This section explores the reflections of participants in relation to both their children’s futures and their lessons learnt from the past. It highlights how fulfilment, success and ontological security are characterised through relationships with others and maintaining respectability, rather than employment or income. When I asked Tanya what her hopes were for her three sons’ futures, the focus was on settling down and being a helping hand in the community:
I just want them to grow up and be happy [LF: yeah] innit you know, meet someone nice, get married [LF: yeah] manage to buy a house *laughs* [LF: yeah don’t leave it late like I have] don’t ask me for the money *laughs* um, just be nice people isn’t it? [LF: yeah, yeah] if they can carrying on with the scouting or something like that [LF: yeah, that’s got a lot] yeah they’ve probably seen us [LF: yeah] as I say, helping with the church, helping with the scouts [LF: yeah] helping with anything else that anyone asks you know [LF: yeah] so you know, yeah, I, I’ve always said that if you don’t want to go to university that’s fine [LF: yeah], cos obviously we didn’t and we’ve done alright [LF: mm] but we’ll support you.
Two narratives are drawn upon here, the dominant coupledom narrative and the property ladder narrative, as Tanya described her hopes for her sons to “meet someone nice, get married, manage to buy a house” (Taylor 2010). There is a strong emphasis on ‘helping’ others, again constructing a relational sociality where value is created through your ties to others (Skeggs 2005). Tanya does not place importance on going to university as she points out that both her and her husband have done well despite not attending university, before concluding offering her ongoing parental support. Kinship, support, and helping others were therefore constructed by Tanya as her main aspirations for her children.
After hearing about Alex’s difficult experiences in education, I was interested to know what her aspirations for her young daughter would be, particularly as Alex found both school and university difficult to adjust to:
LF: Do you want her to do the, be more applied at school than you were with your A-levels? *laughs*
Alex: Not really, it’s not important to me [LF: yeah] like, what’s important to me is that she learns like she, I want her to be, I want her to be able to think critically, and to wanna learn, like want to learn about stuff [LF: yeah], so if she doesn’t engage with school that’s not, I wouldn’t care as long as she was engaging with some kind of learning activity [LF: yeah], um, what I would be worried about is if she wasn’t engaged in school but wasn’t engaged in any other type of learning activity as well [LF: mmm, yeah, yeah] so that would be my only worry, but I, I don’t care if she doesn’t get GCSEs or, I mean I, like, I will encourage her to do that [LF: mhm] with um, and support her to do that I won’t be like you don’t need them or anything like that [LF: *laughs*] cos I realise that like the more pieces of qualification papers you’ve got, the more doors open for you [LF: yeah] like, like I know she’s gotta have English and Maths GCSE at a basic level but it’s not, academic achievement is not, the highest on my list [LF: yeah, yeah] of the things that I want for her, but at the same time I do understand that she does live in this society where it, a lot of importance is placed on that [LF: mm, yeah]
Alex constructed academic achievement for her daughter as a low priority, “not the highest on my list”, while equally recognising that “the more pieces of qualification papers you’ve got”, the more opportunities will be “available”. Alex’s account could be read as a rejection of the dominant social mobility discourse, which focuses on investing in education as the key to success, trying instead to encourage the more intrinsic value of education (Loveday 2015; Bathmaker et al 2016). However, Alex recognised the societal importance placed on this individualised, social mobility
discourse. This suggests that this discourse is pervasive, even when people are actively trying to reject it. For some, such as Lisa whose narrative I explored earlier, this discourse is not even accessible. For others, like Tanya, the discourse just simply is not desirable. All parents wanted the best for their children and for their children to be happy, and for most, this did not necessarily require high academic performance or university education (Gillies 2005; Chapman 2018). As Pearce (2011, p.8) contends:
People aspire to more than just the chance to get their child off to university and up the social ladder: they are interested in their standard of living, quality of life and the strength of their social bonds.
