Abstract
The publication of this book about inequality within the cultural industries comes at a particularly interesting time, since the COVID-19 pandemic has shone a light on the injustices that have long since existed within these industries. For those working within the cultural and creative industries, the pandemic has exacerbated the already deeply unequal nature of the industry. Most of us have been spending more time at home, watching TV, reading books, listening to music – in short, consuming culture. However, as Culture is Bad for You – a new book written by Orian Brook, Dave O’Brien and Mark Taylor – cogently argues, the increase in consumption of culture has not translated into any increase in the sustainability of cultural work, or the security of cultural workers in the United Kingdom.
The book intervenes into a context in which inequality within cultural work is intensifying across multiple and intersecting axes of identity including gender, class and race. While the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in the UK has provided some emergency funding for the arts since the pandemic began, stories abound of people who have fallen through the cracks and missed out on crucial support. Parents who are cultural workers, and mothers in particular, have found themselves juggling work alongside increased childcare responsibilities and the new challenge of home schooling (Akbar, 2021). Working-class cultural workers, already underrepresented, now face navigating a career alongside an increasing concern that only those from wealthy backgrounds will have the means to carry on working in the creative industries (Beaumont-Thomas, 2020). The Black Lives Matter movement has newly highlighted the structural racism that still persists, and recent research has shown that the cultural industries continue to underrepresent Black and Asian voices (Kanter, 2021).
If the pandemic has led to a crisis for the cultural industries, then the fault lines were already there, bubbling underneath the surface. As the authors note, the industry has always been more precarious for already-marginalised groups, and ‘for women, people of colour and those from working- class origins, we will see earlier exits from cultural labour markets than might otherwise have happened’ (p. 10). Culture is Bad For You systematically highlights the inequalities that exist within industries that – as many scholars, including Rosalind Gill (2002), have long argued – often perceive and promote themselves as egalitarian, progressive, and less exploitative than other industries.
The opening chapters of Culture is Bad for You set out the fundamental premise of the book by questioning the assumption that culture is necessarily positive or ‘good for you’, given that access to the cultural and creative industries – for people both as producers and consumers – is deeply unequal. Although chapter 4 focuses on the consumption of culture, the majority of the book focuses on cultural production. Chapter 5, entitled ‘When does inequality begin in cultural workers’ lives?’, draws a link between access to cultural education and the ability to then go on to navigate a career in the industries, while chapter 6 – ‘Is it still good work if you’re not getting paid?’ focuses on the endemic role of unpaid labour, and how this reinforces inequality. Chapter 7 challenges the notion that there was ever a ‘golden age’ for working-class cultural workers, while chapter 8 – ‘How is inequality experienced?’–focuses on the affective impact of structural inequality. The final two chapters focus on gender, looking first at the barriers faced by women, and then concluding by asking how we can go beyond just acknowledging inequality to doing something about it.
The book utilises two key methods, analysing data from sources including the Labour Force Survey to provide quantitative evidence of inequality, alongside interviews with 237 workers within the cultural and creative industries. The mixed methods approach means that the authors not only provide concrete evidence of inequalities, but also rich and compelling detail from their qualitative analysis into the impact on individuals.
Crucially, Culture is Bad for You interrogates the idea that culture is necessarily ‘good’, as signalled by the provocative title. The authors note that there are many forms of exclusion in contemporary culture, and that the production of culture is never politically neutral, since ‘who produces culture reflects social inequality’ (p. 15). Fundamentally, as the book persuasively argues, ‘the people who get to make and commission culture are not a diverse group’ (p. 26). It therefore complements recent work such as Jo Littler’s (2017) Against Meritocracy in challenging the pervasive idea that all it takes to succeed in contemporary culture and employment is talent and hard work. These powerful discourses ignore and obscure the systemic inequalities that mean it is much easier for some to succeed than others.
However, while the book clearly highlights the barriers to access to ‘high culture’ such as music or art lessons, theatre trips, or gallery visits, there is little discussion about those who engage with and create what might be understood as typically working-class culture. Although this is partly due to the surveys that are discussed – such as the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC)-funded Understanding the Value of Arts and Culture which often focus on formal cultural activity – there is a lack of discussion of certain kinds of culture (e.g. club singers or comedians) that are often ignored in studies of cultural consumption. In this sense, the book reflects academia’s long history of paying more attention to ‘high’ culture, and tending to ignore working-class forms that are perceived as ‘low culture’. As a result it does not always fully acknowledge alternative engagements with culture or different possibilities about what ‘culture’ could be. However, notwithstanding this critique, the book is very successful in illustrating how ‘inequalities in cultural production and consumption limit the potential value and impact of culture’ (p. 51) through a range of case studies that, alongside meticulously presented data, help clarify why inequality must be urgently addressed.
Culture is Bad For You’s intervention into the creative industries’ systemic reliance on unpaid work is especially valuable. Those from middle- and upper-middle-class backgrounds are at a distinct advantage when it comes to being able to gain a foothold in – and then stay in – what are notoriously precarious and competitive industries. The book rightly points out the ‘leg up’ that creative workers get from coming from a social background where they feel ‘at home in cultural occupations’ (p. 31). But they also note that access to culture, as well as the ability to sustain a career within the cultural industries, also depend fundamentally on material conditions.
The book highlights that what for some people might be a ‘stepping stone’ to future success, to others constitutes an insurmountable barrier. This is illustrated in a quotation from one of the interviewees – a fashion designer named Veronica – on the importance of unpaid work in career development. She contrasts her experience as a working-class student who could only work for free ‘for three months and that was a struggle’ unlike her middle-class peers who could sustain this for much longer (p. 160). She acknowledges that such unpaid work ‘really does help you’ but that ‘if you don’t have the money to do it, you don’t really get a chance to grow’ (p. 160).
Alongside the material inequalities of cultural work and consumption are the more insidious psychological effects for those from marginalised backgrounds. As Culture is Bad For You clearly points out, there is, for many marginalised cultural workers, the alienating sense of being the ‘only one’. The book compellingly argues that it is not enough simply to tell people from underrepresented groups to get more involved, because the environment that they are being asked to get involved in is often alienating and hostile. One interviewee, John, describes how he ‘stick[s] out like a sore thumb’ in comparison to his posher peers (p. 205).
This mirrors recent discussions about the extent to which working-class actors are marginalised, illustrated by comments from actor Christopher Eccleston about the way he has been typecast due to his northern accent (Jones, 2018) and the assumption that people of colour can only speak with expertise on issues around race. Alongside the endemic underrepresentations within the cultural industries, there is also the issue of the kind of art and culture that marginalised groups are allowed to make.
Fundamentally, Culture is Bad For You is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the impact that inequality has, not only on individuals, but on the kind of culture that is possible. The greatest strength of the book is how clearly it shows that the best way to make the cultural industries a fairer, more equal place is to make society a fairer, more equal place. Culture is Bad For You is essential reading, not only for culture makers, but for academics, policy makers and politicians. If you have any interest in making sure that culture is as diverse, interesting and vibrant as it can be, then you should read this book.
