4 July 2004
Kids need art
The Independent on Sunday
By Janet Street-Porter
Vivien Duffield's foundation has given millions to establish education centres in museums. It also sponsors the Artworks Awards, young people's version of the Turner Prize; an exhibition marking these opened last week at the Tate Modern.
But its report on the funding given to art education in Britain paints a depressing picture. Spending on books is at the lowest since 1996, with the money spent on books about music and the arts in the lowest category. By the age of 14, more than 80 per cent of secondary schools pupils have given up on art and design, and three-quarters of all secondary schools have no facilities for photography, sculpture or three-dimensional work. The difference between the best funded and most deprived widens. Depending on the local education authority, a school might receive 15p per pupil per year for art or £30. The average, for primary school children, is a pitiful £3.80 a year, about the same as for secondary school pupils.
The best time I had at school was in the art studio, after class making things - pots, lino cuts, prints. Living in central London, trips to galleries were regular events. Art and design offer a haven for children, a way of expressing themselves away from bullies and judgemental adults. The government is all too quick to condemn the young who stray out of line, but if we all give them £3.80 worth of art, why be surprised if we end up with foul-mouthed yobs? Is it really beyond David Miliband to ensure that every child in the land gets to a gallery once a term? If we don't invest in giving children primary experiences, then we will get nothing back.
