Tell them what you think

I was talking to a colleague recently about the future of the arts, given the mess the economy is in. Her response was to tell me that in China the symbol for crisis is the same as the symbol for opportunity. Well, given this truth there should be real opportunities for new thinking as Arts Council England (ACE) develops a plan for the next ten years – to which we are being asked to contribute. Consultation is always difficult. Using the web as a tool might be most people’s first suggestion, but the level of debate on the ACE blog is depressing and does nothing to reassure me about the potential for digital media to offer a more participative culture. What appears is a series of rants about tone and language. I don’t doubt the importance of getting these right – but a little more comment on the content would shape a more rigorous debate on the future of the arts. As for the document itself, it’s a difficult balance. Offer too much detail and be accused of stitching it up, or speak in such broad terms that it would be hard to argue against. For me, it’s about right. There are things I would challenge and there are places where it could be braver, but it is a considered, well contextualised set of ideas from a group of people who have thought hard how to position the arts for a different future.
 

The big idea looks like a fixed-term funding programme. This could have the biggest impact and is overdue. The current system of one-size-fits-all is too blunt. However, it will mean fewer regularly funded organisations (RFOs), and those that remain will be expected to play more strategic roles. How else, with a reduced staff, is ACE going to achieve its ambitions? And in any case, isn’t all funding fixed-term? Maybe we should do away with RFOs altogether and develop particular, flexible relationships with a range of organisations. Some might be seen as infrastructural, others artistic. Then we could avoid a hierarchy in which everyone thinks they should aspire to becoming an RFO.
I think it odd that ACE has a mission of ‘Great art for everyone’ and a goal specifically for young people. There is something Orwellian about the idea that ‘all people are equal, but young people are more equal’. Surely everyone means everyone? I have noticed a trend, at least in theatre, for companies no longer to describe themselves as children’s or theatre for young people, thinking that describing work for a particular audience marginalises ambition. Better to make great work and attract as wide an audience as possible. Maybe the sector is ahead of policy. I think there is an opportunity for ACE to say something about the wholeness of its ambition, and of the culture it aspires to create.
As for the goal for an arts sector that is “sustainable, resilient and innovative”, I understand the sentiment behind ACE’s concern for artists “not to worry about next week’s wage bill”, but doesn’t that worry ensure that artists are not only ‘resilient and innovative’ but relevant and connected to audiences? Perhaps ACE would do better to describe all of its goals as expectations of the arts community, as they are better placed to make them happen.
There is mention of “a targeted and limited fund for new buildings”. How about a five-year moratorium on new buildings and investing to increase our capacity to tour all artforms? Haven’t the national theatres of Scotland and Wales taught us anything about the needlessness of buildings? Most of the artists I know are working outside or in other people’s spaces to reach audiences in ways that might excite them.
There is mention of working with the Creative & Cultural Skills (the sector skills council) to develop arts leadership and the workforce. Don’t they replicate a massive specialist training resource developed over decades in the form of our further and higher education institutions – with which they share many of the same ambitions? We should simplify where we can.
We still haven’t cracked the significance of the connectedness between amateur and professional. I was at a knitting festival recently and was amazed by the way that this community encourages each other to be as good as they can be: sharing advice and resources, informally tutoring and celebrating skill in a way that most arts sectors could learn from. Indeed, I have long thought that the crafts have much to offer in terms of participation and inclusion. And that’s what I hope for most of all: that through this consultation exercise we develop a more collaborative, participative and mutually supportive arts sector.