The Trouble with Youth Voice by Steven Hyland
In this paper I’m going to discuss what I’ve discovered through my experience as a part of youth voice. I’ll be touching on points such as diversity, quality, and what effect systems (or a lack thereof) have on youth voice. I’m a member of Tate Collective Liverpool, Tate Liverpool’s young people’s group. The Tate website describes what we do as follows: ‘Tate Collective Liverpool meet regularly to plan and deliver activities and events for other young people aged 15 – 25 years, and to work on creative projects engaging with the Tate Collection displays and exhibitions at Tate Liverpool. Tate Collective Liverpool is a part of Circuit, led by Tate and funded by the Paul Hamlyn Foundation.’1 I should clarify by saying that the Collective’s age range is also 15 – 25 years. What we do is open ended. We develop our own projects, work with Tate Liverpool staff members on other projects, and work with partner organisations on others. Our main position is that of programmers; amongst ourselves but increasingly through integrating and collaborating with the Tate Liverpool staff. The paper I am presenting today has been informed through the experiences of Tate Collective Liverpool during our involvement in the project Circuit. Circuit is a four-year national programme connecting 15-25 year olds to the arts in galleries and museums working in partnership with the youth and cultural sector. It provides opportunities for young people to steer their own learning and create cultural activity across art disciplines. My presentation is based on my own critical reflection upon the project, which the on-going evaluation process has enabled for me and other people participating. The paper is not intended to simply articulate the benefits or value of this project, of which there are many, but to highlight some of the issues or challenges there might be, as have been illuminated through our on-going reflection, as part of the young evaluators group for Circuit, which is called 'Circulate.' I’ve been a member of Tate Collective Liverpool for over 2 years, I’m 23 years old. I’m currently studying for an MA in Art Gallery and Museum Studies after finishing my Fine Art and Art History degree in 2012. I’m white, male and straight. I’m not particularly well off, nor am I in dire straitsmainly because I live at home with my parents. I’m in a fortunate position where I can attend most Tate Collective Liverpool meetings and be a part of a lot of projects in various roles. But I’m kind of scraping by and am looking to earn money. I think all of these things are relevant when considering youth voice. On the Circuit website there is an article called ‘Reality Check’, in which a young person who is part of the Circuit programme expresses reasons for possibly not being able to attend any more of her galleries meetings. She begins by saying ‘So, I thought I’d take one for the team when I asked in our last meeting, and felt quite cheeky by doing so, if the work we will do for the up-coming Arts Festival will be paid somewhat? Anything?’2 She then goes on to explain the various issues that are affecting her life, and how money (the lack of money) is at the root of most of them. She is an art graduate and desperate to be involved with Circuit but having full time paid work doesn’t allow for the
flexibility needed to attend meetings. She stuck with a job she hated because of the flexibility it allowed her to be able to still be a part of Circuit. She says: ‘…the opportunities that have come about are phenomenal and I feel I am part of something important. And I can continue my career by being involved with such an exciting group and project that is fuelling my confidence and in the process gaining lots of good skills, keeping me from having a nervous mental breakdown due to lack of direction in my life.’ 3 (See: https://circuit.tate.org.uk/2015/02/reality-check/) That’s a great credit to what Circuit is doing, not only improving people’s engagement with the arts but also being a really positive force in people’s lives. It improves social wellbeing. However what this also speaks of is a lack of jobs and progression routes within the arts. The skills and experience to be gained from Circuit are fantastic, but what is implied is that there is no clear indication of where to go after it. This may indicate a need for further work, beyond the scope of Circuit, which is about making potential routes into employment more apparent and accessible. The young woman goes on: ‘Apart from students, most people my age would not be able to come to these, and I know of so many who would if they could, resulting in missing out on the opportunities and activities that are meant to open to the whole age bracket.’ 