Chapter 4
Bilingual communities in the Australian Teen Film
This chapter will focus predominantly on Australian cinema, as it demonstrates the
influence of British and American popular culture and cinematic traditions whilst
representing Australian as a nation noticeably affected by multiculturalism.
Contemporary Australian cinema draws on a combination of cultures including those
of several immigrant communities, and various academic works including the work of
Tom O’Regan on Australian national cinema, Brian McFarlane and Geoff Mayer on
the influence of American and British films, and Graeme Turner on the development
of Australia’s popular narratives. Views of the diversity of Australian culture can be
seen in films such as The Heartbreak Kid (Michael Jenkins, 1993) which depicts a
school teacher becoming involved with her student within the Greek community in
Sydney; La Spagnola (Steve Jacobs, 2001) set amongst a Spanish community; Little
Fish (Rowan Woods, 2005) which is set in the Little Saigon area of Sydney; as well
as a more recent film Samson and Delilah (Warwick Thornton, 2009) set within an
Aborigine community in the Central Australian desert. This chapter will focus on the
developments in Australian national cinema since the 1970s, discussing the
representation of multicultural communities, and specifically the position of the teen
genre in this national cinema. By looking at the representation of immigrant
communities, and the teenage experience within these communities, this study will
examine how cultural heritage frames the language use and identity of characters in
the teen genre. Following an introduction to Australian cinema I will analyse
examples of the teen genre before focussing on the case study film, Head On (Ana
Kokkinos, 1998). This film presents a multicultural community – specifically Greek-
169
Australian – in contemporary Melbourne, the relationships within this community,
and the use of language across the generations of a family.
Representations of bilingualism in the teen genre indicate several factors that
contribute to the individual character’s decision to use one language (or a combination
of languages) over another in a single utterance. Traditionally the choice is dependant
on the character that is speaking, the other characters present in the scene, the fluency
of the characters in the languages used, as well as the location and tone of the
conversation. Joan Pujolar’s work on bilingualism amongst young people in
Barcelona discusses the decision making that motivates moving from one language to
another in a single utterance, ‘it is not enough to identify them as instances of, say,
Catalan/French or Spanish/English codeswitching. It is also necessary to find out what
types of discourse are being integrated or responded to in this utterance’ (Pujolar 2001,
172). There is a reason for the initial language choice and another series of reasons
that initiate a change of language as the mere ability to speak both languages does not
indicate why it would be necessary to use both in a single utterance.
In the introduction to the collection One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-disciplinary
perspectives on code-switching,1 Lesley Milroy and Pieter Muysken discuss the
linguistic process that accompanies the emigration to a new country, and how
becoming used to a new language and culture forces the individual’s language use to
adapt. They cite the importance and pressure on immigrants to assimilate into the
culture of their host country, but also the maintaining of their home country’s culture
and traditions. There is a division of interest between fitting into new surroundings
1
One Speaker, Two Languages: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives on Code-Switching. Eds Lesley
Milroy and Pieter Muysken. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
170
and a need to sustain a connection with the country and people that they’ve left
behind (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 2). The cinematic representation of this coincides
with the conventional narrative devise of the generation gap between teenagers and
their parents or grandparents. The young are attempting to fit in with the culture of the
country where they live, whilst the older generation is harking back to the country of
their birth. Members of the older generation are seen to maintain the traditions of their
homeland which then contrast with the culture of the host country. The division of
interests and priorities between young and old can be seen in their use of and attitude
towards their use of language. Whilst one generation refuses to use a new language
another resents using an old language. Each new generation in the family has a
different relationship with language and the family’s heritage as the culture of the host
land replaces that of the home land:
Characteristically, it spans three generations, the oldest speakers
sometimes being monolingual in the community language, the
economically active generation being to varying degrees bilingual
but with greatly differing levels of competence in the host
language, while children born in the host community may
sometimes be virtually monolingual in the host language (Milroy
and Muysken 1995, 2).
The different focus generation by generation demonstrates the gradual change in the
family’s status, moving from cultural outsiders to insiders, from standing out to
assimilation. It is possible to apply Milroy and Muysken’s study to the representation
of immigrant communities seen in numerous films, though this is problematic as a
film only serves as a representation of the reality of these communities. It is through
the characters of various ages that we see the variations noted by Milroy and Muysken.
Linguistic difference as a further indicator of the generation gap is a recurring factor
of the teen genre and can be further explored through socio-linguistic analysis.
171
The British film Bend it Like Beckham (Gurinder Chadha, 2002), features Jess, the
daughter of a Sikh Punjabi family living in Southall, West London, struggling to
reconcile her loyalties to her family and to a local girls football team for which she
plays. Several scenes depict the cultural differences across the family’s three
generations, and the family’s expectations for its youngest members, with Jess’s
sporting ambitions contrasted with the numerous traditional preparations for her
sister’s wedding. Several academic works that discuss the film (Projansky in 2007,
Giardina in 2003, Aftab in 2002) focus on the character’s cultural background, but
despite examining the family’s heritage there is no real attention paid to the family’s
language use. Culture is represented in the film through the characters’ language use,
but is predominantly demonstrated visually, through the depiction of cooking and
wedding preparations as well as the costumes worn by different generations of the
family. The use of costumes ranging from the traditional to the non-traditional,
represent the differences between the generations as well as the importance of cultural
and familial events such as the wedding and the procedures and celebratory gatherings
leading up to the event.2 Marie Gillespie’s study of British Asian teenagers notes the
importance of contemporary Western fashion – sportswear and trainers – and
especially designer labels in forming identities, and displaying an image to their peers
(Gillespie 1995, 181). The characters’ use of language is less apparent in the analysis
of the film’s authenticity though the film does feature its protagonists using terms of
respect and casual slang phrases in the Punjabi and Hindi languages in their everyday
speech; however it is never dwelt upon, and these languages are never used to conduct
The oldest members of the family wear the traditional costumes associated with the family’s home
land. The middle generation combine traditional elements such as turbans with the more Western
aspects of work clothes/ uniforms. The younger generation are more likely to wear Western clothing of
their contemporaries, though they are seen in traditional clothing for formal occasions such as a
sequence set at a family wedding.
2
172
conversations. Though many generations of the community are featured in the film
the majority of characters converse and interact in English.
The Australian film Looking for Alibrandi (Kate Woods, 2000) features three
generations of an Italian family living in Sydney. As with Bend it Like Beckham, the
language use alters from generation to generation, with the teenage protagonist’s
dialogue predominantly in English (the language of the host country) and the family’s
original language more constant amongst members of the older generation. This
favouring of one language over another demonstrates the individual speaker’s loyalty
to a certain country or culture. The older generation’s language choice demonstrates
their strong connection to the country they consider to be their home, which is then
bolstered by constant references to this country and its traditions in their dialogue.
Their use of the home language demonstrates loyalty to their former way of life,
whereas amongst the younger generation there is very little connection to a way of life
they have never experienced first-hand. There is a need to abide by a set of social
conventions and contexts that have never been experienced and which are out of place
in the country in which they live. Gillespie notes the importance placed on keeping up
to date with news and current affairs in the Indian subcontinent by the wider family.
Parents and grandparents want the teenagers to be aware of events not only for their
own education about their homeland, but also to be aware of events affecting family
members living in India. In some instances this education is motivated by a desire to
ease the teenagers’ transition to living in India should the family be deported from
Britain (Gillespie 1995, 115). There is a clear association of ‘home’ to a set of
traditions and language for each generation, which is represented in each character
through their mode of dress, attitude and self-expression.
173
Australian cinema
Combining the influence of America (through popular culture) and Britain (as a
member of the Commonwealth of Nations), as well as the influence of various
immigrant communities, Australian cinema is a potentially rewarding site for
exploring discourse around the teenage multicultural identity. Many of the most
critically and financially successful Australian films are representations of a
community which is recognisably Australian – due to location or use of familiar
stereotypes – whilst also appealing to a wider audience through universal themes of
love, family, and acceptance. The exploration of these themes and the use of
Australian iconography – such as Ayers Rock/ Uluru, the wilderness of the outback,
the attire of surfers or sheep shearers, or the Sydney Opera House – provides a sense
of location before focussing more specifically on the characters’ personal narratives.
