We're Just Talking To The Kids

London Fields # 36
First published Inpress, Melbourne on 21 February 2007
NB: Each column has a name, but these do not appear in print; printed versions may differ slightly to those displayed here

You can’t open a newspaper or turn on the TV in the UK at the moment without some new revelation about the state of youth in Britain today. So is there really something worrying about the environment that society has created for those growing up in urban areas?

Well, there are two big stories over the past fortnight that have given this discussion renewed vigour; firstly a series of inner city shootings, and secondly a report from UNICEF which placed the well-being of children in the UK at the bottom of a list of 21 industrialised nations.

The outward signs are that the UK is a gun-free nation. Bobbies still patrol the streets unarmed [if you don’t include nightsticks, pepper spray or bullet-proof vests] and unlike Australia, you’d never see a store security guard with a gun. In fact it’s a bit of a shock when you do see armed coppers, even if the sight has become more common in the post-9/11 society. Sadly though, this is becoming a dangerous anachronism. In South London, three teenagers have died from gunshot injuries over the past few weeks. The official response was a call to lower the minimum age for mandatory sentencing of five years if found guilty of being in possession of a firearm, but nothing much is said about the reasons for the behaviour.

None of this will change while guns are seen as a fashion statement. One summer’s afternoon while walking in Hackney, a kid of about fifteen caught my eye and then winked as he lifted his t-shirt to reveal a gun stuffed into the waistband of his jeans. And this was just a few days after an execution shooting in roughly the same spot. If they’re trying to frighten, they’ve succeeded.

The UNICEF report, Child Poverty in Perspective: An Overview of Child Well-being in Rich Countries, used forty indicators from 2000-2003 to determine "…whether children feel loved, cherished, special and supported, within the family and community, and whether the family and community are being supported in this task by public policy and resources". Sadly, its findings were used as a political mallet, rather than as a tool for much-needed change.

There was also a bit of an outcry about the content of new E4 television series Skins, which follows a group of fifteen and sixteen year old friends from Bristol, who quite possibly attend the school from Teachers. The furore was that teenagers were shown to drink, take drugs, have sex and generally try to enjoy being alive. The wowsers couldn’t see past this to find a fairly accurate picture of mainly likeable characters facing issues about discovering who they are and how they fit.

It’s an extremely well considered and intelligent piece of television, at a time when the dearth of new ideas in British dramas (see Robin Hood, Hotel Babylon, New Street Law, Party Animals, etc.) is more evident than any exciting developments. The audacious part of the series is that each episode is seen from the viewpoint of a different character. But instead of the hackneyed device of telling the same story over again from a different perspective, Skins has an ongoing narrative that is like a relay race, where each week one of them takes the story and runs with it for a few days. Clever too is the viral element behind the show. There is a MySpace page for each of the characters, and these are all ‘in character’. And you do get to care about them too; the unfolding story of Cassie is heartbreaking.

Maybe a lot of fuss can be written off as stereotyping or political football. But the other side is that you’re not reading stories about shenanigans on the streets of Somerset towns; no it’s Manchester and London. Because it’s true that there’s not much to do in the inner city; areas are heavily built up; it’s grey and brick with few parklands or leisure facilities. I suppose you can watch telly, or play computer games or even kick a ball round on the street if you can avoid the traffic. Even going to see a film will put you back about $25 so you may as well hang around with your mates and kill the time looking for something to do.

There are pressures to grown-up quickly too. The National Curriculum Assessments (SATs) has children and schools being graded and compared nationally at the ages of seven, eleven and fourteen. Maybe part of the problem is that there is no time left to be kids?

Day-after-day I hear of people leaving London as "it’s no place to raise a family"; but isn’t a society a reflection of its members? Things aren’t as bad as they are painted, but saying ‘things are OK but could be better’ is not going to win anyone’s vote. I don’t have the answers to any of the questions I’ve raised. But simply abandoning the ship will leave it to sink with many still onboard…

© James McGalliard 2007