![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blatherskiteWatching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour, a book by the social/cultural anthropologist Kate Fox, is a wonderfully entertaining and insightful look into the way cultural anthropologists identify and pick apart the hidden rules that guide how a culture functions. Fox presents her case for the fundamental characteristics that define "Englishness" in nearly 600 pages of chatty, clever, acerbic, and often viciously funny prose.
As Fox notes, the anthropologist's role is to "make the strange familiar and the familiar strange", which is also coincidentally the role of the author of speculative fiction, also known as "fantasy and science fiction". Since that's a sometimes interest of this blog, it seems like a good choice of book to review. Obvious applications of these insights include creating more believable fictional cultures and very definitely plotting a story in which the protagonist tries to deal with their immersion into a new culture. This is far more complex and difficult than one might think, even when one makes the effort to prepare for this immersion.
Fox, herself a British citizen, has spent decades trying to understand her fellow English, striving to look past the surface to detect the fundamental things that make the English so quintessentially English. Not being a trained anthropologist, I can't speak to the validity of her observations. Speaking as a recovering scientist, I can say that she musters an impressive body of evidence in support of her analysis, and that it holds together well to produce a theory of Englishness that would be eminently testable. (Fox herself does have much of this information, but since she's writing a popularized account of her research, doesn't bury us in the statistical details.) Based on what I know of English culture, and my own experiences with the English, her descriptions and explanations have the ring of truth, and although I kept my inconsistency detector firmly engaged throughout, there weren't many places the alarm went off. That's an impressive achievement in nearly 600 pages of the 2014 2nd edition of the book.
Caution: As Fox herself notes, it's not possible to describe the characteristics of individuals using a simplistic description of the overall trends for an entire culture. I suspect many of the criticisms that would be leveled against this book by professionals and amateurs alike arise from a failure to remember this point. Should you read the book -- and if you're still reading this far into this essay, you'll almost certainly enjoy doing so -- keep firmly in mind that the descriptions in the book are generalities that describe overall patterns; they do not attempt to define the behaviors of all or even most individuals taken as individuals.
With that caveat in mind, Fox divides the characteristics of her study culture into three broad groupings of characteristics (outlooks, reflexes, and values) that together orbit a central defining characteristic: what she calls a social dis-ease (a perhaps tortured pun, where "unease" or "discomfort" might communicate the notion more directly were this a journal article rather than a popularized account of a complex subject). That dis-ease is responsible for the common stereotype of the English as cold and aloof, but very polite notwithstanding. These categories provide a useful framework for examining any culture. Here's how they work out in the context of what Fox calls "Englishness".
"Outlook" divides into three subcategories: "empiricism", which relates to a strong grounding in the here and now and in the pragmatic realities of everyday life; "Eeyorishness" (after the Winnie the Pooh character Eeyore), which relates to a grumpy kind of fatalism crossed with resigned pessimism; and class-consciousness. All societies have some form of hierarchy; in England, the hierarchy permeates and affects all interactions among people to a greater extent than (say) in North America. Whereas class in the United States (and to some extent Canada) relates more to money than anything else, it also shares some of the characteristics of English classes: the type of employment, educational level, and overall outlook.
These (to me, though Fox doesn't mention this) seem to derive from centuries of feudalism that (unlike, say, in post-Revolution France or post-Revolution United States) that remain stronger in England than in most other places I'm familiar with. That's not to say we don't have our own "old money", which defines a distinct class even here. It's just not as pervasive elsewhere as it is in England. In France, for example, the same kind of feudal nobility that existed in England all met with a sticky fate during the revolution, and were forcibly excised from the culture; in the U.S., the classes never fully took root. So it's not part of our worldview the same way it is in England, where that feudal structure never fully went away.
"Reflexes" also divides into three subcategories: "humor", which is one of the first things most people think of when they think of England due to its pervasiveness in the form of puns, humorous self-deprecation, and ironic observations; "moderation", which involves a strong discomfort over extremes (one of Fox's better witticisms is "the importance of not being earnest"); and "hypocrisy", here in the specific form of the polite social fictions every society develops to lubricate social interactions.
Finally, "values" also divides into three subcategories: "fair play", which relates to the profound belief that everyone should be given an equal chance, even if someone will inevitably win; "courtesy", which relates closely to the abovementioned hypocrisy because of its importance as a social lubricant; and modesty, which relates closely to the abovementioned moderation and aims to avoid giving the impression that one is a braggart and a bit too full of oneself. The English delight in "taking the piss out of" anyone who seems a bit to self-proud.
One of the strengths of this model is that it provides insights into any English situation: one or more combinations of the abovementioned guiding principles provides a self-consistent and reasonable (if perhaps incomplete or inaccurate) understanding of broad behavior patterns. Taken together, these combinations can be seen as coping mechanisms for specific situations that defuse potential conflicts and make it easier for people to coexist without coming to blows. Fox also clearly describes the socially sanctioned situations in which these general principles are subverted or ignored, but again, with a very clear social consensus about when and how these departures from the norm are constrained. One of the fascinating things about this book is how these rules evolve tacitly, without anyone (except perhaps the authors of etiquette books) setting them down as laws, and become deeply entrenched in the way people behave.
I don't think, based solely on this book, I'd feel confident writing a literary story set in England that would convince English readers that I was English. I'd want to spend weeks, and more probably months, immersed in the culture before I felt confident that I could do a credible job. But I think I understand Englishness far better than I did beforehand, and will see a great many things I didn't notice before when I watch British TV shows. I've also learned a new way to look at my own and other cultures: through the lens of the cultural anthropologist. (I was already an enthusiastic amateur deconstructionist in the context of communication, so there's fertile ground in which that new mindset will become established.) Donning my other hat as fictioneer, I suspect this will work even better in my speculative fiction by helping me think more clearly about the cultures I'm hoping to portray in that writing.
