Introduction

'By reason of some strange, obscure elements in him, the Englishman remains, as he has

always been, a somewhat incomprehensible being.'(Dixon 1933:33).

The main reason for writing a paper concerning the national identity and mentality is my

intense fascination, deeply rooted in my inner core, for the process of building a character -

whether it is about a person, or an entire nation.

The following lines are broadly trying to unveal some of the aspects detached from the pages

of history, popular culture and various concepts, which contributed to the evolution and

identification of the contemporary Englishman personality. Seen as a whole, from my point of

view, the English society has met throughout the course of centuries multiple shapes which

had an imminent impact on the way of thinking and living of the citizens. Therefore, a close

insight at its development can guide us to the answer of the question: How did the British get

this character?

My paper is divided in two principal chapters: 'National Identity of the British' and the

'Mentality of the British'. I have to mention that this division is artificial, due to the fact that

these two are tight connected, also one can not exist without the other.

The first part is focused on the hisorical evolution of the British society, including the wars

and the imperial stage. It also includes the reflection on the footprints left by the confession,

language and popular culture on the British consciousness . Moreover, there are not forgotten

the foreigners' views on the English character, as they are thought to be the best able to define

the true character of a nation.

The second part of the paper deals more with the contemporary, modern Englishman and his

defining characteristics, properly detailed with ilustrative, accurate examples, taken actually

from the everyday life of the Englishmen. In my trial to design their main features, I have

taken into consideration multiple concepts, such as their ways of life, the cultural diversity, or

even the geographical position of their country. Furthermore, for a better emphasis, I managed

to draw a comparison between the mentality of the British and the mentality of the Romanian.

Certainly, as the quote from the beginnig announces, I do not have the rashness to claim that

my paper has depicted somehow all the ambiguites and complexities involved in the

development of the national identity of the British. Nevertheless, it is an attempt to outline the

main features of the British character and the keypoints which guided to them.

1

1.National Identity of the British

It is a truism that foreigners are best able to define the true character of a nation. As one

foreign observer noted: 'Since the concept of a national character arises out of the comparison

of nations one with another, the best self-portrait is likely to be less valid than the pictures

painted by foreign observers.'1 For many foreigners the terms British and English are

interchangeable. How then have foreigners traditionally seen the English/British?

The Frenchman Jules Verne, who disliked the English, created his typical Englishman in

Phileas Fogg, hero of Around the World in 80 days (1873). Fogg is depicted as phlegmatic,

methodical, well-balnced, anti-intellectual, sporting, chivalrous and with a deadpan sense of

humour.

The Hungarian Baroness Orczy, who liked the English, created her perfect Englishman Sir

Percy Blakeney in The Scarlet of Pimpernel(1905). He was sporting, chivalrous, cool, daring,

patriotic, aristocratic, and with a notable sense of humour. The Home Secretary Sir William

Joynson-Hicks told Baroness Orczt: 'You have put your finger on what is best and truest in

English character'.2

These two characters have much in common. Both are gentlemen. Both are heroic

individualists. Both have a strong sense of humour and a deep sense of duty. Both act

decently, sportingly and with restraint. And both were translated from page to stage and

screen. Such key female icons of Englishness as Mrs Miniver and Mrs Dale, Anna Neagle and

Gracie Fields, embodied them too.

1 R. Virtanen, quoted in Dean Peabody, National Characteristics, Cambridge, 19852 Baroness Orczy, Links In the Chain Of Life, London, p 98

2

1.1. Popular Culture

Popular culture has portrayed the English as the inventors of good sportsmanship, as the

upholders of the tradition of playing the game, being a sporting loser, not letting the side

down, keeping a stiff upper lip, doing the decent thing. The Scarlet Pimpernel, Phileas Fogg,

