How the upper middle class live

[LisaJool]

Apologies for yet another class thread but I find this fascinating. Off the back of a thread I started watching a TV series about British aristos and their stately homes. This lead to other YouTube videos and a podcast.
Some observations I made:

1. The women all have great bone structure with the infamous MN UMC swooshy hair.

1. A lot of "sleepless nights" and hand wringing about how they can maintain their homes, which they are "custodians" of. Many have had to do tours/homemade jams/souvenirs to try to bring in extra money. But, their dc go to private schools - surely the first thing you'd do is remove them from that to save money or get rid of the ponies?

1. Re decor, lots of chintz like you'd expect in lovely formal rooms but their kitchens look like something Kim and Aggie need to tackle. Clutter covering all available workspace, books, riding gear, pet bowls etc, lots of knick knacks. Someone on another thread stated that the 'clutter free' movement is a class thing, with it being a LMC to working class thing. Not sure if this is true but interesting all the same.

I don't know anyone who is truly UMC as in old money or landed gentry types. For those who are acquainted, what are they like and how do they live?

@Mentalpiece The titles of Sir and Lady refer either to a baronet or a knight. (A baronet would put Bt. after their surname to distinguish the two). Neither of these titles are within the peerage and they are not considered to be aristocracy. Whether or not they are upper class is therefore very debatable as most people consider upper class to be those listed in the peerage.

If you say that he was a big advocate and campaigner for workers' rights, it is quite likely that he was awarded his title for services rather than it being hereditary. There are not many hereditary baronets left now and they are no longer being created.

I loved Tony Benn and wept when he died and had the privilege to hear him speak many times he renounced his heredity peerage to stand for Parliament.

Who gets to decide which class another person belongs to?

It seems to me the most subjective of social constructs based largely on nebulous ‘class markers’ that no one quite agrees on (lovely chap, red trousers, Labradors, tatty Volvo, yada yada).

I get to ‘play’ various class roles as I married into a very privileged upper middle class (titled) family, come from a lovely suburban working/lower middle class family, have a wide range of diverse friends, and work in a middle class professional role with people experiencing great challenges. I’m sure I could be judged as belonging to any one of those groups on first, second, third meeting. And I’m pretty pleased about that.

If you're bothered too much about class then you're probably generic middle class based on nothing but my half-baked opinion.

Absolutely!😊

The first rule of class is never talk about class.

Funny that Kate Middleton studied history of art at St Andrews.. Part of the grand plan!

Good spot and interesting and yet she has never talked about it as far as I know - you would think that a tour of the Queen's gallery talking about the Titian's or the Michaelangelo would be a good look and build on that bedrock of knowledge. But apparently not....

Kate has an art history degree from the university, where she and Prince William met 20 years ago. William also started as an art history student, but ultimately switched paths and earned his degree in geography, according to Tatler. They both graduated in 2005

news.artnet.com/art-world/kate-middletons-art-history-background-revealed-221889

If you say that he was a big advocate and campaigner for workers' rights, it is quite likely that he was awarded his title for services rather than it being hereditary

Why do you say that? There are a fair few examples of UC people campaigning for workers rights etc. Tony Benn is one example, but I personally know another. Just because someone is UC doesn't mean they are devoid of political thought.

Two of the Mitford sisters were fascists, but the third was a communist.

@TomTraubertsBlues I was commenting on the fact that @vera99 mentioned 'Sir and Lady' so she was clearly not referring to a member of the peerage. I quite agree that Tony Benn and others from a UC background may campaign for workers' rights etc - I wasn't disputing that.

Tony Benn was a technically a viscount (he renounced his title to remain in the House of Commons) so should have been addressed as Lord rather than Sir and was a member of the peerage. His grandfather was made a baronet and his father a viscount. His son has accepted the title and now sits in the House of Lords. The family has a very impressive record in Labour politics but I do find it all a bit hypocritical given their 'advantages of birth'. Maybe it holds true that despite generations of advantage, the Benn family have not truly become UC. Sir John Benn, the first to gain a title, and the son of a Calvinist minister, moved to the East End to set up a school for homeless boys.

Most UC left wing politicians are typical champagne socialists but it would be very difficult to put Tony Benn in that category.

