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.

My daughter went to performing arts classes, dance classes, etc throughout her school years (which, when added up, has cost us a fortune) and has studied BTEC level 3 Musical Theatre at a state school. The audition round for the next stage has been gruelling, time consuming and expensive (travelling to open days and auditions). What I have observed from the visits, promotional materials, talking to past and present students is that where they seek diversity, it is mainly in terms of ethnicity, disability (but less so and seems to be almost entirely neurodiversity) and gender diversity. Representation of students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds not so much.

The same is true of any career where the industry can only function by having an initial pool of massively underpaid and exploited new entrants who don't yet have the experience to show themselves to be talented and worth paying proper money to. E.g. Journalism which similarly has private schools massively overrepresented. If you want to proove yourself in one of these fields, it helps to have family support behind you and a family who has just finished paying the equivalent of a minimum wage job take-home pay to educate you has the resources to allow you to pursue an underpaid/unpaid career for a few years to see if you are one of the lucky ones who make it.

There's no doubt that the ones who make it are talented but there must be a lot of very talented people from less privileged backgrounds who never get the chance to try.

I agree with you that this is sad but short of bringing about the downfall of capitalism, I'm not sure what can be done about it if wealthy people are allowed to spend their money as they choose.

It’s very sad to think of all the potential talent left wasted or undiscovered. Not just in acting but in music, art, production, writing, commissioning, all of the arts.
in my lifetime I’ve seen a big row back from the days when a working class person could succeed in the arts. The opposite of progress.

I've never associated 'mickey mouse' degrees with being poor. Infact the poor in my experience, are usually the ones worrying about degree outcomes while the rich just do what makes them happy aka mickey mouse degrees.
Discussions about learning a trade have always been to encourage those who are less academic or just not simply interested in following an academic path. Trade has been positioned on MN as a good alternative and to spread awareness that going to university is not the only route for young people. Being non academic isn't the preserve of poor people.

One of the snobbiest posts I think I have ever read on mumsnet.

You’ve just thrown a load of poorly thought -out, nonsensical ideas together.

Your first paragraph is the very definition of a straw man. People complain about SATs and sports day being competitive and you directly link this to (the same?) people complaining about private schools?
Where is the link between these two? You’ve just made it up.

You then go on to link this to competitive , high pressure private schools making individuals more successful in certain industries. It appears you don’t think that the state system has competition?

You talk about bursaries. I think we can agree that there isn’t enough funding in the state sector for performing arts. I don’t agree this means the government thinks the state sector is rubbish.

But I think what many are arguing on here is that wealth ultimately skews the diversity of those in acting, not talent and training. Even if you receive a bursary and go through an excellent, private performing arts school, if you don’t have wealth to sustain you in your early career then you can’t pursue it.

“There is a shortage of funding for state education and this is probably because there is very little interest in improving actual education from parents or the government.”

I can’t believe you wrote that.
Why on Earth would you think parents aren’t interested in improving education for their children?!? Do you see yourself as some sort of superior being? Do you think everyone who doesn’t send their children to private school is just feckless with no ambition?

”Labours extra education funding goes on breakfast which frankly any self respecting parent should be providing themselves.”

Ignorant and out-of-touch.

”Focus should be on improving state education because that will actually have a positive impact on more people.”

As a general issue, this is something we can all agree upon.
But if your argument is that this is the main driver of the current imbalance we see represented on screen, then I’m afraid I can‘t agree with you.

Education and training don’t address the fact that those with wealthy backgrounds are more highly represented in acting. As others have articulated far more eloquently than me, the main factor is money. The money to get someone through the early years of a career where you can barely afford to live.

Yes it's sad. The same for musicians too. Very opportunities in these arts without parental £££. Art is much better as more available in state schools, cost is far lower, potential careers far more varied.

It is not a surprise there are more privately educated people in areas of classical music and sports - where does your average state school get the chance to try out sports like fencing, or as someone mentioned upthread, the chance to play bassoon?

I have a friend who teaches at one of the top boys public schools. The investment they have in their sports facilities and coaches means they have boys who get professional cricket and rugby contracts on leaving - I think they had 4 18 year old last year with cricket contracts. But they get to try less mainstream sports, too. And anyone into elite level equestrianism won't be short of a penny.

My friend's school has a really good theatre on site, that also has professional shows when the school isn't using it. State schools don't usually have that - we did have the travelling RSC visit my state school once, but they brought their own pared down set that works on a flat school hall, which isn't the same as a full theatre with top quality lighting rigs etc that you can get to use yourself.

One of the things parents are paying for with private education is the wealth of different opportunities and experiences children can try. Private school educated people on average are more confident than those at state school (although obviously we are less likely to see those who didn't gain that self-assurance.) Plus they are often better at networking. Every little helps, as does the general access to money cushioning life.

There have been reports on how social mobility has stagnated in the UK, and how the gap between those with money and those without has been widening. The dramatic arts are just a symptom.

Just read an article about Sian Gibson working in a call centre before getting her big break on Car Share with Peter Kaye.

Those without public school backgrounds (and the family wealth behind it) often can't afford the big gaps between jobs that come with the industry. I wouldn't be supportive of my kids going into that line of work as they would need a consistent income.

Quite honestly, it can be as simple as noticing that they sound extremely well-spoken, which is often an indication of wealth and in particular of private education.

This may be an uncomfortable fact, as no doubt it is linked to class. Depending on your own accent, it may be less noticeable for you.

Noticing something and wondering about it is not an obsession.

I dare say, that after this thread, you may be more likely to notice it yourself.

