One of my casual interests is crime novels of the 1920s and 1930s. They were of course written by people who lived through the Great War, often by people who had seen active service or had been engaged in war work of one form or another.
Writers of this era knew the world where my parents, aunts, uncles and many school teachers grew up and in numerous ways their lives were not like ours. For this reader, that is where the main fascination lies, a fascination which is even to be found in cheap second-rate novels sold in railway station bookstalls to alleviate the tedium of long train journeys.
For example, many crime novels of the interwar years relied heavily on stereotypes. There wasn’t much exploration of the nuances of more complex characters, but the stereotypes are still interesting because they had to be recognisable in their era and are still recognisable today.
In novels of the 20s and 30s, middle class characters might refer to certain people as ‘types’, rather than stereotypes. Examples are numerous, such as the well-dressed chancer, the bumbling official, the sturdy down to earth tradesman, the showgirl with a kind heart, the maternal wife, the waspish academic, the bluestocking, the ineffectual vicar, the local drunk and so on.
There are dozens of them and many are still used today. My father once described one of my uncles as 'a local government type’ and I knew just what he meant, why he’d said it and why it was a mild criticism.
The striking aspect of stereotypes both past and present is how they are used to make sense of society. They reinforce social boundaries and thereby knit together an entire culture. Yet at some point, the use of old social stereotypes came under sustained attack by media outfits such as the BBC. Many socially cohesive stereotypes were reclassified as bigotry and those who still used them became stereotypes themselves.
The result has been a gradual shift towards more divisive, politically approved stereotypes as opposed to socially cohesive ones which were largely beyond the reach of government and politics. When this began is impossible to define, but maybe 1960 is a useful marker.
A measure of how far things have deteriorated is that stereotypes now have to be used with care and some can become a matter for the police.
Writers of this era knew the world where my parents, aunts, uncles and many school teachers grew up and in numerous ways their lives were not like ours. For this reader, that is where the main fascination lies, a fascination which is even to be found in cheap second-rate novels sold in railway station bookstalls to alleviate the tedium of long train journeys.
For example, many crime novels of the interwar years relied heavily on stereotypes. There wasn’t much exploration of the nuances of more complex characters, but the stereotypes are still interesting because they had to be recognisable in their era and are still recognisable today.
In novels of the 20s and 30s, middle class characters might refer to certain people as ‘types’, rather than stereotypes. Examples are numerous, such as the well-dressed chancer, the bumbling official, the sturdy down to earth tradesman, the showgirl with a kind heart, the maternal wife, the waspish academic, the bluestocking, the ineffectual vicar, the local drunk and so on.
There are dozens of them and many are still used today. My father once described one of my uncles as 'a local government type’ and I knew just what he meant, why he’d said it and why it was a mild criticism.
The striking aspect of stereotypes both past and present is how they are used to make sense of society. They reinforce social boundaries and thereby knit together an entire culture. Yet at some point, the use of old social stereotypes came under sustained attack by media outfits such as the BBC. Many socially cohesive stereotypes were reclassified as bigotry and those who still used them became stereotypes themselves.
The result has been a gradual shift towards more divisive, politically approved stereotypes as opposed to socially cohesive ones which were largely beyond the reach of government and politics. When this began is impossible to define, but maybe 1960 is a useful marker.
A measure of how far things have deteriorated is that stereotypes now have to be used with care and some can become a matter for the police.
9 comments:
I find it a paradox that as the Progressives seek to undo the power of stereotypes they consequentially increase the atomisation of populations into 'only' individuals.
There is an argument that this is a deliberate tactic so that a glorious future may arise from the ashes. But ordinary people want to reduce the certainty in their lives so that they may plan for their future, and that of their families.
I wonder if the people planning for the glorious future, arising from the ashes, have realised that their own place in Utopia is not guaranteed? I rather expect they intend to (still) be the bosses.
"The well-dressed chancer, the bumbling official, the sturdy down to earth tradesman, the showgirl with a kind heart, the maternal wife, the waspish academic, the bluestocking, the ineffectual vicar, the local drunk ... "
The last one on the rolling English road of course.
Has "local government type" been replaced with "lanyard wearer"?
Penseivat
DJ - that's an interesting point, I'm sure they are comfortable with increasing the atomisation of populations and it could be at least partly deliberate because it is probably a feature of the globalist viewpoint.
James - and surprisingly common to meet one in these novels, rolling home from the pub.
Penseivat - it probably has, but what comes after lanyards? A chip embedded in the forehead perhaps.
Well I've noticed over the years, that left wing progressives are quick both to condemn 'stereotyping', whilst unconsciously stereotyping in their turn - capitalist business men, dirty old men, torries, the privileged, the list goes on and on.
My mother enjoyed both highbrow literature and whodunnits. She particularly enjoyed Ngaio Marsh so when we lived in NZ we visited Ms Marsh's house, nicely preserved by a trust. It was really a homage to Mum, being rather fun to think how she might have enjoyed such a visit.
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g255118-d7753260-Reviews-Ngaio_Marsh_House-Christchurch_Canterbury_Region_South_Island.html
Sticking with the topic of old books, when I was a lad I used to love reading the Hardy Boys. This was in the early 80's, so I was reading the paperbacks that had been re-written for a later English market, but the book series began in 1927.
As an adult who often still lives in the past, I took to collecting the early editions, and I've nearly got them all now. The first 38 books were actually re-written starting in 1959, still for the American market, but to remove outdated language and stereotypes.
The originals contained many racial, personal and situation stereotypes, including most of what you quoted, but even though these were written out in the later editions, they still contained many new stereotypes that would be considered outdated in modern times.
I suppose if they felt the need to re-write them again now, they would still come under the critical eye in fifty more years time
I know they are still printing new books to this day, but the format changed from good to garbage after the 80's
Tammly - yes left wing progressives are very keen on their own stereotypes, they would be lost without them. As you say, 'capitalist' is a favourite but the list is a long one. 'Progressive' is an interesting one because they frequently use it about themselves but don't really analyse what it means and implies.
dearieme - my mother enjoyed Ngaio Marsh and I think I read one or two of her library books years ago but I can't remember which ones. Not that it was ever possible, but Mum would have enjoyed visiting the museum.
Bucko - I remember the Hardy Boys although I can't remember which ones I read, it would depend on what Derby library had and don't think it had many.
I'd like to collect early editions of 20th century books and I have a few, but the choice is huge and bookshelves would soon fill up. Your 38 books must look good on the shelves though, older books do look good when displayed, a bit of nostalgia ready to browse.
I'm sure you are right about rewriting old books, they will have to do it again in fifty years. Maybe they will just go back to the originals.
Post a Comment