ok i know i haven't been posting.. this semester has been rather crazy.. but school is history now. I wonder what God has planned for me now. I haven't been totally slacking with my posting though, i have a piece about fear in our lives, which has remained a draft a few months now! okok. i'll definitely work on it. in the mean time, below is my last ever academic paper in college. Yes, it is about football. what else could it have been anyway? haha... hmm... ok i can bore everyone with my financial econometrics thesis!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Paper: Victorian Football: The False Dawn of Saving Porphyria’s Lover
In the early nineteenth century Britain, there was a clear delineation between the social classes: namely the upper, middle, and working class. Such societal strictures are clearly depicted (and criticized) in poems we have read in class, such as Alfred Tennyson’s “Porphyria’s Lover”, where a pair of lovers are denied a relationship because of the difference in their social classes. The poem takes on a tragic and poignant turn when Porphyria’s lover, who wanted her so badly, ends up killing Porphyria so that they could be together forever. Interactions between classes were explicitly forbidden given the conflict between the classes.
While the aristocrats in the upper class dominated the politics, the Victorian Period saw the increasingly wealthy middle class make political advances of their own, such as the Reform Act in 1832 (Cody, 1). The vicious cycle for the poor working class continued, as skilled artisans and factory operatives became not only deprived of their political franchise, but also somewhat repressed and exploited in the local market place. Through her book, “Mary Barton”, Elizabeth Gaskell gives an account of the working-class men in Manchester suffering in “poorly run mills”, and paid only a “weekly drain of wages… useless in the present state of the market”? (Gaskell 52). Thus, the marginalized working class united together in their common interest to champion their goals of class equality. In his book, “Making of the English Working Class”, Thompson remarks that the working class “acquired a peculiar resonance in English life” as “everything, from their schools to their shops, their chapels to their amusements, had turned into a battle-ground of class” (Thompson 831).
Naturally, such a battle between the social classes would extend to the sports scene. In Victorian times, the sporting experience was very much a reflection, and to a certain extent, a product of a vile social stratification ideology entrenched in the society. Similar to how Porphyria’s family disdained her lover of a lower social class, the Victorian upper and middle classes wanted nothing to do with the working class, in both business and social settings. For instance, the wealthy not only shelled out exorbitant fees of ten shillings a week (when an average agriculture worker would earn 11 to 15 shillings a week) to play sports like golf, but also restricted yachting and polo participation strictly for the wealthy par excellence (Griffin 619). Even for the middle class, sports remained a relative luxury in the beginning of the nineteenth century when their new found wealth enabled them to take up sports and games (Huggin 31). The working class, on the other hand, was almost never involved in sports for three quarters of the century. The stark reality was that they were worked so hard they scarcely had leisure time to play sports. Sports was a privilege restricted to the wealthy, and a clear representation of Victorian social stratification
During the late nineteenth century, the rise of football’s appeal to mass audiences, regardless of their classes, posed promising potential to reconcile Victorian social stratification. Instead of accentuating social stratification, football fostered hope as that ray of light that could actually have the effect of purging societal discrimination. If social stratification was the reason for Porphyria’s death, then football, with its reconciling effect, could hypothetically have had the capability to save Porphyria. In light of sports’ rise to prominence in societies especially in the late nineteenth century Europe, this paper shall study how sports, in particular football, has failed to realize its potential of resolving societal discrimination in the Victorian society.
Football was only officially formalized as a sport by the establishment of the Football Association (The FA) in 1863. Before that, there was never quite an organized version of the game. Football was free for all; almost everybody who played did so with their own set of rules, which sometimes allowed handling and rough tackling, as well as condoning thuggish behavior like punching and gouging. Surprisingly, what started as a ‘refined’ sport only for the wealthy and privileged became associated with the rude and the barbaric. As mass football became perceived as rude and barbaric, it eventually culminated in the suppression of the sport for the early part of the nineteenth century, (Delves 89). However, with the formation of the Football Association, the handling and tackling aspect of the game were officially forced out of the game, and standardized rules to govern the game gradually gained popularity.
