Generation now: the immediate future of the film industry

In most other circumstances, a blog topic falling into my inbox would constitute a great start to the week. In this case, I really wish it hadn't.

An email from IdeasTap, a charity dedicated to creating opportunities in the creative industries for those starting out in their careers, was today sent to subscribers entitled 'So long, farewell: IdeasTap is closing".

Six years after its formation in 2008, IdeasTap will, in June 2015 be shut down. The organisation, an "arts charity for young, creative people at the start of their careers", has to this point run off the funds of founder Peter de Haan's charitable trust, but are now, unable to secure government or corporate support to keep them going. The company that have in just six years given away £2.3m in funding and mentoring to future creatives, and connected and inspired countless individuals at the start of their careers is being forced to close its doors once and for all.

Peter de Haan reflects on the closure of the organisation, flagging up many of the topics I have covered throughout the duration of this blog. He says:

After six years, the picture for the arts is still gloomy. Further funding cuts are coming. The cost of higher education is now dauntingly high. The recent Warwick Report suggests that the arts are not catered for by government agencies, and that arts education is steadily being marginalised – despite the huge value the creative industries offer the UK, both culturally and financially. I hope they wake up, and soon.

As a student mere months away from stepping out into the real world and trying to forge a career in the creative industries, this news - although unfortunately not surprising - couldn't come at a worse time given the already huge lack of foot-in-the-door opportunities. 

The fact that a charity with such aims and values as IdeasTap cannot secure funding to keep it open reflects to me the pure lack of value placed on the creative industries in our society today and it really does make their future seem bleak.

To me, the closure of IdeasTap neatly illustrates the end effect of the some of issues I have been discussing throughout the duration of this blog. Long term, our answer lies in our schools creating a sense of value around the arts, and around film. Our future generations must see the study of moving image in the same light they see English Literature or History. It might not be of interest to everyone, but it is a vital part of our cultural education, and it doesn't seem unfair that a basic understanding of the medium should be expected in all students.

It is important to the future of our culture, society and of particular importance to the film industry that we fight to create an understanding and overarching value of film in our future society, even if we cannot see it take affect for the next 40 to 50 years.

Because the immediate future of film industry in the UK; that is, those just starting out in the their careers, looks bleak. They haven't been part of a society or an education system that, as a rule, values the creative arts in any form, and end up having windows of opportunity slammed shut. There is no doubt that many will turn away from possible future careers in film or in the arts due to lack of certainty and lack of funding and that, for me, is a particularly sad reality to face. 

Let's hope that the closure of a valuable resource such as IdeasTap might spur more people to fight for the future of the arts, and the future of film in the UK. 

The industry responsibility to the future of UK Film

So far I have considered the changes that need to be made in our society and schools order to offer a strong and dynamic UK film industry in the future. However, one thing that is important to note that is, even if such changes were implemented, and the pool of potential film-makers widened and diversified to cover those from all economic and social backgrounds, the industry would still need to take some drastic measures to embrace the changes, and solidify the future of the UK film industry as a richer and more diverse part of our culture and society.

We are currently facing a culture of large companies using loopholes to avoid paying the national minimum wage to people starting out in career. Often they brand jobs as 'work experience', or offering bursaries rather than salaries for the sake of cheap labour and ticking boxes. The low or unpaid internship debate has exploded over the last few years, and newspapers and internet articles are constantly debating to the 'experience or exploitation'. The film industry is no exception to these issues, with the 'Black Swan' case of two unpaid interns suing Fox for their work on the 2010 film gaining global attention.

Going back to previous posts regarding privilege, it's fair to say that we cannot tackle these issues just from an education perspective, although it would be a start. The industry need to stop debating about diversity and start making choices that facilitate change, because those facing the world of the media industry imminently, even those not considered poorly off face some major financial challenges from employers.

Let's consider online jobs board MyFirstJobInFilm.com (MFJIF) as an example. The company describe themselves as a 'recruitment platform between the UK Film Industry and the individuals who wish to join the film industry as new entrants.' The opportunities on this site seem particularly exciting, with emails to members going out nearly every day about new jobs in the film and television industries. While the platform is undoubtedly a great resource, the problems with its service (and many other services like it) illustrate issues within the wider industry quite well.

