Anarchy - User contributions [en-ca]

Anarchy 51/The catchers in the Right

2021-11-13T00:09:20Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />The catchers in the Right
| author = Peter Willis
| section =
| previous = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 52]]'''
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|157}}

<font size="5">'''The catchers<br />in the Right'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Peter Willis|PETER WILLIS]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">'''{{BL|THE UNATTACHED|BLL01001136002}} by {{popup|Mary Morse|Master of Social Work, McGill University}}.  (Pelican 3s. 6d.)'''

{{sc|One of the basic tenets of anarchist evangelism}} (if they aren{{t}} mutually exclusive terms) is, common with that of the church or any other body, to catch {{a}}em young. In the anarchist case this applies more in practice than in theory, simply because anarchist characteristics—open-minded questioning, dislike of authority, a capacity for honesty—are essentially youthful qualities. Not all the young possess them, alack, but they tend to be lost rather than acquired with age. They are a bit more common, though, than a discouraged anarchist might think; it{{s}} just that those who possess them have a healthy suspicion of any organisation and are, logically, unlikely to form themselves into that notorious paradox, an anarchist organisation.

{{tab}}There are, however, other hunters out. In 1960, three incognito social workers were sent to three different towns {{qq|to make contact with unattached young people, to discover their interests and leisure-time activities and, following this, to help in whatever way seems appropriate}}. The project was organised by the {{w|National Association of Youth Clubs|UK_Youth|UK Youth}}, and {{sc|the unattached}} is an account of these people ({{qq|unattached}}, as might be expected in a NAYC project, meant unattached to any official organisation; nobody seems to have expected that the unattached might be perfectly happily attached to each other), and how the workers fared in {{qq|Seagate}}, {{qq|Northtown}} and {{qq|Midford}}, finding, and establishing relationships with, the unattached in, mainly, coffee bars (an apt subtitle might have been: {{qq|With Net and Notebook Through Darkest {{w|Gaggia}}-land}}). The principal value and delight of the book is that it is an amazingly real piece of evidence (about the unattached ''and'' the workers); almost as good as a novel—if not better in parts; the bald sketching-in of characters which nevertheless reveals very clearly the real people behind them, and the in-spite-of-itself moving description—written in best casebook manner, not unsympathetic but asympathetic—of the sad and inevitable disintegration of the Seagate group.

{{tab}}The workers, although not at all painfully impaled on its horns do give some indication of being faintly aware of the dilemma that haunts (or should) everyone whose job involves mental welfare: whether to encourage basically healthy mental attitudes whenever they are found, regardless of the conflicts this will lead to in a sick society, or whether to so amputate and adapt them that they will fit neatly into society as it is. The workers all speak of rebellion against {{qq|adult values}}, {{qq|authority}}, {{qq|society}}, but never stop for long enough to even briefly {{p|158}}question these values for themselves. {{qq|To a disturbing degree it was found that the unattached young people were often consciously or unconsciously attacking the worker{{s|r}} own standards and values.}} Surely they were intelligent and aware enough to realise that no set of values is ever a way of life in isolation, but, in a community where opposing values obtain, is unavoidably an implied criticism of those values? All they managed to do was worry about the seeming impossibility of their task. {{qq|Faced with all the discrepancies between traditional middle-class beliefs and middle-class behaviour, how was the Seagate worker to indicate {{e}} that middle-class values were preferable to the {{q|bum}} philosophy}} (note use of word {{qq|that}}). Although this troubled them continually, they never—and this is the tragedy of the project and the book—managed to find the right questions to ask. The only criticisms of adult society, voiced with the nervous defiance of minor heresies, are to the effect that its failings lie in not having helped {{qq|these young people to feel that they belong}}. Despite some shilly-shallying, the basic creed is always returned to: These are The Unattached; attach them. {{e}} They are in the wrong. We are in the right. NAYC know best.

{{tab}}Nevertheless, the worker{{s|r}} own experiences of {{qq|adult}} attitudes and social conditions obliquely support the unattached{{s}} resentment and distrust. The Northtown worker{{s}} horrifying description of the factory she worked in, and the Seagate worker{{s}} difficulty in finding {{qq|adults with an attitude sufficiently tolerant and understanding to accept the group for what it was without wishing to impose change or insist on conformity to narrowly defined standards just for the sake of it}} both speak eloquently for themselves.

{{tab}}The workers themselves all achieved a fair measure of identification with their unattached. Surprisingly so since they didn{{t}} know what to expect. The Seagate worker—age 22, played jazz piano, liked drama—met up with a vague but cohesive group of intelligent middle-class rebels, many of whom had thrown up {{qq|lifeless, secure and comforting}} office jobs, and only worked casually when they were short of money. Their ambitions were to become actors, artists, writers, models. The worker dismisses these as being {{qq|centred around highly-paid occupations}}, but goes on to say, {{qq|Paul W., who felt he was being creative at the arts college was the only one during the three years that the worker heard admit to enjoying his work}}. The Seagate project was perhaps the most successful. Under the worker{{s}} guidance, the group produced an {{w|Ionesco|Eugène_Ionesco|Eugène Ionesco}} play. At Midford, on the other hand, as befits a more rural community where unavoidable social mixing between age-groups produces a more conservative attitude in young people, the worker—a 28-year-old {{w|schoolmaster|Schoolmaster}}—seems too stolid and humourless. While the Seagate worker can talk almost non-judgementally of a girl being {{qq|sexually generous}}, the Midford man writes: {{qq|Mavis {{e}} has been involved with a great many local boys. Jean (an older, outside person) talked to some of this group recently and told them of the dangers of leading this sort of life. They bluntly told her she didn{{t}} know what she was missing.}} He also mentions {{qq|rescuing}} girls from {{qq|compromising situations with local boys}} (did he, like the {{w|Peter Sellers|Peter_Sellers}}{{a}} {{yt|headmaster|5Kwnh4RbX9s|Peter Sellers - A Common Entrance}}, {{p|159}}{{qq|go round with a crowbar and prize them apart}}?).

{{tab}}Maybe, however, the workers simply found, of the many available, those teenagers that responded to their personalities; the Northtown worker{{s}} account is the most dreary, despite the fact that she was working in what was even then one of the most exciting cities for the unattached. She makes no mention of the several hundred {{w|beat|Beatnik|Beatnik}} groups and clubs even then operating in the city, apart from a vague {{qq|jazz group}} (she is {{qq|uninterested in jazz}}) that played once a week above a coffee bar.

{{tab}}The type of activity most popular with all the groups (apart from the play produced by the Seagate group—a logical next step for a group consistently more self-integrated, articulate and creative than the others) was discussion, almost as a group therapy, talking about themselves, their environments, and about larger issues—the unattached were far from unattached in their concern for society, vide the {{qq|{{w|ban-the bomb|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}}, {{w|abolish-hanging|Murder_(Abolition_of_Death_Penalty)_Act_1965|Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965}}}} group at Midford. All three workers used their flats as centres for discussions, where their function was to act as a catalyst; encouraging, provoking and occasionally holding back. This was only possible because each worker was totally accepted as one of them by his or her group. (Most unattached groups naturally possess somewhere some such older, wiser member.) It was this fact of total acceptance that made it {{qq|an insoluble problem}} for the workers to find suitable replacements for themselves when the projects finished—it will continue to be so as long as they continue to look to the present Youth Service for this facility, and to refer to it as {{qq|adolescent counselling}}.

{{tab}}This is where the project really falls flat. The whole tone and evidence of the worker{{s|r}} reports indicate that the authoritarian and condescending attitude of the existing youth service is unsuitable and inadequate for the needs of the unattached. They found the clubs {{qq|unsophisticated}} and the clubs found them {{qq|disturbing}}. The Midford worker wrote frankly: {{qq|To some extent these clubs seemed to me to attract the sort of members they deserved ({{q|thirteen-year-olds}}, {{q|kiddies and {{popup|hearties|jocks}}}}; {{q|a load of {{popup|twots|twats; idiots}}}}). I could never recommend such a club to the attention of my present unattached contacts.}} But they never quite lose faith. In Seagate, after the group{{s}} play had been performed at a Youth Drama Festival, where it was not allowed to compete on account of the group not being affiliated to the local Youth Association, the worker persuaded them that the affiliation would be worth their while. {{qq|Rather reluctantly, the group decided to apply. The official application form proved impossible to complete and the application was finally made by letter in which it was argued that the group had never found it necessary to draw up a constitution nor officially appoint officers and a committee. The work of the group had been done efficiently and enthusiastically without the aid and support of such a structure. The letter went on to state that the group was a spontaneous and flexible one and that the element of formality implied by the form was contrary to the spirit of the group. As a result, the {{w|Local Education Authority|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} granted the group {{q|temporary affiliation}} {{e}} The principal motive in applying was the purely selfish one of being able to enter competitions and use LEA equipment.}} The worker, although aware of this, {{p|160}}encouraged the group to apply in what he describes as {{qq|the hope}} that {{qq|a more positive attitude towards officialdom might ensue}}. This is unlikely while the function of the Youth Service is to graciously welcome {{qq|the young people}} to the adult world of dreary jobs and—to avoid awkward contrasts—meaningless pastimes. Most of the unattached, quite reasonably, were dissatisfied with their jobs and, like the habitues of the [[Anarchy 27/The Teen Canteen 1|Teen Canteen]] ([[Anarchy 27|{{sc|anarchy}} 27]], but not mentioned in this book) {{qq|attached excessive importance to their off-work hours {{e}} they seek in leisure the freedom and dignity denied to them in work}}. This is patently not provided in the {{w|ping-pong|Table_tennis|Table tennis}} and party-games type of youth club, which is really a time-killer for the well-adjusted and {{qq|normal}} (a word they have the grace to put in inverted commas). Nothing is thought of such as the Teen Canteen or {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}{{s}} famous {{l|Leicester Club|https://digital.library.lse.ac.uk/objects/lse:lok672roc|Full text: Lady Albemarle’s Boys by Ray Gosling at the London School of Economics Digital Library}}. ({{qq|It started as a caff run by the lads for the lads; grass roots, ground level}}<ref><font size="2">{{qq|{{BL|Sum Total|BLL01006992034}}}} by {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}. Faber, 1962. p 154.</font></ref>) which, although eventually closed down, was a success in terms of involvement:

{{tab}}{{qq|I remember coming back one night from {{w|Oxford|Oxford}}, and it was around four in the morning, and as we came in over the bridge to the {{w|Central Station|Leicester_Central_railway_station|Leicester Central railway station}}, I could see the lights and the open door. Walking down the street from the station and in through the door, and the {{w|jukebox|Jukebox|Jukebox}} was playing, and there were two dancing couples, beautifully and slowly soft, and one behind the bar. There had been a good take-in from the till, and the coffee was still good and hot and fresh. There was blood on the floor, and the dirt from a fast night. It had a wonderful used look about it. It was an oasis in a {{w|city|Leicester|Leicester}} of the dead. The only place open. That was the way I liked it. That was the way it could have been. It became that night both open and exclusive; the sort of place where I could feel proud at being a customer.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 161.</font></ref>

{{tab}}The nearest this book gets to anything like that is the tentative suggestion that {{qq|some members of the community may be especially well-placed to help—{{w|fish-and-chip|Fish_and_chips|Fish and chips}}-shop managers, {{w|coffee-bar|Coffeehouse|Coffeehouse}} proprietors and {{w|public-house|Pub|Pub}} landlords have unique opportunities}}. As Ray Gosling put it in {{a}}59, a year before this project started: {{qq|An idea—to bridge the gap between those with high ideals, and good intentions, those who care and do not make contact; and the commercials who make contact but don{{t}} care.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 149.</font></ref>

{{tab}}And meanwhile the NAYC go on talking about looking for a breakthrough, and chucking sandbags of piety into the one staring them in the face. The project—by our standards and even by theirs—must be counted to have failed. However, failures are invariably more interesting than successes, and, while not hoping with its authors that {{qq|as a result of this book, public opinion will be roused and action follow}}—I have less faith in public opinion, particularly when roused—I think the report, with its quaint mixture of {{popup|priggishness|arrogance}} and enlightenment, might give some of the right people something to think about.

<references />
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Catchers in the Right}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Literary criticism]]
[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/The catchers in the Right

2021-11-09T05:08:23Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />The catchers in the Right
| author = Peter Willis
| section =
| previous = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 52]]'''
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|157}}

<font size="5">'''The catchers<br />in the Right'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Peter Willis|PETER WILLIS]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">'''{{BL|THE UNATTACHED|BLL01001136002}} by {{popup|Mary Morse|Master of Social Work, McGill University}}.  (Pelican 3s. 6d.)'''

{{sc|One of the basic tenets of anarchist evangelism}} (if they aren{{t}} mutually exclusive terms) is, common with that of the church or any other body, to catch {{a}}em young. In the anarchist case this applies more in practice than in theory, simply because anarchist characteristics—open-minded questioning, dislike of authority, a capacity for honesty—are essentially youthful qualities. Not all the young possess them, alack, but they tend to be lost rather than acquired with age. They are a bit more common, though, than a discouraged anarchist might think; it{{s}} just that those who possess them have a healthy suspicion of any organisation and are, logically, unlikely to form themselves into that notorious paradox, an anarchist organisation.

{{tab}}There are, however, other hunters out. In 1960, three incognito social workers were sent to three different towns {{qq|to make contact with unattached young people, to discover their interests and leisure-time activities and, following this, to help in whatever way seems appropriate}}. The project was organised by the {{w|National Association of Youth Clubs|UK_Youth|UK Youth}}, and {{sc|the unattached}} is an account of these people ({{qq|unattached}}, as might be expected in a NAYC project, meant unattached to any official organisation; nobody seems to have expected that the unattached might be perfectly happily attached to each other), and how the workers fared in {{qq|Seagate}}, {{qq|Northtown}} and {{qq|Midford}}, finding, and establishing relationships with, the unattached in, mainly, coffee bars (an apt subtitle might have been: {{qq|With Net and Notebook Through Darkest {{w|Gaggia}}-land}}). The principal value and delight of the book is that it is an amazingly real piece of evidence (about the unattached ''and'' the workers); almost as good as a novel—if not better in parts; the bald sketching-in of characters which nevertheless reveals very clearly the real people behind them, and the in-spite-of-itself moving description—written in best casebook manner, not unsympathetic but asympathetic—of the sad and inevitable disintegration of the Seagate group.

{{tab}}The workers, although not at all painfully impaled on its horns do give some indication of being faintly aware of the dilemma that haunts (or should) everyone whose job involves mental welfare: whether to encourage basically healthy mental attitudes whenever they are found, regardless of the conflicts this will lead to in a sick society, or whether to so amputate and adapt them that they will fit neatly into society as it is. The workers all speak of rebellion against {{qq|adult values}}, {{qq|authority}}, {{qq|society}}, but never stop for long enough to even briefly {{p|158}}question these values for themselves. {{qq|To a disturbing degree it was found that the unattached young people were often consciously or unconsciously attacking the worker{{s|r}} own standards and values.}} Surely they were intelligent and aware enough to realise that no set of values is ever a way of life in isolation, but, in a community where opposing values obtain, is unavoidably an implied criticism of those values? All they managed to do was worry about the seeming impossibility of their task. {{qq|Faced with all the discrepancies between traditional middle-class beliefs and middle-class behaviour, how was the Seagate worker to indicate {{e}} that middle-class values were preferable to the {{q|bum}} philosophy}} (note use of word {{qq|that}}). Although this troubled them continually, they never—and this is the tragedy of the project and the book—managed to find the right questions to ask. The only criticisms of adult society, voiced with the nervous defiance of minor heresies, are to the effect that its failings lie in not having helped {{qq|these young people to feel that they belong}}. Despite some shilly-shallying, the basic creed is always returned to: These are The Unattached; attach them. {{e}} They are in the wrong. We are in the right. NAYC know best.

{{tab}}Nevertheless, the worker{{s|r}} own experiences of {{qq|adult}} attitudes and social conditions obliquely support the unattached{{s}} resentment and distrust. The Northtown worker{{s}} horrifying description of the factory she worked in, and the Seagate worker{{s}} difficulty in finding {{qq|adults with an attitude sufficiently tolerant and understanding to accept the group for what it was without wishing to impose change or insist on conformity to narrowly defined standards just for the sake of it}} both speak eloquently for themselves.

{{tab}}The workers themselves all achieved a fair measure of identification with their unattached. Surprisingly so since they didn{{t}} know what to expect. The Seagate worker—age 22, played jazz piano, liked drama—met up with a vague but cohesive group of intelligent middle-class rebels, many of whom had thrown up {{qq|lifeless, secure and comforting}} office jobs, and only worked casually when they were short of money. Their ambitions were to become actors, artists, writers, models. The worker dismisses these as being {{qq|centred around highly-paid occupations}}, but goes on to say, {{qq|Paul W., who felt he was being creative at the arts college was the only one during the three years that the worker heard admit to enjoying his work}}. The Seagate project was perhaps the most successful. Under the worker{{s}} guidance, the group produced an {{w|Ionesco|Eugène_Ionesco|Eugène Ionesco}} play. At Midford, on the other hand, as befits a more rural community where unavoidable social mixing between age-groups produces a more conservative attitude in young people, the worker—a 28-year-old {{w|schoolmaster|Schoolmaster}}—seems too stolid and humourless. While the Seagate worker can talk almost non-judgementally of a girl being {{qq|sexually generous}}, the Midford man writes: {{qq|Mavis {{e}} has been involved with a great many local boys. Jean (an older, outside person) talked to some of this group recently and told them of the dangers of leading this sort of life. They bluntly told her she didn{{t}} know what she was missing.}} He also mentions {{qq|rescuing}} girls from {{qq|compromising situations with local boys}} (did he, like the {{w|Peter Sellers|Peter_Sellers}}{{a}} {{yt|headmaster|5Kwnh4RbX9s|Peter Sellers - A Common Entrance}}, {{p|159}}{{qq|go round with a crowbar and prize them apart}}?).

{{tab}}Maybe, however, the workers simply found, of the many available, those teenagers that responded to their personalities; the Northtown worker{{s}} account is the most dreary, despite the fact that she was working in what was even then one of the most exciting cities for the unattached. She makes no mention of the several hundred {{w|beat|Beatnik|Beatnik}} groups and clubs even then operating in the city, apart from a vague {{qq|jazz group}} (she is {{qq|uninterested in jazz}}) that played once a week above a coffee bar.

{{tab}}The type of activity most popular with all the groups (apart from the play produced by the Seagate group—a logical next step for a group consistently more self-integrated, articulate and creative than the others) was discussion, almost as a group therapy, talking about themselves, their environments, and about larger issues—the unattached were far from unattached in their concern for society, vide the {{qq|{{w|ban-the bomb|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}}, {{w|abolish-hanging|Murder_(Abolition_of_Death_Penalty)_Act_1965|Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965}}}} group at Midford. All three workers used their flats as centres for discussions, where their function was to act as a catalyst; encouraging, provoking and occasionally holding back. This was only possible because each worker was totally accepted as one of them by his or her group. (Most unattached groups naturally possess somewhere some such older, wiser member.) It was this fact of total acceptance that made it {{qq|an insoluble problem}} for the workers to find suitable replacements for themselves when the projects finished—it will continue to be so as long as they continue to look to the present Youth Service for this facility, and to refer to it as {{qq|adolescent counselling}}.

{{tab}}This is where the project really falls flat. The whole tone and evidence of the worker{{s|r}} reports indicate that the authoritarian and condescending attitude of the existing youth service is unsuitable and inadequate for the needs of the unattached. They found the clubs {{qq|unsophisticated}} and the clubs found them {{qq|disturbing}}. The Midford worker wrote frankly: {{qq|To some extent these clubs seemed to me to attract the sort of members they deserved ({{q|thirteen-year-olds}}, {{q|kiddies and {{popup|hearties|jocks}}}}; {{q|a load of {{popup|twots|twats; idiots}}}}). I could never recommend such a club to the attention of my present unattached contacts.}} But they never quite lose faith. In Seagate, after the group{{s}} play had been performed at a Youth Drama Festival, where it was not allowed to compete on account of the group not being affiliated to the local Youth Association, the worker persuaded them that the affiliation would be worth their while. {{qq|Rather reluctantly, the group decided to apply. The official application form proved impossible to complete and the application was finally made by letter in which it was argued that the group had never found it necessary to draw up a constitution nor officially appoint officers and a committee. The work of the group had been done efficiently and enthusiastically without the aid and support of such a structure. The letter went on to state that the group was a spontaneous and flexible one and that the element of formality implied by the form was contrary to the spirit of the group. As a result, the {{w|Local Education Authority|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} granted the group {{q|temporary affiliation}} {{e}} The principal motive in applying was the purely selfish one of being able to enter competitions and use LEA equipment.}} The worker, although aware of this, {{p|160}}encouraged the group to apply in what he describes as {{qq|the hope}} that {{qq|a more positive attitude towards officialdom might ensue}}. This is unlikely while the function of the Youth Service is to graciously welcome {{qq|the young people}} to the adult world of dreary jobs and—to avoid awkward contrasts—meaningless pastimes. Most of the unattached, quite reasonably, were dissatisfied with their jobs and, like the habitues of the [[Anarchy 27/The Teen Canteen 1|Teen Canteen]] ([[Anarchy 27|{{sc|anarchy}} 27]], but not mentioned in this book) {{qq|attached excessive importance to their off-work hours {{e}} they seek in leisure the freedom and dignity denied to them in work}}. This is patently not provided in the {{w|ping-pong|Table_tennis|Table tennis}} and party-games type of youth club, which is really a time-killer for the well-adjusted and {{qq|normal}} (a word they have the grace to put in inverted commas). Nothing is thought of such as the Teen Canteen or {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}{{s}} famous {{l|Leicester Club|https://digital.library.lse.ac.uk/objects/lse:lok672roc|full text of Lady Albemarle’s Boys by Ray Gosling}}. ({{qq|It started as a caff run by the lads for the lads; grass roots, ground level}}<ref><font size="2">{{qq|{{BL|Sum Total|BLL01006992034}}}} by {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}. Faber, 1962. p 154.</font></ref>) which, although eventually closed down, was a success in terms of involvement:

{{tab}}{{qq|I remember coming back one night from {{w|Oxford|Oxford}}, and it was around four in the morning, and as we came in over the bridge to the {{w|Central Station|Leicester_Central_railway_station|Leicester Central railway station}}, I could see the lights and the open door. Walking down the street from the station and in through the door, and the {{w|jukebox|Jukebox|Jukebox}} was playing, and there were two dancing couples, beautifully and slowly soft, and one behind the bar. There had been a good take-in from the till, and the coffee was still good and hot and fresh. There was blood on the floor, and the dirt from a fast night. It had a wonderful used look about it. It was an oasis in a {{w|city|Leicester|Leicester}} of the dead. The only place open. That was the way I liked it. That was the way it could have been. It became that night both open and exclusive; the sort of place where I could feel proud at being a customer.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 161.</font></ref>

{{tab}}The nearest this book gets to anything like that is the tentative suggestion that {{qq|some members of the community may be especially well-placed to help—{{w|fish-and-chip|Fish_and_chips|Fish and chips}}-shop managers, {{w|coffee-bar|Coffeehouse|Coffeehouse}} proprietors and {{w|public-house|Pub|Pub}} landlords have unique opportunities}}. As Ray Gosling put it in {{a}}59, a year before this project started: {{qq|An idea—to bridge the gap between those with high ideals, and good intentions, those who care and do not make contact; and the commercials who make contact but don{{t}} care.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 149.</font></ref>

{{tab}}And meanwhile the NAYC go on talking about looking for a breakthrough, and chucking sandbags of piety into the one staring them in the face. The project—by our standards and even by theirs—must be counted to have failed. However, failures are invariably more interesting than successes, and, while not hoping with its authors that {{qq|as a result of this book, public opinion will be roused and action follow}}—I have less faith in public opinion, particularly when roused—I think the report, with its quaint mixture of {{popup|priggishness|arrogance}} and enlightenment, might give some of the right people something to think about.

<references />
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Catchers in the Right}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Literary criticism]]
[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/The catchers in the Right

2021-11-09T05:07:34Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />The catchers in the Right
| author = Peter Willis
| section =
| previous = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 52]]'''
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|157}}

<font size="5">'''The catchers<br />in the Right'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Peter Willis|PETER WILLIS]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">'''{{BL|THE UNATTACHED|BLL01001136002}} by {{popup|Mary Morse|Master of Social Work, McGill University}}.  (Pelican 3s. 6d.)'''

{{sc|One of the basic tenets of anarchist evangelism}} (if they aren{{t}} mutually exclusive terms) is, common with that of the church or any other body, to catch {{a}}em young. In the anarchist case this applies more in practice than in theory, simply because anarchist characteristics—open-minded questioning, dislike of authority, a capacity for honesty—are essentially youthful qualities. Not all the young possess them, alack, but they tend to be lost rather than acquired with age. They are a bit more common, though, than a discouraged anarchist might think; it{{s}} just that those who possess them have a healthy suspicion of any organisation and are, logically, unlikely to form themselves into that notorious paradox, an anarchist organisation.

{{tab}}There are, however, other hunters out. In 1960, three incognito social workers were sent to three different towns {{qq|to make contact with unattached young people, to discover their interests and leisure-time activities and, following this, to help in whatever way seems appropriate}}. The project was organised by the {{w|National Association of Youth Clubs|UK_Youth|UK Youth}}, and {{sc|the unattached}} is an account of these people ({{qq|unattached}}, as might be expected in a NAYC project, meant unattached to any official organisation; nobody seems to have expected that the unattached might be perfectly happily attached to each other), and how the workers fared in {{qq|Seagate}}, {{qq|Northtown}} and {{qq|Midford}}, finding, and establishing relationships with, the unattached in, mainly, coffee bars (an apt subtitle might have been: {{qq|With Net and Notebook Through Darkest {{w|Gaggia}}-land}}). The principal value and delight of the book is that it is an amazingly real piece of evidence (about the unattached ''and'' the workers); almost as good as a novel—if not better in parts; the bald sketching-in of characters which nevertheless reveals very clearly the real people behind them, and the in-spite-of-itself moving description—written in best casebook manner, not unsympathetic but asympathetic—of the sad and inevitable disintegration of the Seagate group.

{{tab}}The workers, although not at all painfully impaled on its horns do give some indication of being faintly aware of the dilemma that haunts (or should) everyone whose job involves mental welfare: whether to encourage basically healthy mental attitudes whenever they are found, regardless of the conflicts this will lead to in a sick society, or whether to so amputate and adapt them that they will fit neatly into society as it is. The workers all speak of rebellion against {{qq|adult values}}, {{qq|authority}}, {{qq|society}}, but never stop for long enough to even briefly {{p|158}}question these values for themselves. {{qq|To a disturbing degree it was found that the unattached young people were often consciously or unconsciously attacking the worker{{s|r}} own standards and values.}} Surely they were intelligent and aware enough to realise that no set of values is ever a way of life in isolation, but, in a community where opposing values obtain, is unavoidably an implied criticism of those values? All they managed to do was worry about the seeming impossibility of their task. {{qq|Faced with all the discrepancies between traditional middle-class beliefs and middle-class behaviour, how was the Seagate worker to indicate {{e}} that middle-class values were preferable to the {{q|bum}} philosophy}} (note use of word {{qq|that}}). Although this troubled them continually, they never—and this is the tragedy of the project and the book—managed to find the right questions to ask. The only criticisms of adult society, voiced with the nervous defiance of minor heresies, are to the effect that its failings lie in not having helped {{qq|these young people to feel that they belong}}. Despite some shilly-shallying, the basic creed is always returned to: These are The Unattached; attach them. {{e}} They are in the wrong. We are in the right. NAYC know best.

{{tab}}nevertheless, the worker{{s|r}} own experiences of {{qq|adult}} attitudes and social conditions obliquely support the unattached{{s}} resentment and distrust. The Northtown worker{{s}} horrifying description of the factory she worked in, and the Seagate worker{{s}} difficulty in finding {{qq|adults with an attitude sufficiently tolerant and understanding to accept the group for what it was without wishing to impose change or insist on conformity to narrowly defined standards just for the sake of it}} both speak eloquently for themselves.

{{tab}}The workers themselves all achieved a fair measure of identification with their unattached. Surprisingly so since they didn{{t}} know what to expect. The Seagate worker—age 22, played jazz piano, liked drama—met up with a vague but cohesive group of intelligent middle-class rebels, many of whom had thrown up {{qq|lifeless, secure and comforting}} office jobs, and only worked casually when they were short of money. Their ambitions were to become actors, artists, writers, models. The worker dismisses these as being {{qq|centred around highly-paid occupations}}, but goes on to say, {{qq|Paul W., who felt he was being creative at the arts college was the only one during the three years that the worker heard admit to enjoying his work}}. The Seagate project was perhaps the most successful. Under the worker{{s}} guidance, the group produced an {{w|Ionesco|Eugène_Ionesco|Eugène Ionesco}} play. At Midford, on the other hand, as befits a more rural community where unavoidable social mixing between age-groups produces a more conservative attitude in young people, the worker—a 28-year-old {{w|schoolmaster|Schoolmaster}}—seems too stolid and humourless. While the Seagate worker can talk almost non-judgementally of a girl being {{qq|sexually generous}}, the Midford man writes: {{qq|Mavis {{e}} has been involved with a great many local boys. Jean (an older, outside person) talked to some of this group recently and told them of the dangers of leading this sort of life. They bluntly told her she didn{{t}} know what she was missing.}} He also mentions {{qq|rescuing}} girls from {{qq|compromising situations with local boys}} (did he, like the {{w|Peter Sellers|Peter_Sellers}}{{a}} {{yt|headmaster|5Kwnh4RbX9s|Peter Sellers - A Common Entrance}}, {{p|159}}{{qq|go round with a crowbar and prize them apart}}?).

{{tab}}Maybe, however, the workers simply found, of the many available, those teenagers that responded to their personalities; the Northtown worker{{s}} account is the most dreary, despite the fact that she was working in what was even then one of the most exciting cities for the unattached. She makes no mention of the several hundred {{w|beat|Beatnik|Beatnik}} groups and clubs even then operating in the city, apart from a vague {{qq|jazz group}} (she is {{qq|uninterested in jazz}}) that played once a week above a coffee bar.

{{tab}}The type of activity most popular with all the groups (apart from the play produced by the Seagate group—a logical next step for a group consistently more self-integrated, articulate and creative than the others) was discussion, almost as a group therapy, talking about themselves, their environments, and about larger issues—the unattached were far from unattached in their concern for society, vide the {{qq|{{w|ban-the bomb|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}}, {{w|abolish-hanging|Murder_(Abolition_of_Death_Penalty)_Act_1965|Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965}}}} group at Midford. All three workers used their flats as centres for discussions, where their function was to act as a catalyst; encouraging, provoking and occasionally holding back. This was only possible because each worker was totally accepted as one of them by his or her group. (Most unattached groups naturally possess somewhere some such older, wiser member.) It was this fact of total acceptance that made it {{qq|an insoluble problem}} for the workers to find suitable replacements for themselves when the projects finished—it will continue to be so as long as they continue to look to the present Youth Service for this facility, and to refer to it as {{qq|adolescent counselling}}.

{{tab}}This is where the project really falls flat. The whole tone and evidence of the worker{{s|r}} reports indicate that the authoritarian and condescending attitude of the existing youth service is unsuitable and inadequate for the needs of the unattached. They found the clubs {{qq|unsophisticated}} and the clubs found them {{qq|disturbing}}. The Midford worker wrote frankly: {{qq|To some extent these clubs seemed to me to attract the sort of members they deserved ({{q|thirteen-year-olds}}, {{q|kiddies and {{popup|hearties|jocks}}}}; {{q|a load of {{popup|twots|twats; idiots}}}}). I could never recommend such a club to the attention of my present unattached contacts.}} But they never quite lose faith. In Seagate, after the group{{s}} play had been performed at a Youth Drama Festival, where it was not allowed to compete on account of the group not being affiliated to the local Youth Association, the worker persuaded them that the affiliation would be worth their while. {{qq|Rather reluctantly, the group decided to apply. The official application form proved impossible to complete and the application was finally made by letter in which it was argued that the group had never found it necessary to draw up a constitution nor officially appoint officers and a committee. The work of the group had been done efficiently and enthusiastically without the aid and support of such a structure. The letter went on to state that the group was a spontaneous and flexible one and that the element of formality implied by the form was contrary to the spirit of the group. As a result, the {{w|Local Education Authority|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} granted the group {{q|temporary affiliation}} {{e}} The principal motive in applying was the purely selfish one of being able to enter competitions and use LEA equipment.}} The worker, although aware of this, {{p|160}}encouraged the group to apply in what he describes as {{qq|the hope}} that {{qq|a more positive attitude towards officialdom might ensue}}. This is unlikely while the function of the Youth Service is to graciously welcome {{qq|the young people}} to the adult world of dreary jobs and—to avoid awkward contrasts—meaningless pastimes. Most of the unattached, quite reasonably, were dissatisfied with their jobs and, like the habitues of the [[Anarchy 27/The Teen Canteen 1|Teen Canteen]] ([[Anarchy 27|{{sc|anarchy}} 27]], but not mentioned in this book) {{qq|attached excessive importance to their off-work hours {{e}} they seek in leisure the freedom and dignity denied to them in work}}. This is patently not provided in the {{w|ping-pong|Table_tennis|Table tennis}} and party-games type of youth club, which is really a time-killer for the well-adjusted and {{qq|normal}} (a word they have the grace to put in inverted commas). Nothing is thought of such as the Teen Canteen or {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}{{s}} famous {{l|Leicester Club|https://digital.library.lse.ac.uk/objects/lse:lok672roc|full text of Lady Albemarle’s Boys by Ray Gosling}}. ({{qq|It started as a caff run by the lads for the lads; grass roots, ground level}}<ref><font size="2">{{qq|{{BL|Sum Total|BLL01006992034}}}} by {{w|Ray Gosling|Ray_Gosling|Ray Gosling}}. Faber, 1962. p 154.</font></ref>) which, although eventually closed down, was a success in terms of involvement:

{{tab}}{{qq|I remember coming back one night from {{w|Oxford|Oxford}}, and it was around four in the morning, and as we came in over the bridge to the {{w|Central Station|Leicester_Central_railway_station|Leicester Central railway station}}, I could see the lights and the open door. Walking down the street from the station and in through the door, and the {{w|jukebox|Jukebox|Jukebox}} was playing, and there were two dancing couples, beautifully and slowly soft, and one behind the bar. There had been a good take-in from the till, and the coffee was still good and hot and fresh. There was blood on the floor, and the dirt from a fast night. It had a wonderful used look about it. It was an oasis in a {{w|city|Leicester|Leicester}} of the dead. The only place open. That was the way I liked it. That was the way it could have been. It became that night both open and exclusive; the sort of place where I could feel proud at being a customer.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 161.</font></ref>

{{tab}}The nearest this book gets to anything like that is the tentative suggestion that {{qq|some members of the community may be especially well-placed to help—{{w|fish-and-chip|Fish_and_chips|Fish and chips}}-shop managers, {{w|coffee-bar|Coffeehouse|Coffeehouse}} proprietors and {{w|public-house|Pub|Pub}} landlords have unique opportunities}}. As Ray Gosling put it in {{a}}59, a year before this project started: {{qq|An idea—to bridge the gap between those with high ideals, and good intentions, those who care and do not make contact; and the commercials who make contact but don{{t}} care.}}<ref><font size="2">Ibid. p 149.</font></ref>

{{tab}}And meanwhile the NAYC go on talking about looking for a breakthrough, and chucking sandbags of piety into the one staring them in the face. The project—by our standards and even by theirs—must be counted to have failed. However, failures are invariably more interesting than successes, and, while not hoping with its authors that {{qq|as a result of this book, public opinion will be roused and action follow}}—I have less faith in public opinion, particularly when roused—I think the report, with its quaint mixture of {{popup|priggishness|arrogance}} and enlightenment, might give some of the right people something to think about.

<references />
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Catchers in the Right}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Literary criticism]]
[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Template:Yt

2021-11-09T03:15:21Z

Ivanhoe: Created page with "<span class="plainlinks" title="{{#if: {{{3|}}}|YouTube: {{{3}}}|link: YouTube video}}">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v={{{2}}} {{{1}}}]</span>"

<span class="plainlinks" title="{{#if: {{{3|}}}|YouTube: {{{3}}}|link: YouTube video}}">[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v={{{2}}} {{{1}}}]</span>

Anarchy 51/The catchers in the Right

2021-11-01T01:48:52Z

Ivanhoe:

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-18T20:43:03Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Alderson, Stanley|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2020093716/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Cullingworth, J{{br|ohn}} B{{br|arry}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50019776/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Donnison, D{{br|avid}} V{{br|ernon}}|David_Donnison|David Donnison}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Douglas-Home, Alec|Alec_Douglas-Home|Alec Douglas-Home}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Douglas-Home_ministry|Douglas-Home ministry}} (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Durant, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Eden, Anthony|Anthony_Eden|Anthony Eden}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Eden_ministry|Eden ministry}} (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Glass, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}} (a.k.a. Ruth Durant)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Gray, P{{br|ercy}} G{{br|eorge}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50032140/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Holland, Milner|Milner_Holland|Milner Holland}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|James, Bill|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}} (a.k.a. James Tucker)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|John, Caspar|Caspar_John|Caspar John}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Macmillan, Harold|Harold_Macmillan|Harold Macmillan}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Cabinets|Conservative government, 1957‒1964}} (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{BL|Millar, Robert|BLL01002493375}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Morris, Parker|Parker_Morris_Committee|Parker Morris Committee}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Tucker, James|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Waddilove, Lewis E.|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82218429/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Wilson, Harold|Harold_Wilson|Harold Wilson}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|1st ministry|Labour_government,_1964‒1970|Labour government, 1964‒1970}} (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Zweig, Ferdynand|Ferdynand_Zweig|Ferdynand Zweig}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Britain in the Sixties: Housing|BLL01000044488}}'' (1962 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|British Household, The|BLL01001102327}}'' (1949 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates|BLL01001102042}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|English Housing Trends|BLL01000833995}}'' (1965 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Government of Housing, The|BLL01000966825}}'' (1967 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{w|Guardian, The|The_Guardian|The Guardian}}'' (1821‒current newspaper)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|BLL01015222183}}'' (1961 report: {{l|full text|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}})|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes of the Future: A Socialist Policy for Housing|BLL01014245493}}'' (1956 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Honourable Estates|BLL01009012236}}'' (1966 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Housing: A Co-operative Approach|BLL01011288632}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}} (1961 article)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Watling: A Survey of Social Life on a New Housing Estate''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Anarchy 83/Tenants take over

2021-10-18T20:23:47Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 83 (Vol 8 No 1) JANUARY 1968]]<br>Tenants take over: a new strategy for council tenants
| author = Colin Ward
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 83]]
| next = [[../Homeless in Wandsworth|Homeless in Wandsworth]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|1}}
<font size="7">''Tenants take over''</font>

<font size="5">'''a new strategy for'''<br>'''council tenants'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Colin Ward|COLIN WARD]]'''</font>

{{p|s1}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Ours is a society in which}}, in every field, one group of people makes decisions, exercises control, limits choices, while the great majority have to accept these decisions, submit to this control and act within the limits of these externally imposed choices. It happens in work and leisure, politics, and education, and nowhere is it more evident than in the field of housing. This article is concerned with one particular aspect of the housing situation. It presents the arguments for a tenant take-over, for the transfer of control of {{w|municipal housing|public_housing}} from the local {{w|authorities|Housing_authority}} to tenants’ associations. Although more than a quarter of the population of this country live in municipally owned houses and flats, there is not a single estate controlled by its tenants, apart from a handful of {{w|co-operative housing societies|Housing_cooperative}}. At the moment an argument is going on between the two major political parties over the issue of the sale of {{w|council houses|Council_house}} to tenants. From the point of view of increasing people’s control of their own environment this is a sham battle, because it affects only a tiny minority of tenants. At the moment too, in consequence of the changes in the structure of local government in {{w|London|London}}, the {{w|Greater London Council|Greater_London_Council}} is planning a phased transfer of a large proportion of its housing stock to the {{w|London Boroughs|London_boroughs}}. It plans to transfer about 70,000 houses and flats in 1969. Discussion of the ''control'' of housing is in the air, and no time is more propitious than the present for raising the genuinely radical demand for tenant control and tenant responsibility.<br>
{{tab}}The facts and opinions presented here are intended as ammunition{{p|2}} for such a demand.</div>

{{p|s2}}'''THE MODES OF HOUSE TENURE'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The ways in which householders hold their houses in Britain are limited. They are in fact more limited than in any other European country except {{w|Greece|Greece}}, {{w|Ireland|Ireland}}, {{w|Portugal|Portugal}} and {{w|Roumania|Romania}}.<ref name="one">{{popup|Lewis E. Waddilove|(1914-2000)}}: ''Housing Associations'' ({{w|P.E.P.|Political_and_Economic_Planning}} Report, 1962).</ref> The three modes of tenure in this country are owner-occupation, council tenancy and tenancy from a private landlord. The sole exception to this is, of course, ownership by a housing association, and this includes the only examples we have of co-operative housing. Statistically it is insignificant. The proportions between these three tenure groups have changed, and are changing, rapidly. For Great Britain as a whole the percentages in 1947 were<ref name="two">{{popup|P. G. Gray|Percy George Gray}}: ''The British Household'' (The Social Survey, 1949).</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>{{sc|owner-occupied}}</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>{{sc|public authority rented}}</center>
|<center>{{sc|privately rented}}</center>
|-
|<center>26%</center>
|<center>13%</center>
|<center>61%</center>
|}

By 1965 they had become<ref name="three">{{w|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government}}. Parliamentary written answer, November 11, 1965.</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>44.5%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>28.5%</center>
|<center>25%</center>
|}

The figures differ according to whether a dwelling or a household is being counted and according to the definitions used, and they are also different for various parts of Britain. For example, the figures for England only in 1964, counting households, were<ref name="four">{{popup|D. V. Donnison|David Vernon Donnison, political scientist (born 1926)}}: ''The Government of Housing'' (Penguin Books, 1967).</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>46%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>26%</center>
|<center>28%</center>
|}

while another estimate, in terms of dwellings,<ref name="five">Robert Millar: ''The New Classes'': ''The New Patterns of British Life'' (Longmans, 1966).</ref> gives

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>46%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>33%</center>
|<center>21%</center>
|}

The proportions of council-owned dwellings varies greatly. {{qq|The {{w|Newcastle|Newcastle_upon_Tyne}} Corporation controls two out of every five of the city’s houses. In {{w|Greenock|Greenock}}, on the West Coast of {{w|Scotland|Scotland}}, half the population live in council houses.}}<ref name="five" /> The {{w|London Borough of Kensington|Metropolitan_Borough_of_Kensington}} has 5% council tenants, while {{w|Dagenham|Municipal_Borough_of_Dagenham}} has 67%.<ref name="six">{{w|Sir Milner Holland|Milner_Holland}} (chairman): ''{{l|Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London|http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8734|link: National Archives catalogue entry}}'' ({{popup|HMSO|Her Majesty's Stationery Office}}, 1965).</ref>

{{tab}}The general trend is clear, and, since it concerns a commodity so basic, durable and socially important as housing, it is one of the dramatic social changes of this century. Private renting, which before the {{popup|First World War|began 29 July 1914}} accounted for over 90% of households, is declining rapidly for reasons which are well known. Just as rapidly owner-occupation and renting from local authorities is increasing. The proportionate increase of these two tenure groups depends of course, on government policy, as well as on opportunity and increasing affluence. The {{w|post-war Labour government|Attlee_ministry}}, through building licensing and a quota system, put the emphasis on building by local authorities. The{{p|3}} {{w|Conservative|Conservative_Party_(UK)}} governments of the 1950s and early 1960s changed the emphasis: {{qq|Under the Labour government only one new house in six was built for sale to a private buyer; under the {{w|Tory government|Conservative_government_1957–64}} two out of every three were built for sale.}}<ref name="five" /> The policy of the {{w|present government|First_Wilson_ministry}} is that by 1970 the proportions of council houses built for rent and private houses built for sale should be equal. It is pledged to stimulate and facilitate both forms of tenure. Virtually no new house building by private enterprise since the war has been for private letting. This is why privately rented property is usually synonymous with old, run-down property. The bulk of Britain’s slum housing is in the privately rented sector.

{{tab}}Thus {{qq|the range of choice open to the family in Britain seeking a modern house is more limited than is the case almost anywhere else in Europe}}.<ref name="one" /></div>

{{p|s3}}''' HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The alternative to owner-occupation or council tenancy is to be found in the housing society movement, which has been called {{qq|Housing’s Third Arm}}. If it is a third arm, it has so far been a regrettably feeble one, for housing associations of all kinds had by 1962 provided only 1.3% of {{popup|post-war|World War II ended in Europe 8 May 1945}} housing. Between them they control 0.7% of the total housing stock. But since the only examples of tenant co-operative housing fall into this category, it is worth examining more closely.

{{tab}}When {{w|building societies|Building_society}} first came into existence as organs of working-class mutual aid at the end of the 18th century, they were remarkably like the {{w|self-build|Self-build}} housing societies of today, and very unlike the money-lending-plus-savings-bank organisations which are the modern building societies. They consisted of groups of people who saved to buy land to house themselves, and, when the first house was completed, borrowed money on its security to build another, until all the members of the society were housed, at which point the society disbanded. In a sense they resembled the method of financing house purchase used by some groups of immigrants in this country today:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Particularly among {{w|Indians|British_Indians|British Indians}} and {{w|Pakistanis|British_Pakistanis|British Pakistanis}}, housing {{w|finance pools|Pooling_(resource_management)|Pooling}} are found with a substantial membership—perhaps as many as 900—which meet periodically once a fortnight or once a month, and make calls of, say £10 on each member. Those who draw upon the fund thus created are subject thereafter to periodic calls until the whole amount drawn by them has been liquidated. Drawings under this system are substantial and may cover the whole purchase cost. Occasionally, {{w|West Indians|British_African-Caribbean_people|British African-Caribbean people}} operate on similar but less ambitious lines.{{e|r}} Their pooling arrangements usually only provide for the initial deposits necessary for house purchase, thus enabling them to {{qq|get off the ground}}.<ref name="six" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}The building societies changed their character in the nineteenth century to become more permanent societies, separating the people who{{p|4}} wished to save from those who wished to build. A new kind of society was founded in 1830, the {{w|Labourers’ Friendly Society|Labourer's_Friend_Society|Labourer{{s}} Friend Society}}, which also changed its character and its name, to become the Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes. The early efforts of poor people to improve their own housing conditions failed to expand for lack of capital. Investors then, as now, found easier ways to get rich than by financing working-class housing. This is where the {{popup|Victorian|1837–1901}} philanthropists moved in, satisfied with a {{qq|modest return}} on their capital.

{{tab}}The housing society movement since then has never lost this {{qq|charitable}} emphasis, and in this respect is in marked contrast to the co-operative housing associations of several other countries. Mr. {{l|Lewis Waddilove|https://www.theguardian.com/news/2000/aug/23/guardianobituaries1|link: The Guardian obituary}} contrasts the situation here with that in {{w|Sweden}}, where the movement

<blockquote><font size="2">depended strongly on the initiative of tenants; it did not, as in the United Kingdom, become the instrument of liberal employers and philanthropists making provision for what were referred to as the {{qq|working classes}}. The tenants’ unions of Sweden discovered that the best way of preventing the making of undue profits from a housing shortage and to raise housing standards was to build and administer their own homes. As an example, in 1923, the tenants’ union of {{w|Stockholm|Stockholm}} became The Tenants’ Savings and Building Society and in the following year similar movements in other towns came together to form a National Association of Housing Societies known throughout Sweden by the initials {{w|HSB|HSB_(Sweden)}}.{{e|r}} A second national body for housing associations has been formed by the trade unions in Sweden concerned with the building industry. HSB remains the largest national body and its very name measures out the difference between the Swedish and the British housing association movement. In Sweden the movement’s inspiration and drive come from the tenants; they save for the purpose of raising their own housing standards.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}In Britain the initiative in the movement has come from philanthropists and others concerned to raise the housing standards of the {{qq|working class}}. Save in the {{qq|self-build}} societies, little initiative rests with the occupants of the houses who are simply the tenants of the association.<ref name="one" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}He describes how the HSB has built up not only resources of expert advice in building, planning and finance, {{qq|but has become a centre of research, the results of which can immediately be applied in its own large-scale activities. This means that the tiniest housing co-operative in a remote township}} has access to the best of advice, architectural and technical, with the result that {{qq|the standard of design, workmanship and finish are well in advance of comparable dwellings in this country.{{e|r}} So competent is the research, technical and even manufacturing organisation of HSB that municipalities have been glad to avail themselves of it. Many local authorities’ housing schemes are in fact planned and executed by HSB; in some areas municipal houses are built and managed by a {{q|municipal company}} on the directorate of which the local authority and HSB are represented}}.<ref name="one" />

{{tab}}In Britain, at least until the initiation in 1966 of the {{l|Co-ownership Development Society|http://www.cds.coop|link: official web site}}, the nearest thing we have had to HSB has been{{p|5}} the {{w|National Federation of Housing Societies|National_Housing_Federation|National Housing Federation}}, which gets a meagre government grant, and to which are affiliated 1,530 societies providing general family housing, old people’s housing, industrial housing (sponsored by industrial firms for their employees) as well as self-build, {{qq|{{popup|cost-rent|rent calculated solely by the cost of maintaining a property at zero profit}}}} and tenant co-operative schemes. Housing societies were long ago granted the same treatment as local authorities so far as facilities for long-term loans and qualification for subsidies are concerned.

{{tab}}All the political parties express their support for the housing society idea, and it was amid general approval that the {{l|Housing Act of 1961|https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1961/65/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives (PDF)}} (in Section 7) made available £25 million for direct government loans at the then current rate of interest, to be administered through the National Federation to housing societies building new dwellings to be kept available for cost-rent letting, without subsidy. The Minister described his £25 million as a {{qq|pump-priming}} operation, meaning that he wanted to encourage private capital to go the same way. This of course was the same pious hope that was expressed by the philanthropists a hundred years ago, and it met with the same lack of success.

{{tab}}Then in 1964, the government set up the {{w|Housing Corporation|Housing_Corporation}} with Admiral Sir {{w|Caspar John|Caspar_John}} at its head, and offices in {{w|Park Lane|Park_Lane}}, with power to dispense another £100 million in loans to housing societies for both cost-rent and co-ownership schemes.

{{tab}}The results of both these attempts to stimulate the growth of housing societies has been disappointing.

{{tab}}The Corporation’s last report showed that by the end of September 1966, 150 cost-rent projects, involving 6,932 dwellings and costing about £26.7 millions, had been approved together with a further 42 co-ownership schemes, covering more than 1,000 dwellings and costing £4.7 millions. A total of 371 housing societies, 288 of them cost-rent schemes, had been registered with the corporation.<ref name="seven">{{w|Housing Corporation|Housing_Corporation}}: ''Annual Report'', 1966.</ref> Commenting on the implications of the report, which declared that a large potential market exists for co-ownership housing, Sir Caspar John admitted that co-ownership housing had developed slowly, adding hopefully that {{qq|things have speeded up tremendously in the past six months}}.<ref name="eight">''{{w|The Guardian|The_Guardian}}'', October 21, 1966.</ref>

{{tab}}I have referred to the rate of expansion of the housing society movement as disappointing, but perhaps the surprising thing is that it expanded at all, as so many legal and fiscal obstacles stood in its way. In the first place the original cost-rent scheme could only benefit people with an income (five years ago) above about £1,500 a year, while such people, because of the system of taxation and tax allowances would have found freehold house purchase a better proposition. Secondly, and partly because of the difficulty of finding a legal framework—even after 100 years of the Co-operative Movement—for the concept of co-ownership, the whole system was so complex that only groups containing someone with specialist knowledge were likely even to under{{p|6}}stand the scheme. The {{w|Milner Holland|Milner_Holland}} {{l|Report|http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8734|link: National Archives catalogue entry}}<ref name="six" /> criticised the absurdity of the situation: {{qq|It seems to us that if non-profit housing associations are to make an effective contribution to the most urgent needs—and it is widely accepted that they should—then a rationalisation of the fiscal and legal provisions governing their activity is urgently needed; at present these seem to have the effect of discouraging the very associations which are equipped to give effective help in the area where it is most needed.}} And elsewhere the Report declared that {{qq|We have been unable to find any justification for the unfavourable tax treatment of housing associations and we conclude that unless the tax burden is lifted, the contribution to the supply of rented accommodation by housing associations will be seriously hampered.}}

{{tab}}Several steps have been taken recently which, in theory, should improve the situation—the {{l|Housing Subsidies Bill|http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/29/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, the {{popup|option mortgage|a mortgage with a subsidy on interest payments}} scheme, the prospect of assistance from the Land Commission and of more flexible cash borrowing arrangements, but none of these in practice has so far affected the prospect for housing societies.</div>

{{p|s4}}'''THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT AND HOUSING'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The Labour Party issued in 1956 a policy statement on Housing which provided, amongst other proposals, for the municipalisation of urban rented property,<ref name="nine">The {{w|Labour Party|Labour_Party_(UK)}}: ''Homes of the Future'', 1956.</ref> a policy which was quietly dropped in the 1960s (although of course, both Labour and Conservative local authorities have exercised their powers to acquire rented properties by compulsory purchase from unsatisfactory private landlords, and recent Labour Party policy policy statements have demanded that local authorities should use these powers more freely). The Labour Party statement was followed in 1959 by that of the {{w|Co-operative Party|Co-operative_Party}} (debated and approved by the {{w|Bridlington|Bridlington}} Conference that year) which dissented from it in important respects. Labour had dismissed the idea of placing the management and development of municipalised dwellings in the hands of local housing associations, declaring that it was {{qq|sure that the local authorities can undertake this great new responsibility}}. But the Co-operative statement pointed out that, {{qq|if the local authority is to be the only landlord within a given area, there is an obvious possibility of the general application of general rules that do not permit sufficient variation to meet individual requirements}}. The statement expressed the hope that {{qq|local authorities will be more ready than in the past to {{popup|devolute|devolve}} some of their management functions}}, and recommended the formation of a national co-operative development housing organisation to promote co-operative housing, recognising that {{qq|the {{w|Co-operative retail societies|Consumers'_co-operative|Consumer{{s|r}} co-operative}} themselves cannot give the initial financial impetus to this new development in co-operation}}.<ref name="ten">''Housing'': ''A Co-operative Approach'' ({{w|Co-operative Union|Co-operatives_UK|Co-operatives UK}}, 1959).</ref><br>
{{tab}}The 1961 Co-operative Party policy statement reiterated the point that {{qq|very little change of policy would be necessary to give practical encouragement to the formation of co-operative housing societies}}<ref name="eleven">''Social Ownership and Control'' (Co-operative Union, 1961).</ref> and{{p|7}} went on to describe these changes. Later in the same year {{w|Harold Campbell|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)}}’s pamphlet ''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities'' was published.<ref name="twelve">{{w|Harold Campbell|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)}}: ''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities'' (Co-operative Union, October 1961).</ref> Here he outlined the powers which local authorities possessed under the {{l|Housing Act, 1957|http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1957/56/part/V/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, to promote and assist housing associations, described the co-operative schemes which already existed, and the achievements of co-operative housing movements in Sweden, {{w|Denmark}} and the United States, and set out the needs in this country: a powerful promotional organisation, persuasion of local authorities, mobilisation of financial resources, and changes in the legal structure. In 1966 the Co-ownership Development Society was set up and has already fostered five co-operative housing societies, with Mr. Campbell as its chairman. In April 1967 he was appointed to the board of the Housing Corporation. Advocates of co-operative housing who have waited so long for the movement to get off the ground will hope that this appointment will bear fruit. What is missing is the demand from below.</div>

{{p|s5}}'''CHANGING THE COUNCIL ESTATE'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}But however long it takes to develop a co-operative housing movement in this country, must we necessarily assume that the existing municipal housing estates, the homes of well over a quarter of the population, must continue to be administered paternalistically from above as though the vast social changes of the post-war world had not taken place? The {{w|Parker Morris Committee|Parker_Morris_Committee}}, drawing up new standards for housing, did not think so, reminding us that {{qq|It must be admitted that many other European countries reach a far higher standard in their estate layout than we do, very largely through the use of housing associations, which take full responsibility for both the initial landscaping and its maintenance}}.<ref name="twentythree">Sir Parker Morris (chairman): ''{{l|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}}'' ({{w|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government}}, HMSO, 1961).</ref> And the Central Housing Advisory Committee reminded local authorities that {{qq|tenants today are much more representative of the community as a whole and are, for the most part, independent, reliable citizens who no longer require the support and guidance which was often thought to be necessary in the past. ''Local authorities must recognise that this is a major social change which is likely to become more marked in the years ahead.''}}<ref name="seventeen">''Councils and Their Houses'': ''Management of Estates'', Eighth Report of the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee (HMSO, 1959).</ref> (The Committee’s italics.)

{{tab}}The Committee’s report went on: {{qq|To think of the tenants of today as though their circumstances and needs are the same as those of tenants of a generation ago would be unreal. Similarly, to expect methods of management designed to meet the needs of tenants in the 1930s to be suitable for those of the 1950s or 1970s would, we think, be quite wrong. {{e|r}}}} But what of the tenants of the 1960s? Has there been a change in the attitudes of housing management? It would be difficult to find evidence for this.

{{tab}}The time is ripe for change. But change of what kind? I believe{{p|8}} that it should be a radical change to tenant control, and several of our foremost authorities on housing share this opinion. Mr. Waddilove,<ref name="one" /> for example, makes the same unfavourable comparison as did the Parker Morris Committee, between the appearance of housing estates in this country and on the Continent, and draws the same conclusion:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The visitor to housing estates on the Continent comments most often on the attractiveness of their layout, the care with which common land is cultivated, and the harmony of external decoration. The claim of the co-operative association is that it combines the sense of ownership and the security of tenure of the owner-occupied house with an equally strong sense of responsibility for, and interest in, the neighbourhood as a whole. Moreover it does this as a by-product of its normal organisation; in Britain in new estates we have attempted to achieve the same result by all kinds of artificial stimuli to neighbourhood responsibility.</font></blockquote>

The sense of responsibility comes from ''being'' responsible, and people can only ''be'' responsible for their own lives and their own environment if they are in control of it. Similarly Professor Donnison declares:<ref name="twentyone">D. V. Donnison: {{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}}, ''Housing'', Vol. 23, No. 3, December 1961.</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}we need a system that will provide adequate housing of various types with complete security of tenure. Down payments should be negligible but subsequent payments may well be higher than council rents. The occupier should be given responsibility and incentives for maintaining and improving his own house, but should be insured against the costs of major repairs. Some body responsible to the occupiers themselves should retain a continuing interest in the character and development of the immediate neighbourhood and might provide open space and other shared amenities for its residents. In fact a way must be found to continue the advantages of owner-occupation and tenancy, both in new housing and in existing property.</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}The points which require emphasis in his conclusions are that the overall body should be responsible ''to the occupiers themselves'' and that it is not enough to develop this new kind of tenure for future application: it must be applied to ''existing property''.

{{tab}}Mr. {{popup|J. B. Cullingworth|John Barry Cullingworth (born 1929)}} raises similar questions, in fact a whole series of them:<ref name="twentytwo">{{popup|J. B. Cullingworth|John Barry Cullingworth (born 1929)}}: ''{{popup|English Housing Trends|English Housing Trends: A Report on the Rowntree Trust Housing Study}}'' (G. Bell & Sons, 1965).</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Could not tenants be given a greater degree of responsibility for the upkeep of their houses and, probably more important, for the general appearance and amenities of housing estates? There is a growing discussion of the value of {{qq|citizen-participation}} in urban renewal in the rehabilitation of {{qq|{{popup|twilight areas|areas of urban decay}}}}. Is not a similar line possible with council housing estates? Surely it is not only owner-occupiers who are hit by the {{qq|do-it-yourself revolution}} and who have a real concern for their houses and the environment in which they live. More fundamentally, why do we need council housing? If it is a question of ensuring that low-income families can obtain good housing at a price which they can afford, could not this be achieved by a system of family housing allowances? If it is a question of ensuring that sufficient houses are actually built, could not local authorities simply confine their attention to housebuilding and hand over the completed houses to associations of tenants, housing co-operatives, housing societies, or even (with the aid of generous mortgage facilities) to individual families? A {{qq|reserve}} of houses could be kept for special needs, but it need not be on the vast scale of today.</font></blockquote>

{{p|9}}{{tab}}With his reference to housing allowances as an alternative to manipulating the rents of low-income families, and to the sale of council houses to individual tenants, Mr. Cullingworth is raising issues which I have to discuss elsewhere, but he is clearly among those who see a better future in self-management than in municipal management.</div>

{{p|s6}}'''THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TENANTHOOD'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Psychological generalisations about whole groups of people are bound to be meaningless, especially when the group to which a person belongs has been selected by such a variety of factors, most of them quite outside those of individual personality, as the choice of house tenure. In fact, of course, for most people it is not a matter of choice but of grabbing whatever opportunity has been theirs, of getting a roof over their heads.

{{tab}}Yet the generalisations are made. {{qq|Property owners,}} says {{popup|Ferdynand Zweig|Polish economist (1896-1988)}},<ref name="twentyfive">{{popup|Ferdynand Zweig|Polish economist (1896-1988)}}: ''The Worker in an Affluent Society'' (Heinemann, 1961).</ref> {{qq|often struck me as a brighter, more daring and enterprising breed than the rest.{{e|r}} I often asked how people felt when they became house-owners.{{e|r}} The overwhelming majority felt deeply about it,}} and the words which came to their lips were satisfaction, self-confidence, freedom, independence. And {{w|James Tucker|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James}}, describing the effects of segregation by house tenure and the frightening animosities which exist between owner-occupiers and council tenants,<ref name="twentyeight">{{w|James Tucker|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James}}: ''Honourable Estates'' (Gollancz, 1966).</ref> feels able to isolate certain characteristics of council tenants:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Now, what of the people? There are two dominant characteristics, one at least of which I cannot claim to be the first to have noticed. It is unneighbourliness, often resulting in loneliness; the other seems to be based on an acceptance of the notion that people in council houses have failed, haven’t quite made it, and is frequently expressed as a frustrated desire to buy a house off the estate.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Many council tenants speak with gentle pride of how little they have to do with people living near them.{{e|r}} In some measure it may be a means of self-protection against neighbours not considered up to the social mark. But, more important, it is a defensive assertion against the low social standing of estates: {{qq|Look! We can be as unfriendly as anybody.}} People ape what they assume to be superior ways of behaving; suburban ways, for instance. It is tragic that it should be so and leads to great unhappiness.{{e|r}}</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}In so far as we may consider the generalisations to be valid, we can see that they arise from the ''social'' situations in which people find themselves. The walls or fences which in a number of notorious instances have been built to separate privately-owned from council-owned sections of the same estate are an extreme manifestation of ordinary English snobbery, but they make it devastatingly clear to the more vulnerable kind of municipal tenant that in the eyes of millions of his fellow-countrymen he is a second-class citizen. The way in which his relationship with his landlord intensifies this feeling has been made clear by Stanley Alderson:<ref name="twentyfour">{{popup|Stanley Alderson|(born 1927)}}: ''Britain in the Sixties'': ''Housing'' (Penguin Books, 1962).</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}the usual balance of power between landlord and tenant is everywhere upset by the condition of housing shortage. But the problems{{p|10}} are much more acute in council tenancy. It is not only that the council tenant is even less free to move than the private tenant. The private tenant can at least hate his landlord for taking advantage of the conditions of shortage for his own financial gain. The council tenant knows that he is fortunate in having his house, and feels that he has been done a favour. The local authority which is his landlord never does anything for its own financial gain. It always acts in its wisdom for its tenants’ own advantage. In the long run, power employed paternalistically provokes far greater resentment than power employed selfishly or even antagonistically. Because there is no satisfactory outlet for it, the resentment accumulates.{{e|r}}</font></blockquote>

Worse still, every attempt to rationalise rent policy serves to exacerbate this paternalistic relationship, for Mr. Alderson goes on:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}It is often said of {{w|industrial strikes|Strike_action|Strike action}} over wages that their real cause is repressed resentment deriving from day-to-day industrial relationships. Similarly the {{w|rent strikes|Rent_strike|Rent strike}} that followed the introduction of differential rent schemes must have given release to repressed resentment deriving from landlord-tenant relations. The protests against a {{w|means test|Means_test|Means test}} were not merely rationalisations of a reluctance to pay higher rents. Differential rents were resented because they foisted on the local authorities the ultimate paternalist responsibility of deciding how much pocket money their tenants should be allowed to keep. Local authorities deserve sympathy for their reluctance to exercise this responsibility. It is an imperative that they should be relieved of it as that council tenants who can afford to should pay economic rents. The council tenant who needs financial assistance should receive it through some other organ of the state, established to assist private tenants and owner-occupiers as well. He could then claim his assistance without loss of dignity, and he would always pay his full rent to his landlord. Equally his landlord would always be entitled to claim it from him.</font></blockquote>

We need to find a system of tenure which changes this psychology of dependency for one of independence. One which, as Harold Campbell puts it, {{qq|combines private enterprise and mutual aid in a unique form of social ownership which puts a premium on personal responsibility and individual initiative}}.<ref name="ten" /></div>

{{p|s7}}'''COULD TENANTS MANAGE TO MANAGE THEMSELVES?'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The obvious nucleus of a tenants’ co-operative is the tenants’ association. Is there evidence that associations of this kind can bear the weight of continuous organisational responsibility? Several students of this kind of association would doubt it, citing {{w|Ruth Durant|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}’s famous study of {{qq|{{popup|Watling|Watling: A Survey of Social Life on a New Housing Estate. London: P. S. King (1939).}}}} and other more recent examples where, on the {{w|new estate|Watling_Estate|Watling Estate}}, {{qq|there is a familiar pattern of initial loneliness followed by unity against the outside world, giving rise to an agitational {{w|Residents’ Association|Residents'_association|Resident{{s|r}} association}}. This achieves its task and most of the inhabitants settle down to a home-centred but small group-oriented, social life}}.<ref name="thirteen>{{w|Ronald Frankenberg|Ronald_Frankenberg}}: ''Communities in Britain'': ''Social Life in Town and Country'' (Penguin Books, 1966).</ref> Others have developed a {{qq|phase theory}} of the life of tenants’ associations:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}In the first phase, the association played mainly a representative role, negotiating with the local authority for essential services and organising large-scale socials and protest meetings. In the second it became mainly a constructive organisation, fully occupied in building a community centre. In the third phase the centre’s finances were placed on a firm foundation; and in the fourth, popular wishes were discovered through a process of trial and error. In the fifth period, short-run equilibrium was reached: the activities of the centre followed a routine pattern. This was the path of evolution of the most successful centre studied; the others failed to make such rapid adjustments, and lost most of their membership.<ref name="fourteen">{{w|Norman Dennis|Norman_Dennis}}: {{qq|Changes in Function and Leadership Renewal}} ''{{w|Sociological Review|The_Sociological_Review|The Sociological Review}}'' n.s.6, 1958, cited by {{popup|Morris|Raymond N. Morris}} and {{w|Mogey|John_M._Mogey|John M. Mogey}}: ''{{popup|The Sociology of Housing|The Sociology of Housing: Studies at Berinsfield}}'' (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{p|11}}{{tab}}John Hayes, on the other hand, emphasises that it cannot be said that tenants’ associations are merely {{qq|transitory bodies formed for one objective only and then fading away}}. On the contrary, {{qq|Once established they tend to last, and to concentrate on welfare work for their neighbourhood. Of fifty-eight groups affiliated to the London Standing Conference of Housing Estate Community Groups in 1962, one had been in existence for forty-six years, twenty have existed for fourteen years, eighteen for from five to ten years, sixteen for from one to five years, and three were new in 1962. Evidence of this sort should help to disprove the contention that the groups lack stability}}.<ref name="fifteen">John Hayes: {{qq|Tenants’ Associations}}, ''{{w|Society of Housing Managers|Chartered_Institute_of_Housing|Chartered Institute of Housing}} Quarterly Journal'', Vol. V, No. 11, July 1963.</ref> Similarly, [[Author:Gerry Williams|Gerry Williams]], youth adviser to the London group of associations, writing of {{qq|the quite spontaneous development, after the Second World War, on the growing number of council housing estates, of Tenants’ Associations}}, emphasises that, {{qq|Contrary to the general opinion, the great number of these autonomous, self-formed organisations are not {{q|grievance}} bodies, but non-political associations formed for the purpose of creating some sense of community and neighbourliness amongst the uprooted in the often drab new areas of houses and flats that are such a characteristic part of post-war Britain}}.<ref name="sixteen">[[Author:Gerry Williams|Gerry Williams]]: {{qq|[[Anarchy 30/Teen Canteen: End or Beginning?|Teen Canteen: End or Beginning]]}} ([[Anarchy 30|{{sc|anarchy}} 30]], Vol. 3, No. 8, August 1963).</ref>

{{tab}}Testifying to the value of such associations, the Central Housing Advisory Committee reported that, {{qq|The attitude of local authorities towards tenants’ associations tends to vary according to the circumstances in which an association has sprung up. Naturally the main purpose of most associations is to watch over the interests of the tenant. Their approach may differ widely, some starting with the belief that the interests of the tenant and landlord are inevitably opposed. We believe, however, that whatever the starting point, ''the wise course for the local authority is to treat associations as responsible bodies and seek to secure their confidence and co-operation''{{e|r}}}}<ref name="seventeen">''Councils and Their Houses'': ''Management of Estates'', Eighth Report of the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee (HMSO, 1959).</ref> (the Committee’s italics).