It is pertinent to note that the rules, which the Football Association issued, were actually an adaptation of regulations first set up at Cambridge University in 1848 (FIFA website). For the upper and middle class, one of the reasons for football’s blossoming popularity was in part due to a concerted effort by schools to promote a cult of athleticism. In the 1840s, while children in the working class were exploited as child laborers, children from the middle and upper class who attended private and public schools like Cambridge, Eton, Shrewsbury, Westminster, and Charterhouse were encouraged to embrace football as a sport (Walvin 96). Due to disciplinary problems and educational idealism, “athleticism”, for schools, “became a civilizing offensive, aiding Christianity and education in the character-conditioning and health of sometimes bad-behaved, brutal or brutalized pupils, and promoting school identity.” (Huggin 31) Indeed, football as a sport holds strong promise to address the aggression of problematic students as it legitimizes controlled confrontation and instills qualities like unselfishness, loyalty and team spirit. Strikingly, the budding football fever in the upper classes has its roots in the educational institutions.
The 1870 Education Act, which mandated that a school should be placed within the reach of every English child, led to more and more working-class children entering school, and thus, more and more becoming exposed to sports and football. Not only did these now-literate children get to play football as part of school activities, they also formed the new mass reading audience for the “newly burgeoned sports press”. (Bailey 130) Furthermore, because of the 1850 Factory Act, the traditional six-day work week for adult males was shortened to five and a half. (Hutchins 107) By 1870, most industrial workers in mines and factories had gained their half day off on Saturdays, and were spending the extra leisure time playing sports like football. Thus, the working class gained access to football.
One reason for the cross-class popularity of football is its easy accessibility. While involvement in sports like racing, golf and tennis require access to specialized centers such as the racing tracks, golf courses and tennis courts, which could be too costly for the average working class, one only requires a cheap ball (or in some case, waste material made into a shape of a ball) and a little space for a game of football. Furthermore, unlike cricket, football had a more aggressive edge that appealed to the angst of British men. In addition, football pits the skills of players to dribble and maneuver a ball against each other; one does not necessarily need to have the size and strength needed to play in more physical sports like Rugby. Thus, it is not surprising that football appealed to everyone. By the 1870s, a trend of football clubs established with a mix of upper class and working class input had emerged. While teams like Aston Villa and Bolton Wanderers originated from Christian organizations, other teams like Manchester United and Arsenal were made up of primarily of industrial workmen, the products of labor unions eager to be part of the new football craze. (Walvin 56)
The owners of industrial factories, who were themselves avid sports fans, also played a crucial role by allowing their workers to join the unions’ teams. Their argument was that “a healthier workforce with higher morale and sporting identity would be more productive and efficient, and counteract the temptations of drink, gambling and violence.” (Huggin 35) Once the workers had the support of their bosses, they were afforded more time to train for the club teams outside work. Football, in turn, became a respite from the monotony of working class industrial work, if only temporary. Workers increasingly looked forward to Saturday football games which added an element of spice to their otherwise dull life. This was especially true in many great industrial cities like Manchester and Liverpool. Ernest Ensor sums it up rather unsympathetically in his book “The Football Madness”,
“The astonishing increase in the numbers that play and watch others play (football) is largely due to the dull monotony of life in our large towns; it is the absolute necessity of some change, some interest outside the daily work which has long ceased to be interesting, that causes the huge crowds at the weekly football matches.” (Ensor 752)
Even for the upper classes, the physical aspects of football were perhaps also perceived as an antidote to sedentary urban life. Moreover, the upper classes had other vested interests. For the enterprising capitalists, the mass appeal of football provided more than simply sporting pleasure by presenting opportunities for significant profit and prestige. (Huggin 120) Many opportunistic businessmen, with the healthy returns from their industrial enterprises, recognized the lucrative capital gains that could be realized from charging at the gates of football grounds, and promptly invested heavily in football infrastructure. Given the concomitant growth in demand and supply for soccer, it is no surprise the pervasive culture of football developed at a frantic pace.
Notably, football in Victorian times was one of the few sports which had the potential to truly transcend social stratification in its appeal to all social classes. Unlike the exclusivity of golf and yachting, it possessed the charm to bring together all the social classes as a partisan crowd of football fans in their common interest for football. Regardless of one’s social class, football fashions the same imaginary realm that extends an outlet for an outflow of profuse emotions. Everyone who supported the same team wore the same scarves and team colors, sang the same team songs, and idolized the same football players. This was true of all football fans in all social classes and ages. Thus, Saturday afternoons entailed a ritualistic involvement which spawned a sense of belonging across the classes. (Fry 485) Indeed, the ability of football to integrate fans across social classes heralded a new era that promised hopes of breaking down erected social class walls.
