During the Summer months it has long been my custom to catch up on my reading. I have just finished re-reading Alison Weir's Eleanor of Aquitaine, which has given me a new perspective on early English history, and have just commenced re-reading John Hicks' Causality in Economics.
The story of Eleanor of Aquitaine provides strong clues to the beginnings of what we might refer to as the English national character. Set in the late 1100s, England is coming to terms with the Norman invasion which took place two generations earlier, and still has a strong connection to the lands which now make up France. Her second marriage to Henry II, and the story of two of Eleanor's sons, Richard I of England ("the Lionhearted") and John of England, have strong parallels with the later tale of Henry VIII. These are pivotal moments in the history of England, defining what was to become acceptable and unacceptable, via custom and precedent, and also via national institutions. The conflicts between European monarchs and the Pope (head of the Roman Catholic church) mirrors in some small way the current to-and-fro between individual EU nations and the EU in toto. It is also interesting to note that governments a millenium ago faced similar economic problems to those of today: mounting debt, difficulties in raising taxes, international trade problems, etc. Additionally, it is intriguing how much of the contemporary documents of Eleanor's time dwell on her looks and fashionable dress, as well as those of others, both men and women, but primarily women. In this respect Eleanor can be seen as the Kate Middleton of her day, although her convoluted love-life bears greater resemblance to the late mother-in-law of the Duchess of Cambridge! Eleanor of Aquitaine was a fashion icon and a model for future strong women striving to succeed in a male-dominated world.
John Hicks can accurately be described as one of the finest Economists of the 20th century. Less well-known than personalities such as John Maynard Keynes or Milton Friedman, his contributions to Economics span almost the entire field of study. He was partly responsible for the measurement of national economic well-being via GDP, and has contributed to major developments in monetary economics, finance, welfare economics and capital theory. However, in addition to these phenomenal contributions, in my mind John Hicks supersedes many of his contemporaries and those who followed because of the clarity of his expositions. Put simply, Hicks writes well. His style is no longer fashionable; academic expositions today lack the charm and grace which pervades Hicks' work. Despite often being technical, his writing style comes across much more as a conversation piece, or a narrative. It is almost chatty, and in that respect it is far more engaging than the dry, dull, insipid pieces which litter the plethora of academic journals of today. To write an academic article today which betrays any sense of character is guaranteed to ensure non-publication. Hicks is a writer with style; he writes the way Eleanor of Aquitaine dressed and deported herself almost a thousand years earlier.
I have also spent the past two weeks enjoying the European football championships (EURO 2012). As with dress and writing, football enjoys cycles of fashionability. This year's EUROs have seen a revival of passing football, with the better teams tending to enjoy significant percentages of possession. Last night's quarter-final encounter between England and Italy epitomised a clash of styles. The Italians, who are traditionally renowned for a defensive style of football (catenaccio) offered a freer-flowing, more attacking fluid style which was both pleasing on the eye and successful. By comparison, the English national team offered a stoic, ultra-defensive form of catenaccio, without any real flair or pace to counter-attack. It was a clash of styles, and it is football's good fortune that the more flowing style won out. Not just in last night's game, but throughout the tournament to-date. As a long-time Spurs' supporter I am an avid believer in the philosophy out forward by the late Danny Blanchflower:
"The great fallacy is that the game is first and last about winning. It’s nothing of the kind. The game is about glory. It is about doing things in style, with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom."
Style is timeless; fashion is something of its time. All human beings in their teens are subject to following the fashions of their time, whether it is in clothing, makeup, tattoos and piercings, manner of speech, hairstyle, and so on. It is therefore universal that when we look back to the way we look and acted in our teens we are so often aghast and, in some cases, ashamed. When we are young we are subject to fashion; as we grow older we find that style is much more important, and timeless. Eleanor of Aquitaine was a woman of style. The work of John Hicks possesses style. Football which is based on a fluid passing game has style. We should reject all else.
No comments:
Post a Comment