Week 1: Englishman’s home & loneliness of a long-distance runner
Importance of the link between language and class difference: h and u
Orwell: resolving class struggle via not only economic changes/not only policies, but also prejudices
and identities. Middle class tried to keep up the minute differences separating from the working class
by any and all behavioural differences - they want to feel different. Without prejudice, ‘we have
nothing to lose but our aitches.’ Upper class pronounces H, whereas lower class drops it (reference to
Pygmalion with speech therapy (“My Fair Lady”)).
Alan Ross: linguistic demarcation of the upper class: u or non-u. Early 20 th-century: difference
between classes diminished towards only the speech difference, since other demarcations such as
education, hygiene and money were starting to become irrelevant. By patrolling speech, these
boundaries were reinforced, inhibiting social mobility.
Friend of Evelyn Waugh: Nancy Mitford: wrote about the differences between non-u versions of the
posh ‘u-words’.
“Toiletgate”: A conspiracy theory concerning English royalty: usage of toilet was French, and since
Kate Middleton uses it, it was supposed to have caused their brief break-up (with prince William).
Since loo or lavatory is preferred in aristocrat Britain.
Scientific evidence that certain accents are connected to discrimination. Additional barrier for the
lower classes for social mobility, people in power prefer those who not only look similar, but also
sound similar.
All of these links between class, language and identity combine in Pygmalion.
Difference is only partially income, but largely culturally determined.
These differences were shaped by industrialism, imperialism, the modern economy, etc. ‘Wealth
extraction’ supporting differences. Class hierarchies are supported by other hierarchies.
Class is a relatively new term and has changed quite a bit.
Raymond Williams:
17th century: relation between class and classic/classical. Late 17 th: use of class as a word for a group
or division became more common. Due to its creation (the word), it was only possible to speak of
class in later centuries.
Around 1800: development of the modern sense of class; industrialization. Shift in terms of economic
shift, earlier terms were rank, order, state, degree (medieval times).
Class was no longer something to be born into. Made, rather than inherited. Accelerated by political
events, as well as major economic changes. (older systems could be altered – American revolution
and French revolution). Not God or nature, but rather an oppressive human force created these
systems. Could be overthrown.
Conscious of these differences. Large difference whether it is an identity, something you support
yourself, or something you cannot really do anything about, a fact, a number on a paper.
,Language shapes the way you perceive this, which developed in 19 th century, “the language of class.”
I.e. Marx with the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (1867), John Stuart Mill with the landlord,
capitalists and labourers.
Class in narratives: tropes
Rags to riches, riches to rags (very well-off -> poor), struggling artists, Cinderella, revenge on the rich
(hunger games), moral connected to class/happiness (Shrek being happy)
Politics: Who would profit most of pride within one’s social class? Or, who would have most
detrimental consequences from social mobility/uprising?
Class mobility, unrest under the modern economy: rise higher than class ranks
‘Hard times’ being critical of these rags to riches stories. Fantasies of class mobility due to
industrialization and literacy increase. Critical look: fairy tales, black-face briefly, racism.
Literary revolutions: George Orwell: “working-class writer still writes in a bourgeois manner, in the
middle-class dialect. Using old methods for slightly different purposes.”
Modern period is revolutionary for both politics and art. Possibilities proletarian writing, own
experiences/resistance to the system as is, but they’re always doing it in the oppressing dialect.
(Using old methods for slightly different goals) As long as bourgeoisie is oppressive, literature needs
to be bourgeois. Proletarian literature would be the sign of change. Equilibrium under threat?
Literature needs to be common ground: Virginia Woolf “leaning tower”. Classless society would birth
a new type of literature. Before WWI: people were unaware of their privilege and limited vision, after
WWI: generation was incapable of giving great poems/plays/novels due to “extreme class-
consciousness”
Both writers approach the idea of struggle very differently : in and outlaws by Sillitoe.
Waugh and the threat to aristocracy: mass unemployment of Great depression. Previously
responsible for preservation of art literature, ideas, manners, art, are now busy with work (forced to
work). Economic changes in the 20th century. No free time to create art and literature. Threat to the
existence of literature.
Waugh on Mitford u/non-u: modern dilapidation (decay) of literature: open up to the working class,
primal man and woman of the classless society: new wave of philistinism. Her article is an incitement
to class-war according to him.
Sillitoe and the angry young men: waiting for the class system to change, what comes first: literal or
political change? Uses abrupt, crude speech thought characteristic of working-class experience – only
few members of the group were working-class. Stakes of cultural representation. Limited set of roles
for working-class men: criminals, servants or funny people. They come to see themselves as such,
, behaviour controlled by artistic representations. Lacked dignity in fiction, but he aims to portray them
accurately. Wants to remedy these denial in characters and had special interest in ‘the figure of the
masculine outsider.”
