Traditional protests
Apr. 17th, 2011 10:04 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
xenithA couple of years ago, I had to write an essay about agrarian protest in the UK in the early 19th century, specifically the Swing Riots that swept through southern England in 1830. One article, by folklorist Graham Seal, looked at the use of traditional folk elements by the protestors, as a means of legitimising their actions and resist change. I found it interesting to think about these elements in relation to modern protest actions. I've been intending to write a bit about this, and I pencilled it in for April. So...
Some background, about agrarian protest c. 1830. (Italics are from Seal's article, see bottom of post for reference.)
[The] traditional social order involved not only the rural poor, but also the farmers, gentry, clergy and magistracy in a reciprocal relationship based upon custom and convention. The relationship was paternalistic and demanded deferential attitudes from those at the bottom of the social order towards those at the top. Nevertheless, those at the top were almost as closely bound by the unwritten 'code' of customary behaviour and expectation as were those at the lower end of the social spectrum, and were expected to behave in certain ways to alleviate the cyclical sufferings of the poor.
Within the traditional order the rural poor possessed a number of mechanisms for settling disputes with farmers and landlords or for avoiding conflict. These mechanisms were based upon customary assumptions-locally agreed rates for a day's work, so much for threshing, so much for sowing and, of course, the many activities governed by 'common right.' When something more serious went wrong, the farmers or gentry were approached in a variety of traditional manners for a solution grounded on the customary practices of the past.
With the start of the 19th century, the traditional order was changing. Increasing industrialisation was producing a group of society who were valued just for their labour, rather than the skills and experiences that a craftsman. On farms, machines were reducing the demand for agricultural labour, and wages were correspondingly low. (One of the major demands of the Swing rioters was to be paid 2s. 6d. a day. Rather mundane.) And the government preferred to "the normal operation of supply and demand in a free market and to discourage the previously accepted economic tinkering of local gentry and magistrates".
So what did the agricultural workers do?
They turned to pageants, annual festivals, and other traditional community events, and used these customs to form protests. By relying on traditions, the protestors were saying this is how we have always done it, so it is right and therefore legal. It also reinforced their reluctance to change and a desire to return to traditional ways. A desire to restore the social order that agricultural changes were taking away, and a return to how things were, when labourers had work and proper living conditions, and farmers were directly responsible for their workers.
The use of festivity enabled the protestor to step outside their everyday identities and engage in activities they would not normally contemplate including activities normally unacceptable to the community as a whole, yet legitimate within the bounds of the play or other ritual framework. It also encouraged participation by those not directly involved. Such participation is a guarantee of communal sanction for such activities as well as a legitimation of their violent, bawdy or extra-legal aspects that function to alter or reverse the norms of everyday behaviour
The traditional element Seal presents as being present in agrarian protests are:
So that's what the tradition-bound, change-hating agricultural workers in the early 19th century used. How much of that is utilised by modern protestors? Obviously I'm going to pulling my examples from events I've attended.
(This would be easier if I'd taken photos with the intent to illustrate this article. There are things I've seen but don't necessarily have decent photos of. But I'll see how I go. Mostly the photos are from anti-pulp mill protests 2006-2007, and 2011, but the moviettes & some photos are from the industrial relations/anti-Work Choices rally in 2006.)
Disguise
This isn't a big thing at protests I've been to, although there is a small amount.
At this rally, participants were encouraged to bring a face mask as a visual protest against pollution.
As the purpose of disguise is to depersonalise the participants and allow them to perform acts they wouldn't otherwise engage in, it should include dress that invokes group identity rather than individualism.
Levying
Levying of money from outsiders isn't common. Mostly it is targeted at people who have allready chosen to participate.
But does collecting signatures count? The purpose is the same: gaining support from the wider community.
Perambulating
This isn't very common, no wait, I don't think I've been to a protest in recent years that didn't involve perambulation.
The protest march is the most common form. It gets attention, especially when it blocks the roads in the middle of city.
It enables participants to include outsiders, as observers or more actively (shouting support, car horns). It allows all the other elements to be utlised for maximum efficiency. It enhances the "festival" atmosphere.
There are other forms though.
This was just walking across the bridge: "Bridging the bridge". It involved people who had until then just been sitting listening, it attracted attention to the cause and invited outside participation (from the car going across the bridge at the time).
This one was also at the conclusion of a rally. They went down to the beach, and laid out a banner that was photographed by a helicopter. Again, it let people who had been sitting listening with a chance to do something
Adornment
Personal adornment is also something that is not popular in local protests.
Badges are about as far as it goes.
However, the point of adornment is to enhance the idea that these are events are outside normal daily activities by the addition of colourful decorations. Banners anyone? And balloons.
It doesn't have to be people who get adorned either.
Officials
These are fairly obvious. These things need organisers, and speakers.
Effigies
I have seen them. Not common though. Probably some of the more extravagant masks can be included here.
And they don't have to be in human form.
Music
Another element that is always involved, through chanting. It stirs up people. It creates group solidarity. It provides an outlet for participants to express their feelings in a way that gets attention. And it helps gets outsiders involved
(A bit hard to show in photo form. Images aren't great, but that's not the point. File also here.)
And there's nothing like music to create the feeling of festivity and a sense of occasion that rises above day to day routine.
Mock Violence
Another common element: implied or threatened violence.
Usually about violence at the polling booth.
A lot of protest signs carry a threat of violence too.
Waving fists or punching the air, often in conjunction with chanting, is another form of mock violence. Also foot stamping (see second half of IR moviette above).
And a last photo
No sense of festivity here. Sorry.
So, any similarities between modern and older protests systems there?
The purpose is the same though. To let participants step outside their usual behaviour patterns. To solicit support from the wider community. To restore an order that they perceive as being disrupted.
"Tradition and Agrarian Protest in Nineteenth-Century England and Wales", by Graham Seal in Folklore Vol. 99, No. 2 pp. 146-169 JSTOR link
Some background, about agrarian protest c. 1830. (Italics are from Seal's article, see bottom of post for reference.)
[The] traditional social order involved not only the rural poor, but also the farmers, gentry, clergy and magistracy in a reciprocal relationship based upon custom and convention. The relationship was paternalistic and demanded deferential attitudes from those at the bottom of the social order towards those at the top. Nevertheless, those at the top were almost as closely bound by the unwritten 'code' of customary behaviour and expectation as were those at the lower end of the social spectrum, and were expected to behave in certain ways to alleviate the cyclical sufferings of the poor.
Within the traditional order the rural poor possessed a number of mechanisms for settling disputes with farmers and landlords or for avoiding conflict. These mechanisms were based upon customary assumptions-locally agreed rates for a day's work, so much for threshing, so much for sowing and, of course, the many activities governed by 'common right.' When something more serious went wrong, the farmers or gentry were approached in a variety of traditional manners for a solution grounded on the customary practices of the past.
With the start of the 19th century, the traditional order was changing. Increasing industrialisation was producing a group of society who were valued just for their labour, rather than the skills and experiences that a craftsman. On farms, machines were reducing the demand for agricultural labour, and wages were correspondingly low. (One of the major demands of the Swing rioters was to be paid 2s. 6d. a day. Rather mundane.) And the government preferred to "the normal operation of supply and demand in a free market and to discourage the previously accepted economic tinkering of local gentry and magistrates".
So what did the agricultural workers do?
They turned to pageants, annual festivals, and other traditional community events, and used these customs to form protests. By relying on traditions, the protestors were saying this is how we have always done it, so it is right and therefore legal. It also reinforced their reluctance to change and a desire to return to traditional ways. A desire to restore the social order that agricultural changes were taking away, and a return to how things were, when labourers had work and proper living conditions, and farmers were directly responsible for their workers.