In this instance, as a final year university student looking to work in the industry, I will use myself as an example.  I fall under what some might term the 'squeezed middle' category. My parents earn enough that I only receive the minimum entitlement from student finance (which in reality barely covers rent costs for the year), yet they can still struggle to make ends meet in their own lives. The day-to-day implications for me being that each week at university are strictly budgeted, and I must cover much of my own living expenses with savings from previous jobs. So in reality, the monthly subscription fee to access the full jobs board of MFJIF seems to an unaffordable expense when you're struggling to scrape together enough money to pay the gas bill.

Furthermore, a large proportion of jobs advertised on the website, primarily in London, as seen below, are advertised as 'work experience'. While the company stress that applicants should under no circumstances work for more than 4 weeks unpaid, it still seems odd that the majority of experience opportunities fall under this category, making them virtually inaccessible to those who live outside the capital; not to mention those who cannot afford to move to the city to take up a permanent role they might find!

While these sort of barriers make it all the harder for someone in my position to break their way into the industry, consider the position of those in substantially worse financial positions than me. Those endeavours do not just become difficult, or involve taking a second job - they become impossible.

If the UK Film industry wants puts words into action and truly diversify, it needs to take responsibility for itself, support film education initiatives and provide fair and equal opportunities for everyone at the start of their careers, rather than just those who can afford it.

Footnotes
Image 1) Screenshot of MFJIF jobs board on 11th March 2015

BFI Film Academy - the youth perspective

There's nothing quite as frustrating as being a school or college student having to listen to people who have been out of education for 20+ years tell everyone what is 'right' for the education system. Regardless of statistics, reports and graphs, it is undeniable that the answer to most of these issues lies somewhere within the millions of school children studying today, their thoughts, opinions and perspectives.

Given this, it seemed important to put forward some questions regarding film education to those in the thick of it. I managed to put forward some questions to 14 students who are currently in their penultimate week at the BFI Film Academy branch in the East Midlands, run in association with The University of Lincoln. The questionnaire asked the students to consider the following areas; what they have gained from their experience, whether they believed that film should be included in the school curriculum, whether they would pursue a career in the film industry, and whether they would consider studying film and/or media at FE and/or HE levels.

It seems that broadly, those taking part in courses such as the BFI Film academy are very interested in pursuing careers in the film industry, with 78.5% of students ticking 'yes' to that question, with the other 3 students either unsure, or interested in broader media. One student seemed to enjoy studying film, but note she would prefer to study law due to the potential salary differences.

In terms of studying film at further or higher education levels, while 35% percent of the students would consider, or have already applied for a formal film education course, 21.4% would not, citing other career choices, or 'experience over education' as a reason. The rest were unsure, or wanted to consider other media paths, such as journalism.

Considering these statistics in light of the test group - 15-19 year olds who have voluntarily applied for a short course in film production outside of school hours - it hardly seems surprising that the majority are interested in pursuing film or wider media as a career. However, even in this small group, we come up against some large discrepancies between the number of students who want to pursue a career in the media industries (78.5%) versus those who would consider further or higher film education courses (35%). While students did not detail reasons why this might be, answers from other questions offer some insight.

One particular question from the questionnaire provoked an unexpected but particularly interesting response. When asked if film should be included in school education system for students from a young age (like English or Maths), almost 65% of students said no, with only a few saying yes, and a the remaining participants saying it should be included but from later years (GCSE, A Level etc).

What was most interesting about the responses, however, was that of the 9 students who felt that film shouldn't form part of the curriculum, 8 stated startlingly similar reasons why. 6 students felt that, although they loved film,  they felt it deserved extra-currcicular status because not everyone enjoys or is interested in film, lots of people don't want a career in it, and a large number of students said that  - given how passionate they were about film, they wanted to study it with those who were just as passionate as them.

The way these students - a group clearly very passionate about film - consider the medium is quite scary if you consider it closely. The feeling that it shouldn't be included in the curriculum because a lot of people might not enjoy it suggests that the medium doesn't even enter their minds as a valued art form. Many people do not enjoy the study of English literature, History, or Art, yet they still form part of the curriculum, and all students are required to study these subjects to some degree. Film study - even for those who are passionate about the art form - unfortunately consider it far removed from subjects that are taught in our curriculum today.

