Journal of History and Cultures

A little update: Please check out and follow the Journal of History and Cultures. A great new post-graduate journal from people at the University of Birmingham. The first issue was released this month - a great mix of topics and well worth a read. http://historyandcultures.com/current-issue/

Blog Update: All Quiet...

The past few months have been spent busy writing away at my never-ending Thesis (out next October to all self-respecting retailers...), hence the lack of a blog post of any kind. I'll start my new teaching post in a week and a half which will provide another distraction, so in the mean time I'd just like to highlight a few news articles and subjects which have interested/concerned me over the last few months:

Young, Dumb and living with Mum

A recent piece in the Guardian highlighted the rising number of kids who are choosing to stay at home in order to save money during what are hard times, even for young professionals with university degrees and full-time employment. A strong sign of times of prudence and frugality. Might this indicate that a younger generation of people will be slightly more cautious about personal borrowing and credit? I hope so, but personal experience suggests that things may be otherwise.

Benefits-Cheats or Cheetahs?

Another interesting debate has surroumded the paralympics - with a clash of benefit-bashing versus pride and awe for amazing individuals. Several commentators and personalities commented that they hoped the Paralympic Games would change attitudes towards people with disabilities. It seems there is a growing hatred of people on benefits - 'demonising recipients as scroungers in mansions' - which has even stretched to an image of disability benefit recipients as lying about their health to stay off work. Its hard to say whether the games could truly change a saddening view such as this, and as Tony Judt's Ill Fares the Land (2010) suggests, this issue is neither new, nor is it fleeting.

Cabinet Reshuffle: Drawn a Joker?

Finally, the recent Cabinet reshuffle has thrown up some interesting results - and some concerning possibilities. Firstly, our new Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson has yet to deny or confirm with any certainty whether he is a climate change sceptic, while new Energy Minister, John Hayes is an outspoken wind-farm hater. Damian Carrington's twitter and guardian commentary provides fascinating reading on this subject, while guardian Science Editor John McKie has written an open letter asking Owen Paterson not to turn his back on climate change in such a crucial time. It has also been noted that during the ongoing US Presidential Election run-up, there has been virtually no mention of this summer's drastic melting of the polar ice-cap and the clear extremes of weather experienced across the globe. Doom-sayers aside, shouldn't the environment, whether you are pro- or anti-climate change, be at the top of the debating sheets in light of this? Concerning indeed that even when things clearly have taken a turn for the worse, the expected human reaction is slow in coming - if it comes at all.

Comment, as always, is compulsary...

Patrick Longson

Popular Imagination: the Apocalypse of Doom

‘Every time history repeats itself the price goes up.’

  Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress (2005)

I find one of the most interesting aspects of the popular imagination is the fascination and appetite for tales of war, catastrophe, doom, destruction and apocalypse. Like many men and women in the world I enjoy a good science fiction film or novel every now and again. The eminent historian of British future-war literature, I.F. Clarke, believed that fictional prophesies and future imaginings were capable of providing a unique insight into the human psyche – and I tend to agree with him. However, one thing that I believe rings true in over a century of sensationally popular science fiction and dystopian literature is that though fascinating and thrilling, such imaginings are rarely capable of predicting a complete and accurate world of tomorrow.

 Evolving Conceptions of the Future of Our World

Recently, I taught a seminar on ‘environmental history’ to my first year students. This is an area of study my PhD supervisor is moving into, and though many students struggled to see how this topic was history at all, some were inspired and fascinated by this cultural investigation into human interaction with the world around us. The thing that struck me most was the ideological change that occurred, very recently, when it dawned upon us that humans were capable of impacting upon the whole world and changing the planet for worse, or for better. As eminent historian J.R. McNeill so poignantly showed, as late as 1930 the Nobel Prize winning American physicist, Robert Millikan stated in 1930 that there was no possibility that humanity was capable of doing real harm to ‘anything so gigantic as the earth’. In that same year Thomas Midgeley invented CFCs (chloroflourocarbons) which would decades later be banned for their annihilation of areas of the earths ozone layer – the primary ‘life support’ system of the earth.[1]  From this introduction into environmental history I learned how a paradigm shift in human understanding of our impact on the world resulted from the dawning of nuclear warfare. 

