A Drama And A Crisis

Gold cherry

By airyfairy

Fri, 12 Jan 2024
  • 3097 reads
18 comments
 

I don’t know. You take a week off to have Covid and return to a world where the Post Office has grown horns and a tail.

For any non-UK readers: our Post Office, once regarded as a boring but reliable aspect of national life, now turns out to be a collection of wannabe Kray gang members. The Post Office viciously accused hundreds of its own employees of theft and false accounting in order to cover up the fact that the computer system on which the PO had spent millions was a pile of shite. Lives were ripped to pieces, some went to prison, and about ten years ago the PO grudgingly admitted there might be a problem. The PO is a retail company wholly owned by the UK Government. I think. I’ll be honest, who owns what, who runs it, and how they run it, is sludgy ground for me. A bit like the railways.

Some media outlets have been banging on about this for years, while the government did fuck all. The public either took an interest or they didn’t. It wasn’t high on the public agenda.

This month, a television company broadcast a thumping good drama about it, and now the country is pretty much ready to take to the barricades in defence of those wrongly accused. Among the belated howls of fury are pained sighs of “But why did it take a television drama to achieve what lawyers, campaigners, sympathetic journalists and – to be fair – a few MPs have failed to achieve for at least a decade?”

Here you are: because, when done with skill, passion and commitment, drama and the arts in general make people think.

Arts funding in the UK has been slashed to ribbons for – oh, let me see, at least the last thirteen years. Especially the last thirteen years. Not only funding for bodies such as theatres, orchestras and small venues providing space for all kinds of local artists to develop their craft and engage the public, but also funding for community groups and arts education in schools. See also: libraries.

I declare an interest here. I love the theatre. My son is a professional actor and musician. My daughter has been involved in many community theatre projects. We aren’t wealthy, we have no background in theatre, and if there hadn’t been a local subsidised kids' group they started going to just for fun, and which triggered something in both of them, neither would have had these opportunities.

My son recently did panto in Chester and I had the delight of meeting the rest of the young cast in the bar (where else?) after the show. Over and over again the same story. No privileged backgrounds. Inspired by local groups, or a visit from a theatre company while they were at school. Help with funding at drama school.

Toby Jones, the lead in the ITV drama, came from a theatre family, but I’ll bet lots of others in that programme didn’t. My son, his fellow cast members, and those in the ITV show may be a thing of the past soon though, as funding is hacked away. Only the rich or the well-connected will be able to risk following a career in any branch of the arts.

Storyhouse Theatre in Chester was packed that night, as it had been every night. Kids and parents taking away precious memories. Also, a few people venting on Facebook because it was a ‘woke’ production with a secondary, same sex love story. The kids didn’t care. The little girl in front of me, in her sparkly Cinderella dress, was waving her wand and singing her little heart out and said, as we filed out, “Can we come again tomorrow?” She cheered when the beautiful fairy godmother finally found the courage to ask one of the stepsisters for a date. WE WANT A TRADITIONAL PANTO! screeched the offended. Oh. The one where the male romantic lead is played by a woman who is called a principal boy and the matriarch is played by a man called a Dame? That traditional, unwoke one. Maybe think about that.

I’m old enough to remember Cathy Come Home, a BBC drama about homelessness broadcast in 1966. It took ten years before any meaningful action was taken to tackle homelessness in the UK (we need an equivalent now) but the charity Crisis was formed as a direct result of the show and Shelter, a charity which launched shortly after the broadcast, got a lot more interest and support that it would otherwise have done.

People who saw that programme thought, and asked questions.

But why should we fund a bunch of wannabe luvvies when the country can’t afford doctors, dentists, nurses, teachers, firefighters and all the people who really matter?

