4.3.11

Guild Halls

At last night's GOSSIP #2, we got into a mini-discussion about the potential political associations with the word "guildhalls", the context being Philip Larkin's poem "Going, Going":

I thought it would last my time -
The sense that, beyond the town,
There would always be fields and farms,
Where the village louts could climb
Such trees as were not cut down;
I knew there'd be false alarms

In the papers about old streets
And split level shopping, but some
Have always been left so far;
And when the old part retreats
As the bleak high-risers come
We can always escape in the car.

Things are tougher than we are, just
As earth will always respond
However we mess it about;
Chuck filth in the sea, if you must:
The tides will be clean beyond.
- But what do I feel now? Doubt?

Or age, simply? The crowd
Is young in the M1 cafe;
Their kids are screaming for more -
More houses, more parking allowed,
More caravan sites, more pay.
On the Business Page, a score

Of spectacled grins approve
Some takeover bid that entails
Five per cent profit (and ten
Per cent more in the estuaries): move
Your works to the unspoilt dales
(Grey area grants)! And when

You try to get near the sea
In summer . . .
It seems, just now,
To be happening so very fast;
Despite all the land left free
For the first time I feel somehow
That it isn't going to last,

That before I snuff it, the whole
Boiling will be bricked in
Except for the tourist parts -
First slum of Europe: a role
It won't be hard to win,
With a cast of crooks and tarts.

And that will be England gone,
The shadows, the meadows, the lanes,
The guildhalls, the carved choirs.
There'll be books; it will linger on
In galleries; but all that remains
For us will be concrete and tyres.

Most things are never meant.
This won't be, most likely; but greeds
And garbage are too thick-strewn
To be swept up now, or invent
Excuses that make them all needs.
I just think it will happen, soon

It was these lines that made us think:

And that will be England gone,
The shadows, the meadows, the lanes
The guildhalls, the carved choirs.

Some, in hating the poem, singled this stanza out as evidence of a deeply deadening conservatism. That the list given here is full of lifeless things, lifeless and quaint and enemies of progress. There are no people in that list (enhanced by shadows without the things that make them). There are (presumably empty) meadows and lanes, and carved choirs - still, heavy objects, an impression compounded by the inevitable associations readers will have with choirs - a group of people, singing, perhaps even joyously - juxtaposed with the rigid createdness of "carved", something hewn out of a lump of inanimate matter, perhaps a little crudely, not quite the real thing. The lively hand that did the carving, meanwhile, is nowhere to be seen. That "carved choirs" can also refer to objects in a church further encourages this sense of solidity and solemnity.

But guildhalls?

I said that to me, guildhalls - and more specifically guilds - connect to a particularly English collectivity, a civic pride that is not conservative but actually something of the opposite. Not radical exactly, but certainly connected with a sense of an active culture of trade expertise. The guilds fit in my head with libraries as services for the people, as seen in this film of the Sheffield City Library. So I thought I'd look them up, to see whether my associations have any basis.

The Wikipedia page on guilds describes them as:

"an association of craftsmen in a particular trade. The earliest types of guild were formed as confraternities of workers. They were organized in a manner something between a trade union, a cartel and a secret society"

As those three descriptions suggest, the guild doesn't neatly fall into an idea of right-wing conservatism nor left-wing collectivism. Whilst they were organisations of workers, they conspired to keep their trade secrets secret, and appear to have been more associations of individuals than a genuinely collective group. Nevertheless, in some senses they could be seen as opposing a capitalist idea of mass production, and certainly in some areas of contemporary culture, the idea of the master craftsman is seen as a positive alternative to cheap, mass produced products. See for instance the artisan and organic food movements.

Of course, these movements have faced criticisms - that they privilege individuals with enough time and money to buy the products these artisans produce, as well as seeing solutions in individualistic endeavours that have no potential for mass application. The amount of land needed for all farming to be organic, for instance, is so large that any idea of Britain being able to sustain that sort of production remains dead in the water. (Not to mention the de-toxification process the soil would need to undergo, as well as the complete silencing of global mega agri-business corporations).

