fisharepeopletoo

"There the great city stands."

from 81. Song of the Broad-Axe, Walt Whitman (1819–1892).  Leaves of Grass.  1900.

via Paul Salveson (also here)

                            * *

Do you think the great city endures?     
Or a teeming manufacturing state? or a prepared constitution? or the best-built steamships?     
Or hotels of granite and iron? or any chef-d’oeuvres of engineering, forts, armaments?     
 
Away! These are not to be cherish’d for themselves;     
They fill their hour, the dancers dance, the musicians play for them;     105
The show passes, all does well enough of course,     
All does very well till one flash of defiance.     
 
The great city is that which has the greatest man or woman;     
If it be a few ragged huts, it is still the greatest city in the whole world.     
 
5

The place where the great city stands is not the place of stretch’d wharves, docks, manufactures, deposits of produce,     110
Nor the place of ceaseless salutes of new comers, or the anchor-lifters of the departing,     
Nor the place of the tallest and costliest buildings, or shops selling goods from the rest of the earth,     
Nor the place of the best libraries and schools—nor the place where money is plentiest,     
Nor the place of the most numerous population.     
 
Where the city stands with the brawniest breed of orators and bards;     115
Where the city stands that is beloved by these, and loves them in return, and understands them;     
Where no monuments exist to heroes, but in the common words and deeds;     
Where thrift is in its place, and prudence is in its place;     
Where the men and women think lightly of the laws;     
Where the slave ceases, and the master of slaves ceases;     120
Where the populace rise at once against the never-ending audacity of elected persons;     
Where fierce men and women pour forth, as the sea to the whistle of death pours its sweeping and unript waves;     
Where outside authority enters always after the precedence of inside authority;     
Where the citizen is always the head and ideal—and President, Mayor, Governor, and what not, are agents for pay;     
Where children are taught to be laws to themselves, and to depend on themselves;     125
Where equanimity is illustrated in affairs;     
Where speculations on the Soul are encouraged;     
Where women walk in public processions in the streets, the same as the men,     
Where they enter the public assembly and take places the same as the men;     
... 
There the great city stands.

                            *    *

 

I chopped out  (no pun intended) these weird lines at the end:

Where the city of the faithfulest friends stands;     130
Where the city of the cleanliness of the sexes stands;     
Where the city of the healthiest fathers stands;     
Where the city of the best-bodied mothers stands,  

Review of the Hannah Mitchell Foundation public launch

I went to the launch of the Hannah Mitchell Foundation a few weeks ago, which is a campaign for democratic self-determination, authority and responsibility for places in the north of England, and of which I've paid my very reasonably priced 20 quid to become a member.

I really like the fact that a political campaign is named after a person. Inviting people to engage with the Foundation through a story is such an open, warm and welcoming way to start a conversation.

A story is made by readers as much as the writer.  As my friend Peter Sansom - publisher of a poetry magazine called The North for the last 25 years - likes to say, “a book is only as good as its readers”. Reading is active and doing, and reading about Hannah Mitchell is asking people to do some work to begin finding their own understanding of what it means to live in a place in the north of England now.

At the launch, the presentations by The Committee included one of the best talks I've heard on any subject anywhere for quite a while, and the common theme I took from all of them was how empowering and energising it will be to think of the “North South divide”, “regeneration” and all that stuff as being about democratic self-determination, authority and responsibility.

What also I noticed at the launch though was the tension between process and product in the Hannah Mitchell Foundation so far.

The Committee reported that they have begun a process of engaging with other organisations, and of learning from the experience of other devolution campaigns, planning to ask Scottish and Welsh campaigners “If you could start all over again, what would you do differently?”. That's a cracking question, and they've been open about not pretending to ahve any answers yet, saying “We don't know what structure democratic self-determination for places in the north should take”.

That is a great way to begin, but it still feels like at the moment The Committee's sense of their process is of a search for a product. The product will be a set of policies that clever people will work out, and the rest of us will vote for (in a referendum that will be lost). Job done.

But do you start a campaign for democratic self-determination, authority and responsibility, and name it after a human story rather than an abstract policy objective, and choose the word “Foundation”, and say quite openly “We don't have a plan, we'll start by asking people what they think” and have as one of your prime movers a man whose professional expertise is in the provision of network infrastructure (could anything be more timely? I'd support the Hannah Mitchell Foundation just for that alone), if in your heart of hearts you are the kind of people who want to tell other people what to think?

