Hubbry Logo
SnobSnobMain
Open search
Snob
Community hub
Snob
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Snob
Snob
Snob
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Caricature of American lawyer and socialite Ward McAllister (1855–1908) pointing Uncle Sam to "an English Snob of the 19th Century" and saying how he must imitate him or "you will nevah be a gentleman". Uncle Sam is shown laughing heartily.

Snob is a pejorative term for a person who feels superior due to their social class, education level, or social status in general;[1] it is sometimes used especially when they pretend to belong to these classes. The word snobbery came into use for the first time in England during the 1820s.

Examples

[edit]

Snobs can through time be found ingratiating themselves with a range of prominent groups – soldiers (Sparta, 400 BCE), bishops (Rome, 1500), poets (Weimar, 1815) – for the primary interest of snobs is distinction, and as its definition changes, so, naturally and immediately, will the objects of the snob's admiration.[1]

Snobbery existed also in medieval feudal aristocratic Europe when the clothing, manners, language, and tastes of every class were strictly codified by customs or law. Geoffrey Chaucer, a poet moving in the court circles, noted the provincial French spoken by the Prioress among the Canterbury pilgrims:

And French she spoke full fair and fetisly
After the school of Stratford atte Bowe,
For French of Paris was to her unknowe.

William Rothwell notes "the simplistic contrast between the 'pure' French of Paris and her 'defective' French of Stratford atte Bowe that would invite disparagement".[2]

Snobbery surfaced more strongly as the structure of the society changed, and the bourgeoisie had the possibility to imitate aristocracy.[3] Snobbery appears when elements of culture are perceived as belonging to an aristocracy or elite, and some people (the snobs) feel that the mere adoption of the fashion and tastes of the elite or aristocracy is sufficient to include someone in the elites, upper classes or aristocracy.[4]

Snob victim

[edit]

The term "snob" is often misused when describing a "gold-tap owner",[1] i.e. a person who insists on displaying (sometimes non-existent) wealth through conspicuous consumption of luxury goods such as clothes, jewelry, cars etc. Displaying awards or talents in a rude manner, boasting, is a form of snobbery. A popular example of a "snob victim" is the television character Hyacinth Bucket of the BBC comedy series Keeping Up Appearances.

Analysis

[edit]

William Hazlitt observed, in a culture where deference to class was accepted as a positive and unifying principle,[5] "Fashion is gentility running away from vulgarity, and afraid of being overtaken by it," adding subversively, "It is a sign the two things are not very far apart."[6] The English novelist Bulwer-Lytton remarked in passing, "Ideas travel upwards, manners downwards."[7] It was not the deeply ingrained and fundamentally accepted idea of "one's betters" that has marked snobbery in traditional European and American culture, but "aping one's betters".

Snobbery is a defensive expression of social insecurity, flourishing most where an establishment has become less than secure in the exercise of its traditional prerogatives, and thus it was more an organizing principle for Thackeray's glimpses of British society in the threatening atmosphere of the 1840s than it was of Hazlitt, writing in the comparative social stability of the 1820s.[8]

Snobbatives

[edit]

Ghil'ad Zuckermann proposes the term snobbative to refer to a pretentious, highfalutin phrase used by a person in order to sound snobbish. The term derives from snob + -ative, modelled upon comparatives and superlatives. Thus, in its narrow sense, a snobbative is a pompous (phonetic) variant of a word. Consider the following hypercorrect pronunciations in Israeli Hebrew:[9]: 184 

  1. khupím is a snobbative of khofím (חופים‎), which means "beaches";
  2. tsorfát is a snobbative of tsarfát (צרפת‎), which refers to "France";
  3. amán is a snobbative of omán (אמן‎), which means "artist".[9]: 184 

A non-hypercorrect example in Israeli Hebrew is filozófya, a snobbative of filosófya (פילוסופיה‎), which means "philosophy".[9]: 184  The snobbative filozófya (with z) was inspired by the pronunciation of the Israeli Hebrew word פילוסופיה‎ by German Jewish professors of philosophy, whose speech was characterized by intervocalic voicing of the s as in their German mother tongue.[9]: 190 

See also

[edit]
Ad for the American film The Snob, 1921 film with Wanda Hawley and Walter Hiers, on inside front cover of the January 30, 1921 Film Daily.