{{tab}}Describing the activities of the associations, Mr. Hayes notes that, {{qq|Their objects are usually threefold; to encourage good neighbourliness; and to provide facilities for recreational activities; and to work for the benefit of the residents generally. Usually their method is to organise social activities first, and later to serve as a consultative committee for the estate, acting as a link with housing management for the discussion of common problems of living on the estate. The advantage of having such a representative group to consult as a {{q|consumer council}} has only slowly been recognised by housing managers.}}<ref name="fifteen" />

{{tab}}Since, I am in fact, advocating that tenants’ associations should evolve from this consultative status to that of actual control, I should perhaps cite a contradictory opinion. Messrs. {{popup|Morris|Raymond N. Morris}} and {{w|Mogey|John_M._Mogey|John M. Mogey}}, in ''The Sociology of Housing'' observe that,

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Councils are apt to be cautious in granting self-government to their tenants, and this is to some extent justified by the tenants’ diversity and inexperience. Others feel that paternal watchfulness and control by the local authority can easily outgrow the bounds of reason; and give only the minimum of tenancy conditions and unsought advice. This represents the other extreme from paternalism: it assumes such a strong relationship that tenants will feel free to make any requests to the local authority. It{{p|12}} gives tenants’ associations much more responsibility than they are structured to carry. They lack the power to discipline their own members, and cannot therefore bargain successfully or act firmly on their members’ behalf. To find a balance between paternalism and ''laissez-faire'' requires skill; for tenants’ associations will tend to be effectively suppressed if either extreme policy is adopted.<ref name="eighteen">R. N. Morris and John Mogey: ''The Sociology of Housing'' (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}But has anyone ever tried giving ''real'' responsibilities to tenants’ associations? Apart from the handful of examples of co-operative co-partnership housing associations, there is very little evidence to draw upon. There is certainly a lesson to learn from one particular field of private enterprise housing. The general standard of design in speculative house-building is abysmally low, but the outstanding exceptions in post-war private development have been in the work of {{w|Span Developments Ltd.|Span_Developments|Span Developments}} and {{w|Wates Ltd|Wates_Group|Wates Group}}. Wates arrange for the shared facilities of their estates to be the responsibility of a management company composed of the residents themselves, which, they claim, {{qq|also allows people to get to know and help each other (in matters like babysitting for example) without intruding into each other’s essential privacy}}. And in the Span developments there has been developed a method of residents’ control, described by the architect {{w|Eric Lyons|Eric_Lyons}} as a {{qq|special technique of leasehold purchase, which is effecting a quiet revolution in property ownership}} and he claims for the system that

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}It has solved the old problem of maintenance of common spaces and structures, and also involves each resident in the autonomous Residents’ Society which runs each estate.{{e|r}} The scheme which has a Residents’ Society very carefully formed on a non-profit-making basis under the {{w|Friendly Societies Acts|Friendly_Societies_Act|Friendly Societies Act}} {{e}} is a method of guaranteeing the permanent maintenance of the building, and not only the building fabric, but the gardens and general amenities. It is also of singular benefit in involving each individual in the idea, each person who lives there. That seems to be socially a tremendous thing.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}As far as I am concerned, it does not affect me whether it is leasehold or not. The important thing is that the Residents’ Societies are in charge legally and formally. They have their own committees and take an active part. If someone’s child starts digging up the lawn, someone will want to know why. Everyone has a stake in the issue.{{e|r}}<ref name="nineteen">{{w|Eric Lyons|Eric_Lyons}}: {{qq|Domestic Building and Speculative Development}}. Paper read at the {{w|RIBA|Royal_Institute_of_British_Architects|Royal Institute of British Architects}} on March 25, 1958 (''{{w|RIBA Journal|RIBA_Journal}}'', May 1958).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}His last sentence explains why it is reasonable to expect that ''genuine'' control by tenants’ co-operatives would be successful. To suggest that the middle-class residents of Span estates have some quality which is lacking in council house tenants, apart from larger incomes, is to deny the whole edifice of mutual aid organisation which the working class has built up in the past. (In fact, a resident of one Span development at {{w|Blackheath|Blackheath,_London|Blackheath, London}} remarked that {{qq|We have all the advantages without the disadvantages of a working class district. The estate has achieved a high degree of neighbourliness.}}<ref name="twenty">John Barr: {{qq|What Kind of Homes do People Want?}} (''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}'', No. 163, November 11, 1965).</ref>)

{{tab}}And if it is really true that tenant control would give tenants’ associations more responsibility than they are {{qq|structured to carry}}, or that the tenants’ diversity and inexperience would make it impossible, how are we to explain the success of the extreme case which Mr. Waddilove reports from {{w|Norway}}?

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}A pre-war municipal estate near {{w|Oslo}} was transferred over a period from the ownership of the local authority to the ownership of associations{{p|13}} of the tenants themselves. It has been one of the most difficult problems to the local authority; its standards were low, its appearance unpleasant, and there was great resistance to increases in rents to a reasonable level. A series of meetings patiently arranged by the housing manager ultimately resulted in the acceptance by the tenants of membership in co-operatives which, on favourable terms, took over the ownership of the property from the local authority. Today it is transformed. The members have cared for their own property and by corporate action have ensured that others have done so in a way that they failed to do when it was in public ownership; proposed by the municipality at which they protested so vigorously. This experience so impressed the authority that it decided in principle to transfer all its post-war estates similarly to the ownership of tenant co-operatives and to base its housing policy on this principle.<ref name="one" /></font></blockquote></div>

{{p|s8}}'''ONE BY ONE OR ALL TOGETHER'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Local authorities have been at liberty to sell their houses for at least ten years, but it is only very recently that this has become a {{qq|hot}} political issue: since {{w|Birmingham|Birmingham}} Corporation began selling council houses in large numbers last year. The issue is obviously going to be bandied about in future local and national elections, just as it was in the {{w|municipal elections in 1967|List_of_elections_in_1967#United_Kingdom|List of elections in 1967: United Kingdom}} when {{w|London|Greater_London_Council_election,_1967|Greater London Council election, 1967}} and other big cities changed their political masters.

{{tab}}What proportion of council tenants would like to buy the houses they occupy, and are financially able to do so? It is hard to make an estimate. Several years ago Ferdynand Zweig observed that {{qq|The tendency to consider house property as something worth having and struggling for, something which gives one strength and self-confidence and social standing, appears to be spreading among the working classes. I have no figures to offer here but I think that the working classes may be divided into three main groups, numerically not very far apart. One group tries to acquire property; the second does not think about house property at all, as it is beyond its possibilities and its ken; the third group rejects the acquisition of house property outright as undesirable and even pernicious for the working man}}.<ref name="twentyfive" /> On the other hand, James Tucker noted in 1966 that

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}It is unusual, though that is all, to come across council tenants who would not prefer to be owner-occupiers, possibly of council-built property, but more often of a house away from municipal estates. It would be wild to suggest that all those who want to go are seeking an escape from council housing because its social rating is low. More simply, property appreciates and many council tenants feel they are missing something: their objections are not to renting council property but to renting. Yet it is worth noticing that a lot of council tenants regard those who have moved off to their own houses as having taken a leap upward in social standing. The other side of that thought can only be shame or frustration or aggressiveness at finding themselves left behind.<ref name="twentyeight" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Commenting on the actual response of tenants in Birmingham and Reading to offers from the council of the chance to buy their houses, Brian Lapping (''{{w|The Guardian|The_Guardian}}'', 15.5.67) says, {{qq|What is surprising is how few people in council houses have taken the chance to buy them. {{w|Reading|Reading,_Berkshire|Reading, Berkshire}}’s 1,500 have taken five years. In Birmingham so far only 2½% of those offered the chance have bought. Nobody knows why the response rate has been low. Perhaps it is because of the freeze, perhaps because most council tenants don’t like their homes enough to want to{{p|14}} own them.}} And Clive Branson (''{{w|Daily Mail|Daily_Mail}}'', {{popup|11.10.67|11 October 1967}}) remarks, {{qq|My poll among tenants who are thinking of buying their council homes showed that many had only the haziest idea what the step meant. They had not thought of buying a house until approached by the council.}} {{popup|Harry Brack|English community activist (1927-2009)}} (''{{w|Evening Standard|London_Evening_Standard|London Evening Standard}}'', 23.5.67) asks, {{qq|What lies behind this poor response?}} and he answers, {{qq|Many tenants simply cannot afford to go in for owner occupation. For others, a home on a private estate is a status symbol, and an ageing council house is not.}} Among tenants explaining their reasons for opting to buy their council houses, many replied in similar words to those of Mr. Ronald Atkins, {{qq|It seemed that the rents were going up regularly every 12 months or two years. One year they went up twelve {{popup|bob|shillings}}. More or less, we wanted to buy the house on account of that. We didn’t think the rent was all that excessive because it’s a very good house, but from what we could see, the rent would eventually beat what we pay for buying it. It’s not only that, but you feel more inclined to do things to make the house better for yourself and you feel more secure.}}

{{tab}}As with most issues connected with housing, opinions on the sale of council housing have polarised on political lines. This applies even to opinions on the success or failure of the campaign to sell them. Thus at the {{w|Scarborough|Scarborough,_North_Yorkshire|Scarborough, North Yorkshire}} {{w|Conference of the Labour Party|Labour_Party_(UK)_Conference|Labour Party Conference}}, Mr. {{w|Greenwood|Tony_Greenwood,_Baron_Greenwood_of_Rossendale|Tony Greenwood}}, {{w|Minister of Housing|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government|Ministry of Housing and Local Government}}, defending his policy of disagreeing but not intervening, declared that {{qq|The rate of sale is falling: it is lower today than a year ago}} (''Guardian'', {{popup|3.10.67|3 October 1967}}), while on the other hand Mr. {{w|Horace Cutler|Horace_Cutler}}, the new Conservative chairman of the Greater London Council’s Housing Committee, claims that {{qq|There has been a fantastic response to the GLC’s {{q|buy your own home}} scheme for council tenants}}. Both in Birmingham and London, the Councils do not propose to offer to tenants more than 10% of their houses. The rate of response in London is certainly higher than in Birmingham, probably about 10% of tenants to whom the offer has been made have started negotiating. If we assume that the same figure would apply to the 90% of tenants who have not been offered the chance, this would mean that about one in a hundred of council tenants feels able or anxious to buy his house. When you look at it in this light, it is hard to see what the fuss is about.

{{tab}}The arguments which have been used by the Labour Party in opposition to the sale of council houses have hardly been of a kind to convince the uncommitted. It is suggested that the sale of houses to tenants would have the effect of depriving people waiting on the councils’ lists, but in fact these houses would be occupied as tenants by the would-be purchasers in any case. (The actual number of occupied council dwellings which fall vacant in London is only 1½ to 2% a year.) It is extraordinary that in the public discussion of this issue, no one has made the point that transfer of ownership collectively to a tenants’ association is infinitely preferable to the selling of a small number of odd houses whose tenants happen to be ready and willing to buy them, one by one. This could be an alternative more attractive both to the tenant and to the council.

{{tab}}It would extend the benefits of independence much more widely.{{p|15}} It would avoid setting up yet another social barrier on estates, between those who have bought and those who still pay rent. It would enable public spaces to be collectively maintained. It would create, in Mr. Campbell’s words, {{qq|a sense of belonging and of shared responsibility (rarely to be found on a municipal housing estate or among suburban owner-occupiers) which makes for mutual respect, out of which a healthy society naturally grows}}.

{{tab}}There is no point in denying (like many house-owning Labour politicians have) that it is better to be an owner-occupier than a council tenant. What wants emphasising is that it is better than either to be a member of a community.</div>

{{p|s9}}'''UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Housing management, as undertaken by local authorities under the Housing Acts, includes all the work involved in:
# advice on the design and layout of estates from the management point of view;
# the study of housing needs in the borough or district;
# the selection of tenants;
# the allocation of accommodation;
# the fixing of rents and the levying of occupation charges;
# the collection of, and accounting for, rents, rates and other charges due from tenants;
# the upkeep, maintenance and repair of houses and estates, the adaptation, improvement and conversion of properties;
# the provision of caretaking services and the operation of special estate services (laundries, lifts, community centres, clubrooms, etc.);
# the enforcement of tenancy conditions, the maintenance of good order, the care of elderly, infirm, and unsatisfactory tenants.

{{tab}}If an estate were ''taken over'' by a tenant co-operative, the first two of these functions would not be its concern. (Though, of course, if the normal means of providing housing became by way of housing societies rather than by way of local authorities, they would become everybody’s concern.) We have therefore to consider how a co-operative might manage items 3 to 9.

''Selection of Tenants'':  Local authorities vary enormously in their selection criteria. (See for example Jane Morton: {{qq|The Council House Raffle}}, ''New Society'', 23.11.67.) The one basic principle is that allocation and selection is based on need rather than merit. But the {{qq|weighting}} of various kinds of need is bound to be arbitrary, and there is no reason to suppose that a committee of tenants, selecting a candidate to fill a vacancy, would have any less valid a conception of fairness than the housing department’s officials. However, some other criteria usually ignored in council selection may, quite legitimately be adopted. Morris and Mogey<ref name="eighteen" /> note that with the usual selection methods {{qq|legitimate public or group interests may be largely ignored}} and mention the {{w|findings|Family_and_Kinship_in_East_London|Family and Kinship in East London}} of {{w|Young|Michael_Young,_Baron_Young_of_Dartington|Michael Young}} and {{w|Willmott|Peter_Willmott|Peter Willmott}} on the break-up of the extended family through housing policy. {{qq|Experience in establishing co-operative com{{p|16}}munities has shown that success requires the careful selection of applicants on grounds other than immediate need; this is also true to a smaller extent of local authority housing schemes.}}

''Allocation'':  Since we are considering existing estates where vacancies occur one by one, problems of allocation scarcely arise, and when they do, once again, there is no reason to suppose that the sense of fair play of a tenants’ co-operative is any less developed than that of the housing manager. The swapping of dwellings would probably be easier to arrange between members of a co-operative than through the bureaucracy of housing management.

''Rents'':  Few people would deny that the whole field of payment for housing is in an absurd situation, and that if subsidies are to be made (including the concealed subsidy of tax concessions for owner-occupiers) it would be more equitable to subsidise families rather than subsidise particular dwellings. Readers will readily agree that social welfare is no substitute for social justice, but that until we can achieve the latter we have to utilise the former. I assume therefore that after a transfer from municipal to co-operative control, the co-operative would levy rent on its members in relation to its commitments and that subsidies for members would be obtained through the machinery of social welfare rather than through that of housing. We do not want the ability to pay an economic rent to be the criterion of membership of a housing co-operative, while at the same time we know that housing subsidies today do not reach those whose need for them is greatest.

''Collection and Accountancy'':  A small co-operative might provide these services for itself, a large one might pay for them to be professionally provided.

''Upkeep and Maintenance'':  This is likely to be a much less expensive proposition for a co-operative than for a council’s maintenance department. Mr. Campbell notes in his pamphlet that the members of housing co-operatives {{qq|have a keen interest in maintaining their homes in good repair and indeed, constantly to improve them}}. The co-operative policy statement on Social Ownership<ref name="eleven" /> remarked that {{qq|We see no reason why many councils should not contract with small producer co-operatives for at least the maintenance of their properties.}} Exactly the same thing applies to housing co-operatives.

''Communal Services'':  A real community would probably provide these services on a voluntary rota basis. If in practice it was unable to do this, it could pay for them, utilising the services of its elderly or teenage members.

''Good Order'':  Any housing manager will tell you of his impotence in the face of anti-social behaviour on estates. Good order comes from good community relationships which are far more likely under conditions of tenant responsibility than external responsibility.

''Social Welfare'':  Opinions within the world of housing management differ greatly as to the extent to which social welfare is a housing responsibility. It is certain however that the members of a well-developed tenants’ association will see it as a community responsibility. {{qq|We are our own social workers,}} explained a member of one of the{{p|17}} 71 affiliated groups of the Association of London Housing Estates (''{{w|The Times|The_Times}}'', 21.6.1967).

''Cost of Management'': The costs of housing management vary greatly from one authority to another. Cullingworth<ref name="twentysix">J. B. Cullingworth: ''Housing and Local Government in England and Wales'' (Allen and Unwin, 1966).</ref> gives a range of from £1 6s. to £23 2s. per year per dwelling. The organisation and methods committee which studied housing management in the London boroughs,<ref name="twentyseven">Metropolitan Boroughs’ (Organisation and Methods) Committee: ''General Review of Housing Management'', 1963.</ref> suggested that the appropriate staffing of an housing management department controlling 4,000 dwellings might be 25 people, for 8,000 dwellings 46 people, and for 15,000 dwellings 76 people. These figures are for office staff only and they represent 80% of the present London averages. There is every reason to suppose that the administrative costs of self-management would be very much lower than of council management. For specialist services a tenant co-operative could subscribe to and use the expertise of a central body of the same kind that is so necessary for a housing society starting from scratch. And in the Co-ownership Development Society we have a possible nucleus for such a body.</div>

{{p|s10}}'''LEGAL AND FINANCIAL PROBLEMS'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The statutory basis of a local authority’s right to sell its council houses is Section 104 of the Housing Act, 1957, and the only limitation on this is the need for the consent of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, a consent which in no instance so far has ever been refused. The transfer of an estate to a co-operative of its tenants, would, it seems to me, be covered by this provision.

{{tab}}In London, under Section 23(3) of the {{l|London Government Act, 1963|https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1963/33/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, the Minister has power by order, to provide for the transfer to a housing association of any housing accommodation belonging to the Greater London Council or the Council of a London borough provided, in the latter case, that it is outside the borough.

{{tab}}The financial arrangement for the take-over should probably be based on the experience of the existing co-operative housing societies. It might be for instance that the co-operative is advanced a mortgage by the council (the price agreed being based on the members’ status as sitting tenants) for the whole or a part of the purchase price, any other loan being arranged through the Co-ownership Development Society, and each member contributing to a share liability which might in the first instance be nominal.

{{tab}}Or, on the other hand, and if the arrangement is to be made more attractive to members than individual house ownership, some arrangement must be made for a tenant, on moving out, to receive his share of the appreciation of the property. Mrs. Wallis, who acted as arbitrator for a co-operative self-build housing society told the National Federation how this was done in her society:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}We took the value of the house from the time the man entered it until the time when he was compelled to leave due to his job having been changed. We did deem that the money and the labour which he had put into that shell, if you like, to improve it quite rightly should be his profit. We felt that it was his own personal effort, and not that of the association or the group.</font></blockquote>

{{p|18}}<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}However, the other profit which was made over and above that second valuation was divided between that man and his housing association. We felt, again, that part of that extra money was due to the man for his goodwill (the goodwill which he put into the association by being a good member), and he was entitled to something for his labour. We felt that some of it was due to the members for their goodwill as far as he was concerned. We came to a very happy and amicable arrangement.{{e|r}} We have never had a squabble. We have never had an argument over the settlement at all.<ref name="twentynine">Report of 25th Annual General Meeting of {{w|NFHS|National_Housing_Federation}}. ''Quarterly Bulletin'' No. 100 July 1962.</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Here of course the house was actually sold, but the principle can be adapted to a situation where the tenant is rewarded but the tenancy reverts to the society.</div>

{{p|s11}}'''HOW AND HOW SOON?'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The tenant take-over of municipal housing is one of those marvellous ideas that is dormant because no one is taking the trouble to propagate it, but which would catch like wildfire once the principle is established in people’s minds. We have to consider the ways of spreading it.

{{tab}}Firstly it should be spread in those ''ad hoc'' tenants’ committees which spring up when the councils announce rent rises. Their immediate aim may be to resist this or that item of council policy, but what is their ultimate aim? Surely a tenant take-over is the only logical one. Then it should be spread through tenants’ and community associations, to persuade the members that the experience they have gained of community organisation could really flourish and grow in community control. Then it should be spread through the co-operative movement. Millions of council tenants are co-op members, millions of co-op members are council tenants. They need to be convinced that co-operative ownership and control of housing is really much more important than a derisory dividend on retail purchases, which is all the co-op means in most of their lives today. Then it should be spread to members of housing committees, some of whom will readily connect their own experience of the absurdities of housing policy with the advantages to be found in tenant control. Once the idea is being seriously discussed, the ordinary media of communications will spread it, criticise it, appraise it. The first thing is to get it on the agenda of all these bodies.

{{tab}}Then we need study of the financial and legal problems. If there were a genuine and militant upsurge of demand from below, these would rapidly follow to event, but it would be helpful to find out where the difficulties lie, and how they might be resolved, from the experience of bodies like the Co-ownership Development Society and the National Federation of Housing Societies and of the handful of existing housing co-operatives.

{{tab}}Finally we need a working example, a pilot project, to prove to others that it is possible. It may not be in present circumstances a universal solution, it may not be applicable everywhere. But Britain has a higher proportion of municipally owned dwellings than any other Western country. Surely there is room somewhere for an experiment in responsible citizenship, which is what is implied in the transfer of housing from municipal government to self-government.</div>

-----
{{p|s12}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}<font size="4">{{qq|It is curious that left-wing councils, whose members can hardly be unaware of the advantages of co-operative systems, still maintain a rigidly paternalistic attitude to housing management.}}</font></div>

{{r|{{sc|[[Author:Architectural Review|architectural review]]}}, November 1967}}
-----

<div style="text-align:justify;" id="19"><font size="2">{{sc|references and sources}}</font>

<font size="2"><references /></font></div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tenants take over}}
[[Category:Banking and finance]]
[[Category:City planning]]
[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Housing]]
[[Category:Land]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-14T20:06:08Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Alderson, Stanley|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2020093716/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Cullingworth, J{{br|ohn}} B{{br|arry}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50019776/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Donnison, D{{br|avid}} V{{br|ernon}}|David_Donnison|David Donnison}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Douglas-Home, Alec|Alec_Douglas-Home|Alec Douglas-Home}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Douglas-Home_ministry|Douglas-Home ministry}} (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Durant, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Eden, Anthony|Anthony_Eden|Anthony Eden}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Eden_ministry|Eden ministry}} (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Glass, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}} (a.k.a. Ruth Durant)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Gray, P{{br|ercy}} G{{br|eorge}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50032140/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Holland, Milner|Milner_Holland|Milner Holland}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|James, Bill|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}} (a.k.a. James Tucker)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|John, Caspar|Caspar_John|Caspar John}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Macmillan, Harold|Harold_Macmillan|Harold Macmillan}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Cabinets|Conservative government, 1957‒1964}} (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{BL|Millar, Robert|BLL01002493375}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Morris, Parker|Parker_Morris_Committee|Parker Morris Committee}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Tucker, James|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Waddilove, Lewis E.|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82218429/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Wilson, Harold|Harold_Wilson|Harold Wilson}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|1st ministry|Labour_government,_1964‒1970|Labour government, 1964‒1970}} (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Zweig, Ferdynand|Ferdynand_Zweig|Ferdynand Zweig}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Britain in the Sixties: Housing|BLL01000044488}}'' (1962 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|British Household, The|BLL01001102327}}'' (1949 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates|BLL01001102042}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|English Housing Trends|BLL01000833995}}'' (1965 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Government of Housing, The|BLL01000966825}}'' (1967 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{w|Guardian, The|The_Guardian|The Guardian}}'' (1821‒current newspaper)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|BLL01015222183}}'' (1961 report: {{l|full text|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}})|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes of the Future: A Socialist Policy for Housing|BLL01014245493}}'' (1956 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Honourable Estates|BLL01009012236}}'' (1966 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Housing: A Co-operative Approach|BLL01011288632}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}} (1961 article)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-14T19:58:05Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Alderson, Stanley|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2020093716/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Cullingworth, J{{br|ohn}} B{{br|arry}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50019776/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Donnison, D{{br|avid}} V{{br|ernon}}|David_Donnison|David Donnison}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Douglas-Home, Alec|Alec_Douglas-Home|Alec Douglas-Home}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Douglas-Home_ministry|Douglas-Home ministry}} (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Durant, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Eden, Anthony|Anthony_Eden|Anthony Eden}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Eden_ministry|Eden ministry}} (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Glass, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Gray, P{{br|ercy}} G{{br|eorge}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50032140/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Holland, Milner|Milner_Holland|Milner Holland}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|James, Bill|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|John, Caspar|Caspar_John|Caspar John}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Macmillan, Harold|Harold_Macmillan|Harold Macmillan}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Cabinets|Conservative government, 1957‒1964}} (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{BL|Millar, Robert|BLL01002493375}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Morris, Parker|Parker_Morris_Committee|Parker Morris Committee}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Tucker, James|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Waddilove, Lewis E.|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82218429/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Wilson, Harold|Harold_Wilson|Harold Wilson}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|1st ministry|Labour_government,_1964‒1970|Labour government, 1964‒1970}} (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Zweig, Ferdynand|Ferdynand_Zweig|Ferdynand Zweig}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Britain in the Sixties: Housing|BLL01000044488}}'' (1962 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|British Household, The|BLL01001102327}}'' (1949 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates|BLL01001102042}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|English Housing Trends|BLL01000833995}}'' (1965 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Government of Housing, The|BLL01000966825}}'' (1967 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{w|Guardian, The|The_Guardian|The Guardian}}'' (1821‒current newspaper)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|BLL01015222183}}'' (1961 report: {{l|full text|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}})|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes of the Future: A Socialist Policy for Housing|BLL01014245493}}'' (1956 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Honourable Estates|BLL01009012236}}'' (1966 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Housing: A Co-operative Approach|BLL01011288632}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}} (1961 article)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-14T19:57:43Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Alderson, Stanley|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2020093716/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Cullingworth, J{{br|ohn}} B{{br|arry}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50019776/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Donnison, D{{br|avid}} V{{br|ernon}}|David_Donnison|David Donnison}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Douglas-Home, Alec|Alec_Douglas-Home|Alec Douglas-Home}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Douglas-Home_ministry|Douglas-Home ministry}} (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Durant, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Eden, Anthony|Anthony_Eden|Anthony Eden}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Eden_ministry|Eden ministry}} (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Glass, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Gray, P{{br|ercy}} G{{br|eorge}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50032140/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Holland, Milner|Milner_Holland|Milner Holland}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|James, Bill|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|John, Caspar|Caspar_John|Caspar John}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Macmillan, Harold|Harold_Macmillan|Harold Macmillan}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Cabinets|Conservative government, 1957‒1964}} (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{BL|Millar, Robert|BLL01002493375}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Morris, Parker|Parker_Morris_Committee|Parker Morris Committee}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Tucker, James|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Waddilove, Lewis E.|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82218429/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Wilson, Harold|Harold_Wilson|Harold Wilson}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|1st ministry|Labour_government,_1964‒1970|Labour government, 1964‒1970}} (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Zweig, Ferdynand|Ferdynand_Zweig|Ferdynand Zweig}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Britain in the Sixties: Housing|BLL01000044488}}'' (1962 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|British Household, The|BLL01001102327}}'' (1949 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates|BLL01001102042}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|English Housing Trends|BLL01000833995}}'' (1965 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Government of Housing, The|BLL01000966825}}'' (1967 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{w|Guardian, The|The_Guardian|The Guardian}}'' (1821‒current newspaper)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|BLL01015222183}}'' (1961 report: {{l|full text|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}})|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Homes of the Future: A Socialist Policy for Housing|BLL01014245493}}'' (1956 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Honourable Estates|BLL01009012236}}'' (1966 book)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''{{BL|Housing: A Co-operative Approach|BLL01011288632}}'' (1959 report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}} (1961 article)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-14T18:59:52Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Alderson, Stanley|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no2020093716/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Cullingworth, J{{br|ohn}} B{{br|arry}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50019776/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Donnison, D{{br|avid}} V{{br|ernon}}|David_Donnison|David Donnison}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Douglas-Home, Alec|Alec_Douglas-Home|Alec Douglas-Home}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Douglas-Home_ministry|Douglas-Home ministry}} (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Durant, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Eden, Anthony|Anthony_Eden|Anthony Eden}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Eden_ministry|Eden ministry}} (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Glass, Ruth|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{l|Gray, P{{br|ercy}} G{{br|eorge}}|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n50032140/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Holland, Milner|Milner_Holland|Milner Holland}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|James, Bill|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|John, Caspar|Caspar_John|Caspar John}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Macmillan, Harold|Harold_Macmillan|Harold Macmillan}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Conservative_government,_1957–1964#Cabinets|Conservative government, 1957‒1964}} (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{BL|Millar, Robert|BLL01002493375}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Morris, Parker|Parker_Morris_Committee|Parker Morris Committee}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Tucker, James|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James (novelist)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{l|Waddilove, Lewis E.|https://worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82218429/|link: WorldCat Identities entry}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Wilson, Harold|Harold_Wilson|Harold Wilson}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|1st ministry|Labour_government,_1964‒1970|Labour government, 1964‒1970}} (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Zweig, Ferdynand|Ferdynand_Zweig|Ferdynand Zweig}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''Britain in the Sixties: Housing''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''British Household, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''English Housing Trends''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''Government of Housing, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Guardian, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''Homes for Today and Tomorrow''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Homes of the Future''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Honourable Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing: A Co-operative Approach|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Template:Br

2021-10-14T18:35:49Z

Ivanhoe: Created page with "[{{{1}}}]"

[{{{1}}}]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-14T17:32:49Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10–13]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|Alderson, Stanley|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Attlee, Clement|Clement_Attlee|Clement Attlee}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|ministry|Attlee_ministry|Attlee ministry}} (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{w|Campbell, Harold|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)|Harold Campbell (co-operator)}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{w|Churchill, Winston|Winston_Churchill|Winston Churchill}}| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}{{w|3rd ministry|Third_Churchill_ministry|Third Churchill ministry}} (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Cullingworth, J[ohn] B[arry]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Donnison, D[avid] V[ernon]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Douglas-Home, Alec| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Durant, Ruth|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|Eden, Anthony| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Glass, Ruth|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s7|8:10]]}}
{{dex|Gray, P[ercy] G[eorge]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Holland, Milner|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|James, Bill (a.k.a. James Tucker)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|John, Caspar|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Macmillan, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Millar, Robert|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Morris, Parker|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tucker, James|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|Waddilove, Lewis E.|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Wilson, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}1st ministry (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|Zweig, Ferdynand|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''Britain in the Sixties: Housing''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''British Household, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''English Housing Trends''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''Government of Housing, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Guardian, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''Homes for Today and Tomorrow''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Homes of the Future''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Honourable Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing: A Co-operative Approach|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Anarchy 51/The catchers in the Right

2021-10-12T03:31:14Z

Ivanhoe: Created page with "{{header | title = ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965<br />The catchers in the Right | author = Peter Willis | section = | previous = ../"i gotta mil..."

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-12T00:41:34Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|means test|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|rent| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}economic|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#9|8:9]]}}
{{dex|strikes| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}rent|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|welfare assistance|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|Alderson, Stanley|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|Attlee, Clement| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Campbell, Harold|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Churchill, Winston| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}3rd ministry (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Cullingworth, J[ohn] B[arry]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Donnison, D[avid] V[ernon]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Douglas-Home, Alec| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|Eden, Anthony| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Gray, P[ercy] G[eorge]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Holland, Milner|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|James, Bill (a.k.a. James Tucker)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|John, Caspar|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Macmillan, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Millar, Robert|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Morris, Parker|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tucker, James|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|Waddilove, Lewis E.|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Wilson, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}1st ministry (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|Zweig, Ferdynand|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''Britain in the Sixties: Housing''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''British Household, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|''Councils and Their Houses: Management of Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#11|8:11]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|''English Housing Trends''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''Government of Housing, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Guardian, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''Homes for Today and Tomorrow''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Homes of the Future''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Honourable Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing'' (journal)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing: A Co-operative Approach|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#12|8:12–13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}}|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|''Worker in an Affluent Society, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s8|8:13]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-11T21:11:02Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#10|8:10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]] (see also: housing)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|tenancy (see: housing)| }}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|Alderson, Stanley|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|Attlee, Clement| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Campbell, Harold|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Churchill, Winston| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}3rd ministry (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Cullingworth, J[ohn] B[arry]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Donnison, D[avid] V[ernon]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Douglas-Home, Alec| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|Eden, Anthony| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Gray, P[ercy] G[eorge]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Holland, Milner|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|James, Bill (a.k.a. James Tucker)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|John, Caspar|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Macmillan, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Millar, Robert|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Morris, Parker|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tucker, James|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|Waddilove, Lewis E.|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Wilson, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}1st ministry (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|Zweig, Ferdynand|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''Britain in the Sixties: Housing''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''British Household, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''Government of Housing, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Guardian, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''Homes of the Future''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Honourable Estates''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing: A Co-operative Approach|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Anarchy 83/Tenants take over

2021-10-11T20:57:22Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 83 (Vol 8 No 1) JANUARY 1968]]<br>Tenants take over: a new strategy for council tenants
| author = Colin Ward
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 83]]
| next = [[../Homeless in Wandsworth|Homeless in Wandsworth]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|1}}
<font size="7">''Tenants take over''</font>

<font size="5">'''a new strategy for'''<br>'''council tenants'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Colin Ward|COLIN WARD]]'''</font>

{{p|s1}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Ours is a society in which}}, in every field, one group of people makes decisions, exercises control, limits choices, while the great majority have to accept these decisions, submit to this control and act within the limits of these externally imposed choices. It happens in work and leisure, politics, and education, and nowhere is it more evident than in the field of housing. This article is concerned with one particular aspect of the housing situation. It presents the arguments for a tenant take-over, for the transfer of control of {{w|municipal housing|public_housing}} from the local {{w|authorities|Housing_authority}} to tenants’ associations. Although more than a quarter of the population of this country live in municipally owned houses and flats, there is not a single estate controlled by its tenants, apart from a handful of {{w|co-operative housing societies|Housing_cooperative}}. At the moment an argument is going on between the two major political parties over the issue of the sale of {{w|council houses|Council_house}} to tenants. From the point of view of increasing people’s control of their own environment this is a sham battle, because it affects only a tiny minority of tenants. At the moment too, in consequence of the changes in the structure of local government in {{w|London|London}}, the {{w|Greater London Council|Greater_London_Council}} is planning a phased transfer of a large proportion of its housing stock to the {{w|London Boroughs|London_boroughs}}. It plans to transfer about 70,000 houses and flats in 1969. Discussion of the ''control'' of housing is in the air, and no time is more propitious than the present for raising the genuinely radical demand for tenant control and tenant responsibility.<br>
{{tab}}The facts and opinions presented here are intended as ammunition{{p|2}} for such a demand.</div>

{{p|s2}}'''THE MODES OF HOUSE TENURE'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The ways in which householders hold their houses in Britain are limited. They are in fact more limited than in any other European country except {{w|Greece|Greece}}, {{w|Ireland|Ireland}}, {{w|Portugal|Portugal}} and {{w|Roumania|Romania}}.<ref name="one">{{popup|Lewis E. Waddilove|(1914-2000)}}: ''Housing Associations'' ({{w|P.E.P.|Political_and_Economic_Planning}} Report, 1962).</ref> The three modes of tenure in this country are owner-occupation, council tenancy and tenancy from a private landlord. The sole exception to this is, of course, ownership by a housing association, and this includes the only examples we have of co-operative housing. Statistically it is insignificant. The proportions between these three tenure groups have changed, and are changing, rapidly. For Great Britain as a whole the percentages in 1947 were<ref name="two">{{popup|P. G. Gray|Percy George Gray}}: ''The British Household'' (The Social Survey, 1949).</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>{{sc|owner-occupied}}</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>{{sc|public authority rented}}</center>
|<center>{{sc|privately rented}}</center>
|-
|<center>26%</center>
|<center>13%</center>
|<center>61%</center>
|}

By 1965 they had become<ref name="three">{{w|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government}}. Parliamentary written answer, November 11, 1965.</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>44.5%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>28.5%</center>
|<center>25%</center>
|}

The figures differ according to whether a dwelling or a household is being counted and according to the definitions used, and they are also different for various parts of Britain. For example, the figures for England only in 1964, counting households, were<ref name="four">{{popup|D. V. Donnison|David Vernon Donnison, political scientist (born 1926)}}: ''The Government of Housing'' (Penguin Books, 1967).</ref>

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>46%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>26%</center>
|<center>28%</center>
|}

while another estimate, in terms of dwellings,<ref name="five">Robert Millar: ''The New Classes'': ''The New Patterns of British Life'' (Longmans, 1966).</ref> gives

{| width="500"
|-
|style="width:33%" |<center>46%</center>
|style="width:33%" |<center>33%</center>
|<center>21%</center>
|}

The proportions of council-owned dwellings varies greatly. {{qq|The {{w|Newcastle|Newcastle_upon_Tyne}} Corporation controls two out of every five of the city’s houses. In {{w|Greenock|Greenock}}, on the West Coast of {{w|Scotland|Scotland}}, half the population live in council houses.}}<ref name="five" /> The {{w|London Borough of Kensington|Metropolitan_Borough_of_Kensington}} has 5% council tenants, while {{w|Dagenham|Municipal_Borough_of_Dagenham}} has 67%.<ref name="six">{{w|Sir Milner Holland|Milner_Holland}} (chairman): ''{{l|Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London|http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8734|link: National Archives catalogue entry}}'' ({{popup|HMSO|Her Majesty's Stationery Office}}, 1965).</ref>

{{tab}}The general trend is clear, and, since it concerns a commodity so basic, durable and socially important as housing, it is one of the dramatic social changes of this century. Private renting, which before the {{popup|First World War|began 29 July 1914}} accounted for over 90% of households, is declining rapidly for reasons which are well known. Just as rapidly owner-occupation and renting from local authorities is increasing. The proportionate increase of these two tenure groups depends of course, on government policy, as well as on opportunity and increasing affluence. The {{w|post-war Labour government|Attlee_ministry}}, through building licensing and a quota system, put the emphasis on building by local authorities. The{{p|3}} {{w|Conservative|Conservative_Party_(UK)}} governments of the 1950s and early 1960s changed the emphasis: {{qq|Under the Labour government only one new house in six was built for sale to a private buyer; under the {{w|Tory government|Conservative_government_1957–64}} two out of every three were built for sale.}}<ref name="five" /> The policy of the {{w|present government|First_Wilson_ministry}} is that by 1970 the proportions of council houses built for rent and private houses built for sale should be equal. It is pledged to stimulate and facilitate both forms of tenure. Virtually no new house building by private enterprise since the war has been for private letting. This is why privately rented property is usually synonymous with old, run-down property. The bulk of Britain’s slum housing is in the privately rented sector.

{{tab}}Thus {{qq|the range of choice open to the family in Britain seeking a modern house is more limited than is the case almost anywhere else in Europe}}.<ref name="one" /></div>

{{p|s3}}''' HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The alternative to owner-occupation or council tenancy is to be found in the housing society movement, which has been called {{qq|Housing’s Third Arm}}. If it is a third arm, it has so far been a regrettably feeble one, for housing associations of all kinds had by 1962 provided only 1.3% of {{popup|post-war|World War II ended in Europe 8 May 1945}} housing. Between them they control 0.7% of the total housing stock. But since the only examples of tenant co-operative housing fall into this category, it is worth examining more closely.

{{tab}}When {{w|building societies|Building_society}} first came into existence as organs of working-class mutual aid at the end of the 18th century, they were remarkably like the {{w|self-build|Self-build}} housing societies of today, and very unlike the money-lending-plus-savings-bank organisations which are the modern building societies. They consisted of groups of people who saved to buy land to house themselves, and, when the first house was completed, borrowed money on its security to build another, until all the members of the society were housed, at which point the society disbanded. In a sense they resembled the method of financing house purchase used by some groups of immigrants in this country today:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Particularly among {{w|Indians|British_Indians|British Indians}} and {{w|Pakistanis|British_Pakistanis|British Pakistanis}}, housing {{w|finance pools|Pooling_(resource_management)|Pooling}} are found with a substantial membership—perhaps as many as 900—which meet periodically once a fortnight or once a month, and make calls of, say £10 on each member. Those who draw upon the fund thus created are subject thereafter to periodic calls until the whole amount drawn by them has been liquidated. Drawings under this system are substantial and may cover the whole purchase cost. Occasionally, {{w|West Indians|British_African-Caribbean_people|British African-Caribbean people}} operate on similar but less ambitious lines.{{e|r}} Their pooling arrangements usually only provide for the initial deposits necessary for house purchase, thus enabling them to {{qq|get off the ground}}.<ref name="six" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}The building societies changed their character in the nineteenth century to become more permanent societies, separating the people who{{p|4}} wished to save from those who wished to build. A new kind of society was founded in 1830, the {{w|Labourers’ Friendly Society|Labourer's_Friend_Society|Labourer{{s}} Friend Society}}, which also changed its character and its name, to become the Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes. The early efforts of poor people to improve their own housing conditions failed to expand for lack of capital. Investors then, as now, found easier ways to get rich than by financing working-class housing. This is where the {{popup|Victorian|1837–1901}} philanthropists moved in, satisfied with a {{qq|modest return}} on their capital.

{{tab}}The housing society movement since then has never lost this {{qq|charitable}} emphasis, and in this respect is in marked contrast to the co-operative housing associations of several other countries. Mr. {{l|Lewis Waddilove|https://www.theguardian.com/news/2000/aug/23/guardianobituaries1|link: The Guardian obituary}} contrasts the situation here with that in {{w|Sweden}}, where the movement

<blockquote><font size="2">depended strongly on the initiative of tenants; it did not, as in the United Kingdom, become the instrument of liberal employers and philanthropists making provision for what were referred to as the {{qq|working classes}}. The tenants’ unions of Sweden discovered that the best way of preventing the making of undue profits from a housing shortage and to raise housing standards was to build and administer their own homes. As an example, in 1923, the tenants’ union of {{w|Stockholm|Stockholm}} became The Tenants’ Savings and Building Society and in the following year similar movements in other towns came together to form a National Association of Housing Societies known throughout Sweden by the initials {{w|HSB|HSB_(Sweden)}}.{{e|r}} A second national body for housing associations has been formed by the trade unions in Sweden concerned with the building industry. HSB remains the largest national body and its very name measures out the difference between the Swedish and the British housing association movement. In Sweden the movement’s inspiration and drive come from the tenants; they save for the purpose of raising their own housing standards.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}In Britain the initiative in the movement has come from philanthropists and others concerned to raise the housing standards of the {{qq|working class}}. Save in the {{qq|self-build}} societies, little initiative rests with the occupants of the houses who are simply the tenants of the association.<ref name="one" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}He describes how the HSB has built up not only resources of expert advice in building, planning and finance, {{qq|but has become a centre of research, the results of which can immediately be applied in its own large-scale activities. This means that the tiniest housing co-operative in a remote township}} has access to the best of advice, architectural and technical, with the result that {{qq|the standard of design, workmanship and finish are well in advance of comparable dwellings in this country.{{e|r}} So competent is the research, technical and even manufacturing organisation of HSB that municipalities have been glad to avail themselves of it. Many local authorities’ housing schemes are in fact planned and executed by HSB; in some areas municipal houses are built and managed by a {{q|municipal company}} on the directorate of which the local authority and HSB are represented}}.<ref name="one" />

{{tab}}In Britain, at least until the initiation in 1966 of the {{l|Co-ownership Development Society|http://www.cds.coop|link: official web site}}, the nearest thing we have had to HSB has been{{p|5}} the {{w|National Federation of Housing Societies|National_Housing_Federation|National Housing Federation}}, which gets a meagre government grant, and to which are affiliated 1,530 societies providing general family housing, old people’s housing, industrial housing (sponsored by industrial firms for their employees) as well as self-build, {{qq|{{popup|cost-rent|rent calculated solely by the cost of maintaining a property at zero profit}}}} and tenant co-operative schemes. Housing societies were long ago granted the same treatment as local authorities so far as facilities for long-term loans and qualification for subsidies are concerned.

{{tab}}All the political parties express their support for the housing society idea, and it was amid general approval that the {{l|Housing Act of 1961|https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1961/65/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives (PDF)}} (in Section 7) made available £25 million for direct government loans at the then current rate of interest, to be administered through the National Federation to housing societies building new dwellings to be kept available for cost-rent letting, without subsidy. The Minister described his £25 million as a {{qq|pump-priming}} operation, meaning that he wanted to encourage private capital to go the same way. This of course was the same pious hope that was expressed by the philanthropists a hundred years ago, and it met with the same lack of success.

{{tab}}Then in 1964, the government set up the {{w|Housing Corporation|Housing_Corporation}} with Admiral Sir {{w|Caspar John|Caspar_John}} at its head, and offices in {{w|Park Lane|Park_Lane}}, with power to dispense another £100 million in loans to housing societies for both cost-rent and co-ownership schemes.

{{tab}}The results of both these attempts to stimulate the growth of housing societies has been disappointing.

{{tab}}The Corporation’s last report showed that by the end of September 1966, 150 cost-rent projects, involving 6,932 dwellings and costing about £26.7 millions, had been approved together with a further 42 co-ownership schemes, covering more than 1,000 dwellings and costing £4.7 millions. A total of 371 housing societies, 288 of them cost-rent schemes, had been registered with the corporation.<ref name="seven">{{w|Housing Corporation|Housing_Corporation}}: ''Annual Report'', 1966.</ref> Commenting on the implications of the report, which declared that a large potential market exists for co-ownership housing, Sir Caspar John admitted that co-ownership housing had developed slowly, adding hopefully that {{qq|things have speeded up tremendously in the past six months}}.<ref name="eight">''{{w|The Guardian|The_Guardian}}'', October 21, 1966.</ref>

{{tab}}I have referred to the rate of expansion of the housing society movement as disappointing, but perhaps the surprising thing is that it expanded at all, as so many legal and fiscal obstacles stood in its way. In the first place the original cost-rent scheme could only benefit people with an income (five years ago) above about £1,500 a year, while such people, because of the system of taxation and tax allowances would have found freehold house purchase a better proposition. Secondly, and partly because of the difficulty of finding a legal framework—even after 100 years of the Co-operative Movement—for the concept of co-ownership, the whole system was so complex that only groups containing someone with specialist knowledge were likely even to under{{p|6}}stand the scheme. The {{w|Milner Holland|Milner_Holland}} {{l|Report|http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C8734|link: National Archives catalogue entry}}<ref name="six" /> criticised the absurdity of the situation: {{qq|It seems to us that if non-profit housing associations are to make an effective contribution to the most urgent needs—and it is widely accepted that they should—then a rationalisation of the fiscal and legal provisions governing their activity is urgently needed; at present these seem to have the effect of discouraging the very associations which are equipped to give effective help in the area where it is most needed.}} And elsewhere the Report declared that {{qq|We have been unable to find any justification for the unfavourable tax treatment of housing associations and we conclude that unless the tax burden is lifted, the contribution to the supply of rented accommodation by housing associations will be seriously hampered.}}

{{tab}}Several steps have been taken recently which, in theory, should improve the situation—the {{l|Housing Subsidies Bill|http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/29/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, the {{popup|option mortgage|a mortgage with a subsidy on interest payments}} scheme, the prospect of assistance from the Land Commission and of more flexible cash borrowing arrangements, but none of these in practice has so far affected the prospect for housing societies.</div>

{{p|s4}}'''THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT AND HOUSING'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The Labour Party issued in 1956 a policy statement on Housing which provided, amongst other proposals, for the municipalisation of urban rented property,<ref name="nine">The {{w|Labour Party|Labour_Party_(UK)}}: ''Homes of the Future'', 1956.</ref> a policy which was quietly dropped in the 1960s (although of course, both Labour and Conservative local authorities have exercised their powers to acquire rented properties by compulsory purchase from unsatisfactory private landlords, and recent Labour Party policy policy statements have demanded that local authorities should use these powers more freely). The Labour Party statement was followed in 1959 by that of the {{w|Co-operative Party|Co-operative_Party}} (debated and approved by the {{w|Bridlington|Bridlington}} Conference that year) which dissented from it in important respects. Labour had dismissed the idea of placing the management and development of municipalised dwellings in the hands of local housing associations, declaring that it was {{qq|sure that the local authorities can undertake this great new responsibility}}. But the Co-operative statement pointed out that, {{qq|if the local authority is to be the only landlord within a given area, there is an obvious possibility of the general application of general rules that do not permit sufficient variation to meet individual requirements}}. The statement expressed the hope that {{qq|local authorities will be more ready than in the past to {{popup|devolute|devolve}} some of their management functions}}, and recommended the formation of a national co-operative development housing organisation to promote co-operative housing, recognising that {{qq|the {{w|Co-operative retail societies|Consumers'_co-operative|Consumer{{s|r}} co-operative}} themselves cannot give the initial financial impetus to this new development in co-operation}}.<ref name="ten">''Housing'': ''A Co-operative Approach'' ({{w|Co-operative Union|Co-operatives_UK|Co-operatives UK}}, 1959).</ref><br>
{{tab}}The 1961 Co-operative Party policy statement reiterated the point that {{qq|very little change of policy would be necessary to give practical encouragement to the formation of co-operative housing societies}}<ref name="eleven">''Social Ownership and Control'' (Co-operative Union, 1961).</ref> and{{p|7}} went on to describe these changes. Later in the same year {{w|Harold Campbell|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)}}’s pamphlet ''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities'' was published.<ref name="twelve">{{w|Harold Campbell|Harold_Campbell_(co-operator)}}: ''Housing Co-ops and Local Authorities'' (Co-operative Union, October 1961).</ref> Here he outlined the powers which local authorities possessed under the {{l|Housing Act, 1957|http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1957/56/part/V/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, to promote and assist housing associations, described the co-operative schemes which already existed, and the achievements of co-operative housing movements in Sweden, {{w|Denmark}} and the United States, and set out the needs in this country: a powerful promotional organisation, persuasion of local authorities, mobilisation of financial resources, and changes in the legal structure. In 1966 the Co-ownership Development Society was set up and has already fostered five co-operative housing societies, with Mr. Campbell as its chairman. In April 1967 he was appointed to the board of the Housing Corporation. Advocates of co-operative housing who have waited so long for the movement to get off the ground will hope that this appointment will bear fruit. What is missing is the demand from below.</div>

{{p|s5}}'''CHANGING THE COUNCIL ESTATE'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}But however long it takes to develop a co-operative housing movement in this country, must we necessarily assume that the existing municipal housing estates, the homes of well over a quarter of the population, must continue to be administered paternalistically from above as though the vast social changes of the post-war world had not taken place? The {{w|Parker Morris Committee|Parker_Morris_Committee}}, drawing up new standards for housing, did not think so, reminding us that {{qq|It must be admitted that many other European countries reach a far higher standard in their estate layout than we do, very largely through the use of housing associations, which take full responsibility for both the initial landscaping and its maintenance}}.<ref name="twentythree">Sir Parker Morris (chairman): ''{{l|Homes for Today and Tomorrow|https://archive.org/details/op1266209-1001|full text at Internet Archive}}'' ({{w|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government}}, HMSO, 1961).</ref> And the Central Housing Advisory Committee reminded local authorities that {{qq|tenants today are much more representative of the community as a whole and are, for the most part, independent, reliable citizens who no longer require the support and guidance which was often thought to be necessary in the past. ''Local authorities must recognise that this is a major social change which is likely to become more marked in the years ahead.''}}<ref name="seventeen">''Councils and Their Houses'': ''Management of Estates'', Eighth Report of the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee (HMSO, 1959).</ref> (The Committee’s italics.)

{{tab}}The Committee’s report went on: {{qq|To think of the tenants of today as though their circumstances and needs are the same as those of tenants of a generation ago would be unreal. Similarly, to expect methods of management designed to meet the needs of tenants in the 1930s to be suitable for those of the 1950s or 1970s would, we think, be quite wrong. {{e|r}}}} But what of the tenants of the 1960s? Has there been a change in the attitudes of housing management? It would be difficult to find evidence for this.

{{tab}}The time is ripe for change. But change of what kind? I believe{{p|8}} that it should be a radical change to tenant control, and several of our foremost authorities on housing share this opinion. Mr. Waddilove,<ref name="one" /> for example, makes the same unfavourable comparison as did the Parker Morris Committee, between the appearance of housing estates in this country and on the Continent, and draws the same conclusion:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The visitor to housing estates on the Continent comments most often on the attractiveness of their layout, the care with which common land is cultivated, and the harmony of external decoration. The claim of the co-operative association is that it combines the sense of ownership and the security of tenure of the owner-occupied house with an equally strong sense of responsibility for, and interest in, the neighbourhood as a whole. Moreover it does this as a by-product of its normal organisation; in Britain in new estates we have attempted to achieve the same result by all kinds of artificial stimuli to neighbourhood responsibility.</font></blockquote>

The sense of responsibility comes from ''being'' responsible, and people can only ''be'' responsible for their own lives and their own environment if they are in control of it. Similarly Professor Donnison declares:<ref name="twentyone">D. V. Donnison: {{qq|Housing Policy—What of the Future}}, ''Housing'', Vol. 23, No. 3, December 1961.</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}we need a system that will provide adequate housing of various types with complete security of tenure. Down payments should be negligible but subsequent payments may well be higher than council rents. The occupier should be given responsibility and incentives for maintaining and improving his own house, but should be insured against the costs of major repairs. Some body responsible to the occupiers themselves should retain a continuing interest in the character and development of the immediate neighbourhood and might provide open space and other shared amenities for its residents. In fact a way must be found to continue the advantages of owner-occupation and tenancy, both in new housing and in existing property.</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}The points which require emphasis in his conclusions are that the overall body should be responsible ''to the occupiers themselves'' and that it is not enough to develop this new kind of tenure for future application: it must be applied to ''existing property''.

{{tab}}Mr. {{popup|J. B. Cullingworth|John Barry Cullingworth (born 1929)}} raises similar questions, in fact a whole series of them:<ref name="twentytwo">{{popup|J. B. Cullingworth|John Barry Cullingworth (born 1929)}}: ''{{popup|English Housing Trends|English Housing Trends: A Report on the Rowntree Trust Housing Study}}'' (G. Bell & Sons, 1965).</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Could not tenants be given a greater degree of responsibility for the upkeep of their houses and, probably more important, for the general appearance and amenities of housing estates? There is a growing discussion of the value of {{qq|citizen-participation}} in urban renewal in the rehabilitation of {{qq|{{popup|twilight areas|areas of urban decay}}}}. Is not a similar line possible with council housing estates? Surely it is not only owner-occupiers who are hit by the {{qq|do-it-yourself revolution}} and who have a real concern for their houses and the environment in which they live. More fundamentally, why do we need council housing? If it is a question of ensuring that low-income families can obtain good housing at a price which they can afford, could not this be achieved by a system of family housing allowances? If it is a question of ensuring that sufficient houses are actually built, could not local authorities simply confine their attention to housebuilding and hand over the completed houses to associations of tenants, housing co-operatives, housing societies, or even (with the aid of generous mortgage facilities) to individual families? A {{qq|reserve}} of houses could be kept for special needs, but it need not be on the vast scale of today.</font></blockquote>

{{p|9}}{{tab}}With his reference to housing allowances as an alternative to manipulating the rents of low-income families, and to the sale of council houses to individual tenants, Mr. Cullingworth is raising issues which I have to discuss elsewhere, but he is clearly among those who see a better future in self-management than in municipal management.</div>

{{p|s6}}'''THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TENANTHOOD'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Psychological generalisations about whole groups of people are bound to be meaningless, especially when the group to which a person belongs has been selected by such a variety of factors, most of them quite outside those of individual personality, as the choice of house tenure. In fact, of course, for most people it is not a matter of choice but of grabbing whatever opportunity has been theirs, of getting a roof over their heads.

{{tab}}Yet the generalisations are made. {{qq|Property owners,}} says {{popup|Ferdynand Zweig|Polish economist (1896-1988)}},<ref name="twentyfive">{{popup|Ferdynand Zweig|Polish economist (1896-1988)}}: ''The Worker in an Affluent Society'' (Heinemann, 1961).</ref> {{qq|often struck me as a brighter, more daring and enterprising breed than the rest.{{e|r}} I often asked how people felt when they became house-owners.{{e|r}} The overwhelming majority felt deeply about it,}} and the words which came to their lips were satisfaction, self-confidence, freedom, independence. And {{w|James Tucker|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James}}, describing the effects of segregation by house tenure and the frightening animosities which exist between owner-occupiers and council tenants,<ref name="twentyeight">{{w|James Tucker|Bill_James_(novelist)|Bill James}}: ''Honourable Estates'' (Gollancz, 1966).</ref> feels able to isolate certain characteristics of council tenants:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Now, what of the people? There are two dominant characteristics, one at least of which I cannot claim to be the first to have noticed. It is unneighbourliness, often resulting in loneliness; the other seems to be based on an acceptance of the notion that people in council houses have failed, haven’t quite made it, and is frequently expressed as a frustrated desire to buy a house off the estate.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Many council tenants speak with gentle pride of how little they have to do with people living near them.{{e|r}} In some measure it may be a means of self-protection against neighbours not considered up to the social mark. But, more important, it is a defensive assertion against the low social standing of estates: {{qq|Look! We can be as unfriendly as anybody.}} People ape what they assume to be superior ways of behaving; suburban ways, for instance. It is tragic that it should be so and leads to great unhappiness.{{e|r}}</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}In so far as we may consider the generalisations to be valid, we can see that they arise from the ''social'' situations in which people find themselves. The walls or fences which in a number of notorious instances have been built to separate privately-owned from council-owned sections of the same estate are an extreme manifestation of ordinary English snobbery, but they make it devastatingly clear to the more vulnerable kind of municipal tenant that in the eyes of millions of his fellow-countrymen he is a second-class citizen. The way in which his relationship with his landlord intensifies this feeling has been made clear by Stanley Alderson:<ref name="twentyfour">{{popup|Stanley Alderson|(born 1927)}}: ''Britain in the Sixties'': ''Housing'' (Penguin Books, 1962).</ref>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}the usual balance of power between landlord and tenant is everywhere upset by the condition of housing shortage. But the problems{{p|10}} are much more acute in council tenancy. It is not only that the council tenant is even less free to move than the private tenant. The private tenant can at least hate his landlord for taking advantage of the conditions of shortage for his own financial gain. The council tenant knows that he is fortunate in having his house, and feels that he has been done a favour. The local authority which is his landlord never does anything for its own financial gain. It always acts in its wisdom for its tenants’ own advantage. In the long run, power employed paternalistically provokes far greater resentment than power employed selfishly or even antagonistically. Because there is no satisfactory outlet for it, the resentment accumulates.{{e|r}}</font></blockquote>

Worse still, every attempt to rationalise rent policy serves to exacerbate this paternalistic relationship, for Mr. Alderson goes on:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}It is often said of {{w|industrial strikes|Strike_action|Strike action}} over wages that their real cause is repressed resentment deriving from day-to-day industrial relationships. Similarly the {{w|rent strikes|Rent_strike|Rent strike}} that followed the introduction of differential rent schemes must have given release to repressed resentment deriving from landlord-tenant relations. The protests against a {{w|means test|Means_test|Means test}} were not merely rationalisations of a reluctance to pay higher rents. Differential rents were resented because they foisted on the local authorities the ultimate paternalist responsibility of deciding how much pocket money their tenants should be allowed to keep. Local authorities deserve sympathy for their reluctance to exercise this responsibility. It is an imperative that they should be relieved of it as that council tenants who can afford to should pay economic rents. The council tenant who needs financial assistance should receive it through some other organ of the state, established to assist private tenants and owner-occupiers as well. He could then claim his assistance without loss of dignity, and he would always pay his full rent to his landlord. Equally his landlord would always be entitled to claim it from him.</font></blockquote>

We need to find a system of tenure which changes this psychology of dependency for one of independence. One which, as Harold Campbell puts it, {{qq|combines private enterprise and mutual aid in a unique form of social ownership which puts a premium on personal responsibility and individual initiative}}.<ref name="ten" /></div>

{{p|s7}}'''COULD TENANTS MANAGE TO MANAGE THEMSELVES?'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The obvious nucleus of a tenants’ co-operative is the tenants’ association. Is there evidence that associations of this kind can bear the weight of continuous organisational responsibility? Several students of this kind of association would doubt it, citing {{w|Ruth Durant|Ruth_Glass|Ruth Glass}}’s famous study of {{qq|{{popup|Watling|Watling: A Survey of Social Life on a New Housing Estate. London: P. S. King (1939).}}}} and other more recent examples where, on the new estate, {{qq|there is a familiar pattern of initial loneliness followed by unity against the outside world, giving rise to an agitational {{w|Residents’ Association|Residents'_association|Resident{{s|r}} association}}. This achieves its task and most of the inhabitants settle down to a home-centred but small group-oriented, social life}}.<ref name="thirteen>{{w|Ronald Frankenberg|Ronald_Frankenberg}}: ''Communities in Britain'': ''Social Life in Town and Country'' (Penguin Books, 1966).</ref> Others have developed a {{qq|phase theory}} of the life of tenants’ associations:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}In the first phase, the association played mainly a representative role, negotiating with the local authority for essential services and organising large-scale socials and protest meetings. In the second it became mainly a constructive organisation, fully occupied in building a community centre. In the third phase the centre’s finances were placed on a firm foundation; and in the fourth, popular wishes were discovered through a process of trial and error. In the fifth period, short-run equilibrium was reached: the activities of the centre followed a routine pattern. This was the path of evolution of the most successful centre studied; the others failed to make such rapid adjustments, and lost most of their membership.<ref name="fourteen">{{w|Norman Dennis|Norman_Dennis}}: {{qq|Changes in Function and Leadership Renewal}} ''{{w|Sociological Review|The_Sociological_Review|The Sociological Review}}'' n.s.6, 1958, cited by {{popup|Morris|Raymond N. Morris}} and {{w|Mogey|John_M._Mogey|John M. Mogey}}: ''{{popup|The Sociology of Housing|The Sociology of Housing: Studies at Berinsfield}}'' (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{p|11}}{{tab}}John Hayes, on the other hand, emphasises that it cannot be said that tenants’ associations are merely {{qq|transitory bodies formed for one objective only and then fading away}}. On the contrary, {{qq|Once established they tend to last, and to concentrate on welfare work for their neighbourhood. Of fifty-eight groups affiliated to the London Standing Conference of Housing Estate Community Groups in 1962, one had been in existence for forty-six years, twenty have existed for fourteen years, eighteen for from five to ten years, sixteen for from one to five years, and three were new in 1962. Evidence of this sort should help to disprove the contention that the groups lack stability}}.<ref name="fifteen">John Hayes: {{qq|Tenants’ Associations}}, ''{{w|Society of Housing Managers|Chartered_Institute_of_Housing|Chartered Institute of Housing}} Quarterly Journal'', Vol. V, No. 11, July 1963.</ref> Similarly, [[Author:Gerry Williams|Gerry Williams]], youth adviser to the London group of associations, writing of {{qq|the quite spontaneous development, after the Second World War, on the growing number of council housing estates, of Tenants’ Associations}}, emphasises that, {{qq|Contrary to the general opinion, the great number of these autonomous, self-formed organisations are not {{q|grievance}} bodies, but non-political associations formed for the purpose of creating some sense of community and neighbourliness amongst the uprooted in the often drab new areas of houses and flats that are such a characteristic part of post-war Britain}}.<ref name="sixteen">[[Author:Gerry Williams|Gerry Williams]]: {{qq|[[Anarchy 30/Teen Canteen: End or Beginning?|Teen Canteen: End or Beginning]]}} ([[Anarchy 30|{{sc|anarchy}} 30]], Vol. 3, No. 8, August 1963).</ref>

{{tab}}Testifying to the value of such associations, the Central Housing Advisory Committee reported that, {{qq|The attitude of local authorities towards tenants’ associations tends to vary according to the circumstances in which an association has sprung up. Naturally the main purpose of most associations is to watch over the interests of the tenant. Their approach may differ widely, some starting with the belief that the interests of the tenant and landlord are inevitably opposed. We believe, however, that whatever the starting point, ''the wise course for the local authority is to treat associations as responsible bodies and seek to secure their confidence and co-operation''{{e|r}}}}<ref name="seventeen">''Councils and Their Houses'': ''Management of Estates'', Eighth Report of the Housing Management Sub-Committee of the Central Housing Advisory Committee (HMSO, 1959).</ref> (the Committee’s italics).

{{tab}}Describing the activities of the associations, Mr. Hayes notes that, {{qq|Their objects are usually threefold; to encourage good neighbourliness; and to provide facilities for recreational activities; and to work for the benefit of the residents generally. Usually their method is to organise social activities first, and later to serve as a consultative committee for the estate, acting as a link with housing management for the discussion of common problems of living on the estate. The advantage of having such a representative group to consult as a {{q|consumer council}} has only slowly been recognised by housing managers.}}<ref name="fifteen" />

{{tab}}Since, I am in fact, advocating that tenants’ associations should evolve from this consultative status to that of actual control, I should perhaps cite a contradictory opinion. Messrs. {{popup|Morris|Raymond N. Morris}} and {{w|Mogey|John_M._Mogey|John M. Mogey}}, in ''The Sociology of Housing'' observe that,

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}Councils are apt to be cautious in granting self-government to their tenants, and this is to some extent justified by the tenants’ diversity and inexperience. Others feel that paternal watchfulness and control by the local authority can easily outgrow the bounds of reason; and give only the minimum of tenancy conditions and unsought advice. This represents the other extreme from paternalism: it assumes such a strong relationship that tenants will feel free to make any requests to the local authority. It{{p|12}} gives tenants’ associations much more responsibility than they are structured to carry. They lack the power to discipline their own members, and cannot therefore bargain successfully or act firmly on their members’ behalf. To find a balance between paternalism and ''laissez-faire'' requires skill; for tenants’ associations will tend to be effectively suppressed if either extreme policy is adopted.<ref name="eighteen">R. N. Morris and John Mogey: ''The Sociology of Housing'' (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}But has anyone ever tried giving ''real'' responsibilities to tenants’ associations? Apart from the handful of examples of co-operative co-partnership housing associations, there is very little evidence to draw upon. There is certainly a lesson to learn from one particular field of private enterprise housing. The general standard of design in speculative house-building is abysmally low, but the outstanding exceptions in post-war private development have been in the work of {{w|Span Developments Ltd.|Span_Developments|Span Developments}} and {{w|Wates Ltd|Wates_Group|Wates Group}}. Wates arrange for the shared facilities of their estates to be the responsibility of a management company composed of the residents themselves, which, they claim, {{qq|also allows people to get to know and help each other (in matters like babysitting for example) without intruding into each other’s essential privacy}}. And in the Span developments there has been developed a method of residents’ control, described by the architect {{w|Eric Lyons|Eric_Lyons}} as a {{qq|special technique of leasehold purchase, which is effecting a quiet revolution in property ownership}} and he claims for the system that

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}It has solved the old problem of maintenance of common spaces and structures, and also involves each resident in the autonomous Residents’ Society which runs each estate.{{e|r}} The scheme which has a Residents’ Society very carefully formed on a non-profit-making basis under the {{w|Friendly Societies Acts|Friendly_Societies_Act|Friendly Societies Act}} {{e}} is a method of guaranteeing the permanent maintenance of the building, and not only the building fabric, but the gardens and general amenities. It is also of singular benefit in involving each individual in the idea, each person who lives there. That seems to be socially a tremendous thing.</font></blockquote>

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e|l}}As far as I am concerned, it does not affect me whether it is leasehold or not. The important thing is that the Residents’ Societies are in charge legally and formally. They have their own committees and take an active part. If someone’s child starts digging up the lawn, someone will want to know why. Everyone has a stake in the issue.{{e|r}}<ref name="nineteen">{{w|Eric Lyons|Eric_Lyons}}: {{qq|Domestic Building and Speculative Development}}. Paper read at the {{w|RIBA|Royal_Institute_of_British_Architects|Royal Institute of British Architects}} on March 25, 1958 (''{{w|RIBA Journal|RIBA_Journal}}'', May 1958).</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}His last sentence explains why it is reasonable to expect that ''genuine'' control by tenants’ co-operatives would be successful. To suggest that the middle-class residents of Span estates have some quality which is lacking in council house tenants, apart from larger incomes, is to deny the whole edifice of mutual aid organisation which the working class has built up in the past. (In fact, a resident of one Span development at {{w|Blackheath|Blackheath,_London|Blackheath, London}} remarked that {{qq|We have all the advantages without the disadvantages of a working class district. The estate has achieved a high degree of neighbourliness.}}<ref name="twenty">John Barr: {{qq|What Kind of Homes do People Want?}} (''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}'', No. 163, November 11, 1965).</ref>)

{{tab}}And if it is really true that tenant control would give tenants’ associations more responsibility than they are {{qq|structured to carry}}, or that the tenants’ diversity and inexperience would make it impossible, how are we to explain the success of the extreme case which Mr. Waddilove reports from {{w|Norway}}?

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}A pre-war municipal estate near {{w|Oslo}} was transferred over a period from the ownership of the local authority to the ownership of associations{{p|13}} of the tenants themselves. It has been one of the most difficult problems to the local authority; its standards were low, its appearance unpleasant, and there was great resistance to increases in rents to a reasonable level. A series of meetings patiently arranged by the housing manager ultimately resulted in the acceptance by the tenants of membership in co-operatives which, on favourable terms, took over the ownership of the property from the local authority. Today it is transformed. The members have cared for their own property and by corporate action have ensured that others have done so in a way that they failed to do when it was in public ownership; proposed by the municipality at which they protested so vigorously. This experience so impressed the authority that it decided in principle to transfer all its post-war estates similarly to the ownership of tenant co-operatives and to base its housing policy on this principle.<ref name="one" /></font></blockquote></div>

{{p|s8}}'''ONE BY ONE OR ALL TOGETHER'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Local authorities have been at liberty to sell their houses for at least ten years, but it is only very recently that this has become a {{qq|hot}} political issue: since {{w|Birmingham|Birmingham}} Corporation began selling council houses in large numbers last year. The issue is obviously going to be bandied about in future local and national elections, just as it was in the {{w|municipal elections in 1967|List_of_elections_in_1967#United_Kingdom|List of elections in 1967: United Kingdom}} when {{w|London|Greater_London_Council_election,_1967|Greater London Council election, 1967}} and other big cities changed their political masters.

