One of the most common views of the word 'chav' amongst the left is the idea that it's offensive because it's simply interchangeable with 'poor person', and that to use it is in itself class hatred. Things that are associated with being a chav (or ned, townie, kev, charver, etc) are those that cost little, and to denigrate such a culture is to directly insult people for their poverty.
I think, however, it is more meaningful to characterise 'chav' as a subculture. Subcultures, as any good Marxist would assert, are very much products of socioeconomic conditions, but by no means should be considered to be insults. Of course insults are bandied around, as with all subcultures, fights and bullying exist between groups and inside them, but I think to reduce 'chav' or any of it's synonyms to merely an insult is ignorant.
Most of the chavs I've known describe themselves as such. They can often be hesitant with the word, but that's not an unusual feature of subcultures too, especially amongst teenagers. While possibly Britain's biggest subculture, it's also not, to my estimation, the majority of the poor and shouldn't be considered an interchangeable term with poverty. There are certainly features of being a chav that have their origins quite plainly in an (sometimes aspirational) poverty - things like diamante, fake gold chains, hatchback cars and tracksuits, representing the poorest ways to indulge in what everyone else seemingly has effortlessly - but what people seem to be ignoring is people in that subculture who do have money, and what they spend money on remains similar - real diamonds, real gold chains, hyper-upgraded hot hatches, Emporio Armani tracksuits.
It wouldn't be accurate to say that everyone who started off as a poor chav and became richer remains in the subculture, and there are some obvious exit routes that confidently work concurrently with growing up, too, such as the Essex Boy and his extremely sharp suit - Emporio Armani become Armani Privé - but it must be recognised that there exist people who spend tens of thousands of pounds on those hatchbacks with the loud exhausts and blue running lights - it's something to be proud of.
There of course also exist chav celebrities: I think less of the Jade Goodys of this world, because of the obvious rags-to-riches story, and more of people like Peter Andre, Katie Price, Lady Sovereign, and Wayne Rooney. These people have differing backgrounds and yet all (with the exception of Lady Sovereign) have been very rich for quite a long time - if we understand chav as just a classist insult, it doesn't explain why they've stuck to their chosen lifestyles, despite the derision that it draws from the media.
However, what is salutary about the existing understanding of 'chav' that I have noticed is recognising that, whatever it means, it is definitely a term used to bully and exclude people, and certainly from the most conservative of positions. It contains implicit hatred not only of the poor but of the nouveau riche, with all their brash cars and flashy jewellery. This form of classism is of course also familiar in its racist use against the hopelessly misnamed 'hip-hop culture', and it's difficult really to imagine anyone without a lineage to the Hapsburgs who qualifies as acceptable.
I didn't write this in order to reclaim the word 'chav'. I wrote this because I'm becoming increasingly concerned at the very top-down nature of the engagement with chavs. Too many people seem to say "you mustn't call them that" while simultaneously remaining completely blind to the fact that the people they are trying to protect have no such interest. It's nauseating to hear the chinless wonders braying for a 'chav hunt', but I think no less so to hear an leftwing activist bright-eyedly denouncing the idea that people might genuinely want branded sportswear, even if - shock horror - it costs more than plain Ikea chic.
I think, however, it is more meaningful to characterise 'chav' as a subculture. Subcultures, as any good Marxist would assert, are very much products of socioeconomic conditions, but by no means should be considered to be insults. Of course insults are bandied around, as with all subcultures, fights and bullying exist between groups and inside them, but I think to reduce 'chav' or any of it's synonyms to merely an insult is ignorant.
Most of the chavs I've known describe themselves as such. They can often be hesitant with the word, but that's not an unusual feature of subcultures too, especially amongst teenagers. While possibly Britain's biggest subculture, it's also not, to my estimation, the majority of the poor and shouldn't be considered an interchangeable term with poverty. There are certainly features of being a chav that have their origins quite plainly in an (sometimes aspirational) poverty - things like diamante, fake gold chains, hatchback cars and tracksuits, representing the poorest ways to indulge in what everyone else seemingly has effortlessly - but what people seem to be ignoring is people in that subculture who do have money, and what they spend money on remains similar - real diamonds, real gold chains, hyper-upgraded hot hatches, Emporio Armani tracksuits.
It wouldn't be accurate to say that everyone who started off as a poor chav and became richer remains in the subculture, and there are some obvious exit routes that confidently work concurrently with growing up, too, such as the Essex Boy and his extremely sharp suit - Emporio Armani become Armani Privé - but it must be recognised that there exist people who spend tens of thousands of pounds on those hatchbacks with the loud exhausts and blue running lights - it's something to be proud of.
There of course also exist chav celebrities: I think less of the Jade Goodys of this world, because of the obvious rags-to-riches story, and more of people like Peter Andre, Katie Price, Lady Sovereign, and Wayne Rooney. These people have differing backgrounds and yet all (with the exception of Lady Sovereign) have been very rich for quite a long time - if we understand chav as just a classist insult, it doesn't explain why they've stuck to their chosen lifestyles, despite the derision that it draws from the media.
However, what is salutary about the existing understanding of 'chav' that I have noticed is recognising that, whatever it means, it is definitely a term used to bully and exclude people, and certainly from the most conservative of positions. It contains implicit hatred not only of the poor but of the nouveau riche, with all their brash cars and flashy jewellery. This form of classism is of course also familiar in its racist use against the hopelessly misnamed 'hip-hop culture', and it's difficult really to imagine anyone without a lineage to the Hapsburgs who qualifies as acceptable.
I didn't write this in order to reclaim the word 'chav'. I wrote this because I'm becoming increasingly concerned at the very top-down nature of the engagement with chavs. Too many people seem to say "you mustn't call them that" while simultaneously remaining completely blind to the fact that the people they are trying to protect have no such interest. It's nauseating to hear the chinless wonders braying for a 'chav hunt', but I think no less so to hear an leftwing activist bright-eyedly denouncing the idea that people might genuinely want branded sportswear, even if - shock horror - it costs more than plain Ikea chic.
Think you my be off the mark here about subculture, unless you want to seperate 'chav' from the list of other terms you bracketed (Charva, Ned etc). These terms (which chav comes out of) are used to denote, in my experience (of Charva), a poor, rough, probably threatening white working class youth.
ReplyDeleteMore a character and stereotype than subculture, as in different cities the 'culture' manifests in different ways, and is certinly not associated with 'bling'. and, as always i think it depends on who is saying it. But i agree with you to an extent because I used to (and still do when in my home town) use it descriptively, however think it offensive when the middle class use it as an insult because it is, as you seem to say, pure class hatred and contempt for the less well off, less educated, less 'classy' members of society beneath them.
I think what is meant by it when it is said, and how it segregates people by worthiness along class lines, makes it still pretty disgusting.
Interestingly I think that part of the reasons that the 'Celeb Chavs' you list still cling to their lifestyle despite the negative connotations is that they are living a very specific, class conscious, 'working class dream', that is perpetuated on the permanent otherness of those who have gained riches from little.
ReplyDelete