The students responses quite neatly surmise the issues with not including film and media as a form of literacy in our curriculum. Those who are passionate about film, both making it and studying it are very vulnerable, it seems, to being swayed in their opinions on the value of film, and the role it plays in our lives. Luckily for the majority, it doesn't seem to have discouraged a lot of them from wanting to pursue further study or a career in the area, but it does raise concern for those with potential to benefit from the art form who are perhaps not quite so certain or pro-active as those at the Lincoln BFI Film Academy.

More than anything, the responses make me more certain than ever that our society's view of film needs to be changed and that measures need to be put in place now to ensure that our schools and societies appreciate film and moving image for being an art form, rather than just an entertainment.

A wider angle: European film education

Leaving aside the UK's somewhat uncertain future in the EU, its 42 years as part of the community mean it is important to consider Britain in comparison to its mainland counterparts with respect to their approaches to film education. This particular post will concentrate on France, who seem to be outweighing a lot of other European countries in terms of their dedication to integrating film into education from a young age. 

French minister for Culture and Communications, Aurélie Filippetti spoke with some vigour at the 2013 Cannes Film Festival about the level of provisions for film education, claiming that "culture is at the very heart of the project that is the European Union". The French, it seems, are far ahead of us in creating an inclusive entitlement to film education. For the last two decades,  the French National Education Ministry, and the CNC (Centre national du cinéma et de l'image animée) have run (and continue to run) three in-school film education initiatives to cover students at all ages;  “Ecole et Cinéma” (“Schools and Film”), “Collège au Cinéma” (“Secondary School Goes to the Cinema”) and “Lycéens et Apprentis au Cinéma” (“High School Students & Apprentices in Film”), which in the 2011/12 school year reached 1,410,000 pupils, "representing the most significant provision for arts and culture education during school hours."

So what are they doing that other European countries aren't? And how are their actions affecting their industry? 

While they still may not have the perfect approach to film education yet, their use of the medium in schools and the importance they place on the arts in general is certainly more than a few steps ahead of the UK mind-set. It seems that while the BFI and IntoFilm battle against a government who seem particularly resistant to approaching film as a necessary part of a rounded education, the French government seem to have at least put in to action some of the demands made by the pro film education groups there. 

Differences in the French and the UK approach to film education might be partly placed in the history of the country's artistic turning point, the May 68 student strike and subsequent cultural explosion. Interestingly, while France experienced an artist revolution after May 68, and other countries have experienced similar movements (such as 'La Movida' in Spain after the death of Franco's), in England's history, we have never experienced such a dramatic movement that has embraced the arts fully as a form of rebellion or expression of freedom.  

France's much deeper set acceptance and appreciation of the arts in comparison to the UK shows in terms of figures and economic contribution too. A study presented by the CNC in 2013, reported that French cinema contributes twice as much to their national economy than the UK Film industry does to the UK GDP. The organisation put the direct value of the cinema industry in France in 2011  (€ 3.3 billion) accounts for 0.2% of the French GDP versus the 0.1% direct value added to the UK GDP by our own film industry. 

Xavier Lardoux's  2013 report 'For a European Film Education policy', commissioned by the CNC also outlines a number of European countries taking steps towards integrating film into the school systems, including Austria, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Croatia - but not the UK quite yet. 

Despite the dedication in the UK of various individuals and organisations to the entitlement for all to film education, and the integration of media literacy as a part of our national curriculum, the governmental resistance in the UK is disheartening and frustrating. Unfortunately, there are just a few minds that stand directly in the path of a more prosperous and diverse film industry that we might be proud of. 

Footnotes
1) For a European Film Education policy', available at CNC.fr

Case study 1: Into Film initiatives

Up to this point, my blog has taken a fairly cynical view of the state of film education, and focussed generally on what the government and the nation are not doing to help our future generation - industry bound or not.

However film education initiatives should be given their due, and this short case study will look at one of the major film education charities, Into Film, the work they are doing to combat some of the current problems in the film and television industries, and which of their initiatives might be useful to the younger generation if implemented nationwide.

Into Film describe themselves as seeking "to put film at the heart of children and young people's learning, contributing to their cultural, creative and personal development", focussing on watching films, filmmaking, teacher resources, training and development, meeting the industry and inclusion and outreach.

