
‘No barriers to entry': George the Poet reframes art world for young people with immersive exhibition
George the Poet, the award-winning podcaster and spoken-word performer, has worked with a group of young people from the Mayor of London's violence reduction unit, who he helped reinterpret classic works of art.
The Scream by Edvard Munch, Christ in the Storm on the Sea of Galilee by Rembrandt, the Great Wave off Kanagawa by Hokusai and The Garden of Earthly Delights by Hieronymus Bosch will all be shown during the summer as part of Art of Expression in Frameless, an immersive art space in London.
He said: 'When it comes to immersive art, there are no barriers to entry. You don't need a language for this. It's accessible in many ways.
'Sometimes it gets exhausting reading all of the texts of all the artworks that you find interesting. But in an immersive setting, you literally come and sit in some art.'
George the Poet chose Reflections on the Thames by John Atkinson Grimshaw, the enduring image of the moonlit river that runs through the centre of London.
Alongside the immersive artwork that will be projected on to the walls, ceiling and floor of the space, are spoken-word pieces about the paintings, which were developed during workshops.
The poet, who has worked with offenders in prison, believes art can broaden horizons.
He said: 'A lot of the conflict that I saw growing up was exacerbated by the feeling of not being able to leave the community, not being able to see beyond our immediate environment. One way to combat that is to invite new experiences.'
A new piece of research was commissioned as part of the project, which surveyed 2,000 young people, asking them about their views on art and accessibility.
It found that almost two-thirds of young people want more access to art, while a quarter said that art galleries 'can be intimidating'.
Nearly half said that historical art is not relevant to their modern lives, and when asked if they considered a career in the arts, 40% stated they did 'not know where to start'.
Tafari Clarke, a member of the Young People's Action Group at the violence reduction unit, said: 'Being an artist isn't really glamorised like being a lawyer or being a footballer. For me, art was definitely outside the box.'
Sign up to The Guide
Get our weekly pop culture email, free in your inbox every Friday
after newsletter promotion
Access to the arts differs greatly depending on someone's class background.
Sutton Trust research released last year found the creative industries were dominated by people from the most affluent backgrounds, which it defined as those from 'upper middle-class backgrounds', while a Netflix report claimed working-class parents did not see film and TV as a viable career for their children.
The proportion of working-class actors, musicians and writers has shrunk by half since the 1970s, according to one piece of research, while another study found fewer than one in 10 arts workers in the UK had working-class roots.
Guardian analysis from earlier this year found that almost a third (30%) of artistic directors and other creative leaders were privately educated, compared with a national average of just 7%.
George the Poet said improving access to the arts is beneficial for young people and arts institutions themselves. 'When you give a young person the confidence to explore their own artistic interests, it does untold things for their mental health, it has untold benefits for their confidence and their ability to express themselves,' he said.
'And then with these institutions, it brings them into the future. The future is our young people. And if our young people don't feel like they are custodians of these arts and these institutions, then it seems to me we would be moving backwards.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Rhyl Journal
14 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
STV warns over profits as advertising market slumps and TV projects delayed
Shares in the London-listed business plunged by about a quarter on Monday morning following the update. STV said it was now expecting full-year revenue and adjusted operating profit to be 'materially below' a consensus of analysts. Revenues are predicted to range between £165 million and £180 million for 2025. The company said it was now targeting £2.5 million worth of cost savings this year – higher than the £1.7 million outlined in March – having launched a significant savings programme last year, including across its broadcast operations. STV blamed worsening conditions in the commissioning and advertising markets in recent months for the profit and sales downgrade. Advertising revenues for the period between July and September is forecast to decline by 8%, lower than previously expected, driven by a sharp 20% drop in July, it told investors. The year-on-year decline is set to be impacted by particularly strong sales this time last year, due to the men's Euro football tournament being broadcast on TV. It follows a 10% fall in advertising revenues over the first half of 2025. A number of businesses, including WPP and S4 Capital, have flagged a worsening advertising market as more challenging economic conditions prompt clients to reign in marketing spending. Furthermore, STV warned the uncertainty was causing significant deterioration in the commissioning market. It said projects within its unscripted labels were being impacted with some in advanced development not getting the green light, and others being delayed into 2026. Nevertheless, it highlighted strong progress within its scripted labels with current projects including for Netflix, Apple, Sky and the BBC. Rufus Radcliffe, STV's chief executive, said: 'The deteriorating macroeconomic backdrop continues to lower business confidence impacting both markets in which we operate. 'STV Studios' delivery schedule for the remainder of 2025 has been impacted by the UK commissioning market, which has further weakened at the end of H1 (the first half of 2025) and into the second half of the year.' But he said production had finished on 'key titles with international appeal, including high-end drama Amadeus for Sky and a third series of Blue Lights for BBC One'. 'We are proactively responding to market conditions through a combination of investing in targeted future growth initiatives aligned with our long-term strategy and identifying efficiency and cost saving opportunities across the business,' Mr Radcliffe added.


The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why do men like Jeremy Clarkson get so upset at women playing football?
