England Your England: Notes on a Nation

by George Orwell

This new collection brings together four of Orwell’s short sketches of English life with his masterful analysis of a crumbling English society. They range from an expedition down a coal mine to a chastening experience of colonial rule in Burma, and from a witty study of murder reportage in the British tabloids to a grim account of life inside a workhouse. Culminating with Orwell’s masterpiece on English socialism, ‘The Lion and the Unicorn’, the essays in this collection are a testament to the fascinating peculiarities of English culture. Together, they say as much about what England could aspire to be as the state that it has found itself in.

Genres: Nonfiction, Essays, History, Politics, Classics, Philosophy, War

188 pages, Paperback

First published January 19, 1941

About the author

Eric Arthur Blair was an English novelist, poet, essayist, journalist and critic who wrote under the pen name of George Orwell. His work is characterised by lucid prose, social criticism, opposition to all totalitarianism (both fascism and stalinism), and support of democratic socialism.

Orwell is best known for his allegorical novella Animal Farm (1945) and the dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), although his works also encompass literary criticism, poetry, fiction and polemical journalism. His non-fiction works, including The Road to Wigan Pier (1937), documenting his experience of working-class life in the industrial north of England, and Homage to Catalonia (1938), an account of his experiences soldiering for the Republican faction of the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), are as critically respected as his essays on politics, literature, language and culture.

Orwell's work remains influential in popular culture and in political culture, and the adjective "Orwellian"—describing totalitarian and authoritarian social practices—is part of the English language, like many of his neologisms, such as "Big Brother", "Thought Police", "Room 101", "Newspeak", "memory hole", "doublethink", and "thoughtcrime". In 2008, The Times named Orwell the second-greatest British writer since 1945.

Reviews

[Luís · Rating 3 out of 5]

Or "How Orwell Predict the Brexit's World Crisis".

[Sam Quixote · Rating 2 out of 5]

George Orwell thinks England’s not that bad and up yours to anyone who thinks otherwise!

Orwell’s essay takes a meandering and questionable look at the nebulous British national character with its positives and negatives. Among the topics touched upon are the distinct class divides, the curiously anti-militaristic attitude of the time juxtaposed with the existence of the Empire (maintained through military strength), and the not especially patriotic views of the general public - until a bully like Hitler starts throwing his weight around and then everyone’s signing up to fight for King and Country!

Orwell never fails to write well but this time the content didn’t grab me in the way it normally does. The subject matter is not especially compelling or insightful and his conclusions were unconvincing and felt largely pointless. I guess he was in a nationalistic mood while Hitler was bombing London and this was the result?

George Orwell was a fantastic essayist whose reportage is absolutely worth reading but the rambling England Your England is definitely not among his best work.

[Portal in the Pages · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't know that it's possible to dislike Orwell.

[Graeme · Rating 5 out of 5]

Published in 1941, England Your England answers so many questions I have had about that country, going back to the mid-1950's in Australia, when English immigrant kids joined my primary school classes.

The crowds in the big towns with their mild knobby faces, their bad teeth and gentle manners, are different from a European crowd.

I understood that the class system had changed and the middle class had grown, for example, but I never understood when and how. This book answers those questions, and more, with characteristic elegance and simplicity. It is short and inexpensive, but essential to your understanding of the people and their history.

For all its postwar poverty, humiliation, and loss of empire, the very mention of England still stirs my Australian heart. I would answer the call to save it just as my father and grandfathers did before me.

June 2025 I love this essay so much that I will repeat reading it until I die. Here is a sample of its beauty:

It follows that British democracy is less of a fraud than it sometimes appears. A foreign observer sees only the huge inequality of wealth, the unfair electoral system, the governing-class control over the Press, the radio and education, and concludes that democracy is simply a polite name for dictatorship. But this ignores the considerable agreement that does unfortunately exist between the leaders and the led. However much one may hate to admit it, it is almost certain that between 1931 and 1940 the National Government represented the will of the mass of the people. It tolerated slums, unemployment and a cowardly foreign policy. Yes, but so did public opinion. It was a stagnant period, and its natural leaders were mediocrities.

In spite of the campaigns of a few thousand left-wingers, it is fairly certain that the bulk of the English people were behind Chamberlain’s foreign policy. More, it is fairly certain that the same struggle was going on in Chamberlain’s mind as in the minds of ordinary people. His opponents professed to see in him a dark and wily schemer, plotting to sell England to Hitler, but it is far likelier that he was merely a stupid old man doing his best according to his very dim lights. It is difficult otherwise to explain the contradictions of his policy, his failure to grasp any of the courses that were open to him.

