The English: A Portrait Of A People (1999) - Plot & Excerpts
Thankfully, I don't know Jeremy personally (yes, I know this is difficult for my North American readers to understand being as both Jeremy and I both live in 'London'!) so that means I don't have to mince round his feelings like an insomniac's husband going for a midnight pee.All I really know about Jeremy is that he's on the radio and he interviews people (although if you're reading this in the year 2025 this may not still be true).This book that Jeremy wrote comes over like the weather in England, on virtually any day since the history of forever: partly sunny, partly cloudy, with a moderate risk of hailstones the size of sixpences. Hmm - I think that metaphor broke down along the way; but anyway - some parts of this book are excellent, some are utter tosh and most of it says nothing whatsoever about the experience of your average Englishman (aka me) of being English.The excellent parts are ... hmm, strike that. I've re-read my 'Reading Progress' notes, and it's all pretty much cloud, rain and snow, with a brief moment of sunshine between pages 24 and 32 when the book made me feel momentarily privileged to be English.The tosh is pretty much everything else, mainly because I consider the parts of the book that don't speak to me to be tosh too.I wonder how I came to consider myself to be so stereotypically English, yet without identifying myself as the English described in this book.My nose has more than a touch of Roman about it, so perhaps my identity confusion comes by way of being descended from ...Actually, I don't feel confused about this at all. I'm English, and Jeremy doesn't know me and so could not have included me in his book - it's a simple as that. What he has done is describe the England that he knows and the people that he knows, and so has missed out everything and everyone else.The only parts of the book that include me are those that mention the 'common' (or words to that effect) people who live in the 'ugly' (not my experience) built-up parts of the country and who (presumably) don't matter enough to be consulted by Jeremy as to their views and opinions (he wrote letters to several public figures in order to get their views on what it means to be English).A better approach to researching this book would have been to step away from Wikipedia, forget about the famous people he quoted, get out into the country and just talk to more people.If you're reading this Jeremy - you can come and stay with us for a while - there's a futon in the spare room whenever you're ready - and I'll introduce you to a few people on the estate. That way you can have something real to talk about when you write your follow-up: 'The English: A Portrait of a People I Never Even Knew Existed until Robert Clued Me In'.Yeah - I know - utter tosh - sorry and all that.
Many reviewers of The English on Goodreads seem to be more concerned with the author, Jeremy Paxman, than with the actual book. I suppose this is one of the hazards of being a well-known TV face. Since I don't live in the UK and don't watch television, I'd barely even heard of him before I picked up this book, so you won't find any prejudice in this review.As the poet Burns suggested, it is hard to see ourselves as others see us. This is true of nations as of people, and Paxman's struggles to describe and define his compatriots are understandable. He comes to no grand conclusions, apart from noting that, while much that is external has changed since the end of the Victorian era, the English are still recognisably the same people they always were. As a student of history and a foreigner who knows the English pretty well, I think this is true, even obvious.The charm of a book like this, though, is not in its conclusions but in the tapestry of fact and suggestion woven by the author out of his considerable erudition (as well as, doubtless, a great deal of research). I learnt quite a few interesting, amusing and surprising things while reading this book, even though there weren't any shattering revelations or insights to be gained from it. I enjoyed the writing; its friendly, conversational tone wears its learning lightly. As for its politics, which appear to have infuriated a number of reviewers on this site, I found them generally fair-minded and unobtrusive, though the attempt to be 'gender-inclusive' falls rather flat and probably won't satisfy ardent feminists either.The one glaring omission, as far as I could see, was music. Paxman does refer, once or twice, to the enormous effect England has had on contemporary popular music; in this regard it is second only to the USA. However, apart from speculating that the English weather, which tends to keep people indoors, may have something to do with it, Paxman says little about the subject. Surely any study of the English people and character must try to explain how the English, not much known for their music before the second half of the twentieth century, suddenly came to produce so much brilliant and inspired music. But perhaps this is a task for a specialist.On the whole, I found this book absorbing and interesting. It peters out at the end, but for most of its length it is an excellent read. Just don't expect to learn anything new or definitive about the English national character from it.
What do You think about The English: A Portrait Of A People (1999)?
Overall, I think the book was okay. I didn't really like reading it all. However, there were some parts that were enjoyable. I enjoyed chapters about 'Funny Foreigners' 'The English Empire' 'We happy few' 'Meet the Wife' and 'Old Country, New Clothes' - I had to plod through the rest.What I really liked about the book was the humour and the vast amount of sources he used to form a judgement on each specific topic. The book felt well-researched and in many ways did accomplish its aim of producing a right assessment of 'The English'. The historical aspect of the book (he often goes back in time to assess English attitudes) was particularly interesting and his use of foreign descriptions of The English was also very humorous in most parts and fascinating. His assessment of nationalism and what made an Englishman was also fascinating, but by far my favourite chapter was 'Meet the Wife' - mostly because it was very funny, and it felt like a brief overview of the role of women in England since the Enlightenment period. Things I didn't like about the book might have been due to the fact that as a young Londoner, I didn't really understand some of the references he made/was unaware of it, which perhaps made it less enjoyable, especially in some parts of 'The Ideal Englishman'. Also, some of the argument, I felt, were particularly drawn out and could have been more concise.In conclusion, if I were to re-read the book again, I would only read some parts of it. It is certainly not a bad read; indeed, some parts made me laugh! However, it's not the best book that I've ever read, and I'd be very reluctant to pick it up again.
—Elizabeth Oladunni
A good read. Paxman's book is well researched, and packed with interesting points and ideas. He covers our views of foreigners, the anachronistic view of a bucolic England, he rubbishes our self-effacing view that we are doomed as a nation. He describes the traditional Englishman and Englishwoman, and although it informs us of our past, does not define our present states. He points out that we have given a lot to the world, and continue to do so. Yet we still have a defeatist attitude, thinking that we are somehow in decline - a nod, perhaps, to our long-lived love of the underdog. Finally, we are less a homogeneous society (class differences aside), and are now a vibrant society of individuals. And although this means ideas of a strictly defined nationhood are no longer valid, or even possible, it is a strength that will give us more than it will take away.
—Si
The book shines in the historical and sociological background that defines English culture, but crumbles towards the end when less dignified behaviour becomes hard to explain.Some good insights are that an obsession with housing and property makes sense in a country with terrible weather that for a time only gave voting rights to landowners. The idolatry of the country side harks back to an idealised past that was probably never within the reach of most people (see 'The American Dream').This book also gave me some good cocktail party chat: "Why do you live in England?" a) "I admire the quiet dignity of the English people" b) "The English are accepting of eccentrics and you know I can be a little wacky"c) "Individuality and independence are shared values between them English and I"d) "I like how people are so polite that they will not talk to you because they assume you do not want to talk to them"e) All of the aboveIt is nice to know that the English are also somewhat confused by themselves.The difficult and ugly face of hooliganism gets a quick mention, but then we drift into turn of the century stadium games with riotous fans and even into the origins of the game itself which seems to have something to do with fights between villages and schools. This then drifts into historical riots and how political change was mostly an excuse for a good riot. The lager lout gets a similar treatment. His historical existence is verified but we still have no clue why a really good night out includes a fight, except that it always has.Interestingly, London does not feature too much and that make sense. London is a slightly different beast than England and sometimes has more in common with New York and other international cities than with the shires and villages around it.Jolly good!
—Maciej Matyjas
