"He Keeps Himself To Himself"

The first in a series of  seven.

The English... they have such a lovely way with English.
But... I mean... they would now, wouldn’t they?
They have such beautifully colourful ways to describe the oft arcane attributes of human behaviour.
A choice example, might be the word,  eccentric.
If you’re middle class and “odd-turned” as my ole granny would have said, you’re “just a bit eccentric”.  Now, add money and/or title and it’s “ delightfully eccentric” or “terribly eccentric”
And here’s the thing. It is a condition if you will, to be generally admired.  A uniquely English quality to be treasured.
Now obviously this does not translate well into our American experience.
You’re odd, kooky, weird or just plain nuts. To be regarded at best with suspicion, at worst derided or made fun of.  But not, not likely to be admired or treasured.

My favourite “Anglicism” of all has got to be “He keeps himself to himself”, perhaps in no small part due to a personal introspection.
Once again, we have this expression that doesn’t “translate well”.
It’s not just that the words don’t translate easily. I guess that if I were to say that “He keeps to himself”, in American English, the literal meaning is similar and understood.
But.. the statement somehow implies a certain, unsocial quality to the person’s behavior.
A quality implying at best an introvertedness, social awkwardness, or worse, he doesn’t like people..
With a person who “keeps to himself”, there is an almost unconscious suspicion, something's wrong.

If, however, I were to consider the expression “He keeps himself to himself” in English original, and in situ (in it’s place), there is no implied negative context.
The English are as likely to regard this person as not bothering anybody, minding his own business. He keeps out of trouble and he makes no trouble for anyone else.
This person is viewed in an entirely different light.
It is an expression of conduct, most surely, but it implies an  approval of his character.
What might appear at first to be  a slightly back-handed compliment,  is just a compliment, nothing more.
Funny thing, perception. And, context

Once again, the words become lost to their “cultural meanings”.

I suppose it’s always been a little perplexing to me.  As Americans, we celebrate “the myth of the individual”, yet we tend to shun and discourage individual behavior at every turn.
I understand that “He keeps to himself” could yes, describe someone who is somehow unsocial.
But... how is it then that “He keeps himself to himself” can be viewed by some so positively?

Seriously though, doesn’t individual behavior span a broad spectrum?
There are those who thrive on, even crave the “bright lights of the social stage”.
Others are content to just “flit onto and off of the stage”.
Some are terrified and suffer terrible “stage fright”.
And even those who loathe the “stage” entirely.

What we obviously face here, is how differently cultures regard this element of human behavior.

Surely, “He keeps himself to himself” merits a warm regard in both Englishes.

Do we really desire that everybody be “just like me”?  How sad would be a truly crowded or a truly empty “stage”.
And... in reality, don’t we need that “full spectrum” of behaviors to  be at our best?