2007 - 2021

Decontaminating The Union: Post-Industrial Landscapes And The British Psyche

Whatever anxieties I may feel, as an Englishman, about speaking to a Scots audience in the capital of Scotland about how they view their own geography are vitiated by my own vexed relationship with ­Caledonia – one that, I will argue, is ­itself a sort of figuration of the tendencies my psychogeographic practice ­reveals in the collective Scots psyche.

It’s worth pausing here to consider perhaps one of the most significant scenes in recent cinema. I refer to the episode in Danny Boyle’s film adaptation of Irvine Welsh’s Trainspotting, when, in search of a nature cure, the junky protagonists take off for a hike in the purlieu of Loch Lomond. Shivering in their cotton T-shirts, sodden in their PVC training shoes, the denizens of rundown Leith are painfully unsuited to this landscape of soaring, scree-sided beinns, snow-capped peaks and icy tarns; nonetheless the antihero, Renton’s, comment says it all: “Some hate the English. I don’t. They’re just wankers. We on the other hand are colonised by wankers.”

Ostensibly this is a remark on the ­impact of the Union, but given its geographical context it obviously plays upon the beauty of the vista as against the ­ugliness of Renton’s malaise – and by extension the great natural beauty of Scotland’s landscape as against the ugliness of its political and economic predicament in the 1980s and early 1990s.

I first came to know Scotland a little better than the average English wanker during this period. Or, rather, through spending time in the Scots penultima Thule, Orkney, I came to appreciate two key aspects of the relationship between the nation’s geography and its psyche. The first of these is diversity – and by this I mean not simply ethnic or topographical diversity, but both, combined. Once past the forbidding rampart of the 400ft tall red sandstone cliffs of Hoy, the Orkneys unroll before the visitor as an undulating landscape of rich mixed ­arable farmland mysteriously plonked down in the anfractuous waters of the North Atlantic and the North Sea.

The current population of Orkney is pretty much an admixture of lineal descendants of the inhabitants of Scara Brae (a fact established by researches conducted under the auspices of the ­Human Genome Project), and the more proximate descendants of the so-called “Good Lifers” (after the popular 1970s Surbiton-based sitcom of the same name), mostly English incomers to the islands during that period. The union of these peoples has proved remarkably successful, with the Orcadians effortlessly absorbing the Good Lifers, much as they absorbed the Norse before them. One thing is, however, for certain: neither moiety is much disposed to think of themselves as Scots. Indeed, a young Scotsman who lived on Rousay in the early 1990s (like quite a few others a DHSS émigré, who sought to live cheaply on benefits), and who insisted on wearing a kilt, was known derisively as “Jock the Frock”.

You can appreciate why, in a bad year, it’s difficult for them not to think of themselves as wankers colonised by wankers, who have in turn been colonised by wankers (a chain of reflexive self-abuse that, arguably, extends jerking all the way to the White House). From the austere perspective of Kirkwall, Edinburgh begins to look like a dangerously sybaritic Neapolitan city (and like Naples, Edinburgh is indeed a beautiful ossuary built on the bones of its urbane predecessors), while London becomes a positively equatorial sin bin of cocaine-honking samba-dancers. But what the Orcadian experience teaches us is not simply that we should beware of the mono-cultural tendency implicit in all nationalisms, but that we should recognise a particular aspect of the Scots landscape – and by extension the Scottish psyche – and that is its legibility.

Driving north from Edinburgh on the M90 to Perth, the crossing of the Firth of Forth presents the first in a series of parallaxes: the movement of, say, an oil rig moored for refurbishment in Torry Bay relative to Kincardine Bridge, is all that’s necessary for the well-oriented traveller to plot the contours of this wasp-waisted nation on to her mapping table. The long grades up through Pitlochry and then Glen Garry to the uplands of the Cairngorms, no matter how driech it may be, summon equally long prospects to the attentive inner eye: Glen Mor, Glen Albyn, Loch Linnhe, the Firth of Lorn – the deep crease in the ­
landform that supports the complex ­origami of the peaks may be hidden by the Monadhliaths, but once past Aviemore everything tends to the Black Isle and a liaison with its north-eastern ­outlet.

