BS: Who are you? Defining our identities

Subject: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Stu
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 05:14 AM

The excellent 'Are We Anti-Irish' thread started by Dave the Gnome turned into a facinating discussion on the identities of the British/English. I thought this desereved a thread of its own to accomadate the discussion.

I have been reading McCarthy's Bar, where Pete McCarthy goes to Ireland to discover how his Irish ancestry meant he felt at home there. This issue of identity is obviously the central theme of the book, and that and Dave's thread got me thinking.

How do we define our identites? By our ancestry, or where we were born? By where we grew up or where we live now? How far back can you go and still identify yourself with a certain nationality?

So, to start the ball rolling, I have a Welsh mother and an English father, and I can honestly say I am not sure how I feel. I support the England football team, but would not have shed any tears had the Welsh beaten them on Saturday (I may even afforded a bit of smugness). Apart from sports, I don't really feel nationalistic at all, but actually feel like a Islander from our archipeligo, with all it's rich history reaching back to the last ice age.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 05:37 AM

I am the only gay in the village!

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 05:44 AM

I don't bother with a national identity except for sport where I support England. Even then, it's more a matter of needing a team to cheer for and being loyal to my country of birth rather than feeling specially English. Maybe some of it is because I lived many years in Wales and English arrogance to the sort of tune that England=UK does annoy me. Another part that I'm not particularly proud of parts of our history. Apart from not feeling a need for a national identity, I can say my desires run high either.

I don't know much of my mothers side of the family except they were from Shropshire, on the Montgomery borders. My fathers side have a long history in Norwich and that side can be traced before we were English. We were Flemish weavers who moved over with the wollen trade heaven knows when.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Pied Piper
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 05:59 AM

"I don't really feel nationalistic at all, but actually feel like a Islander from our archipeligo, with all it's rich history reaching back to the last ice age."
That about sums up my attitude to belonging to these green islands in the grey North Sea.
Sadly a lot of people here define themselves by what they are not i.e. Sheep-shagging Welsh, tight-fisted haggis eating Scots and lots of much more offensive racial stereotypes applied to the "other".
As an example of my belonging here I regularly eat "wild" food; this year the Cherries were particularly plentiful and tasty and the blackberries (which my family collected in my childhood) were the best for years.
I belong because I'm part of the ecosystem which previous inhabitants created and gives us all Life.

TTFN
PP

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: MBSLynne
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 07:35 AM

Interesting thread......I was born in England of English parents from totally (as far as i can trace) English ancestry. I was brought up in Australia. In sports I support Australia. Generally, I think I feel English, except that there is always an Australian streak in there somewhere which surfaces at different times and with differing intensity. I always feel slightly foreign here really......

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: ranger1
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 08:44 AM

I am a native New Englander. My ancestors came from Ireland, France, England, Scotland and Wales and intermingled with the Algonquin and Abenaki who were already here. I generally tend to lean toward the French-Canadian and Irish parts of my heritage, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Amos
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 09:26 AM

Well, I dunno; sure, the genetic stream that produces our bodies is important, no mistake. And the familial cultural agreements we inherit tend to steer us toward certain kinds of values, virtues, and biases.

But on the whole I think it would be a mistake to say one "is" these things. To me this is kind of like defining yourself by the features in the car you drive. The core quality-ness of being is not centered in the dashboard buttons.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 09:36 AM

Considering from whence my ancestors came from and the armies and such that marched through there, I'm most likely of German-Italian-Spanish-African-Celtic-Viking-Dutch-English-Polish-Flemish-French-Irish-Scottish-Hunnish
stock, with perhaps a little Native American tossed into the pot.

I am more than the sum of my genes, however.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 09:51 AM

Not sure who I am now, but I'm certainly not the person I was 20, 15, 10, or even 5 years ago.

The only thing that seems to remain constant is a decided need to go sit alone somewhere green in the county of Dorset. It's been far too long.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:28 AM

My mothers grandparents came from Ireland, my fathers grandparents were Scots. I was born in California, grew up in Arizona and have lived in Alaska for the past 20 odd years. I am the sum total of all these things and many more.

