# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in Future Play, a resource produced by Fevered Sleep for makers of children's theatre

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in Future Play, a resource produced by Fevered Sleep for makers of children's theatre

# data[].attributes.body
November 2015

# data[].attributes.body
April 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It was in 1946 that George VI granted a charter of incorporation to the Arts Council of Great Britain for the twin purposes of "developing a greater knowledge, understanding and practice of the fine arts exclusively" and "in particular to increase the accessibility of the fine arts to the public".

So from the vantage point of 2016 we are able to reflect on a history of 70 years of public subsidy for the arts. Although such anniversaries rarely offer anything more than symbolic value, in this case it provides pause for thought about the long-term direction of travel and a moment at which to assess achievement in the light of the original ideological intent.

The culture to be democratised is not a common, shared or popular culture but the culture of an elite

Inherent in the idea of Arts Council-led public subsidy is a moral imperative to ensure democratic access to the arts and culture being funded - a 'democratisation of culture'. This ideology has manifested itself in a number of documents, from Jennie Lee's A Policy for the Arts - The First Steps back in 1965, to Arts Council England's (ACE) Great art and culture for everyone in 2013. In practice, this has meant many things, from touring national companies and building regional venues to funding for community arts and audience development.

Most recently, the ideology of the democratisation of culture has appeared in the new DCMS Culture White Paper with its language of "reaching out and increasing access". As the first arts policy in more than 50 years (and only the second ever published) DCMS describes the white paper as ground-breaking. What it certainly is not, however, is paradigm shifting.

Not taking part

Despite much laudable talk of availability and access, the true beneficiaries of public funding for culture still constitute only a small minority. Well over a decade ago, the academic Eleonora Belfiore wrote: "...the fact that so much of public money goes to art forms, the consumption of which is effectively still the preserve of the well-educated and the relatively wealthy (after over 50 years of "pro-access" policies) is undoubtedly a source of unease."

ACE noted some years later: "...even if we were able to eliminate all the inequalities in arts attendances associated with education, social status, ethnicity, poor health and so on, a large proportion of the population would still choose not to engage with the arts."

Last year the Warwick Commission's report on the Future of Cultural Value offered a new segmentation of cultural consumption based on Taking Part data which showed that the two most highly culturally engaged groups accounted for only 15% of the general population and tended to be of higher socio-economic status.

The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population formed the most culturally active segment of all. Between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre, thus benefiting directly from an estimated £85 per head of ACE funding.

This, to quote the Warwick Commission report, "suggests that low engagement is more the effect of a mismatch between the public's taste and the publicly funded cultural offer - posing a challenge of relevance as well as accessibility." As Robert Hewison bluntly notes in his book Cultural Capital: The Rise and Fall of Creative Britain: "The majority of people are not taking part."

This situation asks a fundamental question about the culture which is supposedly being democratised. If art and culture are to matter to more people, they must provide them with value. Much audience development work, however, seeks to provide people not with value but with values, because the ideological basis of audience development is the democratisation of culture.

The culture to be democratised is not a common, shared or popular culture but the culture of an elite. A culture that needs to be democratised in order to justify the subsidy that has led to its creation.

To be fair to ACE, it recognises that there's more to do. It's a viewpoint that strongly implies that ACE sees democratisation as a process, and one that may take a very long time, if it can in fact ever be achieved at all. In this sense, democratising the arts has become the painting the Forth Bridge of cultural policy. The question is whether or not that's acceptable.

DCMS states that its new White Paper "sets out an expectation for the first time that every government-funded museum, theatre, gallery, opera house and arts group should reach out to everyone, regardless of their background".

This appears as either a tacit admission that the previous 70 years of the democratisation of culture was a bit of a sham, or as a failure to understand that what is described in the Culture White Paper is already enshrined in the 1946 charter.

Cultural capitalism

Set alongside imbalances in the geographic distribution of funding, discussed in the RoCC Report, the apparent failure to extend equality of cultural opportunity to all sections of society is now being referred to by commentators as 'cultural capitalism'.

This begs the fundamental question of how much longer the current system of arts subsidy can be considered legitimate. There are, however, promising signs. From one perspective, ACE's Creative People and Places could be construed as an approach grounded in ideas of cultural democracy - that is to say, in a bottom-up, participant-led cultural process.

This is not to suggest that these ideas are new (JA Simpson wrote 'Towards Cultural Democracy' back in 1976), but rather that after 70 years perhaps their time has come round again.

Steven Hadley is a postgraduate researcher at Queen's University Belfast and an arts marketing and audience development consultant.
Tw@mancinbelfast

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It was in 1946 that George VI granted a charter of incorporation to the Arts Council of Great Britain for the twin purposes of "developing a greater knowledge, understanding and practice of the fine arts exclusively" and "in particular to increase the accessibility of the fine arts to the public".

# data[].attributes.headline
Online PPT record on ANew Direction website

# data[].attributes.subject
Online PPT record on ANew Direction website

# data[].attributes.body
Not dated, but likely to be published in the first half of 2016

# data[].attributes.body
10 May 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Opera companies need to get out of their "ghetto" where they are protected by concepts of excellence and artistic integrity and find new audiences on their own ground, the director Graham Vick has told a gathering of the movers and shakers of Britain's classical music world.

Attracting younger, more diverse audiences to become the classical music devotees of tomorrow occupies the mind of all companies. The question is: how to do it?

Vick, the founder and artistic director of Birmingham Opera Company, suggested there were better ways and, controversially, described conventional education and outreach work as a "barrier" to reaching new audiences.

It should be the work itself which finds, develops and educates an audience, he said in his keynote speech at the Royal Philharmonic Society awards.

"You do not need to be educated to be touched, to be moved and excited by opera. You only need to experience it directly at first hand with nothing getting in the way.

"It is those of us who make the work whose responsibility it is to remove the barriers and make the connections that will release its power for everybody."

Vick is an internationally recognised opera figure who has been director of productions at both Scottish Opera and Glyndebourne. He founded what is now Birmingham Opera Company in 1987, annually staging startling, imaginative productions in unusual places - whether abandoned factories or old warehouses.

He challenged his audience "to step up and take responsibility for the wellbeing of our society rather than just talking".

"Maybe that way artists will help bind together our fractured society ... But only if we get up off our arses, get out of our ghetto where we're protected by our excellence, our artistic integrity, our outreach and education departments, our annual reports and go out to find the new world, embrace the future and help build a world we want to live in - not hide away fiddling while Rome burns."

It was a spiky, passionate call to arms in which Vick also criticised the changing art funding model whereby arts organisations are having to raise a greater proportion of their funds privately as public funding falls.

"I see 40 years of work towards the democratisation of art being swiftly reversed by its privatisation," he said.

"I keep hearing 'mixed economy', but make no mistake. We are hurtling towards the American model, where the wealthy pay even less tax in return for a stranglehold on cultural institutions - a phenomenon we see across our society and one that risks driving division ever wider.

"I can't be the only one who feels a sense of collusion - of appeasement? Isn't everything built on such foundations bound to corrode?"

All publicly funded arts organisations in England are now required to show better progress in making audiences, programmes and their workforce more diverse.

Publishing strategies was a key part of the government's white paper and Arts Council England at the end of 2014 warned that it would cut money if it believed not enough was being done.

The debate was sharpened last year by a report from the Warwick commission which showed that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of society make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors.

Vick is in demand as a director at some of the world's grandest opera companies but always returns to Birmingham for, he said, "the glorious participation of audience and performers - of people from every aspect of the city, every age, every ethnicity, every social background.

"Only there can I be completely myself, only there do I find myself, only there is my loneliness always consoled."

Vick gave examples of Birmingham Opera Company's work which brought people together for shared experiences. Last year's project based around Michael Tippett's The Ice Break, in an empty inner-city warehouse, "touched the lives of over 10,000 participants in all 10 districts of the city, 99% of them new to Birmingham Opera Company, 75% under 35."

Vick was awarded honorary membership of the RPS at the awards ceremony - considered the Oscars of British classical music - in the City of London on Tuesday night.

One of the most eye-catching winners and one which chimes in with the sentiments expressed by Vick is an organisation based in Peckham's multi-storey car park.

Multi-Story won the audiences and engagement award "for its ingenuity and simplicity; for its impact in the local community; and as a model that can be replicated to create new audiences for classical music around the UK."

The ensemble specifically sets out to attract new and younger audiences and has been resident orchestra in the Bold Tendencies car park since 2011 when it performed Stravinsky's 1913 The Rite of Spring.

In other awards it was a good night for pianists, with the 25-year-old Russian virtuoso Daniil Trifonov winning the instrumentalist prize for his "technical brilliance, deep musicality and fearless sense of adventure", and Clare Hammond - who also made her film debut as a young Maggie Smith in The Lady in the Van - winning the gong for young artists.

Youth was further celebrated when the National Youth Orchestra of Great Britain won the ensemble award from a shortlist that also included the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra, the Fidelio Trio and the Chineke! Orchestra.

The youth orchestra had been, judges said, "a beacon of excellence for decades".

"But last year it broke new ground with its campaigns to inspire and directly engage hundreds more teenagers with the orchestra. At a time when music has such a precarious place in the schools' curriculum the outstanding work of Britain's world-class youth orchestra is needed more than ever."

Other winners included the BBC Symphony Orchestra's chief conductor, Sakari Oramo; Glyndebourne for Barrie Kosky's staging of Handel's Saul; the baritone Roderick Williams; the Carducci String Quartet; the Kings Place concert venue in London; London's Tri-borough Music Hub in the learning and participation category; composers Julian Anderson and Luca Francesconi; and Michael Church, editor of The Other Classical Musics.

The RPS chairman, John Gilhooly, also spoke of the importance of widening the reach of classical music, of "shouting so loudly" it could not be ignored.

He said: "At the heart of all great music is the idea of looking outwards, of trying to make sense of the world around us, and articulating our thoughts and lives. And in the 21st century, this should be all lives."

* A programme featuring highlights, music and interviews from the awards will be broadcast on BBC Radio 3 at 7.30pm on Wednesday 11 May.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opera companies urged to break out of 'ghetto' to find new audiences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Opera companies need to get out of their "ghetto" where they are protected by concepts of excellence and artistic integrity and find new audiences on their own ground, the director Graham Vick has told a gathering of the movers and shakers of Britain's classical music world.

# data[].attributes.headline
Post on The Arts Fundraising and Philanthropy Programme  website

# data[].attributes.subject
Post on The Arts Fundraising and Philanthropy Programme  website

# data[].attributes.body
December 2015

The Programme was the result of an Arts Council England commissioned grant and has been developed and is led by the Arts Fundraising and Philanthropy Consortium. Consortium partners include the DARE Partnership of Opera North and the University of Leeds, Cause4 and the Arts Marketing Association.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Heather Holcroft-Pinn wasFellow for Tobacco Factory Theatres. Heather helped to raise new funds from Trusts & Foundations, both to support education work and the organisation's future capital plans.
A few weeks ago I attended the Bristol half of the No Boundaries conference 2015, hosted by Watershed. It was a thought-provoking event that pulled off the impressive feat of linking literally thousands of people invested in the Arts world both physically and virtually. I came away feeling a part of a large thriving community, a feeling that the ingenious live link with HOME Manchester really bolstered.

However, one question came up again and again in discussions - why is our community so lacking in diversity? In her provocation, Jo Verrent from Unlimited, confirmed what I had caught glimpses of in other talks by highlighting the findings of the Warwick Commission:

"The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment of all: between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre, thus benefiting directly from an estimated £85 per head of Arts Council England funding to theatre." Read the full report here.

Clearly, we are doing something wrong. In practice, there are very clear boundaries to people accessing the Arts as Sanpreet's excellent blog pointed out; whilst we've got better and better at talking about diversity, we need more practical solutions.

All this discussion about the wealthiest minority got me thinking about my role as a fundraiser - a large motivator for me to be a fundraising Fellow was that when I was growing up in a rural community without a great deal of wealth I was able to participate in theatre for free. We shouldn't forget that the Warwick Commission isn't dealing with all of art - it is specifically talking about publically funded art. For me it seems obvious that, in part, art should be funded so people without personal funds can access it.

So what can I do as a fundraiser to address these boundaries?

Well, first and foremost, I can raise cash for great (ideally free) projects that engage people who experience barriers in accessing the Arts. When looking through the guidelines of trusts and foundations we frequently come across criteria asking us to prove that we reach the most disadvantaged and disengaged members of society - the fundraising imperative is already there.

The second problem is the larger one; how can we transform these participation projects into more than just a tokenistic exercise and instead create life-long engagement with the arts? In the fascinating session at No Boundaries 'How Does the Money Flow', Moira Sinclair of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation made it clear that the Foundation is "prioritising our grants to those [projects] that place user's voices more centrally". As fundraisers we should be looking to gather evidence about the impact that our organisation can make. My organisation, Tobacco Factory Theatres, has a reputation for regenerating its surrounding area and being an accessible space, and whilst this effect is obvious on the ground it is hard to prove without solid data. Gathering case studies and the voices of your community is a great way to give evidence for your potential lasting impact. This was brilliantly demonstrated by Kully Thiarai's talk on CAST, Doncaster's success which had a genuine emotional impact on the conference audience.

Once we've reached out to disadvantaged and disengaged communities we need to ask, 'what boundaries do you face when accessing the arts?' As the widely tweeted John Dyer said in his provocation "Diversity is inviting someone to a party, inclusion is asking them to dance". It's only through asking these questions, gathering the answers and then acting on them that we can truly improve the diversity of arts audiences in the future. As Moira Sinclair warned against, we shouldn't just be saying 'This is what we do', but instead asking 'What can we do?'

No Boundaries was a brilliant event, but whilst the speakers were diverse the majority of the audience (much like all publically funded arts audiences) wasn't. In reality it was an expensive event at £60 minimum and as such it was targeted towards the 8% we've been talking about (there were bursaries available for emerging artists, but only if you were lucky enough to win a ballot).

If the voice of a more diverse type of user is going to be heard, we need to take a step back. It may seem a little frightening, but we can't make a case for our organisation's relevance to a diverse audience without asking this audience first - 'are we relevant?' and if not, 'how can we be relevant for you?'

What do you think? We'd love to hear.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can we break down boundaries as Arts Fundraisers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Heather Holcroft-Pinn wasFellow for Tobacco Factory Theatres. Heather helped to raise new funds from Trusts & Foundations, both to support education work and the organisation's future capital plans. A few weeks ago I attended the Bristol half of the No Boundaries conference 2015, hosted by Watershed.

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in Everyday Creativity report commissioned by ACE

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in Everyday Creativity report commissioned by ACE

# data[].attributes.body
Published in June 2016

# data[].attributes.body
Stella Duffy's mentions the 8% in her blog, February 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Great Art For Everyone' - the problem is in the title.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
And if the problem is in the title, then so is the solution. The Arts Council is asking us what we think of their future plans and strategy. I urge fellow arts-makers AND arts-users to engage with this proposal - yes, being asked what we think is often a sop and answers may well be ignored, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and put our trust in the maybe.

# data[].attributes.body
'Ali Smith calls decline of arts teaching in state schools 'horrific'' by Hannh Ellis-Petersen
18/2/2015
Ali Smith herself mentioned the 8% when speaking at Brighton Festival

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Award-winning Scottish author Ali Smith has described the systematic removal of the arts from state schools, revealed in a report by the Warwick Commission as both horrific and deeply distressing.

Smith, who was speaking as the guest director of this year's Brighton festival, said the report - containing figures that showed children's overall contact with the arts in school has notably decreased over the past five years - were the sign of an education system "going backwards".

"The Warwick commission has raised things which are horrific," said Smith. "Introduction and engagement with the arts begins with education. That's the place where young people either feel included or excluded and if we are cutting back arts coverage and education in our schools, especially at such an early level when young people are so full of possibility and pliability, then where and how are they going to pursue it later if they feel it was never for them in the first place?"

Among the commission's findings were statistics showing that those from working-class backgrounds were being worst hit by the cuts in cultural education, with the wealthiest 8% of society now found to make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors. Smith, whose novels The Accidental and How to be Both, were both nominated for the Booker prize, said that having come from a working-class background herself, school had played a fundamental role in encouraging her to "embrace the arts vibrantly and freely".

"Why would we take that away, why would we go backwards?" she asked. "And it astonishes me to think that it is my generation doing that. I find it deeply distressing that around a third of kids compared to five years ago now have no contact with the arts. It is causing damage at every level and it needs to be addressed."

Smith said her desire to reach out to all audiences and blur the boundaries between the art forms had been a motivating factor in her taking on the role of guest director of this year's Brighton arts festival, one of the biggest cultural events in the UK, now in its 49 th year.

As a guest director, Smith follows the likes of sculptor Anish Kapoor, musician Brian Eno and Burmese democracy leader and campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi. This year, she has helped curate a line-up that features everything from midnight 'nightingale' walks though the South Downs with Mercury-nominated folk singer Sam Lee, a Margaret Atwood discussion on birds and a sound-and-fire installation on Brighton beach.

The festival will also host a rare UK appearance for 86-year-old film director and pioneer of French new-wave cinema Agnès Varda. Varda, whose six-decade career was this year marked by a lifetime achievement award at the European film awards, will be curating a special gallery exhibition as well as doing a talk at the festival while wearing an electronic screen showing her own work around her neck. (She may also, Smith added, come dressed as a potato, "as she has been known to do in the past".)

Smith said she was overwhelmed to have Varda as part of the festival, crediting the French 'mother of new wave' as an integral part of her own introduction both to the arts and the world, while living in Inverness as a teen.

"I grew up in the Highlands of Scotland and we lived in a town where for most of my childhood there was basically no theatre - there was a tiny theatre at the back of the bus station which occasionally put on a play," Smith recalled. "And then when I was about 14, somebody opened a theatre in the middle of the town ... I would go every week, and one Sunday, just by chance, I saw an Agnès Varda film, L'une Chante, L'autre Pas. It was then I realised that Paris was possible in Inverness, that France was possible in Inverness, and that the rest of the world was possible ... She was an influence from that point. So to have her here, all these years later, is simply incredible."

Taking her cue from Varda's recent speech at the European film awards, where she criticised the lack of female directors being celebrated, Smith also made a conscious effort to give British women directors such as Joanna Hogg, Clio Barnard and Carol Morley a platform, with all three speaking and screening their films as part of the festival programme.

It will be a similarly female-led literary line-up, with Jeanette Winterson, author of Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit, delivering the annual new writing lecture, entitled Boldness in the Face of a Blank Page, and Jackie Kay and Carol Ann Duffy also making appearances.

The festival, which closes on 24 May, will end with a new and one-off performance by experimental American artist Laurie Anderson, a show that Smith said was a particularly fitting finale.

"It starts with Varda and ends with Anderson," she said. "Both versatile figures who are never not going to be relevant, never not going to be vibrant and never not going to be plugged into culture across the world in way that resonates."

Brighton festival runs from 2-24 May. For the full programme and to purchase tickets visit the festival website
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ali Smith calls decline of arts teaching in state schools 'horrific'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Award-winning Scottish author Ali Smith has described the systematic removal of the arts from state schools, revealed in a report by the Warwick Commission as both horrific and deeply distressing.

# data[].attributes.body
"Get Creative campaign hopes to unleash the artist inside Britons" by Mark Brown
19/2/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A nationwide campaign has been launched to get the people of the UK to do something creative, whether that is bring out your inner poet, dance a little or, in the case of the BBC's director general, Tony Hall, improve his photography and learn the ukelele.

The Get Creative campaign was launched by the BBC but will be a collaboration with arts organisations and artists around the UK. Hall described it as a "big moment" for the BBC to work as partners with more organisations and individuals than ever before.

