I've read through this thread with some amusement / bemusement with regard to some quaint but what I can't help but feel are slightly distorted views on the 'ethos' of CH. It never has been, any more than the rest of life, the fantasy 'level playing field'. At least I certainly don't remember taking part in any mixed ability classes in my day, dominated by an atmosphere of elitism rather than inclusivity.
Aspiration and awareness of the notions of status and privilege are clearly a part of CH tradition. In truth, since when haven't public schools in general been synonymous in the public eye with yes-man deference/fagging along with croneyism/the Old Boy network? I arrived there in 1970 on an ILEA scholarship and there was certainly a fair spattering of sons of the well-off and successful as well as the professional classes.
Even 40 years ago the financial situation tottered on the brink. My own reservations about the school have always regarded the lack of robust leadership and innovation which seems to see it go through a more or less permanent – to adopt a phrase from my old headmaster – malaise. So what's the current deal with upping the percentage of foreign full-fee paying customers? Presumably as the Entrance Exam remains competitive that shouldn't deprive any worthy but monetarily bereft English soul from gaining a place? Or automatically lead to hush-hush privileges for forementioned premium customers? Again, that's up to the leadership of the school to enforce, surely. A liitle question of trust.
Don't get me wrong, despite myself and despite the inherent paradoxes in the public school system, I think that CH is an institution vindicated and validated over time, a potentially life-changing experience for a searching young mind, and that it would be a great shame were it to be broken up or to disappear altogether. In the meantime, anything that staves off the possibility of it becoming roadkill for beastly market forces is surely a good thing.
Roll on the Age of Aquarius.
