What social hierarchies do we see in the opening chapters of the novel? Are they presented as rational, arbitrary, common sense? Is there a connection between the youth hierarchies and the class system in Black Swan Green?
11 thoughts on “discussion question #3”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
On page 5, Jason is talking about nicknames. He describes nicknames as being a hierarchy based on popularity and/or respect. He says, “It’s all ranks, being a boy, like the army” (5). He equates their hierarchy to the hierarchy of the army. It is presented as common sense the way that Jason introduces because he doesn’t explain why a child is assigned to a rank besides the top rank kids being popular, so the narrator assumes the reader is following because it is common sense to him, therefore it is common sense to us. In regards to the class system, those who are considered on top of the hierarchy (the posh) gain the most respect, while those who are at the bottom (the poor, and disenfranchised) have “piss-take nicknames.”
I also found this very interesting, specifically the casual military and social class metaphors that he uses. It really allows us as readers to get equipped to keep historical context in mind when listening to Jason describe his world.
I agree with Nix Theodorou’s take on that the narrator assumes we understand him therefore he doesn’t explain it any further. It makes sense as knowing that the popular kids are obviously going to be the highest ranked with the best nicknames, then that means the less popular kids will get the worst nicknames. For example, Jason’s friend Moran is called “Moron” for no reason other than his actual name closely resembling the word. Jason has many different nicknames, one for each aspect of himself such as Hangman when he stammers and Maggot when he feels worthless. All things considered, like Nix says, there is a hierarchy of names, these names represent one’s place in the social world
In the opening chapters of the novel, we see a social hierarchy amongst the boys. As Jason says, “It’s all ranks, being a boy, like the army” (5). These ranks determine how you address other boys and how you are addressed by them. And they are presented as common sense as Jason describes how the ranking works. Jason also makes note of gender saying girls are more civilized. So it seems that the hierarchy only applies to the boys. There’s also the idea that boys who are feminine are gay, making those who don’t follow the status quo are othered. Jason also points out that a kid from Kingfisher Meadows, like himself, cannot afford to go against those in a higher rank, suggesting there is a class difference between the boys.
I agree with Brianna, that Jason only sees the social hierarchy with the boys. Since the girls don’t have the hierarchy and don’t scrap as often, Jason sees girls as more civilized. He mentions how if they ever knew that he was published in the magazine they would gouge him to death before spray painting on his gravestone. He sees girls as more civilized and wishes that the boys had no name system like the girls, however in order to protect himself from retaliation of the system he won’t act against it.
The social hierarchies that are present in this book are those of how people are addressed. For instance, those of a higher stature are called by their first names, those of a middle ranking are called by their last names and the rejects have a nickname going on. I would say that they are rational, as one kid earned his nickname “squelch” for showing his pubic hair which had a nappy nature to it and thus he earned his nickname. There is no clear connection to the youth hierarchies and class system because as it seems Jason comes from a wealthy family and has a middle rank name.
I agree with Brianna about how the hierarchies seem to only apply to men from Jason’s perspective, especially since he talks about his sister as if no rules apply to her. Jason sees her sister as someone who can always find her way with words and has more freedom in terms of going out, pocket money etc.
The social hierarchy outlined in the opening, as well as above, seems to be based on rank distinctions founded on individual attributes and affiliation. Jason’s milieu assigns different kinds of names to individuals based on their popularity, because, as Jason puts it, “name’s aren’t just names” (Mitchell, 5). Names in this context serve as markers that are not arbitrary, but, instead, describe something inherently fair in terms of the distribution of respect and power each individual receives. This difference is accepted as a gendered fact of life, as “it’s all ranks, being a boy, like the army” (5).