"The reason I love art and spend time going to galleries and museums is because of watching Civilisation and Kenneth Clark in the 1960s," he said. "At its best, the BBC is an inspirer, and this is an extension of that in that we are encouraging arts organisations, artists and others to inspire the nation."

There will be a blizzard of TV and radio programmes linked to the campaign as well as public debates and local activities.

More than 100 organisations, including the Royal Shakespeare Company, National Theatre Wales and Voluntary Arts, are already on board and it has celebrity endorsements from Dame Judi Dench, Frank Skinner, Kate Moss, Michael Palin and Nick Grimshaw.

A free day of activities was held across the UK on Thursday, with everything from a big painting by numbers project in Cumbria to circus sessions in Walsall.

The launch comes in the same week that the Warwick commission published a report into the state of the cultural and creative industries. It showed how creativity is being squeezed out of education with fewer opportunities and a decline in the number of school pupils taking creative GSCEs.

The report also revealed how white and middle class arts audiences are. The wealthiest, better educated, and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population make up 44% of live music audiences and nearly a third for theatre and visual arts.

At the Get Creative launch, the actor Timothy Spall spoke of the liberation that creativity brings and remembered teachers who spotted something more in him than he realised. Even his bizarre school art project - he stuck pubic hair to apples and nailed them around his school - helped set him on the road to become the actor he is today. "That set the germ in my head that art is a massively broad church," he said.

The comedian Johnny Vegas also recalled teachers who did not give up on him and encouraged him to be creative - pottery "literally saved me", he said. "It gave me a real belief in my ideas."

Vegas added: "In education now we are so focused with Sats and telling kids their limitations ... let's get back to telling them what they are good at, reminding them of the positives."

The campaign stems from the What Next? arts movement, which began life in 2011 at the Young Vic theatre in London as a group of arts leaders trying to work out a path forward for the arts in the face of coalition austerity. The idea of the campaign was put to Hall last year by David Lan, the theatre's artistic director; Marcus Davey, in charge of London's Roundhouse; and Deborah Bull, the director of cultural partnerships at King's College London.

Bull said: "Creativity is crucial to our survival as a society. We need creativity to imagine a future and prepare us for it ... it was creativity that invented the wheel, discovered penicillin, invented the world wide web.

"It will be creativity that unlocks the solution to our global challenges of climate change, affordable housing and so on."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Get Creative campaign hopes to unleash the artist inside Britons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A nationwide campaign has been launched to get the people of the UK to do something creative, whether that is bring out your inner poet, dance a little or, in the case of the BBC's director general, Tony Hall, improve his photography and learn the ukelele.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tony Hall speech at the launch of the Get Creative campaign

# data[].attributes.subject
Tony Hall speech at the launch of the Get Creative campaign

# data[].attributes.body
emphatic full quotation of 8% stat paragraph in Warwick report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcoming Get Creative, Get Creative - BBC Arts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BBC director general Tony Hall, David Lan and Deborah Bull at the launch in 2015.

# data[].attributes.body
'The Future of the Arts Education in the UK' by Olivia Niland
16/11/2015
Based on an interview with Jonothan Neelands that cites the 8% stat
(medium is an online platform for writing)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Olivia Niland

With the Conservative party securing another five-year term, a question now lingering across much of the United Kingdom is whether this election will have brought any significant change, or just more of the same. This question is of particular concern to those advocating for the overall well-being of the nation's arts and culture sector, which, as a result of funding cuts and an overall lack of government support, has experienced a marked decline in participation and engagement over the past decade.

This lessened focus on access to the arts has been described by those in creative industries as a "systematic" removal of cultural opportunities for young people from schools in the UK. Though the arts represent £76.9 billion, or 5 percent of the British economy, the number of arts teachers in schools has fallen 11 percent over the past five years, and the shift in focus from "soft" skills to those deemed more marketable can be seen at all levels of education and the creative sector workforce in the UK.

"There has never been a golden age for arts education," said Jonothan Neelands, Associate Dean of Creativity at the Warwick Business School. "We're used to the idea that arts are not at the center of the curriculum. There's a gap widening massively, more than it ever has done, and in the UK we are beginning to understand the economic importance of our creative industries."

This dilemma has been the topic of much discussion leading up to and in the wake of the General Election, and was the subject of a comprehensive, year-long report released by the Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Value in February. " Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth " addresses six main areas critical to reviving the country's arts and culture sector, including discussions on diversity and participation, education and skills development, digital culture, and local arts and culture initiatives.

The Warwick Commission was launched in November 2013, and the report reviewed evidence and interviews from more than 200 individuals in the arts and culture sector and creative industries.

"The key message from this report is that the government and the cultural and creative industries need to take a united and coherent approach that guarantees equal access for everyone to a rich cultural education and the opportunity to live a creative life," Warwick Commission Chairman Vikki Heywood wrote in the report's introduction. "There are barriers and inequalities in Britain today that prevent this from being a universal human right. This is bad for business and bad for society."

The research outlined in the report anticipates a continued reduction in public spending and investment in the arts, as well as a widening "participation gap" which has seen not only children from low-income families priced out of participating in the arts, but also the whitest, wealthiest, and most well-educated members of society consuming most of the arts and culture in the United Kingdom. In recent years, 87 percent of museum visits were made by the most elite members of society, the Warwick Report found.

"Publicly funded arts in this country are actually only being engaged with by eight percent of the population, but we all pay for arts through taxes," said Neelands, who, like many in creative industries in the UK, view exposure to the arts at a young age as critical to cultural appreciation throughout one's life. "If you don't get exposed to great art at school, you're unlikely to come across it later in life or see it as being of critical importance."

Some proponents for change in the government's approach to arts and culture argue that current strategies place too much emphasis on making students competitive and marketable for STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields. The Warwick report notes that "our national education and skills offer should not be judged against the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) rankings alone," and that equally important is the UK's enterprise and creative achievement ranking measured by indicators including the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM).

The Warwick report's findings on diminishing arts in schools are indeed stark: GCSE numbers for design and technology dropped by half over the course of a decade, nearly a quarter for drama, and by 25 percent for other craft-related subjects. Between 2012-13, only 8.4 percent of students combined arts and science at an AS level.

One UK arts organization, the Cultural Learning Alliance, has responded to the rise of the STEM approach with its own "STEAM" model, which advocates for integrating the arts with science and technology for a more comprehensive curriculum.

"With the STEAM approach, arts are seen as being of equal value," said Samantha Cairns, co-director of the Cultural Learning Alliance. "The major parties in their manifestos talked about STEM, not STEAM, something which we still need to do more to talk about."

An emphasis on the STEM fields, modeled after what countries including the UK and United States view as more productive, competitive Eastern schooling systems, is not necessarily a newly adopted tactic in Western Europe or North America. But experts now warn of such systems backfiring, with even China and other STEM-minded countries exploring the possibility of moving away from highly rigorous curricula in favor of more creativity.

"The USA and UK are falling over themselves to introduce authoritarian education systems that centralize knowledge and standardize learning and teaching, often citing China as an ideal system," said Neelands. "And yet China is moving in the opposite direction, liberalizing their systems and looking for creative pedagogies. They understand that creativity is an economic resource and engine of growth. We are in danger of losing the values, experiences and opportunities that made the UK and US education systems great."

Neelands, a professor and author who has also served in leadership roles for the Royal Shakespeare Company, Drama UK and the Creative Industries Federation, recently visited Beijing to speak about creative arts and education, and said a changing societal conversation about culture and creativity is already evident.

"The Chinese understand that in order to move from Made in China to Designed in China they need to prioritize creativity and the arts," said Neelands. "They have been extremely successful in PISA and other standardized tests but have not developed the ingenuity, imagination, design thinking and aesthetic sensibility needed to be creative."

In fact, for the United Kingdom, rather than attempting to be more economically viable by emulating China's educational practices, the best course of action may just be to continue embracing the cultural output for which it is globally renowned.

"David Cameron went to China to talk to the Chinese government recently, and was ready for all sorts of questions but instead ended up being asked, 'When's the next series of 'Sherlock' coming out?'" said Sara John, Policy Director of the Creative Industries Federation. "People are starting to understand the economic value of the cultural sector."

Another in the recent crop of newly-founded arts organizations, the Creative Industries Federation was launched in November 2014 by Sir John Sorrell, the UK Business Ambassador for the Creative Industries.

"He found that when he was talking to education people he was having one conversation, and when talking to creative people he was having another," John said of Sorrell. "All these sectors are linked, so he believed there should be a federation that links them all."

The Creative Industries Federation plans to release its first annual report this fall, the findings of which, as John indicated, will likely reach many of the same conclusions as the Warwick Commission and other advocates in the arts and culture sector.

"Humanities and arts are incredible in preparing young people for life, and we've been talking to people in manufacturing and engineering and seeing that the arts are important to them too," said John. "STEM is extremely important, but if you prioritize those areas of study in school by saying that this is the only way you're going to get a job, you devalue the other side of the coin."

The general consensus among arts organizations is that, though the teaching of STEM subjects is crucially important, these should be incorporated with arts subjects, rather than taught at their expense. Critics also see a heavy emphasis on standardized testing as perilous to creativity in schools.

"The current focus on exams means that students don't get as many opportunities at school," said Rakhee Jasani, Director of London's Eastside Educational Trust, which was established in 1994 and works with thousands of students each year. "Shifts in funding and a very narrow focus on exams and qualifications has curtailed arts activities. Arts organizations are crucial because schools are not able to provide enough provisions as they don't have the specialist skills and knowledge."

Among the Warwick Report's suggestions is the inclusion of at least one arts or media subject in the English Baccalaureate. This aims to encourage the undertaking of multi-disciplinary studies as the number of students earning General Certificates of Secondary Education (GCSE) in design, drama and other arts-related subjects is dwindling. Yet even the English Baccalaureate itself is not without debate in the arts and culture sector.

"If Conservatives are part of the government, there will be renewed focus on the English Baccalaureate, which could mean more accountability systems and arts devalued in schools," said the Cultural Learning Alliance's Cairns. "But in some ways, the set curriculum has actually been helpful. Art, design and music are part of it, and if there was no curriculum, that would make it harder for external organizations to engage. In countries where there isn't a national curriculum, if a head teacher isn't particularly pro arts, it's much harder to get arts in because there isn't a marker in the sand with the curriculum."

Equally critical to keeping arts accessible to all, the Warwick Commission notes, are bursary and scholarship schemes for financially disadvantaged students, for which the criteria of such awards must be consistently defined and nationally administered.

In the past five years alone, a wealth of arts-centric charity and nonprofit organizations have sprung up with the intent of making arts accessible to students unable to find them at school, many of whom lack the financial means to pursue extracurricular activities.

One such organization is the National Youth Arts Trust, created in 2013 in response to what founder Fiona Millar described as a "poverty of aspiration" among young people. The Trust works with students between the ages of seven and 25-years-old to offer training in music and dance, support local youth theater projects, and help cover expenses for students invited to auditions at Drama UK accredited performing arts schools. The program has so far worked with 100 students, and provided 10 of those with funding through its bursary program.

"Many boards of auditions are finding that the demographics of people who are coming into audition are very much the same, and there's a lack of diversity, and a lack of aspiration starts at a young age," said National Youth Arts Trust administrator Ruth O'Brien. "We're really looking at raising aspirations for young people, especially from disadvantaged backgrounds, and to show that the arts are accessible to them."

This social and economic hierarchies that tend to dictate one's access to arts and culture have been to shown to come into play at very early stages in life. The Warwick Report found that 22 percent of parents in higher social groups pay at least £500 annually for extracurricular activities, in comparison to just 10 percent of parents in middle and lower-income groups.

"Our founder noticed a trend, that the money ends up being trained rather than the talent," O'Brien said. "This isn't to say that people with money don't have talent, but there are a lot of young people who have loads of talent but don't have access to quality, solid training. This is mainly due to cuts across local arts services, which have meant that theaters have closed, and what we've been trying to do is step in where cuts have happened."

The National Youth Arts Trust has been able to help young artists including student Sammi Stewart, 18, who was awarded a bursary in order to audition at several universities, and is now pursuing dance at Leeds Beckett University.

"At first I was scared that I wasn't going to get anywhere with dance and felt like giving up," Stewart said. "I didn't get many opportunities because of the area that I was from."

Independent organizations have increasingly stepped in to provide supplemental arts education where schools are not able to, and for children unable to afford art schools and private lessons. Though well-intended, some within the industry warn of an over-reliance on extracurricular arts activities as a "quick fix" to a much larger problem.

"The thing with extracurriculars is it should always be an extra, it shouldn't be the only way that you get access to things," said Cultural Learning Alliance's Cairns. "The moment you start looking at extracurriculars, people think it's fine, the arts don't need to be embedded in the curriculum. But not everyone has access to extracurriculars."

Arts organizations have been acutely aware in recent years of the deepening class divides that access to the arts, or rather a lack thereof, has created in the UK. The fact that British artists and entertainers are overwhelmingly white and well-off is a topic recently touched upon by celebrities including James McAvoy, who decried an overabundance of "posh" British actors, arguing that a lack of government support for arts education will result in a sector that can no longer provide upward mobility for those from underprivileged backgrounds.

"It's been really great to sort of ride on that wave of publicity because it's an important issue," said O'Brien of the platform celebrities have created for the issue of arts education. "People don't always talk about this in the media because the arts are seen as not important, especially in the run up to the General Election."

Though arts accessibility was hardly expected to be a major talking point in the run up to the May 7 General Election, many in the arts and culture sector were eager to see which aspects of the issue, if any, the candidates' platforms would address.

To the pleasant surprise of advocates, the manifestos of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties all included mentions of arts and culture, and all made notes to the effect that the creative and digital industries will continue to provide a significant number of jobs in the future, and that arts, culture and heritage are critically important to national identity and quality of life in the UK. All major parties also pledged support to continue free admission museums.

Additional arts and culture manifestos were published by the Labour Party, which released a 20-point Charter for Culture and the Creative Industries, and by the Liberal Democrat party. The manifestos did not, however, address solutions for local authorities or the importance of integrating the arts within a focus on STEM subjects.

"Most parties don't really understand that arts and culture is not 'Nice to have' but essential to a vibrant, exciting and successful country," said Philip Hetherington, Development Director of the Creative Youth Network charity, which provides mentorship for students, entrepreneurs, and organizations. "We hope that any new government will truly recognize the value of the culture and creativity to the individual, the community and to the economy."

Months into another Conservative party term, it remains to be seen whether the government will take heed of these suggestions in order to make the next five years of arts and culture in the UK any different than the last.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Future of the Arts Education in the UK - Olivia Niland - Medium

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Olivia Niland With the Conservative party securing another five-year term, a question now lingering across much of the United Kingdom is whether this election will have brought any significant change, or just more of the same.

# data[].attributes.body
'New Study: Diversity Is Plummeting in UK Creative Culture' by Jack Lowe
2593 views as of 17/2/2016
(seems very similar to the Dazed article)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Study: Diversity Is Plummeting in UK Creative Culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Seeing as the 2015 Oscars were heavily criticised for being the least diverse since 1998, it seems like an appropriate time for the Warwick Commission to publish its new study, which found that diversity is plummeting within the UK's creative industries at an astonishing rate.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article in online magazine Art Link, Arts and Culture from the North of England

# data[].attributes.subject
Article in online magazine Art Link, Arts and Culture from the North of England

# data[].attributes.body
"The Cultural Disenfranchisement of a Nation" by Anne Hall
4/4/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Now that we've seen seven party leaders debate the most important issues facing our country and jostle for our votes, we're even more acutely aware that our choice at this election could be the toughest for many years.

No-one expected any of those leaders to discuss the arts, especially when there was so little time for each of them to show what they're made of. It was the heavyweight issues which dominated - the health service, the economy, immigration and education. But once the election is done and dusted, how far down the pecking order will the arts and arts education be? Will they be an afterthought, when all the so-called 'serious' business is done?

The recent Warwick Commission report revealed that the arts sector was more than an afterthought. It estimates that it contributes almost £77 billion to the country's economy and is the fastest growing industry in the UK. The report looked at all aspects of the creative arts sector which included film, theatre and dance but also video games, pop music and fashion. It found that, despite the industry's significant contribution to the economy, the arts are being seriously side-lined in schools and arts audiences are what the report calls, "overwhelmingly middle-class and white".

This means that the wealthiest, best educated and least culturally diverse in our society - around 8 per cent of the population - are the main people benefiting from publicly funded arts and culture. The report authors want everyone to enjoy a rich and varied arts education, not at the exclusion of other subjects but alongside them. They don't want pupils to be forced to choose science or the arts at an early age but recommend that as well as focussing on the core subjects of science, maths and English, the government should include the arts too. The country needs creative scientists!

None of that will work in the current educational climate in this country which encourages the view that the arts are not worth taking seriously. Rob Pitman, one of Lincolnshire's champions of the arts in education, feels that it should be playing a vital role in the education of children and young people. Yet the Warwick Commission report found that in the 10 years to 2013, there was a 50 per cent drop in those taking Design and Technology at GCSE and a 23 per cent decrease in pupils taking Drama. A significant amount of pupils don't take any creative subjects at GCSE.

The chair of the Warwick Commission was Vikki Heywood, CBE, from the University of Warwick. She says that the report's key message is that the government and the cultural and creative industries must take a united and coherent approach to guarantee equal access for everyone to a cultural education and the opportunity to live a creative life. She feels there are barriers and inequalities in Britain today that prevent this from being a universal human right and that this is bad for business and bad for society.

Ms Heywood went on to say that she wants the report seen by all relevant secretaries of state soon after May's general election. "It has got to be a conversation that politicians can't avoid," she said. Let's hope she's right.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Cultural Disenfranchisement of a Nation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Now that we've seen seven party leaders debate the most important issues facing our country and jostle for our votes, we're even more acutely aware that our choice at this election could be the toughest for many years.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article on the arts event listing website RUN RIOT

# data[].attributes.subject
Article on the arts event listing website RUN RIOT

# data[].attributes.body
'Art as citizenship: Rachel Briscoe on FanSHEN's Invisible Treasure' by Bojan Jancovich
19/10/2015
Interview with Briscoe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find listings and features on London's alternative scenes, including Art, Club, Dance, Film, Music, Theatre, Think & Wild Cards. Sign up.

# data[].attributes.body
'The creative arts are getting whiter and more middle class' by Zing Tjeng
The article has received 1.6K shares as of 17/2/2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Have you ever looked around at a gallery or a gig and thought to yourself, "Hey, everybody here is really white and middle class?" Maybe you haven't; you might be white and middle class yourself. Oh, and the music you're enjoying or the art you're appreciating? There's a high chance that was made by a white, middle-class person too. Also: he was probably a dude.

That's the situation according to the Warwick Commission, which produced a report on Tuesday laying into the UK's appalling lack of diversity in the creative arts. Over the past year, the public enquiry has studied every creative discipline going, from pop music and fashion to theatre and film, to determine where the country needs to improve to ensure the future of the creative arts. Vikki Heywood, the chair of the commission, told us that it honed in on a "concerning lack of diversity".

The report states: "The diversity of the creative workforce in Britain has progressively contracted over the past five years in relation to gender, ethnicity and disability... Access to the opportunity for creative self-expression is currently socially stratified and restricted for many women, ethnic minorities and disabled people."

BAME (black, Asian and minority ethnic) creatives account for only 6 per cent of those working in design, 9.1 per cent in film, TV and radio and 6.7 per cent in music, performing and visual arts - despite the fact that they make up 14.1 per cent of the overall population in England and Wales. This underrepresentation becomes even more pronounced when you consider that BAME residents make up 40 per cent of the population in London, where many creative industries are located.