The use of festivity enabled the protestor to step outside their everyday identities and engage in activities they would not normally contemplate including activities normally unacceptable to the community as a whole, yet legitimate within the bounds of the play or other ritual framework. It also encouraged participation by those not directly involved. Such participation is a guarantee of communal sanction for such activities as well as a legitimation of their violent, bawdy or extra-legal aspects that function to alter or reverse the norms of everyday behaviour
The traditional element Seal presents as being present in agrarian protests are:
- Disguise (including blackened faces, masks, men dressing in women's clothes)
- Levying
- Perambulating (including house visiting, circling and processions)
- Adornment (dressing in special garb, adorning clothes with ribbons & handkerchiefs)
- Officials (some sort of named leader and/or officials)
- Effigies
- Music (instruments, banging pots and pans, general chanting)
- Mock Violence (verbal threats, buffetting, jostling or manhandling, implied but not actual violence).
So that's what the tradition-bound, change-hating agricultural workers in the early 19th century used. How much of that is utilised by modern protestors? Obviously I'm going to pulling my examples from events I've attended.
(This would be easier if I'd taken photos with the intent to illustrate this article. There are things I've seen but don't necessarily have decent photos of. But I'll see how I go. Mostly the photos are from anti-pulp mill protests 2006-2007, and 2011, but the moviettes & some photos are from the industrial relations/anti-Work Choices rally in 2006.)
Disguise
This isn't a big thing at protests I've been to, although there is a small amount.
At this rally, participants were encouraged to bring a face mask as a visual protest against pollution.
As the purpose of disguise is to depersonalise the participants and allow them to perform acts they wouldn't otherwise engage in, it should include dress that invokes group identity rather than individualism.
Levying
Levying of money from outsiders isn't common. Mostly it is targeted at people who have allready chosen to participate.
But does collecting signatures count? The purpose is the same: gaining support from the wider community.
Perambulating
This isn't very common, no wait, I don't think I've been to a protest in recent years that didn't involve perambulation.
The protest march is the most common form. It gets attention, especially when it blocks the roads in the middle of city.
It enables participants to include outsiders, as observers or more actively (shouting support, car horns). It allows all the other elements to be utlised for maximum efficiency. It enhances the "festival" atmosphere.
There are other forms though.
This was just walking across the bridge: "Bridging the bridge". It involved people who had until then just been sitting listening, it attracted attention to the cause and invited outside participation (from the car going across the bridge at the time).
This one was also at the conclusion of a rally. They went down to the beach, and laid out a banner that was photographed by a helicopter. Again, it let people who had been sitting listening with a chance to do something
Adornment
Personal adornment is also something that is not popular in local protests.
Badges are about as far as it goes.
However, the point of adornment is to enhance the idea that these are events are outside normal daily activities by the addition of colourful decorations. Banners anyone? And balloons.
It doesn't have to be people who get adorned either.
Officials
These are fairly obvious. These things need organisers, and speakers.
Effigies
I have seen them. Not common though. Probably some of the more extravagant masks can be included here.
And they don't have to be in human form.
Music
Another element that is always involved, through chanting. It stirs up people. It creates group solidarity. It provides an outlet for participants to express their feelings in a way that gets attention. And it helps gets outsiders involved
(A bit hard to show in photo form. Images aren't great, but that's not the point. File also here.)
And there's nothing like music to create the feeling of festivity and a sense of occasion that rises above day to day routine.
Mock Violence
Another common element: implied or threatened violence.
Usually about violence at the polling booth.
A lot of protest signs carry a threat of violence too.
Waving fists or punching the air, often in conjunction with chanting, is another form of mock violence. Also foot stamping (see second half of IR moviette above).
And a last photo
No sense of festivity here. Sorry.
So, any similarities between modern and older protests systems there?
The purpose is the same though. To let participants step outside their usual behaviour patterns. To solicit support from the wider community. To restore an order that they perceive as being disrupted.
"Tradition and Agrarian Protest in Nineteenth-Century England and Wales", by Graham Seal in Folklore Vol. 99, No. 2 pp. 146-169 JSTOR link