4 This is a voice that is often lost in processes that place less emphasis on youth voice, but which Circuit, through a focus on ensuring young people can and do express their critical concerns about gallery practice, is enabling to be expressed. This is just one instance, but one representing many. I know a few people who have loved being a part of Circuit but couldn’t sustain a connection with it as they had to focus on earning money. Although there are many paid opportunities for young people across Circuit, whilst some of these are sustained internships, many others are ad-hoc and all are dependant upon the budgets within each gallery. These are young people engaged in the arts who have a passion for it and they can’t afford to be involved. So, when you consider this, you realise how huge the amount of people we are not reaching, utilising or representing could be. Young people won’t always be able to join these projects if they have much more pressing issues in their lives, and of course we won’t reach everyone, but we need to make it as easy as possible for as many people as possible to get involved- whatever there circumstances. Within this is a dilemma here that I’ve discovered myself. Do I want to gain a wealth of invaluable skills and experience for doing unpaid work, or do I grab any paying job I can to earn money? Not many people have the luxury of even considering this, and trying to balance the two is often complex and stressful. At this point I want to pose the question: what is youth voice? Most young people’s groups within art galleries are, like Tate Collective Liverpool, aged 15 - 25. Is this youth voice representative of all young people in the local area? That’s something I often wonder. I would describe the ideal youth voice as a collective voice from people of different ages, backgrounds, ethnicities, interests, gender and abilities. As a commitment to diversity is an important aspect of what we do in Tate Collective Liverpool and Circuit I often question the validity of my input as I’m already so engaged in the arts; I’m personally pretty well catered for without having to voice an opinion to change something for my benefit. I can see how this can work the other way too. People who are not as used to an arts environment as me,
and people who are closer to 15 than 25, could feel as though their age and lack of experience mean that their input isn’t as important and won’t be taken as seriously. Even I felt like this when I first joined as a 21 year old arts graduate. It’s the voices of the younger, less experienced people that we need more of if we are to open up galleries to even more young people and for them to feel as though it’s a space for everyone and this is one of the key aims of Circuit- so I try and consider things from other young people’s perspectives as well as my own. Only so much can be done by imagining, and for that reason I try whenever possible to bring out the thoughts of people who are less comfortable in an art gallery setting, younger, less experienced, or have a different background to me. To highlight this, here is an example from a previous paper that I worked on with other Tate Collective Liverpool members about one of our projects. ‘During the planning of the ‘Blueprint Festival’ we strategically involved a wide range of cultural activities that encompassed areas of interest that would ensure young people without experience of art galleries would feel more at ease and comfortable in a gallery setting. One example of how we achieved this was the workshop led by skateboarding shop ‘Lost Art’, which brought a large following of young skateboarders to the gallery. The workshop also allowed non-skateboarding audiences to learn about skateboarding culture. Although the skateboarding audience had little experience of gallery spaces, they naturally related to the Claude Parent installation; imagining themselves skating up and down the slopes. As a result, gallery visitors became aware of how skateboarding can be a valid creative pursuit. Equally, the continual interweaving of performance art, music and dance throughout the gallery challenged young people who are familiar with the conventional gallery experience. Consequently a lot of people commented that there was no feeling of having to act in a formal way, as is often the case in an art gallery.’ 5 As another example, at Tate Britain, as part of Circuit, Tate Collective London have co-curated an exhibition entitled ‘Source’ and created the first social space for young people at Tate Britain, entitled ‘Space.’ In an article on the Circuit website, Tate Collective London state that: ‘The quantitative data showed that Source and Space attracted a younger audience and more ethnically diverse audience than usual at Tate Britain. Satisfaction was strong across all age groups showing that what young people like is of broader appeal and not a limitation – with some exceptions – and has the potential to give a positive message about young people to other visitors.’6 (See: https://circuit.tate.org.uk/2015/03/source-space-at-tate-britain/) The ways in which Tate Collective London have achieved this are outlined in the article on the Circuit website. Furthermore, at Tate Liverpool the strand of Circuit that is about partnership working with the Youth Sector is specifically targeting young people who are less likely to have previous experience of gallery contexts and this work is proving to be effective in engaging a wider diversity of young people.
