Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lisa Orta
English 126
4 November, 2018
Identity is one of the things that we, as humans, strive our whole lives to
understand and create. People want to know who they are. They want to have an
identity that helps to define them in positive ways, something that was formed by what
they were born into and what they chose for themselves. And nowhere is this truer than
in London. In a city filled with such diversity - in culture, race, ethnicity, sexuality,
personality, and in every way possible - finding one’s identity is so important. It's a way
to stand out as an individual, and yet also a way to bring people closer together.
Knowing someone who a person may have thought they had nothing in common with,
actually has an identity that they can identify with in some way, can bring people
together. It helps form the bonds of a stronger community to know that everyone is an
individual, and yet can all work together to make that community.
Colthorpe on the Centre For London in April, 2018, the authors talk about the London
identity, and how it has been formed by who they are, how they grew up, and the
communities they’re in now. Bosetti and Colthorpe discuss how the London Identity has
changed over the past 4 or so years: the effect of Brexit, the growing diversity of the
city, and the widening financial class gap. The authors also discuss how a big part of
British, European, or all or none of the above? What Bosetti and Colthorpe are trying to
get across is that London has its own specific identity more than other big cities, and
So what exactly is the “London Identity” anyways? There are a ton of factors,
such as ethnicity, nationality, if you were born in London, and even the specific London
neighborhood. While some people identify with a overall London identity, some people
go even further as to identify with their specific area of London. As Bosetti and
Colthorpe noted that objectively, from a 2012 Britain Thinks poll, “A third of those who
identified as Londoners actually preferred a more local identity: they said they were
North, South, East or West Londoners above all” (Bosetti & Colthorpe 7). London is
such a big city that it makes sense that people would chose a smaller area to identify
with. But it goes even further than that. Social class and ethnicity also play a role in
whether someone identifies with greater London, or their specific area. It was found that
there is a stronger sense of local identities in areas with stigmas attached, or that are
associated with certain ethnicities (Bosetti & Colthorpe 7). As for class, it was found that
middle-class Londoners were more likely to identify with London as a whole, rather than
a specific area (Bosetti & Colthorpe 10). Bosetti and Colthorpe are using these polls to
back the credibility of their arguments. They aren’t just subjectively stating something to
all over the world, and thus become significantly more diversified, and continues to
become more diversified every year. This is exaggerated by the fact that “White British
Londoners have left the city at three times the rate of ethnic minorities” (Bosetti &
Colthorpe 12). Logically, this proves that as London has become more diverse, people
of non-white ethnicities have found it to feel safer, and therefore don’t leave. Whereas
people of white ethnicity don’t face the same issues, and so find no problem with
moving to areas outside of the city. Bisotti and Colthorpe also appeal to their readers
sense of passion for their chosen identity, when they talk about how people who live in
London, and consider themselves Londoners, aren't just the ones who were born there.
They even go so far as to say that, subjectively, "Belonging to a city seldom requires
being 'born and bred' there. The London identity is, it seems, relatively easily and swiftly
acquired" (Bosetti & Colthorpe 4). The identity of London, if anything, is getting stronger
from this diversity. All of these different peoples and cultures just make it a more
As a student that is just studying abroad here for three months, and not truly
living here long term, I didn't think I would really identify myself as a Londoner in any
way. However, as I was returning from the airport over break, I had a family looking
completely lost and helpless who looked to me for direction. I was able to confidently
and correctly direct them on their way, and in that moment, I felt like a Londoner. I won't
be able to claim that identity for long, but I think that's one of the other beautiful things
about the London Identity - that is so accessible. Bosetti and Colthorpe even objectively
point out in their report that “ten per cent of London’s population move in and out of the
city every year” (Bosetti & Colthorpe 3). So whether somebody's here for a short time,
or a long time, whether they immigrated, or moved from another part of the UK, or were
born here - everyone who lives in London at all can feel like a part of that London
identity.
Though Bosetti and Colthorpe had some fallacies to their arguments, such as the
appeal to common belief fallacy in the intro where they claim, “Everywhere, it seems,
politicians who defend internationalist principles find themselves on the back foot, while
anti-migrant, anti-globalization movements make the waves” (2), their overall argument
is pretty solid. The identity of London is just as diverse and varied as it’s people.