Then the Moray Firth, the Cromarty Firth, the Dornoch Firth – with the crossing of each successive sulcus the cranial form of Highland Scotland becomes more and more apparent, until that delirious moment – somewhere around Helmsdale – when our hypothetical driver apprehends – by virtue of the clear view across to the Nairn dunes some 40 miles due south – the entire Nefertiti’s headdress of the far north. And of course, it is only a gearstick pogo-hop and a clutch-skip from Inverness to Ullapool, and a Caledonian MacBrayne pedalo ride from there to the Long Isle.

And all of this brisk quartering of Scotland has been undertaken with no recourse to truly peak perspectives. In whimsical moments it sometimes occurs to me that the Munro-bagging so beloved of a certain kind of Scots politician, far from being animated by a desire to experience the big country, is on the contrary inspired by a megalomaniac impulse; for, by ascending a mere handful of strategically located 3,000-foot-plus summits they can survey the entirety of their domain.

Or can they? The tour d’horizon we’ve just undertaken is just that: a touristic go-round that in no way reflects the purview of the vast majority of Scots, tied down as they are to one or other of the country’s principle conurbations, and leaving these – if at all – simply in order to undertake a workaday or consumption-oriented traverse, along the M8 corridor, to the other one. The apparent naturalness of the Scots rural hinterland is just that: whether you’re standing on Rannoch Moor or in the centre of ­Renfrew you are confronted by equally anthropic landscapes – these are the competing yet mutually reinforcing spectacles, at once exclusive and interconnected; and it’s worth recalling at this point that the Falls of Clyde were at once a way station on the Romantics’ tours of the picturesque in the early 1800s, and at the very same time the motive force for David Dale and Robert Owen’s socio-economic experimentation at New Lanark.

I said earlier that my own relationship with Scotland was a figuration of the tendencies my psychogeographic practice reveals in her psyche – I should now clarify this: I may have rapidly quartered legible – and spectacular – Scotland since the early 1990s, but by far the bulk of my time here in the past decade-and-a-half has been spent in a confined area; namely the environs of Motherwell in North Lanarkshire, a locale I married into.

Arriving in Motherwell in 1997, I was too late to witness the demolition of Ravenscraig, but the epochal nature of this event was engraved in the consciousnesses of my new in-laws, just as the topography of Motherwell and its sister-communities of Wishaw and Newmains represents a palimpsest that has been worked over for several generations by steely instruments of industrialisation and its aftermath. The redevelopment of the Ravenscraig site will in theory replace the decontaminated ground where the steelworks once belched, with a new town centre. ­Already 800 new homes have been ­constructed, together with a certain amount of road infrastructure and two large quasi-public buildings: the upended ­po-mo filing cabinet of Motherwell College, and the sub-Frank Gehry shed-toppling of the splendidly named ­Regional Sports Facility.

The developers, Wilson Bowden and Tata Steel – in association with Scottish Enterprise – promise that this, the first new town in Scotland for a half-century, will act as an economic driver for the entire region; although as yet the investment driver is the £10m pump-priming by the local council of a scheme known as TIF (or Tax Incremental Funding), that sees anticipated rates increases ­hypothecated to service the necessary loans. Critics of TIF observe than in and of itself it catalyses social stratification, intensifying zones of relative affluence and deprivation in a way reminiscent of the Wal-Mart effect.

My late father-in-law, who began as a 14-year-old at Colville’s steelworks (Ravenscraig’s predecessor), and was traumatised by witnessing a particularly ugly industrial accident, spent the balance of his working life as a lathe operator in a succession of metal-fabricating businesses dependent on the Craig’s output. He had taken early retirement when I first met him, but I never recall him speaking about the bizarre fistula left behind once the works was demolished. This ragged zone – once dotted with slag heaps and bings, but now characterised by the sinister regularities of a manufactured area of biodiversity – is traditionally sized by reference to the following telling indices: 450 hectares, yes – 1,175 acres, certainly; but 17 Canary Wharfs? Or for that matter two Monacos? Surely these imprecise units of measurement are intended to implant in the minds of those who attempt the visualisation ghostly images of high finance pinnacles, or the Grimaldis’ fabled castle rising over the shrubberies. Possibly the intention is to evoke the Monaco Grand Prix – and this makes sense, for North Lanarkshire has more than its fair share of boy racers, and the newly constructed Robberhall and New Craig Roads afford ample opportunities for handbrake 
U-turns on the path to prosperity.

