It has been rumbling for some time but last week the Prime Minister announced that the Government is to crackdown on so-called “low value” degrees, those that do not lead to well-paid jobs, further education or starting a business. Whist arts and humanities courses are not specifically mentioned, nor are creative jobs, the underlying message is clear, a degree must lead to a well-paid good professional job. There have been numerous concerns and condemnations to this announcement. Reducing access to higher education, narrowing course content, restricting student intake and stifling the entire sector have all been mentioned.
Reading both the announcement and the discussion around it 3 things came to my mind.
Nowadays many careers are non-linear, but creative careers are especially so, and they require a multi disciplined skill set. The entire creative sector is awash with people working in areas not directly related to their degree, art school alumni Robbie Coltrane and David Bowe, Sadler’s Wells AD Sir Alistair Spalding-linguistics and philosophy for example. I strongly believe that this multi disciplined skill set has helped to make the UK a world leader in arts. Why does the Prime Minister not seek to develop this, when it already exists, instead of marginalising and trying to extinguish it?
Furthermore, the majority of the sector is freelance, not employees or business owners, but freelance. This is how the sector works. A fact that the government seem not to fully understand, as was so clearly shown in its response to the creative sector’s crisis during the pandemic.
With regards to well paid, arts subsidies from both central and local government have been steadily decreasing over the last decade. In 2010 Somerset County Council voted to cut arts organisations’ direct grants, and with the current pressures on local authorities more may follow. As theatres try to do the same with less financial resources the knock on effect has led to stagnant wages and fewer opportunities for those who actually make the work. Added to this is the popular well honed derogatory myth that creatives must be badly paid, that they will do it for the love of the work alone, and should accept being badly paid for doing a creative job. Yes, we do love our work, but that does not mean we should not be well rewarded, or at least fairly rewarded for that work. It is time that this myth was busted. If the current government valued the creative sector and its workers and invested in it fairly, then pay in the sector would rise, leading to creatives having well paid jobs.
As for a good job, what is the definition of a good job, and for that matter what is the definition of a professional job? Is it only STEM jobs, the traditional professions such as medicine and law, those in leadership positions? I do not believe so. There is far more to a balanced job economy than just the traditional professional and STEM jobs, and it is those with creativity, innovation and the ability to risk take that are likely to drive society’s progress and potentially economic growth. Skills that are a fundamental part of many arts degrees. Many creatives strive at the coal face of the sector their entire careers driving creative innovation forward, contributing to the wider society and supporting and influencing creative practitioners of the future. The fact they do so without wider recognition or being well paid is a reflection of both this government’s and society as a whole’s attitude to the creative sector.