In his analysis of Australian narratives, Graeme Turner outlines the difficulty in
defining the image of Australia in the nation’s cultural texts, ‘the idea of the nation is
tainted by an old left romanticism organised around mythologies of the bush and a
masculinist ethic of work-based solidarity’ (Turner 1993, xiii). A national identity
centred on an image of rural masculinity reinforced in a variety of texts clings to a
narrow view of Australia and its people; it also avoids any disruption of a dominant
image of simple straight-forwardness that avoids any difficult issues of colonialism or
the nation’s native population. It also fails to address issues of the diversity of modern
Australia, or represent the vast majority of the nation’s population. Turner goes on to
discuss how the constant repetition of these images in cultural texts creates meanings
and significances that in time come to represent that culture, with the nation’s
174
ideology espoused and articulated in these texts (Turner 1993, 1-2). Ian Craven has
discussed the popular culture of Australia and its invasion of global consciousness
through certain films, food and drink, clothing and popular television soap operas
‘Castlemaine XXXX behind the bar, Yakka in the department stores and Neighbours
on the television’ (Craven 1994, 1). The popularisation of Australian productivity and
modern culture is a conscious step away, but still held in juxtaposition with, the
images of colonial history, the wilderness of the outback, and the rural masculinity, as
outlined by Turner. The negativity associated with images of rural Australian men is
widely noted and represented with varying degrees of self-awareness or satire,
responding to a traditional preference of the rural over the urban as the ‘distinctive
Australian experience’ in various texts (Turner 1993, 25-6).3 Advertisements for
different brands of lager play on the popular and traditional image of rural men noted
by Turner, whilst soap operas such as Neighbours which became popular at a similar
point in the mid-1980s are focussed on the contemporary urban environment.
The representation of a nation through its cultural text leads to the exploration of
national themes, recurring genres and changes in representations of the nation’s
diversity. In his seminal work on Australian cinema, Tom O’Regan labels Australian
cinema as ‘a messy affair’ (O’Regan 1996, 2), which draws together disparate themes
and filmmakers in order to create a field of work that represents the nation that
produced it. Those who study national cinema must ‘deploy hybrid forms of analysis’
to address issues of local history, sociology, culture, critical and industrial practices
when compiling what makes a film an example of national cinema accessible to an
Many Australian films focus on the characters described as ‘Oakies’/ ‘Ockers’, who are traditionally
working-class, white, ignorant, somewhat racist and have a small-town mentality. Examples of this
stereotype feature in Crocodile Dundee, as well as The Adventures of Barry McKenzie (Bruce
Beresford, 1972).
3
175
international audience (O’Regan 1996, 4). The analysis of national cinema must take
into account the various elements that go into the production such as funding and the
policies that regulate it, the political temperament of the time, as well as the text itself.
By hybridising various forms of analysis, those writing on national cinema have a
grasp on the context of production for filmmaking and the affect of this on the films
produced.
Andrew Higson outlines the difficulties of analysing the fluid nature of a national
cinema which has to address a variety of shared identities, ‘equally subject to
ceaseless negotiations: while the discourses of film culture seek to hold it in place, it
is abundantly clear that the concept is mobilized in different ways, by different
commentators, for different reasons’ (Higson 1997, 4). The combination of factors
that are necessary to accurately represent a nation on film is ever-changing, and
impossible to list in their entirety. The idea of nation used here, speaks more of the
ideas and experiences of the film-makers than the people of the nation being depicted.
In addition, a single film cannot address every aspect of a nation or even a small
community and therefore can only present a limited view of any situation or group of
characters. Even an ensemble piece depicting numerous groups of characters is
limited by the groups that the filmmaker has chosen to depict.
The filmmakers’ heritage can also be considered a valuable asset in the representation
of a specific cultural community. The indication from critics such as those discussed
by Sarah Projansky (2007) in her work on the reviews of Bend it Like Beckham, is
that a film based in a specific cultural context can achieve a sense of authenticity if
those involved in the production have a connection to the culture depicted. Though
176
the connection of the filmmakers’ cultural heritage and that of the film’s characters
does not need to coincide in all cases,4 it can be considered beneficial in the evocation
of a specific cultural community. Head On is adapted from a novel written by a
member of Melbourne’s Greek community depicted in the film; which would seem to
provide the film with an authentic voice, not only in the characters’ dialogue but in
presenting a view of the community that may only be available to an insider.5 The
potentially intrusive or offensive voice of an outsider is something that is undesirable
though still exists in depictions of different cultures. Duncan Petrie’s discussion of
cinematic representations of Scotland notes how for the greater part of cinematic
history the depictions of this country had been created by those outside of Scotland
itself, ‘from an industrial and institutional point of view “Scottish” cinema is a
construct subsumed within the history of the British cinema or of Hollywood’ (Petrie
2000, 15). As a nation, Scotland – like Ireland, Wales and others – has had little
control over the image of itself that has been produced, with Scottish films requiring
external funding (from London-based companies, Europe and Hollywood) or being
used as a potentially mythical location for larger external productions.
Susan Hayward’s discussion of national cinema in the French context notes that the
national is traditionally set in contrast with the cinema of other countries but
specifically the cinema of America and Hollywood. Hayward does not dismiss this as
a starting point to the debate, ‘The juxtapositional way of establishing the “national”
of a cinema runs the risk of being too reductionist, but that does not mean that it is a
The film East is East (Damien O’Donnell, 1999) depicts the lives of the children of a British-Asian
family living in Salford, Lancashire in the 1970s, uses a screenplay by a member of an equivalent
community, Ayub Khan-Din, but was directed by an Irishman.
5
In the case of Looking for Alibrandi, Melina Marchetta (the author of the novel) was also the author
of the screenplay. Though Christos Tsiolkas was not involved in the adaptation of his novel Loaded to
the screen, the film Head On is a close adaptation of his depiction of the Greek community living in
Melbourne, features a heavily Greek-Australian cast, and was directed by a Melbourne native.
4
177
definition that should be rejected’ (Hayward 2005, 8). However, by defining
something according to what it is not one overlooks the artefact’s own qualities.
Hollywood films are criticised as much for lacking the artistic and emotional
resonance of European films, as European cinema is for its lack of comparable budget,
effects and box-office takings. These comparisons need to acknowledge that these
two different cinemas are attempting to achieve different things and should be
analysed as much in isolation as in contrast (Crofts 2006, 44-47). The difficulty of
analysing national cinema is in creating borders between individual texts, based on
geography and the creative talents involved. Countless filmmakers have worked
internationally since the medium began, either due to opportunity or necessity, and
their works are as much a product of national and cultural specificities as those
filmmakers who have remained in their home nations.6 The combination of
nationalities and national cultures when discussing representations of
multiculturalism, add to the difficulties of defining and analysing national cinema
(Hill 2006, 109).
When analysing films centred on multicultural communities within the context of
national cinema, there is a combination of cultural influences on the production but
the film must appeal to a broad audience rather than merely to the community being
represented. As with many countries, Australia is influenced by international
migration, with communities from different nations adding to the cultural experience
of the country as a whole. Bennett, Emmison and Frow note the impossibility of
6
An example of this might be the documentary and feature film director Kevin Macdonald (born in
Glasgow), whose films have included the documentary Touching the Void (2003) produced in the UK
with a combination of British and American producers and telling the story of a British citizen. His first
feature film The Last King of Scotland (2006) was a British production with an international cast, and
was filmed in the UK and Uganda. In 2009 he directed State of Play, which was filmed in America for
a predominantly American cast, but was adapted from a UK television series produced with British
talent.
178
pinpointing an exact Australian culture as ‘the boundaries between different national
cultures are becoming more porous as a result of increasingly globalised patterns of
cultural production and distribution’ (Bennett, Emmison and Frow 1999, 5). The
importing of consumer goods, cultural texts and products as well as the various
immigrant cultures that have moved to Australia across more than a century provides
hybridised cultures that draw on a variety of sources and influences that in turn are
represented in Australia’s own cultural texts.
New representations interact with long-standing aspects of national identity to refresh
the image of what it is to be Australian, as well as shedding light on lesser known
facets to expand the view of the nation’s culture. The continuous cycle of influence
between a nation and its cultural products is part of cultural development, which is
then represented in the next cycle of narratives to which that culture again responds.
As each generation creates new cultural texts, using a combination of diverse cultural
influences and technical advancements, they build upon and retell existing narratives.
The growing diversity of the nation’s cultural identity adds to each new telling and
though the presentation changes the themes remain constant. The changes in the
national culture are represented in each new text, and in turn these texts feed back
into the nation’s cultural identity.
National identity in Australian national cinema has changed from a dominant image
of white men to a selection of changeable and more challenging images.7 The
numerous films that represent women, characters of various sexualities, characters
7
Films such as Mad Max (George Miller, 1979), Gallipoli (Peter Weir, 1981) and The Man from
Snowy River (George T.Miller, 1982), may have gained critical acclaim, achieved financial success and
adapted familiar Hollywood genres such as the western to an Australian context but were still
dominated by white, male characters.
179
from immigrant communities, as well as representations of Australian Aborigines, as
protagonists have increased in recent years, with many amongst Australia’s most
internationally successful films.8 In his discussion of contemporary Australian cinema
Jonathan Rayner refers to this shift in national identity, with easily marketable and
memorable stereotypes that appeal equally to national and international audiences,
‘The ideological purpose behind the dominant representations and images of
nationhood produced by Australian cinema is linked indelibly to enduring colonial,
cultural associations…Consequently they form a benchmark from which subsequent
images can diverge or derive power from contrast and comparison’ (Rayner 2000, 8).