{{tab}}What proportion of council tenants would like to buy the houses they occupy, and are financially able to do so? It is hard to make an estimate. Several years ago Ferdynand Zweig observed that {{qq|The tendency to consider house property as something worth having and struggling for, something which gives one strength and self-confidence and social standing, appears to be spreading among the working classes. I have no figures to offer here but I think that the working classes may be divided into three main groups, numerically not very far apart. One group tries to acquire property; the second does not think about house property at all, as it is beyond its possibilities and its ken; the third group rejects the acquisition of house property outright as undesirable and even pernicious for the working man}}.<ref name="twentyfive" /> On the other hand, James Tucker noted in 1966 that

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}It is unusual, though that is all, to come across council tenants who would not prefer to be owner-occupiers, possibly of council-built property, but more often of a house away from municipal estates. It would be wild to suggest that all those who want to go are seeking an escape from council housing because its social rating is low. More simply, property appreciates and many council tenants feel they are missing something: their objections are not to renting council property but to renting. Yet it is worth noticing that a lot of council tenants regard those who have moved off to their own houses as having taken a leap upward in social standing. The other side of that thought can only be shame or frustration or aggressiveness at finding themselves left behind.<ref name="twentyeight" /></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Commenting on the actual response of tenants in Birmingham and Reading to offers from the council of the chance to buy their houses, Brian Lapping (''{{w|The Guardian|The_Guardian}}'', 15.5.67) says, {{qq|What is surprising is how few people in council houses have taken the chance to buy them. {{w|Reading|Reading,_Berkshire|Reading, Berkshire}}’s 1,500 have taken five years. In Birmingham so far only 2½% of those offered the chance have bought. Nobody knows why the response rate has been low. Perhaps it is because of the freeze, perhaps because most council tenants don’t like their homes enough to want to{{p|14}} own them.}} And Clive Branson (''{{w|Daily Mail|Daily_Mail}}'', {{popup|11.10.67|11 October 1967}}) remarks, {{qq|My poll among tenants who are thinking of buying their council homes showed that many had only the haziest idea what the step meant. They had not thought of buying a house until approached by the council.}} {{popup|Harry Brack|English community activist (1927-2009)}} (''{{w|Evening Standard|London_Evening_Standard|London Evening Standard}}'', 23.5.67) asks, {{qq|What lies behind this poor response?}} and he answers, {{qq|Many tenants simply cannot afford to go in for owner occupation. For others, a home on a private estate is a status symbol, and an ageing council house is not.}} Among tenants explaining their reasons for opting to buy their council houses, many replied in similar words to those of Mr. Ronald Atkins, {{qq|It seemed that the rents were going up regularly every 12 months or two years. One year they went up twelve {{popup|bob|shillings}}. More or less, we wanted to buy the house on account of that. We didn’t think the rent was all that excessive because it’s a very good house, but from what we could see, the rent would eventually beat what we pay for buying it. It’s not only that, but you feel more inclined to do things to make the house better for yourself and you feel more secure.}}

{{tab}}As with most issues connected with housing, opinions on the sale of council housing have polarised on political lines. This applies even to opinions on the success or failure of the campaign to sell them. Thus at the {{w|Scarborough|Scarborough,_North_Yorkshire|Scarborough, North Yorkshire}} {{w|Conference of the Labour Party|Labour_Party_(UK)_Conference|Labour Party Conference}}, Mr. {{w|Greenwood|Tony_Greenwood,_Baron_Greenwood_of_Rossendale|Tony Greenwood}}, {{w|Minister of Housing|Ministry_of_Housing_and_Local_Government|Ministry of Housing and Local Government}}, defending his policy of disagreeing but not intervening, declared that {{qq|The rate of sale is falling: it is lower today than a year ago}} (''Guardian'', {{popup|3.10.67|3 October 1967}}), while on the other hand Mr. {{w|Horace Cutler|Horace_Cutler}}, the new Conservative chairman of the Greater London Council’s Housing Committee, claims that {{qq|There has been a fantastic response to the GLC’s {{q|buy your own home}} scheme for council tenants}}. Both in Birmingham and London, the Councils do not propose to offer to tenants more than 10% of their houses. The rate of response in London is certainly higher than in Birmingham, probably about 10% of tenants to whom the offer has been made have started negotiating. If we assume that the same figure would apply to the 90% of tenants who have not been offered the chance, this would mean that about one in a hundred of council tenants feels able or anxious to buy his house. When you look at it in this light, it is hard to see what the fuss is about.

{{tab}}The arguments which have been used by the Labour Party in opposition to the sale of council houses have hardly been of a kind to convince the uncommitted. It is suggested that the sale of houses to tenants would have the effect of depriving people waiting on the councils’ lists, but in fact these houses would be occupied as tenants by the would-be purchasers in any case. (The actual number of occupied council dwellings which fall vacant in London is only 1½ to 2% a year.) It is extraordinary that in the public discussion of this issue, no one has made the point that transfer of ownership collectively to a tenants’ association is infinitely preferable to the selling of a small number of odd houses whose tenants happen to be ready and willing to buy them, one by one. This could be an alternative more attractive both to the tenant and to the council.

{{tab}}It would extend the benefits of independence much more widely.{{p|15}} It would avoid setting up yet another social barrier on estates, between those who have bought and those who still pay rent. It would enable public spaces to be collectively maintained. It would create, in Mr. Campbell’s words, {{qq|a sense of belonging and of shared responsibility (rarely to be found on a municipal housing estate or among suburban owner-occupiers) which makes for mutual respect, out of which a healthy society naturally grows}}.

{{tab}}There is no point in denying (like many house-owning Labour politicians have) that it is better to be an owner-occupier than a council tenant. What wants emphasising is that it is better than either to be a member of a community.</div>

{{p|s9}}'''UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Housing management, as undertaken by local authorities under the Housing Acts, includes all the work involved in:
# advice on the design and layout of estates from the management point of view;
# the study of housing needs in the borough or district;
# the selection of tenants;
# the allocation of accommodation;
# the fixing of rents and the levying of occupation charges;
# the collection of, and accounting for, rents, rates and other charges due from tenants;
# the upkeep, maintenance and repair of houses and estates, the adaptation, improvement and conversion of properties;
# the provision of caretaking services and the operation of special estate services (laundries, lifts, community centres, clubrooms, etc.);
# the enforcement of tenancy conditions, the maintenance of good order, the care of elderly, infirm, and unsatisfactory tenants.

{{tab}}If an estate were ''taken over'' by a tenant co-operative, the first two of these functions would not be its concern. (Though, of course, if the normal means of providing housing became by way of housing societies rather than by way of local authorities, they would become everybody’s concern.) We have therefore to consider how a co-operative might manage items 3 to 9.

''Selection of Tenants'':  Local authorities vary enormously in their selection criteria. (See for example Jane Morton: {{qq|The Council House Raffle}}, ''New Society'', 23.11.67.) The one basic principle is that allocation and selection is based on need rather than merit. But the {{qq|weighting}} of various kinds of need is bound to be arbitrary, and there is no reason to suppose that a committee of tenants, selecting a candidate to fill a vacancy, would have any less valid a conception of fairness than the housing department’s officials. However, some other criteria usually ignored in council selection may, quite legitimately be adopted. Morris and Mogey<ref name="eighteen" /> note that with the usual selection methods {{qq|legitimate public or group interests may be largely ignored}} and mention the {{w|findings|Family_and_Kinship_in_East_London|Family and Kinship in East London}} of {{w|Young|Michael_Young,_Baron_Young_of_Dartington|Michael Young}} and {{w|Willmott|Peter_Willmott|Peter Willmott}} on the break-up of the extended family through housing policy. {{qq|Experience in establishing co-operative com{{p|16}}munities has shown that success requires the careful selection of applicants on grounds other than immediate need; this is also true to a smaller extent of local authority housing schemes.}}

''Allocation'':  Since we are considering existing estates where vacancies occur one by one, problems of allocation scarcely arise, and when they do, once again, there is no reason to suppose that the sense of fair play of a tenants’ co-operative is any less developed than that of the housing manager. The swapping of dwellings would probably be easier to arrange between members of a co-operative than through the bureaucracy of housing management.

''Rents'':  Few people would deny that the whole field of payment for housing is in an absurd situation, and that if subsidies are to be made (including the concealed subsidy of tax concessions for owner-occupiers) it would be more equitable to subsidise families rather than subsidise particular dwellings. Readers will readily agree that social welfare is no substitute for social justice, but that until we can achieve the latter we have to utilise the former. I assume therefore that after a transfer from municipal to co-operative control, the co-operative would levy rent on its members in relation to its commitments and that subsidies for members would be obtained through the machinery of social welfare rather than through that of housing. We do not want the ability to pay an economic rent to be the criterion of membership of a housing co-operative, while at the same time we know that housing subsidies today do not reach those whose need for them is greatest.

''Collection and Accountancy'':  A small co-operative might provide these services for itself, a large one might pay for them to be professionally provided.

''Upkeep and Maintenance'':  This is likely to be a much less expensive proposition for a co-operative than for a council’s maintenance department. Mr. Campbell notes in his pamphlet that the members of housing co-operatives {{qq|have a keen interest in maintaining their homes in good repair and indeed, constantly to improve them}}. The co-operative policy statement on Social Ownership<ref name="eleven" /> remarked that {{qq|We see no reason why many councils should not contract with small producer co-operatives for at least the maintenance of their properties.}} Exactly the same thing applies to housing co-operatives.

''Communal Services'':  A real community would probably provide these services on a voluntary rota basis. If in practice it was unable to do this, it could pay for them, utilising the services of its elderly or teenage members.

''Good Order'':  Any housing manager will tell you of his impotence in the face of anti-social behaviour on estates. Good order comes from good community relationships which are far more likely under conditions of tenant responsibility than external responsibility.

''Social Welfare'':  Opinions within the world of housing management differ greatly as to the extent to which social welfare is a housing responsibility. It is certain however that the members of a well-developed tenants’ association will see it as a community responsibility. {{qq|We are our own social workers,}} explained a member of one of the{{p|17}} 71 affiliated groups of the Association of London Housing Estates (''{{w|The Times|The_Times}}'', 21.6.1967).

''Cost of Management'': The costs of housing management vary greatly from one authority to another. Cullingworth<ref name="twentysix">J. B. Cullingworth: ''Housing and Local Government in England and Wales'' (Allen and Unwin, 1966).</ref> gives a range of from £1 6s. to £23 2s. per year per dwelling. The organisation and methods committee which studied housing management in the London boroughs,<ref name="twentyseven">Metropolitan Boroughs’ (Organisation and Methods) Committee: ''General Review of Housing Management'', 1963.</ref> suggested that the appropriate staffing of an housing management department controlling 4,000 dwellings might be 25 people, for 8,000 dwellings 46 people, and for 15,000 dwellings 76 people. These figures are for office staff only and they represent 80% of the present London averages. There is every reason to suppose that the administrative costs of self-management would be very much lower than of council management. For specialist services a tenant co-operative could subscribe to and use the expertise of a central body of the same kind that is so necessary for a housing society starting from scratch. And in the Co-ownership Development Society we have a possible nucleus for such a body.</div>

{{p|s10}}'''LEGAL AND FINANCIAL PROBLEMS'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The statutory basis of a local authority’s right to sell its council houses is Section 104 of the Housing Act, 1957, and the only limitation on this is the need for the consent of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, a consent which in no instance so far has ever been refused. The transfer of an estate to a co-operative of its tenants, would, it seems to me, be covered by this provision.

{{tab}}In London, under Section 23(3) of the {{l|London Government Act, 1963|https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1963/33/part/I/enacted|full text at National Archives}}, the Minister has power by order, to provide for the transfer to a housing association of any housing accommodation belonging to the Greater London Council or the Council of a London borough provided, in the latter case, that it is outside the borough.

{{tab}}The financial arrangement for the take-over should probably be based on the experience of the existing co-operative housing societies. It might be for instance that the co-operative is advanced a mortgage by the council (the price agreed being based on the members’ status as sitting tenants) for the whole or a part of the purchase price, any other loan being arranged through the Co-ownership Development Society, and each member contributing to a share liability which might in the first instance be nominal.

{{tab}}Or, on the other hand, and if the arrangement is to be made more attractive to members than individual house ownership, some arrangement must be made for a tenant, on moving out, to receive his share of the appreciation of the property. Mrs. Wallis, who acted as arbitrator for a co-operative self-build housing society told the National Federation how this was done in her society:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}We took the value of the house from the time the man entered it until the time when he was compelled to leave due to his job having been changed. We did deem that the money and the labour which he had put into that shell, if you like, to improve it quite rightly should be his profit. We felt that it was his own personal effort, and not that of the association or the group.</font></blockquote>

{{p|18}}<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}However, the other profit which was made over and above that second valuation was divided between that man and his housing association. We felt, again, that part of that extra money was due to the man for his goodwill (the goodwill which he put into the association by being a good member), and he was entitled to something for his labour. We felt that some of it was due to the members for their goodwill as far as he was concerned. We came to a very happy and amicable arrangement.{{e|r}} We have never had a squabble. We have never had an argument over the settlement at all.<ref name="twentynine">Report of 25th Annual General Meeting of {{w|NFHS|National_Housing_Federation}}. ''Quarterly Bulletin'' No. 100 July 1962.</ref></font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Here of course the house was actually sold, but the principle can be adapted to a situation where the tenant is rewarded but the tenancy reverts to the society.</div>

{{p|s11}}'''HOW AND HOW SOON?'''

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}The tenant take-over of municipal housing is one of those marvellous ideas that is dormant because no one is taking the trouble to propagate it, but which would catch like wildfire once the principle is established in people’s minds. We have to consider the ways of spreading it.

{{tab}}Firstly it should be spread in those ''ad hoc'' tenants’ committees which spring up when the councils announce rent rises. Their immediate aim may be to resist this or that item of council policy, but what is their ultimate aim? Surely a tenant take-over is the only logical one. Then it should be spread through tenants’ and community associations, to persuade the members that the experience they have gained of community organisation could really flourish and grow in community control. Then it should be spread through the co-operative movement. Millions of council tenants are co-op members, millions of co-op members are council tenants. They need to be convinced that co-operative ownership and control of housing is really much more important than a derisory dividend on retail purchases, which is all the co-op means in most of their lives today. Then it should be spread to members of housing committees, some of whom will readily connect their own experience of the absurdities of housing policy with the advantages to be found in tenant control. Once the idea is being seriously discussed, the ordinary media of communications will spread it, criticise it, appraise it. The first thing is to get it on the agenda of all these bodies.

{{tab}}Then we need study of the financial and legal problems. If there were a genuine and militant upsurge of demand from below, these would rapidly follow to event, but it would be helpful to find out where the difficulties lie, and how they might be resolved, from the experience of bodies like the Co-ownership Development Society and the National Federation of Housing Societies and of the handful of existing housing co-operatives.

{{tab}}Finally we need a working example, a pilot project, to prove to others that it is possible. It may not be in present circumstances a universal solution, it may not be applicable everywhere. But Britain has a higher proportion of municipally owned dwellings than any other Western country. Surely there is room somewhere for an experiment in responsible citizenship, which is what is implied in the transfer of housing from municipal government to self-government.</div>

-----
{{p|s12}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}<font size="4">{{qq|It is curious that left-wing councils, whose members can hardly be unaware of the advantages of co-operative systems, still maintain a rigidly paternalistic attitude to housing management.}}</font></div>

{{r|{{sc|[[Author:Architectural Review|architectural review]]}}, November 1967}}
-----

<div style="text-align:justify;" id="19"><font size="2">{{sc|references and sources}}</font>

<font size="2"><references /></font></div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Tenants take over}}
[[Category:Banking and finance]]
[[Category:City planning]]
[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Housing]]
[[Category:Land]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Index to Anarchy

2021-10-11T20:26:51Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = Index to ''Anarchy''
| author =
| section =
| previous =
| next =
| notes = This index is special to this web site. Where the author of an ''Anarchy'' article appears as an index entry, only pages by other authors making reference to that author are included. Bolded page numbers indicate whole articles on a subject. For an author’s own works, click their name. For broader subject headings, see [[:Category:Subjects|Subjects]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
{| width="500"
|-
|valign="top" |'''Index to ANARCHY'''
|align="right" valign="top" |'''March 1961-December 1970'''
|}

{|
|-
|[[#s1|Topics]]
|[[#1a|A]]
|[[#1b|B]]
|[[#1c|C]]
|[[#1d|D]]
|[[#1e|E]]
|[[#1f|F]]
|[[#1g|G]]
|[[#1h|H]]
|[[#1i|I]]
|[[#1j|J]]
|[[#1k|K]]
|[[#1l|L]]
|[[#1m|M]]
|[[#1n|N]]
|[[#1o|O]]
|[[#1p|P]]
|[[#1q|Q]]
|[[#1r|R]]
|[[#1s|S]]
|[[#1t|T]]
|[[#1u|U]]
|[[#1v|V]]
|[[#1w|W]]
|[[#1x|X]]
|[[#1y|Y]]
|[[#1z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s2|People]]
|[[#2a|A]]
|[[#2b|B]]
|[[#2c|C]]
|[[#2d|D]]
|[[#2e|E]]
|[[#2f|F]]
|[[#2g|G]]
|[[#2h|H]]
|[[#2i|I]]
|[[#2j|J]]
|[[#2k|K]]
|[[#2l|L]]
|[[#2m|M]]
|[[#2n|N]]
|[[#2o|O]]
|[[#2p|P]]
|[[#2q|Q]]
|[[#2r|R]]
|[[#2s|S]]
|[[#2t|T]]
|[[#2u|U]]
|[[#2v|V]]
|[[#2w|W]]
|[[#2x|X]]
|[[#2y|Y]]
|[[#2z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s3|Institutions]]
|[[#3a|A]]
|[[#3b|B]]
|[[#3c|C]]
|[[#3d|D]]
|[[#3e|E]]
|[[#3f|F]]
|[[#3g|G]]
|[[#3h|H]]
|[[#3i|I]]
|[[#3j|J]]
|[[#3k|K]]
|[[#3l|L]]
|[[#3m|M]]
|[[#3n|N]]
|[[#3o|O]]
|[[#3p|P]]
|[[#3q|Q]]
|[[#3r|R]]
|[[#3s|S]]
|[[#3t|T]]
|[[#3u|U]]
|[[#3v|V]]
|[[#3w|W]]
|[[#3x|X]]
|[[#3y|Y]]
|[[#3z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s4|Geographical places]] 
|[[#4a|A]]
|[[#4b|B]]
|[[#4c|C]]
|[[#4d|D]]
|[[#4e|E]]
|[[#4f|F]]
|[[#4g|G]]
|[[#4h|H]]
|[[#4i|I]]
|[[#4j|J]]
|[[#4k|K]]
|[[#4l|L]]
|[[#4m|M]]
|[[#4n|N]]
|[[#4o|O]]
|[[#4p|P]]
|[[#4q|Q]]
|[[#4r|R]]
|[[#4s|S]]
|[[#4t|T]]
|[[#4u|U]]
|[[#4v|V]]
|[[#4w|W]]
|[[#4x|X]]
|[[#4y|Y]]
|[[#4z|Z]]
|-
|[[#s5|Publications & laws]]
|[[#5a|A]]
|[[#5b|B]]
|[[#5c|C]]
|[[#5d|D]]
|[[#5e|E]]
|[[#5f|F]]
|[[#5g|G]]
|[[#5h|H]]
|[[#5i|I]]
|[[#5j|J]]
|[[#5k|K]]
|[[#5l|L]]
|[[#5m|M]]
|[[#5n|N]]
|[[#5o|O]]
|[[#5p|P]]
|[[#5q|Q]]
|[[#5r|R]]
|[[#5s|S]]
|[[#5t|T]]
|[[#5u|U]]
|[[#5v|V]]
|[[#5w|W]]
|[[#5x|X]]
|[[#5y|Y]]
|[[#5z|Z]]
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s1|n}}'''TOPICS'''</div>

{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|1a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|architecture|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|associations| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]; [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}tenants’|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Banking and finance|banking and finance]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}lending|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}saving|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|building|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|capital| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}financial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|co-operatives| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|council housing (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|do-it-yourself|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|finance (see: banking and finance)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|ghettos|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Government|government]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}local (city, municipal, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Housing|housing]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}associations (co-operatives, societies, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}, [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]
{{dex|{{tab}}authorities|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}for the elderly|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}industrial|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}owner-occupied|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}private rental|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}public (municipal, council, etc.)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}self-build|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|immigrants| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}in the United Kingdom|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|investment|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Land|land]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}residential|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–5]]}}
{{dex|[[:Category:Law|law]]| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}property|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|mortgages|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–8]]}}
{{dex|mutual aid|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|philanthropy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4–5]]}}
{{dex|psychology| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}of tenancy|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9–10]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|[[:Category:Property|property]] (see also: capital, housing, land)| }}
{{dex|{{p|1s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|slums|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|subsidies| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5–6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|tax|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|trade unions|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|urban renewal|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|1v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|1z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s2|n}}'''PEOPLE'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|2a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|Attlee, Clement| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1945–1951)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Campbell, Harold|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Churchill, Winston| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}3rd ministry (1951–1955)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Cullingworth, J[ohn] B[arry]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8–9]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Donnison, D[avid] V[ernon]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Douglas-Home, Alec| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1963–1964)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|Eden, Anthony| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1955–1957)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Gray, P[ercy] G[eorge]|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Holland, Milner|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|John, Caspar|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Macmillan, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}ministry (1957–1963)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|Millar, Robert|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Morris, Parker|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|Waddilove, Lewis E.|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Wilson, Harold| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}1st ministry (1964–1970)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]]}}
{{dex|{{p|2x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|2z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
{{dex|Zweig, Ferdynand|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s6|8:9]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s3|n}}'''INSTITUTIONS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|3a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|Central Housing Advisory Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Conservative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#3|8:3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6–7]]}}
{{dex|Co-operative Union (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|Co-ownership Development Society (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Greater London Council|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|Housing Corporation (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|HSB|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|Labourers’ Friendly Society for Improving the Conditions of the Labouring Classes|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Labour Party (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2–3]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|Ministry of Housing and Local Government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|National Association of Housing Societies (Sweden)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|National Federation of Housing Societies (UK)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Parker Morris Committee|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s5|8:7]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#8|8:8]]}}
{{dex|Parliament (UK) (see also: ministries)| }}
{{dex|Political and Economic Planning (think tank)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|Tenants’ Savings and Building Society (Stockholm)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|{{p|3u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|3z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s4|n}}'''GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|4a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|Bridlington, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s4|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|Dagenham, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Denmark| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|England (see also: United Kingdom| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|Great Britain (see: United Kingdom, England, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities thereof)| }}
{{dex|Greece| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Greenock, Scotland|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|Ireland (see also: Northern Ireland)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|Kensington (London borough)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|London, England| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}boroughs|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{tab}}government|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s1|8:1]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|Newcastle, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|Park Lane, London, England|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|Portugal| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|Romania| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|Scotland| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:2]]}}
{{dex|Stockholm, Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]]}}
{{dex|Sweden| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#4|8:4]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|United Kingdom (see also: Parliament, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and municipalities and ministries thereof)| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|'''[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#s2|8:1–12]]}}
{{dex|United States| }}
{{dex|{{tab}}housing|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|{{p|4v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|4z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

<div style="text-align:center">{{p|s5|n}}'''PUBLICATIONS & LAWS'''</div>
{| width="500"
|-
| 
|width="100" | 
{{dex|{{p|5a|n}}'''A'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5b|n}}'''B'''| }}
{{dex|''British Household, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5c|n}}'''C'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5d|n}}'''D'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5e|n}}'''E'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5f|n}}'''F'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5g|n}}'''G'''| }}
{{dex|''Government of Housing, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Guardian, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5h|n}}'''H'''| }}
{{dex|''Homes of the Future''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Housing: A Co-operative Approach|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1957|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#7|8:7]]}}
{{dex|Housing Act of 1961|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#5|8:5]]}}
{{dex|''Housing Associations'' (report)|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|Housing Subsidies Bill|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5i|n}}'''I'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5j|n}}'''J'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5k|n}}'''K'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5l|n}}'''L'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5m|n}}'''M'''| }}
{{dex|''Milner Holland Report''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5n|n}}'''N'''| }}
{{dex|''New Classes: The New Patterns of British Life, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5o|n}}'''O'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5p|n}}'''P'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5q|n}}'''Q'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5r|n}}'''R'''| }}
{{dex|''Report of the Committee on Housing in Greater London'' (''Milner Holland Report'')|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#6|8:6]], [[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5s|n}}'''S'''| }}
{{dex|''Social Ownership and Control''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|''Social Survey, The''|[[Anarchy 83/Tenants take over#19|8:19]]}}
{{dex|{{p|5t|n}}'''T'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5u|n}}'''U'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5v|n}}'''V'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5w|n}}'''W'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5x|n}}'''X'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5y|n}}'''Y'''| }}
{{dex|{{p|5z|n}}'''Z'''| }}
|}

</div>

[[Category:Appendices]]

Anarchy 3

2021-10-11T19:47:01Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = ANARCHY 3 (Vol 1 No 3) MAY 1961
| author =
| section =
| previous = '''[[Anarchy 2]]'''<br>←[[/Cover|Cover]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 4]]'''→<br>[[/Moving with the times … but not in step|Moving with the times {{e}} but not in step]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
<font size="5">'''Contents of No. 3'''

'''May 1961'''</font>

{| cellpadding="5" width="500" valign="top"
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Moving with the times … but not in step|Moving with the times {{e}} but not in step]]
| 
|align="right" valign="bottom" |65
|-
|valign="top" |[[/From a South African notebook|A notebook in South Africa]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Maurice Goldman|Maurice Goldman]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |72 
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Africa and the future|Africa and the future]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Jeremy Westall|Jeremy Westall]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |76
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Culture and Community|Culture and community]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Nicolas Walter|Nicolas Walter]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |80
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Removal of guilt|Removal of guilt]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Anthony Weaver|Anthony Weaver]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |92
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Cover|Cover]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Rufus Segar|Rufus Segar]]''
| 
|}

{| border="1" style="border-collapse:collapse" cellpadding="10"
|-
|

<font size="4">'''{{qq|THINKING THE THOUGHTS WHICH ALL MEN SHOULD BE THINKING{{e|r}}}}'''</font>

<font size="2">In 1951 a new task was added to FREEDOM’s editorial chores: that of saving the type of a few articles from each issue of the paper, when the rest goes back into the melting-pot, and then re-arranging and re-printing it in book format, so as to produce during the following year a book of about 240 pages or 100,000 words forming a selection from the previous year’s paper, which is given a title from that of one of the reprinted articles.</font>

<font size="2">The collector of these volumes thus has, for a very moderate outlay (especially as the paper-bound volumes are available to readers of FREEDOM for only five shillings each) a panorama of events and opinions in the decade which has just ended. The titles of the volumes are suggestive of the immense variety of topics covered in the million-word output of the decade.</font>

<font size="2">In these collections you will find not only the anarchist criticism of the political, social and economic phenomena of our time, but also praise and analysis of the {{qq|positive trends}} which can be found, like seeds beneath the snow, even in the most authoritarian societies.</font>

<font size="2">The Los Angeles magazine [[Author:Manas|{{qq|Manas}}]] had this to say about one of the volumes in the series:</font>

<font size="2">{{qq|The reader of this book will make an important discovery—that the anarchists are thinking the thoughts which men should be thinking, in these perilous times. The anarchists are not afraid to call attention to what we are losing, have already lost in terms of freedom, in terms of love and respect for other people, in terms of the elemental decencies of life—the decencies we so easily forget when it becomes time to plunge the world into fratricide for the sake of {{e}} all those things we say we go to war for.}}</font>

<font size="4">'''Selections from FREEDOM'''</font>

::::: <font size="2">Vol 1 1951: Mankind is One<br>
::::: Vol 2 1952: Postscript to Posterity<br>
::::: Vol 3 1953: Colonialism on Trial<br>
::::: Vol 4 1954: Living on a Volcano<br>
::::: Vol 5 1955: The Immoral Moralists<br>
::::: Vol 6 1956: Oil on Troubled Waters<br>
::::: Vol 7 1957: Year One—Sputnik Era<br>
::::: Vol 8 1958: Socialism in a Wheelchair<br>
::::: Vol 9 1959: Print, Press & Public</font>

<font size="2">'''Each volume: paper 7s. 6d., cloth 10s. 6d.'''</font>

<font size="4">'''FREEDOM PRESS'''</font>

|}
<font size="1">'''Printed by Express Printers, London, E.1.</font>

-----

<font size="4">''Still available:''</font>

[[Anarchy 1|ANARCHY 1]]: ''Rescuing Galbraith from the conventional wisdom; Sex-and-Violence and the origin of the novel'' ([[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]]) ''Education, equality, opportunity'' ([[Author:John Ellerby|John Ellerby]]) ''The {{q|new wave}} in Britain'' ([[Author:Nicolas Walter|Nicolas Walter]]).

[[Anarchy 2|ANARCHY 2]]: ''Workers’ Control'': ''Looking for a movement; Approaches to industrial democracy'' ([[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|Geoffrey Ostergaard]]) ''The gang system in Coventry'' ([[Author:Reg Wright|Reg Wright]]) ''Workers’ control in the building industry'' ([[Author:James Lynch|James Lynch]]) ''Aspects of syndicalism in Spain, Sweden & U.S.A.'' ([[Author:Philip Holgate|Philip Holgate]]).

{| border="1" width="500" style="border-collapse:collapse" cellpadding="10"
|-
|<font size="4">'''Subscribe to ANARCHY {{e}}'''</font>

::: '''single issues 1s. 6d. (or 25 cents) post free<br>
::: '''twelve issues 19s. (or $3.00)'''

<font size="4">'''{{e}} and to FREEDOM as well'''</font>

::: '''readers of ANARCHY will find FREEDOM the anarchist weekly indispensible, and a year’s subscription to both journals is offered at 30s. (or $5.00)'''

'''Cheques, P.O.’s and Money Orders should be made out to FREEDOM PRESS, crossed a/c payee, and addressed to the publishers.'''

::: '''FREEDOM PRESS'''<br>
::: '''17a Maxwell Road,'''<br>
::: '''London SW6 England'''<br>
::: '''(Tel. Renown 3736)'''
|}

'''[[Anarchy 4|ANARCHY 4]]: {{qq|Where the shoe pinches}}'''

In the care of the young and the old, the delinquent and the sick, there is a recognisable trend towards {{qq|de-institutionisation}}—the breakdown of institutions. What are the wider implications of this trend? What does it mean when applied to the institutions of life in general?

</div>

Anarchy 3

2021-10-11T19:45:33Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = ANARCHY 3 (Vol 1 No 3) MAY 1961
| author =
| section =
| previous = '''[[Anarchy 2]]'''<br>←[[/Cover|Cover]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 4]]'''→<br>[[/Moving with the times … but not in step|Moving with the times {{e}} but not in step]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">
<font size="5">'''Contents of No. 3'''

'''May 1961'''</font>

{| cellpadding="5" width="500" valign="top"
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Moving with the times … but not in step|Moving with the times … but not in step]]
| 
|align="right" valign="bottom" |65
|-
|valign="top" |[[/From a South African notebook|A notebook in South Africa]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Maurice Goldman|Maurice Goldman]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |72 
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Africa and the future|Africa and the future]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Jeremy Westall|Jeremy Westall]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |76
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Culture and Community|Culture and community]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Nicolas Walter|Nicolas Walter]]''
|align="right" valign="bottom" |80
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Removal of guilt|Removal of guilt]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Anthony Weaver|Anthony Weaver]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |92
|-
|valign="top" |[[/Cover|Cover]]
|align="right" valign="bottom" |''[[Author:Rufus Segar|Rufus Segar]]''
| 
|}

{| border="1" style="border-collapse:collapse" cellpadding="10"
|-
|

<font size="4">'''{{qq|THINKING THE THOUGHTS WHICH ALL MEN SHOULD BE THINKING …}}'''</font>

<font size="2">In 1951 a new task was added to FREEDOM’s editorial chores: that of saving the type of a few articles from each issue of the paper, when the rest goes back into the melting-pot, and then re-arranging and re-printing it in book format, so as to produce during the following year a book of about 240 pages or 100,000 words forming a selection from the previous year’s paper, which is given a title from that of one of the reprinted articles.</font>

<font size="2">The collector of these volumes thus has, for a very moderate outlay (especially as the paper-bound volumes are available to readers of FREEDOM for only five shillings each) a panorama of events and opinions in the decade which has just ended. The titles of the volumes are suggestive of the immense variety of topics covered in the million-word output of the decade.</font>

<font size="2">In these collections you will find not only the anarchist criticism of the political, social and economic phenomena of our time, but also praise and analysis of the {{qq|positive trends}} which can be found, like seeds beneath the snow, even in the most authoritarian societies.</font>

<font size="2">The Los Angeles magazine [[Author:Manas|{{qq|Manas}}]] had this to say about one of the volumes in the series:</font>

<font size="2">{{qq|The reader of this book will make an important discovery—that the anarchists are thinking the thoughts which men should be thinking, in these perilous times. The anarchists are not afraid to call attention to what we are losing, have already lost in terms of freedom, in terms of love and respect for other people, in terms of the elemental decencies of life—the decencies we so easily forget when it becomes time to plunge the world into fratricide for the sake of … all those things we say we go to war for.}}</font>

<font size="4">'''Selections from FREEDOM'''</font>

::::: <font size="2">Vol 1 1951: Mankind is One<br>
::::: Vol 2 1952: Postscript to Posterity<br>
::::: Vol 3 1953: Colonialism on Trial<br>
::::: Vol 4 1954: Living on a Volcano<br>
::::: Vol 5 1955: The Immoral Moralists<br>
::::: Vol 6 1956: Oil on Troubled Waters<br>
::::: Vol 7 1957: Year One—Sputnik Era<br>
::::: Vol 8 1958: Socialism in a Wheelchair<br>
::::: Vol 9 1959: Print, Press & Public</font>

<font size="2">'''Each volume: paper 7s. 6d., cloth 10s. 6d.'''</font>

<font size="4">'''FREEDOM PRESS'''</font>

|}
<font size="1">'''Printed by Express Printers, London, E.1.</font>

-----

<font size="4">''Still available:''</font>

[[Anarchy 1|ANARCHY 1]]: ''Rescuing Galbraith from the conventional wisdom; Sex-and-Violence and the origin of the novel'' ([[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]]) ''Education, equality, opportunity'' ([[Author:John Ellerby|John Ellerby]]) ''The {{q|new wave}} in Britain'' ([[Author:Nicolas Walter|Nicolas Walter]]).

[[Anarchy 2|ANARCHY 2]]: ''Workers’ Control'': ''Looking for a movement; Approaches to industrial democracy'' ([[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|Geoffrey Ostergaard]]) ''The gang system in Coventry'' ([[Author:Reg Wright|Reg Wright]]) ''Workers’ control in the building industry'' ([[Author:James Lynch|James Lynch]]) ''Aspects of syndicalism in Spain, Sweden & U.S.A.'' ([[Author:Philip Holgate|Philip Holgate]]).

{| border="1" width="500" style="border-collapse:collapse" cellpadding="10"
|-
|<font size="4">'''Subscribe to ANARCHY …'''</font>

::: '''single issues 1s. 6d. (or 25 cents) post free<br>
::: '''twelve issues 19s. (or $3.00)'''

<font size="4">'''… and to FREEDOM as well'''</font>

::: '''readers of ANARCHY will find FREEDOM the anarchist weekly indispensible, and a year’s subscription to both journals is offered at 30s. (or $5.00)'''

'''Cheques, P.O.’s and Money Orders should be made out to FREEDOM PRESS, crossed a/c payee, and addressed to the publishers.'''

::: '''FREEDOM PRESS'''<br>
::: '''17a Maxwell Road,'''<br>
::: '''London SW6 England'''<br>
::: '''(Tel. Renown 3736)'''
|}

'''[[Anarchy 4|ANARCHY 4]]: {{qq|Where the shoe pinches}}'''

In the care of the young and the old, the delinquent and the sick, there is a recognisable trend towards {{qq|de-institutionisation}}—the breakdown of institutions. What are the wider implications of this trend? What does it mean when applied to the institutions of life in general?

</div>

Anarchy 70/Anarchist anthologies

2021-10-11T19:44:54Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 70 (Vol 6 No 12) DECEMBER 1966]]<br>Anarchist anthologies
| author = Nicolas Walter
| section =
| previous = [[../Libertarian Psychiatry: an introduction to existential analysis|Libertarian Psychiatry]]
| next = [[../Index to Anarchy Volume Six|Index to Anarchy Volume Six]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|374}}
<div style="text-align:justify;"><font size="5">'''Anarchist anthologies'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Nicolas Walter|NICOLAS WALTER]]'''</font>

{{sc|After the histories of anarchism}} come the anthologies. We have already had ''{{l|Anarchism|http://rebels-library.org/files/woodcock_anarchism.pdf|Full text at Rebel Studies Library (PDF)}}'' by [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]], and ''{{l|The Anarchists|http://www.ditext.com/joll/anarchists.html|Full text at Digital Text International}}'' by {{w|James Joll|James_Joll}}, which were reviewed in [[Anarchy 28|{{sc|anarchy}} 28]] and [[Anarchy 46|46]]. Now we have ''The Anarchists'' (no connection) edited by [[Author:Irving Horowitz|Irving L. Horowitz]], and ''Patterns of Anarchy'' edited by {{l|Leonard I. Krimerman|https://philosophy.uconn.edu/person/leonard-krimerman/|Web site}} and Lewis Perry, which are reviewed together now.

{{tab}}Both books are American paperbacks edited by American academics. Horowitz is Associate Professor of Sociology at {{w|Washington University|Washington_University_in_St._Louis|Washington University in St. Louis}}, {{w|St. Louis|St._Louis}}, and ''The Anarchists'' is published by Dell as Laurel Book 0131 (1964, 95c.). Krimerman is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at {{w|Louisiana State University|Louisiana_State_University}}, {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}, and Perry is Lecturer in History at {{w|New York State University|University_at_Buffalo|University at Buffalo}}, {{w|Buffalo|Buffalo,_New_York|Buffalo, New York}}, and ''Patterns of Anarchy'' is published by Doubleday as Anchor Book A501 (1966, $1.95).

{{tab}}Both books come from outside the anarchist movement. ''The Anarchists'' originated when {{w|C. Wright Mills|C._Wright_Mills}}, the left-wing American sociologist, planned {{qq|a reader on ''Anarchists, Criminals and Deviants''}} (shades of {{w|Lombroso|Cesare_Lombroso|Cesare Lombroso}}!). He later {{qq|came to consider anarchism as one of the three major pivots of {{w|Marxism}}, the other two being {{w|Social Democracy|Social_democracy|Social democracy}}{{p|375}} and {{w|Bolshevism|Bolsheviks|Bolsheviks}}}}, and then planned a trilogy of anthologies of Marxist, {{w|Trotskyist|Trotskyism|Trotskyism}}, and anarchist writings. The only one he produced before he died in 1962 was ''{{w|The Marxists|The_Marxists}}'' (1962, published as a Penguin Book in 1963). He hadn{{t}} begun work on the anarchist volume, and it was taken over by his disciple Horowitz (who has edited a posthumous volume of his essays and a memorial volume of essays by his admirers). It is comforting to know that Horowitz has more sensible ideas about anarchism than Wright Mills: {{qq|My own view is that anarchism, far from being a {{q|pivot}} of Marxism, as Mills believed, is an effort to fashion a radical alternative to the Marxist tradition in its orthodox forms.}}

{{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' originated when Krimerman and Perry {{qq|began to discuss, in deep ignorance, the likelihood that the anarchist position had not been given its due.}} Well, it is probably better to have no ideas than wrong ideas. {{qq|Agreed on the likely value of anarchism, we were almost stymied by the paucity of available materials. Slowly the idea of an anthology took hold, as we continued to uncover interesting but neglected anarchist writings. Our amazement at the wealth of anarchist literature has been growing ever since.}}

{{tab}}''The Anarchists'' has 640 pages. It begins with a Preface and an Introduction and ends with a [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Postscript]] by the editor. The rest of the book is divided into two parts containing 35 passages.

{{tab}}{{qq|The Theory}} is divided into three sections. {{qq|Anarchism as a Critique of Society}} contains extracts from {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot|Denis Diderot}}{{s}} ''{{l|Supplement to Bougainville{{s}} {{qq|Voyage}}|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6501|Full text at Project Gutenberg}}'' (1772){{ref|aster|*}}; {{w|Malatesta|Errico_Malatesta|Errico Malatesta}}{{s}} pamphlet ''{{l|Anarchy|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-anarchy|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}'' (1891)*; {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}{{s}} book {{l|''What is Property''?|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1840); {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin|William Godwin}}{{s}} book ''{{l|Political Justice|https://web.archive.org/web/20170207024507/https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/g/godwin/william/enquiry/complete.html|Full text at eBooks@Adelaide via the Wayback Machine}}'' (1793); {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}{{s}} essays {{qq|Science and the Urgent Revolutionary Task}} (1870) and {{qq|The Programme of the International Revolutionary Alliance}} (1871)*, both from {{w|G. P. Maximoff|Gregori_Maximoff|Gregori Maximoff}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Political Philosophy of Bakunin|https://libcom.org/files/Maximoff%20-%20The%20Political%20Philosophy%20of%20Bakunin.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}}'' (1953); [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]{{s}} book ''{{l|Modern Science and Anarchism|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-modern-science-and-anarchism|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}'' (1903)*; {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|State Socialism and Anarchism|https://archive.org/details/statesocialisman00tuck|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}} from his magazine ''{{w|Liberty|Liberty_(1881–1908)|Liberty (1881-1908)}}'' (1886)* and his book ''{{l|Instead of a Book|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}}'' (1893); and {{w|Rudolf Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker}}{{s}} essay {{qq|{{l|Anarchism and Anarcho-Syndicalism|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rudolf-rocker-anarchism-and-anarcho-syndicalism|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}}} from {{w|Feliks Gross|Feliks_Gross}}{{s}} book ''European Ideologies'' (1948).

{{tab}}{{qq|Anarchism as a Style of Life}} contains extracts from {{w|Joseph Conrad|Joseph_Conrad}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|The Secret Agent|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/974|Full text at Project Gutenberg}}'' (1907); {{w|Dostoevski|Fyodor_Dostoyevsky|Fyodor Dostoyevsky}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|Notes from Underground|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/600|Full text at Project Gutenberg}}'' (1864)*; {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''What Then Shall We Do''?|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38690|Full text at Project Gutenberg}} (1886)*; {{w|Albert Camus|Albert_Camus}}{{s}} book ''{{w|The Rebel|The_Rebel_(book)}}'' (1951)*; [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} essays {{qq|{{l|The Tragedy of Woman{{s}} Emancipation|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1906/tragedy-women.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}}} (1906)* and {{qq|{{l|Marriage and Love|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-marriage-and-love|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}}},* both from her magazine ''{{w|Mother Earth|Mother_Earth_(magazine)}}'' and her book {{l|''Anarchism and Other Essays''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1910); and the letters of {{w|Sacco and Vanzetti|Sacco_and_Vanzetti}} (1927), from the edition by Frankfurter and Jackson.

{{tab}}{{qq|Anarchism as a System of Philosophy}} contains extracts from {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1845)*; {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau|Henry David Thoreau}}{{s}} essay {{qq|{{l|Resistance to Civil Government|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Aesthetic_Papers/Resistance_to_Civil_Government|Full text at Wikisource}}}} (1848)*; {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''True Civilisation''|https://archive.org/details/truecivilizatio00warrgoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1869); {{w|William Hocking|William_Ernest_Hocking|William Ernest Hocking}}{{s}} book ''Man and the State'' (1926); {{w|Herbert Read|Herbert_Read}}{{s}} article {{qq|Anarchism in a Capitalist Society}}, from the magazine {{l|''Reconstruir''|https://web.archive.org/web/20180806205005/http://www.federacionlibertaria.org/editorial.html|Federación Libertaria Argentina article (in Spanish) via the Wayback Machine}} (1962); and {{w|Paul Schilpp|Paul_Arthur_Schilpp|Paul Arthur Schilpp}}{{s}} article {{qq|In Defence {{p|376}}of Socrate{{s|r}} Judges}}, from the magazine {{popup|''Enquiry''|Enquiry: A Journal of Independent Radical Thought}} (1944).

{{tab}}{{qq|The Practice}} is divided into two sections. {{qq|The Historical Dimension}} contains accounts of the anarchist movement in {{l|Spain|https://archive.org/details/spanishlabyrinth001334mbp|Full text at the Internet Archive}} up to 1902 (by {{w|Gerald Brenan|Gerald_Brenan}}), in Italy during the 1870s (by {{popup|Richard Hostetter|Richard Jerome Hostetter (1913–1987), author of The Italian Socialist Movement (1958)}}, in the United States during the 1880s (by {{popup|Samuel Yellen|author of American Labor Struggles (1936)}}), in France, Italy, Switzerland, and the United States during the 1890s (by {{w|Barbara Tuchman|Barbara_W._Tuchman|Barbara W. Tuchman}}), in Russia up to 1883 (by {{w|Thomas Masaryk|Tomáš_Garrigue_Masaryk|Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk}}), in America outside the United States and in northern Europe outside {{w|Britain|United_Kingdom|United Kingdom}} up to the 1930s (by [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]), and in Spain during the 1930s (by {{w|Hugh Thomas|Hugh_Thomas,_Baron_Thomas_of_Swynnerton}}), together with [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} [[Anarchy 81/Kronstadt diary|diary]] of the {{w|Kronstadt Rising|Kronstadt_rebellion|Kronstadt rebellion}} (1921).

{{tab}}{{qq|The Sociological Dimension}} contains extracts from {{w|Sorel|Georges_Sorel|Georges Sorel}}{{s}} book {{l|''Reflections on Violence''|https://libcom.org/files/Sorel-Reflections-on-Violence-ed-Jennings.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}} (1906)*; [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book ''Drawing the Line'' (1946); {{popup|Robert Presthus|American educator Robert Vance Presthus (1917–2001)}}{{s}} book ''The Organisational Society'' (1962); {{w|Philip Selznick|Philip_Selznick}}{{s}} article {{qq|Revolution Sacred and Profane}}, from the magazine ''Enquiry'' (1944); and {{w|Karl Shapiro|Karl_Shapiro}}{{s}} article {{qq|On the Revival of Anarchism}}, from the magazine ''{{w|Liberation|Liberation_(magazine)|Liberation (magazine)}}'' (1961).

{{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' has 570 pages. It begins with a Foreword and ends with an essay called {{qq|Anarchism: The Method of Individualisation}} by the editors. The rest of the book is divided into seven sections containing 63 passages.

{{tab}}{{qq|Defining Anarchism}} contains extracts from {{popup|D. Novak|American political scientist Derry Novak (born 1919)}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Place of Anarchism in the History of Political Thought|http://www.ditext.com/novak/anarchism.html|Full text at Digital Text International}}}}, from the magazine ''{{w|The Review of Politics|The_Review_of_Politics}}'' (1958); {{w|John Mackay|John_Henry_Mackay|John Henry Mackay}}{{s}} novel {{l|''The Anarchists''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-henry-mackay-the-anarchists-a-picture-of-civilization-at-the-close-of-the-nineteenth-centu|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1891); {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|Whither the Libertarian Movement?|https://libcom.org/files/Vanguard%20(Vol.%201,%20No.%205,%20January%201933).pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}}}}, from the magazine {{l|''Vanguard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard|Libcom.org article}} (1933); [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]{{s}} pamphlet ''Railways and Society'' (1943)*; {{popup|James Estey|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} book {{l|''Revolutionary Syndicalism''|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1913); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Autobiography of a Catholic Anarchist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1954); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} {{qq|{{l|Reply|https://www.commentary.org/articles/paul-goodman/pornography-censorship/|Full text at Commentary}}}}, to {{l|Richard Lichtman|https://web.archive.org/web/20180131013543/https://www.wi.edu/psyd-faculty-richard-lichtman|Biography at the Wright Institute via the Wayback Machine}} on pornography and censorship from the magazine ''{{w|Commentary|Commentary_(magazine)|Commentary (magazine)}}'' (1961).

{{tab}}{{qq|Criticising Socialism}}—''authoritarian'' socialism, that is—contains extracts from {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|State Socialism and Anarchism|https://archive.org/details/statesocialisman00tuck|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}}, from his magazine ''{{w|Liberty|Liberty_(1881–1908)|Liberty (1881-1908)}}'' (1886)* and his book
{{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1893); {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Slavery of Our Times''|https://archive.org/details/slaveryourtimes00tolsiala|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1900); {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}{{s}} books {{l|''Federalism, Socialism and Antitheologism''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/various/reasons-of-state.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1867)* and ''The Knouto-Germanic Empire and the Social Revolution'' (1871)*, and some minor works of the same period from {{w|K. J. Kenafick|Kenneth_Kenafick|Kenneth Kenafick}}{{s}} book {{l|''Marxism, Freedom and the State''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/mf-state/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1950); [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} book {{l|''My Further Disillusionment in Russia''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-my-further-disillusionment-in-russia|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1924); the {{sc|anarchy}} Editorial {{qq|[[Anarchy 3/Moving with the times … but not in step|Moving with the Times {{e}} but Not in Step]]}} from [[Anarchy 3|{{sc|anarchy}} 3]] (May 1961); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book ''{{w|People or Personnel|People_or_Personnel}}'' (1965).

{{tab}}{{qq|Philosophical Foundations}} contains extracts from {{w|Adin Ballou|Adin_Ballou}}{{s}} {{l|''Non-Resistance in Relation to Human Government''|https://archive.org/details/Non-resistanceInRelationToHumanGovernments|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1839)*; {{w|Nicolas Berdyaev|Nikolai_Berdyaev|Nikolai Berdyaev}}{{s}} book ''Slavery and Freedom'' (1944); {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1845)*; {{w|William Godwin|William_Godwin}}{{s}} {{l|''Political Justice''|http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/godwin-an-enquiry-concerning-political-justice-in-2-vols|Full text at the Online Library of Liberty}} (1793); {{q|{{w|Stephen Andrews|Stephen_Pearl_Andrews|Stephen Pearl Andrews}}|r}} book {{l|''The Science of Society''|http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm|Full text at anarchism.net}} (1852); and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]{{s}} pamphlets {{l|''Anarchist Communism''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchist-communism-its-basis-and-principles|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1887)*, {{l|''Anarchist Morality''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchist-morality|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1891)*, and {{l|''Anarchy'': ''Its Philosophy and Ideal''|http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchism-its-philosophy-and-ideal|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1896)*.

{{p|377}}{{tab}}{{qq|Anarchism on the Attack}} contains extracts from {{w|Lysander Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}{{s}} {{l|''No Treason''|http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spooner-no-treason-no-i-1867|Full text at the Online Library of Liberty}} (1867); {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Relation of the State to the Individual|http://fair-use.org/benjamin-tucker/instead-of-a-book/relation-of-the-state-to-the-individual|Full text at the Fair Use Repository}}}}, from his magazine ''{{w|Liberty|Liberty_(1881–1908)|Liberty (1881-1908)}}'' (1890)* and {{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}}; {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}; {{popup|John Beverley Robinson|American anarchist (1853–1923)}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Economics of Liberty''|https://archive.org/details/economicsofliber00robi|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1916); Frank Lanham{{s}} article {{qq|Two Kinds of Unionism}} from the magazine {{l|''Why''?|https://libcom.org/library/why|Full text at libcom.org}} (1947); {{w|Sam Weiner|Sam_Dolgoff|Sam Dolgoff}}{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''Ethics and American Unionism''|https://libcom.org/library/ethics-american-unionism-sam-dolgoff|Full text at libcom.org}} (1958); [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''Law and Authority''|https://archive.org/details/lawauthorityanar00kropuoft|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1882); and [[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]]{{s}} book {{l|''Authority and Delinquency in the Modern State''|https://libcom.org/library/authority-delinquency-alex-comfort|Full text at libcom.org}} (1950).

{{tab}}{{qq|Constructive Anarchism}} contains extracts from {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''Equitable Commerce''|https://archive.org/details/equitablecommerc00warr|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1846); {{w|Charles Dana|Charles_Anderson_Dana|Charles Anderson Dana}}{{s}} articles {{qq|{{l|Proudhon and His Bank of the People|https://archive.org/details/proudhonandhisb00danagoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}}, from the {{w|New York ''Tribune''|New-York_Tribune|New-York Tribune}} (1849)*; [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''What is Communist Anarchism''?|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1929)*; {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|Decentralisation and Socialism|https://libcom.org/library/decentralization-socialism-senex|Full text at libcom.org}}}}, from the magazine {{l|''Vanguard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard|Libcom.org article}} (1938); {{w|Rudolf Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker}}{{s}} book {{l|''Anarcho-Syndicalism''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rudolf-rocker-anarchosyndicalism|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1938); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Autobiography of a Catholic Anarchist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1954); {{w|Dorothy Day|Dorothy_Day}}{{s}} book ''{{w|The Long Loneliness|The_Long_Loneliness}}'' (1952); [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} ''{{w|''People and Personnel''|People_or_Personnel|People or Personnel}}'' (1965); and [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]]{{s}} articles {{qq|[[Anarchy_62/Anarchism as a theory of organisation|Anarchism as a Theory of Organisation]]}} and {{qq|[[Anarchy 7/Adventure Playground: a parable of anarchy|Adventure Playground]]}}, from [[Anarchy 62|{{sc|anarchy}} 62]] (April 1966) and [[Anarchy 7|{{sc|anarchy}} 7]] (September 1961).

{{tab}}{{qq|The Anarchists on Education}} contains extracts from {{w|Herbert Read|Herbert_Read}}{{s}} books ''Education through Art'' (1943) and ''Education for Peace'' (1949); {{w|Francisco Ferrer|Francesc_Ferrer_i_Guàrdia|Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Origins and Ideals of the Modern School''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/francisco-ferrer-the-origin-and-ideals-of-the-modern-school|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1908)*; {{l|Bayard Boyesen|http://margins.fair-use.org/note/Bayard_Boyesen|Biography at the Fair Use Repository}}{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''The Modern School''|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/ferrer/boyesen/boyesen.html|Full text at Anarchy Archives}} (1911)*; {{w|William Godwin|William_Godwin}}{{s}} books {{l|''The Enquirer''|https://archive.org/details/enquirer00godwgoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1797) and ''{{l|Political Justice|https://web.archive.org/web/20170207024507/https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/g/godwin/william/enquiry/complete.html|Full text at eBooks@Adelaide via the Wayback Machine}}'' (1793); [[Author:Tony Gibson|Tony Gibson]]{{s}} pamphlet ''Youth for Freedom'' (1951); {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} {{l|''Equitable Commerce''|https://archive.org/details/equitablecommerc00warr|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1846); [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book [[Anarchy 24|''The Community of Scholars'']] (1962); and {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}}{{s}} essays {{qq|{{l|The School at Yasnaya Polyana|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Yasnaya_Polyana_School|Full text at Wikisource}}}} and {{qq|{{l|Are the Peasant Children to Learn to Write from Us?|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Who_Should_Learn_Writing_of_Whom;_Peasant_Children_of_Us,_or_We_of_Peasant_Children%3F|Full text at Wikisource}}}}*

{{tab}}{{qq|How Sound is Anarchism?}}—consisting of passages attacking anarchism—contains extracts from {{w|Bertrand Russell|Bertrand_Russell}}{{s}} book {{l|''Roads to Freedom''|https://archive.org/details/roadstofreedomso00russuoft|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1918)*; {{w|Georgi Plekhanov|Georgi_Plekhanov}}{{s}} book {{l|''Anarchism and Socialism''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1895/anarch/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1894)*; {{w|Bernard Shaw|George_Bernard_Shaw|George Bernard Shaw}}{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''The Impossibilities of Anarchism''|https://archive.org/details/impossibilitieso00shawuoft|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1893); {{w|Frédéric Bastiat|Frédéric_Bastiat|Frédéric Bastiat}}{{s}} {{l|''Essays in Political Economy''|http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basEss.html|Full text at the Library of Economics and Liberty}} (1874); two letters from {{l|Hugo Bilgram|http://margins.fair-use.org/note/Hugo_Bilgram|Biography at the Fair Use Repository}} to {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} magazine ''{{w|Liberty|Liberty_(1881–1908)|Liberty (1881–1908)}}'' (1890)*, from Tucker{{s}} {{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}}; {{popup|James Estey|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} {{l|''Revolutionary Syndicalism''|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1913); {{w|Aylmer Maude|Aylmer_and_Louise_Maude|Aylmer and Louise Maude}}{{s}} {{l|''Life of Tolstoy''|https://archive.org/details/lifeoftolstoy01mauduoft|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1918 and {{l|1928|https://archive.org/details/lifetolstoy00maudgoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}}); {{w|Karl Marx|Karl_Marx}}{{s}} attack on {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}} in {{l|''The German Ideology''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1846)*, as summarised in {{w|Sidney Hook|Sidney_Hook}}{{s}} book ''From Hegel to Marx'' (1962); and {{l|D. H. Monro|http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100206529|Oxford Reference: David Hector Monro}}{{s}} book ''Godwin{{s}} Moral Philosophy'' (1953).

{{tab}}General discussion of the books must unfortunately begin with general criticism. My first criticism is of their bibliographical and biographical apparatus. In both books—though ''The Anarchists'' is the worst offender—the notes about the sources of nearly half the passages are inadequate, and in too many cases they are inaccurate as well.

{{p|378}}{{tab}}My next criticism is of the balance of the books. ''The Anarchists'' is the worst offender again, because Horowitz has made a highly personal choice of passages, which has led to many bad ones being included and many good ones being excluded. He tries to excuse {{qq|obvious omissions}} on the grounds that the book {{qq|when initially delivered to the publisher was much longer,}} and he adds that he has {{qq|tried to compensate for the gaps and defects by providing a [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Postscript]] of the questions most often asked of anarchists, the kinds of answers they in turn most frequently provide, and finally, my own beliefs on these matters of controversy.}} It{{s}} a good try, but it won{{t}} do. If an editor has to cut an anthology to fit it into the available space, the first thing to go should surely be his own contribution. As it is, Horowitz{{s}} Introduction and Postscript between them take up a tenth of the book, and, although they are interesting, more contributions by anarchists would have been more interesting.

{{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' has many more and much shorter passages, and manages to give a much wider view of anarchist thought, but there is still some distortion. Why is there nothing written before 1793, when the first passage in the book traces the anarchist tradition back to {{w|ancient Greece|Ancient_Greece|Ancient Greece}}, and when even Horowitz goes back to 1772? Why is there nothing from outside Europe and North America? Why are there three passages about religious anarchism, and none about antireligious anarchism? Why are there ''eight'' passages about authoritarian socialism, and ''eleven'' about education?

{{tab}}To begin with ''The Anarchists''. Horowitz{{s}} Preface is promising. He says that he speaks {{qq|not as an anarchist but as a social scientist.}} He considers that {{qq|the anarchist tradition is a particularly fruitful and frightfully neglected source in the common human effort to overcome manipulation,}} and he adds that his {{qq|sympathies for the anarchists shall not be disguised.}} He agrees that anarchism is not what it was once, but {{qq|the collapse of anarchism as a social movement does not signify its annihilation as an intellectual force.}} Anarchism may have failed, but {{qq|the anarchist does not live in terms of criteria of success, and neither should his views be judged in such terms,}} for {{qq|we inhabit a world of dismal success and heroic failure.}} He comments that {{qq|this sort of orientation may not qualify me as a ''bona fide'' anarchist, but it is my belief that at least it does not disqualify me from writing on and introducing the reader to the wealth of anarchist literature.}} No indeed.

{{tab}}After this, his Introduction is disappointing. It is full of the sort of abstract generalisation that disfigures much modern sociological writing—and disfigured {{w|James Joll|James_Joll}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Anarchists|http://www.ditext.com/joll/anarchists.html|Full text at Digital Text International}}'' as well. Because of this, the good things he has to say are obscured.

{{tab}}The Introduction also contains a {{qq|typology of anarchist strategies and beliefs,}} which is unfortunately never heard of again. Horowitz distinguishes eight varieties of anarchism; ''utilitarian'' (mentioning {{w|Helvétius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius|Claude Adrien Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot|Denis Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin|William Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon|Claude Henri de Rouvroy, comte de Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' mentioning {{w|Münzer|Thomas_Müntzer|Thomas Müntzer}}, {{w|Sismondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi|Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier|Charles Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}), ''syndicalist'' (mentioning {{w|Pelloutier|Fernand_Pelloutier|Fernand Pelloutier}}), ''collectivist'' (mentioning Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''conspiratorial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most|Johann Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)|Émile Henry}}), ''communist'' (mentioning {{w|Malatesta|Errico_Malatesta|Errico Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky|Sergey Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero|Carlo Cafiero}}), ''individualist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner|Max Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren|Josiah Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner|Lysander Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker|Benjamin Tucker}}), and ''pacifist'' (mentioning {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi|Mahatma Gandhi}}). This is reasonable enough, though there are some oddities. Six of the people mentioned weren{{t}} anarchists at all (Münzer, Helvétius, Diderot, Sismondi, Saint-Simon, and Gandhi); two of the varieties are surely wrongly named—Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''utilitarian'', in the normal sense of the pragmatic tradition from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham|Jeremy Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill|John Stuart Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian Society|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Welfare State|Welfare_state|Welfare state}}, but ''rationalist,'' interested not in the greatest happiness of the greatest number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''conspiratorial,'' like many other anarchists, but ''terrorist,'' interested not in conspiracy for its own sake but in conspiracy to murder. And is there not some confusion over Bakunin, who wanted an insurrection of workers as well as peasants and called himself a ''collectivist,'' and over Kropotkin, who always called himself a ''communist''?

{{tab}}Horowitz{{s}} [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Postscript]] was published in [[Anarchy 50|{{sc|anarchy}} 50]], and readers will remember it as a useful survey of some of the problems of anarchism—the liberative potentiality of the state, the utopian, metaphysical, destructive and reactionary tendencies of anarchism, and the personal peculiarities of anarchists—but it really has no place in this book.

{{tab}}{{qq|The Theory}} contains some of the basic texts of anarchism, but readers who are unfamiliar with the movement should have been told about the passages which are not really anarchist, or even anarchic, or else they might get a rather confused impression. The contributions by Diderot, Tolstoy, {{w|Camus|Albert_Camus|Albert Camus}}, and {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau|Henry David Thoreau}} have all been found valuable by anarchists, but they are hardly as central as those by Malatesta, Proudhon, Godwin, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Tucker, {{w|Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker|Rudolf Rocker}}, [[Author:Emma Goldman|Goldman]], and Stirner. {{w|Read|Herbert_Read|Herbert Read}}{{s}} {{popup|essay|“Anarchism and Capitalist Society”}} is a useful summary, and the letters of {{w|Sacco and Vanzetti|Sacco_and_Vanzetti}} provide a tragic glimpse of living—and dying—anarchism. The extract from {{w|Hocking|William_Ernest_Hocking|William Ernest Hocking}}{{s}} forgotten {{popup|book|Man and the State}} is diligent but dull, and {{w|Schilpp|Paul_Arthur_Schilpp|Paul Arthur Schilpp}}{{s}} {{popup|essay|“In Defence of Socrates’ Judges”}} is a repetition of what {{w|Randolph Bourne|Randolph_Bourne}} said much better during the {{w|First World War|World_War_I|World War I}}—especially in {{l|''The War and the Intellectuals''|http://bigeye.com/thewar.htm|Full text at BigEye via the Wayback Machine}} (1917).

{{tab}}What are inexplicable and inexcusable are the contributions by {{w|Conrad|Joseph_Conrad|Joseph Conrad}} and {{w|Dostoevski|Fyodor_Dostoyevsky|Fyodor Dostoyevsky}}. Conrad{{s}} {{l|novel|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/974|Full text at Project Gutenberg}} was drawn ostensibly from the {{w|Greenwich Park Affair|Royal_Observatory,_Greenwich#Bomb_attack_of_1894|Royal Observatory, Greenwich: Bomb attack of 1894}} of 1894, but it is actually a grotesque misrepresentation of the British or any other anarchist movement. Conrad himself said in the Preface that his original feeling about anarchism was of {{qq|the criminal futility of the whole thing, doctrine, action, mentality,}} and of {{qq|the contemptible aspect of the half-crazy pose as of a brazen cheat exploiting the poignant miseries and passionate credulities of a mankind always so tragically eager for self-destruction.}} Incidentally, it is worth remembering that the {{qq|Secret Agent}} of the title is an unsuccessful agent provocateur who arranges the explosion to discredit the anarchists, and that the {{qq|Professor}} of the extract given here is an unbalanced nihilist who gives explosives to anyone who asks—neither of them coming near Samuels, the mystery {{p|380}}man of the Greenwich Park Affair (or Coulon, who played the same part in the {{w|Walsall Affair|Walsall_Anarchists|Walsall Anarchists}} of 1892). As for Dostoevski{{s}} {{l|novel|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/600|Full text at Project Gutenberg}}, it is little more than a psychotic scream of hate against the ideas of humanity, progress, reason, and hope, which are surely essential to most kinds of anarchism. It would be interesting to know how it ever got into the book.

{{tab}}{{qq|The Practice}} contains far fewer useful passages. The historical section, as I said, is very uneven. {{w|Gerald Brenan|Gerald_Brenan}}{{s}} {{l|''Spanish Labyrinth''|https://archive.org/details/spanishlabyrinth001334mbp|Full text at the Internet Archive}} and [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]{{s}} {{l|''Anarchism''|http://rebels-library.org/files/woodcock_anarchism.pdf|Full text at the Rebel Studies Library (PDF)}} need no introduction, since their general high quality has already been noted in {{sc|anarchy}}. Nor does {{w|Hugh Thomas|Hugh_Thomas,_Baron_Thomas_of_Swynnerton}}{{s}} ''Spanish Civil War,'' since its low quality has also been noted. Richard Hostetter{{s}} ''Italian Socialist Movement'' and Samuel Yellen{{s}} ''American Labour Struggles'' contain a great deal of information, so much indeed that it is easy to get confused. {{w|Barbara Tuchman|Barbara_W._Tuchman|Barbara W. Tuchman}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Anarchists|https://archive.org/details/TheProudTower/page/n79/mode/2up|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}} (originally published in the ''{{w|Atlantic Monthly|The_Atlantic|The Atlantic}},'' and now incorporated in her book ''{{l|The Proud Tower|https://archive.org/details/TheProudTower|Full text at the Internet Archive}}'') is another matter altogether, being full of sensational nonsense—{{w|Reclus|Élisée_Reclus|Élisée Reclus}} is {{qq|the soothsayer of the movement}} and Malatesta is {{qq|the firebrand of anarchism}} (who—of course—escapes from {{w|Lampedusa|Lampedusa}} {{qq|in a rowboat during a storm}}, and—of course—is shot at {{qq|by an Italian fellow-anarchist of the extreme ''anti-organizzatori'' wing}}{{ref|aster2|**}}), and most of the passage describes the terrorist wave of the 1890s with a wealth of melodramatic detail.{{ref|dagger|†}} [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Berkman]]{{s}} [[Anarchy 81/Kronstadt diary|diary]] is certainly outstanding material for the history of the {{w|Kronstadt Rising|Kronstadt_rebellion|Kronstadt rebellion}}, but by itself it gives a rather narrow view of a complex episode.

{{tab}}The {{qq|sociological}} section has little sociological about it. {{w|Sorel|Georges_Sorel|Georges Sorel}} was hardly a social scientist; nor was he one of {{qq|the classical anarchists,}} as Horowitz claims (he ought to know, too, since he has written a whole book on Sorel, called ''Radicalism and the Revolt against Reason''). {{l|''Reflections on Violence''|https://libcom.org/files/Sorel-Reflections-on-Violence-ed-Jennings.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}} is always interesting to read, but for some reason the passage here is not the one in which Sorel deals with the myth of the general strike—his most important idea. [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]] is much admired by many anarchists, but I must say I find his writing quite antipathetic, and the passage here quite absurd (to use one of his favourite words); but other readers may well think otherwise. {{popup|Presthus|American educator Robert Vance Presthus (1917–2001)}} is a real sociologist, and his {{popup|book|The Organisational Society}} seems to be similar to {{w|William Whyte|William_H._Whyte|William H. Whyte}}{{s}} better-known ''{{w|Organisation Man|The_Organization_Man|The Organization Man}}''—not really anarchist, but certainly relevant to modern anarchism. {{w|Selznick|Philip_Selznick|Philip Selznick}} rightly apologises for his {{popup|essay|“Revolution Sacred and Profane”}}, and it would really have been kinder to leave it out. {{w|Shapiro|Karl_Shapiro|Karl Shapiro}}{{s}} {{popup|essay|“On the Revival of Anarchism”}} isn{{t}} really about the revival of anarchism so much as the increasing attraction of libertarian ideas, with special reference to {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi|Mahatma Gandhi}}, and it is a weak ending for an anthology described {{p|381}}by the publisher as {{qq|a ringing roll-call of the great non-conformists and dissenters}}.

{{tab}}Turning to ''Patterns of Anarchy,'' Krimerman and Perry remark in the Foreword that {{qq|the peace movements, the civil rights struggles, the agitation of students for unshackled education have evinced vague feelings of affinity to anarchism,}} and that disillusionment with Communism {{qq|has raised further interest in left-wing alternatives to Marxism.}} Although most of the renewed interest in anarchism is not serious, they {{qq|are determined to take anarchism seriously,}} for they {{qq|have become more and more amazed at how many perceptive social theorists have spoken in the anarchist tradition,}} and they {{qq|have tried to restore anarchism to its rightful place as more than a rejection of politics, indeed as a rewarding full-scale theory of human conduct.}}

{{tab}}There is much less detailed criticism to be made of the passages they have selected. They have had the help of the {{w|Freedom Press|Freedom_Press}} in {{w|London}} and of the {{w|Libertarian League|Libertarian_League}} in {{w|New York|New_YorK_City|New York City}}, and they have made good use of it. I must say that I am sorry to see so little from Bakunin and Malatesta, who I think are underrated, and so much from {{w|Berdyaev|Nikolai_Berdyaev|Nikolai Berdyaev}} and Paul Goodman, who I think are overrated. But I am glad to see proper attention given to the neglected early American anarchists ({{w|Ballou|Adin_Ballou|Adin Ballou}}, Warren, {{w|Andrews|Stephen_Pearl_Andrews|Stephen Pearl Andrews}}, and Spooner), and to at least some of the contemporary English anarchists (Herbert Read, [[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]], [[Author:Tony Gibson|Tony Gibson]], and [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]]).

