Arts and Economics


economicsIt’s no real surprise that Fucko the Clown and his grisly crew are taking a swing or two at the idea of arts-based education for the lower orders; even less of one that they are dressing it up as founded on economics, because they have no proper understanding of either, especially in relation to one another. As with many of their fantasies and delusions, their view of the arts is a mess of prejudice, ignorance and resentment.

Arts and culture, overall, contributed billions of pounds to the UK’s GDP, at least prior to the pandemic, yet a lot of right-wingers persist in seeing the whole field as a bunch of disloyal lazy weirdos who should Get A Proper Job. Never mind that music tours, for instance, employ large numbers of people along with the actual performers: the wrecking of the UK’s previously successful tour management industry by Brexit was pretty much ignored – a further example of poor economics.

Some people are very fond of pointing out, whenever artists, performers and other creative people complaineconomics about how hard it is to make a living, that they could ‘produce something that people actually want’ and reminding them that they are not entitled to be paid for writing or singing or painting justĀ  because they like doing these things. The trouble with that is: people often do want what an artist has produced, but don’t see why they should pay the artist. One of the dangers of Big Tech’s dominance is that money tends to get diverted to the tech company and less and less actually makes its way to the creator of that ‘content’ without which fewer people would be happy to pay for more and more tech devices.

Don’t be afraid to ask for money when you have produced art that others actually want to consume. You can’t pay your own bills with love, applause, credibility or exposure. That’s as basic as economics gets.

Help hungry artists and booksellers by checking out the bookshop before you go…


Leave a Reply