Over the 1950s and 1960s the USA and USSR became increasingly antagonistic and the proliferation and testing of nuclear bombs escalated hugely. In one year, 1962 (the same year as the Cuban Missile Crisis), the two super-powers tested a total of 130 nuclear devices pushing the background level of radiation for the planet back up to the level of 1958 when the two powers had agreed to decrease testing due to this terrifying result.[2]  With the effects of nuclear fallout being made clear as a result of disasters like Chernobyl and Bikini Atoll, suddenly the human imagination was forced to recognize that technology had advanced so far as to be able not only to wipe out nations, but even to destroy our only home – Planet Earth. This shocking realisation was soon reflected in popular culture, with the meteoric rise in popularity of post-apocalyptic stories. On the Beach (novel: 1957; film: 1959) was one of the most important and popular stories of this genre, recounting a near-future world in the aftermath of World War III.[3] Its negative message, scenes of destruction, dead cities, and state aided mass-suicides struck home in the Anglophone world. Since the 1960s we have been treated to a regular supply of such apocalyptic dramas as I Am Legend (several versions from 1954), Dr. Strangelove (1964), Threads (1984), and The Terminator franchise (1984-2009). 

For the nuclear generation, the concerns were clear. Fears were openly expressed about global apocalypse at the hands of man. However, with the end of the Cold War, the seeming lack of imminent nuclear war left an ideas vacuum – an epistemic change occurred. A variety of new popular fears have entered into the vacuum which transcend national boundaries: disease pandemics, economic disaster, environmental collapse, fuel shortages and global starvation. Many of the concerns of today are not new ones, but they have received surging interest as polemicists have looked anxiously to predict where next we are truly headed.

Two particular items have recently struck me as being typical of our current state of anxiety: the TV documentary ‘Surviving Progress’ (2011) - inspired by Ronald Wright’s A Short History of Progress (2005)[4] - and Ian Bremmer’s headline-stealing book, Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World (2012): 

Surviving Progress

Ronald Wright theorised that the human addiction to progress at all costs has trapped us in an endless cycle of boom and bust which will eventually lead to societal collapse. ‘Surviving Progress’ asserts that human obsession with technological progress as the answer to economic and social problems results in on-going ‘progress traps’ where ‘alluring technologies serve immediate needs, but ransom the future’. Furthermore, it is argued that the absence of a valuation of the environment, flora, fauna and human life in accepted economic dogma means that blind belief in the benevolence of the market is a disastrous mistake humans have made, and continue to make. This outlook is depressing in its plausibility.

Every Nation for Itself

Similarly, Bremmer’s economic prediction argues that in future the nations of the world will be unable or unwilling to participate in global dialogue and cooperation. He argues that as the USA declines from superpowerdom, no other country will be able to assume the same level of control or influence.  Going from a G20 world to a ‘G-Zero’ – a decade long power vacuum – would have dire consequences for world – acting as ‘an incubator of catastrophe.’ A lack of international cooperation, it is argued, could result in epidemics, the implosion of North Korea, increasing terrorist attacks and wars over scarce food and resources.[5]

These academic polemics tie into long-running discourses about societal collapse,[6] economic uncertainty and existential threats to our current world.[7] In the mass market, these concerns are most visibly expressed through television and film. Recent years have seen a new spate of such films featuring regular ‘paranoid’ themes which have experienced vast box-office or best-selling success: 

• Post-apocalyptic Worlds: Cormac McCarthy’s The Road (novel: 2006; film: 2009); The Book of Eli (2009);
• Alien Invasion=Human Frailty/Complacency: The War of the Worlds (film remake: 2005); Battle: Los Angeles (2011);
• Pandemics: Contagion (2011); Twelve Monkeys (1995);
• Environmental collapse: Waterworld (1995); The Day After Tomorrow (2004); Supervolcano (2005); Sunshine (2007);
• Extraterrestrial Disasters: Deep Impact (1998); Armageddon (1998); Knowing (2009);

The themes here evidently reflect the major anxieties of our own times, and exhibit the success of playing to them.

