Americans often assume that the pecking order of social classes resembles a ladder. Thus, someone from the lower reaches of the middle class necessarily outranks a member of the upper reaches of working class. In Class, his classic study of the American status system, the late Paul Fussell took a different view. He argued that, when it came to things like income, influence, autonomy, and the respect paid by others, the place of a person within his social class was far more important than the broader category to which he belonged.
High school guidance counselors, and other members of the college admission industry, invariably embrace the “ladder” theory of the social pecking order. That is, they believe that studying at Harvard is better than attending the University of Massachusetts, that matriculating at the University of Massachusetts is better than going to Fitchburg State, and that spending four (or more) years at Fitchburg State is better than any sort of college-free alternative.
Professor Fussell begs to differ. In his scheme, the “high prole” has much more in common with the Harvard man than he does with the graduate of Fitchburg State. People at the top of their respective social class enjoy the esteem of their class-mates, make more than enough money to meet their social obligations, and, best of all, can quickly recover from the loss of a job. At the same time, people at the bottom of their social class garner little respect, struggle to “keep up appearances,” and frequently feel obliged to kowtow to tyrannical employers.