Saturday 20 October, 10.30am until 12.00pm, Fountain Room
The title of the Arts Council’s major 10-year vision, ‘Achieving great art for everyone’, captures the contemporary drive to increase audiences for the arts. But the associated literature reveals a palpable defensiveness. Over the past 20 years, arts institutions have become obsessed with their lack of reach. Despite the queues outside blockbuster exhibitions and the popular appeal of West End theatre, arts policymakers have worried that too many people don’t seem bothered about classical music or contemporary art, and what audiences there are seem too old, too posh, too white. Attracting ‘hard to reach’ audiences – urban youth, diverse ethnic groups, the socially excluded – has become the holy grail.
Often this mission seems less about simply making the arts affordable, for example, and more a desperate attempt to dragoon us into opera houses and museums, whether we like it or not. And the justifications for such efforts have little to do with art. It is asserted that people need the arts for the sake of their health and wellbeing, social mobility, economic prosperity, and good citizenship. We are told choirs can build community cohesion; making music can engage would-be rioters; plays can teach empathy; art-related skills make people more employable. Former culture secretary Margaret Hodge stressed the importance of the arts for ‘nurturing our sense of Britishness, of finding common identity and creating a common sense of belonging’. But how credible is this? Are those who remain cold in the face of Rembrandt, or indifferent to the beauty of Beethoven, a social problem?
Critics argue that arts organisations risk compromising their art by obsessing over audiences. After all, the simplest way to get people through the door might be to offer the familiar and unchallenging work they already know they like, rather than working to build an appreciative audience for new and difficult work. If we push the arts as a public good, do we threaten their role as a private pleasure, freely chosen? Should people be free to reject as well as to fall in love with orchestral music, sculpture, ballet? Are those who enjoy a rich and varied experience of the arts in danger of sneering at those who don’t get it? Or is there a greater danger that if we don’t ensure everyone appreciates the arts, they will become no more than a luxury for those who have the time, education and money to enjoy them?
Listen to session audio
Download mp3 (Right click and choose “Save link as”)
writer and theatre-maker; award-winning author of short stories, plays and novels
playwright; president of the Writers' Guild; author, How Plays Work; playwright, Written on the Heart, Pentecost
advisor on arts and philanthropy; former deputy mayor of London for education and culture; author, The Politics of Culture: the case for universalism
director, Visual Arts and Strategic Programmes, British Council; governor, University of the Arts, London; author, Gagarin in Britain
Dr Tiffany Jenkins
writer and broadcaster; author, Keeping Their Marbles: how treasures of the past ended up in museums and why they should stay there
Can the language and tools of economics help the case for cultural sector funding? Or is culture a special case with its own rules?Claire Donovan, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 17 May 2012
If art museums are the new churches, perhaps they should end the veneration of ambiguity and start serving our inner needsAlain de Botton, Guardian, 20 January 2012
Publicly funded arts institutions are under more pressure than ever to quantify the social benefits they bring, as would be done for schools and hospitals. But isn't the crucial role of art to challenge the way society is run?David Edgar, Guardian, 5 January 2012
In the twenty-first century, cultural policy is increasingly dominated by the politics of diversity. Cultural institutions lack confidence in their own intrinsic value and seek relevance by promoting diverse identities.
Munira Mirza, Palgrave Macmillan, 13 December 2011
The anti-cuts case can't be just the elitism of the arts' intrinsic value, nor their social utility, but bothDavid Edgar, Guardian, 30 March 2011
Is an unmade bed art? How about a saucy seaside postcard - or even a slogan T-shirt? It's art to the person who thinks it expresses their life.Katharine Whitehorn, BBC News, 8 August 2008
Civil disobedience or violent criminality?
"There's a real sense of intellectual delight that so much can be discussed in just sixty minutes - and so thoughtfully - both by the speakers and especially by the audience. A rich feast of ideas."
Christopher Kelly, reader in Ancient History and Fellow and Director of Studies in Classics at Corpus Christi College