Is Class Snobbery Alive and Well in Britain?

Hove, Photo Copyright Gareth Cameron

People are weird.

I began to realise this when I decided to move away from Hove three years ago. Not because it wasn't good enough, it was just too expensive for me to find adequate accommodation spacious enough for all my books and files.

I'm in West Sussex now, but for a while I considered towns nearer to Hove, in East Sussex.

I suppose some people might find what happened to me offensive.  I didn't.  I couldn't let myself care that much, but here it is:

It appears there are "people" who are really beneath one, and with whom one has nothing in common. Some of these people live in areas a little outside Brighton & Hove.

An invisible line

Apparently there is a line, where B & H and its more salubrious suburbs, like Rottingdean, end, and then one might venture, at one's peril, into areas where one just wouldn't choose to live.  At this point, the people change from being educated, with "nice" manners, into those who need to be avoided at all costs. The word generally used is "common." (shudder...)

All this because I was thinking of moving to Peacehaven, conveniently situated halfway between Brighton and Eastbourne.

But it's all right, they said. I would be okay so long as I moved to Shoreham instead.  (Personally, I've always found upmarket Shoreham a wee bit unfriendly and Peacehaven more than agreeable. But there you are. I guess, maybe, I'm a bumpkin too and those lower-class Peacehaven people recognise me as one of their own!)

There was one positive aspect to all this. I was made to understand that, because I managed, at least, to get myself educated, I am not entirely lost as a human being in spite of my "Sarf London" accent.

Oh, give me a break! I thought. Are you implying  I will be the only "educated" person in Peacehaven?  Goodness Gracious!

Not a Wetherspoons - here - please!

Not that class distinctions are absent where I live now. One person mentioned in the presence of another delightful (and unsnobbish couple) that saunas were a great leveller and only when people got dressed could we recognise their "class."  I was swift to point out that these days it wasn't okay to judge people that way, but to discern their human qualities of kindness and acceptance.

But there is nothing much one can do. There is a certain chain of easy going, admittedly slightly shabby pubs, that serve consistently excellent food with plenty of vegetarian options for very little money. The pubs employ friendly respectful staff and have a most comfortable ambience.  

You should have heard the uproar when it was thought we might get a branch of the chain when the old Co-op was closed down in the village. The local forums were positively bristling.

"Not a Wetherspoons in Rustington. We really don't want that."

I am so glad I live inside my own head. How much rich, human experience must be lost to people with snobbish mindsets?

Tesco says "The Fun Starts with your Vouchers" - Not!!!

Going shopping?  You don't need vouchers! Photo: Janet Cameron

I hate vouchers.

These are the things I really hate about vouchers:

• They're fiddly and time-consuming but you feel guilty if you waste them.
• They're complicated. Some are for money off once, some are for money off on two separate occasions, some are for points, some can be doubled up if you go to Reception or something.
• You need to know when you're going shopping. I never do. I just think, Oh, I'll think I'll just pop into Tesco's. And, of course, when I do that, I don't have my vouchers.
• You need to keep an eye on the dates. You might think of buying something that you would normally consider a bit expensive, but a pound off makes all the difference. Then you get to the till and find your voucher expired yesterday.
• They're long-winded at the till.  You have wait, clicking your heels, while the person in front of you expresses alternately happiness or dismay, as to whether their vouchers are the right date or not, and the correct product, or not. It's easy to make a mistake unless you have all day twiddling your thumbs. Then the person behind you waits groaning and tapping their foot while you have your turn. It's worse than waiting for people to buy their lottery tickets in the Co-op.
• Some are "two for one." Or "Buy One Get One Free."   I hate "two for one." I'm single, I don't want the same thing every day just to use something up. And I don't to waste stuff. I'd rather just have one at a fair price. Besides, the word "Free" should not be conditional on you buying something.
• And lastly, you get so fed up with carrying the wretched things around, you might even be tempted to buy something you don't need. Which is exactly what the supermarket wants you to do!

Of course the straight £2 or £3 off your shopping bill voucher is fine. It's all the rest. Sometimes I just throw them away then I feel guilty when I shop, thinking how much money I'm wasting. Or I go to Iceland where you don't need money off cos it's all so cheap.  So why don't I go to Iceland all the time?  Well, in spite of all the above, Tesco's is, somehow, more inviting.

