Kezia is a disillusioned arts student with bags of talent and a heavy doseof reality.

Her article, below, was first published on the online magazine, hackwriters.com. To visit it click here

Page 1 of 3

We should all know by now that life is what you make it, just go get it.

Even Radiohead have gone all positive, and even Oprah.

The whole planet has cottoned on to the notion that moaning is so 1990s and all this just as, oh dear Lord, just as I have the stupidity to graduate in English Literature and move back home to try and find work.

Shake your head in the time-honoured tradition of all arts students because, surely, you all know what I had been avoiding: life post-graduation is when, (screams of terror) the science and I.T students get their own back.

It was once hurriedly intimated to me by a wild-eyed, ridiculously drunk marketing student, behind a pillar in the back room of an unpopular Manchester pub, that as a non-Arts undergraduate with 10 hours of lectures a week or the something approaching human exploitation levels that they endure, it is a duty to sneer at all Arts students.

With the disgust passed down from their 1980s Yuppie mentors, it is a matter of honour to declare, "History of Art?? What are you going to do with that then?" and wait patiently for the look of awful revelation to pass across the deluded Arts student's face.

The equation seems to run something like: three years of lie-ins and reading books equals a life time of job market misery, whereas three years of 9am lectures and computer projects guarantees £30K graduate employment schemes and smug self-congratulation.

Maybe I exaggerate. Perhaps, even though this perception exists, it does so in the form of a harmless, overblown, stereotype. To class arts subjects as a non-vocational waste of time against more vocationally-orientated subjects is, of course, narrow-minded.

A degree in History of Art is a good idea if your burning ambition is to become an art historian. Even if you just really liked art, had no ambition of becoming an art historian but decided you could put up with studying it for three years, there remains a strong argument for its validity.

Next page...