Arts, Architecture & Design, Food, Opinion & Thought

Props

On our dusk walk back to the station during our visit to Lille, our eye was caught by a brightly-lit interiors shop. As with so many shops on the continent, it was the enticing window display that did it. Before we knew, we were inside. We had gone to Lille minus hand luggage, which is just as well, since we exited sporting two very large bags containing four nicely textural wool cushions for our sofas. It was also just as well that we had restrained our other purchases that day to a box of pâtes de fruits from Méert, since we had quite a job getting through Eurostar check-in and onto the train.

So once again, we returned from France with enticing stuff, an eventuality much more likely from there than here. And it started my mind rolling on why stuff is important; after all, I spend a lot of time on this blog talking about it…

In my head, I can hear a riposte to my frequent laments about poor quality in the U.K.: people who are secure in their identities and lives do not need emotional props to make their lives worthwhile. Maybe that is why the U.K. plays everything down: its citizens are already wholly secure in themselves….

If only the evidence supported it. Quite apart from the mental health crisis, it is not that the British eschew stuff: consumer culture has never been more dominant in the nation’s life, and shopping is apparently still a national recreation, even if now done online rather than on the high street. We have so much stuff that apparently self-storage facilities are a growth sector… But when we have so much, how can we possibly appreciate it all? 

I’m not going to decry stuff as a modern sin; people have coveted attractive objects since early human times. What has perhaps changed is the balance between quality and quantity: we are now so used to it, that stuff is as cheap psychologically as it can be monetarily.

So I am not going to apologise for, in effect, arguing for more veneration of stuff. Quite apart from purely practical necessity, personal possessions may well be props for our fragile egos, as they have been since early times. The secret lies in the appreciation: choosing more carefully in the first place, and then actively appreciating what we are lucky enough to have, rather than taking it for granted, throwing it away – and buying more. People have long had possessions – but the important bit is the treasuring – rather than taking for granted. If wool cushions can genuinely add a small amount of pleasure to one’s life, then why not? But choose carefully and don’t throw away and replace after a short period!

While writing this, my attention turned to the contents of our chocolate basket, sitting on the post-lunch table.  Even there, the issue was clear: Exhibit A (below) shows the contrast in how chocolate is presented in the U.K. and Switzerland. This is not contrived: the bar of Cadbury was given to me at Christmas by a student; the Lindt was our regular fare bought from a local supermarket, and is reasonably representative of how chocolate is packaged in Switzerland. And yet it is Cadbury’s that is the most popular chocolate in the U.K.: cheap – and almost taste-free. Once again, dumbed down ‘product’ triumphs over something altogether more rewarding.

I tried a square of the Cadbury but could eat no more. The packaging said it all: 20% cocoa solids and “contains vegetable fats other than cocoa solid”. Enough to have hitherto made the EU exclude the British product from being described as chocolate in continental markets. It tasted of nothing but sugar. The dumbed-down packaging says all one needs to know about the mindset of how such products are marketed in the U.K.: a childish candy, rather than the more complex, adult offering of the Swiss. To be fair, Hotel Chocolat and others are slowly educating the British public about the possibilities – but there is a long, long way to go….

While I’m generally a fan of mindfulness, I found the concept of appreciation journalling a bit over the top  – until it occurred to me that in part, this blog does exactly that: it makes the case for choosing and owning of stuff as something less trivial: a matter of active celebration rather than mere mindless routine. One might still have the guilt-trip about needless consumption, but one solution is to turn ‘mindless’ into ‘mindful’. Material possessions can bring real pleasure to our lives – if chosen carefully and appreciated to the full. And in terms of ‘total consumption’, I suggest that choosing better is more likely to decrease our overall consumption, since it reduces levels of boredom and the need for the constant replacement of what we own.

Purchasing may be fun, but the defining part of the process should not be that moment, so much as the ongoing process of appreciative ownership. Indeed, purchasing is more pleasurable when one has the anticipation of a meaningful relationship with what one is buying. I suspect the Saturday afternoon arms-full leisure-shoppers don’t get this: our culture shops on quantity over quality every time. Mainstream retailers probably prefer it this way – but if one does decide to patronise a more discerning supplier, one finds a rather different attitude, where fewer-but-better still makes sense…

The French, Italians and others seem to know this better. My impression is that they are not as indiscriminate in what they buy as many British. Food is a perfect example: the veneration takes on almost cult-like status with renowned foodstuffs, and the knowledgeable selection of ‘good stuff’ is the informed customer’s part in this ritual. It’s a courtesy to the producer to have a deep appreciation for, and discrimination of, what one is buying. It can apply to other things too: it’s notable that many of the world’s great brands come from these countries. But I am not suggesting that brands are essential; while they acquire their reputations for a reason, there are plenty of good products out there from unknown suppliers. It’s the quality, not the label that is important.

The word ‘prop’ has another meaning: as in the ‘properties’ that actors and artists use to express their lives and work, to make that work more intense and more effective. Every day is part of the drama of one’s own life; the careful use of props to amplify and express our experiences, even to affirm our identities, is not a crime, but an integral part of the human experience – at least if done in the spirit of genuine appreciation.  

But as with chocolate, in that respect not all stuff is equal.

Opinion & Thought, Travel

Li(tt)lle differences

The transition from southern England to northern France on Eurostar is rapid, no more than 25 minutes or so. We took a daytrip to Lille a few weeks ago, our first since 2020, which was unknowingly made in the last weeks before lockdowns began.