So from time to time, out of frustration, I give Morrisons, or Asda or Lidl a try. I quite like Morrisons except I've had about three bunches of flowers that haven't managed to open. (Never a problem with Tesco, who must have a superior supplier.)

So, a supermarket that's cheap, with no vouchers, beautiful flowers that do what it says on the tin, and friendly staff.  Doesn't seem a lot to ask.

What I Love and Hate About Poets

Bing Images

I like:

Poets who invent new, exciting words, just so long as I have some idea of what is meant through the context in which they are used.

I dislike:

Pernickety people who say, "There's no such word!"

I like:

People who admit they don't know much about poetry, but they have an open mind, and are willing to see if they can get something from it.

I dislike:

People who just declare they don't like poetry, even though they've never bothered to try it.

I can live with:

People who are indifferent but who don't make judgments are okay. That's their choice and they have every right to make that choice. It's just the noisy detractors I cannot stand.

I like:

People who are open to trying different forms, and don't make certain kinds of poetry "wrong". 

I dislike:

People who insist they hate rhyming poetry or contemporary blank verse, or prose poetry, or humorous verse. There's room for everything, and one kind of voice doesn't prevail over all others.

I like:

Poets who are original and who write from their own experience.

I dislike:

Pretend-poets who steal other people's ideas, change a few words around, (just enough to avoid a charge of plagiarism) and present it as their own. 

I especially dislike:

Two poets who have played that trick on me!

It's Not All About Wolfe and Greene!

A cry from the heart when I was doing my MA:

CONFUSED

When

fragmentary

and highly original

Stream-of-Consciousness writings

from Wolfe and Greene

get praised

incessantly,

it hurts

when my

fragmentary

and highly original 

Stream-of-Consciousness essays

don't get

their

Just Desserts

Truth is Variable - Cultural Relativism Part 2

Going the way that suits our circumstance. Copyright Janet Cameron

Cultural relativism is just a small step away from cultural ethics. (To see the Intro to this article, pleae go to Why Can't We Agree:  Cultural Relativism Part 1

The cultural relativists believe that truth is variable and cannot be absolute. This belief discredits ethical issues of right or wrong. Everything is - quite simply - as it is! Cultural norms are a matter of opinion, and one culture cannot be less worthy than another - not even if that culture practises human or animal sacrifice.

"Cultural Relativism" in All About Philosophy mentions an event in January 2002. President Bush described terrorist nations, collectively, as "an axis of evil." This incensed the cultural relativists. The West, they felt, had no right to cast a judgement on Islam. Even suicide bombings could not be described as evil. They were, simply, a result of a human culture.

Steven Pinker, in "Culture Vultures" in The Blank Slate, says that sometimes we view the development of culture in the wrong way. "The best explanation today... depends on seeing a culture as a product of human desires rather than as a shaper of them."

There is a good reason for this.

The geography of the land can influence culture, as people seek what is most useful to them. 

Maps have to Simplify - and All Maps Distort

It may be useful to look at our Model as a sort of map. The main point is that the model that we choose to live our lives by, should be the one that is most useful to us. On the other hand, we must accept that sometimes things don't work out as we have planned.

As Howard Damrstadter points out, "People in different situations with different needs may opt for different, and conflicting, models. We must each settle for those simplifications that suit our particular circumstances, accepting that occasionally the roast will burn, the investment sour, the article be rejected... No one map or model can get it all right."

We must be aware that, apart from differences in perception, we also have psychological limits in the way our personal models operate. From time to time, our own models will prove defective. Although these models may prove effective for us in most situation, occasional defective experiences do not affect our overall perspective. But, imagine how much more defective our models might be for a different person in a different situation operating under a different model.

In a small group or tribe, slight differences may not cause major problems. The disagreement is exacerbated when dealing with models in a global society where others needs conflict strongly with our own.

An Analysis of Cultural Differences

It might be helpful to remind ourselves of the background against which philosophy measures the challenging implications of cultural relativism.

In "Culture Vultures" Pinker includes a quotation from the economist, Thomas Sowell, that informed Sowell's trilogy of works, Race and Culture, Migrations and Cultures and Conquests and Cultures.

