As I am sure you have noticed, mostof the things we buy these days are labeled “Made in Taiwan”or China or even better Bangladesh. Rare are the moments when weactually get a hold of a “Made in the U.K.” product.“Made in Britain” seems to withhold a content that ismore than a label. A Cadbury chocolate is not just any ‘chocolate’and a Royce isn’t exactly a Dacia; well it depends on how youlook at it!
What are the first ideas that enterour minds when we think “The United Kingdom?” Apart fromthe images that everyone seems to embrace such as the royal family,Shakespeare or the British weather, people tend to understand Britainfrom two angles: of tradition and modernity.
Accordingto the №surveyundergone by the British Council in 2001, the U.K. is viewed as beingtraditional in high-income countries while in the middle andlow-income countries it is seen as modern. Thesame survey shows that the image of the U.K. is also different in thecases of those people that have or haven’t visited the country.The former tend to see the British society as modern, while thelatter, gather that the U.K is more ‘traditional.’ Usingthis information we can conclude that people draw up an image ofanother country according to many factors such as the level ofdevelopment (of that certain country), the degree of education andalso on personal experience and information.
Comprehending the twoterms ‘tradition’ and ‘modernity’ isessential in fully analyzing their relationship in the U.K.
Does one know the oldsaw about the secret behind the loveliness of English gardens? Askedto explain a lord replied: ‘ Simple, take ordinary grass andturn the soil regularly for five hundred years.’ This,metaphorically speaking, has created the image of tradition in theU.K.: regularity, permanence, devotement, and rigor, a continuousglorification of the past and a constant appraisal and opening to thefuture.
Hi-tech gadgets thatmake the society „technologically advanced,” so to say,do not represent modernity in the U.K., or anywhere else in theworld. Modernity refers to the character of life under changedcircumstances; on one hand having the capacity to make the moment onelives in as vibrant as possible, while on the other hand, stronglymaintaining traditional values.
When onevisits the U.K. one is bewildered by how everything around fromhouses to museums or shops are beautifully conserved but at the sametime astoundingly modern. Taxi’s are no longer a sober blackbut full of colourand personality, double-deckers move rather fast on the little,narrow streets so picturesquethat one has the impression they wont fit or that only a 19thcentury carriage would. History is everywhere you turn in Britain butthe ‘decorations’ bring light and individuality to thepicture. The U.K. has never lagged behind in the process ofmodernization nor in the process of keeping traditions alive: inarchitecture, in design, in fashion, in car making, in its gardens,in its literature, in other words in its ‘image’.
In my opinion, Britainis not all about Manchester United, kings and queens, the blue bloodphobia or five o’clock tea.
British design forexample is a topic that well enhances the liaison between traditionand modernity.
І FrederiqueHuygen sees British design as: “… Burberry raincoats,floral interior fabrics, Jaguars, Shetland pullovers, Dunhilllighters and Wedgwood pottery. Tradition, respectability andquality.” But later in the work we discover that even thoughtraditionally that is what British design stands for, modernisationdoes not make this image disappear.
Britainhas been the witness of several radical movements brought along bywhat is known as the “street culture,” such as theanarchy of punk and pop musicians such as the Sex Pistols whose musicwas a blasphemous treatment of the monarchy and country. Well-knownpop musicians like Boy George, David Bowie or Adam Ant created a newstatement in British fashion design by wearing shocking outfitscreated by young fashion designers. Butsuch movements did not create profound changes in Britain’simage. In fact, design was known as the tonic for Britain’seconomy that had drastically fallen after the two World Wars, andbrought industry back to life by sheer unbridled competition.Actually British design became “shocking” rather late dueto British reluctance to all that was modern. Eventhough the U.K. was the actual ‘generator’ ofindustrialization, the late arrival of a Modern Movement is oftenassociated with the quest of acceptance of the machine.