But to counter that again, one could suggest that the guild idea is worth retaining for an idea that can seem both more abstract and more practical: the idea of the master craftsman ensures that trades continue in some form and do not become conscripted into a global corporate economy that makes shoddy products cheaply and quickly, and without any real connections being established between the crafter, the materials and those that use the product. That people remain that know what blacksmithing is, or cobbling, or being a butcher, or a furniture maker. If a prominent effect of globalisation has been to separate people from their immediate environments, and to discourage meaningful contact between people and the food they eat, the tools they use and so on, then the master craftsman or woman and the guilds may be a way of re-establishing these connections. In books, for instance, in a market where Amazon has pretty much any book anyone could want, often for extremely cheap prices and available at the click of a button, it is refreshing and encouraging that small presses aware of the history of book-binding and proficient in its skills are re-appearing.

It doesn't seem, then, in the end, that guildhalls have particular associations with any specific political viewpoint. I suppose in a way that complicates Larkin's mourning. What complicates more, though, I think, is to compare the things/ideas that he is ostensibly mourning in the poem with the things/ideas movements like the slow food movement, the green movement, DIY culture and the like are championing, and to wonder whether the words "conservative" and "progressive" have the same meaning as they did in 1972, when "Going, Going" was written, or even if they have any meaning at all anymore, whether they are even useful words to invoke when talking about political aims.

4 comments:

  1. One thing that interests me in the way this debate about Englishness and whether it is under threat has unfolded in the last hundred years or so is the fact that, even before the issue of empire comes up, England is just one country/nation within Great Britain. It's perhaps a shame that, sitting in a flat in Glasgow, with a mixture of Scots and English in attendance, we didn't discuss the implications of this - after all, the rate of economic and cultural change affected Scotland and Wales at least as much as England, and in Scotland the hypertrophy of industrialisation in places like Glasgow makes quite an extreme contrast with the ways of life in communities in the highlands and islands. Anyway, I looked for guildhalls near us on Googlemaps, and found that The Guildhall is an office complex on Queen Street in the city centre, housing News International Newspapers, The Sun, The Sunday Times... Almost all the other results that came up were for music venues - but they were because bands playing there also had tour dates in English cities, where "The Guildhall" has been converted into a venue. Was there not a culture of guilds in Scotland? Or is Glasgow the anomaly? And how did these buildings come to have their present function(s)? Curiouser and curiouser.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fascinating! From what I can gather (as often is the case, actually trying to find some concrete - no pun intended - facts about these sorts of buildings is rather difficult) that office complex that is called The Guild Hall has no historical relation to an ACTUAL guild hall. Which suggests the namers of the building saw something in the name and its associations that they felt fitted their project. Ironic, given that those companies are part of a capitalism that was partly responsible for the decline of guilds.

    A quick Google search for Scottish guilds suggests that there is some sort of guild presence in Scotland, although it is hard to tell quite how old they are, as there are lots which are obviously connected with recent reviving of interest in arts and crafts and stuff, a bit like I was alluding to in the post above. There is this - http://www.historyshelf.org/shelf/learn/12.php - the Scottish Co-Operative Women's Guilds, which sounds a lot more like my original associations with the word:

    "The co-operative ventures began in Scotland during the first half of the 19th century. By 1900 co-operative societies were everywhere, from the largest cities to villages so small that they were barely mentioned on the map. They appealed to main the wives of working class men, encouraged by the financial benefits of the dividend and the idea that they were taking part in a social revolution." Note though - "These women had no say in how it was run."

    The co-operative side of things is perhaps where my initial assocations came from, as I've talked a lot with my Dad about the co-operative movement (which in part led to the Co-Op shops etc) that started in Yorkshire, and various proto-NHS's in south Wales.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mark-

    The basis for my doubt about the status of guilds and their political viewpoint was from my experience of one in particular. The 'Worshipful Company of Fishmongers' (one of the Livery Companies of the City of London and a guild of the sellers of fish) is a trustee of the (private) school that I attended from the ages of 13-16.

    Historically their role is to protect the monarch, one of them killed Wat Tyler at the Peasants' Revolt, and they were one of the plantation companies in Ulster- granted land there by the King. They do claim to still have some dealings with fish and fisheries but essentially they are an elite group who still make their money from property- lots of which was granted by royalty. You do admit that those in guilds are privileged individuals. With the fishmongers you only have to look at their ‘notable liverymen’ to realise they are a pretty select group of members and membership is granted (as with most guilds) by patrimony or close recent family connections to the company. However in this instance I don’t think this is redeemed by the part they play in keeping the trade alive, they are not master craftsmen or tradesmen, or experts in fish or fisheries and how they use their privileges does seem to me to be a case of right-wing conservatism.

    Their main outgoings are charitable donations, maintenance of their lavish headquarters on London Bridge and catering costs. In terms of charity they supported the school I attended. I was a fishmonger’s scholar so essentially they paid my fees and perhaps I shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth but I am now of the opinion that funding an elite private school is not really all that charitable. The dealings the students of the school had with them was, I always felt, slightly bizarre. Once a term the school choir would perform at a big dinner for their wardens and livery members (one of the main outgoings listed on their website) in their hall on London Bridge and in return would be given an envelope with fifty pounds in it. Upon leaving the school they send a letter inviting you to become a member of the member's only club they are affiliated with for a reduced fee. Half of the board of governors of the school is made up of fishmongers company members. Although I shouldn't be shocked at a private school being funded, or having connections with an elite group I did feel that there was a huge sense of old boys club about it rather than a noble ideal of preserving a trade or tradition. (also members get to vote in elections of the Corporation of London, in light of how their members are chosen this seems to me to be highly undemocratic).

    Anyway, their role in society always felt anachronistic and the dealings I had with them always felt very ‘closed shop’ (they don’t publish their accounts either). It all sat uneasily with me- a bit fishy (ho ho).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worshipful_Company_of_Fishmongers
    http://www.fishhall.org.uk/Governance/

    I cannot claim to have any experience of any other guilds and if they do indeed ensure that trades continue in some form then perhaps I would agree that they are worth retaining. I am also not saying that I think they are part of some secret right-wing conspiracy (i'd probably like to be able to say that!) but I do feel that in reality their role is merely ceremonial and in terms of what they use their guild for pretty superfluous.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, that certainly sounds like the "secret society"/"cartel" part of the three descriptions.

    I wasn't trying to suggest that they should be retained, more I was trying to find out if my personal associations with them (mental associations, that is) were in any way based on fact, or whether I'd got them confused with something or whatever. It turns out what I had in mind about guilds bears only a very slight resemblance to what they actually were/are - the "trade union" bit.

    As for all this crafts stuff that seems to have come back again in recent years, the food-related stuff I think is, not to put too fine a point on it, bollocks - from working in an organic food shop (in Bristol and here) and farming in France, I just think those that think that if we all went organic and had master cheese-people and master fruit-people etc etc then everything would be fine are hopelessly naive. To think that massive agri-business would just stand by why their profits eroded is incredibly lazy thinking.

    As far as books go, I do like the fact that there are publishers (I had a link to a great one in LA, but couldn't find it) who are retaining knowledge of the book as physical object. Having said that, I like the fact that it's small presses and DIY culture that is doing it, not these weird civic societies.

    Really, the narrative behind/of my post is I had certain mental associations with guilds, they turned out to be pretty much wrong, then I thought about these modern day versions, could see the arguments but didn't really buy them, apart from liking the books bit.

    I do think, though, that the meanings (in politics and in art) of what is conservative and what is progressive have changed and are continuing to. Not entirely, by all means, there are certain things conservatives will always be for and others that progressives will always be for. But I think Europe especially is seeing a massive confusion of what it means to be left-wing and what it means to be right-wing. There's a really good book on this by Ian Buruma called "Murder in Amsterdam: The Death of Theo Van Gogh and the Limits of Tolerance". I used it in my dissertation, especially this quote:

    "There is a long and frequently poisonous history in European politics of left-wing internationalism and conservative defense [sic] of traditional values. The Left was on the side of universalism, scientific socialism, and the like, while the Right believed in culture, in the sense of “our culture,” “our traditions.” During the multicultural age of the 1970s and 1980s, this debate began to shift. It was now the Left that stood for culture and tradition, especially “their” cultures and traditions, that is, those of the immigrants, while the Right argued for the universal values of the Enlightenment"

    Buruma's a remarkable writer - throughout the book, he manages to observe a massively complex situation with calmness, subtlety and an even-handedness that is uncommon in writing about this sort of thing.

    This may have gotten off-topic a bit, but that last paragraph of my post about the terms progressive/conservative really had this paragraph from Buruma in mind. Also, I suppose, the mention of DIY culture had in mind conversations the Open School had after the Instal festival, where we wondered about issues of entrepreneurialism in DIY culture, and the differences (if any) between Do It Yourself and Do It Ourselves...

    ReplyDelete

Me

My photo
I am writing a PhD at the University of Glasgow entitled "The Poetics of Time in Contemporary Literature". My writing has been published in Type Review, Dancehall, Puffin Review and TheState. I review books for Gutter and The List. I am also an editor and reviewer at the Glasgow Review of Books.

Blog Archive