Instead, it sounds much more like you are inventing (perhaps in spite of yourselves at first) a new way of doing politics in places in the North that isn't a shouting match aimed at browbeating other people into silence. It is politics as a public, civic, space (where does the word “politics” come from?).

When we step into that space we listen to and cooperate with people we don't have to agree with, let alone like. We can like whomsoever we like in our private lives, in the political space we simply have to extend people the courtesy of not thinking we are the only ones who know the truth, and that everyone has their own claims on the common good (my understanding of ideas like the common good is very sketchy, so buyer beware). People like Maurice Glasman and Richard Sennett are saying these sorts of things very persuasively I think. 

This tension plays itself out in what I think is the odd and unwieldy official definition the Hannah Mitchell Foundation has for itself, which is as a campaign for democratic self-determination, authority and responsibility for places in the north of England and ethical socialism. That has got to beg the question hasn't it: how can you have a campaign for process when you are already telling people what the end product is going to be.

I think tacking on “and ethical socialism” will reduce the store of goodwill that the Foundation can draw on, and narrow its capacity to engage with other voices and stories. Hannah Mitchell's story becomes the only story, rather than a motivating story. Instead of being a wellspring of narrative capital, it becomes an excluding and backward looking Heritage Leftie Northernism.

And there really are other stories. What about the Makers of Leeds? Doesn't that piece of storytelling have any insights to contribute to the future of places in the north of England? And what about British Asian people from those places, for example, let alone people from Eastern Europe? Does Hannah's story say everything they might want to say? 

I don't think that is what the Hannah Mitchell Foundation is or wants to be at all.

I think the Hannah Mitchell Foundation is process - self-determination, authority and responsibility - and how that happens. Or, in places in the north of England at the moment, doesn't. The Hannah Mitchell Foundation should always be doing what it is. Listening, being open, finding grounds for cooperation in good faith with people and organisations that they might not want to spend time with socially.

There is a responsibility on The Committee to live up to that. To be open enough to let the Hannah Mitchell Foundation become what it needs to be.  It's a doers responsibility - they are doing it, no one else is going to do it, so they've given themselves the responsibility whether they like it or not.

And the hardest part, and something they might have to wrestle with, is taking a step back from their personal political world views. That's not to say they have to change them, but in their roles as The Committee of the Hannah Mitchell Foundation their position has to be about the creation of the civic, political, space, not prejudging the policies that should be formed in that space. Of course there will be a campaign, but it's for self-determination (which is something bigger than ad hoc press releases about teachers' pay scales). The Committee's role might not be to find the answers for us, it might be to curate and facilitate the discussions.

Those discussions might be about three things: the value of democratic self-determination, authority and responsibility in themselves (here's an interesting piece of research that suggests the chance to participate in local political decisions makes people happier); the necessity of devolved authority and responsibility in order to make sustainable, resourceful and resilient places in the north of England; the structure of constitutions in those places such that they best achieve the first two.

I think we are a long way from needing to make final choices on any of that (wikipedia tells me the SNP was founded in 1934), but that doesn't mean the end is a long way off. The process is an end in itself. By having those discussions, and listening to anyone who thinks they have something to contribute, we are doing devolution.

Occupy Bristol and Free All Monsters! @Occupybristoluk @OccupyLSX

Monster Makers from Rossendale in Pennine Lancashire.

 

Press release, apologies for the press release tone.

Calling All Bristol Monster Makers

Saturday 3rd December, 1pm-4pm

Bristol children, and even grown ups, have the chance to create monsters that will travel all around the world as part of a new mobile phone game.

To make a monster, children use the power of their imagination and the pens, paper and art materials provided to conjure it up. The monsters are then uploaded into a mobile phone game called Free All Monsters!

The game has players all around the world who use their mobile phone as a Monstervision Machine to look for invisible monsters visiting their local streets, and monsters created in Bristol will regularly be seen as far away as America and Australia, as well as on the streets of Bristol.

So far more than 300 monsters have been created by children and grown ups, and these monsters have been spotted more than 4000 times in total around the world. Children who take part are awarded a unique Monster Makers badge.

Andrew Wilson, of the Advanced Monstrology Institute said “Making monsters is a great way to practise being creative, and to imagine the world differently.”

Adults as well as children are welcome to come along and make monsters. Dr Paul Coulton, also of the Institute, explained “Grown ups often say that they aren't creative, but we've found that everyone enjoys drawing monsters if they give themselves chance.”