Often, science fiction looking further into the distant future has predicted dark consequences for humanity as a reflection of contemporary societal uncertainties. The Alien films were both progenitors and inheritors of a vast quantity of exceedingly popular films and productions imagining future human colonisation of the galaxy. Alien (1979), along with Silent Running (1972), Logan’s Run (1976) and Blade Runner (1982), is the best in a highly regarded and influential sub-genre of dystopian future imaginings which tell us much about the times in which they were conceived. These examples of space-age dystopia represent two major themes of their time: (1) the rapid expansion of the space race; and (2) increasing concern over environmental damage and voracious human expansion.[8] These stories depict worlds where humans have been developed incredibly advanced technology, yet still suffer from the cruelties and hardships which blight the ‘human condition’: be they the corporate greed (Alien), the ‘Frankenstein-inspired arrogance of man(Blade Runner), problems of population control (Logan’s Run) or environmental exhaustion (Silent Running).  Their message seems to be (in agreement with Surviving Progress) that despite technological advancement, the future should not be assumed to be a better place. 

Sci-fi and disaster movies can tell us something about the state of mind of our current society. Such vastly popular films play on a common trope of destruction and disaster. In spite of the fact that people are fearful for the future, they seem to have a desire to see these events take place on the big screen. Although our current culture has its own unique flavour of disaster-concepts, this fear of the future has a legacy of over a century. Though all of these fictional tales were not written directly as polemics to correct the evils of the world, they are the cultural spear-tip of deeply latent concerns about the destructive nature of humanity.  As times change, so the concerns expressed in popular culture mutate and flex to meet the demands and desires of the popular imagination of the time. As I hope it is clear from the above examples, each generation of cultural creators plays upon the hopes, fears and imaginings of its consumers. This, I would strongly argue, is nothing new….

Future and Science Fiction in the Fin-de-Siecle (1880-1914)

Many literary historians see the period either side of 1900 as being remarkable for the vast number of works of future fiction and predictive forecasts. Although the limitations of Earth and modern science were little understood in this period, philosophers, artists and essayists shared the same deep sense of unease at what appeared to be an increasingly widespread decadence and fundamental anxiety affecting society. This can be seen both in contemporary journalism, as well as in the fictitious works of authors, painters, poets and musicians.[9]

Amongst the most influential literary genres were the utopian/dystopian world of the future, science fiction/prediction and the ‘tale of future war’. In European fiction writers were infected with a sense of change – whether for the better or for the worse. H.G. Wells and Jules Verne are perhaps the best-known authors of their generation today. They were prolific novelists, but in their work they also attempted to show people the future path of humanity, and warn against certain perceived ills. Wells’ many works imagined the progress of technology in war (The War in the Air, 1908), a possible ideal world-state (A Modern Utopia, 1905) and also the potential for destruction and disaster (War of the Worlds, 1898). Verne too was capable of imagining both positive and negative and both authors sought to imagine the capabilities of technological advancement, with the potential for both advancements and disasters in equal portions. There were many similar authors who sought to augur and propose the path to a better or worse society. Some stories flew way wide of the mark, with ideas of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ galactic colonisation,[10] communist utopias on Mars,[11] and poisonous galactic gas clouds enveloping earth.[12] More close to reality, writers attempted to imagine a near-future world. G.K. Chesterton’s more thoughtful The Napoleon of Notting Hill (1904) imagined Britain in 1984 as a largely unchanged yet completely un-democratic place.[13] J. McCullough’s Golf in the Year 2000 (1892) is something of a golf fanatic’s handbook and made some accurate predictions for daily life, while failing to envisage air travel, preferring high-speed undersea trains. McCullough suggests that in the year 2000 women have become the breadwinners and the men simply play golf all of the time – if only…!

