literary fiction. It is within the artefact that Ihope to revalue and situate Roland Barthes concept of reading for pleasure, andnot simply the pleasure of the cognoscenti who share the cultural capital of theliterati. I am writing to and for older women readers . However this readershipis not the sole buyer of what is loosely deemed romance-fiction readers. I amwriting for the woman reader who needs to see her own life reflected on thepage.In the 70s and 80s disenfranchised groups remobilized what had becomederoratory terms flung at their group by the vocal and intolerant of thecommunity. Thus women’s theatre produced the Vagina Monologues with itsovert usage of colloquial and offensive terminology for women’s genitalia in thesame way our stand –up commedians reappropriated terms such as wog, wop,chink and abo. It was political activism and inversion to reclaim the dominantdiscursive space.My novel is unashamedly ‘hen lit’; ‘chick lit’ for an older demographic. Bychoosing genre fiction I am asking through the exegetical dialogue with theartefact if there exists a cultural snobbery at play in the current Australianpublishing industry and indeed within our humanities literature courses andsyllabi? I would to suggest that my novel moves beyond such reductionistlabelling by questioning he role this literature plays in the lives of ourcontemporary female readership and why these novels do not share thesubriquet of airport fiction as do the thrillers and action genres of dick-lit?Similarly by writing what I now call ‘clit lit’ I am attempting to write a femalesensuality and sexuality freed where possible of the phallocentreicity of mucherotic and romance fiction. Whilst not denying the female reader the pleasureand identification with the object of the gaze, I ask if there can ever be written afemale gaze and if so does it also subject the object of that gaze to a subservientposition within the text? Can visual techniques used effectively in cinema beadapted to the written word and then inverted as such theatrical piecesmentioned earlier did successfully and commercially?As evidenced by this introductory chapter, it is clear where the dialoguebetween Artefact and Exegesis became a virtual war of words, a clash of voices, a18
  19. 19. blurring of subjectivities and indeed often destabilising identity construction,deconstruction and re-constitution.How my choice of genre and writing style and tone was dictated to by thesecreative , artistic and scholarly decisions will be discussed as each subsequentchapter looks at particular crisis moments within the candidature whenseemingly irresolvable conflicts were drawn into synergy with each other.To understand my own crisis moments within the PhD candidature I had to usemy own reflective journal and blog entries to identify where my own crises ofidentity and self-belief were located and how they became mobilised at thisspecific time of the research/writing journey. To do this I felt that I needed tocompletely objectively identify myself as ‘data’ in the way my praxis wasdemanding and the feminist theorists have used for many years. Thus I neededto not only lay bare my self-doubts and insecurities as a writer, but also as ascholar and indeed as a woman. Why am I doing this to myself? What do I actually want from life? Is the PhD it? Is the outer suburban University a place I want to be? My fear is that the answer to all these questions is a big fat "No, I refuse to play the ‘game’ and I will through my PhD challenge the validity of this game! (Croker journal entry 2011)The first of these three sites for observation and analysis was the mostcomfortable as I have never identified as creative writer, having never beencommercially published in a fiction market. The first and most obvious site oftension was articulated in the very thesis question driving my candidature, thevoice of the author in fiction/faction. Could I even look back through my manypages of text and identify my voice as an author?The notion of self-identity as writer is the first space where doubt and conflictbecame evident. As a confident and practiced educational writer and non-fictionwriter I made an assumption that the author’s voice is different when genre-crossing into the realm of fiction writing. In my readings were quotes frommany professional authors speaking about their authorial voice and the voice ofthe characters, as distinct voices. Would I as a non-fiction writer be able to19