OK. Let’s put it another way. Why should we fund the House of Lords, or the monarchy, or the wine cellar in Parliament, or Boris Johnson’s legal fees, when the country can’t afford the people who really matter? Why should we fund Rishi Sunak taking helicopters everywhere because, let’s face it, a man of his sensibilities doesn’t want to find himself on trains that are delayed/cancelled/filled to busting? A glimpse of real life? Perish the thought. Why should we not tax the corporations who laugh in our faces while trousering our cash? Why should we not remove from Michelle Mone every last penny she got from the government for PPE that didn’t work?

The money could be there. Of course it could.

This government – and quite possibly the one apparently set to come after it – doesn’t want to fund the arts because that would make the arts accessible to all sorts. It doesn’t want to subsidise theatres or concert halls or your local gig venue because then the common people might start getting ideas. It doesn’t want ordinary adults and children to think for themselves or ask questions, it certainly doesn’t want ordinary to kids to think they could have a future in a profession that not only brings joy to thousands, even millions, but can also make people question and alter the national discourse.

Oh, and by the way, the arts are a massive earner for the country. For now.

Mr Bates v The Post Office is a brilliant example of what the arts can do, and why the arts are important. And why our government is so afraid of them.

 

Picture by MarioSuperstar77 on WkimediaCommons: 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Game-icons.net_Drama-masks.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Certificate 15
Non-fiction
Rant
Other Non-fiction
Opinion

Comments

Submitted by Turlough on

The people with the money just can't see, and don't want to see, what they are doing to Britain. The arts are a platform for people with voices but possibly/probably with no money. Withdrawing funding is withdrawing the possibility of those voices being heard... of what they consider to be anarchy. 

I can't understand how the people with the money can enjoy their lives while so many people around them are miserable due to having little or no money. Surely the moneyed people would be able to enjoy their money more in a society where fewer people are miserable due to having little or no money. But no, they choose to blame economic and social problems on the less well off. It completely baffles me.

I like what Alexei Sayle once said... Austerity is the idea that the global financial crash of 2008 was caused by there being too many libraries in Wolverhampton.

This would be funny if it wasn't true. 

Turlough

Submitted by airyfairy on

Brilliant Alexei Sayle quote. It's my belief that many of the extremely rich (I won't say all, because yeah, I believe in Santa Claus) enjoy their money precisely because they have it and we don't. The yacht the size of the average castle is lovely to swan about on but let's face it, one half as big would still go on the water and provide enough space for three private chefs and a cinema. The bigger the yacht, or whatever, the bigger the gap between them and the hoi polloi. And the gap is what matters. If the millionaires rather than the billionaires could all afford floating castles, the billionaires would all want their own islands on Mars. If the millionaires could get those, the billionaires would want entire continents on a planet somewhere in the Andromeda galaxy. It's the same mentality that buys a bunker in New Zealand for when the planet finally declares all out war on us. The issue is not what world would they emerge to, but that they would emerge and we wouldn't. The only way to maintain the gap is to blame us for it. That way we're all too busy taking pot shots at each other to go after them.

Submitted by Turlough on

You're exactly right. Thinking about that gap makes me miserable. I consider myself very lucky to be on the green and grassy part of the opposite side of the gap to the yacht keepers and I wouldn't want to cross. I have a conscience that wouldn't allow me to. I feel sad and angry for all the people in the world who are on the shit side of the opposite side of the gap and whose misery pays for the floating castles, islands, non floating castles, etc.

But what can we do? I've never missed an opportunity to vote but I've never come away from a polling station without the feeling that I've wasted my time. 

¡Hasta la revolución siempre!

Turlough

Submitted by Insertponceyfre... on

Where I live, the local council has announced a 100% reduction in arts funding. 100%!!

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2024/jan/04/suffolk-county-council-ann...

Thank you for this rant airy. I hope people will remember this when they vote - but of course, by then the post office scandal will be a thing of the past and we will all be reading about how untrustworthy the opposition is. Enormous sums of money will be spent on this, funded by 'business'

Very good to hear you're feeling better though, and long live the arts - woke and unwoke (that is so funny about the pantomime complaints). I hope there is something left to save.