{{tab}}There are a few detailed criticisms to make. {{popup|Novak|American political scientist Derry Novak (born 1919)}}{{s}} {{l|essay|http://www.ditext.com/novak/anarchism.html|Full text at Digital Text International}} is a weak opening for such an ambitious work, and Novak is hardly {{qq|one of the few scholars}} to deal with the origins of anarchism, which is after all one of the commonest preoccupations of anarchist scholars, from Kropotkin onwards. It should have been explained that {{popup|Estey|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} {{l|study|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}} of syndicalism is confused about more than just Proudhon{{s}} relationship with anarchism and syndicalism, above all in giving far too much prominence to the writings of Sorel. It should also have been explained that {{w|Dana|Charles_Anderson_Dana|Charles Anderson Dana}}, though an admirer of Proudhon{{s}} economic ideas, later became an extreme reactionary newspaper editor, as well as {{w|Lincoln|Abraham_Lincoln|Abraham Lincoln}}{{s}} {{w|Assistant Secretary of War|United_States_Assistant_Secretary_of_War|United States Assistant Secretary of War}} during the {{w|American Civil War|American_Civil_War}}.

{{tab}}Another very useful feature is the final section—{{qq|How Sound is Anarchism?}}—but this is to some extent spoilt by the large claims made for it. Krimerman and Perry describe it as {{qq|far more than a sample of the serious efforts to evaluate the anarchist position,}} and they even claim that, {{qq|with little exaggeration, we could offer them as the only efforts of this sort.}} On the contrary, this is a huge exaggeration. Take for example the statement that there aren{{t}} {{qq|anything approaching comprehensive critical works on such first-rank libertarian thinkers as Berdyaev, Bakunin, and the individualist anarchists.}} Berdyaev was hardly a libertarian, or a first-rank thinker of any kind, but there are several books about him published just after the {{w|last war|World_War_II|World War II}}. There are also several books about Bakunin, as well as important contemporary criticisms by {{w|Herzen|Alexander_Herzen|Alexander Herzen}} and {{w|Marx|Karl_Marx|Karl Marx}}. There is a book about Max Stirner, as well as Marx{{s}} attack in {{l|''The German Ideology''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}'','' which is after all given in this section—though in {{w|Sidney Hook|Sidney_Hook}}{{s}} words, {{qq|For {{p|382}}some reason, rather than that of Marx himself.}}

{{tab}}There is in fact a much larger body of criticism of anarchism than Krimerman and Perry realise. They give Marx{{s}} attack on Stirner, but not his attack of Proudhon in {{l|''The Poverty of Philosophy''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/poverty-philosophy/|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1847), though this is included in the bibliography. They give {{w|Plekhanov|Georgi_Plekhanov|Georgi Plekhanov}}{{s}} {{l|''Anarchism and Socialism''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1895/anarch/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}, but not the earlier works by Marx ({{l|''Indifference in Political Matters''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/01/indifferentism.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}) and {{w|Engels|Friedrich_Engels|Friedrich Engels}} ({{l|''On Authority''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}), or the later works by {{w|Lenin|Vladimir_Lenin|Vladimir Lenin}} ({{l|''The State and the Revolution''|https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}) and {{w|Stalin|Joseph_Stalin|Joseph Stalin}} ({{l|''Anarchism or Socialism''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}). They give {{l|Monro|http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100206529|Oxford Reference: David Hector Monro}}{{s}} modern {{popup|criticism|Godwin’s Moral Philosophy}} of Godwin, but not {{w|Hazlitt|William_Hazlitt|William Hazlitt}}{{s}} contemporary criticism in {{l|''The Spirit of the Age''|https://archive.org/details/aea8982.0001.001.umich.edu|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1825). They don{{t}} mention the chapters on Godwin, Proudhon and Bakunin in {{w|Alexander Gray|Alexander_Gray_(poet)}}{{s}} {{l|''The Socialist Tradition''|https://mises.org/library/socialist-tradition-moses-lenin|Full text at Mises Institute}} (1946) and in {{w|John Bowle|John_Edward_Bowle|John Edward Bowle}}{{s}} ''Politics and Opinion in the Nineteenth Century'' (1954). They don{{t}} seem to be aware of the long list of 19th-century studies of anarchism mentioned in {{w|Eltzbacher|Paul_Eltzbacher|Paul Eltzbacher}}{{s}} {{l|''Anarchism''|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/eltzbacher/eltzbacher.html|Full text at Anarchy Archives}} (1900). They don{{t}} mention the Epilogue of Woodcock{{s}} ''Anarchism'' or the Conclusion of Joll{{s}} ''The Anarchists''. And they don{{t}} even mention the Postscript of Horowitz{{s}} ''The Anarchists''.

{{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' is clearly a better book than ''The Anarchists,'' though the latter does quote more basic anarchist texts at length, and is of course much cheaper. The real trouble is that neither book is as good as it could and should have been. Horowitz has a great deal of ability, and Krimerman and Perry have done a great deal of work, but somehow they have all missed their opportunity, and there is still room for a really good anthology of anarchism. In ideal circumstances both books would be almost valueless, because even the best anthology is only a second-best in comparison with original material, and these are far from the best. But the circumstances are not ideal, and in fact both books are extremely valuable, because even the worst anthology is better than nothing—and apart from them, there is almost nothing of the original material of anarchist literature in print.

{{tab}}This is indeed one of the most serious defects of the English-speaking anarchist movement today. Many important anarchist works have been written in, or translated into, English at one time or another, but very few are still obtainable. I wonder how many readers of {{sc|anarchy}} have ever read any book by any major anarchist writer, and how many of those who have done so actually own one. It is possible to get hold of them, but it isn{{t}} easy. {{w|Winstanley|Gerrard_Winstanley|Gerrard Winstanley}} and Godwin were reprinted in the United States and Canada during the {{popup|war|1939–1945}}, but were soon out of print again. The old translation of Stirner by {{w|Steven Byington|Steven_T._Byington|Steven T. Byington}} was reprinted in the United States a few years ago, but it has aready gone. The old translations of Proudhon by Benjamin Tucker—and Tucker{{s}} own ''Instead of a Book''—have been out of print for years. Bakunin{{s}} fragmentary output has long been obtainable only in digests, and Kropotkin{{s}} enormous output only through a few pamphlets. Some of Tolstoy{{s}} tracts are still in print, but mostly the religious rather than the political ones. Emma Goldman and Rudolf Rocker have virtually disappeared, and the same was true of Malatesta until Vernon Richards rescued him last year. Many more have com{{p|383}}pletely disappeared. Krimerman and Perry remark that {{qq|there is a need for full new editions of the best works of Proudhon, Tucker, Kropotkin, and many others, whom the reader can only begin to appreciate here.}} There is indeed, but until then these two anthologies will give their readers at least some idea of what the major anarchist writers are like.

{{tab}}In the present circumstances, then, we must be grateful for both books, and they are certainly good value for only a guinea or so. But we must also consider the dangers of these circumstances. We have a weekly and a monthly paper, a new pamphlet every year or so, occasional reprints of old pamphlets (Berkman and Malatesta being the most recent), and very occasional books (such as Richard{{s|r}} {{l|''Malatesta''|https://libcom.org/files/Malatesta%20-%20Life%20and%20Ideas.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}}). Apart from that, there are miscellaneous second-hand books and pamphlets in curculation, and occasional magazines appearing at irregular intervals. That{{s}} about all, because that{{s}} about all we can afford. The trouble is that there are not only old things which ought to be reprinted again, but also new things which ought to be printed or reprinted for the first time. It is important to remember the past, as these anthologies remind us, but not at the price of forgetting the future. In practice, what happens is that we are stuck in the present, running as fast as we can to stay in the same place, working so hard to fill up our papers and keep them going from week to week and from month to month, that we have no time or energy (or money) for anything else. Partly because of this, most of what is printed is disappointingly bad—most of the articles in {{sc|{{w|freedom|Freedom_(newspaper)|Freedom (newspaper)}}}} and {{sc|anarchy}} are best forgotten, but the good ones are forgotten too. We have had to wait for ''Patterns of Anarchy'' to see a few of the valuable articles disinterred, and this is the sort of work we should be doing ourselves; it is not enough to bind up back numbers or annual selections.

{{tab}}It is true that if we pay too much attention to literature we may neglect other important things—direct contact with appropriate people, for example, and direct action in appropriate places—and it is true that both these anthologies, like most literature, stress the theory of anarchism at the expense of the practice. But no one can say that we are all so active that we have no time to preserve the literature of the past or create the literature of the future. Literature is after all the main voice of a movement. These anthologies may be only a faint echo, but then our own efforts are hardly more than a whisper. If we don{{t}} like what people write about us, the remedy is in our hands. Both the anthologies refer to and result from the recent revival of interest in anarchism. It is a pity that this revival has taken place almost in spite of, rather than because of, what we have said or done. It is time that we took advantage of it, and raised our voice again.

-----

<font size="2">{{hang|{{note|aster|*}} I have asterisked the passages which have something wrong with them, and this will give an idea of the problem; there is no room here to list all the mistakes in detail.

{{note|aster2|**}} These two stories have been demolished by [[Author:V.R.|Vernon Richards]] in his article {{qq|[[Anarchy 46/Two views on 'The Anarchists' 2|Anarchism and the Historians]]}} ([[Anarchy 46|{{sc|anarchy}} 46]]) and his book {{l|''Malatesta'': ''His Life and Ideas''|https://libcom.org/files/Malatesta%20-%20Life%20and%20Ideas.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}} (1965).

{{note|dagger|†}} {{w|Thomas Masaryk|Tomáš_Garrigue_Masaryk|Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk}}{{s}} ''{{l|Spirit of Russia|https://archive.org/details/spiritrussiastu00masagoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}}'' may have been a good book when it was published, nearly half a century ago, but it has been completely superseded by {{w|Franco Venturi|Franco_Venturi}}{{s}} ''{{l|Russian Populism|https://archive.org/details/rootsofrevolutio008262mbp|Full text at the Internet Archive}}''—published in this country as ''Roots of Revolution'' (1960).

}}</font>

</div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Anarchist anthologies}}
[[Category:Anarchist history]]
[[Category:Literary criticism]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 70/Libertarian Psychiatry: an introduction to existential analysis

2021-10-11T19:43:12Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 70 (Vol 6 No 12) DECEMBER 1966]]<br>Libertarian Psychiatry: an introduction to existential analysis
| author = Peter Ford
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 70]]
| next = [[../Anarchist anthologies|Anarchist anthologies]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|353}}
<div style="text-align:justify;"><font size="5">'''Libertarian Psychiatry:'''<br>'''an introduction to'''<br>'''existential analysis'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Peter Ford|PETER FORD]]'''</font>

{{p|s1|n}}{{sc|This article aims to draw attention}} to the work of a group of British psychiatrists of whom the best known are {{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}} and {{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}. They have achieved some notoriety in this country because of the extent of their divergence, both in theory and practice, from current psychiatric orthodoxy—and particularly as a consequence of their references to the prevalent {{qq|treatment}} of the mentally ill as {{qq|violence}}. As a teacher, I am not qualified to attempt more than an outline of their ideas as understood by me, after reading their books and articles and some related studies. But the implications of the work of the British existentialist group extend beyond the limits of psychiatry—and the very generality of their assertions invites a response from the layman. Writing of the process which in their view results in the ultimate invalidation of persons through the labelling of them as {{qq|mad}}, Laing asks: {{qq|{{e|l}}what function does this procedure serve for the civic order? These questions are only beginning to be asked, much less answered. {{e}} Socially, this work must now move to further understanding {{e}} of the meaning of all this within the larger context of the civic order of society—that is, of the ''political'' order, of the ways persons exercise control and power over one another.}} (''{{w|New Left Review|New_Left_Review}}'', No. 28.) Anarchism is about just this, and any theory, from whatever discipline, which leads to a questioning of the political order of society should have relevance for us—and we should know something about it.

{{tab}}Dr. Laing has written that his main intellectual indebtedness is to {{qq|the {{w|existential|Existentialism|Existentialism}} tradition}}—{{w|Kierkegaard|Søren_Kierkegaard|Søren Kierkegaard}}, {{w|Jaspers|Karl_Jaspers|Karl Jaspers}}, {{w|Heidegger|Martin_Heidegger|Martin Heidegger}}, {{w|Binswanger|Ludwig_Binswanger|Ludwig Binswanger}}, {{w|Tillich|Paul_Tillich|Paul Tillich}} and {{w|Sartre|Jean-Paul_Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre}}—and of these there is no doubt that Sartre{{s}} influence has been the greatest. The British analysts have clearly worked out their own theoretical basis and in many instances have developed Sartre{{s}} ideas rather than merely adopted them as they stand. I am not certain, for example, how completely Laing and Cooper share Sartre{{s}} total rejection of the concept of {{qq|the unconscious}}. However, their book {{l|''Reason and Violence'': ''A Decade of Sartre{{s}} Philosophy'' 1950-1960|http://laingsociety.org/biblio/randv.htm|Full text at the Laing Society}} (Tavistock, 1964) opens with a complimentary prefatory note from the French philosopher—I believe this is an unusual honour for a book about his ideas—and this ''imprimatur'' suggests that whatever their divergencies, they cannot be basic.

{{tab}}In [[Anarchy 44|{{sc|anarchy}} 44]] J.-P. Sartre is referred to as {{qq|one of the foremost {{p|354}}anarchist moralists}} ([[Author:Ian Vine|Ian Vine]]: {{qq|[[Anarchy 44/The morality of anarchism|The Morality of Anarchism]]}}). This description compares intriguingly with another, made by the socialist {{w|Alasdair MacIntyre|Alasdair_MacIntyre|Alasdair MacIntyre}}, reviewing Sartre{{s}} book ''{{w|The Problem of Method|Search_for_a_Method|Search for a Method}}'' in ''{{w|Peace News|Peace_News}}''. He refers to Sartre as a newly found {{qq|spokesman of genius}} for {{qq|ersatz {{w|bolsheviks|Bolsheviks|Bolsheviks}}}} and {{qq|imitation anarchists}}. Not knowing MacIntyre{{s}} idea of the genuine article, this does not exactly rule the Frenchman out and I believe his work may well justify a place on an anarchist{{s}} book list. Writing with particular reference to Sartre{{s}} recent work, MacIntyre notes that Sartre can offer no bonds, other than reciprocally threatened violence and terror, of sufficient strength to maintain the cohesion of human groups in a world of {{qq|impossibly individualist individuals}}. Perhaps a spokesman for {{w|Stirnerites|Philosophy_of_Max_Stirner|Philosophy of Max Stirner}}? Nevertheless, the potentialities of Sartre{{s}} philosophy as a basis for anarchism are incidental to my purpose here.

{{tab}}The first of four episodes of this essay are intended to create a setting against which existential analysis may be viewed.

{{p|s2|n}}'''EXISTENTIAL FREEDOM'''

{{tab}}{{qq|Man cannot be sometimes slave and sometimes free; he is wholly and forever free, or he is not free at all.}}

<div style="text-align:right;">{{w|Sartre|Jean-Paul_Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre}}: ''{{w|Being and Nothingness|Being_and_Nothingness}}''.</div>

{{tab}}The concept of freedom at the core of existentialism is very different from what I take to be the common understanding of the term. In general usage, a man is free in as much as he can achieve his chosen ends with a minimum of effort. Similarly, a man{{s}} freedom is reduced as the obstacles between his desires and chosen ends are increased. Freedom is regarded as a measurable quantity; one may have a lot or a little of it, and it can be taken away—or even {{qq|given}}. The anarchist{{s}} hypothetical destination, the {{qq|free}} society, may often be thought of in the sense of an harmonious environment in which all removable obstacles between man{{s}} desires and their fulfilment have been eliminated. But for Sartre, man is totally free by reason of his very being as man, and obstacles between desires and chosen ends are of no relevance. To use a favoured existentialist phrase, man is free by ontological necessity. But his freedom rests, within this concept, in his total responsibility in the face of undetermined choice and in his recognition of the inescapable obligation to choose. An intuitive awareness of this responsibility—perhaps provoked by some sort of {{qq|extreme situation}}—gives rise to what Sartre calls {{qq|the anguish of freedom}}. It is our fate to be free. {{qq|{{e|l}}One must always decide for oneself and efforts to shift the burden of responsibility upon others are necessarily self-defeating. Not to choose is also to choose, for even if we deliver our power of decision to others, we are still responsible for having done so. It is always the individual who decides that others will choose for him.}}<ref>Robert G. Olson, ''An Introduction to Existentialism'', New York, Dover Publications, 1962, p. 52.</ref> In so far as we are free in our choices, we {{qq|create}} the obstacles that lie between our project and its fulfilment: {{qq|an insignificant public official in {{w|Mont-de-Marsan|Mont-de-Marsan}} without means may not have the opportunity to go to {{w|New York|New_York_City|New York City}} if that be his ambition. But the obstacles which stand in his way would not exist as obstacles were it not for his free choice of values: in this case, his desire to go {{p|355}}to New York.}}<ref>ibid., p. 105 (a reference to an episode in ''Being and Nothingness'', p. 495).</ref> Even though human freedom, in his view, is total, Sartre admits of a sense in which it may be spoken of in terms of degree. A man may be said to become {{qq|more free}} as his consciousness of total freedom and responsibility increases; and certain situations in life can crystallize this awareness. In an apparently cryptic paragraph in ''Being and Nothingness'' Sartre describes the {{w|German Occupation of France|German_military_administration_in_occupied_France_during_World_War_II|German military administration in occupied France during World War II}} during the last {{w|war|World_War_II|World War II}} as such a situation. {{qq|{{e|l}}the choice that each of us made of his life and his being was an authentic choice because it was made face to face with death, because it could always have been expressed in these terms: {{q|Rather death than{{e|r}}}}.}}<ref>{{w|J.-P. Sartre|Jean-Paul_Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre}}, ''Situations III'', Paris, Gallimard, 1949 (quoted by {{popup|Olson|Robert G. Olson. An Introduction to Existentialism.}}, p. 121).</ref> But the issue is not just one of an increased sense of responsibility for our day-to-day options—for instance in deciding upon a change in occupation, or merely which book to read next; most significantly ''we choose ourselves'', and our day-to-day decisions necessarily reflect this primary choice we have made. We are what we have chosen to be. All our subsequent modes of action are related to this original {{qq|project-of-being}}, {{qq|Freely chosen at the moment one wrenches oneself away from the in-itself to create one{{s}} own world}}<ref>{{popup|Olson|Robert G. Olson}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}, p. 119.</ref> (the in-itself: the world of things). This event I take to be comparable with what R. D. Laing calls {{qq|existential birth}} which, he suggests, is as essential for a fully human existence as the biological birth which it normally follows.{{ref|aster|*}} It is only in relation to this fundamental choice, the individual{{s}} original {{qq|project-of-being}} that his later behaviour can be fully understood. The plausibility of this basic idea is not increased by Sartre{{s}} denial of the division of the self into conscious and unconscious modes; the idea of a toothless infant consciously determining its future lifestyle and purpose is at first thought absurd. But whilst explicitly denying validity to the {{qq|unconscious}} Sartre does separate consciousness into {{qq|reflective}} and {{qq|non-reflective}} levels, and it is at the non-reflective level that this fundamental choice is made. He stresses that this original choice is in no way deliberate: {{qq|This is not because it would be less conscious or less explicit than a deliberation but, on the contrary, because it is the foundation of all deliberation and because {{e}} a deliberation requires an interpretation in terms of an original choice.}}<ref>{{w|J.-P. Sartre|Jean-Paul_Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre}}, {{w|''Being and Nothingness''|Being_and_Nothingness}}, London, Methuen, 1956, pp. 461-2.</ref> The concepts of {{qq|authenticity}} and its approximate opposite {{qq|bad-faith}} are in a sense understandable as judgements (although Sartre claims only to use these terms descriptively) upon the degree of concordance between the choices of our reflective consciousness and our original project-of-being. In a passage which bears directly upon existential analysis he writes that a man {{qq|can make voluntary decisions which are opposed to the fundamental ends which he has chosen. These decisions can be only voluntary—that is, reflective. {{e}} Thus, for example, I can decide to cure myself of {{w|stuttering|Stuttering|Stuttering}}. I can even {{p|256}}succeed in it. {{e}} In fact I can obtain a result by using merely technical methods. {{e}} But these results will only displace the infirmity from which I suffer; another will arise in its place and will in its own way express the total end which I pursue. {{e}} It is the same with these cures as it is with the cure of {{w|hysteria|Hysteria|Hysteria}} by {{w|electric shock treatment|Electroconvulsive_therapy|Electroconvulsive therapy}}. We know that this therapy can effect the disappearance of an hysterical contraction of the leg, but as one will see some time later the contraction will appear in the arm. This is because the hysteria can be cured only as a totality, for it is a total project of the for-itself}}<ref>ibid., pp. 471-75 (quoted by {{popup|Olson|Robert G. Olson}}, p. 121).</ref> (the for-itself: the world of consciousness and intention).

{{tab}}Sartre argues against the {{w|Freudian|Sigmund_Freud|Sigmund Freud}} three-way split of the personality into {{w|id, ego and super-ego|Id,_ego_and_super-ego|Id, ego and super-ego}} and the {{w|psycho{{-}}analytic|Psychoanalysis|Psychoanalysis}} dictum of conscious behaviour as determined by drives, instincts and desires allegedly emanating from the id. As Sartre{{s}} arguments hinge upon his stated belief in man{{s}} ontological freedom, Freud{{s}} project of {{qq|determination by the unconscious}} is met with similar objections to those made against other determinist theories and I need not attempt to summarise them here.<ref>The first part of {{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}{{s}} ''The Self and Others'' is a lucid argument against the basic concepts of traditional psycho-analysis.</ref> The only valid form of therapy is one aimed at discovering an individual{{s}} fundamental project-of-being—and this is the purpose of existential analysis (or psycho-analysis; the prefix seems to be optional). {{qq|The principle of this psycho-analysis is that man is a totality and not a collection; he therefore expresses himself in his totality in the most insignificant and the most superficial aspects of his conduct}} (''Being and Nothingness''). Through the use of a technique or method based on such assumptions the initially {{qq|crazy}} actions of the insane may be made comprehensible—and may even appear {{qq|reasonable}} if a picture of the world in which the patient lives can be assembled.

{{tab}}R. D. Laing has written that {{qq|only by the most outrageous violation of ourselves have we achieved our capacity to live in relative adjustment to a civilisation apparently driven to its own destruction}} and has described the {{qq|normal}} person in the present age as {{qq|a half-crazed creature, more or less adjusted to a mad world}}.<ref>{{qq|Massacre of the Innocents}}, ''{{w|Peace News|Peace_News}}'', 22nd January, 1965.</ref> What is the norm that gives the generally accepted meaning to such relative descriptions as {{qq|mad}}, {{qq|insane}}, {{qq|maladjusted}}? And what is the significance of what is done to the people that are disqualified when measured against this criterion; the people that the mad officials label as {{qq|officially mad}}?

{{p|s3|n}}'''THE INSANE IN A MAD WORLD'''

{{tab}}{{qq|In the context of our present madness that we call normality, sanity, freedom, all our frames of reference are ambiguous and equivocal.}}

{{r|{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}: ''The Divided Self''.}}

{{tab}}In 1965 there were 160,000 people in mental hospitals in Britain and an estimated 200,000 psychotics in the community. Nearly half of all hospital beds are occupied by the mentally ill. In a television programme on mental health<ref>{{w|BBC}} {{qq|{{w|Panorama|Panorama_(TV_series)}}}} on {{qq|Mental Health}}, 6th June, 1966.</ref> the number of the mentally ill in Britain was given as half a million. The televised psychiatrist suggested that there were four main categories of illness: people with mental deformity, {{p|357}}old people with {{qq|mental equipment in decline}} ({{e}} perhaps old people with nowhere else to go?{{ref|aster2|**}}), people with physiologically normal mental equipment but with acquired neurotic patterns, and lastly, victims of {{qq|bio{{-}}chemical illness}}—in his words, {{qq|Struck down out of the blue}}. This fourth category perhaps reflects, more than anything else, the currently favoured styles of treatment!

{{tab}}By far the largest group is the third—the {{qq|neurotics and psychotics}}. Among these {{qq|{{w|schizophrenia|Schizophrenia|Schizophrenia}}}} is the most common diagnosis. {{qq|In most European countries about one per cent of the population go to hospital at least once in their lifetime with the diagnosis schizophrenia.}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|The Anti{{-}}Hospital: An Experiment in Psychiatry}}, {{w|''New Society''|New_Society}}, 11th March, 1965.</ref> But what meaning can be given to these statistics and assessments without a standard of sanity or madness? {{qq|Definitions of mental health propounded by the experts usually reduce to the notion of conformism, to a set of more or less arbitrarily posited social norms.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|Violence in Psychiatry}}, ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 8, Summer, 1965.</ref> The labelling of people as mad can have the social function of defining the area of {{qq|sanity}}—perhaps there is a parallel with {{w|Durkheim|Émile_Durkheim|Émile Durkheim}}{{s}} theory of crime and punishment as {{qq|necessary}} to respectable society to mark off the limits of permissible and tolerated behaviour. {{qq|Society needs lunatics in order that it may regard itself as sane.}}<ref>ibid.</ref> It could also be argued that certain kinds of society {{qq|need}} lunatics as their managers; a discussion in {{w|''Peace News''|Peace_News}} recently was concerned with the uncertifiable madness of the {{w|American President|Lyndon_B._Johnson|Lyndon B. Johnson}} in relation to a {{qq|collective norm of insanity}}. A correspondent noted: {{qq|No significant member of a power establishment can ever be {{q|certifiably insane}} since it is this same establishment which determines the definitions of {{q|sanity}} and {{q|insanity}} and which decides—checked only by the occasional conscience of an occasional professional medical man—when {{q|insanity}} becomes {{q|{{w|certifiable|Involuntary_commitment|Involuntary commitment}}}}.}}<ref>Part of a letter by Pierre{{-}}Joseph Brie, {{qq|Insanity and the Egg}}, {{w|''Peace News''|Peace_News}}, 1st July, 1966.</ref>

{{tab}}In official statistics there must, in any case, be a murky overlap area between what comes out as {{qq|crime}} and what as {{qq|lunacy}}—and a lot of luck in who ends up in which institution. Perhaps it is the institutional bureaucracy that has most need of the labels: {{qq|According to the commonsense definition,}} writes Dr. Theodore Szasz, {{qq|mental health is the ability to play whatever the game of social living might consist of and to play it well. Conversely, to refuse to play, or to play badly, means that the person is mentally ill. The question may now be raised as to what are the differences, if any, between social nonconformity (or deviation) and mental illness. Leaving technical psychiatric considerations aside for the moment, I shall argue that the difference between these two notions—as expressed for example by the statements {{q|He is wrong}} and {{q|He is mentally ill}}—does not lie in any observable ''facts'' to which they may point, but may consist only of a difference in our ''attitudes'' toward our subject.}}<ref>{{w|T. S. Szasz|Thomas_Szasz|Thomas Szasz}}, {{qq|Politics and Mental Health}}, {{w|''American Journal of Psychiatry''|American_Journal_of_Psychiatry}}, No. 115 (1958) (quoted by {{w|Erving Goffman|Erving_Goffman}} in {{w|''Asylums''|Asylums_(book)|Asylums (book)}}, p. 509).</ref> What sort of behaviour is likely to lead those with the appropriate attitudes to see signs of mental illness and to set going the transfer process from {{p|358}}{{qq|person to patient}}? {{qq|Ordinarily the pathology which first draws attention to the patient{{s}} condition is conduct that is {{q|inappropriate in the situation}}. {{e}} Further, since inappropriate behaviour is typically behaviour that someone does not like and finds extremely troublesome, decisions concerning it tend to be political, in the sense of expressing the special interests of some particular faction or person.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{w|Erving Goffman|Erving_Goffman}}, ''{{w|Asylums—Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates|Asylums_(book)|Asylums (book)}}'', New York, Anchor Books, 1961, pp. 363-4.</ref> As an example of {{qq|inappropriate behaviour}}, consider the case of {{qq|The Naked Prisoner}} ({{sc|{{w|freedom|Freedom_(newspaper)|Freedom (newspaper)}}}}, 16.10.65). Mr. Paul Pawlowski was arrested during a demonstration at the {{w|Spanish Embassy|Embassy_of_Spain,_London|Embassy of Spain, London}} in {{w|London}}. Eventually reaching {{w|Brixton Prison|HM_Prison_Brixton|HM Prison Brixton}}, he refused to put on the standard prisoner{{s|r}} uniform and was consequently locked up, naked, in his cell. Thus he remained for ten days. On the tenth day he was interviewed by a social worker: {{qq|{{e|l}}You know that two doctors have seen you while you have been in Brixton {{e}} they came to the conclusion that what you need is a little stay in a mental hospital.}} In fact he did not have the benefit of this confinement. The hospital psychiatrist decided that Mr. Pawlowski{{s}} opinions were not those of the majority but {{qq|people are not put into mental hospitals for their opinions. They do that sort of thing in {{w|Russia|Soviet_Union|Soviet Union}}.}}{{ref|aster3|***}} Mr. Pawlowski was fortunate in his psychiatrist, but it is interesting to see how the pre{{-}}existing attitudes of officials brought him to the brink of admission. The overt political implications may make this example exceptional—but it would not seem to be to the advantage of a person suspected of mental illness to have been {{qq|mixed up in politics}} or {{qq|the dregs of society in {{w|CND|Campaign_for_Nuclear_Disarmament|Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament}}}}—which it seems, may well be taken as a confirmatory symptom.{{ref|dagger|&dagger;}} The mental health service—like the education {{qq|service}}—is a functional part of the present social system and, as such, acts to preserve that system and its values. {{qq|The psychiatric profession is a bureaucracy,}} writes James Green, a contributor to ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 8, {{qq|making an essential contribution to the running of government and administration. {{e}} Most psychiatrists would probably take for granted the structure and values of their own society, in such a way that the therapeutic process becomes a question of returning the sick person to his social context or roles, e.g. his family, whether or not this is good for him, and without questioning whether the context and roles are themselves satisfactory.}} Although no doubt unrepresentative and redolent of {{qq|what they do in Russia}} I cannot resist quoting the words of a psychiatrist participant in a recently televised discussion: {{qq|Our function is to get people well enough to be indoctrinated.}} It would be misleading to suggest that anything but a tiny minority become inmates of asylums simply or only because they hold disapproved {{p|359}}opinions, but possibly such cases may lead to a consideration of the far more subtle {{qq|political}} and social meaning of the labelling and confinement of the unvocal majority.

{{p|s4|n}}'''CURATIVE—OR PUNITIVE?'''

{{tab}}{{qq|Many of us, for quite some time have considered that problems of punishment and repression are most acute in the context of imprisonment. But this is not so; the ''really'' intractable problem in this sphere is that of the mental hospital.}}

{{r|Roger Moody: {{qq|Driving The Mad Insane}}, {{w|''Peace News''|Peace_News}} ({{popup|3.6.66|3 June 1966}}).}}

{{tab}}In his account of {{qq|[[Anarchy 4/Where the shoe pinches|de{{-}}institutionalisation]]}} ([[Anarchy 4|{{sc|anarchy}} 4]]) [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]] referred to the prison as {{qq|the most sinister of institutions}} and no doubt it is. But as anarchists are aware, the state can make skilful use of the {{qq|approved}} concepts of crime and criminality to divert attention from its own more grandiose but identical activities: so we should be alert to the possibility that the institutions openly labelled as prisons are not the only ones serving that function. Suppose, as Roger Moody says in his article that mental hospital and prison are {{qq|different terms for the same thing}}? If there is some truth in this there is consequently an additional danger in that anything called a {{qq|hospital}} has automatically a protective cocoon around it as a result of its claim to provide therapy. But surely the {{qq|voluntary}} presence of many of the patients in mental hospitals ensures that they cannot have a punitive character or effect? A different approach is suggested by the American sociologist {{w|Erving Goffman|Erving_Goffman}}: {{qq|{{e|l}}We must see the mental hospital, in the recent historical context in which it developed, as one among a network of institutions designed to provide a residence for various categories of socially troublesome people.}}<ref>ibid., p. 354.</ref>

{{tab}}Goffman states that only a small number of patients enter mental hospital willingly, in the sense that they believe it will be good for them, having come to see themselves as {{qq|mentally unbalanced}}—and as Laing and Cooper argue, even in these cases this self{{-}}perception as being {{qq|ill}} or {{qq|mad}} can be induced by the behaviour or strategy of the person{{s}} immediate relatives and contacts. The sequence from {{qq|person to patient}} can follow a series of associated stages set in motion by a {{qq|complainant}} who sees an action on the part of the pre{{-}}patient as perhaps a {{qq|last{{-}}straw}} and refers him to a succession of {{qq|mediators}}—probably drawn from among teachers, social workers, clergy, psychiatrists, lawyers, police—one of whom, with co{{-}}operation from the {{qq|sick}} man{{s}} relatives, will commit the individual to hospital with legal sanction. {{qq|The society{{s}} official view,}} writes Goffman, {{qq|is that inmates are there because they are suffering from mental illness. However, in the degree that the {{q|mentally ill}} outside hospitals numerically approach or surpass those inside hospitals, one could say that mental patients distinctively suffer not from mental illness, but from contingencies.}}<ref>ibid., p. 135.</ref> In other words, good or bad luck—depending on your point of view. One might debate the degree to which this whole process is {{qq|voluntary}}—bearing in mind that the individual is unprepared for the nature of his future life in the hospital, is probably living {{p|360}}in socially distressing circumstances which would have the effect of making most alternatives seem favourable, and is subject to collusive pressure from both relatives and {{qq|mediators}}.

{{tab}}As {{w|Malatesta|Errico_Malatesta|Errico Malatesta}} noted in his essay {{qq|{{l|Anarchy|http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-anarchy|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}}}, {{qq|Organs and functions are inseparable terms. Take from an organ its function, and either the organ will die, or the function will reinstate itself.}} The existence of the mental hospital is justified by its function of curing the mentally ill. {{qq|The patient{{s}} presence in the hospital is taken as ''{{popup|prima facie|sufficient until proven otherwise}}'' evidence that he is mentally ill, since the hospitalization of these persons is what the institution is for.}} A very common answer to a patient who claims he is sane is the statement: {{qq|If you aren{{t}} sick you wouldn{{t}} be in the hospital.}}<ref>ibid., p. 380.</ref> One consequence of this for the person initiated into a {{qq|career}} as a mental patient is that his past life will be restructured in terms of a {{qq|case history}}—and he may be denied rights of privacy over what he previously regarded as {{qq|his own business}}—any facet of which may now provide evidence of {{qq|symptoms}}.<ref>For a reconstruction of a psychiatric interrogation see {{qq|The Case Conference}}, ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 11, Summer, 1966. {{w|Elias Canetti|Elias_Canetti|Elias Canetti}} has written that {{qq|questioning is a forcible intrusion. When used as an instrument of power, it is like a knife cutting into the flesh of the victim. {{e}} The most blatant tyranny is the one that asks the most questions}} ({{w|''Crowds and Power''|Crowds_and_Power|Crowds and Power}}, Gollancz, 1962).</ref> Once inside, the patient may find the internal organisation of the asylum dominated by a {{qq|ward system}} separating patients off into {{qq|disease}} categories, the various levels providing different standards of accommodation, food and grounds{{-}}and{{-}}town {{qq|privileges}}, among other factors of importance in the life of the patient. The material and social provisions on each ward level are officially those that are most appropriate to the mental condition of the patient. But whilst the system may be justified by its partisans on these grounds, it has an unacknowledged function as an inmate{{-}}controlling device. There is a direct parallel here with the alleged purpose of the {{w|streaming|Tracking_(education)|Tracking (education)}} system in schools; invariably defended on the basis of its educational value yet actually operating in schools as an important component of the disciplinary system. And in asylums, as in schools, these {{qq|divide and rule}} disciplinary strategies have developed as the best method of {{qq|management by a small staff of a large number of involuntary inmates}}.

{{tab}}Because society needs lunatics to provide it with reassurance of its own sanity, so it has need of institutions to contain them. But as with prisons, the real enemy is not the material structure—{{qq|It is our own anxiety which forces us to lock people up}}<ref>A sentence of Dr. Joshua Dierer{{s}}, speaking at the {{w|World Federation of Mental Health|World_Federation_for_Mental_Health|World Federation for Mental Health}}, 1960 (quoted by [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]] in {{qq|[[Anarchy 4/Where the shoe pinches|Where The Shoe Pinches]]}}, [[Anarchy 4|{{sc|anarchy}} 4]]).</ref>—and it is through anxiety about our own sanity that we build walls around the {{qq|mentally ill}}. {{qq|Mental hospitals are not found in our society because supervisors, psychiatrists and attendants want jobs; mental hospitals are found because there is a market for them. If all the mental hospitals in a given region were emptied and closed down today, tomorrow relatives, police, and judges would raise a clamour for new ones; and these true clients of the mental hospital would demand an institution to satisfy their needs.}}<ref>Goffman, op. cit., p. 384.</ref>

{{p|s5|n}}'''SCHIZOPHRENIA—A PSEUDO{{-}}DISEASE?'''

{{tab}}{{qq|In the popular mind the schizophrenic is the proto{{-}}typical madman—author of the totally gratuitous crazy act that always has overtones of violence to others.}}

{{r|{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}: ''Violence in Psychiatry''.}}

{{p|361}}{{tab}}The various titles given to mental diseases, says Goffman, serve to meet the needs of hospital census regulations. {{qq|When pressed {{e}} staff will allow that these syndrome titles are vague and doubtful.}} A lot of people at the present time, appear to have schizophrenia—this diagnosis is applied to two out of three patients in British mental hospitals and it has been estimated that for every {{qq|schizophrenic}} receiving some form of treatment there are ten {{qq|undetected}} in the community.<ref>An estimate made by the Swiss psychiatrist {{w|E. Bleuler|Eugen_Bleuler|Eugen Bleuler}}, quoted by {{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}} in {{qq|The Anti{{-}}Hospital}}.</ref>

{{tab}}One psycho{{-}}analytic view is that schizophrenia is the outcome of a split between a person{{s}} {{qq|conscious}} and {{qq|unconscious}} forces which in the normal state are believed to work simultaneously. Another idea—in schizophrenia {{qq|there is a subtle change in brain chemistry which interferes in some way with nerve impulses.}}<ref>{{popup|P. Rube|Peter Rube}}, {{qq|Healing Process in Schizophrenia}}, ''{{w|Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases|Journal_of_Nervous_and_Mental_Disease|Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease}}'', 1948 (quoted by [[Author:John Linsie|John Linsie]] in {{qq|[[Anarchy 24/Schizophrenia: a social disease|Schizophrenia: A Social Disease]]}}, [[Anarchy 24|{{sc|anarchy}} 24]]).</ref> The popularity of this view and others similar to it has led to an emphasis on surgical or physical treatment such as electro{{-}}convulsive therapy (a low voltage shock passed between the temples) and, in some cases, operations on the brain ({{w|leucotomy|Lobotomy|Lobotomy}} and {{w|lobotomy|Lobotomy|Lobotomy}}). In at least one London hospital schizophrenics have been placed in deep freeze. Drugs are much used. And it seems that what are taken to be the symptoms of the disease can be eliminated by the use of such means at least for a time. As Sartre observed, one {{qq|can obtain a result by using merely technical methods.}} But, as the writer of a survey in ''The Observer'' ({{popup|5.6.66|5 June 1966}}) commented: {{qq|No one knows, except in the fuzziest outline, what the treatments do. And none of them is a cure.}} [[Author:John Linsie|John Linsie]] in his [[Anarchy 24/Schizophrenia: a social disease|article]] in [[Anarchy 24|{{sc|anarchy}} 24]] pointed out that the effectiveness of drugs and E.C.T. in temporarily removing {{qq|symptoms}} has perhaps prevented more widespread research into the basic aetiology of the {{qq|disease}}. Schizophrenia often occurs within the same family and some researchers believe that it is transmitted genetically. John Linsie quoted {{w|Mayer{{-}}Gross|Wilhelm_Mayer-Gross|Wilhelm Mayer-Gross}}: {{qq|It may now be regarded as established that hereditary factors play a predominant role in the causation of schizophrenic psychosis}}—and then trumped this with the opinion of another expert, {{w|Roth|Martin_Roth_(psychiatrist)|Martin Roth}}: {{qq|No simple genetic hypothesis accords with all the facts.}}

{{tab}}This I hope is enough to provide some basis for R. D. Laing{{s}} and {{w|A. Esterson|Aaron_Esterson|Aaron Esterson}}{{s}} statement in the introduction to ''Sanity, Madness and the Family'' that there is no more disputed condition in the whole field of medicine. {{qq|The one thing certain about schizophrenia is that it is a diagnosis, that is a clinical label, applied by some people to others.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|What is Schizophrenia?}}, ''{{w|New Left Review|New_Left_Review}}'', No. 28.</ref> The essentially social process which results ultimately in the fixing of this label to one person is the underlying theme of three books and a good many articles by Dr. Laing and his colleagues. I shall try to outline their account of this process subsequently, but an idea of their truly radical conclusions can be given here:

{{tab}}{{qq|We do not use the term {{q|schizophrenia}} to denote any identifiable condition which we believe exists {{q|in}} one person.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}} and {{w|A. Esterson|Aaron_Esterson|Aaron Esterson}}, ''Sanity, Madness and the Family'', London, Tavistock, 1964.</ref>

{{tab}}{{qq|I do not myself believe that there is any such {{q|condition}} as schizophrenia.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|What is Schizophrenia?}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref>

{{tab}}{{qq|Schizophrenia is not a disease in one person but rather a crazy {{p|362}}way in which whole families function.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|The Anti-Hospital}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref>

{{tab}}{{qq|Schizophrenia, if it means anything, is a more or less characteristic mode of disturbed group behaviour. ''There are no schizophrenics.''}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, Violence in Psychiatry, ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 8.</ref>

{{p|s6|n}}'''THE FAMILY—{{qq|FROM GOOD TO BAD TO MAD}}'''

{{tab}}{{qq|Over the last two decades there has been a growing dissatisfaction with any theory or study of the individual which artificially isolates him from the context of his life, interpersonal and social.}}

{{r|{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}: ''{{w|The Self and Others|Self_and_Others|Self and Others}}''.}}

{{tab}}Sartre holds that all groups are structured against an awareness of a {{qq|spectator}}. This {{qq|spectator}} may be an individual—as in the case of children seeing themselves as {{qq|pupils}} in relation to a teacher—or another group, as in the case of workers constituting themselves against managers. This spactator he calls the {{qq|Third}} for whom the group exists as an object. Laing and Cooper seem to have developed their views on groups—and in particular, the family system of the future {{qq|schizophrenic}}—from Sartre{{s}} interpretation of group structure and cohesion. In elaborating their theories the British existential analysts have made use of a number of terms, some of their own creation, whilst others are also used by Sartre. This rather technical and esoteric language creates a density in some of their writing which obscures the importance of what is being said; in my view, the value of Laing and Cooper{{s}} book ''Reason and Violence'' is much reduced by their over{{-}}reliance on such terms and it is a pity that what one senses to be important ideas are couched in language which requires a good deal of deciphering before it becomes intelligible. If this particular book had been in existence at the time {{w|Orwell|George_Orwell|George Orwell}} was preparing his essay {{qq|Politics and the English Language}} it would have provided him with some remarkable cautionary extracts.

{{tab}}The British existentialists make use of two words, series and nexus, in differentiating between kinds of group—and two words, praxis and process, which describe group dynamics or the relationships between group members. A series is typically, a human association on negative grounds—for example a bus queue in which the sole link between persons is a common desire to travel on the bus; each person in the queue being {{qq|one too many}} for the others. Also regarded as series are persons united solely on the basis of opposition to some shared concept: anti{{-}}semites sharing only their hatred of Jews, or one could perhaps say anarchists, united by shared opposition to the state (the only belief common to ''all'' anarchist views). A series may move towards being a group through {{qq|an act of group{{-}}synthesis}} (Laing{{s}} term). {{qq|If I think of certain others as together with me, and certain others as not together with me, I have already undertaken two acts of synthesis, resulting in ''we'' and ''them''. However, in order that ''we'' have a group identity, it is not enough that I regard, let us say, you and him as constituting a ''we'' with myself. You and he have to perform similar acts of synthesis, each on his own behalf. In this ''we'' (me, and you, and him), each of ''us'' recognises not only our own private syntheses, but also the syntheses that each of the others makes.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|Us and Them}}, ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}},'' No. 11.</ref>

{{tab}}The distinctive qualities of the nexus are that each person acknow{{p|363}}ledges: the need of each for the others; the existence of strong bonds between members (not maintained principally by institutional or organisation structures, or a shared external {{qq|common object}}). {{qq|The relationships of persons in a nexus are characterised by enduring and intensive face{{-}}to{{-}}face reciprocal influence on each other{{s}} experience and behaviour.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}} and {{w|A. Esterson|Aaron_Esterson|Aaron Esterson}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref> The family, or at least the family as we are accustomed to think of it, is representative of a nexus.

{{tab}}Praxis and process are both terms used by Sartre. Basically, praxis is what is done by someone: {{qq|deeds done by doers}}, {{qq|the acts of an individual or group}}; whilst process refers to {{qq|what just happens}}, activity not intended by anyone and of which no one person in a group may be aware.

{{tab}}The position of the person within the group will affect his idea of himself—of who he is. In the same way his view of others in the group affects their definitions of themselves. And again, his behaviour will be affected by his idea of what other people make of him. As a person moves during even one day, from group to group, from one mode of association to another, he must adapt himself to each context: {{qq|Each group requires more or less radical internal transformation of the persons who comprise it. Consider the metamorphoses that the one man may go through in one day {{e}} family man, speck of crowd dust, functionary in the organisation, friend. These are not simply different roles: each is a whole past and present and future, offering differing options and constraints, different degrees of change or inertia, different kinds of closeness and distance, different sets of rights and obligations, different pledges and promises.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|Us and Them}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref>

{{tab}}Dr. Laing{{s}} second book ''{{w|The Self and Others|Self_and_Others|Self and Others}}'' deals with the way in which a person is affected by his situation in a {{qq|nexus}} of others, in particular within the family. {{qq|The others either can contribute to the person{{s}} self{{-}}fulfilment, or they can be a potent factor in his losing himself (alienation) even to the point of madness.}} He asserts his belief that {{qq|fantasy is a mode of experience}} and that relationships on a fantasy level are {{qq|as basic to all human relatedness as the interactions that most people most of the time are more aware of.}}

{{tab}}What happens in the families of {{qq|schizophrenics}}? It is important to emphasise that it is not the thesis of these workers that the family rather than the individual is {{qq|ill}}. A group is not an organism—even though it may appear to be one to its members or to observers outside it. A human group of whatever size, does not possess either a body or a mind that can be either well or ill. In the family, a person{{s}} self can be either confirmed or disconfirmed by the actions and influence—including influence in {{qq|fantasy}}—of others in the family nexus. Mystification of a person can be carried so far that all genuine expressions of independent development are denied validity. {{qq|In the families of schizophrenic patients intentions, which link up with the {{q|psychotic acts}} of the patient are denied, or even, their antithesis asserted so that the patient{{s}} actions have the appearance of pure process unrelated to praxis and may even be experienced by him as such.}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|Two Types of Rationality}}, {{w|''New Left Review''|New_Left_Review}}, No. 29.</ref> In the moving final section of ''The Divided Self'' (called {{qq|The Ghost of the Weed {{p|364}}Garden}}) R. D. Laing describes the clinical biography of a schizophrenic. This was based on a series of interviews with the patient, members of the patient{{s}} family, both individually and jointly with other members. These interviews were designed to secure the information necessary for an existential analysis and were not a form of group psychotherapy. It is here that Laing first outlines the sequence which would appear to be typical of this kind of family interaction: whilst each family member had his or her own view of the patient{{-}}to{{-}}be{{s}} life, they all agreed on three basic phases:

# {{qq|The patient was a ''good'', normal, healthy child; until she gradually began|l}}
# {{qq|to be ''bad'', to do or say things that caused great distress, and which were on the whole {{q|put down}} to naughtiness or badness, until|l}}
# {{qq|this went beyond all tolerable limits so that she could only be regarded as completely ''mad''.}}

What was seen by the mother as her daughter{{s}} {{qq|good}} period, in infancy and early childhood, she described with such remarks as {{qq|she gave no trouble}}, {{qq|she always did what she was told}}. Laing comments that what to the mother were signs of goodness, were signs that the child had never been permitted to become {{qq|existentially alive}}—in fact {{qq|being existentially dead receives the highest commendation}}. The {{qq|bad}} period was the time of adolescence, during which the patient made her greatest struggle towards a realisation of her own self through autonomous action but found that her efforts were continually defeated by {{qq|the complete absence of anyone in her world who could or would see some sense in her point of view}}. The transfer from {{qq|bad}} to {{qq|mad}} came as something of a relief to the rest of the family, who {{qq|blamed themselves for not realising sooner}}. As the mother said: {{qq|I knew she really could not have meant the awful things she said to me. In a way, I blame myself but, in a way, I{{m}} glad that it was an illness after all, but if only I had not waited so long before I took her to a doctor.}}

{{tab}}In ''Sanity, Madness and the Family'' (the first volume of an uncompleted study) Drs. Laing and Esterson present extracts from interviews with members of 11 families, all of which contained daughters diagnosed as {{qq|schizophrenic}}. In the Introduction to this book the authors write: {{qq|{{e|l}}we believe that we show that the experience and behaviour of schizophrenics is much more socially intelligible than has come to be supposed by most psychiatrists {{e}} we believe that the shift of point of view that these descriptions both embody and demand has an historical significance no less radical than the shift from a demonological to a clinical viewpoint 300 years ago.}} Behaviour which is eventually interpreted by the family as a sign of madness is, they argue, the outward expression of a desperate attempt on the part of the {{qq|mad one}} to {{qq|make sense of a senseless situation}}—to preserve some authentic elements of personality—a struggle for autonomy, spontaneity, responsibility and {{qq|freedom}}. Here is an excerpt from Laing and Esterson{{s}} transcript of Mr. and Mrs. Gold{{s}} account of their daughter: {{p|365}}{{qq|When she is her {{q|real}} self, that is, when she is {{q|well}}, she is not to be seriously interested in writers or art, not to wear coloured stockings, not to listen to jazz in a jazz club, not to bring friends home, not to stay out late. It is only from time to time that Ruth tries to assert herself over against this parental eternal essence, and when she does she wears clothes to her liking, and insists vehemently on going where and with whom she wishes. Then her mother {{q|knows}} an {{q|attack}} is coming on. She is told she is being difficult, inconsiderate, disrespectful, thoughtless, because she is causing her parents such anxiety—but they do not blame or hold her responsible for all this, because they know she is odd and ill. Thus mystified and put in an intolerable position she becomes excited and desperate, makes {{q|wild}} accusations that her parents do not want her to live, and runs out of the house.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}, p. 155.</ref>

{{tab}}These writers claim, and I think demonstrate, that armed with a knowledge of the patient{{s}} existential situation, it is possible to make sense of what {{qq|psychiatrists still by and large regard as nonsense}}. For example, Julie, the patient in {{qq|The Ghost of the Weed Garden}}, referred to herself whilst in her {{qq|psychotic}} state as {{qq|Mrs. Taylor}} and as a {{qq|tolled bell}}. Dr. Laing interprets her chosen title {{qq|Mrs. Taylor}} as expressing the feelings: {{qq|I{{m}} tailor made; I{{m}} a tailored maid; I was made, fed, clothed and tailored}} and a {{qq|tolled bell}} is also {{qq|the told belle}} {{qq|the girl who always did what she was told}}. The schizophrenic{{s}} {{qq|delusions}} of persecution are real expressions of reaction in response to real persecution and are existentially true; that is to say they are {{qq|literally true statements within the terms of reference of the individual who makes them}}.{{ref|dagger2|††}}

{{tab}}The person is now launched on a {{qq|career}} as a mental patient. He is confirmed in this role by society{{s}} agents the psychiatrists, in collusion with the patient{{s}} family, and by process of betrayal and degradation<ref>{{w|Erving Goffman|Erving_Goffman}} in {{w|''Asylums''|Asylums_(book)|Asylums (book)}} makes use of the term {{qq|career}} to denote {{qq|the social strand}} of a person{{s}} life inaugurated at the moment of his definition as a mental patient; {{qq|betrayal funnel}} to describe the circuit of figures (relatives, psychiatrists, etc.) whose interactions end with the patient{{s}} confinement in the {{p|374}}asylum, and {{qq|degradation ceremonial}} for the psychiatric examination preceding the patient{{s}} admission.</ref> becomes an inmate of a mental hospital, which institution embodies {{qq|a social structure which in many respects reduplicates the maddening peculiarities of the patient{{s}} family {{e}} he finds psychiatrists, administrators, nurses who are his veritable parents, brothers and sisters, who play an interpersonal game which only too often resembles in the intricacies of its rules the game he failed in at home.}}<ref>{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|Violence in Psychiatry}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref>

{{tab}}The existential analysts have asserted that a great deal of what passes for treatment in mental institutions is violence. Perhaps we can now begin to see what is meant by this. David Cooper in his article in ''Views,'' No. 8 quotes Sartre{{s}} definition of violence: {{qq|The corrosive {{p|366}} action of the freedom of a person on the freedom of another.}} And he explains this: {{qq|The action of a person {{e}} can destroy the freedom of another or at least paralyse it by mystification.}} In an article printed in ''{{w|Peace News|Peace_News}}'' (22.1.65) called {{qq|Massacre of the Innocents}} R. D. Laing makes his understanding of the word clear: {{qq|Love and violence, properly speaking, are polar opposites. Love lets the other be, but with affection and concern. Violence attempts to constrain the other{{s}} freedom, to force him to act in the way we desire, but with ultimate lack of concern, with indifference to the other{{s}} own existence or destiny.}} The basic theme of his article is that a most brutal and destructive form of violence is {{qq|violence masquerading as love}}. In relation to the family and its {{qq|schizophrenic}} member, action to secure care and attention in hospital for someone who is {{qq|ill}} could well be interpreted as an expression of concern and love. Whether or not one believes that this process and the patient{{s}} subsequent treatment is a form of violence will depend in part, on whether one believes that there is any illness {{qq|in}} the person to be {{qq|cured}}. It is not violence to amputate a {{w|gangrenous|Gangrene|Gangrene}} leg. We would all agree that it would be a violent project to persuade a person that his leg was diseased ({{qq|because you do not keep in step with us{{e|r}}}}), to find a surgeon who believes that there is a social need for one{{-}}legged people—and for him to cut off the leg. In the actual case of the hospitalised schizophrenic each person in the chain sees himself as acting in the best interests of the others {{e}} {{qq|but we have also to remember that good intentions and all the wrappings of respectability very often cover a truly cruel human reality.}}<ref>ibid.</ref>

'''THEORIES IN PRACTICE: {{qq|THE ANTI-HOSPITAL}}'''

{{tab}}In his pamphlet ''Youth for Freedom'' (1951) [[Author:Tony Gibson|Tony Gibson]] wrote to the effect that the chief value of {{w|Summerhill|Summerhill_School|Summerhill School}} to the community lay in its having taken the general concept of what a school should be and turned it on its head. Dr. David Cooper{{s}} {{popup|unit|Villa 21}} in {{w|a large mental hospital|Shenley_Hospital|Shenley Hospital}} {{qq|just {{w|north{{-}}west of London|Shenley,_Hertfordshire|Shenley, Hertfordshire}}}} has done very much the same thing to the general concept of the asylum. To maintain the educational parallel, Dr. Cooper{{s}} experiment (judging from his account of it in ''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}''<ref>''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}'', 11th March, 1965.</ref>) also has great relevance for those who would wish to attack the violence implicit in the customary methods of social organisation in schools.

{{tab}}The theoretical basis of the experiment rested on the findings of Laing and Esterson, published in ''Sanity, Madness and the Family''. I hope already to have given some idea of what these findings were: the family preserves its inauthentic system by using one of its members as a kind of {{qq|scapegoat}}, ending by attributing madness to him. In general, society confirms the attributions made by the {{qq|sane}} relatives and invalidates the patient{{s}} version of events by translating them into {{qq|symptoms of a disease}}. The bearing of this theory on the psychiatric ward, writes Dr. Cooper, is that {{qq|staff must begin to refuse to enter into the traditional covert collusion with the patient{{s}} family. In the past this collusion has often meant that staff become implicated in a progressive violence that is perpetuated, in the name of treatment, {{p|367}}against the labelled patient.}} The workers on the {{qq|anti{{-}}hospital}} project maintained one central conviction: that it was necessary to understand, in some measure, the processes going on in themselves before they could hope to have real insight into the {{qq|inner}} world of their patients.

{{tab}}The unit—one ward in a hospital of some 2,300 patients—opened in January, 1962, with 19 young male patients, two{{-}}thirds of whom had been diagnosed as {{qq|having}} schizophrenia. They had all been previously in the insulin{{-}}coma ward. In the second year, the number of patients was increased to 30.

{{tab}}The programme during the first year was highly structured, with daily meetings of the whole staff{{-}}patient group, separate and regular staff meetings, {{w|occupational therapy|Occupational_therapy|Occupational therapy}} and organised recreational activity. No {{qq|physical}} treatments were used except for the occasional dose of mild {{w|tranquilliser|Tranquilizer|Tranquilizer}}, and there was no individual {{w|psycho{{-}}therapy|Psychotherapy|Psychotherapy}}; there were however regular {{qq|interviews}} between therapist and patient and therapist and patient with various members of his family. After about a year, the staff became dissatisfied with the rigidities of the system and changes in the direction of greater fluidity were felt to be appropriate.

{{tab}}Dr. Cooper writes of two areas in which the consequent {{qq|destructuring}} had remarkable effects—the traditional business of getting patients out of bed in the morning and the attitude to the provision of work and activities. {{qq|One of the commonest staff fantasies in mental hospitals is that if patients are not coerced verbally or physically into getting out of bed at a certain hour in the morning they will stay in bed until they rot away.}} This fantasy, like all anxiety over punctuality, is a form of projection. For the staff, the patient represents {{qq|that frightening aspect of themselves that sometimes does not want to get out of bed in the morning and come to work.}} After considerable discussion and the trial of various approaches by different staff groups it was found that if the usual {{qq|rousing procedures}} were abandoned the patient did get up himself—even if he {{qq|rebelled}} to the extent of remaining in bed most of the day for a week or more. {{qq|No one rotted away after all and the gain in personal autonomy seemed worth while.}} Dr. Cooper relates one episode when {{qq|all the occupants of a six{{-}}bed dormitory rebelled against the community meeting by staying in bed until after 11 o’clock. One of the charge nurses went upstairs to see what was going on. One of the patients left to go to the toilet and the nurse seized the opportunity to take off his white coat (worn not as uniform but as protective clothing for certain messy jobs like washing up) and climb into the vacant bed. The patient, on his return, appreciating the irony of the situation, had little option but to take the vacated {{q|staff role}}, put on the white coat and get the others out of bed.}}

{{tab}}The motivating fantasy or belief behind the provision of work and {{qq|occupational therapy}} activities is frequently that this in some way protects the patients from the eroding effects of institutionalisation. But Dr. Cooper observes: {{qq|The bitter truth is that if they submissively {{p|368}}carry out all these required tasks they become what is implied by these labels anyhow.}} If one wishes to encounter the ultimate in withdrawn chronic institutionalisation one has only to visit one of the more {{qq|active}} and productive {{qq|factories in a hospital}} or {{qq|industrial occupational therapy departments}}. In the unit, discussion centred on this theme; the patients were in any case showing resistance to conventional projects. Jobs of a vigorous, destructive kind ({{qq|knocking down an {{w|air{{-}}raid shelter|Air_raid_shelter|Air raid shelter}}}}) which within a certain mythology, would have been supposed to provide a proper outlet for aggression, were not tackled with enthusiasm. {{qq|People had real reasons to be angry with real other people at home and in hospital.}} Hammering away at brick walls was of no relevance. Partly as a result of failure to hold the patient{{s}} interest in tasks such as these—despite an attempt to influence them by reduction of their money allowance—a situation was reached in which {{qq|no organised work project was presented to the community}}. The occupational therapist decided that she would be better employed in the unit as an assistant nurse. It was at this stage of developments that the staff became conscious of the breakdown of role boundaries: {{qq|There was a progressive blurring of role between nurses, doctor, occupational therapist and patients which brought into focus a number of disturbing and apparently paradoxical questions: for example, can patients {{q|treat}} other patients and can they even treat staff? Can staff realise quite frankly and acknowledge in the community their own areas of incapacity and {{q|illness}} and their need for {{q|treatment}}? If they did what would happen next and who would control it?|l}}

{{tab}}{{qq|It was at this point that the most radical departure from conventional psychiatric work was initiated. If the staff rejected prescribed ideas about their function and if they did not quite know what to do next, why do anything? Why not withdraw from the whole field of hospital staff and patient expectation in terms of organising patients into activity, supervising the ward domestic work and generally {{q|treating patients}}.}} After this, the staff retained control of the issuing of drugs and continued their administrative work. Other sections of the hospital were made aware of the policy change in the unit and the details of the new approach were clarified at the community meetings. The immediate effect of the change was reflected in piles of washing{{-}}up left undone and a marked increase in dirt. The normal level of staff anxiety increased as the patients gave no sign of organising among themselves. The patients were divided between those who wanted a return to the previous system and others who {{qq|appreciated the more authentic elements in the policy change}}. The crisis point came during Dr. Cooper{{s}} absence on holiday. Up to that time, many of the staff had found assurance in the belief that the evident disorder was a consequence of enacting the Doctor{{s}} {{qq|ultra{{-}}permissive}} policy—they had done his bidding and what happened was ultimately his responsibility. But during the period of his absence, they acted together to put a limit to their intense anxiety and reintroduced some controls within the ward. This, Dr. Cooper suggests, was an advance on their part in that they achieved a joint decision and all members of the unit began to {{p|369}}experience the real demands made by the {{qq|group reality}}. Dr. Cooper{{s}} observations at this point are interesting and recall the distinctions made by other writers between forms of authority—{{qq|functional or arbitrary}} ([[Author:Martin Buber|Martin Buber]]) {{qq|overt or anonymous}} ({{w|Erich Fromm|Erich_Fromm}}). Dr. Cooper writes: {{qq|This leads us on to the central problem of the psychiatric hospital of distinguishing between authentic and inauthentic authority. {{e}} The authority of the authority person is granted him by arbitrary social definition rather than on the basis of any real expertise he may possess. If staff have the courage to shift themselves from this false position they may discover real sources of authority in themselves. They may also discover such sources of authority in {{q|the others}} who are defined as their patients. {{e}} Perhaps the most central characteristic of authentic leadership is the relinquishing of the impulse to dominate others. Domination here means controlling the behaviour of others where their behaviour represents for the leader projected aspects of his own experience. By domination of the other the leader produces for himself the illusion that his own internal organisation is more and more perfectly ordered. The {{w|Nazi|Nazi_Germany|Nazi Germany}} {{w|extermination camps|Extermination_camp|Extermination camp}} were one product of this Dream of Perfection. The mental hospital, along with other institutions in our society, is another.}} Substitute {{qq|school}} for {{qq|psychiatric hospital}} and {{qq|pupil}} for {{qq|patient}} and one sees the wider relevance of this passage.

{{tab}}The workers in the unit were faced with conflicting pressures—pressures to conform with the customary approaches facing them in social systems and relationships outside the unit (professional advancement and willingness to conform to some extent going together)—and contrary pressure from within the unit itself. This again resulted in tension which obliged them to face the need for {{qq|commitment one way or the other}}.

{{tab}}The position of the experimental ward inside the framework of the large hospital prompted the growth of fantastic and distorted attitudes towards the unit in the minds of senior staff members working outside it; this indicated the deep challenge which the new approach made to their more traditional concepts. For example an incident one night, in which an hysterical girl patient was helped back to her ward by a male friend was {{qq|processed}} by the communications system until in its final form, it had become a case of attempted sexual assault.

{{tab}}An assessment of the success of the {{qq|anti{{-}}hospital}} in terms of {{qq|results}} (usually measured in such cases by the incidence of re{{-}}admission) would not be any more meaningful than a judgement on Summerhill based simply on the pupil{{s}} success rate in public examinations. The criterion of re{{-}}admission rates is also inadequate in that staff encouraged patients to return after discharge if they felt that a return to the unit would be of value to them. Nevertheless, even by this standard the {{qq|anti{{-}}hospital}} results compare favourably with those achieved by more widely accepted methods—17 per cent of patients being re{{-}}admitted during a one{{-}}year period following discharge. In the issue of the ''{{w|British Medical Journal|The_BMJ|The BMJ}}'' which included these results Dr. Cooper stated his belief that the experiment has established {{qq|at least {{p|370}}a ''prima facie'' case for radical revision of the therapeutic strategy employed in most units for schizophrenia}}.<ref>''{{w|British Medical Journal|The_BMJ|The BMJ}}'', No. 5476, p. 1462.</ref>

{{tab}}As a postscript to the foregoing, I can deal only sketchily with an intriguing aspect of the work of the British existentialists—their ideas on the nature of {{qq|madness}} itself. A recurrent theme in R. D. Laing{{s}} writing is his emphasis on the disastrously narrow field of experience which is credited in contemporary life, as {{qq|reality}}. {{qq|We are far more out of touch with even the nearest approaches of the infinite reaches of inner space, than we now are with the reaches of outer space. {{e}} We are so out of touch with this realm that many people can now argue seriously that it does not exist.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|What is Schizophrenia?}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref> It is no surprise that Dr. Laing has spoken on the power of the drug {{w|LSD|Lysergic_acid_diethylamide}} to extend the boundaries of reality for those who make use of it responsibly. In ''The Divided Self'' he cites the value of the {{w|Prophetic Books|William_Blake's_prophetic_books|William Blake's prophetic books}} of {{w|William Blake|William_Blake}} and (in ''The Self and Others'') relates Blake to his previous description of a {{qq|psychotic}}: {{qq|Blake{{s}} position seems to me to have been this. Single {{q|vision}} (one modality of experience) is death. This is what most people regard as sanity.}} He also charts in this book and in other articles, the dualism implicit in the idea of fantasy to be found in most psycho{{-}}analytic works and in the minds of a good many psychiatrists: {{qq|A very confused dualistic philosophy of psychical and physical, inner and outer, mental and physical.}} It is the opinion of Laing and Cooper that what is clinically described as {{qq|a schizophrenic breakdown}} may be the onset in the individual of a voyage into the world of inner space and time. The word {{qq|inner}} is misleading, suggesting a place located {{qq|inside}} the person; as they use the word it refers to {{qq|our own personal idiom of experiencing our bodies, other people, the animate and inanimate world: imagination, dreams, fantasy{{e|r}}}}. And far from being a {{qq|disease}} this process, or {{qq|voyage}}, may well be the path to greater awareness, the crisis of the individual{{s}} struggle to realise himself as a person, even—the onset of sanity! (Dr. Cooper has suggested that it may be {{qq|when people start to become sane that they enter the mental hospital}}). A person undergoing this experience may well be {{qq|difficult for others}} and is in need of special care—but not {{qq|treatment}} in {{qq|the quite bizarrely incongruous context of the mental hospital}}. Those who care for him should assume the role of guides—and people capable of providing this help will very probably be those who have themselves been through similar experiences: {{qq|We need a place where people who have travelled further and, consequently, may be more lost than psychiatrists and other sane people, can find their way ''further'' into inner space and time, and back again {{e}} the person will be guided with full social encouragement and sanction into inner space and time, by people who have been there and back again. Psychiatrically, this would appear as ex{{-}}patients helping future patients go mad.}}<ref>ibid.</ref>

{{tab}}No fully autonomous unit in which this process can take place exists at the present moment,{{ref|3dagger|†††}} but we can deduce from the {{qq|anti{{-}}{{p|371}}hospital}} experiment, a good deal about what is required for its successful realisation.

