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

[chulast]

6% of the population go to private school yet the majority of successful British screen actors have been privately educated.

I just find it quite bleak really and makes it feel like it's nigh on impossible to make it in that industry without a leg up and connections.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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'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.

Correctly funding to support those less well off is not happening in Scotland sadly.

Creative Scotland are directly funded by ScotGov and will only fund things that promote the most progressive stories. Which means that the majority of those who get funding are rich Londoners or rich Scots with wealth behind them. Look up the scandal of the pornographic funded "art" that a posh London woman was doing. They dismissed a local working class arts project about promoting working class roots etc. Yet funded what was essentially hard core porn. Until the papers found out and the scandal stopped them. The initial £50k+ money was not returned though.

Satirist comedian shauny boy has a whole sketch on it. Ridiculous.

Biscuitsneeded thank you so much for that advice. I really appreciate it as I’m completely out of my depth with all of this. If you have any other tips to share please do feel free to pass them on to me 😊

@Doublevodka I'll PM you!

Looking at this from another angle, perhaps if you feel strongly about this you could lobby your MP or the Education Secretary for greater arts programmes in schools.

The Arts industry in general is full of successful people who were privately educated - primarily because they had the wealth/support to pursue their goals in the first, poorly paid part of their career.

The “jobbing actor working as a waitress” trope is very real.

Many of us have still been able to pursue a job in the arts. I spent years also working as a freelance fitness instructor but found that even that meant sacrificing income for last minute auditions. I am lucky enough to be working in the industry but it definitely took me longer to build up my success than many of my privately educated peers who are very talented but also had wealth or connections to bolster them along.

What a thing to get your knickers in a twist over. Honestly 🙄

Law firms are now very strict about nepotism and inclusion no way would dd just get a training contact in Dh firm for example (mores the pity but know its right really).

Lots of private schools give drama scholarships so those parents clued in will shift their kid in sixth form or Year 7 for drama scholarships and so it comes across that more actors are private schools educated. Some private schools allow them to audition and go on movie set during term time with catch up work online. Or state schools with weekends at Sylvia Young etc and move to private later. Kids in West end shows need time for rehearsals and show could run for 3 weeks period and may not be in school during those days. A supportive private school with minimum paperwork is easier compared to some state schools that will not allow as much missing school days.

@ChocolatesAndRainbows It’s a legitimate discussion and has certainly been raised by serious media outlets.

Interesting issues. In my profession (law) and for the doctors in our family, there are people who manage to get through with no family connections as there are law paid vacation schemes and much else. It was back in the 1890s our family realised getting professional qualifications might help lift you out of poverty - my grandfather's brother qualified as a solicitor in the 1890s and his sister as a nurse (I think she would not have been allowed to be a doctor in the 1890s as female). You see the same today in some families (including my children and their cousins - 4 solicitors, 3 law students, one medical student etc and in the Indian area of London where I live lots of parents wanting their children in those kinds of jobs).

I would not have stopped my children doing arts had they wanted and we could have afford that but their father ( a brilliant organist) certainly has said at times he wished he had done something better paid. Cathedral organists at least when I was up to date with it got s kind of minimal "stipend" although he had luckily also done a music degree and PGCE so could teach and still does do both.

I think once you are fairly well off children brought up like that have a safety net that enables them to earn less if they want and can indeed be less worrying at work about things and more relaxed in all kinds of jobs

It's a very real concern in the industry. I don't know what you do for a living, but imagine if access to that career was effectively reserved for a tiny minority of people. This isn't knocking kids from private schools - it's holding up for scrutiny a systemic barrier that stops an entire industry from being properly representative of society. Maybe stop and reflect before sneering.

Quite a few schools have had their arts budget cut back fairly drastically. This charity comes in and runs music, art and drama sessions within schools but they rely on charitable donations.

https://artisfoundation.org.uk

Yes I agree with this.

its some actors from Anna Scher who said in an interview they felt typecast into certain predictable roles in e.g. the Bill and London’s Burning when those shows still aired and struggled to get much else.

The Anna Scher School sounds great to be honest and I admit I’m envious of the kids who had the opportunity to go there. However. realistically when it comes to adult acting roles they’re going to be competing with those who went to RADA etc and people from families similar to the Redgraves.

So those fortunate enough to have gone to Anna Scher as children might find they also have to attend somewhere like RADA aged 18 so they can maximise their chances in a very competitive industry.

Let’s face it. even some kids of 2 established very successful theatre and screen actors STILL can’t make it in the profession and have to find another way to make a living !

@CruCru Budgets are not given to schools specifically for arts. Heads allocate budgets and if they don’t value arts, they get marginalized.

However there are too many training for most acting roles. It’s therefore far more difficult to get jobs. We have degrees available to all but this has made the numbers training enormous. We had a more elite training process before but people complained about that too. In many roles we do have outstanding actors. I think what rich actors need to do is sponsor poor actors. And we need fewer training.

Why would we want to limit numbers of people going into acting? It’s not like it’s taxpayer funded (I think?). There are plenty of saturated industries where the majority barely make a living - do we want to limit how many people can go into those too? I have a friend trying to make it in the fitness industry, setting up her own online fitness business. She is exceptionally talented, IMO, but there are just far too many of these fitness subscription offerings that it’s very hard to turn a profit. Luckily she can freelance at gyms on the side to keep afloat, otherwise she would probably have to abandon her dream. I think for a lot of people simply being in the industry they’re passionate about in some shape or form, in sort of “adjacent” roles, is better than giving up entirely and pursuing a more stable and better paid career, and they should be allowed to make that decision. I think most people are aware of how competitive it is, but believe it’s worth a try.

Same argument for elite sports like tennis. They offer tennis scholarships for university however to be excellent you need to train 24/7 and have a parent ferrying to and fro. Ergo wealthier students benefit from the scholarships.

It’s interesting when so much of the British music scene is working class and attended state school.

I don’t believe US actors are overwhelmingly privately educated