X Close

The North East is too nostalgic A new generation needs inspiration

"Busy Bar" by Norman Cornish. Copyright: Norman Cornish Ltd

"Busy Bar" by Norman Cornish. Copyright: Norman Cornish Ltd


August 12, 2024   6 mins

“We had nowt, but we were happy” became my grandmother’s catchphrase in her later years. I was never sure if she was being serious, not least because I knew how grim the Depression had been in the pit villages of the North East: a time when she’d lost her teenage sister to diabetes and seen two of her closest childhood friends turfed out of their colliery-owned house after their father was killed in an accident at the pit.

But rather than dwell on such hardships, my grandmother grew nostalgic for the everyday kindnesses and instinctive mutuality that, for all their faults, characterised coalfield communities. The extent to which ordinary people relied on one another then is hard for later generations to imagine.

Some of the best evocations of that world can be found in “Kith and Kinship: Norman Cornish and L.S. Lowry”, an exhibition which has recently opened at the Bowes Museum in County Durham. The museum itself is an astonishing sight: a vast Second Empire chateau built on the edge of Barnard Castle by John Bowes, the playboy scion of a local coal-owning dynasty, to house his art collection. Nikolaus Pevsner called it “gloriously inappropriate”. So it is pleasing to see the working-class paintings of Cornish and Lowry take their place alongside all those Raphaels and Van Dycks.

What is immediately apparent on entering the exhibition is the contrasting personalities of the two artists. Cornish, a former miner, was an active participant in the coal town of Spennymoor that remained his constant muse, while Lowry, a rent collector, was the eternal outsider. This is reflected too in their work, where the beaten-down stickmen and women of Lowry’s Salford diverge from the warmth and joviality of Cornish’s Durham folk, a people that he always refused to portray as “cowed and defeated”.

The peasant-strength of Cornish’s subjects call to mind the works of Brueghel, Rembrandt and van Gogh, which Cornish had spent every spare moment studying as a young miner. Yet it was not just his phenomenal talent as a painter that won Cornish so many admirers, but his vision as a storyteller. “He is a painter of place in a way that Thomas Hardy is a writer of place,” wrote Melvyn Bragg. “Spennymoor is the grain of sand in which he brings a whole world to life.”

Lowry, by contrast, has a colder eye. His silent, almost robotic figures seem isolated from one another. “All these people in my pictures, they are all alone you know,” he once said. “Crowds are the most lonely thing of all. Everyone is a stranger to everyone else.” There is a hint in his Salford pictures of Karl Marx’s idea of the alienation of labour. As Robert McManners and Gillian Wales observe in The Quintessential Cornish, Lowry’s characters “are relegated to automata by the harshness of industrialisation and each figure is almost incidental. Norman’s, by contrast, are elevated to centre-stage… They are people who each have a life before, during and after the picture.”

One explanation for this artistic divergence is the type of industrial work that dominated Lowry’s Cottonopolis compared to Cornish’s Durham coalfield. Friedrich Engels once wrote of the “nameless misery” of the workers he observed in Manchester, and novelists from Charlies Dickens onwards described in horror its stygian gloom and satanic mills. But the coalfields were different; here was a landscape that was by no means picturesquely rural, but it wasn’t quite grimly urban either. The miners here had a strange love-hate relationship with the pits too, where the work could be debilitating and often lethally dangerous, but it could also be satisfying and often thrilling. My own pitman grandfather would recount stories about intense workplace camaraderie until the day he died.

The miners also created a distinctive culture, where an interest in the arts was not uncommon — just consider the Pitmen Painters, or even Billy Elliot. Cornish himself once said: “I’m sick of being looked at like some sort of zoo animal or specimen… It assumes that a man who works in a mine is not up to writing or painting or playing music. But it simply isn’t true.” Of course, not every miner was an autodidact. But Cornish’s attitude was certainly shared by my own grandfather, who read voraciously and always had a sketchbook to hand.

Another hallmark of the coalfields was the working men’s clubs, and Cornish was a fabulous painter of bar scenes. Among my favourites in the exhibition is his much-reproduced image of two flat-cap-wearing blokes leaning on the bar, greyhound at their feet. These men are “Tosser” Angus and Joe Hughes, miners who served in the Second World War in the Durham Light Infantry, and who were among the last men off the Dunkirk beaches, before seeing brutal combat in North Africa and Sicily.

“Two Men at Bar with Dog” by Norman Cornish. Copyright: Norman Cornish Ltd.

In Cornish’s vision, the worlds of work and recreation are strictly gendered. No women appear at the coalface, where they had been forbidden from working since the 1840s, and the bar room was a male preserve. (Indeed, I saw women being ushered out of the bar of working men’s clubs as recently as the Nineties.) Miners could be as superstitious as sailors in their attitude to women, and it was considered unlucky to pass a female on the way to the pit.