'''CRITICISM AND CONCLUSIONS'''

{{tab}}The only extended criticism known to me of the work and ideas of these British psychiatrists is an article by B. A. Farrell called {{qq|The Logic of Existential Analysis}} which appeared in ''New Society'' ({{popup|1.10.65|1 October 1965}}). This writer argues that the existentialists have dismissed orthodox views on the causes and treatment of schizophrenia on inadequate grounds and also make logically unwarrantable deductions from their research into the families of schizophrenics. Referring to the claim of Laing and Esterson that they have made the {{qq|symptoms}} of schizophrenia intelligible, he makes the point that even if they are successful in doing this, making the symptoms intelligible is not the same thing as establishing truth for their hypothesis. Farrell comments that {{qq|this would be a trivial point to make}} if we had other grounds for believing that the narratives were true. In relation to their suggestions for treatment he asks for evidence that units of the {{qq|anti{{-}}hospital}} type produce results {{qq|as good as, or better than, the traditional methods}}. In conclusion he advises them that some of the opposition to their work might not have been so vehement had they avoided {{qq|abusive}} and {{qq|intemperate}} language in their references to the Establishment; and also that {{qq|they would help themselves if they could avoid giving the impression that they had fallen in love with their schizophrenic patients. {{e|r}}}}

{{tab}}Correspondents in subsequent issues suggested some answers to these criticisms. Commenting on Mr. Farrell{{s}} remark on the lack of supportive evidence, Dr. John Bowlby wrote: {{qq|Although Dr. Laing{{s}} is the only psychiatric group in this country publishing material of its sort, in the {{w|United States|United_States}} there are several. The two best known are the group at the {{w|National Institute of Mental Health|National_Institute_of_Mental_Health}} {{e}} and the one at {{w|Palo Alto|Palo_Alto,_California}}. {{e}} Each of these research groups has used methods and reported findings essentially similar to those of Dr. Laing. Some of their most recent reports {{e}} are of projects that at critical points in the procedure are {{q|blind}} in just the way that Mr. Farrell rightly requests. In addition a number of findings derived from quite other methods are supportive. {{e}} There is thus substantial evidence derived from more than one method in support of the Laing type of hypothesis. {{e}} When compared with evidence advanced to support other types of hypothesis, it is not unimpressive. On the one hand it is ''far more substantial'' than any yet offered in support of psycho{{-}}analytic theories, whether traditional or {{w|Kleinian|Melanie_Klein|Melanie Klein}}, and, on the other, more consistent than that supporting a genetic{{-}}biochemical type of theory}} (my italics).<ref>Extract from letter in ''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}'', 4th November, 1965.</ref>

{{tab}}I have already made some reference to the {{qq|results}}, in terms of re{{-}}admissions, of the {{qq|anti{{-}}hospital}} which were published in the {{p|372}}''{{w|BMA Journal|The_BMJ|The BMJ}}'' and reprinted in ''New Society'' three months after the appearance of Mr. Farrell{{s}} article. They are indeed as good as, or better than, results achieved by traditional methods.

{{tab}}Mr. Farrell{{s}} final charge is valuable in that it draws attention to the basis of the method of existential analysis as described and practised by Dr. Laing and his colleagues. I do not think that Dr. Laing would wish to deny that {{qq|love}} is involved in his attitude towards his patients and their predicament. In ''The Divided Self'' he writes of the act of empathy—this is not a strong enough word—that is required if the therapist is to understand the patient{{s}} existential position. {{qq|I think it is clear that by {{q|understanding}} I do not mean a purely intellectual process. For understanding one might say love.}}<ref>{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, ''The Divided Self—An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness'', London, Tavistock, 1960 (Pelican Books, 1965).</ref> In making this attempt the therapist {{qq|draws on his own psychotic possibilities}}. Although not a direct parallel, one is reminded of {{w|Homer Lane|Homer_Lane}}{{s}} attitude towards emotionally disturbed {{qq|delinquent}} adolescents and his dictum of {{qq|being on their side}} even when their actions were most anti{{-}}social. A concept that recurs in a similar way in Dr. Laing{{s}} writing is to {{qq|let the other be}}: {{qq|The main agent in uniting the patient, in allowing the pieces to come together and cohere is the physician{{s}} love, a love that recognises the patient{{s}} total being, and accepts it, with no strings attached.}}<ref>ibid., p. 165.</ref>

{{tab}}As I hope I have succeeded in indicating in this article, the work of Drs. Laing, Cooper and Esterson constitutes far more than just another theory of what causes {{qq|schizophrenia}}; a correspondent in ''New Society'' characterised it as {{qq|an exploration of the necessary conditions for a fully human relationship}}.<ref>A phrase from a letter by J. D. Ingleby ({{w|Applied Psychology Research Unit|Cognition_and_Brain_Sciences_Unit|Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit}}, {{w|Cambridge}}), ''{{w|New Society|New_Society}}'', 28th October, 1965.</ref>

{{tab}}Dr. Laing has suggested that the reason why exploration of the {{qq|inner}} world of the self is invalidated by society as {{qq|madness}} is that such experience is subversive. {{qq|And it is subversive because it is ''real.''}}<ref>{{qq|A Ten Day Voyage}}, ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 8.</ref> Deified destructive illusions—{{qq|the health of {{w|sterling|Pound_sterling|Pound sterling}}}}, {{qq|the {{w|Red menace|Red_Scare|Red Scare}}}}, {{qq|the interests of the State}}—are the stage{{-}}props of normal social life and these phantoms are confirmed as {{qq|reality}} by all the resources available. Because the vast majority of people act in terms of these negations {{qq|we find ourselves threatened by extermination that will be reciprocal, that no one wishes, that everyone fears, that may just happen to us {{q|because}} no one knows how to stop it. {{e}} Everyone will by carrying out orders. Where do they come from? Always from elsewhere.{{e|r}}}}<ref>{{qq|Us and Them}}, {{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}</ref> Dr. Cooper has also described this tragic condition: {{qq|The myth of {{w|Thanatos}} is a self{{-}}actualizing phantasy. The {{w|bomb|Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki|Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki}} really did drop on {{w|Hiroshima}}. {{e}} The basic paradox that we live is that mankind needs illusions but the illusions it needs destroy it. Even through relatively innocuous or {{q|good}} illusions we imprison ourselves metaphysically and then find we have built real prison walls (perhaps around someone else).}}<ref>{{qq|Freud Revisited}}—a review of {{w|Herbert Marcuse|Herbert_Marcuse}}{{s}} ''{{w|Eros and Civilization|Eros_and_Civilization}}'', ''{{w|New Left Review|New_Left_Review}}'', No. 20.</ref>

{{tab}}I hope that, as Dr. Laing has hinted, their future work will involve and imply further criticism in depth, of our society; if this is the case it will have direct relevance for contemporary anarchism (notwithstanding the association of these writers with a form of {{w|Marxism|Marxism}}). In conclusion, I would risk the statement that the body of work they have {{p|373}}so far produced—derived as it is from social psychology and observational research in the best [[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]] manner—already {{qq|upholds}} a form of anarchism—a form which could be typified by a phrase of Dr. Cooper{{s}}: {{qq|The way of autonomy}}.

-----

<font size="2">{{hang|{{note|aster|*}} See ''The Divided Self'', pp. 41-42. For an account of the consequences of the obstruction of this occurrence: {{qq|an existentially dead child}} see p. 183. In ''{{l|Views|https://lccn.loc.gov/sf83002178|Library of Congress catalogue entry}}'', No. 8, {{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}} writes: {{qq|{{e|l}}the beginning of personal development is never pure passivity. {{e}} From the first moment of mother-child interaction, where each is another to the other, the child is in the position of having to initiate the project to become whoever he is to be, and this is in principle a free choice, his free creation of his essential nature.}}

{{note|aster2|**}} An article in ''{{w|The Observer|The_Observer}}'' ({{popup|4.9.66|4 September 1966}}) announced the formation of {{qq|Project 70}}—{{qq|a plan to rescue mentally normal old people from the wards of mental hospitals.}}

{{note|aster3|***}} This may have been an allusion to a case which was receiving some publicity at that time. Zenya Belov, a student, was confined in a Russian mental institution around September, 1965—and he is presumably still there. It was alleged that he had shown {{qq|schizophrenic symptoms}} ({{qq|drawing diagrams, trying to reorganise the world graphically}}) but the only {{qq|symptoms}} evident to the British students who were with him shortly before the onset of {{qq|illness}} were his {{qq|unorthodox and reformist political views}}.

{{note|dagger|†}} References to a letter from Brenda Jordan in ''{{w|Peace News|Peace_News}}'' (17.6.66).

{{note|2dagger|††}} See also Laing{{s}} interpretation of the statements of a schizophrenic from the original account in {{w|Kraepelin|Emil_Kraepelin|Emil Kraepelin}}{{s}} {{l|''Lectures on Clinical Psychiatry''|https://archive.org/details/lecturesonclini00kraegoog|Full text at the Internet Archive}}, 1905 (pp. 29-31 ''The Divided Self''). Laing writes: {{qq|What does this patient seem to be doing? Surely he is carrying on a dialogue between his own parodied version of Kraepelin, and his own defiant rebelling self. {{q|You want to know that too? I tell you who is being measured and is measured and shall be measured. I know all that, and I could tell you, but I do not want to}}.}} Laing comments: {{qq|This seems to be plain enough talk.}}

{{note|3dagger|†††}} Since this was written an article has appeared. {{qq|Schizophrenia as a way of life}}, by Ruth Abel (''{{w|Guardian|The_Guardian|The Guardian}}'', {{popup|4.10.66|4 October 1966}}), describing a {{qq|fully autonomous unit}} for {{qq|schizophrenics}} established by Drs. Laing, Esterson and Cooper at {{w|Kingsley Hall|Kingsley_Hall}} in London. This project is financed by {{w|The Philadelphia Association|Philadelphia_Association|Philadelphia Association}} and it seems that two new centres have been opened during the last few months in {{w|North London|North_London}}, and it is hoped that these are only the first of {{qq|a chain of communities}}.
}}</font>

<font size="2">{{c|''Relevant Books and Articles not mentioned in References'':}}

{{hang|{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{qq|Series and Nexus in the Family}}, ''{{w|New Left Review|New_Left_Review}}'', No. 15.

{{w|David Cooper|David_Cooper_(psychiatrist)}}, {{qq|Sartre on Genet}}, ''{{w|New Left Review|New_Left_Review}}'', No. 25.

{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, ''The Politics of Experience and the Bird of Paradise'', Penguin Books, Autumn, 1966.

{{w|R. D. Laing|R._D._Laing}}, {{popup|H. Phillipson|Herbert Phillipson, British clinical psychologist (1911-1992)}}, {{popup|A. R. Lee|A. Russell Lee}}, ''Interpersonal Perception'': ''A Theory and a Method'', London, Tavistock, 1966.

{{w|T. S. Szasz|Thomas_Szasz}}, ''The Myth of Mental Illness'', London, Seeker and Warburg, 1962.

{{w|Carl R. Rogers|Carl_Rogers|Carl Rogers}}, ''On Becoming a Person'', London, Constable & Co., 1961.
}}</font>

<font size="2">{{c|''NOTES''}}</font>

<font size="2"><references /></font>

</div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Libertarian psychiatry : an introduction to existential analysis}}
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
[[Category:Psychology and psychiatry]]
[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 43/Reflections on parents, teachers and schools

2021-10-11T19:20:46Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 43 (Vol 4 No 9) September 1964]]<br>Reflections on parents, teachers and schools
| author = John Ellerby
| section =
| previous = [[../Some addresses of organisations mentioned in this issue|Some addresses]]
| next = [[../Anarchy on education|Anarchy on education]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|275}}
<div style="text-align:justify;">

<font size="5">'''Reflections on'''<br>'''parents, teachers'''<br>'''and schools'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:John Ellerby|JOHN ELLERBY]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|What anarchists are after}} is personal and social autonomy—the idea that individuals and their organisations should be self-regulating autonomous bodies. It is this which makes us advocates of worker{{s|r}} control in industry and which makes us enthusiastic about such examples as we find of social organisations spring up from below, from people{{s}} urge to satisfy their own needs, as opposed to those which depend on a structure of hierarchy, power and authority in which one set of people give instructions and another set of people carry them out.

{{tab}}The theoretical application of our ideas to the organisation of education is clear enough. The autonomous self-governing school is the aim, and in view of the obvious limits within which children may be said to govern themselves, this means in practice a school controlled by teachers by virtue of their functional responsibility to children, and by parents because of their biological responsibility for them. But the issue is more complicated, for in both primitive and complex communities it is recognised that all adults have a responsibility towards children, which because of the vagaries and vicissitudes of individual parentage, may have to be exercised on its behalf or on the child{{s}} behalf. Once that is admitted, we have of course admitted that education is the concern of the community. But what community? The state as in {{w|France|Education_in_France|Education in France}}, the local authority as in the {{w|United States|Education_in_the_United_States|Education in the United States}}, or a mixture of the two as in {{w|Britain|Education_in_the_United_Kingdom|Education in the United Kingdom}}? And where does the responsibility of the community begin and end?

{{tab}}Should education be compulsory anyway? (And is the compulsion to be applied to the child or to the parent?) {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}} saw the question dialectically:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The principle of authority, in the education of children, constitutes the natural point of departure; it is legitimate, necessary, when applied to children of a tender age, whose intelligence has not yet openly developed itself. But as the development of everything, and consequently of education, implies the gradual negation of the point of departure, this principle must diminish as fast as education and instruction advance, giving place to increasing liberty. All rational education is at bottom nothing but this progressive immolation of authority for the benefit of liberty, the final object of education necessarily {{p|276}}being the formation of free men full of respect and love for the liberty of others. Therefore the first day of the pupil{{s}} life, if the school takes infants scarcely able as yet to stammer a few words, should be that of the greatest authority and an almost entire absence of liberty; but its last day should be that of the greatest liberty and the absolute abolition of every vestige of the animal or divine principle of authority.</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Eighty-five years later, {{w|Ethel Mannin|Ethel_Mannin}} in her utopian survey ''Bread and Roses'' took a more absolutely {{qq|libertarian}} line:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}At this point you perhaps protest, {{qq|But if there is no compulsion, what happens if a child does not want to attend school of any kind, and the parents are not concerned to persuade him?}} It is quite simple. In that case the child does not attend any school. As he becomes adolescent he may wish to acquire some learning. Or he may develop school-going friends and wish to attend school because they do. But if he doesn{{t}} he is nevertheless learning all the time, his natural child{{s}} creativeness working in happy alliance with his freedom. No Utopian parent would think of using that moral coercion we call {{q|persuasion}}. By the time he reaches adolescence the child grows tired of running wild, and begins to identify himself with grown-ups; he perceives the usefulness of knowing how to read and write and add, and there is probably some special thing he wants to learn—such as how to drive a train or build a bridge or a house. It is all very much simpler than our professional educationists would have us believe.</font></blockquote>

{{tab}}Some of us think it is not ''that'' simple. But the point is academic, for in practice the decision is that of the parents. Nowadays it is only highly sophisticated and educated people who bother to argue about whether or not it is desirable that children should learn the {{w|three Rs|The_three_Rs|The three Rs}}. The law in this country does not in fact require parents to send their children to school; it imposes an obligation on them to see that their children while within the compulsory age, are receiving {{qq|an appropriate education}}. The occasional prosecutions of recalcitrant parents usually reveal a degree of apathy, indifference or parental incompetence that hardly provides a good case for the opponents of compulsion, though they do sometimes rope in highly conscientious parents whose views on education do not happen to coincide with those of the local authority. (Mrs. {{popup|Joy Baker|Joy Elsbeth Baker}}{{s}} {{popup|account|Children in Chancery (1964)}} of her long and in the end successful struggle with the authorities will be [[Anarchy 46/A partner not envisaged|reviewed]] in a coming issue of {{sc|anarchy}}). Usually, apart from a few of the rich, with their governesses and tutors, there are not many parents with the time or skill to teach their children at home, and of those who could, many must feel it unfair to deprive their children of the pleasures and social experience of belonging to a community of their peers, or may cherish the right of parents to have the kids out of their way for some of the time—and the reciprocal right of their children to be outside the parental atmosphere.

{{aster}}

{{tab}}Historically, in this country, the struggle to make education free, compulsory and universal, and out of the exclusive control of religious organisations, was long and bitter, and the opposition to it came, not from libertarian objectors, but from the upholders of privilege and dogma, and from those (both parents and employers) who had an economic interest in the labour of children or a vested interest in ignorance. The very reason why it had to be made compulsory ninety-four {{p|277}}years ago was because children were an economic asset. Readers of chapters {{l|8|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch08.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} and {{l|12|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} of {{w|Marx|Karl_Marx|Karl Marx}}{{s}} ''{{l|Capital|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}}'' will not dissent from the assertion that the {{w|industrial revolution|Industrial_Revolution|Industrial Revolution}} was made by the children of the poor. As late as 1935 {{w|Lord Halifax|Edward_Wood,_1st_Earl_of_Halifax|Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax}}, as {{w|President of the Board of Education|Secretary_of_State_for_Education|Secretary of State for Education}}, opposing the proposal to raise the school leaving age from fourteen to fifteen, declared that {{qq|public opinion would not tolerate an unconditional raising of the age}} and the {{w|Bradford|Bradford}} textile manufacturers assured him that {{qq|there was work for little fingers there.}}

{{tab}}The notion that primary ecucation should be free, compulsory and universal is very much older than the {{w|English Act of 1870|Elementary_Education_Act_1870|Elementary Education Act 1870}}. It grew up with the printing press and the rise of protestantism. The rich had been educated by the {{w|Church|Church_of_England|Church of England}} and the sons of the rising bourgeoisie in the {{w|grammar schools|Grammar_school#Early_grammar_schools|Grammar school}} of the Middle Ages. From the 16th century on arose a gradual demand that all should be taught. {{w|Martin Luther|Martin_Luther}} appealed {{qq|To the Councilmen of all Cities in {{w|Germany|Holy_Roman_Empire|Holy Roman Empire}} that they establish and maintain Christian Schools}}, observing that the training children get at home {{qq|attempts to make us wise through our experience}} a task for which life itself is too short, and which could be accelerated by systematic instruction by means of books. Compulsory universal education was founded in {{w|Calvinist|Calvinism|Calvinism}} {{w|Geneva|History_of_Geneva#Reformation|History of Geneva: Reformation}} in 1536, and {{w|Calvin|John_Calvin|John Calvin}}{{s}} {{w|Scottish|Scotland|Scotland}} disciple {{w|John Knox|John_Knox}} {{qq|planted a school as well as a {{w|kirk|Church_of_Scotland|Church of Scotland}} in every parish.}} In {{w|puritan Massachusetts|Massachusetts_Bay_Colony|Massachusetts Bay Colony}} free compulsory primary education was introduced in 1647. The common school, writes {{w|Lewis Mumford|Lewis_Mumford}} in ''{{l|The Condition of Man|https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.188937|Full text at the Internet Archive}}'':

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}{{e}} contrary to popular belief, is no belated product of 19th century democracy: I have pointed out that it played a necessary part in the absolutist-mechanical formula. {{w|Friedrich Wilhelm I|Frederick_William_I_of_Prussia|Frederick William I of Prussia}} of {{w|Prussia|Brandenburg-Prussia|Brandenburg-Prussia}}, following Luther{{s}} precept, made primary education compulsory in his realm in 1717, and founded 1,700 schools to meet the needs of the poor. Two ordinances of {{w|Louis XIV|Louis_XIV_of_France}} in 1694 and 1698 and one of {{w|Louis XV|Louis_XV_of_France}} in 1724 required regular attendance at school. Even {{w|England|England}}, a straggler in such matters, had hundreds of private charity schools, some of them founded by the {{w|Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge|Society_for_Promoting_Christian_Knowledge}}, which had been incorporated in 1699. {{w|Vergerious|Pier_Paolo_Vergerio|Pier Paolo Vergerio}}, one of the earliest renaissance schoolmasters, had thought education an essential function of the State; and centralised authority was now belatedly taking up the work that had been neglected with the wiping out of municipal freedom in the greater part of Europe.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}All the rationalist philosophers of the 18th century thought about the problems of education, and of them, the two acutest educational thinkers ranged themselves on opposite sides on the question of the ''organisation'' of education: {{w|Rousseau|Jean-Jacques_Rousseau|Jean-Jacques Rousseau}} for the State, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin|William Godwin}} against it. Rousseau, whose ''{{l|Emile|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5427|Full text at Project Gutenberg}}'' postulates a completely individual education (human society is ignored, the tutor{{s}} entire life is devoted to poor Emile), did nevertheless concern himself with the social aspect, arguing, in his ''{{l|Discourse on Political Economy|https://archive.org/details/socialcontractd00rousgoog/page/n302/mode/2up|Full text at the Internet Archive}}'' (1755) for public education {{qq|under regulations prescribed by the government}}, for

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}If children are brought up in common in the bosom of equality; if they are imbued with the laws of the State and the precepts of the General Will {{e}} we cannot doubt that they will cherish one another mutually as brothers {{e}} to become in time defenders and fathers of the country of which they will have been so long the children.</blockquote></font>

{{p|278}}{{tab}}William Godwin, who, in his ''{{l|Enquirer|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/godwin/enquirer.html|Full text at Anarchy Archives}}'' attacks the concealed authoritarianism of Rousseau{{s}} educational theories, criticises in his ''{{l|Enquiry Concerning Political Justice|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/godwin/PJfrontpiece.html|Full text at Anarchy Archives}}'' (1793), the idea of national education. He summarises the arguments in favour, which are those of Rousseau, adding to them the question:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}If the education of our youth be entirely confined to the prudence of their parents, or the accidental benevolence of private individuals, will it not be a necessary consequence, that some will be educated to virtue, others to vice, and others again entirely neglected?</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}Godwin{{s}} answer is:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}The injuries that result from a system of national education are, in the first place, that all public establishments include in them the idea of permanence. They endeavour, it may be, to secure and to diffuse whatever of advantage to society is already known, but they forget that more remains to be known {{e}} But public education has always expended its energies in the support of prejudice; it teaches its pupils not the fortitude that shall bring every proposition to the test of examination, but the art of vindicating such tenets as may chance to be previously established {{e}} This feature runs through every species of public establishment; and, even in the petty institution of {{w|Sunday schools|Sunday_school|Sunday school}}, the chief lessons that are taught are a superstitious veneration for the {{w|Church of England|Church_of_England}}, and to bow to every man in a handsome coat {{e}} Refer them to reading, to conversation, to meditation, but teach them neither creeds nor {{w|catechisms|Catechism|Catechism}}, neither moral nor political {{e}}</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}Secondly, the idea of national education is founded in an inattention to the nature of mind. Whatever each man does for himself is done well; whatever his neighbours or his country undertake to do for him is done ill. It is our wisdom to incite men to act for themselves, not to retain them in a state of perpetual pupillage. He that learns because he desires to learn will listen to the instructions he receives and apprehend their meaning. He that teaches because he desires to teach will discharge his occupation with enthusiasm and energy. But the moment political institution undertakes to assign to every man his place, the functions of all will be discharged with supineness and indifference {{e}}</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}Thirdly, the project of a national education ought uniformly to be discouraged on account of its obvious alliance with national government. This is an alliance of a more formidable nature than the old and much contested alliance of church and state. Before we put so powerful a machine under the direction of so ambitious an agent, it behoves us to consider well what we do. Government will not fail to employ it to strengthen its hands and perpetuate its institutions {{e}} Their view as instigator of a system of education will not fail to be analogous to their views in their political capacity: the data upon which their conduct as statesmen is vindicated will be the data upon which their institutions are founded. It is not true that our youth ought to be instructed to venerate the constitution, however excellent; they should be instructed to venerate truth {{e}} (Even) in the countries where liberty chiefly prevails, it is reasonably to be assumed that there are important errors, and a national education has the most direct tendency to perpetuate those errors and to form all minds upon one model.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}Godwin{{s}} arguments are worth quoting at this length, not only as the classic statement of an anarchist position on this issue, but because they have had such ample subsequent justification. On the other hand he does not really answer the question of how we can ensure that every child can have free access to whatever educational facilities will suit its individual needs.

{{p|279}}{{tab}}In practice, in this country today people who want to try an anarchist approach to education have two possible courses of action: to work in the private sector—independent schools of one kind or another, a minority of which are progressive, or to work in the normal school system and try to influence it in a {{qq|progressive}} direction. These two courses are by no means mutually exclusive, and there is plenty of evidence of the influence of the former on the latter.

{{tab}}It is surprising, and certainly saddening, considering the number of people interested in {{qq|progressive}} schools, how few of them there are and how they seldom inspire other people to start them. For example, the publication of ''{{w|Summerhill|Summerhill_(book)|Summerhill (book)}}'' a compilation of the writings of [[Author:A. S. Neill|A. S. Neill]] brought about a great deal of interest in his school and his ideas in {{w|America|United_States|United States}}; there was an embarrassing procession of overseas visitors to Neill{{s}} little school in {{w|Suffolk|Suffolk}}, but how few of the admirers and visitors set about starting more schools on similar lines. A few did: one of the [[Anarchy 43/High School U.S.A.|contributions]] in this issue of {{sc|anarchy}} comes from people who are trying to.

{{tab}}Why shouldn{{t}} the parents of a group of babies in the same age-group get together and plan a school for them well in advance, so as to accumulate the funds required before they are needed? They could as several groups of parents do, run their own {{w|nursery school|Preschool|Preschool}} when their children reach the appropriate age and then develop from the primary stage onward. The wealthy who are also intent on educating their children in independent schools, have found a variety of ways for financing them by way of Deeds and Covenant, endowment policies and so on. ({{w|John Vaizey|John_Vaizey,_Baron_Vaizey}} estimates that at present something like £60 million a year is spent on school fees and £15-£20 million of this is found by tax-avoidance).

{{tab}}Many of us on the other hand, are more concerned with changing the ordinary primary and secondary schools which the vast majority of children attend, changing the teaching methods and changing parental and social attitudes. Some will simply say that this cannot be done—this would be the view of the {{w|secondary modern|Secondary_modern_school|Secondary modern school}} [[Author:Mister P.|school-teacher]] who contributes an honest [[Anarchy 43/Teacher's dilemma|account]] of his problems elsewhere in this issue. But others will say that it would be foolish not to try to take advantage of the present wave of interest in education and in the state of the schools.

{{tab}}The anarchist, seeking functional, as opposed to political, answers to social needs, and contrasting the social principle with the political principle, sees in the state{{s}} control of education a usurpation of a social function. (Historically of course, the Education Act of 1870 didn{{t}} {{qq|usurp}} anybody{{s}} function, but if you accept the conception of an inverse relationship between the state and society—the strength of one resulting from the weakness of the other—you can see how the social organisation of popular education was, so to speak, atrophied in advance, by its political organisation. That this has not been the disaster—though some would say it has—that anarchist thinkers like {{p|280}}Godwin predicted, has been due to the local diffusion of control, the divergent aims of teachers and the resilience of children).

{{tab}}Functionally, the administration of the school is the concern of parents and teachers, and if we really seek a society of autonomous free associations we must see such bodies as {{w|parent-teacher associations|Parent-Teacher_Association|Parent-Teacher Association}} as the kind of organisation whose eventual and {{qq|natural}} function is to take over the schools from the {{w|Ministry|Ministry_of_Education_(United_Kingdom)|Ministry of Education}}, the {{w|County Councils|County_council#United_Kingdom|County council}}, the Directors, Inspectors, Managers and Governors who, in a society dominated by the political principle are inevitably their controllers. I don{{t}} know whether schools so administered would be any better or any wrose than they are at present, but I do believe that a {{qq|self-regulating}} society would run its schools that way. Among independent schools in this country which exemplify this kind of organisation, there used to be [[Anarchy 43/Progressive experience|Burgess Hill School]] (described by one of the [[Author:Olive Markham|parents]] in this issue of {{sc|anarchy}}) which was owned by a Friendly Society of parents and teachers and there still is {{w|King Alfred School|King_Alfred_School,_London}}, governed by a society of people interested in modern educational methods and {{qq|administered by an advisory council of pupils and staff}}. I have not heard of any parent-teacher associations in the ordinary school system which aspire to such functions, though with the development of a variety of organisations in the last few years concerned with interesting parents in education, one can imagine the members reflecting after a time on whether their own intense {{qq|participation}} had not rendered the usual complicated and expensive bureaucracy of school administration superfluous.

{{tab}}The mention of parent-teacher associations—in theory an epitome of the kind of social organisation which anarchists envisage—reminds us of their greater development in America, and the fact that this has not had exactly the results that we as anarchists would find desirable. In his book ''On Being Human'', writing about the school as {{qq|a most important agency in the teaching of the art and science of human relations}}, the anthropologist and biologist {{w|Ashley Montagu|Ashley_Montagu}} declares:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}We must shift the emphasis from the three Rs to the fourth R, human relations, and place it first, foremost, and always in that order of importance as the principal reason for the existence of the school. It must be clearly understood, once and for all time, that human relations are the most important of all relations. Upon this understanding must be based all our educational policies {{e}} Our teachers must, therefore, be specially qualified to teach human relations {{e}}</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}But the kind of thing that happens when this point of view filters into the school system is discussed by {{w|David Riesman|David_Riesman}} in his {{qq|Thoughts on Teachers and Schools}}. The teaching function, he observes, {{qq|has been extended to include training in group co-operation, manners, the arts, and self-understanding, as well as large residues of the traditional curriculum}}. For Human Relations has in fact already become a classroom subject, but somehow not in Montagu{{s}} sense. {{qq|The school is implicated and embroiled}}, says Riesman, {{qq|in the changing forms {{p|281}}of America{{s}} preoccupation with success—the patina of success now being defined by such terms as {{q|group co-operation}}, {{q|self-understanding}}, {{q|personal adjustment}} and {{q|getting along with people}}.}} The progressive education movement, spreading in a distorted fashion through the state school systems, has, he feels, dovetailed with the {{qq|mindless pragmatism and vocationalism}} which the schools absorb from their social surroundings, from parents, supervisors, taxpayers and the variety of pressure groups, great and small which surround the American school boards. Meanwhile the teachers lead lives of harried desperation fighting a {{qq|losing battle in defence of the traditional intellectual values}}. And he evolves, on the analogy of {{w|Keynesian economics|Keynesian_economics}} a ''counter-cyclical'' theory of education. Just as {{w|Keynes|John_Maynard_Keynes|John Maynard Keynes}} recommended spending in times of {{w|depression|Depression_(economics)|Depression (economics)}}, so Riesman recommends that {{qq|teachers, in selecting among the expectations held out to them, have some modest opportunities to oppose life in its momentary excesses}}. He wants {{qq|to encourage some of them to give up trying to be psychiatrists, mothers and moralists, to give up making citizens, democrats, and tolerant children. Could they not be persuaded to concentrate more than many now feel justified in doing, on their roles as teachers of specific subjects? This is, after all, a job no one else is assigned or trained to do.}}

{{tab}}Montagu writes that {{qq|A society such as ours, in which human relations are submerged in the economic system, can rescue itself only by submerging its economy in the matrix of human relations {{e}} And this is the task that the schools must assist in undertaking, no less that the rescue of man from his debasing enslavement to the principles and practices of an aquisitive society}}. But how does the attempt work out? We may gain a clue from the book {{popup|''Crestwood Heights'': ''A North American Suburb''|University of Toronto Press (1956)}} by {{popup|Seeley|John R. Seeley}}, {{popup|Sim|R. Alexander Sim}} and {{popup|Loosley|Elizabeth W. Loosley}}. {{w|Crestwood Heights|Forest_Hill,_Toronto|Forest Hill, Toronto}} is built around its modern, well-equipped and enlightened schools. It is particularly {{qq|child-oriented}} and the Crestwood Heights parents {{qq|appear to have accepted nearly all the values which the humanists, the liberals, and the psychiatrically oriented speakers and writers have advocated over the last fifty years.}} All the right adjectives are used. {{qq|In the city}}, writes William J. Newman, {{qq|competition is open, acknowledged, and brutal; in the suburb toleration, permissiveness, and individual choice are the rule. The child is brought up as an autonomous spontaneous individual: thus the open glass school. The suburb will provide the arena in which the family and especially the children can emerge as {{q|free}} and {{q|responsible}}, ready to take their place in the world.}} But the well-meaning parents of Crestwood Heights are pursuing for their children two contradictory goals, {{qq|success}} and {{qq|psychological maturity}}. The authors observe that:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}The child must be free in accordance with democratic ideology; but he must, by no means, become free to the point of renouncing either the material success goals or the engineered co-operation integral to the adequate functioning of an industrial civilisation.</blockquote></font>

{{p|282}}And Newman comments:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}But it is not only the functioning of an industrial civilisation which provides the drive behind the overmastering of individual choice; it is the urge to go from status to status, for one generation to achieve in the eyes of their peers what the other could not, which is the motive force of American life in the suburb. The child {{q|is forced into the position of ''having to choose'' those means which will assure his ultimate entrance into an appropriate adult occupational status}}. Since it is a choice made on the sly through an omnipresent culture, the child {{q|sees no authority figures against which to rebel, should he feel the desire to do so {{e}} The child has therefore, only one recourse—to turn his attacks against himself.}} A pleasant society this, a new society, in which freedom is institutionalised, where choice is dictated.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}So this {{qq|free and progressive}} education becomes, with the best of intentions, no better than Rousseau{{s}} system which Godwin described as {{qq|a puppet-show exhibition, of which the master holds the wires, and the scholar is never to suspect in what manner they are moved.}}

{{tab}}Ashley Montagu, in another book, ''The Direction of Human Development'' writes of the coming together of parents and teachers in the complementary task of developing the potentialities of the child:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}The parents would contribute what the teachers ought to know, and the teachers would contribute what the parents ought to know, for the benefit of the child as well as for the benefit of all concerned. The teaching the child receives at home and the teaching it receives at school must be joined and unified. The teaching of the elementary skills of reading, writing and arithmetic is important, but not nearly as important as the most important of all skills—human relations.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}But David Riesman again, in his book ''Individualism Reconsidered'' makes this observation on the children of Crestwood Heights:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}Their parents want to know how they have fared at school: they are constantly comparing them, judging them in school aptitude, popularity, what part they have in the school play; are the boys sissies? the girls too fat? All the school anxieties are transferred to the home and ''vice versa'', partly because the parents, college graduates mostly, are intelligent and concerned with education. After school there are music lessons, skating lessons, riding lessons, with mother as chauffeur and scheduler. In the evening, the children go to a dance at school for which the parents have groomed them, while the parents go to a Parent-Teacher Association meeting for which the children, directly or indirectly, have groomed ''them'', where they are addressed by a psychiatrist who advises them to be warm and relaxed in handling their children! They go home and eagerly and warmly ask their returning children to tell them everything that happened at the dance, making it clear by their manner that they are sophisticated and cannot be easily shocked. As Professor Seeley describes matters, the school in this community operates a {{qq|gigantic factory for the production of relationships}}.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}This really frightening description pulls us up with a jerk. Accustomed to think of parent-teacher co-operation as a Good Thing, we seldom consider its possibilities as a tender trap, a well-intentioned conspiracy against the child. For where home and school are two separate worlds a child unhappy at home might find a means of escape in the different life of a school, and a child who is miserable at school might find consolation in the atmosphere of home. But if home and school are {{qq|joined and united}}, all avenues of escape are closed. After {{p|283}}all, how many children of your acquaintance enjoy discussing their school life with their parents or their home life with their teachers? Is not the plurality of environment one of the child{{s}} means of defending itself against the paying omnipotence of the adult world?

{{aster}}

{{tab}}In this country the pioneer of parent-teacher co-operation was the Home and School Committee of the {{l|New Education Fellowship|http://www.wef-international.org/|World Education Fellowship web site}}. Another body, the National Federation of {{w|Parent-Teacher Associations|Parent-Teacher_Association#United_Kingdom|Parent-Teacher Association}} was founded in 1956, linking together many existing bodies. Some of these associations have sprung up in a negative way to resist, and in some cases successfully avert {{qq|closing-down}} orders for schools. In the case of one independent school in London ({{w|St. Paul{{s}} Junior School|St_Paul's_Juniors|St Paul's Juniors}}, {{w|Hammersmith|Hammersmith}}) due to be closed down because the existing building could not economically be kept in repair while the trustees could not find the money for a new building, the parents successfully raised loans for it, announcing that they {{qq|would accept financial and educational responsibility for a new school}}. Other associations connected with both primary and secondary schools have provided their schools with swimming baths, or have seen their function in improving the school{{s}} equipment—providing such equipment as record-players, film-projectors, stage-lighting and so on. On the pitfalls and possibilities of this kind of organisation, the staff at one school reported that:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}{{e}} the progress of several children in arithmetic was being impeded by well-intentioned efforts to help them at home. At a series of evening meetings, the staff worked through specimen arithmetic papers with the fathers and mothers, explaining the particular methods in use at the school. Similarly, the headmistress of a village school introduced italic handwriting, a move which appeared to perturb some parents. As a result of discussion several mothers became interested and asked her to arrange evening classes so that they might learn it for themselves.</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}Formal association between parents and teachers does face certain difficulties, on occasion it may provide a hunting-ground for the committee-minded man or woman, and a trap for the excellent teacher who may be less adept at committee work. Another criticism is that it does not necessarily bring in the type of parent with whom contact is most needed: for example those whose children present particularly difficult problems, perhaps because of their home background.</blockquote></font>

{{aster}}

{{tab}}Another of the difficulties frequently met in the relations of parents and teachers is the narrow concern displayed so frequently by the anxious middle-class parents in little Johnny{{s}} {{w|11-plus|Eleven-plus|Eleven-plus}} or {{w|GCE|General_Certificate_of_Education|General Certificate of Education}} prospects, to the exclusion of an interest in the class or the school or the age-group as a whole. The attitude may be understandable, but it is nevertheless primitive to those who see as one of the pleasures of parenthood an enlargement of sympathy and concern from one{{s}} own biological offspring to children in general. Two other more recent developments in educational organisations may help to bring about this wider view which is certainly a prerequisite for the parent-teacher control of education which we see as an eventual aim.

{{p|284}}{{tab}}The first of these is ACE, the {{l|Advisory Centre for Education|https://socialinnovationexchange.org/insights/advisory-centre-education|Social Innovation Exchange article}} founded in 1960. This is another brain-child of {{w|Michael Young|Michael_Young,_Baron_Young_of_Dartington}} who started the {{w|Institute of Community Studies|Institute_of_Community_Studies}} and the Consumer{{s|r}} Association, and just as the latter organisation and its journal {{w|''Which''|Which%3F|Which?}} seeks to improve the quality of our consumption of goods and services, so ACE and its journal ''Where''? (subscription £1 a year) seeks to give the same kind of independent, unbiased assessment and advice for the consumers of education. The consumer approach with its implied philosophy of {{qq|he who pays the piper calls the tune}} could be the vehicle of a narrow {{w|philistinism|Philistinism|Philistinism}}, but in practice it is sound and sensible. Michael Young returns to the theme in the annual report of the Consumer{{s|r}} Association, published last month. The attitude of regarding parents as intruders in the schools is ruinous to good education, he declares, {{qq|How can parents take an interest if they are barely allowed inside the schools? The sooner parents play a part in our schools, the sooner will the money be found for their improvement.}} In fact, ACE, as readers of ''Where''? will agree, is an invaluable medium for closing the gap between parents and teachers.

{{tab}}The second of these new trends is the springing-up of {{w|Associations for the Advancement of State Education|Campaign_for_State_Education|Campaign for State Education}}. This movement again began in {{w|Cambridge|Cambridge}} in 1960, when a group of parents tried to hurry along improvements to a {{w|Newnham|Newnham,_Cambridgeshire}} primary school. They found that the poor conditions were more widespread than they had realised and that restrictions in educational expenditure prevented anything from being done. From the original pressure group, others sprang up in different parts of the country and today there are bout 90 such associations with a total of 10,000 members federated in CASE, the Confederation of Associations for the Advancement of State Education, which has been conducting national enquiries on a variety of educational topics. Undoubtedly this movement—co-existing, not competing, with Parent-Teacher Associations—has helped to widen people{{s}} field of concern from one child in one school, to the schools of the city or county and of the country.

{{tab}}Before getting too excited about this trend of course, we should attend an association meeting, to discover, once again, the solidly middle-class attendance and the disconcertingly vocational attitudes to education expressed from the floor. However, what better forum could there be for the education of parents? And is it inconceivable that some, without adopting an attitude of patronage or superiority, could devote themselves to bringing others in?

{{tab}}Certainly the phrase {{qq|Advancement of ''State'' Education}} is unfortunate from our point of view (and is an indication of the middle-class origins of this movement since it is people who normally think in terms of private education who most frequently refer to the {{qq|council}} schools as {{qq|state}} schools). Continual use of the phrase in ''{{w|The Observer|The_Observer}}'' led to a protest recently from Mr. Terence Kelly who wrote:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}I am sorry to see references to State education in your columns from time {{p|285}}to time. In less happy lands the Minister of Education (or of Public Instructions) determines what is taught in every school. In this country the State—thank God—does not own or run a single school. Those which are not independent of direct grant are maintained by local education authorities, who, with their various sub-committees and divisional executives on which teachers are represented, run an education system which is the envy of the world.</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}I understand that there are even societies for the advancement of State education. Do these good people know what they are asking for? Do they really want a State system on the Communist or Fascist model?</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}In case anyone should think this is an idle quibble on words, I ask you to consider, Sir, what the view of your readers would be if you began referring to the State police.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}It is not an idle quibble from another point of view: because we tend to be hypnotised by the idea of an educational monolith we take far too little advantage of the local autonomy that does exist, nor of that degree of autonomy (differing widely from place to place) which individual head teachers have, or could demand. Informed local pressure from parents and teachers is a weapon which we have hardly learned to exercise.

{{aster}}

{{tab}}Are there ways in which parents can push further into the decision-making bodies on education? The original Cambridge Association for the Advancement of State Education put up two members as independent candidates for the county council elections. One was elected and is now on the education committee. This is hardly a procedure which fits into an anarchist approach to the problem, although one of our frequent contributors, [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]] is proud to be a School Board member in {{w|New York|New_York_City|New York City}}. But what about parents as school governors or school managers? (Readers interested will find an article on what their functions are and how they are appointed in ''Where''? No. 10). Discussing parent-teacher relations in a letter to the {{w|''New Statesman''|New_Statesman}} in March this year, Mr. John McCann made an interesting point which most of us never knew and which should provide useful ammunition in arguments with local authorities: that back in 1944 the government gave a pledge that parents would be properly represented on the managing bodies of the schools attended by their children. Mr. McCann says:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}At the Committee stage of the {{w|1944 Education Act|Education_Act_1944|Education Act 1944}} the government gave an undertaking to see that parents would be properly represented on the managing bodies of primary schools. It was stated that they were not to be {{qq|drawn from a different social stratum from that in which the pupils of the schools are found, but that some, at least, of the Managers will be people who live the daily life of the village or town, who are in close association with the parents, and can make the wishes of the parents known to the Managers and to the teachers.}} This admirable principle was laid down in the form of an undertaking which is binding—for it was on that assurance that a Member of Parliament withdrew an amendment he had proposed.</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}This undertaking has not been implemented. Some authorities try to see that parents are genuinely represented, some pay lip service to the principle, some regard the principle with suspicion. The bodies which appoint Foundation Managers of voluntary schools often come into the last category. Hundreds of years of strife over electoral representation have shown that there is only one way to achieve adequate representation; that is for the people concerned to elect their own representative. No nomination from above is going {{p|286}}to work or to satisfy the people who want to be represented.</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}The government undertaking could be honoured very simply, without any change in the law, if the {{w|Minister of Education|Secretary_of_State_for_Education|Secretary of State for Education}} would ask local authorities to appoint one Manager ''who had been elected at a meeting of parents convened by the headmaster''. The parents should have the right to elect one of themselves or any other person (other than those already disqualified—teachers at the school, tradesmen supplying the school, etc.). Local education authorities appoint one, two or four Managers according to whether it is an {{w|Aided|Voluntary_aided_school|Voluntary aided school}}, {{w|Controlled|Voluntary_controlled_school|Voluntary controlled school}} or {{w|County|Community_school_(England_and_Wales)|Community school}} school. I am suggesting in all cases that this election procedure be applied to the appointment of one {{w|LEA|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} Manager.</blockquote></font>

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}It is sometimes said that School Managers have no powers. At Aided schools they have very real powers, at all schools they have duties. Managing bodies vary greatly in the extent to which they fulfil their duties, but in the most successful schools they perform a valuable service particularly in the field of parent-school relationships.</blockquote></font>

{{aster}}

{{tab}}And how do teachers react to all this? Many of course are delighted to make contact with the parents of their pupils and to feel that they have a shared concern. Their only regret is that the parents whom they most need to meet are the very ones they never see at open-days, parent-teacher functions and so on. Relations are closest in the infant{{s|r}} school and seem to dwindle away later. {{qq|What happens then}} asks Jean Rintoul, {{qq|that this close parent-teacher relationship should be broken as the child gets older until, in the later secondary years, it is worse than non-existent? Is the teacher to blame and, if the teacher is, will a brief talk with a parent at an appropriately-spaced {{q|surgery}} suffice? The answer to that is in the answer to another question: {{q|Who are the parents who are going to attend the surgery?}} That{{s}} an easy question and every teacher can answer it. They will be the same parents who attend the parent-teacher association meetings, the school prize-givings, the school concert or play; the same parents whose children are readily identifiable in every class because such children exhibit all the well-being and confidence that a privileged home provides.}} This is one of the problems of parent-teacher relations for which a solution has not been found.

{{tab}}There are teachers too, who have a deep suspicion of parental encroachment on their functions and their autonomy. Their point of view was put with more-than-usual frankness by Mr. G. B. Corrin in a letter to the {{w|''Times Educational Supplement''|TES_(magazine)|TES (magazine)}} ({{popup|10/4/64|10 April 1964}}). Commenting on a proposal by an {{popup|AASE|Association for the Advancement of State Education}} secretary that time for evening meetings with parents should be written into the teacher{{s}} conditions of service, Mr. Corrin asked:

<font size="2"><blockquote>{{tab}}When the child of one of these parents goes into hospital for an operation, do they demand a meeting with the surgeon at a time convenient to themselves and then criticise his methods? I consider myself as highly trained and as experienced in my work as any surgeon, and I resent this intrusion by the ignorant, who apparently have no faith in my ability to do the job for which I am paid. Parent-teacher associations and such-like may be useful for raising money which the government is too parsimonious to provide and arranging social activities for those who have nothing better to do, but, in my experience they in no way benefit the education of the children and can become a positive {{p|287}}nuisance because of their inability to resist the temptation to interfere. Certainly, many parents are ignorant about education, but is it the teacher{{s|r}} business to instruct them? If so, let classes be arranged and the teachers remunerated. But parents cannot plead ignorance and at the same time demand the right to interfere with those who have been properly trained to carry out the education of their children.</blockquote></font>

{{tab}}Obviously the writer of this letter would be not only hostile, but derisory about our view that the form of educational organisation which we should see as our aim is one in which control of the schools is in the hands of associations of parents and teachers. For teachers, as Sir {{w|Ronald Gould|Ronald_Gould_(trade_unionist)}} once put it, {{qq|neither love nor trust the parish pump.}} The vehemence with which London teachers opposed the intended break-up of the {{w|LCC|London_County_Council|London County Council}}{{s}} education service shows how strongly they prefer the remote and impersonal control of {{w|County Hall|County_Hall,_London|County Hall, London}} to the near-at-hand interfering bureaucracy of {{qq|the office}} which teachers in many other parts of the country suffer and resent. We can cartainly understand, in view of the sheer number of bosses which the organisation of education has set over them, why they regard encroachment by parents beyond a certain point and beyond certain topics, with suspicion. And when you see some of those self-confident high-income consumers in some of the AASEs, who quite obviously regard the teachers as their servants and not as their partners, you can see the point of this suspicion.

{{tab}}Nor would it be wise to assume that it is a question of progressive parents and reactionary or time-serving teachers. It is much more often the other way round, as everyone who has tried in humble ways to introduce progressive methods into the schools has found. When Teddy O’Neill was headmaster of {{w|Prestolee|Prestolee}} School in {{w|Lancashire|Lancashire}} and set about transforming it, it was with the support of the local education authority and of the Inspectorate, and against the hostility and abuse of local parents—and it took him years to win them over.

{{aster}}

{{tab}}In looking for the roots in our existing society for a different kind of organisation, we have found pitfalls and dangers everywhere—for children, for parents and for teachers. This is not surprising, for our society is riddled with these problems of status and hierarchy, and the concept of social organisation which most of our fellow-citizens understand, is one in which one lot of people order another lot of people around. But somehow, somewhere we have to develop the germs of a non-authoritarian method of co-operative social organisation. Where better to make the attempt than in the schools?
</div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Reflections on parents teachers and schools}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 43/Teacher's dilemma

2021-10-11T19:09:27Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 43 (Vol 4 No 9) September 1964]]<br>Teacher{{s}} dilemma
| author = Mister P.
| section =
| previous = [[../Primary courtesies|Primary courtesies]]
| next = [[../Progressive experience|Progressive experience]]
| notes = ''MISTER P. teaches in a {{w|London|London}} {{w|secondary modern school|Secondary_modern_school|Secondary modern school}}''
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|260}}

<font size="5">'''Teacher{{s}} dilemma'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Mister P.|MISTER P.]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|My headmaster looked up from the book he was reading,}} and although I had been teaching on his staff for ten years I still retained that sense of guilt whenever I disturbed him. A quiet, gentlemanly type the head is—modest, undemanding, kindly—a face wrinkled with fifty odd years of experience. Rather like an amiable {{w|bloodhound|Bloodhound|Bloodhound}}—the sort you want to pat on the head. Some of the boys say he{{s}} too much of a gentleman to be headmaster of a {{w|Secondary Modern School|Secondary_modern_school|Secondary modern school}}. His voice is one of undertones, a whisper almost. He is rarely roused. His equable nature seems incapable of deep emotion.

{{tab}}When a boy was caught looking at pornographic photos we all thought it would break the trend but it didn{{t}}.

{{tab}}{{qq|Where did you get them?}} the head asked in a dull monotone. He could even have been thinking of the weeding still to be done in his back garden. The boy said he found them on the floor of a public lavatory.

{{tab}}{{qq|Which one?}}

{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}The one by the Green, sir.}}

{{tab}}The head turned in that direction before he replied.

{{tab}}{{qq|I doubt the story. Go away and think it over. Then come and tell me the truth.}}

{{tab}}The incident was never referred to again. I admired his attitude, but soon realised it was right not because of deliberate motive but because of a dreadful indifference. Thirty years of {{w|State School|State-funded_schools_(England)|State-funded schools (England)}} teaching had tainted the head{{s}} enthusiasm with cynicism. He was in that vacuum when the curve of success flattens and when there is nothing ahead but retirement. But in all sincerity—a good man, seeing the follies of politics, of systems, of ideals. Turned in on himself. The fight given up. Just jog along. Read quietly behind the closed door and let the school run like a well tuned machine. Enthusiasm is there on his staff—but they{{ll}} learn with the years. Disappointment will seep in. Repeated failures with disgruntled, aggressive pupils see to that. The staff will perhaps join the pupils and rebel—give up. An unlikely event, since their livelihoods depend on it. Or they{{ll}} stifle their dedication and save their nerves.

{{tab}}{{e}} So the headmaster looked up from the book he was reading and I felt guilty.

{{tab}}{{qq|This boy David,}} I began. The book closed. Sad, tired eyes raised themselves up enquiringly. His face reflected an assumed interest.

{{p|261}}{{tab}}{{qq|Yes, Mr. P.?}}

{{tab}}{{qq|He just doesn{{t}} like Science—that{{s}} all there is to it,}} I said. {{qq|Can I put him in the library during these periods? He won{{t}} learn. He hasn{{t}} a capacity for Science.}}

{{tab}}{{qq|We can{{t}} help that.}} A few papers were pointlessly shuffled. {{qq|Don{{t}} accept so many explanations from these boys—they only make your job more difficult. Tell the boy you expect the work done. If he doesn{{t}} do it, keep him in after school—and keep him in until it IS done.}}

{{tab}}It was hopeless, of course, but I persisted.

{{tab}}{{qq|The boy is unhappy. His mother has no affection for him and there is tension between his parents.}}

{{tab}}A little more useless paper shuffling, then:

{{tab}}{{qq|Don{{t}} look for excuses. These boys must do what is asked. You always seem to get emotionally involved. Don{{t}}. It doesn{{t}} help your discipline. Just do the teaching and take it for granted they{{ll}} follow. They will if you insist. Don{{t}} get side-tracked on these sort of issues.}}

{{tab}}Problem solved. The book was carefully reopened at the page to intimate the interview was over. I was left wondering how any teacher could inspire without being emotionally involved. Surely it means just that—an emotional involvement with one or more pupils. Of course, the system of packing thirty boys into a room with one teacher who is expected to be a light and inspiration to them all is absurd. The {{w|Ancient Greeks|Hellenistic_philosophy|Hellenistic philosophy}} knew the answer, but unfortunately their method was not extended to the masses. No Government can afford to experiment along those lines because in our too complex society the individual doesn{{t}} count any more. The Greeks gave the warning long ago—the individual must be more important than the society.

{{tab}}{{qq|The greatest training (not education) for the greatest number}}—this is the adage of our school system. The Government, that far remote body with its hierarchy of serving officers, is well out of touch with those who are expected to apply their rules, and even further removed from those who are forced to obey them. Of course, amenities are available for the recalcitrant in the form of Child Guidance Clinics, but I have never yet succeeded in getting a boy into the hands of a person who has done more than the merest superficial remedial work. The surprisingly high number of stammerers in our schools shows this: little, usually absolutely nothing—is done to help them.

{{tab}}I have 32 boys in my {{w|form|Form_(education)|Form (education)}}. They are in their third year—average age about 14. It is a typical {{qq|B}} stream of a Secondary Modern School. Here are some details concerning a few of them.

{{tab}}1.  Father and Mother separated. Mother regards son as a husband substitute and appears amazed to find boy is uncontrolled. He has been unruly but has responded to a very personal approach, and welcomes opportunities to be a child and not an adult.

{{tab}}2.  Repeated {{w|migraine|Migraine|Migraine}} keeps this boy away from school. No action or treatment from his doctor. Parents are quite indifferent and lack common sense, though they are kindly.

{{tab}}3.  Noisy, boisterous child, who has been in the courts for petty {{p|262}}stealing three times in the last year. No serious work done to resolve his problems. He has no parents and lives with his grandmother who is too old to cope.

{{tab}}4.  A difficult child who gets temper {{w|tantrums|Tantrum|Tantrum}} and has tried to {{w|injure himself|Self-harm|Self-harm}} by banging his head against the playground wall. Father a dominant ex-army {{w|sergeant|Sergeant#United_Kingdom|Sergeant}} who believes in {{qq|the iron fist}} upbringing. {{qq|It did me no harm—made a man out of me,}} he says. Father divorced and boy hates his step-mother. Boy recommended for Child Guidance. After three short talks with {{qq|a nice lady}} he was discharged, and the tantrums continue.

{{tab}}5.  A long history of truancy, dishonesty, migraine and asthma. Mother is baffled by his disorders and says she can{{t}} understand the child. After successive interviewing her confidence was won and she admitted the boy is {{w|illegitimate|Legitimacy_(family_law)|Legitimacy (family law)}}, but he has been led to believe that the man he regards as his father is his father. Mother says his real father was a cruel man who {{qq|used the belt on me often.}} The boy feels a tension at home, especially with his {{qq|father}}. There is lately an added burden—the arrival of a baby which {{qq|was an accident}} and {{qq|is an awful nuisance to us all}}. The quotes are the mother{{s}}.

{{tab}}6.  An inaccessible, quiet, {{w|introvert|Extraversion_and_introversion|Extraversion and introversion}} with no personality. Parents show no interest in his education and have not appeared at the school. Boy now opening up a little and has become emotionally upset because of the frequent quarrels between his parents. There are repeated threats that they will part and the boy doesn{{t}} know which side to take.

{{tab}}7.  This boy has no interest in anyone or anything. He seems spoiled by well-to-do parents (hairdressers) who have guaranteed him a {{qq|cushy job}} in the family firm. Has had frequent intercourse with 13 and 14 year old girls and has also homosexual tendencies. He regards all these activities with pride, feeling it is a flout at authority.

{{tab}}8.  A pleasant lad who is experiencing difficulty with certain teachers who use an authoritative approach. This makes him react aggressively. His father uses this method and the boy resents it, but is unable to demonstrate his resentment. His father lost one arm during the war and is envious of the boy being able to be {{qq|the man of the house}} by doing all the jobs he cannot do. He says the boy is trying to usurp his authority and tries to make him feel inferior in the home.

{{tab}}9.  An extremely pleasant boy who is very emotional, craving affection. He shines academically only when shown affection and when a special interest is taken in him. His father and mother live together but decided three years ago to go their own ways. He is rarely at home—{{qq|preferring the company of the chaps in the local}} she says. The mother has an affair with a man residing in the room upstairs whom the boy has come to know as his Uncle Peter. This man spoils him and encourages his extravagant ways. The boy has definite homosexual tendencies.

{{tab}}10.  A {{w|stammerer|Stuttering|Stuttering}}. Father and mother are keen {{w|Salvation Army|Salvation_Army}} workers who have little understanding of the problems their child is experiencing. Mother says, {{qq|He{{ll}} grow out of it. We have faith, both of us. We know.}} I hope, for the boy{{s}} sake, they do.

{{p|263}}{{tab}}11.  Rather inattentive and dreamy. Lives within himself. Not surprising. His father is in prison serving a long sentence for robbery.

{{tab}}In my form there is also an {{w|Indian|India|India}}, a boy from {{w|Hong Kong|Hong_Kong}}, another from {{w|Morocco|Morocco}} and two from {{w|Ghana|Ghana}}. I had one from {{w|Cyprus|Cyprus}} but he was removed to a {{w|remand|Remand_(detention)|Remand}} school because he was discovered by a police constable masturbating a boy of twelve behind a bush on a common.

{{tab}}How is it possible with such diversity, to make them fit into a scheme? It is to be expected that any teacher, however conscientious must by the sheer force of the burden, break under the strain and adopt a less serious attitude if his sanity is to be kept. How can he gain the confidence of every pupil? A man cannot turn himself into 32 personalities. And how can he cope withy the boy who is resentful because he has been made to feel a failure by finding himself damned to a {{qq|lower stream}}, no matter how hard he works? The {{w|Grammar Schools|Grammar_school|Grammar school}} are streamed into A, B, and C forms in just the same manner. Naturally the reputation of the school rests with examination results, so the A{{s}} are favoured—the élite. A {{qq|good}} school is the one with {{qq|good}} results. Exams are the currency of education and the rot spreads to the staff rooms. The A stream teachers pride themselves as being the chosen, while the C stream teachers are regarded with a certain disdain.

{{tab}}As well as this, the scramble after {{qq|special allowances}} for supposed responsibilities can only be compared with what goes on in the worst type of business concerns. These privileged members are naturally envied, and the jealousies ferment. It is the fault of the system which does not recognise that all teachers, no matter whom or what they teach, are valuable contributors of equal importance.

{{tab}}Of course, this system exalts only the few academically minded pupils who, with their crushed individuality, succeed in knuckling down under the pressures. All incentives go to create schools which fit these and tolerate the rest. If the majority of pupils leaving our schools leave them free of bitterness, it is more luck than planning, for there is only boredom for those who do not shine at examinations. This is the age of Science and Technology and the Government intends to glorify only those things. No politician sincerely believes that the mind of a child is sacred—that it should be respected and encouraged to develop naturally—surely the real task of the teacher is to guide each child individually, not to force a group along one channel laid down by politicians. It is quite astonishing how few people realise the dangers arising from a system of education based on government policies—a government which holds the purse and calls the tune, whilst the teachers are the vassals who merely dance to it.

{{tab}}I see no way in which the position can be improved—at any rate, not so long as we have a State education. Of course, there are many dedicated teachers who are struggling against impossible odds in our State Schools. They are trying to create some sort of reform. Without them the position would be even worse.

{{tab}}The tragedy of it all is that schools can make a child into anything—a patriot or a traitor; a {{w|Fascist|Fascism|Fascism}} or a {{w|Rocker|Rocker_(subculture)}}; a saint or a scourge; and almost, it seems, in spite of himself.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Teachers dilemma}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 43/Primary courtesies

2021-10-11T19:07:42Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 43 (Vol 4 No 9) September 1964]]<br>Primary courtesies
| author = Charlotte Franklin
| section =
| previous = [[../Stunted to school|Stunted to school]]
| next = [[../Teacher's dilemma|Teacher{{s}} dilemma]]
| notes = ''CHARLOTTE FRANKLIN lives in {{w|North London|North_London}} and has four boys who have experienced a variety of schools.''
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|258}}

<font size="5">'''Primary courtesies'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charlotte Franklin|CHARLOTTE FRANKLIN]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Everyone knows the discrepancy}} between private and public services in {{w|England|England}} in Health and in Education. In many cases the essentials—medical or teaching skill are no better in one or the other.

{{tab}}But some of us like to pay, quite a lot even, for being treated as an individual with feelings and possibly even ideas of our own.

{{tab}}With more and more compulsory education greater efforts must be made to make it as palatable as possible or else the fundamental aim of producing able and civilised individuals is defeated. A change in attitude towards the parents and children by the {{w|local Education Authorities|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} is essential.

{{tab}}The Welfare Clinics seem to be able to combine courtesy and efficiency and achieve the co-operation of the mothers in the current phases of medical hygiene. Their positive approach must be carried on in the educational field at the {{w|primary school|Primary_school|Primary school}} stage.

{{tab}}In my own area, London, which has had a pioneering, enlightened{{p|259}} Education Committee for years, the parent of the five-year-old is confronted with the most unenthusiastic, unwelcoming and clumsy note straight away:</div>

<blockquote><font size="2"><div style="text-align:right;">From {{w|L.C.C.|London_County_Council|London County Council}} School {{e}}{{tab}}{{tab}}{{tab}}</div>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{qq|Dear Sir/Madam,|l}}<br>

{{tab}}{{qq|I am to inform you that if your child X is not attending school and there has been no infection or contageous illness in the home during the last three weeks he/she can be admitted to the above named school.|r}}</div></font></blockquote>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Of course this is purely formal and unimportant. Nevertheless it reflects the whole attitude which is most important. From a Private school the parents might get a slightly different letter:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{qq|We are pleased to tell you that we have a vacancy for your child starting next term{{e|r}}}}</font></blockquote>

and only then a sentence to the effect—please inform the school if there has been an infection or a contageous disease in the house.

{{tab}}The emphasis, the spirit is so different.

{{tab}}Most Educational Authorities seem only to understand if you write to them in their own limited language. On the following point I myself have had experience in London only, but a friend in {{w|Norwich|Norwich}} and one in {{w|Cambridge|Cambridge}} have found the same in their areas.

{{tab}}We all thought (quite independently) that for our five-year-old children the morning at school would be sufficient and that in fact spending the whole day at school was very tiring and possibly doing more harm than good.

{{tab}}Our ideas as parents were of no interest to the heads of the schools. Only a doctor{{s}} letter, that the child had started bed wetting again or something similar was understood and accepted as reasonable.

{{tab}}In the {{w|Middlesex|Middlesex}} area some schools make it very difficult for the parent to meet the teacher of the child without complicated appointments. The school has no telephone number available to the parents. Every call has to go through the Town Hall.

{{tab}}We have found in the private school an entirely different approach.

{{tab}}Any problem, please let us know at once—we are here to help, to work together with you.

{{tab}}I should point out that {{w|Parent Teacher Associations|Parent-Teacher_Association|Parent-Teacher Association}} are not the answer. They can have interesting meetings and help in educating parents in the work of the schools. But my experience of this is that parents join together in a kind of minor plot to redress grievances. This Trade Union atmosphere is also wrong and no substitute for a direct and trusting contact between parents and the schools.

{{tab}}The state primary schools are still permeated with a critical approach towards the parents. In fact collection of dinner money, taking numbers in a class, medical inspections have an importance in the minds of the poor child quite out of proportion with actual importance.

{{tab}}The whole bureaucratic, slightly bullying, we-know-how-to-do-it, keep-out-of-it tone has, of course historic reasons, but it must be changed now and quickly. Unnecessarily, the gap between private and public education widens. And if private education should be abolished, all the more reason that the civilised approach towards the children and their parents must win through and not the authoritarian.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Primary courtesies}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Health]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 43/Primary courtesies

2021-10-11T19:04:32Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 43 (Vol 4 No 9) September 1964]]<br>Primary courtesies
| author = Charlotte Franklin
| section =
| previous = [[../Stunted to school|Stunted to school]]
| next = [[../Teacher's dilemma|Teacher{{s}} dilemma]]
| notes = ''CHARLOTTE FRANKLIN lives in {{w|North London|North_London}} and has four boys who have experienced a variety of schools.''
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|258}}

<font size="5">'''Primary courtesies'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charlotte Franklin|CHARLOTTE FRANKLIN]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Everyone knows the discrepancy}} between private and public services in {{w|England|England}} in Health and in Education. In many cases the essentials—medical or teaching skill are no better in one or the other.

{{tab}}But some of us like to pay, quite a lot even, for being treated as an individual with feelings and possibly even ideas of our own.

{{tab}}With more and more compulsory education greater efforts must be made to make it as palatable as possible or else the fundamental aim of producing able and civilised individuals is defeated. A change in attitude towards the parents and children by the {{w|local Education Authorities|Local_education_authority|Local education authority}} is essential.

{{tab}}The Welfare Clinics seem to be able to combine courtesy and efficiency and achieve the co-operation of the mothers in the current phases of medical hygiene. Their positive approach must be carried on in the educational field at the {{w|primary school|Primary_school|Primary school}} stage.

{{tab}}In my own area, London, which has had a pioneering, enlightened Education Committee for years, the parent of the five-year-old is confronted with the most unenthusiastic, unwelcoming and clumsy note straight away:</div>

<blockquote><font size="2"><div style="text-align:right;">From {{w|L.C.C.|London_County_Council|London County Council}} School {{e}}{{tab}}{{tab}}{{tab}}</div>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{qq|Dear Sir/Madam,|l}}<br>

{{tab}}{{qq|I am to inform you that if your child X is not attending school and there has been no infection or contageous illness in the home during the last three weeks he/she can be admitted to the above named school.|r}}</div></font></blockquote>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{tab}}Of course this is purely formal and unimportant. Nevertheless it reflects the whole attitude which is most important. From a Private school the parents might get a slightly different letter:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{qq|We are pleased to tell you that we have a vacancy for your child starting next term{{e|r}}}}</font></blockquote>

and only then a sentence to the effect—please inform the school if there has been an infection or a contageous disease in the house.

{{tab}}The emphasis, the spirit is so different.

{{tab}}Most Educational Authorities seem only to understand if you write to them in their own limited language. On the following point I myself have had experience in London only, but a friend in {{w|Norwich|Norwich}} and one in {{w|Cambridge|Cambridge}} have found the same in their areas.

{{tab}}We all thought (quite independently) that for our five-year-old children the morning at school would be sufficient and that in fact spending the whole day at school was very tiring and possibly doing more harm than good.

{{tab}}Our ideas as parents were of no interest to the heads of the schools. Only a doctor{{s}} letter, that the child had started bed wetting again or something similar was understood and accepted as reasonable.

{{tab}}In the {{w|Middlesex|Middlesex}} area some schools make it very difficult for the parent to meet the teacher of the child without complicated appointments. The school has no telephone number available to the parents. Every call has to go through the Town Hall.

{{tab}}We have found in the private school an entirely different approach.

{{tab}}Any problem, please let us know at once—we are here to help, to work together with you.

{{tab}}I should point out that {{w|Parent Teacher Associations|Parent-Teacher_Association|Parent-Teacher Association}} are not the answer. They can have interesting meetings and help in educating parents in the work of the schools. But my experience of this is that parents join together in a kind of minor plot to redress grievances. This Trade Union atmosphere is also wrong and no substitute for a direct and trusting contact between parents and the schools.

{{tab}}The state primary schools are still permeated with a critical approach towards the parents. In fact collection of dinner money, taking numbers in a class, medical inspections have an importance in the minds of the poor child quite out of proportion with actual importance.

{{tab}}The whole bureaucratic, slightly bullying, we-know-how-to-do-it, keep-out-of-it tone has, of course historic reasons, but it must be changed now and quickly. Unnecessarily, the gap between private and public education widens. And if private education should be abolished, all the more reason that the civilised approach towards the children and their parents must win through and not the authoritarian.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Primary courtesies}}
[[Category:Children]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Health]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 31/The spontaneous university

2021-10-11T18:59:43Z

Ivanhoe:

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>The spontaneous university
| author = Alexander Trocchi
| section =
| previous = [[../Anarchism and practicability|Anarchism and practicability]]
| next = '''[[Anarchy 32]]'''
| notes = ''ALEXANDER TROCCHI graduated in philosophy at {{w|Glasgow University|University_of_Glasgow|University of Glasgow}} and has since lived in {{w|Paris|Paris}} and {{w|America|United_States|United States}}. He is the author of ''{{w|Young Adam|Young_Adam}}'' and ''{{w|Cain{{s}} Book|Cain's_Book}}.'' These fragments are from his {{qq|{{l|Invisible Insurrection of a Million Minds|http://www.notbored.org/invisible.html|Full text at NOT BORED!}}}}, and readers will notice their relevance to the ideas canvassed in ''[[Anarchy 24|{{sc|Anarchy}} 24]] (''The Community of Scholars'')'' and ''[[Anarchy 30|{{sc|Anarchy}} 30]] (''The Community Workshop'').
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|293}}

<font size="5">'''The spontaneous university'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Alexander Trocchi|ALEXANDER TROCCHI]]'''</font>

{{sc|In a recent essay {{w|Arnold Wesker|Arnold_Wesker}}}}, concerned precisely with the gulf between art and pupular culture and with the possibility of reintegration refers to the threatened strike of 1919 and to a speech of {{w|Lloyd George|David_Lloyd_George|David Lloyd George}}. The strike could have brought down the government. The Prime Minister said:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}{{e}} you will defeat us. But if you do so have you weighed the consequences? The strike will be in defiance of the government of the country and by its very success will precipitate a constitutional crisis of the first importance. For, if a force arises in the state which is stronger than the state itself, then it must be ready to take on the functions of the state. Gentlemen have you considered, and if you have, are you ready?</font></blockquote>

The strikers, as we know, were not ready. Mr. Wesker comments:

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The crust has shifted a bit, a number of people have made fortunes out of the protest and somewhere a host of Lloyd Georges are grinning contentedly at the situation {{e}} All protest is allowed and smiled upon because it is known that the force—economically and culturally—lies in the same dark and secure quarters, and this secret knowledge is the real despair of both artist and intellectual. We are paralysed by this knowledge, we protest every so often but really the whole cultural scene—particularly on the left—{{q|is one of awe and ineffectuality}}. I am certain that this was the secret knowledge that largely accounted for the decline of the cultural activities in the Thirties—no one really knew what to do with the philistines. They were omnipotent, friendly, and seductive. The germ was carried and passed on by the most unsuspected; and this same germ will cause, is beginning to cause, the decline of our new cultural upsurge unless {{e}} unless a new system is conceived whereby we who are concerned can take away, one by one, the secret reins.</font></blockquote>

Although I found Mr. Wesker{{s}} essay in the end disappointing, it did confirm for me that in {{w|England|England}} as elsewhere there are groups of people who are actively concerned with the problem. As we have seen, the political-economic structure of western society is such that the gears of creative intelligence mesh with the gears of power in such a way that, not only is the former prohibited from ever initiating anything, it can only come into play at the behest of forces (vested interests) that are often in principle antipathetic towards it. Mr. Wesker{{s}} {{q|{{popup|Centre 42|a theatre founded by Arnold Wesker}}}} is a practical attempt to alter his relationship.