This view of Australian-ness, representing as it does the predominantly white
community, was channelled through cinematic representation, as well as through
other popular cultural texts.9
Several studies of Australian cinema concentrate of the phenomenon of the New
Wave which occurred in the 1970s with several films capturing international attention.
The New Wave featured the work of new directors such as Peter Weir (The Cars that
Ate Paris (1974), Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975), as well as influential, established
directors from overseas, such as Michael Powell’s Age of Consent (1969) and Nicolas
Roeg’s film Walkabout (1971). In the 1980s the image of Australian-ness was
affected by the success of such films as the Mad Max series (George Miller and
8
At the American box office, Strictly Ballroom earned $11,738,022, The Adventures of Priscilla,
Queen of the Desert earned $11,059,700 and Muriel’s Wedding earned $15,185,594 (figures found at
imdb.com 09/08/2011). The worldwide box office of 2005 film Little Fish was $3,248,506, (figure
found at www.boxofficemojo.com 09/08/2011). Warwick Thornton’s Samson and Delilah, grossed
$8,188,931 at the Australian box office, but worldwide box office is not recorded (figure found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_and_Delilah_(2009_film) 09/08/2011).
9
British advertisements for Australian brand lagers in the 1980s, such as Fosters or Castlemaine
XXXX which were broadcast extensively in the UK used similar comedic images of the country’s
population to the films of the period. Paul Hogan, star of Crocodile Dundee, also appeared in
advertisements for Fosters lager and promotional films for the Australian tourist board which were
shown in the USA between 1984 and 1990, inhabiting a similar amiable everyman guise.
180
George Ogilvie, 1979–85)10 and Crocodile Dundee (Peter Faiman, 1986) and
Crocodile Dundee II (John Cornell, 1988). 11 These films combine to create a
contradictory image of Australian cinema and national identity. These films, which
are known for an expressionistic aesthetic, have been produced on very low budgets
and diverge from the influence of mainstream Hollywood (Walkabout, Picnic at
Hanging Rock); contrast with the representation of small rural communities which
feature more traditionally masculine characters who depend on physical strength
rather than emotional understanding (Mad Max, Crocodile Dundee).
James Bennett discusses the period of production since the 1970s as significant when
examining the production of successful Australian films, as well as for the analysis of
cinematic representations of Australian multiculturalism. He cites the official decision
made by the Australian Ethnic Affairs Council in 1977 to promote a multicultural
image of Australia, but that ‘cinematic “imaginings” struggled to accommodate an
image of national identity as multicultural that met with widespread approval’
(Bennett 2007, 64). Bennett recognises that the films produced still favoured
traditional images that still favoured a homogenised vision of white Australian
masculinity which avoided modern issues of multiculturalism, in films such as
Gallipoli (Peter Weir, 1981) and The Man from Snowy River (George Miller, 1982)
which enforces the ‘mythology of “the bush”, “mateship” and “laid-back
egalitarianism”’ (ibid). The more persistent images of male Australia, the images with
which Australia promoted itself, offer an apparent simplicity of life and attitude
10
The first Mad Max film achieved worldwide box office takings of $100 million (imdb.com
09/08/2011).
11
Crocodile Dundee achieved worldwide box office takings of $360 million, and in 1986 was the
second highest earning film in the USA after Top Gun (Tony Scott, 1986). Crocodile Dundee II earned
a worldwide box office of over $239 million (figures in US dollars found at imdb.com 09/08/2011). A
third film in the series was released in 2001, Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles (Simon Wincer, 2001),
but was significantly less successful.
181
depicted as an ideal. The complication of additional cultural and national influences
draws away from tradition and contributes to the external view of national identity.
Despite the political desire to open out the idea of Australian identity, the artistic
evolution that was sparked during the New Wave and the changes in the cinematic
images of Australia, the image of the white male still dominated throughout this
period. Rayner describes above, the attempts in the early 1990s to change this image,
but also notices that the new images of Australian-ness are as equally contrived as
those that went before. The most internationally successful films to emerge from
Australia in the last twenty years – Strictly Ballroom (Baz Luhrmann, 1992), Muriel’s
Wedding (P.J. Hogan, 1994) and The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert
(Stephen Elliott, 1994) – continue to use the stereotype of the uncultured Australian,
but they are positioned as background characters or as characters for the protagonists
to react against. They no longer lead the narrative; they are obstacles for the heroes to
overcome. Other Australian film of this period offer contrasting representations of the
nation and its people, from the historical in Scott Hicks’s biopic of David Helfgott,
Shine (1996), or the more fantastical in the adaptation of Dick King-Smith’s
children’s book The Sheep Pig, Babe (Chris Noonan, 1995).
The creative powers behind these productions – producers, directors and writers – are
still predominantly white men, and despite the attempts to present a new perspective
of Australia they appear to originate from the same cultural location. The film Head
On, as well as Looking for Alibrandi, distinguish themselves from the tradition of
‘white-male’ cinema in two ways: firstly, both films were directed by women, and
secondly both were adapted from novels by authors from the immigrant communities
182
featured. These two films raise the question of authenticity which can be explored
more fully due to their use of multiple languages, a combination of European cultures
with that of Australia, and teenage characters coming to terms with the cultural
duality of their lives.
The representation of a multicultural community would appear to warrant a greater
sense of realism, in order to avoid reliance on a collection of simplistic or negative
stereotypes. In a discussion of the study of ethnic image, Robert Stam notes the
corrective nature of these analyses in discussing where films have misrepresented an
ethnic group for the sake of verisimilitude or historic grounds, ‘Debates about ethnic
representation often break down on precisely this question of “realism” and
“accuracy,” at times leading to an impasse in which diverse spectators or critics
passionately defend their version of the real’ (Stam 1991, 252). If this aspect of ethnic
image studies is focussing primarily on correcting the representation of ethnic groups,
less attention is being paid to the other aspects of these films. We must consider
whether the success or failure of the individual film to reflect the cultural context
affects the reading of the film as a whole. Is the producers’ understanding and
creative representation of the situation as important as the judgement of it by the
media and the academy? There is a perception that the cultural background of those
behind the film’s production has an effect on the verisimilitude of the events depicted,
especially if the production team features individuals from a similar cultural
background to the film’s characters. Projansky discusses how the reviews of Bend it
Like Beckham cite the film’s co-writer and director Gurinder Chadha’s own cultural
background as being similar to her characters when discussing the film’s realism:12
12
Chadha being of a Sikh family and raised in Southall, West London.
183
The collapse of the director with the film in the service of
producing an authenticity authorizes someone from the outside of
the supposedly authentic culture to take pleasure in laughing at that
culture without risking critique for denying the film’s/ culture’s
“integrity.” The “authentic” director, after all, provided the humour
in the first place (Projansky 2007, 193).
Projansky’s description of the debate around the ethnic background of cinematic
creativity recalls Stam’s description of the tradition of ethnic image studies, though
Projansky is discussing the press rather than the academy. Stam notes that studies of
the ethnic image concentrates on the incorrect presentation of specific images, and the
importance of accuracy in regard to ethnic details as this affects the reception of the
individual film. Projansky’s understanding of the press’s reaction to ‘ethnic’
characters focuses on the film’s ‘authenticity’ and how these achieves the ‘correct’ or
‘hegemonic reading’ (in Stuart Hall’s terminology13) from the audience. Stam uses
Bakhtinian theory to analyse this subject, and discusses how a Bakhtinian
interpretation would avoid the impasse created by the debate around ‘realism’ in a
creative representation. Stam discusses Bakhtin’s argument which states the lack of
direct contact between ‘human consciousness and artistic practice’ and the ‘real’, as
they are mediated through ideology, ‘Literature, and by extension cinema, do not so
much refer to or call up the world as represent its languages and discourses’ (Stam
1991, 252). The representation of ethnicity and community through language, in
either medium, is subjective and incomplete based partly on the text itself and the
understanding of the individual audience member or reader.
Hall, Stuart. “Encoding/decoding”. Culture, Media, Language: Working Papers in Cultural
Studies,1972-79. Eds Stuart Hall, Dorothy Hobson, Andrew Lowe and Paul Willis. London:
Hutchinson, 1980. 128-38.
13
184
Bakhtin’s concept implies that the use of language in a creative work has to create a
representation of the world yet cannot depict it exactly and so there is no need to
debate the portrayal’s ‘realism’. Although Stam is adapting Bakhtin’s work from a
study of literature to cinema, it is possible to see similarities in the analysis of
dialogue. Language use is a platform to discuss the discourses at work in the
representation of a community, and by applying a bilingual or multicultural context it
is possible to read the multi-levelled relationships between the characters in a more
complex method than in a monolingual situation. The construction of levels of
communication through the application of multiple languages allows a variety of
discourses and various aspects of character to be expressed. Each language has a
different function and represents a different set of discourses and the character’s use
of a certain language – or avoidance of using this language – provides an additional
level of discussion.
