Editing Nancy Mitford (section)

===''Noblesse Oblige''===
{{Main|Noblesse Oblige (book)}}
In 1954 [[Alan S.C. Ross|Alan Ross]], a [[University of Birmingham]] professor of linguistics, devised the terms [[U and non-U English|"U" and "Non-U"]] to differentiate the speech patterns of the social classes in England. "U" indicated upper-class usage, and "Non-U" the conventions of the lower strata of society.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Ross |first=Alan S.C. |author-link= Alan S.C. Ross |title=Linguistic Class Indicators in Present-day English |url=http://www.helsinki.fi/jarj/ufy/24991_s113_150Ross.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170819065747/http://www.helsinki.fi/jarj/ufy/24991_s113_150Ross.pdf |archive-date=19 August 2017 |journal=Neuphilologische Mitteilungen |pages=113–49 |date=1954}}</ref> His article, in a learned Finnish journal and with an illustrative glossary, used ''The Pursuit of Love'' to exemplify upper-class speech patterns.<ref name="Hastings223">Hastings, pp. 223–225.</ref> In a spirit of mischief, Mitford incorporated the U and Non-U thesis into an article she was writing for ''[[Encounter (magazine)|Encounter]]'' on the English aristocracy.<ref>{{cite journal|last= Mitford|first= Nancy|title= The English Aristocracy|journal= Encounter|date= September 1955|pages=11–15}}</ref> Although the aspect formed only a small section of Mitford's article, when it was published in September 1955 it caused a major stir.<ref name=Hastings223/> Few recognised the tongue-in-cheek aspect. Mitford received hundreds of letters from worried readers desperate to know if they were snobs or merely "common".<ref name=Thompson294>{{harvnb|Thompson|2003|pp=294–95}}</ref> The level of anxious or amused interest was sustained to such an extent that in 1956 Hamish Hamilton reproduced the article in a short book, ''[[Noblesse Oblige (book)|Noblesse Oblige]]''. The book also included an abbreviated version of Ross's original article,{{#tag:ref|An article in ''Language'', the journal of the Linguistic Society of America, complained that too much of the original Ross article had been omitted, including everything related to pronunciation.<ref>{{cite journal|last= Bailey|first= Richard W.|title= Reviews: Talking Proper: The rise of accent as a social symbol|jstor= 4489870|journal= Language|volume= 81|issue= 1|date= March 2005|pages=269–71|doi=10.1353/lan.2005.0002|s2cid= 143494221}} {{subscription required}}</ref> |group= n}} and contributions from Waugh,<ref>{{cite journal|author-link= Evelyn Waugh|last=Waugh|first= Evelyn|title= An Open Letter to the Hon. Mrs. Peter Rodd (Nancy Mitford) on a Very Serious Subject|journal= Encounter|date= December 1955|pages=11–16}}</ref> Betjeman, [[Peter Fleming (writer)|Peter Fleming]] and [[Christopher Sykes (author)|Christopher Sykes]],<ref>Acton, p. 99.</ref> It was a tremendous success; as Lovell records, "'U and Non-U' was the buzz phrase of the day&nbsp;... Nancy's comments made her the arbiter of good manners for several generations".<ref>Lovell, pp. 452–53.</ref> Thompson notes the irony that the U and Non-U labels, perhaps Mitford's best-known legacy, were not her own but were borrowed for the purpose of a "tease".<ref name=Thompson294/>{{#tag:ref|The terms "U and Non-U" entered the language permanently; Thompson argues that the notoriety associated with ''Noblesse Oblige'' came to haunt Mitford, partly by branding her in some eyes as a "super-snob" and partly by distracting attention from her serious writing. ''The Daily Telegraph''{{'}}s obituary in 1973 was headed: "Nancy Mitford, U and Non-U creator, dies at 68".<ref>{{harvnb|Thompson|2003|p=297}}</ref> |group= n}}