{{tab}}I should like to say at once that I have no fundamental quarrel with Mr. Wesker. My main criticism of his project (and I admit my knowledge of it is very hazy indeed) is that it is limited in character and that this is reflected in his analysis of the historical background. {{p|294}}He takes the 1956 production of {{w|Osborne|John_Osborne|John Osborne}}{{s}} ''{{w|Look Back in Anger|Look_Back_in_Anger}}'', for example, to be the first landmark in {{q|our new cultural upsurge}}. A serious lack of historical perspective, the insularity of his view {{e}} these features are, I am afraid, indicative of a kind of church-bazaar philosophy which seems to underlie the whole project. Like handicrafts, art should not be expected to pay. Mr. Wesker calls for a tradition {{q|that will not have to rely on financial success in order to continue}}. And so he was led to seek the patronage of trade unions and has begun to organise a series of cultural festivals under their auspices. While I have nothing against such festivals, the urgency of Mr. Wesker{{s}} original diagnosis led me to expect recommendations for action at a far more fundamental level. Certainly, such a programme will not carry us very far towards seizing what he so happily refers to as {{q|the secret reins}}. I do not think I am being overcautious in asserting that something far less pedestrian than an appeal to the public-spiritedness of this or that group will be the imperative of the vast change we have in mind.

{{tab}}Nevertheless, at one point in what remains an interesting essay, Mr. Wesker quotes Mr. {{w|Raymond Williams|Raymond_Williams}}. Who Mr. Williams is and from what work the quotation is taken I am unfortunately ignorant. I only wonder how Mr. Wesker can quote the following and then go out and look for patronage.

<blockquote><font size="2">{{tab}}The question is not who will patronise the arts, but what forms are possible in which artists will have control of their own means of expression, in such ways that they will have relation in a community rather than to a market or a patron.</font></blockquote>

Of course it would be dangerous to pretend to understand Mr. Williams on the basis of such a brief statement. I shall say simply that for myself and for my associates in Europe and America the key phrase in the above sentence is: ''{{q|artists will have control of their own means of expression}}.'' When they achieve that control, their {{q|relation to a community}} will become a meaningful problem, that is, a problem amenable to formulation and solution at a creative and intelligent level. This we must concern ourselves forthwith with the question of how to seize and within the social fabric exercise that control. Our first move must be ''to eliminate the brokers.''

{{tab}}How to begin? At a chosen moment in a vacant country house (mill, abbey, church, or castle), we shall foment a kind of cultural {{q|jam session}}: out of this will evolve the prototype of our ''spontaneous university.''

{{tab}}The {{w|Jewish settlements|Kibbutz|Kibbutz}} in {{w|Israel|Israel}} turned a desert into a garden and astounded all the world. In a flowering garden already wholly sustained by automation, a fraction of such purposiveness applied to the cultivation of men would bring what results?

{{tab}}Then there was the {{w|experimental college|Black_Mountain_College|Black Mountain College}} at {{w|Black Mountain|Black_Mountain,_North_Carolina|Black Mountain, North Carolina}}, {{w|North Carolina|North_Carolina}}. This is of immediate interest to us for two reasons. In the first place, the whole concept is almost identical to our own in its educational aspect; in the second, some individual members of {{p|295}}the staff of Black Mountain, certain key members of wide experience, are actually associated with us in the present venture. Their collaboration is invaluable.

{{tab}}Black Mountain College was widely known throughout the {{w|United States|United_States}}. In spite of the fact that no degrees were awarded graduates and non-graduates from all over America thought it worthwhile to take up residence. As it turns out, an amazing number of the best artists and writers of America seem to have been there at one time or another, to teach and learn, and their cumulative influence on American art in the last fifteen years has been immense. One has only to mention {{w|Franz Kline|Franz_Kline}} in reference to painting and {{w|Robert Creeley|Robert_Creeley}} in reference to poetry to give an idea of Black Mountain{{s}} significance. They are key figures in the American vanguard, their influence everywhere. Black Mountain could be described as an {{q|action university}} in the sense in which the term is applied to the paintings of Kline ''{{popup|et alii|and others}}.'' There were no examinations. There was no learning from ulterior motives. Students and teachers participated informally in the creative arts; every teacher was himself a practitioner—poetry, music, painting, sculpture, dance, pure mathematics, pure physics, etc.,—of a very high order. In short, it was a situation constructed to inspire the free play of creativity in the individual and the group.

{{tab}}Unfortunately, it no longer exists. It closed in the early Fifties for economic reasons. It was a corporation (actually owned by the staff) which depended entirely on fees and charitable donations. In the highly competitive background of the United States of America such a gratuitous and flagrantly non-utilitarian institution was only kept alive for so long as it was by the sustained effort of the staff. In the end it proved too ill-adapted to its habitat to survive.

{{tab}}In considering ways and means to establish our pilot project we have never lost sight of the fact that in a capitalist society any successful organization must be able to sustain itself in capitalist terms. The venture must pay. Thus we have conceived the idea of setting up a general agency to handle, as far as possible, all the work of the individuals associated with the university. Art, the products of all the expressive media of civilisation, its applications in industrial and commercial design, all this is fantastically profitable (consider the {{w|Musical Corporation of America|MCA_Inc.|MCA Inc.}}). But, as in the world of science, it is not the creators themselves who reap most of the benefit. An agency founded by the creators themselves and operated by highly-paid professionals would be in an impregnable position. Such an agency, guided by the critical acumen of the artists themselves, could profitably harvest new cultural talent long before the purely professional agencies were aware it existed. Our own experience in the recognition of contemporary talent during the past fifteen years has provided us with evidence that is decisive. The first years would be the hardest. In time, granting that the agency functioned efficiently from the point of view of the individual artists represented by it, it would have first option on all new talent. This would happen not only because it would be likely to recognize that talent before its competitors, but because of {{p|296}}the fact and fame of the university. It would be as though some ordinary agency were to spend 100 per cent. of its profits on advertising itself. Other things being equal, why should a young writer, for example, not prefer to be handled by an agency controlled by his (better-known) peers, an agency which will apply whatever profit it makes out of him as an associate towards the extension of his influence and audience, an agency, finally, which at once offers him membership in the experimental university (which governs it) and all that that implies? And, before elaborating further on the economics of our project, it is perhaps time to describe briefly just what that membership does imply.

{{tab}}We envisage an international organisation with branch universities near the capital cities of every country in the world. It will be autonomous, unpolitical, economically independent. Membership of one branch (as teacher or student) will entitle one to membership of all branches, and to travel to and residence in foreign branches will be energetically encouraged. It will be the object of each branch university to participate in and {{q|supercharge}} the cultural life of the respective capital city at the same time as it promotes cultural exchange internationally and functions in itself as a non-specialised experimental school and creative workshop. Resident professors will be themselves creators. The staff at each university will be purposively international; as far as practicable, the students also. Each branch of the spontaneous university will be the nucleus of an experimental town to which all kinds of people will be attracted for shorter or longer periods and from which, if we are successful, they will derive a renewed and infectious sense of life. We envisage an organisation whose structure and mechanisms are infinitely elastic; we see it as the gradual crystallisation of a regenerative cultural force, a perpetual brainwave, creative intelligence everywhere recognizing and affirming its own involvement.

{{tab}}It is impossible in the present context to describe in precise detail the day-to-day functioning of the university. In the first place, it is not possible for one individual writing a brief introductory essay. The pilot project does not exist in the physical sense, and from the very beginning, like the Israeli {{w|kibbutzes|Kibbutz|Kibbutz}}, it must be a communal affair, tactics decided ''{{popup|in situ|locally}},'' depending upon just what is available when. My associates and I during the past decade have been amazed at possibilities arising out of the spontaneous interplay of ideas within a group in constructed situations. It is on the basis of such experiences that we have imagined an international experiment. Secondly, and consequently, any detailed preconceptions of my own would be so much excess baggage in the spontaneous generation of the group situation.

{{tab}}The cultural possibilities of this movement are immense and the time is ripe for it. Scientists, artists, teachers, creative men of goodwill everywhere are in suspense. Waiting. Remembering that it is our kind even now who operate, if they don{{t}} control, the grids of expression, we should have no difficulty in recognising the spontaneous university as the possible detonator of the invisible insurrection.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Spontaneous university}}
[[Category:Art]]
[[Category:Education]]
[[Category:Articles]]
[[Category:Republished from other sources]]

Anarchy 31/Beatnik as anarchist?

2021-10-11T18:54:59Z

Ivanhoe:

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>Beatnik as anarchist?
| author = Ian Vine
| section =
| previous = [[../Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems|Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems]]
| next = [[../Anarchism and practicability|Anarchism and practicability]]
| notes = ''IAN VINE, born ''1943,'' left school to become an apprenitce at {{w|Bristol Aircraft Ltd.|Bristol_Aeroplane_Company|Bristol Aeroplane Company}}, but after four years his abhorrence of capitalist industry and the war machine had grown to such an extent that he left, and enters {{w|Bristol University|University_of_Bristol|University of Bristol}} in October. A member of the West ''{{w|''Committee of'' 100|Committee_of_100_(United_Kingdom)|Committee of 100}}'' and the {{w|Bristol|Bristol}} Federation of Anarchists, he has just published his first book of poems,'' The Holy Eye.
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|283}}

<font size="5">'''Beatnik as anarchist?'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Ian Vine|IAN VINE]]'''</font>

{{sc|Many younger anarchists are used to being called {{w|Beatniks|Beatnik}}}}, because it is a word which has been seized on by our free press and turned into a term of derision, to be applied indiscriminately to young non-conformists who dare to challenge the social norms in sex, dress, and mass murder. It has frequently been applied in ways very different from those intended by its originators, and unless we re-define it, is a word without real meaning.

{{tab}}Who then are the real Beats? {{w|Clellon Holmes|John_Clellon_Holmes|John Clellon Holmes}} described being beat as:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}not so much weariness, as rawness of the nerves; not so much being {{q|filled up to ''here''}} as being emptied out. It describes a state of mind from which all inessentials have been stripped, leaving it receptive to everything around it, but impatient with trivial obstructions. To be beat is to be at the bottom of your personality, looking up; to be existential in the {{w|Kierkegaard|Søren_Kierkegaard|Søren Kierkegaard}}, rather than the {{w|Jean-Paul Sartre|Jean-Paul_Sartre}} sense.}}</blockquote>

{{w|Kerouac|Jack_Kerouac|Jack Kerouac}} says:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}we seek to find new phrases {{e}} a tune, a thought, that will someday be the only tune and thought in the world and which will raise men{{s}} souls to joy.}}</blockquote>

{{p|284}}But these are only the spokesmen. Most beats do not think in such high-flown terms as these. Most society disaffiliates will admit to sharing ''some'' of the ideas and feelings of Kerouac, {{w|Ginsberg|Allen_Ginsberg|Allen Ginsberg}}, and {{w|Mailer|Norman_Mailer|Norman Mailer}}, whether they be anarchists or not, but most will not be Beat in the extreme sense. Similarly, by no means all of the definitive Beat characteristics are possessed by these writers.

{{tab}}I shall then confine my use of the word to a particular extreme group, which is in fact that furthest outside society, and which happens to coincide remarkably closely with what the Sunday papers would have us believe is the ''norm'' amongst {{w|nuclear disarmers|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}}. Actually, although statistics are impossible, I doubt if these are more than a few hundred such beats in the whole of the {{w|British Isles|British_Isles}}.

{{tab}}These real beatniks are often visually distinctive, the boys frequently having beards, long hair, threadbare jeans, sandals, and a variety of eccentric coats and neck-ties, while the girls, except for the beards, are more or less the same. But appearances can be confusing, for there are a large number of other social rebels who adopt the same or similar uniforms without adopting the Beat philosophy and way of life. These range from art students and anarchists to the dissident sons of aristocrats, and to attempt to analyse ''their'' ideas and motivations would take a book in itself. One interesting point is that the {{w|bowler-hats|Bowler_hat|Bowler hat}} and starched collars of the {{qq|{{popup|ravers|party-goers}}}} are usually absent among the real beats—an indication that they largely eschew the ostentation of oddity for oddity{{s}} sake.

{{tab}}Perhaps the most interesting characteristic of the beat is his restlessness. The average beat (if such an animal exists) likes to be {{qq|on the road}}, always moving on, never forming fixed attachments with his environment. Although there are certain recognised {{qq|scenes}}, there are few permanent beat communities. The population in any given town is constantly changing as someone moves on, perhaps not to return for a year, and someone-else {{qq|makes town}}. The traditional method of travel is hitching lifts, and if you can con the driver for a meal and a few {{popup|fags|cigarettes}} then so much the better. It is remarkable how far some beats travel by this means, most have covered almost the whole of Britain this way, and many have travelled widely abroad. One who was recently in {{w|Bristol|Bristol}} for the winter was last heard of in the {{w|Sahara nuclear testing|France_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction|France and weapons of mass destruction}} area, being looked after by the {{w|Foreign Legion|French_Foreign_Legion|French Foreign Legion}}. The relevance of all this to anarchists may be questioned, but it brings me to my first main contention: that the beat has found a solution to the problem of how to remain almost entirely free in an authoritarian society. His solution may not be to our liking, but {{p|285}}because he has one he is certainly worthy of our serious attention.

{{tab}}Needless to say, they have bought their freedom at a price. Most of them do not work, and few can afford a {{qq|{{popup|pad|dwelling}}}} of their own. Occasionally a flat is taken over by a small group who happen to have found an easy means of temporary employment, but this never lasts for long, either because the landlord is getting no rent, or because of the intolerance of neighbours. Most of them will if necessary, rough it under a hedge or in a bus shelter, but normally they will stick to scenes where someone is prepared to put them up for a few days or weeks. They do in fact depend largely on charity, which is usually pretty freely given, usually by someone on the beat fringe who has a permanent pad. Frequently their only possession is a sleeping bag, and occasionally even these get lost ''en route''. And that too can be an advantage if it gets you the spare mattress.

{{tab}}Work is definitely frowned on (and when it{{s}} not there aren{{t}} many employers who would employ a long-haired, bearded, unwashed beat), but few beatniks draw {{w|national assistance|National_Assistance|National Assistance}} or {{w|unemployment benefit|Jobseeker's_Allowance|Jobseeker's Allowance}}. This is not through any laudable refusal to be involved in the dealings of a capitalist system, or a matter of conscience, but mainly because most of them are ineligible to draw them. They are vagrants in the most literal sense, and apart from having no fixed address dislike having to stay in one area, and being obliged to present themselves regularly in front of some hostile official. This is not only an assertion of their freedom, but also provides their second, and inevitable, claim to being anarchists, namely their hatred of orders and authority.

{{tab}}They are of course not alone in this respect, since they share the characteristic with the {{w|teds|Teddy_Boy|Teddy Boy}} as well as with us, but they differ from most groups who detest the police in that they are not interested in wasting time in contemplating libertarian utopias, they prefer to enjoy life here and now. Ignoring all that doesn{{t}} happen to suit them, their search for living involves them in the drugs and alcoholic excesses which delight the {{w|Fleet Street|Fleet_Street}} snoopers; and their disregard for {{qq|trivialities}} makes them unenthusiastic bathers—especially as few of them have a change of clothes anyway. All this horrifies the righteous, but criticism means nothing to them. If we can consider them as anarchists we should never expect them to help propagate the anarchist cause or listen to our criticisms. The typical beat could by no stretch of the imagination be called {{qq|politically minded}}. It is true that many of them wear {{w|CND|Campaign_for_Nuclear_Disarmament|Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament}} badges, and even march with us at {{w|Aldermaston|Aldermaston_Marches|Aldermaston Marches}}, but they{{ll}} never be found at political meetings or civil-disobedience demos. Their reason is common enough—their ability to see through the humbug of politicians, and their disbelief that anything can ever remove them. Most of them have packed more into 20 years experience than the {{qq|squares}} do into 70, and they are cynical in the extreme. This is one very significant beat characteristic—there is no desire to influence or convert, each beatnik is his own philosopher and his own master, and is happy to remain such.

{{tab}}Despite the divergence here from the anarchist aim of promoting change I feel we have still something to learn from the beats. One {{p|286}}important positive virtue they have is their close community and co-operative sense. This has been effectively described by {{w|Colin Wilson|Colin_Wilson}} in his novel {{qq|Adrift in Soho|Adrift_in_Soho}}, but an example from my own experience should help make the point. Recently a group of eight or so spent a couple of weeks in Bristol. Each evening they would congregate in the local left wing pub (where the landlord far prefers them to the teds), and sit around talking, singing, and {{popup|cadging|begging for}} drinks—which were freely shared—while one played guitar for hours on end, both for enjoyment and to entertain the attentive crowd. Towards closing-time the prettiest girls would go round with beer mug, sidling up to listeners and asking {{qq|Put some money in the glass, for the singer?}} By doing a very effective {{qq|poor little girl}} act they would bring in several shillings in a few minutes. This would then be counted out on the table and divided up between the group, either equally or dependent on need. Likewise, one beat would assiduously collect all the dogends from the ashtrays and these would then be taken back to the pad for a communal roll-up.

{{tab}}This existence of this communistic sense amongst the beats is partly due no doubt to force of circumstances, mutual co-operation being essential to guarantee their survival. But it is an indication of its strength that it exists despite the remarkable egoism and ruthlessness of some of them. Most will willingly fleece any outsider who thinks to use them as a source of amusement, but only the smallest few will cheat their own kind. They often display remarkable resourcefulness. The {{qq|Please mister, sell me a cigarette for tuppence}} is well known, but there are many more techniques, and the interesting thing is that their begging does not make them servile as it might be expected to. I have known some who almost make a living out of leading on queers, accepting food, drinks, and fags, and then giving them the slip just before the time of reckoning comes. I have seen a few openly begging in the streets, but their pitiful looks only hide their secret smiles; they are parasites, but far less so than the successful ones who ride in {{w|Jaguars|Jaguar_Cars|Jaguar Cars}} and make their millions on the {{w|Stock Exchange|Stock_exchange}}; in some ways they are degenerate, but not as degenerate as the crooks who uphold {{w|Christian morality|Christian_ethics|Christian ethics}} and outward respectability while they deceive the world with the myth of democracy. They are under no illusions, and their rejection is total. The world that judges them by its own imaginary standards is false, and for this reason they see no wrong in milking it dry in whatever way they can. Many will lie or shoplift, con or cheat, their only principle is personal freedom from the rat-race, and this, in a crooked world that rejects them out of hand, is the only way they can see to attain it.

{{tab}}The average anarchist, who rather proudly sees himself as the ''most'' responsible type of human animal, may perhaps feel little sympathy for the beat way of life. He may regard the beats as lost souls, lazy tramps who are little good to anyone. But this is a very unanarchistic position. These are lovers of freedom, lively and cheerful people, wanderers who can surely claim the right to live the life of their choosing. They harm no one, they oppress no one, their pleasures are mainly {{p|287}}innocent enough. They make no claim to be intellectuals or leaders of the world. They are a mixed lot, and every generalisation must inevitably exclude a sizable proportion of them, but most are basically working-class in origin, with little regard for formal culture, intellectuals, and symbols of status. Their rejection of current society is largely an emotional one, their awareness is based on intuition rather than erudition, but they are observant, and quietly perceptive of beauty around them. Although they are rarely especially articulate they have very real and personal ideas. Although they mock at religion many of them are religious. In response to a local Sunday afternoon evangelist who stopped in a Bristol park to tell a group that God was in his heaven and they should roll up and be saved, I heard one say: {{qq|God? God is everywhere. In this grass and trees, not in your little book}}.

{{tab}}I suppose few beatniks would consciously admit to being anarchists, but I maintain that in their positive love of personal freedom and hatred of restrictions, their detestation of Authority and its instruments—the police, the church, the monarchy, the armed forces—and their communistic sense, they are anarchist in all but name, anarchist if not Anarchist. The question then is what is their relevance to us? They are not martyrs; they see no merit in suffering for their beliefs any more than they have to, and I see no hope that many of them can ever be roused to political action. Their presence on the Aldermaston march is more in the nature of a social occasion than an assumption that it helps ban the ever-present bomb. It is almost the annual gathering of the cult. Despite all this I believe that we can learn from them.

{{tab}}They manage to live a personally anarchistic life in spite of the system that surrounds them. Their cynicism does not have the stifling effect that it has on some politically conscious left-wingers. They are all very much alive, and they show that a small number of determined people scattered about the country can remain a remarkably coherent and loyal group when the will is strong enough (and we can certainly learn something from them there!). Perhaps because they have no desire to expand they are unharmed by public derision and press distortion, and they get away with the very minimum number of compromises. As yet they are a young generation, mainly in their early twenties or late teens. They have not experienced parenthood or loneliness. Perhaps the Beat movement will die a natural death, but more likely it will continue to be a young generation, the present beats finally compromising with conformity in their late twenties while a new generation takes their place. In doing so the civilisation will continue, standing out not as an example of behaviour for the anarchist to follow, but as a constant reminder that all souls are not captive ones, and that it ''is'' possible, at least in the early years, to live a life unhampered by the threat of imminent death.

{{tab}}Above all the beats are practical rebels, not the armchair revolutionaries sometimes to be found in anarchist and socailist circles. Of course they wouldn{{t}} be found at the barricades, fighting is for fools, they can live without a revolution. Life is what you make it, and the Beats can make it almost anywhere.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Beatnik as anarchist}}
[[Category:Counterculture]]
[[Category:Lifestyle]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 31/Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems

2021-10-11T18:39:44Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems
| author = John D. McEwan
| section =
| previous = [[../Randolph Bourne vs. the State|Randolph Bourne vs. the State]]
| next = [[../Beatnik as anarchist?|Beatnik as anarchist?]]
| notes = ''JOHN D. McEWAN was born in'' 1938 ''and after a somewhat erratic career in both Science and Arts Faculties at the {{w|University of St. Andrews|University_of_St_Andrews}}, emerged with a degree in mathematics. He is now working on diagnostic programming for an electronic computer.''
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|270}}

{| width="100%"
|-
| colspan="2" |<font size="5">'''Anarchism and the'''</font>
|-
| colspan="2" |<font size="5">'''cybernetics of self-organising'''</font><br>
|-
| <font size="5">'''systems'''</font>
| align="right" valign="top" | <font size="4">'''[[Author:John D. McEwan|JOHN D. McEWAN]]'''</font>
|}

{{p|s1|n}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|The intention of this article}} is to suggest that some of the concepts used by {{w|cyberneticians|Cybernetics|Cybernetics}} studying evolving self-organising systems may be relevant to anarchist theory, and that some of the conclusions drawn from this study tend to favour libertarian models of social organisation. Much of the specifically cybernetic material is drawn from lectures given by {{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}} and {{w|Stafford Beer|Stafford_Beer}} at {{w|Salford College of Advanced Technology|University_of_Salford|University of Salford}}. They are not, of course, responsible for any conclusions drawn, except where explicitly stated.

{{tab}}Firstly, what do we mean by a self-organising system? One definition is simply {{q|a system in which the ''order'' increases as time passes}}, that is, in which the ratio of the ''{{w|variety|Variety_(cybernetics)|Variety (cybernetics)}}'' exhibited to the maximum possible variety decreases; variety being a measure of the complexity of the system as it appears to an observer, the uncertainty for the observer regarding its behaviour. A system with large variety will have a larger number of possible states than one with smaller variety. Thus such a system may start by exhibiting very varied behaviour, ''e.g.'' a large number of different responses to a given stimulus may appear equally likely, but over a period of time the behaviour becomes less erratic, more predictable—fewer and fewer distinct responses to a given stimulus are possible (or, better, have a significantly high probability.)

{{tab}}This definition is, however, in some ways restrictive. The best such a system can do is to reach some sort of optimum state and stay there. Also, if we regard the system as a {{w|control system|Control_system|Control system}} attempting to maintain stability in a fluctuating environment, the types of disturbance with which it can deal are limited by the fixed maximum variety of the system. This point will be dealt with later. The essential thing is that unpredictable disturbances are liable to prove too much for the system.

{{tab}}Such considerations suggest that it would be more fruitful to incorporate in the definition the idea that the maximum possible variety might also differ at different times. Thus Pask restricts the term to situations where the history of {{q|the system}} can best be represented as a series S₀ S₁ {{e}} S''ₙ'' each term a system with fixed maximum variety, and each self-organising in the first sense. With this definition we are {{p|271}}able to deal with control systems of the type found in living organisms. Indeed, with a few limited exceptions, biological and social organisation are, up to now, the only fields in which such control systems can be found. Some of the exceptions, in the shape of artificially constructed systems, despite their crude and elementary nature in comparison with living organisms, do however exhibit remarkably advanced behaviour, at least in comparison with conventional controllers.

{{tab}}For an example of self-organising behaviour in this sense, we may consider a human being learning to solve certain types of problem, as his behaviour appears to an observer. Over an interval the behaviour may appear self-organising in the first sense. When, however, the learner adopts a new concept or method, there will be a discontinuity in the development of the behaviour, after which it will again be self-organising in the first sense, for a time, but now incorporating new possibilities, and so on.

{{tab}}In many discussions of control situations the concept of {{q|Hierarchy}} appears very quickly. This may tend to make the anarchist recoil, but should not do so, since the usage is a technical one and does not coincide with the use of the term in anarchist criticisms of political organisation.

{{tab}}Firstly, the cybernetician makes a very important distinction between two types of hierarchy, the ''anatomical'' and the ''functional'', to use the terminology adopted by Pask. The former is the type exemplified in part by hierarchical social organisation in the normal sense (''e.g.'' {{q|tree of command}} structure in industry), that is: there are two (if two levels) actual distinguishable concrete entities involved. The latter refers to the case where there may be only one entity, but there are two or more levels of information structure operating in the system—as for example in some types of {{w|neuron networks|Biological_neural_network|Biological neural network}}. A comparable concept is {{w|Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}{{s}} {{q|disalienated decision procedure}}.<ref>See {{w|Seymour Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}: '''Decision-Making and Productivity''' (Blackwell, 1958).</ref> This idea might, I think, be suggestive to anarchists.

{{tab}}Secondly, even in the case of {{q|anatomical hierarchy}}, the term only means that parts of the system can be distinguished dealing with different levels of decision making and learning, ''e.g.'' some parts may deal directly with the environment, while other parts relate to activity of these first parts, or some parts learn about individual occurrences, while others learn about sequences of individual occurrences, and others again about classes of sequences.

{{tab}}Even in the anatomical sense, then, the term need have none of the connotations of coercive sanctions in a ruler-ruled relationship which are common in other usages.

{{tab}}An important phenomenon in self-organising systems is interaction between the information flowing in the system and the structure of the system. In a complex system this leads to ''Redundancy of Potential Command''—it is ''impossible to pick out the critical decision-making element,'' since this will change from one time to another, and depend on the information in the system. It will be evident that this implies that the idea of a hierarchy can have only limited application in such a system.

{{p|272}}{{tab}}I will now attempt to give a brief sketch of a partly artificial self-organising system, involving the interaction between human beings and a machine. This provides examples of the concepts introduced, and also, I feel, suggests important general conclusions about the characteristics of self-organising groups—characteristics which may sound familiar to libertarians. The machine in question is a group teaching machine developed by Gordon Pask.<ref>{{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}}: {{qq|Interaction between a Group of Subjects and an Adaptive Automaton to produce a Self-Organising System for Decision-Making}} in the symposium '''Self-Organising Systems, 1962,''' ed. {{popup|Jovits|Marshall C. Yovits (born 1923), American computer scientist}}, {{popup|Jacobi|George T. Jacobi, Armour Research Foundation}} and {{popup|Goldstein|Gordon David Goldstein (1917-1989), American computer scientist}} (Spartan Books).</ref>

{{tab}}Prior to this Pask had developed individual teaching machines which were important advances in the growth of applied cybernetics.<ref>See {{w|Stafford Beer|Stafford_Beer}}: '''Cybernetics and Management''' (English Universities Press, 1959) pp.123-127, and {{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}}: '''An Approach to Cybernetics''' (Hutchinson, 1961).</ref> However, on considering the problem of group teaching (for skills where some calculable measure of the pupil{{s|r}} performance, the rate of change of which will serve as a suitable indication of learning, exists), he did not simply combine individual machines.

{{tab}}The important insight he had was that a group of human beings, in a learning situation, is itself an evolutionary system, which suggested the idea of the machine as a catalyst, ''modifying the communication channels in the group,'' and thus producing different group structures.

{{tab}}In the development of the individual teaching machines, the possibility of the pupil dominating the machine had already arisen. This Pask now extended by introducing the idea of a quality {{q|money}} allocated to each member of the group, and used by each of them to {{q|buy}} for himself control over the communication structure of the group and over the partial specification of the solution provided by the machine. Now, in the individual machine, the degree to which the pupil was helped was coupled to change of his degree of success. If he was becoming more successful then the help given was decreased. In the group machine, the allocation of {{q|money}} is coupled to ''two'' conditions—increasing success ''and'' increasing variety in the group structure. This second condition is the key to the novelty of the system.

{{tab}}The system, then, has changing dominance and exhibits redundancy of potential command.

{{tab}}In practice, each pupil sits in a little cubicle provided with buttons and indicators for communication, and a computer is used for control, calculating the various measures, etc. The operator is provided with some way of seeing what is going on, and can deliberately make things difficult for the group, by introducing false information into the channels, etc., seeing how the group copes with it.

{{tab}}The problems which Pask, at the time, had used in these group experiments had been formulated as conveying information about the position of a point in some space, with noise in the communication channels. The group had been asked to imagine that they are air traffic controllers, given co-ordinates specifying the position of an aircraft at a certain time, for example.

{{tab}}He suggests, however, that problems of agreeing on a choice of policy on a basis of agreed facts is not, in principle, very different from the case in which {{q|the facts}} are in dispute, and there is no question of adopting any future policy—except of course the policy to adopt in order to ascertain the true facts and communicate them; this being the problem which the group solves for itself. It is in this sense that {{p|273}}the group may be regarded as a decision maker.

{{tab}}It will be noted that the state of the system when in equilibrium ''is'' the solution to the problem. Also that this solution changes with time. This is also the case in the first example from purely human organisation which occurred to me—a jazz band (an example also suggested by Pask).

{{tab}}Pask emphasised that he had not then had the opportunity to obtain sufficient data to make any far-reaching well substantiated generalisations from these experiments. The results he had obtained, however, were very interesting and, I think, give considerable insight into the characteristics of self-organising systems, and their advantages over other types of decision-makers.

{{tab}}Some groups, after an initial stage while they were gaining familiarity with the machine, began assigning specific roles to their members and introducing standard procedures. This led to a drop in efficiency and inability to handle new factors introduced by spurious information, etc. The learning curve rises, flattens, then drops sharply whenever some new element is introduced. The system is now no longer self-organising.

{{tab}}Necessary characteristics for a group to constituted self-organising system, Pask suggests, are avoidance of fixed role-assignments and stereotyped procedures. This is of course tied up with redundancy of potential command.

{{tab}}I think we might sum up {{q|fixed role assignment and stereotyped procedures}} in one word—institutionalisation.

{{tab}}Note that these characteristics are ''necessary,'' not ''sufficient''—at the very least the group must first of all constitute a system in a meaningful sense; there must be communication between the members, a sufficient structure of information channels and feedback loops.

{{tab}}The role of the computer in Pask{{s}} system may be worrying some. Is this not an analogue of an authoritarian {{q|guiding hand}}? The answer is, I think, no. It must be remembered that this is an artificial exercise the group is performing. A problem is set by the operator. There is therefore no real situation in actuality for the group to affect and observe the result of their efforts. It is this function of determining and feeding back success/<wbr>failure information which the machine fulfils.

{{tab}}The other important aspect of the machine as a catalyst in the learning process, we have already mentioned. There is a rough analogy here with the role of {{q|influence leader}} in the Hauser{{s|r}} sense,<ref>See {{popup|Richard|Richard Hauser, Austrian sociologist}} and {{w|Hephzibah Hauser|Hephzibah_Menuhin|Hephzibah Menuhin}}: '''The Fraternal Society''' (Bodley Head, 1962).</ref> rather than any authoritarian {{q|overseer}}. I will return to this question of the role of the machine shortly.

{{tab}}Regarding the group as a decision maker, Pask suggests that this is perhaps the only sense in which {{q|two heads are better than one}} is true—if the {{q|two heads}} constitute a self-organising system. The clue as to why a number of heads, ''e.g.'', notoriously, in committees, often turn out to be much worse than one, is, he suggests, this business of role assignment and stereotyped procedure. He has not, however, suggested why this should arise.

{{tab}}Drawing on knowledge of behaviour of a self-organising nature {{p|274}}exhibited in other groups, ''e.g.'' informal shop-floor organisation, the adaptability and efficiency exhibited in instances of collective contract working, and similar phenomena,<ref>See, for example, the paper by {{w|Trist|Eric_Trist|Eric Trist}} on collective contract working in the {{w|Durham|County_Durham}} coalfield quoted by {{w|H. Clegg|Hugh_Clegg_(industrial_relations)|Hugh Clegg}} in '''A New Approach to Industrial Democracy''' (Blackwell, 1960) and the discussion of this book by [[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|Geoffrey Ostergaard]] in [[Anarchy 2/Approaches to industrial democracy|ANARCHY 2]]. Note the appearance of new elements of job rotation.<br>{{tab}}Despite his emphasis on the formal aspects of worker organisation, {{w|Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}{{s}} analysis (see Note 1) of the worker decision process at {{w|Standard{{s}}|Standard_Motor_Company|Standard Motor Company}} brings out many of the caracteristics of a self-organising system: the evolving nature of the process; the difficulty of determining where a particular decision was made; changing dominance; the way in which the cumulative experience of the group changes the frame of reference against which subsequent problems are set for solution. A better idea of the gang system from which this derives can, however, be obtained from [[Author:Reg Wright|Reg Wright]]{{s}} articles in [[Anarchy 2/The gang system in Coventry|ANARCHY 2]] & [[Anarchy 8/Erosion inside capitalism|8]].</ref> we may perhaps offer some suggestions as to how institutionalisation may arise in certain types of circumstances.

{{tab}}Imagine a workshop of reasonable size, in which a number of connected processes are going on, and where there is some variation in the factors affecting the work to be taken into account. There is considerable evidence that the workers in such a shop, working as a co-operating group, are able to organise themselves without outside interference, in such a way as to cope efficiently with the job, and show remarkable facility in coping with unforeseeable difficulties and disruptions of normal procedure.

{{tab}}There are two levels of task here:

:#The complex of actual production tasks.
:#The task of solving the problem of how the group should be organised to perform these first level tasks, and how information about them should be dealt with by the group.

{{tab}}In situations of the kind I am imagining, the organisation of the group is largely determined by the needs of the job, which are fairly obvious to all concerned. There is continual feed-back of information from the job to the group. Any unusual occurrence will force itself on their notice and will be dealt with according to their resources at that time.

{{tab}}Purely for the purpose of illustration, let us now consider the situation of the same type of shop, only this time assuming that it is organised by a committee from outside the shop. The situation in which the committee finds itself is completely different from that of the work group. There are now three levels of problem:

:#The problems solved by the individual workers, ''i.e.'' their jobs.
:#The problem of the organisation of the work group.
:#The problem of the organisation of the committee itself.

{{tab}}The determining success/<wbr>failure information for all these has still to come from (or at least is supposed to come from), the net result of the solution of the first level problems, ''i.e.'' the state of production in the shop.

{{tab}}The committee is denied the continuous feed-back which the group had. While working on its solution to the second level problem, it will have no information about the success of its alternatives, only previous findings, coded, in practice, in an inadequate way. The degree of success will only be observable after a trial period after they have decided on a solution. (Also unusual circumstances can only be dealt with as ''types'' of occurrence, since they cannot enumerate all possibilities. This is important in determining the relative efficiency of the two methods of organisation, but is of less importance in our immediate problem.)

{{p|275}}{{tab}}It follows that the committee cannot solve the third problem by a method analogous to that used by the original work group in solving the second level problem; while working on the second level problem the committee has no comparable information available to determine the solution of the third level problem. But they must adopt some procedure, some organisation at a given time. How then is it to be determined?

{{tab}}In theory, such a controller could still remain an adoptive self-organising system, learning the structure to adopt in particular circumstances over a longer period of time, though it would still suffer from imperfect information.

{{tab}}In practice, however, the committee promptly convene a meeting, assign specific functions and decide on standard procedures. The actual determining information is probably a mixture of personality factors (including externally deprived status) and the existing ideas on organisation theory (including local precedent) possessed by the members. Once decided they will shelve the third level problem unless disaster, or a new superior, strikes, when a similar, but more cumbersome, procedure will be necessary to re-organise the committee along the same general lines.

{{tab}}In other words, within the closed system of the committee and work group, there is no, or virtually no, coupling between the success of the actual undertaking, ''i.e.'' the production job, and the decision procedure solving the third level problem. Worse, the factors influencing the solution of this problem, far from increasing the possible variety of the committee, lead to rigidity and low variety. Owing to this structure it will generally prove less efficient than a single imaginative person.

{{tab}}We might suggest, then, that it is this isolation from the process in terms of which the success of their own activity is defined, which is generally typical of the committee situation, which leads to their common failure to exhibit self-organising characteristics, and frequent inadequacy as decision makers.

{{tab}}Consider the first case of the self-organising work group again. Here it is the ''job itself'' which provides the analogue of Pask{{s}} machine, as far as feedback of success/<wbr>failure information is concerned. Also, it has frequently been pointed out that in a {{q|face-to-face}} group in this kind of situation (''i.e.'' where the need for the situation demanding collective action are fairly obvious, and where some common criteria of success exist), that group leadership tends to be granted to the member or members best suited to the particular circumstances obtaining,{{ref|aster|*}} and to change as these circumstances change. In other words, changing dominance, determined by the needs of the situation. Here again, the job, acting through the group psychology of the face-to-face group performs a function analogous to Pask{{s}} machine, allocating temporary dominance in accordance with success.

{{p|276}}{{tab}}I now wish to turn from this question of small group organisation to that of larger systems, and consider some criticisms of conventional industrial organisation developed, in particular, by Stafford Beer. He maintains that conventional ideas of control in complex situations, such as an industrial company, or the economy of a country, are crude and inadequate. {{qq|The fact is,}} he says, {{qq|that our whole concept of control is naive, primitive, and ridden with an almost retributive idea of causality. Control to most people (and what a reflection this is upon a sophisticated society!) is a crude process of coercion.}}<ref>{{w|Beer|Stafford_Beer|Stafford Beer}} [[#cite_note-2|'''{{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}''']] p.21.</ref>

{{tab}}In the lecture referred to earlier, his main thesis was the impossibility of truly efficient control of a complex undertaking by the type of rigid hierarchic organisation with which we are at present familiar. That such systems manage to survive, and work in some sort of manner, as they obviously do, is, he suggested, due to the fact that they are not entirely what they are supposed to be—that there are unofficial self-organising systems and tendencies in the organisation which are essential to its survival.

{{tab}}Beer is unusually perceptive, and frank, in emphasising the prevalence and importance of unofficial initiatives at all levels, ''e.g.'' (of shop-floor workers). {{qq|They arrange things which would horrify management, if they ever found out}}, (of charge-hands, etc.) {{qq|If ''they'' did not talk things over and come to mutual agreements, the whole business would collapse.}}

{{tab}}The main keystones in Beer{{s}} argument are {{w|Ashby|W._Ross_Ashby|W. Ross Ashby}}{{s}} {{q|{{w|Principle of Requisite Variety|Variety_(cybernetics)#The_Law_of_Requisite_Variety|The Law of Requisite Variety}}}} from the theory of {{w|homeostats|Homeostat|Homeostat}}, and information-theoretic requirements for adequate channel capacity in a multi-level system.

{{tab}}The principle of requisite variety states that, if stability is to be attained, the variety of the controlling system must be at least as great as the variety of the system to be controlled. We have already had an instance of this, for this was really the trouble with our hypothetical committee: due to its rigid structure and the need to issue instructions in terms of standard procedures to be adopted, it could not possibly be efficient in a situation of any complexity. If we made the further assumption that there was no organisation of the work group other than that imposed by the committee, chaos would be unavoidable. Approximations to this occur in {{q|{{w|working to rule|Work-to-rule|Work-to-rule}}}}. In normal working, the initiatives of the shop-floor workers would serve as an additional source of variety, this enabling the principle of requisite variety to be satisfied, at least as far as normal variations in the factors affecting the production situation were concerned.

{{tab}}The relevance of the requirements of channel capacity is to the inadequate, attenuated information available at the top of the hierarchy—this is inevitable, for, in practice, the channel capacity could never be made adequate in the sort of pyramidical structures we have—and also to the inadequacy of the formal channels between subsystems (''e.g.'' departments) which require to co-ordinate their activities.

{{tab}}To emphasise how far conventional managerial ideas of organisation are from satisfying the principle of requisite variety, Beer used an {{p|277}}amusing parable concerning a Martian visitor to Earth, who examines the activities at the lower levels of some large undertaking, the brains of the workers concerned, and the organisational chart purporting to show how the undertaking is controlled. The visitor is most impressed, and deduces that the creatures at the top of the hierarchy must have heads yards wide.

{{tab}}In discussing the attempts of an inadequate control system to control a system of greater variety, Beer pointed to the accumulation of unassimilable information likely to occur as the control vainly struggles to keep track of the situation.

{{tab}}A comparable converse phenomenon was pointed out by {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}} in 1851, in what must rank as one of the most prophetic statements about the development of social organisation ever written: {{qq|(The government) must make as many laws as it finds interests, and, as interests are innumerable, ''relations arising from one another multiply to infinity,'' and antagonism is endless, lawmaking must go on without stopping. Laws, decrees, ordinances, resolutions, will fall like hail upon the unfortunate people. After a time the political ground will be covered by a layer of paper, which the geologists will put down among the vicissitudes of the earth as the ''papyraceous formation''.}}<ref>{{w|P.-J. Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}: '''{{l|The General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century|http://fair-use.org/p-j-proudhon/general-idea-of-the-revolution/|Full text at the Fair Use Repository}}''' (Freedom Press, 1923).</ref> (The first italics are mine.)

{{tab}}This is also an early, and lucid, statement of the complexity of the control situation in social organisation.

{{tab}}Beer has some suggestive ideas on the question of centralisation ''vs.'' decentralisation in industry. (That is, centralisation of control. The question of centralisation of ''plant'' is a different, if related, problem.) He puts the dilemma thus:

{{hang|Centralise: insufficient channel capacity, etc.—cannot work efficiently.}}

{{hang|Decentralise: completely autonomous units—no cohesion, probably ceases to be a system at all.}}

{{tab}}The point, he suggests is that neither alternative corresponds to what we find in really efficient systems, ''i.e.'' complex living organisms. What we do find are a number of different, interlocking control systems. Beer also draws attention to the prevalence, and importance, of redundancy of potential command in self-organising systems, and points out that it is completely alien to the sort of theory of organisation found in industry and in similar undertakings.

{{tab}}The type of organisation at which we should aim is, he suggests, an organic one, involving interlocking control systems, intermeshing at all levels, utilising the principle of evolving self-organising systems, with the channel capacity and flow of information kept as high as possible.<ref>Compare also the concluding section of {{w|Pask|Gordon_Pask|Gordon Pask}}{{s}} '''An Approach to Cybernetics,''' in particular the discussion of a {{q|biologically organised}} factory.</ref>

{{tab}}He mentioned in this connection an American businessman who claimed that his business was, in part, organised along somewhat similar lines and seemed to work very well. The idea was that anybody at all, no matter how {{q|junior}} (I do not know whether this was actually restricted to what are termed {{q|staff}} or not), could call a conference at short notice, to discuss anything they wanted, whether connected with {{p|278}}their work or not. Such a meeting could call in the president of the company himself, or anyone they thought they needed.

{{tab}}In context of interlocking control structures, we may note, as a fairly crude example, the {{w|syndicalist|Syndicalism|Syndicalism}} attempt to co-ordinate the activity of their basic units, the factory unions, through an interlocking two-fold structure of industrial and territorial federation.

{{tab}}Let us now contrast two models of decision making and control. First we have the model current among management theorists in industry, with its counterpart in conventional thinking about government in society as a whole. This is the model of a rigid pyramidal hierarchy, with lines of {{q|communication and command}} running from the top to the bottom of the pyramid. There is fixed delineation of responsibility, each element has a specified role, and the procedures to be followed at any level are determined within fairly narrow limits, and may only be changed by decisions of elements higher in the hierarchy. The role of the top group of the hierarchy is sometimes supposed to be comparable to the {{q|brain}} of the system.

{{tab}}The other model is from the cybernetics of evolving self-organising systems. Here we have a system of large variety, sufficient to cope with a complex unpredictable environment. Its characteristics are changing structure, modifying itself under continual feedback from the environment, exhibiting redundancy of potential command, and involving complex interlocking control structures. Learning and decision-making are distributed throughout the system, denser perhaps in some areas than others.

{{tab}}Has any social thinker thought of social organisation, actual or possible, in terms comparable with this model? I think so. Compare [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]] on that society which {{qq|seeks the fullest development of free association in all its aspects, in all possible degrees, for all conceivable purposes: an ever-changing association bearing in itself the elements of its own duration, and taking on the forms which at any moment best correspond to the manifold endeavours of all.}}<ref>[[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Peter Kropotkin]]: '''{{l|Anarchism, its Philosophy and Ideal|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchism-its-philosophy-and-ideal|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}''' (Freedom Press, 1895).</ref>

{{tab}}Further, {{qq|A society to which pre-established forms crystallised by law, are repugnant, which looks for harmony in an ever-changing and fugitive equilibrium between a multitude of varied forces and influences of every kind, following their own course.}}

{{tab}}The language is perhaps somewhat vague and ambiguous, but for a brief description in non-technical terms, of a society conceived as a complex evolving self-organising system, it could hardly be bettered. Certainly not in 1896.

{{tab}}The tragedy is not that so-called progressive thinkers today think that anarchist ideas of society and social organisation are inadequate. (This is excusable, and indicates failure on the part of anarchist propagandists to develop and spread their ideas.) It is that they think the other model ''is'' adequate. Also that they are incapable of thinking in any other terms.

{{tab}}Hence such thinkers are surprised when they cannot find the great efficient decision makers they expect in control of our institutions. The {{p|279}}{{q|solutions}} they propose to the muddle they do find, would require supermen-gods to work—even if the supermen could obtain adequate information to determine their decisions. This, from the nature of the structure, they can never do.

{{tab}}Again, when existing systems break down, as in industrial disputes, the tendency for the leaders on both sides is to attempt to remedy the situation by measures which increase the inadequacy of the system. That is, they attempt, by reorganisation and contractual measures, to increase the rigidity of the system by defining roles and responsibilities more closely, and try to confine the activities of human beings, who are themselves evolving self-organising systems, within a predetermined contractual framework. An interesting example of this will be found in ''{{l|Wildcat Strike|https://libcom.org/files/gouldner-alvin--wildcat-strike-a-study-in-worker-management-relationships.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}}'' by {{w|A. W. Gouldner|Alvin_Ward_Gouldner|Alvin Ward Gouldner}}.

{{tab}}To return to the conventional picture of government and the supposed control by the governed in democratic theory:

{{tab}}Firstly, does what I have said about the inefficiency and crudity of the governmental model as a control mechanism conflict with [[Author:W. Grey Walter|Grey Walter]]{{s}} analysis in his article {{qq|[[Anarchy 25/The development and significance of cybernetics|The Development and Significance of Cybernetics]]}} in [[Anarchy 25|{{sc|Anarchy 25}}]], in which he claimed that Western democratic systems were remarkably sophisticated from the cybernetic point of view?

{{tab}}I do not think so. The point is that what I am claiming is that they are inadequate for controlling the economy, say, or providing the greatest compatible satisfactions for the governed, as Proudhon pointed out. I would also claim that they are inadequate as mechanisms for maintaining order in society, unless society is conceived as largely self-regulating without the governmental institutions. Given this, I do not deny that the government-electorate system has proved an efficient ''machine for maintaining itself,'' although I might be inclined to give a little more importance to unofficial, informal elements in the system in this context than Grey Walter does in his article.

{{tab}}I agree that the system is well adapted to this task. Also, various psychological factors outside the scope of cybernetics help in the self-perpetuation of a system of this nature.

{{tab}}If the model of effective control by the government is inadequate, the naive democratic theory of control of the government by the people is much more so. This theory puts great stress on the importance of elections as the means by which the governed control their rulers and on the results of the elections, and hence, derivatively, on the constitution and behaviour of the government, as expressions of {{q|the will of the people}}.

{{tab}}If we consider the indiviudal, in a two party system, he is allowed one binary choice every five years or so, in which to reflect all the complex, dimly understood, effects of government actions, intended and unintended. The model seems to allow of no structured subsystem to be identified as {{q|the people}}—there is only an aggregate of individual choices.

{{tab}}It seems to me significant that this theory of self-government of the people, by the people, through universal, or at least wide, suffrage, {{p|280}}developed in the 18th and 19th centuries along with the growth of the {{q|rabble hypothesis}} of society (''i.e.'' society as an unstructured aggregate of individual social atoms, pursuing their own egocentric interests, held together only by authority and coercion). Sociologists and social psychologists now find this picture of society completely inadequate.<ref>See, for example {{w|J. A. C. Brown|James_A._C._Brown|James A. C. Brown}}: '''{{popup|The Social Psychology of Industry|The Social Psychology of Industry: Human Relations in the Factory}}''' (Penguin, 1954), Ch. 2.</ref>

{{tab}}This is not to deny the genius of some of the thinkers who worked within the limitations of this model of democracy, for they were able to see the difficulties in practice, and devised most complicated systems of checks and balances to render their systems practicable, (''e.g.'' the architects of the American constitution, as Grey Walter points out). However, they could not be expected to overcome the fundamental inadequacies of their model of government of the people, by the people, for the people, no matter how successful they were in developing the skeletons of viable self-perpetuating systems.

{{tab}}In contrast to the {{q|rabble hypothesis}}, we find that libertarian socialist thought, especially in Kropotkin and [[Author:Gustav Landauer|Landauer]], showed an early grasp of the complex group structure of society; society as a complex network of changing relationships, involving many structures of correlated activity and mutual aid, independent of authoritarian coercion. It was against this background that they developed their theories of social organisation.

{{tab}}Neither am I convinced by the more sophisticated pressure group theory of democracy, introduced in an attempt to avoid the obvious inadequacy of the naive theory. As a descriptive theory of the actual situation it does seem reasonably adequate, but as a means by which the individual obtains a voice in decisions affecting him, it is just as inadequate as the naive theory. This in fact is generally admitted by its adherents, who have largely dropped the idea of democracy as self-government.<ref>See {{w|Clegg|Hugh_Clegg_(industrial_relations)|Hugh Clegg}}: '''A New Approach to Industrial Democracy''' and [[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|G. Ostergaard]]{{s}} discussion in [[Anarchy 2/Approaches to industrial democracy|ANARCHY 2]].</ref>

{{tab}}In the case where a group, of a self-organising type, freely organises itself to tackle some situation, the resulting structure adopted by the group might be taken to exhibit {{q|the will of the group}}. More generally, groups of this nature are capable of genuine group decisions. Such expressions as {{q|the will of the group (people)}} are, I suggest, acceptable, and only as a rather dangerous shorthand, solely in cases of this sort.

{{tab}}In direct application, this is, of course, limited to fairly small groups, since, beyond a certain size, an unstructured aggregate of human beings is unable to act as a group, because there is too much information to be handled. The channel capacity is probably inadequate, and, even if the individual member could be presented with sufficient information, he would be unable to deal with it.

{{tab}}In certain work situations where the job effectively constrains the system, and only part of the behaviour needs to be correlated, we might expect larger aggregates to be capable of behaviour as a group. This is borne out by experience. In a situation where complex activity has to be correlated and there are few prior constraints, ''e.g.'' collective improvisation in a jazz band, most research groups, discussion groups, a maximum of the order of ten seems to be imposed; in manual jobs {{p|281}}of certain types, and in the groups of the gang system at Coventry, much larger aggregates are found capable of coherent behaviour—groups of the order of a hundred or even a thousand members. Some of the very large groups, ''e.g.'' in the motor industry, may, however, be examples of more complex organisation.

{{tab}}We have said that only small aggregates of human beings, if regarded initially as unstructured, can exhibit genuine group behaviour. There is no reason, however, why large aggregates, if ''sufficiently structured,'' should not maintain coherent behaviour, while retaining genuine self-organising characteristics enabling them to deal with unpredictable disturbances in their environment (including in {{q|environment}} their own {{q|substance}}, ''i.e.'' the human being constituting the aggregate) without developing a hierarchic structure in the authoritarian sense.

{{tab}}This is not to say that there will be no hierarchy in the ''logical'' sense. There will certainly be functional hierarchy in the sense of multi-level information flow, ''i.e.'' problem solving at the level of group environment, internal activity of subgroup, relations between subgroups, and so on. We have seen that this need not ''necessarily'' mean different isolatable physical parts handling the different levels. In a situation of great complexity, however, we would expect to find anatomical hierarchies, in as far as there would be identifiable subgroups, of varying degrees of permanence of form and constitution, dealing with different levels of activity.

{{tab}}The essential points are that the existence of redundancy of potential command, with changing dominance, means that any analysis of part of the system at any time in terms of a hierarchic model must be regarded with caution, and that, where such anatomical hierarchy is distinguishable, it need not be a question of the higher levels controlling the lower by coercive sanctions, but rather of feeding back information to bias the autonomous activity of the other subgroup. In short, a very different sort of hierarchy from that of managerial theory.

{{tab}}There certainly need not be any isolatable {{q|control unit}} controlling the rest.

{{tab}}I am using {{q|structured}} here in a sense comparable to [[Author:Martin Buber|Buber]], ''i.e.'' possessing a structure of connected subgroups, groupings or subgroups, etc., of a functional nature, but I would place relatively less emphasis on formal federation of subgroups, even in multiple federation, than Buber,<ref>See [[Author:Martin Buber|Martin Buber]]: '''{{l|Paths in Utopia|http://www.ditext.com/buber/utopia.html|Full text at Digital Text International}}''' (Routledge, 1949).</ref> and more on more complex forms of connection. Also I am counting as subgroups both localised and more diffuse structures, formal and informal. One form of connection which seems to be of importance, is the case of diffuse substructures {{q|penetrating}} into more localised ones, ''e.g.'' certain members of a particular subgrouping being members of some more widespread grouping, some sort of interest association, say, and thus serving as a means by which information about special forms of activity, passing in the more widespread structures, can pass into the localised structure, and play a part in determining its subsequent behaviour.

{{p|282}}{{tab}}I hope I have shown that ideas derived from cybernetics and information theory are suggestive of fruitful lines of approach in considering social organisation, especially to the libertarian. I would not, however, expect too much in the way of rigorous direct application of cybernetic technique to social situations, for two reasons. Firstly there is the difficulty of specifying adequate and generally acceptable models of complex social situations, where the bias of the observer is notoriously effective in determining the picture he adopts. Secondly, the information theoretic concept of {{q|information}} is an abstract one which emphasises only the selective characteristic on information. There are situations in which this is not entirely adequate.

{{tab}}This, however, is no excuse for remaining bound by a primitive and inadequate model of decision-making and control procedures. The basic premise of the governmentalist—namely, that any society must incorporate some mechanism for overall control—is certainly true, if we use {{q|control}} in the sense of {{q|maintain a large number of critical variables within limits of toleration.}} Indeed, the statement is virtually a tautology, since if such a situation did not exist, the aggregate would not possess sufficient stability to merit the designation {{q|a society}}.

{{tab}}The error of the governmentalist is to think that {{q|incorporate some mechanism for control}} is always equivalent to {{q|include a fixed isolatable control unit to which the rest, ''i.e.'' the majority, of the system is subservient}}. This may be an adequate interpretation in the case of a model railway system, but not for a human society.

{{tab}}The alternative model is complex, and changing in its search for stability in the face of unpredictable disturbances—and much less easy to describe. Indeed, we are perhaps just beginning to develop an adequate language to describe such situations, despite the prophetic insights of a few men in the past.

{{tab}}A quotation from Proudhon makes a fitting conclusion—and starting point—{{qq|People like simple ideas and are right to like them. Unfortunately, the simplicity they seek is only to be found in elementary things; and the world, society, and man are made up of insoluble problems, contrary principles, and conflicting forces. Organism means complication, and multiplicity means contradiction, opposition, independence.}}<ref>{{w|P.-J. Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}: The Theory of Taxation (1861) quoted in [[Author:Martin Buber|Buber]] [[#cite_note-11|'''{{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}''']]</ref>

-----

<font size="2">{{hang|{{note|aster|*}} {{q|best suited}} that is from the point of view of the group.}}

-----

<references /></font>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Anarchism and the cybernetics of self organising systems}}
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
[[Category:Cybernetics]]
[[Category:Labour and industry]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 31/Randolph Bourne vs. the State

2021-10-11T18:38:12Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>Randolph Bourne vs. the State
| author = H. W. Morton
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 31]]
| next = [[../Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems|Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems]]
| notes = ''H. W. MORTON is a New York anarchist who, with [[Author:Sam Weiner|Sam Weiner]], wrote {{qq|[[Anarchy 19/Were they way out way back?|Were they way out, way back?]]}} in'' [[Anarchy 19|{{sc|Anarchy}} 19]].
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|265}}

<font size="5">'''Randolph Bourne vs. the State'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:H. W. Morton|H. W. MORTON]]'''</font>

{{p|s1|n}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{qq|{{sc|War is the health of the State}}.}} Had {{w|Randolph Bourne|Randolph_Bourne}} never written another line he would have earned immortality from those words alone. {{qq|War is the health of the State,}} he announced, and went on to explain:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|It automatically sets in motion throughout society those irresistible forces for uniformity, for passionate co-operation with the Government in coercing into obedience the minority groups and individuals which lack the larger herd sense. The machinery of Government sets and enforces the drastic penalties; the minorities are either intimidated into silence, or brought slowly around by a subtle process of persuasion which may seem to them really to be converting them. Of course the ideal of perfect loyalty, perfect uniformity is never really attained. The classes upon whom the amateur work of coercion falls are unwearied in their zeal, but often their agitation instead of converting, merely serves to stiffen their resistance. Minorities are rendered sullen, and some intellectual opinion bitter and satirical. But in general, the nation in war-time attains a uniformity of feeling, a hierarchy of values culminating at the undisputed apex of the State ideal, which could not possibly be produced through any other agency than war.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}Randolph Bourne, a brilliant cripple, was born in {{w|New Jersey|New_Jersey}} in that singularly radical year 1886, and died in {{w|New York City|New_York_City}} in 1918. A graduate of {{w|Columbia University|Columbia_University}}, and a member of that nebulous clique of {{w|Greenwich Village|Greenwich_Village}} {{w|Bohemians|Bohemianism|Bohemianism}}, he was a frequent contributor to ''{{w|The New Republic|The_New_Republic}}'', ''{{w|The Atlantic Monthly|The_Atlantic|The Atlantic}}'', ''{{w|The Seven Arts|The_Seven_Arts}}'' and ''{{w|The Dial|The_Dial}}''. Most of his writing, however, would be of little interest to anarchists—I found {{qq|{{l|The History of a Literary Radical & Other Papers|https://archive.org/details/historyofliterar00bouruoft|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}} (New York, Russell, 1956) so uniformly innocuous that I didn{{t}} even finish it. On the other hand, had this collection included {{qq|{{l|The State|http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/randolph-bourne-the-state|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}}}, I would have no complaint, for {{qq|The State}} is the healthiest of Randolph Bourne.

{{tab}}{{qq|The State}}, an unfinished essay written at the time of {{w|World War I|World_War_I}}, had long been out of print. It has recently been reissued—in time for World War III—by the Greater New York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to the Human Animal, 150 Nassau Street, New York 38, N.Y. It is well worth the $1.00 price despite a rather bizarre format {{p|266}}({{popup|28 inches|71 cm}} wide, {{popup|8 inches|20 cm}} high when open).

{{tab}}In its incomplete form the essay defines the State, describes its activities, and discusses its historic evolution. Since it was never completed, we cannot know what further treatment Bourne had planned. He might or might not have intended to propose methods of abolishing the State and discuss the possibilities of a Stateless society. From the content of the work itself, I would infer not.

{{tab}}He begins with vigour and brilliance:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|Government is synonymous with neither State nor Nation. It is the machinery by which the nation, organized by a State, carries out its State functions. Government is a framework of the administration of laws, and the carrying out of the public force. Government is the idea of the State put into practical operation in the hands of definite, concrete, fallible men. It is the visible sign of the invisible grace. It is the word made flesh.}}</blockquote>

Then after this beautifully anarchistic beginning, Bourne immediately disappoints us: {{qq|And it has necessarily the limitations inherent in all practicality.}} Imagine attacking Government on the basis of practical limitations! I can no more conceive of an anarchist writing that, than of a pacifist complaining that {{w|Hydrogen Bombs|Thermonuclear_weapon|Thermonuclear weapon}} are no good because they don{{t}} work.

{{tab}}However, Bourne immediately redeems himself by pointing out that Government {{qq|is by no means identical with}} the State. He emphasizes the fact that the State is an abscraction whereas Government is tangible. {{qq|That the State is a mystical conception is something that must never be forgotten. Its glamour and its significance linger behind the framework of Government and direct its activities.}} Here Bourne has put his finger on a critical distinction—one which few people other than anarchists seem to grasp.

{{tab}}''Society'' is the sum total of all the relationships, combinations, associations, institutions, etc. of human beings in an indeterminate territory. ''The State'' is an involuntary legal relationship whereby a supreme authority has control over all persons and property in a specifically bounded territory. ''Government'' is merely the mechanism of that legal relationship. In other words, Government is an operating body, constituting only part of the overall legal relationship called the State. Similarly the State is but one relationship among all the innumerable relationships which comprise Society. Conversely, Society includes the State; and the State includes the Government. The confusion over the terms, and the temptation to interchange them, arises because Government is the most prominent part of the State, which in turn is the most powerful relationship of Society.

{{tab}}Without a clear understanding of these terms and their exact inter-relationship, anarchist theory becomes incomprehensible. When we anarchists attack the State we don{{t}} want to destroy society, injure government employees, or even demolish their office buildings. Contrasting the millennia of society{{s}} growth and development without the State to the imminent prospect of universal death with it, we have concluded that the State is but a removable malignant tumour on the {{p|267}}body social. Therefore we want to abolish the vicious power arrangement by which we are dominated politically, exploited economically, and jeopardized physically.

{{tab}}For the most part Bourne goes along with us. The following, for example, is fine anarchistic analysis:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|What is the State essentially? The more closely we examine it, the more mystical and personal it becomes. On the Nation we can put our hand as a definite social group, with attitudes and quantities exact enough to mean something. On the Government we can put our hand as a certain organisation of ruling functions, the machinery of law-making and law-enforcing. The Administration is a recognizable group of political functionaries, temporarily in charge of the Government. But the State stands as an idea behind them all, eternal, sanctified, and from it Government and Administration conceive themselves to have the breath of life. Even the nation, especially in times of war—or at least, its significant classes—considers that it derives its authority and its purpose from the idea of the State. Nation and State are scarcely differentiated, and the concrete, practical, apparent facts are sunk in the symbol. We reverence not our country but the flag. We may criticize ever so severely our country, but we are disrespectful to the flag at our peril.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}On the other hand some of Bourne{{s}} terminology is disturbing: he persistently uses {{qq|herd}}, although he contends that {{qq|there is nothing invidious in the use of the term.}} He also refers occasionally to the {{qq|significant classes}}. Yet he is not necessarily élitist, for it is entirely possible that he is viewing people with sympathy rather than scorn. Thus, although he speaks of the State being {{qq|the organisation of the herd to act offensively or defensively against another herd similarly organized}} and points out how it {{qq|becomes an instrument by which the power of the whole herd is wielded for the benefit of a class,}} he may be writing more in compassion than contempt. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in view of his opinion that the working classes {{qq|live habitually in an industrial serfdom, by which though nominally free, they are in practice as a class bound to a system of a machine-production the implements of which they do not own, and in the distribution of whose product they have not the slightest voice {{e}} From such serfdom, military {{w|conscription|Conscription|Conscription}} is not so great a change.}}

{{tab}}Anarchists might also be irked by the treatment Bourne accords man{{s}} gregarious instinct. Here too, however, he might not be deriding mutual aid so much as complaining of how the State brutalizes us: {{qq|In this great herd-machinery, dissent is like sand in the bearings. The State ideal is primarily a sort of blind animal push towards military unity.}} I wish I could decide whether his anger is directed solely at the State or if it includes humanity as well, ''e.g.'':

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|There is, of course, in the feeling towards the State a large element of pure filial mysticism {{e}} A people at War have become in the most literal sense obedient, respectful, trustful children again, full of that naive faith in the all-wisdom and all-power of the adult who takes care of them, imposes his mild but necessary rule upon {{p|268}} them{{e|r}}|l}}</blockquote>

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|In your reaction to an imagined attack on your country or an insult to its Government, you draw closer to the herd for protection, you conform in word and deed, and you insist vehemently that everybody else shall think, speak and act together.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}Even if Bourne was closer to {{w|Nietzsche|Friedrich_Nietzsche|Friedrich Nietzsche}} than to {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}, his criticisms are devastating:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|The State is a jealous god and will brook no rivals. Its sovereignty must pervade everyone and all feeling must be run into the stereotyped forms of romantic patriotic militarism which is the traditional expression of the State herd feeling.}} {{e}}</blockquote>

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|The State moves inevitably along the line from {{w|military dictatorship|Military_dictatorship|Military dictatorship}} to the {{w|divine right of Kings|Divine_right_of_kings|Divine right of kings}}. What had to be at first rawly imposed becomes through social habit to seem the necessary, the inevitable.}} {{e}}</blockquote>

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|Government [by the time of {{w|George III|George_III_of_the_United_Kingdom}}] had been for long what it has never ceased to be—a series of berths and emoluments in Army, Navy, and the different departments of State, for the representatives of the privileged classes.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}Judging solely from this essay I surmise that Bourne has never read any of the anarchist theoreticians, or if he did, that not much had rubbed off. (Still, his milieu probably included a few anarchists). Assuming this essay to be an entirely independent creation, it becomes all the more remarkable for its originality and insight. On the other hand much of his brilliance is wasted in exploring ground already covered quite thoroughly by numerous anarchists before him. For 150 years anarchist theoreticians had been building up a vast body of knowledge on the State. No one individual, even one so penetrating as Bourne, could possibly match that century and a half of evolution by himself. Had he taken contemporary anarchist thinking as a point of departure, there is no telling what he might have achieved. For example, his treatment of the State{{s}} historic development—the weakest part of the essay—would have been considerably enhanced had he studied [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]. Conversely, Kropotkin could have benefitted from reading Bourne on War:

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|The State is intimately connected with war, for it is the organization of the collective community when it acts in a political manner, and to act in a political manner towards a rival group has meant, throughout history—war.{{e|r}}|l}}</blockquote>

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|It is States that makes wars and not nations, and the very thought and almost necessity of war is bound up with the ideal of the State {{e}} for war implies an organized people drilled and led; in fact it necessitates the State.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}War for Bourne is not a continuation of diplomacy—rather, {{qq|diplomacy is a disguised war.}}

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}for the last stronghold of State power is foreign policy. It is in foreign policy that the State acts most concentratedly as the organized herd, acts with fullest sense of aggressive power, acts with freest arbitrariness. In foreign policy, the State is most itself. {{p|269}}States, with reference to each other, may be said to be in a continual state of latent war. The {{q|armed truce}}, a phrase so familiar before 1914, was an accurate description of the normal relation of States when they are not at war. Indeed, it is not too much to say that the normal relations of States is war. Diplomacy is a disguised war, in which States seek to gain by barter and intrigue, by the cleverness of wit, the objectives which they would have to gain more clumsily by means of war. Diplomacy is used while the States are recuperating from conflicts in which they have exhausted themselves. It is the wheedling and the bargaining of the worn-out bullies as they rise from the ground and slowly restore their strength to begin fighting again. If diplomacy had been the moral equivalent for war, a higher stage in human progress, an inestimable means of making words prevail instead of blows, militarism would have broken down and given place to it. But since it is a mere temporary substitute, a mere appearance of war{{s}} energy under another form, a surrogate effect is almost exactly proportioned to the armed force behind it. When it fails, the recourse is immediate to the military technique whose thinly veiled arm it has been. A diplomacy that was the agency of popular democratic forces in their non-State manifestations would be no diplomacy at all. It would be no better than the Railway or Education Commissions that are sent from one country to another with rational constructive purpose. The State, acting as a diplomatic-military ideal, is eternally at war.{{e|r}}}}</blockquote>

<blockquote>{{tab}}{{qq|It cannot be too firmly realized that war is a function of States and not of nations, indeed that is the chief function of States. War is a very artificial thing. It is not the naive spontaneous outburst of herd pugnacity; it is no more primary than is formal religion. War cannot exist without a military establishment, and a military establishment cannot exist without a State organization. War has an immemorial tradition and heredity only because the State has a long tradition and heredity. But they are inseparably and functionally joined. ''We cannot crusade against war without crusading implicitly against the State.'' (My emphasis—H.W.M.). And we cannot expect or take measures to insure, that this war is a war to end war, unless at the same time we take measures to end that State in its traditional form. The State is not the nation, and the State can be modified and even abolished in its present form, without harming the nation. On the contrary, with the passing of the dominance of the State, the genuine life-enhancing forces of the nation will be liberated {{e}} For the very existence of a State in a system of States means that the nation lies always under a risk of war and invasion, and the calling away of energy into military pursuits means a crippling of the productive and life-enhancing processes of the national life.}}</blockquote>

{{tab}}In view of all the above sentiments should we consider Bourne an anarchist, a pacifist, both, or neither? Obviously he had a genuine hatred both of the State and of war, but somehow I get the impression that he was not ready to replace either the former with freedom, or the latter with love.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Randolph Bourne versus the State}}
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Literary criticism]]
[[Category:War and militarism]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/"i gotta million friends"

2021-10-03T19:42:44Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />{{qq|i gotta million friends}}
| author = Cassandra Vaughan
| section =
| previous = [[../Blues walking like a man|Blues walking like a man]]
| next = [[../The catchers in the Right|The catchers in the Right]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|155}}

<font size="5">'''{{qq|i gotta million friends}}'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Cassandra Vaughan|CASSANDRA VAUGHAN]]'''</font>

{|
|<font size="4">'''{{qq||l}}'''</font>
|<font size="4">'''you ask'':'' how does it feel to be an idol?'''</font>
|-
| 
|<font size="4">{{qq|'''it{{d}} be silly of me to answer, wouldn{{t}} it{{e|r}}|r}}
|}

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|The brilliant young american singer {{w|bob dylan|Bob_Dylan|Bob Dylan}}}} is currently engaged in a full-blooded assault on the {{w|English hit parade|UK_Singles_Chart|UK Singles Chart}}, to the obvious delight of those who believe that {{w|Folk-music|Folk_music|Folk music}}, to be relevant, must be treated as an adjunct of {{w|pop-music|Popular_music|Popular music}}, and to the equally obvious consternation of those who believe Dylan to be the only major American song writer since {{w|Woody Guthrie|Woody_Guthrie}}.

