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 For the BFI, the debate about the place of moving image in education is "as outdated as the debate about digital technology."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.