In the press and periodicals of the time, the same currents of thought were commonplace. The words ‘next’, ‘future’, ‘ambition’, ‘menace’ and ‘danger’ were second nature to journalists. They embody the sense that in such a changing world something new was just around the corner. For example such headlines:

• Henry Mann, ‘Europe’s Coming War: The Next Struggle Will Probably Spill Rivers of Blood. Forecast Of The Battle,’ Washington Post, April 8, 1894.
• ‘The Future Empire of the World. Is It To Be Anglo-Saxon or Russian? An American Author’s Plea,’ Daily Mirror, December 2, 1904.
• ‘The Menace of the East,’ Contemporary Review 87, (January 1905), pp. 628-639.
• ‘The Next World War. Startling Prophecy of Britain’s Battle with Germany. All Nations Involved,’ Daily Mirror, March 13, 1907.
• ‘Does Germany Menace the World’s Peace?,’ North American Review 184:8 (April 1907), pp. 853-860.

In the 1890s and 1900s there was a seeming acceptance that things were changing and rarely was the assumption made that it would be for the better. As seen above, many believed that a ‘world war’ was increasingly likely. Henry Mann’s 1894 article (above) argued that France, by invading Italy, would create a world war.[14] In Mann’s vision, it would be France who would fight on German soil. The fascination with predictions of the future - and in particular of war - meant that there was a vast selection of prophecies available. Many, like Mann, were unsuccessful in many details. However, as Anatoly Karlin has noted, (only) three authors were close to hitting the nail on the head with predictions of the Great War: Iwan Bloch, Friedrich Engels and Pyotr Durnovo. These theorists accurately predicted the brutality of trench warfare (Bloch), the rise of total war and accurate death tolls (Engels); and combined alliances, war outcomes and their revolutionary repercussions (Durnovo).[15]

 

Though these three men did their utmost to warn anyone who would listen, they were unable to persuade the General Staff of any of the Great Powers to prepare appropriately for the war to come. Amongst the vastness of opinion and conjecture, this proves how difficult it is to believe any single tale. No single ‘scientific’ analysis ever got every detail correct. Though Bloch correctly saw the devastation and horror of the coming conflict, who was going to believe the thoughtful writings of a Polish railway financier pontificating in his spare time?

Conclusion

From these examples in disparate time periods I hope it is evident that the vast majority of predictions of the future are unable to envision a real and ‘deep’ version of times to come. For me this is a lesson we could well learn. When reading the works of respected and eminent economists, demographers, social scientists and biologists we should take care to note the extreme rarity of a fully correct forecast for human ‘progress’. This is not to say that there is no value in these works. Doubtless many of these authors will look back regretfully on the way their warnings were ignored. Perhaps they will even do so with a sense of schadenfreude. The difficulty for planners and decision makers, as well as individuals, is that there are so many threats and warnings – how can anyone possibly know which aspects will be accurate, and which are facile.[16]

Humans have been obsessing about the ‘apocalypse’ since the dawn of the species. Every time there is a bright light in the sky, or an unexplained red sunset there was always a shaman/witchdoctor/priest/scientist/story-teller there to explain it could well be the end of us all. As long as there is a human imagination, there will be humans envisioning their own doom. It just seems to be an underlying fact of our brief existence. The real interest from such predictions, be they scientific or flights of fancy, is what they tell us about the way people are thinking. They delve deep into the human psyche to explain the issues that matter most to society at the time of their inception. This is what makes them – and ‘us’ (humans) – so fascinating.

Patrick Longson (June 2012)

Edited by Jamie Perry.

---

[1] John McNeill, Something New Under the Sun: an environmental history of the twentieth century (Penguin, 2000), p. 357; Millikan is cited in E. Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes, (New York, 1994), p. 534.