But this isn't the only problem that the commission discovered: arts audiences are also becoming increasingly white and middle-class. As the puts it, "the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8 per cent of society make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors". That means they disproportionately benefit from Arts Council funding - which is, y'know, meant to help everybody.

The situation is especially concerning, given that fewer and fewer students are taking up the creative arts. Between 2003 and 2013, there was a 50 per cent drop in students taking up design and technology at GCSE level, and 25 per cent for other craft-related subjects. (The report doesn't go into how these figures have affected arts at the university level.) "We do not wish to stray into speculation," Heywood tells us, "but the dramatic drop in the numbers taking arts and cultural subjects at GCSE does not bode well for the future."

If you've ever wondered why British TV is obsessed with period dramas, or why every actor these days seems to come from Harrow or Eton, or why you're interning with somebody called Cressida, there's your answer. The creative arts are stuck in a grotesque feedback loop in which an increasingly narrow segment of society caters to an increasingly narrow segment of society.

"(This) is not about forcing everyone to go to the opera, visit art galleries or take part in dance workshops, but about ensuring that they have the opportunity to live a rich creative life," says Heywood. "It's about making sure that culture is relevant and representative and that everyone feels it is 'for them'. If we don't achieve this, then the 'costs' of failing to grasp our opportunities as a creative nation are deeply sobering."

"If the arts continue to be dominated by white, middle-class audiences and producers, we risk a diminished ability to unlock the creativity of future generations and a sclerotic range of cultural expressions across our many communities."

The report was welcomed by key arts figures, including BFI chief executive Amanda Nevill. "To succeed, we need to involve ALL of the next generation, not just some," says Nevill. "Talent is everywhere, but opportunity often isn't, and the richness and depth of future success, creatively and economically, depends on us winkling out that talent no matter where it is."

Are you a creative who isn't a white, middle-class man who grew up in the home counties? Does this report ring true? Read it in full here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The creative arts are getting whiter and more middle class

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Have you ever looked around at a gallery or a gig and thought to yourself, "Hey, everybody here is really white and middle class?" Maybe you haven't; you might be white and middle class yourself. Oh, and the music you're enjoying or the art you're appreciating?

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in a feature on the Royal Academy of Arts website

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in a feature on the Royal Academy of Arts website

# data[].attributes.body
'Are we building too many museums?' By Stella Duffy and Kieran Long
21/5/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are we building too many museums?

Would building more museums help to improve society or be a wasteful luxury? Theatre-maker Stella Duffy and curator Kieran Long go head to head. Read both sides then vote in the poll below.

Yes...

We should focus all of our efforts on opening up existing museums to a much wider public, says Stella Duffy.

We don't need another museum or another gallery because we don't fully use those that we already have. Additionally, we have far too many city-centre venues. While many buildings purport to be for all, sharing arts and culture with all, they cannot possibly do so from a static base. Not everyone lives in a city, and of those who do, not all live in London, and many of those who do live in London still don't feel welcome in the moneyed monoliths that are our major arts institutions.

Instead of creating yet more buildings for an elite (if your venue isn't free to all, if there are still people who do not feel your venue is for them, then yes, it's for an elite), we need to utilise the spaces we do have properly. Turn our night- empty galleries into dance studios, change foyers into midnight rehearsal spaces, share thousands of offices for free evening classes, or simply offer an hour at a well-lit desk to the would-be writer in the night cleaning team.

Currently, too many of our arts institutions use the school visit as their main form of engagement, but a teenager who does not enjoy school will equate both venue and art form with the schooling they don't enjoy, and are less likely to ask a parent or guardian to bring them again. Further, if an adult does not feel comfortable in the building, they will not bring their child, and the depressing circle of privileged parents privileging their children continues. Depressing, not least, because it means new blood is not coming into the arts, and the arts are diminished when this happens.

I was born in a south London council estate and grew up in a small New Zealand town, two hours from the nearest gallery or museum. My family did not regularly engage with formal arts provision, not least because, as products of the pre-Second World War working class, little about arts venues made my parents feel welcome. Not enough has changed. I first visited the RA only ten years ago, taken by a friend who is a Friend. I had walked past the courtyard many times, yet had no idea it was available to me.

The RA is over the road from Fortnum & Mason: how many of their staff regularly use the courtyard, let alone the gallery? How many doing the lowest-paid jobs in galleries and museums feel they own the spaces in which they work? The troubling statistics from the Warwick Commission Report on the future of cultural value tell us that the 'wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8 per cent of the population are most culturally active'. Public engagement must be more than school visits or summer schools for those lucky enough to live near a venue, more than occasional late-night openings. Take art to the people instead. Save the money from a single big new build and create dozens of touring exhibitions, travelling to shopping malls, camping sites, rural villages. Wider access is good for the people and good for future arts.

I have worked in the arts as a writer and theatre-maker for over 30 years, and I know we are still not making 'arts for all'. So if you must build, make a Fun Palace when you do. I co- founded the Fun Palaces campaign to promote the widest possible engagement with and access to culture for all people in local communities. Ask the plumbers and electricians working on your building what they'd like to learn, hear, view, enjoy. Invite the cleaners to curate. In our Fun Palaces pilot last year, with 138 venues and locations participating across the UK, tens of thousands joined in. Venues that opened their doors to all, found that 70 per cent were visiting for the first time - because the community were invited to curate, to create, their families and neighbours came to see what they had made. For just one day, these organisations attended to their geographic community, and came alive locally. Sharing the arts more fully with everyone might mean we have to open our doors a little wider than is comfortable - it's a small price for finally achieving arts for all.

Stella Duffy is a writer, theatre-maker and Co-Director of Fun Palaces, a national campaign for greater access for all to the arts. Her story collection Everything is Moving, Everything is Joined is published by Salt (2014).

No...

New museums can bring positive change to the places in which they are built, argues Kieran Long.

While there are still more people going to the British Museum than to Alton Towers, and while in the past year London's V&A (where I work as a curator) had record visitor numbers (3.6 million), it is difficult to argue that the public's appetite for museums is sated. People want to come. Whatever else they might be, museums are a primary leisure destination today, especially in cities, and urban populations are set to continue to rise for some while longer.

I believe museums are so popular because they are public in the best sense: they are accessible, not driven by commerce. They empower people with reliable knowledge and have a sense of authenticity and institutional mission that is rare in public life. Museums are often in beautiful or strange buildings. The things in them are not for sale. These are not common attributes in the city these days.

We feel good in places where generations have cared for a collection, where artists, designers, scientists and scholars have been inspired, where social and economic hierarchies are put on hold and cultural ones are in question. Museums are places that are owned by the public, and they are loyal to a different set of values than those of the shopping mall or theme park.

Of course museums do not inherently possess these qualities. We see the results of the National Lottery culture-building boom of the 1990s and 2000s with its many successes, but also plenty of institutions without a mission, with no clear sense of public duty, and with an offer pitched somewhere between didactic educational experience and theme park. Also, too many museums are obsessed with contemporary fine art, and not enough with the crossovers between artistic production and design, digital, architecture, technology, science, anthropology and history.

But there is a new model brewing. One of the pioneers has been Grizedale Arts, based on a farm in Coniston, Cumbria. Under Director Adam Sutherland, it has conducted a wide-ranging enquiry on how art can be useful. Its Ruskinian ethos helps the public to make things and even to make money from their work. But Grizedale also collaborates with world-class artists on useful projects - its Liam Gillick- designed library in Coniston is a surreal, but also oddly appropriate thing to find in a small town in Cumbria. At a small scale Grizedale has become a rich, multifaceted institution and an impressive profile in terms of curatorial practice.

Sutherland asks what can art and craft do for the public at a granular, local level, and he takes the answer seriously. Grizedale alumnus Alistair Hudson has just taken over Middlesbrough Institute of Modern Art and is set to bring the same sensibility to one of those Lottery-funded buildings that has been struggling for a mission. I await the results with excitement.

At the V&A we are beginning the process of designing a new museum for the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in Stratford, London, as part of a new cultural quarter. We want that new building to reframe for the digital age the Victorian civic ethos of Albertopolis, the cultural area around London's Exhibition Road that is home to the V&A. When a museum with the V&A's resources arrives in a borough such as Newham, it has the potential to make a generational shift in aspiration, education and culture in a place that is ready for it.

If we consider the question at the level of individual communities that long for impartial, reliable, civic institutions that aspire to provoke profound artistic, philosophical and political reflections in their audiences, then museums are as essential as bus stops, job centres or town halls to the communities they serve.

Kieran Long is Keeper of the Design, Architecture and Digital Department of the V&A, and was formerly Editor of the Architects' Journal.

Enjoyed this article?

Become a Friend to receive RA Magazine

As well as free entry to all of our exhibitions, Friends of the RA enjoy one of Britain's most respected art magazines, delivered directly to your door.

Why not join the club?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are we building too many museums? | Blog | Royal Academy of Arts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Would building more museums help to improve society or be a wasteful luxury? Theatre-maker Stella Duffy and curator Kieran Long go head to head. Read both sides then vote in the poll below. We should focus all of our efforts on opening up existing museums to a much wider public, says Stella Duffy.

# data[].attributes.body
Mention in the blog that accompanies the Get Creative project at KCL
'Update' by Anna Bull
18/1/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are now halfway through the Get Creative Research Project and have written an internal interim evaluation report, drawing on our research to date, which has been circulated to the Stakeholder group running the campaign. This has been a fairly substantial piece of work which - although provisional - lays out a series of interim...

# data[].attributes.body
Gompert's video blog (which misunderstands the 8%) listed in a Nigeria news listing website
http://www.newsjs.com/ng/binge-watch-is-collins-dictionarys-word-of-the-year/

# data[].attributes.body
Gompert's video blog (which misunderstands the 8%) listed in a Nigerian news listing site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New Zealand Philippines العالم العربي (Arab world) الإمارات (UAE) لبنان (Lebanon) <السعودية (KSA) 香港版 (Hong Kong) தமிழ்(India) മലയാളം (India) తెలుగు (India) ישראל (Israel) Việt Nam (Vietnam) বাংলাদেশ (Bangladesh) ฉบับ ประเทศไทย (Thailand)

# data[].attributes.body
Quote from the Warwick report on an ethics-themed tumblr site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The wealthiest, better educated and leas...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment of all: between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre, thus benefiting directly from an estimated £85 per head of Arts Council England funding to theatre.-- The Warwick Report, Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in the May 2015 newsletter of the Little Theatre Guild

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in the May 2015 newsletter of the Little Theatre Guild

# data[].attributes.body
The Little Theatre Guild, now known as the LTG, has been in existence since 1946 to represent the views of Amateur theatres across the UK. Membership of the LTG is open only to those amateur theatres that own or lease the theatre premises in which their productions are mounted.

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in blurb for a conference on artists's responses to demographic change

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in blurb for a conference on artists's responses to demographic change

# data[].attributes.body
Grand Union Orchestra presents 'The Isle is Full of Noises'
Sunday, 12 April 2015 (All day) to Sunday, 26 April 2015 (All day)

A Series Of Performances And Practical Debates On How Artists Can Reflect And Respond To Britain’s Rapidly Changing Demographic.

12th – 26th April 2015

# data[].attributes.body
A report of an IETM event, produced as part of the 2015 Wales Arts Council Investment Review "Would anyone miss us if we’re gone?”
March 2015
Acknowledges both UEP and the Commission

# data[].attributes.body
'Arts Cuts Cost' by Molly Horner

# data[].attributes.body
Mention in the blog post entitled 'THE WARWICK COMMISSION REPORT – A TIMELY MANIFESTO?' in the Theatrenobody blog
3/3/2015
https://theatrenobody.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/the-warwick-commission-report-a-timely-manifesto/

# data[].attributes.body
31/8/2015
'UK Culture is Becoming a Dead Parrot. What do you want? Cash?' by Peter Elliot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I Am As Mad As Hell. Like Peter Finch, I am going to lean out of my window shouting I Am As Mad As Hell.

Join me. Go to your window now.

It has been quite busy inside my head recently. The usual problems - how long is it safe to keep a tin of corned beef in the fridge; where did I leave my glasses, and how did something this bad ever get on to my television? - have all been squeezed to one side. Even that Circle of Hell discussion 'What are the blues' has temporarily disappeared....

Instead, two serious issues have loomed up through the little grey cell swamp.

An important discussion about the funding and future of the arts and culture in the UK is in danger of being totally buried by the noise of trough chomping.

First. I gather that if you slip MPs Jack Straw or Sir Malcolm Rifkind some dosh they will be happy to join your side as a cheerleader. For somewhere between £5,000 and £8,000 for a half a day's work they will "make a speech or something" or get you access to any UK Foreign Ambassador or possibly even the Prime Minister. Hold that exciting thought in your non-greased palm for a moment. I will come back to it.

The Second Issue is that, eventually, The Warwick Commission published its phenomenal final Report on the Future of Cultural Value in Britain. I have in the past got marginally involved in the national discussion about the funding of the "Arts" but I fear that this time this important report, plus the BBC's 'Get Creative' campaign and the launch of Hull as 2017 City of Culture are all in danger of being drowned out by the front page antics of lesser mortals.

Sadly we have become accustomed to the parlous state of both - the one wallowing in a sea of uncountable (and unaccountable) moolah - and the other scrabbling around in the dust for some spare change. This report is important.

The arts have never had any political traction and with pre-election promises now forgotten, the subject will become a Dead Parrot. The idea that you give money to a school to teach kids about music or art or dance or drama or film takes on on a hollow doomed ring. It doesn't tick any vote boxes so let's talk about something else, anything else.

The Warwick Report tackles that question of confused priorities head on. At a time when the 'creative arts industry' is showing an unprecedented growth (faster than most other areas) and is a serious force in the economy, this is not a moment to sideline the discussion. On the contrary, most commentators think that if the report is taken seriously, it has the potential to transform the cultural life of the country. They are right. A brave politician would pick that one up and run with it. Yeah.

Nowhere is there a suggestion that the answer is for the Nanny State to step in - and quite rightly so. Sponsorship, patronage and private backing have been part of the arts structure for centuries and you only have to look at the major institutions in say New York or Milan to appreciate that and how well it can work. There is no need to compromise as a result of commercial investment. The real issues raised here centre around funding - on how to nurture the talent, how to cultivate the creative arts as they come through the schools into the community, how to maintain them and make them blossom.

The very idea of the arts helping to provide a richer and more uplifting way of life for the individual, the community and to the country as a whole should not be a day-dream and a political no-go area. The evidence is out there. You don't need me to point out the extraordinary curative power of music or its neurological benefits; the sheer delight of the local community musical or the magic joy shown in all those random choir shows. It touches all of us and should be dead centre.

What is clear is that while the nation base for the arts is extraordinarily diverse with every type of artist and audience arriving from multi- class and multi-ethnic starting points, two things are still happening that must be arrested. Educational cultural freefall. Just for example, after-school drama and dance classes have dropped by 50%, art classes by 33% and higher education craft courses by 46%. Secondly, at the top of the pyramid (including the Arts Council, Regional Arts Organisations and major national arts organisations and boards and management) the predominance is only representative of the top 8% of the well educated, well heeled and least ethnically diverse group in the country. The Warwick report spells it out and doesn't mince its words....
"DfE and Ofsted must ensure that all children up to the age of 16 receive a cultural education in order to ensure their life-long engagement and enjoyment as audiences and creators. The goal is to ensure that those creative and cultural experiences and capabilities that are increasingly being limited to the wealthiest and least representative groups are also made available to all. Without educational intervention we are in danger of allowing a two-tier system in which the most advantaged in social and economic terms are also the most advantaged in benefitting economically, socially and personally from the full range of cultural and creative experiences."
On the plus side, the advance of digital technology is providing wider access to the creative experience and, particularly for the young, is making inter-action and the creative process both easier and instantly exciting, in music, art and film in particular. Yet, despite £200 million being invested in 'Crowd Funding' mainly via the internet last year, (no surprise) half of our arts and cultural institutions don't use the internet to generate revenue. There is a vast area here that should be opened up, invested in both for research and development and the establishment of national cultural data-bases.

There is in the UK a 'vibrant creative life at local and regional levels across the country that reflects and enriches community expressions of identity, creativity and culture'. The fact that it is being slowly starved to death in our educational and community institutions without regard to its importance and that in all probability it will only appear as a small paragraph on page 94 of a party manifesto is a scandal. The Warwick Report should be on the front pages instead of that collection of pathetics currently hogging the headlines.

Ok, back to our trough-fixated MPs. So here's a deal my porcine friends.

I have a vested interest challenge for you, my Slithy Toves. Here is a crisp £20 note. I borrowed it from the Swiss Branch of my Fictitious Blues Support Company. Go on, take it. Look after it - for all you know, it is part of my children's inheritance. Take my cash and go and get The Blues on your agenda.

You can start with laying your hands on some funding for school music classes, home tuition, instrument loan, equipment, visiting artists and all those volunteers out there who are getting on with it, spending their own money, without having their palms crossed or their arses kissed.

Look, I'm offering you money. Hard cash. You bragged you could 'make a speech or something'. Years ago Mary Warnock wrote a fabulous book on the importance of Imagination which, among other things looked at its direct connection to the creative arts. Use your imagination when you reach the trough.

Apart from anything else, you could put it towards getting your hearing fixed - as it seems that you and your friends aren't listening right now.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK Culture is Becoming a Dead Parrot. What do you want? Cash? - Trebuchet Magazine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join me. Go to your window now. It has been quite busy inside my head recently. The usual problems - how long is it safe to keep a tin of corned beef in the fridge; where did I leave my glasses, and how did something this bad ever get on to my television?

# data[].attributes.body
8% stat mentioned explicitly

# data[].attributes.body
Blog by Will Gompertz on the BBC website
9/3/2015
Sort of misunderstand the point of the 8%

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Only 8% of the population actively consumes culture in the UK, according to Enriching Britain, a study by Warwick University.

But perhaps it depends on what you consider to be culture.

For example - why does opera count when cinema does not? And are art institutions, and the people who run them, pandering to their mates?

That's what I've been pondering in my weekly vlog.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Only 8% of the population actively consumes culture in the UK, according to Enriching Britain, a study by Warwick University. But perhaps it depends on what you consider to be culture. For example - why does opera count when cinema does not? And are art institutions, and the people who run them, pandering to their mates?

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in report "Celebrating Success" on the work Clean Break does in prisons

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in report "Celebrating Success" on the work Clean Break does in prisons

# data[].attributes.body
Latest round of greenhouse projects – who are theatre makers and venues planning to talk to?
16/7/2015
House supports venues by improving the range, quality and scale of theatre presented across South East and Eastern England, and exists to build the audience for contemporary theatre across the region

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you asked theatre makers who they'd most like their work to reach, the majority probably wouldn't plump for the wealthiest, best-educated, least ethnically diverse 8% of the population that the Warwick Report identified as the main consumers of publicly subsidized theatre. And when great work meets a less exclusive demographic - as I experienced recently in Bordon when house brought the astonishing Grounded to The Phoenix Theatre and Arts Centre - the result can be electrifying, injecting the whole business of making and presenting contemporary theatre with a renewed sense of purpose.

This remaking of the connection between theatre makers, venues and, crucially, audiences, is what lies behind greenhouse's emphasis on projects that are created in dialogue with a potential audience. It's great to see this ambition increasingly reflected in the pitches that we receive. More exciting still is how this approach has infused many of these projects with a politic that feels as refreshing as it does urgent.

And so it is with our latest round of seed funded projects; 15 new ideas that have been selected through an open call, conversations with theatre makers and venues in the house network, and partnerships formed through our Pitch Up events (forums to help theatre makers and venues make new connections). Thanks to the generous support of Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and Arts Council England, we have been able to invest over £70,000 across these projects, enabling new conversations to be opened between theatre makers and audiences in the South East.

