>>Simply put, the working class and the aristocracy are cool, the middle
class
>>aren't and can't be
>Could you please explain this statement? Possibly I'm not picking up on
>intended sarcasm or maybe there was missing punctuation in your post. I
>refuse to believe that someone could make such a statement and expect to be
>taken seriously.
Depends on how you read it, and what you believe 'cool' to mean. If you
would
like a pat on the back and to be told that the middle-class are the coolest,
here, have one. But my point is that the very definition of cool is
contradictory
to middle class values, and that seeing as at least one part of it is made
up
on envy of the freer behaviour of the other classes, I don't really see that
changing. Oh sure, you can say so-and-so is cool, or Group X are cool,
but it's usually because they subscribe to 'cool' culture, not because
they're
a bunch of yuppies that emulate the cast of Friends and that is what is
cool about them.
And to extend the armchair psychology - as has been noted by many
people, the common ground between the toffs and the mob (over
hundreds of years) has been a hedonistic approach to life, sex,
and alcohol (especially alcohol), while the middle class were
getting bogged down in Protestant respectability - all pleasure must
be earned before it is taken, and shouldn't come in the way of
'getting ahead'.