{{tab}}It seems worthwhile, therefore, to write briefly about Dylan in this issue of {{sc|anarchy}}—whether this piece is by way of an obituary remains to be seen. If it is, it will not be entirely Dylan{{s}} fault: he has been picked up by the pop parasite as the ''{{popup|frisson nouveau|exciting new thing}}.'' Pop traditionally preys on more virile musical forms, either corrupting the original practitioners to suit the market or producing its own pre-corrupted copyists, as happened in the case of {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}. It usually works out best from both sides when pop produces its imitations and leaves the originals to go their own way. In the case of Dylan both things seem to have happened. The manipulators of pop fashion who have for a long time been pushing {{qq|folk}} as the next teenage {{w|rave|Fad|Fad}} have created their own {{w|English|England|England}} Dylan, by name {{w|Donovan}}, who plays {{w|Tommy Steele|Tommy_Steele}} to Dylan{{s}} {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. Fortunately Donovan does not matter; he is going to earn a lot of money and keep himself, and thousands of little girls, happy by imitating Dylan. But the fate of Dylan, who is highly original, despite admitted debts to Woody Guthrie and Guthrie{{s}} disciple, {{w|Rambling Jack Elliott|Ramblin'_Jack_Elliott|Ramblin' Jack Elliott}}, and whose songs have been an emotionally articulate vehicle for the feelings of the {{w|integration|Racial_integration|Racial integration}} generation in the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} and the {{w|anti-nuclear|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}} generation here, is of great concern. The news that his current American {{w|single|Single_(music)|Single (music)}} ''{{w|Subterranean Homesick Blues|Subterranean_Homesick_Blues}}'' is being sold in a {{l|sleeve|https://images.45cat.com/bob-dylan-subterranean-homesick-blues-1965-16.jpg|Image at 45cat}} bearing photographs of the {{w|Beatles|The_Beatles|The Beatles}} heightens this concern.

{{tab}}The process of popularising Dylan has been going on now for several months. He is the logical successor to the long-haired r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups—the protest implicit in the {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Things}} and the {{w|Rolling Stones|The_Rolling_Stones|The Rolling Stones}} is explicit in Dylan—but recording as he does for the American {{w|Columbia|Columbia_Records|Columbia Records}} company, whose concern for the fast buck rather than for the effect of over-exposure on their artists is notorious, there has always been the {{p|156}}risk that Dylan would be stretched on the rack of the publicity machine, and it does indeed look as though Dylan, already strained as a writer by Columbia{{s}} recording requirements, may increasingly turn out ill-considered, poorly constructed songs. His latest {{w|LP|LP_record|LP record}} available here at the time of writing, ''{{w|Another Side of Bob Dylan|https://www.discogs.com/master/3730-Bob-Dylan-Another-Side-Of-Bob-Dylan|Discogs: Bob Dylan – Another Side of Bob Dylan}},'' may be symptomatic of his decline or it may be a passing phase—after all he is not yet twenty-four and has not necessarily reached the height of his powers. But we hear occasional sighs of discontent from American Dylan fans that he is withdrawing more and more into the private world created by his success and refusing to face real life—something very close to treason in a Guthrie disciple. He has even been criticised in an {{l|open letter|http://www.edlis.org/twice/threads/open_letter_to_bob_dylan.html|Full text at EDLIS Centrale}} in the most influential folk magazine, ''{{w|Sing Out|Sing_Out!|Sing Out!}};'' this would be a blow to the orthodox American singer but its probable effect on Dylan is difficult to assess. We can only hope that Dylan will survive the commercial obstacle race in which he has become involved. It is impossible to say at this point what his chances are. If he does survive it will be as big a tribute to him as a person as his best songs are to him as a serious contemporary song-writer.

{{tab}}In all that has been written about Dylan, only one writer, {{w|Philip Oakes|Philip_Oakes}}, in a valuable and perceptive article which appeared in ''{{w|Queen|Queen_(magazine)|Queen (magazine)}}'' almost a year ago, seems to have described accurately how Dylan is being mythologised: {{qq|{{e|l}}a powerful piece of myth-making is taking place. Dylan is being promoted not just as a folk-singer (and he is a good one) but as a folk-hero, a randy {{w|Johnny Appleseed|Johnny_Appleseed}} for this day and age.}}

{{tab}}This still does not fully account for the rapid rise of Dylan{{s}} ''{{w|The Times They Are A-Changin{{a}}|The_Times_They_Are_a-Changin'_(song)|The Times They Are a-Changin'}}'' in the top twenty, for the fact that tickets for his two May {{w|Albert Hall|Royal_Albert_Hall|Royal Albert Hall}} appearances sold out in a total of under two days, or for the consistent appearance of his LPs amongst the ten national best sellers. Has he captured this enormous public as a result of plugs given him by such groups as the Beatles and the {{w|Animals|The_Animals|The Animals}}? Is his nasal voice, rudimentary {{w|guitar|Guitar|Guitar}} and uncomfortable {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} style really the sound the record buyers have been craving for, having been sated on the noise of the British {{qq|Chicago-line}} r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups? Or is it possible, by some chance, that his {{qq|message}} corresponds with a new outlook held by all these people, that they actually listen to the words and not just the overall sound? The answer seems to lie somewhere between the first two possibilities. For if half the people who now buy Dylan{{s}} records really listen to the words of ''{{w|With God on Our Side|With_God_on_Our_Side_(song)}},'' why is radical activity in {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} confined to minute local groups? If a quarter understand what he is saying in ''{{w|The Masters of War|Masters_of_War|Masters of War}},'' why aren{{t}} the streets filled? And if but a tenth feel every emotion in ''{{w|The Hard Rain{{s}} Are Gonna Fall|A_Hard_Rain's_a-Gonna_Fall|A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall}},'' when is the revolution? Philip Oakes probably has the answer: {{qq|Folk song has become everyone{{s}} instant conscience; easy to summon, easy to settle. To ditto the message, to agree with the sentiments, is all that{{s}} required. You too can be a {{w|liberal|Liberalism_in_the_United_States|Liberalism in the United States}}: all you have to do is play the record}}.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:i gotta million friends}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Author:Cassandra Vaughan

2021-10-02T08:55:49Z

Ivanhoe:

{{author
|firstname = Cassandra
|lastname = Vaughan
|birthdate =
|deathdate =
|bio =
|image =
}}<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">

== Articles ==

{| {{alist}}
{{list|51|"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}}}
|}
</div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Vaughan , Cassandra}}
[[Category:Anarchy contributors]]

Anarchy 51/"i gotta million friends"

2021-10-02T08:51:30Z

Ivanhoe: Created page with "{{header | title = ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965<br />{{qq|i gotta million friends}} | author = Cassandra Vaughan | section = | previous = ../Bl..."

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />{{qq|i gotta million friends}}
| author = Cassandra Vaughan
| section =
| previous = [[../Blues walking like a man|Blues walking like a man]]
| next = [[../The catchers in the right|The catchers in the right]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|155}}

<font size="5">'''{{qq|i gotta million friends}}'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Cassandra Vaughan|CASSANDRA VAUGHAN]]'''</font>

{|
|<font size="4">'''{{qq||l}}'''</font>
|<font size="4">'''you ask'':'' how does it feel to be an idol?'''</font>
|-
| 
|<font size="4">{{qq|'''it{{d}} be silly of me to answer, wouldn{{t}} it{{e|r}}|r}}
|}

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|The brilliant young american singer {{w|bob dylan|Bob_Dylan|Bob Dylan}}}} is currently engaged in a full-blooded assault on the {{w|English hit parade|UK_Singles_Chart|UK Singles Chart}}, to the obvious delight of those who believe that {{w|Folk-music|Folk_music|Folk music}}, to be relevant, must be treated as an adjunct of {{w|pop-music|Popular_music|Popular music}}, and to the equally obvious consternation of those who believe Dylan to be the only major American song writer since {{w|Woody Guthrie|Woody_Guthrie}}.

{{tab}}It seems worthwhile, therefore, to write briefly about Dylan in this issue of {{sc|anarchy}}—whether this piece is by way of an obituary remains to be seen. If it is, it will not be entirely Dylan{{s}} fault: he has been picked up by the pop parasite as the ''{{popup|frisson nouveau|exciting new thing}}.'' Pop traditionally preys on more virile musical forms, either corrupting the original practitioners to suit the market or producing its own pre-corrupted copyists, as happened in the case of {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}. It usually works out best from both sides when pop produces its imitations and leaves the originals to go their own way. In the case of Dylan both things seem to have happened. The manipulators of pop fashion who have for a long time been pushing {{qq|folk}} as the next teenage {{w|rave|Fad|Fad}} have created their own {{w|English|England|England}} Dylan, by name {{w|Donovan}}, who plays {{w|Tommy Steele|Tommy_Steele}} to Dylan{{s}} {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. Fortunately Donovan does not matter; he is going to earn a lot of money and keep himself, and thousands of little girls, happy by imitating Dylan. But the fate of Dylan, who is highly original, despite admitted debts to Woody Guthrie and Guthrie{{s}} disciple, {{w|Rambling Jack Elliott|Ramblin'_Jack_Elliott|Ramblin' Jack Elliott}}, and whose songs have been an emotionally articulate vehicle for the feelings of the {{w|integration|Racial_integration|Racial integration}} generation in the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} and the {{w|anti-nuclear|Nuclear_disarmament|Nuclear disarmament}} generation here, is of great concern. The news that his current American {{w|single|Single_(music)|Single (music)}} ''{{w|Subterranean Homesick Blues|Subterranean_Homesick_Blues}}'' is being sold in a {{l|sleeve|https://images.45cat.com/bob-dylan-subterranean-homesick-blues-1965-16.jpg|Image at 45cat}} bearing photographs of the {{w|Beatles|The_Beatles|The Beatles}} heightens this concern.

{{tab}}The process of popularising Dylan has been going on now for several months. He is the logical successor to the long-haired r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups—the protest implicit in the {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Things}} and the {{w|Rolling Stones|The_Rolling_Stones|The Rolling Stones}} is explicit in Dylan—but recording as he does for the American {{w|Columbia|Columbia_Records|Columbia Records}} company, whose concern for the fast buck rather than for the effect of over-exposure on their artists is notorious, there has always been the {{p|156}}risk that Dylan would be stretched on the rack of the publicity machine, and it does indeed look as though Dylan, already strained as a writer by Columbia{{s}} recording requirements, may increasingly turn out ill-considered, poorly constructed songs. His latest {{w|LP|LP_record|LP record}} available here at the time of writing, ''{{w|Another Side of Bob Dylan|https://www.discogs.com/master/3730-Bob-Dylan-Another-Side-Of-Bob-Dylan|Discogs: Bob Dylan – Another Side of Bob Dylan}},'' may be symptomatic of his decline or it may be a passing phase—after all he is not yet twenty-four and has not necessarily reached the height of his powers. But we hear occasional sighs of discontent from American Dylan fans that he is withdrawing more and more into the private world created by his success and refusing to face real life—something very close to treason in a Guthrie disciple. He has even been criticised in an {{l|open letter|http://www.edlis.org/twice/threads/open_letter_to_bob_dylan.html|Full text at EDLIS Centrale}} in the most influential folk magazine, ''{{w|Sing Out|Sing_Out!|Sing Out!}};'' this would be a blow to the orthodox American singer but its probable effect on Dylan is difficult to assess. We can only hope that Dylan will survive the commercial obstacle race in which he has become involved. It is impossible to say at this point what his chances are. If he does survive it will be as big a tribute to him as a person as his best songs are to him as a serious contemporary song-writer.

{{tab}}In all that has been written about Dylan, only one writer, {{w|Philip Oakes|Philip_Oakes}}, in a valuable and perceptive article which appeared in ''{{w|Queen|Queen_(magazine)|Queen (magazine)}}'' almost a year ago, seems to have described accurately how Dylan is being mythologised: {{qq|{{e|l}}a powerful piece of myth-making is taking place. Dylan is being promoted not just as a folk-singer (and he is a good one) but as a folk-hero, a randy {{w|Johnny Appleseed|Johnny_Appleseed}} for this day and age.}}

{{tab}}This still does not fully account for the rapid rise of Dylan{{s}} ''{{w|The Times They Are A-Changin{{a}}|The_Times_They_Are_a-Changin'_(song)|The Times They Are a-Changin'}}'' in the top twenty, for the fact that tickets for his two May {{w|Albert Hall|Royal_Albert_Hall|Royal Albert Hall}} appearances sold out in a total of under two days, or for the consistent appearance of his LPs amongst the ten national best sellers. Has he captured this enormous public as a result of plugs given him by such groups as the Beatles and the {{w|Animals|The_Animals|The Animals}}? Is his nasal voice, rudimentary {{w|guitar|Guitar|Guitar}} and uncomfortable {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} style really the sound the record buyers have been craving for, having been sated on the noise of the British {{qq|Chicago-line}} r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups? Or is it possible, by some chance, that his {{qq|message}} corresponds with a new outlook held by all these people, that they actually listen to the words and not just the overall sound? The answer seems to lie somewhere between the first two possibilities. For if half the people who now buy Dylan{{s}} records really listen to the words of ''{{w|With God on Our Side|With_God_on_Our_Side_(song)}},'' why is radical activity in {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} confined to minute local groups? If a quarter understand what he is saying in ''{{w|The Masters of War|Masters_of_War|Masters of War}},'' why aren{{t}} the streets filled? And if but a tenth feel every emotion in ''{{w|The Hard Rain{{s}} Are Gonna Fall|A_Hard_Rain's_a-Gonna_Fall|A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall}},'' when is the revolution? Philip Oakes probably has the answer: {{qq|Folk song has become everyone{{s}} instant conscience; easy to summon, easy to settle. To ditto the message, to agree with the sentiments, is all that{{s}} required. You too can be a {{w|liberal|Liberalism_in_the_United_States|Liberalism in the United States}}: all you have to do is play the record}}.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:i gotta million friends}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-02T05:02:05Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />Blues walking like a man
| author = Charles Radcliffe
| section =
| previous = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| next = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|140}}

<font size="5">'''Blues walking<br />like a man'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charles Radcliffe|CHARLES RADCLIFFE]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|It is impossible to say with any certainty}} when the {{w|blues|Blues|Blues}} became a complete musical form, recognisably different from its antecedents—the songs of the farms and {{w|levee|Levee|Levee}} camps, the {{w|work songs|Work_song|Work song}}, axe songs, {{l|arwhoolies|https://www.loc.gov/collections/songs-of-america/articles-and-essays/musical-styles/traditional-and-ethnic/traditional-work-songs/|link: Library of Congress article}}, {{w|hollers|Field_holler|Field holler}} and {{w|rags|Ragtime|Ragtime}}. It is equally difficult to ascertain in which of the {{w|southern states|Southern_United_States|Southern United States}} of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} it originated. Many of the early singers were migratory labourers or {{w|blind men|Blind_musicians|Blind musicians}} who travelled widely to beg and earn money by singing, so it seems probable that it was a concurrent development over large areas of the {{w|Deep South|Deep_South}}. What is quite certain is that the blues was not a creation of any one man ({{w|W. C. Handy|W._C._Handy}}{{s}} self-inflating claim to be Father of the Blues has always seemed more than a little ludicrous to blues enthusiasts). Neither was it a product of city life. {{w|Bessie Smith|Bessie_Smith}}, for example, is frequently held to be the finest blues singer ever to record but she recorded {{w|''Classic'' city jazz-blues|Classic_female_blues|Classic female blues}}, which were a descendant, rather than a close relation, of the {{w|rural blues|Country_blues|Country blues}}, although they found their way onto record earlier. Her style is most often praised by {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}} critics, which correctly indicates her position as the creator of jazz-blues, rather than a blues singer ''per se.''<br />

{{tab}}Although the precise geographical, historical and musical origins of the blues are uncertain, the social conditions which produced it are well-recorded, not least of all in the blues itself. In the {{w|white supremacist|White_Supremacy#United_States|White Supremacy: United States}} society of the south the {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americans}} was in a situation of terrifying paradox: {{p|141}}isolated by race and colour, yet forced to conform to the ''mores'' of a society in which he was denied a voice and from which he was rigorously excluded. It is, incidentally, one of the most bitter ironies of the history of America{{s}} negroes that they should have practised their own form of {{w|racialism|Discrimination_based_on_skin_color|Discrimination based on skin color}}—that of distinction based on {{w|Creole|Creole_peoples|Creole peoples}} blood, {{qq|yellow-skins}}, {{qq|brown-skins}} and {{qq|black-skins}}. Despite these conditions being a primary factor in the creation and evolution of the blues, it is not usually a music of direct social protest and the few magnificent protest blues are far outnumbered by blues on women, men, cars, and rent, on the everyday life of an oppressed minority.

{{tab}}The blues has influenced jazz, {{qq|{{w|pop|Popular_music|Popular music}}}} music and even {{qq|serious}} music, yet its structure is extremely simple. In its {{w|developed form|Twelve-bar_blues|Twelve-bar blues}} it amounts to a three line {{w|stanza|Stanza|Stanza}}, with one line repeated and a third line, rhymed or unrhymed, in the form of {{w|call and response|Call_and_response_(music)|Call and response}}, a heritage from work songs. {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, one of the finest living rural singers, sings:

:: <font size="2">''Now I was sittin{{a}} in jail wi{{a}} my eyes all full of tears'' (repeat)
:: ''Y{{a}}know, I{{m}} glad didn{{t}} get lifetime, boys, that I {{a}}scaped th{{a}} {{a}}lectric chair''</font>

and {{w|Jaydee Short|J.D._Short|J.D. Short}} sang bitterly:

:: <font size="2">''So dark was the night now, people; cold, cold was the ground'' (repeat)
:: ''Me {{a}}n{{a}} my buddies in two {{w|foxholes|Defensive_fighting_position#Terminology|Defensive fighting position}}, had to keep our heads on down''</font>

{{tab}}Earlier singers drew more on the entire tradition of {{w|negro folk-song|African-American_music|African-American music}} and less on a still incomplete blues tradition, and there was less fixed form. {{w|Bukka White|Bukka_White}}, in a haunting blues, sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}}, believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}},''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die.''
:: ''I know I was born to die, but I hate to leave my chillen cryin{{a}}''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back, before they let me down,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''And don{{a}} leave them standin{{a}} and cryin{{a}} on the graveyar{{a}} groun{{a}}''</font>

{{tab}}Another early singer, {{w|Skip James|Skip_James}}, sings in two line verses:

:: <font size="2">''Hard time here, everywhere y{{a}} go''
:: ''Time{{s}} harder than they ever been before.''
:: ''If you certain y{{a}} had money, you better be sure,''
:: ''{{a}}Cause these hard times will drive y{{a}} from do{{a}} to do{{a}}.''</font>

{{tab}}Like {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, the {{w|doyen|Doyen|Doyen}} of the {{w|Delta|Delta_blues|Delta blues}} singers, and the superb {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}}, the {{qq|father}} of the {{w|Mississippi|Mississippi}} Blues, White and James were from Mississippi, and played their guitars in the peculiar regional {{qq|{{w|bottleneck|Slide_guitar|Slide guitar}}}} style. This involved the use of a knife, a steel ring or a smoothed down bottleneck which was usually placed on the thumb or little finger, and used as a {{w|drone|Drone_(music)|Drone (music)}} on the strings of the guitar. It gave their instruments a high-pitched whining sound which they were able to utilise for lyric passages, for simple rhythmic or melodic accompaniment or as a highly dramatic form of punctuation. Any blues looks rather bleak in print, because it is literally only half there. In the case of the {{p|142}}early Delta singers it gives a more than usually hollow effect.

{{tab}}Although Mississippi takes pride of place in any discussion of blues, there were fine singers from other areas. {{w|Jay Bird Coleman|Jaybird_Coleman|Jaybird Coleman}}, a superbly ferocious {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} player came from {{w|Bessemer|Bessemer,_Alabama|Bessemer, Alabama}}, {{w|Alabama|Alabama}}, and was so successful that the local {{w|Ku Klux Klan|Ku_Klux_Klan}} took over his management. {{w|Blind Boy Fuller|Blind_Boy_Fuller}} came from {{w|Carolina|North_Carolina|North Carolina}}, {{w|Oscar Woods|Oscar_%22Buddy%22_Woods}} (The Lone Wolf) from {{w|Louisiana}}, {{w|Peg Leg Howell|Peg_Leg_Howell}} and {{w|Blind Willie McTell|Blind_Willie_McTell}} from {{w|Georgia|Georgia_(U.S._state)}}, {{w|Bill Broonzy|Big_Bill_Broonzy|Big Bill Broonzy}} from {{w|Arkansas}}, and {{w|Furry Lewis|Furry_Lewis}} from {{w|Tennessee|Tennessee}}. Also from Tennessee came the two great {{w|jug bands|Jug_band|Jug band}}—{{w|Gus Cannon|Gus_Cannon}}{{s}} Jug Stompers and the {{w|Memphis Jug Band|Memphis_Jug_Band}}. The other great jug band—the {{l|Birmingham Jug Band|https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Birmingham_Jug_Band|Bhamwiki: Birmingham Jug Band}}—was from Alabama.

{{tab}}The early blues found its way onto record in the early {{a}}twenties, not through the devotion of {{w|ethnomusicologists|Ethnomusicology|Ethnomusicology}} but because record companies realised that it was a commercial proposition. Most of the early recordings were {{qq|field-recorded}} in rural centres like {{w|Memphis|Memphis,_Tennessee|Memphis, Tennessee}}, {{w|Dallas}} and {{w|Atlanta|Atlanta}}, in small halls and bars, wherever space could be found to set up equipment, and the records, by Skip James, {{w|Blind Lemon Jefferson|Blind_Lemon_Jefferson}}, Son House, Charlie Patton, Gus Cannon, {{l|Jed Davenport|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jed-davenport-mn0000238491/biography|Allmusic: Jed Davenport}} and later {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_I|Sonny Boy Williamson I}}, Bill Broonzy, {{w|Tommy McClennan|Tommy_McClennan|Tommy McClennan}}, Blind Boy Fuller and {{w|Cripple Clarence Lofton|Cripple_Clarence_Lofton}}, flooded through the mails and from the small-town stores into thousands of negro homes. The singers soon found themselves {{qq|race-heroes}} and the derisively labelled {{qq|{{w|race-record|Race_record|Race record}}}} market was a booming business. Fortunately men like {{w|Ralph Peer|Ralph_Peer}} of ''{{w|Victor|Victor_Talking_Machine_Company|Victor Talking Machine Company}}'' and {{w|Mayo Williams|J._Mayo_Williams|J. Mayo Williams}} of ''{{w|Paramount|Paramount_Records|Paramount Records}}'' had excellent taste and much of the early field recording was of great interest and superlative quality.

{{tab}}It requires enormous efforts of imagination to understand the conditions in the Deep South during the years in which the blues began. After the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War|American Civil War}}, when negroes had been given their {{qq|freedom}}, the {{w|white south|White_Southerners|White Southerners}}, with embittered ruthlessness, set about the re-enslavement of the negro population by {{qq|legal}} means. The negroes soon found themselves {{w|driven off|Black_land_loss_in_the_United_States|Black land loss in the United States}} their newly-gained land by former owners and the fast developing railroad companies. They were increasingly the victims of {{w|Jim Crow legislation|Jim_Crow_laws|Jim Crow laws}}, designed to keep them in their place regardless of the {{w|Fourteenth Amendment|Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}}. They were forced to work on the railroads; to work the land as {{w|tenant|Tenant_farmer|Tenant farmer}} {{w|share-croppers|Sharecropping#United_States|Sharecropping: United States}}, which meant in effect reversion to slavery; to work on the levees, in the {{w|sawmills|Sawmill|Sawmill}} or {{w|turpentine camps|Knabb_Turpentine|Knabb Turpentine}}, which became symbols of racial subjugation. Wherever they went they were swindled and exploited with sophisticated savagery, designed, consciously or not, to demoralise as well as to enslave. Often they were charged more for food and lodging than they could possibly earn. It is a bitter commentary on the south that when {{w|Alan Lomax|Alan_Lomax}} issued his superb ''{{l|Blues in the Mississippi Night|https://www.discogs.com/Alan-Lomax-Blues-In-The-Mississippi-Night/master/720494|Discogs: Blues in the Mississippi Night}}'' recordings in 1957, he still felt it necessary to hide the real identities of the three singers whose reminiscences were contained on the record. The performers are listed simply as Sib, Natchez and Leroy but they were in fact the harmonica player Sonny Boy Williamson, the guitarist Bill Broonzy and the pianist {{w|Memphis Slim Chatman|Memphis_Slim|Memphis Slim}}. There was always the added risk of natural calamity. {{w|Texas}} is subject to floods and so is Mississippi: when {{p|143}}the {{w|levees burst in 1927|Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927|Great Mississippi Flood of 1927}}, it was the negroes, forced to live very close to the banks, who died in thousands. Segregation affected everything. Even hospitals refused to treat negroes, and although the Bessie Smith death-legend is largely apocryphal, many negroes died through lack of sufficient medical care.

{{tab}}In the search for better work and living conditions, thousands of negroes {{w|trekked north|Great_Migration_(African_American)|Great Migration}}, from the {{a}}twenties up to the present, in the sort of exodus which is a feature of the history of racially tormented minorities. They arrived in the north by road and rail. They had no right on either, but the rail usually gave them a better chance. They could either walk the long straight lines—always risking a fall between them, and with it death, induced by the tiring and hypnotic effect of doing so—or they could {{qq|{{w|jump|Freighthopping|Freighthopping}}}} a train. This was riskier, but quicker. The traveller stands on one of the few slow curves in the track and then, in {{w|Paul Oliver|Paul_Oliver}}{{s}} words:

{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}breaks from cover and dashes towards the track taking advantage of the slowing of the train to make boarding possible, and of the bend to hide his movements. Crooked fingers clutch the {{w|couplings|Railway_coupling|Railway coupling}} and he swings perilously on the swaying truck before getting a firmer grip. He may make for the blinds if he can. These are the baggage cars next to the {{w|tender|Tender_(rail)|Tender (rail)}}, which are {{q|blind}} or, in other words, have no side door. Sitting on the step he is safe and out of reach of the {{w|brakeman{{s}} club|Brakeman's_cabin|Brakeman's cabin}}. {{e}} More dangerous, but out of sight and unapproachable, are the {{w|brake|Railway_brake|Railway brake}} rods that run beneath the freight cars. Risking his life he may try to worm his way across these, or if he is unusually adept he may carry a small board to throw across the rods and then precipitate himself upon it in the narrow gap between them and the underneath of the truck {{e}} in icy winds, in choking poisonous fumes of the railroad tunnels, he may freeze to numbness or succumb to exposure and drop to certain death{{e|r}}}}

{{tab}}There can be few worse condemnations of a society than that it should make this method of travel acceptable. Despite the risks the exodus continued, and women and children, as well as men, risked road and rail to go north:

:: <font size="2">''Oh, stop your train, let a poor boy ride.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, fare you well, never see you no more.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, train I ride, smokestack shine like gold.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}With them they took their blues, into railside {{w|hobo|Hobo|Hobo}} jungles where in hopeless poverty they could scratch a living, comparatively free from white interference, into the fast-developing northern ghettoes, into {{qq|New World}}. The blues proved remarkably resilient to city life at first. There were refinements which have continued up to the present: drums, basses and pianos were added to the more portable, and more {{p|144}}musically flexible instruments favoured by rural musicians, such as harmonicas (known as {{qq|harps}}, violins, guitars and {{w|jugs|Jug_(instrument)|Jug (instrument)}} which, when blown into, acted as bass resonators. However it was not until just before the {{w|last war|World_War_II|World War II}} that the blues altered dramatically and irrevocably, and even today there are traces of Mississippi in the blues of some {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} singers.

{{tab}}From the blues recordings we have a record of negro life, its joy and laughter—blues were primarily to entertain—as well as its bitterness and sorrow. We have stories of broken relationships, of {{w|rent parties|Rent_party|Rent party}}, of work in the fields of the south and the mills and factories of the north. Much of it is fine folk poetry, some of interest because of its subject, at its bext an index of the singer{{s}} feelings as well as a vivid picture of social conditions and the despair of the negro{{s}} brutalised life, a despair usually lightened only by the spiritual release of religion, the erotic release of sex or the physical release of violent pleasure. A much recorded blues begins:

:: <font size="2">''Rock me, mama, rock me all night long'' (repeat)
:: ''I want you to rock me, mama, till by back ain{{t}} got no bone.''</font>

and {{w|Chester Burnett|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin' Wolf}} (Howling Wolf) sings:

:: <font size="2">''Tell ole {{w|Pistol Pete|Frank_Eaton|Frank Eaton}}, everybody gonna meet,''
:: ''Tonight we need no rest, we really gonna throw a mess,''
:: ''We gonna break out all the windows, we gonna kick down all the doors,''
:: ''We gonna fix a {{w|Wang Dang Doodle|Wang_Dang_Doodle}}, all night long, all night long. {{e}}''
:: ''Tell {{w|Fats|Fats_Waller|Fats Waller}} and {{w|Washboard Sam|Washboard_Sam}}, that me {{a}}n{{a}} everybody gonna jam,''
:: ''Tell Shakey, Box Car Joe, we got sawdust on the floor,''
:: ''Tell Jennie Mae, till I die we gonna have a time,''
:: ''Well the fish scent fill the air, there{{s}} love juice everywhere.''
:: ''We gonna fix a Wang Dang Doodle. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Race records catered for various audiences and ranged from the harsh religious songs of {{w|Blind Willie Johnson|Blind_Willie_Johnson}}—once arrested for {{w|incitement|Incitement|Incitement}} outside a {{w|Customs House|Custom_house|Custom house}}, for singing his {{w|Samson|Samson}} song, ''{{w|If I Had My Way I{{d}} Tear This Building Down|Samson_and_Delilah_(song)|Samson and Delilah (song)}}''—to the lilting, leering blues of Blind Boy Fuller, which were often simply strings of sexual metaphores. Johnson and Fuller epitomised two main sources of relief for the negro—religion and sex. There were also songs on the catalogues about everything from {{w|cocaine|Cocaine|Cocaine}} sniffing to {{w|meningitis|Meningitis|Meningitis}}, and there were a large number of blues about {{w|prison|Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system|Race in the United States criminal justice system}}, suffered usually as a result of minor offences but frequently enough for more vicious crimes, and quite often for murder.

{{tab}}Prison was a daily feature in the lives of many families. It is some indication of the viciousness of the prisons and {{w|prison farms|Prison_farm|Prison farm}} that, as recently as 1951, fourteen prisoners in the {{w|Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola|Louisiana_State_Penitentiary}} {{popup|hamstrung themselves|A group of prisoners, known in the media as the Heel String Gang, cut their Achilles' tendons.}} rather than submit to beating with the {{qq|bat}}, a particularly crude, {{popup|fourteen pound|6.35 kg}} leather strap which, according to Paul Oliver, {{qq|can break a brick at a single blow}}. Yet prison farms, like Angola, were preferable to the overcrowded, unhealthy, closed prisons. The prison system is, even by conservative judgements, totally inadequate and archaic and even where there have been Federal {{p|145}}{{w|Commissions|Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government|Independent agencies of the United States government}} the south has ignored them and their recommendations. Despite the horror, many negroes have testified that life in prison was less frightening than life outside: at least in prison the next meal was assured, the tyranny rarely varied and there was ''less'' chance of the casual cruelty which typified the lives of so many racial underdogs. The great folk singer {{w|Leadbelly|Lead_Belly|Lead Belly}} sang his way out of prison, but not all singers were so lucky—{{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}} did a term at {{w|Parchman Prison Farm|Mississippi_State_Penitentiary|Mississippi State Penitentiary}}, Mississippi, and so did Bukka White, who sang a fine blues about it. {{l|Hogman Maxey|https://www.discogs.com/artist/401200-Hogman-Maxey|Discogs: Hogman Maxey}} and {{w|Robert Pete Williams|Robert_Pete_Williams}} did time at Angola. More recently the great Chicago guitarist, {{w|Auburn {{qq|Pat}} Hare|Pat_Hare|Pat Hare}} got a ninety-nine year sentence for shooting his mistress{{s}} husband and a policeman who tried to arrest him.

{{tab}}Murder occurs frequently in blues, both as a threat and as an occurrence, an indication of the everyday violence of American negro life. Sonny Boy Williamson sang:

:: <font size="2">''I got the meanest woman, the meanest woman you most ever seen,''
:: ''She sleep with an {{w|ice pick|Ice_pick|Ice pick}} in her hand, man, fights all in her dreams,''
:: ''I{{d}} soomer be sleepin{{a}} with the devil, I{{d}} sooner be sleepin{{a}} with the devil {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Williamson died in 1948 on his way to hospital—his {{w|cranium|Skull|Skull}} split by an ice-pick—the victim of the casual violence of his own people, killed either by a jealous husband or young thugs after his money.

{{tab}}The blues quoted above is also indicative of the disintegrative effect the negro{{s}} position in society had on the stability of family life. Many singers have recorded blues about leaving women, or women leaving them; many have sung about their mothers, few about their fathers. The reason is not hard to find—in thousands of cases the mother was left to bring up children on her own, the father having left in frustration or in search of work. Not surprisingly jealousy also looms large:

:: <font size="2">''Lord, my hair is a-risin{{a}}, my flesh begin to crawl'' (repeat)
:: ''Had a dream last night, babe, {{a}}nother mule in my doggone stall''</font>

{{tab}}And so does seduction:

:: <font size="2">''I am a back door man'' (repeat)
:: ''Well the men don{{t}} know but the little girls understand''
:: ''When everybody tryin{{a}} to sleep, I{{m}} somewhere makin{{a}} my midnight creep.''
:: ''I{{m}} the mornin{{a}} when the rooster crow, somethin{{a}} tell me I gotta go. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}As an aid to sexual ability and attraction, charms were used—{{w|mojo|Mojo_(African-American_culture)|Mojo}} teeth, mojo hands, {{w|black cat bones|Black_cat_bone|Black cat bone}}, {{w|John the Conkeror|John_the_Conqueror|John the Conqueror}} {{w|roots|Ipomoea|Ipomoea}}. {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down Louisiana, baby, behin{{a}} the sun'' (repeat)
:: ''Well, you know, I just found out my troubles just begun''
:: ''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down in {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}—hmmm—get me a mojo hand'' (repeat)
:: ''I wan{{a}} show all you good lookin{{a}} women just how to treat your man.''</font>

{{tab}}Even today magazines, like ''{{popup|Rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} Blues|Rhythm and Blues (1952–1965), first edited by Marvin Shnayer}}'', read by working class negroes, carry advertisements for these strange fertility symbols and charms—produced in {{w|Louisiana voodoo|Louisiana_Voodoo|Louisiana Voodoo}} circles—along with patent devices for straightening hair, strange medicines and other necessities of {{p|146}}ghetto life.

{{tab}}For the most part however there was little relief and little assistance. The great {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}, another Delta singer, obviously haunted by the phantoms of a divided society and using imagery of considerable richness, sang:

:: <font size="2">''I gotta keep movin{{a}}, I gotta keep movin{{a}}''
:: ''Blues fallin{{a}} down like hail, blues fallin{{a}} down like hail'' (repeat)
:: ''I can{{t}} keep no money, {{w|hellhound on my trail|Hellhound_on_My_Trail|Hellhound on My Trail}},''
:: ''Hellhound on my trail, hellhound on my trail''</font>

and again:

:: <font size="2">''You may bury my body down by the highway side''
:: (Spoken: ''Babe, don{{t}} care where you bury my body when I{{m}} dead and gone'')
:: ''You can bury my old body down by the highway side''
:: ''Lord, my ole evil spirit can catch a {{w|greyhound bus|Greyhound_Lines|Greyhound Lines}} and ride.''</font>

{{tab}}Johnson{{s}} blues remain the most personal and frightening of negro folk music, with their sense of transient ecstasy and sorrow, heightened by an abiding torment and despair. In his work the blues lays its most serious claim to be considered an art form, and of all the great singers he is the most likely to chill and electrify the listener, to make the agony of his life real, and to communicate, from his intense, tortured private emotions, the situation and condition of his people. Johnson is frightening because he is a victim without realisation of the complete meaning of his victimisation. His songs are, in the social sense, inarticulate, and this gives them their peculiar eloquence. It was not only social conditions which affected Johnson: he was obviously chained by his own shyness and frustration. He is thought to have been poisoned by his {{w|common law|Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States|Common-law marriage in the United States}} wife or to have died from {{w|alcohol poisoning|Alcohol_intoxication|Alcohol intoxication}}; whichever way, he died young in 1938. Howling Wolf, who knew him vaguely, says he was about 25 at the time; Muddy Waters thinks he was about 30; he is generally thought to have been {{popup|about 19|He was 27.}}. Johnson must have had more money than most negroes of his age and he seems to have had some trouble with women:

:: <font size="2">''Got up this mornin{{a}} to fin{{a}} it was gone'' (repeat)
:: ''Got up this mornin{{a}}, all I had was gone''
:: ''Well, leavin{{a}} this mornin{{a}} if I have to, gon{{a}} ride the blinds''</font>

{{tab}}And in another of his blues he sang:

:: <font size="2">''Gonna stay roun{{a}} {{w|Jonesboro|Jonesboro}}, until my teeth {{w|crowned with gold|Gold_teeth|Gold teeth}}'' (repeat)
:: ''She got a {{w|mortgage|Mortgage|Mortgage}} on my body, got a {{w|lien|Lien|Lien}} on my soul.''</font>

{{tab}}In Johnson—the inheritor of a tradition which stretched from the itinerant timbermill worker Charlie Patton, a beautiful, heavy voiced singer, reputedly half-{{w|Puerto Rican|Puerto_Ricans|Puerto Ricans}}, who first recorded ''{{w|I Shall Not Be Moved|I_Shall_Not_Be_Moved}},'' Son House, Bukka White and Skip James, whose oddly {{w|oriental-sounding|Music_of_Asia|Music of Asia}} blues were amongst the strangest and most haunting noises to come from the Delta—the blues reached its peak. Despite a handful of superb singers since, it has never again reached such an emphatic state of artistic unity.

{{p|147}}{{tab}}Undoubtedly the finest of the early singers from outside Mississippi was a dirty, ugly, dissolute Texan—Blind Lemon Jefferson. Blind men have often made good blues singers—they are doubly oppressed, a minority within a minority. Jefferson was a harsh singer with enormous powers of expression and his guitar playing was amongst the best to be recorded. He is now best remembered for his moving ''{{w|See That My Grave is Kept Clean|See_That_My_Grave_Is_Kept_Clean|See That My Grave Is Kept Clean}}'':

:: <font size="2">''Well, there{{s}} one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''One kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''Oh Lord, one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you''
:: ''Please see that my grave is kept clean.''
:: ''It{{s}} a long lane got no end'' (three times)
:: ''An{{a}} it{{s}} a bad way that don{{a}} never change''
:: ''Lord, it{{s}} two white horses in a line'' (three times)
:: ''Gon{{a}} take me to my buryin{{a}} groun{{a}}''
:: ''Dig my grave with a silver spade'' (three times)
:: ''You may let me down with a golden chain''
:: ''Have you ever heard a coffin soun{{a}}?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} in the groun{{a}}''
:: ''Have you ever heard a church bell toll?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} dead an{{a}} gone.''</font>

{{tab}}Jefferson began recording in 1924 and was dead by 1930, frozen to death on a Chicago sidewalk during a snowstorm. His records sold well but they did not stop his life being as sad as any of his people{{s}}. Today, in a cemetary at {{w|Wortham|Wortham,_Texas|Wortham, Texas}}, Lemon{{s}} grave is almost lost under the grass and weeds.

{{tab}}The blues changed subtly over the years and as the {{w|radio networks|Broadcast_network|Broadcast network}} extended their influence, the various regional styles began to mingle. By the mid-{{a}}thirties it was increasingly difficult to recognise regional characteristics in blues vocals—the demonic intensity of Mississippi, the harsh but more introverted {{w|blues of Texas|Texas_blues|Texas blues}}, the jollier {{w|blues of Carolina|Piedmont_blues|Piedmont blues}}—though some were unmistakable. {{w|Leroy Carr|Leroy_Carr}}, who seemed to fuse various regional styles in his singing, had en enormous effect on the future of the blues, during his career in the late {{a}}twenties and early {{a}}thirties. Carr was more sophisticated than the rural singers and his singing, over the sensitive accompaniment of his piano and {{w|Scrapper Blackwell|Scrapper_Blackwell}}{{s}} guitar, emphasised melody rather more than emotion. His better recordings are marked by musical intelligence and an appealingly wistful quality and his ''{{w|How Long Blues|How_Long,_How_Long_Blues|How Long, How Long Blues}}'' is one of the few enduring, and widely recognised blues classics. Carr was easily imitated—even today there are Carr imitators like {{w|Bumble Bee Slim|Bumble_Bee_Slim}}—and the {{qq|style}} he invented was the dominating current in blues until the {{popup|war|The United States entered World War II on 11 December 1941}}. Carr was excellent but the blues trend he started was somewhat disastrous. The new blues were lighter, more swinging, but often depressingly insensitive. They were recorded, by this time, mainly in the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} Cities, for a city audience which demanded slickness and polish. With the more rigid discipline imposed by pianos, basses and drums, which greatly restricted the flexibility and individuality of singers, it was perhaps inevitable that, by 1940, the urban background, which was, broadly {{p|148}}speaking, {{qq|introduced}} by Carr, shoud have drastically affected the sound and content of blues. There were good records by the likeable Bill Broonzy, the irrepressible {{w|Memphis Minnie|Memphis_Minnie}}, the harshly intense Tommy McClennan, Sonny Boy Williamson, {{w|Arthur {{qq|Big Boy}} Crudup|Arthur_Crudup|Arthur Crudup}} and the great, rolling pianist {{w|Big Maceo Merriweather|Big_Maceo_Merriweather|Big Maceo Merriweather}}. There were a few {{qq|social blues}} like John Este{{s|r}} ''{{l|Working Man Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/817873-Sleepy-John-Estes-1929-1940|Discogs: Sleepy John Estes – 1929-1940}},'' which contained an invocation to the whites to break up trucks and tractors and work more mules and men, thus ensuring employment, and a few recordings in an older, country style, but the {{a}}forties was a lean period for blues which said anything.

{{tab}}During the war the negroes found themselves fighting for freedom against {{w|racialism|Racism|Racism}} and tyranny; the paradox didn{{t}} fail to strike any number of them and many have retained a lasting cynicism as a result. They either joined up cynically:

:: <font size="2">''I{{ve}} got my questionary and they need me in the war'' (repeat)
:: ''Now I feel like murder, won{{t}} have to break the county law''
:: ''All I want{{s}} a {{w|thirty-two-twenty|.32-20_Winchester|.32-20 Winchester}}, made on a'' {{w|.45|11_mm_caliber|11 mm caliber}} {{w|frame|Receiver_(firearms)|Receiver (firearms)}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Yes, and a red, white and blue {{w|flag|Flag_of_the_United_States|Flag of the United States}}, wavin{{a}} in my right hand.''</font>

{{tab}}Or pathetically eagerly:

:: <font size="2">''I want a {{w|machine gun|Machine_gun|Machine gun}}, wan{{a}} be hid way out in the wood'' (repeat)
:: ''I want to show ol{{a}} man {{w|Hitler|Adolf_Hitler|Adolf Hitler}} Sonny Boy don{{a}} mean him no good.''
:: ''I want to drop a bomb, and set the {{w|Japanese|Japan_during_World_War_II|Japan during World War II}} city {{w|on fire|Air_raids_on_Japan#Firebombing_attacks|Air raids on Japan: Firebombing attacks}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Now because they are so rotten, just love to see them die''</font>

{{tab}}The reality was different. {{w|Uncle Sam|Uncle_Sam}} wouldn{{t}} have dreamed of letting negroes operate a precious {{qq|{{w|thunderbolt|Republic_P-47_Thunderbolt|Republic P-47 Thunderbolt}}}}, though he was happy enough for them to fight—and die. The bitterness of the negro community was clearer after the Second World War than it had been after the first, but the lessons have been learnt incompletely or not at all, and there are still blues like {{w|Jimmy Rogers|Jimmy_Rogers}}{{s}} ''{{w|World is in a Tangle|Jimmy_Rogers_(album)|Jimmy Rogers (album)}}'' or {{w|Lightnin Slim|Lightnin'_Slim|Lightnin' Slim}}{{s}} (Otis Hicks) ''{{l|GI Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/614095-Lightnin-Slim-Rooster-Blues-G-I-Slim|Discogs: Lightnin' Slim – Rooster Blues / "G I" Slim}}'' which express, in terms nearly as militant as the blues quoted above, the desire to fight the {{w|Russians|Soviet_Union|Soviet Union}}. In this the singers reflect the tone of white society in a way that more isolated singers would have found impossible, even if they had felt it desirable. The institutions of state violence can now speak directly to the negro whereas there was little to convince older singers, like the previously quoted Jaydee Short, that they had anything to gain from the white{{s|r}} wars and their natural feelings certainly told them otherwise.

{{p|s2|n}}'''THE POST WAR BLUES'''

{{tab}}The decline of blues in the {{a}}forties was an indication not so much of integration ''into,'' as of imitation ''of'' white society: this coupled with the record companie{{s|r}} lack of discrimination and the ''comparative'' ease of ghetto life. But if the early {{a}}forties were lean years, the late {{a}}forties and early {{a}}fifties saw an increase in both the quantity and quality of {{p|149}}blues recording. ''{{w|Victor|RCA_Records|RCA Records}}, {{w|Decca|Decca_Records|Decca Records}}'' and ''{{w|Bluebird|Bluebird_Records|Bluebird Records}},'' before and during the war, had the money and organisation to ensure large scale distribution for their records but the post-war companies were much smaller, with fewer resources. It took a big hit to give them a reputation, and with it distribution, and in the search for success many hundreds of new singers were recorded, many of them performers in an older style. {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} recorded some archaic-sounding blues and singers like Muddy Waters, {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_II|Sonny Boy Williamson II}} (the second), Howling Wolf and {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin' Hopkins}}, all of them fresh from the country, were recording relatively simple rural-style blues. There were others, like {{w|John Brim|John_Brim}}, {{w|Harmonica Frank|Harmonica_Frank}}, {{w|Big Boy Spires|Arthur_%22Big_Boy%22_Spires|Arthur "Big Boy" Spires}}, {{w|Houston Boines|Houston_Boines}}, less well known but almost as good. The list of labels then and since seems unbelievable. There were ''{{w|Aristocrat|Aristocrat_Records|Aristocrat Records}}, {{w|Checker|Checker_Records|Checker Records}}, {{w|Chess|Chess_Records|Chess Records}}, {{w|JOB|J.O.B._Records|J.O.B. Records}}'' (Chicago), ''{{w|Gotham|Gotham_Records|Gotham Records}}, {{w|Savoy|Savoy_Records|Savoy Records}}'' (East Coast), ''{{w|Excello|Excello_Records|Excello Records}}, {{w|Gold Star|Gold_Star_Records|Gold Star Records}}, {{w|Sun|Sun_Records|Sun Records}}, {{w|Trumpet|Trumpet_Records|Trumpet Records}}'' (Southern States), ''{{w|Flair|Flair_Records|Flair Records}}, {{w|Modern|Modern_Records|Modern Records}}'' and ''{{w|RPM|RPM_Records_(United_States)|RPM Records}}'' (West Coast) and many, many more. They often disappeared after a few releases of exceptional quality, like the amazing ''{{l|Bloodstains on the Wall|https://www.discogs.com/master/1357429-Honeyboy-Bloodstains-On-The-Wall-My-Time-Aint-Long|Discogs: Honeyboy – Bloodstains on the Wall / My Time Ain't Long}}'' by a singer improbably named {{w|Honey Boy|David_%22Honeyboy%22_Edwards|David "Honeyboy" Edwards}} or Harmonica Frank{{s}} ''{{l|Howling Tom Cat|https://www.discogs.com/release/10057029-Various-The-Sun-Records-Story|Discogs: Various – The Sun Records Story}},'' which might as easily have been recorded in the South during the {{a}}twenties, as in Chicago by Chess during the {{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}From this profusion of new bluesmen there were a handful who became very big names and who still play a rôle close to that of the race-hero; others have sunk to the second rank, often playing as well as their {{qq|betters}}; still others—and they are the majority—have died or live on half-forgotten, their memories sustained only by a few worn {{w|78s|Phonograph_record#78_rpm_disc_developments|Phonograph record: 78 rpm disc developments}} in junk shops or collections. Of the post-war Chicago singers Muddy Waters takes pride of place. He first recorded, for Alan Lomax in the {{w|Delta|Mississippi_Delta|Mississippi Delta}}, in 1941, using his real name of McKinley Morganfield. By the late {{a}}forties he had moved to Chicago and was making an exciting series for ''Aristocrat.'' His guitar playing, in the old bottleneck tradition, retained much of the vigour of earlier Mississippi bluesmen and his voice was rich and thrilling. He was usually accompanied by the finest of all blues bassists, {{w|Big Crawford|Ernest_%22Big%22_Crawford|Ernest "Big" Crawford}}, and the harmonica player {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. Jacobs was, and is, a magnificent musician and in his hands the harmonica became a {{w|horn|Brass_instrument|Brass instrument}}-like instrument, with superb tone, range, flexibility and crispness; he blew long, flowing phrases of classical elegance and feeling, saying as much about the condition of the negro in his playing as most singers say in a lifetime of singing. He and Waters achieved a fine unity, exemplified by such tracks as ''{{l|Louisiana Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/1277043-Muddy-Waters-Louisiana-Blues-Evans-Shuffle|Discogs: Muddy Waters – Louisiana Blues / Evan's Shuffle}},'' where the guitar and harmonica fuse so that they sound almost like a single instrument. Waters continued his series for ''Chess'' when that company took over ''Aristocrat'' but there was a new mood about to hit Chicago and the {{qq|rural}} bluesmen—a mood that had its cause in both social and musical developments.

{{tab}}Migration figures are not an entirely accurate index of population movement since they neither give reasons for migration nor take into account temporary migration. Quite obviously the well-to-do white moves for widely different reasons than those which compel a socially {{p|150}}and economically harrassed negro. It is interesting, however, that the figures show negro population movement to be both more permanent and more frequent during the period 1940-1947 (14.1%). This period of increased migration roughly coincides with the beginning of the post-war {{w|revival|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Further point is added by the fact that in 1900 90% of the negro population lived in the south, and 74% in rural areas, whereas by 1960 only 60% lived in the south and just under 25% in the rural south. Of the 40% elsewhere, under 2% lived in rural areas. The American negro has become increasingly a northern city dweller rather than a southern country dweller and in the years immediately post-war this process speeded up. This would seem to show one major reason for the blue{{s|r}} new lease of life in the early {{a}}fifties and also why since the middle-{{a}}fifties there has been a marked decline in quality. The negro who left the south after the war was usually brought up in an environment where the blues was a part of daily life, fulfilling a function both as entertainment and as a psychological release, and there was a consequent demand from this migrant group for {{qq|down-home}} blues. The migrants moved all over the USA and new recording companies sprang up to meet their demands, often in places where no authentic blues tradition existed. The record companies, previously deeply committed to the urban blues market, centred on Chicago since the late {{a}}thirties, now found themselves with a new audience for country-style blues which many enthusiasts had considered dead. The country-style blues were able to survive this transplantation as long as singers and audiences kept their southern roots, but they began to lose their ''{{popup|raison d{{a}}être|reason for being}}'' as the southern audience grew older and gave way to a younger white pop-influenced negro record buyer who, far from wanting blues, found the constant reminder of southern servility deeply embarrassing.

{{tab}}The musical developments arose to some extent from the social developments. In 1954 a young white singer walked into the ''Sun'' studio in Memphis, Tennessee. ''Sun'' had issued good blues singers like {{w|Joe Hill Louis|Joe_Hill_Louis}}, {{w|Walter Horton|Big_Walter_Horton|Big Walter Horton}} and {{w|Doctor Ross|Doctor_Ross}} but their biggest hit was an old Crudup blues, ''{{w|That{{s}} All Right, Mama|That's_All_Right|That's All Right}},'' recorded after a number of attempts by the young {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. ''Victor'' bought up ''Sun{{s}}'' Presley contract in 1955 and {{w|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} music (a nice white name, invented by the {{w|disc jockey|Disc_jockey|Disc jockey}} {{w|Alan Freed|Alan_Freed}}, for what was basically negro {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}) flooded into a million white homes. For the first time the popular music of the two racial groups was broadly similar. Partly in sub-conscious self-defence and partly in emulation of white youth, the young urban negroes demanded a noisier, more aggressive blues, expressing their increasing confidence. There were singers like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley}} and {{w|Fats Domino|Fats_Domino}} (who sold more records than anyone except Presley during the {{qq|rock era}}), who were selling to both racial groups, but many of the older singers were forced to use screaming, over-amplified electric guitars and {{w|saxes|Saxophone|Saxophone}} to keep up. Some, like Howling Wolf, managed the change without too much difficulty, but most were less lucky. Wolf had a rough, rasping voice which came across the amplification with exciting power—he had made fine {{p|151}}records in the country style in the late {{a}}forties—but in Chicago he had a massive beat and his records for ''Chess'' have a raucous, jangling sense of guts and urgency which suited the new audiences. Muddy Waters, although he has retained to the present his reputation as {{qq|King of Chicago}}, was hit badly.

{{tab}}From the mid-{{a}}fifties his records became worse and worse, with poor accompaniment, trivial and repetitive words, and a badly strained singer: the only relief was afforded by one or two splendid blues shouts, like his ''{{w|Hoochie Coochie Man|Hoochie_Coochie_Man}};''

:: <font size="2">''I got a black cat bone,''
:: ''I got a mojo tooth,''
:: ''I got a John the Conker root,''
:: ''Gonna mess with you.''
:: ''Gonna make all you girls''
:: ''Lead me by the hand,''
:: ''Then the world will know''
:: ''I{{m}} a hoochie coochie man.''</font>

{{tab}}Waters is aware of his deterioration but he now fits the requirements of the new audience—an exciting stage act rather than interesting blues.

{{tab}}The other great post-war bluesman from the Mississippi, John Lee Hooker, began recording in the late {{a}}forties. At his best he has more than a little of the old Delta manner in his rich, sensual voice and dramatically rhythmic and flexible guitar style. He started his career recording imaginative, earthy blues in a most arresting style, accompanied only by his own guitar. His voice was strong and, occasionally, bitter and his guitar had a throbbing vigour and a magnificent drive rarely heard before. With its terse, intense and rhythmic phrasing it acted as a foil for the voice and gave his blues extraordinary tension, strengthened by his sharply stamping feet. The early tracks, particularly the slow, atmospherically sensual ones, take their place amongst the great blues. Hooker{{s}} versatility is a bit discomfiting but he can still be a magnificently haunting singer. Like his contemporary, Lightning Hopkins, Hooker entertains on the predominantly white folk circuit as well as the negro rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues circuit. He gives the white audiences folk-tinged blues and the negro audiences highly rhythmic {{w|boogie|Boogie|Boogie}}-type numbers. He rarely sings in the old style now, but his recent visit to {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} emphasised his position as one of the dozen finest post-war singers, with roots stretching far back into the Delta of his youth.

{{tab}}A number of singers have earned the reputation of being {{qq|{{w|Kennedy|John_F._Kennedy|John F. Kennedy}}-line}} singers. {{w|Bobo Jenkins|Bobo_Jenkins}} castigated those who voted {{w|Republican|Republican_Party_(United_States)|Republican Party}} in {{w|1952|1952_United_States_presidential_election|1952 United States presidential election}} (''{{l|Democrat Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/2137609-Bobo-Jenkins-Democrat-Blues-Bad-Luck-Trouble|Discogs: Bobo Jenkins – Democrat Blues / Bad Luck & Trouble}}''), {{w|Louisiana Red|Louisiana_Red}} sang about tugging {{w|Castro|Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro}}{{s}} beard and removing {{w|missile bases|Cuban_Missile_Crisis|Cuban Missile Crisis}} from {{w|Cuba}} in ''{{l|Red{{s}} Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}'' (though he demanded for himself and his soul-brothers, {{w|Ray Charles|Ray_Charles}}, {{w|Jimmy Reed|Jimmy_Reed}}, {{w|Big Maybelle|Big_Maybelle}} and Lightning Hopkins, a share in running the nation) and about Civil Rights in ''{{l|Ride on Red, Ride on|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}.'' {{w|J. B. Lenoir|J._B._Lenoir|J. B. Lenoir}} savaged {{w|Eisenhower|Dwight_D._Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower}} so mercilessly in one blues that the {{l|record|https://www.discogs.com/master/888269-J-B-Lenoir-Im-In-Korea-Eisenhower-Blues|Discogs: J. B. Lenoir – I'm in Korea / Eisenhower Blues}}, which had a more moderate indictment of the {{w|Korean War|Korean_War}} on the other side, was banned.

{{p|152}}{{tab}}Amongst these few singers with a marked sense of social justice is a tall lean Texan, who wears dark glasses perpetually and learned his blues as a child from his cousin, {{w|Texas Alexander|Alger_%22Texas%22_Alexander|Alger "Texas" Alexander}}, and his {{qq|master}}, Blind Lemon Jefferson. Sam {{qq|Lightning}} Hopkins sings in lines of uneven measure, his singing without normally accepted blues discipline. He plays incessant bass {{w|runs|Glossary_of_music_terminology#run|Run (music)}} and rhythms as he sings and then his guitar rings out sharp and clear in the lyric passages between lines and verses. His style is even more intense than Hooker{{s}}, the voice harsh, comparatively deep and with an almost unbearable sense of loneliness and desolation. Hopkins can be an ingratiating singer, particularly for white audiences, but on his earliest and best records he never bothered and the result is the purest body of country blues to be recorded post-war. Despite many miles of travelling and widely varied audiences, Hopkins is still oddly superstitious, with an abiding distrust of aeroplanes ({{qq|just can{{t}} be natural}}) and an intense hatred of wine—his feelings don{{t}} extend to whiskey! He is fiercely proud of his {{w|Houston}} roots, and is witheringly contemptuous of the Chicago singers—{{qq|They can{{t}} sing {{a}}bout nothin{{a}} but women}}. He has tended to protest where and when he sees injustice, natural or man-made, bothering less about cures.

{{tab}}In ''{{l|War Is Starting All Over Again|https://www.discogs.com/master/1940628-Lightning-Hopkins-And-His-Guitar-Got-Me-A-Louisiana-Woman|Discogs: Lightning Hopkins And His Guitar – Got Me A Louisiana Woman / War Is Starting Again}}'' he sings of his feelings about the Korean War:

:: <font size="2">''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yes, I feel they{{re}} thinking to start war again,''
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yeah, I feel they{{re}} gonna start war again,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gon{{a}} be many mothers and fathers worry,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gonna be as many girls that lose a frien{{a}}.''
:: ''Oooh, I got news this morning, right now they need a million men'' (repeat)
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know I bin overseas, woman, poor Lightnin don{{a}} want to go there again.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know my girl frien{{s}} got a boy frien{{a}} in the army, the poor body goes to sea.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know I don{{t}} hate it so bad, boys, y{{a}}know there{{s}} a bit of a break for me.''
:: ''Ohhhhh, this world is in a tangle, about to have war again. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}He did a slightly altered version of the sung under the title ''{{l|Blues for Queen Elizabeth|https://www.discogs.com/master/694530-Sam-Lightnin-Hopkins-The-Rooster-Crowed-In-England|Discogs: Sam 'Lightnin' Hopkins – The Rooster Crowed In England}}.'' It must be the most horrific and least sycophantic work of art ever dedicated to a resident of {{w|Buckingham Palace|Buckingham_Palace}}:

:: <font size="2">''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in {{w|France}} they wade in blood knee deep,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in France, they was wadin{{a}} in blood knee deep,''
:: ''An{{a}} at that time whole lots of people wanderin{{a}} roun{{a}} hungry an{{a}} didn{{t}} have a bite to eat.''</font>

{{tab}}In ''{{l|Awful Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/346449-Lightnin-Hopkins-Mojo-Hand|Discogs: Lightnin' Hopkins – Mojo Hand}}'' he amplified his horror of war:

:: <font size="2">''Have y{{a}} ever looked over a mountain, one you ain{{t}} never seen?'' (repeat)
:: ''Have y{{a}} ever lay down in your bed and had one of them lonesome dreams?''
:: ''Sounds like the world was comin{{a}} to an end, somebody had passed and dropped a bomb,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know they tell me, this world is in a tangle now and them things is sure to come''
:: ''But I don{{t}} know, God know I don{{t}}, teach me, teach me, teach me that I{{m}} wrong.''</font>

{{p|153}}{{tab}}His sharp sense of pity for the afflicted comes through in a fine blues about a one-eyed woman:

:: <font size="2">''Yeah, the poor soul look so pitiful, cryin{{a}} out that ol{{a}} one eye. {{e}}''
:: ''{{e}} Yeah, y{{a}}know it{{s}} misery, it{{s}} misery, every time she cry it hurt poor me.''
:: ''She ain{{t}} got one eye to cry from when there{{s}} something in that good eye,''
:: ''It hurt me to know that she can{{t}} see.''</font>

{{tab}}Hopkins is probably the last great bluesman. When he, and the few other singers in this mould, have gone, the blues, the ''real,'' down-home, country blues, will finally be dead and with it will pass a dishonourable episode of American history.

{{tab}}It is impossible to regret the passing of the condition which made the old blues culturally relevant yet it is permissible to regret the passing of the old singers who have enriched the lives of so many people, both coloured and, albeit after the event, white. The blues will be left to the white folk-singers, a few good modern stylists like {{w|Otis Rush|Otis_Rush}}, the rabble-rousing Chicago blues-beat bands—the descendants of singers and musicians of some sensitivity like {{w|Elmore James|Elmore_James}}—and the blues-rock {{a}}n{{a}} rollers like Chuck Berry, {{w|James Brown|James_Brown}} and Bo Diddley. The blues in some form may live on for a generation or more. It is possible to see in the harsh, angular, neurotic-sounding blues of {{w|Buddy Guy|Buddy_Guy}} the logical extension (via singers like {{w|B. B. King|B.B._King|B.B. King}}) of the early post-war blues—noisier, uglier, more involuted, more intense and expressing increasing confidence. But the course of the blues, whether it be classic, urban or country, is notoriously difficult to predict and it may be that the clearest expression of the urban negroe{{s|r}} new preoccupation is in the {{qq|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll}} songs of Chuck Berry who sings about cars, machinery and the {{w|teenage|Youth_culture|Youth culture}} American Way of Life—telephones, {{w|juke boxes|Jukebox|Jukebox}}, {{w|soda stalls|Soda_jerk|Soda jerk}}, {{w|hot dog stands|Hot_dog_stand|Hot dog stand}}, {{w|drive-ins|Drive-in|Drive-in}} and even the backwoods myth of {{qq|{{w|country-boy-makes-good|Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States|Socioeconomic mobility in the United States}}}} (''{{w|Johnny B. Goode|Johnny_B._Goode}}''). Despite prison sentences he sings constantly and without bitterness of his delight at being resident in the {{w|Land of the Free|The_Star-Spangled_Banner|The Star-Spangled Banner}}. Bo Diddley{{s}} songs are equally instructive but, mercifully, more sceptical. On the whole the blues gives every indication of being a dying form, increasingly less relevant to the audience for which it is obviously intended.

{{tab}}The record companies which, since the war, have tended to have parallel catalogues of {{qq|pop}} music and blues, have gradually utilised more and more {{qq|pop}} production gimmicks in their blues issues. More and more releases are dependent on careful {{w|arrangements|Arrangement|Arrangement}}, careful words, catchy tunes or phrases, set-pattern {{w|instrumental breaks|Break_(music)|Break (music)}}, pre-determined playing time and gimmicks like {{w|double-track|Double_tracking|Double tracking}} recording and {{qq|girlie}} {{w|choirs|Backing_vocalist|Backing vocalist}}. The sham techniques of mass production do not affect all issues but they have effectively stemmed the stream of good recordings which ran from the {{a}}twenties to the mid-{{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}Even in this the blues are a reflection of social conditions, or increasing automation and decreasing artistry. Today, however, one feels that the environment is reflected more in the production of records than in their content. Recently, the supposedly rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues sound of the negro-operated {{w|Tamla-Motown-Gordy|Motown|Motown}} set-up of {{w|Detroit}}, consciously designed as a {{w|gospel|Gospel_music|Gospel music}} and blues tinged {{qq|soul-beat}} music, {{p|154}}has shown a possible new direction for blues-influenced music. It is, perhaps inevitably, the direction of white {{w|tin pan alley|Tin_Pan_Alley|Tin Pan Alley}} and the ''{{w|Billboard|Billboard_(magazine)|Billboard (magazine)}}'' {{w|Top Hundred|Billboard_Hot_100|Billboard Hot 100}}. (Equality and integration in all things!) As Muddy Waters told {{w|Pete Welding|Pete_Welding}}{{ref|aster|*}}: {{qq|I think the blues—the old style blues—will die with us. I don{{t}} see any youngsters coming along in that style nowadays. The Negro kids, they don{{t}} like it at all; they{{re}} more interested in the popular music. And these young white kids that are playing in the old style. Now, maybe they feel the blues like I do, and maybe they can play like I do, but they can{{t}} sing like I do. So I don{{t}} think that{{s}} the answer. I guess maybe the old blues will die, but I don{{t}} like to think about that.}}

{{tab}}It only remains to be seen whether the attainment of some measure of social equality will be a fair exchange for the passing of the blues. It is to be hoped that the courage, endurance, hopes, fears and feelings of the thousands of negroes, named and unnamed, who have sung the blues for recordings, for friends and for personal solace, in hits, halls, bars, prisons and ghettoes all over the USA, will not be betrayed, for it is they who have, in a very real sense, kept alive the vision of something better, who have created from appalling conditions a vital and extremely beautiful folk music. If the spirit of the blues is to be honoured the negro must demand something better and more dignified than mere integration into the affluent squalor, neurosis and schizophrenia of modern America.

