Cook’s viewpoint is also supported by Roland Carter who through his study of the CANCODE Corpus (2006, p.29) identify three models, ‘inherency’, ‘sociocultural’ and ‘cognitive’ which draw a link between everyday creativity through the use of puns, repetition and echoing in verbal language, and literature (2006, p.8). Perhaps however where Carter most corroborates Cook’s findings is in acknowledging that language play can be used for ‘humorous purposes’ and act in part ‘to bring people closer together’ (2006, p.34). Whilst Cook agrees that children’s play can serve as a bonding mechanism he goes further in claiming that there is a secondary social function and that is to ‘implicitly exclude others’ (2006, p.39).
Cook’s reading also examines the use of ‘adult language play in private’ (2006, p.40) claiming that although less apparent, language play extends into adulthood through the use of baby talk, asinine and uncouth language e.g. lovers may use pet names to reveal a level of intimacy. Moreover just as children will abandon their studies to engross themselves in fictional video games and television, so too will adults, which is reflected in the widespread popularity of soap-operas. Cook draws on this point further stating that adults use everyday conversations relating to our preferences for films, music, books etc. as a premise not only to define ourselves but also those with whom we wish to form relationships.
Cook also observes ‘adult language play in public’ (2006, p.40) citing pop songs, football chants, graffiti and advertising as examples of word-play and everyday conversation as having ‘playful and creative uses of language’ (2006, p.41). Cook’s commonplace examples of peer-group bonding and word-play is consistent with Carter’s references to ‘interactional functions’ and ‘punning and playing’ (2006, p.8) relating to his inherency model and to this degree conforms to the Maybin and Swann definition of creativity.
The reading also draws on the similarity between children and adults in their use of language-play to relay ‘competition and aggression’ (2006, p.41). In the former this is likely to take the form of playground taunts whilst in adults, particularly males, evidence of ‘verbal duelling’ (2006, p.41) is apparent. Cook refers to evidence of repetition, rhyme and structural patterning used by rappers. This is supported by William Labov’s (1994) earlier study on New York gangs in which he observed gang members using creative language skills such as ‘sounding or a competitive form of fanciful insults’ (1994, p.189) as a harmless way to gain acceptance and social standing within the group. Although Carter would claim that this linked contextually to his ‘sociocultural’ model, Cook would argue that competition and aggression is not class specific, which he substantiates through examples of verbal duelling evident in the higher echelons of society e.g. the banter and rhetoric in the House of Commons. However, in both instances, the application of poetic devices in conjunction with the dramatic element reflect Terry Eagleton’s (2006, p.10) position that performance can be viewed in both a ‘conventional’ and ‘theatrical’ sense and that creative performance is present in everyday life.
This combination of poetry and performance can be seen in Martin Luther’s ‘I have a Dream’ speech, which Cook applauds as ‘one of the best known and most highly valued pieces of English ever produced’ (2006, p.43). In this profound speech Luther merged ‘political rhetoric, poetry and prayer’ (2006, p.42), creating through grammatical patterning and language-play a national coalition amongst the white and black communities of America. Whilst again a link to Carter’s ‘sociocultural’ model can be seen, Luther’s ‘dream’ has a more cognitive effect, tapping into the audience’s knowledge of an ‘alternative reality’ (2006, p.43) and encouraging them to think in new ways. Luther’s ‘dream’ also relates to Lynne Cameron’s study (2006, p.17) of conceptual metaphors and her observation that they are frequently used to create a threat or mutual accord. When Luther speaks of his ‘dream’ we do not presume he is relaying an actual nocturnal vision but rather he is using the term as a symbol for change. Luther’s ‘dream’ embodies his aspiration for the abolishment of racial segregation.
Drawing on the national identity produced by Luther’s speech, Cook observes that language-play is prevalent and creates ‘conformity’ across a wide range of public activities including ‘pop concerts and political rallies’ (2006, p.43). Football fans for example will chant the same songs, wear the same clothes and can feel a sense of unity with other fans, in some instances across the globe. However this social conditioning is restrictive and can constrain creativity. This point is corroborated by Norman Fairclough who referred to this type of conditioning as the ‘slow drip effect’ (Fairclough, 1994) which is generated by the various texts we read during our lives. This links into Cook’s theory that as adults we define ourselves and form relationships with others based on a shared appreciation of books and other media.
Whilst this type of language play enables us to develop our social interactions, what of our individuality? Cook too identifies that there are some genres e.g. poetry and song which enable us to ‘break away from established values and ideas’ (2006, p.43) enabling us to think imaginatively. Other theorists including Ezra Pound (2004) and Carter support this synergy, acknowledging poetry and song as being on the same literary ‘continuum’ (2004, p.202) or ‘cline’ (2006, p.11). Cook goes onto claim that such literary texts are ‘schema refreshing’ (2006, p.14) and that both stimulate and shift our view of the world e.g. Luther’s speech and Dylan’s song lyrics (2006, p.44). He also recognizes that whilst literature can provide new or improved knowledge and awareness, there too is the possibility for this to occur though everyday language. Others including Semino and Jefferies (2006, p.14) have disputed Cook’s ‘schema refreshing’ theory, arguing instead that we look to texts to reinforce our existing view of the world and that whilst language-play can enable us to break with our conventional principles and beliefs, the same text can produce different effects for different people. Therefore a text will not necessarily change our view of the world on every occasion.
In conclusion being creative helps us to adapt and respond to a rapidly changing world. We can be creative in the language we use, the sounds we make and the way we think. In fact, anyone can be creative even if they cannot write, sing, read or dance. Creativity one could argue therefore is a process and not a product and ultimately is open to interpretation. Cook’s reading goes a long way in helping us to understand how to identify creativity in everyday language as opposed to conventional literary texts e.g. through adverts, television, emails, children’s rhymes and political speeches. Moreover we are also able to appreciate language-play as a commonplace but vital survival skill, which can be used to express emotions, create or sever relationships, for enjoyment and simply to encourage us to be more creative in our own use of language. What Cook’s reading does not enable us to sufficiently identify is creativity in everyday language across a range of ethnic groups and gender. This concentration on the importance of language-play within Cook’s reading sidelines more functional types of language (2006, p.12) e.g. the ‘bison down by the lake’ and to this end could be viewed as narrow in its ability to fully identify creativity in everyday language.
Word Count: 1586
Bibliography:
Cameron,L. (1999) ‘Metaphor in everyday language’ in Maybin,J. and Swann,J. (eds) (2006) The art of English: Everyday Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University
Carter,R. (1999) ‘Extracts from “Common language corpus, creativity and cognition” in Maybin,J. and Swann,J. (eds) (2006) The art of English: Everyday Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University
Cook,G. (2000) ‘Why play with language’ in Maybin,J. and Swann,J. (eds) (2006) The art of English: Everyday Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University
Cook,G. (2006) ‘Why play with language’ [CD-ROM], Band 3, The art of English 1, Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Graddol,D. and Cheshire,J. and Swann,J. (2003) Describing Language, Maidenhead, Open University Press.
Macaulay,R.(1994) The Social Art: Language and Its Uses, New York, Oxford University Press
Maybin,J and Mercer,N.(2004) Using English: From Conversion to Cannon, Abingdon, Routledge
Maybin,J. and Swann,J. (eds) (2006) The art of English: Everyday Creativity, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan/Milton Keynes, The Open University
Owen,A. (2007) The art of English: Everyday Creativity Study Guide 1, Milton Keynes, The Open University