British society pushedaside mass production and classless products over hand-made and smallscale production, until it realized that tradition and modernity arenot contradictory or exclusive thus learning how to make the twocoexist. For example, a radical movement such as punk anarchytogether with the art school’s creativity brought innovation todesign in the U.K. The effects were that starting with the 80’sfashion was back in the international spotlight, the industry made ahuge profit and alongside other industries it aided economy inregaining its strengths. Designs by Vivienne Westwood, John Galliano,John Richmond, succeeded in finding their identity in the world of‘haute-couture’ by creating a twist of tradition andmodernity.
Another importantbranch of British design, is the car-making industry. I find carmaking in the U.K. to be a relevant example of the way in which ithas always strived to combine the traditional and the modern. Wellknown for their class car manufacturing of models such as the RollsRoyce, Aston Martin, Walter Owen Bentley or the Jaguar, the term“Britishness” becomes self-explanatory.
Due to thefact that British approach to design is one of common sense rooted inthe craft tradition, the cars have maintained that classic design andstyle that spell ‘British’ or better said Іґ“wellgroomed and tame” as the Jaguar is described. But these typesof cars are spicily priced and their affordability comes easy only tothose who are willing and can pay large sums of money. An interestingfact is that according to іBBC News, in 2000 car makers in Britain were ordered to cut pricesfor they were up to 10% and even 20% higher than in other Europeancountries. Still, the 2000 figure of sales was that of 2.21 millionsold cars and in 2001 sales established a record sale of 2.33 millionbeating the record of 1989.
Althoughthe class cars do not figure in the top ten most sold, they do appearin the top 30 and 40 which no doubt shows the relatively high livingstandard in Britain. Even though it is still considered to be aclass-structured society, high-income rates have contributed topolitical tranquillity. ˉ To paraphrase the work “20thCentury Britain,” compared to the 1900 when British society wassharply divided among class and gender lines, in Edwardian Britainthis structured status quo was not meekly accepted by everyone (weare to remember the Suffragette movement). Therefore, we can see thatas society evolved so did mentality and as living standards surgedthe class and gender issues dissipated and Britain ˉ “seemedto be moving towards a fairer, more egalitarian society.”
Modernitylies in the power to somehow shape mentality, much like modern ideasgive a new and polished look to a classic Bentley or make the RangeRover more equipped to win the Paris- Dakar.
Arthas no history because ˜ “history has an unchanging basicstructure” and as car making, fashion or everything designrepresents is art, artknows no temporalboundaries. Because just like tradition is at times erroneouslyconsidered a “thing of the past” without any contemporarylegitimacy, and modernity is often mistakenly understood as a synonymfor modernism, art is timeless.
Atradition can be born today and referred to as being modern or not.Today we so often state that some clothing article is ‘modern’when in fact it was also known to be ‘modern’ in the 60’sor at the beginning of the century!
By this Iwould like to conclude that ‘modernity’ is notnecessarily something happening right now or in the future and‘tradition’ is not just the docile transmission of somedead deposit but the living repetition that manages to suggest afresh truth.
Ulrich Bez, CEO forAston Martin describes this car in such a way that clearly elicitswhat tradition and modernity are in the U.K. Therefore, when you everask yourselves: “What can a car say about a country?”think of this:
“ Aston Martin isalso about being British; the best of British. Those characteristicswhich appear to be opposites: Discipline with creativity…traditionwith a new twist…respect of craft and love ofmodernity…traditions combined with free thinkinginventiveness.”
This is how I seetradition and modernity in the U.K. A profound respect fortraditional values, a promoter of creativity and an inborn pride insaying: “Made in Britain.” Now you can understand what Imeant that this “is more than a label!”
