Multilingualism and the arts: Introduction

Multilingualism is implicated in the arts in very many ways. The connections between the two are extremely diverse and have yet to be explored or categorised in any comprehensive manner. Among the different aspects which can be identified, one can list the following:

The papers collected here, most of which were presented in an earlier form at the International Symposium on Bilingualism in Oslo in June 2011, obviously cannot attempt to cover all these issues, though several of them impinge on more than one of the areas above. An attempt has been made to be representative, if not comprehensive, through the inclusion of papers on several different art-forms: on literature (Tannenbaum), on theatre (Jonsson), on music (Tokita), on visual art and letters (Gardner-Chloros) and on ‘Metrolingual Art’ (Jaworski), which straddles various media. Research on these issues is, generally speaking, less well developed in relation to arts other than literature, and one of the purposes of this volume is to suggest that the ramifications of multilingualism deserve to be investigated in the non-literary arts also. Although this can most obviously be done in relation to issues (iii) and (iv), it is also the case that concepts originating in linguistics, such as code-switching, which concerns (i), (ii) and (iii), can be extended to other fields, including visual art, music and choreography (Friedman & Moana Te Rangitakina Ruha Gwynne, 2008; Gardner-Chloros, 2010; Hioki, 2011; Tokita, this volume).

The first paper, by Michal Tannenbaum, is about a case of ‘Translingualism’, which refers to writing in a language other than your mother-tongue or main language. Tannenbaum takes the case of Arab writers in Israel, several of whom choose to write in Hebrew rather than in Arabic. Although Arabic is also an official language, it is nevertheless hierarchically disadvantaged compared with Hebrew and carries associations of alienation or discrimination. These writers’ use of Hebrew therefore goes beyond the widely noted advantage of writing in another tongue, i.e. the creation of some emotional distance (see Kellman, 2000; 2003), or indeed the simple practical advantage of reaching a wider, or different, audience. For these writers, using Hebrew is in itself a way of raising issues of identity, of breaking down strict associations between nation, state, identity, language or religion. Their particular form of ‘translanguaging’ (Creese & Blackledge, 2010) highlights internal as well as external conflicts, and allows them, Tannenbaum argues, to be part of a particular reality and to be observers at the same time.

Contestation of the existing order is a more overt motivation in the theatrical multilingualism described by Carla Jonsson, whose paper presents the role which theatre can play in raising consciousness among minority or oppressed groups. Chicano theatre has been active since the 1960s and represents an ‘act of resistance’ against the symbolic domination of American English and of monolingual identities. Taking the case of the Chicana playwright Cherrie Moraga, the speech of the Chicano community is represented in all its code-switched glory and, by being heard on the stage, is elevated to being a legitimate form of communication. Rather than reaching a wider audience, as in the case of the Arab-Israeli writers, the aim here is rather to reach a very specific one and to create an alternative ‘marketplace’ in Bourdieu’s sense (Bourdieu, 1997).

Adam Jaworski’s paper on Metrolingual Art presents a series of novel cross-media and cross-language practices which link text and image in urban contexts in a ‘dynamic and unorthodox’ fashion. By using language(s) – rather than simply text, as has been done for centuries – as an essential part of their creative material, artists such as Xu Bing and Claire Fontaine challenge traditional categorisations and ideologies and allow connections to be made across genres. Metrolingual Art can be seen as an extension of Metrolingualism (Otsuji & Pennycook, 2010) or a new form of multimodal heteroglossia. In these practices, we see multilingualism as such becoming the stuff of creativity, thus going beyond the idea that the use of different languages, whether singly or in combination, can act as a channel for different voices and identities.

In what sense can the concepts of bi-(or multi-)linguality and bi-(or multi-)lingualism be transposed in the music domain? Can an individual or a society be bi-musical? If so, what is the relationship between this and bilinguality/bilingualism? Can hybrid forms develop as they can with languages? These questions are explored by Alison Tokita in a paper on the recent development of Japanese musical culture. The introduction of Western music in Japan in the 19^th century eventually led to a society where the ‘foreign’ tradition came to dominate the home-grown one, with the latter perhaps now entering an ‘endangered’ category. Tokita sets out how this transition took place from a cultural and historical perspective, as well as what was involved at a musical level. Through short case-studies, she outlines the difficulties which may be experienced at various levels by Japanese musicians trained essentially in Western styles, despite a degree of ‘intermusability’ or ability to move between the different styles or traditions.

The last paper, by Penelope Gardner-Chloros, crosses the linguistic–artistic border in a different way by juxtaposing the visual output of two bilingual artists born in the late 19^th century, Vincent van Gogh and Lucien Pissarro, with a study of their respective correspondence. This provides evidence of their acculturation (Hamers & Blanc, 2000), from the Netherlands to France in one case and from France to England in the other, demonstrating both a changing linguistic dominance and the adoption of new cultural values, a process which is implicated in their linguistic code-switching. At the same time, both artists’ visual expression is marked by cultural dualities, incorporating elements of their visual culture of origin with that of their adopted country. The paper argues for making more use of multimodal bilinguals such as these in the study of bilinguality, as their dual mode of expression allows a more concrete understanding of what we mean when we say that a new ‘culture’ becomes part of their identity.

Finally, as a pointer for future work, a few general points can be made about the connections between linguistic and artistic multilingualism and multiculturalism. It should be clear from this slim volume that these connections go far beyond the – albeit remarkable – creative use of different languages such as that which was employed by writers and literary movements in various periods (Forster, 1970). Bilinguality and biculturality juxtapose different ways of codifying reality and thought, and this produces creative responses at a variety of both linguistic and non-linguistic levels (Davies & Bentahila, 2008; Rampton, 1996).

Creativity is itself increasingly a centre of interest in the language-related sciences (Baetens Beardsmore, 2008; Carter, 2004; Swann, Pope & Carter, 2011), and historiometric research suggests that creativity is more prominent in multilingual civilizations (Simonton, 2008). However, the precise workings of the connection between multilingualism and creativity are not well understood. It is a new challenge for linguists to try and show more precisely the role which language, as the main mouthpiece of culture as well as thought, plays in these life- and art- changing encounters.