On the subject of Eton (again)

[Timbro]

Name change for this - no big fan of Amy Chua's methodology for child rearing but I think there is some truth in this - that an oversupply of self-entitlement may not be the best recipe for becoming a world changer - (statesmom take note) - from today's FT - see link - (and Kellaway has no axe to grind with OE hubby).

www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b8dc242c-8e83-11e3-98c6-00144feab7de.html#axzz2svmQWGjH

This?

www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b8dc242c-8e83-11e3-98c6-00144feab7de.html#axzz2svmQWGjH

It only confirms my belief that (if you're lucky enough to be able to make such a choice) you choose a school primarily for the quality of life it will give while the child is there. Not for some nebulous dream of future glory.

Try here: www.afr.com/p/business/companies/lessons_on_success_from_eton_and_YrIXP6lZkDkBL51NX7YBEK

to avoid the FT's login/pay wall.

It seems a bit silly.

The basis for the article is that these people are failures for having well-paid middle-class jobs. Presumably she expects them all to have started billion pound companies, or cured AIDS.

"They were a middling group of lawyers, property investors and fund managers, rich by national standards, but disappointing if you consider their start in life."

I don't see why you would expect any more than that.

And perhaps the super-stars didn't turn up.

Here's the salient part below in case links don't work for all ..

I have also wondered, aside from the networking angle, how much of the rise of a Cameron or a Clegg is more to do with their already privileged background, parentage and wealth in the first place more than to do with what school they went to.

"They arrived at that school at 13, clever and mostly from wealthy ­families, to spend five years wearing tailcoats and becoming members of one of the world’s most elite networks. Yet there they were, in their prime, and it had amounted to not very much at all.

His observation turns on its head the usual complaint about Eton – that it is an exclusive club of men who run the country.

It is true there is currently a trinity of Etonians in power, as Prime Minister, Mayor of London and Archbishop of Canterbury. But they are the exceptions to a more surprising rule that Eton is a club of men born to do great things but who increasingly fail to do anything much at all."

TBH I think the journo may be over thinking this to get a colum out of it .

The reality is that many OEs don't need to take up the best paid roles in the world; they are independently wealthy!!!

250 boys leave Eton every year. Only 150 turned up at the reunion. The other 100 were perhaps too busy being super-successful.

i imagine quite a few of the missing 100 may have been overseas.

Or maybe some of the missing ones are so down and out they find it impossible to show up?

I suppose it is possible that after having such a high octane life at school they are often quite happy for a more restful, balanced career. Not all of them want to devote themselves to public service. I have met all sorts from Eton but there are a substantial proportion who, however politely they camouflage it, believe in their innate superiority. Maybe, as per article, those just don't feel the need to prove themselves in the outside world, they can rest back on their laurels.

"innate superiority" - like those OEs on Made in Chelsea?

those just don't feel the need to prove themselves in the outside world, they can just rest back on their ..... trust funds

But also it's a totally self-selected sample. You're hardly going to break into your filming schedule and make a dash from Hollywood for a mere school reunion; and you're not likely to favour the journey if it means having to borrow the bus fare. But if you're "doing ok", can hold your head up, nothing to be terribly ashamed of - and it's only 30 minutes down the road .... Why not?

To be honest I've managed to avoid my own reunions. The very thought is horrifying. (And there's the thing about people turning up because their schooldays were the highlight of their lives so far.)

Daft column. Are the men unhappy? Are they poor? If not, then what do they have to complain about? Nothing and they're not complaining. Any "lack" is in the eyes of the columnist's husband. What does he do, anyway?