Into Film on: Privilege 

The organisation put huge emphasis on allowing access to film education for all, regardless of background or ability. One such project launched in May of 2014 was the Lottery funded 'Opening Minds, Transforming  Lives'. The initiative targeted children and young people from underprivileged backgrounds in Manchester, attempting to engage them with their local heritage through film, and in the process setting up 150 new film clubs in the Greater Manchester area. Sir Alastair Macdonald spoke at the opening event, saying;

If we want to narrow the gap in attainment we must give disadvantaged children what their middle class counterparts take for granted - art, culture, theatre, cinema, reading...film clubs help provide this

Sir Alasdair Macdonald, Former Headteacher

This programme's approach to inclusive film education is a particularly interesting one. By placing the focus on the local talent from the Greater Manchester area, the initiative is telling these students that coming from an underprivileged background does not determine their future, and they must strive to do what they want with their lives - whether it be in film, or an alternative passion. Given the universally acknowledged difficulty of breaking into the film industries, this approach gives resources and opportunity for young people, but most of all; hope.

Into Film on: Teacher Training

Into Film also place a particular emphasis on training teachers on positive ways to utilise film and moving image to engage students. We face a struggle today, created by the use of film and television in the classroom as 'treats', and often students see watching film as an opportunity to disengage.

They provide documents, resources and training sessions for teachers who wish to approach the use of film in their classrooms in a different way, and use it to help deeper engagement rather than the other way around.

Into Film's focuses themselves speak very clearly about the issues we're currently facing with film education, and with the industry itself. The inaccessibility of the industry, which I will address in more detail in a later post, can be off putting for any person, and especially those from underprivileged backgrounds. Into Film  Into Film attempt to squander the notion that film-making is out of reach for those with less opportunities. 

Education wise, we have a fundamental lack of understanding about how to use film in the classroom, and the current use of it is perpetuating and deepening the idea that the moving image is only a form of entertainment.

My hope for organisations like Into Film is that their work will be recognised and appreciated as important, not just in words, but in actions, by people in power who have the opportunity to implement some of their great approaches in schools nationwide, and help widen the pool of people they are reaching.


Footnotes
1) Information on "Opening Minds, Transforming Lives available at: "http://www.intofilm.org/news/articles/opening-minds-transforming-lives-manchester

Fear of the future: the new government and the UK film industry (Part 2)

Politicians were slightly stirred up this week by the publication of The Warwick Commission report, a twelve month inquiry investigating all aspects of the creative sector and reporting some worrying statistics that showed "the systematic removal from the education system of creative and cultural opportunities for young people". 

It occurs to me that, while there are clearly invaluable projects in place thanks to organisations such as the BFI and Creative Scotland, they are, unfortunately only reaching a very small minority of people. To change the way people view film education, and to create any sense of diversity within the film industry, we must start at the bottom - and that means schools. But, as seen in my previous post, it seems our current politicians might have a slight fear unknown power of media education. 

Realistically, we are relying on them facing that fear, starting to view media literacy as a fundamental part of education, and offering nationwide resources and teacher training if we want to see any substantial progress in this area in the next few decades. High hopes it seems...

The future diversity of UK creative content is in the hands of our country's major politicians, and the Warwick Commission report certainly gave at least one of the them something to talk about. The report, released last week, estimated the value of the creative arts sector to be £76.9bn (approximately 5% of the British economy), and went alongside figures published by the BFI that show our screen content alone generates over £6bn of that. 

These findings triggered Labour leader Ed Miliband to give his first major talk regarding his party's arts and culture politics in advance of the May elections. He said it would be Labour's mission "to guarantee every young person, from whatever background, access to the arts and culture: a universal entitlement to a creative education for every child." The party leader went even further, promising to make creative subjects obligatory if any school wishes to acheieve an 'outstanding' rating from Ofsted. 

If elected, and promises kept (!), Labour's policies could mean a step in the right direction for media education - albeit it more of a small shuffle. The promises are not film specific, nor are the party promising to make media education a standard form of literacy, but the policy changes would mean that high flying schools who regularly boast 'Outstanding' Ofsted ratings are put in a 'do or die' position when it comes to offering the arts, unless they are willing to give up their top tier rank.  It might not be much - but it's a gesture.

The Conservatives, on the other hand, are - to most, unsurprisingly - much quieter on the issue of arts education and funding, with their only major input on the matter to this point being the an uproar from arts and humanities supporters when Education Secretary Nicky Morgan gave a speech that attempted to steer teenagers away from the arts. The Conservative politician, at a speech for the Your Life campaign, inferred that arts study at school will offer significantly poorer employment opportunities for students, and urged them instead to pick 'STEM' subjects; the sciences, maths, technology and engineering. 