Socioeconomic class is a modern idea, in Britain it is not just income, it is also a matter of identity,
and cannot be changed by policy alone. Modern British literatures future is seen inseparable from the
results of class struggle, but there are conflicting views.
To which class does literature belong and where should it belong?
Tutorial session
Major conflicts in both stories:
- Waugh (Englishman): class conflict, the position of the aristocracy is slipping, imaginative
threat: Metcalfe is new, not used to aristocratic ideas and unwritten rules, so it still is a
businessman at heart (resolving of the conflict). However, he is still richer than Lady Peaberry,
without the status (new money vs. old status) resolved through naming the building (adding
some status). Supported by the scammers needing money, despite being of higher status, in
order to keep their estate
- Sillitoe: the central struggle in the story is the race he has to run. He has the internal conflict
of to conform or to stand out? The conflict is between the runner and the governor. The
runner is in physical constraint (rehome, borstal, army?), and he is trying to find mental
freedom, if physical freedom is not possible due to imprisonment.
Historical context:
Both stories are in the context of the Great Depression following the first world war, with a higher
income and property tax, with some second world war coming up. Waugh shows a ‘war’ over a piece
of land, referencing soldiers (Colonel), the struggle is said to be worse than bombs being dropped on
their heads. Referencing the appeasement policy of Chamberlain against Hitler, Hitler is referenced,
too.
Sillitoe: the first world war was a working class war (upper class drew them in), similar to in Sillitoe’s
story the army directly after the Borstal.
Language & Class struggle:
Slang and first person POV to signify lower class, the turning down the volume on the tv as a sign of
mockery of higher class speech, whereas the slang is not understood by the higher class. Also, the
silence of the politicians to show how they’re lying (keeping them in their place).
Running helps the main character to escape from society and think about politics, become aware of
the class divisions, and in some way, be able to write (room of one’s own?). A hatred to the class
system, ‘the governor would not understand’ although he might have read plenty of books.
Literature: Sillitoe says that the governor wouldn’t understand, higher classes don’t bother to
understand. We are able to read this as he probably was arrested again (ending). Governor does not
understand Orwell’s ‘middle-class dialect,’ and shall not understand his story. Honesty to the
Importance of the link between language and class difference: h and u
Orwell: resolving class struggle via not only economic changes/not only policies, but also prejudices
and identities. Middle class tried to keep up the minute differences separating from the working class
by any and all behavioural differences - they want to feel different. Without prejudice, ‘we have
nothing to lose but our aitches.’ Upper class pronounces H, whereas lower class drops it (reference to
Pygmalion with speech therapy (“My Fair Lady”)).
Alan Ross: linguistic demarcation of the upper class: u or non-u. Early 20 th-century: difference
between classes diminished towards only the speech difference, since other demarcations such as
education, hygiene and money were starting to become irrelevant. By patrolling speech, these
boundaries were reinforced, inhibiting social mobility.
Friend of Evelyn Waugh: Nancy Mitford: wrote about the differences between non-u versions of the
posh ‘u-words’.
“Toiletgate”: A conspiracy theory concerning English royalty: usage of toilet was French, and since
Kate Middleton uses it, it was supposed to have caused their brief break-up (with prince William).
Since loo or lavatory is preferred in aristocrat Britain.
Scientific evidence that certain accents are connected to discrimination. Additional barrier for the
lower classes for social mobility, people in power prefer those who not only look similar, but also
sound similar.
All of these links between class, language and identity combine in Pygmalion.
Difference is only partially income, but largely culturally determined.
These differences were shaped by industrialism, imperialism, the modern economy, etc. ‘Wealth
extraction’ supporting differences. Class hierarchies are supported by other hierarchies.
Class is a relatively new term and has changed quite a bit.
Raymond Williams:
17th century: relation between class and classic/classical. Late 17 th: use of class as a word for a group
or division became more common. Due to its creation (the word), it was only possible to speak of
class in later centuries.
Around 1800: development of the modern sense of class; industrialization. Shift in terms of economic
shift, earlier terms were rank, order, state, degree (medieval times).
Class was no longer something to be born into. Made, rather than inherited. Accelerated by political
events, as well as major economic changes. (older systems could be altered – American revolution
and French revolution). Not God or nature, but rather an oppressive human force created these
systems. Could be overthrown.
Conscious of these differences. Large difference whether it is an identity, something you support
yourself, or something you cannot really do anything about, a fact, a number on a paper.
,Language shapes the way you perceive this, which developed in 19 th century, “the language of class.”