Like the mass of the people, he did not want to pay the price either of peace or of war. And public opinion was behind him all the while, in policies that were completely incompatible with one another. It was behind him when he went to Munich, when he tried to come to an understanding with Russia, when he gave the guarantee to Poland, when he honoured it, and when he prosecuted the war half- heartedly. Only when the results of his policy became apparent did it turn against him; which is to say that it turned against its own lethargy of the past seven years. Thereupon the people picked a leader nearer to their mood, Churchill, who was at any rate able to grasp that wars are not won without fighting. Later, perhaps, they will pick another leader who can grasp that only Socialist nations can fight effectively.

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don’t want to be a soldier,
I don’t want to go to war.
I’d rather stay at home,
Around the streets to roam,
And live on the earnings of a well paid whore.
I don’t want a bayonet up my arse-hole,
I don’t want my bollocks shot away.
I’d rather stay in England,
In merry merry England,
And fuck my bloody life away.

This essay is a picture of the total English culture from a modern viewpoint.

Most nationalities have their peculiar characteristics. Spaniards are cruel to animals and make a lot of noise. The Chinese are addicted to gambling. The English are the ones, who are not gifted artistically like the Italians who have fondness for painting and sculpture. Painting and sculpture have not flourished in England as they have flourished in other European countries like France. The English are not intellectual either. They have a horror of abstract philosophy or a systematic world-view. They feel no need for any philosophy and hence they are neither intellectual nor philosophical. But they are quite practical. In moments of supreme crisis the English are capable of forgetting their distinctions and differences of class and rank. However, as a whole, they are a most class-stricken people.

The English are a nation of flower lovers; they are also a nation of stamp-collectors, pigeon fanciers, amateur carpenters, coupon snippers, darts-players, cross-word puzzle fans. All their native culture, centres round the pub, the football match, the back-garden, the fireside and the nice cup of tea. The liberty of the individual is still believed in as in the 19th century, but it has nothing to do with economic liberty, the right to exploit others for profit --- even this private liberty is a lost cause. The English are in process of being unnumbered, labelled, conscripted and coordinated.

By and large the English are gentle. But the common people are not puritanical. They are gamblers, drink as much bear as their wages will permit, are devoted to bawdy jokes, and use probably the foulest language. They are without definite religious belief and have been so for centuries.

The Anglican church does not exercise any hold on them. They have retained notwithstanding a tinge of Christian feeling, while almost forgetting the name of Christ. The common people have not yet been tainted by power-worship which happens to be the new religion of Europe today. They have never caught up with power politics. The realism, preached in Japanese and Italian newspapers, would horrify them.

The old-fashioned outlook, their categorized snobberies, their mixture of bawdiness and hypocrisy, their extreme gentleness, their deeply moral attitude to life, all of these characteristics of the English people are obviously reflected in the comic coloured post-cards that are seen in the windows of cheap stationers' shops.

The gentleness of English civilization is perhaps its most marked feature. England is a country where even the bus conductors are good-tempered and the policemen carry no revolvers. Then the English have a hatred of war and militarism. It is strongly rooted in the lower middle-class as well as the working class. Successive wars have shaken this characteristic but not destroyed it completely.

The mass of the people are without military knowledge or tradition and their attitude towards war is invariably defensive No. politician could rise to power by promising them conquests or military glory. No hymn of Hate has ever made an appeal to them.

The songs sung by sung by the soldiers in the last war were not vengeful, but humorous and mock-defeatist.

For example,

I don't want to join the bloody Army,
I don't want to go into the war;
I want no more to roam,
I'd rather stay at home
Living on the earnings of a whore….

But when the English fight, they fight with determination, unity and courage. They do not glorify their victories. There is a large number of battle poems. But no popular poem about Trafalgar or Waterloo exists. The names of the great battles that finally broke the German armies are simply unknown to the general public.

The gentleness of the English civilization is mixed up with barbarities and anachronisms. The English criminal law is out of date. In England people are still hanged, but there has never been any popular outcry against it. People accept it as they accept the weather. They are part of the law which is assumed to be unalterable. Englishmen have a great respect for constitutionalism and legality. They believe that the law is something above the state and the individual, something which is cruel and stupid but at any rate incorruptible.

