| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - What is the "English" culture?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


What is the "English" culture?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2009 at 21:15
Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:

Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

What about Australia-NewZealand particularly the latter. In both countries the Anglican church is still strong which indicate high level of "English" ethnic presence. What kind of English culture may exist there?

 
Al-Jassas


I wouldn't place much emphasis on the religious aspect in places like Australia and New Zealand. Attitudes towards religion here are very casual, and very few people take it seriously and make it a central part of their life or identity.
Which indeed is part of their English cultural identity, no?
I am of course bored with pointing out that the overwhelming majority of the Queen's ancestors are English (plus some Scots and Welsh) - or at least as English as anyone is. OK she had a mostly German great grandfather (Francis), but even that one eighth is pretty diluted. And a German great great grandfather (Albert), which I suppose throws in another possible sixteenth.
 
But basically she is no more 'German' than I am.
 
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
calvo View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 21 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1357
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calvo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2009 at 22:11
Compared to Latin, southern, and eastern europeans, English society tends to be much more individualistic.
The bonds with family, roots, the village and the neighbourhood where you grew up tend to be much weaker, and people generally are much more independent from a very young age.

In Spain and Italy it is usual to see people living with their parents until they get married, in Britain young people tend to seek independence from the age of 18 or 20.
In southern and eastern Europe most parents have a big say in the decisions of their adult offspring, while in Britain and the USA they have far less influence.
At the age of 16, many youngsters in Britain are completely independent, and live with their parents as if they were flatmates rather than family.

I don't know whether this trait is specific to the English, or is it something British (Scottish and Irish), and northern European in general.
Surprisingly, I find the "Irish" character more similar to that of southern Europeans than to the English.
Back to Top
calvo View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 21 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1357
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote calvo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2009 at 22:14
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

I have been always lead to think that the American south has more in common with what can be classified as "traditionally" english than any other place in the world especially that the most Southerners are actually of English heritage.
 


I'd say that at least today, the culture of the American south is VERY distant to the culture of England.
You can't really imagine any rednecks singing country music in England can you?

Many southern Americans might have distant Anglo roots, but over the centuries they've developed a radically different identity.
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2009 at 23:24
Originally posted by gcle gcle wrote:

Which indeed is part of their English cultural identity, no?


That's quite true. Ironically, one can say the same for some of the USA's religious fundamentalists, they too are a product of English emigration. They got the religious fanatics, we got the petty crims. I think we probably got the better deal of it Big smile.

Though the reason I mentioned this trait is to show that religion as a factor which influences the way one lives one's life (i.e. following scriptural commands on daily life activities), is not very strong in Australia. So a sense of religious 'brotherhood' through common daily habits which you see in some regions of the world (e.g in parts of the Middle East and the Americas), would not be a strong cultural link between Australia and the English. The unique nature of religious brotherhood, which in some societies is ever present and influential, would be missing. So a common Anglican following between the two countries would not equal a very strong cultural link.

Though the relaxed and generally tolerant attitude towards religion probably would be something that would enable and Englishman and an Aussie to find more common ground.


Edited by Constantine XI - 31 Aug 2009 at 23:26
Back to Top
Craze_b0i View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 200
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Craze_b0i Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Aug 2009 at 23:24
Ethnically the 'English' of today are predominantly celtic, but with a Germanic culture introduced by the invaders of the 5th and 6th century.
 
Ironically one can say the same about the Welsh and Scots, most of whom speak English as a first language and have almost identical culture (same tv, newspapers, books, music). What is percieved as traditionally scottish, for example highland dress and sword dancing, is actually specific to the highlands which contain only a tiny fraction of the Scots population... As a classic example the movie Braveheart depicts wallace in highland costume, but actually the real Wallace was a lowlander and would have been dressed in a more ordinary fashion.