The football pitch, especially for the working class, was a level playing field, unlike politics, commerce, higher education and other sectors. Notably, one does not need to belong to the upper or middle class to possess extraordinary football skills on the pitch, for the best footballers are the ones who spend the most time playing it. This level playing terms was epitomized by a Football Association Cup Final match in 1883, which placed the Old Etonians vis-à-vis the Blackburn Olympics. In contrast to the privileged backgrounds of the players from team Old Etonians, the Blackburn Olympics team included dental assistants, textile factory workers and weavers. To the delight of the working class crowd, the Blackburn Olympics took the game to penalties and beat the Old Etonians. (Walvin 74) The victory was more than a monumental win in a game of football. More importantly, it was a triumph that heightened the sense of self among the working class, and showed them that they were just as good, if not better, than the privileged class. Notably, the realization and desire to fight for meritocracy dawned upon the working class. When a snobbish captain of a football club refused to “recognize his men on a long railway journey (nor) speak to them” and “behaving as if he was a superior sort of being” en route to a football match, he was admonished by “The Athletic News” and reminded that “sports levels all classes”.(Mason 77). Football’s ideology of an egalitarian and meritocratic level playing field thus showed much promise of eroding the traditional notion of social stratification.
Unfortunately, the promises of a widely appreciated game of football obliterating the walls of social stratification cannot be farther from the truth. Instead of fighting the divisive energy of discriminatory class structures by working hard in other areas like commerce and politics, the working class simply focused on football, for this seemed to them their best chance of being rewarded. Thus, they turned “professional”. Huggin, in his book, “The Victorians and Sports”, defines the term “professional” as “(referring) to individuals of lower social status earning money from sport” (Huggin 52). To earn wages and prize money, working class players trained more seriously to raise their skill and fitness levels, trusting in the belief that the meritocratic promise of football would reward their efforts. Yet, Huggin laments: “Professionalism weakened work discipline, since professionals would give up their full time work and fail to develop useful work habits and skills.” (Huggin 58) In addition, there were also regular commentaries about working class children spending all their time playing football in the streets, rather than studying. While football, in Lancashire and Yorkshire, was “played in every street” on weekday afternoons and Saturday mornings (Thompson 68), “urchins” in the East End of London would be “kicking paper balls in the back alleys” (Sims 292). Consequently, football became the working class’ preeminent distraction as they lost their drive to tackle the bias world of social politics through work and education.
In addition, as the Victorian society became more fluid, and conventional markers of social division were eroded by rising income and flattening prices, social aspirants reacted by establishing clear lines of status hierarchy in the world of football. Therein, along with the term “professionals” which refers primarily to lower class sportsmen earning a living through sports, “amateur” was coined as a “synonym for an upper class patron or sporting enthusiast” (Huggin 52). The upper class, in response to the threat posed by “professionals”, began to distinguish themselves by a different set of moral values and attitudes. Emblematic of the “amateur” ideals, Sir Henry Newbolt, the famous poet of late Victorian sporting imperialism, argues that the playing of sports “was important for social and moral salvation, and should not be for actual or symbolic reward.” (Huggin 51) Juxtaposed next to the “art for art’s sake” movement of the late Victorian period, which champions the separation of art and moral, Newbolt was effectively advocating against a “play for play’s sake” movement in a sporting sense. The main theme of this sporting classification movement was naturally inclusion and exclusion.
By early 1879, the Old Harrovians, comprising of graduates from the Harrow School, were already charging that only “amateurs” should have the prerogative to contest for the FA Cup (Huggin 63). This led to Preston Football Club’s elimination from the FA Cup in 1884 for professionalism (Huggin 64). Although the FA was eventually pressured into embracing professional football due to monetary reasons in the form of gate money, the upper class’ intention to purge their sports of the working class was conspicuous (Huggin 65). Despite football’s egalitarianism ideology, there was a heightened sense of opposition to such a movement stoked by upper class social aspirants who jealously guarded their social position, thereby intensifying the class hostility.
