Posted by PeterH on December 06, 2006 at 13:15:03 from 86.130.137.218 user Peter_H.
In Reply to: Re: UHT milk posted by Peter Ceresole on December 06, 2006 at 12:07:34:
Does the one exclude the other?
No, Peter, you're right, it doesn't. But the two (romanticism and class consciousness) can sit uneasily together. Many years ago, I had a friend who, when we happened to visit a large 'stately home' or National Trust property, would just stand in the Great Hall (or wherever) scowling and muttering to himself about how it had been built 'on the backs of the workers'. In vain I pleaded with him that, although historically speaking he had a point, the house now exists and we can all see it - why not briefly enjoy the art and workmanship? I think my friend was an exceptional case, and he probably would have collectivised Mr D's sheep.
But (to get back on-topic) this is why I am uneasy with 'class' analysis of AR's stories. Somehow it introduces a feeling of 'ought' to people who just 'are'. If Mrs Blackett really was well-off and sent N and P to an expensive boarding school, should she not have sent them to the local village school like other children? Was the ownership of several boats, including a launch, a needless display of wealth over the neighbours, like the Swainsons for instance, who only had a rowing boat?
Did Nancy have a patronising attitude to people like Sammy and Jacky? Once you start asking these questions, you never stop, and the 'magic' ebbs away. I much prefer Dixon's sheep to be left alone.
(I emphasise that this is a personal reaction and I am sticking my neck out. Please moderate the flak if you can - I have lent my helmet to John Lambert!)