Current projects include a verbatim play created with residents of the UK's most deprived town, a new theatre company comprised of people who are long-term unemployed, and a project that creates a dialogue between homeless people and detained asylum seekers. There are projects that will be created with ageing swingers in Canterbury, South Asian communities in Gravesend, foster carers in Aldershot, activists and politicians in Havant, young children in Worthing, pleasure-seekers in Letchworth, Eastern European migrants in Margate and social housing residents in Chipping Norton. Because, it turns out, when you do ask them, these are the people that theatre makers want to reach.
All 15 projects to receive seed funding in 2015:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Latest round of greenhouse projects - who are theatre makers and venues planning to talk to? - house

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you asked theatre makers who they'd most like their work to reach, the majority probably wouldn't plump for the wealthiest, best-educated, least ethnically diverse 8% of the population that the Warwick Report identified as the main consumers of publicly subsidized theatre.

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in report of a meeting of Reading Borough Council 

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in report of a meeting of Reading Borough Council 

# data[].attributes.body
Report entitled:  THE FORMER CENTRAL CLUB BUILDING – CONSULTATION AND REVIEW BY READING VOLUNTARY ACTION
16/3/2015

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in an abstract of paper presented at conference

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in an abstract of paper presented at conference

# data[].attributes.body
MAKING THEATRE IN THE MIDST OF AUSTERITY
http://blog.poortheatres.manchester.ac.uk/events/

# data[].attributes.body
'The arts are dying and only one man is willing to save them' by Stuart Haw, 21/11/2015 (the man in question is Corbyn, according to the article)

# data[].attributes.body
'The Art of Valuing: Between evident and evidence-based', Report of a panel discussion held at an IETM conference in Brussels in February 2015
Cites UEP as well as Commission BUT completely gets wrong the 8%

# data[].attributes.headline
Commentary on Warwick Commission on A.N.D.'s website

# data[].attributes.subject
Commentary on Warwick Commission on A.N.D.'s website

# data[].attributes.body
'A thriving creative ecosystem starts with young people' by Holly Donagh, 24/2/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Still taken from the Warwick cultural value report)

The Warwick cultural value report is a bold attempt to look holistically at the dynamics - social, economic, political - which underpin the cultural sector and come up with a small number of policy recommendations to help Britain capitalise on its creative strength.

For those of us who have worked in the arts for a while there are few revelations in the report but there is a determined, and in some ways subversive, clarity to the way the issues are brought together and positioned.

It has been known for a long time that income and educational attainment are the most reliable signifiers of adult arts engagement, it is therefore inevitable that audiences are predominately drawn from a small section of society, but it is still quite shocking to see this so starkly described;

"The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment of all: between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre, thus benefiting directly from an estimated £85 per head of Arts Council England funding to theatre....The same 8% of the population also accounted for 44% of attendances to live music, benefiting from £94 per head of Arts Council music funding."

It is the fact that the sector is underpinned (though not wholly reliant) on public funding that makes this an issue. Is there another part of the public sector where beneficiaries are so skewed towards people from upper income brackets?

The Warwick notion of an ecosystem is crucial, the interdependencies of the sector are the sector, it can't be treated like a purely commercial industry nor a state run 'public good'. But if we are to tackle the ingrained issue of inequity then the ecosystem metaphor needs to be expanded. It is not enough to simply maintain the same notions of outreach, accessibility and education programmes if they have not significantly shifted the nature of arts engagement in the last twenty years. There are issues of class, power and autonomy which have deep roots - the arts and cultural ecosystem will only thrive if it starts to engage with these questions further back.

As an organisation with a focus on young people it is perhaps inevitable that I start with them, but the deeply rooted dynamics which underpin choices of engagement begin a long time before adulthood. In primary school, maybe even before that, children start to recognise what is and is not for 'them' and start to see the world in terms of people like them as opposed to people not like them.

Our research with young people suggests that many young people are suspicious of what they understand 'the arts' to be, it is imagined as something middle aged, mono-cultural and pretentious - this is despite the almost universal interest young people have in one or other mode of creative expression.

At A New Direction (AND) we would never interpret this as saying that the arts should therefore dumb-down or try to be something it is not but we have to ask what does it say about the sector (and wider society) when young people so often perceive it as part of a world which is entirely disconnected from their own. And of course if you are one of the 650,000 young people in London growing up in poverty, are you likely to end up as part of the 8% most culturally active segment of the population? Not if current trends are anything to go by, so maybe it always will be entirely disconnected from your life anyway.

Warwick are right to make a strong plea for cultural education and to take a tough stance on diversity and access to the creative workforce. It essential that we normalise arts participation an early age through school and create a school accountability framework which encourages arts, culture and creativity.

As a sector, employers must start taking more responsibility for encouraging young people from different backgrounds to make careers in the field. Young people are often hugely passionate about creativity and see working in the creative industries as a life dream and yet they have woefully little concept of how to achieve this and little or no useful support at home or in school. For people of a certain age working in the arts it is almost inevitable that they would have started out by doing some kind of unpaid work experience. If we are serious about changing the demographics of the sector then we've got to come up with better ways than this of providing first entry points.

Warwick's headline about a 'national plan' whilst eye catching, masks more interesting recommendations embedded in the report which press for greater regional and local collaboration, resource sharing and strategy join-up. In this time of strained resources this is surely the only way to manifestly expand opportunity. But for this to work it requires organisations, maybe also individuals, to put their collective needs of communities before their own. Our Connected London programme is an attempt to build local partnership between cultural orgnisations and schools and it is having some good outcomes it terms of shifting the balance but it is also showing up some of the pitfalls and difficulties with this approach.

It is slightly depressing to once again see the fact of higher arts funding levels in London from the Arts Council (not by any means by local authorities) used as an argument for re-distribution to the regions. London is not the enemy, it is a crucial engine for the creative sector and if it is diminished it will diminish the whole of the sector in England - that is the nature of an ecosystem after all. Also, London is experiencing both a population boom and a housing crisis, this is pushing more working families into poverty and levels of child poverty remain stubbornly high. The issues of who does and does not have access to culture are just as real within London as anywhere else in the country and the assumption that somehow high levels of funding to London mean that the region is in some way sorted are specious.

AND's focus is addressing the underlying causes cultural inequity through:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A thriving creative ecosystem starts with young people﻿

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Still taken from the Warwick cultural value report) The Warwick cultural value report is a bold attempt to look holistically at the dynamics - social, economic, political - which underpin the cultural sector and come up with a small number of policy recommendations to help Britain capitalise on its creative strength.

# data[].attributes.body
'Arts must do more to appeal to wider public or face “cultural apartheid” – report' by David Hutchinson, 17/2/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A landmark new report has warned that more needs to be done to fix the "mismatch" between publicly funded arts and the taste of the general public, in order to avoid "cultural apartheid".

Statistics in the publication reveal the 8% of people who are the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse made up at least 28% of live theatre attendees in the last three years.

Following a 12-month inquiry into the state of arts and culture in Britain, the Warwick University report highlights concerns over the relevance and accessibility of subsidised arts.

After asserting that passion for the arts is "widespread", it concludes: "Low engagement is more the effect of a mismatch between the public's taste and the publicly funded cultural offer."

"We are particularly concerned that publicly funded arts... are predominantly accessed by an unnecessarily narrow social, economic, ethnic and educated demographic that is not fully representative of the UK's population".

The report features recommendations from a collective of leading arts figures including Young Vic artistic director David Lan, as well as Arts Council England chair Peter Bazalgette and incoming ACE chief executive Darren Henley.

Lan told The Stage that more must be done to engage wider theatre audiences to avoid "cultural apartheid" between elite arts audiences and the broader public.

"It's hard to believe that suddenly people aren't interested in great works of the imagination that have engaged vast quantities of people over the past 400 years", he said. "I would like to know why that should be. I just think we're not good enough at engaging people."

He also said that ACE should be forward thinking with its investment, adding: "Arts organisations, like other organisations, don't have to live forever. It's not a bad thing if they stop. If the energy's gone out of them, or if there's more energy in something else, then that energy should be supported."

Former Royal Shakespeare Company chief executive Vikki Heywood, who chaired the report, said it was "a demanding scorecard against which to judge the next government."

She said: "We're not saying that every piece of art has to be massively popular, but what we are saying is that more art needs to be of interest to a wider group of people - not in numbers, but in demographics."

An ACE spokeswoman denied that low engagement was just a challenge for subsidised arts, and said it extended to the commercial sector.

She added: "Broadening audiences, to include as many people as possible, is one of our absolute priorities. Everyone in England should feel art and culture can be part of their lives regardless of their income or their background."

The report emphasized a number of the creative sector's assets - including the fact that its workforce is growing four times faster than the UK workforce as a whole. In addition, it highlighted recent government figures showing the sector contributed £76.9 billion to the economy in 2013.

Read the full report online here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arts must do more to appeal to wider public or face "cultural apartheid" - report | News | The Stage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A landmark new report has warned that more needs to be done to fix the "mismatch" between publicly funded arts and the taste of the general public, in order to avoid "cultural apartheid". Statistics in the publication reveal the 8% of people who are the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse made up at least 28% of live theatre attendees in the last three years.

# data[].attributes.body
'MY PROSECUTION WITNESS STATEMENT FROM TODAY’S @ARTSONTRIAL #PARTICIPATIONONTRIAL' by Stephen Pritchard (refers to 8% as 'the magic number')

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is my prosecution witness statement from today's Participation on Trial event... The (eventual) verdict was "GUILTY - BUT WHO CARES?" Comments always welcome... Everyone's a 'participant' nowadays. Aren't 'they'? Or, following the Warwick Commission's report on The Future of Cultural Value and its magic number - 8% - should I say 'we' - members...

# data[].attributes.body
The Lyn Gardner Guardian blog post of May 2015 'How would you explain theatre to somebody who's never been' reposted on the website of Company One Theatre, in Boston, MA
Company One is Boston’s theatre for the people. We are the intersection of art and social change.

# data[].attributes.body
The Lyn Gardner Guardian blog post of May 2015 'How would you explain theatre to somebody who's never been' reposted on the website of the  Hong Kong Arts Administrator Association on 22/6/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hong Kong Arts Administrators Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Subscribe | Facebook Page | Youtube Channel

# data[].attributes.body
'How would you explain theatre to somebody who's never been?' by Lyn Gardner (for the Guardian Stage blog)
29/5/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In Manchester last Saturday lunchtime I walked past Home, the city's wonderful new arts centre. Two elderly women were standing outside, and one was reading out loud to the other the offer written on the glass exterior: "Five cinemas, two theatres, a gallery space." She turned to her friend and asked "What is there for us?" It's a good question: what is the offer that the arts are making to those - and there are many - who never step inside a theatre or gallery space and think it's not for them?

Half an hour later, I walked back and the same two women were sitting happily in Home deckchairs outside the building in the sunshine, glasses in hand. No, they weren't yet in the theatre, but they had at least felt welcome enough to get through the door and buy their drinks and, who knows, maybe they popped their heads in the free gallery space on the way. It's a start. Home is trying hard to be welcoming to everybody. Leading up to the venue's opening weekend, 22% of tickets had been sold to students with £5 offers.

There's been lots of talk recently around the idea that theatre sometimes feels too much like an exclusive club for those who are in the know. Questions are being asked about why so many people think that it's not for them - something I touched upon in a blog earlier this year. Figures from the Warwick Commission make worrying reading: the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of society make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors.

Perhaps what we don't talk about enough is the pleasure of theatre, how it makes us feel, and why those of us who go frequently love it so much. One of the wonderful things about the Royal Exchange's A Night at the Theatre sleepover event was hearing both young and old people talk about their emotional attachment to theatregoing. One of the things that came up again and again was that they had moments in the theatre when it felt as if what was taking place on stage was happening just for them, as if it had been written and staged with them in mind. I've experienced exactly that myself: the feeling that a piece of art has been made just for me, and that somehow the artist has glimpsed inside my head and heart. I love that.

Other questions were posed at the Royal Exchange's event, about who theatre is for and who gets access to it. One of the most direct and intriguing was very simple: how would you describe theatre to someone who had never been? When I tweeted the question, a number of answers came back. @AlexPMcClaren suggested that "good theatre recaptures the feeling you had as a child when grownups who you didn't know well would really PLAY with you." @TouchthePlay said: "Imagine telling great stories with friends for a good evening with some of the best storytellers you can ever imagine!" @Oddsockstweets thought it was "like wearing Harry Potter's invisibility cloak, or at times like being at a party without having to make small talk." I reckon it's like dreaming with your eyes open. So how would you describe theatre to someone who has never been?

Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How would you explain theatre to somebody who's never been?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In Manchester last Saturday lunchtime I walked past Home, the city's wonderful new arts centre. Two elderly women were standing outside, and one was reading out loud to the other the offer written on the glass exterior: "Five cinemas, two theatres, a gallery space." She turned to her friend and asked "What is there for us?"

# data[].attributes.body
8% mentioned upfront in about page

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The wealthiest, best-educated, least ethnically diverse 8% of the population are the main producers and consumers of publicly subsidised theatre. That's what the Warwick Commission's 2015 report into cultural value discovered.

The Commission's report found that that "low engagement is more the effect of a mismatch between the public's taste and the publicly funded cultural offer - posing a challenge of relevance as well as accessibility". I see this as a social justice issue.

Why? Francois Matarasso argues that being able to shape your own cultural identity - and having this recognised by others - is central to human dignity and growth.

During a time of austerity - with 'the cuts' hitting the poorest hardest - we think it's wrong for public subsidy of the arts to be used in such a way that it results in the production of work that attracts primarily white, wealthy, well-educated professionals to the theatre.

Brighton People's Theatre is an intervention into this landscape. It's an attempt to role model a different way of working in the arts by embracing the community instead of the market. The challenge is how to do this in an economically viable way.

Credit: Diane Ragsdale

We agree with Arts Council CEO Darren Henley that creative talent is everywhere but opportunity is not. We think that one way to create opportunities for people to explore their creative talent is for theatre-makers to co-create work with community groups through a people's theatre.

We will tour our shows to community centres across the city using a pay what you decide model of ticketing. Alan Lane from Slung Low describes this idea brilliantly in his blog here. We will also tour to theatres and arts centres elsewhere.

It's an experiment.

Want to find out how we get on? Then get in touch and we will add you to our mercifully occasional and stunningly exciting newsletter. Don't worry, there won't be lots of them cluttering up your inbox.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The wealthiest, best-educated, least ethnically diverse 8% of the population are the main producers and consumers of publicly subsidised theatre. That's what the Warwick Commission's 2015 report into cultural value discovered. The Commission's report found that that "low engagement is more the effect of a mismatch between the public's taste and the publicly funded cultural...

# data[].attributes.headline
Mention in a Commentary on the 25th anniversary of Cultural Trends

# data[].attributes.subject
Mention in a Commentary on the 25th anniversary of Cultural Trends

# data[].attributes.body
by Pauline Tambling, 'Education provision in the subsidised cultural sector'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Taylor & Francis Group partners with researchers, scholarly societies, universities and libraries worldwide to bring knowledge to life. As one of the world's leading publishers of scholarly journals, books, ebooks and reference works our content spans all areas of humanities, social sciences, behavioural sciences, and science, technology and medicine.

# data[].attributes.body
'Creativity draining away from schools and access to arts too restricted, report reveals'
by Mark Brown
18/2/2015
(contains nice graphics for the 8% stat)

# data[].attributes.headline
Open Democracy website, 100 ideas for the BBC

# data[].attributes.subject
Open Democracy website, 100 ideas for the BBC

# data[].attributes.body
Stat mentioned in 'Broaden access through a Digital Public Space' by Jeremy Myerson, Director of the Hamlyn Centre for Design, Royal College of Art

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The BBC is not just one of Britain's most important cultural institutions. It is, more than that, key to who we are as a nation and sits at the heart of our identity. Brilliant programme-making over several decades has created a media archive of astonishing content that holds up a mirror to how the UK has changed - socially, economically and technologically - since the first broadcasts from Alexandra Palace in the 1930s.

This BBC-generated and owned material is a priceless national asset. In the digital age I would like to see the Corporation push ahead with plans to develop a Digital Public Space so that its own programme archives can be universally accessed and creatively reused, as free as possible from commercial or political interference. Such an approach would focus attention one of the most pressing challenges of the age - cultural exclusion - and reaffirm the BBC as a popular, democratic force for national good. According to the Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Value, the wealthiest, most educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the UK population today benefits most from public funding of the arts. A fresh BBC thrust to digitise its own archives and create a Digital Public Space would do much to broaden access.
Jeremy Myerson is the Director of the Hamlyn Centre for Design, Royal College of Art
Why vote? We will feed in readers' favourite ideas to the government's consultation on the future of the BBC, and profile them heavily in the media. We believe the debate over the BBC's future is too narrow and focused on cuts - it's missing strong, positive ideas about what public broadcasting can and should be. By voting, you can have your say on what those ideas should be - and if you've got your own, share them with us→

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Broaden access through a Digital Public Space - 100 ideas for the BBC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The BBC is not just one of Britain's most important cultural institutions. It is, more than that, key to who we are as a nation and sits at the heart of our identity.

# data[].attributes.body
Do we need disloyalty cards for theatre?
22/6/205
News item on the website of the Victorian Association of Performing Arts Centre

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research by Purple Seven, the company founded by Tesco Clubcard inventor Clive Humby, showed that new theatregoers were far more likely to visit a West End theatre than a subsidised one. Photograph: Jeff Blackler / Rex Features

Recent British Theatre Consortium research found that 2013 marked the first time that more new work was staged in UK theatres than revivals and classics. One of the lesser reported aspects of the research was the finding that 36 long-running shows, representing 2% of all performances, accounted for 45% of the total number of seats sold.
Creativity and culture not open to all, review finds:

It's clear that for many people a trip to the theatre means a trip to the West End. Last year, research by Purple Seven - the company founded by Clive Humby who invented the Tesco Clubcard - showed that new theatregoers, or those attending a production for the first time in three years, were far more likely to visit a West End theatre than a subsidised one.

Purple Seven's report showed that nearly 42% of the total spend in the commercial sector in 2012 and 2013 came from new theatregoers, while at Arts Council-funded theatres 60% of spending came from just 9.5% of households. That's even more concerning if you read those figures in conjunction with the Warwick Commission report, which found that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population are its most culturally active segment. It's not an argument against subsidy or for wall-to-wall Wickeds across the country, simply that if you are going to give away free tickets or make offers they need to be better targeted and based on better data.

If a customer stops visiting your venue, it doesn't mean that they have stopped visiting the arts. If they are new to your venue it doesn't mean that they are actually a "first-time" arts attender. But that's often how theatres will categorise them for data purposes. Purple Seven discovered that less than three-quarters of people described by venues as "new" arts attenders actually were new.

So what can venues do? They are already collaborating with each other far more often and with a greater than ever spirit of generosity, but although there are some difficulties in terms of data protection it's clear that theatres and arts centres are going to have to work together far more to share their findings if they are going to understand the audience and its behaviour better. And that means all the audience not their own audiences.

Humby, of course is famed for the supermarket loyalty card, and that could be one route that theatres might go down in order to try and understand their audiences better. But what would perhaps be far more useful for venues and different art-forms would be a disloyalty card in which those who regularly bought tickets for one venue or for one particular art form would receive benefits if they tried a show at another venue entirely - or instead of always booking for a musical opted for new writing or performance art.

