Alan Bennett on private education

[UrbanDad]

A great quote from AlanBennett, in the Guardian today taken from his talk last summer at King’s College Chapel, Cambridge: “We all know that to educate not according to ability butaccording to the social situation of theparents is both wrong and a waste. Private education is not fair. Those who provide it know it. Those who payfor it know it. Those who have to sacrifice in order to purchase it know it. And those who receive it know it, orshould. And if their education ends without it dawning on them, then that education has been wasted.”

I cannot disagree with any of that.

I don't think that wanting to educate your DC to be a Renaissance person is "16th century". On the contrary

Well, except in the sense that that's when the Renaissance was, of course. I mean, I'm being silly in a way, because I get that HG essentially wants a broad education and plenty of cultural capital, and 'Renaissance Man' is shorthand for that. But I do think it's a bit odd.

Because the reason why, in the renaissance, you could know, or feel you knew, everything, was that there wasn't as much to know! The reason arts and science became two distinct disciplines (two cultures, indeed) was because there was more science to know! So to aim for a smattering of everything and a shed load of cultural capital just seems an odd thing to want, from a school.

That's quite an English attitude. In other countries, general education goes on for much longer.

DSS2 is in his final year of school. He does: maths, physics, chemistry, biology, English, Spanish, philosophy, Latin, history, geography, sport for his bac.

Sorry, Newrule, in my idea of "fairness" it is not possible for something to be fair if it is not morally right. If it is morally right, it is just.

I can see that something can be for the greater good, but not always for the good of individuals, but then I don't see justice as being the macro and fairness being the micro, there, or vice versa, particularly not in the context of the tax system, where I see it as a problem with the design of the system that we need to keep working on...

bonsoir I think you're being a cheeky little stirrer again: you've only just been arguing that music isn't and shouldn't be on the curriculum! The subjects your ds is doing are smashing, but they're not opera, dance and music appreciation, are they? They're mostly academic and useful.

I don't think a list of Middle Class Stuff To Appreciate Convincingly is the same as an education. How terribly English of me.

I suspect that if Bonsoir's DSS2 was musical, she would definitely want it to be on the curriculum.

General education is a very good thing and I certainly agree that three or four a levels can be rather narrow. What I said was that there's more science now than Sir. Thomas More and his renaissance friends would have had time to get a grip on whilst also maintaining a good solid knowledge of all the art, literature, music, dance, sport, politics, social science, philosophy, meteorology, medicine... Etc... That would make them true polymaths today.

I did not learn about opera at school - that was for evenings at Covent Garden or summer holidays at Glyndebourne.
Classical music was wandering up to the Albert hall of an evening.
Dance was seeing the graduation performances at White Lodge, sitting next to Dame Ninette.

Then again I'm a girl so the great schools that give a renaissance education would not let me in - very 18th century

A broad education is very appealing to me. I think it's more useful to the individual in the long run than a narrow, almost vocational focus. Life is long and change is pretty much the only constant. For me, a broad base is the best preparation for this.

Absolutely!

Music is an option in the bac. DSS2 already does his full quota of options (Latin and extra English in his case).

DD will undoubtedly do art or music options when her time comes.

Rabbitstew, it is morally right to allow refugees and in general immigrants to come to the UK for a better life. Is it fair and yo whom is it fair. In fact, does fairness even enter the equation?

I don't understand this business of justice being macro and fairness micro and the rest of it.

Talkin I'm unsurprisingly completely clueless about girls schools we would have considered coed but were unable to find even a remotely similar coed school.
Bonsoir maybe you're right it's a luxury and that only a small minority genuinely want it. But what if your wrong? What if all children were regularly exposed to culture art music architecture etc, unrelated to examinations, "outcomes" value added, league tables and university destinations. Learning just because it's there, maybe this would impact positively on their examined "3 R's curriculum", I'm sure there is research somewhere demonstrating this, maybe they'd start seeing the world in a different way, maybe they would get more pleasure out of life in general; I went on a water colour painting course once, although completely devoid of any ability I started looking at the world in a different way, how unobservant Id become, I saw more colours, trees were not just green, light, sunsets changed, hills took on a different perspective, my view of the physical world around me changed. My mother loved classical music and was a prodigious and talented artist as dementia sadly took over art and music became her only solace. I recently attended a fascinating (free) lecture at a very niche art museum, the paintings changed before my eyes, suddenly they had meaning, paintings that Id always frankly considered rather boring became beautiful, I came out exhilarated, I started looking around me and saw things Id never noticed before. As a mature student I studied prospect refuge theory, of no use to me in my current job but someone put into words my own unexpressed feeling about landscape, it gave me a deep inner satisfaction. Maybe this "luxury" education would have a wider impact; how people raise their children, how we view those of us around us from other cultures etc, how we view our material possessions, maybe more parents would want governments to offer a broader more balanced state education. Who knows? But whilst some consider it a luxury and others mock the term "renaissance man" when they know perfectly well what it means this type of education will remain a luxury that only those able and willing to pay for will get. My grand parents both believed in a classical education, they were poorly educated as children both were literate and numerate but felt they has missed out on a classical education so they saw it as their duty to do something about this, they spent there lives doing there own classical education in there spare time, reading, painting, listening to music etc, they believed that this was how you improved yourself and society, you could the question and understand our society better. Both were prominent trade unionist and spoke out for the rights of the workers, and those who particularly before and during the war couldn't speak out for themselves. They didn't see a classical education as a luxury but as an essential to life that gave you confidence and knowledge and that this knowledge was power in the fight against oppression.

happygardening - it's a luxury in the sense it is unaffordable to deliver to everyone.