Unlike trips made to the continent when I was younger, the brief suspension of daylight while passing under the sea is insufficient to make it feel as though you have come a long way; while the open spaces of France contrast markedly with the smaller landscapes of Kent, in many ways, the experience is one of continuity. We adjust pretty immediately.

And yet, unnoticed, many things do change, notably, the culture – a phenomenon that has always both fascinated and frustrated me. The crow-flies distance from our home to Lille is a mere 130 miles, but despite the short journey, culturally, it feels like much more. I’m not only talking about the language, though it is always a joy to be able to give my French a work-out, but Lille (unsurprisingly) is utterly French and thus worth getting up at an ungodly hour on a January weekend morning for a spot of flânerie, lunching and shopping.

I get withdrawal symptoms if I can’t do this from time to time. For me, continental city life – or at least the imagining of it – comes as close to lived perfection as I can envisage. And to be frank, there is almost nowhere in the UK that gets near that combination of architecture and cultural sophistication that is available even just 80 minutes from St Pancras.

Lille is much more manageable than Paris for a day trip. I know the city well, having visited many times over the years and have something approaching a routine for such visits – there are several streets and buildings that must form part of the base-touching. We have added to this over the years by, for example, heading to the Rue de Gand for lunch – a street a little outside the centre, which has a reliable choice of estaminets and crêperies, one of which we patronised this time for one of the best galettes I have eaten perhaps ever.

Despite the internationalisation of retail, Lille also retains many independent shops, and even the chains don’t seem as aggressively, homogeneously bland as they do in the U.K. I think the French consumer expects more, so even those shops have to try harder. Here we come to one of those marked differences: just why is it that so many independent shops survive in France, despite the fact that it too has a large out-of-town sector? And those shops seem very well frequented. They offer a far wider range of esoteric goods than one might see in the average British town or city.

I suspect it may concern approaches to things like city planning and business rates – things that have crushed many independent businesses in the U.K.  But I think it may also be a matter of attitude: those independent shops and restaurants can only survive because they are patronised – and I can see enough to note that it is not all tourist trade. Not on a cold Saturday in January. And even approaches to planning and tax rates are underpinned by a set of values.

The same thing might be said about the patrons. Unlike in the U.K., the majority of the populace of Lille still seems to think it worth dressing reasonably well for an afternoon in town. This is not to say that everyone is dressed to the nines – but there is little of the general scruffiness that one sees in the streets of towns on this side of the Channel. People make more effort.

Sitting in various restaurants and cafes, we noted groups of young people sheltering from the cold over hot chocolates – but the tarty clothes, fake tans and multiple piercings of much British youth were little in evidence. French kids somehow seem more wholesome; OK, I know that can’t possibly be the whole truth, but it is the impression. And while we’re on the subject of hot chocolate, that arrived as melted real chocolate in a glass cup, with a jug of hot milk – not the over-sweet Cadbury’s powder that is standard fare in the U.K.

 I know that it is too easy to see such things in a biased light, but this is nonetheless an impression that repeats on each visit; at what point does it cease being rose-tinted bias and just become the truth? And Lille is hardly an entirely prosperous city, so it cannot all be the product of economic privilege. For all that this may be subjective, it seems to me that France simply has a more sophisticated culture than the U.K. It simply does not tolerate the degree of dumbing down, dilution or outright bastardisation that is commonplace in the U.K. And I’m hardly the first to point this out. People at large in the UK are simply not brought up to expect good things, let alone with concepts such as “good judgement” that might allow them to discriminate more effectively.

One notes the difference, too, in small things such as the attractiveness of shop window displays. I have written about this before, but each return visit only confirms the impression. I can only conclude that that is a response to a culture that has different aesthetic expectations. This year, we added to our reference points with a gallery from where we are in the process of buying a painting that would be considered impossibly avant-garde for anywhere in this country – perhaps outside certain chichi parts of London.

Underlying my fascination with such contrasts is the question of why they arise; after all, these are communities that live a matter of only tens of miles apart, less than the distance between different parts of either country.

The easy answer would be “The Sea” – and it is surely indisputable that the English Channel is responsible for quite a lot of the contrasts between Britain and the continent. Over centuries, different traditions arose on either side of the divide, at times when crossing it was nowhere as easy as it is now.

But even this answer is not a full explanation. It does not explain why it is the British side that so often debases everything it touches or otherwise reserves it only for the elites with the finest breeding or the deepest pockets. Culture is about more than distance. And even the ease of international travel seems to be doing little to erode the differences between England and France. If anything, they seem to be getting wider, as this country plunges further into its Brexit-induced decline.

What really makes the difference is what happens in people’s minds. This is a topic I will return to, but it increasingly seems to me that the key to sustaining a cultural identity is what is sown in people’s minds. In the case of the U.K., the population under 50 years of age has never known a country not thrown open to the bleak functionality of the neo-liberal free market, with its chill commercialisation of almost every aspect of life; the replacement of cultural capital with the bland efficiency of big business, enterprises that have no interest in the warmth of the cultural fabric, but which exist solely to hoover up the maximum amount of consumers’ cash as efficiently and soullessly as possible. And most people now accept and collude with that. Maybe they don’t even know that different is possible.

The French, by comparison, seem to retain a much wider understanding of the meaning of the quality of life; they still understand that the intangibles are important – as experienced in the food and aesthetics witnessed on one random day in January 2026. Things that are not some elite luxury but are just the general daily fabric of a good quality of life. It is no accident that that country is known for these values; what perplexes me more, in this age of high-speed transport and international mobility, is why such values still seem to fail to make the journey a mere 130 miles to the adjacent country, where in some ways, life is as demoralisingly different as it could possibly be.