It's not my idea, but that of a King's College student, Lauren Holden, who as part of last year's excellent King's Cultural Challenge came up with a disloyalty app. It squashes the long outmoded idea that theatres and venues are in competition with each other for the same audience. In fact, it could be a way to grow audiences, possibly across the commercial and subsidised sector, the big subsidised houses and smaller venues, for the benefit of all.
The Guardian June 20 2015

Advertisement

Humby, of course is famed for the supermarket loyalty card, and that could be one route that theatres might go down in order to try and understand their audiences better. But what would perhaps be far more useful for venues and different art-forms would be a disloyalty card in which those who regularly bought tickets for one venue or for one particular art form would receive benefits if they tried a show at another venue entirely - or instead of always booking for a musical opted for new writing or performance art.

It's not my idea, but that of a King's College student, Lauren Holden, who as part of last year's excellent King's Cultural Challenge came up with a disloyalty app. It squashes the long outmoded idea that theatres and venues are in competition with each other for the same audience. In fact, it could be a way to grow audiences, possibly across the commercial and subsidised sector, the big subsidised houses and smaller venues, for the benefit of all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do we need disloyalty cards for theatre?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research by Purple Seven, the company founded by Tesco Clubcard inventor Clive Humby, showed that new theatregoers were far more likely to visit a West End theatre than a subsidised one. Photograph: Jeff Blackler / Rex Features Recent British Theatre Consortium research found that 2013 marked the first time that more new work was staged in UK theatres than revivals and classics.

# data[].attributes.headline
Report of a Symposium held by the Creative Exchange Hub 

# data[].attributes.subject
Report of a Symposium held by the Creative Exchange Hub 

# data[].attributes.body
June 2015
Ele gave a presentation on behalf of the Commission and cited the UEP data

# data[].attributes.body
X Factor? Pass me a trowel - and the remote...
25/6/2015
Blog entitled  The Blues Man in The Hat (mostly about music)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some of this is true.

First, hand me a trowel...no, two trowels, one for each hand. I am going to lay this on Thick.

"My Grandad died. Yep. Tragic. He was lovely. He always told me to Follow My Dream. I remember he had a jolly twinkle in his eye. He played the concertina. That's what got me interested in music. Every time I see a concertina I think of my Grandad so I owe it to him that I am here now. That and my three small children, one of whom needs an operation for a disease you've never heard of. My mum has always been there for me and has given up everything, except pizza, so I can follow my dream. She's not a pushy mum, she just wants me to follow my dream. My Dad buggered off when I was three so I have always had to be really really brave. I don't think my Dad knew about my dream. This is all I have Ever wanted to do Ever in the History of My Life Ever.....!"

Sound familiar? Well, The Hat did have a Grandad - several, in fact. They lived till their nineties and one of them played the spoons as well as the concertina. Also, they were really expert at creative swearing and copious drinking. The rest is bollox...but I fear most of it will be hitting a screen near you very shortly - twice a week - until you want to smash the television with your handy trowel or tear your face off with a cheese grater. Yep. The X Factor Season is upon us again.

We have already had an announcement about the Amazing Expert Judges. The one who cries a lot will be joined in the competitive dress department by another this-week-I'm-blonde and a self-obsessed chap well qualified in reading out radio PR blurbs. They will be presided over by a rich smug bloke looking for the Next Big Thing (for Thing read Cash Thing) whilst pretending to be a philanthropic kind uncle. Rock 'n Roll this ain't. The X Factor programme is a Money-Making Behemoth that just keeps on giving in trowel loads. We will get Comedy, Tragedy, Satire, Buttock-Clenching Embarrassment, Bad Hair, Frocks and Spots and Misplaced Delusion....oh yes, and Grandad. Sadly the one thing it doesn't have in abundance is Talent. You would think that, for a talent show, this might be a shortcoming? Of course it isn't, because this stopped being a talent show, in dozens of countries around the world, light years ago. I want to have anyone who thinks it is a talent show given a strait-jacket and committed indefinitely to a dark place with wall-to-wall Magic Fm..

I have no problem with the existence of programmes like the X factor. I have a remote control. I don't have to watch them. They clearly tick some entertainment box somewhere - but then people used to watch bear-baiting in days gone by. If you started worrying about that crowded Dark Corner of television shows then you would have to kill yourself or go and live in a yurt in Mongolia Let's be sensible - a Kardashian Backside does not a Deep Thinking Documentary make. My problem is that, even after so many years of being served up candy floss, there are still so many people thinking in all honesty, that it has something to do with musical talent, vocal prowess or even the nursing of embryonic talent. The show is there to make money and, rather like the lottery, the chances of all the factors coming together for success are so minimal as to be non-existent.

The final of The X factor last year was watched by about 9 million people (say that very slowly) and yet that was the worst figure for a decade. Here are two names for you...Ben Haenow and Sam Bailey. No, I haven't either - but they are the winners of the last two years of the show. They disappeared, probably, like unwanted characters in The Apprentice and East Enders, in a taxi, cruising into the fading mists of time accompanied by some anodyne backing music.... However, even after years of mind bleach it is almost impossible to dispel images of Leonard Cohen and Whitney Houston weeping while 'Hallelujah' and 'I will always love you' are put through the mincer and the auto-tune engineer stabs himself to death with a mic stand...

The health side-effects of X factor are not my concern though. As a music fan, musician, writer about and supporter of musicians, The Factor that interests me about this programme - setting aside the knockabout ruthless and cavalier judging and dismissals - is the huge amount of money involved in this annual sleight of hand. The programme has, amongst other marketing ploys, massive sponsorship, huge commercial advertising income, money from downloads and apps, hoodies, T-shirts, tote bags, mugs (how appropriate) and a positive pirate's chest of income from phone voting - this last, always a secret, is usually estimated at somewhere around the £8/10million mark....and that's not counting the selling of a few copies of the competition winner's 'Music to Kill Your Neighbours' album...

Simon Cowell, the impressario behind the show, has personally given substantial amounts quietly to charity for many years and that should be acknowledged. His personal website lists a number of them. I don't doubt that he is nice to his mother and he is clearly brilliant at what he does. Also, there is a misplaced notion, to which I don't subscribe, that if you work hard and are rich and successful, you are obliged to give away your money to the less fortunate - or face Opprobrium and Abuse from the trolls. However, what intrigues me is the fact that despite basing its success on the mantra of 'discovering and encouraging new talent', there is no obvious sign that any of the profits from the triple-dialling fans finds its way towards meeting that end except as an occasional one-off high profile public relations exercise.

Yep. There is indeed, money in 'music'. Oh Really? There is another rather more tarnished side to this shiny coin.

When the long awaited Warwick Commission Report was published a few months ago on The Future of Cultural Value in Great Britain it drew a picture, in particular, of education in culture in disastrous Free Fall. Music tuition, support funding, education and opportunity in the UK are in dire straits. The British have always been ahead of the game when it came to the application of culture as a 'soft power' export and drama, film, art and music have been admired world-wide and exported with stunning effect for years. Creative arts financial export and turnover is annually estimated in billions. It is a phenomenon of which we can be rightly proud and yet over the last decade the funding of the 'arts' , in particular music, has been whittled away and eroded to the point of collapse in some areas. The Commission gives figures that show falls of anything from 33% to 50% in after school and higher education dance, drama, craft, music classes. The serious funding now only mainly goes via the Arts Council, Regional and National Arts Organisations and Boards of Management. This line-up largely represents just the top 8% of those engaged and they are the well educated, well heeled and least ethnically diverse group in the country. Facing austerity cuts, many local authorities have closed libraries and axed provision to small theatres and the provision of music services. Where music is concerned, it is also evident that parental funding (which in some areas covers nearly half the cost of these 'non-core' activities) is starting to fade and pupils are disappearing.

Sadly, this uncompromising report - which called for the Government to "... ensure that all children up to the age of 16 receive a cultural education in order to ensure their life-long engagement and enjoyment as audiences and creators.." - was published during the pre-election hustings and got buried in political flummery and the accompanying 'my promise is bigger than yours' braggodacio.

It is time for it to be rescued from the too hot to handle cul-de-sac where it has been shunted.

The new Culture Secretary, (who was Margaret Thatcher's political adviser for five years) would presumably heartily support the amazing private enterprise success of X-factor. However, he needs to look at his In-Tray where alongside the killer Warwick Commision report he will find the 'National Plan for Music Education', a government scheme, launched with fanfares by his predecessor in 2011, which promised up to £60million annually via 'Music Hubs' going into support grass roots development. However, the Educational Services Grant which covers many of those activities is now to be chopped by £200million. It is "un-ringfenced" which means that it is up to the local authority as to how it deals with these cuts. Consequently, contributions to these hubs have been cut back, classes curtailed, peripatetic teachers are a thing of the past, in some areas instrument hire charges and other fees increased and, inevitably as is always the case, those least able to pay are excluded and are disappearing. Music education always used to be wonderfully egalitarian. The society that allowed us to flourish creatively whatever our background or income is in rapid decline. That cannot be right.

When he is next invited to a gig by, for example, the National Youth Jazz Orchestra (50 yrs old) or the National Youth Orchestra (65 yrs old), the Secretary of State would do well to give a thought to how they came to exist in the first place - and how in the future, he can call a halt to the steady erosion of the opportunities for such brilliant creativity. If ever there was a guaranteed blue chip investment in the future well-being of the country, then this is it. It's time Mister Secretary, that you let more children Follow Their Dream. Getting on to The X-Factor is not the answer - even if your Grandad does play the concertina....

Pip Pip!

All the above data and much more can be found in the 76 page Warwick Commission Report freely available on line.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
X Factor? Pass me a trowel - and the remote...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some of this is true. First, hand me a trowel...no, two trowels, one for each hand. I am going to lay this on Thick. "My Grandad died. Yep. Tragic. He was lovely. He always told me to Follow My Dream. I remember he had a jolly twinkle in his eye.

# data[].attributes.body
Post by Naomi Alexander, theatre professional

# data[].attributes.body
Oakley and O'Brien in critical literature review on cultural value and inequality, funded by AHRC Cultural Value Project

# data[].attributes.headline
University of Exeter news service picks up and cites Guardian article

# data[].attributes.subject
University of Exeter news service picks up and cites Guardian article

# data[].attributes.headline
EXPLORING EVERYDAY CREATIVITY IN HULL by Robin Simpson

# data[].attributes.subject
EXPLORING EVERYDAY CREATIVITY IN HULL by Robin Simpson

# data[].attributes.body
29/1/2016
Article on the Cultural Playing Field website, which seems run by Robin Simpspn

Cultural Playing Field looks at how to develop an enabling environment to encourage people to participate in the arts and crafts. The focus is on political, legal, policy and funding issues that affect voluntary and amateur arts organisations and individual arts participants in the UK and the Republic of Ireland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Monday afternoon I was in Hull for the first in a series of meetings organised by 64 Million Artists to discuss the role professional arts organisations and artists should play in supporting everyday creativity. I joined representatives of arts organisations, the local authority and other agencies - including some of the team running Hull...

# data[].attributes.headline
Reference on South West Observatory (Skills and Learning section)

# data[].attributes.subject
Reference on South West Observatory (Skills and Learning section)

# data[].attributes.body
19/2/2015
Arts and culture being 'systematically removed from UK education system'

# data[].attributes.body
COULD A LACK OF DIVERSITY IN THE ARTS THREATEN UNDERGROUND MUSIC?
by James Frances
2/06/205
Flux is one of the UK’s leading providers of house, techno and disco, and has an online magazine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For those that watched them back in February, this year's Brit Awards will be best remembered for a certain pop diva and her alleged stunt to regain a place in the spotlight. But beyond the dramatics, the ceremony also served to highlight something that increasingly seems to characterise the British music industry - its glaring, almost embarrassing lack of diversity.

Take the winners to start with: there were only 9 awards reserved for British artists - compare that with the Grammys, which have 83 in total. Out of those 9, the awards went to Ed Sheeran (2), Sam Smith (2), Paloma Faith, Royal Blood, James Bay, One Direction and Mark Ronson. All of them white, except for One Direction's since-departed Zayn Malik.

Looking back at years gone by, it is abundantly clear that the Brits have failed to adequately acknowledge musical diversity ever since their inception in 1990. Whereas the Grammys continues to honour a wide variety of styles, the Brits' initial genre categories, limited as they might have been, were ultimately abandoned and discarded in 2007. This further streamlined the ceremony, causing it to be even less representative of the nation's musical output than in previous years. Today, the organisers present a spectacle that could easily cause any foreign viewer to think that to succeed in music in Britain you pretty much have to be white and from a relatively comfortable background. Unfortunately, in light of findings from a recent study, that perception might now be a lot closer to the truth than we would like.

Also in February, a report confirmed that the arts in Britain are suffering from a diversity crisis. The report, published by the Warwick Commission, takes a look at today's artistic landscape, and presents figures relating to participation in the arts through recreation, education and profession.

One of the headline findings is that the wealthiest, highest educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population are the most engaged in artistic activities, and that the same 8% make up almost half of live music audiences. Other figures concern education - one being that the number of arts teachers in schools has fallen by 11% since 2010. With regard to ethnicity, it is revealed that BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) people account for only 6.7% of those working in music, performing and visual arts, despite the fact that they make up 14.1% of the overall population. The report concludes that 'there are barriers and inequalities in Britain today' that prevent access to a cultural education and the opportunity to live a creative life.

Like any discipline, those that succeed are often those who have had the opportunities early in life. In music, that includes being encouraged to sing or play a musical instrument, listen to records and go to music events. But for many parents, providing such opportunities to their children can be expensive, and in some cases, impossible. These are the families who rely heavily on the education system to provide a broad spectrum of opportunity for their children. Yet, since the economic downturn, the government has significantly reduced arts funding in schools. This has led to fewer resources in state-funded schools, where there are now not only fewer arts teachers, but also fewer arts subjects to choose from. A division now exists in Britain between those more advantaged, who continue to enjoy an artistic education, and those less advantaged, who are now being effectively discouraged from creative expression. If that gap is allowed to widen further, a generation of children bearing inner artistic talent will simply slip through the net. This is deeply concerning, because the messages contained within the art that surrounds us in future might only reflect a limited section of society.

In the music industry, a seismic shift in revenue streams (due to downloads and streaming) means that record labels are moving cautiously. There are fewer record deals, and much less risk is being placed on new artists. Major labels have been less likely to sign so-called 'disruptive' artists that break new musical ground, and opt for artists who follow tried and tested formulae. Consider the house music crossover in the past few years. Since Surrey-based brothers Disclosure broke through with their shiny fusion of garage and house, labels have been quick to sign a multitude of imitating acts such as Gorgon City, Duke Dumont, Secondcity, Route 94 and Philip George. In playing the safe bets, diversity is being sacrificed in every sense.

The stagnation of popular music, at least in terms of 'groundbreaking' talent, is one of the reasons why we turn to the sounds of the underground. Whether at nightclubs, gigs or festivals, music lovers go out to watch artists who try new approaches. But the underground is not necessarily immune to a lack of diversity among the producers and DJs that propel it.

Below are the British artists that made it into Resident Advisor's top 100 DJs and live acts in 2014:
Alan Fitzpatrick, Andrew Weatherall, Ben UFO, Bicep, Carl Cox, Damian Lazarus, Daniel Avery, DJ Harvey, Dusky, Eats Everything, Four Tet, James Zabiela, Jamie Jones, Karenn (Blawan & Pariah), Floating Points, George Fitzgerald, Hot Since 82, Jackmaster, John Digweed, Jon Hopkins, Joy Orbison, Lee Burridge, Maya Jane Coles, Midland, Optimo, Patrick Topping, Richy Ahmed, Sasha, Scuba, Skream, Steve Lawler and Surgeon.
Out of the 36 individuals that comprise the acts, only Carl Cox, Jamie Jones and Richy Ahmed fall within the BAME category. This amounts to BAME representation of 8.3%, lower than the British population overall (14.1%), but slightly higher than in other art forms (6.7%). Perhaps more revealing, however, is that the list comprises artists within house and techno; genres which almost entirely owe their origins to both ethnic and social minorities. One might therefore expect the British artists within the list to reflect that more, but for the most part, they don't.

Consider the position of today's budding music producers. As online marketing would have it, all you need is a heavily branded multi-instrument software package and you're half-way to the big time. But what the glossy adverts routinely fail to mention is the high level of musical and technical aptitude required to use their products. To gain those skills, a desire and commitment to learning is required, which usually stems from having had opportunities to engage with music from an early age. The point is this: whether an artist aspires to be 'underground' or 'mainstream', it is essential that they receive some form of musical education to inspire them in the first place. And if such education isn't being provided in equal measure across the nation, the resultant pool of artists will hardly represent the nation.

The Warwick report emphasises the importance of the arts to both business and society, estimating that the creative sector represents 5% of the British economy (valued at £76.9bn). Unfortunately, too many politicians are failing to acknowledge that by cutting skills at one end, figures will fall at the other. The report is due to fall on the desks of all relevant secretaries of state following the general election. But despite such intentions, one would be optimistic to expect a review on the arts finding its way into immediate post-election matters.

That's where we, the music lovers and partygoers, might be able to make some moves. Perhaps, in times when the arts are low on the government's agenda, it is down to us to invest in young people through local, charitable initiatives.

An example of such a project can be found in Leeds. Funded by one of the city's most popular parties, Cosmic Slop, the MAP charity gives young people who have difficulty accessing mainstream education the opportunity to engage with arts and music. It's a unique way of funding, and its success is a sign of how important something like this is to clubbers in the city. In fact, Leeds could soon claim to be at the forefront in terms of providing such initiatives. As reported in a previous article, Back To Basics founder Dave Beer is currently in the process of establishing a Back To Basics Academy, in order to "give kids from difficult backgrounds...a tangible option in life".

This is a template for action that could be multiplied to ensure that young people have access to music, regardless of their background. Rather than rely on assistance from the powers that be, we need look no further than the communities in which we dance to enact social change. Local scenes are what distinguish underground music culture from the mainstream, and it is these people-led projects that stand the best chance of giving birth to a rich, diverse artistic network.

On a final note, you might not have noticed that among the artists referred to in this article, only two have been female. This is a diversity crisis in itself, especially within the music industry, but one that is too often overlooked and accepted as a norm. This article covers limited ground in a necessary discussion surrounding equality, but it's clear that if we are to properly measure (and subsequently achieve) diversity, more factors need to be considered. The Warwick report is a significant and positive step towards starting these conversations. Here's to many more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Could A Lack Of Diversity In The Arts Threaten Underground Music?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For those that watched them back in February, this year's Brit Awards will be best remembered for a certain pop diva and her alleged stunt to regain a place in the spotlight. But beyond the dramatics, the ceremony also served to highlight something that increasingly seems to characterise the British music industry - its glaring, almost embarrassing lack of diversity.

# data[].attributes.body
28/02/2015
Does not explicitly mention the 8% statistics, but the conclusion the Warwick report draws on the basis of UEP data

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I went last week to see the justly praised production of Wagner's The Mastersingers at English National Opera, and I didn't see a single black face there, nor even much dark hair (except in the case of Melvyn Bragg who, though now greying a bit, still seems to have Ronald Reagan's gift for keeping white hairs at bay). This chimed with the finding of the Warwick Commission on the arts in Britain that much the greater part of live-music audiences, theatre-goers and gallery visitors is old, white and middle-class. Even though this wasn't actually the reason for the Arts Council's drastic decision to curtail ENO's funding - this was because of its allegedly shambolic management - it easily might have been. For the Warwick Commission's report has reawakened concerns that the publicly funded arts are, as it put it, 'predominantly accessed by an unnecessarily narrow social, economic, ethnic and educated demographic that is not fully representative of the UK's population'.

