Why the arts have lost funding to help the Olympics

One reason, of course, is the Games will cost billions and the money has to come from somewhere. But there is a lot in what Tiffany Jenkins says in an article for Spiked.

She says that over the last decade arts professionals have not argued for state funding on the basis of the arts' intrinsic qualities. Instead they have made an instrumental case, arguing that the arts will further whatever the fashionable government aim of the time is.

For instance, a recent document from seven major arts organisations asks for government money because their work will improve participation, self-esteem, community cohesion, social regeneration, economic vitality and health.

As Jenkins says:

Over time, the special case for the arts has been forgotten. It means that when some other activity or sector comes up, which similarly claims to help us participate, regenerate or raise our self-esteem, the arts have to compete on purely these terms. And this is what has happened with the Olympics.