hey rebecca - very up for answering your questions, but i couldnt find them. other than this, are there discussions about how English folk can reckon with the effects of colonisation in the UK, in the ways we are (however slowly) in the remnants of the Commonwealth? but in that, im not sure what yr asking me? with regards to references t…
hey rebecca - very up for answering your questions, but i couldnt find them. other than this, are there discussions about how English folk can reckon with the effects of colonisation in the UK, in the ways we are (however slowly) in the remnants of the Commonwealth? but in that, im not sure what yr asking me? with regards to references to women in the book of trespass, im sorry you got frustrated - land has been exceedingly patriarchal in its dominion, a point i was trying to make in chapter 6, spider - whereby it was owned by men, through primogeniture, and written about by men, through law and philosophy - the second book, trespassers companion was conceived as the antidote to the book of trespass, the what-to-do about it, and you will read a lot more first hand experiences of women in that - also, the right to roam campaign was started by two white men, and now has expanded to include much more diversity at the helm, including in terms of gender - let me know more specifically what youd like me answer, and i'll be glad to
Fair enough. I had hoped you would be able to see to what I’m trying to work through to ask. I’m dancing around things because your argument to make the commons available to everyone seems simple, but as always there is much complexity.
How land is managed in England (and beyond) has long been patriarchal, imperial, and unjust but this never stopped diverse people from having deep relationships to land, caring for land, or from being part of land rights debates. That’s what I was trying to get at regarding the absence of women writers in your book.
I think Lesley’s, Craig’s and Nick’s questions about different or shifting paradigms/ideologies/worldviews are getting at the same question as me in different (much clearer) ways. History is a big part of how you are framing rights, which feels sort of bucolic. But the past wasn’t great for everyone so how does this movement imagine a different kind of future? Is this a social and environmental justice movement as well a legal one?
hey, i think yr absolutely right, framing stuff historically does risk a sepia tinged nostalgia, and actually, we've avoided that for the campaign, talking mainly about health benefits and protection of nature - our analogy for inclusivity is that of the wild flower commons, full of diversity, queerness, mutability and fecundity - contrast this with the ploughed lines of a monoculture field, or a canalised river, everything meant to fit into its owners vision - not sure how far you got thru the book, but the hare chapter talks a fair bit about marginality and edward soja's concept of spatial politics - our next bookm, released as a group, will be centering these marginalised voices, race, class, gender, and borrowing indiginous wisdom from around the globe to set out the way forward - and yes, right to roam has always been more of a social justice movement for us, rather than grabbing new places for wealthy middle class people to walk with ski poles and has morphed very quickly into an environmental justice campaign too, highlighting the devastation of nature behind the walls that exclude us, and arguing for a closer bond between communities and nature in order that we might begin to viscerally care about the loss oof biodiviersity
hey rebecca - very up for answering your questions, but i couldnt find them. other than this, are there discussions about how English folk can reckon with the effects of colonisation in the UK, in the ways we are (however slowly) in the remnants of the Commonwealth? but in that, im not sure what yr asking me? with regards to references to women in the book of trespass, im sorry you got frustrated - land has been exceedingly patriarchal in its dominion, a point i was trying to make in chapter 6, spider - whereby it was owned by men, through primogeniture, and written about by men, through law and philosophy - the second book, trespassers companion was conceived as the antidote to the book of trespass, the what-to-do about it, and you will read a lot more first hand experiences of women in that - also, the right to roam campaign was started by two white men, and now has expanded to include much more diversity at the helm, including in terms of gender - let me know more specifically what youd like me answer, and i'll be glad to
Fair enough. I had hoped you would be able to see to what I’m trying to work through to ask. I’m dancing around things because your argument to make the commons available to everyone seems simple, but as always there is much complexity.
How land is managed in England (and beyond) has long been patriarchal, imperial, and unjust but this never stopped diverse people from having deep relationships to land, caring for land, or from being part of land rights debates. That’s what I was trying to get at regarding the absence of women writers in your book.
I think Lesley’s, Craig’s and Nick’s questions about different or shifting paradigms/ideologies/worldviews are getting at the same question as me in different (much clearer) ways. History is a big part of how you are framing rights, which feels sort of bucolic. But the past wasn’t great for everyone so how does this movement imagine a different kind of future? Is this a social and environmental justice movement as well a legal one?
Anyway, again, toooo long on my part!
hey, i think yr absolutely right, framing stuff historically does risk a sepia tinged nostalgia, and actually, we've avoided that for the campaign, talking mainly about health benefits and protection of nature - our analogy for inclusivity is that of the wild flower commons, full of diversity, queerness, mutability and fecundity - contrast this with the ploughed lines of a monoculture field, or a canalised river, everything meant to fit into its owners vision - not sure how far you got thru the book, but the hare chapter talks a fair bit about marginality and edward soja's concept of spatial politics - our next bookm, released as a group, will be centering these marginalised voices, race, class, gender, and borrowing indiginous wisdom from around the globe to set out the way forward - and yes, right to roam has always been more of a social justice movement for us, rather than grabbing new places for wealthy middle class people to walk with ski poles and has morphed very quickly into an environmental justice campaign too, highlighting the devastation of nature behind the walls that exclude us, and arguing for a closer bond between communities and nature in order that we might begin to viscerally care about the loss oof biodiviersity