Edited by Craze_b0i - 31 Aug 2009 at 23:26
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6261
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 02:01
Well, I do know how to push a few buttons, after all gcle had to post a rejoinder to my tongue-in-cheek allusion to the dear tenant of a certain bit of prime London real estate that actually belongs to a certain Stuart descendant!Stern Smile 
 
 


Edited by drgonzaga - 01 Sep 2009 at 02:02
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 02:23
Why did it pass me I don't know. The English Maritime culture!
 
Almost all the maritime culture around the English speaking world is exclusively english. From legends to cutoms and the way they all talk arrrr.
 
Al-Jassas
 
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6261
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 02:44
Bravo, Al Jassas, although the Spanish and Portuguese might raise a few howls over naval matters. The most obvious aspects of English "culture" escape many because we are all essentially "English" in outlook, be it in pursuit of profit or politics and even along the lines of intellectual ponderings. One may wish to put an "American" twang on many things, but essentially scratch any of these surfaces and there before your eyes you'll see a bowler hat and a bumbershoot!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 11:58

Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

I have been always lead to think that the American south has more in common with what can be classified as "traditionally" english than any other place in the world especially that the most Southerners are actually of English heritage.

No I wouldn't say so. If anything the Southerners are the most culturally different of the English emigrant countries. Sense of humour, attitudes to life and religion are quite different.
Quote I read a linguistic study once that say the dominant accent in certain places in NC coast are closer to those of England than any other place in the US which is interesting.

I suppose that would depend on what an English accent is. I would say the New England accents (like Winchester in MASH if you've seen it) is the most English of the American accents.
Quote What about Australia-NewZealand particularly the latter. In both countries the Anglican church is still strong which indicate high level of "English" ethnic presence. What kind of English culture may exist there?

English culture is predominant, and has always been the expectation of the establishment. White Australian is synomous for Anglo-Celtic Australian. I remember Adelaide once being described as "the most English city outside England", but a google of that phrase turns up Christchurch, still a good example though.
While the class difference is less pronouced than in England, it still exists in a watered down form. The upper classes (who I tend to think of as 'squatters') are distinctly more upper class English than the lower classes are lower class English. Probably because lower classes have blurred more with Celtic and other cultures.
Originally posted by CXI CXI wrote:

I wouldn't place much emphasis on the religious aspect in places like Australia and New Zealand. Attitudes towards religion here are very casual, and very few people take it seriously and make it a central part of their life or identity.

I agree with gcle, that's not different from England. God knows, being Anglican has nothing to do with religion
Similarly the disdain of a privileged aristocracy is normal for the English lower classes, there just happens to be far more emigrants from the lower classes here than from the upper (and the middle was hardly represented until the mid 20th century).
Quote with the idea of a privileged aristocracy being totally unacceptable to Australian sensibiliies.

Not at all, there is just disdain, otherwise the Grammer schools, Kings School, St Peters (and etc) wouldn't exist. The squatocracy used to be very powerful in the 19th century, and their descendents and class buddies from England who migrated later still like to think they are. The Downers (as in Alexander Downer) are a perfect example.

I also don't think that the change is a deviation from English culture either, because as far as I know the English are experiencing a similar change. If anything, now that Australia is highly urbanised unlike 100 years ago we have drifted closer to England. The major differenciating factor between Aus & England is the enviroment, but in a city it becomes much closer than it does than in the bush.

Quote Compared to Latin, southern, and eastern europeans, English society tends to be much more individualistic.
The bonds with family, roots, the village and the neighbourhood where you grew up tend to be much weaker, and people generally are much more independent from a very young age.

In Spain and Italy it is usual to see people living with their parents until they get married, in Britain young people tend to seek independence from the age of 18 or 20.
In southern and eastern Europe most parents have a big say in the decisions of their adult offspring, while in Britain and the USA they have far less influence.
At the age of 16, many youngsters in Britain are completely independent, and live with their parents as if they were flatmates rather than family.


Definitely. Can't agree more. It's North European rather than exclusively British though.
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

Almost all the maritime culture around the English speaking world is exclusively english. From legends to cutoms and the way they all talk arrrr.

Yeah, good point. Actually in even in Alice Springs they hold a regatta. Although they cancel it if the river floods (ie, there is water in it)

Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 14:22
Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

I remember Adelaide once being described as "the most English city outside England", but a google of that phrase turns up Christchurch, still a good example though.
 
The men who conceived the settlement of both South Australia and New Zealand did so with the conviction that these two colonies would be different from the rest of Australiasia in that they would be designed to more closely conform to the culture of the mother country. I would agree that to some extent they did succeed.
 
Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

I agree with gcle, that's not different from England
 
Then we all agree on that.
 
Quote Similarly the disdain of a privileged aristocracy is normal for the English lower classes, there just happens to be far more emigrants from the lower classes here than from the upper (and the middle was hardly represented until the mid 20th century).
 
The English in England more readily recognise the hereditary titles of their aristocracy. We don't have hereditary titles and a sense of social privilege which is inherited. The disdain for the privileges which come with belonging to a certain class are not as strong in the UK. I can't imagine Australians tolerating our upper house of parliament with its members appointed on the basis of their aristocratic lineage.
 
Quote Not at all, there is just disdain, otherwise the Grammer schools, Kings School, St Peters (and etc) wouldn't exist. The squatocracy used to be very powerful in the 19th century, and their descendents and class buddies from England who migrated later still like to think they are. The Downers (as in Alexander Downer) are a perfect example.

I also don't think that the change is a deviation from English culture either, because as far as I know the English are experiencing a similar change. If anything, now that Australia is highly urbanised unlike 100 years ago we have drifted closer to England. The major differenciating factor between Aus & England is the enviroment, but in a city it becomes much closer than it does than in the bush.

There is a stark difference between a hereditary aristocracy, which the English have, and an economic upper class, which both countries have.
 
While our schools are unequal and represent the interests of religious isolationists and the economic elite, this does not equate to the more tightly closed and hereditary based society which exists in England. You can actually be pretty poor over there, but by having the right lineage will enjoy membership in clubs and make friends within the aristocratic circle anyway.
 
In Australia, social mobility into and out of our economic elite is far more fluid. If you make a success of yourself you can easily end up mixing with our own elites. They care less about your bloodline and the school you went to, and more about what you have achieved professionally.
 
So here we certainly do find the idea of a hereitary aristocracy to be anathema. We will not grant feudal titles to our own citizens, nor do we care about the feudal titles of people visiting here from England. We do have an economic upper class, for sure, but that is not the same as a hereditary aristocracy.
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 17:59
Originally posted by CXI CXI wrote:

The English in England more readily recognise the hereditary titles of their aristocracy. We don't have hereditary titles and a sense of social privilege which is inherited. The disdain for the privileges which come with belonging to a certain class are not as strong in the UK. I can't imagine Australians tolerating our upper house of parliament with its members appointed on the basis of their aristocratic lineage.

Agreed, but I'd argue that is due to the type of people who emigrated from England rather than a wholesale break with English culture. That is to say, the sections of English society that had more disdain for privileges were more likely to migrate to Australia - especially pre WW2.
Quote There is a stark difference between a hereditary aristocracy, which the English have, and an economic upper class, which both countries have.

There was a mostly unsucessful attempt to establish a hereditary aristocracy in Aus. James MacArthur even tried to make the NSW parlament restricted to such a class (for which he was mocked as the Earl of Camden by the Bulletin). While they failed to large degree, there are established landowning familes like the Downers that bring the culture of the aristocracy to Aus.
I don't think its true to say that a privileged aristocracy is totally unacceptable to Australian sensibiliies, without kicking this class of people out of being 'Australian'. The attitude at these schools is very much one that they deserve a privledge position. If anything, a large amount of Australian history is concerned with the struggle for power between the people who think they deserve priviledge and the people who think they don't.
Quote In Australia, social mobility into and out of our economic elite is far more fluid. If you make a success of yourself you can easily end up mixing with our own elites. They care less about your bloodline and the school you went to, and more about what you have achieved professionally.