What we are not seeing from either party, nor, in fact any of the more minor parties, is the ongoing support for children choosing what they are good at, and most importantly what they enjoy. At 15 years old, when students are making their first tentative steps towards adulthood, they are asked to make GCSE subject choices. Given that these choice somewhat limit your choices at A-Levels (and therefore University, and future career...) it's kind of a big deal. This, for a lot of young people seems like the first big decision they have to make about their own future. So steering them blindly towards either a science or an arts path by using scare tactics is bound to stifle creative and entrepreneurial potential and passion, for fear that they might make the 'wrong' decisions. 

The policies being put in place by the politicians today are affecting the future of the UK film and television industries, be it by way of convincing people their passions will not lead to a career, cutting funds, opportunities or resources, we cannot hope to have a completely creatively diverse or at all interesting base of creative content from UK creators if we are not nurturing or encouraging that interest from the get go. Nor, it would seem from the figures, would any government want to see the cultural industries go down the pan given their contribution to the UK GDP. Hopefully, whoever is elected in May will give this area the attention it deserves. 

Footnotes
1) Warwick Commission report available at: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/research/warwickcommission/futureculture/finalreport/ 
2) Ed Miliband on arts education: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/23/ed-miliband-pledge-universal-entitlement-arts-education
3) The Telepgraph on Nicky Morgan's 'STEM' speech: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/11221081/Nicky-Morgan-pupils-held-back-by-overemphasis-on-arts.html

Where does our government stand? (Part 1)

Considering Mark Reid's insight into the politics of film education, it seemed appropriate to look a little more carefully at the government's stance on the matter.

While there are absolutely invaluable projects running at the moment from the likes of the BFI and Creative Scotland, it occurs to me that, in reality, they are only reaching a very small minority of people, with the real way to access and change the views of film and media education being through schools. 

We then rely on the government facing their fear of the power of media, starting to view media literacy as a fundamental part of education, and pushing resources into nationwide access and teacher training and support if we want to see any substantial progress in this area in the next few decades. 

It would be unfair, however, to tar the whole UK with the same brush. Having spoken with Scott Donaldson, Creative Scotland's Special projects portfolio Manager, regarding his views on the matter, it seems (to me at least) that while Scotland are still fighting similar battles as the rest of the UK with regard to perceptions of film education in general, they are coming up against substantially less resistance from the powers that be in terms of including film and media literacy as a fundamental part of the official curriculum.

In Scotland, the 'Curriculum for excellence', their national curriculum, defines literacy as;

"the set of skills which allows an individual to engage fully in society and in learning, through the different forms of language, and the range of texts, which society values and finds useful."

with examples of texts being:

Examples of texts

novels, short stories, plays, poems reference texts the spoken word charts, maps, graphs and timetables advertisements, promotional leaflets comics, newspapers and magazines CVs, letters and emails films, games and TV programmes labels, signs and posters recipes, manuals and instructions reports and reviews text messages, blogs and social networking sites web pages, catalogues and directories

Furthermore, the Scottish government also circulates a literacy survey to students every other year at the following stages: to test levels of literacy, and questions regarding film text and language form part of those questionnaires. 

p4, p7 S2 (in terms of English schooling, Year 4, Year 7 and Year 9 respectively)

Mick Davies, Education Manager for the CCEA exam board in Northern Ireland also had this to say regarding media literacy in Northern Ireland. 

The inclusion of reference to media education (and moving image products as one among the various stimuli pupils might engage with) as part of the statutory requirements for English with Media Education within the KS3 curriculum reflects the fact that cultural and media products of all types can be read as texts. 

The concept of ‘literacy’ has diversified from the narrow sense of ability to read and write, to reflect the ubiquity of various forms of communication, and the need for young people to be able to understand, interpret and  engage with all sorts of texts. 

In stark comparison, the National Curriculum framework document for England states that the "overarching aim for English in the National Curriculum is to promote high standards of literacy by equipping pupils with a strong command of the written and spoken word, and to develop their love of literature through widespread reading for enjoyment."

