Letter: Luvvies, sillies and Labour

Mr Cal McCrystal
Thursday 13 April 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Is it not time to acknowledge that the "luvvies" joke ("Ken Follett resigns as Labour's luvvie-in-chief", 12 April) has had its day? I have not examined the etymology of "luvvie" but assume it to have sprung from the now widespread philistinism that regards artistic creation as sectarian and any demonstration of candour, sensitivity, enthusiasm or goodwill as an affectation to be mocked. Those involved in theatre and cinema are particularly sneered at; the more so, if they also harbour notions that society can be improved other than by destruction.

One recalls that Cambridge caste dubbed "sillies" - described by Leonard Woolf as "an intellectual aristocracy of the middle class, the nearest equivalent in other countries being the French 18th century noblesse de robe". His wife, Virginia, was a "silly"; as was G. E. Moore, author of Principia Ethica and one of the four great philosophers to come down from Cambridge at the time. Maynard Keynes, Lytton Strachey and E. M. Forster were "sillies". The word seems to have applied to those who thought themselves capable of building a new society, free, rational, civilised and in pursuit of truth and beauty. The First World War put an end to such "silliness" and the cliquish meaning of the word disappeared.

I'm sure a moratorium on "luvvy" would hold renewed bellicosity (in myself, at least) at bay.

Yours sincerely,

CAL MCCRYSTAL

London, N20

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in