Turnbull and Downer represent a type of economic elite that Packet & Murdoch do though. The former would care more about school than wealth, while the latter would not.
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2009 at 18:41
Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

Agreed, but I'd argue that is due to the type of people who emigrated from England rather than a wholesale break with English culture. That is to say, the sections of English society that had more disdain for privileges were more likely to migrate to Australia - especially pre WW2.


I agree, although I will add the caveat that this is also a product of non-English migration. The Germans who came here saw nothing special in English titles. Especially those who arrived here post-1848 revolutions and were political exiles due to their actions against the establishment in the German states. Plus the Irish are naturally going to be nothing but hostile to English power structures.

Quote There was a mostly unsucessful attempt to establish a hereditary aristocracy in Aus. James MacArthur even tried to make the NSW parlament restricted to such a class (for which he was mocked as the Earl of Camden by the Bulletin). While they failed to large degree, there are established landowning familes like the Downers that bring the culture of the aristocracy to Aus.
I don't think its true to say that a privileged aristocracy is totally unacceptable to Australian sensibiliies, without kicking this class of people out of being 'Australian'. The attitude at these schools is very much one that they deserve a privledge position. If anything, a large amount of Australian history is concerned with the struggle for power between the people who think they deserve priviledge and the people who think they don't.


I can certainly see the attitude that develops in some of our private schools, and among their students, as somewhat elitist compared to your typical public school. Some of these kids may think they deserve a privileged position. But I must question, do they actually get special privileges beyond the good start in life provided by mum and dad?

I have not seen much evidence of it. No special clubs to join, no reserved seats in parliament or at the footy oval, no special titles, rules of precedence, or really very much to distinguish them from the public school kid who grows up to be a brickie. They may end up with a flashier education, more money and more opportunities - though that is the natural product of their parents having more money than a system which is willing to accommodate their elitist demands.

Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

Turnbull and Downer represent a type of economic elite that Packet & Murdoch do though. The former would care more about school than wealth, while the latter would not.


I do see the different categories you are illustrating here. Let's ask ourselves, when Downer and Turnbull were/are heading the Liberal Party, what have been the their approval ratings? Late teens as a percentage of approval ratings is laughably pathetic. It goes to show you that the best of the 'old boys' group is still too alien too your typical Aussie to ever be appealing, and this is without peerage or titles.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2009 at 00:26
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

Well, I do know how to push a few buttons, after all gcle had to post a rejoinder to my tongue-in-cheek allusion to the dear tenant of a certain bit of prime London real estate that actually belongs to a certain Stuart descendant!Stern Smile 
 
 
Thanks for the link, I appreciate it Approve
 
However I have to point out that the dear tenant is in fact the owner of the property in question (and much else).
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2009 at 00:33
The definitive statement on the English class system is of course, as many will already know, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0DUsGSMwZY
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7823
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2009 at 22:09
Originally posted by CXI CXI wrote:

I can certainly see the attitude that develops in some of our private schools, and among their students, as somewhat elitist compared to your typical public school. Some of these kids may think they deserve a privileged position. But I must question, do they actually get special privileges beyond the good start in life provided by mum and dad?

Well, they think so. I don't. But that fact that they do shows that privilege isn't a total anathema. At one event I was at a Grammar school boy thought it a good way to prevent binge drinking was to make it look "common". I don't know what he thinks common means, but obviously he doesn't like it.
Quote No special clubs to join

There are clubs and social circles.
Quote
I do see the different categories you are illustrating here. Let's ask ourselves, when Downer and Turnbull were/are heading the Liberal Party, what have been the their approval ratings? Late teens as a percentage of approval ratings is laughably pathetic. It goes to show you that the best of the 'old boys' group is still too alien too your typical Aussie to ever be appealing, and this is without peerage or titles.