This is a longstanding worry. Already more than a decade ago, Britain's most famous museums and art galleries were being warned that they could lose their government grants unless they managed to attract more visitors from ethnic minorities and low-income families. Specifically, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport demanded that 18 of them, including the National Gallery and the Victoria and Albert Museum, should aim for a rise of 8 per cent in the number of visitors from the poorest and least privileged sections of society. In addition, it required that seven million more children should visit them during the next few years. These objectives were agreed by the museums and galleries, which were warned that if they failed to respect them they could have their public funding cut off.

I don't know what progress was made in this area, but judging from the Warwick Commission's report, not very much. Certainly museum and gallery curators showed eagerness to comply at the time. The then director of the National Gallery, Charles Saumarez Smith, even announced a plan to get 30 Bengali-speaking mothers from Tower Hamlets to 'make a number of sustained visits to the gallery, many travelling by Tube for the first time'. But this wouldn't have made much difference, and it certainly wouldn't have solved the problem of how you get people to look at paintings or go to the opera or theatre if they just don't want to. The National Gallery even made itself a new entrance at street level, claiming that people found the front steps 'intimidating', but that hasn't solved the problem either.

The cost and the overwhelmingly middle-class audiences may deter poor people from going to places like the Royal Opera House, but our museums and art galleries are mostly free. And if theatre, art collections and other temples of high culture are considered good things in themselves, and if they need state subsidies to survive, it seems to me that they should get them, provided anyone who wants to have access to them can do so, but without their subsidies being made conditional upon them attracting the right numbers of people from different socioeconomic groups, an unachievable aim.

A problem, however, is the extent to which such subsidies cut into the funds available for other cultural purposes such as arts education in schools, the decline in which was one of the greatest concerns of the Warwick Commission. Creativity, culture and the arts were being systematically removed from the education system, with dramatic falls in the number of pupils taking GCSEs in design, drama and other craft-related subjects, it said. Whatever the reasons for this, I wonder if it has anything to do with the other strange phenomenon of the moment - the fact that posh people predominate not only in audiences but on stage and screen as well.

And it's not only in the cinema and theatre that public-school people such as Eddie Redmayne predominate, but in pop music as well. According to Noel Gallagher, formerly of the pop group Oasis, there is a shortage of working-class bands in an increasingly middle-class pop-music world. 'The working classes have not got a voice any more,' he says. 'There doesn't seem to be a noise coming from the council estates.' Heaven knows why this should be, but I can't see what anyone can do about it. We want much greater social equality than we have, but we would all be happier if we could only stop worrying about what class everyone belongs to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
You can't force low-income people to go to an art gallery or the theatre if they don't want to | The Spectator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I went last week to see the justly praised production of Wagner's The Mastersingers at English National Opera, and I didn't see a single black face there, nor even much dark hair (except in the case of Melvyn Bragg who, though now greying a bit, still seems to have Ronald Reagan's gift for keeping white hairs at bay).

# data[].attributes.headline
You’re Beautiful: Government and the pursuit of beauty - speech by Chris Bryant

# data[].attributes.subject
You’re Beautiful: Government and the pursuit of beauty - speech by Chris Bryant

# data[].attributes.body
posted 26/02/205

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To give your score, credit reference agencies gather information about your credit history including loans application, repayment trends, late repayments, and other financial transactions. In addition to this, you need to ensure that your name is on the electoral register that stocks some information such as court cases related to debts.

# data[].attributes.body
UK: new study examines the important contribution of creative industries to the economy and society
4/3/2015
IFRRO, the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations, is the main international network of collective management organisations and creators’ and publishers’ associations in the text and image spheres.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The outcome of a study made by the UK Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Value published in February 2015 has confirmed the findings of previous studies: the creative industries contribute significantly to the UK's economy and employment, and the share of the sector in the overall GDP is growing.

As outlined in the introduction of the study, a total of 1.7 million people work in the creative industries: " together they contribute almost £77bn in value added, equivalent to 5.0% of the economy. The latest Department for Culture, Media and Sport estimates show that they grew by 9.9% in 2013, higher than any other sector. Allowing for the contribution of creative talent outside the creative industries, the creative economy's share may be approaching one-tenth of UK's economy". IFRRO had already reported about the contribution of creative industries and within them, of the publishing sector, to the UK economy.

The study also measured the benefits of the creative industries for the British society and engagement in cultural activities; according to the latest figures, it seems that the gap between those enjoying culture and those who do not has widened over the last years, leading to a disproportion in the participation in cultural activities: "the wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment of all: between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre", with similar results for attendance of live music or visits to visual arts exhibitions.

In the education, attendance of some art classes has fallen: "between 2003 and 2013 there was a 50% drop in the GCSE numbers for design and technology, 23% for drama and 25% for other craft-related subjects." At the same time, other subjects such as Media and Film have experienced a substantial growth in the number of pupils attending classes.

Find the report here and an article in the Guardian here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK: new study examines the important contribution of creative industries to the economy and society

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The outcome of a study made by the UK Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Value published in February 2015 has confirmed the findings of previous studies: the creative industries contribute significantly to the UK's economy and employment, and the share of the sector in the overall GDP is growing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Report by the Royal Philharmonic Society

# data[].attributes.subject
Report by the Royal Philharmonic Society

# data[].attributes.body
Musical Routes: A landscape for music education
September 2015

# data[].attributes.body
Fewer children experiencing the arts
20/2/2015
ReadingZone supports teachers and librarians in helping to grow children as readers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Specialist school library service and public librarians are ready to answer your book and reading-related questions. Whether you are searching for a book for a young football enthusiast or historical fiction set in the Elizabethan era, these experts will have the answer.

# data[].attributes.body
by Andrew Clarke
Private Viewing: The time has come to invest in the arts education in order to save ourselves
Completely misunderstand the 8% statistic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the provision of arts education declines, Arts Editor Andrew Clarke is worried about whether we are short-changing our students

Richard Griffiths as Hector and Dominic Cooper as Dakin in Alan Bennett's The History Boys. Bennett won Best Play award for The History Boys at the National Theatre. In the comedy-drama he explores the state of modern education.

Last week a rather disturbing report landed on my desk. Entitled Enriching Britain: Culture, Creativity and Growth it turned out to be an unsettling look into the role of the arts in modern society.

In a nutshell, it said that the arts were reaching fewer people and were seen as increasingly irrelevant by a large proportion of the population. These conclusions were drawn up by the Warwick Commission, created by the University of Warwick, following a year-long study of the arts sector in Great Britain.

Reading this weighty document was not only alarming but also rather depressing until I stopped taking it at face value and started applying what I know to be true about the arts in East Anglia. Investment is being injected into cultural tourism in this part of the world. We have festivals galore and great music and dance venues and stunning theatres staging new work and first-class revivals. Last year our theatres played to more than 80% capacity which is stunning at a time of recession.

In 2013, nationwide, the arts generated £76 billion which represents a contribution of 5% to the UK economy.

Much of what the Warwick Commission says is undoubtedly true but I also think that they are guilty of painting too gloomy a picture of the state of things at present. I do question their assertion that only 8% of the population engage with the arts.

I find that impossible to believe when you consider the sheer number of theatres around the country, the millions who go to the cinema each week, the greater millions who take part in amateur theatre, dance or musical hobbies. Choirs, orchestras and bands of all types continue to thrive. Also, with live broadcasts from the National Theatre, the Royal Shakespeare Company, Royal Ballet and opera from Covent Garden being beamed to packed cinemas around the country, surely more people than ever before are getting the opportunity to enjoy world-class art and culture at an affordable price?

As with everything the devil is in the detail and it turns out that amateur arts, going to the cinema and attending pop, folk and rock concerts are not considered cultural activities, nor is supporting a cabaret or a comedy gig; which is pure snobbery in my book. So, according to the Warwick Commission, if you go to Latitude you are not attending a cultural event even though they have a wide range of music, theatre and dance but if you go to The Aldeburgh Festival you are.

Once you realise this then you have to question whether they are right when they say only 8% of the current adult population are engaging with the arts. Having dismantled that argument, sadly it is much harder to dismiss their findings about the future of the arts when they take a look at culture and creativity in schools.

The report pulls no punches when it says that the arts are systematically being squeezed out of state education. The report states that between 2003 and 2013 there had been a 50% drop in youngsters taking design and technology subjects and a 23% drop in those taking music and drama.

Steadily arts subjects are being removed from the options list at schools. The commission found that since 2010 the number of arts teachers had fallen by 11%, drama teachers had dropped by 8% and where arts and cultural activities were on offer they were frequently advertised as non-examination, out-of-hours, extracurricular subjects which had to be paid for and, as such, were frequently out of reach of low-income families.

This is where the real danger lies that we have a generation of youngsters who will not be introduced to the full spectrum of the arts in its bewildering array of different forms and in that case culture may well start to die. It seems to me that while we can't be complacent about the present we do need to start seriously worrying about the future.

This is something that playwright Alan Bennett addresses in his play The History Boys. In the course of the action he asks: "What are we educating our children for?" There is more to education than passing exams. We need the next generation to have a sense of general knowledge and love and understanding of things other than maths, finance and science. We need a population with a broad range of skills, interests and the ability to question our leaders. Maybe that's something they are keen to avoid?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Private Viewing: The time has come to invest in the arts education in order to save ourselves

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the provision of arts education declines, Arts Editor Andrew Clarke is worried about whether we are short-changing our students Richard Griffiths as Hector and Dominic Cooper as Dakin in Alan Bennett's The History Boys. Bennett won Best Play award for The History Boys at the National Theatre.

# data[].attributes.headline
THE ART OF PHILANTHROPY: MAKING THE MOST OF YOUR GIVING TO THE ARTS

# data[].attributes.subject
THE ART OF PHILANTHROPY: MAKING THE MOST OF YOUR GIVING TO THE ARTS

# data[].attributes.body
Report published by New Philanthropy Capital (NPC) on 29/10/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The art of philanthropy: Making the most of your giving to the arts

, 24 pages

by Angela Kail, Lynn Simmonds, Sally Bagwell

From libraries to theatre, dance classes to galleries and museums, the arts play a crucial role in our lives. But as government budgets tighten, arts organisations are increasingly looking to philanthropists for support. This paper explores the important role philanthropists have to play in ensuring the future of the arts, and outlines some considerations for anyone seeking to support an arts charity.

The arts are a crucial part of our culture and heritage. They also achieve a great deal of positive social outcomes. Yet the arts sector is under threat from severe budget cuts, and there is a disparity of resource between small and large arts charities; between those based in the South East and those elsewhere.

Philanthropists can help to solve these problems-to ensure the survival of the arts, and to influence the future direction of the sector. If funders think more strategically about their giving, philanthropy could make an impact across a whole range of arts charities and initiatives.

In this paper, we outline:

The nature of the arts sector and the challenges it faces;

The different types of outcomes the arts can achieve: intrinsic, educational, social, and economic; and

The key things philanthropists should consider if they want to make a difference to the arts through their funding.

To share your thoughts about this paper, or to see what others have said, visit us on twitter via @NPCthinks using the hashtag #ArtsPhilanthropy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The art of philanthropy: Making the most of your giving to the arts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From libraries to theatre, dance classes to galleries and museums, the arts play a crucial role in our lives. But as government budgets tighten, arts organisations are increasingly looking to philanthropists for support. This paper explores the important role philanthropists have to play in ensuring the future of the arts, and outlines some considerations for...

# data[].attributes.headline
Autumn 2015 issue of Epiphany Music News

# data[].attributes.subject
Autumn 2015 issue of Epiphany Music News

# data[].attributes.body
Undated
Epiphany is an adaptable and innovative music ensemble of professional musicians offering creative musical events with an emphasis on improvisation and innovation. Besides performing in regular concert venues, Epiphany regularly take their music out of the concert hall and into the community.

# data[].attributes.headline
Feature on the a-n website on the Vote Art exhibition

# data[].attributes.subject
Feature on the a-n website on the Vote Art exhibition

# data[].attributes.body
Vote Art: ideaologically [sic] conservative and preaching to converted?
6/05/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Occupying a space usually reserved for imperatives like 'ENJOY COKE' or 'COMPARE THE MARKET', Fatima Begum's 'VOTE' (pictured above) looms over Leece Street in Liverpool at the moment; big, bright, bold lettering bearing down on passers-by.

Begum's work forms part of the Vote Art project, a series of commissions on billboards across the country, from artists including Jeremy Deller and Bob and Roberta Smith. The posters dogmatically demand those catching a glimpse of them to enact their democratic right on 7 May. Postcards of the works are also available in national galleries, canvassing cultural consumers.

But is this powerful work good art? Or does the project demonstrate worrying tendencies in both contemporary art and parliamentary politics?

By mimicking advertising and unquestionably advocating the electoral system, Vote Art is indicative of a wilful lack of criticality within mainstream contemporary art. Structures of power and capital actively support the contemporary art market. Similarly, powerful political parties rely on the current electoral voting system to retain power disproportionate to the votes received (see First Past the Post, also known as Single Member Pluality, Simple Majority Voting or Plurality Voting).

By presenting 'voting' and 'art' together, the Vote Art project signifies the intentional failure of both contemporary art and mainstream politics to encourage - or even entertain - alternatives.

Discussion and debate
The rhetoric of advertising and Vote Art functions by presenting imperatives without the need of justification or a dialogue. This is the antithesis of a well-functioning democracy founded on discussion and debate.

What's more, by using the space and language of advertising, viewers of Vote Art are forced into the role of passive consumer. Again, this is antithetical to democracy. A truly democratically-minded project should attempt to free the viewer from the isolating impacts of consumer culture in order to cast a considered vote.

But what does following the Vote Art commandment actually mean? To draw parallels with the theorisation of participatory art, the electoral system in the UK offers at best very limited participation, and at worst is purely symbolic. The participant is free only to act within limited, predetermined categories (i.e. parties, candidates). Even the physicality of the act is fixed: mark an 'X' or your ballot is spoilt.

Participatory art projects are often motivated by a desire to empower the participants, enabling them to enact change in their social situation. If a vote on 7 May was truly participatory, the resultant parliament would be representative of the needs of the people that voted for it. Instead, the number of ethnic minority MPs stands at just over 4% of members and women MPs make up only 22.7% of parliament.

Even the realisation of the project is ideologically conservative. By circulating the postcards at galleries - places which (unfortunately) attract 'the wealthiest... and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population' (Warwick Commission, p. 33) - the project is limited to encouraging voices that are once again unrepresentative of society. So the section of society Vote Art reaches is likely to vote anyway, even without an arty typeface; in the 2005 election there was a 70% turnout from the top (AB) social classes, against a working class (DE) turnout of 54% (see the 2005 election class statistics).

The Vote Art project is an idea borne of ideological conservatism; it demonstrates a failure of contemporary art and parliamentary politics to encourage meaningful change. Both have the potential to create a fairer and more enjoyable world to live in; and both should be something you do, not something that is done to you.
The UK general election takes place 7 May 2015. Polling booths are open 7am-10pm. Vote Art is an arts initiative inspired by the theme of democracy that aims to encourage people to take part in the democratic process; see more at voteart.co.uk This is an edited version of an article originally published by The Double Negative More on a-n.co.uk: Vote Art: "We're putting up posters, just asking you to vote" Vote Art goes live from Aberdeen to Plymouth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vote Art: ideaologically conservative and preaching to converted? - a-n The Artists Information Company

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vote Art has seen artists such as Jeremy Deller and Bob and Roberta Smith using art to encourage people to vote through a series of billboards across the country. On the eve of tomorrow's general election, Laura Harris argues that the project demonstrates worrying tendencies in both contemporary art and parliamentary politics.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nick Ewbank formal comment on DCMS' "The People Challenge" consultation

# data[].attributes.subject
Nick Ewbank formal comment on DCMS' "The People Challenge" consultation

# data[].attributes.body
5/12/205

# data[].attributes.body
Art experts publish ticking-time-bomb report
Warwick Commission study bemoans decline of children’s arts education and failure to make culture more inclusive
by Robert Hewison
1 March 2015

# data[].attributes.body
No Milk for the Foxes: the beatboxing show bringing ‘council estate rage into the theatre’ By Matt Truman
22/04/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
British theatre has a major class problem. In fact, it has three: participants, audiences, stories. Who's making it? Who's watching it? Who's it about? Three questions, one answer: the middle-classes - mostly.

In February, the Warwick Commission found that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population made up 28% of theatre audiences. Recent analysis of the Great British Class Survey discovered that only 10% of actors came from a working-class background - and those who did earned on average £10,000 a year less than their peers. Julie Walters, Christopher Eccleston and Timothy Spall have all raised concerns about the dwindling number of working-class actors - and part of that problem is surely the lack of working-class parts and stories on our stages.

Beats & Elements is a new company born out of frustration with this. Paul Cree and Conrad Murray got sick of not seeing people like themselves on stage - but worse was that on the rare occasions they did, it often felt deeply inauthentic. "Case in point," says Murray: Home at the National Theatre. "There was a guy in it who was practically like, 'Whas gawn'on. Yeah, man.' But this guy was totally fake. It was so false and patronising. The nuances were all wrong." The two of them decided to do something about it themselves.

Theatre isn't the only industry with a representation problem, but, says sociologist David O'Brien, its representation problem has significant knock-on effects. "People from working-class origins have issues making it into medicine, but medicine is not telling us stories about who we are. Medicine is not the thing we turn to to ask, 'What's my identity?'"

In No Milk for the Foxes, Beats & Elements' first show, Cree and Murray play two security guards idling away a night shift spent watching washing-machine circuit boards - hardly top of any would-be burglar's wishlist. They're very definitely working-class characters. "It's in the language they use, the way that they dress, the way that they move, as much as their economic background," says Murray - and in the fact that neither would change that for a second.

Their jobs, however, they'd change in an instant. It's all shift work, a zero-hour contract with no guarantees; mundane, boring and, Murray adds, "completely pointless. Who's going to nick a load of washing-machine circuit boards?" Like Alexander Zeldin's Beyond Caring, which puts the lives of contract cleaners on stage and re-opens at the National this week, No Milk for the Foxes attacks the indignity and exploitation inherent in this kind of work.

Unlike that piece, though, No Milk for the Foxes is as celebratory as it is cautionary. The long shift lets the two men chew the fat: "The camaraderie between them is 100%," says Cree. They talk grandparents and girlfriends and gossip, but they also talk politics, particularly a tension between trade unions and individual aspirations. One of them, Mark, wants to keep his head down and collect his pay packet, in the hope of some future reward. His colleague, Sparx, holds out less hope.

Between scenes, Cree and Murray burst into spoken word and beatboxing - deliberately bringing a street art form into a more rarefied cultural space. "It's going to be loud," Murray insists. "Part of this is about bringing the fucking council estate rage into the theatre." It is, in no uncertain terms, a disruption.

That's what theatre needs. Its class problem is not just endemic, it's cyclic - perhaps even systemic. To oversimplify - though not grossly - you end up with middle-class critics approving work programmed by middle-class artistic directors for middle-class audiences, meaning a preponderance of middle-class stories with middle-class parts for middle-class actors. If theatre is really serious about opening up, if it wants to do more than pay lip-service to the problem, it has more work to do than it thinks.

Cree and Murray met at Battersea Arts Centre, through its Young People's Theatre (YPT) scheme - now renamed the Homegrown Company. However, both came close to missing out: Murray because his family couldn't afford the £60-a-term fees and Cree because he was already 25 and fast approaching the upper age limit. "If I'd been a few months older, I wouldn't be doing any of this stuff."

It's proof that the existence of a participatory arm or an outreach programme isn't enough in itself. While BAC have introduced subsidised Homegrown places, Murray is adamant that the cut-off point is still an issue. "Go down the estate and there are 26-year-olds kicking beer cans up against the wall." They might get involved, he says, but it can take a lot longer to work out where or how. "They haven't got those connections."