Is it unaffordable though Bonsoir?

How much would it cost to play classical music at break and lunchtime over the PA system in a school? Precious little.

How much would it cost to have paintings in the corridors? Again very little.

Not much, but both would be a start.

So what I don't see is, why if your grandparents did it in their spare time, and viewed it as an essential but one you could see to yourself, do you now think only Winchester can deliver it? And why did you only want it for one child?

HappyGardening, you've made a heroic effort to communicate how a classical education feeds into what it means to have a "good life" and to strive for human excellence.

TBH appreciation of art and music and literature and sport and food and wine
should be mentioned at school but really its up to parents and those in favour of it to encourage others

I do not regard Opera or Ballet or painting or literary criticism as luxuries that the state should be funding when there are food bank collections in supermarkets

you want it, give it to your kids
or pay for somebody else to

personally I prefer to spend time with my kids and expose them to culture in my company

Happygardening, if the government provided this to all - exposing pupils to music, arts, sports, etc, it would be at the expense of something else. Then others would ask the same question except it would be about the something else that is no longer widely available.

There is the bigger picture that the government needs to consider; ensuring the UK is competitive in terms of brain power. If the UK wants to keep competiting in terms of medical research, other science, etc etc then it has to prioritise the things it believes will achieve this.

TOSN

I had Art, English, German, French, History, Maths, Physics, Geography, Sociology, Law (and other academic subjects I can't remember - I was a geek, so overdid it a little) in my final year of school, plus Dance (Ballet and Modern Dance) and Tennis. I could also have chosen to do Skiing, but didn't.

And since everyone is talking about it... I was a member of the Opera Appreciation Club. We went to the opera every six weeks, after having read and understood the entire script over the previous weeks. Tickets were paid for by either alumni association and the "friends of the opera house"

I went to what could be classed a grammar school. Abroad. Being a "Renaissance Woman" has definitely helped in my life/career.

Oh, and when I meant "Art" it's not just painting and drawing. This included Architecture, Art History and study trips to Rome and Prague, etc.

you want it, give it to your kids
or pay somebody else to

This is precisely what happygardening is doing. The message of this thread seems to be: it's wrong for the state to pay for a classical education, and at the same time, it's wrong for parents to pay for it. Sheesh! It sounds like we just don't want anyone getting above themselves and being educated to this level.

TOSN an interesting question. On a purely practical note my grand parents were born and lived in S Ken, they had every cultural opportunity on their doorstep, I live in a rural community even our nearest library is 15 miles away. Secondly they worked less hours than most of us do in the 21 st century, my grand mother never had paid employment, I spend at least two hours a day just commuting to and from work, I bring work home with me, in the 30's and 40's and 50's and beyond this was unheard of my grand father lived 10 mins from his job and came home at lunch time.
They were knowledgable but it was largely self taught and any knowledge was diligently acquired over many many years but I think if alive today they would admit that they still had large gaps in this knowledge, but schools can provide a whole army of teachers all experts in their fields and children are perfectly placed to begin receive a broad education, they could be at their most receptive. There was also a greater opportunity to acquire knowledge in both my grand parents and parents day. I recently found numerous notes made by my mother on Renaissance art/classical Greece/and ecclesiastical architecture and geology at classes run in the fifties by groups like the Workers Education Trust, these I believe we're free, and well attended. I recently decided that I needed to get a bit of a life so thought I take up water colour painting again, I searched our five "local colleges" offering part time adult courses ignoring the fact that it's a minimum of a -5 mile drive one way there are plenty of classes on accountancy or dog grooming but not one offered any kind of art class let alone courses on architecture, renaissance art, geology or Classical Greece. I can find private classes but they're not cheap.
Why is this? Maybe bonsoir is right it is a luxury only a certain section of society want, or are we too busy having our minds addled by meaningless drivel on the TV? Perhaps our governments wants the majority of our society to be unquestioning turgid lumps so that they can continue to pull the wool over our eyes about their economic policies, continue dismantling the NHS, and destroying local government in particular social services and social care, creating a ever widening divide between rich and poor, penalising those in greatest need of help, but of course continue telling us that all is fine. My grand father who sheltered and gave financial help to escaping Jews in WW2, who campaigned vociferously for workers rights, who fought for those who lived in abject poverty would be horrified.

my older dcs had a classical education and are still enjoying a fuller life because of it. My younger dcs are at an independent school which will give them the classical education. It is, I feel more valuable than that extra A level. I don't expect the taxpayer to pay for it but God only knows what it's got to do with food banks ( but they are another thread)

Toomany

I was just thinking this myself. Not on HG scale but having dd H.ed for 3 years has allowed us/her to have a perfectly tailored education to suit her needs.
It has incorporated a trip to Rome, museums, galleries, opera houses and some fine productions. concerts and shows gigs and festivals.
Topics that she chose herself and her education being generally child led.
She chose Roman history, art, architecture, music, not at any grand level but she still was interested.
I'm not sure she would have chosen these subjects at school.