Comments on: Caste And The Gentleman Class http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/ Issues & insights Sat, 22 Aug 2009 15:19:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Tony Vangelabbeek http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270199 Tony Vangelabbeek Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:05:32 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270199 Larissa, only thing I want to say is that the concept of "gentleman" describes something British or European at most. If it's superfluous or not, I don't know. You cannot just apply that concept to the aristocratic Brahman caste in India. It has just nothing to do with it. Especially because of the connotations it has with a certain British era. In the same way the concept of Indian "untouchability" could never be applied to the low social classes in Europe. They are just concepts which have a meaning within a certain society. I really don't think India and China can be described thàt easy with concepts having only sense in Europe. If you force the use of such concept to describe f.i. India, then you have to know that WITHIN each Indian caste there was certainly a separation between gentlemanlike behaviour and other behaviour. Like is in every group. Only in India there are much more valuesystems crossing the society. That makes the country so diverse and multicultural also. In my eyes entirely different from Europe. Stating that "gentlemaniness" is not there in India because it could not evolve throughout the whole population (because of "Darwinistic" reasons) has the same value as "A cat cannot bark". In India they say: "White peope work hard, but they're just so stupid that they don't understand anything about the Indian society". I think they're right. Larissa, only thing I want to say is that the concept of “gentleman” describes something British or European at most. If it’s superfluous or not, I don’t know.
You cannot just apply that concept to the aristocratic Brahman caste in India. It has just nothing to do with it. Especially because of the connotations it has with a certain British era.

In the same way the concept of Indian “untouchability” could never be applied to the low social classes in Europe.

They are just concepts which have a meaning within a certain society. I really don’t think India and China can be described thàt easy with concepts having only sense in Europe.
If you force the use of such concept to describe f.i. India, then you have to know that WITHIN each Indian caste there was certainly a separation between gentlemanlike behaviour and other behaviour. Like is in every group. Only in India there are much more valuesystems crossing the society. That makes the country so diverse and multicultural also. In my eyes entirely different from Europe.

Stating that “gentlemaniness” is not there in India because it could not evolve throughout the whole population (because of “Darwinistic” reasons) has the same value as “A cat cannot bark”. In India they say: “White peope work hard, but they’re just so stupid that they don’t understand anything about the Indian society”. I think they’re right.

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270136 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 17:07:18 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270136 “Writing in his latest book A Farewell To Alms UC Davis Professor Gregory Clark provides insight into the possible reasons why the English (and Europeans in general) are on the whole considered “gentlemanly” and more “polished” (except while watching football, of course).” Where is the polish left? One has to look at the pop culture in Britain--as I recall the popular shows are ones such as "skin" about teenagers having sex produced by the BBC (not sure)? Another show was calleed "mistress" and highly popular. America is far more conservative in this respect. Perhaps with no more colonies and no more wealth the "real" culture comes out which was covered by a veneer of weath and power--the so called 'gentlemanly' culture? Which is not to say I do not respect the great people Britian has produced in the course of its history...but I did not like the pop culture I saw among young folk there.... “Writing in his latest book A Farewell To Alms UC Davis Professor Gregory Clark provides insight into the possible reasons why the English (and Europeans in general) are on the whole considered “gentlemanly” and more “polished” (except while watching football, of course).”

Where is the polish left? One has to look at the pop culture in Britain–as I recall the popular shows are ones such as “skin” about teenagers having sex produced by the BBC (not sure)? Another show was calleed “mistress” and highly popular. America is far more conservative in this respect. Perhaps with no more colonies and no more wealth the “real” culture comes out which was covered by a veneer of weath and power–the so called ‘gentlemanly’ culture? Which is not to say I do not respect the great people Britian has produced in the course of its history…but I did not like the pop culture I saw among young folk there….

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270135 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:45:49 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270135 “social upperclass” behaviour in China and India which was rather a religious and ethical ideal based on a holistic approach to life. And one last thing, upper class behavior in India did not consist in having a holistic approach to life--this is a superficial understanding of someone not part of the culture...In India your behavior was very much determined by your lineage and blood...this was very important until recently when people have begun to inter-marry across castes...The royalty behaved like royals and other upper castes like Brahmins behaved like Brahmins who were different from royals but higher on the caste scale...In India caste is not based on wealth, but on something different like blood and lineage which is why a poor Brahmin was higher on the caste scale than a royal...this is indeed very different from European aristocracy which was based mostly on wealth...The British upper classes as I understand did not hesitate to marry those with money and very often married Jewish folk...this could never happen in India and often the millionaire businessmen were not high on the caste scale but quite low...so it is hard for Europeans to understand class in India.... “social upperclass” behaviour in China and India which was rather a religious and ethical ideal based on a holistic approach to life.