Yeah that's true. Well, I'm not sure the approval ratings can be held to be caused just by their class, but I accept that toffee-nosed bastards aren't exactly popular. But, as these people are Australians, we can't quite say that Australian culture in general regards priviledge as a totally unacceptable. If these people had migrated in greater numbers, then perhaps they'd have more power in Aus, just as they do in England.

Having said that I will admit that I would describe Packer as "more Australian" and Downer as "more English". I don't think that's really fair to the English or accurate to Australians, but the stereotypes certainly lend well to those descriptions.

Edited by Omar al Hashim - 02 Sep 2009 at 22:11
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2009 at 00:17
Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

Well, they think so. I don't. But that fact that they do shows that privilege isn't a total anathema. At one event I was at a Grammar school boy thought it a good way to prevent binge drinking was to make it look "common". I don't know what he thinks common means, but obviously he doesn't like it.


Snot nosed school kids get a nasty shock when they enter the working world. Hard performance targets, emotional intelligence, ability to think creatively and communicate in an appealing way to an audience from a variety of backgrounds. Many have difficulty grappling with these dynamic demands. To their horror, they often find CEOs and Managing Directors tend to embrace an old fashioned work ethic which more closely resembles that of an Aussie construction foreman than the tea room musings of an English aristocrat. Trust me on this one Wink. All of this I have found to be personally a source of enormous glee Smile.

The arrogant musings of a more than likely insecure adolescent should not be read too much into. What pretensions that boy does have will likely be knocked out of him by the demands of his career.

Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

There are clubs and social circles.


Not on the scale of English High society. There is nothing here that compares with their polo matches, or group tours of the south of France for wealthy schoolboys.

Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

Yeah that's true. Well, I'm not sure the approval ratings can be held to be caused just by their class, but I accept that toffee-nosed bastards aren't exactly popular. But, as these people are Australians, we can't quite say that Australian culture in general regards priviledge as a totally unacceptable. If these people had migrated in greater numbers, then perhaps they'd have more power in Aus, just as they do in England.


It is certainly true that those who migrated here from the British Isles had the most to gain by rejecting the class system, and they had the practical means to do it also. I don't think Australians view 'privilege' as unacceptable in the sense of economic privilege, as we are a capitalist nation. But for privilege to be organised into a system of defined social behaviours, roles, protocol etc in the way the English aristocracy is would be totally unacceptable to Australian sensibilities.

Howard, coming from the same party, was more popular than Downer because he talked like a typical Aussie (compared to Downer's more English sounding enunciation of words), embraced typical Aussie cultural events like the cricket, and overall just appeared rather middle class instead of privileged.

Originally posted by Omar Omar wrote:

Having said that I will admit that I would describe Packer as "more Australian" and Downer as "more English". I don't think that's really fair to the English or accurate to Australians, but the stereotypes certainly lend well to those descriptions.


Certainly true, even more so than the Howard/Downer contrast.


Edited by Constantine XI - 03 Sep 2009 at 00:20
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6261
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2009 at 00:21
Well, way back when in the hoary days of history privilege was a function of responsibility and this relationship still lives on in vocabulary: noblesse oblige. No "lord" could expect a long and happy life absent a satisfied peasantry. Deference is seldom achieved through brute force so one does need to take a hard look at the origins of class so as to understand not only its breakdown but also how human behavior always tends to separate the doers from the ne'er do wells. How else to explain the current "scandal" over the pols and their entitlement to remuneration from the public purse! Privilege ends once it takes on the appearance of corruption.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Oct 2009 at 08:38
English culture?
 
