Brits love to be outside and walking. It is one of the things we enjoy most about living here and would never want to go back to car culture. We walk everywhere. Our favorite walking days are Saturdays, strolling to the grocery store, then to the butcher and the baker -- and all nearby where we live, making a four mile jaunt in all, and with much needed good exercise and community building. Later that evening, we take a walk to the local pub for a drink with friends. Some of our friends are even ramblers -- for more on them, click here.
Still, while there is a love of walking here, there is less a love of walking orderly. Give me a few minutes and you will understand what I mean.
I have given serious years of my life trying to sort out the rules for walking in the UK. I have always intuitively felt that, somehow, figuring out these rules would be a window into the wider society. It might. Let’s see. But it’s probably also that I am a grumpy middle-aged guy who cannot enjoy a good walk without being annoyed. I am even happier if the cause of my misery can be blamed on others!
First, let’s get the issue of queuing versus walking out of the way. Standing in a line is not the same as walking down the street. Simple enough. Brits queue perfectly. For a brilliant and fun BBC article on queuing, click here.
The same perfection cannot be said for walking, be it down a crowded city street or along some rambling country path. How Brits walk is not dependent upon the number of people walking. I have watched two Brits on a country path, out in the middle of nowhere and with not a single other person in sight, walk straight into each other. No, these rules apply almost everywhere, be it in the South or up in the North.
And, sorry, but these have little to do with narrow sidewalks or living in small towns. These rules are entirely cultural! Sort of like road rage in the States. It's a state of mind! :) The rules are simple enough – actually, no they are not. As we say in the UK, “Sorry!”
RULE 1: When it comes to walking in the UK, there is no rule, . . . until there is one.
Most people in the UK walk about unaware or unconcerned. There is no staying to the left, as one does while driving, nor is there any crowd behaviour such that people will mostly follow a direction of travel. People in the UK simply walk where and how they please. Case in point: in train stations, with stairs and hallways clearly marking a direction of travel, most people walk oblivious.
Until, suddenly, there is a rule. When and how it emerges in entirely self-organizing and consistently contradictory. The only way one knows it is when, maddeningly, one finds oneself on the opposite end of the rule, with a polite grimace or snubbing quick to follow. For example. You think walking on the left is correct as that is the side for driving and biking. Not as one would expect, unfortunately. One minute it’s the right then the next minute the left — fifty people in front of you all go the wrong way, you follow, but only to be suddenly corrected. Can’t you see there is clearly a rule for walking?
Another example: I was riding my bike in the bike lane over a foot/bike bridge with two clear lanes: a wide lane walking (see picture on right) and the narrow lane (see left side of picture) for bikes. A middle-aged person is in the biking lane with their two dogs. I am ringing my bell, three times! Three bikes behind me and one coming the other way, all of us in the bike lane as the walking lane is filled. The person turns around, angrily, and says to us all, "This is a foot bridge!" How dare we challenge the apparent rule that is actually not the rule, until it is???
The result is a sociological conundrum. Walking in the UK is not a brilliant ballet of crowd behaviour or some river-like flow of pedestrian traffic. Quite the opposite. The result is more akin to a bumper car approach to walking, with everyone weaving and darting around each other and with collisions and pileups a continual occurrence and with the rules not followed . . . until suddenly so.
This paradox of RULE 1 is explained by RULE 2 and RULE 3.
RULE 2: When walking, the goal is to avoid conflict or, if one is the cause of a collision, to politely say “Sorry” or make it clear it’s someone else’s fault, which means anything or anyone else but them.
That is not to say, everyone responds the same way. Brits enact Rule 2 in one of three ways: Unawares, Accommodators, and Selfish.
But first a caveat. These three types are not monoliths. People can and often flow in and out of them. Even myself -- sometimes I am Unawares, while other times a bit Selfish or Accommodating. Others might likewise come up with more types. With this caveat in mind, let's proceed.
The most common are the Unawares, which constitute about 50% of the population. They are simply not paying attention, lost in their own public travelog. And if you alert them to that fact, they look at you with blank eyes, confusion, fear or sudden embarrassment, and will either continue on or adjust accordingly, and with a smile or a quick “Sorry”. They are also often pleasantly surprised if you, while following the rule, give way to them, and will say “Thanks” as if you did them a favour, when in reality, you simply decided it was not worth crashing into them.