Whether someone identifies with the greater city of London, or their specific
neighborhood or borough, they’re still a part of the same identity. It crosses the
boundaries of race, social class, gender, sexuality, and nationality. The London identity
is something that anyone, no matter where they come from, can connect with and claim
as their own if they do wish, while their living there. London isn’t just an identity. It’s a
place, a home, and an identity, and its arms are open to everyone.
But what, exactly, helps to make up this Identity? What are the building blocks
that create the Identity we see today? Well, as all Identities are, the Identity of London is
partly built up with subgroups. These subgroups allow people to connect with other
people like them, so they don’t feel lost in the larger scale scope of the Identity of
London as a whole.
In a subsection called “Subgroups,” from a chapter titled, “Defining Culture and
Subgroups are, and why they are important for Social Identity. The author first defines
their terms, stating that a subgroup is group that, “provide[s] members with relatively
complete sets of values and patterns of behavior” (Defining Culture and Identities 18). In
other words, it’s a group of people brought together through having the same interests,
beliefs, or characteristics. It is a part of one’s identity that is chosen, instead of one that
occupation, listing several such as, “nurses and doctors, police officers, and employees
of large organizations such as Microsoft” (Defining Culture and Identities 18). It doesn’t
just have to be an occupation, though. It can be any group of people brought together
They continue on to stress that while subgroups have often been linked with the
word decciant, the real definition of that word is just to deviate for the norm of society.
The author then points out that membership can either be a temporary thing, or for life,
and is not exclusive to one thing. A person can belong to as many subgroups as they
chose to identify with in their lifetime. The author makes their last point by talking about
how people who want to be a part of group, but aren’t yet part of one. These people are
called “wannabes,” and they “[imitate] the behavior of a group he or she desires to
belong to” (Defining Culture and Identities 18). They wrap up their argument by claiming
that these subgroups identities are just as important as our cultural identities.
Seeing as this was a chapter in a textbook instead of an article or report, it was
much harder to note the uses of rhetorical devices such as ethos, pathos and logos,
objective and subjectives claims, and fallacies and propaganda. Once you look closer,
however, you begin to notice them. For example, when the author said, “Unfortunately,
(Defining Culture and Identities 18). The author’s claim is subjective, because they
cannot claim to know what is “normal,” as normality itself is a subjective idea. Another
example is when the author evokes a sense of ethos to back up their credibility, by
claiming their arguments are backed by psychologists. They also make a subjective
claim when they state that “One important subgroup category is occupation” (Defining
Culture and Identities 18). What might be seen as an important subgroup to one person,
might not be as important to another. So while it would have been objective to call
One thing that is agreed upon, though, is that subgroups are an important part of
identity, and they’re something that one chooses for themselves. Everyone needs these
subgroups to be a part of, so they can feel as if they are a part of something bigger than
themselves. That’s why when I found out that I was going to be able to study abroad in
London for a semester, I was ecstatic. To me, this meant three months of submerging
myself into one of my two greatest passions and subgroups that make up who I am - the
Theatre world. London is known globally for its amazing theatre, the West End rivaling
even the fame of of Broadway in New York City. And while I have been experiencing the
theatre submersion I was hoping for, I got something else I hadn’t been expecting.
Unbeknownst to me, London is a city that boasts a large community in the literary
world of books, and reading, and writing. There are books stores on every corner, and
book talks with authors, or writing workshops are constantly happening throughout the
city. You go to the event pages of the hundreds of books stores in the city, and each
one has an event list miles long. London is the home of many of the greatest writers in
the world - living and dead - not to mention the setting for some of the greatest plays
In an Ipsos MORI poll of public opinion, called “Literature in Britain today,” the
authors of the introduction - Dr. LIsa Appignanesi - and the forward - Tim Robertson -
discuss what role literature plays in Britain in current times. This poll, commissioned by
the Royal Society of Literature in 2017, goes in-depth into how many people read
literature, and how it affects their lives. It had overwhelmingly positive views on literature
and its impact, finding that out of 2,000, “75% of [those] people (adults in Britain) have
read something in the last 6 months which they consider to be literature” (Literature in
Britain today 3). This shows that there is a large population of people in Britain who read
novels, and have literature as a part in their lives. Appignanesi also claims that, “81% of
our sample [believed] that ‘Literature helps people understand other points of view’” (4).
