U (upper class) v. non-U (middle class) identifiers in the language:Highlights:- Taking/having high tea: Non-U. I always knew this! Good to see it written down.- Consulting etiquette books: Non-U. You either do it U, or you do it non-U. You aren't allowed to change or learn.- addressing a man as "Sir": Non-U, unless you are an elderly academic(!).- addressing a woman as "Miss": Non-U.- "Cheers!": Non-U! "Until 1939, English U-speakers normally said nothing. Since then, however, the Service habit...

I stumbled across a most pristine copy that has never been read for a mere $5. When opening the post, I ended up doing a reread of it and appreciating Evelyn Waugh's Open Letter even more. Such an interesting window into a time period and literary discourse.

So, by way of an old episode of Backlisted I learned about an essay by Nancy Mitford called The English Aristocracy, which is part of this volume (I have not read the whole collection, only this essay). I must say that this essay is simultaneously very informative and absolutely hilarious; I haven't laughed so much in a while (and I also learned a great deal about the English aristocracy, which put my beloved Downton Abbey in some perspective). I highly recommend this if you have any interest in...

Squashed between fat books of grammar I found Noblesse Oblige, a set of essays on English colloquialisms and class in the twentieth century. The Hon. Mrs. Peter Rodd (aka Nancy Mitford)'s sharp little essay on "the identifiable characteristics of the English aristocracy" caused a flurry of letters and debate, some of which is published in this volume. Mitford set down a by-no-means comprehensive list of grammar, vocabulary, and modes of thought as Upper-Class or Not Upper-Class. In the 1950s, a...

I love the Mitfords so I am biased, but this is a satiric look into English upper and non-upper class speech. Funny. Biting. Snobbish. For all of the humor behind it, it is a compelling sociological study as well.

Clearly I am not in on the joke.

Although of course it's now quite dated, thisexamination of "U" (upper class) and "non-U" usage remains a classic. Strangely enough, though British people are famed for their ability to "place" others in terms of class and origins by their speech, this wasn't a phenomenon that was much discussed before Mitford's book, which is a lighthearted but still quite penetrating look at British speech. Consisting of a group of pieces written by such literary luminaries as Mitford, Evelyn Waugh, John Betje...

It's pretty funny that some American readers think this series of articles was satirical (besides John Betjeman's poem, of course). It was an amusing close examination of a social custom, and a look at the contributors will let you know the level of the writing.

The English are super-weird about class.

A few startlingly recognisable observances, and otherwise lost on me.

Dynamic, vigorous, entertaining. Noblesse Oblige is a must have book for your library. Indeed, any Englishman’s library… Objectively tearing into the heart of English society, this collection of essays — featuring Professor Alan S. C. Ross, Miss Nancy Mitford, Mr Evelyn Waugh, and ‘Strix’ to name but a few — provides a clear landscape on the English aristocracy in 1956. But what makes the work so gripping? For me, Professor Ross’s remark captures the energy of the debate. An aristocrat is not “b...

Nancy Mitford wrote her essay as a joke; making fun of her own class. She was one of the famous Mitford sisters: young, rich, aristocrats. Some of her sisters had affairs with prominent figures, not always respectable, such as Hitler and other Nazi heads. Some other married into even more nobility. Even Lady D. was directly related to one of them!So Nancy thought it would be very funny to write a manual "from an insider" on how to be a noble person or a U (for Upper-class) opposed to a Non-U cha...

Once upon a time (1955ish) Nancy Mitford read a socio-linguistics paper that had been published in a Finnish journal (how she found it I do not remember, if I ever knew) about the differences in speech between the English aristocracy and the rest of the English people, and she took it and ran with it in a piece of light journalism for the literary magazine Encounter -- and for whatever reason, it caught on enormously and sparked much debate and discussion both in Britain and the US. I had read t...

A delicious correspondence between Nancy Mitford and Evelyn Waugh makes up the second and third sections, but the subject is either out-dated or totally over my head. This is a great reference point for how the socialist side of the Mitford family viewed the majority population of England at the time, but it’s not probably anything worth actually studying. I have a hard time believing Nancy knew enough about the outside world to even speak for other U’s - let alone provide an accurate view of th...

Wanted to read as famous essay and concept of U and non-U, but very slight and a lot has datedEvelynWaugh’s essay is probably more relevantThe idea of ‘tribes’ of people/professions,etc have words,phrases etc.that divide groups into Us and non-Us (rather than the originalUpper and non-Upper class is still true

After reading this, I can only conclude that, despite my vocabulary containing a mix of U and non-U terms, I am definitely too middle class to understand the British upper class.PS: On this note, it seems Bridget Jones' mother was solidly non-U. I always suspected as much.PPS: Were this book written today, I suspect it would include a How U Are You quiz at the end.

Remarkably hard to find at a sensible price (I eventually got a cheap-ish copy from a French book seller!), but worth the effort. There are a few tedious bits, but this is a quick read and more fun than not.

I read about Nancy Mitford and her five sisters and was curious how she sorted U vs. Non-U. She wrote the first article in this collection, which was witty and snobby, and to my American ears, a bit silly. I read most of the second article and decided enough is enough. Did not finish

Less fun and funny than I thought it would be. I picked up some linguistic nuances I didn’t know about British upper-class (U) speech, but the presentation was rather gratingly whimsical, except for Mitford’s original essay.

“...for generations of English have used the epithets ‘common’ and ‘middle class’ as general pejoratives to describe anything which gets on their nerves.”