OK, you're an inverted snob because you dismiss the motivation of those who are studying music academically because you say you can't see the point and you'll brave it out by asserting you're better off without it. In this respect you are being as narrow-minded as the 'good-enough-for-f*lk' brigade. Such an attitude doesn't actually bring you working-class cred (except possibly among Sun readers) and you recognise surely what little worth that is.

As for George's assertion that the discussion about money 'distracts and detracts', it doesn't. To counter it is to challenge the materialistic attitude of those who value art only for what it costs. Exponents of our traditional arts are precious beyond price and may well find some reward in what they do, especially (ha!) is their audiences value and appreciate what they do. But they also need paying. Starving in garrets isn't a premise of Brown's Britain. Is it?