Middle class domain

The current tagline for those working in the arts is that ‘art is for everyone’. It can inspire people from any walk of life, enrich their lives and contribute greatly to their wellbeing. I know this, but why do I feel so middle class and out of touch with the real world when trying to relay this message?

We are well versed in the arguments that public funding of the arts is minute in comparison to worthier causes, and can work preventatively to educate and contribute to wellbeing. But what is your response to the person telling you to stop talking arty farty and get back down to earth? You must admit, even the way we say "the arts" is enough to put some people off. I know I always subconsciously lose my broad Boltonian accent when I say the words and for a millisecond sound like I have a nasal defect. It’s almost impossible for me to separate "the arts" from its middle class aspirations and adopt a ‘common man’ tone of voice, never mind argue for its relevance to everyone.

Maybe it’s in the language. We talk about the arts as a higher place. A coveted haven of revelation, if only you could be smart enough to "get it". No, you can’t be critical of that piece of art, you must find deeper meaning and understand its deliberate antagonism to spur intellectual debate. To say it’s shit, or submit to the old adage of "I don’t know about art but I know what I like", is to admit you’re an uneducated philistine. Art doesn’t always have to challenge, it can just be liked.

Maybe it’s in the environment. How many launches and previews have you been to with an austere atmosphere and lots of middle-aged hippies and youngsters desperately trying to do the cool but geeky look. The scandals of union spending on socials has nothing on some of these lavish soirees, even the ones that are community-based.

Maybe it’s a lack of awareness. Some people don’t realise that the arts are all around them and often don’t notice when they have watched, taken part in, or sometimes created them. During the NI11 indicator survey it became necessary to give lists of arts activities to those taking part in order to get some people to understand whether they had, or hadn’t, experienced the arts. I’m not sure how someone is meant to know, when the arts translates as the high arts to many people, and a lot of popular culture is not classed as being worthy of having an arts status.

So maybe it’s the content. We’re all happy to praise PJ Harvey as a great artist and thoroughly deserving of her second Mercury Award, but I doubt that’s the same of Tulisa from N-Dubz. Yes, their fans have far different tastes and you could probably prove that a lot more insight and thought is present in PJ Harvey’s music. You could also argue that these factors indicate a higher level of quality. However, that doesn’t mean that the X-factor panellist is not an artist, and does not produce art.

We talk about art for art’s sake, and how people are free to interpret artists and their work themselves. Funnily enough, that doesn’t seem to be the case when it comes to looking down on popular culture. I do the same. I’m patronisingly pitying towards people I feel have no taste. I’m always the first to balk at an action blockbuster, but give me the same content in a foreign language film and I may just give it a go – and praise it wholeheartedly. I scoff at popular music – the more obscure, the more appealing. I reckon that makes me as shallow as the people whose tastes I deride.

I think a climate has been created that positively pushes the arts sceptics out of the clique. All the mystique, intellectual high ground and prestige we put on what are deemed the ‘real arts’ only serves to make it an exclusive, middle class club. And let’s face it, without it being exclusive it would become open to populism, which is the last thing many arts aficionados want. I still think there’s hope in using the arts for community engagement. At least this way the majority can try and enjoy it before it’s appropriated by the few.