As well as monster making there will also be a monster spotting trail in which players must find monsters living in Bristol city centre and prove their Advanced Monstrology skills to earn a Monster Spotters badge. Families and grown ups who want to take part in the monster spotting trail need to have an iPhone and should download the Free All Monsters app, but there is no need for an iPhone to take part in Monster Making.

The monster making session and monster spotting trail are both free events as part of a range of activities for this week's Community Day at Occupy Bristol.

Families and grown ups should come to College Green between 1pm and 4pm on Saturday 3rd December.

To spot monsters made in Bristol at any time, download the Free All Monsters app.

 

The respected monster Mean Green Giraffe Bee.

 

Re imagining local democracy at City Camp Manchester #ccmcr @CityCampMCR

“Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.”
Award winning Constitution Designer Thomas Jefferson advocating an iterative approach to constitution design.
(more here, some contemporary constitution design sketches here).

There were two Open Space session on local democracy at City Camp Manchester.

Summarising both of them from memory, and my interpretation only, I'd say:

- there was a real interest in talking about what local democracy is, and wanting to think about how it might be different
- most people don't like the way national politics happens, and want local democracy to be something else (in the Friday session there were two people from a political party - a candidate in a safe council ward, and a local organiser/activist, maybe paid - and even they seemed to think the same)
- people do recognise that good councillors are valuable to the places they represent, but it is their role as representatives and activists that is valued

In the second of the two sessions I scribbled down notes. I tried to write down everything everybody said, but failed by quite a long way. I've grouped them under headings, but the headings reflect only my interpretation. There are many more possible headings than this, but I'm not clever enough to untangle everything.

Cynicism - felt to be justified - and dislike of the bear pit Question Time model - middle aged middle class London based white men [1] shouting at each other

* council consultation exercises (“when did you stop beating your wife”)
* “I didn't believe it would make a difference”
* “they had already made their mind up”
* cynicism - is it justified?
* voting wont change anything
* voters are angry * “the main parties”
* breaking cynicism
* but party machines get people elected
* why aren't things “properly representative”
* what are we allowed to have direct democratic control over? Shrinking budgets.
* what control/access/info do we have to private companies and privatised stuff (example of prisons run by private companies)
* properly representative = women, working class, not London

 

Councillors, councils and their roles
* can councillors work effectively - “gather stuff people are saying”
* transparency
* how to support councillors better
* tracking issues raised with the council “who has discussed this”
* Better CRM?
* process of canvassing
* online tools
* policy as enacting ideas
* start with ideas
* devolution of power from local authorities
* councillors as mediators
* what are we allowed to have direct democratic control over? Shrinking budgets.

 

Redesigning
* utopias (as a way of seeing what we've got more clearly)
* pirate party +1 vote at least
* start your own party
* why don't people like us [in the open space session] stand for election
* party based local politics is bad
* properly representative = women, working class, not London
* why aren't things “properly representative”
* what are we allowed to have direct democratic control over? Shrinking budgets.
* what control/access/info so we have to private companies and privatised stuff (example of prisons run by private companies)
* what do we think about the online petitions?
* utopia vs reform from within
* devolution to the North ( how, what)
* policy as an open source technology
* open knowledge
* devolution of power from local authorities
* participatory budgeting
* properly representative = women, working class, not London
* offering new alternatives
* party based local politics is bad
* what do we think about the online petitions?
* policy making - who does it now
* How do the ideas from things like this (City Camp Manchester) contact with local democracy and policy making
* everyone gets ten votes = redesign of the voting system
* different forms of democracy. Representative democracy is not the only one eg direct democracy
* “direct democracy is easier to swallow”
* “it's easier to swallow opposing results if you know who they are from and why they said it” - “if I know them”
* properly representative = women, working class, not London
* why aren't things “properly representative”
* what do we think about the online petitions?
* devolution to the North ( how, what) [2]
* is “it” not working and why isn't it working
* councillors as mediators [3]
* policy as an open source technology
* open knowledge
* consultation about ideas rather than policies (pirate party)
* what do we think about the online petitions?

 

[square brackets]
[1] I'm one of those, for my sins, so I'm not saying it's a bad thing to be in itself, just that it's not the only thing
[2]
Manchester city region 3.2 million people
Leeds city region 2.9 million
Wales 2.9 million
Estonia 1.3 million
[3] mediatory democracy is a very interesting phrase I think, and suggests something a bit different from representative, participatory, or direct democracy?