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Snob

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A snob is a term denoting a who asserts superiority over others based on , , cultural tastes, or other markers of refinement, often manifesting in disdain or condescension toward those perceived as inferior. The word originated in late 18th-century English dialect as slang for a shoemaker or apprentice, later shifting in university slang to describe townspeople or lower-class individuals, and by the early 19th century referring to those who imitated their social betters without genuine entitlement. This evolution culminated in its modern connotation, popularized by William Makepeace Thackeray's 1848 satirical The Book of Snobs, which critiqued the pretensions of Victorian society across classes, portraying snobbery as a pervasive vice arising from vulgar emulation rather than aristocratic tradition. Sociologically, snobbery involves hierarchical grading of individuals by arbitrary standards of taste or status, often compensating for personal insecurities through judgmental exclusivity, though it can reflect adaptive signaling in competitive social environments. Psychologically, it correlates with underlying shame or inferiority, prompting defensive elevation of self-perceived expertise, which undermines authentic achievements and fosters isolation. Culturally, snobs have been depicted in literature and as arbiters of elite norms, such as 19th-century socialite , whose gatekeeping of New York high society exemplified the type's influence on defining exclusivity.

Definition and Characteristics

Core Definition

A snob is a who claims superiority over others on the basis of , , , cultural , or refined tastes, typically expressing disdain or toward those deemed inferior in these domains. This attitude often involves an exaggerated emphasis on status markers—such as brand names, elite institutions, or exclusive experiences—as proxies for personal worth, leading to judgmental behavior that prioritizes hierarchy over merit or shared humanity. Core to snobbery is a dual mechanism: self-elevation through association with perceived high-status elements and denigration of alternatives, regardless of objective or . For instance, a wine snob might dismiss affordable yet palatable options in favor of exorbitant vintages solely for their prestige, or an snob could belittle popular media while ignoring its broader or insights. Such traits stem from a need to signal distinction in competitive social environments, where empirical evidence shows snobbery correlates with insecurity masked by arrogance, as individuals overvalue non-essential differentiators to affirm their position. Empirically, snobbery manifests in behaviors like name- affiliations, critiquing others' choices as vulgar or uninformed, and avoiding associations that might dilute one's curated . Studies of indicate this reinforces in-group cohesion among elites but alienates wider , often yielding in genuine influence or satisfaction. Unlike earned based on verifiable skills or contributions, snobbery relies on superficial proxies, which historical analyses trace to aspirational rather than innate superiority.

Key Traits and Behaviors

Snobs typically display an exaggerated valuation of attributes such as , , refined tastes, or social connections, while derogating individuals or groups perceived as deficient in these areas. This manifests in behaviors like condescending speech or dismissive gestures toward those deemed inferior, often to affirm their own elevated status. A core is selective exclusivity in social interactions, preferring association only with individuals matching or exceeding their self-perceived standards of , such as limiting friendships to those with comparable levels or cultural interests. This exclusivity reinforces a sense of superiority but can isolate the snob from broader social . Judgmental criticism forms another hallmark, where snobs habitually critique others' preferences in areas like , , or activities, labeling mainstream or accessible options as vulgar or uncouth. For instance, they may express disdain for popular , insisting on niche alternatives as the sole markers of discernment. Bragging or overt signaling of their advantages, such as name-dropping elite acquaintances or flaunting possessions, serves to elicit admiration and delineate social boundaries. Expectations of preferential treatment, like demanding service attuned to their refined sensibilities, further underscore this entitlement. In social settings, snobs often adopt postures of aloofness or superiority, avoiding engagement with "lesser" company and prioritizing displays of erudition or exclusivity to maintain hierarchical distinctions. These patterns, while varying by context, consistently prioritize self-elevation through comparison and exclusion.

Etymology and Historical Development

Origins of the Term

The term snob first appears in English records around , denoting a shoemaker or cobbler, though the precise etymological root remains unknown despite various conjectures. This early usage likely derived from dialectal or expressions in , possibly linked to , but no definitive precursor has been traced. By the 1790s, the word had entered to describe a "townsman"—a non-student resident of the town, often viewed with disdain by "gownmen" (university students wearing academic robes)—contrasting social outsiders with the privileged academic elite. This shift marked an initial pejorative connotation tied to lower social status, reflecting class tensions in university settings where townsfolk serviced but were subordinate to students. A folk etymology, popularized in the mid-19th century, proposed snob as an abbreviation of Latin sine nobilitate ("without nobility"), allegedly used in university registers to denote commoners lacking aristocratic titles. The earliest version of this legend dates to 1850, coinciding with the word's evolving sense of social pretension, but linguistic analysis dismisses it as coincidental; abbreviations like s. nob. appeared in some 18th-century matriculation lists, yet they postdated the term's independent slang usage and lacked direct causal link. Scholars attribute the persistence of this explanation to retrospective rationalization rather than historical evidence, as the shoemaker-to-townsman progression aligns more closely with documented slang evolution in lower-class and student vernacular. This foundational phase laid the groundwork for later expansions, with snob by the 1820s denoting a vulgar or mean person of inferior rank, setting the stage for its 19th-century refinement into someone who imitates upper-class manners without genuine entitlement. The term's opacity underscores broader challenges in tracing slang origins, often reliant on fragmentary records from oral traditions rather than formal literature.

