Almost all of the British people I know are fairly leftwing and rigorously anti-monarchist. In general their attitude has been highly disdainful towards the royal wedding the values underlying it.
I have a good deal of sympathy for this view. It is not just the Irish who have good reason to remember the abusive and tyrannical nature of the British monarchy throughout history.
Indeed, monarchies in general have benefitted from a significant whitewashing of what has been a shameful history. I have always thought it strange that the persecution that occurred in the early stages of the French Revolution cited as proof of the danger of revolution when monarchies have ruthlessly slaughtered their opponents throughout history.
It is also easy to forget that most members of the British royal family do actually believe that they are qualitatively superior to non-royals. In an increasingly unequal society I can really appreciate how enraging it is for that society’s communal celebrations to be based around highly unequal ideas of heredity.
And yet I must say I enjoyed the atmosphere that gripped London over the days before the royal wedding. Life in this city is generally relentlessly individualistic. People keep themselves to themselves, travel long distances in packed silent buses and trains and work long hours to keep up with an expensive cost of living.
The royal wedding has allowed people to focus on something other than their individual lives for a brief time and to engage in a genuinely shared celebration.
There is something thrilling about watching an event and knowing that thousands of others are both doing the same thing and sharing in appreciating its importance.
That is why it is so satisfying to attend large sporting events in person. You probably get a better overall view of the game on television but there, in the stadium, you have the thrilling sense of connection, the joyous sensation that what is important to you is also important to others.
It is this sense of connection to others that make things like flags and national anthems so important. They allow us to feel part of what the great theorist of nationalism, Benedict Anderson described as an “imagined community” where we feel connected to people we will never meet.
Communal identities and communal events come out of a particular history. When a team wins an All-Ireland final the excitement of the crowd comes from the knowledge of the teams that have gone before and the importance accorded to that title by Irish society over the years.
Similarly when Rafael Nadal beat Roger Federer in the famous final of 2008 the electric atmosphere on Centre Court was not just because it was a great match, but because everyone watching knew the historical significance attributed to Wimbledon by tennis players over the decades.
Likewise, the traditions and communal celebrations of the British state come from a particular set of historical circumstances. Like it or not, monarchy has been a central feature of British history and what Churchill called “the long continuity of our institutions”.
It is therefore unavoidable that in Britain, national communal events that have any historical resonance are going to be linked to the monarchy. It would be nice if events could be based on something more egalitarian but is not year zero and culture cannot be created from scratch.
Communal occasions that are not linked into some longer historical tradition are generally failures at catching the popular imagination. No signficant sense of togetherness results, for example, from the promotion of “Europe Day” by the EU (it is on the 9th of May…..see, you had to be told).
In Britain therefore, the alternative to royal communal events is really no engaging communal events at all and fewer chances to feel connected to those around you, in short, a more atomised and lonely society.
In Ireland, Saint Patrick’s day has become a celebration of national identity, culture and a way for us to feel connected through a shared commitment to society and its cultural tradition.
Yes, it is officially a celebration of the coming of Christianity to Ireland and the churches probably derive some boost from the association. Non-Christians however, are, by and large, are happy to overlook religious bits they don’t agree with in order to join in a celebration of national belonging.
As Giles Fraser said in the Guardian in relation to the royal wedding “sometimes it is worth giving in to a communal sense of joy even when it can’t quite be justified by our critical faculties or political commitments.”
Indeed, those who aspire to remoulding national cultures along more secular and egalitarian lines would perhaps be better advised to join in celebrations with everyone else rather than being labeled killjoys with no sense of the importance of tradition to communities.
The alternative is to allow unsavoury reactionary forces to monopolise these powerful forces and to harness them for anti-egalitarian ends.
Cultures can and should evolve. In both Ireland and Britain the hope is that such evolution will be in the direction of greater egalitarianism.
However, most people need reassurances that such evolution will not involve a complete breach with the past and will allow them to maintain the thrilling feeling of connection with their fellow citizens and with future and past generations that make national identity such a potent force.
No comments:
Post a Comment