1. www.Britishcouncil.com
2; 2’Frederique Huygen “British Design Image & Identity”first published 1989 in Great Britain, Thames and Hudson Ltd., London– (page 15 (2), page 24 (2’))
BBC News, SundayApril 8th2001(also exists in article form at www.bbc.com)
“20thCentury Britain-Economic, Social and Cultural Change” editedby Paul Johnson, first published 1994 in London and New York,Longman,( page 123)
Peter Donaldson and JohnFarquhar “Understanding the British Economy”, PenguinGroup 1988,( page 11)
“Art Has No History-The Making and Unmaking of Modern Art” edited by John Roberts,Verso 1994, (page1)
7. www.astonmartin.com
Address:Aura Buzescu #32
Sector2
Bucharest
093.39.22.55
E-mail:chieffy1@excite.com now: irinagligor@localgenius.com
TEN REASONS FOR A TRADITION OFMODERNITY
Itis a truth universally acknowledged that Britain is unique. Really,who can possibly deny it? It is also very much true, although not souniversal that the image Britain projects overseas is ratherinaccurate. Mostly because the traditional opinion is that Britainlacks modernity, that it is caught in a golden Victorian cage, andthis cage, in spite of its material, is restricting the way towardswhatever is considered modern. WRONG.
Whyis it so wrong (and in capitals)? Because of at least 10 reasons.
Chronologicallyspeaking, the first reason that comes to mind is
1.J.M. W. Turner,who can be considered as a painter with nerve. When everyone's'paintings were oils on canvas "photographing" importantpersonalities, he had the impulse to use watercolours to paint shipscaught in storms. "His paintings are … so different andoften [painted] in such an ambiguous manner, were often misunderstoodby contemporaries", say Fleming and Honour in their "AWorld History of Art". And being misunderstood by contemporariesis often the sign of modernity. A modernity that strikes at thefirst sight of a painting by Turner. One cannot believe that theyhave been painted in the first decades of the nineteenth century. Asone cannot believe that Caulfield or Hodgkin’s works are soresembling and have so "vital links" with the past, withthe traditional methods of painting, when they have shocked the artcommunity. Turner even finds a disciple in what concerns thepreference for marine themes in Tim Stoner. Turner stopped time for aship, Stoner stopped time for a couple of kids in a garden plasticpool: the modern ships are too ugly to have the time stooped forthem, and besides nowadays the sea means the holiday there during thesummer , not pirates' adventures. Centuries apart, all these modernpainters support the idea of a Britishness in British art, of acertain sense of insularity. And this is tradition.
Themind's track often brakes loose from the dominance of time, so let usabandon the chronological trail and follow the white rabbit throughthe mirror.
2. Jane Austen, Elizabeth Bennet and Bridget Jones.You are probably wondering what two fictional characters and theauthor of one of them have in common. They are all modern women. Thisfirst two are actually more modern than the latter. For Jane Austen,modernity meant independence, being able not to depend on a husbandto make a living, and writing. For Elizabeth Bennet, modernity meanta marriage with a peer not in station but in mind. As for Bridget,modernity means… Oh, Bridget is rather special. She is sotraditional in her quest for a husband, that makes one wonder whethershe is the real daughter of Mrs. Bennet. In fact, Bridget is notmodern at all, except that she, unlike her other nominee in thiscategory does know how to use a computer. She actually determines thereader of her Diary to scream " Are all British women 30year-olds in search of a husband and a job?" Apparently forBridget being British is like being called Heathcliff: you have to gooutside and bang your head on very tree you find, while yelling"Catherine!"
Thetrend nowadays is that old is new. Old mentalities, old things ingeneral. Everything traditional is remixed, redesigned and morphedinto the sensation of the month.( Often on the catwalk). This leadsus to:
3.John Galliano, or Stella McCartney , or any other British designer. The reason: for using at least once in their collections the corset. For a whole century, women all over the world, including Britain,have tried to sack the corset, mostly due to its symbolism. Britishdesigners never let it go for good, they just put it on hold. TheGoth image at the end of the past century gave them the opportunityto put it out back in the open. They waited for the symbolism to blurand vanish, and there it is: different colours, textures, butnevertheless a corset.