However, from my experience, the people who have been present and contributed, rather than just been audience members, for most projects at Tate Liverpool have been from a narrower cohort, for example, they have usually been older than 20. This, I believe, is largely down to different priorities of people who are in school and those who aren’t. For people under the age of 20 their focus is usually on school marks or enjoying themselves, while for older people there is a greater sense of needing to grasp opportunities that enhance career prospects. The people aged over 20 have been involved in art or cultural related activity for a number of years, so this puts the youth voice in even more danger of being extremely narrow. When working on a peer-led project, how do you reel in other young people’s voices beyond the over 20’s? Emails and Facebook posts are sent out- but there is often little response. It can be a lot of work to get some more people’s views so it can often go neglected as we push ahead with a project. But I think it is important to have a system in place which allows for easier input from a greater number of people- including people who are not involved with a project due to time constraints and various other things. It has to be done in such a way the people feel they can offer an opinion despite not being part of the project, because often if I or other people haven’t been part of a project, we’ve not wanted to disrupt or disparage the work of the people who are working on a project we know little about. Perhaps for each project there should be a brief document with key information on that everyone has easy access to. Even if a lot of the ideas of people outside of the project aren’t used it’s important that they are gathered and considered. A possible way of making people feel confident that their input is valued is to, at some stage, report back and say how ideas were considered, and the reasons for using and not using certain ideas. Let people know they are an important part of the process, a sounding board of sorts. When generating Tate Collective Liverpool projects in meetings I’ve sometimes struggled to think what my thoughts were as I’ve had no frames of reference. It can be hard to be creative or be critical when the format is so open. I’ve looked to people who’ve been in the Collective longer than I have and assumed they know what’s going on and what’s wanted from us. I felt as though there was some key piece of information I never knew about. As time went on I discovered that it was more to do with those people feeling comfortable to make a suggestion as they have been part of the process before. Having an idea or opinion that you feel as though you can stand behind is quite difficult when other people are giving their thoughts based on something they’ve done before or researched. There is a natural tendency in wanting to be professional, particularly once you are over the age of 20. After all, there are occasionally staff members who are of similar age. Are the young staff members’ views thought of as being part of a youth voice? I suspect not and instead say that they are seen by everyone as professional opinion. People with arts backgrounds and hopes to develop a career in the arts, do they follow what they have seen before them in what professionals do? Can a youth voice be something that is heavily influenced by established practices? People who have been with the Collective a long time- do they have a better grip of the gallery as a whole and through the process of time have they become institutionalised? I think there is a place for people who are seeking that step inside a profession, people like me. We can act as representatives of youth voice but shouldn’t take our own voices to be representative of young people, nor should anyone else take them as that. When in a small group, how do you get the greater range of opinions you’re aiming to represent?
A 1999 study by Hurley & Buxbury states: ‘Youth councils and youth forums are used in many areas to provide a voice for local young people but often suffer by appearing tokenistic or attracting only the more active and more able members of the community. In addition, many youth consultation schemes flounder due to the fact that young people, already insecure and suspicious of authority, are forced into ‘adult’ decision-making mechanisms. They are effectively being set up to fail.’ 7 A small group of us were asked to come up with some form of extra interpretation for the Transmitting Andy Warhol exhibition. If there was to be any point in another form of interpretation it was clear that it had to be significantly different to what was already going to be there. Our ideas were based on opening up the interpretation to other people- we commissioned a spoken word piece from a local poet, a playlist from a local DJ and a video from a local blogger. Alongside this we created a hashtag, WarholChallenge, which was aimed at generating the public’s own interpretation of Warhol. As it was based on social media websites like Twitter and Instagram, we thought that this would be an effective way of utilising the voices of a great range of young people. What was our resulting voice from the project? Consultation with the wider Tate Collective Liverpool was minimal due to a lack of time and no clear way of getting people’s opinions. We gave local creative talents a platform- though as far as I know none of them were at an age where you could class them as a young person. Our hashtag WarholChallenge was in the public domain, so I wouldn’t be able to justify calling what was generated through that as youth voice because there’s no way of knowing the ages of people who participated in the hashtag. That was closer to a public voice. You could argue that our youth voice wasn’t used, it was more our insight into youth culture that we used. That brings up its own questions: at what level is youth voice important? At what point do our roles become about marketing to young