“Ask what you can do for the n*rth”

I'm involved in the early stages of a  project looking at what the arts can contribute to the new democratic cities in the north (that's my definition, for me, of what I feel like I'm doing as my bit of it).

I've learned loads from this process already, and I've got the highest hopes for what might come of it.

Part of what we did as a group was try and come up with some “research questions”. The ones that most rang true for me were about making a contribution. What can the arts do?

The tricky part though is that the fastest road to crap works of art is giving people lectures and trying to save the world.

So, with the dangers of being a boring self righteous finger wagging lecturer in mind, this is what I came up with (this list is really no more than a justification of my interests, and making no excuses for the depths of my ignorance):

• Make visible a network structure of people and places - horizontal, peer-to-peer, bottom up. Where are the gaps in the network? Contrast this with national, centralised, vertical and hierarchical, broadcast structures.
• Make Narrative Capital visible, make new Narrative Capital, make the process of forming Narrative Capital visible.
• Make visible the barriers to creativity, innovation, conversation, exchange, self reliance and self determination, question what causes the barriers, propose solutions for debate.
• Be a way to make sure that all the voices in a place get heard.
• Insist on the importance of places, legitimise and celebrate a place specific world-view and language.
• Legitimise and celebrate iteration, open processes, risk taking, and learning from failure.
• Make complex systems visible, and put the arts within interconnected complex systems of places, cultures, language, economics, and political structures.
• If places are a process, not an end point, make sure that those processes keep happening. “Keep the plates spinning.” as Chris Meads put it.

* I'm sure there must be more, for example “earn money and employ people”, and “contribute to wellbeing”, but it's all got too much for me to get my head round now!

** I took out one at the last minute: “Motivate debate and action.” That might happen, but I'm uncertain about whether the arts should be rousing people to man the barricades. If anything, shouldn't it be the opposite?: “Hang on. Think about things. The world is complicated and complex.”

*** The question might be better framed as “How can arts practise contribute to the civic life of places in the north.

 

Why I Hate The N*rth

I'm involved in a research process which looks at how artists might contribute to imagining The N*rth now.

By way of a "hello and getting to know you" I was asked to write briefly about "What aspects of the project's aims are you, at this stage, most passionate about?"

I launched into this, which is not the cheery hello that was called for, and is about 200 words too long.

        *    *    *

Re imagining, and making connections outside of The Arts. I think it's quite a hopeful time to be doing this. As I read the other day "‘We live in wonderful times. We’ve reached the end of the neo-liberal dream and state domination. It’s time for citizenship, imagination and growth.’"(from here)

But, that was said by Maurice Glasman, who couldn't be more of a London-patriot (in a good way) if he tried. If you asked him where he lived, he'd talk about a real place, London, not a geographical abstraction. He has civic pride. London tells a very powerful story about itself which gets its power not least by using a real name.

Newcastle, Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds. That is a powerful list of words. When you say it like that it's a litany. For a birth or a death? People often talk about the 21st century as "the century of the city", about cities as "our greatest invention", cities as self organising systems from which most human wealth, culture and innovation comes. Newcastle, Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds. Those cities made the world once.

So re imaging the N*rth means saying the words, even if it takes a bit more breath. Making the effort to use real names is about respect. People don't live in abstractions, they live in places. An abstraction like "The N*rth" makes human lives too easy to dismiss. "Those people who don't work in banking and can't afford interships for their kids? Don't worry, that's The N*rth. It's like that there."

And it's about self respect. What did "the N*rth" ever motivate anyone to do except cry into their beer?

If nothing else, abstractions always make bad writing. We need to begin with an investment in narrative capital (more on narrative capital here).

Say the names: Newcastle, Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds. Now your head is wired differently. A process of re imagining has started.

All Architects, Planners, Designers, Developers and Planning Committees should be made to cross this bridge.

 

Look into your souls, you wretches.

Really quite nice on one side.

 

 

Awful on the other.

Shocking but brilliantly designed infographics showing investment in high speed network infrastructure in UK city regions

 

Historically high levels of investment in high speed network infrastructure.

 

 

Historically low levels of investment in high speed network infrastructure.

 

 International Comparison

Investment in high speed network infrastructure in a medium sized post industrial city in Germany.