Just spent my last weekend in freedom before going back to the grind at school tomorrow. It was a phenomenal week of doing as little as possible, travelling to Toulouse to spend time with my niece, getting back here and eating and sleeping a lot. And last but not least, renewing some really valuable friendships.
Meanwhile, this weekend, London hosted the St George's day celebrations, which were quite something. As I was waiting for the train to get downtown yesterday, I realised that the tiny little town I'm living in - a suburb of Twickenham - had its own St Geroge's Day parade. Far from the gaggle of bewildered kids I was expecting, it was quite a spectacle. Everybody, from the local drug volunteers in a double decker bus, to the line dancing group hot on the heels of the enormous military orchestra, was out under the dark, soupy April sky, braving the likelihood of rain.
I'm pretty flabbergasted to see how much is going on in this suburban sprawl of a place which I thought completely barren of everything except 99p shops and Tesco's. I suppose people don't advertise what they do here in the same way they do in downtown London, because they tend to stick around here for Longer, and don't need as much attention for what they do. I really should get involved in something, and find out for myself what Whitton is actually like.
Something I really enjoy about living in the UK is how small, grassroots-type stuff works. People have this unending ability to create small groups to address a local problem, or keep a social group going. As compared to France where people complain about the government not doing enough to improve their lives, but hardly ever actually set up any viable alternatives of their own, the British are far more proactive and resilient. Then again, they let their government get away with gross incompetence or negligence a lot of the time. The transport, the health system, overcharging everyone for everything and doing little to pay it back... When stuck in the Tube for the millionth time, with a 45 minute delay, and everybody patiently sighing and saying "Mustn't grumble!" the Frenchman in me often thinks "Yes you should grumble! Why are you so damn resilient??!"
Anyway, I got into town and moseyed about the city centre, looking for something interesting to do. As I got to the British Museum, I heard Indian music playing. I went into the main hall - which is a spectacle of gigantism in itself - and witnessed this unbelievable music and dance show. This snippet doesn't really capture how colourful and graceful the six dancers were. It culminated in a Tarantella-like frenzy of drumming as the dancers spun wildly out of control. The audience - mostly composed of tourists visiting the museum - were completely wowed, as I was myself. That was probably the first time in history that the British Museum was anticlimactic. What an unbelievable place.
It just strikes me each time how absolutely enormous the British Empire project was. My friend Chris has helped bring this to the forefront of my thoughts by bringing me all sorts of documents on Sudanese politics in the 19th century to translate. But while moseying around the Islamic and South Asian sections of the British Museum, I couldn't but think what a massively organised enterprise of pillage the Empire was. They actually organised raids, or 'razzia' as they called them, to break down local resistance to their government, where they would steal the odd woman here, shoot the odd herd of cattle there... And of course, get hold of any interesting-looking booty on the way. So the grandeur of this museum is always mitigated by the knowledge of how it was acquired, in my case.
I can't help but enjoy the simplicity of British attitudes. The way they can be uncomplicated about organising themselves to get things done and address problems. Of course, that simplicity can sometimes translate into oversimplifications when it comes to understanding foreigners, as many of the idiotic TV programmes on immigration display. But then there's also a sort of instinctive acceptance that outsiders like myself can disagree with the non-essentials. That I can look at the St. George's Day parade with amused detachment, without being anti-British. And of course, the most interesting Britons, those who like Chris display the mixture of humility, self-mockery and genuine cultural interest, are the most critical of their own Empirical history. And long may it continue, despite the rants of Boris Johnson, or Tony Blair's Americanism.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
St George? Who's that?
Posted by
chienchaud
at
12:07 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

3 comments:
Dear David
Could not agree with you more regarding the way British people let their govt get away with unacceptable stds - esp in their transport system - just appalling! And yes, they definitely need to complain more. Much much more! And louder. And without embarassment. But then, they wouldn't be British if they did that, would they? (laugh!)
By the way, the British Empire wasn't one big concerted project. It was in fact very piecemeal, very fragmented, no standardisation, no uniformity, trying different things in different places, with different policies, and so on. It wasn't calculated to the nth degree or anything remotely like that. There was no big masterplan. In fact, so much of it was almost arbitrary that it staggers me. It just had a lot to do with trying to nab this island and that piece of land and this kingdom or fiefdom here, there, and so on. Negotiating, sometimes usurping, placing puppet kings, doing deals with the Dutch and other colonial powers, playing one group off against another, using spies and traitors, all kinds of techniques. So many endless stories about how places ended up in British hands. Some places received more attention from headquarters in London, some much less. No set rule. Don't forget that the East India Trading company was just that for a long time, for trade, not for colonisation or governance, not outright. It was late in the day when it was taken over by the British govt. Am not going to reproduce my lecture on that here, but just to make the point how strange an entity the Empire was, and how almost organically the Empire grew! (Am exaggerating a bit to make my point, but hope I made it!)
Lisa.
Hi,
Really good of you to post, by the way. A real academic point of view is always appreciated!
I see what you mean about the Empire; it wasn't technically as orchestrated as all that to begin with. But I think the ideology of the empire was enough structure in itself to allow the rest to follow.
Shaw has a series of plays which address this, but I found "Flaherty VC" to be the most revealing one. The young Irish soldier returns from battle in WW1, and, knowing he'll be sent out again, spills the beans about the reality of war. The general whose property he grew up on welcomes him as a veteran, but then has to suffer his comments.
Essentially, the British view of the Irish was that they were a different, inferior race. They could be tolerated, discussed with, their culture was even interesting enough to be learned and recorded, but that they would ever dare claim any moral or spiritual authority approaching that of a Briton was unthinkable. That's why Flaherty's comments are not only offensive to the general, but beyond comprehension.
More generally, the strucures of power in the Empire were such that it didn't need to be politically orchestrated like others did. The ideology kept it together, and it was essentially fascist thinking. A Grand Narrative of literature and history, a set of values based on the earlier notion of gentlemen's behaviour and aristocratic codes of moral authority. Coupled with an unprecedented operation of recording history and landscape into written archiveable records, these cultural tools were a far better vehicle for domination than centralised government.
Totally agree wuth you about the ideology of Empire. Edward Said said it all really in 'Orientalism'.
Lisa.
Post a Comment