I have written Alaska songs, Arizona songs, Irish songs, Scottish songs, English songs, songs about Native Americans and Civil War songs from both sides of the Mason-Dixon line. Some of my songs have even been mistaken for traditional. I have felt at home and comfortable with people from every walk of life and wherever I have traveled (with the possible exception of Parisians).

Who are we really? Nurture or Nature? Does it matter? I am quite happy with who I am. Sometimes I wear a parka, sometimes a kilt. I feel lucky to be a part of the human race. I will continue to enjoy life as long as there is any of it left in me.

Best wishes,
Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Amos
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:42 AM

I suggest we are neither, but contain them both in our composite makeup; but who one fundamentally is the one who views, not some object of perception. The 'thou' of you is not your name, nor your body, nor your brain or other possessions. IMHO, kknowing this is a key to great energy, freedom and balance in the world as it is an understanding that restores one to the center of all experience, yet needing no defense or artifical rightness to abide.

It is possible that identifying ourselves with an object, such as a blood-type, or category, is a fundamental error that causes all kinds of complexity in its ramifications. Being a something means you have to manage its survival, protect it, make sure it is right, and so on. Being yourself, on the other hand, requires none ofthese, as they are natural concomitants of being itself.

This may seem much too simple to be comprehensible, but i don't mind! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:52 AM

oh go on Amos...... be a something......
you know you want to......

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 11:40 AM

I think of myself as an American. Mom=Hungarian jew raised in, and identifying ethnically with, Serbia; Dad=Quaker from the Philly area whose father was American (partly Cherokee but didn't look it) and whose mom was Russian. On that side, the ancestors who came to the New World and started our last name were French Hughenots, apparently impatient ones, I gather that if they had waited for the edict of Nantes they could have stayed in France. When I was growing up overseas I was thought of as European, as that was more of a racial description than a geographical one, in fact we were once introduced with the phrase, "The Europeans among us come from the United States."

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: kendall
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:10 PM

One time in college the professor asked the question of each of us, "What nationality are you>" There were many answeres, and mine was "I'm 11th generation American" He announced that I was the only one to give the right answer.

I can trace my people back to Normandy. Some of the more troublsome ones invaded England with William the the guy who was pissed off at his Brother, Brian".
It's my understanding that we go back to the Vikings. i suppose I could be Norwiegen, I have the feet for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: kendall
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:20 PM

But, I spell like I'm from Hull.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,DB
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:28 PM

An ex-girlfriend, who was a very accomplished genealogist, discovered that all of those of my family members that she could trace came from eastern England (East Anglia, Kent and London). Her family were much more diverse.
I am grateful to this woman for giving me this insight into my roots but I don't think that it alters my perception of who I am or affects my relationship with people from other ethnic backgrounds. Some of the finest and happiest experiences of my life have involved working with people from other countries (including people in Europe, the Far East and Africa). These experiences have convinced me that it's perfectly possible to get along fine with people from different cultures - although it helps to have a common language - English!
I count myself lucky that I didn't have to learn Thai, Polish or Yoruba etc. - although I wish I had the apptitude to do so!

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Metchosin
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:41 PM

I'm a mongrel. There are hordes of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 12:49 PM

Warning: A gross simplification coming up.

A major difference between the USers and the UKers shows mightily here. We 'Americans' tend to be such a blend of etnicities we have trouble picking out the 'main' one. At the same time, we tend to speak only one language, the one we were born into.

Across the ocean many people derive from one or two nationalities but they speak 2-3-5 languages. Go figure.

I have a Polish friend. Ask her what ethnic strains she bears, her answer is simple. But she learned - and speaks - Polish, Russian, Ukrain(ish?)Czech and English.

"I'm certainly not the person I was 20, 15, 10, or even 5 years ago." Liz the Squeak

Isn't that the truth. It has gotten so that I'm wary of speaking my mind on anything- I may change it tomorrow. (It should stop me more often.)

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Charmion
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 02:14 PM

When asked the dreaded question, I usually answer "Canadian" -- the list of ethnicities is so chequered that it is useless. Around here, people also ask "Which are you, English or French?", to which I answer, "Both." They hate that.