As other posters have said, it is very much about money -especially in the early stages of trying to get a break. The cost of rent - especially in London- has spiralled up and so waiting tables when you can and spending days auditioning is no longer viable. It is true that those who have been privately educated are more likely to have families who can afford to ‘ bank roll’ them when they have no work. And it is very competitive. Difficult to see how that can change.
I am involved in a local drama group and we have lots of members now who went to drama school -whereas 20 years ago we only had a couple. Does mean that the standard is very high - so worth checking out your local drama group and support those still living their dream - even if it’s a week’s run here and there 😊

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/apr/01/christopher-eccleston-impossible-for-me-to-become-an-actor-today

It is probably because to excel in that field you need to go to a drama school for secondary, majority of which are private, the government seem to have difficulty funding mainstream schools to a decent standard, imagine them funding drama schools etc they would be awful and there would be public backlash.

UK produce fantastic talent, University of the Arts is a World class institution

This is the organisation I mentioned earlier.

https://www.arts-emergency.org/

Far easier for those financed by family to stick it out.
Hard to live in london on a struggling actors wage.

I think it is a huge factor.
Several of my friends children are interested in acting and they have all but one been privately educated and are comfortably off and ready to finance them.

They are well off but not multiple millions rich.
It will cost them.

He warned: “You’re going to have to put up with the unemployment – you’re gonna have to put up with the rejection – and that’s going to be doubled if you’re from a working-class background, ethnic minority etc.”
Eccleston said he would “keep banging on” about the promise of a new theatre in Oldham.
Social media users praised Eccleston for drawing attention to the closure and stressing the negative effect it could have.
“God bless Christopher Eccleston for refusing to offer soothing platitudes about the forgotten north, class and race bias, the establishment chokehold on the arts, ingrained elitism, you name it. Go get ‘em!” one listener wrote.

Wise words by Eccleston. Love the honesty. This article seems to be a summary of a radio interview - I wish I could find the whole interview.

You are probably right, but I listened to an interview with Danny Dyer the other day on Radio 4 and he made it. As did the Lion King guy who was also interviewed on R4 I think he is also deaf. Which is something else to overcome.

My niece has just had her big break playing one of the Mitford sisters in the upcoming series Outrageous. She is however genuinely talented and won a Laurence Olivier scholarship, she wasn’t privately educated, these two bits of information about her are readily available online. Which are the only pieces I’m willing to relate.

Me too, OP and ditto most areas of the arts. my good friend is a lecturer at a UAL university and he said all the students are incredibly privileged and it’s so rare for any working class kids to apply as it’s not a sustainable career path unless you have money / parents to support you.

Wow! I am so looking forward to this.

@ProudAuntie3 Congrats on your niece’s achievements. And while I’m not asking any more questions on her situation in particular it’s worth remembering in this discussion that many are still affluent without necessarily being privately educated.

So “not privately educated” doesn’t tell us everything - and to be clear I’m not asking you to tell us anything more. It’s more a general point.

As I said upthread, my former actor flatmate wasn’t privately educated but her family were rich and she was massively financially privileged having got significant help in buying and maintaining a flat in London when she was in her mid 20s despite not working full-time. She did agency TA work a few times a week so she’d work 9am to 3pm on her working days which left her plenty of time to do auditions. The money she earned from renting out her spare room to people like me, and significant top ups from her parents meant she could afford to pay the mortgage on low wages

I know a “not privately educated 25 year old aspiring author” with a huge trust fund that means she’s never had to work so far in her life.

There will always be some people who make it - there are outliers in every statistical range. This doesn't change the fact the number of privately educated people in the performing arts and many other areas of life, does not reflect the proportion of people who are privately educated in the general population. Money gives you more choices.

It will probably be true in other fields, too. I am not in the field I wanted to be in when I was a teenager, mainly because I had to keep a roof over my head and needed to earn money. My parents couldn't afford to fund me through the masters degree it would have required, and there were very few funded places. I would never have been in the public eye, had I taken that path, and there are probably loads of other people in similar situations, and they just have an interest in the field, as a hobby, reading books, watching podcasts on it, maybe some volunteering, that sort of thing.

A list below gathered from various articles:
Eddie Redmayne (Eton) Benedict Cumberbatch (Harrow), Dominic West (Eton) Damian Lewis (Eton), Tom Hiddleston (Eton), Henry Cavil (Stowe) Jamie Campbell Bower (Bedales), Tom Hardy (Reed) Matthew Goode (Exeter) Dan Stevens (Tonbridge) Andrew Garfield (City of London Freeman School) Josh O' Connor (St Edwards, Cheltenham) Alex Lawthers (Churchers College)

Rosamund Pike (Badminton) Alice Eve (Bedales), Juno Temple (Bedales) Carey Mulligan (Woldingham)Kate Beckinsale (Godolphin and Latymer) Imogen Poots (Latymer) Emilia Clarke (St Edward's) Emily Blunt (Hurtwood House) Rebecca Hall (Roedean) Anya Taylor Joy (Queen's Gate School) Florence Pugh (St Edward's School) Emma Corrin (Woldingham School) Phoebe Dynevor (Cheadle Holme School)

Well I don’t know about you but I could not have afforded to take a risk on a career like acting when you don’t know when you’ll next get a paid job and pretty much have to live in London.

I saw Danny Dyer in something like Silent Witness when he was probably about 13, so he may not have been privately educated but I’m guessing he had private drama lessons and very supportive parents.

I have been working in state schools for many years in both deprived areas and not so deprived areas, so I don’t think I’m totally out of touch. It is just a snapshot though.

You are probably right that I am snobby about education as do I think the government’s education policy should be about education. Breakfasts are a welfare policy and should come out of that budget.

Anyway, you think success in performing arts is about wealth, not education, so this is all a bit irrelevant.