Not only is media literacy not mentioned at all in that definition, but the only instance in which media is brought up is to say; 

"The arts (comprising art and design, music, dance, drama and media arts)... are not compulsory National Curriculum subjects after the age of 14 but all pupils have a statutory entitlement to be able to study a subject in each of those... areas."

So, students - at least in England - are far from being encouraged to pursue arts subjects at the points in their schooling where they're beginning to make decisions about their careers and futures, therefore perpetuating the notions that that media, or the arts in general, are not valuable areas of study or potential career paths. 

The second part of this study will consider why this might be, and take a look at the directions media education, and the UK film industry might be headed after the General Elections.

Footnotes

1) All details regarding National Curriculums are available via respective websites

Film education and industry representation: Is film-making just for the privileged?

James Blunt's open argument with shadow culture secretary Chris Bryant debating talent vs. privilege hit the headlines on Tuesday, rubbing salt into the wound of the "#OscarsSoWhite" media firestorm about the lack of diversity in this years Academy Award nominees. Suffice it to say, both incidents have not done much to rebut the feeling that film-making (or in Bryant's argument, the arts in general) is still overwhelmingly a wealthy white man's game. 

Image:  #Oscarssowhite they “don't see color” Illustration by Victoria Courtney 

Without wanting to dig too far into the politics of under-respresentation in the film industry, which merits a whole study in itself, we might apply Bryant's arguments about privilege to film education. He says in reply to Blunt; 

 “I’m delighted you’ve done well for yourself. But it is really tough forging a career in the arts if you can’t afford the enormous fees for drama school, if you don’t know anybody who can give you a leg-up, if your parents can’t subsidise you for a few years whilst you make your name, and if you can’t afford to take on an unpaid internship." 

Bryant argues not against talented individuals from privileged backgrounds, but instead called for a more level playing field to allow talent from all backgrounds the opportunity to be nurtured. 

In the run up to the general election, this argument is particularly pertinent. In 2010, a low point of the economic downturn, the government spending review announced a cut of almost 30% to the Arts Council England budget, and in 2012, further cuts to the budget amounting to £11.6m before 2015. Only the next few years will reveal the effects that these cuts have had on the arts world, but it does serve as a good reminder to those who support the arts to keep a close eye on culture manifestos in the run up to the general election. 

As the future for arts funding, and the role film and media might take in formal education is completely unknown, it falls upon organisations finding other means of funding if they desire a sense of stability. One such organisation is Creative Scotland's 'CashBack for creativity' scheme, which sees profits raised from criminal activity re-channeled into funding for their scheme 'Xpress Yourself,'  for those who otherwise might not have had the opportunity to explore or learn about the medium.

Schemes such as 'Cashback' serve as an incredibly positive framework for other projects in the UK, both to widen access to arts education but also to create awareness around the importance of self sustainability in this area. 

Cashback for Creativity is just one of Creative Scotland's various initiatives that attempts to improve access to various art forms for young people in "communities where there is an identified and demonstrated need."

As per the Cashback website; 

"The CashBack for Creativity Strategic Fund will deliver a programme of learning and developmental activities which improve skills and confidence, but also raise aspirations and provide pathways for further learning, training, education and employment."

Speaking with members of staff at both the BFI and Creative Scotland, it is clear that the two organisations, among others, seem to be tirelessly dedicated to improving access to film education, and providing more a comprehensive education with as much emphasis on arts, including film, as on maths and the sciences. 

It must be made clear, however, that these organisations are not working towards this goal for the benefit of the industry, but for the benefit of those children receiving a more dynamic and well rounded education and set of opportunities than those currently available. Movement from this type of education into the industry, for these initiatives, is almost a by-product of the work they're trying to do. 

This idea is key to understand the underlying issue with film education, and does directly affect the media industry. If media education was offered comprehensively in schools, introduced as a basic form of literacy from a young age, it may raise the profile and opinion of media education in higher learning. In turn, this could offer a wider demographic the opportunity to explore and nurture talents which they never before considered might develop into careers, along with creating a different perception of film for everyone - not just those in the industry. Once we are able to do that, perhaps we might start seeing more true and organic diversity among the Academy nominees. 

