Prince Harry,
who is reported to have called for bringing back "National Service",
is one of The Royals in more ways than one.
The important one is that his regiment is The Blues and Royals created
in 1969 by merging The Blues of the Household Brigade with The Royal Dragoons
(not to be confused with the Royal Dragoon Guards).
The Royal
Dragoons was a regiment I was acquainted with and once played cricket against
them. We won, partly because their best
batsman, their Adjutant, had to retire injured when caught where it hurt by a
vicious in-swinger.
In those days upper
class chaps often did not wear "boxes" to protect their genitals
relying on the sporting instincts of opponents.
Sadly the bowler in question suffered a deficit in that instinct having
learned the game in local leagues playing on public parks where bets were involved
as well as other rivalries.
I name no
names. Before anyone thinks about
National Service now it might be useful to look back at what it was. As you now have to be 70 or more to have done
it in the mid 20th Century it might be worth realising at what the intakes were
like then in comparison with the youth of today.
You became
liable for National Service at 18, but it might be deferred if you went for
some forms of higher education or were in an apprenticeship in various trades
etc. For some it was an awkward
choice. Did you get it over first or
wait until later, but then have a two year hiatus in career and life?
Most men went
in at 18. As the school leaving age was
then the end of the term in which you became 15, typically the great majority
had worked in ordinary jobs. In the
grammar schools then, many left at 16, again to take up jobs and a minority
went into the sixth forms.
In short the
majority of recruits had already had the discipline and experience of real work
and usually for longer hours than today in highly structured workplaces. Moreover, among that majority were very many
in fact who had not been to a secondary school at all, but had attended all age
Elementary Schools.
So National
Service in general was not the first experience of strict discipline in their
lives. School discipline was a lot more
physical and fiercer and for the majority who had been in work they had been
obliged to knuckle down to do what they were told to do. Broadly this was a world away from present
conditions. The Armed Services simply
carried the discipline etc. thing further.
A more
difficult area is the mind world of that period. We need to very wary of what is usually
suggested as the norm on the basis of some of the legacy media from that
period. All teenagers were not rock and
rollers, in fact many regarded those that were as prats suckered by crap films
and other noisy Hollywood stuff.
What was
common at the time among all classes was the business of ballroom dancing, for most
a necessary social skill. Many took
lessons others learned from friends etc.
On TV now it may look very old fashioned but that in turn
had its disciplines.
Despite all
this, many National Servicemen did not get on with the services, counting the
days, learning how to avoid work, turning bolshie and become more questioning
of authority. One skilled worker friend
of mine did his time working in a stores, picture above, and regarded it as a gross waste
of time.
But
experiences did vary. There was
education provided in the services which helped many. Some had interesting and worthwhile work or
opportunities. Some did not, spending
their time on routine work of limited scope.
Some, including men who saw active service came out damaged in one way
or another. It was a lottery.
National
Service brought them into contact with the upper class in the shape of some of
the officers and often they did not like what they saw. But there was worse to come. When National Service ended and major
reductions occurred in the services it impacted greatly on the officer classes.
The public
schools that had sent so many into Empire and the services for decades found
that their alumni had to look for other kinds of work. One effect therefore was to redirect hordes
of public school men into management and supervision in the public and private
sector, very often into "personnel" and such.
There the
subordinates were often former National Servicemen whose experience had the
effect with many of causing them to distrust, dislike and often oppose the
implications of the class system and to suspect the motives and attitudes of
those at the top notably the managerial classes as they were then.
This may have
been an underlying element in much of the industrial and other strife that
became so common in the 1960's and 1970's.
Also, there may have been other effects arising from disenchanted young
males.
It wasn't rock
and roll and the media that created the freedom culture of later, for my money
it was a male population who had mostly done time in the services and came out
with a very different perspective on life, work and society.
Quite how
modern 18 year olds in this very different world might react I do not know. It can only be a wild guess, but I cannot
think that periods of forced military service would improve matters.
If Prince
Harry were to play cricket against a bolshie conscript I would advise him to
wear a well fitted box.
Interesting post, particularly this point.
ReplyDelete"One effect therefore was to redirect hordes of public school men into management and supervision in the public and private sector..."
For many itr was the first time away from home and mother. And meeting the rough and tumble. On the other hand they were near all white and sang from the same hymn book.
ReplyDeleteBack then the state didn't regard everyone as tax fodder.
Education was near free because the state needed educated prople. National service was often education - however apparantly useless. You had to read and write.