This gendered division of labour was driven by the needs of the coal industry, which needed their thoroughbreds well-cared for, fed and washed around the clock. In many ways, the role of pitman’s wife was similar to that of a groom to a horse. It was common for miners to pay tribute to female labour in their writing and their art, and Cornish’s tender paintings of his wife Sarah performing tasks which might be seen as drudgery — peeling potatoes, cooking, ironing — are both reverent and dignified.

But for all their stoicism there is something wistful about these women. Perhaps Sarah Cornish — an accomplished pianist who had worked as a nurse during the war — nurtured a sense of thwarted ambition that I sometimes detected in my own grandmother. For feminist writers such as Beatrix Campbell, this was a source of shame. “No group of men has been so cold and confident in its exclusion of women, yet so dependent on their support,” she wrote of the miners of the Northern Coalfield. We don’t know if Cornish would have agreed, but a characterful, almost Rembrandtian, sketch of his grandmother, which he drew when he was only 17, says something profound about the respect he felt for the matriarchs that made these communities tick.

I am sure that many of the visitors to this exhibition will feel the pangs of nostalgia. Yet this was far from a progressive age. For the strength of community in these pit villages, and their distinctive work ethic, relied on socially-enforced codes of behaviour, and a low-level surveillance culture that our modern individualistic sensibilities would probably make us recoil from today.

“The strength of community relied on a low-level surveillance culture.”

And yet, in a recent interview, the political philosopher John Gray argued that much was lost when his tight-knit, “rather matriarchal” street community in the coal and shipbuilding town of South Shields was broken up. When the Gray family and their neighbours were moved out of town in the Sixties to better housing in newly-built orbital council estates, he noticed that almost immediately “there was graffiti, there was street crime, there were all the pathologies of what sociologists call anomic individualism”. He concluded that “great advances”, such as those brought about by the Labour government of 1945-1950, “are often associated with losses”. These formative early years led, he said, to a lifelong scepticism about progress.

How, then, might we assess the progress of the North of England since the days of Lowry and Cornish? The North East in particular has had a difficult last century, with only sporadic interludes of confidence and prosperity — notably in the Fifties. It now has among the very worst health, education and employment outcomes in the country. Indeed, for all the improvements in housing and healthcare, the coming of the centralised welfare state in places such as County Durham was a mixed blessing, emasculating once-proud local institutions, and bureaucratising many aspects of social life.

There are still occasional glimmers of the old days. In “left behind” Sacriston, a former pit village not far from Spennymoor, local women took over the derelict former Co-op in 2019 to establish a family centre, and local networks were set up to tackle male loneliness. These community efforts, according to a team of UCL researchers, were galvanised by a sense of “constructive nostalgia” for a time when the village was confident enough to solve its own problems through a web of communal institutions:

“But people in Sacriston are not nostalgic for mining disasters, unemployment, emphysema or dysentery. Rather, they lament a lost era of relative prosperity based on secure local employment and the erosion of the community bonds that were the basis for their struggle to improve life in the village, which produced genuine ‘pride in place’.”

By stirring our collective memory, the Kith and Kinship exhibition reminds us of what community life in the North East was and could be again. The challenge for anyone concerned about the region’s future is not to recreate the past, but to convey its history to inspire a new generation of community builders.

***

Kith and Kinship: Norman Cornish and L.S. Lowry is at the Bowes Museum from 20 July until 19 January.


Dan Jackson is the author of the best-selling book The Northumbrians: The North East of England and its People. A New History, published by Hurst (2019)

 

northumbriana

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

16 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brian Kneebone
Brian Kneebone
1 month ago

Good piece. As a wider interpretation I would argue that the UK, rather than build better on its industrial foundations basically wrecked the foundations and replaced it with the husk of today. Politicians bear most of the blame. Sixty years of retrenchment and dead ends have done their job.
Too late, perhaps.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
1 month ago
Reply to  Brian Kneebone

Come off it. The mines were doomed, as they were pretty much everywhere in Europe and even the US. That isn’t to say the response to this was fantastic. But you can’t artificially keep industries alive forever.

Pedro the Exile
Pedro the Exile
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

That isn’t to say the response to this was fantastic
I was brought up in a pit town in Lancashire in the 60′ and saw the impact of deindustrialisation and the problem was not the closures per se but absolutely no coherent plan to manage the decline and ensure there were replacement jobs.The same is happening with Nut Zero unfortunately-no lessons learned.

David McKee
David McKee
1 month ago

At this telling, Gray is right to be sceptical of progress. We should also be sceptical of nostalgia.

Working class communities: cohesion, low crime, mutual support, but also rickets, economic insecurity, domestic violence.

Modernity: indoor loos, tolerance of gays, opportunities for the talented, more freedom for women, but also ubiquitous drug abuse, loneliness, selfishness.