I.e. Marx with the bourgeoisie and the proletariat (1867), John Stuart Mill with the landlord,
capitalists and labourers.
Class in narratives: tropes
Rags to riches, riches to rags (very well-off -> poor), struggling artists, Cinderella, revenge on the rich
(hunger games), moral connected to class/happiness (Shrek being happy)
Politics: Who would profit most of pride within one’s social class? Or, who would have most
detrimental consequences from social mobility/uprising?
Class mobility, unrest under the modern economy: rise higher than class ranks
‘Hard times’ being critical of these rags to riches stories. Fantasies of class mobility due to
industrialization and literacy increase. Critical look: fairy tales, black-face briefly, racism.
Literary revolutions: George Orwell: “working-class writer still writes in a bourgeois manner, in the
middle-class dialect. Using old methods for slightly different purposes.”
Modern period is revolutionary for both politics and art. Possibilities proletarian writing, own
experiences/resistance to the system as is, but they’re always doing it in the oppressing dialect.
(Using old methods for slightly different goals) As long as bourgeoisie is oppressive, literature needs
to be bourgeois. Proletarian literature would be the sign of change. Equilibrium under threat?
Literature needs to be common ground: Virginia Woolf “leaning tower”. Classless society would birth
a new type of literature. Before WWI: people were unaware of their privilege and limited vision, after
WWI: generation was incapable of giving great poems/plays/novels due to “extreme class-
consciousness”
Both writers approach the idea of struggle very differently : in and outlaws by Sillitoe.
Waugh and the threat to aristocracy: mass unemployment of Great depression. Previously
responsible for preservation of art literature, ideas, manners, art, are now busy with work (forced to
work). Economic changes in the 20th century. No free time to create art and literature. Threat to the
existence of literature.
Waugh on Mitford u/non-u: modern dilapidation (decay) of literature: open up to the working class,
primal man and woman of the classless society: new wave of philistinism. Her article is an incitement
to class-war according to him.
Sillitoe and the angry young men: waiting for the class system to change, what comes first: literal or
political change? Uses abrupt, crude speech thought characteristic of working-class experience – only
few members of the group were working-class. Stakes of cultural representation. Limited set of roles
for working-class men: criminals, servants or funny people. They come to see themselves as such,
, behaviour controlled by artistic representations. Lacked dignity in fiction, but he aims to portray them
accurately. Wants to remedy these denial in characters and had special interest in ‘the figure of the
masculine outsider.”
Socioeconomic class is a modern idea, in Britain it is not just income, it is also a matter of identity,
and cannot be changed by policy alone. Modern British literatures future is seen inseparable from the
results of class struggle, but there are conflicting views.
To which class does literature belong and where should it belong?
Tutorial session
Major conflicts in both stories:
- Waugh (Englishman): class conflict, the position of the aristocracy is slipping, imaginative
threat: Metcalfe is new, not used to aristocratic ideas and unwritten rules, so it still is a
businessman at heart (resolving of the conflict). However, he is still richer than Lady Peaberry,
without the status (new money vs. old status) resolved through naming the building (adding
some status). Supported by the scammers needing money, despite being of higher status, in
order to keep their estate
- Sillitoe: the central struggle in the story is the race he has to run. He has the internal conflict
of to conform or to stand out? The conflict is between the runner and the governor. The
runner is in physical constraint (rehome, borstal, army?), and he is trying to find mental
freedom, if physical freedom is not possible due to imprisonment.
Historical context:
Both stories are in the context of the Great Depression following the first world war, with a higher
income and property tax, with some second world war coming up. Waugh shows a ‘war’ over a piece
of land, referencing soldiers (Colonel), the struggle is said to be worse than bombs being dropped on
their heads. Referencing the appeasement policy of Chamberlain against Hitler, Hitler is referenced,
too.
Sillitoe: the first world war was a working class war (upper class drew them in), similar to in Sillitoe’s
story the army directly after the Borstal.
Language & Class struggle:
Slang and first person POV to signify lower class, the turning down the volume on the tv as a sign of
mockery of higher class speech, whereas the slang is not understood by the higher class. Also, the
silence of the politicians to show how they’re lying (keeping them in their place).
Running helps the main character to escape from society and think about politics, become aware of
the class divisions, and in some way, be able to write (room of one’s own?). A hatred to the class
system, ‘the governor would not understand’ although he might have read plenty of books.
Literature: Sillitoe says that the governor wouldn’t understand, higher classes don’t bother to
understand. We are able to read this as he probably was arrested again (ending). Governor does not
understand Orwell’s ‘middle-class dialect,’ and shall not understand his story. Honesty to the
