{"id":16406,"date":"2024-03-05T18:04:20","date_gmt":"2024-03-05T18:04:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.gfdesign.co.uk\/culture\/from-salford-to-saltburn-class-privilege-and-the-screen-industries\/"},"modified":"2024-03-05T18:04:20","modified_gmt":"2024-03-05T18:04:20","slug":"from-salford-to-saltburn-class-privilege-and-the-screen-industries","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.gfdesign.co.uk\/culture\/from-salford-to-saltburn-class-privilege-and-the-screen-industries\/","title":{"rendered":"From Salford to Saltburn: Class, Privilege and the Screen Industries"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

Jon Baldwin<\/strong> compares and contrasts <\/em>Nobody Loves You and You Don\u2019t Deserve to Exist with <\/em>Saltburn. Image above by Paul Routledge, see here<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Nobody Loves You and You Don\u2019t Deserve to Exist<\/em> (dir. Brett Gregory, 2022) and Saltburn<\/em> (dir. Emerald Fennell 2023) were released within a year of each other. Both, in their own way, offer a gothic twist on contemporary matters of British class and economic relations. They are refreshing and innovative, lyrical and sumptuous. Both are from under-represented film-directors, e.g. neither is an affluent white man.<\/p>\n

Both directors extract remarkable scenes from their actors, in particular a ten-minute single take of Reuben Clark by Gregory. Both have the classic locations found in British cinema, the gritty streets (of Salford) or the sprawling manor house (of Saltburn). But the journey to screen and subsequent destination of these films could hardly be more different. I make a comparison here, not to denigrate one (or other) of the filmmakers, but to try to shed light on class, privilege, and the screen industries.<\/p>\n

Working-class access to the film industry<\/strong><\/p>\n

Brett Gregory is a working-class filmmaker and would no doubt have encountered the obstacles identified by Carey et al, 2020<\/a>. Working-class entrants face at least twelve challenges to work in the Screen (and other) Industries. In early life they face unequal access to cultural experiences, disparity in cultural education, participation and achievement, and lack of role models. In post-16 education, they have unequal access to higher education, are offered flawed technical education pathways, and disadvantaged by a lack of resources to undertake work placements.<\/p>\n

When making the transition to work there are the obstacles of informal recruitment practices, and cultural matching and unconscious bias, perpetuating \u2018jobs for the boys\u2019 which alternatively smooths the access of the privileged who can often count on the \u2018bank of mum and dad\u2019 to sustain their entries into the profession and rely on the old boy network.<\/p>\n

Finally, in-work progression and advancement is often challenged by organisational culture and \u2018fit\u2019: that is, mastering the upper\/middle class behavioural codes that are vital in \u2018getting on.\u2019<\/p>\n

The underlying causes of these issues lies in disparity in the financial, social, and cultural capital of those of different class origin and not in notions of meritocracy, intelligence, talent, or hard work. The upshot is a disastrous lack and silencing of working-class voices, narratives, content, considerations, and concerns in the industry and production.<\/p>\n

Emerald Fennell is an affluent well-connected filmmaker and would not have encountered the obstacles detailed above or associated issues around funding, production, exhibition, and distribution. This is not to say that she has not transcended other obstacles in her path or that she is any less resilient or talented a filmmaker. But her education, family economic support, networking, and privilege must have greased her development in a way counter to the grit placed in front of Gregory\u2019s wheels.<\/p>\n

In a piece for Variety<\/em>, K.J. Yossman<\/a> sheds light on Fennell\u2019s background and education. Fennell is the daughter of society jeweller \u2013 \u2018king of bling\u2019 – and old Etonian, Theo Fennell. She attended Marlborough (\u00a315,665 per term), where she found herself a year or two either side of Princess Eugenie and Kate Middleton, now the Duchess of Cambridge. State-educated Yossman attended Oxford in 2006 at the same time as Fennell. It is claimed that Fennell was part of a rarefied social set whose family names were recognized from the gossip columns and history books. Yossman describes how she was once introduced to a contemporary whose last name was Roosevelt-Morgan, with the whisper that: \u201cShe\u2019s that Morgan but not that Roosevelt\u201d \u2014 which Yossman interpreted to mean she was descended from the banking dynasty but not the U.S. president.<\/p>\n

The working class are Not Fucking Invited<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a telling anecdote revealing the aforementioned privilege of having the \u2018bank of mum and dad\u2019 and \u2018old boys\u2019 network\u2019, Yossman recalls that she and Fennell were involved in a charity fashion show. Yossman\u2019s contribution was to persuade make-up artists to lend their services for free; Fennell however got her father to donate some jewellery for the accompanying raffle. As the show drew nearer, Yossman says, \u201cselect students received silver-embossed invitations in their pigeonholes. The rest were NFI \u2014 not fucking invited.\u201d You don\u2019t have to guess who got the silver and who was NFI. In micro, this is contemporary class relations in macro and the workings of the screen industries today: the working classes can try but they are NFI. There is nothing simpler than a problem you can toss jewels at.<\/p>\n

Nobody Loves You and You Don\u2019t Deserve to Exist<\/em> is an independent arthouse film, which is to say, it is not small budget, or even micro-budget, it is a debt-producing feature film. Gregory used a redundancy package and maxed-out credit cards and relied on the good will of crew over six years.<\/p>\n