There is a significant generational aspect to the Unawares and a lot of it has to do with technology. Take a moment on any given day while walking and look around. You will see most young people walking with their heads down staring at their phone . . . completely unaware!
The second most common are the Accommodators, and here we are talking about 40% of pedestrians. These are your reasonable caring people. British politeness at its best. Being Accommodators, these folks generally try to follow the rules – walking on the left when possible and with the flow of pedestrian traffic.
.jpg)
Here is the problem, though: Accommodators, as the name suggests, are often too polite. For example, you find someone walking in the bicycle lane in a city unawares or uncaring. In response, rather than challenge the person, bicyclists move out into the pedestrian lane or into oncoming car traffic, all of which are now making accommodations, all for that one person. The result is a ripple effect that causes a crowd of Unawares and Accommodators to change their behaviour, spiraling off in all directions. The result is collision or chaos.
The third and most obnoxious are the Selfish, at about 10%, who do as they please. There also seems to be a social class component and (alternatively) a male gendered aspect to this approach – but, as with all these rules, not always, as selfishness is free for all – and with posh folks often thinking they have the right of way and not too worried about the conflict or collision it causes elsewhere. Social class is everything in the UK. And often with lads and aggressive males not caring or thinking it’s funny.
For example: you are walking with the flow of traffic on a typical British street that is far too narrow, requiring everyone to walk single file. Coming the opposite way is a couple walking hand-in-hand or a group of lads. They will not move over, and will not switch to single file, all the while staring right at you. Everyone else – be they Unawares or Accommodators – are pouring into oncoming traffic or colliding into one another to give them way. It is clearly an example of taking advantage of British kindness. Which takes us to the third rule.
RULE 3: Both Rules 1 and 2 can be explained by a potential superordinate rule: the goal of public life is to keep the peace; even in the face of those disturbing the peace.
Critiquing this rule is tricky, because it is, at once, what is great but also frustrating about public life in the UK. On the positive side, it is what makes living here, particularly in the countryside and small towns and cities, so homey, congenial and pleasant. It truly is a great thing about the UK. People are not keen to disturb the peace and they enjoy being together, including one of the great things of UK culture -- Pub and Café life. And being seen as a disturber of the peace is not cool at all.
It also helps to explain the general approach to Democracy. With Brexit, for example, upholding the vote, even if one disagrees, is widely seen as more important than undermining it, as it constitutes a direct challenge to democratic process. In turn, however, once things are generally sorted, as with abortion rights or gay marriage, for example, they are respected as such.
This upholding the peace stands in direct contrast to the States, where disturbing the peace is promoted in public life. It's the name of the game. As such, while a vote like Brexit would probably have been overturned, so has Roe-V-Wade and aspects of Affirmative Action, and also many Voting Rights for minorities. Disturbing the peace also almost entirely explains Trump and the riotous politics of the Hard-Right.
Again, as with all these rules, while necessary, they are far too simplistic to be sufficient in explaining UK public life. People are not automatons. And social life emerges out of a configuration of factors, many which directly challenge or contradict the others. For example, as we will see in a moment, certain groups of Brits, as in the case of the Posh Selfish, are quite content to disturb the peace to get what they want, which, given the role of social class in the UK, is tolerated under the heading of not disturbing the peace around the established class order.
Contradictions in configurations aside, then, there is a large grain of truth in Rule 3, and it helps to understanding walking in public.
For Unawares, walking in the UK is the embodiment of Rule 3. Hence, the obligatory “Sorry!” Given such a situation, Unawares are confused when challenged; and overall not concerned about challenging others. Doing either puts them in a tizzy. They truly respond with confusion and concern. They cannot figure out why one is so upset. Why are you disturbing the peace? The conflict ensuing is to be avoided at all cost. This explains very well why, even if the rule of walking on the left is broken, you, the person saying something, is seen as ruder than those walking the wrong way! Why? Simply put: you are disturbing the peace!
