Pleasure in British culture - medieval festivals to raves

[Brainaddict]

This thread is a result of vague mental meanderings so excuse me while I think aloud, but I'm interested in the historical and current role of pleasure in British culture. A few thoughts:

- Pleasure seemed to be looked down on with the rise of Protestantism, particularly of the dissenting variety, but how was it regarded prior to that? Perhaps hard to know, given the lack of printing or writing in pre-protestant times.
- Could the rise of pleasure from the youth movements of the mid 20th century to rave culture be seen as a form of political movement - a genuine grassroots cultural rebellion. And the urge to eat better food over the last few decades?
- The 'stiff upper lip', very reserved, Brit stereotype always seemed to refer to middle to upper class types. The lower sorts have often been chastised for taking their pleasures where they will. But was it simply about *different* pleasures for different classes?
- I sometimes wonder if we could see the current festival culture as a re-emergence of the suppressed medieval festival culture. A romantic way to see it perhaps, but it's a nice idea, and perhaps with interesting class connotations.
- statistically speaking I believe (read it ages ago - can't remember where) British people have quite a lot of sex, even compared to many European countries - if true, is this new or was it always the case, but well hidden by the prissy upper classes?
- A political problem around pleasure at the moment is that consumer culture is so directed at offering pleasure. So even if we can see ordinary people as the main drivers for a more pleasurable culture, we could say we have a parasite riding on that. And can we talk about different types of pleasures, marking out consumer pleasures as different in quality to others?

Also does anyone know of any good books around this?

Be nice. It's not meant to be a bunfight thread.

 

[Crispy]

Be nice. It's not meant to be a bunfight thread.

Should have this road to hell paved in no time

 

[krtek a houby]

I think Londoners have a lot of sex, don't know about the rest of the country.

 

[Brainaddict]

Should have this road to hell paved in no time

I realise I'm not the one who gets to decide whether it's a bunfight I just wanted it to be a collaborative and appropriately pleasurable thread, a haven, if you will, from sniping from entrenched positions, which is only pleasurable to perverts.

 

[Pickman's model]

given the lack of printing or writing in pre-protestant times.

yeh cos printing wasn't invented till after 1517

 

[Pickman's model]

Brainaddict why not have a look at gail hawkes's 'sex and pleasure in western culture'?

 

[FNG]

City of sin by c Arnold maybe?

 

[Pickman's model]

City of sin by c Arnold maybe?

yeh i thought what happened in the seventeenth, eighteenth (in the case of your book) or nineteenth centuries ought to be mentioned.

 

[Orang Utan]

You might find this book interesting:
Decency and Disorder: Amazon.co.uk: Ben Wilson: 9780571224692: Books
Though there has been some controversy about it - the young historian who wrote it drew on his university tutor's work and failed to acknowledge it. But still, might be up your street.

 

[Pickman's model]

You might find this book interesting:
Decency and Disorder: Amazon.co.uk: Ben Wilson: 9780571224692: Books
Though there has been some controversy about it - the young historian who wrote it drew on his university tutor's work and failed to acknowledge it. But still, might be up your street.

the link you were looking for: Author sorry for uncredited debt

 

[Orang Utan]

the link you were looking for: Author sorry for uncredited debt

I wasn't looking for it.

 

[Pickman's model]

I wasn't looking for it.

Never mind eh

 

[butchersapron]

This thread is a result of vague mental meanderings so excuse me while I think aloud, but I'm interested in the historical and current role of pleasure in British culture. A few thoughts:

- Pleasure seemed to be looked down on with the rise of Protestantism, particularly of the dissenting variety, but how was it regarded prior to that? Perhaps hard to know, given the lack of printing or writing in pre-protestant times.
- Could the rise of pleasure from the youth movements of the mid 20th century to rave culture be seen as a form of political movement - a genuine grassroots cultural rebellion. And the urge to eat better food over the last few decades?
- The 'stiff upper lip', very reserved, Brit stereotype always seemed to refer to middle to upper class types. The lower sorts have often been chastised for taking their pleasures where they will. But was it simply about *different* pleasures for different classes?
- I sometimes wonder if we could see the current festival culture as a re-emergence of the suppressed medieval festival culture. A romantic way to see it perhaps, but it's a nice idea, and perhaps with interesting class connotations.
- statistically speaking I believe (read it ages ago - can't remember where) British people have quite a lot of sex, even compared to many European countries - if true, is this new or was it always the case, but well hidden by the prissy upper classes?
- A political problem around pleasure at the moment is that consumer culture is so directed at offering pleasure. So even if we can see ordinary people as the main drivers for a more pleasurable culture, we could say we have a parasite riding on that. And can we talk about different types of pleasures, marking out consumer pleasures as different in quality to others?

Also does anyone know of any good books around this?

Be nice. It's not meant to be a bunfight thread.

There seems to be a contradiction in your post - you start off by suggesting a miserable proddy culture and then project that on the nation and its peoiple as a whole, but then you go onto suggest that other stereotypes refer only to a certain section of the population. I think that insight should a) be extended to your wider question (which would put the idea of re-emergence under scrutiny) and b) junked due the long standing traditions of upper class debauchery c) put the idea of a new youuth culture discontinuous from pre-20th century history into doubt as well

I think you need to look at the production and marketing (as worthy, collectively and individually) of consumption of a particular sort - what drove the need to develop this in the mid 20s, and how this has changed since then - what roles did it play then and what role does it play now. I.e some material basis.

There is masses of research into saint monday (i.e workers enforcing a collective day off due to monday hangovers), ways in which the attempt to turn what was leisure time into work time (capitalist time) at the birth of capitalism, various festivals (from apprentice special piss up weeks, to local regular drink ups) that were fought against by new capital - there's a great piece that totted up all the various days off that workers were able to impose around the early 1800s and they added up to more days off than workdays (i'll find that piece if i can - it's either E.P Thompson or Hobsbawm), days when all social relations were turned upside down, charivari turning into week long festivals - all sorts. So i think the re-emergence suggestion is wrong imo and overly focused on urban relations.

In a more wanky, less grounded and more individual focused way, Foucault' wrote some late work on pleasure.

As for todays festival culture being an eruption of earlier demands - no. Rave culture for a brief time. But massive pleasuredomes that you pay to get in and pay to get wrecked that you pay to get to and that you work to be able to pay to go to - nah. The old culture is there, but it ain't in festivals. Not even those wanky middle class ones.

 

[butchersapron]

...and quite importantly, the old stuff i mentioned above developed directly out of peoples closeness - geographical, work based, housing based, school or church based - a recognition of common conditions and needs, everyday stuff. Modern festivals are aggregations of people without those connections - the connections are put there together from above and afar in fact and a commercial basis by and large. And then they end. Not true of old stuff.

 

[JimW]

There was a fair bit in Fire From Heaven looking at the "Puritan" project in 17th c Dorchester that considered the supposed clash between 'merrie England' of cakes and ale and dour but worthy reform.
Ronan Bennett covers similar ground in his novel Havoc in its Third Year which draws a lot on his post grad thesis IIRC.

 

[Brainaddict]

...and quite importantly, the old stuff i mentioned above developed directly out of peoples closeness - geographical, work based, housing based, school or church based - a recognition of common conditions and needs, everyday stuff. Modern festivals are aggregations of people without those connections - the connections are put there together from above and afar in fact and a commercial basis by and large. And then they end. Not true of old stuff.

Good point on these differences. I hadn't thought so much about the fact that olde festivals were often people coming together who were together in daily life anyway.

There are definitely contradictions in my post - was a collection of thoughts, not necessarily congruent with each other, or statements of position.

Could you expand on the continuities of 20thC youth culture with the past? With my knowledge I could trace it back to woodcraft folk and so on, but not much further. I'm reading Akenfield at the moment (Ronald Blythe - brilliant book for anyone who hasn't read it), and one of the elements of village life quite apparent is there wasn't much in the way of youth culture because work started so young, and wages for the young were even more appalling than the normal wages. But the memories in this book started in the middle of an agricultural depression, so I don't know how far back that goes.

Upper class debauchery is a good point. But where did the Victorian middle class take their pleasures? It seems this is the stereotype that haunts ideas about British culture, that got people saying e.g. Brits weren't into sex (never evidenced as far as I know). Perhaps it is the middle class who have changed the most in the last two hundred years?

 

[Brainaddict]

Thanks to all for the reading suggestions btw - will look into them.

 

[planetgeli]

It may not be quite at what the OP is aiming at but the importance of the joust in medieval England should never be overlooked when considering where people got their pleasure and entertainment. Particularly in the following context.

Where else, in all history, can you see the richest, most powerful and most privileged members of society risk injury and death for the sake of your entertainment? Where else in all history can you find rich and powerful young men paying for the privilege of breaking their necks and goring each other in public?

I think there's an argument for the reintroduction of that.

 

[planetgeli]

Sex has always been a massive part of culture and I'm not sure where anyone would get the idea it wasn't. Again, in medieval England, medical knowledge was largely based on 3rd century Galen. These teachings held that woman's wombs were cold and in need of constant warming by male sperm, otherwise the woman's 'seed', as it was put, might coagulate, suffocate and damage their health. Therefore it was widely held women needed a lot of sex. Women were led to believe they were physical manifestations of lust and so therefore indoctrinated into the need for regular sex. Marriage was seen as an essential means of satiating this. But what of the unmarried woman? Well, advice given was along the lines of marry or else. And if you can't, and the lust brings on a fainting fit, a woman should find a midwife who should lubricate her fingers with oil, insert them into her vagina, and move them vigorously about. (Leyser, Medieval Women)

I don't know of a time when sex wasn't important to any culture (I'm prepared to be corrected) but that was just a pretty cheap excuse for that anecdote.

 

[TikkiB]

This might be of interest - not British culture specific as it is about dancing as a human activity, and as I recall it doesn't cover contemporary dance phenomena such as raves.
Dancing in the Streets: A History of Collective Joy: Amazon.co.uk: Barbara Ehrenreich: 9781847080080: Books

 

[DotCommunist]

But where did the Victorian middle class take their pleasures?

theres some unpleasant answers to this

 

[realitybites]

- I sometimes wonder if we could see the current festival culture as a re-emergence of the suppressed medieval festival culture. A romantic way to see it perhaps, but it's a nice idea, and perhaps with interesting class connotations.

Interesting thought.. The Victorian era were absolutely terrified of nature or of coming across as 'wild'. Paintings of the era show the educated society sitting around summer houses sipping tea with nature unknown sitting politely in the background. Travelling from city to city was known to be a treacherous task, to be undertook with carriage curtains closed tight, save from having to ever see the unsightly wilds.. I wonder if the rise of iPhones etc are playing a similar role? Large masses of crowds, equally there but not there. A screen, quite possibly a veil to cordone off its user from the emotionally induced wilds, all of the sweat, the drugs, the sex and the lunacy that festivals were famous for..

 

[Pickman's model]

Interesting thought.. The Victorian era were absolutely terrified of nature or of coming across as 'wild'. Paintings of the era show the educated society sitting around summer houses sipping tea with nature unknown sitting politely in the background. Travelling from city to city was known to be a treacherous task, to be undertook with carriage curtains closed tight, save from having to ever see the unsightly wilds.. I wonder if the rise of iPhones etc are playing a similar role? Large masses of crowds, equally there but not there. A screen, quite possibly a veil to cordone off its user from the emotionally induced wilds, all of the sweat, the drugs, the sex and the lunacy that festivals were famous for..

Utter nonsense.

 

[realitybites]

I would add partly right and partly wrong.. John Singer Sargent was the late Vic artist I was thinking of, but that's off track from the OPs main point, which is an interesting one none the less.