I would hazard a guess that personal happiness flourishes best in secure communities and reasonable prosperity.

Brett H
Brett H
1 month ago
Reply to  David McKee

“secure communities and reasonable prosperity.”
Has that ever existed? I can’t think of a time when it might have. Though my youth in New Zealand might have been that, but I’m not sure about others. Without realising it at the time I was living in a working class town. My father worked in the city. My friends’ fathers were bricklayers or worked in the factories. There were very poor families. I don’t know what their lives were like, The women, from my young observation, seemed to be tired and frazzled and a little short with you at times. The men could be blunt about your attitudes, like there was some resentment. I look back on it in a nostalgic way but I can’t speak for the others.
I had a friend from a mining village in England. He couldn’t wait to get out, not because of the work, the prospect of the mine, but because of the attitudes he chafed against. It occurs to me that now, today, you can’t get away from the attitudes you chafe against, they’re almost universal. I wonder, if in the future, there’ll even be room for nostalgia.

Lancashire Lad
Lancashire Lad
1 month ago

An exhibition of works by Cornish and Lowry in the North East could just as easily be an exhibition by Lowry and Cornish in the North West. Substitute cotton for coal. Substitute Blackburn for Spennymoor. (I use Blackburn since our non-UK readers may be familiar with the Beatles song invoking “holes” i.e.potholes in the roads, as a sign of neglect).

The common theme would be the legacy of post-industrial decline. In the 18th & 19th centuries, the movement of the population from rural to urban created the world’s first industrialised communities. Once the rest of the world started to catch up, the UK had no precedent for how to manage the decline. Those which followed (e.g. the Rust Belt in the US) didn’t learn from it; to be fair, the two industrialised nations grew if not simultaneously then one after the other with no real chance to reflect or learn how to manage de-industrialisation. This is the world the West has to manage now, and we’re struggling. The human element has changed: individuals not communities. I’m one of them (the former) and sense all the advantages and disadvantages of both.

An interesting prospect: another of today’s articles describes the urbanisation of China. Will the same fate await the Chinese, a hundred years or so hence?

Jon Morrow
Jon Morrow
1 month ago
Reply to  Lancashire Lad

Absolutely the same fate awaits China, because it is hubris to think that it is possible to manage decline in an economy, once governments get involved they make it worse.

General Store
General Store
1 month ago
Reply to  Lancashire Lad

Schumpeter: creative destruction – inexorable

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 month ago
Reply to  Lancashire Lad

Thank you for explaining that lyric I knew had to mean something but didn’t know how to find out. But what is meant by “now we know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall”?

Lancashire Lad
Lancashire Lad
1 month ago

I suspect it was a scatological reference to arseholes.

General Store
General Store
1 month ago

Great piece

James Clark
James Clark
1 month ago

Dan, thank you. I was introduced to you first via The Rest is History. (And there are personal reasons why I’m interested in Northumbria.) But in the context of my own history, as the son of a mining family – who went on to do very different things, yet remains deeply connected to his sprawling family, and recognises that family’s role in his own evolution – this was really thought-provoking. The key thing(s) I’m thinking about as a result of reading this article are around the difference between pit communities (and maybe other ‘extractive’ occupations … don’t know?) and the “new” communities forced-created as a result of the shift from the land to the industrial cities

James Clark
James Clark
1 month ago

And: I would really, really like to thank you for introducing me to Cornish’s work. I had never heard about it before now. And – although I appreciated Lowry’s work, and his focus on working class experience – it always (for me) had that quality you describe of making the individual people just “drones”

James Clark
James Clark
1 month ago
Reply to  James Clark

… whereas I definitely knew them all as people (real, complex people in the Cornish mould)

James Clark
James Clark
1 month ago

I will do my best to visit the exhibition

General Store
General Store
1 month ago

What would liberate Northumbrians and Geordies would be libertarianism for families, for communities – and a reduction in the scope and intensity of state interventions. We need total deregulation of home-based, farm-gate enterprise. Regulation and tax should be proportionate to SCALE of enterprise and SCOPE. Brewers and distillers selling at farm gate or doorstep – ZERO intervention, buyer beware. Same with all food products. Family brew pubs (as opposed to chains)….Small garages as opposed to chains……Get the jackboot of the state off the neck of the people….Household production of anything – sold at gate only, zero tax, zero regulation…..Less means tested welfare but a universal partial basic income (tax credits paid in advance to everyone)….End the poverty trap. Child- school credits instead of funding schools. If communities want to get together and create their own schools, or families want to homeschool….all good. A total ban on local state pushing ideological pride agenda through schools….. Craft schools, guilds…less BS university education….Bring back proper polytechnics. Total end to DEI. More power for individuals and communities to solve their own problems, build their own houses, build their own bridges if necessary ……And end to the state nipple …..There is a great deal we could do. First we need to destroy the Labour Party.