Wednesday 19 October 2022
It is in your own interests, my man
Three examples of a sharp social division as illustrated in a Victor Whitechurch detective novel written almost a century ago. The division here is between Mr Proctor of the professional classes and Jim Webb, an ordinary working man. The person addressing them both is a senior police officer.
“Well,” he said, as he went up to him, “you gave your evidence well today, my man. We like a witness who speaks out plainly, and you did it.”
“You may be able to help us. Now then, Webb,” and he took out his notebook.
“Yes, sir.”
“Where’s your home?”
“All right, so long as you keep in touch with us. That’s all for the present. Thank you very much, Mr Proctor. You can go, Webb.” Mr Proctor rose from his chair, crossed the room and showed Webb out of the door.
Victor Whitechurch - The Templeton Case (1924)
Common enough in novels of the period, although better writers were less likely to emphasise social distinctions in this way. Unless servants were being addressed of course. It was a different world and in certain respects, perhaps less familiar to us than we may imagine.
In other respects, it is entirely familiar. We are not surprised if a confirmed social climber talks down to those lower down the social hierarchy. Neither are we surprised to find that politics and government attract professional social climbers. Do they look down on us? Of course they do, but now they disguise it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
That's one of the reasons why Jacob Rees-Mogg seems a bit more trustworthy. He's definitely not engaging in social climbing. Somehow the social climbing seems worse than a naked sociopathic desire for power. At least the power-freaks want to accomplish something, whereas most politicians seem content to just let things drift or latch on to the latest silly fad.
I believe that around 70 years is enough to make the past 'distant'. Not because that is also my age(ish) but because it allows roughly 3 generations each to shape their own world, differ from their parents, and learn nothing from their grandparents.
So 70 years ago men wore hats in the street, newspapers and the single television channel were in black and white (as were many films), some foods were still being rationed in the UK, and the NHS was born. The family was still the default arrangement. The middle classes looked up to the upper classes and down on the working classes.
I don't think there is as much social concern for the 'class war' today. In the USA there was a less clear cut distinction anyway - but there does appear to be a distillation into three layers, the Elite, the Dependables, and the Deploreables. I see the UK going that way too. But take heart, some social historians see us in the chaotic gap between the old Elite and the new Elite.
Fascinating. Have just written something (0830) which is about talking down. Says more about that person than the one spoken down to.
Sam - I agree, Jacob Rees-Mogg does seem a bit more trustworthy. As if we need politicians with nothing to prove socially, in other words people who have at least achieved something already.
DJ - in recent decades, social class seems to have become both less important, more diffuse and more disguised in that there is less outward show. Not easy to see where it is going as power becomes more global and more complex. I see UK stratification trending towards three main layers too, but also layers within layers.
James - I've seen it and yes it does says more about that person than the one spoken down to.
Post a Comment