The ironic-gnome rule
Talking-up the good things about the English national character is all the fashion in the wake of last week’s bombs: stoicism, stiff upper lip, mustn’t grumble, etc. As it happens last week I also read Kate Fox’s pop-anthropology participant-observer account of the English. Funny and well-0bserved in parts is my verdict on the 400-odd pages of Watching the English , though it was getting a bit crass and tedious towards the end. Still, the book has its moments, most of which have to do with class. The most memorable being the ironic-gnome rule:
I once expressed mild surprise at the presence of a garden gnome in an upper-middle-class garden …. The owner of the garden explained that the gnome was “ironic”. I asked him, with apologies for my ignorance, how one could tell that his garden gnome was supposed to be an ironic statement, as opposed to, you know, just a gnome. He rather sniffily replied that I only had to look at the rest of the garden for it to be obvious that the gnome was a tounge-in-cheek joke.
But surely, I persisted, garden gnomes are always something of a joke, in any garden—I mean, no-one actually takes them seriously or regards them as works of art. His response was rather rambling and confused (not to mention somewhat huffy), but the gist seemed to be that while the lower classes saw gnomes as intrinsically amusing, his gnome was amusing only because of its incongruous appearance in a “smart” garden. In other words, council-house gnomes were a joke, but his gnome was a joke about council-house tastes, effectively a joke about class….
The man’s reaction to my questions clearly defined him as upper-middle, rather than upper class. In fact, his pointing out that the gnome I had noticed was “ironic” had already demoted him by half a class from my original assessment. A genuine member of the upper classes would either have admitted to a passion for garden gnomes … or said something like “Ah yes, my gnome. I’m very fond of my gnome.” and left me to draw my own conclusions.
posted on Monday, July 11th, 2005 at 9:20 am
Kurt Goedel’s wife supposedly collected garden gnomes. That was quite a family.
His explination sounds reasonable enough to me, but anyway, I think we should turn the Gnome Liberation Front on to him anyway- even exploitation done in the name of irony is still exploitation, after all.
http://www.freethegnomes.com/
or this one:
http://internettrash.com/users/sprkythdvl/gnome.htm
“We’re very fond of each other”
The man’s reaction to my questions clearly defined him
It certainly did, although the designation I would have suggested would have been shorter and more demotic than “upper middle class”.
the designation I would have suggested
Trust the Welsh to lower the tone. Typical!
I suspect that the man in question might have been Toby Young.
Lee and Herring’s “The Ironic Review” was a pile of cack. Bet you weren’t expecting me to say that were you? Aaaaahh!
Surely Toby Young is genuinely upper class, by birth anyway? (He certainly doesn’t form part of the the meritocracy ;) .)
As the son of a life peer I think he would be pretty borderline and the ironic gnome thing probably tipped the balance.
Am I the only one who detects a condescending attitude towards the upper middle class and an (uncalled for) admiration for the (genuine!) upper class? Now that is very British indeed.
Is it specifically British? Is there not a similar division in the US between the country-club set and thre really wealthy? (Genuine question)
Hmm. In the U.S. there’s a certain divide is between the suburban rich—the “country club set”—and the urban rich, but I don’t think it’s really about who has more money. I’d say the urban rich look down on the suburban rich, but only in the general sort of way that people in the big cities look down on the ‘burbs.
It’s more that, while we don’t really think the upper classes are worth an awful lot of our time, someone who isn’t one but who pretends to be is worth even less.
Is it specifically British? Is there not a similar division in the US between the country-club set and thre really wealthy? (Genuine question)
It isn’t about the British … it is about the English . How far it generalizes to the Welsh and the Scots is a matter for debate ….
And it isn’t about money . The class distinctions that are to the fore in the gnome story aren’t between the rich and the rest, indeed a member of the upper class can be quite impoverished whilst a member of the lower middle can be filthy rich.
God damn snobs.
Daniel, what is the class origin of sons of refusenik life peers? Just curious.
The ‘genuine’ upper class have no need to try to impress anybody,
they simply are. There’s honor in that.
The radical and reactionary anti-bourgeois have a lot in common, but a full third of the professoriate in the English speaking world spend their lives and careers pretending it ain’t so (and pretending they’re not predictably bourgeois) Say what you want about continental postmodernism, the people who invented it get the joke.
