To find it sad that privately educated actors dominate telly/film?

I'm not sure about the bar particularly, although I have one acquaintance who managed it from a poor background with absolutely no contacts.

I know masses of doctors and lots of solicitors who have done extremely well without contacts. I also know that Magic Circle firms, etc can't just hand out jobs to their kids now.
It's completely different in something like acting or presenting or 'pop music' or the untalented artist getting to display in a gallery. For professional classical musicians, you need to be excellent and there is masses of competition but, coming from a wealthy background is almost essential nowadays because of the costs involved and having parents who are professional or excellent musicians helps massively.

Being in London is very important for lots of creative jobs. I actually kept my apartment in London when I emigrated from the UK partly so that my siblings’ children can have somewhere to live in the future if they decide to pursue the arts or any other job where living in London is a huge advantage.

I have a DS in his second year of drama school. He is state educated for primary, secondary and 6th form, and I am hugely proud of all he's accomplished, but like you I foresee a rocky road ahead. I would suggest if you don't live anywhere near London it might be better if at all possible for your DD not to move back home to you but to find a very cheap flatshare in London and do Front of House work to pay the rent. This has the advantage of being mainly evening work with a few matinees - someone mentioned that auditions do tend to be in the mornings - and of course it keeps her where the action is and in a sphere where she is likely to hear what is coming on where. Getting an audition in the first place will be down to your DD securing a good enough agent who can get her into audition rooms. And she will have spotlight access and can see which auditions are happening.
My DS is champing at the bit and I really think he may be in for a rude awakening after he graduates, but I do think if they use the time at drama school to make contacts, try their damnedest to get a good agent and make sure they are living in London even if it means they are pulling pints or waiting tables, it's not impossible for a state schooler from a more normal background to make it.

There's a huge difference to "getting in" (i.e.to a course) and "getting in" to the bar etc.
Yes "technically" anyone who gets the grades can do a law degree in an ex-poly but then try getting a sponsor or initial contract in a good chambers. That's when it becomes less about the marks you got but where you got them from and who you know.

You could just as easily say "anyone" can do drama or music at university, that doesn't magically translate into a paying job once you graduate.

Exactly, my friends ( all from working class and/or immigrant backgrounds) who did nursing didn’t have contacts at the hospitals and care homes they worked at before starting their uni course. They just signed up to various agencies and actually got paid work in those settings . And it’s hardly just rich or famous people who have “contacts” in hospitals anyway.

Once again yes of course rich parents can and often do support their kids in any career goals, but the stringent qualifications and work needed to enter the medicine or law (the latter which I studied at uni)fields mean that there’s only so much parents can do.

It’s a completely different scenario to acting.

Claudia Jessie from Bridgerton has spoken a lot about how unusual she feels as a successful working class actor, and that it’s a problem there aren’t more (agree with her obv).

One thing that strikes me though is people are talking about this as a middle class vs working class issue, but if only 6% of people go to private school surely that excludes a lot of the middle class as well?

Indeed. But will having actors from a more diverse background increase the value of the entertainment industry ? There is no reason to believe this.

The argument about needing to be of a certain background to tell a compelling story seems weak. Ken Loach and Jeremy Sandford come to mind.

Completely agree op, was reading an article yesterday about an actor whose work I admire, she’s very connected to the industry through parents and wider family/ friends so I imagine got a leg up. So difficult to make it in that industry if you haven’t got that or at least family that can support you while you audition and hone your craft. It used to be that you could survive with a part time job or even sign on but not now. Of course wealthy and connected people can be talented but i feel it’s very damaging to the creative industries overall if a diverse mix of people can’t make it.

I read an interesting article on this that for the life of me I can't find. People with family money or wealthier parents are able to go into the arts more easily because they typically have fiscal security, additional options and networks that mean they won't be in the same situational as people from average or lower income families. It isn't that they are more talented but couple private school confidence and opportunities with money in the bank, they continue to be able to take risks, study and survive on a meagre wage b/c paying rent isn't reliant on what they earned last month and they also know they typically have significant inheritances in their futures. I'd say this isn't just actors but also classical musicians, art history/museum roles etc.