  20. 20. allow my characters their own voices or would all the protagonists be speakingin my voice?Having been a professional actor I knew the importance of the character voicesounding and ‘feeling’ true and believable, allowing for the suspension ofdisbelief on the part of the audience/reader. But I had always had a director,playwright and sometimes dramaturg drawing from me the ‘real’ from withinthe fiction.In one sense this lead to a secondary crisis of identity, how could I nonpractising fiction writer dare to presume that I could learn the craft of fictionwriting when in actual fact the genesis of my novel’s plot was and remains thelives of myself and women friends of my generation living in my home town andduring my formative young adult years?The much articulated adage that many writers are advised to write what theyknow (in first novels) became my double bind. Did that mean I was no longerwriting fiction but this hybrid flippantly described by reviewers and marketersas ‘faction’? If writing faction whose stories were being told and how? Whichvoice became dominant at which point in the narrative structure or was theauthor voice mine all through as I am/was became all three characters at timesduring the drafting process.If writing hybrid form, or faction, then I needed to also be able to call upon twodistinct voices when speaking about the notion of hybridity and uncertainty; thevoice of the scholar and the voice of the practitioner. Thus, the identity crisisescalated from binary fiction/non-fiction writer to a triangulation with thecraftsperson/practitioner.Notions of whose story became subjugated to how can I allow these three authorpositions, (voices) to find a home within the exegetical component of the PhD?Of interest in my research was the numerous times PhD candidates andpublished writers all spoke of an inherent conflict between the craft of exegeticalwriting and artefact writing, and the need for one to dominate at differing stagesof the candidature. My research also suggested that the ideal candidature inPLR allows for the dialogue between the two with each strengthening the other.20
  21. 21. My identity shifts and insecurities adopting the multiplicity of positions, voicesand even language employed for the distinct components (artefact and exegesis)has become a form of meta-narrative for this exegesis (Stephens & McCallum1998).It is a meta-narrative that follows the unsurprising trajectory fromneophyte/acolyte scholar at the feet of the expert and esteemedpractitioner/academic through, what I perceive to be, perhaps a necessarytheoretical and philosophical split accompanied by a period of instability whilsta new self-identity is being forged, that of the new craftsperson/writer andexpert researcher in the various sites of the exegetical research.Each chapter of this exegesis will examine how this trajectory can be perceivedand articulated at three crucial stages: the mad stage, the bad stage and finallythe radical stage of new knowledge site.The exegesis will chart the mediation between the sense of identity and self andthe various texts written at these stages. They demonstrate a time andpositionality that I can now identify as based upon my own scholarly/writersituatedness within the academy but striving for the market out there. 2011 is time to stop hiding behind the dredged up mask of the clown. It is Act 5 and Shakespeares clown is now calling it like it is and others will see how they underestimated the character of the fool. (Croker [h] 2010)In summary, rather than the exegesis being a reflection on a pre-determinedpractice based upon tested artistic choices and praxis it illuminates a shiftingand transmogrifying academic journey shrouded in the fogginess of thepreviously unknown and unknowable hypotheses from the start of thecandidature.Along the way my characters and indeed myself as author will have discoveredour sites of our identities and what constitutes these (socially and intrinsically).We explore women’s role identity, professional identity, women’s sexuality andsensuality, notions of pleasure, of reading and of eroticism, and women’spleasure to be located within fantasy wish fulfilment found in the much21
  22. 22. maligned and disparaged genre fiction, chick lit’ or in my own artefact perhapseven ‘Nanna clit lit’.22