"A culture is not a symbolic pattern, preserved like a butterfly in amber. Its place is not in a museum but in the practical activities of daily life, where it evolves under the stress of competing goals and other competing cultures. Cultures do not exist as simply static 'differences' to be celebrated but compete with one another as better and worse ways of getting things done - better and worse, not from the standpoint of some observer, but from the standpoint of the people themselves, as they cope and aspire amid the gritty realities of life."

It is easy to see where difficulties arise, as cultures compete among themselves. Some may do better than others. We may applaud diversity but at the same time, we must acknowledge our discontent if another culture works better than ours by achieving more material success.

No Llamas or Alpacas in Mexico!

Sometimes, success is partly due to excellence in science, art or technology, but it can also be assisted by geographical elements. An example cited by Pinker is the huge landmass of Eurasia which stretches in an east-west direction, making it much easier for crops and animals to survive and for trade to prosper because it enjoys a steadier climate along a similar line of latitude.

Landmasses such as Africa and the Americas, however, run north to south. is the huge landmass of Eurasia which stretches in an east-west direction making it much easier for crops and animals to survive and for trade to prosper because it enjoys a steadier Landmasses such as Africa and the Americas, however, run north to south.

Pinker says, "...llamas and alpacas domesticated in the Andes never made it northward to Mexico, so the Mayan and Aztec civilizations were left without pack animals."

This is why Eurasian countries invaded and conquered so much of the world, not because Eurasians are cleverer or cannier, "but because they could best take advantage of the principle that many heads are better than one," says Pinker.

The Big Problem for Philosophy

The big problem is that we cannot always convert other people to our own way of thinking. We cannot persuade them to adopt our model when their wants and needs are so different from our own. "A multi-model understanding tells us that such differences may make conversion unlikely."

Howard Darmstadter concludes his article "Why We Can't Agree" on a note of hope. He claims that we must not give up on conversation, that we must keep on trying.

We can still look for "...mutally beneficial accommodations that are possible even when models differ." Steven Pinker says - almost - the same thing from his own viewpoint, or "model."

"...our understanding of ourselves and our cultures can only be enriched by the discovery that our minds are composed of intricate neural circuits for thinking, feeling, and learning rather than blank slates, amorphous blobs, or inscrutable ghosts."

Why Can't We Agree? - Cultural Relativism Part 1

Copyright Janet Cameron

People have long considered how different patterns of behaviour and use of language in human beings suggest that they perceive the world different ways.

In "Perceptions, Cultural Differences," in The Mind, the author (unnamed) explains a peculiar phenomenon, the theory that awkward translations prove that the Greeks saw colours differently from the way we see colours today, and that there might be differences in perception between those who live in the West, from people who live in the East.

The theory is not just about visual perceptions. It also encompasses the most fundamental issues about how we perceive and understand what goes on around us.

We See Our World Through Different Models

In his article, "Why We Can't Agree" in Philosophy Now, Howard Darmstadter uses extreme examples from the animal kingdom to demonstrate how living things use models to deal with their immediate environment and survival.

"A wildebeest on the African plain - aware of much in its environment, unaware of much else. The presence of suitable grasses, the whereabouts of predators, and the actions of other wildebeest, get its attention, but wind currents, the flights of birds, and the doings of small mammals are of no concern."

The eagle, soaring way above the fleeing wildebeest, will, clearly, have a vastly different model in order to deal with her own survival. Again, the human hunters on the ground will be looking for signs indicating edible plants or game, while a geologist's model will focus on rock formations, overlooking signs of animal prey.

What is Cultural Relativism?

So, how can we know whether we are right or wrong? Should historical figures be judged within the context of their culture at that time? In other words, should we refuse to make allowances for actions that we would find morally reprehensible today? Should we disparage other cultures whose rituals and practices repulse us in present times?

The cultural relativists would say "No, no, no! Definitely not."

The website "All About Philosophy" displays an article "Cultural Relativism" which defines the term as follows:

"Cultural relativism is the view that all beliefs, customs, and ethics are relative to the individual within his own social context. In other words, “right” and “wrong” are culture-specific; what is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in another, and, since no universal standard of morality exists, no one has the right to judge another society’s customs."

The cultural relativists certainly do believe this, and where our senses of justice and empathy are not challenged, we, too, might think this is perfectly acceptable. However, it might take an exceptional ability to look at the bigger picture without being disturbed by the underlying detail.

Can we take this theory on board without a qualm of conscience?

Continued: Truth is Variable, Cultural Relativism Part 2

Othello's Soliloquy is as Real Today - Tortured Thoughts Seek a Scapegoat

Othello, Wikimedia Commons

One of the most graphic expositions of jealousy flowed from Shakeaspeare's pen when he wrote "Othello."

Othello's struggles for an explanation for the red mist of jealousy that consumes him leads through confusion, despair and madness to the need for someone or something to blame. It was written hundreds of years ago, yet is a lesson in modern-day psychology.

Othello's soliloquy betrays his extreme confusion, so that the reader/audience may anticipate the conflict to come. We know all too well that such extremes of passion are explosive and bound to erupt into physical violence. Othello's plight seems to be primarily one of confusion, indicated by his conception of Desdemona as the wonderful lady he married, who, in his eyes, turned into a deceitful wanton. His frustration drives him mad. 

It is clear from the start to the reader that jealousy is part of that confusion. 

"I had rather be a toad / And live upon the vapour of a dungeon / Than keep a corner in the thing I love / For others' uses."

The speed with which Othello's thoughts flit from one image to another intensifies the sense of insanity. These shifts in viewpoint, the changing rhythms of speech that inform those shifts, the alterations in pace and the use of run-on lines, all contribute to his loss of direction. 

There is the change from reflection "Haply for I am black..." to abruptness, "She's gone..."  Then he continues, "I am abus'd; and my relief / Must be to loathe her. O curse of marriage."

Foreshadowing

The soliloquy foreshadows the future action in other specific ways. Of Iago, Othello says: 

"This fellow's of exeeding honesty." The phrase has already been used: "Whip me such honest knaves." The reader is primed to question the value of this word when expressed by Othello in the first line of the soliloquy. By convention, a soliloquy reveals the character's true feelings. We know from Othello's nobility that his belief in Iago is sincere and that Iago's mischief will wreak havoc upon Othello's state of mind and, therefore, his actions. Iago knows exactly how to manipulate Othello, but his view of woman's nature is very limited.

The soliloquy also expresses Othello's insecurity, which feeds his confusion and jealousy as he begins to search for explanations: 

"Haply, for I am black / And have not those soft parts of conversation / That chamberers have."  

Othello is only too aware that his life as a soldier has not prepared him for courting a high-born and beautiful woman. He laments, also, his loss of youth, "...for I am declined / Into the vale of years."  

We understand that his nobility and his achievements no longer give him the confidence that he can hold onto the thing that he most loves, and so, he feels hopeless. This hopelessness contributes to his desperate state of mind, fuelling the anger at being, in his own eyes, betrayed.

Tortured Thoughts Seek a Scapegoat

Shakespeare's use of animal similes and metaphors add strength to the language. Desdemona, as Othello's captive hawk, to be released to fend for herself in revenge for his apparent betrayal, is an image which shows how his tortured thoughts are turning upon themselves. We know that he will, in his passion, harm the woman he loves. His conviction that he would "rather be a toad" shows how far he has sunk in his own estimation and how repugnant he finds his condition. The reader knows that Othello is not only insecure, he has also lost his reason, and so insanity must follow.

In the final few lines, he looks for a scapegoat and blames his situation on fate.

"Yes 'tis the plague of great ones; / Prerogatived are they less than the base / 'Tis destiny unshunnable, like death:"  

He has abnegated responsibility for his condition, which is another consequence of losing his reason. The violence of the language, for example, such words as "plague", "base", and "destiny unshunnable" shows the extreme violence of his thoughts. In the next line, the metaphor "forked plague" serves a similar purpose, revealing the force of his emotive language. "Even then this forked plague is fated to us." There may be a biblical allusion here, in the forked tongue of the evil serpent. The image is made all the more shocking by Othello's conviction that such a fate begins at conception, "When we do quicken."

The implication is that he can do nothing about it except tear himself apart, once again, foreshadowing the inevitability of the bloody confrontation to come.

Source:

• Shakespeare, William, Othello, the Moor of Venice, 1603.