The masses are to blame. Or are they?

Barbarians, Philistines and the Populace – Matthew Arnold

Arnold defines the aristocracy as Barbarians, the middle class as Philistines and the masses and working class as the Populace. He says that we all, regardless of social class, “imagine happiness to consit in doing what one’s ordinary self likes”, but acknowledges that what each individual likes doing can be closely related to what class they come from.

· Barbarians – enjoy “honours and consideration”, as well as “field-sports and pleasure”.

· Philistines – enjoy “fanaticism, business and money-making”, as well as “comfort and tea-meetings”.

· The Populace – enjoy “bawling, hustling and smashing”, as well as beer.

He suggests that in each class their are a number of people who are more curious than others about how to become “their best self”, and this enables and encourages this minority to explore outside of their class traditions and look further into their humanity. Arnold terms these few people “aliens”, whom he believes are led by their “general humane spirit”, rather than their social class. He also suggests that many of these “aliens” within society will have a personality made up from their “ordinary self “, the class they supposedly belong to, and a mixture of other class insticts – which all work together to create a more rounded individual.

Although Arnold's portrayl of class devisisions and social groups may be somewhat outdated, the ideas behind how and why these groups are seprerated and categorised are still very relavent in today's society. I bet everyone could think of a certian social group which displays some of the tradtions and interests mentioned above?

If so, let me know your thoughts and opinions on Arnold's way of decribing the different groups within society and their relationship with culture, or perhaps their relationship with anarchy - if it is more fitting?