Moreover, even though football fans of all social classes congregated on Saturday afternoons to support their teams, spectators from the upper and middle class would be seated in a separate enclosure from the working class. While the elite social classes were allocated seats at the grandstand, the working class had to stand in the terraces (Huggin 37). Not that they minded the terraces, for any decent working class football fan would gladly proclaim that nothing beats the atmosphere at the terraces. Such a separation only generated more tension and animosity between the two groups of fans. Often, fans were provoked by a combination of frustration and taunting from opposing fans which culminated in football related violence. Notably, middle class journalists were always quick to condemn the working class mobs as a “crowd of rough”, “unruly hobbledehoys”, or the “football mobocracy”. (Lewis 310)
Another salient point is that the elite classes were only too happy for the working class to remain consumed by their passion for football, as football became a convenient foil to dilute the working class’ political energies. Most of the working class had left their village for the urban life, only to find themselves alone in a new cold and impersonal urban jungle. Hence, the football craze helped distract the workers away from their loneliness and search for a sense of belonging. Their melancholic industrial working life contrasted sharply with the excitement and passion that football could bring to their life. Hence, to most working class football fans, football became their significant partner in life. Gareth Jones aptly describes: “like the pubs and music halls which thrived in the late nineteenth century, football was a personally satisfying diversion, a warm blanket covering the cold fact of political impotence.” (Jones 471) Thus, because of their consuming passion for football, the working class chose to remain oblivious to their glaring political feebleness. The lack of political ambitions in the working class eventually perpetuated the relative status quo of the Victorian social stratification.
In conclusion, football in the late Victorian period possessed a paradoxical ability to rise above social stratification in its appeal, and yet simultaneously underscore the chasm between social classes. While football’s mass appeal brought the classes together in a fervent partisanship hitherto reserved for life-and-death matters, however, its egalitarian ideology ultimately still failed to pierce the parapet of Victorian social stratification, fortified by the elites’ obdurate refusal to relinquish their privileged social position. Undoubtedly, the predominant belief against the notion of “play for play’s sake” hindered soccer players from embracing the egalitarian ideology and lifestyle offered by football, as epitomized by their refusal to reconcile the terms “professionals” and “amateurs”. Furthermore, the failure of football as a platform to transcend social stratification was also in part due to the working class’ disposition to mask away the repugnance of their industrial work life with the emotional ecstasy of football. Their repression by the elite industrialist remained a non issue as long as their appetite for excitement and aggression was satiated, via football.
Porphyria would still die as long as societies remain contented to passively rest in the stranglehold of social discrimination. However, in today’s context, social stratification seems like a relatively minor problem in most developed worlds. In my opinion, what have changed since Victorian times, are the increased flow of information and the idea of the freedom to excel. Professional footballers in the late Victorian period were only able to harness the egalitarian ideology of football to excel in a footballing sense. If only they had learned to extend the values of football to their pursuit of social and political equality, Britain might well have been free from the perils of social stratification by the end of the Victorian period. Because of the parochial perspective of football fans and football players alike, football missed its chance to be Porphyria’s messiah.
Work Cited:
Bailey, Peter. Leisure and Class in Victorian England: Rational Recreation and the Contest for Control, 1830-85. Taylor & Francis, Inc, 2006.
Cody, David. Victorian Web: Social Class. Associate Professor of English, Hartwick College. http://www.victorianweb.org/history/Class.html
Delves, Anthony. Popular Recreation and Social Conflict in Derby, 1800-1850.
Ensor, Ernest. The Football Madness. Contemporary Review, 74, p 751-760
Fry, C. B. Football. Lawrence & Bullen - Suffolk Sporting Series, 1898.
Griffin, Emma. Popular Culture in Industrializing England. Historical Journal, 45, 2002.
Gaskell, Elizabeth. Mary Barton. Penguin Classics, 1997.
Huggin, Mike. The Victorian and Sport. Hambledon and London, 2004.
Hutchins, B. L. A History of Factory Legislation. Burt Franklin research & source works series, 612. History, economics & social science, 205.
Jones, Gareth Stedman. Working-class culture and working-class politics in London, 1870-1900: notes on the remaking of a working class. Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Lewis, R. W. Football Hooliganism in England before 1914: A Critique of the Dunning Thesis. International Journal of the History of Sport, 13, 1996.
Perkin, Harold. Teaching the Nations How to Play: Sport and Society in the British Empire and Commonwealth. International Journal of the History of Sport, 6, 1989.
Mason, Tony. Association Football and English Society, 1863-1915. Brighton: Harvester Press, 1980.
Mangan, J. A. Reformers, Sport, Modernizers: Middle Class Revolutionaries. London, Frank Cass, 2002.
Sims, George. Living London, vol. 2. Cassel and Company Ltd, 1906.
The Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). www.fifa.com
The Football Association. The history of the Football Association. http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/TheOrganisation/Postings/2004/03/HISTORY_OF_THE_FA.htm
Thompson, Paul. The Edwardians: The Remaking of Bristish Society. Routledge, 2 edition, 2004.
Tranter, Neil. Sport, Economy, and Society in Britain, 1750-1914. Cambridge University Press.
Walvin, James. The People’s Game: A Social History of British Football. Allen Lane, London, 1975.
