Class Rule: The Hegemonic Role of the Royal Dockyard Schools, 1840–1914

Casey, Neil

doi:10.4324/9781315862569-4

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At Chatham Dockyard, like many other industries, these skills were often laced with classed and gendered ideals. The social aspect of Dockyard training is well accounted for, as highly masculine (Mah ) and rigorously disciplined (Casey ). Through this education, a community was reinforced that reproduced a similar masculine character: ‘with strong intergenerational traditions of sons following fathers onto the docks’ (Mah : 9).…”

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the culture to remain, it had to impose standards of behaviour. This necessarily required a morality to form; how to perform this identity properly (Casey ).…”

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Equally, it developed a social character. By engaging with this moral economy and community, and performing the correct identity, the worker could become a member of a social sphere that provided value through work (see Casey ; Roberts ). Apprenticeships are an important space where identities and value are made and remade.…”

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Industrial apprenticeships were once important avenues for young working‐class men to find a career and learn an identity shaped by craft, class and masculinity. They were not just technical educations, they were social (Casey ; Roberts ; Vickerstaff , ). The Medway towns of Kent in the south‐east of England, and particularly the Royal Dockyard in Chatham, were once nationally renowned for the quality of their government‐funded industrial apprenticeships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Dirty work: cultural iconography and working‐class pride in industrial apprenticeships

Pleasant

2019

British Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the seemingly routine and the everyday, lie layers of cultural and social symbolism. So it is with dirt. This article examines the social and cultural roles of dirt within socialization practices in working‐class industrial and ex‐industrial communities. Drawn from oral history accounts with 46 former and current engineering apprentices, the discussion demonstrates dirt as a concept and a practicality, and how the idea of ‘getting dirty’ provided a cultural imagery used to renegotiate moral boundaries that devalue working class, masculine experiences and identities. Building on from the work of Skeggs (1997, 2004, 2011), it demonstrates the lived experience of value within the industrial workplace past and present. Through dirt, the role of cultural artefacts and iconography within working‐class experience and workplace training is explored. Additionally, the role of a cultural icon like dirt in the intergenerational dialogues of workplace communities is given new attention. In doing so the article argues that while after decades of underinvestment in apprenticeships as a model for training in the UK, a recent resurgence in interest can go some way in overcoming the long‐term effects of the loss of large‐scale industrial work. However, the cultures of work attached to the apprenticeships of the past are, within deindustrialization, much more complicated to develop or recreate.

show abstract

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the culture to remain, it had to impose standards of behaviour. This necessarily required a morality to form; how to perform this identity properly (Casey ).…”

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Class Community and Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations