Parading our emotions

The rugby celebrations drew people who were not even fans

The countryside and the anti-war protesters have had their turn, now it's an Olympic parade on the streets of central London. But what does our increasing need to complain, celebrate or mourn in large numbers say about us?

Lord Nelson has had a bewildering 24 hours. Tens of thousands of anti-war protesters, some dressed as bananas, filled Trafalgar Square on Sunday, followed by a flag-waving crowd to greet British sporting heroes the next day.

The angry mood had changed to triumph with the arrival of well-wishers honouring the Olympians and Paralympians for their success in Athens.

These athletes fully deserve the applause, as do the protesters the right to demonstrate. But this desire to express ourselves en masse appears to be a growing sight in London, where the Met Police says there are 4,000 such events each year, and elsewhere.

Henley in Oxfordshire was awash with Union flags held by rowing fans on Sunday to celebrate their sport's Olympic success, just as Tonbridge in Kent greeted Kelly Holmes last month.

Charged emotions

It seems the British are hitting the streets more and more, no longer happy with a letter to the MP or a toast to sporting heroes.

"Increasingly we are orientated about things which charge up our collective emotions. Pride or anger is pulling people together for public demonstrations of approval or disapproval," said Professor Dominic Abrams of the University of Kent.

Although the strikes of the 1970s got people on the streets, there is now a difference in motivation, he said.

It was unbelievable seeing people from all walks of life, some of whom had probably never watched rugby before the World Cup, lining the streets Tom Armstrong World Cup parade in 2003

"In the past, although emotions were important, demonstrations were organised around ideals or particular points.

"People might have gone on strike out of loyalty to a group or a sense that they had to do it."

But now people take to the streets out of choice and for a common goal, driven by a sense of shared identity which is further emphasised by taking part, he said.

A year ago England's World Cup-winning rugby team was greeted by up to half a million people in central London, including Tom Armstrong, 33.

He said: "It was unbelievable seeing people from all walks of life, some of whom had probably never watched rugby before the World Cup, lining the streets, leaning out of windows and standing on top of roofs shouting, waving and applauding the team."

Diana's death deeply affected many

Professor Abrams believes this kind of behaviour is encouraged by increased media coverage of events, which means people are more aware about how others are reacting to a tragedy or a sporting triumph.

And modern technology has also helped, thinks Dr Cynthia McVey, an expert in group behaviour.

Mobile phones, e-mail and the internet mean more people can receive information about demonstrations, she said.

Dr McVey traces a British shift towards overt displays of joy or anger to the death of Princess Diana in 1997, when a huge outpouring of grief "broke the mould" and legitimised public emotion.

"A huge number of people took to the streets in 1965 for Winston Churchill's funeral but that was to pay their respects in silence, so there's a qualitative difference.

"And the emotional demonstrations of women towards The Beatles was confined to a particular section of society.

"But at Princess Diana's death you got both genders looking very distressed. We weren't used to this and it made people feel it was all right to express emotions."

Whether it helps society is another matter. Although making a political point or sharing in a success is usually beneficial, Dr McVey thinks a group mentality can occasionally fuel unacceptable behaviour.