Popular Posts

Showing posts with label North of England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label North of England. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

North and South - Cat and Mouse



MADFERIT ARR KID

One of the ways in which I have reconciled the different strands of my background over the years is through geography. As the limited oral history of my father’s family suggested that he had been brought up in Salford as Harry Johnson - and my stepfather’s family were long-established in not so distant Cheshire, there was a link there.

As for my mother’s family, although her maternal grandparents were immigrants to Nantwich in Cheshire in the late 19th Century, strong roots had developed such that their offspring regarded themselves as true locals or ‘Dabbers’. And, on the other side, grand-mother Clarke was a Kenyon from Oldham – you can’t get much more North Western than that.

Cheshire of course is a bit dodgy if you want to be a Northern Nationalist. It is on the edge and can equally be counted as part of the Mercian Midlands – it is somewhere between Maryland and Virginia in its standing.

Anyhow, if a prominent Irish Republican who started life as John Edward Drayton Stephenson (born Leytonstone, London, 1928) can reinvent himself as Seán Mac Stíofáin, I don’t think that you can argue too much about the rights and wrongs of my case.

Years back, when I was a lecturer at the University of Bradford, I had a firebrand spell in the Liberal Democrats and gave a wildly implausible speech to the Annual Conference on regionalism and the need for the South to give greater respect to the North – I sat down to resounding whistles and yells of support.

I guess the main reason for the acclamation was that, unlike most of the other speeches, mine was not that boring. And I think that people were genuinely amazed to be told that the Yorkshire and Humberside Region had a GDP that was larger than that of New Zealand.

[Incidentally, modern New Zealand has a population that is larger than that of the free population of the core states of the Southern Confederacy at the onset of the US Civil War – something I’ll pick up in another article].

Anyhow, having spent more than half of my life now in exile, I have largely given up on the possibility of being invited back to the Independence Celebrations in Harrogate.

But I still follow the subject and have been amused at the row that has broken out about the artistic merits and cultural standing of L.S. Lowry. To me, it is really rather simple. He probably wasn’t all that good an artist but he is ours’ – and, chuck, as they say in Cheshire, ‘a cock fights best on his own bank’.

So I’ll let Gandalf lead the charge.

IAN MCKELLEN LEADS CHALLENGE TO TATE OVER L.S. LOWRY ‘EXCLUSION’

[by Mark Wainwright, The Guardian, 17 April 2011]

The Tate has been challenged to put its collection of paintings by LS Lowry up for sale if it intends to continue to exclude them from its London galleries.

The actor Sir Ian McKellen threw down the challenge in a joint attack by leading figures from the art world which questioned whether the "matchstick men painter" has been sidelined as too northern and provincial.

Although many artists from the north of England enjoy metropolitan critical acclaim, including David Hockney and Damien Hirst, none assert the character of northern people and landscape with Lowry's dogged persistence.

"Over the years, silly lies have been thrown around that he was only a Sunday painter, an amateur, untrained and naive," said McKellen, who narrates a highly critical television programme about Lowry's "exclusion" to be screened by ITV1 on Easter Day.

"His popularity needs no official endorsement from the Tate, but it is a shame verging on the iniquitous that foreign visitors to London shouldn't have access to the painter English people like more than most others."

The film sees others line up to condemn the fact that the Tate has shown only one of its 23 Lowrys – Industrial Landscape, painted in 1955 and owned by the gallery for 50 years – and then only briefly.

Noel Gallagher, of the Manchester band Oasis, said: "They're not considered Tateworthy. Or is it just because he is a northerner?"

The controversy reached a crunch point when the Tate was refused permission to copy Industrial Landscape to form part of a temporary mural on the work of landscape artists. Lowry's estate, which has donated much of his unsold work to the Lowry centre at Salford Quays, has made no secret of its irritation at the continued storage of his work.

The Tate denied any deprecation of "northern-ness" in Lowry's work, pointing to its record of establishing Tate Liverpool and supporting new Hepworth Wakefield gallery, which opens next month. Henry Moore, the Yorkshire sculptor and contemporary of Barbara Hepworth, has also been much feted by the gallery, whose founder Sir Henry Tate, the sugar mogul, was one of Lowry's fellow-Lancastrians.