Evolution Through the 19th and 20th Centuries

In the early , the term "snob" shifted from denoting a lower-class , such as a townsman or non-aristocrat, to describing someone who vulgarly aped social superiors. This reflected growing middle-class mobility and toward pretentious displays amid industrialization. accelerated the change through his satirical essays in Punch magazine from 1846 to 1847, collected as The Book of Snobs in 1848, which fixed the word's meaning as obsequious admiration for wealth and rank. By mid-century, "snobbery" emerged as a critique of such behavior, capturing tensions between inherited aristocracy and emergent wealth. In the United States, late-19th-century figures like Ward McAllister embodied this by compiling "The Four Hundred," a 1890 list defining New York high society and enforcing Anglo-inspired exclusivity. Entering the , "snob" broadened to include those exhibiting smug rejection of inferiors, as in a 1901 to social exclusiveness. By 1911, it denoted contempt for those deemed lower in rank, attainment, or . The 1909 coinage of "inverted snob" described anti-elite posturing, signaling adaptations to democratizing societies and welfare states. These shifts paralleled literature's of cultural hierarchies, extending snobbery beyond class to and .

Types of Snobbery

Social and Class-Based Snobbery

Social and class-based snobbery entails attitudes of superiority predicated on socioeconomic position, family pedigree, or inherited wealth, often manifesting as exclusion of or disdain toward those from lower strata. Individuals exhibiting this trait prioritize traditional elite markers—such as lineage or old money—over personal merit, enforcing social boundaries through selective associations and judgments of taste or manners deemed inferior. This form of snobbery reinforces hierarchical structures by devaluing upward mobility from non-elite origins. In 19th-century Britain, class snobbery was satirized by William Makepeace Thackeray in The Book of Snobs (1848), a series of essays depicting middle-class aspirants who fawned over aristocracy while scorning the working classes, defining snobs as those who "open the door of a carriage with a flourish" to curry favor with superiors. Thackeray highlighted how such behavior stemmed from a graded class system where status signaled moral and cultural worth, with snobs aping noble habits to mask their own middling roots. Across the Atlantic, during the Gilded Age, Ward McAllister embodied American social snobbery as self-appointed arbiter of New York elite society, compiling the "Four Hundred" list published in the New York Tribune on February 16, 1892, which confined high society to 400 families of established pedigree, sidelining industrial nouveaux riches like the Vanderbilts despite their fortunes. McAllister's criteria emphasized European-influenced refinement and hereditary status, fostering resentment and caricature as a purveyor of exclusionary elitism. Literary critiques, such as Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice (1813), further illustrate class snobbery through characters like , who demanded based on rank and opposed alliances across class lines, reflecting Regency England's rigid where birth determined worthiness. These examples how class-based snobbery historically perpetuated inequality by conflating social origin with inherent value, often at the of character or accomplishment.