So not only are people reading, but they view it as something that is important for
society. That reading is something that helps us as human beings to understand other
people, and have empathy for them where we may not have had empathy if we didn’t
understand other people through literature. In this poll they let people decide what they
counted as literature, and asked them to name authors they believed wrote literature,
and came up with 400 different authors, living and dead. Another thing that they asked
the participants of the poll was whether or not literature should be a part of everyone’s
education, and got an overwhelmingly positive consensus with 88% of people saying
SInce this was more like an academic paper, instead of a textbook chapter, it
was a lot easier to find the rhetorical devices used by the two authors. One example
was with the propaganda at the end of the forward, where Robertson using pathos to
evoke a sense of pity and asking people to donate money to the Royal Society of
Literature to keep it running, by stating, “we are a small charity looking to play a national
role in championing literature. We can do this only with help from others” (8). In another
part, Roberts makes a subjective claim when he says that, “Literature also genuinely
adds value to people’s lives” (5). While I wholeheartedly agree with his statement, and
this survey is going a long way to try and prove this point, it is not entirely objective.
“The overall list of 400 writers named by the public is arguably the most definitive
summary that exists of Britain’s literary canon – certainly one of the most democratic”
(5). He is phrasing it in a way that leaves little room for the reader to disagree, and like it
from people held in high esteem for their writing capabilities - such as President Barack
Obama and author JK Rowling. She also evokes a sense of pride and nationality in her
British readers by introducing JK Rowling as, “our very own” (4). Appignanesi also uses
many subjective claims, one of them being when she states that, “[this report] makes
fascinating reading” (4), as there is no way to prove that claim, because it is in fact an
opinion.
Despite all of the biased phrases and uses of rhetorical devices, this survey
proves is that, especially Britain, literature plays a large and positive role in the day to
day lives of its people, and while I have been here, I’ve been able to experience it first
hand. Over my three months here in London I have been able to experience the literary
world like I never have in the San Francisco Bay Area. Not only have I gotten to explore
multiple, giant bookstores that I could spend hours getting lost in, but I’ve also had the
pleasure of going to not one, not two, but three literary events. The first one, though not
something I would normally go to, was a book talk with three feminist authors that I went
to for an assignment. While I consider myself a feminist, it’s not something I talk about a
lot, or get super involved with to that level. It was very interesting, though, and
something that I’m glad I got to experience. The other was a book talk with a writer,
Ransom Riggs, who’s books I absolutely love, and who was just as witty and
personable in person as he is in his books. I also had the pleasure of getting a book
signed by his wife, Tahereh Mafi, who was there with him, and is one of my favorite
The icing on the cake, though, was a writing workshop with the author E.
Lockhart, on finding your narrative voice while writing novels. This workshop was put on
through the London Literature Festival, which was held over a week long period in
October at the Southbank Centre. Up until this summer, I had been a musical theatre
major. That all changed with Heidi Goen-Salter, the english teacher I had for two
semesters at DVC. She pushed me to be a better writer, and lead me to see the
potential I have as a writer. I had always loved reading and literature, and thought of
writing as something that would be amazing to do, but that I didn’t have the talent for.
She helped convince me that it was something I could achieve, and this summer I
decided to change my major. This subgroup, of the literature world, was something I
had always had one foot in of, and one foot out. It turned out to be perfect timing for me
to jump all in, as London is city where that subgroup is a large part of it’s identity.
The city of London has such a large Identity on its own, and not many cities can
claim the same. It’s a city full of diversity, smaller subgroup identities, and yet they
somehow all come together to create this identity. The way that this is possible is
through those subgroups, like the literature community. These smaller subgroups come
together, and allow people to connect with each other, to build up one large, beautiful,
London Identity. With out these subgroups, where would the Identity of London be?
Works Cited
Appignanesi, Lisa. Robertson, Tim. Literature In Britain Today. Royal Society of Literature,
2017. https://rsliterature.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/RSL-Literature-in-Britain-
Today_01.03.17.pdf
Bosetti, Nicolas. Colthorpe, Tom. Identities. London Essays: Reports, The Centre for
default/files/upm-binaries/45974_Chapter_1.pdf