The Conversation

Margaret Hodge's speech to the IPPR on Britishness, Heritage and Culture is being reported on the BBC website due to her perceived criticism of the Proms for not being inclusive enough. You can read (or indeed listen to) a copy of the speech on the IPPR website, and it is an interesting contribution to the ongoing debate over 'Britishness', and raises the question of the role that culture can play in the cohesion of a society.

Margaret starts by outlining that she is looking at the role of cultural institutions in developing "shared values and common purpose". She outlines her own initial experience of Britishness - having arrived in the UK as part of an immigrant family, she was forced to eat cucumber sandwiches and fruit cake to convince the inspector that they were British enough! It is a lovely story, but it did make me stop and think. I don't think I've ever eaten a cucumber sandwich in my life! Indeed, living in Glasgow, traditional 'British' fare (in the post devolution whirlwind that we live in, of course there is great debate over British/Scottish, but that is a tangent!) would be seen as chips, either with fish, pie or smothered in cheese, washed down with a large volume of lager. Margaret Hodge might have had more of a struggle to get citizenship if that had been the test!

Of course, I am playing up to stereotypes, but isn't this what the test itself implied? National identity is a ethereal concept, and often becomes associated with either concepts which go beyond national borders (equality, fair play, liberty etc) or are based on stereotypical concepts. So Britishness should be defined by either a commitment to 'fair play' (whatever that exactly means) and/or a stiff upper lip and lack of culinary ability.

Margaret explored culture as a means for bringing together a society and helping to find shared bonds. I think that she has a valid point with this, however I think that the shared bonds that are discovered through 'culture' are more often than not bonds which join all humanity, not just the members of our national community. Music, art, sport, knowledge - these are all international bonds, which are fed by the experience of human beings across the planet. We may bring particular viewpoints to them, shaped by our geographic location, upbring, history or beliefs, but ultimately they succeed because they tap into a beauty and inspiration which is shared across the world.

She is right to encourage culture and to open it up to all. A country with a flourishing cultural sector will indeed witness improved bonds as a society - but they will be improved because our society will be looking outwards to the world, rather than inwards to what makes us different. I am proud of my country, and I believe that our history and context do help us to play a role in the world which can do great good. However, our role in the world is to sustain and support our fellow humans, learning from the knowledge and beauty that they posses, and helping them to share in what we have.

In her speech, Margaret described culture as "the public expression of the constant and unyielding conversation between our values, rules and behaviour". This, to me, is a beautiful way of expressing what culture can and should be, and the role that it can play. But it also clearly demonstrates the never ending evolution of culture. If it is ever possible to define Britishness today, we can guarantee that by tomorrow that definition will have changed as it winds along its never ending path.

The Proms are a unique experience, the only real time (other than in the bedlam of a sporting event) that Britain really goes overly patriotic. If anything, the Proms could be dismissed as being the opposite of stereotypical Britishness, a 'foreign' approach, not in keeping with our carefully maintained reserve. But this is what makes the Proms special. A reserved nation going mad over the (stereotypically) most reserved form of music. It is a ludicrous joy, and Margaret is right to want to explore the event to make sure that it is as accessible to every one as it can be.
Margaret rightly identifies that each of us has multiple identities, and that these can react to events in different ways. This is crucial to the debate on national identity. We need to accept that someone can be a British Muslim, with both of those identities equally important to them. We need to accept that someone can be a Scot and a Brit without compromising either of those identities, but rather strengthening them. Diversity is not a weakness in our country, and we need to start celebrating it rather than lameting the loss of a nation that, in reality, never existed.

Britain is not the same now as it was a generation ago, and this will be the same in future. We are changing and adapting, moving into the uncertain future influenced by the diverse pasts that we bring to the conversation. Our culture will adapt with this conversation, reflecting the triumphs and tensions that we are going through, bringing our particular viewpoints to the international discussion. Sometimes the conversation will be heated and voices will be raised - this will be reflected by productions which push boundaries or challenge conceptions and beliefs. But ultimately, as long as we all keep talking, the conversation moves on, and new topics appeal to different sides of our multifaceted identities.

Culture can be ignored in the hustle bustle of economics and politics, but it is culture that makes the world real and our dreams worthwhile. A commitment to culture is a crucial aspect of our desire to make our country, and the world, a better place, and we must ensure that we keep conversing.