By way of contrast the Clyde Walkway, between Strathclyde Park and Cardies Bridge, offers the walker a five-mile traverse of the southern edge of the city of the future. Standing at the end of the lime avenue that stretches from the tumbledown covenanters’ graveyard all the way to the Clyde’s bank, you can look up over open hummocky ground, still grazed by cattle to where, across the crowns of ancient oaks, the seven 17-storey Muirhouse towers return your gaze with their own cyclopean stares. Why it is that the lift wheelhouses on top of these blocks have been re-cladded to resemble the arched window on Play School is a mystery, but it does mean than anyone of a certain age, who spots the towers from the northbound M74 (and this is a great number of economic drivers), will find themselves wondering what’s through it.

I propose alternative, artificial sight lines then for the M8 corridor to compete with the spectacular afforded by the Highlands: from the top of Red Road in Glasgow look southeast to Glencairn House in Motherwell; from the top of Glencairn House look northeast to Stuart House in Cumbernauld; and from the top of this look still further southeast again to Livingston, within shopping distance of where we are now – thus completing the rondeau we began by driving north across the Firth of Forth road bridge. That some of these structures have either been demolished, or are scheduled to be, should not concern us. The high-rise era of Scottish public housing – which loosely straddled that of deindustrialisation – can thus be seen not as an attempt to realise Le Corbusier’s Ville Radieuse, but on the contrary to lift the benighted inhabitants of the Gorbals into the peak perspectives afforded Munro-bagging Labour party leaders and grouse-stalking nabobs alike. The unconscious aim was to make Scotland legible to the masses, and thus ease replacement of the spectacular of production with that of consumption.

Hence the conflicts that matter in the M8 corridor, and which define its occluded vistas are those between competing shopping malls and the distribution centres that service them. Such employment as there is consists in ministering to this consumption complex, or else servicing still more distant service industries via telephone and computer. The dichotomy between the legible landscape of recreational Scotland and the illegible one of consumption has been fully effected, and in outline it mirrors certain other key dichotomies in the Scots national psyche: Calvinism/libertinism, parochialism/cosmopolitanism, drunkenness/sobriety. The Scots Rustbelt, far from being an unavoidable zone of historically inevitable post-industrial detritus, to be tidied away into museums, piled up into grassy pyramids, planted over with sustainable verdure, or otherwise greenspaced, is simply another Antonine Wall, paralleling the old one, and so dividing the complacent ego from the maddened id of the Scots ­unconscious. .


This is an extract from the Wreford Watson Lecture given by Will Self at the University of Edinburgh this week.


Comments (22)

Leave a Reply to alangregor1976 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Peter A Bell says:

    “…we should beware of the mono-cultural tendency implicit in all nationalisms…”
    ALL nationalisms? Really? This folly of simplistic generalisation tells us more about what is in the mid of its author than it does about the nature of Scotland’s civic nationalism. It speaks of an inability to conceive of a nationalism that is pragmatic and inclusive. And of a certain arrogance which assumes that this intellectual incapacity necessarily implies the non-existence of that which cannot be appreciated.

    As a nationalist I am all too familiar with the pomposity of those who would define my politics and my attitudes according to the limitations of their own experience and understanding. Needless to say, I utterly reject facile labels written in the indelible ink of others’ puerile prejudices. Were Will Self just slightly less convinced of his own omniscience he might think to ask me how I define my nationalism, rather that dictating to me how it must be defined.

  2. orpheuslyre says:

    To be fair to Will Self, Peter, if I recall correctly, he’s a long time champion of Alasdair Gray, including Gray’s arguments in support of Independence. He might have indicated that here in some way though, I suppose.

    1. Peter A Bell says:

      I know nothing of Will Self’s views on the matter of Scotland’s independence. My objection is to his glib characterisation of nationalism as being inherently “mono-cultural”. I seem to recall him saying something about seeking through his writing to make people aware of how how unstable are the categories which mediate their word-view. Perhaps he should read some of his own work.

      1. pmcrek says:

        This isnt a dig at Scots nationalism, it is a statement of fact, all nationalisms have mono-cultural tendencies, British being the prime example imo.

        1. Peter A Bell says:

          In that it is a “dig” at “all nationalisms” it is inevitably a dig at “Scots” nationalism. And I reject it totally. Undoubtedly SOME forms of nationalism have mono-cultural tendencies. But it is simply not the case that this is universally true. I know this to be so because I personally subscribe to a form of civic nationalism which explicitly rejects any kind of mono-culturalist tendencies. Indeed, I find the very notion of such tendencies anathema because I find the concept of culture as a discrete, immutable thing quite ludicrous.