Cool book, and highly recommended if the inner workings of a culture interest you.
As Fox notes, the anthropologist's role is to "make the strange familiar and the familiar strange", which is also coincidentally the role of the author of speculative fiction, also known as "fantasy and science fiction". Since that's a sometimes interest of this blog, it seems like a good choice of book to review. Obvious applications of these insights include creating more believable fictional cultures and very definitely plotting a story in which the protagonist tries to deal with their immersion into a new culture. This is far more complex and difficult than one might think, even when one makes the effort to prepare for this immersion.
Fox, herself a British citizen, has spent decades trying to understand her fellow English, striving to look past the surface to detect the fundamental things that make the English so quintessentially English. Not being a trained anthropologist, I can't speak to the validity of her observations. Speaking as a recovering scientist, I can say that she musters an impressive body of evidence in support of her analysis, and that it holds together well to produce a theory of Englishness that would be eminently testable. (Fox herself does have much of this information, but since she's writing a popularized account of her research, doesn't bury us in the statistical details.) Based on what I know of English culture, and my own experiences with the English, her descriptions and explanations have the ring of truth, and although I kept my inconsistency detector firmly engaged throughout, there weren't many places the alarm went off. That's an impressive achievement in nearly 600 pages of the 2014 2nd edition of the book.
Caution: As Fox herself notes, it's not possible to describe the characteristics of individuals using a simplistic description of the overall trends for an entire culture. I suspect many of the criticisms that would be leveled against this book by professionals and amateurs alike arise from a failure to remember this point. Should you read the book -- and if you're still reading this far into this essay, you'll almost certainly enjoy doing so -- keep firmly in mind that the descriptions in the book are generalities that describe overall patterns; they do not attempt to define the behaviors of all or even most individuals taken as individuals.
With that caveat in mind, Fox divides the characteristics of her study culture into three broad groupings of characteristics (outlooks, reflexes, and values) that together orbit a central defining characteristic: what she calls a social dis-ease (a perhaps tortured pun, where "unease" or "discomfort" might communicate the notion more directly were this a journal article rather than a popularized account of a complex subject). That dis-ease is responsible for the common stereotype of the English as cold and aloof, but very polite notwithstanding. These categories provide a useful framework for examining any culture. Here's how they work out in the context of what Fox calls "Englishness".
"Outlook" divides into three subcategories: "empiricism", which relates to a strong grounding in the here and now and in the pragmatic realities of everyday life; "Eeyorishness" (after the Winnie the Pooh character Eeyore), which relates to a grumpy kind of fatalism crossed with resigned pessimism; and class-consciousness. All societies have some form of hierarchy; in England, the hierarchy permeates and affects all interactions among people to a greater extent than (say) in North America. Whereas class in the United States (and to some extent Canada) relates more to money than anything else, it also shares some of the characteristics of English classes: the type of employment, educational level, and overall outlook.
These (to me, though Fox doesn't mention this) seem to derive from centuries of feudalism that (unlike, say, in post-Revolution France or post-Revolution United States) that remain stronger in England than in most other places I'm familiar with. That's not to say we don't have our own "old money", which defines a distinct class even here. It's just not as pervasive elsewhere as it is in England. In France, for example, the same kind of feudal nobility that existed in England all met with a sticky fate during the revolution, and were forcibly excised from the culture; in the U.S., the classes never fully took root. So it's not part of our worldview the same way it is in England, where that feudal structure never fully went away.
"Reflexes" also divides into three subcategories: "humor", which is one of the first things most people think of when they think of England due to its pervasiveness in the form of puns, humorous self-deprecation, and ironic observations; "moderation", which involves a strong discomfort over extremes (one of Fox's better witticisms is "the importance of not being earnest"); and "hypocrisy", here in the specific form of the polite social fictions every society develops to lubricate social interactions.
Finally, "values" also divides into three subcategories: "fair play", which relates to the profound belief that everyone should be given an equal chance, even if someone will inevitably win; "courtesy", which relates closely to the abovementioned hypocrisy because of its importance as a social lubricant; and modesty, which relates closely to the abovementioned moderation and aims to avoid giving the impression that one is a braggart and a bit too full of oneself. The English delight in "taking the piss out of" anyone who seems a bit to self-proud.
One of the strengths of this model is that it provides insights into any English situation: one or more combinations of the abovementioned guiding principles provides a self-consistent and reasonable (if perhaps incomplete or inaccurate) understanding of broad behavior patterns. Taken together, these combinations can be seen as coping mechanisms for specific situations that defuse potential conflicts and make it easier for people to coexist without coming to blows. Fox also clearly describes the socially sanctioned situations in which these general principles are subverted or ignored, but again, with a very clear social consensus about when and how these departures from the norm are constrained. One of the fascinating things about this book is how these rules evolve tacitly, without anyone (except perhaps the authors of etiquette books) setting them down as laws, and become deeply entrenched in the way people behave.
I don't think, based solely on this book, I'd feel confident writing a literary story set in England that would convince English readers that I was English. I'd want to spend weeks, and more probably months, immersed in the culture before I felt confident that I could do a credible job. But I think I understand Englishness far better than I did beforehand, and will see a great many things I didn't notice before when I watch British TV shows. I've also learned a new way to look at my own and other cultures: through the lens of the cultural anthropologist. (I was already an enthusiastic amateur deconstructionist in the context of communication, so there's fertile ground in which that new mindset will become established.) Donning my other hat as fictioneer, I suspect this will work even better in my speculative fiction by helping me think more clearly about the cultures I'm hoping to portray in that writing.
Cool book, and highly recommended if the inner workings of a culture interest you.