Upon returning to the UK after such a long absence (2 years and 3 months), many people have asked us what our impressions were of the old country, and also how we adjusted to western society. We were indeed apprehensive about how we would cope once we were exposed to the modern world. Would we, as some posters to this blog suggested, be shocked by the shallow materialism? Or would we be relieved to be back in a 'developed' modern society? Would we struggle to know which was worse: shock or attraction?
To give some background to this it is worth reminding ourselves as to why we volunteered in the first place, and what this blog was all about. We came out to Flores so we could stop standing on the sidelines and get stuck into trying to make the world a better place. We felt uncomfortable about our own affluence and aware that the contradiction between our world view and our behaviour was hypocritical. Also, we were curious to find out how we could live a simpler life, unsullied by status anxiety and neophilia. However, we were keen not to be 'development tourists', objectifying the disadvantaged and regarding their poverty as part of an experiential cultural encounter. We needed to get to know these people and understand their situation in as many dimensions as possible and thus form a sound framework by which we could better understand the causes and consequences of inequality.
I think we can state that we achieved that level of understanding, but not necessarily in a way that it can be communicated lucidly to other people (though hopefully in this blog we have occasionally made sense). Also, going back home to the UK was the test to see if we had really changed or not.
I don't think we are ready to report on all our experiences and impressions, but here are some snapshots:
- It seems to be a rite of passage for returning VSO volunteers to suffer a panic attack on Oxford Street in their first week back. We were no exception!
- We were struck by how badly dressed most people were, and the sheer amount of flesh on display was a shock after the conservatism of Flores.
- We learned about something called a 'Muffin' and a WAG. The latter was easier on the eye, but still faintly alarming.
- Most people seemed very vexed and stressed about the state of the country (though less upset about the state of the world, oddly enough). There seemed to be an obsession with immigration and tax...
- We had never noticed before how the British have a keen sense of entitlement. They see themselves as 'entitled' to a secure well-paid job, free healthcare, low taxes and decent weather. One needs to live somewhere else for a while to realize that most people in the world would count themselves lucky to be 'entitled' to a daily meal.
- After Indonesia, it is a joy to walk around cities where the traffic is so orderly, the streets so clean and safe, and the general environment so conducive to human habitation. This is something the British fail to appreciate, and may be surprised by what they take for granted.
- The British are confused about globalization in a way that Asians are not. They enjoy the freedom of movement of goods and capital (from which they benefit massively), but are less keen on its corollary: free movement of labour.
- Polish barmen have transformed British pubs and eateries into polite, congenial places that are a joy to visit. In fact, this is one of the most striking things we noticed about the country. Gone are the surly students resenting the imposition on their leisure time that a bar job represents, in their place stand smart and polite Polish people. Except in the Channings, Clifton, which is an oasis of crap service untouched by Ryszard or Waclaw; it should become a theme pub to remind us of how things used to be.
- Most people were genuinely interested in what we had been doing in Indonesia, were not as hard-hearted about foreign aid as we were led to expect, and were generous to a fault.
I read a piece in the paper that seemed to encapsulate much of what we were observing:
'It is almost 15 years since the UK had a serious economic downturn and the voters are so used to having money (or, for many, credit) that they take it all for granted. The New Labour creed is that we are all consumers now, so it can hardly complain when the public acts like the mob in ancient Rome. For bread, read wall-to-wall shopping on the never-never. For circuses, read the brutishness and cruelty of reality TV, for the mercenary armies on the borders of empire, read the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.'
(Larry Elliott, The Guardian, 25/09/06)
It seemed to us a shame that the British are so determined to be dissatisfied with their lot when in many ways they are so damned lucky to live where they do. Most people seem very affluent (thanks to the property boom) but they are confused about what this wealth means. People seem to think that the holy grail of financial independence will secure liberty for themselves and their family. But is liberty really freedom from obligations? Traditionally the British has used their liberty to build the elements of civil society and habits of reciprocity (what some call ‘social capital’) that in many ways laid the foundations of liberal democracy in the world. It would be a shame if prosperity and individualism led us to shrink back from the network of social obligations that maintains politeness, charity and mutual respect, and makes Britain (and the British) so admirable.
Recent Comments