Arts Group

Two hundred years ago, the arts were seen as a diversion from productive capital. Today, creative industries have a strong role in the country’s economy and accounts for 7.3% of it. What steps do creative projects have to take to ensure the achievement of their final goal? And what obstacles will they meet along the way?

By Lemma Shehadi

These are questions that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport tried to tackle in 2007, with a commissioned report on the state of Creative Industries. This analysis made by the Work Foundation argues for creativity as a catalyst for running businesses. Creative products are assessed and gain popularity by their “expressive value”, a concept which I will explain subsequently.

Originality and creativity, the production of ideas rather than objects is what makes the Creative Industries a “pioneer” sector. Universities and high tech manufacturers, which are hot spots for new ideas, become central building blocks of the economy.  These two contribute to what is known as the knowledge economy. Similarly it is this basis in innovation that gives creative industries that lucrative potential. Furthermore, in the UK, knowledge and creativity fuelled industries thrive better than in other parts of Europe. On a tangent, the reports adds that cultural diversity, as is seen in the highly cosmopolitan cities like London, bring forth a tolerance and openness to new ideas from which the knowledge economy thrives. Creative industries function by commercialising expressive value. This is not limited to paintings and poems but new software, video games etc. “Essentially expressive value creates new insights, delights and experiences. It adds to our knowledge, stimulates our emotions and enhances our lives” (4.7) This commonality also makes creative industries unique in that their products are truly original. Playstations 2, 3 and Xbox for example, are technological enhancements of the original Playstation, however new games that emerge, with new narratives and new graphics are the marketed ‘expressive’ goods. Makers of creative products cannot predict how these will be received. As the report points out, fluctuating trends allow for some products to experience an unexpected vogue, though this is always temporary. But what such products have as a distinguishing quality is that once made obsolete, they can experience a revival. This is very true to the current fad for “vintage” clothing and accessories. A 1970’s kettle, for example, is made useless by newer, faster and more eco-friendly ones. However it is highly desirable as an antique or as a decorative object. The “expressive value” of the kettle comes into play even though its value as a technological product is nought. It becomes also difficult, with the uncertainty of reception, to predict what profits a creative product will make, and creative products cannot be sold until they are packaged and completed. It would be absurd to release half of a blockbuster in cinemas whilst the rest of the movie is still in the making. What happens then is that a lot of money is spent producing a good film with unpredictable revenue and shelf life. A man setting up a barber shop can compete with his peers by ensuring quality and value. He can hire the best hairdressers, give cheap haircuts and build on his reputation. On the other hand, an eminent film maker could ensure that the best actors, the best production team and the latest equipment be used for her film. However she cannot guarantee that the ‘expressive value’ of the film itself will appeal to contemporary audiences. The dissemination of products with expressive value involves many layers of work from various creative industries. At the core are the creative ideas, truly innovative products that earn the need of a copyright. These are disseminated and mass produced by cultural industries such as film or production companies, radio, television. If Don deLillo writes a novel, this is a product of “core expressive value”. It is awarded copyright which protects it’s expressive originality. deLillo’s publisher is the cultural industry that reproduces the book. Another sector in the creative industries, designers and marketers would get involved in producing a cover for the book and advertising such as banners and PR. Politicians and celebrities also make use of this latter sector to create a public image. It is finally important to note that this analysis explores the function of art within an economic framework. The commercial value of artistic expression is subjective to popular demand, though this changes radically and unexpectedly. Creative projects undertake a lot of risks in such an ambiguous market. However, as the report underlines, there is much demand for expressive value in almost every aspect of consumer experience, which allows creative industries to flourish and generate more ideas.

Courtesy of the Farnham Herald via the fantastic Ms Maria Pryor!:

STUDENTS at Farnham’s University for the Creative Arts held a protest last week over an “unfair” hike in tuition fees that has seen graduate debt double since 2006.
The protest, which involved the release of hundreds of helium filled balloons, was organised by the UCA Students’ Union to draw attention to the ever increasing debt faced by many upon graduation.
Protesters were encouraged to write down their debt onto tags that were attached to the balloons, but unlike the resulting spectacle in the sky, students say their debts wont just blow away in the wind.
Part of the problem, organisers explained, is that the amount of money on offer in the form of a university bursary is lower than that available at different institutions.
As most degree courses at UCA require students to pay large amounts towards materials, many feel as though they are being left severely out of pocket with inadequate help.
Kaylie Nugent, currently in the second year of her studies for a degree in film, explained how she would be in £24,000 of debt when she graduates.
“Living in Farnham is so expensive – you get all of the London prices but without any of the financial support that London students are entitled to,” she said.
“Other universities will offer up to £1000 in bursaries but the maximum we can get, if we are lucky enough, is £300. In the third year we are expected to spend up to £6,000 of our own money creating a film. The whole point of this protest is to try to make the university realise just how expensive it is to come here. In this time of recession I think it’s outrageous that there is so little help on offer.”
Another student on the film degree course, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “Usually the university pay for our film stock but in the final year it is up to us to fund everything. I don’t have any money and I’m overdrawn so to fund this I’ve had to get credit cards. This means that I’ve put myself in even more debt just so I can finish my degree.”
She went on to say that she has so little money that she can’t afford to shoot her final project on film but is having to use digital instead.
“I’m not happy about that, it’s not what I really want to do and as such it’s compromising my entire degree but I simply can’t afford to do anything else.”
Maria Ann Pryor, vice president of the Students’ Union, said that when she graduated in 2006 average debt was around £12,000 now it is more than £24,000.
“We want people to realise how bad this situation is for our students and how it is only going to get continually worse. People are now coming out of university with the same amount in debt that you would need to put down as a deposit on a house, it’s crazy. We want to make sure that these unfair tuition fees don’t get any higher because we now have students who are leaving because they can’t afford it. We have a lot more students now who choose to remain living at home and who commute here just to study.
“I’ve had so many students come to me and complain that they can’t afford to look after themselves properly because of their course costs. It’s quite frightening that for most it is a choice between eating or finishing their projects.”
She called on the university to consider increasing the amount of money available in bursaries and means-testing students to ensure that the truly impoverished receive the most financial help.
“Other universities means-test those eligible for bursaries and offer them up to £1000, which UCA could and should do for its students. At present they offer the absolute minimum.”
A spokesman for the University for the Creative Arts said: “It is regrettable that fees have had to increase so much over the past three to four years. However, in order to maintain the high standards of course provision and investment in the student experience, this increase in fees has been unavoidable.
“Research has demonstrated that higher education is an excellent investment in future earning potential. The creative industries in particular have outstripped growth in the economy as a whole in recent years and are in a much stronger position to weather the current recession.”