The law is not regarded to be just, but everyone, in spite of this, respects law and feels a sense of outrage, when it is not. Everyone believes that the law can be, ought to be, and on the whole, will be impartially administered. The totalitarian idea that there is no such thing as law, there is only power, has never taken root.

In England concepts such as justice, liberty and objective truth are still believed in. They may be illusions, but they are very powerful illusions.

The belief in them influences conduct, national life is different because of them. The English electoral system is but an open fraud, but it, too, cannot be regarded as a powerful safeguard. The hanging judge is a symbol of the strange mixture of reality and illusion. Democracy and privilege, humbug and decency, the subtle outlook of compromises by the English, keep themselves in their familiar shape.

Therefore, this essay is a picture of England politically, socially, intellectually, militarily and industrially. It portrays the life of the ruling class, the military, the industrial classes and the bourgeois. But at the same time it summarizes the chief characteristics of the people of England, their attachment, comportments, opinions, ways and viewpoint.

[Ian D · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ένα σύντομο δοκίμιο γύρω από την "αγγλικότητα" της χώρας, όλα τα χαρακτηριστικά που την κάνουν αυτό που είναι, με τα συν και τα πλην. Ναι, δεν είναι ό,τι πιο αντικειμενικό, πρέπει να μη λησμονήσουμε ωστόσο πως γράφτηκε μεσούντος του Β' Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου το 1941, όταν όροι όπως εθνικισμός, πατριωτισμός και σοσιαλισμός ήταν πιο επίκαιροι από ποτέ. Κι έπειτα ο Orwell είναι πάντα ο Orwell.

[🌶 peppersocks 🧦 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reflections and lessons learned:
“It is quite true that the English are hypocritical about their Empire. In the working class this hypocrisy takes the form of not knowing that the Empire exists”

Not the beginning of political thought of course, but for me an insight into politics from a crucial historical time in Europe (WW2) and when relatives I have known (and naturally been influenced and challenged by) were contributing to and raised in. Context is everything and this understanding crucial

[Richard Newton · Rating 3 out of 5]

An essay, rather than a book, written about 80 years ago during WWII by Orwell. Like most of Orwell's non-fiction writing it has an appeal and clarity of writing, but it is mostly of historical interest only. That history is of course interesting to many people, and hence the book still has relevance, but unlike some of his other works I didn't find his timeless observations here.

It paints a picture of the England of the 1940s, with Orwell's directness - it neither seems to be making any specific claims or boasts, more just saying this is what England is like … or at least what it was like. Some is complementary, much is not. The word stupid occurs quite a few times!

I'm sure some people think England is still like this. It generally isn't. I was born almost quarter of a century after this was written, and I suspect in my childhood much of what was written here may still have been true. But that was half a century ago, and the country I live in now changed in innumerable ways since then. Of course, you can find things in the essay that still hold true or choose to interpret it in such a way that it tells you some timeless truth about England. But I think if you knew nothing about England, and wanted to understand the reality of modern England, this little book would add little to your knowledge.

[Ben Ballin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Immaculately written, of course, this is nonetheless a confusing book: a weird amalgam of nationalist myth-making and bold assertions, attempting to define 'Englishness' and to bridge both socialism and patriotism. It contains some fine observational nuggets, but little by way of evidence or analysis. I can only assume that Orwell's desire to forge a nationalist discourse arises from the time of its writing, 1941, when Britain was at war, and facing the imminent threat of a fascist invasion. In which case, it was presumably a useful piece of propaganda.
That passages of it have served the needs and interests of a subsequent Conservative Prime Minister (I think of John Major's famous speech on Britishness) and have even been republished by far-right groups, only serves to further demonstrate its confusions. Orwell, in this, is like the famous elephant facing the blind men of an Indian traditional tale: one feels the trunk, and identifies it as a snake; another, the leg, and assumes it is a tree ... and so forth. We each find our own Orwell: the anti-communist, the fighter with POUM, the patriot etc. For me, the Orwell in this particular historical curiosity is a conflicted and a confusing one.

[Charlie · Rating 3 out of 5]

"...England will still be England, an everlasting animal stretching into the future and the past, and, like all living things, having the power to change out of recognition and yet remain the same."

I found this tough reading. I genuinely have a headache as I write this review. I bought this essay because I thought a lot of what Orwell wrote decades ago is still very relevant today, especially this line: "(England is) a family with the wrong members in control." Also I thought it would be interesting to read somebody's opinion on the Second World War whilst it was in progress.