Australian cinema and the teen genre
Jonathan Rayner has discussed the recurring narratives of Australian cinema: ‘the
individual or communal rite of passage remains central to the Australian narrative.
Even the imported mainstream genres concentrate on peripheralised identities,
distinguished by age, gender, race and sexuality’ (Rayner 2000, 162). Australia’s
position – historically, geographically, culturally – is somewhat removed from other
English-speaking countries. Therefore the proliferation of narratives that explore the
stories of outsiders and peripheral identities is unsurprising, and by investigating these
characters the films can explore the identity of Australia itself.
185
Coming of age stories are a key element of the teen genre, and are a familiar part of
adolescence, and Rayner’s concept of an Australian genre offers an interesting site of
comparison when examining Australian teen films. The films discussed in this thesis
depict characters developing an understanding of themselves and of their place in
their communities. The ‘rite of passage’ is a necessary narrative factor as a
protagonist moves from ignorance to knowledge. Rayner continues: ‘As surrogates of
the nation overcoming colonial inferiority and attaining nationhood, the tribulations
of troubled, innocent, fallible and impressionable youth searching for meaning and
identity appear consistently, tackling social and historical forces with varying
conviction and success’ (ibid). The teen genre is characterised by a series of themes
and conventions which feed into issues of cultural representation. As with the
majority of the teen genre, issues such as schoolwork, identity, love and relationships
are discussed in various Australian examples. With the additional issue of
multiculturalism and the teenage protagonists being the children of immigrants, these
films provide a microcosm for the national debate on the same issues. Australia as a
nation, and the average teen protagonist, is attempting to prove itself, needing to
complete a task or overcome an obstacle in order to be regarded as an equal. The
coming of age in both cases involves the formation of a coherent and stable identity
which takes into account the various factors of culture, heritage, interactions with
others and personal contentment. As different cultures are brought together this
balance is more difficult to maintain but also provides a greater complexity of image
and impact.
The focus of Looking for Alibrandi is the protagonist coming to terms with
discovering her family history and coming to terms with her position as an Italian-
186
Australian. The language use in Looking for Alibrandi reflects Milroy and Muysken’s
outline of linguistic development across three generations in immigrant families. The
language use in the film is a comfortable co-existence of English and Italian. In the
film’s early scenes Josie (the teenage protagonist) predominantly speaks English but
is happy to use Italian when speaking to members of her family, though usually only
the odd word or phrase. Similarly to other examples of the teen genre, Josie’s
language use is different to older members of the Alibrandi family, and the use of
specific languages alters with each generation. Josie, as the representative of the
youngest generation, primarily uses English in her day to day speech; whereas, her
grandmother (Nonna), as the representative of the oldest generation, primarily uses
Italian with only the occasional use of English. As the representative of the middle
generation Josie’s mother (Christina) is forced to mediate between the two, using
English in her professional life and with Josie, but also using Italian with her mother
and for terms of endearment with her daughter. The emotional resolution of the film
is reached when Josie comes to terms with her identity as an Italian-Australian, after
learning the truth about her family history, that her mother was the child of an
adulterous encounter between Josie’s grandmother and a white Australian man as
opposed to her abusive Italian husband. When Josie learns her grandmother’s secret,
the linguistic barrier disappears, and in the most significant conversation in their
relationship they both adapt their language choices to connect emotionally with each
other for the first time.
Nonna: (In Italian, subtitled in English) You don’t understand
what it was like to live with a man who treats you like farm
animals. (In English) I did my duty. I stayed with him. That was
my penance.
187
The constant changes between the two languages in this monologue demonstrate
Nonna’s attempt to connect with Josie. Nonna uses English for the most important
statements in her confession to be sure that Josie understands her motives and that
there is no misunderstanding between them. Josie’s bilingualism highlights her
position as an individual – different from her family and from her social peers – but,
as she learns more about herself and others, she discovers that these differences are
less significant than she had imagined. Her issues of identity are parallel to the other
teenagers around her, but coloured, rather than made unique, by her cultural heritage.
Both films address issues of Australia’s growing acceptance of its multiculturalism,
one addressing the effect of immigration of the existing white community, and the
other representing the role of the Australian-born generations of an immigrant family.
Though the case study for this chapter primarily addresses the latter issue, the
depiction of the teenager is more extreme, depicting life after the completion of
school education, and using fewer conventions of the teen genre. However, the film’s
depiction of the emotional themes associated with the representation of teenagers, and
the relationship of the teenager with their family is familiar from across the teen genre.
Case Study – Head On
The film Head On is concerned with the Greek community living in the city of
Melbourne, and specifically the teenage protagonist Ari’s relationship with this
community. From its earliest scenes Head On emphasises its representation of a
specific community and a specific location, opening with black and white newsreel
footage of ships arriving in Australia from the mid-twentieth century. The
accompanying narration is a report discussing the thousands of new arrivals from
188
Europe speaking in ‘a hundred strange tongues’, which merges with a piece of
traditional Greek music as the sequence continues. The newsreel images are then
intercut with images of Ari (the protagonist) dancing in slow-motion until the scene
finally shifts to a Greek wedding party where Ari is a guest, and is involved in a
traditional dance with numerous other men.
The next scene sees Ari’s silently leaving the party ignoring others when they attempt
to interact with him directly. These scenes introduce his general attitude towards his
community as he exists within it but also his lack of interest in the people around him,
and as this scene is at a wedding – clearly an event for family and friends – Ari’s
movement away from the event quickly reinforces this attitude. Ari does not speak to
those around him, and his first words in the film come in a voice-over which
expresses his feelings towards the community, its traditions, and the community’s
expectations of its younger members. Ari’s words stem from the negative and his
earliest attempt at self-definition endeavours to avoid labels altogether, rejecting
potential definitions of his character or occupation:
Ari: I’m no scholar. I’m no worker. I’m no poet.14
Ari’s decision to position himself away from everyone else is reflected in his
conversations and discussions with other characters, and many of his scenes see him
walking alone and avoiding verbal communication. His feelings tend to emerge only
in voice-over but even these only occur at the opening and closing of the film rather
than being used throughout as a narrative device. Ari’s closing monologue in voice14
All quotes from the dialogue of Head On are taken verbatim from the DVD, screenplay by Andrew
Bovell, Ana Kokkinos and Mira Robertson.
189
over expresses similar sentiments to this initial statement, and though Ari’s language
use – and that of other characters – displays elements of his identity, he avoids
conversations about intimate or emotional issues and at times refuses to speak at all.
The use of language when portraying an immigrant family conveys the family’s
history and cultural origins, as well as providing a representation of their relationship
with their new cultural surroundings. The members of Ari’s family are divided
generationally, most notably in their differing attitudes to Greek cultural tradition and
contemporary Australia culture. Ari and his sister, Alex, (Ari also has an older brother,
Peter, who has moved out of the family home) clash with their parents over issues of
cultural difference as well as more conventional issues associated with adolescence in
the teen genre such as respecting their family, staying out late and money. Ari’s
relationship with his family is similar to his relationship with his cultural community.
He does not want to be defined by his Greek background, and equally does not want
to be like his father who embodies that background. However he can’t distance
himself from this part of his identity.
The use of the characters’ bilingualism is also used to demonstrate the interrelationships within the family. The greatest linguistic difference between the
generations is that the parents’ generation is more likely to use Greek as their day to
day language, whereas their children will use English. The cultural development of
the teenagers combines their cultural heritage with their everyday experiences –
usually shared with their friends – which combine in forming that individual’s, or a
group’s, identity. As with other examples of the teen genre, Ari wants to escape the
expectations of his restrictive community, as well as wanting to avoid repeating what
190
he sees as his parents’ mistakes. The use of the home country’s language causes
difficulties for Ari, but the need to accept his heritage, and the language of this
heritage, is a key moment in his journey towards maturity. For Ari, the emotional
connection between language and his social situation in the community prolongs his
move towards accepting this aspect of his identity.
As with the previous case studies the language switches in Head On arise from
emotional situations. The use of the Greek language occurs at precise moments and
display developments of character amongst Ari and his friends. The use of Greek by a
teenager not only displays their relationship with their cultural heritage, but also their
loyalty to friends, family and the community. Ari’s attitude towards these aspects of
his life is constant, but his language use – and his reasons for language switches – is
affected by his various relationships. The individual characters use the Greek
language for different purposes with Ari, his best friend and their parents uses
contrasting significantly in key situations.
The rejection of identity – Ari
Ari’s family has lived in Australia for some time, and Ari and his siblings have been
raised in a different cultural atmosphere to their parents.15 The language uses amongst
the family not only denote the different attitudes of the individual members but also
the location of authority in the family unit. It is possible to see Ari’s attitude towards
the different members of his family represented in his means of communication with
Though not expressed directly in the film, Christos Tsiolkas’ original novel notes that Ari’s father
was born in Greece, whilst his mother was born in Australia (Tsiolkas 1997, 12), but has remained
within the Greek community and married a Greek-born man, maintaining a restricted cultural
experience through her adult life.