Cultural and Intellectual Snobbery

Cultural snobbery entails an attitude of superiority based on preferences for elite artistic, literary, or musical forms, such as opera, abstract painting, or canonical novels, while dismissing popular culture like commercial films or folk music as vulgar or inferior. This form of snobbery positions cultural discernment as a marker of refinement, often implying that those favoring mass entertainments lack sophistication. Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu analyzed it as "cultural capital" in his 1979 study Distinction, arguing that tastes for legitimate high culture—acquired through family habitus and education—reinforce class distinctions by naturalizing inequality under the guise of aesthetic judgment. However, Bourdieu's framework, rooted in 1960s French surveys, overemphasizes rigid homology between class and taste; U.S. empirical data from the same era onward reveal elites increasingly adopting "omnivorous" patterns, blending highbrow pursuits with lowbrow ones to signal cultural breadth rather than exclusivity, thus diluting overt snobbery. Intellectual snobbery, closely allied but distinct, derives from perceived superiority in education, logical rigor, or esoteric , leading to disdain for individuals or ideas deemed insufficiently cerebral or credentialed. For instance, academics may deride non-specialists' opinions on complex topics, invoking specialized as a gatekeeping mechanism. , in his 1930s "Selected Snobberies," highlighted intellectuals' endorsement of culture-snobbery while practicing subtler forms, such as prizing abstract over practical , which he saw as a compensatory vice amid modernity's leveling forces. Empirical observations in sociology note its persistence in elite institutions, where metrics like Ivy League pedigrees or publication counts serve as proxies for merit, though this can mask conformism to prevailing ideological norms rather than genuine intellectual depth. Historically, cultural snobbery peaked in the late 19th and early 20th centuries amid industrialization, when European and American elites contrasted symphony orchestras against vaudeville, viewing the latter as symptomatic of democratic decay; Thorstein Veblen's 1899 Theory of the Leisure Class framed such displays as "conspicuous consumption" of refined leisure to flaunt non-pecuniary status. By the mid-20th century, this waned in the U.S. as mass media proliferated, with highbrow exclusivity giving way to hybrid tastes—e.g., educated consumers enjoying both Proust and pulp fiction—reflecting broader access to cultural goods post-World War II. Modern manifestations include food snobbery, where artisanal cuisines supplant traditional arts as status signals, as noted in analyses of urban elite dining habits since the 2000s. Intellectually, chronological snobbery—coined by C.S. Lewis in 1939—exemplifies a variant, wherein contemporaries uncritically assume contemporary ideas surpass historical ones due to temporal proximity, ignoring evidence of perennial truths in pre-modern philosophy. Both types intersect in academia and media, where gatekeepers prioritize "serious" discourse over accessible forms, potentially stifling innovation; yet, defenders argue they incentivize excellence by upholding standards against mediocrity, as Huxley's critique implies snobbery's role in preserving cultural hierarchies against egalitarian erosion. Psychological underpinnings suggest snobbery compensates for insecurity, with cultural and intellectual variants signaling competence in zero-sum status games, though cross-cultural studies indicate variability tied to societal inequality levels. In hierarchical contexts, these behaviors persist as low-cost signals of distinction, verifiable in consumption patterns: higher socioeconomic groups report 20-30% greater engagement with museums and theaters, per General Social Survey data from 1982-2012, even as omnivorism rises.

Reverse Snobbery

Reverse snobbery, also termed inverse snobbery, refers to an attitude of disdain toward those perceived as having higher social status, education, or refinement, often coupled with exaggerated pride in one's own purportedly humble or common origins. This form of prejudice manifests as mockery of elite tastes, achievements, or backgrounds, positioning the "common" as morally or culturally superior while rejecting anything associated with sophistication or success. Psychologically, reverse snobbery functions as an ego defense mechanism against the perceived threats posed by others' superior status, allowing individuals to diminish the value of accomplishments they lack. It arises particularly among those with lower socioeconomic standing, , or , who may sneer at higher-status individuals to preserve self-esteem without personal effort toward . This mirrors traditional snobbery in its reliance on arbitrary hierarchies but inverts the valuation, often rooted in underlying or insecurity rather than genuine . In practice, reverse snobbery reinforces social divisions by dismissing merit-based distinctions as elitist, such as deriding or as pretentious while idealizing "authentic" lowbrow alternatives irrespective of . Historical instances include British working-class attitudes post-World II, where admiration for "ordinary" virtues sometimes veered into contempt for educated elites, as noted in analyses of persistent class resentments. Unlike egalitarian ideals that seek broad access to excellence, this snobbery perpetuates barriers by equating aspiration with betrayal of one's , ultimately hindering individual and societal advancement.

Psychological and Evolutionary Basis

Individual Motivations

Snobbery often serves as a psychological defense mechanism against underlying feelings of inferiority or , allowing to project an of superiority through disdain for others' tastes or status. Clinicians observe that this compensates for social insecurity, frequently originating in childhood experiences of exclusion, entitlement, or perceived difference, which foster a need to elevate oneself by derogating those deemed lesser. For instance, the snob may adopt pretentious preferences in art, cuisine, or etiquette not merely for enjoyment but to distance themselves from an internal sense of defect, transforming personal vulnerability into outward condescension. At the individual level, snobbery functions as a form of self-enhancement via downward social comparison, where belittling others reinforces one's own perceived excellence and high self-regard. Clinical psychologist Leon Seltzer describes this as an internal orientation toward viewing others as inferior, driven by a desire to affirm belonging to a superior stratum rather than inherent taste differences. This mechanism aligns with social dominance orientation, a trait associated with preferring hierarchical structures that justify personal elevation, though it may mask sensitivity to criticism despite surface-level confidence. In cases of extreme manifestation, such as in narcissistic traits, snobbery provides validation and control, enabling the individual to maintain a fragile ego by enforcing divisions that affirm their exceptionalism. Additionally, snobbery can arise from , where individuals overcompensate for impostor-like doubts by gatekeeping niche expertise or luxury signals, such as rare , to broadcast superiority and secure social validation. This ties to broader patterns of , where exclusivity wards off fears of inadequacy, though it risks isolating the snob from genuine connections. Empirical observations in suggest these motivations persist because they temporarily alleviate identity threats in competitive environments, even as they undermine long-term relational or institutional .

