Tuesday 11 February 2014

Eamonn to That

In the Guardian, while writing about George Orwell's posthumously published essay on his days at prep school, Sam Leith confesses to being an old Etonian and presents a version of how an Etonian's character is formed that is rather different from the one mentioned here the other day:
"... its forms and hierarchies were easily internalised. I attribute to my education not only an uncountable number of advantages and privileges, but some of the characteristics I find least attractive in myself. I have a craven teacher-pleasing tendency: a deference to authority and a desire to excel within parameters established by others rather than to challenge those parameters. I am a more conventional – sometimes timid – thinker than I would like.
One aspect of that school's setup – the prefect system – still seems to me a stroke of ideological genius: an object lesson in co-option. There, as in St Cyprian's and any comparable institution, "virtue consisted in winning": the strong and beautiful attracted hero-worship. So the apex prefect body, "Pop", is self-elective: the most popular boys – ie those most in a position to lead others astray – are also the most thoroughly bought and sold.
Their special privilege is to peacock about in coloured waistcoats – and for this, they will dutifully and without pay perform tedious prison-trusty duties such as spending hours in the rain on Windsor bridge preventing younger boys sneaking to the pub. What is cleverest is that they wear the price at which they've been bought – shiny buttons and a swatch of brightly coloured cloth – on their chests.
We can certainly see about us those – need we mention names? – to whom politics seems to be the continuation of private school by other means. For those forever striving to regain the intoxication of having been a gilded god at 18, a cabinet post shines as the equivalent of election to Pop, and the prime ministerial job as the ultimate combination of head boy and victor ludorum.
At the same time there is a strong tradition of public schools acting on certain temperaments to produce absolutely the opposite: rebels whose anti-establishment zeal seems to have been fired by exposure to the rituals of that establishment at an early age. From Shelley (Eton) to Paul Foot (Shrewsbury), Tam Dalyell (Eton) to Tony Benn (Westminster), many prominent figures on the left have been public schoolboys.
"A school could be conducive to that, if you have a certain kind of mind, because it is a sort of oppressive dictatorship in miniature," says Karl Marx's biographer and Private Eye stalwart Francis Wheen. "Some of us found it so oppressive that we rebelled against it. I hated Harrow so much that I ran away when I was 16 and left a note for my parents saying: 'I've gone to join the Alternative Society' and scampered off to London and lived in a squat. It's fair to say in my case that my politics was formed in reaction to Harrow."
Talking about the current schisms in the Socialist Workers party, Wheen points out that the party's leader Alex Callinicos, grandson of the 2nd Lord Acton, was educated at a top private school and another senior leader, Charlie Kimber, is the Old Etonian son of a baronet. Also prominent in the brouhaha has been Dave Renton, an Old Etonian barrister related to a former Tory chief whip: "It sometimes reads like a conversation between Old Rugbeians and Old Etonians about the main British Trotskyist party. It's quite bizarre."
There is a popular school of thought, indeed, that holds that the treachery of the Cambridge spy ring was a reaction against their public school educations – an idea explored psychologically in (Old Wykehamist) Julian Mitchell's fine 1981 play Another CountryLindsay Anderson's film If …, meanwhile, dramatised the idea of the public school rebel as a sort of violent dream."
There is one aspect of Leith's analysis that I am unconvinced by and that is his belief that his deference to authority and unwillingness to challenge parameters is due to his education. To the extent that I am any kind of thinker at all, I am, like Leith, "a more conventional - sometimes timid - thinker than I would like". Sadly though, I believe that tendency is something one is born with; it is ingrained in one's essential character, rather than something one is taught. I wonder if others feel the same. 

8 comments:

  1. I think it's probably true that our views are the product of a nebulous mixture of instinct and upbringing and that rather than being formed by what we read and experience, we select whatever seems to ratify our gut feeling. I certainly do.

    Whenever I read Roger Scruton, I can't help feeling that rather than arriving at his ideas, he simply uses his philosphical training to justify his subconscious desires. In his deeply nostalgic yearning for a neo-feudal England, I sense a lower-middle-class, provincial grammar school boy, in thrall to a world that he has been excluded from.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't comment on Scruton, especially as I keep muddling him with the one who speaks in a mincing voice and has rather long hair and comes to Australia from time to time to tell us to be humanists not religious believers or something - oh, after a bit of a google hunt, I've realised that's AC Grayling. It seems to me observing my children that they are born with different levels of anti-authoritarian tendency, but that's hardly scientific, I acknowledge. I wonder if all philosophers use their training to justify their subconscious desires and possibly that is the main function of philosophy. Or perhaps not. As you may have guessed, I am not a trained philosopher otherwise I wouldn't be burbling on in this manner.

      Delete
  2. If he believes that it was taught to him and you believe that you were born with it then I don't see why you can't both be right. Deference is a complicated pattern of behaviour. No reason why there should be only one cause.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Predictably, I defer to you on the matter

      Delete
  3. "At the same time there is a strong tradition of public schools acting on certain temperaments to produce absolutely the opposite:"

    Any school, surely. The Jesuits boasted of their ability to indoctrinate boys given to their care. Yet they turned out quite a number of rebels of one sort or another: Voltaire, Carl Schurz, the Castro brothers come to mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Goes off in ashamed ignorance to look up who Carl Schurz is.

      Delete
    2. Gee, your school systems didn't cover obscure Civil War generals & Secretaries of the Interior?

      Delete
    3. I would never blame any school system for my infinite failings as a student.

      Delete