The old dinosaur Jeremy Clarkson claims he likes women's football. In fact, he wrote a column about it for The Sunday Times, saying he found the Lionesses' Euros final 'exciting'. Great! Progress, right? Well… not quite. Because in the very same breath, he compares that excitement to what he imagines he'd feel watching cow racing in Sri Lanka. Yes, really. His exact words: ' It was exciting – in the same way that I'd be excited if I were in Sri Lanka and the locals invited me to watch some cow racing.' It's a thinly veiled pat on the head – the kind of backhanded compliment women in sport have heard for decades. Clarkson's message is clear: well done, ladies – that was 120 minutes of fun, in a novelty sort of way. Not real football, of course. Just a quirky spectacle for a Sunday afternoon. And that, right there, is the problem. Because even when some men say they like women's football, it's often delivered with a side of snark, scepticism or condescension. It's not quite "real". It's not quite worthy. It's the football equivalent of a try-hard indie band – enjoyable, but let's not pretend it deserves top billing. That mindset – whether shouted from comment sections of newspapers or whispered into broadsheet columns – is why women's football continues to be met with hostility. And it's going to take far more than England's back-to-back Euros win, a Downing Street visit and a street parade through the capital to convince men like Clarkson that women's football is worthy of their attention. What are they waiting for – a Bank Holiday in the Lionesses' honour? Nothing has stirred more bizarre, irrational rage in recent years than women playing football. Not climate change, not taxes, not even unfixed potholes. No – it's women daring to lace up their boots and play the same sport men have dominated for over a century. The horror! Now, don't get me wrong. I'm well aware there are thousands of men who have supported the Lionesses wholeheartedly through the Euros and through the trials and triumphs of women's football. Those men exist. In fact, I live with two of them. But what's also been impossible to ignore is the other group – a loud, seething contingent who foam at the mouth every time women's football gets airtime. Let's be honest. Some of these men don't just dislike women's football – they absolutely hate it. Viscerally and irrationally. As though women simply kicking a ball poses a threat to their very identity. Take Graham (real name, I believe), a caller I heard on LBC just the other day. He proudly declared – without a hint of irony – that he 'can't stand' women's football. Not just that he doesn't enjoy it. Not just that it's not his thing. No, Graham hates it. He can't watch it. He repeated several times that he can't bear it being 'shoved down our throats'. Shoved down our throats? Remind me… has there ever been a sport more relentlessly marketed, broadcast and worshipped than men's football? We've had 24/7 coverage for decades, wall-to-wall analysis of Premier League games, live transfer updates (snore) that border on obsession. Somehow, that's just normal. But when the BBC dares to air a Lionesses match? Now it's an outrage. Another gem came from a man I came across on a well-known sports account on Instagram who insisted women's football 'isn't the same sport' as men's. It's not as fast, not as powerful. Therefore, in his eyes, it's a different game entirely. Let's unpack that for a second. Two teams. Eleven players per side. A ball. A pitch. A goal at each end. A ref. Sounds like football to me. The only real difference? Some of the players have penises and some don't. That's not a different sport. That's just biology. By this logic, does he tell his son – who maybe plays under-12s on a soggy Sunday morning – that his football isn't real football because it lacks the speed and precision of the Champions League? Does he pat the kid on the head and say, 'Sorry son, it's just not the same sport'? Unlikely. The moment you challenge these men, even gently, the reaction is instant and vicious. I dared to comment on one of these videos, pointing out the obvious: it is the same sport. Cue the backlash. Within seconds, I saw replies accusing me of 'rage bait', clown emojis and insults I won't repeat here. The vitriol is astonishing – and sadly familiar, if you've ever spoken up for women's sport. But it begs the question: why does women's football cause such a meltdown in some men? Why this sport in particular? Why not women's tennis, where the stars earn millions and fill arenas? Why not rugby or cricket? Why this obsessive need to gatekeep football? The answer is as uncomfortable as it is obvious: misogyny. It's pure, deep-seated and often subconscious. Men's football is one of the last cultural arenas where some men feel untouchable. It's 'theirs'. The pub, the banter, the tribalism. And it seems when women enter that space (and excel in it), it rattles them to their core. Here's the real kicker: the England Lionesses aren't just playing football. They're winning. They're one of the most successful England teams this country has ever produced. While the men's team continues to serve us heartbreak, hype and penalty shootout trauma, the Lionesses deliver us trophies and finals and pride. At last! And it's not just what happens on the pitch. Off the field, the women are widely seen as more approachable, less egotistical and, frankly, better role models. They play as a team. They show humility. They connect with fans in a way that's rare in the era of £100k-a-week Instagram stars. That success – both in results and in values – should be a source of national pride. But instead, a portion of the male population would rather die on the hill of 'it's just not the same' than cheer on the best England football team we've got. Before I get accused of having no facts to back up my point – let's talk numbers for a minute. The Lionesses won the 2022 European Championship, something the men haven't done. They've reached the World Cup finals. Their matches have sold out stadiums. They've inspired millions of young girls – and plenty of boys – to take up the sport. If you're still arguing they don't deserve the spotlight, then sorry, but you've left logic behind. It's a sad day when a country finally gets to be world-class at something… and a significant chunk of its population responds by crossing its arms and pouting. Here's the truth: no one's asking you to like every pass or admire every tackle. But if you hate it – if it genuinely makes you angry to see women succeeding in sport – then maybe the problem isn't the football. Maybe the problem is you.


The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ella Toone and Beth Mead share moving tributes after Euro 2025 win
Ella Toone dedicated England 's Euro 2025 victory to her late father, Nick, marking her first trophy since his passing last September. Following England's shootout win against Spain, an emotional Toone looked skyward and was comforted by teammates. She later shared on Instagram that a spare seat next to her mother at the final felt like a sign her father was watching. Toone also shared a poignant moment with Beth Mead, who lost her mother 18 months ago, dedicating their win to 'our angels in the sky'. Toone and Mead have shared a special bond during the tournament by supporting each other through grief and posed with their Euro 2025 medals.