@Unicorn1919 Yes, it was awarded for his services 🙂 He was a QC and human rights judge too, but I don't think that had any bearing on his award.
A lovely man, very humble like his wife.

If you've ever watched The Duchess with Keira Knightly (the book was excellent)
playing Georgiana Cavendish, the Duchess of Devonshire, she was Princess Diana's ancestor.

There were 3 people her her marriage as well.
She was a great socialite who was basically the leader of the Ton, which was the name for British high society in the Regency period.

Very influencial woman as popular as Diana, but she still had to share her husband, a little like Dianna.

Great book (Georgiana), film not so good.

"I've got no money". Friend never had any actual, spendable, cash for the everyday friperries of life but his essentials were covered by his trust fund. Flat, car, groceries account at Harrods etc., all OK with trustees. Spare money for coffees, books, concert tickets, holidays and so on, not OK. It became quite annoying.

My mum used to recall the story that Queen Mary - wife of George V the late Queen's grandfather was notoriously stingy indeed looking it up turned out she was a kleptomaniac or at least admiring stuff in a way that encouraged the person to give it to her. The Queen was regarded as thrifty with the tales of using one bar on an electric fire which is probably true and no doubt date back to the war era when everything was on ration or limited and the people were encouraged to make do and spare resources for the war effort.

In general when I had encounters with them during my working life, the rich (mostly business people, not aristocrats) were stingy rarely buying a drink when you had help;ped them in trade missions and they were relaxing with staff. Though again that might be my confirmation bias at work again.

www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/who-queen-mary-teck-life-wife-george-v-did-she-steal-was-kleptomaniac-collection-facts/

I always thought it hilarious that William gave up art history as it was rumoured he found it 'too hard'. Considering his family owns half the paintings.....

I knew a wealthy German girl at uni that would complain about being so poor. Before I realised she was incredibly well off I used to feel sorry for her snd buy her lunch or a pint. But she always had money for things like dog dancing lessons

Daddy went up to Cambridge University in 1967 to read Archaeology and Anthropology. He changed to History for the second part of his degree and was awarded a 2:2 in 1970. A waste of three years where he could have been polishing "what do you do ? ", "how interesting " and "I declare this leisure centre open! ".

The Royals certainly wouldn't get into Oxbridge or the Russell Group with their lacklustre exam achievements.

www.tatler.com/gallery/how-the-royals-did-in-their-a-levels

Hahaha 'Too hard' always been relatable, our Will. Not being funny, but history of art is a bit fluffy for a future king (+ the aesthete of the family is Charlie). I think geography was his degree? If so much more the thing.

That's very funny even if it isn't true, the dog dancing lessons I mean and it is an actual thing 😁

Given the Catherine, the Princess of Wales, gained an acceptance to study at St Andrews and went on to get a decent degree hardly suggests she is “a bit thick”. Some posters sound deeply envious…

Yeah we were in the same small faculty. He was the year behind me, but I knew him slightly and we had mutual friends. I also saw him perform at a Footlights 'smoker' which was cringey. He was very young for his age: sports jacket and tie when everyone else was in Afghan jackets. Also very pink. Talking of which, he tried to join the Labour Club but that was shut down pretty quickly.
To be fair he was doing ok but was hoiked off to Wales to learn Welsh at a critical point.

No degree course at the University of St Andrews would be described as “fluffy “ by anyone in the know.

I wonder where those who are so dismissive were at university themselves? Of course they may have missed that opportunity completely.

I'll give her , her A in maths, fair dos; Art A Level is a bit of a joke though and B in English rather passe and that's from private cramming schools that know how to focus the young mind on passing exams. Art History was the old-school equivalent of media studies in my jaundiced opinion and I love art as a hobby. I've established my envy earlier on in the thread. 😁

I'm impressed consider a curtsy given - he seems like a good sort in these pics.

I did history of Art A Level, it was very academic, the level of essay you had to write was far higher than for English Literature
You don't just write nice thing about paintings, but about the history of the era and societal movements of the period too

I'm grateful to have studied it, I learned loads about history alongside the art that we looked at
It's nothing like media studies at all