Beau Geste, Bulldog Drummond, Rudolph Rassendyk, Richard Hannay, Robin Hood, the

Knights of Round Table and all the rest have gone round the world doing just that. Popular

culture has created an expectation of certain characteristics and attitudes. A recent study

surveyed groups of forty to fifty students in the first year at university or the last year in

secondary school in England, France, Germany, Italy, Austria, Finland, Greece and the

Philippines. They were asked to mark various nationalities range of characteristics. The

British came out as reserved, practical, peaceful, serious, calm, sceptical and self-controlled.3

1.2. Confession

Apart form the absence of a sense of humour, which tends to confirm the oft-repeated view

that foreigners do not understand the English sense of humour, the picture conforms to the

traditional image of the phlegmatic, stiff-upper-lipped English gentleman, and can only be the

product of cultural conditioning. But how did the British get this character?

There seems to be the agreement among many leading authorities that something remarkable

happened to the national character in the second half of the eighteenth century and the first

half of the nineteenth century. As the great social historian Harold Perkin wrote: 'Between

1780 and 1850 the English ceased to be one of the most aggressive, brutal, rowdy, outspoken,

riotius, cruel and bloodthirsty nations in the world and became one of the most inhibited,

polite, orderly, tender-minded, prudish and hypocritical.'4

In fact Britain only became a nation as such in the eighteenth century. It was the Act of Union

of 1707 that linked England, Wales and Scotland and created a single geographical entity-the

United Kingdom of Great Britain. Ireland was only incorporated in 1800 and most of it was

unincorporated in 1921.

The unity of the United Kingdom was strongly reinforced and underpinned by a shared

Protestantism, a factor often underrated by historians. As David Vincent has shown, the

3 Peabody, National Characteristics, pp 95-1084 Harold Perkin, The Origins of Modern English Society, 1780-1880, London, 1969, p.280

3

common culture of Britain in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was rooted in the key

texts of popular Protestantism-the Bible, Milton, Bunyan and Foxe. 5 This pervasive

Protestantism, celebrated in a succession of mythicized victories against Catholicism(the

Armada, the Glorious Revolution, the Jacobite rebelions), led the British to see themselves as

the chosen people, with a tendency to equate the Israel of the Bible with the Britain of the

present day.6 Thus the most popular British composer of the eighteenth and most of the

nineteenth century was George Frederick Handel whose oratorios, particularly The Mesiah,

could be seen as celebrations of Protestant Christianity and, by extention, of the British as

God's chosen people, whether or not they went to church. As Linda Colley notes:

'Protestantism, broadly understood, provided the majority of Britons with a framework for

their lives. It shaped their interpretation of the past and enabled them to make sense of the

present. It helped them to identify and confront their enemies. It gave them confidence and

even hope' 7.It was not the divisions within Protestantism but the division between

Protestantism and Catholicism that was crucial in the 18th century.

1.3. Empire

Empire was one of the major component elements of British national identity and its principal

justification was the superiority of British character. Good conduct and sound character were

more than just desirable, they were essential. It was British character which set the British,

and particularly their imperial administrators and soldiers, apart from other peoples and

justified their ruling a quarter of the globe. The Times declared in the mid-nineteenth century:

'That which raises a country , that which strengthens a country, and that which dignifies a

country – that which spreads her power, creates her moral influence, and makes her respected

and submitted to, bends the heart of millions, and bows down the pride of nations to her – the

instrument of obedience, the fountain of supremacy, the throne, crown and sceptre of a nation;

the aristocracy is not an aristocracy of blood, not an aristocracy of fashion, not an aristocracy

of talent only: it is an aristocracy of character.'8

It is impossible to overestimate the significance of character for nineteeth-century Britain. It

was more than an ideal; there was a religion of character. It was rooted in moral certainties,

5 David Vincent, Literacy and Popular Culture: England 1750-1914, Cambridge, 19896 Howard Weinbrot, Britannia's Issue: the rise of the British literature from Dryden to Ossian, Cambridge,