The Tate said it planned to give Lowry space when its galleries are extended in 2013, but Tate Britain's head of displays, Chris Stephens, said in the television programme:

"What makes Lowry so popular is the same thing which stops him being the subject of serious critical attention. What attracts so many is a sort of sentimentality about him. He's a victim of his own fan base."

McKellen said: "If the Tate feels no responsibility to give the art-viewing public their favourite painters to view, perhaps they could let their stash go elsewhere. They could pass them on to a gallery like the Lowry, which shares its visitors' tastes. Or perhaps a touring retrospective, with a twist – the exhibits would be for sale."

NOT MUCH SENTIMENTALITY AT THE TATE



SENTIMENTALITY, SENSIBILITY AND MICKY MOUSE

Of course, Chris Stevens is just the sort of poncey Southerner who we of the flat vowels love to hate.

I looked him up and found his comments on Tate Britain’s 20th Century Memorial by Michael Sandle:

"As you walk into the gallery, the skeleton-ness and the Mickey Mouse-ness and the machine gun are all immediately apparent, and I think the aggressive tone of the piece is obvious even before you properly discern what it is and what it’s about. It packs a visual punch first of all, and then it’s compelling because there’s enough to it that you stop to think, 'what’s going on here?’

It’s a very confrontational sculpture – it really does stop people in their tracks. Well, apart from children, who seem to have an urge to walk straight across it.

I've met Michael Sandle, and he’s very passionate about this piece. He conceived it in response to the Vietnam War, and was originally going to call it ‘Mickey Mouse Machine Gun Monument For Amerika’, but he changed the title to make it more general after learning the extent of British culpability in that conflict. He sees that as a sort of precedent for what happened with Bush and Blair in Iraq.

Changing the title to ‘Twentieth Century Memorial’ makes it much more about a century of conflict. A century of conflict nevertheless dominated by the US – the mouse is unavoidably a symbol of a rotten and decayed America.

I like how Sandle uses the contrast between the materials – the beautiful polish on the gun, the black skeleton and the head. It all works particularly well in a huge space like the Duveen Gallery, with its shifting daylight. He worked on the sculpture over the best part of a decade, casting each part himself. The gun is not simply cast from a gun, because it’s larger than life-size, so he’s cast the individual components in bronze from moulds.

I’m not sure whether we should call Michael a traditionalist or not, but certainly he believes in painting and sculpture as a craft. He’s very hands-on and proud of the fact that this sculpture is hand-cast”.

Well that’s all very well – but how about the Tate commissioning a new work called a ‘Memorial to the Nineteenth Century North of England’?

It could be built up from shuttles shone by underage mill girls and old coal pit machinery plus a Blackpool Pantomime Cat.

Or, heaven knows, it could draw upon some locally painted images of homely stick people dwarfed by a ghastly, ghostly heimat.


Friday, February 12, 2010

In search of the the Old North - Yr Hen Ogledd





















My map of ‘Keith Johnsons’ in the USA in my previous posting, nudged me into reporting on some of the interesting work on surname distributions that has been undertaken for England by Kevin Schürer.

The whole paper ‘Surnames and the search for regions’, Local Population Studies, 72 (2004) by K. Schürer can be found at:

http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/surnames/papers/schurer.pdf

Kevin is the Director of both the UK Data Archive and Economic and Social Data Service and also Professor of History at the University of Essex.

His paper analyses the geographical distribution of surnames in England in 1881 in an attempt to identify ‘cultural provinces’ or local ‘countries’ (i.e. ‘pays’ in French), following the 19th Century search for districts ‘to which people felt that they belonged’.

That is distinct areas ‘which could evoke sentimental feelings amongst those who had moved away – and which people felt were inhabited by their relations, friends and fellow workers, having a character all of their own’ (see my post on the French human geographer Paul Vidal de la Blache).

While 396,776 unique surnames were recorded in the 1881 Census of England and Wales, there were only 41,203 surnames with a frequency of 25 individuals or more. Schürer uses these surnames as the basis of his study. This equates to an average of one additional surname for every 630 persons across the whole population.

