Class and Imitation Class: Henry Trace and the Rainbirds

Issues of social class are very prevalent in the novel of The Killings at Badger’s Drift but have mostly been muted in the TV adaptation. Most notable is the contrast between the Rainbirds and the Traces; while most of the visual differences remain, there are several key elements in the novel that highlight the class divide. Through the analysis of these characters I will discuss the role of performativity in relation to constructing idealised class performativity, and perhaps more importantly, how the novel frequently suggests that performativity is innate rather than learned. This implies that breeding is an important aspect of class, and by extension Englishness. The TV adaptation focuses on the eccentricity of the Rainbirds, as a caricature of Englishness, rather than an imitation of upper-class performativity.

In the novel, there is a certain level of ambivalence towards the upper class from which Henry Trace belongs. On the one hand, there is respect for the long lineage of his revered family as demonstrated by the following passage:

The Traces went back to Norman times. Effigies of Sir Robert Trayce and his wyffe Ismelda and her cat rested eternally in the cool of the thirteenth-century

church. Traces had shed a modest amount of their landowning blood in the two world wars and returned to their squirearchical duties garlanded with honour. (Graham 97)

The Norman invasion of 1066 is a significant historical event that altered the course of English politics and culture, and the reference suggests that the Trace family are historically relevant and perhaps even significant. There is no mention of how Sir Robert Trayce acquired the land or wealth, whether it was honourable or ill-gotten, rather, it is just accepted as traditionally having always been so. Raymond Williams characterises the innocence of a traditional order as “misleading” because “very few titles to property could bear humane investigation in the long process of conquest, theft, political intrigue, courtiership, extortion and the power of money” (Williams 50). But the undisputed acceptance of this tradition is important because it allows for a narrative about birth right, as I will point out, the novel on different occasions suggests that class is something innate rather than a learned performativity. Characters who aspire upward social mobility, such as Barbara Lessiter, the Rainbirds, and Katherine Lacey, violate the “natural” order of English society and are consequently ill-fated with death or unhappiness. This vision of a natural social order is consistent with conservative ideology which “sees people as naturally unequal, and therefore holds that people do not have rights that are universal” because “People have differing innate abilities” (Hoffman 86). In this way, “conservatism seeks to restore traditional regimes and values” (Hoffman 87). The notion that class is innate can be understood as a conservative strategy which in the view of Robert Eccleshaw “makes unacceptable any serious questioning of existing authority structures by invoking a definite set of social values. These values create a presumption of legitimacy by proclaiming that social hierarchy produces beneficial effects” (Eccleshall 62). The negative consequences of

social mobility within the novel serve to legitimise the prevailing class structure by discrediting social mobility as transgressive.

Another aspect that the quoted passage reveals is the reverent nature of the Traces’

social status. Not only are they eternally remembered by the effigies of their early ancestors, but also their recent forefathers are honoured for patriotism having served in both world wars.

Having shed blood during the wars indicates the Traces’ loyalty and sacrifice to their country, and signals a solidarity with the middle and working classes who also suffered deaths in their families. Therefore, what we see in this passage is an unquestioned mark of respect towards this upper-class family, void of criticism or controversy, and thus the hereditary justification for respect goes uncontested.

The idea that class is innate is spelt out by Mrs Rainbird, and recognised by Sergeant Troy, when they discuss Michael and Katherine Lacey’s family background:

“Oh very upper class they were then. Old family nanny, the children at Bedales, ponies and cars and off to France every five minutes. And shooting and hunting in the holidays. Thought themselves real gentry. They weren’t, of course. No breeding at all.” Sergeant Troy, his pencil at rest, recognized the concealed resentment in this remark immediately, without knowing why.

(Graham 106-7)

In this passage, Mrs Rainbird makes an illocutionary statement about upper class performativity when she describes the Lacey family as having been “very upper class” and recounting various performative acts, such as having a nanny, going to a private school (Bedales), and having ponies and cars and overseas holidays. But she then suggests that “real gentry” cannot be achieved as a performative accomplishment without the appropriate breeding, thereby suggesting that class is innate and hereditary. The concealed resentment that Sergeant Troy recognises is aimed at the Laceys’ belief in performativity, because

simply acting like the upper class is not enough to make a person superior to others such as him. It is the noble family history of someone like Henry Trace that carries legitimacy and distinguishes the upper class from the middle and working classes.

However, the respect for Henry Trace is not extended to admiration or idealisation, his power and prestige are considerably muted by his paraplegia as his descriptions are somewhat emasculating: “Barnaby was surprised to discover later that Henry Trace was only forty-two” (Graham 85). Looking much older than he is indicates that he lacks strength and vitality. This sentiment is emphasised by Barnaby: “He wondered if it was quite without thought that David Whitely took the seat nearest to his employer. There could hardly have been a crueller contrast” (Graham 85). David Whitely is described by Sergeant Troy as

“Marlboro Man” (Graham 85), which is of course a reference to the decades long advertising campaign by the Philip Morris cigarette company who used images of rugged cowboys that

“embodied the virtues of hegemonic masculinity, mate ship, musculature, and virility”

(Geczy and Karaminas 88) to promote their brand. This contrast has an emasculating impact on the character of Henry Trace but without laying any judgement on his social status. His seclusion from the rest of the village is identified by Sergeant Troy, who notices that he does not state like everyone else in the village that Miss Simpson had taught his mum, which is a suggestion that he went to a private school instead.