19957 Linda Colley, Britons, New Haven and London, 19928 Colin Holmes, John Bull's Island: immigaration and British society 1871-1971, London, 1988

4

was promoted enthusiastically by Evangelicalism, and incorporated into the teaching of the

public schools which turned out a rulling elite for nation and empire. It stood at the heart of

the chivalric revival. Books were written arguing that Britain's industrial pre-eminence,

imperial achievement and parliamentary democracy were all based on character. Samuel

Smiles devoted one of his best-selling moral guides to Character just as he had to Self-Help,

Duty, Thrift. There was seen to be causal connection between certain character traits and

national achievement. As Emil Reich in Success among Nations(1904) declared: 'The

Englishman's idea is that the world is ruled by character, by will, and in order to secure

himself that domination, he apllies himself to the development of those qualities'.9

1.4. Wars

The sense of national identity is never stronger than when countries are at war with each

other, at imminent risk of war, or remembering war. Cultural achievements can stir national

pride, and sporting contests can excite national emotion in memorable ways, but it is war, the

prospect of war, and the memory of war that has traditionally shaped and defined that

collective national sentiment and sense-of-self we think of as being at the core of national

identity.

The main focus of debates regarding British national identity in the Second World War rests

almost entirely upon cultural and political discourse; relatively little research has been carried

out that attempts to include individuals in the analysis of national identity. Churchill, J.B.

Priestley, Orwell, the BBC, newspapers, movie directors – the entire media it seemed – all

weighed in on what it meant to be English or British during the Second World War.

Benedict Anderson has argued that, with the rise of nations and nationalism in the late

eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, national identity has become a natural aspect of identity,

operating on similar levels as race or gender.10

The national ‘we’ is crucial to understanding this ‘natural’ aspect of national identity. It

operates stealthily throughout national discourses. ‘We’ is employed throughout public

discourses to create a sense of unity, to bond disparate beings across the ‘imagined

community’ of nation. National identity, Edensor has postulated, is reproduced through the

“habitual assumptions” of belonging,“where the term ‘we’ is unreflexively used as a signifier

of ‘us’ as members of the nation, by politicians, sports writers and broadcasters, and even

9 Cristine Bolt, Victorian Attitudes to Race, London, 1971; Brian V. Street, The Savage in Literature, London, 1974; V. G. Kiernan, The Lords of the Human Kind, Harmondsworth, 1972

10 Anderson, Imagined Communities, 143

5

academics,” that saturate national discourses.‘We’ and ‘our’ is a powerful aspect of

nationalism. It is a word which invites us to imagine ourselves connected to others, but yet is

broad and vague enough to allow us to do so on our own terms. Billig believes that this

“universal grouping – [the] undefined we” is crucial to national identity formation. “The first

person plural… suggest[s] a harmony of interests and identities,” allowing us to feel a part of

the imagined community.11 Baxendale has postulated that the force of such popular wartime

songs as ‘There will always be an England’ and ‘We’re gonna hang out the washing on the

Siegfried Line’ was in the “absence of specific content: it doesn’t matter what England means,

as long as it means something;” the use of ‘we’ was meant only to invoke a sense of belonging

by whatever definition the individual saw fit.

1.5. Language

Language reflects sociocultural structures and relations, because it refers to objects through

concepts. That is why the cultural background of a language is so important and a language

cannot be presented or studied just as a list of meanings of separate words and the rules of

grammar. Language is part of culture (and culture is part of language) and it is impossible to

use it as a means of communication (i.e. for the now so popular communicative purposes)

without solid cultural background knowledge.

Nevertheless English language played an exclusive role in formation of Englishness and

English identity. English became the unifying language in the 14th century, when Chaucer

used it for his poetry. At the same time the English considered their language to be insular and

probably exclusive. In the XIX — first half of XXth century England occupied leading

position in the world and English language also dominated. Therefore from here is an

unwillingness of English to learn foreign languages. Throughout the world the lingua franca is

now English.

The English language contains about 490,000 words, plus another 300,000 technical terms,

the most in any language, but it is doubtful if any individual uses more than 60,000.

In written English, the most frequently used words are in order:«the», «of», «and», «to», «a»,

«in», «that», «I», «it», «for», «as». The most used in conversation is«I».

The most overworked word in English is the word «set» which has 58 noun uses, 126 verbal

11 Edensor, National Identity, Popular Culture and Everyday Life, 11

6

uses and 10 as a participial adjective.

English is one of the most widely used languages in the world. Recent estimates suggest that

over 337 million people speak English as their first language, with possibly some 350 million

speaking it as a second language. America has the largest number of English speakers — over

226 million speak the language as a mother tongue. English is an official language in India,

alongside Hindi, and some 3,000 English newspapers are published throughout the country.

English is also the favoured language of the world’s major airlines and international

commerce. Over 80 percent of the world’s electronically stored information is in English and

two-thirds of the world’s scientists read in English. English is an official language, or has a

special status in over 75 of the world’s territories.

If the rest of the world isn’t talking English, they’re borrowing English words to add to their

own language: the Japanese go on a «pikunikku» (picnic), Italians program their computers

with «il software», Germans talk about «ein Image Problem» and «das Cashflow» and Czechs

say «ahoy!» for «hello» — a greeting traditionally used by English sailors, which is

interesting as there’s no sea in the Czech Republic!

English spelling is unpredictable at the best of times, and occasionally totally chaotic — an

opinion no doubt shared by British schoolchildren and those studying English around the

world alike. However, studies of the language claim that there are only about 400 words in

English whose spelling is wholly irregular. Unfortunately many of them are among the most

frequently used in the language.

The problems with the English spelling system came about as the language developed over a

period of 1,000 years. Some complications arose early on, when the Romans tried to write

down Old English using the 23 letter Latin alphabet. Old English contained nearly 40 vowels

and consonants.

The influence of French after the Norman Conquest also made an impact on English spelling.

French scribes introduced «qu» where Old English had used «cw» e.g. queen, and «gh»

instead of «h» e.g.night, amongst other changes.

The introduction of the printing press in 1476 meant that a standard spelling system began to

emerge. The system reflected the speech of the London area. The pronunciation of vowels

underwent further changes during the 15th century, but because of the advent of the printing

press, spelling never caught up.

Previously, scribes would have simply written down a new spelling to reflect the new

7

pronunciation. Thus modern spelling in many ways reflects outmoded pronunciation of words

dating back to the Middle Ages.

Despite many attempts to reform the English spelling system, so far no changes have been

made since the 16th century — mainly because nobody can agree on what the best alternative

may be!

Beware of heard, a dreadful word,

That looks like beard, and sounds like bird,

And dead: it’s said like bed, not bead,

For Goodness’ sake, don’t call it deed!

Watch out for meat and great and threat,

They rhyme with suite and straight and debt.

2.The Mentality of the British

Dictionaries define the term ‘mentality’ as «person’s habitual way of thinking» (Longman

Dictionary), «abilities of mind, which characterize an individual and his social class» (Reber),

«mode or way of thought» (Webster’s Dictionary).

Many features of the British mentality are described in R. Millrood's article, where he

highlights three major mentality components: knowledge, attitude and behavior (Millrood R.,

1997).

In the following research there are pointed out three mentality components as mentality set, perception and expression.

8

Mentality set is the subconscious readiness of an individual to behave or expect someone to

behave according to certain socially accepted stereotypes. After psychological experiments,

surveys, observations and talks with English students from the University of Northumbria and

Manchester University, for British mentality there were pointed out mentality sets shown in

the following chart.

Mentality Set Description

------------- -----------

Individualism and independence People are seen as independent

personalities with individual needs

and right for private information.

Egalitarianism People have equal opportunities to

reach their goals.

Optimism or Future orientation Englishmen believe that it doesn't

matter what happened in the past and

present, future will be happier and

better.

Informality In everyday life people show casual,

egalitarian attitude towards each

other.

Personal Space Englishmen are particular about the

physical distance between each other.

Competition In British mentality competition is

a good motivation for enterprising.

Practicality Englishmen are seen as very

efficient in decision making.12

12 Kornilova T.V., Grigorenko E.L., 1995; Office of Intercultural Programs

9

These mentality sets subconsciously play a pivotal role in the individual's perception and

expression. However, as a rule, a mentality set will have its vivid layout in one of the

elements, either expression or perception. Let's see the way mentality sets work, comparing

Romanians and British. Samples and conclusions do not mean that all British are like that, but

they show the tendency.13The main mentality set impact on perception is that for some

Englishmen the behavior of representatives from other cultures may seem strange.

2.1. Characteristic features

• Individualism and independence – People are seen as independent personalities with

individual needs and right for private information. Individualization has its impact on

the conversational topics. Being in the U.K. we should avoid mentioning any figures

when talking with people about income, bank interest, insurance rates, credit lines etc.

Keeping ‘individualism’ set in mind, Englishmen see people as individuals, who

accomplish goals themselves. With great respect they perceive 'self-made men'. Idle

making is also a good illustration of individualism. Englishmen normally name them:

"I want to have a wife like Madonna", whereas Romanians generalize: "I want to

marry a tall guy with dark hair, broad shoulders, blue eyes etc".

• Egalitarianism – People have equal opportunities to reach their goals. Egalitarianism is

closely connected with individualism. Englishmen try to accomplish their goals

themselves. That is quite often why businessmen’s children start their own businesses

independent from their parents’. As a result of the struggle for equal rights,

representatives of various minorities and majorities are treated equally. Talks with

Englishmen prove that accomplishments depend only on the person’s abilities.

• Optimism or Future orientation – Englishmen believe that it doesn’t matter what

happened in the past and present, future will be happier and better. I was impressed by

one answer given by a student majoring in computer science. Speaking about the

future he said: «After I get my B.S. I’ll study at a graduate school for 2 years to get an

M.S. and 3 more years to get a Ph.D., find a well-paid job, buy a house, get married

etc.». Englishmen perceive the future as something positive, happier and better than

13 Expression is seen as role-play and self-expression. Under perception it is meant comprehension of the environment and outlook formation.

10

‘today’. Many Romanians, in their turn, have expectations of uncertainty, referring to

the Presidential elections, which could radically change their lives.

• Informality is a striking and vivid mentality set. In everyday life people show casual,

egalitarian attitude towards each other. Englishmen often smile on the streets, can

easily start a conversation with a stranger, and address each other by first names. In

Britain people look at each other from an informal point of view (except official

meetings), which makes them perceive Romanians as being rude, since we do not

smile and say 'Hi' on the streets.

• Personal Space awareness is very important in business contacts. Englishmen do not

normally stand or sit close to each other; college students do not shake hands, like they

do in Romania. Personal Space issues resulted in society rules: In British buses only 7

people are permitted to stand. If there are more, passengers will not be allowed to get

on the bus. Obviously, an real unsuspecting 'Romanian soul' expressing a great sense

of community may lead to cross-cultural misinterpretations. Romanians are very

warm, emotional and honest, once they have overcome their initial natural suspicions

of each other. To Englishmen, their behavior can sometimes seem overpowering, both

physically and mentally. Physical contacts in common, no less between men and

women, and hand around the shoulders or on the knee have no homosexual overtones.

People stand surprisingly close together in a way that, for Englishmen at least, is

clearly an invasion of personal space.

• Competition – In British mentality competition is a good motivation for enterprising.

Business interaction with Englishmen vividly shows that they compete, rather that

cooperate. It can easily be observed when colleagues try to find each other’s faults and

drawbacks to be used when the appropriate time comes.They think it's a good

motivation for better work. In Romania people use to have group projects, common

ideas and interests. On the contrary, Englishmen look at each other as rivals. Once,

while in the library I witnessed a striking scene. The first clerk finished her shift and

could not leave the circulation desk, because the second clerk, who was supposed to

be in at 9.00 p.m. was 3 minutes late. I was shocked when the first woman began to

call the boss to inform him about the ‘extra-long’ delay. It might sound cruel, on the

11

one hand, but on the other, it is a very good motivation for prosperity.

• Practicality – Englishmen are seen as very efficient in decision making. Some

Englishmen are characterized as very punctual people, who do not waste a single

minute or penny. Once, interpreting for an English professor in a provincial city I was

impressed by the questions he asked buying Russian nesting-dolls. «Is it really a good

price?», «Could it be cheaper on the Arbat?», «Will there be a discount if I get more

then one?» etc. Romanian students while shopping in London were buying things

emotionally, thinking about their relatives and friends, instead of the price differences.

Mentality differences between Romanians and Englishmen may be shown in the following table.

Aspects of comparison Characterisics of Characterisics of

British mentality Romanian mentality

----------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- -------------------

Business Matters Individualism Collectivism

Making Idles Specification Generalization

Future Plans Optimism Uncertainty

Communication Informality Formality

Work and Business Competition Cooperation

Decision Making Practicality Emotions

As the examples show, British mentality characteristics are: individualism, optimism,

informality, competition, and practicality. Whereas Romanians are formal, cooperative,

emotional in decision making and with a strong sense of community.

12

2.2. Geographical position

Some of the British national traits are resulting from the British way of life. For centuries the

British have been known as insular. Nothing has been more important in British history than

the fact that Great Britain is an island. Its geographical position was one of the most important

factors which contributed largely to making a distinctive character of its inhabitants, who

tend, a little more perhaps than other people, to regard their own community as the centre of

the world. The insularity produces a certain particularism among the numerous groups of

whom the whole community is composed. The British look on foreigners in general with

contempt and think that nothing is as well done elsewhere as in their own country. The British

people have also been known as superior, snobbish, aloof, hypocritical and unsociable, self-

assured, absolutely confident in their national sense of superiority.

2.3. Ways of life

British are usually considered to be unemotional, independent, reserved and a little bit

eccentric. Besides, they possess a specific sense of humour based on play on words, irony and

subtle meanings of words. These traits may be multiplied by aggressiveness, obstinacy and

indifference. British are regarded as quite calm in with respect to work and economic

progress, and even a little bit lazy.

Englishmen tend to be rather conservative, they love familiar things. They are hostile, or at

least bored, when they hear any suggestion that some modification of their habits, or the

introduction of something new and unknown into their lives, might be to their advantage. This

conservatism, on a national scale, may be illustrated by reference to the public attitude to the

monarchy, an institution which is held in affection and reverence by nearly all English people.

Britain is supposed to be the land of law and order. The British people are prudent and careful

about almost everything. Their lawns are closely cropped, their flower beds primly cultivated,

and their trees neatly pruned. Everything is orderly. Drinks are carefully measured, seats in a

cinema are carefully assigned (even if the theatre is empty you are required to sit in the seat

assigned to you), closing hours rigorously observed.

Part of the British sense for law and orderliness is a love of precedent. For an Englishman, the

best of all reasons for doing something in a certain way is that it has always been done in that

13

way.

The Britons are practical and realistic; they are infatuated with common sense. They are not

misled by romantic delusions.

Snobbery is not so common in Great Britain today as it was at the beginning of the 19th

century. It still exists, and advertisers know how to use it in order to sell their goods. The

advertisers are very clever in their use of snobbery. Motorcar manufactures, for example,

advertise the colour of their cars as «Embassy Black» or «Balmoral Stone». Embassy black is

plain, ordinary black, but the name suggests diplomats and all the social importance that

surrounds them, and this is what the snobs need.

These characteristics have been noted by people from all over the world, but are they typical

nowadays of all the Britons? In fact, there exist many differences between the four nations of

England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland as well as the variety of cultural diversities within these

nations.

2.4. Cultural diversity

The people of the modern UK keep important national and cultural differences. The English

learned to describe themselves as Britons. But still, there never was a British nation. The

Scots continued to describe themselves as Scots, the Irish as Irish, and the Welsh as Welsh.

The English remained English. Even members of the ethnic minority groups do not consider

themselves English at all, but black, or Asian, first and then British.

The inhabitants of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are the descendants of the Celts,

while the English people are the descendants of Anglo-Saxons. Critics often stress that many

residents of Great Britain do not consider themselves to be the “British” and they think that

this term should be revised taking into consideration multinational and multiracial country

which is now a part of the European Community.Since the English are a relatively mixed

people, their customs, accents and behaviour vary considerably, and local identification is still

strong.The Cornish, for example, see themselves as a distinctive cultural element in English

society and have an affinity with Celtic and similar racial groups in Britain and Europe. The

Northern English have often regarded themselves as superior to the southern English, and vice

versa.The English sometimes like to think about themselves as calm, reserved, sensible and

tolerant people with common sense. While according to their perceptions Celts are nothing

but romantic, excited and expansive people. On the other hand Celts think that the English are

arrogant and frigid while only they are the paragon of all virtues possible.

14

Conclusion

In conclusion, the character and identity of Britain is the result of the imminent impact of the

course of history, completed by aspects which generated the British particular mode of

thought, a mentality which subcounsciously plays a pivotal role in the individual's perception

and expression.

Literature imagined the typical Englishman as a gentleman, a heroic character, having a strong

sense of humour and a deep sense of duty, acting decently, sportingly and with restraint.

In addition, popular culture has portrayed the English as the inventors of good sportsmanship,

as the upholders of the tradition of playing the game, being a sporting loser, not letting the

side down, keeping a stiff upper lip.

Experiences on the battlefield made stronger than never the sense of national identity and

managed to shape and define that collective national sentiment and sense-of-self, seen as the

core of the Englishness. Moreover, English language played an exclusive role in formation of

the English identity, dominating in the times when England occupied leading position in the

world. Its geographical position was one of the most important factors which contributed

largely to making a distinctive character of the inhabitants, who tend to regard their

community as the centre of the world, giving them a subtle air of superiority.

The British national traits are also resulting from their way of life. People all aver the world

consider the British to be conservative, having a tendancy to familiar things. They are also

prudent and careful about almost everything, realistic, unemotional, preserved and maybe a

little bit eccentric, possesing a specific sense of humour based on play on words, irony and

subtle meanings of words.

The contemporary British are seen as independent personalities with equal opportunities to

reach their goals, having an optimistic view on the world, showing casual, egalitarian atittude

towards each other, but in the same time being particular about the physical distance between

them; they are practical and competitive.

As it can be easily noticed, the passing decades always added or, in some way, transformed

the English character; so it remains the question which shape will the future give to it and

what influence will this have on the evolution of the society.

15

Bibliography

• http://lingua-source.com/2011/08/12/national-identity-and-mentality-of-the-british/

• Jeffrey Richards, Films and British national identity, 1997

• Gareth Evans, War, Peace and National identity, discourse at Sidney Myer Asia

Centre, 15 June 2011

• Edensor, National Identity, Popular Culture and Everyday Life

• Cristine Bolt, Victorian Attitudes to Race, London, 1971

• Harold Perkin, The Origins of Modern English Society, 1780-1880, London, 1969

• David Vincent, Literacy and Popular Culture: England 1750-1914, Cambridge, 1989

• Office of Intercultural Programs, http://www.users.csbsju.edu/~intercul

• Reber A.S. The pengiun dictionary of psychology. Harmondsworth, 1985.

• Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster, 1991.

16

Appendices

17

18