I'm glad I read this essay, if only to broaden my horizons (and appear sophisticated). I feel as though my political knowledge of 20th century Britain could be better so some of it probably went over my head.

Thank you Orwell but now I need a lie down.

[Valentina Salvatierra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Adding this book feels like cheating on my 2019 reading challenge, but that's life. I did read it and because I thought it was pretty thought-provoking I do want to have a register of it.

This essay focuses on a specific period and geographical location: written by Orwell during WWII, he takes the patriotism that this war brings into focus as a starting point to reflect on England's identity. Like any discourse on such an intangible subject, this one has its limitations and could arguably be seen as nothing more than an invitation to nationalism in the midst of an inernational conflict that called for national unity. He does seem to be a bit too optimistic, both about the virtues of Englishness, their essential nature, and the future of the country. However, I think it's still possible to draw out ideas that are still relevant in the early 21st century.

From the reflection on English (British? One weakness perhaps is that Orwell tends to conflate the two, arguing that regional differences with Scotland and Wales fade out of view when seen from outside the island itself) identity Orwell moves to consider the way that a decaying elite and new modes of communication, as well as economic transformations, paved the way for a weakening of foreign policy and to WWII. Finally, his argument about the weakness and incompetence of Britain's elite becomes an argument in favor of a new distribution of power, one presumably closer to socialist organization where elitism is done away with but which nonetheless respects fundamental elements of English identity as distinct from, say, continental Europe.

Despite being so narrowly located in terms of time and location, Orwell is a such a good writer that some of the metaphors he writes seem applicable for other countries as well. For instance, he provides this excellent metaphor for the way national identity might guide future opportunities for growth in the face of change, without determining them:
"England, together with the rest of the world, is changing. And like everything else it can change only in certain directions, which up to a point can be foreseen. This is not to say that the future is fixed, merely that certain alternatives are possible and others not. A seed may grow or not grow, but at any rate a turnip seed never grows into a parsnip." (5) - trivial, therefore easily understood, yet perfectly capturing that the future is open but not limitless!

When discussing the English love of liberty, the "privateness" of English life, Orwell makes a distinction which I think is as relevant in today's context of reigning neoliberal ideology as it was in his time:
"The liberty of the individual is still believed in, almost as in the nineteenth century. But this has nothing to do with economic liberty, the right to exploit others for profit. It is the liberty to have a home of your own, to do what you like in your spare time, to choose your own amusements instead of having them chosen for you from above." (7-8)
When so many right-wing commentators, at least in Chile, tend to conflate freedom/liberty with the freedom to profit, to have a business, to earn more money, and fail to recognize that there are other worthy ends in life and other types of freedom that our supposedly "free" country is sorely lacking, this distinction could become more popular.

I'm not sure I agree with Orwell's ideal of patriotism and his somewhat essentialist view of nation. It might make somewhat more sense for an island country that has never been colonized but quickly becomes blurred and ideological when we think about colonized countries, or nations whose very identity has been constituted by waves of immigration. Which, indeed, is also the case for England. Orwell's hope that WWII would "wipe out most of the existing class privileges" (39) yet maintain its identity is also somewhat contradicted by the actual events during the second half of the 20th century. His idea that "single-minded" (20) England always moved as one body, one "animal" (40), was also sadly contradicted by the divisive Brexit vote. On the other hand, his observations on patriotism might help explain some of the results of that very vote, an impulse to preserve English identity against the perceived threats of submerging it into a wider European one.

Some Chileans have considered themselves the "Englishmen of South America" - this is often used in self-praise but also can twisted ironically. When reading this essay, parts of it at least did seem to make sense in the Chilean context, so I'll close this review with one such quote which is especially illuminating at the current crossroads of protests, future constitutional change, and even, arguably, class struggle in Chile in October-November 2019. When Orwell describes the English ruling class in the years leading up to WWII, he could well have been talking about the current political and economic elite that rules Chile:
"What is to be expected of them is not treachery, or physical cowardice, but stupidity, unconscious sabotage, an infallible instinct for doing the wrong thing. They are not wicked, or not altogether wicked; they are merely unteachable. Only when their money and power are gone will the younger among them begin to grasp what century they are living in." (30)

[Dani Winkler · Rating 4 out of 5]

"[The Germans] do not feel any enmity against me as an individual, nor I against them. They are 'only doing their duty,' as the saying goes. Most of them, I have no doubt, are kind-hearted law-abiding men who would never dream of committing murder in private life. On the other hand, if one of them succeeds in blowing me to pieces with a well-placed bomb, he will never sleep any the worse for it. He is serving his country, which has the power to absolve him from evil."