Evolutionary and Social Signaling Aspects

Snobbery aligns with evolutionary theories of status hierarchies, where individuals compete for prestige or dominance to secure resources, mates, and alliances in ancestral environments. High-status positions conferred reproductive advantages, as evidenced by studies showing that status correlates with mating success across hunter-gatherer societies and modern populations; for instance, among the Ache of , high-status men had 2-3 times more offspring than low-status counterparts. Behaviors like snobbery may have evolved as extensions of dominance strategies, involving exclusionary tactics to maintain hierarchical position by devaluing competitors' traits or possessions, thereby reducing their perceived . In terms of social signaling, snobbery functions as a costly signal of underlying quality, requiring investments in time, education, or resources to develop refined tastes that are difficult for lower-status individuals to fake. This parallels costly signaling theory, where honest indicators of fitness—such as knowledge of esoteric cultural artifacts—deter impostors and attract high-value partners or allies, similar to how male birds display elaborate plumage to signal genetic quality. Empirical data from economic models of the "snob effect" demonstrate that consumers avoid goods that become too accessible, as exclusivity preserves signaling value; for example, demand for luxury items drops when they gain mass popularity, preserving status differentiation. Highbrow snobbery, in particular, emerged historically as a prestige marker in fluid societies, where new elites distinguished themselves from inherited through cultural discernment rather than lineage. from the late 19th to mid-20th century, adopting "" tastes like or served as a dynamic status signal, rising with industrialization and falling as democratized access, illustrating how snobbery adapts to enforce social boundaries amid changing mobility. Evolutionarily, such signaling likely reinforced coalitional bonds among high-status groups, excluding outsiders to protect shared resources, with disdain for "lowbrow" preferences acting as a low-cost cue for group loyalty and vigilance against free-riders. This mechanism persists because, in causal terms, failing to signal and defend status invites exploitation, reducing individual fitness in competitive hierarchies.

Sociological Perspectives

Snobbery in Hierarchical Societies

In societies with pronounced social hierarchies, snobbery serves to police class boundaries through everyday practices, thereby reinforcing stable divisions rooted in economic disparities, , , and power that shape individuals' . This function is evident in layered models of , where fine distinctions in behavior, speech, and consumption maintain a graded order, distinguishing "respectable" from "rough" elements across upper, middle, and working strata. Sociological analyses distinguish "snobbery of position," which attaches disdain or aspiration directly to ranks within an ordered , from "snobbery of possession," focused on or cultural . In hierarchical contexts, the former prevails, involving upward-looking emulation of superiors to secure proximity to power while fostering downward to preserve separations, thus stabilizing the against mobility threats. Historically, 19th-century Britain exemplified this dynamic, with its rigid class gradients snobbery to permeate social interactions, as satirized by in The of Snobs (), which exposed how such attitudes upheld hierarchical norms by equating status with or cultural superiority. Thackeray's work linked snobbery inextricably to class, portraying it as a mechanism for enforcing and exclusion in a society where economic inheritance dictated position. Even in modern stratified systems, snobbery reinforces hierarchies by status cues in cultural domains like or , where higher strata themselves from lower tastes to signal distinction and deter equalization. This boundary often operates subtly, as in where accents or deportment override qualifications, perpetuating inherited advantages over pure achievement. Sociologically, such patterns confirm snobbery's dominance in status-seeking actions, prioritizing hierarchical preservation over merit-based fluidity.

