Toby Young suffers from Status Anxiety
‘As I write, highly civilised human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.’ So began one of the most famous essays in the English language, George Orwell’s ‘The Lion and the Unicorn’, written almost 70 years ago.
It’s a much-loved essay thanks to its lyrical invocation of ‘English civilisation’: red pillar boxes, bad teeth, the old maids cycling to Holy Communion through the mists of the autumn mornings, etc. (John Major ‘borrowed’ some of this language when describing what he loved most about Britain.) But it’s worth pointing out that in most respects ‘The Lion and the Unicorn’ was completely wrongheaded. The theme of the essay was that the English class system was impeding the war effort, largely thanks to the incompetence of the public-school educated officer class. England, according to Orwell, was a family with the wrong members in control. If we were to stand a chance of defeating Hitler, the old ruling class had to be put out to grass. ‘What is wanted is a conscious open revolt by ordinary people against inefficiency, class privilege and the rule of the old,’ he wrote.
In fact, no such revolt took place and we still went on to win the war, albeit with a little help from our allies. Orwell’s essay can be read as a veiled attack on Winston Churchill, who was not only the embodiment of class privilege but beyond retirement age when he became Prime Minister in 1940. Orwell can be forgiven for lacking confidence in Churchill less than a year into his premiership, but it is now almost universally accepted that the Allied victory — or, more precisely, the avoidance of defeat before America entered the war — owed much to Churchill’s leadership. ‘I’m absolutely convinced that if Churchill hadn’t been there, the British people would have made terms with the Nazis,’ says Max Hastings, author of the recently published Finest Years: Churchill as Warlord 1940-45.
More articles from: Toby Young | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
The present Queen succeeded to the throne 60 years ago…
The City is used to ignoring MPs, because they don’t matter. Or at least they didn’t
It’s not strange that bankers have so much more money…
Ancient and modern: Call that a spectacle?
The Grand Olympic Opening Ceremony will apparently inform us ‘who…
I write this having just returned from the BBC, where…
The Wiki Man: The best thing since wheeled suitcases
I had a Land Rover Discovery once. It was expensive…
1 Terry shouldn’t be captain, but that should be Capello’s decision to make - Rod Liddle
2 Do we really need to know more about Gary Speed’s death? - Rod Liddle
3 Snow? What snow? - Rod Liddle
4 Scottish Labour Embrace the Logic of Independence - Alex Massie
5 Falklands Talks? There Is Nothing To Talk About. - Alex Massie
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Doppelganger
August 12th, 2010 5:34pm Report this commentRe "But it’s worth remembering that the few whom we owe so much to were all members of England’s ‘clapped out’ ruling class.": really? What about the NCO pilots, the pilots who came from overseas, and the other pilots who were not from the "ruling classes"?
Herbert Thornton
August 12th, 2010 11:16pm Report this comment".......it is now almost universally accepted that the Allied victory — or, more precisely, the avoidance of defeat before America entered the war — owed much to Churchill’s leadership. ‘I’m absolutely convinced that if Churchill hadn’t been there, the British people would have made terms with the Nazis,’ says Max Hastings, author of the recently published Finest Years: Churchill as Warlord 1940-45."
That Churchill was the sole reason the British people did not make terms with Hitler may indeed be true but surely it requires us to also ask what other consequences would have followed? Two questions in particular that deserve an answer are, to my mind -
1. Would Hitler's campaign against the Soviet Union have succeeded? and
2. Would Hitler have launched his programme to exterminate all Germany's Jews?
I ask the second question because I discovered, to my surprise when working in East Africa, that one of my colleagues was from Vienna and had spent several months in a Nazi concentration camp. He told me that he had been released and allowed to leave Germany. I realise that his example may count for very little, but it does seem to raise the question of whether universal extermination of all Jews would have necessarily followed had Hitler's war against the Soviet Union been more successful.
Peter Jukes
August 13th, 2010 10:19am Report this commentHas the Spectator now lost all sense of historical probity, and left open the coffers of the past to unchecked plundering like this?
The RAF was famously the most meritocratic and least class obsessed of the three services. Of course, its senior officers were, by modern standards, Blimpish and Toff. But it was mainly nice upper middle class boys - like Richard Hillary - who flew the planes. Fighter pilots thrived on an ethos of individualism: they were more existentialist and radical than conservative. Think A Matter of Life and Death. The David Niven character may be charming and smooth spoken by our standards, but by the standards of the 1940s he was no aristocrat.
You only think the RAF pilots in the Battle of Britain are Toffs because of the change of accent and class structure over the last 60 years.
At the time the pilots were known as 'long haired boys' - rascals and rebels with more in common with Beatniks than Cecil Beaton.
Rarely has one op ed contained so many historical errors.
Peter Anson
August 15th, 2010 1:38pm Report this commentThis is such a pointless and silly article that any analysis would, itself, be pointless. One hopes that the author has not been paid.
Derek Mc
August 18th, 2010 12:44pm Report this commentDoubtless when Toby has to crank out a few hundred words for the Spectator historical research must seem like a boring chore, however it wouldn't prevent him hanging an entire piece on a fallacy thereby rather invalidating the whole thing. Of the just over 3,000 pilots (including 20% from outside the UK) accepted to have fought in the battle of Britain approximately 200 came from a public school background. I don't suppose there's any chance of a correction or apology is there?
Mik Black
August 19th, 2010 7:07pm Report this commentMr Young doesn't seem to have actually read Orwell's essay, for if he had he might have discovered that Orwell actually says:
"It is worth noticing that the navy and, latterly, the air force, have always been more efficient than the regular army. But the navy is only partially, and the air force hardly at all, within the ruling-class orbit."
How long would it have taken to read the essay in its entirety? 20 minutes?
Back to top