Footnotes
1) Full article outlining the debate between James Blunt and Chris Bryant avialable at: http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/jan/19/james-blunts-letter-chris-bryant-in-full

2) Information on arts funding cuts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20664137
3) Cashback for Creativity website: http://www.creativescotland.com/funding/funding-programmes/targeted-funding/cashback-for-creativity

Thoughts from the BFI

It would be impossible to discuss film and education without considering the BFI. The British Film Institute are currently the largest and loudest advocates for improving media literacy and run some of the most prolific film education initiatives available today. Their approach and dedication to improving the profile of film and film education in our society is second to none. Over the course of this blog, I will aim consider some of their approaches and initiatives in detail, in respect of their effect on the industry. 

Impact, Relevance and Excellence: A new stage for film education is the BFI's most recently published in a myriad of documents outlining their views and aims for "learning about film, leaning through film, and also learning about - and engaging with - film as a vocation." As touched on in my introductory blog post, their main focus is the eventual full integration of media literacy in schools to the same level as the written text. For the BFI, the debate about the place of moving image in education is "as outdated as the debate about digital technology."

I was lucky enough to be able to speak with  Mark Reid, Head of Education for the BFI, who kindly answered some of my questions. Here is what he had to say:

“Why does the BFI put such a heavy emphasis on film education?”

BFI’s role, in its Royal Charter, is to ‘promote understanding and appreciation of the arts of film and television, and to conserve them in the national interest.’  So, we are constituted to develop film education.

In our publication Film Forever, our 5 year plan to promote film in the UK, our number 1 priority is to broaden audience choice and to provide more opportunities for people to learn about film.

Interestingly, then, the appreciation, and more importantly, the understanding of film and television is deemed important enough by HMQ to constitute a Royal Charter, but not quite important enough by government education ministers to introduce as a fundamental part of the curriculum, which was my next question.

“Many high ranking schools and 6th forms do not offer film education at any stage in their curriculum, deeming it a ‘soft subject’. Do you fear this might discourage potential future filmmakers or creatives from pursuing their goals?”

If you look at the profile of many current filmmakers, you’ll see that they very often came from privileged backgrounds, and from private schools.  They rarely studied film in school.  We think that creating a climate where film study is taken seriously will enable a much wider range of young people to progress into the film industry, so that it doesn’t depend on private connections and privilege.  ‘Talent is everywhere; opportunity isn’t’.

Second point though is that film study isn’t solely (or even primarily) about progress into the industry.  That would be like saying we teach every child to write so they can be authors or work in publishing.  Instead, we believe that film education, being ‘literate in film’ is a fundamental part of being able to participate in society – it’s a part of literacy, not a route into the film industry.  This means beginning film education when children are first introduced to the moving image – for many of them this is before the age of 2 years old.  Long before they learn to read and write.

Mark's view here is particularly interesting. His point regarding the privileged background of many of our country's film-makers is incredibly pertinent not only to how we view film education, but also to the nature of the industry and the dynamic of our creative content. 

His second point raises some interesting issues in respect of this blog too. Although it is primarily focussed on how the view of film education effects the film industry, there is no doubt it is all interlinked. While improving media literacy may not be a method of moving more people into the industry, what it does allow is the opportunity for the formal study of film to eventually become more respected, therefore hopefully taking the stigma away from a career in film, and allowing those who might potentially thrive in the industry to pursue what could be a rewarding career without feeling that parents, peers or anyone else may disapprove.

“In light of the previous question, do you feel introducing film and media as key elements of the curriculum from the very early stages of education might change perceptions of the medium?”

Yes.  But here’s a caveat: how long did it take from the invention of printing to having a universal entitlement to being literate?  About 500 years..  the Catholic Church for centuries blocked universal literacy, because it would empower people too much.  People who block film literacy for everyone are doing the same thing.

The curriculum (in England; Northern Ireland and Scotland are much more progressive) is focused on words; as a culture we’re afraid of pictures (think of all those moral panics about internet images).  The Reformation in the 16^th century, while enabling universal literacy, also smashed images in churches and monasteries.  That’s the origin of the word ‘iconoclasm’.  We’re still living with the fear of images… which in my book would make a great case for including moving/ image education in a curriculum.

Mark's assertion regarding the widespread fear of the moving image certainly gives pause for thought. While there are those fighting tirelessly for media literacy to be a right among every person, regardless of their wealth, race or gender, they're certainly up against some heavy forces of oppression.

