meaning deeper than that understood by the Hayes Society.

 

In fact, a comparison of how I might interpret 'a distinguished household' with

what the Hayes Society understood by that term illuminates sharply, I believe,

the fundamental difference between the values of our generation of butlers and

those of the previous generation. When I say this, I am not merely drawing

attention to the fact that our generation had a less snobbish attitude as

regards which employers were landed gentry and which were 'business'. What I am

trying to say - and I do not think this an unfair comment - is that we were a

much more idealistic generation. Where our elders might have been concerned with

whether or not an employer was titled, or otherwise from one of the 'old'

families, we tended to concern ourselves much more with the moral status of an

employer. I do not mean by this that we were preoccupied with our employers'

private behaviour. What I mean is that we were ambitious, in a way that would

have been unusual a generation before, to serve gentlemen who were, so to speak,

furthering the progress of humanity. It would have been seen as a far worthier

calling, for instance, to serve a gentleman such as Mr George Ketteridge, who,

however humble his beginnings, has made an undeniable contribution to the future

well-being of the empire, than any gentleman, however aristocratic his origin,

who idled away his time in clubs or on golf courses.

 

In practice, of course, many gentlemen from the noblest families have tended to

devote themselves to alleviating the great problems of the day, and so, at a

glance, it may have appeared that the ambitions of our generation differed

little from those of our predecessors. But I can vouch there was a crucial