15
191
them, and so by analysing them in turn it is possible to achieve an understanding of
Ari’s upbringing in a bilingual family.
Michael Halliday describes the process of a child learning a language as being shaped
but the cultural circumstances of the learning environment. When a child learns a
language it not only acquires vocabulary but also the specific dialect prominent in the
region or subculture in which it is raised. As its language skills develop the child is
influenced by the language of its family and of the wider community (Halliday 1978,
23). The depiction of a Greek-Australian family draws on the community it represents,
and by doing so provides a sense of verisimilitude to the proceedings. There is an
emphasis on language in the family’s interactions, with some characters alternating
between Greek and English whilst others stick resolutely to one or the other. The
implication of this is that the children have been raised bilingually, with one parent
providing virtually monolingual communication. Ari and his siblings have been
raised bilingually due to their situation. Had the family stayed in Greece or had they
moved to Australia several generations earlier, the situation would likely be very
different and they’d have been raised monolingual. The family keeps its connection to
the home land by teaching the children Greek, but the children also need to be fluent
in English for their schooling and socialisation in Australia day-to-day. The younger
generation needs to nurse their bilingualism more than their parents as their activities
take them outside the Greek community more regularly as they make connections
with the wider society. Halliday continues by noting how behaviour and interactions
are mediated through the learning of language, and the cultural context in which this
occurs:
192
The child learns his mother tongue in the context of behavioural
settings where the norms of the culture are acted out and
enunciated for him, settings of parental control, instruction,
personal interaction and the like; and, reciprocally, he is
‘socialized’ into the value systems and behaviour patterns of the
culture through the use of language at the same time as he is
learning it (ibid).
If the home environment has been shaped by Greek culture, Ari’s parents may have
used Greek to teach their cultural heritage to their children. Whilst the children spent
their school days immersed in English-language Australian culture, when they
returned home the Greek culture would regain dominance. As with many children,
much of their language use would have been shaped by their school experiences,
either from lessons or from mingling with children from outside the Greek
community.
The first member of his family with whom Ari speaks in the film is his brother Peter,
who is at university and lives in a student house with friends. This scene occurs away
from the influence of the family home and the Greek community, even though a
substantial segment of the scene features Peter on the phone to his mother. The phone
conversation features Peter speaking in English but then switching to Greek briefly in
order to reassure his mother about Ari’s wellbeing. Peter’s conversation features him
casually lying to his mother about his and Ari’s activities in order to reassure her that
all is well, and that she has no need to worry about them. As with many teen films,
the younger generation is often seen lying to their parents in order to maintain their
own lives without interference.
Shortly after this, Ari walks home listening to contemporary dance music on his
personal stereo which blocks out any other sound in the scene. There is no other
193
diegetic sound from the traffic or pedestrians, no voice-over, and no dialogue; Ari is
sealed off from the world around him, and the film makes no attempt to break into his
thoughts or interpret his actions. The absence of voice-over indicates that Ari has no
need to share every thought and emotion or provide an interior monologue to lure the
audience into his train of thought. Throughout the film Ari verbalises his feelings
about his community and the actions of his friends but reveals very little about
himself, and no positive feelings about himself or his future. Though the film shows
intimate moments from Ari’s daily life – conversations with friends and family,
sexual encounters with strangers, the consumption of drugs and alcohol – each
moment of pleasure is transitory, each positive emotion last only for the duration of
the action itself and no longer. Ari’s reactions to life only occur with specific
interactions; otherwise he withdraws from communication by listening to loud music
which allows him to avoid actively participating in the world until he arrives home.
The essence of Ari’s relationship with his father is demonstrated in each of their
conversations. From their first scene in the film, Ari’s father only speaks to his son in
Greek and Ari answers his father in English on virtually every occasion. Dimitri’s
dialogue with the rest of the family, as well as when he is socialising in the
community, is also uniformly in Greek. There are several differences between Ari and
his father, but on a very simple level they disagree on every point, and refuse to speak
the same language, although it is always clear that they both understand what the
other is saying. Their conversations continue even when one refuses to answer or will
only answer in the opposing language. Ari refuses to be like his father to such a
degree that he cannot even communicate with him in the same language. Both men’s
stubbornness in this regard does more to highlight their similarities than to
194
demonstrate their differences. Both are trying to cause a reaction in the other and both
use the same tactics in order to do so.
Ari and his friends are on the threshold between childhood and adulthood and their
choices for the future are shaped by their relationships with their parents and the
wider Greek community. As Ari rebels against his family’s wishes, his friends are far
more willing to follow their parents’ example and expectations. The tensions that
arise between Ari and his friends are based on the differences between individuality
and tradition – the choice of having a different life to their parents, or following the
paths that the older generations have set out for them. The teenage characters are the
first generation of their families to be born in Australia, and represent a turning-point
in the community’s culture. Despite the fact that this community is made up of people
who have moved to another country they seem to cling to the culture of their
homeland and are unprepared to change this situation. The split in the younger
generation is born out of the concept of staying faithful to the community and their
parents’ culture. Rayner refers to the importance of ‘the individual or communal rite
of passage’ as a narrative in Australian cinema, and as part of the teen genre this
journey of the individual towards the discovery and understanding of their identity is
a constant theme. Here, the choice to stay within or move away from the Greek
community echoes these themes. In addition to this, the younger generation represent
the changes in Australian national cinema by moving away from the traditional image
of the country and personalising the issue of multiculturalism.
O’Regan noted that, ‘Australian cinema is involved in charting existing and emergent
social divisions and identities within society. It accommodates, recognizes and
195
promotes the social divisions constitutive of society. Films provide for alternative –
even counter-identities and histories’ (O’Regan 1996, 22). The idea of counteridentities has arisen several times in recent Australian cinema with the themes of
multicultural communities and alternative sexualities featured since the 1990s. In
Head On, these two themes are combined in Ari’s generation and in his own identity.
Analyses of the film refer to the similarity of Ari’s character to the iconic figures of
the teen genre. Collins and Davis identify Ari as a gay Greek Australian who is
conflicted by the issue of belonging to a community which rejects him:
As a result, Ari lives a double life. And as the film shows in its
numerous scenes of Ari’s self-destructive behaviour, this duplicity
is tearing him apart. He lashes out at people he despises. He lashes
out at people he loves. And he pushes his body to its physical
limits in an all-night drug, sex and alcohol binge (Collins and
Davis 2004, 160).
However, Ari’s life is pulled in more than the two directions outlined here, as it is
more than his secrecy about his sexuality that separates Ari from his community. He
understands his own mind and his physical desires whilst attempting to avoid social
categorisation, which he achieves by keeping the various aspects of his life separate
from each other. For example, few of his friends know that he is gay, and the more
extreme aspects of his lifestyle are kept secret from his parents. His cultural heritage
pulls him between his family and friends, his sexuality pulls him between the friends
that know and those that don’t, and his sexual encounters are divided between those
that could potentially lead to a relationship – if Ari accepted the possibility of a
relationship with another person was possible – and anonymous encounters in clubs
and alleyways. There are multiple dualities in Ari’s life which combine to create a
character that is lost.
196
It is possible to assign the lack of direction in Ari’s life to the fact that he is being
pulled in so many directions at once. Linguistically, Ari’s identity is expressed
through a repression of the Greek language for the vast majority of the film; however,
when he does use Greek it is to demonstrate his emotional, be it positive or negative,
connection to his family. For much of the film Ari expresses himself through physical
acts, be they sexual encounters or dances, not verbal statements, though his silences
conform to one of the many clichés about the male teenager.
The younger generation in the film are united by the way they favour the English
language to Greek in their dialogue, and therefore the few occasions that Greek is
used are significant. Ari’s attacks on his community arise in dialogue with his friends,
as well as his disappointment in his friends’ lack of ambition. Ari does not want to be
like anyone else but neither does he want to be special or stand out from the crowd.
These feelings are verbalised in Ari’s voice-over which reflects the first-person
narration of the novel on which the film is based (though the voice-over is a rare
feature of the film). The novel is from Ari’s perspective and the narration is his view
of the world around him. Towards the end of the novel Ari outlines his identity in
relation to the opinion of others of him:
I’m not Australian, I’m not Greek, I’m not anything. I’m not a
worker, I’m not a student, I’m not an artist, I’m not a junkie, I’m
not a conversationalist, I’m not an Australian, not a wog, not
anything. I’m not left wing, right wing, centre, left of centre, right
of Genghis Kahn. I don’t vote, I don’t demonstrate, I don’t do
charity. What I am is a runner. Running away from a thousand and
one things that people say you have to be or should want to be
(Tsiolkas 1997, 149).