All I know is that Toby Young (according to his memoirs) applied for a credit card in the name “The Honourable Toby Young”, a courtesy title which he believed his dad’s life peerage entitled him to and maybe any resident Debrett’s fans can confirmthis. He did so in the belief that it would help him pull the birds in New York, and as I recall (and apologies, but I’m damned if I’m reading that book again) it didn’t.
“And it isn’t about money”
That’s it.
I’d be astonished if a life peerage entitled a son to use the “the Honourable”. If no-one knows for sure my estimate of the quality of our readership will plummet.
Years ago, Doonesbury ran a story line where Zonker won a lottery and bought a peerage with the money. Trudeau, who still had it back then, got in some great jokes about class, both American and British, but I only remember this one:
Friend (reading from the exam prep book): “What distinguishes the true gentleman?”
Zonker: “His contempt for poor breeding?”
Friend: “Close; his love of dogs.”
“And it isn’t about money . The class distinctions that are to the fore in the gnome story aren’t between the rich and the rest, indeed a member of the upper class can be quite impoverished whilst a member of the lower middle can be filthy rich.”
Precisely! So to recapsulate your POV: The upper class are better than the upper middle because the upper middle class earns its own (“filthy”) money, while the upper class gets their status the old fashioned way, by inheriting it. Again very English! (My apologies to the Scots and the Welsh for using the term “British”…)
No Andrew, the rich have the luxury of being able to take for granted that life is about more than money. They share this understanding with the lumpenproletariat, which is one of the reasons NY night life used to be such fun.
My POV? I thought your earlier attribution was to Kate Fox, author of the book. No, not my POV at all.
I remember a survey that showed how the upper and working classes shared a penchant for gaudy and/or expensive Christmas presents, while the upper-middle class preferred ‘meaningful’ ones.
Anyway, Castiglione’s sprezzatura may have a place here, at least to explain how the Duke of Devonshire gets away with wearing yellow socks.
My apologies Chris, missed the indent. Greatly relieved!
Kate is the sister of Martha, who earns her money in trade on that ghastly interweb.
Her father’s Oxford college? New. Need I say more?
You are surely mistaken Jeffrey, as Martha’s dad is Robin Lane Fox (ancient historian and FT gardening correspondent) whereas Kate’s is anthropologist Robin Fox of Rutgers.
There’s no need to apologise to the Scottish and Welsh, btw, if anything old money from the Celtic fringe is even snobbier.
I call dibs on “The Ironic Gnomes” for the name of my next band, assuming I ever have one.
I’ll have to file this one away for future use, under “Gardening with Bourdieu.”
Anyone who claims his garden gnome is “ironic” is a wanker, in my opinion. Social class doesn’t come into it.
The ‘genuine’ upper class have no need to try to impress anybody, they simply are. There’s honor in that.
No, they don’t and no there’s not. (They are also, for the record, wankers, by and large.) If the upper class have no need to do so, why have they spent untold sums of money, over the centuries, on stuff whose purpose is to try to impress people? This claim does not stand up.
engels, you must be an American, since you obviously don’t understand the subtleties of class differentiation. I have two ironic gnomes in my own garden and totally understand what that guy is talking about although I am very fond of my gnomes, especially the one with wheelbarrow, which, incidentally, I bought in Graefenroda, the birth place of the garden gnome.
By the way, the garden gnome’s physical stature was supposedly modeled on the gnarled and stunted shapes of the local miners in the Thueringer Wald. In that sense the garden gnome is really a symbol of the proud and defiant working class, displaying joy and happiness in the face of inhuman working conditions.
Oh, and since 1992 there’s an official (since it’s produced by the last member of the gnome-inventor’s family) “Gartenzwergin”, which caused a bit of an uproar in the gnome community.
So you see, engels, social class not only comes into play here, it’s a pivotal point.
Surprisingly unintellectual of you Engels. I must remember to give you a spanking after I’ve cashed that check.
It’s in the mail?
engels, you must be an American
Do you want to take this outside?
I thought I had had some experience of the (stifling, tedious) subtleties of class differentiation we have in this country but I apologise for insulting you and your gnomes.
But I’ll leave you to be the judge of whether or not my apology was “ironic”.
Hmm. I may be slightly in error on a small matter of fact. But my central point stands: the entire family are the most frightful nouves.
Krug anyone?
engels, dude, you’re getting into the spirit now, my gnomes are proud of you!
“It certainly did, although the designation I would have suggested would have been shorter and more demotic than “upper middle class”.”
