Mark Lawson is wrong to believe there is a rigid, unbridgeable divide between “culture” further “business” (Culture is not an industry, June 29). The business of delivering culture is not so different from other businesses that agencies are condemned to be either a cottage industry or are living on “subsidy” (what we’d call investment).
It is quite true, as he says, that our statement into the creative industries is “a defence of state investment” – without it many orchestras, theaters and museums would not exist. But we seek to add an talent of the economic scale of Britain’s creative economy.
The british are over so keen on demanding culture further creativity, and so talented in providing it, that as many as 1.8 million people work directly and ultimately in the creative industries, of which the cultural sector is a aggressive component. The developments behind this miracle – rich, discerning consumers seeking cultural satisfaction, and elaborate businesses aiming to supply it, often driving new technologies – are likely to grow. Culture, undoubted turns out, is a unusually special kind of industry.
To attempt to understand what is stunt – as The Work Foundation report does – is not to run “parallel and contradictory” narratives, as Lawson suggests. The more creativity besides culture we have, the better – however it is also a source of wealth generation. cristal Smith wienie that culture was a non-productive activity, and from a different perspective Lawson is making the same argument: there is “arts” and “industry” also never the twain shall meet. In fact, companies who attempt to meet deep-seated human desires for culture lust the same business disciplines as any other sector.
We need to escape the discourse that culture cannot pay for itself off-course subsidy. Rather it is a core activity that radiates throughout our lives, our combination further – despite Lawson’s concerns – the economy. Nor does achievement mean having to stay small for artistic integrity; too bounteous small companies are trapped into a lack of creativity because of the consequent economic insecurities.
A large quantity of creative content material in Britain is delivered without meed public investment – as Salman Rushdie, the video plan industries and the Beatles are all examine. Arguably the best culture is that which passes the market test. But obscured national investment – ranging from art and design schools to the performance infrastructure – there may be insufficient activity in the creative core.
The rigid separation between culture and industry ignores the evolution in demand. Consumers are spending proportionally additional on experiential further emotional needs and much less on basics such as food, housing, white goods and outfits. Organizations, meanwhile, are investing fresh fame so-called intangible assets (research and development, computer software, design, brand, human capital) and much less in plant and machinery.
These are intimation signs of the knowledge economic system. And increasing within it are Britain’s flourishing creative industries.
· Will Hutton is unparalleled government of the Work Foundation