197
Ari does not define himself by nation, culture or community. He has no interest in
tradition or politics; and though he does use drugs and describes himself in negative
terms, he does not see these as a form of self-definition or self-expression. The film
does not feature a monologue as detailed as this segment of the novel, though it does
feature scenes that allow Ari to voice his apathy with regard to politics and other
issues. In one scene, Peter and his university friends are discussing the contemporary
state of Australian politics, and Ari’s only response is to demonstrate his disinterest.
His interest is in the present and the personal, and he summarises his view with the
words ‘Fuck politics, let’s dance’. Neither Ari nor his friends show much interest in
their heritage or attempt to incorporate it into their daily lives. His group of friends
follow their parents’ wishes and are considering marriage and staying within the
community as it is an easier option than refusing. Ari objects to his friends’ attitude,
and for allowing themselves to be imprisoned by the community. Even though Ari
and his friends agree on the constraints of the community, Ari is the only one actively
fighting against these binds. His friends are willing to get married and settle down
whereas Ari is trying to avoid any such responsibility.
Even though Ari is happy to voice his negative opinions about traditional Greek
culture, he is still rather conventional. He wants to look after his family and to
connect with other people, and he enjoys taking part in Greek traditions such as
dancing. The quote from the novel (above), where Ari defines himself by what he is
not, can be compared to the film’s opening and closing voice-overs which clarify
Ari’s acceptance of himself, and shows how he is willing to maintain them whatever
damage they may cause:
198
Ari: I’m a whore, a dog, a cunt. My father’s insults make me
strong. I accept them all. I’m sliding towards the sewer, I’m not
struggling. I can smell the shit, but I’m still breathing. I’m gonna
live my life. I’m not going to make a difference. I’m not going to
change a thing. No one is going to remember me when I’m dead.
I’m a sailor and a whore, and I will be until the end of the world.
Ari’s words in both speeches, in the novel and the film, demonstrate his feelings
about himself and confirm his statement in the film’s first monologue. At the opening
of the film Ari outlines what he is not, and here he balances this with a description of
what he is. He sees this as his permanent status and has no ambitions to change his
situation. At the end of the film, Ari’s words create an image of himself that could
last the rest of his life and shows his view of the world, whereas the end of the novel
shows an attitude of acceptance but is far less extreme. Ari accepts elements of his
character, but has no inclination to change his situation. In the novel he has no ideas
about his life and no energy to change, whereas in the film it is his negative aspects
that strengthen him as he steps away from the responsibilities in his life. In the novel
it is a lack of motivation that stops him from reacting to the events in his life, whereas
in the film he continues to regard himself and his community in purely negative terms.
Collins and Davis use Ari’s closing speech from the film to compare him to the
archetypal teen rebel:
He is not a ‘rebel without a cause’ but rather an embodiment of
anti-rebellion, a lived form of a powerful refusal to engage, to be
subjugated… Ari’s words express his determination to escape time,
space and the socialising forces of history by immersing himself in
the speed and immediacy of the present (Collins and Davis 2004,
162).
199
In contrast to numerous heroes of the teen genre Ari has no interest in conforming or
in being accepted by his peers. His actions are selfish and it is in only one scene that
he demonstrates guilt for his attitude and an emotional reaction to his personal
situation. Collins and Davis discuss how Ari’s words and deeds keep him in the
present, but the speech also demonstrates that he accepts that this selfish life is his
future. Ari understands that he is sinking and he refuses to do anything to stop himself,
and has no plans for the rest of his life. Ari calls his friends weak even though they
are moving on with their lives, but he regards himself as being worthless. He accepts
his actions and his attitudes, but is as negative in his self-criticism as he is of his
community.
Throughout the film we see Ari interacting with various strangers including Greeks
from outside his regular social group and others from outside the Greek community,
including several men: his brother’s house-mate Sean, a young Asian man, people in
the street, an old man in a Greek club, a taxi driver and two police officers. Ari’s
reaction is different in each situation depending on his actions, whether he speaks or
not, the physical or sexual nature of the encounter, and his level of sobriety. The film
is set across a period of approximately thirty-six hours, and shows Ari exploring
different aspects of his identity across this brief period of time. Each encounter shows
a different situation and demonstrates Ari’s differing levels of power and control each
time – at times he is in complete control of events and in others he has none.
When Ari meets Sean, the only stranger with a given name, there is a clear indication
of a physical attraction. However, when Ari speaks he does not dwell on his feelings
or verbalise any confirmation of this attraction. Although their conversation is brief it
200
does contain reference to Ari and his brother’s relationship with their parents, as well
as expressing Ari’s views of the Greek community:
Sean: How come you Greeks always bullshit your parents?
Ari: You have to lie.
Sean: Why?
Ari: Because if you tell a wog the truth they use it against you.
Here Ari demonstrates the recognisable tensions between a teenager and their parents
which are demonstrated regularly in the teen genre – lying in order to preserve
personal privacy – but includes it in a negative reference to his community. Ari
critiques his community to an outsider without betraying any emotion, either related
to his family, or to his attraction to Sean (which has been alluded to in the editing of
the previous scene). Ari’s words appear to position him as external to the community
he is criticising, but throughout the film his words and actions contradict each other.
Ari’s statement also serves as a warning to Sean, as when he and Ari share a sexual
encounter in the latter stages of the film, Ari becomes angry, aggressive and briefly
violent. This reaction confuses and then angers Sean, which ultimately destroys any
potential future for their relationship. When Ari uses abusive terms such as ‘wog’ he
includes himself in the scorn that he pours on his community, specifically to the
tendency of manipulation and the lack of honesty. Therefore when Sean is honest
with Ari and responds positively to Ari’s physical advances, Ari’s reaction is to turn
on Sean. Following the abrupt end of their coupling, Ari has been thrown out of
Sean’s room and sits crying on the staircase demonstrating remorse; however, his
negative behaviour positions him squarely within the community to which he objects.
201
The first scene to feature one of Ari’s many sexual encounters has no dialogue, and
events pass with without any verbal interaction between the two young men, and Ari
controls every aspects of the event. Towards the end of the film, there is a sequence
that mirrors this in structure but is different in every other way. As with the first scene
Ari makes eye-contact with a man and they meet in a back street, but the latter man is
much older than Ari and far less compliant. The second man speaks to Ari in an
authoritative tone and in Greek, he then forces Ari to fellate him, a situation that Ari
finds uncomfortable and that angers him. The first man was young and from an Asian
community therefore outside of Ari’s own social group, and with no real connection
to Ari’s daily life. The second man is part of the Greek community, and Ari
encounters him in a club that he frequents regularly and that contains members of his
family and friends. The events of this second encounter include a verbal connection
between Ari and the stranger even though their conversation only includes
instructions and insults. This is the only time that we see Ari in a sexual encounter
with another Greek man and the situation is entirely out of Ari’s control. The Greek
man gains the upper hand over him and forces him into an unfamiliar situation of
weakness. As with other scenes in the film the use of the Greek language is symbolic
of authority, and as with the scenes between Ari and his father, Ari reaction is
extreme and negative.
Ari’s aggression towards the Greek men who’ve dominated him is constant, as
though the language used is a provocation. Ari’s dialogue displays his differing
attitudes based upon his company and the nature of their interaction. He is
affectionate to his mother and aggressive or silent with his father, he is supportive of
his siblings when they are not bickering, and equally relaxed and confrontational with
202
his friends. His usual reaction however is to be silent, allowing his physical actions to
indicate his mood. His statement ‘fuck politics, let’s dance’, is representative of his
attitude throughout, preferring to lose himself in physical expression than indulge the
cultural confrontations in his community. However, when he wishes to speak his
mind, rather than repeat his views on the Greek community, he is concise.
Pride in identity – Johnny
Ari’s closest friend is Johnny, though Johnny does not socialise with Ari’s other
friends and has been somewhat exiled from the wider community. Johnny is also gay,
but unlike Ari, he is open about his sexuality and is an active transvestite. Johnny’s
mother has been dead for many years and he lives with his alcoholic father, who was
once a good friend of Dimitri (Ari’s father). Johnny and Ari are close in many ways
and keep each other’s secrets, and at the beginning of the film Johnny is the only one
aware of Ari’s sexuality. Johnny is also Ari’s opposite as he is open about his
sexuality and liberated from the community’s expectations since the exile of his
family from the wider Greek community. Johnny also embraces aspects of his Greek
heritage and celebrates this in his daily life, having taken his mother’s name (Toula)
for his female persona. However, his relationship with his father is hostile indicating
not only Johnny’s anger at his father’s alcoholism, but also his father’s displeasure at
Johnny’s sexuality. The differences between Ari and Johnny are more obvious when
they meet publicly. Ari hides away any part of himself that might affect his external
image, even when frequenting a gay nightclub he avoids any superfluous
conversation. Johnny, however, is willing to demonstrate his true self when
socialising, as in one sequence when he meets Ari in a Greek club, he introduces
himself as Toula. Though Johnny and his father have been marginalised in the Greek
203
community, Johnny’s attitude is one of honesty and he is willing to be Toula amongst
those who disapprove of him; whereas, Ari hides away any controversial elements of
his identity when surrounded by his community.