It can also take time just to work out that you want to get involved. Arts organisations project an identity and, for all that they aim to be welcoming and open, they can quite easily put people off. Architecture - "big, posh buildings" - can repel, as can decor, and large public organisations can quite easily smack of municipality. "People are scared of authority and establishment," Murray explains. It all adds up to an assumption that you won't fit in; that theatre is for other people.

It comes down to the tiniest things - something as simple as the stock behind the bar. "Kids might want to drink KA," says Cree. "They're not bothered about organic elderflower or whatever." Worse than that, Murray chips in, is over-priced organic elderflower. "Who's going to take a bird to see a show if you can't even afford to buy a drink?"

The question for theatre, then, is whether it can really afford to tackle the problem. Doing so would likely involve alienating some of its habitual middle-class audiences. It might mean losing its mark-up at the bar and in its restaurants, spending more money on outreach and shifting the way it advertises, let alone programming against personal taste. But it's a matter of principle: arts subsidy is drawn out of all of our taxes, but only some of us are reaping the results. As Murray puts it, "Why are they handing out benefits to middle-class people, you know?"

* No Milk for the Foxes runs at Camden People's theatre until 9 May
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No Milk for the Foxes: the beatboxing show bringing 'council estate rage into the theatre'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
British theatre has a major class problem. In fact, it has three: participants, audiences, stories. Who's making it? Who's watching it? Who's it about? Three questions, one answer: the middle-classes - mostly. In February, the Warwick Commission found that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population made up 28% of theatre audiences.

# data[].attributes.body
Theatre – a (middle) class of its own?
A reprint of a Guardian article - but reached the arts professional community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two young theatre makers dissect the industry's "class problem" and tell Matt Trueman what the arts sector should be doing about it.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Arts cuts a disaster for children from working-class backgrounds" - Ali Smith

# data[].attributes.subject
"Arts cuts a disaster for children from working-class backgrounds" - Ali Smith

# data[].attributes.body
Undated - with link to Guardian article
Music Mark: The UK Association for Music Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
News from the UK's music education sector. Read about the latest campaigns, policy updates and exciting music education projects from across the UK.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sharing Stories:  Sharing Understanding – A Spotlight on Arts in Learning for Adults

# data[].attributes.subject
Sharing Stories:  Sharing Understanding – A Spotlight on Arts in Learning for Adults

# data[].attributes.body
Presentation by Vikki Heywood, 1/10/2015
slides: https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=19&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwisntvku_fKAhVGvxQKHWaHB7w4ChAWCEowCA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.learningandwork.wales%2Fsites%2Fniace_cy%2Ffiles%2Ffiles%2FVikki%2520Heywood%2520Powerpoint.pptx&usg=AFQjCNFzykZJ9I42iNQu1mC1XqU-p01uKQ
Learning and Work Institute is a membership organisation with a diverse set of individual and corporate members including colleges, local authorities, third sector organisations, universities, businesses and iconic organisations in civil society.

# data[].attributes.headline
Report on the No Boundaries conference on Unlimited Impact website

# data[].attributes.subject
Report on the No Boundaries conference on Unlimited Impact website

# data[].attributes.body
No Boundaries: A Symposium on the Role of Arts and Culture
30/10/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
No Boundaries is the industry conference for the Arts, museums and libraries, with a focus on presenting questions and challenging new ideas on the role of arts and culture, finding positive approaches to influence change and supporting the sector's growth in a world of unknowns. 450 delegates from across the Arts and culture sector will attend No Boundaries with an array of national and international contributors who speak to five themes relevant to issues facing the industry: Can we exercise freedom of expression? Are we nurturing tomorrow's talent? How does the money flow? Can we do things differently? What does success look like?
Jo Verrent, Senior Producer for Unlimited, contributes to this year's No Boundaries Symposium - Catch the video here

Before I start on what I do differently, I want to explain why. Why do I think there is a need to radically change the way in which we make, fund, develop and deliver the arts in the UK?

I feel that the arts 'industry' is in a loop making work that appeals only to itself. Work that is made for and by the same type of people, with the same kinds of tastes. Work that excludes pretty much anyone outside of that mould, that is shown in spaces and forms that exclude pretty much anyone outside of that mould, in an industry that has systemically excluded anyone outside of that mould for years. And we wonder why 'new audiences' are so hard to come by?

In April this year, the Warwick Commission Report reported that:
"the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of society make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors"
And their findings are not an anomaly - Purple Seven have shown similar in relation to performing arts, the Audience Agency also.

So the core of our arts audience makes up 8% of the population - the richest, most educated, least diverse 8%. And guess who is making that work that they are lapping up? Yup, it's them too. Basically the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse artists, writers, directors, employed by the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse curators, commissioners, board members and funded often by the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse funders and supporters.

Just a quick note, disabled people don't even get a mention in the statistics at this helicopter level as we are 'statistically insignificant' in number despite making up between 18-22% of the population.

And this is after years of schemes, positive actions, training courses, development programmes and other diversity initiatives. None of which have succeeded in really turning the tide.

So what is the solution? If all of that didn't work, what does?

At its most simple, the people making the work must change, the people programming the work must change, the spaces where we show and share the work must change and we must open up discussion and debate on what 'the work' is anyway. The only way that's going to happen is if we commit to doing things differently.

In 2013, I decided to do one thing different each day - I tweeted and set up a weekly blog - DoDifferentDaily. I ate new foods, worked in new ways, tried new hobbies, met new people. What did I learn? That doing something new is incredibly exciting, immensely rewarding, a huge learning opportunity but also really, really scary. And some of the most terrifying things were going to new places - a football match, a mosque, a rally on the other side of my own political leanings. New can be terrifying. But it's where we have to go to change things.

Last week, I went to a performance at a new theatre. I hated it. Everyone knew everyone else, I knew no one. They knew the rules - where the bar was, the well hidden toilets, the fact you got a playing card and not a ticket. And that's all before I began the 'I'm deaf and need to sit at the front' thing. I felt embarrassed, isolated and old - the show was great but the whole experience was awful. Is this really still how we welcome anyone new?

And if it's that alienating for 'new' audiences, what's it like as an artist trying to break through into a sector, especially one in which you are still perceived as 'different'?

I'm senior producer for Unlimited, a commissions programme for disabled artists. We are trying to break down some of the walls that stop disabled artists getting the recognition they deserve within the cultural sector.

We select 9 or 10 artists or companies every couple of years to make and tour a new work. We are called Unlimited, and that's our aim - not to limit artists, but to showcase the widest range of work we can - Just because you are a disabled artist, it doesn't mean you have to make a particular type of work.

Our 'different' if you like, is the artists we support - traditionally disabled artists have had a pretty hard time breaking into the industry - but we also do the whole selection thing differently.

Our aim, when we select works, is the same as everyone else - to choose a diverse range of excellent work - work that is just crying out to be made.

We have a selection panel - but difference number one is that 5 places on that selection panel are for independents - people who applied to join the selection panel who have no stake in the work. Not people we have chosen cos they think in the same way we do, not a token 'one' who might have a dissenting voice. Nope, nearly half the voting members of the panel are entirely independent, and if they are freelancers, then they are paid to be there. And it makes a difference.

Difference number two - is about the balance of power. The majority of our panel are disabled people themselves. Sounds simple and obvious, if we are selecting work that is disabled-led, then the process for making those decisions needs to be disabled-led too. And this means that some of our key funders - Creative Scotland and Arts Council of Wales, for example, donate their voting place to disabled artists from those countries to ensure we reflect the opinions from the sector bottom up - not top down.

And difference three - I don't vote. None of the staff working on the programme do. The work we support isn't my 'choice' - I'm not interested in simply commissioning work that I like - that's limiting. I think it's that attitude that has led to the problem we currently have - when people think their opinions are the only ones that count. It means such a narrow range of work being shown. For me, work can be excellent without me liking it. My tastes are simply my tastes - and my tastes aren't indicative of what a wide range of other people want to see. Where does the arrogance come from when someone thinks they have the only 'vision', and everyone has to agree with them?

Our panel has diverse views, and I see this as a good thing. They argue a lot, we rarely have consensus but we often have majority, they take risks, they force us to take risks, and I often think 'what the hell have they chosen that for?' - and these are all good things.

Unlimited supported Jess Thom and her company Touretteshero to make their first piece of work - Backstage in Biscuit Land. On paper it was a risk - a show principally performed by someone who says 'biscuit' spontaneously 16,000 times a day - and 'cat', and 'Aladdin' and quite a lot about animal sex almost as frequently. Someone who might have a 'tic-ing fit' on stage and have to resort to an emergency script delivered by her co-performer until Jess comes round and is able to continue... It's been one of our most successful pieces. It played at the Barbican last week and is at Soho this. Its done Brighton Festival, Southbank Centre's Unlimited Festival and Edinburgh Festival Fringe - twice. It was chosen by the BBC to have a special broadcast version this November - Broadcast from Biscuit Land.

First piece of work. Radically different 'type' of performer from the so called 'norm'. Big risk. And the result? Consistently delighting established audiences and bringing in new audiences to everywhere that takes the show. See, its not just about pleasing one set of people or another - it can be about appealing to both.

And that's not the only risk we've funded - Birds of Paradise's outrageously rude Wendy Hoose, Vital Xposure's Let Me Stay offering a tender yet humorous take on living with Alzheimer's, Richard Butchin's video installation 213 things about me - looking at both autism and suicide. And we've more 'risks' in development - Liz Carr's Assisted Suicide: The Musical, Cameron Morgan's large scale TV Classics depicting TV through the decades, for galleries and bill boards.

And most of the works are getting both critical and public acclaim - both of which are vital. Wendy Hoose was in the Made in Scotland selection this year, we had two more in the British Council Showcase, Cameron's just heard he's got into Glasgow International Art Festival 2016 on the same bill as Damien Hurst... and so it goes. Yet we still get some programmers say that work by disabled artists is 'niche' and not for them or their audiences.

Unlimited's work is not just about the commissions - we are pushing venues and promoters to do things differently too. Our Impact programme means we can work on supporting that, working on new ways to provide access, on issues and debates, with young artists and activists, and sharing the lessons we - and they - are learning.

I'm not for a moment saying we have everything right - far from it. But am I saying we are trying to take risks. We are taking actions that are conscious and deliberate to diversify the range of people whose work gets seen, diversify the range of people who select that work, and to get others to do things differently too - and that its working. It is not an accident, and it is not from simply having the desire to change things noted down somewhere in an action plan.

Doing things differently does work, but you have to do something different, not just 'want to do something different'. The secret is in the doing.

I said earlier that we have to do something different. That means us, the 8%. 'We' are the ones who must change until the demographic of those making work, those in the audience for the work, matches the demographic of the society in which we live.
Catch the live stream here

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No Boundaries: A Symposium on the Role of Arts and Culture - Unlimited

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
No Boundaries is the industry conference for the Arts, museums and libraries, with a focus on presenting questions and challenging new ideas on the role of arts and culture, finding positive approaches to influence change and supporting the sector's growth in a world of unknowns.

# data[].attributes.body
Vote Art?
2015 (undated)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Or preaching to the converted? In a personal take on the looming General Election, Laura Harris voices her concerns about the relationship between contemporary art and parliamentary politics...
Occupying a space usually reserved for imperatives like 'ENJOY COKE' or 'COMPARE THE MARKET', Fatima Bergum's 'VOTE' looms over Leece Street in Liverpool at the moment; big, bright, bold lettering bearing down on passers-by.

Bergum's work forms part of the Vote Art project, a series of commissions on streets just like this one across the country, from artists including Jeremy Deller and Bob and Roberta Smith. The latter, whose real name is Patrick Brill, is widely known for his art party conferences, and is now standing against Tory MP Michael Gove in Surrey Heath at the general election. The Vote Art project dogmatically demands those catching a glimpse of one of its special billboards to enact their democratic right on May 7 th. Postcards of the works are also available in national galleries (including at FACT Liverpool), canvassing cultural consumers.

But is this powerful word art? Is it even good art? I believe that the Vote Art project demonstrates worrying tendencies in both contemporary art and parliamentary politics.

"By mimicking advertising, and unquestionably advocating the electoral system, Vote Art is indicative of a wilful lack of criticality within mainstream contemporary art"

By mimicking advertising, and unquestionably advocating the electoral system, Vote Art is indicative of a wilful lack of criticality within mainstream contemporary art. Structures of power and capital actively support the contemporary art 'market', built as it is on foundations of obscene private capital (see a recent Guardian article on Sotheby's highest ever art auction sales). Similarly, powerful political parties rely on the current electoral voting system to retain power disproportionate to the votes received (see First Past the Post (FPTP), also known as Single Member Pluality, Simple Majority Voting or Plurality Voting).

By presenting 'voting' and 'art' together, the Vote Art project signifies, therefore, the intentional failure of both contemporary art and politics to encourage - or even entertain - alternatives.

The rhetoric of advertising and Vote Art functions by presenting imperatives without the need of justification or a dialogue. This is the antithesis of a well-functioning democracy founded on discussion and debate. What's more, by using the space and language of advertising, viewers of Vote Art are forced into the role of passive consumer. Again, this is antithetical to democracy. A truly democratically minded project should attempt to free the viewer from the isolating impacts of consumer culture (the 'buy this limited edition print so no one else can have it' mentality) in order to cast a considerate 'VOTE'.

"To draw parallels with the theorisation of participatory art, the electoral system in the UK is at best very limited participation"

Beyond rhetorical devices, it is also important to assess what following the Vote Art commandment actually means. To draw parallels with the theorisation of participatory art, the electoral system in the UK - occurring once every five years and using the first-past-the-post system - is at best very limited participation, and at worse purely symbolic. The participant is free only to act within limited and exteriorly predetermined categories (i.e. parties, candidates). Even the physicality of the act is fixed; mark an 'X', or your ballot is spoilt. Authorial control over this participation is as total as possible.

Participatory art projects are often motivated by a desire to empower the participants, enabling them to enact change in their social situation. If a vote on May 7th was truly participatory, therefore, the resultant parliament would be representative of the needs of the people that voted for it. Instead, the number of ethnic minority MPs needs to increase by 433% to become representative of the British population, and women MPs make up only a shocking 22.7% of parliament as a whole.

"Democracy and art should both strive towards being spaces for active participation. Both have the potential to create a fairer and more enjoyable world to live in"

Even the realisation of the project is ideologically conservative. By circulating the postcards at galleries, places which (unfortunately) attract 'the wealthiest... and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population' (Warwick Commission, p. 33), the project is limited to encouraging voices once again unrepresentative of society. This shows the flaccidity of Vote Art, as the section of society it reaches is likely to vote anyway, even without an arty typeface; in the last election there was a 70% turnout from the upper-classes, against a working class turnout of 54% (see the 2005 election class statistics). The balance does not need to be tipped any further in favour of the privileged.

The Vote Art project is at best a misjudged and poorly thought-out avocation of democracy, and at worst a dangerous curtailment of dialogue borne of ideological conservatism. It demonstrates a failure of contemporary art and parliamentary politics to encourage meaningful change to societal systems.

Contrary to the premise of Vote Art, democracy and art should both strive towards being spaces for active participation. Both have the potential to create a fairer and more enjoyable world to live in. Politics, like art, should be something you do, not something that is done to you.
Laura Harris See the Vote Art exhibition at Peckham Platform, London, 11am-6pm, until its last day on Thursday 7 May 2015 - free entry Vote Art is an arts initiative inspired by the theme of democracy that aims to encourage people to take part in the democratic process; see more at voteart.co.uk Read our Big Interview with Bob and Roberta Smith Read My Day As An Art Party Pilot Read the Arts Council's Summary of party manifestos: what they mean for arts, culture and creativity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Or preaching to the converted? In a personal take on the looming General Election, Laura Harris voices her concerns about the relationship between contemporary art and parliamentary politics... Occupying a space usually reserved for imperatives like 'ENJOY COKE' or 'COMPARE THE MARKET', Fatima Bergum's 'VOTE' looms over Leece Street in Liverpool at the moment; big, bright, bold lettering bearing down on passers-by.

# data[].attributes.body
How can we break down boundaries as Arts Fundraisers?
10/12/2015
(also reposted on various other sites)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A few weeks ago I attended the Bristol half of the No Boundaries conference 2015, hosted by Watershed. It was a thought-provoking event that pulled off the impressive feat of linking literally thousands of people invested in the Arts world both physically and virtually. I came away feeling a part of a large thriving community, a feeling that the ingenious live link with HOME Manchester really bolstered.

However, one question came up again and again in discussions - why is our community so lacking in diversity? In her provocation, Jo Verrent from Unlimited, confirmed what I had caught glimpses of in other talks by highlighting the findings of the Warwick Commission:

"The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment of all: between 2012 and 2015 they accounted (in the most conservative estimate possible) for at least 28% of live attendance to theatre, thus benefiting directly from an estimated £85 per head of Arts Council England funding to theatre." Read the full report here.

Clearly, we are doing something wrong. In practice, there are very clear boundaries to people accessing the Arts as Sanpreet's excellent blog pointed out; whilst we've got better and better at talking about diversity, we need more practical solutions.

All this discussion about the wealthiest minority got me thinking about my role as a fundraiser - a large motivator for me to be a fundraising Fellow was that when I was growing up in a rural community without a great deal of wealth I was able to participate in theatre for free. We shouldn't forget that the Warwick Commission isn't dealing with all of art - it is specifically talking about publically funded art. For me it seems obvious that, in part, art should be funded so people without personal funds can access it.

So what can I do as a fundraiser to address these boundaries?

Well, first and foremost, I can raise cash for great (ideally free) projects that engage people who experience barriers in accessing the Arts. When looking through the guidelines of trusts and foundations we frequently come across criteria asking us to prove that we reach the most disadvantaged and disengaged members of society - the fundraising imperative is already there.

The second problem is the larger one; how can we transform these participation projects into more than just a tokenistic exercise and instead create life-long engagement with the arts? In the fascinating session at No Boundaries 'How Does the Money Flow', Moira Sinclair of the Paul Hamlyn Foundation made it clear that the Foundation is "prioritising our grants to those [projects] that place user's voices more centrally". As fundraisers we should be looking to gather evidence about the impact that our organisation can make. My organisation, Tobacco Factory Theatres, has a reputation for regenerating its surrounding area and being an accessible space, and whilst this effect is obvious on the ground it is hard to prove without solid data. Gathering case studies and the voices of your community is a great way to give evidence for your potential lasting impact. This was brilliantly demonstrated by Kully Thiarai's talk on CAST, Doncaster's success which had a genuine emotional impact on the conference audience.

Once we've reached out to disadvantaged and disengaged communities we need to ask, 'what boundaries do you face when accessing the arts?' As the widely tweeted John Dyer said in his provocation "Diversity is inviting someone to a party, inclusion is asking them to dance". It's only through asking these questions, gathering the answers and then acting on them that we can truly improve the diversity of arts audiences in the future. As Moira Sinclair warned against, we shouldn't just be saying 'This is what we do', but instead asking 'What can we do?'

No Boundaries was a brilliant event, but whilst the speakers were diverse the majority of the audience (much like all publically funded arts audiences) wasn't. In reality it was an expensive event at £60 minimum and as such it was targeted towards the 8% we've been talking about (there were bursaries available for emerging artists, but only if you were lucky enough to win a ballot).

If the voice of a more diverse type of user is going to be heard, we need to take a step back. It may seem a little frightening, but we can't make a case for our organisation's relevance to a diverse audience without asking this audience first - 'are we relevant?' and if not, 'how can we be relevant for you?'

