![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This blessed plot, this England.
Mar. 20th, 2008 09:37 amWhenever it's a bit of a slow news week and the papers are short of things to write about, the subject of the 'crisis in Englishness' seems to crop up to fill up a bit of space. What this boils down to is that whilst the Scots, Irish and Welsh have well defined national identities and symbols thereof, the English don't really seem to and this is in some way a crisis.
I'd disagree, but it's interesting that the idea has come up. Certainly in the last deacde we've seen a decline in expressions of 'Britishness' in this country and more expressions of parochial nationalism with the shaven-headed lobster-coloured oafs who support the football who once used Union Jacks now using the Flag of St George instead. If there's a problem here I'd say it's that, and here's some thoughts why.
We can only define ourselves with reference to others. Aggressive expressions of nationalism are symbolic of a lack of confidence in that nationalism; an extreme example is that of germany, whose rise of aggressive nationalism in the 1920's and 30's can be traced to a crisis of national confidence in the wake of the First World War and the treaty of Versailles. Less extreme examples are the national identities of the Irish, Welsh and Scots which may be seen as reactions to the dominant English culture - they feel a need to strongly define themselves in the face of a greater hegemony. It's interesting that the English increasingly feel the need to indulge in the same national definition, presumably in the face of growing international cultures - European, Chinese, American. The problem that the English face is that their symbols and myths of nationality are less well defined because for a couple of centuries they haven't been quite so necessary.
Every nation has it's myths. Their reason why they are better than anyone else; the Irish, Scots and Welsh have their myth of brave resistance in the face of persecution the Evil English. The Americans have their myth of the west and the idea that anyone can achieve anything out there. The Chinese have their myth of 'all under heaven'. All nations do it, and all myths under a bright light can be shown to be untrue but they serve the purpose of binding people together.
There was a time when to be a 'free-born Englishman' was the finest thing to be (so the myth went). Unlike other nations ruled by tyrants, English law was a shining beacon of fairness in which all were equal before it. Shakespeare, arch-propagandist that he was, sums this up brilliantly in Act 5 Scene 2 of Henry IV Part II. Nobody, not even the King himself, was above the law.
In this post-imperial age, this is an idea that is now the recognised standard of international justice in a way that it certainly was not before. The English myth has become the global one. The reason the English have a crisis of nationhood is because these days, legally, pretty much everyone else has become us and so really there's nothing for the English to define themselves against.
I'd disagree, but it's interesting that the idea has come up. Certainly in the last deacde we've seen a decline in expressions of 'Britishness' in this country and more expressions of parochial nationalism with the shaven-headed lobster-coloured oafs who support the football who once used Union Jacks now using the Flag of St George instead. If there's a problem here I'd say it's that, and here's some thoughts why.
We can only define ourselves with reference to others. Aggressive expressions of nationalism are symbolic of a lack of confidence in that nationalism; an extreme example is that of germany, whose rise of aggressive nationalism in the 1920's and 30's can be traced to a crisis of national confidence in the wake of the First World War and the treaty of Versailles. Less extreme examples are the national identities of the Irish, Welsh and Scots which may be seen as reactions to the dominant English culture - they feel a need to strongly define themselves in the face of a greater hegemony. It's interesting that the English increasingly feel the need to indulge in the same national definition, presumably in the face of growing international cultures - European, Chinese, American. The problem that the English face is that their symbols and myths of nationality are less well defined because for a couple of centuries they haven't been quite so necessary.
Every nation has it's myths. Their reason why they are better than anyone else; the Irish, Scots and Welsh have their myth of brave resistance in the face of persecution the Evil English. The Americans have their myth of the west and the idea that anyone can achieve anything out there. The Chinese have their myth of 'all under heaven'. All nations do it, and all myths under a bright light can be shown to be untrue but they serve the purpose of binding people together.
There was a time when to be a 'free-born Englishman' was the finest thing to be (so the myth went). Unlike other nations ruled by tyrants, English law was a shining beacon of fairness in which all were equal before it. Shakespeare, arch-propagandist that he was, sums this up brilliantly in Act 5 Scene 2 of Henry IV Part II. Nobody, not even the King himself, was above the law.
In this post-imperial age, this is an idea that is now the recognised standard of international justice in a way that it certainly was not before. The English myth has become the global one. The reason the English have a crisis of nationhood is because these days, legally, pretty much everyone else has become us and so really there's nothing for the English to define themselves against.