When reflecting on their lives, many residents drew on classed and gendered discourses of ‘fulfilment’ (Casey 2008). Often working-class ‘success’ and ‘fulfilment’ is focused around being ontologically secure, having enough, and being ‘okay’ both materially and emotionally (Walkerdine et al 2001; Casey 2008). As Chapman (2018) notes, many people are happy to remain in their class of origin providing their fundamental aspirations are met, and for many, particularly women, these aspirations were to provide a stable home for the family with food on the table and clothes on their backs. As with the working-class women in Casey’s (2008) research, fulfilment was often the “mundane desire to do working-class and woman more effectively”, and to ensure everyday struggles over money were eased. There was pride in the fact that fulfilment was decoupled from wealth and occupation. This was demonstrated through Diane’s (70s) reflections on her part-time job as a lunchtime supervisor/dinner lady in a local school:
I must admit, it was only an hour and a quarter [LF: yeah] a day, but it was, one of the most happiest six years [LF: really? *laughs*] we had a ball up there!
Often participants, in an unprompted manner, provided some conclusions to their narratives through reflecting and ascertaining their overall experience of living in Hiraeth. Mary (80s) and her son Carwyn reflected upon their lives and their fulfilment:
Mary: …we had a very happy life there [LF: mm] you know and um
Carwyn: Yeah it’s been independent [Mary: yeah] of money hasn’t it? Happiness [M: yeah] yeah
Mary: It is yeah
This sentiment of being happy regardless of how much money you have featured in several participants’ narratives. Reay (2013) argues that the crude desire for money and power only exist among the few, and the desire for money and power certainly was not evident amongst participants. Reay (2013) suggests that we should value and strengthen working-class communities rather than push for social mobility ‘out’ of your class. It is clear from these reflections that there is pride in being working-class and also a sense of mundanity in what constitutes a fulfilled, valuable life (Casey 2008). Despite the rhetoric of meritocracy and social mobility being focused on moving ‘upwards’ in relation to occupation, class and income, this
does not equate to being happier and more fulfilled (Littler 2018). For many participants, as long as you are able to provide a secure home for your family and the necessities such as food and clothes, this was all that was needed for fulfilment42. This value appeared to be shared across
generations, for example, in the narratives of Rosemary (70s) and her daughter Kathryn (40s), who were interviewed separately on different days in different locations:
Rosemary: Yes, but at the same time don’t make money the only thing, be happy, be happy LF: Yeah exactly, that’s the thing, I’m not really in it for that so
Rosemary: No, I mean, it’s nice to be able to buy clothes that you want and eat properly and all that kind of thing [LF: yeah] but um, big bank accounts are, are, don’t make you happy
***
Kathryn: No, none of us need to be rich, you just need to be able to keep a roof over your head
LF: Yeah, and just, have some enjoyment
Kathryn: And people do get carried away with wanting to be rich, I’ve always been the same, as long as I earn enough, to feed myself and clothe my kids that was [LF: mm] just as well really, in nursing *laughs* you’re never gunna be rich! [LF: no]
This ‘fulfilment’ discourse was constructed in contrast to the individualised social mobility and self-improvement discourse. There was much more of a focus on relationality, providing for others, and fundamentally a sense of ontological security, something which is often unachievable in an ever-changing ‘entrepreneur of the self’ model (Walkerdine 2003; Skeggs 2011). Income and occupation (and the gaining of appropriate capitals which go along with this) were therefore not the driver of fulfilment or success for some residents within the working-class community of Hiraeth.
This section explored residents’ narratives of education, employment and life reflections to demonstrate their response to individualistic and competitive social mobility/self-improvement discourses (such as those espoused by Communities First). Some of the residents constructed themselves as ‘other’, distancing themselves from the education system, unable or unwilling to ‘invest’ in the dominant social mobility discourse as it is not for ‘people like them’. Higher education was presented as an unaffordable middle-class luxury, and the importance of remaining true to your class roots was emphasised. Temporal reflections from the past and for the future highlighted a common theme underpinning narratives, what I called a working-class discourse of fulfilment. This entailed being able to look after your family and being secure in
42 I am aware that for many working-class families, this aspiration is a very difficult struggle, especially in unregulated private renting markets and the current crisis in the availability of social housing (see Minton 2017 for more). Please see Chapter Four, section 4.4 for a justification as to why the majority of my participants were homeowners but who I would still consider being working-class.
your home, without an emphasis on wealth, income, and employment status. I argued that the dominant social mobility discourse was not accessible and/or was rejected by participants, and that a relational sociality centred on kinship ties and support was dominant. Next, I will draw together the sections of this chapter to discuss more broadly what these findings mean in relation to understandings of social mobility.