Arts in the UK post-Brexit

[Serial_Apologist]

Manifestos are a marketing exercise. At one time there might have been a fair degree of alignment between the words and the intentions, but for the past 20 or so years I have viewed them(if at all) as a means of determining what the Conservative and Labour parties are unlikely to, or do not intend to, do.

As regards labour Party, that's an awfully long term basis of assessment!

[MrGongGong]

Arts in the UK post-Brexit

Has anyone any answers yet to:

(a) how many significant people involved in orchestras etc in the UK would be impacted by Brexit
(b) the nature/range of "non-commercial" music that would be affected and the numbers involved?

(Post 196)

"significant people" ?

I'm still waiting to know

how many people involved in orchestras etc in the UK think that Brexit is a great idea and has opportunities for the cultural life of the UK ?

[MrGongGong]

Britain is culturally part of Europe in very many ways and always has been, as well of course as being geographically part of it.

What I see from my perspective is that funding for the kind of musical projects I'm involved in is being reduced almost everywhere (except for example in the USA where it was never there in the first place) and one way of working with this problem is to pool resources across countries. If the UK were to be excluded from such networks and retain as much activity in this kind of area as is going on now, there would have to be a fairly considerable increase in institutional support for it, and I don't see that being part of the Tory post-Brexit economic plan.

It's hard to be "proactive" when you don't get paid for what you do.
The UK is by "choice" excluding itself from many networks, no amount of people with no knowledge banging on about how it could be different will change that.

[Lat-Literal]

"significant people" ?

I'm still waiting to know

how many people involved in orchestras etc in the UK think that Brexit is a great idea and has opportunities for the cultural life of the UK ?

You can decide on the meaning of significant. I'm being generous with the looseness of the definition. Support staff can be included if you wish. I bet it is a very, very, small fraction of just one 10,000, let alone 10 of them. The point that you are making doesn't really say anything about numbers or whether concerns might or might not be justified on a large scale. What it might well say is that people with artistic leanings were overwhelmingly for remain. Window cleaners - they may have been strongly for leaving. I am beginning to think I was misinterpreting "non-commercial music" by thinking it meant "not for profit". Perhaps what is being discussed here is specialist music but I'm guessing in the absence of anything else.

[Richard Barrett]

I am beginning to think I was misinterpreting "non-commercial music" by thinking it meant "not for profit". Perhaps what is being discussed here is specialist music but I'm guessing in the absence of anything else.

It means the vast majority of the music that gets discussed on this forum. The kind(s) of music broadcast by Radio 3. That should surely be obvious.

[Lat-Literal]

It means the vast majority of the music that gets discussed on this forum. The kind(s) of music broadcast by Radio 3. That should surely be obvious.

It wasn't to me initially, hence my comments on busking pan pipe groups.

I thought you were meaning originally music that is not commercially sold.

That category might conceivably have included funding to students and others who were involved in musical development and experimentation without a profit aim.

But I guess almost everyone - apart from me - is in the game of making money now.

[Stanfordian]

It wasn't to me initially, hence my comments on busking pan pipe groups.

I thought you were meaning originally music that is not commercially sold.

That category might conceivably have included funding to students and others who were involved in musical development and experimentation without a profit aim.

But I guess almost everyone - apart from me - is in the game of making money now.

Post Brexit, with all the aftermath the party in power will be far less bothered about the Arts than they are now. Art education should start in State schools.

[DracoM]

Music is taking the biggest hit in schools, IMO.
I don't know.....all those bloomin' peris to pay, tricky instruments to loan out, old fashioned music, and so difficult. Naw, give me Beyonce every time....'
............or words to that effect

[french frank]

Post Brexit, with all the aftermath the party in power will be far less bothered about the Arts than they are now. Art education should start in State schools.

I can't understand why the government doesn't take the cost-neutral step of insisting that the BBC plays its part in broadcasting a lot more serious, wide-ranging arts programmes (I mean the programmes are serious), in exchange for the privilege of pocketing the licence fee. And on the mainstream services, especially those for younger listeners/viewers.

[Beef Oven!]

Post Brexit, with all the aftermath the party in power will be far less bothered about the Arts than they are now. Art education should start in State schools.

The thing is, people in general don't place much importance on music. I personally don't think life would be worth living without music, but it means little to most people.

And I mentioned before about grammar schools (but the post has been deleted) - we shot ourselves in the foot on a number of levels when we decided to get rid of them. My school in north east London produced many excellent musicians including Sir John Pritchard, Johnny Dankworth and Michael Nyman. But it was all part of the grammer school ethos. I don't think we'll ever get that back now. Great levellers though, schools nowadays.

[MrGongGong]

And I mentioned before about grammar schools (but the post has been deleted) - we shot ourselves in the foot on a number of levels when we decided to get rid of them. My school in north east London produced many excellent musicians including Sir John Pritchard, Johnny Dankworth and Michael Nyman. But it was all part of the grammer school ethos. I don't think we'll ever get that back now. Great levellers though, schools nowadays.

and the moon is made of cheese
I know you don't really do "evidence" but you are simply WRONG about Grammar/Grammer/Grammuur schools

Shoe box
M62

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Cockney Sparrow]

And I mentioned before about grammar schools (but the post has been deleted) - we shot ourselves in the foot on a number of levels when we decided to get rid of them......

So, it seems that after music and performing arts are all but eliminated from state schools by other pressures music will be "for the few not the many". But if only we still had Grammar Schools - where it would be "for the not-quite-so-few but still not the many" because that produced eminent musicians.

But the state school system overall would not be producing adults who had experienced the music we talk about and some of them in some way supporting it in their later life - listening to Radio 3 or Classic FM, going to concerts, supporting their child, such as when learning an instrument etc etc. Or even being involved in music making.

[Richard Barrett]

So, it seems that after music and performing arts are all but eliminated from state schools by other pressures music will be "for the few not the many". But if only we still had Grammar Schools - where it would be "for the not-quite-so-few but still not the many" because that produced eminent musicians.

In fact of course schools don't "produce" eminent musicians, they create the conditions where students can develop their interests and abilities. And there's no law of nature that says this requires a tiered school system. It does however require this function of schools to be seriously supported, which relates right down to what the functions of schools are perceived to be - to facilitate imagination and independent thinking, or to encourage the development of conformity, of citizens who will consume and behave as desired by the system. Under a framework featuring grammar schools (not to mention public schools) the former is conveniently restricted to the few, as you say. The factor of location is also important here: affluent London as opposed to the provinces. (I speak as a "product" of a provincial comprehensive school.)

[Stanfordian]

In fact of course schools don't "produce" eminent musicians, they create the conditions where students can develop their interests and abilities. And there's no law of nature that says this requires a tiered school system. It does however require this function of schools to be seriously supported, which relates right down to what the functions of schools are perceived to be - to facilitate imagination and independent thinking, or to encourage the development of conformity, of citizens who will consume and behave as desired by the system. Under a framework featuring grammar schools (not to mention public schools) the former is conveniently restricted to the few, as you say. The factor of location is also important here: affluent London as opposed to the provinces. (I speak as a "product" of a provincial comprehensive school.)

From my experience Grammar Schools are great for those who win scholarships to get there but no so great for those who don't.

[Old Grumpy]

In the "old days" you didn't need a scholarship to receive a free grammar school education, though. Agreed, those who did not pass the 11 Plus often received a second-rate education.