I find it more useful to sort people by their habits and interests. Readers, musicians, campers and cooks; home-renovators and car enthusiasts; sewing-machine mavens and sweater-knitters. Horse people, dog people, cat people. Fashionistas. People who think fly-fishing is not both difficult and incredibly boring.

Who am I? I'm a novel-reading fashion-impaired mezzo-soprano mandolin picker who cooks and keeps cats, but prefers not to camp. That's far more informative than English-Irish-Scots-Welsh-French-Dutch-Swiss and probably a smattering of Romany.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Kaleea
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 07:23 PM

Now, now, metchosin--is "mongrel" politically correct?   Mayhaps on a softer note, "ancesterly confused" or possibly "DNA knowledge
challenged," which is not to be confused with "Male parental DNA knowledge challenged?"

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Sep 05 - 10:10 PM

Nothing wrong with mongrels. They tend to be tougher and healthier and savvier than purebreds. *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Rasener
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 01:53 AM

I'm a true brummie
True brummies support Aston Villa
They also support Warwickshire Cricket Club
They also support England at Cricket and Football

My mothers side of the family were Welsh
My fathers side were Publicans

I have lived in England, Scotland, Holland and played cricket on tour in Wales.

On forms that have to be filled in, I always answer White/British

I also consider myself European. I am also an adopted Yellowbelly.

I have great difficulty understanding why people get so patriotic about their section of land they were born in.

I am more concerned about living in a peaceful environment, where the neighbours are friendly and don't need ASBOS served on them.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Metchosin
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 02:53 AM

Kaleea, just because I and a fine number of dogs are of no defineable breed, as a result of various crossings, does not necessarily mean we cannot trace our ancestry. LOL

Thank you, Ebbie.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 03:00 AM

I traced mine back nearly 200 years in one village.... still have family living there today ... doesn't make a figs worth of difference to who I am now, but it did define a lot of who I was then.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 04:09 AM

Too right about true brummies supporting the Villa.

Up the Villa! Right up the Blues!

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Rasener
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 06:37 AM

Good on yer stigweard our kid :-)

Maybe you should change your name to The Villan1, so that we can have a like minded set of mudcatters who talk the same language :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Dani
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 09:09 AM

How do you keep 'em once they're cooked, Charmion. Confit?

This is very interesting: I'll be back....

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: An Englishman Abroad
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 09:36 AM

Living in the USA the more English I am the more money I make. I was speaking at a meeting on Tuesday and a woman with a very thick European accent told me she had been in the USA for 25 years. She asked if I thought I would lose my accent. I told her I was working hard not to as it would cost me.

One of the presentations I give is a light hearted look at the relationship between the USA and the UK. People with a British background can not wait to tell me their history.I get the feeling that America is such a mix that they are pulled in all directions untill the chips are down then they become all Amercan. Same in Britain, we are Scots, Welsh, English untill something happens then we are Brits.

Got to admit I am English but supprt the Welsh when they play England at Rugby.

all the best John

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,DB
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 10:44 AM

I know that this is going to sound a bit provocative but why is it that when Americans claim to have Native American roots they always seem to be descended from the Cherokees? Why are they never descended from the Comanches or the Pawnees or the Delawares or the Seneca or the Nootka or the Choctaw or the Nez Perce or the ... well, you get the picture!
I'm sorry if this upsets any of our American friends but it is something that has puzzled me for a long time.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Kim C
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:21 AM

I just am who I am.

Guest DB, you're not the only person ever to have made that observation! I -think- that may have something to do with Mark Lindsey and his "Cherokee People" song in the 70s. It was trendy to be Cherokee. And if you think about it this way - the Cherokees were in the East, and were removed to the West --- well, they can have descendants all over. (I actually do have ONE documented Cherokee ancestor, a woman from Georgia. The confusion is that no one seems to know if she was full-blood, or if her mother was. Anyhow, she was at least half-blood, and her sons gained land grants based on that in the 1800s.)

