An old boy network or society can refer to social and business associations among former pupils of top male-only public schools (independent secondary schools)…and indirectly to preservation of social elites over time without regard to merit.
—Wikipedia
My high-school, Upper Canada College, is often touted as one of the best schools to attend in Canada. Someone once said that it provides Canada with a disproportionate number of leaders, of whom include a Governor General, five Lieutenant-Governors, 24 Rhodes Scholars, and nine Olympic medallists.
The faculty was exceptional. A passionate, charismatic group, some of them former professors, notable businessmen, intellectuals. The facilities were top notch; football fields, baseball diamonds, tennis courts, indoor/outdoor pools, squash courts. Even the bands and theatre groups had access to exotic instruments and props. I remember for a production of Hamlet they hired a fight choreographer to lend his expertise in orchestrating the final fight scene.
School isn’t just about the education though. It’s as much about the experience. The classmates. The connections. The Old Boy network.
When I first started at the prep at age seven, I was cycling along a bridge with another little seven year old UCC chap. He said to me, ‘My mother is so happy that we are friends because you are going to be able to do so much for me in later life.’ I remember thinking, ‘I wonder what it is that I am going to be able to do for this chap?’ Then I grew up and realized, ‘So that’s the way it is. That is what people expect.’
—Lord David Thomson (1964–1967, 1970–1975), Chairman of Thomson corporation, Canada’s wealthiest man, sixth wealthiest in the world
The influence of the elite legacy of the Old Boys is far-reaching. Compounding this is the age of the school, and perhaps a degree of nepotism. A related male at the school significantly increased the chances of getting in.
Like his grandfather, John was in McHugh’s house. If had a brother or a son, they would belong to Jackson’s.
Years later, I insisted that my sons, Hugh and Stafford, go to UCC simply because I knew from my own experience that once a boy had gone to Upper Canada, he would never again be in awe of great family names, money, power or social standing. He would know that although a good private school like UCC can produce the best, it can also produce the worst.
—Conn Smythe (1908–1910), founder, Maple Leaf Gardens
It was only when James Fitzgerald, an Old Boy himself, published his best-selling book Old Boys: The Powerful Legacy of Upper Canada College in 1994 (from where these quotes are taken) that the blemishes of UCC came to light.
Beneath the veneer of of navy blue blazers and polished shoes were issues like any other school. There were drugs (though much higher-classed because of better funding). There were sadistic headmasters who looked for an excuse to cane their pupils. There were teachers who molested — or seduced — their students.
I learned to be a sexual masochist at Upper Canada. I’m not kidding. Whenever the housemaster caught me masturbating, his way of dealing with it was to cane me. Caning is a rotten method of teaching anything. What it taught me, of course, was the erotic connections of caning. They are still with me to this day.
—John Gartshore (1935–1943), musician
A couple months ago, I received a copy of Old Times, the semi-annual publication for alumni. In a section called “Class Notes”, they bring others up to speed on their classmates. In the last issue, for example, they mention that Michael Ignatieff, class of ’65, had just joined the race for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada.
There are updates starting from the graduates of 1941, including my graduating class, the class of ’99. Out of curiosity, I looked back on my yearbook, The College Times, Canada’s oldest student publication. I had to wonder just how much the prestige of the school had helped them. To compare my idea of where I believed my fellow classmates would be, with what they’re doing now.
The memories I had didn’t always match up with their current achievements.
I can’t remember the source, I’m pretty sure it was a book written in the last 10–15 years, but it was a passage about how a reunion and how people who were jerks in high school are still jerks and people who were superficial are still superficial. But everyone covers it up a little bit better. It’s funny after being out of high school for a while and seeing people and reconnecting … that assessment isn’t too far off the mark.
I think for the most part, that passage is right. At their cores, most people don’t change. And of course, we never want to look like failures, so it’s natural to only speak of our successes.
I always wished I’d gone to private school. Not because it’s supposed to be “better” but because the experience seems like it would vary so much school to school, whereas public schools are generally cookie cutter creations these days. Even the universities in Ontario are pretty standardized now. I’m graduating this spring and in 17 years and 4 different schools, it’s pretty much felt like the same system, same experience. A lot of this opinion is based in the fact that I know next to nothing about private school and have a pretty romanticized mental image based in movies and books.
Like everything else, there are good sides and bad sides to the private school system.
When I switched out to a public (Catholic) system in my last year, it was a bit of culture shock. The teachers in private school were much smarter, interesting, and passionate. But if I had a question about something, they would tell me to see them after class so as not to hold up the rest of the class. In public school, they would stop the entire class and make sure that everyone understood before continuing. It was as if they cared more, wanting to be sure that no one was left behind.
The cookie cutter system is a good way to keep things standardized, so that universities don’t have to weigh the marks depending on which school you go to (which they’re not allowed to do anyway, but it still continues in practice).
There’s also a big debate about co-education. A lot of Old Boys feel socially stunted because of the lack of girls in the school. Out of the entire faculty, there were only three women. Nowadays, school plays and band projects are used to alleviate this, but only a fraction of the school is involved. I agree with the tradition of single-sex education though. When the opposite sex enters the equation, the entire dynamic of high-school changes. Trinity College School went co-op, and they started slipping in the independent school standings.
Private schools favour the strong. If you can take advantage of everything they have to offer, as an athelete, musician, or scholar, they will give you a huge advantage. Otherwise, if you’re an average person like me, who was never outstanding at anything, it’s more of a waste of money.
Fascinating reading of post and comments.
I never knew in early school what a prestigious school could do, neither could my parents. I did want single-sex education tho.