Discussed the project I am part of that happens in a predominately black area of London with a friend. Described how all of us working on it are white, including the helper/volunteer and that I might recommend using one of the black artist-educators or storytellers next year instead of me or collaborating with a black arts organisation instead. Friend said that at least working with a black young person/volunteer as part of professional development might work if we do chose to work with me and the other organisation again. Afterall, it is working...
Went to British Library coz I might do a project there. Was asked by the organiser what I thought of the staff profile. I had clocked it and said, diplomatically, 'put it this way, there seems to be a preponderance of bearded middle-aged white men.'
And then I added, is that a problem as long as anybody feels comfortable to be there? Naturally there are bearded white men in corderoy - it's almost like a theme park for them. It's where you would expect to find them, like going to the zoo to find monkeys... Those men are part of the British Library experience.
I wonder whether a place actually becomes more accessible to a broad audience depending on its staff quotas. In some ways - clearly yes - because people want to see that their own communities use the facility but in other ways...
The collections within the British Library and Tate Modern are 99% white european (descent) - is it more honest to have the staff quotas actually reflect that imbalance (They do, anyway) - in a theme park kind of way, acknowledging the 'ghetto'-ness, exclusiveness of it?