And one last thing, upper class behavior in India did not consist in having a holistic approach to life–this is a superficial understanding of someone not part of the culture…In India your behavior was very much determined by your lineage and blood…this was very important until recently when people have begun to inter-marry across castes…The royalty behaved like royals and other upper castes like Brahmins behaved like Brahmins who were different from royals but higher on the caste scale…In India caste is not based on wealth, but on something different like blood and lineage which is why a poor Brahmin was higher on the caste scale than a royal…this is indeed very different from European aristocracy which was based mostly on wealth…The British upper classes as I understand did not hesitate to marry those with money and very often married Jewish folk…this could never happen in India and often the millionaire businessmen were not high on the caste scale but quite low…so it is hard for Europeans to understand class in India….

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270134 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:24:26 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270134 Also much of the British concept of gentleman in the sense of not being the chivalry found in the middle ages (which could be seen among the Rajputs in India (Count Keyseling on his travels to India in the 20’s) )seems to be a result of their “trading culture”. Much of the superficiality of British of culture or what appears superficial and nonsensical to non-Brits comes from their being a “nation of traders”…In other respects, I do not see how the moral and ethical qualities of being a “gentleman” are different from those found in the East…So how is "gentleman" to be only associated with only the British and not those of other aristocratic cultures? Please explain. If it just consists in dressing a certain way and speaking English a certain way, it appears very superficial to me.... Also much of the British concept of gentleman in the sense of not being the chivalry found in the middle ages (which could be seen among the Rajputs in India (Count Keyseling on his travels to India in the 20’s) )seems to be a result of their “trading culture”. Much of the superficiality of British of culture or what appears superficial and nonsensical to non-Brits comes from their being a “nation of traders”…In other respects, I do not see how the moral and ethical qualities of being a “gentleman” are different from those found in the East…So how is “gentleman” to be only associated with only the British and not those of other aristocratic cultures? Please explain. If it just consists in dressing a certain way and speaking English a certain way, it appears very superficial to me….

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270133 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:17:20 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270133 Also muchy of the Brisith concept of gentleman in the sense of not being the chivalry found in the middle ages (which could be seen among the Rajputs in India (Count Keyseling on his travels to India in the 20's) seems to be a result of their "trading culture". And much of the superficiality of British of culture or what appears superficial and nonsensical to non-Brits comes from their being a "nation of traders"...In other respects, I do not see how the moral and ethical qualities of being a "gentleman" are different from those found in the East... Also muchy of the Brisith concept of gentleman in the sense of not being the chivalry found in the middle ages (which could be seen among the Rajputs in India (Count Keyseling on his travels to India in the 20′s) seems to be a result of their “trading culture”. And much of the superficiality of British of culture or what appears superficial and nonsensical to non-Brits comes from their being a “nation of traders”…In other respects, I do not see how the moral and ethical qualities of being a “gentleman” are different from those found in the East…

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270132 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:09:55 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270132 And I have read a lot of Dickens... And I have read a lot of Dickens…

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-270131 larissa Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:07:29 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-270131 @ Tony Vangelabbeek, So the British concept of gentleman is a very superficial concept is it not? That is what I am trying to get at. Wearing a starched collar and pronouncing your vowels a certain way? I think gentleman exist in all aristocratic cultures--they might not conform to what the British mean by "gentleman". I recall in India money making was not considered "gentlemanly" amongst the upper castes until very recently now when the business knighthood are in control everywhere...Perhaps the concept of gentleman ought to be found on ethical ethical ideals as was the case in China and India where it was not necessarily associated with wealth and material possessions but intellectual and moral qualities....Actually in India behaviour was very much associated with lineage and family, so it's not just in England, except what it meant to be a gentleman did not consist in dressing a certain way and having other superficial airs which is what you seem to associate with "gentleman"....I do not get what you are trying to say.... @ Tony Vangelabbeek,
So the British concept of gentleman is a very superficial concept is it not? That is what I am trying to get at. Wearing a starched collar and pronouncing your vowels a certain way? I think gentleman exist in all aristocratic cultures–they might not conform to what the British mean by “gentleman”. I recall in India money making was not considered “gentlemanly” amongst the upper castes until very recently now when the business knighthood are in control everywhere…Perhaps the concept of gentleman ought to be found on ethical ethical ideals as was the case in China and India where it was not necessarily associated with wealth and material possessions but intellectual and moral qualities….Actually in India behaviour was very much associated with lineage and family, so it’s not just in England, except what it meant to be a gentleman did not consist in dressing a certain way and having other superficial airs which is what you seem to associate with “gentleman”….I do not get what you are trying to say….