  23. 23. Their Lives A Storm Whereon They Ride. Lord ByronBIBLIOGRAPHYBlack Dog Institute (The) Findings of 2007 Australian National Survey ofMental Health & Wellbeing (Accessed January 2011), J., J. Webb, and D,Lee Brien (2008) ‘A plethora of policies: Examining Creative Research Higher Degrees in Australia’. Paper presented by Janene Carey at Creativity and Uncertainty: the 13th Australian Association of Writing Programs Annual Conference, at the University of Technology, Sydney, Nov 27- 29. (Accessed 23/03/2009)Carthew, M. (2009) ‘Into the labyrinth. Early career research: the academic journey and the publishing maze’. Text, Vol 13 (1). (Accessed 25/5/2010)Chakravarty, R. (2008) Feminism and Contemporary Women Writers: Rethinking Subjectivity, Routledge. London, New York & Delhi.Croker, C.A. (2010a) ’From the Gloved One… No, Not That One’, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, August 9th. gloved-one-no-not-that-one.htmlCroker, C.A. (2010b) ’From the Gloved One… No, Not That One’, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, August 9th. gloved-one-no-not-that-one.htmlCroker, C.A. (2010c) ‘Spring Awakening’, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, July 1st,, C.A. (2010d) ‘Let’s Go Fly a Kite’, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, July 31st, C.A. (2010 e) ‘Winter Solstice?, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, July 15th, C.A. [f] (2010) Meritocracy within Practice Led Research doctorates in an Era of Quality Frameworks, Quantitative Data Collections and Bibliometrics. Paper
  24. 24. presented at Writing the Future, Tertiary Writing Network Biennial Colloquium, Victoria University, Wellington New Zealand, December 2. (Publication forthcoming)Croker, C.A. [g] (2010) ‘Meritocracy or Metric Minefield’, Paper presented at Strange Bedfellows: Perfect Partners, the 15th annual Australasian Association of Writing Programs Conference, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne. November 26. (Publication forthcoming) (First accessed December 5, 2010)Croker, C.A. (2010h) ‘Vale Geraldine Hoff Doyle, Carol-Anne’s Wellness Blog, December 31st (or in AEST January 1st 2011), D (2008) ‘Banking on Creativity’, The Creativity and Uncertainty Papers Proceedings of the 13thConference of the Australian Association of Writing Programs (AAWP 2008), Australian Association of Writing Programs, University of Technology Sydney, 27-29 November, 2008. (Accessed July 2009)Hemmingson, M. (2008) ‘’Here Come the Navel-gazers: Definitions and Defenses for Auto/ethnography’, Working Papers Series, University of California, San Diego, SSRN: (Accessed January 4, 2010)Holt, N.L (2003) Representation, legitimation and autoethnography: an autoethnographic writing story’. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(1), 1-22.Jamison, K. R.(2009) Nothing Was the Same: A Memoir. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Jamieson, K.R, (1995a) An Unquiet Mind, New York, Alfred A. Knopf.Jamieson, K.R. (1995b) ‘Manic-depressive illness and creativity’, Scientific American Vol272(2) 62-67) (February) (accessed 31/01/2010)Jamison, K. R. (1993) Touched With Fire: Manic-Depressive Illness and the Artistic Temperament.New York: Free Press (Macmillan).Kaufman, J.C. (2009) ‘Does Creativity Have Dark Side?’ Creativity 101 Ch5: 11-139. New York. Springer Publishing CompanyMcGraw, B.R. (1977) ‘Review: Barthess The Pleasure of the Text: An Erotics of Reading” boundary 2, Vol. 5(3) (Spring), 943-952, Duke University Press URL:,B.L. (2004) ‘(Re)locating pleasure in Media Studies: towards an erotics of reading’,Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies Vol 1(2) June.24
  25. 25. Owen,W.J.B. (ed) (1969) . ‘Appendix: Wordsworth’s Preface of 1800, with a Collation of Enlarged Preface of 1802’ in Wordsworth and Coleridge: Lyrical Ballards(1798) , 2nd edition, Oxford University Press,p.167.Spitzer, R.L (ed) (c2002) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) 4th Edition, text revision, American Psychiatric Association Washington DC. USA.State Library of Queensland (2010):’ Female Hysteria’ (Def), Wikpedia (Last accessed December 19)Ward, D., D.Thompson-Lake, R.Ely and F. Kaminski (2008) ‘Synaesthesia, creativity and art: What is the link?’ British Journal of Psychology Vol 99, 127-141.Webster, R. (1996) Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis (Revised edition, Harper Collins.Young, B. (2010 a) ‘The role of psychotherapy in bipolar disorders’. Annals American Psychotherapy Association, 42-49.Young, B. (2010a) ‘The Integrative Power of the Creative Spirit’, Psychoanalytic Enquiry, Vol.30, 276-283.25