Following this sequence the two are arrested for possession of narcotics and when in
custody they are severely beaten by the police. During this sequence their actions and
dialogue reaffirm the differences between them including their contrasting attitudes
towards the Greek community. Specifically Johnny’s dialogue demonstrates the
relationship between tradition, language and emotion. There are several moments
when Ari and Johnny criticise members of the Greek community, even when they
themselves are being criticised for being Greek, but here Johnny uses his language
choice to defend himself and to retaliate against his attackers. As with other films in
this genre, the use of language changes from one situation to another and is affected
by emotion. During the police interrogation, Johnny uses passages of uninterrupted
Greek in a moment of extreme emotion, but as the scene closes he reverts to English.
The scene shows Ari and Johnny being questioned by two male police offices, the
senior officer is a white Australian, and the junior is from a Greek background, who
physically and verbally abuse them. Johnny’s verbal reaction in Greek is directed at
the officers’ bigotry, as well as focussing on the Greek officer for attacking his own
people, demonstrating Johnny’s pride in his own identity and that of his community.
This scene shows Ari faced once again with authority. However unlike the scenes of
conflict with his father, he has no understanding of how this encounter might progress.
His arguments with his father follow a repetitive pattern and as such Ari can predict
the inevitable outcome and how he might respond. On the other hand, with the police
204
Ari avoids providing any further provocation as he realises that he cannot control the
situation. In contrast, Johnny’s conflict with his father is emotionally unpredictable
and he is used to expressing his feelings in order to support his argument. As Johnny
retaliates against the police, he focuses on the Greek officer, and speaks Greek more
than English in order to personalise the attack. Whilst Ari withdraws from the conflict,
Johnny uses the incident to vent his anger at the police and the Greek community that
has rejected him and his identity.
The Greek officer is seen allowing his senior colleague to racially abuse Ari and
Johnny, even though the insults affect him as much as they affect his detainees. The
Greek characters in the scene have been set against each other as the white officer
watches the scene unfold. The Greek officer physically attacks Johnny as a means of
channelling his aggression towards his racist colleague. Though the white officer is
outnumbered by the Greek men, they proceed to fight amongst themselves whilst
contained within a structure of implicitly white Australian authority, as the officer
watches them. The Greek men display a variety of attitudes about their own
community as well as suggesting the relationship between immigrant communities
and white Australia. The Greek officer reacts to Johnny’s provocations physically
whilst Johnny reacts linguistically, using their shared language to proclaim his
identity and reinforce his community pride.
Johnny’s confrontational nature is seen earlier through the persona of Toula. He
proclaims his identity by interacting with his community as Toula, provoking a
reaction by striding unafraid through the community that turned his family away.
During the scene at the police station Johnny is still dressed as Toula, and though his
205
wig is removed and his dress damaged, his identity is cemented as a combination of
both Johnny and Toula. The pride and character he exhibited when he entered the
Greek club in full drag is still present during his encounter with the police. Johnny
expresses his Greek heritage through his persona as Toula, using his mother’s name
as a direct link to his family’s history and the generation of immigrants that came to
Australia. His drag persona is also a symbol of the sense of freedom and selfexpression of his Australian identity, as Ari expresses himself through the act of
dancing Johnny expresses himself through his performance as Toula.
The parents – Dimitri and Sofia
Ari’s relationship with his parents can be interpreted to some degree by the fact that
both parents favour a single language when speaking to their children, which also
suggests that Ari is very used to switching between languages within single
conversations. Ari’s father (Dimitri) only speaks Greek throughout the film, whereas
Ari’s mother (Sofia) speaks English to her children with occasional uses of Greek;
Ari’s language choice when interacting with his parents also implies his attitude to
that individual as he predominantly uses English. His conversations with his mother
can be quite loving and use warm verbal tones demonstrating a close and affectionate
relationship. This stands in marked contrast with Ari’s conversations with his father
which are always stressful and difficult, as Dimitri gruffly lectures his son and Ari
reacts either mutely or belligerently, with the refusal of both men to use each others
languages adding to the sense of tension.
In the family home where Greek culture dominates over Australian culture it is
Dimitri’s voice that represents authority. Ari’s actions and attitude (following a
206
traditional path for an example of the genre) react against traditional forms of
authority and therefore against his father’s voice. The lives of Ari and his siblings
combine the cultural traditions of Greece that permeate their community, with the
culture of contemporary Australia. The actions of Ari’s father represent the morals
and mores of his youth in Greece and have not moved on from that point, he
maintains the traditions he was taught and makes no allowance for the possibility that
these have modernised. The vision of Greece that Dimitri holds dear is traditional but
it is also dated.16 The actions of the younger generation move between duty to their
families and their lives outside the family home. Their behaviour and their language
use have been shaped by the need to constantly change their means of expression
based on the situation in which they find themselves. These teenagers have learnt the
appropriate behaviour for each different situation, and keep their lives within the
family separate from the lives they lead with their friends.
Returning to the work of Milroy and Muysken on immigrant communities, there is an
echo here of the linguistic situation in Looking for Alibrandi. In Head On we see the
relationship between two generations rather than three, but it is possible to divide
Ari’s family in a similar way. Dimitri represents the oldest generation (‘monolingual
in the community language’), Sofia represents the middle generation (which is to
‘varying degrees bilingual’) and Ari and his siblings represent the younger generation
(‘virtually monolingual in the host language’) (Milroy and Muysken 1995, 2). Here
the division occurs to some degree from the attitudes of the different characters rather
In an article published in The Guardian ‘Family’ supplement (10/07/10), Christos Tsiolkas discusses
his relationship with the his grandparents and states how he always referred to his extended family with
the Greek words for uncle and aunt as a gesture of respect and the mocking that ensued from his Greek
friends, who stated that this was a tradition only maintained by rural communities, ‘Do you still use
those terms in Australia? You guys are still stuck in the 50s’ (Tsiolkas 2010, 4-5).
16
207
than being based entirely on their age.17 The language use between Ari and his father
comes from contrasting situations, and in each situation there is no place for a
peaceful resolution as neither is prepared to meet in the middle. The middle role in
the argument – linguistically and as the centre of the family – belongs to Sofia, as she
makes the greatest effort to unite the family which is demonstrated in her use of both
languages.
Ari’s mother, Sofia, speaks to her children in English, and with a Greek-Australian
accent, and to some degree this reflects their relationship. Whilst Dimitri makes no
effort to empathise with his children, Sofia makes as much effort as possible. Sofia
also speaks English to her husband in front of her children and acts as mediator
between the two generations by trying to keep the peace in the house. Ari’s
conversations with his mother tend to be in English, although some sentences do
occur in Greek from time to time. The use of Greek, as with the phone conversation
between Peter and Sofia, arise from an emotional need. Peter uses Greek to comfort
his mother and to reassure her, and similarly Sofia uses Greek to quieten her son and
to soothe any bad feeling between Ari and Dimitri. In addition to this, Sofia’s use of
English demonstrates that her relationship with her children is warmer and more
relaxed than their relationship with Dimitri. The scenes between Ari and Sofia begin
in a rather light tone and any change of tone towards the negative is due to the
presence of Dimitri as he enters or exits the scene.
17
Similar to Nonna in Looking for Alibrandi, Dimitri is consistently looking back to his home country
for comfort and culture, whilst Ari, despite his desire to avoid labels, is like Josie and takes more from
the Australian culture around him than he does from his Greek heritage as he considers Australia his
home.
208
Sofia connects with her children by speaking the same language as them and by
engaging with Australian culture. Despite this she does take comfort in the use of the
Greek language in family discussions. When Peter speaks to his mother on the phone
we don’t hear her side of the conversations, but Peter noticeably changes language
mid-conversation. Peter has left the family home and needs to prove to his mother
that he has adapted well to living in his new home outside the Greek community. To
do this he peppers his conversation with Greek phrases indicating a close relationship
with his mother and his concern for her feelings. In the same way the members of the
family comfort each other at significant or emotional moments and to show their
support by speaking Greek.
The positioning of family members by their choice of language is a constant element
of the film. By assigning a specific language to the lead characters, each individual
character begins to represent an attitude and a specific discourse in the film. Ari’s
parents show two sides of the immigrant experience in a new country.18 By analysing
the uses of Greek and by concentrating on the uses within the family, one language
can convey several attitudes and levels including authority, anger, comfort and
maturity. By juxtaposing each character’s linguistic intention within different scenes
the levels of understanding adapt according to the individual. The levels of authority
in Dimitri’s voice and language choice when he speaks to Sofia is different to the
comfort in Peter’s voice whilst speaking the same language when speaking to his
mother on the phone, despite the fact that they are utilizing the same language and
speaking to the same person. A film’s dialogue serves the narrative and creates
relationships between the characters, and between the characters and the audience. In
18
Dimitri has come to a new country as an adult, whilst Sofia has been born and raised in an immigrant
community and has remained there.