What do you think? We'd love to hear.
Heather Holcroft-Pinn is an Arts Fundraising Fellow at Tobacco Factory Theatres.
Agree with this post? Click here and have your opinion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can we break down boundaries as Arts Fundraisers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A few weeks ago I attended the Bristol half of the No Boundaries conference 2015, hosted by Watershed. It was a thought-provoking event that pulled off the impressive feat of linking literally thousands of people invested in the Arts world both physically and virtually.

# data[].attributes.body
What does 8% mean to you?
ITC is the management association for theatre's independent sector
2/04/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Charlotte Jones, Chief Executive, ITC
From where ITC sits in the diversely buzzing Albany in Deptford you could really believe that UK arts in the 21st Century is hitting the spot. Elders fill the café on Tuesday participating in the inspiring, artist-led Meet Me at the Albany project; Heart 'n' Soul ensure that learning disabled young people are visible, engaging in quality artistic activity; Fun Palaces are sparking participation right across the UK from their little HQ here, while Kali & Yellow Earth create their work alongside. Independent artists and small companies from all over the country perform here and reach a real community audience. Rosy or what!

Meanwhile though the recent Warwick Commission Report draws out from the Arts Council ' Taking Part data ' this deeply worrying and depressing statistic:
'The wealthiest, better educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population forms the most culturally active segment... benefiting from £84 per head of ACE funding to theatre and £94 per head of ACE music funding'
How can we still be in this place after so many efforts by Arts Council England to improve their reach and diversity? It is because those efforts are mere tweaking. The systemic wealth gap in the arts has not closed - it is widening increasingly. Interestingly 8% is also the proportion of their funding that the Albany receives from ACE.

Since we are talking statistics here's another: Of ITC's 440 member companies fewer than 25% are National Portfolio Organisations funded by ACE and in the latest round of decisions this was reduced even further. 40% of ITC companies work regularly with young people (mostly not the privileged ones) - GLYPT (Greenwich & Lewisham Young Peoples Theatre) - unfunded by ACE - works on some of the most deprived estates in South East London, Dark Horse (soon to become ex-NPO) works with learning disabled young people in Huddersfield, Big Brum (also newly cut) serves thousands of young people in Birmingham.

Many ITC companies are specifically set up to serve disadvantaged, disenfranchised groups and, most importantly, they are not doing it because a funder said there was a strategic need for that work - an artist or group of artists identified the need, cared enough to make work to address that need and then spent a large chunk of their lives delivering that work and serving those people.

Last year when ITC asked its membership 'why do you do it?' the vast majority replied 'because we want to make a better world'. They weren't joking or filling in a funding application - it was that genuine vision that drove them to work absurdly hard for very little money and still maintain that they loved coming to work each day. Clean Break with women in prison, Oily Cart with young people on the autistic spectrum, Peshkar with Asian youths in Oldham, Red Ladder in working men's clubs, Ladder to the Moon in care homes, Cardboard Citizens with homeless people, Hijinx with Learning Disabled performers in Wales, Candoco with professional disabled dancers, Deafinately Theatre (the name gives it away), Birds of Paradise with disabled artists in Scotland, 20 Stories High with young artists in the North West..... That's the tip of the ITC iceberg - our members' directory will give you the fuller picture and it's exciting and amazing. I suspect the only group our 440 are not reaching so well is that 8% 'wealthiest' above.

I have said this before but, clearly, I need to say it again - time for a redistribution of wealth in the arts! Time to recognise the quiet power to change the world of small, independent arts companies! The second Rebalancing Cultural Capital report entitled 'Hard Facts to Swallow' identified a pernicious dwindling in the ACE portfolio of small organisations - they do a lot with a little - how does it make sense to reduce their number? If increasing diversity is a priority (which it absolutely has to be) then let's have a diverse range of organisations and independent artists enabled, empowered and properly supported to do this. It's not complicated, it's obvious.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What does 8% mean to you? | Blog | ITC Arts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Charlotte Jones, Chief Executive, ITC From where ITC sits in the diversely buzzing Albany in Deptford you could really believe that UK arts in the 21st Century is hitting the spot.

# data[].attributes.body
http://theshakespeareblog.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Knowing the exact date in May 2015 of the next General Election has provoked discussions on topics that don't get an airing during the usual month of campaigning before the big day. Recently, the arts has been the subject of these debates. The Guardian noted that it was 50 years since Jennie Lee, then Arts Minister in a Labour government, published a White Paper, A Policy for the Arts - First Steps. It argued that everyone should have access to the arts, and they need to be embedded in the education system.

Ed Miliband, the leader of the opposition, has now made his first statement on the arts (leader of the Labour Party since 2010). He said he aimed "To put policy for arts and culture and creativity at the heart of the next Labour government's mission.", and echoed the aspirations of Lee's report "to guarantee every young person, from whatever background, access to the arts and culture: a universal entitlement to a creative education for every child".

It can be no coincidence that the Warwick Commission on Cultural Value has just reported after a year examining the creative arts sector "from film, theatre and dance to video games, pop music and fashion". The report found a striking drop in the number of students studying arts subjects including drama, and a downward trend in participation in cultural activities by children. Other results relate to audiences: publicly funded arts "are predominantly accessed by an unnecessarily narrow social, economic, ethnic and educated demographic that is not fully representative of the UK's population". Only 8% of the population make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors, and Richard Eyre commented on the "absolute divide" between those who enjoy the arts and those who feel excluded.

The Front Row debate on 23 February, "Are Artists owed a Living?", brought together a range of people for a discussion at Hull Truck Theatre, including some involved in the Warwick Commission. The aim was "to open a national conversation exploring the relationship between the state and the arts". It examined the broad issue of funding for the arts and those who create them.

Shakespeare, inevitably, got a mention. Not only are his works key to our culture, but economist Philip Booth suggested that public funding for the arts is unnecessary, since Shakespeare successfully worked in a commercial environment. Perhaps Mr Booth hasn't noticed the many ways in which life has changed in the last 400 years.

Shakespeare is in a privileged position: his work is popular around the world, helping to attract tourism and business to our shores. Last year, 2014, Fin Kennedy wrote a piece proposing that theatre must take risks with new work, even in a time of austerity.

Shakespeare too can be controversial, and recently there has been an outbreak of disagreement about staging Shakespeare. Mark Rylance seems to have a particular knack for making odd remarks, suggesting it is "disrespectful to the author" to study the plays in school. The event where he made this comment was the UK viewing of the St Omer First Folio, discovered last year in France. The Folio was the first collected edition of Shakespeare's plays, and the only printed source of about half of them so it was particularly unfortunate for him to suggest that reading the plays was "the last thing the author intended". Heminges and Condell, Shakespeare's long-term fellows, didn't think so: "Read him, therefore, and again, and again" they say in their preface.

Rylance suggests that Shakespeare should be cut onstage to remove offensive remarks, in particular anti-semitic lines. It's a reasonable concern, with the recent terrorist massacres in Paris in our minds, though the whole "I am Charlie" movement was aimed at upholding the right to freedom of expression, including the making of offensive remarks.

Dominic Cavendish, responding to Mark Rylance's comments, notes that "there's almost limitless opportunity to take offence at Shakespeare if one chooses", not least by some of his remarks about women.

Being experimental with the text is the theme of a Times Educational Supplement article. "My advice to teachers who are looking to introduce a more creative approach to teaching Shakespeare is simple: be fearless. Encourage play, questioning and experimentation.". Professor Tony Howard, for British Black and Asian Theatre: "Historically "Shakespeare" has meant, and too often still means, "exclusion". Every time we open up Shakespeare to more young people we shall make Shakespeare better − truer and more diverse." This way Shakespeare, can help young people "develop their sense of identity by also seeing people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds working together to make art."

Surely this was behind Jennie Lee's White Paper 50 years ago, a document still waiting to be put fully into practice. Erica Whyman, RSC Deputy Artistic Director, has written a post on the value of the arts at this important milestone.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shakespeare, culture, and a policy for the arts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Knowing the exact date in May 2015 of the next General Election has provoked discussions on topics that don't get an airing during the usual month of campaigning before the big day. Recently, the arts has been the subject of these debates.

# data[].attributes.body
Warwick Report exposes systematic divides in UK culture

# data[].attributes.headline
The Stage - Matt Trueman: Theatre must widen its reach

# data[].attributes.subject
The Stage - Matt Trueman: Theatre must widen its reach

# data[].attributes.body
18/05/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's been much talk, since the election, about elites and echo chambers. The Labour Party stands accused of wooing its own. The pundits and pollsters, of spinning a cyclone of received opinion about the way things were set. The chattering classes, of arguing the toss with one another on social media. Everyone, it seems, was so ensconced in their comfort zone that no one bothered to see what the rest of the country thought.

Theatre has faced the same reprimand. It finds itself facing a charge of insularity - criminal for an artform that prides itself on a) encapsulating the state of the nation and b) using the stage as a public space. However, the Warwick Commission's finding - that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of the population account of 28% of audiences - is a stark illustration of the reality.

Some will, of course, insist that theatre needs to cling onto its core audience - an audience that has stuck with it through thick and thin, from Shaw to Whishaw. Others will say that it's time to do more, to branch out. That we all pay for the arts and we should all benefit. Great art for everyone, as the Arts Council put it. (There's a paradox in that phrase and a piece by Jan Dalley in the Financial Times this weekend illustrates it beautifully, picking apart a mock mission statement: 'Elitism for All.')

Before we start with the self-flagellation, just think back a moment. Less than two years ago, Ticketmaster's State of Play survey found that 63% of the population had been to the theatre in the previous year. A third of attendees came from households earning between £20,000 and £39,000. The Warwick Commission can be spun in reverse: 72% of theatre attendances come from outside that top 8%.

'If you want to reach people who don't go to the theatre, don't go to the theatre'

David Eldridge revived his blog last week to pick up on the issue of insularity. "New theatre is becoming too inward-looking, focused disproportionately on formal experiment and innovation." It's a hearty call for accessible theatre - theatre that talks to a wide audience, regardless of their theatre literacy and knowledge. "Post-dramatic theatre or an auteur's flourish won't attract the 91%," he writes. "People want to go to the theatre when they think they're going to have 'a good night out.'"

He's right, of course. For most people, theatre isn't a form of self-medication or education. It's entertainment first and foremost, if not pure and simple. (It can, of course, be all of that at once.)

But, he's also wrong. Accessibility is more than a matter of plain comprehensibility. If Eldridge writes a play with the 91% in mind and puts it on at the Royal Court, it won't suddenly reach a new audience by magic. The theatre's members will still come. The theatre community will still come. David's fans will still come. You still have to know about a show to go along and understand it.

If theatre wants to diversify its audience, it has two options: invite people in or go out to them.

An invite can take many forms. It could be David's new 91% play, backed up with a targeted advertising campaign, an attractive pricing policy and, perhaps, a scheme for ensuring regulars don't bulk buy the show. It could be developing a different, deeper, longer-lasting relationship. A fortnight ago, I watched a group of 20 women, all of them designated carers, perform a dance-theatre response to Happy Days as part of the Young Vic's Two Boroughs project. Here was theatre that made itself matter.

Going out is equally important - and I don't just mean touring. If you want to reach people who don't go to the theatre, don't go to the theatre. It's why the 'Without Walls' model, pioneered by the National Theatre of Scotland and picked up by National Theatre Wales is such a necessity. Last Monday, I spent the evening watching Brecht in Merthyr Tydfil's Labour Club. If the Valleys won't come to Mother Courage, bring Mother Courage to the Valleys - and more than that, re-interpret it especially.

In six years, National Theatre Wales has been into barracks and school halls, sheep farms and ancient woodlands. It has spanned the country, from Anglesey in the North West to Monmouthshire in the South East. Many of its shows do more that just get new audiences in. They're social interventions that should leave a mark. at Prestatyn took an interactive show to a town dominated by pensioners. The Passion of Port Talbot turned a declining, industrial town into the setting for an event with worldwide significance.

The fact is this: that wealthy, white, well-educated 8% have the resources and the desire to get out to see these shows. They will come regardless. They will travel. For others, if it's out of reach, they just won't come. Why, then, don't we put it on their doorstep? Take the theatre to them. The 8% will follow.
Read more from Matt Trueman

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Matt Trueman: Theatre must widen its reach

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's been much talk, since the election, about elites and echo chambers. The Labour Party stands accused of wooing its own. The pundits and pollsters, of spinning a cyclone of received opinion about the way things were set. The chattering classes, of arguing the toss with one another on social media.

# data[].attributes.headline
		
	
	
		
			
				
					The 2015 Creative Education
Conference 
				
			
		

# data[].attributes.subject
		
	
	
		
			
				
					The 2015 Creative Education
Conference 
				
			
		

# data[].attributes.body
Jonathan's keynote script

# data[].attributes.body
17/03/2015

# data[].attributes.headline
British Universities Film & Video Council

# data[].attributes.subject
British Universities Film & Video Council

# data[].attributes.body
Archive - highlights the 8% stat

# data[].attributes.body
17/02/2015

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Creativity, culture and the arts are being systematically removed from the education system, with dramatic falls in the number of pupils taking GCSEs in design, drama and other craft-related subjects, a new report has revealed.

A year in the writing, the Warwick commission report, published on Tuesday, examines all aspects of the creative arts sector: from film, theatre and dance to video games, pop music and fashion. It estimates the sector represents 5% of the British economy valued at £76.9bn.

The report describes arts audiences as overwhelmingly middle class and white. It says that the wealthiest, best educated and least ethnically diverse 8% of society make up nearly half of live music audiences and a third of theatregoers and gallery visitors.

Vikki Heywood, the chair of the commission, said two of the most eye-opening aspects of the inquiry were to do with cultural education and the lack of diversity in arts audiences.

The cultural and creative economies were one ecosystem, she said, and policymakers needed to realise that "if you fiddle around with the education system at one end then something at the other end goes wonky".

Some of the most striking statistics are around education. Between 2003 and 2013 there was a 50% drop in the GCSE numbers for design and technology, 23% for drama and 25% for other craft-related subjects. In 2012-13, only 8.4% of students combined arts and science at AS level. The number of arts teachers in schools has fallen by 11% since 2010 and in schools where a subject has been withdrawn, drama and performance has dropped by 23%, art by 17% and design technology by 14%.

The report highlights a downward trend in participation in most cultural activities. For example, the number of five- to 10-year-olds who engaged in dance activities was down from 43% in 2008-09 to 30% in 2013-14.

The artist Bob and Roberta Smith said CP Snow's "two cultures" distinction of 50 years ago - that society was split into science and the humanities - had been made "irrelevant by the emergence of the power of digital technology".

He said: "We must totally overhaul the importance of art, design, dance, craft and drama, and teach them in a more contemporary and computer literate way to every child so that we do not deny our young people access to a £76.9bn economy."

The arts broadcaster Lord Melvyn Bragg said he was glad to see schools and education mentioned so strongly. He said: "In my view, investment in the creative arts is the key to the lives of so many people in this country, and to the richer life of the country itself."

The report insists that arts education should be an entitlement for all children. It believes the government's focus on science, technology, engineering and maths needs also to include the arts. It says: "Policymakers are obsessed with a siloed subject-based curriculum and early specialisation in arts or science disciplines that ignores and obscures discussion around the future need for all children to enjoy an education that encourages creativity."

David Lan, the artistic director of the Young Vic who served as a commissioner, said society needed creative scientists and that pupils' involvement in dance, theatre, music and film would enhance their success in other non-arts subjects and "encourage young people to be hungry for equality and democracy".

The report highlights "barriers and inequalities" that prevent "equal access for everyone to a rich cultural education and the opportunity to live a creative life".

Statistics include the fact that higher social groups account for 87% of all museum visits.

The report says publicly funded arts "are predominantly accessed by an unnecessarily narrow social, economic, ethnic and educated demographic that is not fully representative of the UK's population".

Heywood said: "Progress on equality of participation and opportunity is too slow and we are all culturally and economically impoverished as a result."

The findings also feed in to the ongoing debate around career opportunities for people from lower income families with Julie Walters recently telling the Guardian that she would not have a chance of making it as an actor if she was starting out today.

The report says it strongly suspects there are "lower than average numbers of students from low income backgrounds" in vocational and higher education courses which feed the cultural and creative sector but stresses "further systematic research is needed".

The director Richard Eyre said the report showed an "absolute divide" between those who enjoyed the arts and those who felt excluded from them. He said: "The 'choice' of going to the theatre or the opera or an art gallery is a choice that doesn't exist for vast numbers of people in this country, who, if they feel anything at all about art, feel disenfranchised."

Last month, Chris Bryant, the shadow minister for culture, said one of his priorities if he became a minister would be to encourage diversity and fairer funding in the arts as well as encouraging the arts world to hire people from a variety of backgrounds.

He told the Guardian: "I am delighted that Eddie Redmayne won [a Golden Globe for best actor], but we can't just have a culture dominated by Eddie Redmayne and James Blunt and their ilk.

"Where are the Albert Finneys and the Glenda Jacksons? They came through a meritocratic system. But it wasn't just that. It was also that the writers were writing stuff for them. So is the BBC, ITV or Channel 4 doing that kind of gritty drama, which reflects [the country] more? We can't just have Downton programming ad infinitum and think that just because we've got some people in the servants' hall, somehow or other we've done our duty by gritty drama."

The report was written by 16 arts sector leaders including Nicholas Serota, the Tate director, fomer ballerina Deborah Bull, and Roly Keating, the chief executive of the British Library.

Heywood said she wanted the report to be on the desks of all relevant secretaries of state after May's general election. She said: "It has got to be a conversation that politicians can't avoid."

Among the recommendations are for a joined-up national plan in England that would involve civil servants and politicians from the the relevant departments: education, business, and culture, media and sport.

It calls for a free digital public space to be developed allowing all publicly funded creative content to be easily discoverable.

One of the biggest problems for the arts is national and local funding cuts, with Arts Council England cut by 32% and local government by 40% between 2010 and 2015.

The amount of money given to the arts - 0.3% of the total public spend - is "infinitesimal" compared with what they generate, the report says.

Further spending cuts to the arts "will undermine the ecosystem, creating a downward spiral in which fewer risks are taken, resulting in less talent development, declining returns and therefore further cuts in investment."

The report has been widely welcomed. Sir Peter Bazalgette, the chairman of Arts Council England, said: "Two critical themes leap out of this welcome report - the importance of improving access to the arts, and that culture and the creative industries are one entity. The report's proposals contain much welcome new thinking."

Tessa Ross, the chief executive of the National Theatre, said the report made important points on "the diversity of the work on our stages, of our workforce and our audience, the need to enshrine arts education as an entitlement to all young people, including the most disadvantaged, and the desire of national organisations to extend our reach".

The Department for Education said: "As part of our plan for education, we are ensuring all pupils experience a broad and balanced curriculum which will prepare them for life in modern Britain - the arts are a key part of this.

"We are clear that arts education should be every bit as rigorous as the rest of the school curriculum and we have strengthened the national curriculum in these subjects and reformed the music and art GCSEs and A levels to make sure this is the case.

"For 2015-16, we are providing £109m to support music, art and cultural education projects - an increase of £17m from last year - allowing thousands more pupils to benefit from a wide range of enriching activities."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arts and culture being 'systematically removed from UK education system'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Creativity, culture and the arts are being systematically removed from the education system, with dramatic falls in the number of pupils taking GCSEs in design, drama and other craft-related subjects, a new report has revealed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Commission says arts & creativity is being squeezed out of schools particularly for low-income families

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"We are concerned that the educational system as a whole is not focussing on the future needs of the Cultural and Creative Industries and the broader needs of a creative and successful UK.