          Culture is organic. It can no more survive isolated from the wider environment than can a biological organism. In truth, there is no such thing as a mono-culture. All cultures exist as the product of external influences and are continually being modified by those influences.

          What Self refers to as mono-cultural tendency is in reality an appeal to a constructed myth of cultural purity and, more often than not, cultural exceptionalism. How can such nonsense possibly have any place in a formulation of nationalism which defines itself by its openness and inclusivity? It makes no sense.

  3. Arrogant no presumptuous is what I would say ,he comes over to me as one who presume that he has an intellect superior to those that surround him,methinks he is not as clever as he hoped the rest of us thinks he is.So you had a bus journey,me I went round the world twice off of my own bat,and drove round Australia,but would never heave the cheek to say I know all about the place

    1. Iain Macmillan says:

      Exactly what I was thinking,what an arrogant,pretentious numpty he comes across as!

  4. Soixante-neuf says:

    One of the great things that emphasises Scotland’s status as a nation is the existence of many regions and cultures within it. The very thing that gives the lie to “Scotlandshire” regionalism is the variety within Scotland’s borders. We’re all Scots, but at the same time we celebrate our differences. A country that contains only one region is a poor thing indeed.

  5. Prophet_Peden says:

    Peter. You are the worst example I can think of regarding a fulminating nationalist I’m afraid.

    I’m no fan of Will Self’s verbiage, but in this case you are a pygmy compared to his intellectual might.

    In short – froth elsewhere. Nationalism borders on mono-culturalism by definition. I want independence for reasons other than nationalist mono-culturalism. You are one of the worst examples of it on the net.

    Sorry, someone else said it somewhere else, but you remind me of Ian Paisley and his dogmatic intolerance of differing views.

    Calm the beads bud. You’re a non-inclusive embarrasment.

  6. orpheuslyre says:

    On reflection, I think Peter is right to stick to the point about monoculturism, and the implied ‘community of fate’ against which contemporary Scottish nationalism has defined itself.
    Will Self chose to generalise from an experience of Orkney to reach his (obviously predetermined) conclusion. But on scrutiny I wonder to what extent his version of Orkney (encountered some time ago) really ever existed. Incomers in the twentieth century were never simply or effortlessly assimilated into Orkney. They were basically left alone to get on with it. Orcadians are a kindly but very tough lot, and, as you would expect from a farming & fishing community, small-c conservative. Broadly speaking, their basic attitude is that change is bad unless there is a 100% risk-free gain to be had by it. If incomers prove themselves by showing some clear gain to the community they are accepted – after a fashion. Otherwise they’re ignored or publicly and privately ridiculed. Politically, their support for the Liberals is a manifestation of this. Voting for someone else would mean a change, and that just doesn’t happen easily. Nevertheless, the indications from the last election are that the SNP are a strongly rising force there (however inconvenient that is for Will Self’s argument) and with a decent candidate and a properly organised campaign, the resident MSP, Liam Macarthur, will be shown the door.

  7. Will Self has always struck me as someone who is educated beyond his own intelligence. There is an element of the emperors new clothes surrounding much of what he tries to communicate – by this I mean he has created a following who invariably don’t understand a word he says but are too beguiled to put their hand up and say so. Mostly he uses lots of word to say little or nothing. Compare the volumus dross of this piece to the reasoned, concise and well argued response of Peter Bell. Wise and or intelligent people are invariably abel to communicate complex and thought provoking ideas in practical simply terms that everyone understand. Always best to avoid unnecessary complexity masquerading as fact or the truth!!

  8. bellacaledonia says:

    Fact: Will Self voted Liberal Democrat at the last election. Some people aren’t as clever as they think.

  9. As a LD Mr Self obviously understands that there is a permanence and intangibility to ideas which may, for a time, come to manifest in the form of spoken or published words. He therefore, like the Liberal Democrates, pumps out content on the basis or hope that some of the output finds an ear. 

    But Peter Bell speaks and responds for many when he says “as a nationalist I am all too familiar with the pomposity of those who would define my politics and my attitudes according to the limitations of their own experience and understanding. Needless to say, I utterly reject facile labels written in the indelible ink of others’ puerile prejudices”. And that’s the point;  the ideas of Mr Self never seems to extend beyond his own, often narrow, prejudices. There’s nothing in what he says that is either insightful or inspirational – in fact just like Willie Rennie et al. 

