Are we living in a classless society? Does class still matter?

[DanSumption]

Originally posted by wayne72

How society has as many different classes now as it always as, if not more.

Exactly! "Class" will always be with us in some form, but it will also be different from one era to the next - I've just been watching the Ronnie Barker tribute with the "I look down on him because I am upper class" sketch from the Frost Report - there are still many traces of the upper/middle/working class system with us, but I think that other factors are more important nowadays, and other types of classification have more bearing upon most peoples' lives.

[Hels]

Hmmm this reminds me of something that happened at work a few years ago.

 

I used to go into the works 'bar' on Thursdays for the regular quiz night. Often there would be one of the Directors and sometimes a member of the 'Board'. I knew them both to look at - often sat opposite them in the bar, but had never had a conversation with them, they'd never glanced in our direction - we, after all, were just 'workers'.

 

Then one Thursday hubby came to join us. He was dressed in his usual work clothes - smart suit, tie, tie-pin, cuff-links and looks imaculate.

 

He's sat with us about 10 mins when the 'Board' member strikes up conversation with him I was gobsmacked - but quickly realised it was because of the way hubby looked - he did not dress as 'one of the workers' and looked every inch a 'senior person' the Board member saw this, identified with him and felt comfortable talking to him.

 

I guess the 'Board' member and the Director saw hubby as 'one of them' and to me, that's pretty much what class is all about - are you one of 'us' or one of 'them'?? It happens at all levels, and I guess that sometimes youngsters may see teachers as being in a different 'class' so don't relate to them in the way they might to someone who they see as belonging to their own 'class'.

 

Hope this makes sense!

[timo]

Some, like the late French sociologist/philosopher, Pierre Bourdieu, argue that the old systems of stratification and socio-economic classes are out of date. Bourdieu argued that 'class' has been replaced by 'cultural capital'. This equates to the values and norms of the dominant social class. In other words, in order to 'succeed' in life, one must possess 'cultural capital' in the form of middle class speech patterns, deportment, knowledge of the 'high arts' etc. Bourdieu makes the point that working class children are at a great disadvantage in school because they are effectively placed within an alien culture in which their own culture [values and norms etc] is devalued by predominantly middle class teachers.

 

Bourdieu realises that not all middle class people possess huge amounts of 'cultural capital' in some cases, and identifies 'the philistine middle classes' too. This group are socio-economically 'middle class' by job definition, but they have more in common with the working classes in their scant knowledge of the canon of Western arts, humanities and sciences.

 

Of course, it is possible to run the proverbial 'horse and carriages' through Bourdieu's theories. There is no 'neatness of fit' here. However, in social science and political science circles, his theory of 'cultural capital' [the extent to which one has absorbed the values and norms of the dominant social class in any society] is a popular one.

[DanSumption]

Originally posted by timo

Some, like the late French sociologist/philosopher, Pierre Bourdieu, argue that the old systems of stratification and socio-economic classes are out of date. Bourdieu argued that 'class' has been replaced by 'cultural capital'. This equates to the values and norms of the dominant social class. In other words, in order to 'succeed' in life, one must possess 'cultural capital' in the form of middle class speech patterns, deportment, knowledge of the 'high arts' etc. Bourdieu makes the point that working class children are at a great disadvantage in school because they are effectively placed within an alien culture in which their own culture [values and norms etc] is devalued by predominantly middle class teachers.

Exactly so, in fact there was an article in the papers this weekend about how the "old school tie" is in decline (although it still has footholds in a few places) but has been replaced by other forms of "it's not what you know it's who you know". There's also a book by Jeremy Paxman, called "Friends in High Places: Who Runs Britain?" - it was written over 10 years ago, and charted much of the shift in the "ruling classes" particularly over the Thatcher years, but even more has changed since the book was published.

 

Also, there's another thread on the go at the moment about childrens' names which mentions the fact that teachers tend to be automatically wary of your Dwaynes, Shanes, Kylies and Latetias.

[timo]

Dan,

You make a good point re names. They are most certainly coded, and act as indicators of socio-economic status. The worst cases are when parents give their offspring 'exotic'-sounding names which the child will grow up to loathe. I heard of a little girl named 'Kiora', the other week. Forgive me if I am mistaken, but isn't that a brand of dilutable orange juice drink?

[ToryCynic]

Originally posted by DanSumption

 

Also, there's another thread on the go at the moment about childrens' names which mentions the fact that teachers tend to be automatically wary of your Dwaynes, Shanes, Kylies and Latetias.

 

Did you read the contraversial comments on the TES board? I found it amusing; it was pretty close to the truth too.

 

[Mathom]

Timo - that was interesting - that theory seems to hold a lot of truth. Though I have to ask how the following would fit into this theory: those people who may or may not be well educated (may be self-educated, may be educated to postgrad level) but who do possess incredible knowledge, appreciation and understanding of Arts and Humanities, and yet are distinctly working class in socio-economic terms?

 

As to whether we have a classless society, those who are poor or disadvantaged would not agree with this!

[Greenback]

Originally posted by timo

Dan,

You make a good point re names. They are most certainly coded, and act as indicators of socio-economic status. The worst cases are when parents give their offspring 'exotic'-sounding names which the child will grow up to loathe. I heard of a little girl named 'Kiora', the other week. Forgive me if I am mistaken, but isn't that a brand of dilutable orange juice drink?

 

But then if you turn that round 360 degrees, you'll find that daddy's little princesses, who tend to work either in PR or marketing, have equally stupid names. Like Tiffinni, or Prima, or Zorah (for example).

[Tony]

Originally posted by timo

The worst cases are when parents give their offspring 'exotic'-sounding names which the child will grow up to loathe. I heard of a little girl named 'Kiora', the other week. Forgive me if I am mistaken, but isn't that a brand of dilutable orange juice drink?

 

Chiara is a quite ordinary Italian girls name. I think you misheard and misunderstood

[timo]

Tony,

No, I very much doubt that 'Kiora' is an attempt at the Italian 'Chiara' in this particular case. Her brother is called 'Vimto'.

 

Class shows itself in many different ways in human social interaction. One tell-tale sign of a genuinely upper-middle class upbringing, apart from other indicators such as speech patterns, deportment, clothes etc, is the ease with which such people converse and generally interact. The Hugh Grant stereotype of the 'umming' and 'erring', diffident, clumsy upper-middle class type is wide of the mark in my experience. The upper -middle classes proper [and I would class myself as merely 'professional, middle class' by virtue of career definition] are at ease with the world in general, though the world is far from at ease with them. They lack the embarrassment which holds back the working classes in particular. They rarely blush, because they are rarely caught out in 'bogus self-presentation'. They are what they are, and look the world firmly in the eye.

 

It is often wrongly assumed that they are gauche, and used to a life of luxury. I have made it clear that I believe the former a myth, and the latter is only relative. Certainly, as children, the upper-middle classes have to learn to fend for themselves more quckly than the majority of working class and middle class children, because they are so often packed off to boarding school. I often wonder if the life of so-called 'tough', inner-city children is really any harsher? Ultimately, there is no comparison in terms of life-chances, but upper-middle class children certainly have a childhood with greater challenges than mine featured. Few will have sympathy with them, of course, because so many people are 'chippy' about wealth. This includes the present Roundhead government , who despise tradition, and don't want the 'ordinary' middle classes to become affluent, despite relying upon them to pay their huge welfare bills.