Posted by dsquared
A five letter word, begining with ‘W’, and ending with ‘lsh’?
Jeffrey, to repeat Clive Anderson’s question: Is there no beginning to your talents?
I’ll have to file this one away for future use, under “Gardening with Bourdieu.”
Quite so. Remember how John Major prickled a little when people poked fun at his father’s ‘lawn ornament’ business?
American lawn decoration is quite another thing entirely: plastic pink flamingos and fibreglass deer, anyone?
The ‘Pedia it say:
Life peers (of baronial rank, as we have seen) not excluded, we note. But bear in mind that:
I remain, of course, the Margrave of Moravia, the Great Voyvod of the Voyvodina and especially the Holy Roman Emperor and propaganda minister of the Free State of Trieste and Trst (all, sadly, in Exile).
count des—my faith in our readership is restored. I’ll muse on what it means for me.
When I was at uni, I used to collect various objects of this kind, including gnomes, with an ironic intent. The most ironic was the archetypal 1950s wall decoration in Australia: a flight of china ducks ascending the wall.
Over time, however, I got rid of nearly everything, keeping only the ducks, for which I now feel an entirely unironic affection. For a while I had a flying masked koala, which unfortunately got broken.
Ernest Shackleton famously said “A life peer is like a mule — no pride of ancestry, no hope of posterity.” For that matter, what American could claim to be upper class, since we constitutionally lack the apparatus of aristocracy?
I’m not personally accountably for any of my yard’s garden statuary, since half are gifts and the rest inheritances. The bench in the form of a cat seems to attract cats; some dogs freak out at the small figure of a bear, now green with moss.
Irony is an attitude unavailable with such abundance.
Which Ernest Shackleton was that Jim? The only famous one died in 1922 (sez Wikipedia) and life peers began in about 1959 (ah , 1958, wikipedia again)
Harry: are you trying to give me a tip for our office sweepstakes on the New Year honours? Are you suggesting that a surprise elevation to the Lords for a dedicated public servant, Commissioner of London Schools etc etc might be on the cards? Rest assured that if it is I will bribe Kieran to change the template and you will be forever known as “Honners“. Good God there are hardly any references to the Peter Pook books on the internet. I thought some enthusiast would have had a go.
The chap obviously buys his own furniture.
[Obviously, gross generalisations but …]
One difference is that the upper classes often know they’re privileged and that their position/wealth/status isn’t due to any particular hard work or talent on their part.
An unfortunate number of the middle classes, and I would count some of my closest friends within this number, have come to believe that their wealth and position—if they’re even aware of their relative wealth and position—is due to their innate talents or to the innate talents and hard work of their parents and leads them to make silly claims like “the class sytem doesn’t really exist anymore”…
My tip would be that you can rely on that name not ever appearing! I’ll eat my hat—or at least excoriate the old man on CT —if I’m wrong.
If there is an american upper class distinct from the merely rich, I would imagine Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman would be members.
soru
Soru, so wrong in so many directions. Tom “Cruise” is an oik. A midget scientologist who changed his name. How upper-class is that?
If there is an american upper class distinct from the merely rich, I would imagine Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman would be members.
Yep, unfortunately soru, even on a comparatively non contentious topic you do not lose sight of your traditional mission of being competely wrong.
Not upper-class in UK terms, certainly. But if americans defer to anyone, they defer to celebrities.
soru
if americans defer to anyone, they defer to celebrities
Indeed. All those supermarket tabloids featuring intensely ugly close-ups of so-&-so’s latest “tragic plastic surgery mishap” are actually signs of love and devotion.
Back in the day there were, of course, similar pamphlets discussing the vices of the Duchess of Devonshire and her set.
soru
Soru – Being upper class is about at least two things.
(i) Never having to work
(ii) Inheriting your position from your parents. Neither apply to Cruise and Kidman.
(1) celebrities don’t place themselves in the labour market as commodities, instead they pursue projects that interest them, like a Duke pursuing war against some continental army or breeding a better racehorse.
Like capitalists, celebrities very rarely stop doing what they do just because no longer need money.
(2) those two didn’t, but being the son or daughter of a celeb is sufficient qualification – see Stella McCartney, Priscilla Presley, etc.
Given that the term ‘mixed marriage’ is apparently used in the rare cases when a celeb marries a non-celeb, ‘caste’ might well be a better term than class.
soru