[2] See Ralph H. Lutts, ‘Chemical Fallout: Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, Radioactive Fallout, and the Environmental Movement,’ Environmental Review 9:3 (1985), pp. 210-225.

[3] Neville Shute, On the Beach (Heinemann, 1957); On the Beach (film), 1959.

[4] http://survivingprogress.com/; Accesed: 14/06/2012 15:27.

[5] http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/05/ian-bremmer-every-nation-for-itself.html Accessed: 14/06/2012 16:22.

[6] See e.g. Jared Diamond, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed (2005).

[7] See Adam Curtis, ‘All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace‘ (TV Documentary (2011)).

[8] See Rachel Carson, Silent Spring (1963); and Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb (1971).

[9] See for example Edvard Munch’s Scream (1893), Oscar Wilde’s The Painting of Dorian Grey (1891) etc.

[10] R.W. Cole, The Struggle for Empire: a story of the year 2236 (Elliot Stock, 1900).

[11] Alexander Bogdanov, Red Star, (1908).

[12] Arthur Conan Doyle, The Poison Belt, (1913).

[13] Some critics believe this inspired Orwell’s date selection for his own novel 1984.

[14] Henry Mann, ‘Europe’s Coming War: The Next Struggle Will Probably Spill Rivers of Blood. Forecast Of The Battle,’ Washington Post, April 8, 1894.

[15] http://akarlin.com/2010/05/05/great-war-prophets/ Accessed: 18/06/2012 11:43

[16] A proviso here: I do not wish to be seen as any kind of environment-change sceptic. I have no reason to doubt the findings of serious academic and scientific investigation. However, in the realms of prediction, even hard facts can be difficult to turn into unquestionable predictions of the future and it is this knowledge gap that I seek to emphasise.

Footballers’ Lives: Celebrity Culture in Britain

 

 

'Pictures of the Day' Daily Mirror, September 30, 1905

Image Missing. 

(image can be found via ukpressonline.co.uk searching for the date of issue (above))*

Caption Reads: 'That the game of football is not all fun, as so many people think, may be learned from the photographs. They depict—(1) Mr. Tait, the captain of the ‘Spurs, who takes his benefit on October 21.; (2) golf, a Scot’s relaxation; (3) a fast fifty yards for the wind; (4) skipping, another footballers’ exercise; (5, 6, and 7) keeping the eye in form on the hail; and (8) after the day's training, pleasure at the billiards table.'

When I came across an article entitled ‘Pictures of the Day’ from September 1905 which showed several snap-shots of a day in the life of a footballer it was difficult not to be intrigued. At that time The Daily Mirror in 1905 was one of a growing number of popular illustrated newspapers, enabling the increasingly vast British newspaper readership to view previously unseen elements of the wider world. This photograph based article evidently sought to emphasise the hard work and training that goes on in the daily lives of footballers paid to ply their trade, in discount a myth that the life of a professional footballer is all play, and no work.

‘Sandy’ or ‘Terrible’ Alexander Tait (So known for his ferocious tackling – though apparently he was never booked (pictured here)) was a prime example of a Scottish footballing ‘mercenary’, common in his time. He was a professional, a master of defensive destruction, who performed in front of crowds of thousands over the whole of his lengthy career. His was a story of rags to ‘riches’ elevating himself from working-class origins to a lengthy career as a sportsman, captaining an FA Cup winning side in 1900. He even coached the famous Brazilian team Corinthians. Clearly, for Tait, football had provided a long career of regular employment and relative comfort. However, in spite of the vast popularity of football in the Edwardian period, the wealth and celebrity experienced by footballers today is barely comparable. I can imagine that the hard-man Tait wouldn’t have much time for the actions and behaviour of today’s footballing prima donnas. 

Indeed, Mario Balotelli’s actions as philanthropist/playboy/bad boy/moron might have provoked one or two hay-makers from ‘Terrible Tait’, were the two players to have met competitively. Balotelli is perhaps the ultimate example of the unprecedented wealth of today’s footballers. His blasé attitude to cash has earned him both adulation and ignominy in the past year. In a way, Balotelli seems to appreciate the ludicrousness of footballing wealth better than any other. Nevertheless, many have been led to question the moral ethics of such vast sums of money ploughed into football clubs today. The Premier League is a prime example of the rising admiration of ‘get rich quick’ success stories which dominates a chunk of British popular culture. Football, a game which involves a great deal of hard work, training and years of commitment, provides by no means a bad model for youngsters to aspire to. However, at the top end, footballers, their celebrity friends and partners do little to provide role models or examples to new generations of British children. 

Similarly, the last few years have also seen the rise of pseudo-reality dramas such as ‘The Only Way is Essex’ and ‘Made In Chelsea’. These dramas document the daily lives of ‘ordinary’ people. They are not famous for their expertise, or work in film/television/music/modelling. They live a life of luxury and comfort whilst seemingly doing little or no work of worth. Though many viewers are able to make the distinction between myth and reality, it seems that the idea of wealth without industry is one that has increasing purchase in our society. This is no new phenomena, but perhaps is the ultimate expression of a long-trend. ‘Celebrities’ such as Katie Price, Jodie Marsh, Kerry Katona, Big Brother candidates A-Z and ‘WAGs’ have dominated headlines for over a decade, not only in trash ‘mags’, but also mainstream news media and satire.

However, in true form, this phenomenon of celebrity obsession is not completely unique. Although it may be special in its bloated opulence and political apathy, the popularity and press obsession with a group of privileged, moneyed, non-working celebrities with questionable moral values has been seen before.  

At the end of the 19^th century and the early 20^th century two major celebrities dominated the headlines of Britain’s new tabloid newspapers: The Daily Mail, The Daily Mirror, The Daily Sketch etc. etc. They were of course Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and later King Edward VII of Britain. Wilhelm was a press favourite. A nationalist fanatic and proponent of expansionist imperialism, Wilhelm was prone to horrendous gaffes (e.g. Daily Telegraph Affair) and outrageous statements (e.g. the Hunnenrede, the Krüger Telegram). His regular visits to Britain attracted large crowds where he was both adored and hated in equal portions.[1] Interest in his life and behaviour provided the press with constant material throughout his turbulent thirty year reign. Similarly, Edward VII, son of Queen Victoria, was a character who was much scrutinised by the popular press. He led a life of debauched luxury, gambled heavily, ate unbelievable amounts of food, smoked profusely and was a womaniser – much of which attracted interest and disgust in equal amount. He was nevertheless famed and admired for his diplomatic abilities, often attributed to his great personal gravitas and likeability. Though their popularity was subject to peaks and troughs, Edward VII and Wilhelm II remained a constant interest for the press in Britain and abroad throughout their lives. They provided drama, spectacle, distaste, awe and humour – who could say no to that?!

Although there are a great many differences between our current celebrity culture and that of the 1890s and 1900s it is clear that inquisitiveness and spectacle are consistent to human nature through the ages. As recently popularised in films such as ‘The Queen’ (2006) and ‘King’s Speech’ (2011) royalty has always played a central role in the national imagination as a focus for popular interest and debate – whether we like it or not. Although society has changed hugely, royalty still attracts its own special popularity. Prince William’s marriage to Kate Middleton, and the upcoming jubilee show a continued fascination with the royal family. This curiosity, I would argue, derives from the same human impulse that motivates the general public to read OK! and Heat articles documenting the latest extravagance of footballers like Balotelli or Z-list celebrities like ‘Joey Essex’. ‘Exposing’ the life of a footballer in 1905, though marked by many different social expectations, derives from that same British gossip-loving ‘nosiness’. 

It is unlikely that this historical comparison will provide any comfort the next time a footballer crashes his Bentley or a TOWIE character is booked into rehab. Things do change, not always for the better, and humans will always delight in hearing the extravagances and disasters of the rich and famous. But remember this: at least today’s crazy celebrity idiots don’t have the power to start a global bloodbath….not yet anyway.

Patrick Longson

(edited by Jamie Perry)

---

* N.B. (Sadly, due to the Daily Mirror's copyrighting policy I was unable to provide the actual image - if anyone wishes to donate £50 to the blog in order to see the real thing I'll post it up here...otherwise - see my fun image description above. Somehow an image not seen by anyone since 1905 is still apparently worth that amount....)

[1] “The Kaiser’s Journey. Royal Farewells at Sandringham. Parting Incidents. ‘A Gentleman Who is Always Smiling.’,” Daily Express, November 17, 1902.

The End of Boom and Bust?

…Boom-Bust-Boom-Bust-Boom…

The business cycle is a fundamental and undeniable cornerstone of economic theory. However, the economics expert and former British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, is often quoted as demanding 'no return to boom and bust' (1997). These fabled words will doubtless outlive him, and go down in history as a prime example of 'man-eating-hat' - or perhaps that should be 'hemisphere-eats-hat'. Brown was not alone. Adam Curtis's excellent documentary series, 'All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace' (2011) exposed the economic optimism which dominated the end of the 20^th century and opening of the 21^st. A new-found global confidence (or complacency) meant that major decision makers in charge of the world's largest economies garnered the belief that recessions were dead in this age of ever advancing computer technology, wealth and prosperity.

WRONG...... (cue 'Family Fortunes' buzzer)

They should have listened to the late-great J.K. Galbraith (JKG) - the eminent scholar of the 1930s 'great depression' - who warned in June 1999 that this talk was a result of 'another exercise in speculative optimism'. Speaking to the London School of Economics he warned ominously: "Let us have both the needed warnings against speculative excess and awareness that the ensuing slump can be painful." Nevertheless, the boom continued unabated and the world economy stumbled and lurched its way to our deliciously entitled 'Credit Crunch' (…a tasty sandwich now available at all self-respecting chain-bakeries across the UK...). Ever since 2008, commentators and journalists seem to have bemoaned the special nature of the misfortunes of the current generation. 

But was it such a huge surprise? Had we learned nothing of close to seventy years of academic scrutiny to know that no boom can last forever? My A-Level Economics lecturer and general font of knowledge, Mrs. K. Matthews, was prophesying our economic doom in 2004 - that the bubble would soon burst. I distinctly remember poo-pooing the idea of recession, having never experienced one first hand. Poor old JKG lived to a grand old age of 97 and died (April 2006) almost 2 years prior to the global slump - he never lived to pronounce, 'I told you so!'

Well none of the above (a rudimentary view of exceedingly complicated economics) will come as much of a surprise. What with Robert Peston's moaning, groaning and gurning during the Six O'clock News - and seemingly endless political satire of disaster after disaster  - the creaking-old term 'crisis' could do with a well-earned break (Fill-in where appropriate: Debt-, Eurozone-, Financial-, Greek-, Foreign-Currency-Speculation-, Oil-, Bankers-, Ecological-, Development-, Food-, Water-, Fuel-,....). However, any claim that the events effecting the global markets and national economies are new and unique should quickly be dismissed.

Talk of the economic crisis and the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s is relatively commonplace. In fact many similarities are drawn between the way that global recession played out and our own. Like now, property prices were a fundamental cause. Like now, the slump shocked a world which had dared to hope that things might just keep improving - people might just keep getting richer, happier and safer. Like now, the slump led to the fall of governments and national soul searching. First there were calls for austerity (like our old pal ‘Dave’ Cameron, LOL). Then people got sick of that, and demanded a change - just look to the French and Greek voters, and even British local elections for evidence of the assonances with today. Like now, there was also an infamous turn to the extremes and to 'strong' rulers (1920s and 1930s: Germany, Italy, Hungary, Spain, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania). The success and resurgence of an array and variety of right-wing parties in Europe (Netherlands, Denmark, France, Greece, Britain) is a gloomy reminder of what can happen when times are hard and people need scapegoats. 