The Rainbirds by contrast, are not born with the wealth or title like Henry Trace, although we are not given any details about their background. Mrs Rainbird and her son Mr Rainbird are imitations of idealised upper-class Englishness. The falseness of the Rainbirds is exemplified in the scene introducing Dennis Rainbird in his funeral parlour. Barnaby requests to see the body of Miss Simpson, to which Mr Rainbird replies, “Toot sweet”

(Graham 36), which is a heavily anglicised pronunciation of “tout de suite” meaning “right away” in French. The French language is a symbol of upper-class performativity because

after the French-speaking Normans invaded in 1066, the ruling class spoke French for several centuries. This is a noticeable attempt at upper-class performativity, but the inaccurate pronunciation marks him with a false performativity and highlights the distinction between real and fake upper-class performativity. However, the TV series omits the faux French performativity, and as well, the afternoon tea in the TV series omits the more sophisticated sounding treats such as “marrons Lyonnaise” and “frangipane”. This reflects the TV series’ shift away from the class discourse of these characters, and they are instead transformed into an example of what executive producer Brian True-May described as

“English genteel eccentricity” (Wilson 20).

The Rainbirds demonstrate other forms of false upper-class performativity; their house is described in a negative way by different characters. Barnaby notes that “The room really was unbearably oppressive. It was crammed full of voluptuous showy furniture […] The whole shebang was what his daughter would have called twentieth-century grotesque”

(Graham 110). Phyllis Cadell was also critical during her police interview, “We sat facing each other in her revolting lounge” (Graham 212). In another scene, Barnaby postulates

“how impossible it was for a gardener to conceal his personality” (Graham 186). He studies the Rainbirds’ garden and concludes that “Here was ostentatious vulgarity, literally in full bloom” (Graham 186), which he compares with the “unsophisticated harmony” of Miss Simpson’s garden (Graham 186) and the “tangled exuberance” of Miss Bellringer’s garden (Graham 186). In other words, Barnaby directly associates the garden with personality, and in this passage, he elevates as desirable Miss Simpson and Miss Bellringer, whilst condemning the Rainbirds as undesirable because of the vulgarity of their ostentatiousness.

In section 3.1.1, I noted the cultural importance of gardening as highlighted by a brief exchange between Henry Trace and Inspector Barnaby that “led to a lot of pleasant horticultural chat” (Graham 139). This demonstrated gardening as a form of cultural capital,

which is favourably held by Inspector Barnaby, Henry Trace, Miss Simpson and Miss Bellringer, while the Rainbirds, in this passage, are being contrasted as vulgar and ostentatious, and therefore lacking the authentic cultural capital of the other characters. This guides the reader to identify which performativity is idealised and emphasises cultural capital as a marker of class division. Cultural capital is thus demonstrated as a restraint on social mobility since no amount of money can “conceal” the vulgarity of the Rainbirds’

personality expressed in their garden.

In the TV series, however, the role of cultural capital has been withdrawn and the portrayal of the Rainbirds as vulgar downplayed. Inspector Barnaby and Sergeant Troy grimace at the sight of the sandwiches served with afternoon tea, and Phyllis Cadell describes the Rainbirds house as “revolting” during her police interview. However, their class performativity is portrayed more as eccentric English behaviour rather than an imitation of upper-class performativity. The outlandish afternoon tea can be read as a parody of a traditional English afternoon tea and, in doing so, provides a humorous introspect that reinforces its place in English culture. The focus of the parody is on the elaborate dress up of the otherwise bland or plain sandwiches. The lack of class commentary in the TV series steers us to read this scene differently from the novel. However, in both the novel and the TV series, afternoon tea and sandwiches are portrayed as English performativity.

In section 3.1, I have discussed the performativity of Englishness and suggested that Inspector Barnaby blends contemporary progressive ideals with elements of the classic English gentleman, while maintaining Christian ideals of marriage, to produce a character that is an idealised representation of modern Englishness with nostalgic appeal. He is also able to bridge the rural and urban divide through his village background and contemporary suburban life. Miss Simpson was also identified as being an idealised character, particularly

in the novel through her apparel that evoked a reflective nostalgia for disappearing English fashion and rural production.

The class conflict identified in the novel maintains a conservative position for the prevailing social class structure by insinuating that class is innate rather than learned performativity. The novel accepts the tradition and heritability of social status, although the emasculating depictions of the paraplegic Henry Trace fall short of truly idealising the upper class. The Rainbirds provide a contrast of false upper-class performativity through their vulgar ostentatiousness, and through their incestuous behaviour, they are confirmed as immoral characters. However, this class discourse is absent from the TV series which likely reflects a change in the political and social context of the series.

Thus, I have attempted to demonstrate a nostalgic construction of Englishness through the idealisation of certain characters that possess idealised markers of Englishness. I have identified class and Christianity as integral elements of idealised performativity which can be interpreted as a response to contemporary ideals of social mobility and sexual freedom.

This embrace of tradition is thus looking to the past for a nostalgic construction of an idealised society, or an idealised English nation.