Empowering a wider range of people would mean a more dynamic range of content, new questions and new issues for the film industry. To myself, and hopefully to the reader, this seems like something we should strive for, but the industry is tight knit, stubborn - and it knows what it likes. In all reality it's an industry that would have to be dragged kicking and screaming out of its comfort zone on Hollywood Boulevard.

And as for the educational side; is it a case of being scared of the unknown? Quite possibly. Perhaps formal and all inclusive media education is not included as standard in the English curriculum simply because those in power don't understand it enough yet - they do not know the ramifications of enabling the masses with the power to understand, appreciate and produce this medium, and perhaps they're not willing to take that risk.

Footnotes
1. Document from BFI referenced in initial post.
2. Answers from personal email exchange/interview with Mark Reid, Head of Education for the BFI.

Studying a 'reel' subject: An Introduction

Masoud Yazdani | Director, Intellect Publishing

In 1999, the British Film Institute published an influential report entitled 'Making Movies Matter', calling for "a new attitude towards the moving image amongst education policy-makers." The BFI are no doubt pioneers in their attitude toward film education. From a range of schemes and talks to papers and reports, it seems they work tirelessly in support of the integration of learning about (and through) film into the British school curriculum, as well as attempting to address perspectives of film in older generations. In their most recent education report, 'Impact, Relevance and Excellence', the organisation say they aim to equip everyone with "the practical skills to appreciate, interpret and apply the language of film... just as we expect...so much through the printed text."

In the years between the BFI's 1999 report, and their current 2014 review of film education, however, I have graduated from primary, secondary and sixth form education, and am now in my final year at The University of York, studying for a BSc in Film and Television production - and I see a problem. Studying film at a Russell Group university means that I am painfully aware that the measures set out by the BFI for the integration of film as a fundamental part of literacy, culture and society have not been quite as penetrative as they may have hoped; and unfortunately they have not yet managed to change the attitudes of the masses.


Often when revealing my degree at a party or bar, I receive a mixed bag of responses, but, unfortunately, 90% are negative. Most claim it must be an easy degree ("so do you just watch films all day?"), while others deign to admit it's 'kinda cool', but follow straight up with "but I actually want a job at the end of my degree." Clearly my value of film isn't widely share by the pool of predominantly middle class students who populate the campus. In reality, a massive proportion of people I interact with think film just isn't worthy of formal study. It's a hobby, a pastime, an entertainer - and if you study it, you're probably just not cut out to be doing what they consider to be a 'real' subject. 


But where does this mentality stem from? Sir Ken Robinson, renowned speaker on education, creativity and innovation has a theory. 

;width:320;" width="320" height="266" style="display:block;text-align:left;margin-right:auto;" class="igm">

(From the full talk: "How schools kill creativity" (2006), available at TED.com)



The inaccessibility of film-making in the past, coupled with an impenetrable industry may have left many in the dark about this relatively new medium, but while neither film nor television might not be as old an art form as literature, there is no doubt it plays an integral part in most of our lives. Increasing media literacy now, in the era of the iPhone and Youtube, is more viable and important than ever before, and this, along with creating respect for the medium from the beginning of education is fundamental to the future of the UK film industry. 

If the younger generation do not see it as a viable or respectable industry to enter, or are (as is currently happening) widely discouraged from pursuing their interest in it, it faces a bleak future. In the most recent report by Oxford Economics in 2011, it was estimated that the UK film industry contributes over  £4.6 billion to UK GDP, and supports over 117,000 jobs - an industry, no doubt, that both the government and the wider public have vested interest in keeping afloat. So to keep from losing potential future talent and important cultural content, it is vital that film and television are understood, respected and (eventually) held in just as high a cultural esteem as any other art form in our educational establishments


I think it's time for a new view of film education, and the purpose of this blog is to understand, research and explore approaches being taken by the industry to increase the value of film and television in culture and society - and what that means for everyone else. 




Footnotes

1. "Making movies matter", published by the BFI is available to read in full at: http://sic.conaculta.gob.mx/centrodoc_documentos/21.pdf
2. 'Impact, Relevance and Excellence,' available at http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/downloads/bfi-film-education-strategy-impact-relevance-and-excellence-2014-03.pdf
3. Oxford Economics study on the impact of the film industry on our economy. Available at: http://www.bfi.org.uk/sites/bfi.org.uk/files/downloads/bfi-economic-impact-of-the-uk-film-industry-2012-09-17.pdf