Other people do claim other roots, it's just I think because of the Trail of Tears fiasco, the Cherokee people were pretty spread out.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: MMario
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:27 AM

hmmmmmmm....I find it intereesting that as far as I see all the comments here seem to tend to define based on country/ethnicity of origin.

I find myself more defined by my releationships with other people. And I feel that different facets of "me" come to the fore depending on who I am interacting with.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:30 AM

GUEST, DB - Iroquois, Seneca tribe. No Cherokee in my family.

:)

E

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,DB
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 01:07 PM

Thanks to Kim C and Epona for replying to my rather impudent question.
I hope no offence was taken - none was intended. Being a lifelong Native American buff I'm a bit jealous - I sort of wish some of my ancestors were Cherokee or Seneca!

I've often wondered if the 'Cherokee Ancestor' syndrome (if it exists) might, in some cases, be a sort of unPC, nineteenth century hangover - after all the Cherokees were characterised as 'civilised', one of their number (Sequoyah) invented an alphabet for their language and they were a 'noble people grievously wronged' - perhaps some unenlightened souls would rather be descended from 'civilised' Cherokees than from 'uncivilised' Utes or whatever (?)

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:29 PM

My national family origins don't have much more to do with who I am than the size of my ears. My identity is determined far more by "what am I doing with this life I have been given?"

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,Sandra
Date: 07 Sep 05 - 11:41 PM

When I read the thread title...I didn't even think of background or ethnicity. I thought I would come to read all sorts of 'favorite things' type of posts. Or things of that nature. I, having come from some unpleasantness in the past, choose to define myself by where I am now (California) and the things and people that are around me now. When folks ask me my ethnicity I will answer I am Californian, knowing that is not what they want to know. For purposes of my skin color, hair and eye color, I suppose what they want to hear is Scandinavian. But I know nothing about my own set(s) of ancestors, (does that make me bad?), and very little about their ways of life and/or how they came to America. I grew up in Wisconsin...but feel no pangs of longing for that area. I am who I am because of all I've gone through to get to the point where I'm at now. I am happily non-ethnic....I sort of LIKE the term mongrel.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 12:11 AM

I think Kim C has the truest answer of all, subtracting the polite "just": I am who am. Good enough for any sovereign Being, with or without a body!

A

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 03:37 AM

And it was good enough for Descartes too... or was that Popeye?

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Amos
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 07:51 AM

LTS, you must learn the difference. While they were both profound thinkers and early Existentialists, Descartes is never noted as having gotten a tattoo. Popeye has a large anchor tattoo on his right forearm.

As far as I know, Descartes never served in the armed forces. This may explain the lack of interest in getting a tattoo.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 09:11 AM

GUEST, DB - I think you're right about it being about civility in part. Because the Cherokee were more "civilized" as determined by the settlers, there was more interaction with them than a lot of other Indian nations. Because of the increased interaction, there were more marriages that occured between the groups...

E

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 09:24 AM

But I know many people with colourful and decorative tatoos... none of whom would be seen dead in any uniform other than leathers, club T shirts and Chapter insigna.....

I also know that the thing with spinach was just a bluff.... but the whole show sold a lot of hamburgers!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: jacqui.c
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 10:09 AM

When I was about nine my school teacher told me I was a mongrel. I don't think she meant it, and at the time I did not take it, as a compliment but, more and more these days, that is how I see myself.

I'm English by birth but can only trace my family back three generations, further back than that has no real interest to me. I now live in the USA and feel quite at home there because I have found the niche that suits me. I define my identity by the people with whom I choose to associate and seem, at last, to have found a group to which I feel a real infinity.

Denizens of the folk world do seem to be my kind of people, whatever the nationality. On this site one can see, in spite of the differing opinions, a sense of extended family. Having met a number of Mudcatters I can confirm that this sense carries through to the 'real' world. I don't think I have ever felt more at home than I do at a gathering of folkies.

Ask me who I am?

A folkie and a Mudcatter.

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 11:49 AM

I too am a folkin' mudcatter. *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Who are you? Defining our identities
From: GUEST,popeye
Date: 08 Sep 05 - 12:25 PM

I yam what I yam