While those at the top of the pinnacle of popularity and masculinity are seen as individuals deserving of the utmost respect as they are called by their first name, the ranks below this group are dehumanized in some form. The subordinate classes are described in a way that suggests that they are respectable objects, respectable groups of objects, or deplorable people whose usefulness is only to reinforce a hierarchy through fear. Curiously, if this hierarchy of names were to be questioned or broken by a group member with relative power, then it appears it would likely risk one’s allocation of respect. When Jason says, “it’d damage my own standing” if he were to call “Moron” the more respectful name “Dean” in front of the group, this seems to imply that the true nature of this ranking system is in part based on some arbitrary measurement of some specific kind of strength for some vague goal as well as for group cohesion. The cement of this unity, however, is contingent upon an acceptance of some opaque and militaristic concept of being male, which is implicitly defined as objectifying people for resources. This pattern is echoed later in the story as Jason’s father’s transactional relationship with women is revealed, and when Margaret Thatcher made explicit pronouncements to children to justify war in terms of youth hierarchy and youth justice found in Jason’s social world (91). However, it does appear the character, Jason, through commenting on the inconsistencies he observes in his own experience of having different interests, as well as to his seeming ignorance to belonging to a higher class, suggests that both the ideology of individual identity in Jason’s own youth society and Thatcher’s society at large is an illusion and a ruse for group identity and exploitation.
We see arbitrary social hierarchies based on the naming system the children in the book use. These names are based on perceptions gleaned upon the kids based on things outside of their control (name rhyming with moron, etc) and to which they don’t have have choice. These parallels to capitalism (a lot also shown in chapter 2) are furthered by the sports analogy used through the British Bulldog game, such as when Jason talks about how the “unimportant kids” put at either end of the lake (page 7), “sports are really about humiliating your enemies” (page 8), and how British Bulldog “forces you to be a traitor” (page 8). These hierarchies are further expanded upon in Chapter 3, where Hugo very obviously playing the part of ringer against Jason in the dart bet to con Jason out of money, and when Hugo steals the cigs and candy despite being able to afford the purchases, saying that plebes call cigs “fags”, says sports are about winning, and the “not today” monologue.
Masculinity is also an important part of the social hierarchy. Jason hides the fact that he won a poetry prize from his cohorts, as well as says “books’re gay.” Jason also states “wish i’d been born a girl, sometimes,” and says girls don’t do the naming structure much, except Dawn, as she’s “a boy gone wrong in some experiment.”
Hugo talks about LotR by saying “they shouldn’t have let that homoerotic porn near children.” Hugo also bullies Nigel to the point of tears and then uses Nigel’s reaction against him when their mother comes asking questions.
Jason acquiescence to Hugo’s prodding him to smoke (while noting earlier how a couple of other boys also began smoking) in attempt to impress hyper capitalist/masculine Hugo is another example of masculinity being a large part of the hierarchies.
The hierarchy in the first couple of chapters manifests itself in a nickname system that is both explained ti the reader and somewhat left to the imagination. Cool kids are referred to with first names, slightly less popular get “sort of respectful nicknames” (pg 5) derived from their first names, eve more less popular get last names privileges, and those at the bottom get tasteless puns as nicknames. Like any of my classmates have mentioned, the decision on who gets what class of name is arbitrary at best and appears to be based on some convoluted popularity system as well as a sort of general consensus. Additionally, Jason mentions that the girls “don’t do this much” and that he wishes he had “been born a girl” (pg 5), suggesting that he doesn’t enjoy this system and would prefer to interact the way girls did. It’s both class defined and gendered which draws an interesting parallel to the way society as a whole operates outside of a school setting.
The social hierarchy that we see in the opening chapters would be how the boys refer to each other. The popular boys are called by their first names, then the next set of boys who are a bit popular are called by a respectful nickname, then there are the ones who are called by their last names, and last, in the hierarchy, there are those who are called by an insulting nickname. Jason also talks about how addressing Moron as “Dean” in front of other people could hurt his own standing in the system. Jason seems to find the system arbitrary but still abides by it because not doing so would hurt his own standing in the system. He abides by the system by only calling Moron by his actual name when they are alone. But he finds the system arbitrary because when he speaks about the girls he points out how they don’t have this system of name-calling and how he sometimes wishes he had been born a girl because they are usually more civilized. He’s inferring that he clearly disagrees or doesn’t like the system but saying that could hurt him, he would get “Bumhole Plummer” written across his locker. Speaking out against the youth hierarchy of names warrants retaliation, and the retaliation is most likely coming from the top of the hierarchy. The youth hierarch can be connected back to the class system in that those who sit at the top of the hierarch as in the upper class or in the youth system the “popular kids” get the moot respect while the lower you go in the hierarchy respect is lost until you get to bottom of the hierarchy with the poor or the kids with the insulting nicknames.