  26. 26. Their Lives A Storm Whereon They Ride. Lord ByronChapter 2Madness and: Cliché or Fact? “Men have called me mad”, wrote Edgar Allan Poe, “but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligence – whether all that is profound – does not spring from disease of thought –from moods of the mind exalted at the expense of the general intellect”. (Poe 1850 [unumbered but page 3 in pdf print copy])In many articles and chapters written about the link between creativity andmental illness this quote from Edgar Allen Poe is often invoked to represent thetruism that creative artists indeed suffer from mental illness and that it is thismental illness which is responsible for their creative ‘gift’. In these same articlesand popular magazine columns authors choose to list the ‘creative geniuses’ thatidentify as having mental illness or indeed ‘madness’ as proof of the connectionbetween madness and creativity.Lists including such notable writers and painters as Edgar Allen Poe, LordTennnyson, Hans Christian Anderson, Virginia Woolf, Sylvia Plath, EugeneO’Neil, Michaelangelo, Mark Rothco, Edvard Munch and Jackson Pollack(Neihart 1998) are used to demonstrate a direct correlation between madnessand creativity. And whilst all the creative individuals who populate these listshave self-identified as suffering from mood disorders or depression the evidenceremains anecdotal at best.Perhaps a similar list of creative artists could be compiled of those who do notidentify as suffering mood disorders, and why restrict ‘creativity’ to the artspractitioners? Could not great scientists, mathematicians and inventors begathered into a list of suffers of mood disorders also? And what of the generalpopulation with mood disorders are they deviant because they are not identifiedwith creative genius or artistic production?
  27. 27. I see my BMD as a character trait in as much as I am brunette, have light blue eyes and am overweight. It does not define who I am, however it explains to me why my moods are seemingly unpredictable and I require medication for life, as would people with other, yet different medical conditions such as diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease. My illness is NOT me and I am not my illness. (Croker; 2008)Whilst the science remains divided as articulated in the most recent academicpublication on the debate (Furnham & Nederstrom 2010), I can only claim thatmy research is not so much about whether or not creativity and mental illnessare intrinsically linked or whether for some people diagnosed with mentalillness there appears a correlation between their symptoms of their varyingdegrees of ‘illness’ and their self-perceived notion of their own creative states.In this chapter I am firmly of the belief that in the last decade the predominantdiscourse emerging from many developed nations demonstrates a belief that itis creativity-led innovation for economic stimuli; (Bakhski, McVittie & Simmie2008 ; Bakhski & Schneider 2008 ; Cunningham 2009 ; de Jong, Fris & Staim2007 ; Eltham 2009 ; Haseman & Jaaniste 2008 ; Jaaniste 2009 ; Jacobs 2005 ;Potts 2009 ; Sands & Reese 2008) ;socio- cultural dominance via humancapital ; (Florida 2002, 2005, 2005 c); recognition and sustainability. (Frew2006 ; Hoyman & Faricy 2009)Throughout this period articles dealing with what Paul Stoneman (Stoneman2010) has identified as ‘soft innovation’ has moved the creativity/madnessnexus research into the business and marketing disciplines. All corporationsare now actively seeking individuals who can ‘think outside the box’ as thejargon identifies it. But where is that thinking outside the box and creativitylinked, could it possibly be a re-positioning of madness as less pathologised andcurrently in the process of re-construction under less threatening terminologysuch as divergent thinking? (Basadur & Hausdorf 1996 ; Gibson, Folley & Park2009 ; Kousoulas 2010 ; Nielsen, Pickett & Simonton 2008 ; Razumnikova2004 ; Richards 2001)As a person with BMD having read the academic literature throroughly, I aminterested in the shifting contextualising of certain mental illness symptoms. I27
  28. 28. have witnessed a change in context across disciplinary fields from the earlyrationale for the study of, say Depression, over the years.A number of what became accepted as ‘truisms’ seemed lead the field research.The first was of depressed patient as deviant, requiring medical(psychiatric/psychological) attention and the quest for a cure, or what could bedescribed as normalcy; in colloquial terms, the mad as deviant and to be fearedor isolated.At the same time studies pointed to depression and mental illness as the blackside of the ‘creativity’/artist discourse. This shift I call the shift towards maniacas genius. Deviant behaviour, whether in the form of eccentricity or worse, is not only associated with persons of genius or high-level creativity, but it is frequently expected on them.(Rothenberg 1990:243)Now, I perceive the notion of mental illness being shifted and unpacked intoisolated component parts, resulting in some positive positioning and only withregard to specific symptoms. (Bolton 2008) The quest is to identify (andpresumably genetically manipulate) the gene responsible for the varying brainprocesses showing brain functioning under periods of ‘çreativity’. We are nowbeing ‘invited in ’as desirable link in a productivity chain. (Cropley 2006 ;Cropley & Cropley 2008 ; Dollinger, Urban & James 2004)(need quote mine….)In the academic discourse, we (the mad) are always the subject or specimum forinvestigation in the attempt to identify actual thought processes andassociations at play during periods of heightened creativity to discover how suchattributes can be understood in terms of innovative thinking and problemsolving as desirable traits for society. (Heilman, Nadeau & Beversdorf 2003)(Need quote here)…Who is studying us and why, are the questions that lead my readings across thedisciplines.(Beghetto, Plucker & MaKinster 2001). As it stands I want to knowwhat value is it for us to be positioned inside the establishments and institutions28
  29. 29. of the globalized knowledge economy? Are we now simply another commodity,lacking in personhood and identity? We have basically been analysed to pointwhere creativity is actually stifled or compromised in some way, especiallywithin the discipline of higher education and pedagogy. It worries me that as a culture we don’t equate artistic success with commercial success, that we put art on some elite pedestal. It worries me that we have a perception of art that is not based on how well it engages with its intended audience but only how well it engages a few like minds, and it worries me that it is so distanced from the culture from which it purportedly emanates.(Fisher 2005 [unumbered pages but in pdf copy p:3])One recent example of the business/management colonising of the creativitydiscourse can be found in Affect and Creativity at Work the authors examinewhat is happening in the thinking processes of creative or innovative individualsin order to give a positive value to this ‘deviant thinking’ or ‘creative thinking’.(Amabile et al. 2005)The more recent writings in predominantly business and management journalsand periodicalsBIBLIOGRAPHY Ch 2.Amabile, TM, Barsade, SG, Mueller, JS & Staw, BM 2005, Affect and Creativity at Work, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 367-403,Croker, C.A. (2008) [Unpublished] ‘Writer’s Journal’ Entry from December (whilst hospitalised at Beleura Private Hospital, Mornington , Victoria for a period of medication readjustment and clinical depression.)Furnham, A & Nederstrom, M 2010, Ability, demographic and personality predictors of creativity, Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 957-961,29
  30. 30. Neihart, M 1998a, Creativity, the arts, and madness, Roeper Review, vol. 21, no. 1, September, p. 4,Poe, EA 1850, in, as cited in ‘Manic Depessive Illness and Creativity’, Kay Redfield Jamieson (1995), Scientific American 95(2)p.62. (Accessed January 6, 2011)Amabile, TM, Barsade, SG, Mueller, JS & Staw, BM 2005, Affect and Creativity at Work, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 367-403,Bakhski, H, McVittie, E & Simmie, J 2008, Creating Innovation: Do the creative industries support innovation in the wider economy?, NESTA, London. <Error! Hyperlink reference not valid..Bakhski, H & Schneider, M 2008, Arts and Humanities Research and Innovation, NESTA special issue, November 2008Basadur, M & Hausdorf, PA 1996, Measuring Divergent Thinking Attitudes Related to Creative Problem Solving and Innovation Management, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 21-32,Beghetto, RA, Plucker, JA & MaKinster, JG 2001, Who Studies Creativity and How Do We Know?, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 13, no. 3-4, pp. 351-357,Bolton, D 2008, What is Mental Disorder? An Essay in Philosophy, Scince and Values, Oxford University Press.Cropley, A 2006, In Praise of Convergent Thinking, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 391-404,Cropley, A & Cropley, D 2008, Resolving the paradoxes of creativity: an extended phase model, Cambridge Journal of Education, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 355-373,Cunningham, S 2009, Measuring creative employment: Implications for Innovation Policy, Innovation: management, policy and practice, vol. 11, no. 2, August, pp. 190-200,de Jong, JPJ, Fris, P & Staim, E 2007, in Scientific Analysis of Entrepreneurship and SMEsScales.Dollinger, SJ, Urban, KK & James, TA 2004, Creativity and Openness: Further Validation of Two Creative Product Measures, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 35-47,Eltham, B 2009, Australian cultural and innovation policies: Never the twain shall meet?, Innovation: management, policy and practice, vol. 11, no. 2, August, pp. 230-239,30
  31. 31. Fisher, J 2005, in Alchemy: Blending Research and Creativity. 10th Annual AAWP ConferenceAAWP, Curtin University of Technology, WA.Florida, R 2002, The rise of the creative class : and how itss transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life, Basic Books, New York.Florida, R 2005, Cities and the Creative Class, Routledge, New York.Florida, R 2005 c, The Flight of the Creative Class: the New Global Competition for Talent, 1st edn., Harper Business, New York.Frew, T 2006, The new middle-class meets the creative class: The Masters of Business Administration and creative innovation in the 21st-century, International Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 9,Furnham, A & Nederstrom, M 2010, Ability, demographic and personality predictors of creativity, Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 957- 961,Gibson, C, Folley, BS & Park, S 2009, Enhanced divergent thinking and creativity in musicians: A behavioral and near-infrared spectroscopy study, Brain and Cognition, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 162-169,Haseman, B & Jaaniste, L 2008, The Arts and Australias national innovation system 1994-2008, CHASS Occasional Papers,Heilman, KM, Nadeau, SE & Beversdorf, DO 2003, Creative Innovation: Possible Brain Mechanisms, Neurocase (Psychology Press), vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 369-379,Hoyman, M & Faricy, C 2009, It Takes a Village: a Test of the Creative Class, Social Capital, and Human Capital Theories, Urban Affairs Review, vol. 44, p. 311,Jaaniste, L 2009, Placing the creative sector within innovation: The full gamut, Innovation: management, policy and practice, vol. 11, no. 2, August, pp. 215- 229,Jacobs, D 2005, in Background briefing paper for the Innovation Lecture, Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs.Kousoulas, F 2010, The Interplay of Creative Behavior, Divergent Thinking, and Knowledge Base in Students Creative Expression During Learning Activity, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 387 - 396, viewed January 02, 2011.Neihart, M 1998, Creativity, the arts, and madness., Roeper Review, vol. 21, no. 1, September, p. 4,Nielsen, BD, Pickett, CL & Simonton, DK 2008, Conceptual Versus Experimental Creativity: Which Works Best on Convergent and Divergent Thinking Tasks?, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 131-138,Poe, EA 1850, in, Vol.
  32. 32. Potts, J 2009, Creative Industries and Innovation policy, Innovation: management, policy and practice, vol. 11, no. 2, August, pp. 138-147,Razumnikova, OM 2004, Gender differences in hemispheric organization during divergent thinking: an EEG investigation in human subjects, Neuroscience Letters, vol. 362, no. 3, pp. 193-195,Richards, R 2001, Millenium as opportunity: Chaos, creativity, and Guilfords structure of intellect model, Creativity Research Journal, vol. 13, no. 3-4, pp. 249-265,Rothenberg, A 1990, Creativity and madness: New findings and old stereotypes., John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Sands, G & Reese, L, A. 2008, Cultivating the Creative Class: And what about Nanaimo?, Economic Development Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 8Stoneman, P 2010, Soft Innovation.32