The distribution of surnames was, as is still typical, very skewed. One fifth of the population shared just under 60 surnames; a half of the population were accounted for by some 600 surnames; while the top 10,000 surnames covered 90 per cent of the population.

Conversely, ten per cent of the population, those with the rarest surnames, jointly accounted for some 30,000 surnames, more if those with frequencies of less than 25 are also considered.

So what does the data covering some 26 million people with some 41,000 different surnames reveal about regional diversity?

I have taken the Northern England as my area of interest – drawing on the comments made in Schürer’s paper.

Looking first at the density (i.e. the average number of persons per surname), not surprisingly Wales stands out as having a low surname density (or a high number of people per surname) - but one which is matched in an area consisting of south Lancashire and the south-western parts of the West Riding of Yorkshire.

The low density of surnames in south Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire seems to be associated with a greater propensity towards toponymic (place descriptive) originating surnames (e.g. Grimshaw, Greenhalgh, Ramsbottom, Sykes, Scargill) at the expense of the ‘son’ ending patronymics which are elsewhere typically northern. The latter dilute the toponymics to a greater degree in the areas of Norse (Cumbria) and Danish (east Yorkshire and Lincolnshire) settlement.

Across England, the patronymic and metronymic surnames (those ending in –son, for example, Johnson, Richardson, Jackson, Mallinson) are relatively frequent in proportional terms north and east of the line drawn from Chester to London (i.e. the old Danelaw), excluding Rutland and East Anglia.

It is interesting to note that this nineteenth-century distribution of patronymic and metronymic surnames is very similar to that depicted by the Lay Subsidy Rolls some 500 to 600 years earlier. The processes of industrialisation and migration, even over half a millennium apparently did had fundamentally change the pattern.

An alternative line of analysis is to consider the degree of clustering of surnames (or the extent to which the surnames in a particular place do or do not overlap or correspond with those of another place).

Centring the analysis on Lancaster, there is a high degree of correspondence with adjoining areas. But correspondence is also high with parishes extending through the North and East Ridings of Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and also parts of north Wales.

Conversely, the degree of correspondence is relatively weak with much of the southern part of the county and the West Riding of Yorkshire.

It would appear that there are echoes here of the regional pattern displayed in toponymic surnames.

Refocusing the central point on the city of York, the parishes with the highest degree of surname correspondence are located in the North and East Ridings of the county, but relatively high levels of correspondence are also displayed by parishes in Cumberland, and to a lesser degree Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Leicestershire.

Equally, most parishes in the west of the country (except Cumbria) record relatively low levels of surname correspondence with York. It may not suit Yorkshire loyalists to learn that the North and East Ridings of ‘God’s own county’ have more in common, using this measure, with north Lancashire and Cumberland than they do with the West Riding - which, in turn, seems bound at the hip with south Lancashire.

Looking more specifically at the degree to which individuals with the same surname were scattered by distance, amongst those regions with the lowest separation distances (with the darkest shading in the map) were south Lancashire and the southern parts of the West Riding of Yorkshire – which again stand out as a common area.

A second belt of low separation distances takes in Cheshire, north Staffordshire and north-east Derbyshire, while a ‘middling belt’ encompasses Shropshire, south Staffordshire, south Derbyshire, stretching over to east Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire, with Lincolnshire being joined by Cambridgeshire.

So what does this tell us about the North, as a region, and its distinct cultural districts or 'pays'?

Well, nothing for certain that's for sure - but it is fascinating that the surname evidence supports the common observation that the South Lancashire and West Yorkshire dialects are very close, in spite of their separation by the bleak Pennine hills.

So, could there be a faint outline still sketched on the palimpsest of the ancient Celtic / Brigantian kingdoms of Yr Hen Ogledd (the old 'Welsh North')?

This would certainly fit with the historical references to the relatively longstanding survival of a Celtic kingdom in West Yorkshire (Elmet - and its likely capital 'Leeds') and the presence of a cluster of 'Welsh' placenames in South Lancashire (including 'Wigan').