people rather than being representatives of them? And what’s the difference between young people commissioning someone and staff members commissioning someone? I’ve been thinking how I can give specific examples about different projects without too obviously referring to certain people or opinions and potentially coming across as overly critical. But that’s more difficult than I thought, and I think it reflects, in a way, how we try not to discourage anyone from doing what they think’s best. However this needs to be asked of us: are we challenged enough? An idea might be good, but it might have been done before somewhere else and in a better way. Equally an idea may have been done before and failed to achieve what it set out to. Useful good and bad examples may be out there to learn from before going ahead with an idea. There are so many questions to consider that I think some sort of systems need to be in place for those questions not to fall by the wayside. At Tate Collective Liverpool we’re currently working on ways we can evaluate what we do in a more focussed way. We hope to put in place a member of the Collective on each of our projects whose role it is to ensure our aims and objectives are being met as the project develops, and the issue of youth voice is a big part of this. Though we’re only in planning stages at the moment I think it is an important way of improving the quality of our youth voice. One project we’ve begun recently involves Tate Liverpool staff, including Tate Liverpool directors and curators. There are five staff members and five Tate Collective Liverpool members in the steering group for this project. Working on a project on equal terms with staff members is a new
prospect for us so we’re still finding our bearings to some extent. The five Tate Collective Liverpool members, of which I’m one, are representing youth voice. We consult with Tate Collective Liverpool and members of workshop groups we’ve created, and are in the process of making a list of other young people’s groups we’d like to be part of this project as well. On what basis we’ll select these groups I don’t yet know. Whatever groups we select could change what the youth voice is. Something to consider here is- how do we ensure youth voice is on equal footing with professional opinions? It will be interesting to see, as the project goes on, how effective it is positioning youth voice in such a way. Mark Hadfield & Kaye Haw in a 2001 study called ‘Voice’, about young people and action research, question a series of assumptions about youth voice. One of which is that ‘young people can tell professionals about their experiences in a way that is meaningful.’ They say: ‘We have to question whether we undervalue the way young people express themselves through their behaviour, clothes, music, apathy, loyalty and, just as importantly, their silence. Do adults attach too much importance to certain forms of expression? Research and policy development tends to fall back on those who are verbally articulate and selfconfident. Young people who are less articulate or confident can be stereotyped as not having developed the capacity to express themselves in the way required of citizens with rights. The lives of young people and their experiences are at least as diverse as those of other social groups. When we set out to listen to their ‘voice’ we need to recognise that being young is only part of what creates their perspective. They are also young men and women: they come from different ethnic and social class backgrounds, have a different range of abilities, live in different family structures and come from a range of communities.’ 8 These thoughts chime with my personal experience and observations. Silences need to be noticed and understood as much as outspoken voices, and youth voice encompasses such a diverse range of people that an immense amount of work needs to be done to reach enough of these people for there to be any sort of satisfactory and representative voice. Though this paper is largely from my perspective, a lot of it has been generated by thoughts raised by discussions with a range of younger people in conversations and workshops. As part of Circuit I see my position as being dual- I bring my own thoughts and ideas, but also I try to find out and represent other people’s thoughts. The more young people we talk to through this, the more thoughts shared and ideas generated, the better the quality of the programme becomes. Circuit is proving to be a significant opportunity for youth voice, not least in terms of exploring the issues and challenges there are in achieving a meaningful youth voice that is representative of the experiences of all young people, not just those who have privileged opportunities to be able to volunteer their time. As such Circuit has enabled us to uncover a key issue to achieving what is a fairly common aim across many arts organisations- to ensure equal access across all social and cultural groups. This issue indicates the need for a much broader programme of work, beyond the scope of Circuit, to develop more paid roles so that young people from a broader cross section of society would be able to contribute their own opinions in meaningful ways, influencing programmes and events and thereby making further, meaningful connections with a broader social and cultural cohort.
References 1. Author unknown, ‘Tate Collectives, Tate Liverpool’, <https://collectives.tate.org.uk/collectives/tate-liverpool> 2. Alice Thickett, ‘Reality Check’, Circuit, <https://circuit.tate.org.uk/2015/02/reality-check/> 3. ibid. 4. ibid. 5. India Cawley-Gelling, Steven Hyland, Connah MacCarron-Roberts, Sufea Mohamad Noor & Ruth Morrissey, ‘Evaluation: The Value of the Blueprint Festival’, Circuit 6. Sabine Doolin, Source and Space at Tate Britain, Circuit, <https://circuit.tate.org.uk/2015/03/source-space-at-tate-britain/> 7. Mark Hadfield & Kaye Haw (2001) ‘Voice’, young people and action research, Educational Action Research, 9:3, 485-502 8. ibid.