]]> By: Tony Vangelabbeek http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-269848 Tony Vangelabbeek Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:24:51 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-269848 @Larissa, It is nonsense to use the word "gentlemanliness" for "social upperclass" behaviour in China and India which was rather a religious and ethical ideal based on a holistic approach to life. This is something entirely different from what is meant when we talk about "gentlemanliness". I not only have read history, I also do understand (at least I try to) the essential differences in nature of various societies. And for your information: in England "gentlemanliness" was only a behaviour that you had to learn if you were born in a rich family. It helped those English aristocrats to distinct themselves from the lower classes. I guess because they had no other ways of defining themselves differently - if you don't have to work for your money, then what else is there as a possible social identity than to define some behavioural rules ? I advise you to read Dickens. @Larissa,
It is nonsense to use the word “gentlemanliness” for “social upperclass” behaviour in China and India which was rather a religious and ethical ideal based on a holistic approach to life. This is something entirely different from what is meant when we talk about “gentlemanliness”.
I not only have read history, I also do understand (at least I try to) the essential differences in nature of various societies.
And for your information: in England “gentlemanliness” was only a behaviour that you had to learn if you were born in a rich family. It helped those English aristocrats to distinct themselves from the lower classes.
I guess because they had no other ways of defining themselves differently – if you don’t have to work for your money, then what else is there as a possible social identity than to define some behavioural rules ?
I advise you to read Dickens.

]]> By: Rahul Menon http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-268444 Rahul Menon Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:10:59 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-268444 This is a joke, right? Please tell me this is a joke. The notion that one should simply swallow the values and way of life of the upper class in order for society to become more 'polished' is disgusting to say the least. Moreover, this idea of gentlemanliness (which has no definition. It is assumed to be an end in itself. I suppose what all of India really wants is to be like the Europeans and live like them.) is elevated to something almost genetic. Its almost as if you are saying that good ideas and good modes of life are the domain of the upper classes only and they are the saviour of all humanity. And seriously, what do you mean by "polished"? This article smacks of a colonial hangover and slave mentality. This is a joke, right? Please tell me this is a joke.
The notion that one should simply swallow the values and way of life of the upper class in order for society to become more ‘polished’ is disgusting to say the least.
Moreover, this idea of gentlemanliness (which has no definition. It is assumed to be an end in itself. I suppose what all of India really wants is to be like the Europeans and live like them.) is elevated to something almost genetic. Its almost as if you are saying that good ideas and good modes of life are the domain of the upper classes only and they are the saviour of all humanity.
And seriously, what do you mean by “polished”?
This article smacks of a colonial hangover and slave mentality.

]]> By: larissa http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/comment-page-1/#comment-268421 larissa Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:20:51 +0000 http://indianeconomy.org/2008/07/15/caste-and-the-gentleman-class/#comment-268421 "Writing in his latest book A Farewell To Alms UC Davis Professor Gregory Clark provides insight into the possible reasons why the English (and Europeans in general) are on the whole considered “gentlemanly” and more “polished” (except while watching football, of course)." Is this a joke? Europeans are considered more gentlemanly? No way. However, it is right to say that Anglo-Saxons have established good institutions. People in Western Europe are forced to follow laws regardless of inner development. This is why their societies run well like a well oiled machine. “Writing in his latest book A Farewell To Alms UC Davis Professor Gregory Clark provides insight into the possible reasons why the English (and Europeans in general) are on the whole considered “gentlemanly” and more “polished” (except while watching football, of course).”
Is this a joke? Europeans are considered more gentlemanly? No way. However, it is right to say that Anglo-Saxons have established good institutions. People in Western Europe are forced to follow laws regardless of inner development. This is why their societies run well like a well oiled machine.

]]>