A Class Act: The Complexity Of Britain’s Class System

Class is not a simple concept or system.  As our society evolves, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to define and pin down what the class system looks like, and like most complicated things, it has become simplified, reduced by unhelpful stereotypes which get us nowhere. Most of us will have a vague three part tier in our heads of the class system: the upper class (who own yachts and brush their teeth with truffle), the middle class (in nice five bedroom suburban houses and a golden retriever), and the working class warehouse workers in council flats. But note the imagery - all the markers are superficial. Types of houses, holidays, food, and accents are things we use to assume someone’s class and economic standing. It is simply too reductive. Class is way more nuanced than that.

Personally, I have always felt that class preconceptions have never been all-encompassing. The way people conceive middle class and working class people in Britain has never aided my expression of myself and my background. I went to a state school in an affluent area in Hertfordshire and therefore I have a typical southern, RP sounding accent. Would I consider myself middle class however? No. My mother is a receptionist and father a self-employed graphic designer and they have worked for everything. I am a first generation graduate and have qualified for bursaries for two thirds of my higher education. I have had a job for spending money since I was 15. I would not say I economically fit into most people’s understanding of the middle class. If you were to assess my postcode and voice you might say I do, but from my lived experience, I can tell you I don’t.

Class is not all about day to day possessions and accents - it is so much more. It does have something to do with the houses people can afford but is also about opportunities and social mobility, and preconceptions about people who typically are disadvantaged do not always equate to reality. In 2013 the BBC carried out a survey with 161,000 participants to discover that there are actually 7 social classes - very different from our blue collar/toff binary. The study revealed that the three tier class system only fitted 39% of the participants' lives. The new structure measured people on economic, social, and cultural capital and consists of the Elite, Established Middle Class, Technical Middle Class, New Affluent Workers, Traditional Working Class, Emergent Service Workers and Precarious Proletariat, also known as the Precariat. The study essentially showed that the distinction between working and middle classes isn’t as clear cut as we thought. The Traditional Working Class is low-scoring on the three capitals but is not considered utterly deprived, whereas the Technical Middle Class is economically prosperous but has low social and cultural capital scores - essentially, there are many more factors to class than accent and assets. Capital is not just cash.

This revision of the class system appears to show that class is also about who you know and how culturally engaged you are. You could have a large house in an affluent area but a lack of cultural engagement which wouldn’t superficially categorise you as middle class. And this is only one revision of the class model - this will not do justice to a lot of people’s circumstances. But what does become clear through these class studies is that clumping people into stereotypical class groups due to a few superficial factors like accents and holiday destinations does not reflect people’s long-term financial security or opportunities. Working class people can have nice possessions and still not economically fit into a traditional middle class bracket. It is none of people’s business what people spend their earned money on. It is also none of people’s business to presume someone’s class status through superficial judgement: they are not our circumstances to explain.

As George Orwell states, Britain is ‘the most class-ridden society under the sun’; what cripples mobility in our society is the lack of opportunity to break into what Erzsebet Bukodi notes as, the ‘managerial and professional employment’ which climbed upwards during the 1950s and 80s. We all know that the glory days of ‘climbing the ladder’ from coffee maker to CEO are a lot less likely now because more people have degrees. The golden age of growing mobility in the 50s and 80s secured that generation good, managerial jobs through which they were able to filter their children - meaning that mobility doesn’t grow but cements. The attitude of who you know is what seems to mobilise people’s opportunities these days, and what this approach does in terms of resolving the class-system in Britain, is very little.

So what relationship should we form with understanding class identity? We should approach class identity open-minded and understanding of the fact that class changes according to personal circumstance. We should comprehend that it is not the role of an outsider to categorise an individual. No one knows the circumstances, finances, cultural engagement, background, of a person more than themselves. There are so many institutions which do not reflect the nuance and agency that individual’s require to explain their class and financial status. Student Finance being one example: just because your parents have sufficient incomes doesn’t mean you have a relationship with your parents where that money is an accessible fund for your education. YOU should be the one to explain your circumstances. But we should all let people explain if they want to. Class presumptions: dump them.


lydia+waller.jpg

Written by Lydia Waller

Lydia is 21 year old Nigel Slater enthusiast. Lydia is a writer and literature graduate, with a particular passion for injecting the art of hosting into younger generations. You can find her sporting a constant bloat from all the food she cooks for her friends.

MouthwashGuest User