  10. DougtheDug says:

    I thought I’d pick out the important points from Will Self’s speech by deleting out the verbiage and leaving in any salient points about Scotland.

    What I got left was that he doesn’t think Orcadians regard themselves as Scots and nationalism is by definition mono-cultural.

    Maybe Will should remember that Scots have three languages, Scots, Gaelic and English with their respective musical and literary traditions which also differ between geographical areas within Scotland. Even just looking at the indigenous cultures of Scotland mono-cultural and Scottish are mutually exclusive terms.

  11. An Duine Gruamach says:

    Has someone forwarded this to Private Eye for next week’s Psueds’ Corner? All I managed to get out of this was “I’ve been around Scotland and some bits of it are quite different from other bits.”

    I note that Prophet Peden’s shrieking at Peter Bell didn’t include any examples of Bell’s supposed cultural exclusiveness. I also must say I didn’t see much evidence if Self’s “intellectual might” here. Just a lot of words.

  12. zedeeyen says:

    Hah. Classic. I didn’t read the leader, and about halfway through the thought occurred to me; “Jesus, this is like reading Will Self”.

    Then after I’d lost the will to read any further I scrolled down to read the comments and discovered that I was precisely correct!

  13. This shows the limitations of someone indoctrinated in Marxian thinking, socio-economic analysis. Everything is seen in terms of the great anathema of nationalism. National Socialism being the paradigm against which all other forms of nationalism are judged. Mr Self is not Scottish. Marrying a Scotswoman doesn’t mean that 300 years of the effects of colonial domination are transferred to his psyche. He should stick to commenting on London politics, London society, the dying prehistoric monster called Socialism and writing novels which few understand.

  14. douglasclark says:

    Will Self is a writer, not a politician. The aim of this sort of writer is to try to show a different perspective on the internal and external landscapes.

    I didn’t think it was a very good piece, but the final sentence did reverberate – for me – quite well:

    “The Scots Rustbelt, far from being an unavoidable zone of historically inevitable post-industrial detritus, to be tidied away into museums, piled up into grassy pyramids, planted over with sustainable verdure, or otherwise greenspaced, is simply another Antonine Wall, paralleling the old one, and so dividing the complacent ego from the maddened id of the Scots ­unconscious.”

    At least, what I think it means reverberates quite well……..

    The constituencies on the rough line of the Antonone Wall, which reflects the industrial heartland of Scotland, has proven to be the most difficult nut for the SNP to crack. That electorate has historically been somewhat complacent – absent Hamilton and Govan – and has continued to vote with a complacency that at times beggars belief. But things are changing………………..

  15. Hen Broon says:

    I completely identify with Peter Bells excellent description of Scottish nationalism. Will Self has little to say, and so he smothers it in intellectual mumbo jumbo which he imagines places him on a higher plane to the rest of us plebs. Peter has highlighted that Self has been consumed by his own arrogance and pomposity. He even looks pompous. Was ever a man more aptly named. If he was chocolate he would eat himself. Apart from jis Newsnight appearances he is an unknown to me. He is sailing very close to the jibe much used to describe the supporters of Scottish Independence. Whilst also at the same time trying to label us a Marxist loons. Jeremy Paxman actually said it to Alex Salmond and Cochrane the swivel eyed right wing Britnat loon of Telegraph fame has frequenty name called Alex Salmond as Dear Leader, il Duce, Mugabe, and much more. It is all part of the Britnat agenda to try and demonise us and our political leaders. All it has done is corrode the credibility of Unionism and their diminishing band of supporters. like their lies and scaremogering, the law of diminishing returns has scuppered them.

  16. Wullie says:

    Skara Brae & Surbiton? misses out the half a millenium of Scottish settlement in Orkney. The people are a Scots speaking, Scots/Norse mixture who largely have Scots names.
    The goat keeping home counties set , a la Richard Briars, arrived to take advantage of cheap hooses. They will assimilate just as the thousands of other English folk did who moved to Glasgow in Victorian times.
    Why do working class literary types feel that they have to pack in as many big words as possible. Who’s kidding who?

  17. Pure verbal Flaneur, if you ask me.

    How can so much be written by one person and not amount to much? If you have something to say, say it straight and to the point. D- minus.

  18. Wullie says:

    Getting back to this discovery that the stone age population being “pretty much” the ancestors of the present population, business. When did this happen?
    Some evidence would be nice.

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.