The same is true if Accommodators. They are trying to keep the peace by adjusting the rules to avoid conflict. They also do not like those making a fuss by calling out the error, as it violates Rule 2 of no conflict and Rule 3 of keeping the peace, even when the Unawares and Selfish are wrong.
Then, again, there are those that do challenge things, but only be indirectly and only rarely outright. These are (sometimes) the slightly assertive Accommodators who have finally had enough and are willing to slightly disturb the peace. Going back to our earlier example of the rule suddenly appearing, it is sometimes an Accommodator, who, by letting fifty people go by, finds themselves in such a state of frustration that they say something to you, pedestrian #51. One can hardly blame them for speaking out, if only too little and too late.
But, still, that is not the majority of cases. What often explains why Rule 1 suddenly emerges is that, in an effort to not disturb the peace, contradictory rules will be created to avoid conflict. Everyone is walking the wrong way, you are the only person walking the right way as opposing traffic, everyone gets upset with you, looking at you as if to ask, "Why are you doing this? What does it matter? You are disturbing the peace? Just go with the flow.”
And, again, there is some value in this point for creating a pastoral, homey public life. But, as we will see next, it allows uncaring and selfish people to get away with public behaviour that in other counties would not be tolerated.
Afraid of causing such an upset, most people in the UK avoid at all costs the Selfish, all of which creates a negative feedback loop, as the behaviour of the Selfish feeds into the Unawares and Accommodators, who instead of saying something, simply say "Sorry," or nothing at all – leaving them to careen off in your direction. Again, conflict, collision.
For example, I have seen Brits with an unruly dog off-leash blame their dog for threatening or jumping on someone while out walking, saying "Oh, now, Buddy (the pit bull) get over here you naughty dog!". Followed by "Sorry, he does that. What a bad boy." When clearly the only person responsible for a dog jumping on someone is the owner. Others around them, unwilling to make conflict, then say, "Oh, no worries, what a jumpy dog. He really is a bit naughty!"
Is walking a window into UK society?
So, is there something to learn from this bit of sociology of everyday life in the UK? Or am I just grumpy? Well, in terms of being grumpy, YES! 😅 There is a part of my complaint that has yet learned how to keep the peace and enjoy the day.
But, there is still a bit of a problem here. As I have been suggesting, walking in the UK is a microcosm of a general collision of social class, rule inconsistency and gender issues. These issues are combined, as my colleague Jonathan Wistow points out, a British conflict over wanting to be individualist (like the States) or collectivist (like the rest of Europe). And with polite Brits (Accommodators) trying to use civility, good manners, and accommodation to hold it all together. But without really challenging things for fear of conflict, for worry on insulting others. All of which can often lead to an unwillingness (particularly on the part of the Selfish and Unawares) to engage in open and critical engagement around issues such as social class, diversity, and the social determinants of inequality. (And with the caveat, again, that we all move in and out of these three types, albeit still finding one more in our wheelhouse.)
Still, there is a sense of keeping calm and carrying on!
But to come back to Rule 3, while all of this undercurrent of collision and chaos of walking in daily life is taking place, because of a focus on keeping the peace, there is no outrage, no real aggression and nobody yelling! In an otherwise often troubled world, this is worth pausing to appreciate. And to repeat a point, it is one of the things we absolutely love about living in the UK -- the gentleness of daily life. And, again, as a point of contrast, it is not like the States where people are at each other constantly, bipartisan and failing to get along, or worse. Living in the North of England, in particular, is homey and peaceful. People are kind and, even when all of the "bumper-car collisions" of walking is going on, people do not get too upset about it all. They just keep calm and carry on, as cliche as that sounds. They seem much more concerned with trying to enjoying the day (or at least keeping it somewhat peacefully moving) than ruining it because someone walked into them. It is so much easier to be kind and never mind.
There is a lot to learn here.
Still, it would not be so terrible if those who take advantage of this kindness would, perhaps, do so a little less often then they presently do. And, apologies, but perhaps we Accommodators could be a bit more assertive and ask others to take us into consideration as much as we do them.
Maybe, but probably not, . . .
"Sorry". But I am not sure it is the UK way of doing things presently.
In the background I cannot help but hear Pink Floyd's song, 'Time'.
Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way.
The time is gone, the song is over, thought I'd something more to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment