Cultural capital and cultural deprivation

[Pariswhenitdrizzles]

Disclaimer: I promise and solemnly swear that I'm not trying to be goady or trollish or anything like that. I'm just really interested.

this Wikipedia article on cultural capital and cultural deprivation says:

"Proponents of this theory argue that working class culture (regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or other factors) inherently differs from that of people in the middle class. This difference in culture means that while middle-class children can easily acquire cultural capital by observing their parents, working-class children cannot, and this deprivation is self-perpetuating."

Last week, I was talking to a school librarian who's based in London. Part of his job involves organising events such as free theatre trips for London schoolchildren. He's organised trips to places like the Royal Opera House, and said that some children and their families on one of the trips didn't actually end up going into the Royal Opera House because they felt like they shouldn't go in.

I really think that more should be done to help everyone feel that they're able to go anywhere that they'd like to and that they should never feel as if they don't belong somewhere or that they shouldn't go somewhere.

I know that a lot of work has already been done on social equality and cultural capital, but I really think that more needs to be done. What can we do? And AIBU?

OP you might be interested in the Sistema music programme which is bringing classical music and orchestra to a very deprived area in Stirling. Exactly the sorts of people who don't have a history of attending concerts or listening to classicl music.

www.makeabignoise.org.uk/sistema-scotland/

Similarly I know from my own kids' experience that organisations like Scottish Opera have children in for special performances in the main theatre in Glasgow - a sort of scaled down version of a famous opera where they stop after every bit and tell the kids what's going on. I do agree though that some of the Arts are seen as highbrow, inaccessible and "posh". They're also expensive to access - I have bought tickets for me and my daughter to see Scottish Ballet do the Nutcracker just after Christmas, a ticket in the front row of the Gods on the first night was still something like £26 each. No kids' discounts. That's an awful lot of money for some families.

When was the last time a middle class person felt like they couldn't go to the football because they weren't good enough?
If you've never been to a football match then it can feel intimidating.

Culture is a choice.

You can read books for free.

You can visit museums and galleries for free in this country.

Yes but Splendid, if you've never set foot in a gallery or museum growing up save for school trips, and nobody you know goes to museums, it would probably never cross your mind to do so. And even if it did, you may feel intimidated about walking in.

having cultural capital is a real advantage, but its a real shame that its always working class people that are supposed to try and learn middle class culture, and never the other way round.
People discriminate against working class people and culture all the time. Laughing at their names, their kids names, the way they speak, the way they dress, the way they spell, the films and tv they watch, the sport theyre into.

@PoppyPopcorn

Very true.

@splendidisolation - grew up on a council estate, library was closed, museums in my city and the surrounding areas weren’t free, and dad owned the only car because he needed it for work. Area is pretty much the same now. Still no library (nearest one is still 3 bus rides away), and the museums in the city have all closed. Another factor to consider is that in my city only people claiming unemployment and disability benefits get free bus passes, low income earners who probably would use them more for cultural activities don’t and so when 3 busses could cost £12 pp (4 pound day return per company), library usage and reading for fun (instead of academia) is not really encouraged. Shocking I know but not all of us live in London

It's a huge issue for social mobility and enabling aspirations to become reality. People just can't begin to imagine all the little ways that stop children succeeding if they come from a very poor background.

Take medicine for example.The BMAT entrance tests are usually held in large public schools. Children who attend independent schools are comfortable surrounded by wood panelling, lots of silver in cabinets and oil paintings. Children from poor estates are not generally comfortable in these settings so are at a disadvantage.
Sometimes work experience in medicine costs money but you need work experience on your form. GOS charges around £150 a day. The medlink preparation courses at places like Nottingham university cost about £400.
Kaplan course to prepare for BMAT and UKCAT cost around £120.
Then there's being confident in interviews. Much easier for a middle class child whose used to handing round canapés at drinks parties and making polite conversation with a range of adults.
Interview clothes are another give away and a real confidence booster if you know you look the part. Parents will take their middle class children to find something appropriate and pay the money for a decently cut suit. The child from a poor community might struggle to find the train fare let alone anything suitable to wear - so they just don't apply unless the school is particularly supportive and buys them a suit.
The language used in everyday conversation also marks out those from more affluent families. It's long been recognised that unconscious bias means we recruit people like ourselves. If a middle class child uses the same vocabulary to establish a connection with the interviewer then they are more likely to get the place.
We have to give children wider experience of theatre, music, art and teach them to use the vocabulary to engage with others on the subject. The words they use DO matter. The way they dress DOES matter. Their ability to make small talk DOES matter. It might not be fair but it is the way it is. We can only encourage social mobility if we fund schools to provide the additional opportunities and support young people to grow in confidence regardless of their backgrounds.

More seriously, it does seem as if we are heading in the wrong direction in this country with respect to this issue. It would seem in the arts right now (especially the theatre), they are becoming more upper class, especially looking at the Tom Hiddlestones and Benedict Cumberbatches of the world. This may be perception rather than reality, but perception is important.

Yes, much culture is "free", but there are whole expectations that come with it (you don't turn up to the opera in a pair of jeans). And upper class culture can be intimidating.

I write this as someone who would say I've changed social class, or at least I mix in different circles than the one I grew up in, and the differences are enormous

I was coming on to say that this bit is bollocks - " This difference in culture means that while middle-class children can easily acquire cultural capital by observing their parents, working-class children cannot, and this deprivation is self-perpetuating." - but I see that thecat has put it far more eloquently and with citations

No-one grows up in a cultural vacuum, of course - that's just what some people would like you to think.

I'd dispute that there's no point learning ancient languages except as a class signifier though - unless you think that experiencing some of the world's finest literature is a pointless activity.

As a middle class person you can (almost always) participate in things that are outside of your comfort zone culturally
Vice versa, not so much
I work is an industry that is incredibly class oriented. it's confidence and self assuredness. The public school system teaches you that in droves.
I am midddle class, not wealthy parents but educated, went to a standard comp. I felt like I was out of place, couldn't walk into places others could. It was bollocks, but it was how I felt. I can't imagine how much harder it would be for someone else without my advantages.
There are also virtually no people of any other ethinicty in the industry I work.

very sad really

Katherine I agree with you, wrt to Latin, for what it's worth. It does have it's point. However, it tends to get used for purposes other than that. I was being blunt, rather than nuanced at that juncture, I guess for rhetorical effect. But it was a bit unfair.

I think possibly the most useful thing that private schools teach is confidence! Everyone I know who went to private school seems able to fit in wherever they need to.

Branleuse Yes. And you will get people who say, "But we also laugh at middle class culture." But, it's not equal, is it? There was a good thread on Primark on here a while back, where some posters made that point.

I do love MN sometimes. When it's great, it's like a real-time demonstration of praxis.

This is why on a recent thread about a boy being excluded from school for having a tidy, non skin head, short hair cut lots of people were determined it was "inappropriate" but couldn't say why. As a few people pointed out, what they meant was its not a hair cut middle class boys have.

I'm very ambivalent about the opening post because it implies this attitude is right, and the way forward is to help the working classes understand that middle class values are the right ones, and help them adopt them.

I'd say actually identifying and naming prejudice for what it is, and absolutely cynically and honestly giving children a genuine understanding and ability to choose whether to play the system whilst trying to be the generation to change it would be better.

Giving a few working class children middle class experience without encouraging all children regardless of background to analyse their and society's entrenched prejudices just compounds the problem.

We used to get basic Latin/Greek classes alongside Sanskrit at the Hindu temple to prepare us for pre-calculus and science study. It was useless really for the purpose it was intended for-wasn’t really interested in reading the Latin or Greek versions of the classics as the english versions (when I could get a copy) were easier. However learning them made it easier to become fluent in Hindi, Spanish, and French so there was a benefit I guess.

And the arts might be free.
But joining them is a different thing altogether.
I work with artists, when you could get grants to go to uni/art school there were a huge amount of diverse artists from all different backgrounds.

Now, definitely not as much. Being an artist/actor. It's tough, likelyhood of succeeding is pretty low. So will you get yourself into 60k of debt when you don't have friends or family who know galleries or have connections in the theatre or film world?
When it was free, you might have been able to justify the risk.

One of the ways I sell Latin as an option at school is for its cultural capital: its very rarity makes pupils who study it stand out and it has a cachet for that reason, particularly at state and non selective schools. Of course, I believe it does have intrinsic value too, much like fine art or classical music does.

I'm interested in the idea of hierarchy. What would be the equivalent 'culture' in the working classes (from a Bordieu point of view maybe?)? What is prized as cultural by the middle classes up is things like art, history, literature - stuff which lasts. Is there an equivalent permanence to working class culture?

re Classical languages, it is interesting to observe that the Social Democrat Sweden I grew up in offered Latin and Greek in all sixth form colleges even in the middle of nowhere. It was not (as far as I can gauge) about class but about a sense of history and to support general language learning which was considered a good thing for everyone.

The other thing I notice in retrospect was that there was not the same sense that the working classes have nothing to contribute in terms of knowledge or experience, that the middle class have a better understanding of e.g. how to bring up children or look after the home or eat nutritiously. That idea was something I first came across when I arrived in the UK.

I think the term working class and middle class are problematic. There are high earning working persons who are very middle classed.
There is a big difference between someone working a till at a coffee shop and an oil rig technician. Very little difference between an x ray technician and physician.

Evelyn "Giving a few working class children middle class experience without encouraging all children regardless of background to analyse their and society's entrenched prejudices just compounds the problem."

I think this is such a good point.

I'm very curious about how secondary school teachers handle this one.

My dd is beginning to be encouraged to think about and discuss these things in school aged 14.

I know that I was taught it would be a bit inappropriate to introduce any element of analysis (tantamount to 'indoctrination') in a primary setting.

Which is kind of crazy, given that what actually happens is a kind of 'invisible', unanalysed indoctrination. But, genuinely, they are very young.

It's one of the reasons that education is such a complicated, conflicted and contested field.

WyclefJohn That is a very good point about the practical arts becoming the preserve of the (upper) middle classes. It's a definite thing. I know people say that acting has been very middle class for a long while but my sense is that it has become more so, especially with the decline of rep. theatre. I also think that pop music has changed quite a lot.

Re: the arts being dominated by people of upper or upper-middle class backgrounds - what happened at the time when they were in education that narrowed the field? Is the issue about what kind of art is being made now - the kind that make it easier for someone like Cumberbatch to get roles that are upper class or about upper class society? Or do we need to track back to see what level of support was in place when he was training that pushed other people out?

@dinosaursandtea
I think it's a bit of both.
Not sure Tracey emin would have got as far as she did today. Consumption of the visual arts is very monetarily focused.
Lack of funding across the arts, the British council amongst other organisations used to give grants to artists a lot more in the 50s/60s/70s
I also think it's a lot to do with capitalism, very generally. But still.
Most in my industry have been helped by nepotism in some way, and I imagine that is also the case for performing arts.

So they can firstly get opportunities others can't, and can also afford not to make money out of it.
If I was faced with all of that debt and virtually no hope of a helping hand in my industry I am not sure I would go for it today.

The OP ..... is asking my workingclass often feel light they do not have a right to experience high culture.

Exactly, Ttbb - thanks :)