Posted by PeterH on September 04, 2006 at 10:58:15 from 81.132.217.219 user Peter_H.
In Reply to: Re: The S&A Films posted by Peter Ceresole on September 04, 2006 at 08:23:15:
It seems to me from reading the books that AR made the Amazons upper middle class, not from any details he provided (apart from the size of Beckfoot and the presence of Cook) but simply in the way he wrote Nancy, Peggy and their mother. The style of their speech and the lives they lived simply say 'middle class'. It's not sociology, it's AR's art.
Peter Ceresole's assessment seems to me to be the most convincing so far. At the risk of falling into Andyb's category of those who 'wilfully misunderstand class' (BTW how can one 'wilfully misunderstand' anything?) I think that we have to approach the question of the 'class' (used here in its general conversational sense) of the Amazons by looking at the girls themselves. Counting cars and motor launches doesn't get you very far - possessions can be acquired . . . and lost. This is a complex problem - can one 'wilfully' change one's class? Can we all define or re-define our own class and ensure that other people observe our self-definition? Leaving those questions aside, if we use Peter C's criterion, then yes, I have to admit that N and P are upper middle class in speech and behaviour.
The problem is that there are various types of UMC. The Blackett girls and the Turners of Beckfoot are a recognisable type - probably the tail end of a Victorian well-to-do family, based on commerce, which has spread out and diversified due to deaths, failure to marry, and failure to earn big money in business. Lack of resources means no funds to modernise buildings - hence the genteel decay of Beckfoot. There is a tangible air of 'Making the Best of Things'.
Peter has dealt with the servant question, and it has been pointed out before that in the 1920s even 'middle middle class' households frequently employed at least one servant. So while there is no surprise that there is a 'cook' at a house like Beckfoot, one does wonder why, in Mrs Blackett's case, she continued to employ a cook while her daughters had gone off to school and her brother was away a great deal. Cook must have spent a lot of the time cooking meals solely for Mrs B.
I think the problem here is that AR regarded financial matters in the same way that he regarded lavatorial matters - as Best Not Mentioned. To be fair, he was writing books for children, who would not be in the least interested in the Turner Trust Fund or whatever. I am not sure I am. AR's sketching in of the Beckfoot set-up is impressionistic, and immediately recognisable (to me anyway). It is a realistic, but fuzzy, background to the Important Matters of what Nancy is Up To Next.
It's not sociology, it's AR's art. Yep, I'll buy that.