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

That's so sad, and appalling, and frustrating. I do have some sympathy with local authorities because they are being bled dry by a government determined to take away every last vestige of local autonomy. And leave behind a scorched earth it would take their successors twenty years to even begin to remedy.

They say the election will probably be in November - perhaps Sunak is hoping for a Trump victory, or at least a major kerfuffle, across the pond so that we'll all be saying, 'Well they're not Trump, so they're not THAT bad.' I think Sunak will be a bit disappointed if he wins. I'm sure he doesn't want to postpone the move to California for much longer.

Submitted by sean mcnulty on

This is our Facebook and Twitter Pick of the Day. Please share and retweet!

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

Oh, thank you! That's chased the Covid blues away!

Submitted by marandina on

My brother works for the PO so that story is a bit close to home for me. He's quick to clarify that it's Post Office Counters LTD that's at the heart of the controversy so not his part of the business but, I guess, everyone is potentially complicit. That story has rumbled on in the financial press for years. I remember The Times exposing it, I think, as far back as 2015. They appear to have recieved all kinds of threats as a result. It really is corruption of the worst kind. I'm sure I read that there were even bonuses paid on numbers of PO Masters successfully convicted.

 

The Arts are a wonderful thing. Only last week I saw Danny Robbins's show "2:22 A Ghost Story" at the Derngate, Northampton. There's also the chance to watch some amdram in Milton Keynes on offer which I may take up. There's all kinds of reasons for ongoing funding and patrionage, in general. Again, I'm sure I've read about lots of projects that develop confidence in kids and give them skills that they wouldn't otherwise have.

The panto is as popular as it was pre-Pandemic. I agree, it's lovely to see children having a great time at the shows. Someone I was talking too the other day was saying that the production in MK this year is "a bit woke" but the kids knew no different and this kind of art form is not insulated from new thinking (I guess).

 

A powerful argument, powerfully made. Enjoyed reading and the driving force behind it.

 

[And get well soon!] 

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

Thank you - I'm a lot better. I have lots of sympathy with PO employees (ie most of them) who had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this and have to know that people have lost confidence in the entire organisation.

As you say, Panto evolves like everything else. I remember when I first saw a panto with a man playing the principal boy and some people got the vapours over that. I always think that a panto, if done well, always has a kind of 'Lord of Misrule' feel, with jabs at the status quo as well as lots of fun and laughter. If a traditional panto is what people want, there's a lot of them about, and some of them are brilliant. The one in Chester was very clearly advertised as being a new take on the Cinderella story rather than a traditional panto (I think they actually called it a Christmas Show) so people couldn't say they hadn't been warned. Everyone's entitled to their view and I don't think the theatre, or the cast, were unduly concerned about the few negative reactions amid a sea of celebration. Enjoy the amdrams!

Submitted by blighters rock on

Enjoyed this. We'll never get to the truth about the PO scandal but my thoughts always return to the govt outsourcing work to indemnify their own actions, in this case vilifying perfectly honest and capable sub postmasters whose jobs could not be replaced without some serious training, and perhaps initiating a new system for corrupt negligence, overseen by lawyers and consultants. Always, though, I turn instinctively to the wanton wishes of dealmakers, those who know how to play the powerful to their own advantage. They've been licking their lips waiting for councils to sell off libraries (prime real estate to their mind), just as they've dismantled the pub trade by taking over those pubs on prominent propert and bulldozing without permission those that weren't, while hoping the greasy palms win the day. As for the theatre business it's a rich man's game and they'll always keep it in the family whenever possible. It seems that gender skewing gets the green light before any serious productions are even considered. The powers only allow it in order to distract and frustrate the general public, which is their only agenda. I know that children don't worry about race, colour, etc but when they grow up the vast majority will be heterosexual and hopefully they'll bring some reality back to the game of life while remaining open minded about sexuality. I got rid of the telly a few months back, very soon after the killings and western hypocrisy got going, but some of the shows were just plain weird and I had to protect what little sanity remains. 