Cricket, red double decker buses, fish and chips, bowler hats, etc.
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 3326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 09:39
English culture is Newton, Crick, Sanger and Fleming to me.
Back to Top
Anton View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 3326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 09:41
... and Carling!
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 10:08
Don't forget Football, Rugby, Parliamentary Democracy, a well renowned Legal System(not now of course!), Rock'n'Roll,  The Computer (Alan Turing and Charles Babbage), The Steam Engine, The Neutron, Tea(Earl grey Tea,) Shakespeare, and Marlowe. Those are all the things i'd associate as part of English Culture (and for those not interested in anything other than drinking; going to Tenerife and becoming heavily intoxicated thus embarrassing English People as a whole). 
Back to Top
Chookie View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chookie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 10:08
Originally posted by Windemere Windemere wrote:

It's true that the English don't seem to have much of an "ethnic" identity. Other ethnic groups (including Scottish) have their cultural celebrations and festivals, while the English don't seem to have any. I think possibly this may have come about because the English were the original colonial settlers,

Can you justify this? Preferably using acceptable sources.

The "English" were not settlers - original or any other way. They are descended from the Anglo-Saxons (should really be Anglo-Frisians but lets not quarrel) who were invited into what is now England to defend the Romano-British inhabitants against the Picts, Scots and Irish. This being the case, it is patently obvious that the "English" were not the "original colonial settlers".

I'm not going to mention "Cheddar Man" because I don't want to upset anyone....

Originally posted by Windemere Windemere wrote:

and thus had no need to make any effort to preserve their culture. Their's was the prevailing culture. As succeeding ethnic groups settled in the region, being a minority, they made a conscious effort to band together and institute ethnic-based groups and events in order to preserve their heritage, and this has persisted down the generations. I suppose if there were to be a 'new wave' of English immigration into the region, they might do the same thing. The descendants of the original settlers, though, never really had a need to create ethnic institutions.

Succeeding ethnic groups? Which ones? Danes pr Normans?

Don't forget the Danemark or Danegeld and the Normans introduced the concept of taxation. Ever hear of the Domesday Book?


Edited by Chookie - 09 Oct 2009 at 10:09
Iasdan dan fasalach 's iadsan gairm sith
Back to Top
Chookie View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chookie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 10:40
Originally posted by Azrael Azrael wrote:

Don't forget Football, Rugby, Parliamentary Democracy, a well renowned Legal System(not now of course!), Rock'n'Roll,  The Computer (Alan Turing and Charles Babbage), The Steam Engine, The Neutron, Tea(Earl grey Tea,) Shakespeare, and Marlowe. Those are all the things i'd associate as part of English Culture (and for those not interested in anything other than drinking; going to Tenerife and becoming heavily intoxicated thus embarrassing English People as a whole). 

Crap. Football was invented in Scotland (I can't recall the detail, but there is a historical source which places the first published rules of football in Aberdeen). The Parliamentary democracy thing was stolen from the Danes. Rock'n'Roll was American (one of my history books references a bill Haley), the steam engine wasn't invented by an Englishman - steam engines were a court novelty in the time of Alexander the Great.

The stem engine you seem to be referring to is that devised by James Watt (a Scot) who didn't invent the steam engine,he added a condenser.

Earl Grey was actually a Scot.

Neutrons were discovered by Walther Bothe and Herbert Becker both of whom were German.
Iasdan dan fasalach 's iadsan gairm sith
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Oct 2009 at 21:05
You are correct in some of your points. However, I was merely pointing out what English Culture is and what people associate with it, not what an Englishman invented. Earl Grey is no more a scot than I would be a scouser. As far as I am aware Sir James Chadwick discovered the neutron, and a google search on this topic yields the same answer. As for football, well it's still up for debate, however, I don't know whether you read my post as I am quite sure I did not suggest that the English invented football, though I may go back and read my post thrice as at the moment my dear man I cannot seem to find it! And the Same Goes for rock. If my memory serves me still, then I would put forth that in Archaeology, or the study of cultures that the concept of culture is on of tradition, and learning etc, not having to be a progenitor of certain practices and constant invention. So all in all, my post was not 'crap' and I would thank you to not be so rude in the future, it doesn't bode well for discussion though i'm not sure if your aware of this!
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2009 at 00:58
Chookie stated a couple of posts ago that the term for the original English inhabitants should be "Anglo-Frisians". God knows wher he got that term from because all Anglo-Saxon historians and scholars  use the term "Anglo-Saxon". Its true that there were some Frisians amongst those who arrived during the time known as the "Adventus Saxonum", but they never came in any appreciable numbers. They never were in sufficient numbers to form a kingdom or even a province.
 