Interactions with Meritocracy and Egalitarianism

In meritocratic systems, snobbery evolves from hereditary privilege to judgments based on perceived achievement, education, and refined tastes, often masking persistent inequalities. Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu argued in Distinction (1984) that cultural capital—embodied in habits, preferences, and knowledge—functions as a form of snobbery that advantages those from privileged backgrounds, even as meritocracy ostensibly evaluates individuals on talent and effort alone, thereby reproducing class structures under the rhetoric of fairness. This dynamic is evident in elite universities, where admissions emphasizing standardized tests and extracurriculars correlate with familial advantages, fostering snobbery that equates institutional prestige with inherent superiority, as critiqued in analyses of institutions like Princeton. Egalitarian ideals, which emphasize and diminish overt hierarchies, provoke adaptations in snobbery rather than its eradication. In societies like , with welfare provisions and cultural norms against class displays, upper-middle-class individuals maintain distinctions through subtle cultural omnivorousness—professing tastes to appear inclusive—while privately enforcing boundaries via disdain for "inauthentic" preferences, contrasting with more overt snobbery in stratified Britain. Sam and colleagues (2017) found that British cultural elites downplay snobbery in interactions by framing exclusions as merit-based or personal , aligning with egalitarian while preserving status advantages amid declining traditional class markers. Philosophical examinations of egalitarian highlight tensions with snobbery, as preferences for exclusive or associations may resources that undermine equal welfare distribution. For instance, accommodating "snobbish tastes"—such as aversion to shared consumption—could require compensatory allocations, challenging egalitarian principles that prioritize over status-driven desires, as explored in debates on offensive preferences. Historically, the rise of aristocratic snobbery in favor of ability-based , yet noted in 1972 that this shift risks new elitisms where merit distinctions harden into snobbery, exacerbating without addressing underlying inequalities. Empirical studies indicate snobbery intensifies in ostensibly meritocratic contexts amid growing inequality, shifting from positional hierarchies to cultural judgments like holiday decorations or pursuits, which signal subtle superiority without invoking class outright. In Singapore's explicit meritocracy, snobbery has drawn backlash, illustrating how formalized merit systems can amplify perceptions of arrogance among high achievers, prompting reflections on balancing excellence with social cohesion. Thus, snobbery persists as a mechanism for boundary , complicating both meritocratic claims of and egalitarian aspirations for flattened hierarchies.

Criticisms and Defenses

Negative Consequences

Snobbery contributes to by devaluing individuals based on perceived cultural or class inferiority, often leading to interpersonal and reduced within groups. In academic settings, for instance, snobbish attitudes manifest as dismissive comments toward colleagues' work or attire, which not only inflict emotional but also discourage interdisciplinary and . Such behaviors reinforce hierarchical barriers, limiting access to and opportunities for those outside circles, thereby perpetuating inequality without regard for actual competence. On a psychological level, snobbery frequently serves as a defense mechanism against personal insecurity, where the snob elevates arbitrary tastes or affiliations to underlying feelings of inadequacy or . This compensatory ultimately undermines the snob's own accomplishments, as reliance on exclusionary signaling erodes genuine self-confidence and isolates them from diverse feedback that could foster true excellence. Victims of snobbery, meanwhile, experience demotivation and lowered self-esteem, with studies in educational contexts showing that belittling based on non-merit factors reduces student engagement and performance. Broader societal impacts include stifled cultural and , as snobbery shrinks participation in niche markets by alienating potential consumers or contributors who fail to meet unspoken exclusivity criteria. For example, in industries like or , elitist gatekeeping driven by limits market expansion and , favoring insular validation over widespread . This dynamic contrasts with merit-based systems, where snobbery's emphasis on signaling over substance hampers and exacerbates class tensions without empirical justification for its hierarchies.

Potential Positive Functions

Snobbery may promote discernment and higher standards in cultural and domains by rewarding genuine expertise and refinement over mere . Philosopher Westacott argues in his 2011 The Virtues of Our Vices that feelings of superiority inherent in snobbery are not inherently sinful, particularly when grounded in verifiable merits such as superior or aesthetic , as opposed to unfounded pretension; this can counteract egalitarian pressures that dilute by equating all tastes as equally valid. For instance, Westacott posits that deeming certain audiences—like NPR over others—as better informed reflects a defensible that incentivizes rigor rather than pandering to the . In societal terms, snobbery can function as a corrective mechanism against cultural mediocrity, with snobs serving as informal arbiters who challenge flawed trends and uphold excellence. A 2025 analysis in Country Life defends snobs as essential "sounding boards" in an era of algorithmic abundance, where they provide candid critiques—such as rejecting superficially trendy art or fashion—to guide public taste toward substantive value, exemplified by figures like designer Nicky Haslam, whose discerning lists expose commonplace errors in aesthetics. This role fosters aspiration, as individuals motivated by exclusionary standards strive for improvement, potentially elevating overall group or communal achievements in fields like cuisine, literature, or etiquette. Such functions, however, hinge on snobbery's basis in objective merit rather than arbitrary exclusion; when aligned with empirical quality markers, it can reinforce social incentives for excellence without devolving into mere class signaling. Westacott emphasizes that snobbery's benefits emerge when it aligns judgments with reality, avoiding the pitfalls of self-deception that undermine its utility. Empirical studies on status hierarchies, while not directly endorsing snobbery, indirectly support this by showing how perceived superiors drive emulation and performance gains in competitive environments.

