The old school tie

I wrote this a few years ago. I dimly recall that the school has asked Old Boys and Girls this question as part of some branding exercise. Six years on I think I still stand by my comments.

What value has been added to your life,
your achievements, even your beliefs
by virtue of being a Cranleighan?

I have no idea.

By common consent among my brothers who also went to Cranleigh and my parents who chose it, paid for it and must have the ultimate overview, this question is almost impossible to answer. Going to a school like Cranleigh is so much a part of my development that to consider it now, years later, as a discrete element that is somehow ‘Cranleigh’ is rather like plating fog. Where do you start? What can you get hold of?

Your question is provocative and given rise to a number of interesting discussions. Form these my own conclusions follow.

Cranleigh was established for the sons of the local communication and it still retains that sense of being a ‘Surrey school’. It draws on the professions in the area and produces sound people who go on to replenish these professions. Naturally it reflects the values, beliefs and expectations of this group. Cranleigh is very very good at being very very sound. Nothing flash, nothing wild; good solid, caring, sharing and sensible, if a little conservative. As a parent this must seem a wonderful if ludicrously expensive proposition.

(Perhaps you should address this question to the parents of Old Cranleighans. They are uniquely placed to provide a balanced view of the School, its values and the end results.)

A ‘Cranleighan’ is a matter of fact – one who went to the school – yet you hint at something else, something that describes a set of characteristics that are distinctly ‘Cranleigh’ (and not Charterhouse or Christ’s Hospital or….). My brothers and I are the former but find it hard to agree on the latter. Apart from our individual experiences did we share any collective values drawn exclusively from the school? Did the School have any form of identity over and above these experiences?

As a boy within the school it seemed to stand for nothing so much as everything. It wasn’t a rugger school or an academic school or a music school or ever a religious school although it pursued each of these and many many more with comforting thoroughness. Wherever excellence was possible it was nurtured, whenever achieved it was applauded. But this process appeared ad hoc, there was never a feeling of the collective pursuit and support of excellence as a school.

With hindsight I can see that this was, partly, the results of the breath of opportunity that was presented to us. No doubt this was a way of allowing everyone to achieve, to find a role, to experiment and develop. I believe this gives rise to two characteristics found in the average Cranleighan. Firstly it encourages an admirable range of knowledge and academic/intellectual curiosity. From this comes well balanced people who can form well balanced judgements. Secondly, this very breadth dissipates focus and discipline and therefore excellence in any particular field.

In such an environment it is not hard to see why formative experiences are base on individual relationship with other boys and particular masters. The school as a collective body with an identity to which any boy could subscribe never really came into it and after serious reflection I don’t believe it ever existed.

There is a motto, but in my time no-one knew what it meant and it was never, ever, invoked, by Masters. A crest and motto suggests heritage, experience, possibly wisdom but if it’s not used, referred to or acknowledged it becomes a quirk easily ignored. Much the same can be said for the School song. It was wheeled out every so often as a bit of an oddity and not really relevant. Mottos and songs do not a school make but there are symbols whose content and use reflect the nature of the place.

Among the boys there was no sense of continuity as a school. No sense of what previous generations had endured or achieved. Honours boards remained silent records of…..what? Who was V A Cox? We knew about the headmaster (Merriman, Rhodes, Emms) but not about the Cranleighans. What were we a part of? Could they inspire us or even humble us? We would never know.

In many ways this is a very good thing. I believe it meant that the boys personalities were encouraged and not dominated. It provided comfort and confidence for pupils and parents. Boys left as themselves – five years on, bigger, brighter, better and mostly harmless – and not as a specific Cranleigh model. Nothing had been drilled into them or beaten out of them. Under the ‘give-them-enough-rope-within-reason’ philosophy of adolescent management boys were allowed to find their own level. But we were rarely pushed to achieve more.

I suspect you would like something a little bit more clear cut. Something solid, clear and presentable. A brand image, a unique selling point. After a few hours of discussion nothing like this emerged. It could be created, all the elements are there, but it just doesn’t exist now.

And that may not be such a bad thing.

© MB 1995 and 2011