In my studies I am constantly reminded of how little humans really change. From the Roman ‘Crisis of the Third Century’ to the ‘South Sea Bubble’ of the early 18^th century, the history of human society is cluttered with many ‘great’ recessions. My own historical scope falls later in the great terrible, joyful, farcical parade of human history. Studying the period from the late 1880s into the twentieth century it is impossible to ignore the 'Long Depression', which spanned the 1870s, 80s and 90s and effected the entire Western hemisphere. There is no question the world was a different place back then. For the great majority life was immeasurably harder in a way which would be hard to comprehend today. But that depression had results which we would all recognise today:

• Interventionism - the rise of socialism in this instance - experienced a great surge of popularity and developed many of its key ideas
• Right-wing parties and ideas of population control and eugenics can be traced back to this formative period
• New economic powers surged where the old ones stuttered: in that time Britain's industrial might was challenged and subsumed by Germany and the United States - today China has continued its rise while the older 'western' economies spluttered under a mountain of debt.
• Rise in the popularity/sympathy of/with the military (as seen in the UK) and popular and social imperialism: through 'new imperialism' and the expansion of European empires (seen today recent revival of the Falkland Islands/Malvinas dispute - here intended as a device to explain the "the diversions outwards of internal tensions and forces of change in order to preserve the social and political status quo" (see H-U. Wehler, 1969))
• Censure of the 'new journalism' and its profit-driven, voyeuristic and intrusive approach (phone hacking). (Lee, A.J. (1976) pp. 117-118)

A particular area of interest for my own studies is the development of a discourse of 'National Efficiency'. In 1896 E.E. Williams (an economic polemicist) published the best-selling book, Made In Germany. Williams posited that an external industrial threat (Germany) had developed as a result of an internal British lack of efficiency and work-ethic. Amongst many other works of this time, the discourse quickly gathered support from across the British political spectrum. In the years 1896-1910 the idea of regenerating a decadent, unappreciative and increasingly lazy population and economy gained much attention. The press and politicians continually showed a special interest in reforming every aspect of British society: education, politics, foreign policy, industry, army, civil service, the media and even the 'national physique'. Indeed the ideas of eugenics and Social Darwinism can trace some of their roots back to this developing intellectual discourse. (See G.R. Searle, 1971)

Although this movement eventually died away, its legacy did outlast its proponents. In the twentieth century governments across Europe and North America adopted approaches which shared the same genetic make-up. Social reform and interventionism, technocracy, 'cult of the expert', Fascism, National Socialism - all share elements of the ideas of these outspoken British reformers. In its response to the perceived ills of a society of contrasts, National Efficiency also can be linked to many of the features of our current 'modern' society. Technocratic governance in Italy (Mario Monti), demands for industrial regeneration and rebirth (the UK in particular), political reform (AV referendum, House of Lords reform, expenses scandals) and demands for a change in the way the media operate (phone hacking) are all major issues and debates upon which our commentators and political 'experts' cogitate and masticate. 

The perennial question for the historian: SO WHAT!!?? Well that’s a tough one. Each grand recession is the same but different. There is no way to argue that each one follows an exact model, and there are innumerable fundamental changes in the structure and nature of each society - they belong to distinct 'epistemes' as Foucault would probably say (although he would probably do it in a 3 volume dialogue studying the history of chicken farming in 18th Century Alsace). Perhaps the only thing we can truly learn is that there is and never will be an end to the business cycle. Humans might change their clothes, their methods of communication and what they have for dinner - but the lumps of squidgy mush inside their little crania still go on producing the same old answers to the same old questions. 

 All recessions end, and although they often bring out the worst in humanity, they can also produce grand reform for the benefit of all. Therefore, we should all stop mithering about it, relax and remember to embrace the mantra of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: "Don't Panic!" (Douglas Adams, 1979).

Unless Greece defaults……

Patrick Longson

(edited by Jamie Perry)