Cultural Representations and Examples

Literary and Historical Depictions

William Makepeace Thackeray's The Book of Snobs (1848), originally serialized in Punch magazine from 1846 to 1847, provided one of the first comprehensive literary critiques of snobbery in Victorian England. Thackeray portrayed snobs as individuals who obsessively mimic and admire social superiors while scorning inferiors, observing that "Snobs are to be studied like other objects of Natural Science, and are a part of the Beautiful" and that they "pervade all classes." This work popularized the modern usage of "snob" to denote pretentious social climbers rather than merely shoemakers, as derived from 18th-century slang. Thackeray's satire targeted diverse types, including "literary snobs," "dining-out snobs," and "party-giving snobs," highlighting snobbery's hypocrisy across aristocracy, bourgeoisie, and aspiring middle classes. In Jane Austen's novels, snobbery manifests through characters who prioritize rank and over merit or . In Pride and Prejudice (1813), Mr. Collins embodies clerical snobbery by fawning over the aristocratic Lady Catherine de Bourgh, proposing to secure social , and dismissing the Bennet family's modest connections as inferior. Lady Catherine herself displays aristocratic snobbery, interrogating Elizabeth Bennet on her family's status and forbidding the of her nephew to a woman of lower birth. Similarly, in Emma (1815), Emma Woodhouse exhibits genteel snobbery by matchmaking based on class distinctions and condescending to those like Harriet Smith or the socially awkward Miss Bates. These depictions underscore snobbery's role in Regency-era social navigation, where inheritance and title often trumped personal worth. Historically, (1827–1895) exemplified American snobbery as the self-appointed arbiter of New York . Collaborating with Caroline Astor, he curated "The Four Hundred," an exclusive list of elite families deemed worthy of social acceptance, famously quipping in 1890 that "There are only 400 people in fashionable New York . If you go outside that number, you strike people who are either not at ease in a ballroom or else make others not at ease." McAllister's rigid protocols for invitations and etiquette reinforced class barriers amid rapid industrialization and immigration, earning him caricatures as a pompous "schoolmaster of snobbish society." His influence waned after publishing Society as I Have Found It (1890), which exposed internal rivalries, leading to his social ostracism and death in relative poverty.

Modern and Contemporary Instances

In academia, snobbery persists through hierarchical attitudes that devalue non-traditional disciplines and institutions. For example, critics within higher education have expressed disdain for fields like popular culture studies, arguing they lack the intellectual rigor of classical humanities and undermine scholarly standards. This elitism extends to preferences for ancient universities over modern , where prestige is equated with inherent superiority despite of comparable outcomes in and employability. Such views reinforce barriers, as seen in resistance to vocational qualifications like T-levels in the UK, dismissed as inferior to academic routes despite their in addressing skill shortages. Cultural snobbery in media and manifests as for mass-produced content, particularly amid the proliferation of streaming series and AI-generated . Commentators have lamented the "era of mid TV" and "AI slop," positioning discerning as a defense against homogenized, low-effort output from platforms like and algorithms. This attitude echoes in literary and artistic circles, where inverse snobbery—celebrating over —is in favor of upholding aesthetic standards, as in debates over academic poetry's resistance to populist trends. In broader society, "chronological snobbery" appears in assumptions of modern superiority, such as investors overlooking historical inflation patterns due to faith in contemporary economic models. Among institutions, and environments foster snobbery via exclusivity and that prioritize pedigree over merit. Admissions and often toward state or non- graduates, with self-reported experiences from attendees revealing a cultivated sense of detachment from "lesser" educational backgrounds. This extends to interdisciplinary snobbery, where historians or traditional scholars view applied fields as diluted, perpetuating internal hierarchies that marginalize diverse contributions. In ' moral frameworks, such attitudes have correlated with declining emphasis on universal , favoring ideological over open .

