Agincourt and all that

There seems to be a lot of discussion in almost every walk of life about what it is to be English.

Some may simply say that they have always been so as a matter of pride and patriotism. There are always St George's Cross flags flying even if not coinciding with a fixture involving the national football team. Others may feel a bit beleagured by the constant media coverage of a perceived imminent invasion by foreigners. A few may think that they are already in a minority in their own local area.

Personally, I am a bit concerned by this upsurge in celebrating and commemorating Englishness particularly where it involves dragging up some long distant battle, invasion, siege or  resistance which should remain confined, for all its merits,  to a history book.

As a nation we are part of a larger, much larger global community. We fought against  most of our European neighbours at one time or another and although usually declaring ourselves the victor in the slaughter and human misery. Llets face it, the fact that not much changed as a consequence made it a victory on purely technical rather than righteous grounds.

Historic foes, now our friends do not seem to dwell on their past as much as we do. It may all be just diversionary tactics.

I think that all of the postering is because we are a bit confused about our own standing in the hierarchy of social classes that is the defining feature of English life.

There has been, since the era depicted by the TV series Downton Abbey, a huge change in  social mobility. In that programme the class differences were accentuated by the attitudes, behaviour and prejudices of those whether upstairs or downstairs although amongst their own class each were strikingly similar. The Lord of the Manor was head of the hereditary family and the Head Butler was Lord of the domestic staff.

What movement has there been in the class structure over my own lifetime, ie the past half decade?

It is obvious that the segment of the population that would with pride regard themselves as working class has declined because industry and the old working practices have declined. The parameters of the middle class have blurred and as a consequence the numbers have increased. The upper or ruling class remain stagnant in spite of some injection of new bloodlines and new money.

Try explaining the composition of English society to an overseas visitor  and you will appreciate how bewildering it is. So what, today, can be reasonably relied upon as a tell tale sign of someone's social standing.

The social anthropologist, Kate Fox, published a work entitled "Watching the English" in the early years of the new century. Last year she reviewed the research and findings to see if  we are still a nation obsessed with and yet dismissive of the class structure.

She highlighted two important factors in giving away the class to which someone belongs and they are the words we use and  how we say them.

Seven words in particular put down a marker to our social position.

If responding to an unclear enquiry the use of "Pardon?" is a lower middle or middle-middle indicator. The upper middle class will say "sorry-what?" or "What-sorry?". Surprisingly both the upper class and working class will use "What?" although the latter may drop the "t".

What we call the toilet is a defining thing. Upper classes refer to "loo" or the phonetic  "lavuhtry" and even "bog" if used with humour is acceptable. The working class use "toilet" but those with aspirations above their station can be caught out by using "powder room", "conveniences", "Gents" and "Ladies".

Table habits are also cited as class defining. A "napkin" is now upper middle and upper territory with "serviette" being relegated to the lower class.

If you refer to the family evening meal as "tea" you are working class whereas the higher social order use "dinner" or "supper". Another giveaway is that tea is served around 6pm but dinner nearer 8pm being a throwback to working hours in manual and executive employment respectively.

Those with a "settee" or "couch" are no higher than middle-middle but if you have a "sofa" then you are upper-middle or higher.

As for the room in which the aforementioned item of furniture is usually found? A settee is invariably found in lounges or living rooms but a sofa forms part of the ambience of a sitting or drawing room.

Even foodstuffs can be used as a guage of our class. The upper classes refer to the sweet course at the end of a meal as "pudding" but if you as a guest ask after a "dessert" or "afters" then notwithstanding it to be rude you should also think about fetching your own coat before leaving.

Confusion and ambiguity abound in our own minds about the class structure in this country so is it any surprise that we try so hard to define the essence of Englishness as an excuse to avoid having to deal with it.