Theverb "blur" used above sends to music. British music. Andwhen talking about British music, one must talk about:
4.The Beatles. As a matter of fact, they should be reason number one on this list.They are the symbol of Modern Britain, of a certain Britain thatused to dare and that was part of the “Avant-garde”. Theywere so modern for such a long time , they became tradition.
5.Guy Ritchie.Film Director. The traditional British movie was either Sir LaurenceOlivier or Alfred Hitchcock. From time to time , directors used tomake a name out shocking puritans, as Peter Greenaway did. Ritchiefollows this unspoken tradition and tries to catch its bare essence:to make a couple of hit-movies, shock everybody, get famous and marryMadonna.
6.Madonna– this one is actually a “negative” argument. Shedoes not prove Britain is modern , she proves the image the worldperceives of Britain is wrong. Madonna is the epitome of modernity,the trend-maker. Now she wants to have a normal life, although heridea of normality is more resembling to Tony Ray-Jones’sphotograph – Glyndebourne ( a couple smartly-dressed, havingtea in a field , amidst or among cows). The critics said about thisphoto that captures the “introverted , self-contained lives incontrast to the more expressive world of the cattle”. So,Madonna wants a normal life, to be a mid-aged wife with a couple ofkids, to live in Scottish manor, to spend her mornings giving ordersto the butler and her afternoons having tea with some high-class pureBritish ladies, and during the holidays to go to Bath.
Actuallythis is not Britain, it is the celluloid version of Britain. As forcelluloid, it has the tendency to exaggerate.
Speakingof movies:
7.The Full Monty .
Tradition: In Sheffield, steel is produced.
Modernity:In Sheffield, “Hot Steel” is produced.
Thedifference: “Hot Steel” is formed of male strippers, whoactually are ex-steel workers.
forModernity in this one.
8.Football– It was invented in Britain, it’s a tradition inBritain. And 1966 was a great year for British football: Cantona wasborn. Considering British football is still one of the most praised,it has won the honour to be also considered modern. And if Beckhamisn’t modern, who is?
9.London.“Traditionally” speaking, London is supposed to bepermanently foggy, with no other means of transportation butdouble-deckers and cabs, populated by men wearing bowlers or lookinglike James Bond. Well, it’s not. What is really traditionalabout London is its scent, its atmosphere, it’s the arroganceto have an area named so pompously “The City”, it’sthe mixture of trends, it’s the possibility of having Virginrecords and Harrods in the same part of town and it’s havingthe Changing of the Guards happening just the same for such a longtime, may it be under the flashes of the last generation of camerasor under the curious eyes of people that seemed to jump right out ofDickens’s books.
10.Cars.Especially Rolls-Royce. Probably the most British car ever, it isimpregnated with the glow of “Britishness” and yet it isequipped with the latest discoveries in car technology.
Herewere the ten reasons meant to show that Britain is a wonderful blend,like a Lady Grey tea. Tradition never excluded modernity, andmodernity never excluded tradition. So, there is no place for a“versus” between them. They were never parallel, neverhad each a separate life. Some things are so new that they becometradition, and some things , although obsolete for a while, become somodern all over again.
Conclusion:Britain is not the celluloid image of Britain. And for once, it hasthe power to say through the voice of Robbie Williams: “I willtalk and Hollywood will listen!”
Frayling,Christopher – “100 Years at the Royal College of Art –Art and
Design”, Collins & Brown, 1999
Graham-Dixon,Andrew – “A History of British Art”, BBC, 1996
Hounour,Hugh & Fleming, John – “A World History of Art”,Calmann &
King,1998
***ThePhotography Book, Phaidon Press, 1997
Thelist of all the sources mentioned in this text and found in theBritish Council Library is rather long, and I honestly think thatonly the catalogue of the Library would cover them all. Neverthelesshere are at least fur that have had an impact on this article.
Austen,Jane – “Pride and Prejudice”
Fielding,Helen – “The Diary of Bridget Jones”
Carroll,Lewis- ”The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland”
***TheFull Monty , VHS & DVD
***Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Directed by Guy Ritchie