I agree that the UK's privately educated actors/arts professionals are disproportionately the norm. Out of something like the top 30 British actors listed, 28 went to private schools, most of which were very elite (read: some of the most expensive in the country). The same could likely be said about many other professions in the arts.

Of course this doesn't mean that private schooled people are more talented actors, it's that they have a climate that makes it easier to get to the top. I think it's fabulous that Christopher Eccleston has spoken about this topic so passionately.

In theory for doctors - I have been liaising with our local sixth form chemistry teacher as a link to get potential medical and similar students to visit where I work and going through the proper channels and it is getting harder but each summer I see various young people around (that is Dr x's son or daughter). When DC was at med school nearly every other student they encountered had been to private or grammar school. And yes I did help a little with the work experience what parent wouldn't. Medical students do not get the long university holidays to top up their bank accounts.
A friend's DD struggled to get the experience for the law - apart from the hen's teeth paid placement most were voluntary and she couldn't afford to not do paid work during university holiday.

It's completely different for doctors and solicitors. Anyone with the right grades, aptitude, etc, etc can get in. It costs nothing to do some work experience in a care home. Performing arts, training in classical music, etc is extremely expensive. Contacts are used to a completely different extent to in the professions you mention. Nowadays, people mainly get jobs on their own merit, very little nepotism is possible.

Bingo – classic Mumsnet response to having lost any footing in a disagreement.

You appear very sensitive, this site may not be for you.

VERY MUCH seems like you're the one that can't, 'darling', or you wouldn't keep erroneously correcting what people haven't actually said.

Darling it’s a public opinion forum, don’t go on one if you can’t handle other people having an opinion 🤣

Righto – why don't you pop off to write a letter to the Laurence Olivier Awards rather than banging on to someone on the internet about a subjective opinion on acting credibility? The attitude isn't welcome.

Your perception of incredible actors is very different to mine and vice versa.

Once again – I didn't say you could. Though plenty of exceptional actors and actresses have attended theatre school – most likely because they already exhibited a talent for it. Kate Winslet, Olivia Coleman, Andrew Garfield, Ewan McGregor ...

You can teach skills but you can’t teach talent.

I didn't say they have talent (or 'more talent' would be more accurate here). I said they receive higher quality training and have more exposure to actions and agents.

Training in theatre school for years doesn’t mean they have talent. A lot of respected directors purposely avoid using “theatre school kids” as they’re all trained in the same way.

I’ve already said wealthy parents can help as it can with ANY career choice, but my point is it’s still always going to be selective in the sense you still need to meet very high academic requirements. You can’t get all Cs for examples and wriggle your way in to uni studying medicine as your mum is a consultant. There’s little comparison between medicine and acting in this respect.

You can be pretty mediocre as an actor and get a shot if you’re wealthy and/ or well connected.

I’m a millennial I don’t know if things have changed but back when I was at uni you did not need any experience in a hospital. Some of my close friends and flatmates at uni where medicine students and my brother was as well. None of them had hospital experience.

I actually had some nursing student friends in my home town who did do a little ward experience - not sure if it was compulsory or not - but not the ones studying medicine.

And I’m not aware of any paid training for the interviews anyone did unless it’s slipped my memory. But again, I do know money can play a role in supporting your child with anything but the role it plays in medicine versus acting is worlds apart.

Well, a great many TV and film actors will have gone to theatre school from a young age, most for the secondary years, so obviously those people are going to be more present on screens, due to the quality of training and exposure to auditions and agents.

Theatre training is expensive, even if don't attend a fee-paying theatre school. My little boy is really interested in theatre, and even the summer school to go one Saturday a week is £300 for 6 weeks.

I imagine not,

I agree, OP. The same goes for scriptwriting - and music, book publishing and most creative industries. Of course some non-rich people scrape through, but they're in the minority. The quality is going down because the work is going to those with 'connections' made through nepotism or old boy's networks (or in the case of publishing, already being famous). I have to grit my teeth at all the praise for the Emerald Fennells, Phoebe Waller-Bridges etc of this world. Not that they're talentless, but they're not all they're cracked up to be, either. It's easy to be a creative genius if you're already mates with everyone you need to know to be a success, and you don't actually have to work for a living. See: every male author in history up until about 1970.