This was more of a 3.5 star read than a 4 star one, but I didn't want to just give it 3 stars. Was recommended to me by a Brit, and I probably would've liked it better if I was one too. Commentary on Britain and its social/political systems and how they've failed in the face of WWII. Definitely worth the read -- and it's a quick one.

[Jonas · Rating 2 out of 5]

tvunget

[Mr Siegal · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bygone Era or Possible Future?

Orwell writes this essay in a time where England was mostly a homogenous society. He easily talks about ‘us’, and he pokes fun at the ‘us’ and likens England to a dysfunctional family, something which one can see now in various sitcoms.

At the time of reading this essay however, the ‘us’ in the fair land that is England has evaporated. Tensions, be they political, racial, religious exist, and inevitably, so does fragmentation. Hence, when one reads this essay, there can be a sense of loss, of a bygone era were things were better.

I see it differently; when I read this essay, I do not see what was lost, but what can be. England has undoubtedly changed, but I do hope that they can again view every citizen of that fair land (and this applies to all countries) as an ‘us’ rather than a ‘them’. I hope that counties in general can become again dysfunctional families.

[Kinga · Rating 5 out of 5]

There is much in this short essay which is quotable and fascinating. George Orwell's view of England and the English seems strangely prescient, as much of what he writes about is still applicable today. Especially this:
The immediately striking thing about all these (news)papers is their generally negative, querulous attitude, their complete lack at all times of any constructive suggestion. There is little in them except the irresponsible carping of people who have never been and never expect to be in a position of power.

There are something which Orwell did not forsee (rise of the European idea) and somethings which he got wrong (some people still care about Eton vs Harrow), but Orwell's understanding of his country and its people is spot on.

[Sylvie Helen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Yes, I bought this because of Brexit. Obviously. This was actually a pretty accessible, very quick little pamphlet and, like all Orwell, very apt and still relevant to the here and now - much like his Notes on Nationalism.

[Rhiannon · Rating 1 out of 5]

It's filled with insidious myths and self deceptions - as well as some interesting insights - into the English character. Gave me a few reasons why I love England, and many many many more why I hate it. But then again, I'm clearly part of the anti-english left wing intelligentsia he criticises.

[Chelsea Harrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Just a short but interesting essay.

[Hestia Istiviani · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read in English but this review is in Bahasa Indonesia

"And above all, it is your civilization, it is you. However much you hate it or laugh at it, you will never be happy away from it for any length of time."

Masih dalam masa swakaratina di rumah, menengok beberapa koleksi Orwell di Kobo.com membuatku semakin tergoda. England Your England yang merupakan esai tidak sampai USD3. Siapa yang tidak tergiur?

Dalam England Your England, Orwell menuliskan pendapatnya tentang menjadi orang Inggris. Perlu diingat, esai ini hadir di kala Perang Dunia II. Meskipun dari luar terlihat kalau Inggris semacam sebuah negara kuat yang digadang-gadang menjadi pemenang perang, nyatanya Orwell memiliki pendapat yang berbeda. Bagi Orwell, masih ada kekurangan di sana-sini. Pertentangan kelas semakin terlihat dan ketidakadilan rasanya sebagai suatu normalitas baru.

"Everyone knows that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor."

Menariknya adalah, meskipun Orwell menulis England Your England sebagai bentuk kritisnya terhadap penduduk Inggris selama masa Perang Dunia II, nyatanya beberapa poin di dalam esainya masih bisa dihubungkan dengan keadaan sekarang. Seakan, apa yang ditulis oleh Orwell ketika zaman itu tidak banyak berubah.

England Your England bisa diselesaikan dalam sekali duduk. Tidak mencapai 100 halaman dan masih dengan khas Orwell yang tidak banyak berbelit-belit, rasanya esai ini harus dibaca oleh mereka yang terpukau dengan bagaimana Orwell menulis Animal Farm.

"The totalitarian idea that there is no such thing as law, there is only power, has never taken root. Even the inteliigentsia have only accepted in theory."

[Ninbooklover · Rating 4 out of 5]

So the copy I've read was 40 pages long and not 22. I don't know if there are different versions of this book but mine was from Penguin with the red cover.

Overall I give this book 4.5/5 🌟
But I will give different ratings for different parts.
Writing style : 5/5 🌟
Story theme : 3.5/5 🌟
Language used : 5/5 🌟
Length of the book : 5/5 🌟

Would I recommend this book? Yes! 😁

[Paul Barnes · Rating 5 out of 5]

[Penguin Books] (2017). SB. First printing thus. 39 Pages. Purchased from Syntax64.