 

[ska invita]

...and quite importantly, the old stuff i mentioned above developed directly out of peoples closeness - geographical, work based, housing based, school or church based - a recognition of common conditions and needs, everyday stuff. Modern festivals are aggregations of people without those connections - the connections are put there together from above and afar in fact and a commercial basis by and large. And then they end. Not true of old stuff.

its an unfair comparison to make between pre-modern knees ups and contemporary ones...the modern world is more socially fragmented and so the starting point is very different.

The urge to come together and ideally find and rekindle that human unity that was previously a geographical given makes modern festival/rave culture all the more impressive in its ability to achieve communion in a group of otherwise seemingly unrelated people -across race, creed and even class!

Yes, at the start of the night "Modern festivals are aggregations of people without those connections", but yet when it kicks off, by the end of the night/ those connections are made by the people themselves, not "put there together from above and afar in fact and a commercial basis by and large".

Are there commercial festivals that require no one to bond on any level? Yes. But they're shit. Good festivals, good raves, good clubs, goods pubs, allow bonds to be made, well and beyond any obvious commonality. We all have "common conditions and needs, everyday stuff", whether we are neighbours or not, whether we go to the same church or not, whether we have the same skin tone or not.

The unity of closeness of the past also created Otherness. Whats great about modern 'festival' culture is that it so much better overrides those instincts to label others as Other.

 

[TikkiB]

Interesting thought.. The Victorian era were absolutely terrified of nature or of coming across as 'wild'. Paintings of the era show the educated society sitting around summer houses sipping tea with nature unknown sitting politely in the background. Travelling from city to city was known to be a treacherous task, to be undertook with carriage curtains closed tight, save from having to ever see the unsightly wilds.. I wonder if the rise of iPhones etc are playing a similar role? Large masses of crowds, equally there but not there. A screen, quite possibly a veil to cordone off its user from the emotionally induced wilds, all of the sweat, the drugs, the sex and the lunacy that festivals were famous for..

Apart from the fact that the 'Victorian era' saw major developments in our understanding of the natural world in botany, biology and geology, and that engaging with nature through drawing, collecting and walking was popular leisure activities for men and women of all classes.

 

[Pickman's model]

I would add partly right and partly wrong.. John Singer Sargent was the late Vic artist I was thinking of, but that's off track from the OPs main point, which is an interesting one none the less.

I should add you're still talking bollocks

 

[realitybites]

Bollocks does nothing to keeping this thread on track.. I'm talking about the relationship people have or have had with subversive activities, Victorians with all there perversities and untruths are a great specimen for that. I travel a lot performing & see lots of folk obsessed with capturing everything on their glammercam flash mobs.. Nothing like the traveller festivals I witnessed as a wee lad, Nostel Priory etc..

 

[Corax]

Interesting thought.. The Victorian era were absolutely terrified of nature or of coming across as 'wild'. Paintings of the era show the educated society sitting around summer houses sipping tea with nature unknown sitting politely in the background. Travelling from city to city was known to be a treacherous task, to be undertook with carriage curtains closed tight, save from having to ever see the unsightly wilds.. I wonder if the rise of iPhones etc are playing a similar role? Large masses of crowds, equally there but not there. A screen, quite possibly a veil to cordone off its user from the emotionally induced wilds, all of the sweat, the drugs, the sex and the lunacy that festivals were famous for..

Ummm....

Charles Darwin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Alfred Russel Wallace - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Henry Walter Bates - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Edward Forbes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

etc......

 

[Pickman's model]

Bollocks does nothing to keeping this thread on track.. I'm talking about the relationship people have or have had with subversive activities, Victorians with all there perversities and untruths are a great specimen for that. I travel a lot performing & see lots of folk obsessed with capturing everything on their glammercam flash mobs.. Nothing like the traveller festivals I witnessed as a wee lad, Nostel Priory etc..

Perhaps if you read more about the 19th century and stopped posting nonsense about it fewer people would pull you up on the shite you're spouting