References

  1. https://www.etymonline.com/word/snob
  2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/snob-word-history-origin
  3. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/22147/etymology-of-snob
  4. https://blog.oup.com/2008/05/snob-before-and-after-thackeray/
  5. https://www.britsoc.co.uk/about/latest-news/2019/february/why-snobbery-matters/
  6. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/hide-and-seek/201807/why-are-some-people-snobs
  7. https://www.afterpsychotherapy.com/snobbery-and-pretentiousness/
  8. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/phc3.12940
  9. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snob
  10. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/snob
  11. https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/snob
  12. https://www.aconsciousrethink.com/14787/characteristics-of-a-snob/
  13. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/articles/200905/field-guide-the-snob-some-it-haute
  14. https://parade.com/living/signs-you-might-be-considered-a-snob-according-to-psychologists
  15. https://www.gentlemansgazette.com/snobbism-snob-why-not/
  16. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/snob
  17. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/snobbery
  18. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2686/2686-h/2686-h.htm
  19. https://www.boweryboyshistory.com/2025/08/the-education-of-a-snob-ward-mcallisters-american-aristocracy.html
  20. https://study.com/academy/lesson/class-in-pride-and-prejudice-explanation-examples.html
  21. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X97000132
  22. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372724080_Aesthetic_Snobbery
  23. https://www.academia.edu/42641030/Selected_Snobberies
  24. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/how-food-replaced-art-as-high-culture.html
  25. https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/c-s-lewis-on-chronological-snobbery/
  26. http://foundationenglish20172018.blogspot.com/2017/01/selected-snobberies-huxley.html
  27. https://fltrmagazine.com/2025/02/28/the-psychology-of-snobbery/
  28. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304422X15000042
  29. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/reverse-snob
  30. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fulfillment-at-any-age/201410/5-ways-to-handle-a-snob
  31. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jun-22-adfg-class22-story.html
  32. https://www.billauxier.com/blog/snob
  33. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsif.2018.0731
  34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294576844_Structural_Equivalence_and_Cohesion_Can_Explain_Bandwagon_and_Snob_Effect
  35. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304422X97000132
  36. https://eriktorenberg.substack.com/p/how-status-signaling-evolved
  37. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/snobbery/snobbery-and-social-class/52556764F2A3827A4747B5502FA489FA
  38. https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/monochap/book/9781447340355/ch007.xml
  39. https://revisesociology.com/2023/04/07/the-great-british-class-survey/
  40. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2001/sep/30/socialsciences.highereducation
  41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/587992
  42. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674212770
  43. https://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/books/lost-in-the-meritocracy-a-dream-of-privilege-a-bastion-of-snobbery/
  44. https://www.uib.no/en/sosio/103592/snobbery-and-egalitarianism-norwegian-and-british-upper-middle-class
  45. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68968/1/Friedman_%2520I%27m%2520not%2520a%2520snob_2017.pdf
  46. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/josp.12041
  47. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/11-020-poverty-public-policy-and-controversy-fall-2003/4aff80f504e8f35d32254bcd5b989cb7_bell_paper.pdf
  48. https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2018/december/snobbery-today-more-likely-to-be-about-christmas-decorations-and-other-cultural-tastes-says-book/
  49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20445123
  50. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1047084.pdf
  51. https://www.academia.edu/78157187/Snobbery_in_the_academy_is_alive_and_well_and_doing_harm
  52. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393140376_Snobbery_vs_Elitism_Understanding_the_Fine_Line_Between_Exclusion_and_Excellence
  53. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691162218/the-virtues-of-our-vices
  54. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/01/04/review-emrys-westcott-virtue-our-vices
  55. https://www.countrylife.co.uk/people/its-never-been-more-vital-to-have-reliable-sounding-boards-willing-to-tell-us-that-actually-weve-got-this-terribly-wrong-in-defence-of-snobs
  56. https://philpeople.org/profiles/emrys-westacott
  57. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2014/04/old-lampooner
  58. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/oct/21/snobs-literature-middle-class-snob-novel-dj-taylor
  59. https://forgottenfiles.substack.com/p/ward-mcallister-creator-of-nycs-the
  60. https://hum.byu.edu/breaking-the-academic-stigma-surrounding-pop-culture-studies
  61. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/snobbery-towards-modern-universities-unfair-and-outdated
  62. https://royalsociety.org/news/2022/06/future-of-education-conference/
  63. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/sep/28/cultural-snobbery-too-much-studio-rogen-house-of-the-dragon
  64. https://medium.com/atlas-writes/what-a-squabble-within-academic-poetry-can-tell-us-about-our-culture-a49712f087b9
  65. https://smeadcap.com/missives/chronological-snobbery/
  66. https://ernestowens.com/post/38944506186/confessions-of-an-ivy-league-snob
  67. https://ivypanda.com/essays/do-elite-colleges-produce-elite-snobs/
  68. https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2023/07/academic-snobbery-in-the-times
  69. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/12/interesectionality-american-college/676350/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.