Originally part of “The Lion and the Unicorn” (1941).

“…solid breakfasts and gloomy Sundays, smoky towns and winding roads, green fields and red pillar-boxes…”

“…flower-lovers… stamp-collectors, pigeon-fanciers, amateur carpenters, coupon-snippers, darts-players, crossword-puzzle fans… the pub, the football match, the back garden, the fireside and the ‘nice cup of tea’…”

A charming catalogue… but there’s abundant bile and bigotry, aimed at our people, to boot. Frank, shocking and awful in many respects.

A 21st century refresh would be entertaining, but it’s hard to imagine Orwell - these days - finding a mainstream publisher for such a mustard cocktail.

[Richard Gleeson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Poetry in motion - classic Orwell.

[Elif O’Neil · Rating 1 out of 5]

product of his time i guess???

[Julita · Rating 4 out of 5]

świetny kontekst do 1984, szkoda tylko że nie jest przetłumaczony na polski

[Stephanie · Rating 4 out of 5]

some things never change

[Sham BLES · Rating 3 out of 5]

Idk whats up with this version because he starts out thirsting about coal miners but then when reading the actual England your England essay I found myself agreeing on the stuff he says about Socialism and Fascism and the Labour party... made me think a bit but also he is a bit of a prick

[Peter Ellwood · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great fun. It's an enjoyable piece of writing, even if he sometimes gets carried away with his own particular beefs, and the changes of tone are occasionally a bit abrupt.

For example, at random:

"Since the [eighteen] fifties every war in which England has engaged has started off with a series of disasters, after which the situation has been saved by people comparatively low on the social scale".

I'm sure he would want to modify that a little if pressed, but it sums up/exemplifies a cheery romp through Britain's place in the world, explored in this essay.

Obviously, placed firmly as it is in the context of England's being bombed as he wrote, there are odd bits which seem a little quaint. And there are outbursts you would pretty much expect Orwell to come out with, for example the chapter on class:

"England is the most class-ridden country under the sun. It is a land of snobbery and privilege, rules largely by the old and silly."

Well of course it is, George - though interestingly, even in 1941, he anticipates a blurring of lines between the "working class" and the middle class, as money and attitudes tend to converge.

For me the enduring image of this piece is of a deeply patriotic man, not necessarily in any bombastic way, simply a guy who really loves the place he comes from. It oozes out of every witty word and is a pleasure to read.

"The Stock Exchange will be pulled down, the horse plough will give way to the tractor, the country houses will be turned into children's holiday camps, the Eton and Harrow match will be forgotten, but England will still be England, an everlasting animal stretching into the future and the past, and, like all living things, having the power to change out of recognition and yet remain the same."

[Mylesgorton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some of the observations in this essay still hold true, but there is much that has happened post WW2 that has changed the rest of it, elements like immigration, the influence of the USA and increased foreign travel are key to this and more recently the growth of the internet and multiculturalism. His assessment of how the English ruling classes and middle classes changes with the advent of the Telegraph is interesting and rings true. I would suggest that the Internet and multiculturalism has caused a direct extension of this phenomena.
I think that the provides something of a snapshot of England at that point and the period spanning 80 years before. George was right that England did not become a fascist state and elements of what he describes as English traits still remain, but I think George would struggle to recognise much of his England in the England of today and I think he would probably reflect that this has been as a result of the continuation of the phenomenon he identified with the Telegraph through internet, immigration and multiculturalism.

[Steven Godin · Rating 3 out of 5]

"England is not the jewelled isle of Shakespeare's much-quoted message, nor is it the inferno depicted by Dr Goebbels. More than either it resembles a family, a rather stuffy Victorian family, with not many black sheep in it but with all its cupboards bursting with skeletons. It has rich relations who have to be kow-towed to and poor relations who are horribly sat upon, and there is a deep conspiracy of silence about the source of the family income. It is a family in which the young are generally thwarted and most of the power is in the hands of irresponsible uncles and bedridden aunts. Still, it is a family. It has its private language and its common memories, and at the approach of an enemy it closes its ranks. A family with the wrong members in control – that, perhaps, is as near as one can come to describing England in a phrase."

[ocicat · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read and absorbed this view as my own. Tomorrow I will share my new thoughts to my friends. Five stars.