Oppressed English

Ian Hay

Description

Taking a break from the action-adventure tales that were his forte, Scottish writer Ian Hay presents his tongue-in-cheek views on the political and cultural situation facing England in the World War I era, with a particular focus on the controversy surrounding Ireland and its political autonomy.

Sujets

• Histoire
• History

Informations

• Publié par: The Floating Press
• Date de parution: 01 octobre 2016
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781776672752
• Langue: English

Extrait

THE OPPRESSED ENGLISH
* * *
IAN HAY
 
*
The Oppressed English First published in 1917 Epub ISBN 978-1-77667-275-2 Also available: PDF ISBN 978-1-77667-276-9 © 2014 The Floating Press and its licensors. All rights reserved. While every effort has been used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the information contained in The Floating Press edition of this book, The Floating Press does not assume liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in this book. The Floating Press does not accept responsibility for loss suffered as a result of reliance upon the accuracy or currency of information contained in this book. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Many suitcases look alike. Visit www.thefloatingpress.com
Contents
*
Chapter One Chapter Two Chapter Three Chapter Four Chapter Five Chapter Six Endnotes
Chapter One
*
As a Scotsman, the English people have my profound sympathy.
In the comic papers of all countries the Englishman is depicted—or wasin the days of peace—as stupid, purseproud, thick-skinned, arrogant,and tyrannical. In practice, what is he? The whipping-boy of the BritishEmpire.
In the War of to-day, for instance, whenever anything particularlyunpleasant or unpopular has to be done—such as holding up neutralmails, or establishing a blacklist of neutral firms trading with theenemy—upon whom does the odium fall? Upon "England"; never upon France,and only occasionally upon Great Britain. The people and pressinterested thunder against "England's Arrogance." Again, in the neutraldays, when an American newspaper published a pro-British article,Potsdam complained peevishly that the entire American Press was beingbribed with "English" gold. A German school teacher is greeted by herinfant class with the amiable formula: "Good morning, teacher. Gottstrafe England! " (Never "Britain," as a Scotsman once very rightlycomplained to me.) On the other hand, when there is any credit goinground—say, for the capture of a hitherto impregnable ridge on theWestern Front—to whom is that credit assigned? Well, it depends. If theCanadians took the ridge, Canada gets the credit; and the world's press(including the press of London and England generally) pays due tributeto the invincible valour of the men from the Dominions. Or, if aScottish or Irish regiment took the ridge, the official report fromGeneral Headquarters makes appreciative reference to the fact. But howoften do we see the phrase: "The ridge was stormed, under heavy fire, byan English regiment?" Practically never. A victory gained by Englishboys from Devon or Yorkshire appears as a British victory, pure andsimple.
Now why? Why should the credit for the good deeds of the British Empirebe ascribed to those respectively responsible—except the English—whilethe odium for the so-called bad deeds is lumped on to England alone? Toa certain extent, England herself is to blame. When a Scotsman speaks ofScotland he means Scotland. An Irishman, when he speaks of Ireland,means Ireland and nowhere else. But when an Englishman speaks of"England," he may mean Scotland, or Ireland, or even Canada! Thisplayful habit of assuming that England is the Empire, and that theEmpire is England, does not always make for imperial fraternity, eventhough in the vast majority of cases not the slightest offence isintended. To the average Englishman it seems simpler to say "England."
But there are other and deeper reasons. England is a big nation, whilethe others are small. There are more people in London than in the wholeof Scotland, or Ireland, or, until recent years, Canada. And a smallnation is always intensely sensitive, and assertive, of its ownnationality. The English, too, are an exceedingly placid nation. Theirenemies call them self-satisfied, but this is hardly just. Scotsmen andIrishmen celebrate the mysteries of St. Andrew's Day and St. Patrick'sDay with a fervour only equalled by that of the average American citizenon the Fourth of July. But if you were to ask the average Englishmanthe date of St. George's Day, he probably would not be able to tell you:and under no circumstances would he dream of celebrating the occasion.
"Of course I am proud of being an Englishman," he says in effect; "buteverybody realizes that. So why advertise the fact unnecessarily? Whymake a cantata about it?"
It is this same attitude of mind which causes an Englishman to carelittle, provided a piece of work is