For Chookie`s education this is where the various groups settled: The Jutes settled in Kent, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Saxons founded the kingdoms of Essex, Sussex, and Wessex. The kingdoms of Northumbria, East Anglia, and Northumbria were formed from Anglian peoples. Obviously there would have been some racial mixing but the list is still accepted by historians.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 08 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Oct 2009 at 01:17
The steam engine wasn't invented in Alexander's time nor anyone else for that matter, the steam engine was invented by Newcomen who was engish (probably even cornish). Toys don't count for inventions.
 
Second point, parliamentry democracy (if we actually can call the systems before 1642 real parliaments) is an international phenomenon and the anglo-saxon tribes practiced similar systems before they came to England. Plus danes and Anglo-Saxons are from the same part of land and shared the same cultural attributes and even gods and religion before the advent of christianity.
 
Third point, inventions and science aren't really culture but social norms and legal systems are. The common law is probably Englands cheif export but also modern music, modern theatre, cinema etc all trace their roots directly to the english school not anyother school.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Chookie View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 107
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chookie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Oct 2009 at 09:40
Originally posted by Wulfstan Wulfstan wrote:

Chookie stated a couple of posts ago that the term for the original English inhabitants should be "Anglo-Frisians". God knows wher he got that term from because all Anglo-Saxon historians and scholars  use the term "Anglo-Saxon". Its true that there were some Frisians amongst those who arrived during the time known as the "Adventus Saxonum", but they never came in any appreciable numbers. They never were in sufficient numbers to form a kingdom or even a province.
 
For Chookie`s education this is where the various groups settled: The Jutes settled in Kent, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Saxons founded the kingdoms of Essex, Sussex, and Wessex. The kingdoms of Northumbria, East Anglia, and Northumbria were formed from Anglian peoples. Obviously there would have been some racial mixing but the list is still accepted by historians.


These are what seem to be the facts as they are currently known:-

The Saxons are not now seen as a separate or even identifiable tribal grouping. It seems that the term Saxon referred to their preferred weaponry – the seax.

My reference to Anglo-Frisian was based on the language which is defined as an Indo-European language of the West Germanic branch of Germanic. The Anglo-Frisian subdivision has two branches which are further subdivided into Insular Anglo-Frisian (English and Scots) and Continental Anglo-Frisian (West Frisian, Saterland (East) Frisian and North Frisian).

Whilst I agree that the Frisians were probably comparitively few, they brought the language...




Edited by Chookie - 11 Oct 2009 at 09:41
Iasdan dan fasalach 's iadsan gairm sith
Back to Top
Guest View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Mar 2014 at 17:35
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

What about Australia-NewZealand particularly the latter. In both countries the Anglican church is still strong which indicate high level of "English" ethnic presence. What kind of English culture may exist there?

 
Al-Jassas
This post is "off topic" so I'll be very brief.
 
Of course there is a strong "ethnic" English presence in both Australia and New Zealand, after all, it was England which settled both countries (not to ignore indigenous occupation).
 
But both are different from England.
 
Australia was a Penal Colony-there is more of an anti authoritarian "larrikin" in Australians.
 
The New Zealanders, on the other hand, were comprised of many dour Presbyterian Scots-and it still shows.
 
Forget the religious aspect-it's not relevant now.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.