During the Post Mortem phase of the Olympic Games there has
been a lot of discussion about why some sports do better than others.
In the discussions the word “Pathways” is sometimes used. The
thinking goes something like this: If
young people do not have exposure to a sport ( start of the ‘pathway’), we will never know if they are
good or not or if they are going to be a
champion or an Olympic Games medal winner.
The discussions here are particularly in relation to swimming
and athletics that were often taught at school.
They also involve discussion of the sports where we did well. Those for
New Zealand were rowing and yachting and Kayaking. These sports do have well
established well organised infrastructure with clubs and coaches at junior
level and then those who are good are nurtured thus emerging elite sports
people. There is an established and
effective Path, from first learning the sport to achieving at the games.
My experience has been with the arts, rather than sport, but
the same applies. If people are not
exposed to the arts, particularly the craft arts, music and dance, how will we
know who will be our next Icon artists?
I think particularly of Glass and Ceramics, but also
Sculpture, film and Fabric, music and dance arts. Most of these art forms were in the past
funded from Community Education courses and many people attended. The community education courses also provided
funding for small orchestras, Jazz groups and craft arts. With
the cuts to community education these course have been cut or consolidated with
little funding and in “hubs” which do not acknowledge transport links or cost.
In Otaki for example, where I know the Pottery Club. That
Club had to change from a community educational group into an Incorporated
Society and almost immediately the only a few new people joining. The cost of
running the club and the private funding of courses was only for those who can
afford the $100 plus dollars for a course, or who were already good enough to
sell some product.
In the Community Education Classes of the past there were
young people, refugees, Maori and Pacific Island students. These groups have
stopped coming and with that we are losing the potentially high performance
artists among them. Dance, Music and
Singing are most often now taught by private dance teachers, and choirs again,
are no longer open to everyone. The
cost of a young person learning the violin or cello, or becoming a top ballet
or jazz dancer is totally in the hands of parents who can afford the fees. The Pathway has been closed, with no new
or diverse people learning the skills there will in a few years time no
excellent artists. You have to start
somewhere and if that start is too expensive then the only people attending are
comfortably off middle class.
I gather this is the same as with sport. Access to the Arts and Sport is a right
that goes with being an active member and part of a community, so why have we
changed the goal posts and made the arts and sport accessible only to the few
and excluding opportunity for many whose talent lies unnoticed? Surely we should make programmes available
for little or no cost. Then we will have
the Pathway that is needed for success.
Just one other comment from my own experience. I have spent much of my adult life working in
prisons and correctional facilities and have been in awe of some of the work by
prison artists. I can’t count the number
of times a prison artist said to me “I had never done art/ sculpture/ ceramics
till I came to prison.” They then
learn quickly and become excellent.
They also suggest that if they had learnt to be an artist at school they
might not have ended up in prison.
Given the cost of prison per offender or prisoner the opportunity cost
of spending money on sport and arts at the basic level should not only save
money spend in crime, but also provide positive Pathways to high performance.