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

Thank you so much for reading and commenting, blighters. It is very sad that much theatre is now 'a rich man's game'. I remember when I was younger and there was so much more affordable fringe theatre. Once I worked near a lunchtime theatre venue, with half hour productions where you could take your sandwiches. It was a fleapit but it was always packed, 25p to get in! I saw some brilliant stuff, some rubbish stuff, and some completely baffling stuff, but it was a highlight of my week.

Submitted by blighters rock on

You've just reminded me of the old ABC cinema in Wallasey on Saturday mornings, just for kids in the 70s. We made a mess but it was all part of the deal to give kids an outlet. Especially since the 90s, so many doors have closed, mostly under the guise of health and safety, and austerity of course. They've taken all the fun out of life, made it so corrupt, and we need to fight back somehow. That said, it took a drama to reveal a crisis at the Post Office, which I think was dodgy from the word go. It does show that people power is still very much alive but it's a shame it needs actors and a telly to reveal it. 

 

Submitted by Kris on

Cool Rant Jane.... with ya all the way....yes

I'll throw my 2bits in here, aside from the particular politics written herein...

Opinion from a Political Science POV:

From a Poli-Sci prospective, in a measured sense, Kingdoms, Dictators, Ruling Parties, Political Agendas. In times of war, financial crises + democratic party shifts & purges, culture wars etc. (circled & squared).....

De-funding the arts for the common folk is a means of stripping, and, or suppressing a peoples culture and cultural identity.... Whether intended or not or mixed agendas of the decision makers = powers at be.

It has a ripple affect locally, regionally, nationally... In a measured sense; The result is same, it lays the ground for a cultural revolution and in most cases does not work in favor for the ruling political power base and the their supporters that was/is in control when it happend.....  There's also a direct economic prosperity link to that, but thats another issue, I'm not going touch here at this time.......

(Good Work Jane at connecting the dots and sending the vision)!   Maybe... could be... the start of a platform for you to run for a political officeenlightenedsurprisewink = Thats meant as a compliment*

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

Thanks for reading, Kris. No, I could never be a politician. My gob's too big for me to keep it shut at the right moments.

I think it's sad that the word 'culture' now often has elitist overtones when, as you say, it should be about shared experience and identity. I'm not wildly keen on any labels that imply things are good or bad simply because of the form they take, like 'literary' versus 'genre' fiction or 'serious' versus 'popular' films. My criteria would be whether or not the thing succeeds in what it's trying to do and does it show an understanding of and concern for the world's circumstances and situation? Neither of which mean it can't be a lot of fun along the way.

Submitted by Insertponceyfre... on

Very well deserved golden cherries Airy - and I hope you feel better soon!

 

Submitted by airyfairy on

Thank you! Yes, feeling a lot better and, sadly, I've got my appetite back.

Submitted by Di_Hard on

Very glad you are feeling a bit better!
It is chilling the lack of funding which goes into encouraging creativity. Perhaps the hope is, if people no longer understand there are such things as stories which are not true, they will believe politicians when they say "we can pay for these tax cuts with more efficiency savings (which we missed finding somehow during all the years of Austerity, maybe we just need some more computer software from those clever people at Fujitsu) and there will be plenty left over for public services!"
There was a bit on the news yesterday saying that the PO deducted the compensation payment money from profits before paying tax. It is like the water companies, whoever makes mistakes, the higher up they are the fewer the financial consequences

 

Submitted by celticman on

we all work for Jeff Bezos now. 

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2024/jan/15/worlds-five-richest-m...

The world’s five richest men have more than doubled their fortunes to $869bn (£681.5bn) since 2020, while the world’s poorest 60% – almost 5 billion people – have lost money.

Compiled using data from the research company Wealth X and Forbes, it says the combined wealth of the top five richest people in the world – Elon Musk, Bernard Arnault, Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison and Mark Zuckerberg – have increased by $464bn, or 114%. Over the same period, the total wealth of the poorest 4.77 billion people – making up 60% of the world population – has declined by 0.2% in real terms.