209
conversations dominated by English, the use of Greek words or phrases occurs for a
reason. Greek is the language used to punish, to warn, to show pride and to give
advice. It is also an authoritative language in the community, is the language of
tradition and culture, and therefore these words hold greater weight than the use of
English. Dimitri’s constant use of Greek bolsters his position of authority in the
household, and as he never uses English his authority is absolute.
Dimitri’s character and dominant actions continue beyond his use of language. In one
scene Sofia, Alex and Ari are dancing in the kitchen to an English-language pop song
before going out for the night, the song is rather old-fashioned (from Sofia’s youth)
and the three of them appear close and happy dancing together. When Dimitri enters
the room he changes the music to a traditional and instrumental Greek piece and
demands that Ari dances a traditional male Greek dance with him, putting a stop to
the more frivolous dancing performed by the women in the family. Dimitri is again
enforcing his authority and that of Greek culture over Australian, as well as his
dominance as the man of the house with his masculine authority over his family
reflecting the male dominance in scenes of Greek culture throughout the film. Sofia’s
enjoyment of ‘English’ music and her language use demonstrates that she embraces
Australian culture, as opposed to Dimitri who is constantly looking back to the land
of his birth. The dance Ari shares with his father is one of the few connections
between them, as Ari is a skilled dancer across cultural contexts. He is seen on
several occasions involved in traditional Greek dances but is also seen engaged in
energetic contemporary dance at a gay nightclub, two locations that contrast strongly
and represent two parts of Ari’s life that he wants to keep separate. Although the
210
dancing does not involve any verbal language, the movements and music used in both
locations are evocative of specific and contrasting cultures dominated by men.
In the scene that follows Ari’s dance with his father, the two argue once again, and
again the argument is bilingual as they shout at each other without interruption from
Sofia and Alex. As with many scenes in the teen genre depicting conflict between a
parent and child – these arguments are often constructed along gender lines with a
mother arguing with her daughter, and a father arguing with his son – there is a sense
of familiarity in the content of the argument. The feelings that are expressed have
been expressed countless times before even if the phrasing has changed. The
argument ends as Dimitri leaves the room and Ari shouts after him, calling his father
a hypocrite. What is notable is that Ari shouts the word in Greek rather than in
English.19 For the first time Ari wants his father to hear his opinion, and to make sure
of this Ari uses Greek, his father’s language, and the language of authority in the
home.
The effect of Greek varies depending on the speaker. Whilst Dimitri exudes discipline
and authority, Sofia expresses affection and a sense of calm. Similarly amongst the
children the language expresses contrasting attitudes and emotions. Peter uses Greek
to calm and reassure his mother, providing a moment of conformity as a child tries to
please their parent. When Ari speaks Greek to his father it is a moment of defiance
and anger, he is attempting to provoke an extreme reaction rather than quieten the
situation. This indicates that language use is not necessarily gendered; men do not use
language in a different way to women, as language itself suits all necessary functions.
19
This choice of language is reinforced by the appearance of a subtitle on the screen.
211
It is the characters speaking that charges the language with meaning. The use of
Greek here is a means of expressing a part of the character’s identity, thereby
emphasising the emotion they are experiencing be it positive or negative.
Conclusion
The representation of multicultural teenagers conveys the unbalanced relationship
between one culture and another, with the family heritage battling against popular
culture in the characters’ lives. The teenage characters spend their time choosing
between one and the other and ultimately resenting the expectations placed on them
by both. In Head On, Ari is trying to avoid his heritage throughout the film and
especially the possibility of becoming like his father. As his actions lead him away
from his family and friends, his connections with his community seem centred on a
few events and traditions.
The use of language in Head On is located in three specific contexts with Ari
undertaking a role in each: firstly, the various examples of Greek in the family and
the dialogue between Ari, his parents and his siblings; secondly the use of Greek
between Ari and his peer group; and finally in the wider Greek community. The
prominence of family as a linguistic influence in this chapter indicates characters
becoming comfortable with their heritage as they move away from their families
towards the wider world. By linking their identities with their family’s cultural
heritage they are carrying their family’s identity with them, whilst balancing this with
their own interests and ambitions outside their family and cultural community. The
films discussed in this chapter also demonstrate characters being able to connote
212
relationships linguistically and finding it possible to express themselves effectively in
two different languages in different contexts.
Halliday argues that the process of teaching language to children is shaped primarily
by culture and the language heard during formative years. The presentation of Ari’s
family situation indicates a bilingual upbringing formed by a combination of cultures
in the home. The use of the individual is affected by the people and the events around
them, ‘the child learns his mother tongue in the context of behavioural settings where
the norms of the culture are acted out and enunciated for him’ (Halliday 1978, 23).
The language uses of Ari, Peter and Alex, and the uses of their friends within the
Greek community, have been influenced by the linguistic contributions of their
parents and the rest of their community. During the process of learning English and
Greek they have learnt the suitability of language to a particular situation, which
language to use when, and which language to use to convey certain emotions. When
Ari calls Dimitri a hypocrite he is reacting emotionally, but his language choice is a
specific one in order to have the greatest effect on his father. When Johnny verbalises
his feelings of cultural pride and challenges the police officers who have attacked him,
his language choice arises from emotion. The use of Greek rather than English
represents his defence of his position in the Greek community, and his defence of his
identity (cultural and sexual), two aspects that have consistently positioned him as an
outsider throughout the film. Johnny’s empowered use of language alongside his
adoption of the character of Toula, provides him with a strong sense of self. He has
taken on the persona of his Greek mother, by using her name and wearing her clothes
and these combine to symbolise his cultural heritage and cultural pride.
213
The use of languages in the film, especially in the scenes based around the family,
convey historical discourses, as well as the levels of understanding in each
conversation. The power of the understanding arises from the words used and the
history of their usage within the context of the family, and the position of language in
each relationship. Bakhtin describes language as being full of ‘the intentions of
others’ (Bakhtin 2004, 294), and Ari’s use of Greek when attacking his father is laden
with significance. Predominantly Greek is the language of the parents, and the
community’s older generations, and in using it Dimitri and Sofia demonstrate their
parenting styles, aggression and empathy, discipline and love. When the children use
Greek they are taking a parental position, Peter’s comforting of his mother on the
phone, and Ari warning his younger sister about her involvement with an unsuitable
boy.
Ari’s identity is a combination of the rebellious teenager common in the teen genre
and a representation of the developments in Australian identity seen over the past
twenty years. The relationship between the teenager and their parents is a key element
of the teen genre, but here it is combined with a linguistic situation which emphasises
the divide between the generations and specifically between Ari and his father.
Certain aspects of Ari’s character might raise expectations on how the narrative might
progress – his homosexuality, his drug use, and his culture – but his refusal to discuss
these aspects of his identity, and his hedonistic attitude move him away from the
more archetypal characters of the genre, or other characters analysed in this thesis.20
Though Ari is a development in the representation of the Australian male, he is not a
Ari’s sexuality might lead to comparisons with both Spike in Gadael Lenin and Christian in Clueless,
but these characters come to terms with their sexuality, or are comfortable enough in their own
identities that it does not warrant discussion, unlike Ari who remains silent on the subject or content in
his acknowledged self-destructiveness.
20
214
simplistic representation of the contemporary masculine identity, but he is a definite
step away from the traditional views of masculinity outlined by Turner, Bennett and
others. The majority of Ari’s identity is expressed physically, through his
involvement in dances (within the family and with strangers), his sexual encounters,
and his removal of himself from the company of others. Ari’s voice-overs express
anger and futility but his physical movements are positive and expressive of his
cultural heritage.
As noted by Halliday, children learn language and behaviour in tandem, both when a
language – words or phrases – is appropriate and with whom, and in what manner
they should speak. In this film the teenagers divide their vocabulary, languages, and
verbal tone between certain contexts. The bilingualism of these teenagers operates in
part to segregate the contrasting cultural elements of their lives. English is used for
their everyday lives, such as interactions with friends, Australian culture and wider
society, whilst the language of their heritage is kept for interactions with family and
the narrower cultural community. The division of family from friends is a constant
factor in the teen genre, but in films concerning multicultural teenagers the family
plays a far more prominent role – seen in Head On, Looking for Alibrandi, and Bend
it Like Beckham amongst others – and is far more ingrained in the teenager’s identity.
This stands somewhat in opposition to the focus of the previous chapter where the
character’s bilingualism was their everyday means of expression – with the dialogue
combining both languages sentence by sentence much of the time – whilst in this
chapter the two languages are suited to specific situations.
215