C O N T E X T 1 3 2 : N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 3 25 HERITAGE AND NATIONHOOD example, celebrated the flexible nature of Englishness in that it relates to soil, not blood: that Englishness is about residing in England. It was only with the rise of Powellian ideas of ‘blood and soil’ that debate about Englishness became drawn into racialised ideas that exclude migrants from being characterised as Englishmen and women. It is in the vacuum created from a demise of Britishness that institutions need to incorporate critical understandings of Englishness. These critical understandings should reflect a contentless model of Englishness in order to continue to recognise diversity and difference within society. The danger of an uncritical expression of Englishness is that diversity and difference become appendages to a mono-cultural idea of Englishness and are therefore patronisingly belittled. This would render Englishness an exclusive identity relative to a particular social construction of English people.This would not only reinforce culturally divisive ideas of belonging, it would also marginalise the vitality emergent from diversity – a diversity that is as much about regional attachments to place as it is about the diversity of the population, in terms of such things as heritage. As more power is drawn away fromWestminster, there is a greater emphasis in national institutions to define their constituencies more clearly.This would ask the question of where, geographically speaking, do their activities have legitimacy? The National Trust may have to ask itself in late 2015 what nation it appeals to. This does not apply to English Heritage, because that organisation has always governed conservation, preservation and heritage within an English geographical framework. In many ways, English Heritage is an exemplary case of how we can understand Englishness as a contentless form of identity. English Heritage’s commitment to recognise subjective notions of heritage and under-represented forms of heritage signifies how Englishness can be instrumentally managed in a way that allows its cultural content to be defined locally.This is a more democratic form of cultural governance that allows English people to define the content of Englishness.They have exhibited leadership on what constitutes English heritage, recognising regional diversity and difference. This does much to encourage the expression of Englishness in diverse ways that secure inclusion, rather than to seek to draw boundaries between people in terms of who is recognised to belong to Englishness and what histories should be recognised as authentic. Ultimately, institutional reflexivity on questions of Englishness does much to revitalise interest in culture and identity, as they expand the parameters of whose heritage, what heritage and for whom heritage is enjoyed. The example of English Heritage is meaningful and not arbitrary in this context, because it is through an appreciation of heritage that national identity gains legitimacy. In the current climate, Englishness is still a much under-referenced issue, despite its manifestation in the media. Indeed, much of this debate focuses on the malignant aspects of nationalist expression. Over the coming years Englishness will need to be seriously confronted by politicians, the media, academia, practitioner communities and citizens alike, not to confront the negatives, but to reassess the nation’s status and role in the world. This will primarily be the result of the Scottish referendum. Even if there is a ‘no’ vote, the questions of who the English are in respect of their regional neighbours and through what institutions we relate to one and other, will still be issues of major public concern. In this context more knowledge is needed on how people living in England experience Englishness. Is it something immediately relevant to them? Does its legitimacy conflict with other sources of identity, such as Britishness or as part of a diaspora? What are the legitimate differences and diversities of an English expression of contemporary life? A great deal of current academic research sheds light on some of these questions, notably how Englishness is experienced in terms of the other variables we might use to characterise our lives, such as social class, gender, ethnicity, age and place. From this research base, greater working relationships need to be fostered between academics and practitioner communities from a range of professional backgrounds that are directly or indirectly charged with governing the vast array of domains relative to English life, be these in heritage, education, urban planning or the countryside. The question of who the English are, what Englishness is, and how Englishness can be recognised in a cosmopolitan fashion will become a major aspect of policy and strategy planning.Through constructive working partnerships we can make a difference and provide the cultural leadership required to ensure that Englishness is an identity that we can be proud of on an international stage. Richard Courtney is a lecturer in the school of management at the University of Leicester, where he specialises in the management of cultural value in the public, private and third sectors.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=