<font size="2">{{note|aster|*}}''{{w|Down Beat|DownBeat|DownBeat}},'' October 8, 1964.</font>

{{p|s3|n}}'''BIBLIOGRAPHY'''

<font size="2">{{hang|''The Meaning of the Blues (Blues fell this morning).'' Paul Oliver. (Collier Books—available through Leeds Music Ltd., Denmark Street, London). The best account of the origins and developments of blues and very good too on the Negro society of the USA. 8/6d.}}

{{hang|''The Country Blues.'' Samuel B. Charters (Michael Joseph). Well-written short history, marred by many inaccuracies and the inexplicable omission of many of the finest singers. 21/- now widely {{w|remaindered|Remaindered_book|Remaindered book}} at 7/6d.}}

{{hang|''Blues Unlimited. The'' blues monthly with a friendly and expert staff, helpful to the collector and curious alike, at 38a Sackville Road, Bexhill-on-Sea, Sussex. Free sample on request.}}

{{hang|''The Economic Situation of Negroes in the United States.'' (US Embassy). Excellent brief documentary details on employment, migration, population without whitewashing.}}</font>

{{p|s4|n}}'''SHORT DISCOGRAPHY'''

<font size="2">{{hang|''Robert Johnson—King of the Delta Blues''—Philips BBL 7539. (Now {{w|deleted|Deletion_(music_industry)|Deletion (music industry)}} but available from specialists.)}}

{{hang|''Origin Jazz Library''—Volumes 1 to 8—Origin Jazz Library. (Superlative re-issues of pre-war singers, ranging from the intensity of House, James and Patton to the rambling, melodic, folksiness of {{w|Henry Thomas|Henry_Thomas_(blues_musician)}}, via the jug bands.)}}

{{hang|''Sleepy John Estes'' 1929-40—Folkways RBF 8.}}

{{hang|''Blues from the Mississippi Delta''—J. D. (Jaydee) Short and Son House—Folkways FA 2467.}}

{{hang|''The Blues''—Volumes 1 to 4—Post-War Chess Blues—PYE NPL 28030, NPL 28035, NPL 28045, NPL 28060.}}

{{hang|''John Lee Hooker Sings the Blues''—Ember 3356.}}

{{hang|''Dirty House Blues''—Lightning Hopkins—Realm RM 171.}}

{{hang|''Tell Me''—Howling Wolf—PYE NEP 44032.}}

{{hang|''Best of Muddy Waters''—PYE NPL 28040.}}</font>
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues walking like a man}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:War and militarism]]
[[Category:Wealth and poverty]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-02T04:38:52Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />Blues walking like a man
| author = Charles Radcliffe
| section =
| previous = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| next = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|140}}

<font size="5">'''Blues walking<br />like a man'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charles Radcliffe|CHARLES RADCLIFFE]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|It is impossible to say with any certainty}} when the {{w|blues|Blues|Blues}} became a complete musical form, recognisably different from its antecedents—the songs of the farms and {{w|levee|Levee|Levee}} camps, the {{w|work songs|Work_song|Work song}}, axe songs, {{l|arwhoolies|https://www.loc.gov/collections/songs-of-america/articles-and-essays/musical-styles/traditional-and-ethnic/traditional-work-songs/|link: Library of Congress article}}, {{w|hollers|Field_holler|Field holler}} and {{w|rags|Ragtime|Ragtime}}. It is equally difficult to ascertain in which of the {{w|southern states|Southern_United_States|Southern United States}} of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} it originated. Many of the early singers were migratory labourers or {{w|blind men|Blind_musicians|Blind musicians}} who travelled widely to beg and earn money by singing, so it seems probable that it was a concurrent development over large areas of the {{w|Deep South|Deep_South}}. What is quite certain is that the blues was not a creation of any one man ({{w|W. C. Handy|W._C._Handy}}{{s}} self-inflating claim to be Father of the Blues has always seemed more than a little ludicrous to blues enthusiasts). Neither was it a product of city life. {{w|Bessie Smith|Bessie_Smith}}, for example, is frequently held to be the finest blues singer ever to record but she recorded {{w|''Classic'' city jazz-blues|Classic_female_blues|Classic female blues}}, which were a descendant, rather than a close relation, of the {{w|rural blues|Country_blues|Country blues}}, although they found their way onto record earlier. Her style is most often praised by {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}} critics, which correctly indicates her position as the creator of jazz-blues, rather than a blues singer ''per se.''<br />

{{tab}}Although the precise geographical, historical and musical origins of the blues are uncertain, the social conditions which produced it are well-recorded, not least of all in the blues itself. In the {{w|white supremacist|White_Supremacy#United_States|White Supremacy: United States}} society of the south the {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americans}} was in a situation of terrifying paradox: {{p|141}}isolated by race and colour, yet forced to conform to the ''mores'' of a society in which he was denied a voice and from which he was rigorously excluded. It is, incidentally, one of the most bitter ironies of the history of America{{s}} negroes that they should have practised their own form of {{w|racialism|Discrimination_based_on_skin_color|Discrimination based on skin color}}—that of distinction based on {{w|Creole|Creole_peoples|Creole peoples}} blood, {{qq|yellow-skins}}, {{qq|brown-skins}} and {{qq|black-skins}}. Despite these conditions being a primary factor in the creation and evolution of the blues, it is not usually a music of direct social protest and the few magnificent protest blues are far outnumbered by blues on women, men, cars, and rent, on the everyday life of an oppressed minority.

{{tab}}The blues has influenced jazz, {{qq|{{w|pop|Popular_music|Popular music}}}} music and even {{qq|serious}} music, yet its structure is extremely simple. In its {{w|developed form|Twelve-bar_blues|Twelve-bar blues}} it amounts to a three line {{w|stanza|Stanza|Stanza}}, with one line repeated and a third line, rhymed or unrhymed, in the form of {{w|call and response|Call_and_response_(music)|Call and response}}, a heritage from work songs. {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, one of the finest living rural singers, sings:

:: <font size="2">''Now I was sittin{{a}} in jail wi{{a}} my eyes all full of tears'' (repeat)
:: ''Y{{a}}know, I{{m}} glad didn{{t}} get lifetime, boys, that I {{a}}scaped th{{a}} {{a}}lectric chair''</font>

and {{w|Jaydee Short|J.D._Short|J.D. Short}} sang bitterly:

:: <font size="2">''So dark was the night now, people; cold, cold was the ground'' (repeat)
:: ''Me {{a}}n{{a}} my buddies in two {{w|foxholes|Defensive_fighting_position#Terminology|Defensive fighting position}}, had to keep our heads on down''</font>

{{tab}}Earlier singers drew more on the entire tradition of {{w|negro folk-song|African-American_music|African-American music}} and less on a still incomplete blues tradition, and there was less fixed form. {{w|Bukka White|Bukka_White}}, in a haunting blues, sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}}, believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}},''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die.''
:: ''I know I was born to die, but I hate to leave my chillen cryin{{a}}''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back, before they let me down,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''And don{{a}} leave them standin{{a}} and cryin{{a}} on the graveyar{{a}} groun{{a}}''</font>

{{tab}}Another early singer, {{w|Skip James|Skip_James}}, sings in two line verses:

:: <font size="2">''Hard time here, everywhere y{{a}} go''
:: ''Time{{s}} harder than they ever been before.''
:: ''If you certain y{{a}} had money, you better be sure,''
:: ''{{a}}Cause these hard times will drive y{{a}} from do{{a}} to do{{a}}.''</font>

{{tab}}Like {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, the {{w|doyen|Doyen|Doyen}} of the {{w|Delta|Delta_blues|Delta blues}} singers, and the superb {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}}, the {{qq|father}} of the {{w|Mississippi|Mississippi}} Blues, White and James were from Mississippi, and played their guitars in the peculiar regional {{qq|{{w|bottleneck|Slide_guitar|Slide guitar}}}} style. This involved the use of a knife, a steel ring or a smoothed down bottleneck which was usually placed on the thumb or little finger, and used as a {{w|drone|Drone_(music)|Drone (music)}} on the strings of the guitar. It gave their instruments a high-pitched whining sound which they were able to utilise for lyric passages, for simple rhythmic or melodic accompaniment or as a highly dramatic form of punctuation. Any blues looks rather bleak in print, because it is literally only half there. In the case of the {{p|142}}early Delta singers it gives a more than usually hollow effect.

{{tab}}Although Mississippi takes pride of place in any discussion of blues, there were fine singers from other areas. {{w|Jay Bird Coleman|Jaybird_Coleman|Jaybird Coleman}}, a superbly ferocious {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} player came from {{w|Bessemer|Bessemer,_Alabama|Bessemer, Alabama}}, {{w|Alabama|Alabama}}, and was so successful that the local {{w|Ku Klux Klan|Ku_Klux_Klan}} took over his management. {{w|Blind Boy Fuller|Blind_Boy_Fuller}} came from {{w|Carolina|North_Carolina|North Carolina}}, {{w|Oscar Woods|Oscar_%22Buddy%22_Woods}} (The Lone Wolf) from {{w|Louisiana}}, {{w|Peg Leg Howell|Peg_Leg_Howell}} and {{w|Blind Willie McTell|Blind_Willie_McTell}} from {{w|Georgia|Georgia_(U.S._state)}}, {{w|Bill Broonzy|Big_Bill_Broonzy|Big Bill Broonzy}} from {{w|Arkansas}}, and {{w|Furry Lewis|Furry_Lewis}} from {{w|Tennessee|Tennessee}}. Also from Tennessee came the two great {{w|jug bands|Jug_band|Jug band}}—{{w|Gus Cannon|Gus_Cannon}}{{s}} Jug Stompers and the {{w|Memphis Jug Band|Memphis_Jug_Band}}. The other great jug band—the {{l|Birmingham Jug Band|https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Birmingham_Jug_Band|Bhamwiki: Birmingham Jug Band}}—was from Alabama.

{{tab}}The early blues found its way onto record in the early {{a}}twenties, not through the devotion of {{w|ethnomusicologists|Ethnomusicology|Ethnomusicology}} but because record companies realised that it was a commercial proposition. Most of the early recordings were {{qq|field-recorded}} in rural centres like {{w|Memphis|Memphis,_Tennessee|Memphis, Tennessee}}, {{w|Dallas}} and {{w|Atlanta|Atlanta}}, in small halls and bars, wherever space could be found to set up equipment, and the records, by Skip James, {{w|Blind Lemon Jefferson|Blind_Lemon_Jefferson}}, Son House, Charlie Patton, Gus Cannon, {{l|Jed Davenport|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jed-davenport-mn0000238491/biography|Allmusic: Jed Davenport}} and later {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_I|Sonny Boy Williamson I}}, Bill Broonzy, {{w|Tommy McClennan|Tommy_McClennan|Tommy McClennan}}, Blind Boy Fuller and {{w|Cripple Clarence Lofton|Cripple_Clarence_Lofton}}, flooded through the mails and from the small-town stores into thousands of negro homes. The singers soon found themselves {{qq|race-heroes}} and the derisively labelled {{qq|{{w|race-record|Race_record|Race record}}}} market was a booming business. Fortunately men like {{w|Ralph Peer|Ralph_Peer}} of ''{{w|Victor|Victor_Talking_Machine_Company|Victor Talking Machine Company}}'' and {{w|Mayo Williams|J._Mayo_Williams|J. Mayo Williams}} of ''{{w|Paramount|Paramount_Records|Paramount Records}}'' had excellent taste and much of the early field recording was of great interest and superlative quality.

{{tab}}It requires enormous efforts of imagination to understand the conditions in the Deep South during the years in which the blues began. After the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War|American Civil War}}, when negroes had been given their {{qq|freedom}}, the {{w|white south|White_Southerners|White Southerners}}, with embittered ruthlessness, set about the re-enslavement of the negro population by {{qq|legal}} means. The negroes soon found themselves {{w|driven off|Black_land_loss_in_the_United_States|Black land loss in the United States}} their newly-gained land by former owners and the fast developing railroad companies. They were increasingly the victims of {{w|Jim Crow legislation|Jim_Crow_laws|Jim Crow laws}}, designed to keep them in their place regardless of the {{w|Fourteenth Amendment|Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}}. They were forced to work on the railroads; to work the land as {{w|tenant|Tenant_farmer|Tenant farmer}} {{w|share-croppers|Sharecropping#United_States|Sharecropping: United States}}, which meant in effect reversion to slavery; to work on the levees, in the {{w|sawmills|Sawmill|Sawmill}} or {{w|turpentine camps|Knabb_Turpentine|Knabb Turpentine}}, which became symbols of racial subjugation. Wherever they went they were swindled and exploited with sophisticated savagery, designed, consciously or not, to demoralise as well as to enslave. Often they were charged more for food and lodging than they could possibly earn. It is a bitter commentary on the south that when {{w|Alan Lomax|Alan_Lomax}} issued his superb ''{{l|Blues in the Mississippi Night|https://www.discogs.com/Alan-Lomax-Blues-In-The-Mississippi-Night/master/720494|Discogs: Blues in the Mississippi Night}}'' recordings in 1957, he still felt it necessary to hide the real identities of the three singers whose reminiscences were contained on the record. The performers are listed simply as Sib, Natchez and Leroy but they were in fact the harmonica player Sonny Boy Williamson, the guitarist Bill Broonzy and the pianist {{w|Memphis Slim Chatman|Memphis_Slim|Memphis Slim}}. There was always the added risk of natural calamity. {{w|Texas}} is subject to floods and so is Mississippi: when {{p|143}}the {{w|levees burst in 1927|Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927|Great Mississippi Flood of 1927}}, it was the negroes, forced to live very close to the banks, who died in thousands. Segregation affected everything. Even hospitals refused to treat negroes, and although the Bessie Smith death-legend is largely apocryphal, many negroes died through lack of sufficient medical care.

{{tab}}In the search for better work and living conditions, thousands of negroes {{w|trekked north|Great_Migration_(African_American)|Great Migration}}, from the {{a}}twenties up to the present, in the sort of exodus which is a feature of the history of racially tormented minorities. They arrived in the north by road and rail. They had no right on either, but the rail usually gave them a better chance. They could either walk the long straight lines—always risking a fall between them, and with it death, induced by the tiring and hypnotic effect of doing so—or they could {{qq|{{w|jump|Freighthopping|Freighthopping}}}} a train. This was riskier, but quicker. The traveller stands on one of the few slow curves in the track and then, in {{w|Paul Oliver|Paul_Oliver}}{{s}} words:

{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}breaks from cover and dashes towards the track taking advantage of the slowing of the train to make boarding possible, and of the bend to hide his movements. Crooked fingers clutch the {{w|couplings|Railway_coupling|Railway coupling}} and he swings perilously on the swaying truck before getting a firmer grip. He may make for the blinds if he can. These are the baggage cars next to the {{w|tender|Tender_(rail)|Tender (rail)}}, which are {{q|blind}} or, in other words, have no side door. Sitting on the step he is safe and out of reach of the {{w|brakeman{{s}} club|Brakeman's_cabin|Brakeman's cabin}}. {{e}} More dangerous, but out of sight and unapproachable, are the {{w|brake|Railway_brake|Railway brake}} rods that run beneath the freight cars. Risking his life he may try to worm his way across these, or if he is unusually adept he may carry a small board to throw across the rods and then precipitate himself upon it in the narrow gap between them and the underneath of the truck {{e}} in icy winds, in choking poisonous fumes of the railroad tunnels, he may freeze to numbness or succumb to exposure and drop to certain death{{e|r}}}}

{{tab}}There can be few worse condemnations of a society than that it should make this method of travel acceptable. Despite the risks the exodus continued, and women and children, as well as men, risked road and rail to go north:

:: <font size="2">''Oh, stop your train, let a poor boy ride.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, fare you well, never see you no more.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, train I ride, smokestack shine like gold.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}With them they took their blues, into railside {{w|hobo|Hobo|Hobo}} jungles where in hopeless poverty they could scratch a living, comparatively free from white interference, into the fast-developing northern ghettoes, into {{qq|New World}}. The blues proved remarkably resilient to city life at first. There were refinements which have continued up to the present: drums, basses and pianos were added to the more portable, and more {{p|144}}musically flexible instruments favoured by rural musicians, such as harmonicas (known as {{qq|harps}}, violins, guitars and {{w|jugs|Jug_(instrument)|Jug (instrument)}} which, when blown into, acted as bass resonators. However it was not until just before the {{w|last war|World_War_II|World War II}} that the blues altered dramatically and irrevocably, and even today there are traces of Mississippi in the blues of some {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} singers.

{{tab}}From the blues recordings we have a record of negro life, its joy and laughter—blues were primarily to entertain—as well as its bitterness and sorrow. We have stories of broken relationships, of {{w|rent parties|Rent_party|Rent party}}, of work in the fields of the south and the mills and factories of the north. Much of it is fine folk poetry, some of interest because of its subject, at its bext an index of the singer{{s}} feelings as well as a vivid picture of social conditions and the despair of the negro{{s}} brutalised life, a despair usually lightened only by the spiritual release of religion, the erotic release of sex or the physical release of violent pleasure. A much recorded blues begins:

:: <font size="2">''Rock me, mama, rock me all night long'' (repeat)
:: ''I want you to rock me, mama, till by back ain{{t}} got no bone.''</font>

and {{w|Chester Burnett|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin' Wolf}} (Howling Wolf) sings:

:: <font size="2">''Tell ole {{w|Pistol Pete|Frank_Eaton|Frank Eaton}}, everybody gonna meet,''
:: ''Tonight we need no rest, we really gonna throw a mess,''
:: ''We gonna break out all the windows, we gonna kick down all the doors,''
:: ''We gonna fix a {{w|Wang Dang Doodle|Wang_Dang_Doodle}}, all night long, all night long. {{e}}''
:: ''Tell {{w|Fats|Fats_Waller|Fats Waller}} and {{w|Washboard Sam|Washboard_Sam}}, that me {{a}}n{{a}} everybody gonna jam,''
:: ''Tell Shakey, Box Car Joe, we got sawdust on the floor,''
:: ''Tell Jennie Mae, till I die we gonna have a time,''
:: ''Well the fish scent fill the air, there{{s}} love juice everywhere.''
:: ''We gonna fix a Wang Dang Doodle. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Race records catered for various audiences and ranged from the harsh religious songs of {{w|Blind Willie Johnson|Blind_Willie_Johnson}}—once arrested for {{w|incitement|Incitement|Incitement}} outside a {{w|Customs House|Custom_house|Custom house}}, for singing his {{w|Samson|Samson}} song, ''{{w|If I Had My Way I{{d}} Tear This Building Down|Samson_and_Delilah_(song)|Samson and Delilah (song)}}''—to the lilting, leering blues of Blind Boy Fuller, which were often simply strings of sexual metaphores. Johnson and Fuller epitomised two main sources of relief for the negro—religion and sex. There were also songs on the catalogues about everything from {{w|cocaine|Cocaine|Cocaine}} sniffing to {{w|meningitis|Meningitis|Meningitis}}, and there were a large number of blues about {{w|prison|Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system|Race in the United States criminal justice system}}, suffered usually as a result of minor offences but frequently enough for more vicious crimes, and quite often for murder.

{{tab}}Prison was a daily feature in the lives of many families. It is some indication of the viciousness of the prisons and {{w|prison farms|Prison_farm|Prison farm}} that, as recently as 1951, fourteen prisoners in the {{w|Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola|Louisiana_State_Penitentiary}} {{popup|hamstrung themselves|A group of prisoners, known in the media as the Heel String Gang, cut their Achilles' tendons.}} rather than submit to beating with the {{qq|bat}}, a particularly crude, {{popup|fourteen pound|6.35 kg}} leather strap which, according to Paul Oliver, {{qq|can break a brick at a single blow}}. Yet prison farms, like Angola, were preferable to the overcrowded, unhealthy, closed prisons. The prison system is, even by conservative judgements, totally inadequate and archaic and even where there have been Federal {{p|145}}{{w|Commissions|Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government|Independent agencies of the United States government}} the south has ignored them and their recommendations. Despite the horror, many negroes have testified that life in prison was less frightening than life outside: at least in prison the next meal was assured, the tyranny rarely varied and there was ''less'' chance of the casual cruelty which typified the lives of so many racial underdogs. The great folk singer {{w|Leadbelly|Lead_Belly|Lead Belly}} sang his way out of prison, but not all singers were so lucky—{{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}} did a term at {{w|Parchman Prison Farm|Mississippi_State_Penitentiary|Mississippi State Penitentiary}}, Mississippi, and so did Bukka White, who sang a fine blues about it. {{l|Hogman Maxey|https://www.discogs.com/artist/401200-Hogman-Maxey|Discogs: Hogman Maxey}} and {{w|Robert Pete Williams|Robert_Pete_Williams}} did time at Angola. More recently the great Chicago guitarist, {{w|Auburn {{qq|Pat}} Hare|Pat_Hare|Pat Hare}} got a ninety-nine year sentence for shooting his mistress{{s}} husband and a policeman who tried to arrest him.

{{tab}}Murder occurs frequently in blues, both as a threat and as an occurrence, an indication of the everyday violence of American negro life. Sonny Boy Williamson sang:

:: <font size="2">''I got the meanest woman, the meanest woman you most ever seen,''
:: ''She sleep with an {{w|ice pick|Ice_pick|Ice pick}} in her hand, man, fights all in her dreams,''
:: ''I{{d}} soomer be sleepin{{a}} with the devil, I{{d}} sooner be sleepin{{a}} with the devil {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Williamson died in 1948 on his way to hospital—his {{w|cranium|Skull|Skull}} split by an ice-pick—the victim of the casual violence of his own people, killed either by a jealous husband or young thugs after his money.

{{tab}}The blues quoted above is also indicative of the disintegrative effect the negro{{s}} position in society had on the stability of family life. Many singers have recorded blues about leaving women, or women leaving them; many have sung about their mothers, few about their fathers. The reason is not hard to find—in thousands of cases the mother was left to bring up children on her own, the father having left in frustration or in search of work. Not surprisingly jealousy also looms large:

:: <font size="2">''Lord, my hair is a-risin{{a}}, my flesh begin to crawl'' (repeat)
:: ''Had a dream last night, babe, {{a}}nother mule in my doggone stall''</font>

{{tab}}And so does seduction:

:: <font size="2">''I am a back door man'' (repeat)
:: ''Well the men don{{t}} know but the little girls understand''
:: ''When everybody tryin{{a}} to sleep, I{{m}} somewhere makin{{a}} my midnight creep.''
:: ''I{{m}} the mornin{{a}} when the rooster crow, somethin{{a}} tell me I gotta go. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}As an aid to sexual ability and attraction, charms were used—{{w|mojo|Mojo_(African-American_culture)|Mojo}} teeth, mojo hands, {{w|black cat bones|Black_cat_bone|Black cat bone}}, {{w|John the Conkeror|John_the_Conqueror|John the Conqueror}} {{w|roots|Ipomoea|Ipomoea}}. {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down Louisiana, baby, behin{{a}} the sun'' (repeat)
:: ''Well, you know, I just found out my troubles just begun''
:: ''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down in {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}—hmmm—get me a mojo hand'' (repeat)
:: ''I wan{{a}} show all you good lookin{{a}} women just how to treat your man.''</font>

{{tab}}Even today magazines, like ''{{popup|Rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} Blues|Rhythm and Blues (1952–1965), first edited by Marvin Shnayer}}'', read by working class negroes, carry advertisements for these strange fertility symbols and charms—produced in {{w|Louisiana voodoo|Louisiana_Voodoo|Louisiana Voodoo}} circles—along with patent devices for straightening hair, strange medicines and other necessities of {{p|146}}ghetto life.

{{tab}}For the most part however there was little relief and little assistance. The great {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}, another Delta singer, obviously haunted by the phantoms of a divided society and using imagery of considerable richness, sang:

:: <font size="2">''I gotta keep movin{{a}}, I gotta keep movin{{a}}''
:: ''Blues fallin{{a}} down like hail, blues fallin{{a}} down like hail'' (repeat)
:: ''I can{{t}} keep no money, {{w|hellhound on my trail|Hellhound_on_My_Trail|Hellhound on My Trail}},''
:: ''Hellhound on my trail, hellhound on my trail''</font>

and again:

:: <font size="2">''You may bury my body down by the highway side''
:: (Spoken: ''Babe, don{{t}} care where you bury my body when I{{m}} dead and gone'')
:: ''You can bury my old body down by the highway side''
:: ''Lord, my ole evil spirit can catch a {{w|greyhound bus|Greyhound_Lines|Greyhound Lines}} and ride.''</font>

{{tab}}Johnson{{s}} blues remain the most personal and frightening of negro folk music, with their sense of transient ecstasy and sorrow, heightened by an abiding torment and despair. In his work the blues lays its most serious claim to be considered an art form, and of all the great singers he is the most likely to chill and electrify the listener, to make the agony of his life real, and to communicate, from his intense, tortured private emotions, the situation and condition of his people. Johnson is frightening because he is a victim without realisation of the complete meaning of his victimisation. His songs are, in the social sense, inarticulate, and this gives them their peculiar eloquence. It was not only social conditions which affected Johnson: he was obviously chained by his own shyness and frustration. He is thought to have been poisoned by his {{w|common law|Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States|Common-law marriage in the United States}} wife or to have died from {{w|alcohol poisoning|Alcohol_intoxication|Alcohol intoxication}}; whichever way, he died young in 1938. Howling Wolf, who knew him vaguely, says he was about 25 at the time; Muddy Waters thinks he was about 30; he is generally thought to have been {{popup|about 19|He was 27.}}. Johnson must have had more money than most negroes of his age and he seems to have had some trouble with women:

:: <font size="2">''Got up this mornin{{a}} to fin{{a}} it was gone'' (repeat)
:: ''Got up this mornin{{a}}, all I had was gone''
:: ''Well, leavin{{a}} this mornin{{a}} if I have to, gon{{a}} ride the blinds''</font>

{{tab}}And in another of his blues he sang:

:: <font size="2">''Gonna stay roun{{a}} {{w|Jonesboro|Jonesboro}}, until my teeth {{w|crowned with gold|Gold_teeth|Gold teeth}}'' (repeat)
:: ''She got a {{w|mortgage|Mortgage|Mortgage}} on my body, got a {{w|lien|Lien|Lien}} on my soul.''</font>

{{tab}}In Johnson—the inheritor of a tradition which stretched from the itinerant timbermill worker Charlie Patton, a beautiful, heavy voiced singer, reputedly half-{{w|Puerto Rican|Puerto_Ricans|Puerto Ricans}}, who first recorded ''{{w|I Shall Not Be Moved|I_Shall_Not_Be_Moved}},'' Son House, Bukka White and Skip James, whose oddly {{w|oriental-sounding|Music_of_Asia|Music of Asia}} blues were amongst the strangest and most haunting noises to come from the Delta—the blues reached its peak. Despite a handful of superb singers since, it has never again reached such an emphatic state of artistic unity.

{{p|147}}{{tab}}Undoubtedly the finest of the early singers from outside Mississippi was a dirty, ugly, dissolute Texan—Blind Lemon Jefferson. Blind men have often made good blues singers—they are doubly oppressed, a minority within a minority. Jefferson was a harsh singer with enormous powers of expression and his guitar playing was amongst the best to be recorded. He is now best remembered for his moving ''{{w|See That My Grave is Kept Clean|See_That_My_Grave_Is_Kept_Clean|See That My Grave Is Kept Clean}}'':

:: <font size="2">''Well, there{{s}} one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''One kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''Oh Lord, one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you''
:: ''Please see that my grave is kept clean.''
:: ''It{{s}} a long lane got no end'' (three times)
:: ''An{{a}} it{{s}} a bad way that don{{a}} never change''
:: ''Lord, it{{s}} two white horses in a line'' (three times)
:: ''Gon{{a}} take me to my buryin{{a}} groun{{a}}''
:: ''Dig my grave with a silver spade'' (three times)
:: ''You may let me down with a golden chain''
:: ''Have you ever heard a coffin soun{{a}}?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} in the groun{{a}}''
:: ''Have you ever heard a church bell toll?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} dead an{{a}} gone.''</font>

{{tab}}Jefferson began recording in 1924 and was dead by 1930, frozen to death on a Chicago sidewalk during a snowstorm. His records sold well but they did not stop his life being as sad as any of his people{{s}}. Today, in a cemetary at {{w|Wortham|Wortham,_Texas|Wortham, Texas}}, Lemon{{s}} grave is almost lost under the grass and weeds.

{{tab}}The blues changed subtly over the years and as the {{w|radio networks|Broadcast_network|Broadcast network}} extended their influence, the various regional styles began to mingle. By the mid-{{a}}thirties it was increasingly difficult to recognise regional characteristics in blues vocals—the demonic intensity of Mississippi, the harsh but more introverted {{w|blues of Texas|Texas_blues|Texas blues}}, the jollier {{w|blues of Carolina|Piedmont_blues|Piedmont blues}}—though some were unmistakable. {{w|Leroy Carr|Leroy_Carr}}, who seemed to fuse various regional styles in his singing, had en enormous effect on the future of the blues, during his career in the late {{a}}twenties and early {{a}}thirties. Carr was more sophisticated than the rural singers and his singing, over the sensitive accompaniment of his piano and {{w|Scrapper Blackwell|Scrapper_Blackwell}}{{s}} guitar, emphasised melody rather more than emotion. His better recordings are marked by musical intelligence and an appealingly wistful quality and his ''{{w|How Long Blues|How_Long,_How_Long_Blues|How Long, How Long Blues}}'' is one of the few enduring, and widely recognised blues classics. Carr was easily imitated—even today there are Carr imitators like {{w|Bumble Bee Slim|Bumble_Bee_Slim}}—and the {{qq|style}} he invented was the dominating current in blues until the {{popup|war|The United States entered World War II on 11 December 1941}}. Carr was excellent but the blues trend he started was somewhat disastrous. The new blues were lighter, more swinging, but often depressingly insensitive. They were recorded, by this time, mainly in the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} Cities, for a city audience which demanded slickness and polish. With the more rigid discipline imposed by pianos, basses and drums, which greatly restricted the flexibility and individuality of singers, it was perhaps inevitable that, by 1940, the urban background, which was, broadly {{p|148}}speaking, {{qq|introduced}} by Carr, shoud have drastically affected the sound and content of blues. There were good records by the likeable Bill Broonzy, the irrepressible {{w|Memphis Minnie|Memphis_Minnie}}, the harshly intense Tommy McClennan, Sonny Boy Williamson, {{w|Arthur {{qq|Big Boy}} Crudup|Arthur_Crudup|Arthur Crudup}} and the great, rolling pianist {{w|Big Maceo Merriweather|Big_Maceo_Merriweather|Big Maceo Merriweather}}. There were a few {{qq|social blues}} like John Este{{s|r}} ''{{l|Working Man Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/817873-Sleepy-John-Estes-1929-1940|Discogs: Sleepy John Estes – 1929-1940}},'' which contained an invocation to the whites to break up trucks and tractors and work more mules and men, thus ensuring employment, and a few recordings in an older, country style, but the {{a}}forties was a lean period for blues which said anything.

{{tab}}During the war the negroes found themselves fighting for freedom against {{w|racialism|Racism|Racism}} and tyranny; the paradox didn{{t}} fail to strike any number of them and many have retained a lasting cynicism as a result. They either joined up cynically:

:: <font size="2">''I{{ve}} got my questionary and they need me in the war'' (repeat)
:: ''Now I feel like murder, won{{t}} have to break the county law''
:: ''All I want{{s}} a {{w|thirty-two-twenty|.32-20_Winchester|.32-20 Winchester}}, made on a'' {{w|.45|11_mm_caliber|11 mm caliber}} {{w|frame|Receiver_(firearms)|Receiver (firearms)}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Yes, and a red, white and blue {{w|flag|Flag_of_the_United_States|Flag of the United States}}, wavin{{a}} in my right hand.''</font>

{{tab}}Or pathetically eagerly:

:: <font size="2">''I want a {{w|machine gun|Machine_gun|Machine gun}}, wan{{a}} be hid way out in the wood'' (repeat)
:: ''I want to show ol{{a}} man {{w|Hitler|Adolf_Hitler|Adolf Hitler}} Sonny Boy don{{a}} mean him no good.''
:: ''I want to drop a bomb, and set the {{w|Japanese|Japan_during_World_War_II|Japan during World War II}} city {{w|on fire|Air_raids_on_Japan#Firebombing_attacks|Air raids on Japan: Firebombing attacks}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Now because they are so rotten, just love to see them die''</font>

{{tab}}The reality was different. {{w|Uncle Sam|Uncle_Sam}} wouldn{{t}} have dreamed of letting negroes operate a precious {{qq|{{w|thunderbolt|Republic_P-47_Thunderbolt|Republic P-47 Thunderbolt}}}}, though he was happy enough for them to fight—and die. The bitterness of the negro community was clearer after the Second World War than it had been after the first, but the lessons have been learnt incompletely or not at all, and there are still blues like {{w|Jimmy Rogers|Jimmy_Rogers}}{{s}} ''{{w|World is in a Tangle|Jimmy_Rogers_(album)|Jimmy Rogers (album)}}'' or {{w|Lightnin Slim|Lightnin'_Slim|Lightnin' Slim}}{{s}} (Otis Hicks) ''{{l|GI Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/614095-Lightnin-Slim-Rooster-Blues-G-I-Slim|Discogs: Lightnin' Slim – Rooster Blues / "G I" Slim}}'' which express, in terms nearly as militant as the blues quoted above, the desire to fight the {{w|Russians|Soviet_Union|Soviet Union}}. In this the singers reflect the tone of white society in a way that more isolated singers would have found impossible, even if they had felt it desirable. The institutions of state violence can now speak directly to the negro whereas there was little to convince older singers, like the previously quoted Jaydee Short, that they had anything to gain from the white{{s|r}} wars and their natural feelings certainly told them otherwise.

{{p|s2|n}}'''THE POST WAR BLUES'''

{{tab}}The decline of blues in the {{a}}forties was an indication not so much of integration ''into,'' as of imitation ''of'' white society: this coupled with the record companie{{s|r}} lack of discrimination and the ''comparative'' ease of ghetto life. But if the early {{a}}forties were lean years, the late {{a}}forties and early {{a}}fifties saw an increase in both the quantity and quality of {{p|149}}blues recording. ''{{w|Victor|RCA_Records|RCA Records}}, {{w|Decca|Decca_Records|Decca Records}}'' and ''{{w|Bluebird|Bluebird_Records|Bluebird Records}},'' before and during the war, had the money and organisation to ensure large scale distribution for their records but the post-war companies were much smaller, with fewer resources. It took a big hit to give them a reputation, and with it distribution, and in the search for success many hundreds of new singers were recorded, many of them performers in an older style. {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} recorded some archaic-sounding blues and singers like Muddy Waters, {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_II|Sonny Boy Williamson II}} (the second), Howling Wolf and {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin' Hopkins}}, all of them fresh from the country, were recording relatively simple rural-style blues. There were others, like {{w|John Brim|John_Brim}}, {{w|Harmonica Frank|Harmonica_Frank}}, {{w|Big Boy Spires|Arthur_%22Big_Boy%22_Spires|Arthur "Big Boy" Spires}}, {{w|Houston Boines|Houston_Boines}}, less well known but almost as good. The list of labels then and since seems unbelievable. There were ''{{w|Aristocrat|Aristocrat_Records|Aristocrat Records}}, {{w|Checker|Checker_Records|Checker Records}}, {{w|Chess|Chess_Records|Chess Records}}, {{w|JOB|J.O.B._Records|J.O.B. Records}}'' (Chicago), ''{{w|Gotham|Gotham_Records|Gotham Records}}, {{w|Savoy|Savoy_Records|Savoy Records}}'' (East Coast), ''{{w|Excello|Excello_Records|Excello Records}}, {{w|Gold Star|Gold_Star_Records|Gold Star Records}}, {{w|Sun|Sun_Records|Sun Records}}, {{w|Trumpet|Trumpet_Records|Trumpet Records}}'' (Southern States), ''{{w|Flair|Flair_Records|Flair Records}}, {{w|Modern|Modern_Records|Modern Records}}'' and ''{{w|RPM|RPM_Records_(United_States)|RPM Records}}'' (West Coast) and many, many more. They often disappeared after a few releases of exceptional quality, like the amazing ''{{l|Bloodstains on the Wall|https://www.discogs.com/master/1357429-Honeyboy-Bloodstains-On-The-Wall-My-Time-Aint-Long|Discogs: Honeyboy – Bloodstains on the Wall / My Time Ain't Long}}'' by a singer improbably named {{w|Honey Boy|David_%22Honeyboy%22_Edwards|David "Honeyboy" Edwards}} or Harmonica Frank{{s}} ''{{l|Howling Tom Cat|https://www.discogs.com/release/10057029-Various-The-Sun-Records-Story|Discogs: Various – The Sun Records Story}},'' which might as easily have been recorded in the South during the {{a}}twenties, as in Chicago by Chess during the {{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}From this profusion of new bluesmen there were a handful who became very big names and who still play a rôle close to that of the race-hero; others have sunk to the second rank, often playing as well as their {{qq|betters}}; still others—and they are the majority—have died or live on half-forgotten, their memories sustained only by a few worn {{w|78s|Phonograph_record#78_rpm_disc_developments|Phonograph record: 78 rpm disc developments}} in junk shops or collections. Of the post-war Chicago singers Muddy Waters takes pride of place. He first recorded, for Alan Lomax in the {{w|Delta|Mississippi_Delta|Mississippi Delta}}, in 1941, using his real name of McKinley Morganfield. By the late {{a}}forties he had moved to Chicago and was making an exciting series for ''Aristocrat.'' His guitar playing, in the old bottleneck tradition, retained much of the vigour of earlier Mississippi bluesmen and his voice was rich and thrilling. He was usually accompanied by the finest of all blues bassists, {{w|Big Crawford|Ernest_%22Big%22_Crawford|Ernest "Big" Crawford}}, and the harmonica player {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. Jacobs was, and is, a magnificent musician and in his hands the harmonica became a {{w|horn|Brass_instrument|Brass instrument}}-like instrument, with superb tone, range, flexibility and crispness; he blew long, flowing phrases of classical elegance and feeling, saying as much about the condition of the negro in his playing as most singers say in a lifetime of singing. He and Waters achieved a fine unity, exemplified by such tracks as ''{{l|Louisiana Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/1277043-Muddy-Waters-Louisiana-Blues-Evans-Shuffle|Discogs: Muddy Waters – Louisiana Blues / Evan's Shuffle}},'' where the guitar and harmonica fuse so that they sound almost like a single instrument. Waters continued his series for ''Chess'' when that company took over ''Aristocrat'' but there was a new mood about to hit Chicago and the {{qq|rural}} bluesmen—a mood that had its cause in both social and musical developments.

{{tab}}Migration figures are not an entirely accurate index of population movement since they neither give reasons for migration nor take into account temporary migration. Quite obviously the well-to-do white moves for widely different reasons than those which compel a socially {{p|150}}and economically harrassed negro. It is interesting, however, that the figures show negro population movement to be both more permanent and more frequent during the period 1940-1947 (14.1%). This period of increased migration roughly coincides with the beginning of the post-war {{w|revival|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Further point is added by the fact that in 1900 90% of the negro population lived in the south, and 74% in rural areas, whereas by 1960 only 60% lived in the south and just under 25% in the rural south. Of the 40% elsewhere, under 2% lived in rural areas. The American negro has become increasingly a northern city dweller rather than a southern country dweller and in the years immediately post-war this process speeded up. This would seem to show one major reason for the blue{{s|r}} new lease of life in the early {{a}}fifties and also why since the middle-{{a}}fifties there has been a marked decline in quality. The negro who left the south after the war was usually brought up in an environment where the blues was a part of daily life, fulfilling a function both as entertainment and as a psychological release, and there was a consequent demand from this migrant group for {{qq|down-home}} blues. The migrants moved all over the USA and new recording companies sprang up to meet their demands, often in places where no authentic blues tradition existed. The record companies, previously deeply committed to the urban blues market, centred on Chicago since the late {{a}}thirties, now found themselves with a new audience for country-style blues which many enthusiasts had considered dead. The country-style blues were able to survive this transplantation as long as singers and audiences kept their southern roots, but they began to lose their ''{{popup|raison d{{a}}être|reason for being}}'' as the southern audience grew older and gave way to a younger white pop-influenced negro record buyer who, far from wanting blues, found the constant reminder of southern servility deeply embarrassing.

{{tab}}The musical developments arose to some extent from the social developments. In 1954 a young white singer walked into the ''Sun'' studio in Memphis, Tennessee. ''Sun'' had issued good blues singers like {{w|Joe Hill Louis|Joe_Hill_Louis}}, {{w|Walter Horton|Big_Walter_Horton|Big Walter Horton}} and {{w|Doctor Ross|Doctor_Ross}} but their biggest hit was an old Crudup blues, ''{{w|That{{s}} All Right, Mama|That's_All_Right|That's All Right}},'' recorded after a number of attempts by the young {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. ''Victor'' bought up ''Sun{{s}}'' Presley contract in 1955 and {{w|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} music (a nice white name, invented by the {{w|disc jockey|Disc_jockey|Disc jockey}} {{w|Alan Freed|Alan_Freed}}, for what was basically negro {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}) flooded into a million white homes. For the first time the popular music of the two racial groups was broadly similar. Partly in sub-conscious self-defence and partly in emulation of white youth, the young urban negroes demanded a noisier, more aggressive blues, expressing their increasing confidence. There were singers like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley}} and {{w|Fats Domino|Fats_Domino}} (who sold more records than anyone except Presley during the {{qq|rock era}}), who were selling to both racial groups, but many of the older singers were forced to use screaming, over-amplified electric guitars and {{w|saxes|Saxophone|Saxophone}} to keep up. Some, like Howling Wolf, managed the change without too much difficulty, but most were less lucky. Wolf had a rough, rasping voice which came across the amplification with exciting power—he had made fine {{p|151}}records in the country style in the late {{a}}forties—but in Chicago he had a massive beat and his records for ''Chess'' have a raucous, jangling sense of guts and urgency which suited the new audiences. Muddy Waters, although he has retained to the present his reputation as {{qq|King of Chicago}}, was hit badly.

{{tab}}From the mid-{{a}}fifties his records became worse and worse, with poor accompaniment, trivial and repetitive words, and a badly strained singer: the only relief was afforded by one or two splendid blues shouts, like his ''{{w|Hoochie Coochie Man|Hoochie_Coochie_Man}};''

:: <font size="2">''I got a black cat bone,''
:: ''I got a mojo tooth,''
:: ''I got a John the Conker root,''
:: ''Gonna mess with you.''
:: ''Gonna make all you girls''
:: ''Lead me by the hand,''
:: ''Then the world will know''
:: ''I{{m}} a hoochie coochie man.''</font>

{{tab}}Waters is aware of his deterioration but he now fits the requirements of the new audience—an exciting stage act rather than interesting blues.

{{tab}}The other great post-war bluesman from the Mississippi, John Lee Hooker, began recording in the late {{a}}forties. At his best he has more than a little of the old Delta manner in his rich, sensual voice and dramatically rhythmic and flexible guitar style. He started his career recording imaginative, earthy blues in a most arresting style, accompanied only by his own guitar. His voice was strong and, occasionally, bitter and his guitar had a throbbing vigour and a magnificent drive rarely heard before. With its terse, intense and rhythmic phrasing it acted as a foil for the voice and gave his blues extraordinary tension, strengthened by his sharply stamping feet. The early tracks, particularly the slow, atmospherically sensual ones, take their place amongst the great blues. Hooker{{s}} versatility is a bit discomfiting but he can still be a magnificently haunting singer. Like his contemporary, Lightning Hopkins, Hooker entertains on the predominantly white folk circuit as well as the negro rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues circuit. He gives the white audiences folk-tinged blues and the negro audiences highly rhythmic {{w|boogie|Boogie|Boogie}}-type numbers. He rarely sings in the old style now, but his recent visit to {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} emphasised his position as one of the dozen finest post-war singers, with roots stretching far back into the Delta of his youth.

{{tab}}A number of singers have earned the reputation of being {{qq|{{w|Kennedy|John_F._Kennedy|John F. Kennedy}}-line}} singers. {{w|Bobo Jenkins|Bobo_Jenkins}} castigated those who voted {{w|Republican|Republican_Party_(United_States)|Republican Party}} in {{w|1952|1952_United_States_presidential_election|1952 United States presidential election}} (''{{l|Democrat Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/2137609-Bobo-Jenkins-Democrat-Blues-Bad-Luck-Trouble|Discogs: Bobo Jenkins – Democrat Blues / Bad Luck & Trouble}}''), {{w|Louisiana Red|Louisiana_Red}} sang about tugging {{w|Castro|Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro}}{{s}} beard and removing {{w|missile bases|Cuban_Missile_Crisis|Cuban Missile Crisis}} from {{w|Cuba}} in ''{{l|Red{{s}} Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}'' (though he demanded for himself and his soul-brothers, {{w|Ray Charles|Ray_Charles}}, {{w|Jimmy Reed|Jimmy_Reed}}, {{w|Big Maybelle|Big_Maybelle}} and Lightning Hopkins, a share in running the nation) and about Civil Rights in ''{{l|Ride on Red, Ride on|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}.'' {{w|J. B. Lenoir|J._B._Lenoir|J. B. Lenoir}} savaged {{w|Eisenhower|Dwight_D._Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower}} so mercilessly in one blues that the {{l|record|https://www.discogs.com/master/888269-J-B-Lenoir-Im-In-Korea-Eisenhower-Blues|Discogs: J. B. Lenoir – I'm in Korea / Eisenhower Blues}}, which had a more moderate indictment of the {{w|Korean War|Korean_War}} on the other side, was banned.

{{p|152}}{{tab}}Amongst these few singers with a marked sense of social justice is a tall lean Texan, who wears dark glasses perpetually and learned his blues as a child from his cousin, {{w|Texas Alexander|Alger_%22Texas%22_Alexander|Alger "Texas" Alexander}}, and his {{qq|master}}, Blind Lemon Jefferson. Sam {{qq|Lightning}} Hopkins sings in lines of uneven measure, his singing without normally accepted blues discipline. He plays incessant bass {{w|runs|Glossary_of_music_terminology#run|Run (music)}} and rhythms as he sings and then his guitar rings out sharp and clear in the lyric passages between lines and verses. His style is even more intense than Hooker{{s}}, the voice harsh, comparatively deep and with an almost unbearable sense of loneliness and desolation. Hopkins can be an ingratiating singer, particularly for white audiences, but on his earliest and best records he never bothered and the result is the purest body of country blues to be recorded post-war. Despite many miles of travelling and widely varied audiences, Hopkins is still oddly superstitious, with an abiding distrust of aeroplanes ({{qq|just can{{t}} be natural}}) and an intense hatred of wine—his feelings don{{t}} extend to whiskey! He is fiercely proud of his {{w|Houston}} roots, and is witheringly contemptuous of the Chicago singers—{{qq|They can{{t}} sing {{a}}bout nothin{{a}} but women}}. He has tended to protest where and when he sees injustice, natural or man-made, bothering less about cures.

{{tab}}In ''{{l|War Is Starting All Over Again|https://www.discogs.com/master/1940628-Lightning-Hopkins-And-His-Guitar-Got-Me-A-Louisiana-Woman|Discogs: Lightning Hopkins And His Guitar – Got Me A Louisiana Woman / War Is Starting Again}}'' he sings of his feelings about the Korean War:

:: <font size="2">''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yes, I feel they{{re}} thinking to start war again,''
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yeah, I feel they{{re}} gonna start war again,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gon{{a}} be many mothers and fathers worry,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gonna be as many girls that lose a frien{{a}}.''
:: ''Oooh, I got news this morning, right now they need a million men'' (repeat)
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know I bin overseas, woman, poor Lightnin don{{a}} want to go there again.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know my girl frien{{s}} got a boy frien{{a}} in the army, the poor body goes to sea.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know I don{{t}} hate it so bad, boys, y{{a}}know there{{s}} a bit of a break for me.''
:: ''Ohhhhh, this world is in a tangle, about to have war again. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}He did a slightly altered version of the sung under the title ''{{l|Blues for Queen Elizabeth|https://www.discogs.com/master/694530-Sam-Lightnin-Hopkins-The-Rooster-Crowed-In-England|Discogs: Sam 'Lightnin' Hopkins – The Rooster Crowed In England}}.'' It must be the most horrific and least sycophantic work of art ever dedicated to a resident of {{w|Buckingham Palace|Buckingham_Palace}}:

:: <font size="2">''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in {{w|France}} they wade in blood knee deep,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in France, they was wadin{{a}} in blood knee deep,''
:: ''An{{a}} at that time whole lots of people wanderin{{a}} roun{{a}} hungry an{{a}} didn{{t}} have a bite to eat.''</font>

{{tab}}In ''{{l|Awful Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/346449-Lightnin-Hopkins-Mojo-Hand|Discogs: Lightnin' Hopkins – Mojo Hand}}'' he amplified his horror of war:

:: <font size="2">''Have y{{a}} ever looked over a mountain, one you ain{{t}} never seen?'' (repeat)
:: ''Have y{{a}} ever lay down in your bed and had one of them lonesome dreams?''
:: ''Sounds like the world was comin{{a}} to an end, somebody had passed and dropped a bomb,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know they tell me, this world is in a tangle now and them things is sure to come''
:: ''But I don{{t}} know, God know I don{{t}}, teach me, teach me, teach me that I{{m}} wrong.''</font>

{{p|153}}{{tab}}His sharp sense of pity for the afflicted comes through in a fine blues about a one-eyed woman:

:: <font size="2">''Yeah, the poor soul look so pitiful, cryin{{a}} out that ol{{a}} one eye. {{e}}''
:: ''{{e}} Yeah, y{{a}}know it{{s}} misery, it{{s}} misery, every time she cry it hurt poor me.''
:: ''She ain{{t}} got one eye to cry from when there{{s}} something in that good eye,''
:: ''It hurt me to know that she can{{t}} see.''</font>

{{tab}}Hopkins is probably the last great bluesman. When he, and the few other singers in this mould, have gone, the blues, the ''real,'' down-home, country blues, will finally be dead and with it will pass a dishonourable episode of American history.

{{tab}}It is impossible to regret the passing of the condition which made the old blues culturally relevant yet it is permissible to regret the passing of the old singers who have enriched the lives of so many people, both coloured and, albeit after the event, white. The blues will be left to the white folk-singers, a few good modern stylists like {{w|Otis Rush|Otis_Rush}}, the rabble-rousing Chicago blues-beat bands—the descendants of singers and musicians of some sensitivity like {{w|Elmore James|Elmore_James}}—and the blues-rock {{a}}n{{a}} rollers like Chuck Berry, {{w|James Brown|James_Brown}} and Bo Diddley. The blues in some form may live on for a generation or more. It is possible to see in the harsh, angular, neurotic-sounding blues of {{w|Buddy Guy|Buddy_Guy}} the logical extension (via singers like {{w|B. B. King|B.B._King|B.B. King}}) of the early post-war blues—noisier, uglier, more involuted, more intense and expressing increasing confidence. But the course of the blues, whether it be classic, urban or country, is notoriously difficult to predict and it may be that the clearest expression of the urban negroe{{s|r}} new preoccupation is in the {{qq|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll}} songs of Chuck Berry who sings about cars, machinery and the {{w|teenage|Youth_culture|Youth culture}} American Way of Life—telephones, {{w|juke boxes|Jukebox|Jukebox}}, {{w|soda stalls|Soda_jerk|Soda jerk}}, {{w|hot dog stands|Hot_dog_stand|Hot dog stand}}, {{w|drive-ins|Drive-in|Drive-in}} and even the backwoods myth of {{qq|{{w|country-boy-makes-good|Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States|Socioeconomic mobility in the United States}}}} (''{{w|Johnny B. Goode|Johnny_B._Goode}}''). Despite prison sentences he sings constantly and without bitterness of his delight at being resident in the {{w|Land of the Free|The_Star-Spangled_Banner|The Star-Spangled Banner}}. Bo Diddley{{s}} songs are equally instructive but, mercifully, more sceptical. On the whole the blues gives every indication of being a dying form, increasingly less relevant to the audience for which it is obviously intended.

{{tab}}The record companies which, since the war, have tended to have parallel catalogues of {{qq|pop}} music and blues, have gradually utilised more and more {{qq|pop}} production gimmicks in their blues issues. More and more releases are dependent on careful {{w|arrangements|Arrangement|Arrangement}}, careful words, catchy tunes or phrases, set-pattern {{w|instrumental breaks|Break_(music)|Break (music)}}, pre-determined playing time and gimmicks like {{w|double-track|Double_tracking|Double tracking}} recording and {{qq|girlie}} {{w|choirs|Backing_vocalist|Backing vocalist}}. The sham techniques of mass production do not affect all issues but they have effectively stemmed the stream of good recordings which ran from the {{a}}twenties to the mid-{{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}Even in this the blues are a reflection of social conditions, or increasing automation and decreasing artistry. Today, however, one feels that the environment is reflected more in the production of records than in their content. Recently, the supposedly rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues sound of the negro-operated {{w|Tamla-Motown-Gordy|Motown|Motown}} set-up of {{w|Detroit}}, consciously designed as a {{w|gospel|Gospel_music|Gospel music}} and blues tinged {{qq|soul-beat}} music, {{p|154}}has shown a possible new direction for blues-influenced music. It is, perhaps inevitably, the direction of white {{w|tin pan alley|Tin_Pan_Alley|Tin Pan Alley}} and the ''{{w|Billboard|Billboard_(magazine)|Billboard (magazine)}}'' {{w|Top Hundred|Billboard_Hot_100|Billboard Hot 100}}. (Equality and integration in all things!) As Muddy Waters told {{w|Pete Welding|Pete_Welding}}{{ref|aster|*}}: {{qq|I think the blues—the old style blues—will die with us. I don{{t}} see any youngsters coming along in that style nowadays. The Negro kids, they don{{t}} like it at all; they{{re}} more interested in the popular music. And these young white kids that are playing in the old style. Now, maybe they feel the blues like I do, and maybe they can play like I do, but they can{{t}} sing like I do. So I don{{t}} think that{{s}} the answer. I guess maybe the old blues will die, but I don{{t}} like to think about that.}}

{{tab}}It only remains to be seen whether the attainment of some measure of social equality will be a fair exchange for the passing of the blues. It is to be hoped that the courage, endurance, hopes, fears and feelings of the thousands of negroes, named and unnamed, who have sung the blues for recordings, for friends and for personal solace, in hits, halls, bars, prisons and ghettoes all over the USA, will not be betrayed, for it is they who have, in a very real sense, kept alive the vision of something better, who have created from appalling conditions a vital and extremely beautiful folk music. If the spirit of the blues is to be honoured the negro must demand something better and more dignified than mere integration into the affluent squalor, neurosis and schizophrenia of modern America.

<font size="2">{{note|aster|*}}''{{w|Down Beat|DownBeat|DownBeat}},'' October 8, 1964.</font>
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues walking like a man}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:War and militarism]]
[[Category:Wealth and poverty]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-02T03:22:48Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />Blues walking like a man
| author = Charles Radcliffe
| section =
| previous = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| next = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|140}}

<font size="5">'''Blues walking<br />like a man'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charles Radcliffe|CHARLES RADCLIFFE]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|It is impossible to say with any certainty}} when the {{w|blues|Blues|Blues}} became a complete musical form, recognisably different from its antecedents—the songs of the farms and {{w|levee|Levee|Levee}} camps, the {{w|work songs|Work_song|Work song}}, axe songs, {{l|arwhoolies|https://www.loc.gov/collections/songs-of-america/articles-and-essays/musical-styles/traditional-and-ethnic/traditional-work-songs/|link: Library of Congress article}}, {{w|hollers|Field_holler|Field holler}} and {{w|rags|Ragtime|Ragtime}}. It is equally difficult to ascertain in which of the {{w|southern states|Southern_United_States|Southern United States}} of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} it originated. Many of the early singers were migratory labourers or {{w|blind men|Blind_musicians|Blind musicians}} who travelled widely to beg and earn money by singing, so it seems probable that it was a concurrent development over large areas of the {{w|Deep South|Deep_South}}. What is quite certain is that the blues was not a creation of any one man ({{w|W. C. Handy|W._C._Handy}}{{s}} self-inflating claim to be Father of the Blues has always seemed more than a little ludicrous to blues enthusiasts). Neither was it a product of city life. {{w|Bessie Smith|Bessie_Smith}}, for example, is frequently held to be the finest blues singer ever to record but she recorded {{w|''Classic'' city jazz-blues|Classic_female_blues|Classic female blues}}, which were a descendant, rather than a close relation, of the {{w|rural blues|Country_blues|Country blues}}, although they found their way onto record earlier. Her style is most often praised by {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}} critics, which correctly indicates her position as the creator of jazz-blues, rather than a blues singer ''per se.''<br />

{{tab}}Although the precise geographical, historical and musical origins of the blues are uncertain, the social conditions which produced it are well-recorded, not least of all in the blues itself. In the {{w|white supremacist|White_Supremacy#United_States|White Supremacy: United States}} society of the south the {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americans}} was in a situation of terrifying paradox: {{p|141}}isolated by race and colour, yet forced to conform to the ''mores'' of a society in which he was denied a voice and from which he was rigorously excluded. It is, incidentally, one of the most bitter ironies of the history of America{{s}} negroes that they should have practised their own form of {{w|racialism|Discrimination_based_on_skin_color|Discrimination based on skin color}}—that of distinction based on {{w|Creole|Creole_peoples|Creole peoples}} blood, {{qq|yellow-skins}}, {{qq|brown-skins}} and {{qq|black-skins}}. Despite these conditions being a primary factor in the creation and evolution of the blues, it is not usually a music of direct social protest and the few magnificent protest blues are far outnumbered by blues on women, men, cars, and rent, on the everyday life of an oppressed minority.

{{tab}}The blues has influenced jazz, {{qq|{{w|pop|Popular_music|Popular music}}}} music and even {{qq|serious}} music, yet its structure is extremely simple. In its {{w|developed form|Twelve-bar_blues|Twelve-bar blues}} it amounts to a three line {{w|stanza|Stanza|Stanza}}, with one line repeated and a third line, rhymed or unrhymed, in the form of {{w|call and response|Call_and_response_(music)|Call and response}}, a heritage from work songs. {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, one of the finest living rural singers, sings:

:: <font size="2">''Now I was sittin{{a}} in jail wi{{a}} my eyes all full of tears'' (repeat)
:: ''Y{{a}}know, I{{m}} glad didn{{t}} get lifetime, boys, that I {{a}}scaped th{{a}} {{a}}lectric chair''</font>

and {{w|Jaydee Short|J.D._Short|J.D. Short}} sang bitterly:

:: <font size="2">''So dark was the night now, people; cold, cold was the ground'' (repeat)
:: ''Me {{a}}n{{a}} my buddies in two {{w|foxholes|Defensive_fighting_position#Terminology|Defensive fighting position}}, had to keep our heads on down''</font>

{{tab}}Earlier singers drew more on the entire tradition of {{w|negro folk-song|African-American_music|African-American music}} and less on a still incomplete blues tradition, and there was less fixed form. {{w|Bukka White|Bukka_White}}, in a haunting blues, sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}}, believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}},''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die.''
:: ''I know I was born to die, but I hate to leave my chillen cryin{{a}}''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back, before they let me down,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''And don{{a}} leave them standin{{a}} and cryin{{a}} on the graveyar{{a}} groun{{a}}''</font>

{{tab}}Another early singer, {{w|Skip James|Skip_James}}, sings in two line verses:

:: <font size="2">''Hard time here, everywhere y{{a}} go''
:: ''Time{{s}} harder than they ever been before.''
:: ''If you certain y{{a}} had money, you better be sure,''
:: ''{{a}}Cause these hard times will drive y{{a}} from do{{a}} to do{{a}}.''</font>

{{tab}}Like {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, the {{w|doyen|Doyen|Doyen}} of the {{w|Delta|Delta_blues|Delta blues}} singers, and the superb {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}}, the {{qq|father}} of the {{w|Mississippi|Mississippi}} Blues, White and James were from Mississippi, and played their guitars in the peculiar regional {{qq|{{w|bottleneck|Slide_guitar|Slide guitar}}}} style. This involved the use of a knife, a steel ring or a smoothed down bottleneck which was usually placed on the thumb or little finger, and used as a {{w|drone|Drone_(music)|Drone (music)}} on the strings of the guitar. It gave their instruments a high-pitched whining sound which they were able to utilise for lyric passages, for simple rhythmic or melodic accompaniment or as a highly dramatic form of punctuation. Any blues looks rather bleak in print, because it is literally only half there. In the case of the {{p|142}}early Delta singers it gives a more than usually hollow effect.

{{tab}}Although Mississippi takes pride of place in any discussion of blues, there were fine singers from other areas. {{w|Jay Bird Coleman|Jaybird_Coleman|Jaybird Coleman}}, a superbly ferocious {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} player came from {{w|Bessemer|Bessemer,_Alabama|Bessemer, Alabama}}, {{w|Alabama|Alabama}}, and was so successful that the local {{w|Ku Klux Klan|Ku_Klux_Klan}} took over his management. {{w|Blind Boy Fuller|Blind_Boy_Fuller}} came from {{w|Carolina|North_Carolina|North Carolina}}, {{w|Oscar Woods|Oscar_%22Buddy%22_Woods}} (The Lone Wolf) from {{w|Louisiana}}, {{w|Peg Leg Howell|Peg_Leg_Howell}} and {{w|Blind Willie McTell|Blind_Willie_McTell}} from {{w|Georgia|Georgia_(U.S._state)}}, {{w|Bill Broonzy|Big_Bill_Broonzy|Big Bill Broonzy}} from {{w|Arkansas}}, and {{w|Furry Lewis|Furry_Lewis}} from {{w|Tennessee|Tennessee}}. Also from Tennessee came the two great {{w|jug bands|Jug_band|Jug band}}—{{w|Gus Cannon|Gus_Cannon}}{{s}} Jug Stompers and the {{w|Memphis Jug Band|Memphis_Jug_Band}}. The other great jug band—the {{l|Birmingham Jug Band|https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Birmingham_Jug_Band|Bhamwiki: Birmingham Jug Band}}—was from Alabama.

{{tab}}The early blues found its way onto record in the early {{a}}twenties, not through the devotion of {{w|ethnomusicologists|Ethnomusicology|Ethnomusicology}} but because record companies realised that it was a commercial proposition. Most of the early recordings were {{qq|field-recorded}} in rural centres like {{w|Memphis|Memphis,_Tennessee|Memphis, Tennessee}}, {{w|Dallas}} and {{w|Atlanta|Atlanta}}, in small halls and bars, wherever space could be found to set up equipment, and the records, by Skip James, {{w|Blind Lemon Jefferson|Blind_Lemon_Jefferson}}, Son House, Charlie Patton, Gus Cannon, {{l|Jed Davenport|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jed-davenport-mn0000238491/biography|Allmusic: Jed Davenport}} and later {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_I|Sonny Boy Williamson I}}, Bill Broonzy, {{w|Tommy McClennan|Tommy_McClennan|Tommy McClennan}}, Blind Boy Fuller and {{w|Cripple Clarence Lofton|Cripple_Clarence_Lofton}}, flooded through the mails and from the small-town stores into thousands of negro homes. The singers soon found themselves {{qq|race-heroes}} and the derisively labelled {{qq|{{w|race-record|Race_record|Race record}}}} market was a booming business. Fortunately men like {{w|Ralph Peer|Ralph_Peer}} of ''{{w|Victor|Victor_Talking_Machine_Company|Victor Talking Machine Company}}'' and {{w|Mayo Williams|J._Mayo_Williams|J. Mayo Williams}} of ''{{w|Paramount|Paramount_Records|Paramount Records}}'' had excellent taste and much of the early field recording was of great interest and superlative quality.

{{tab}}It requires enormous efforts of imagination to understand the conditions in the Deep South during the years in which the blues began. After the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War|American Civil War}}, when negroes had been given their {{qq|freedom}}, the {{w|white south|White_Southerners|White Southerners}}, with embittered ruthlessness, set about the re-enslavement of the negro population by {{qq|legal}} means. The negroes soon found themselves {{w|driven off|Black_land_loss_in_the_United_States|Black land loss in the United States}} their newly-gained land by former owners and the fast developing railroad companies. They were increasingly the victims of {{w|Jim Crow legislation|Jim_Crow_laws|Jim Crow laws}}, designed to keep them in their place regardless of the {{w|Fourteenth Amendment|Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}}. They were forced to work on the railroads; to work the land as {{w|tenant|Tenant_farmer|Tenant farmer}} {{w|share-croppers|Sharecropping#United_States|Sharecropping: United States}}, which meant in effect reversion to slavery; to work on the levees, in the {{w|sawmills|Sawmill|Sawmill}} or {{w|turpentine camps|Knabb_Turpentine|Knabb Turpentine}}, which became symbols of racial subjugation. Wherever they went they were swindled and exploited with sophisticated savagery, designed, consciously or not, to demoralise as well as to enslave. Often they were charged more for food and lodging than they could possibly earn. It is a bitter commentary on the south that when {{w|Alan Lomax|Alan_Lomax}} issued his superb ''{{l|Blues in the Mississippi Night|https://www.discogs.com/Alan-Lomax-Blues-In-The-Mississippi-Night/master/720494|Discogs: Blues in the Mississippi Night}}'' recordings in 1957, he still felt it necessary to hide the real identities of the three singers whose reminiscences were contained on the record. The performers are listed simply as Sib, Natchez and Leroy but they were in fact the harmonica player Sonny Boy Williamson, the guitarist Bill Broonzy and the pianist {{w|Memphis Slim Chatman|Memphis_Slim|Memphis Slim}}. There was always the added risk of natural calamity. {{w|Texas}} is subject to floods and so is Mississippi: when {{p|143}}the {{w|levees burst in 1927|Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927|Great Mississippi Flood of 1927}}, it was the negroes, forced to live very close to the banks, who died in thousands. Segregation affected everything. Even hospitals refused to treat negroes, and although the Bessie Smith death-legend is largely apocryphal, many negroes died through lack of sufficient medical care.

{{tab}}In the search for better work and living conditions, thousands of negroes {{w|trekked north|Great_Migration_(African_American)|Great Migration}}, from the {{a}}twenties up to the present, in the sort of exodus which is a feature of the history of racially tormented minorities. They arrived in the north by road and rail. They had no right on either, but the rail usually gave them a better chance. They could either walk the long straight lines—always risking a fall between them, and with it death, induced by the tiring and hypnotic effect of doing so—or they could {{qq|{{w|jump|Freighthopping|Freighthopping}}}} a train. This was riskier, but quicker. The traveller stands on one of the few slow curves in the track and then, in {{w|Paul Oliver|Paul_Oliver}}{{s}} words:

{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}breaks from cover and dashes towards the track taking advantage of the slowing of the train to make boarding possible, and of the bend to hide his movements. Crooked fingers clutch the {{w|couplings|Railway_coupling|Railway coupling}} and he swings perilously on the swaying truck before getting a firmer grip. He may make for the blinds if he can. These are the baggage cars next to the {{w|tender|Tender_(rail)|Tender (rail)}}, which are {{q|blind}} or, in other words, have no side door. Sitting on the step he is safe and out of reach of the {{w|brakeman{{s}} club|Brakeman's_cabin|Brakeman's cabin}}. {{e}} More dangerous, but out of sight and unapproachable, are the {{w|brake|Railway_brake|Railway brake}} rods that run beneath the freight cars. Risking his life he may try to worm his way across these, or if he is unusually adept he may carry a small board to throw across the rods and then precipitate himself upon it in the narrow gap between them and the underneath of the truck {{e}} in icy winds, in choking poisonous fumes of the railroad tunnels, he may freeze to numbness or succumb to exposure and drop to certain death{{e|r}}}}

{{tab}}There can be few worse condemnations of a society than that it should make this method of travel acceptable. Despite the risks the exodus continued, and women and children, as well as men, risked road and rail to go north:

:: <font size="2">''Oh, stop your train, let a poor boy ride.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, fare you well, never see you no more.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, train I ride, smokestack shine like gold.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}With them they took their blues, into railside {{w|hobo|Hobo|Hobo}} jungles where in hopeless poverty they could scratch a living, comparatively free from white interference, into the fast-developing northern ghettoes, into {{qq|New World}}. The blues proved remarkably resilient to city life at first. There were refinements which have continued up to the present: drums, basses and pianos were added to the more portable, and more {{p|144}}musically flexible instruments favoured by rural musicians, such as harmonicas (known as {{qq|harps}}, violins, guitars and {{w|jugs|Jug_(instrument)|Jug (instrument)}} which, when blown into, acted as bass resonators. However it was not until just before the {{w|last war|World_War_II|World War II}} that the blues altered dramatically and irrevocably, and even today there are traces of Mississippi in the blues of some {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} singers.

{{tab}}From the blues recordings we have a record of negro life, its joy and laughter—blues were primarily to entertain—as well as its bitterness and sorrow. We have stories of broken relationships, of {{w|rent parties|Rent_party|Rent party}}, of work in the fields of the south and the mills and factories of the north. Much of it is fine folk poetry, some of interest because of its subject, at its bext an index of the singer{{s}} feelings as well as a vivid picture of social conditions and the despair of the negro{{s}} brutalised life, a despair usually lightened only by the spiritual release of religion, the erotic release of sex or the physical release of violent pleasure. A much recorded blues begins:

:: <font size="2">''Rock me, mama, rock me all night long'' (repeat)
:: ''I want you to rock me, mama, till by back ain{{t}} got no bone.''</font>

and {{w|Chester Burnett|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin' Wolf}} (Howling Wolf) sings:

:: <font size="2">''Tell ole {{w|Pistol Pete|Frank_Eaton|Frank Eaton}}, everybody gonna meet,''
:: ''Tonight we need no rest, we really gonna throw a mess,''
:: ''We gonna break out all the windows, we gonna kick down all the doors,''
:: ''We gonna fix a {{w|Wang Dang Doodle|Wang_Dang_Doodle}}, all night long, all night long. {{e}}''
:: ''Tell {{w|Fats|Fats_Waller|Fats Waller}} and {{w|Washboard Sam|Washboard_Sam}}, that me {{a}}n{{a}} everybody gonna jam,''
:: ''Tell Shakey, Box Car Joe, we got sawdust on the floor,''
:: ''Tell Jennie Mae, till I die we gonna have a time,''
:: ''Well the fish scent fill the air, there{{s}} love juice everywhere.''
:: ''We gonna fix a Wang Dang Doodle. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Race records catered for various audiences and ranged from the harsh religious songs of {{w|Blind Willie Johnson|Blind_Willie_Johnson}}—once arrested for {{w|incitement|Incitement|Incitement}} outside a {{w|Customs House|Custom_house|Custom house}}, for singing his {{w|Samson|Samson}} song, ''{{w|If I Had My Way I{{d}} Tear This Building Down|Samson_and_Delilah_(song)|Samson and Delilah (song)}}''—to the lilting, leering blues of Blind Boy Fuller, which were often simply strings of sexual metaphores. Johnson and Fuller epitomised two main sources of relief for the negro—religion and sex. There were also songs on the catalogues about everything from {{w|cocaine|Cocaine|Cocaine}} sniffing to {{w|meningitis|Meningitis|Meningitis}}, and there were a large number of blues about {{w|prison|Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system|Race in the United States criminal justice system}}, suffered usually as a result of minor offences but frequently enough for more vicious crimes, and quite often for murder.

{{tab}}Prison was a daily feature in the lives of many families. It is some indication of the viciousness of the prisons and {{w|prison farms|Prison_farm|Prison farm}} that, as recently as 1951, fourteen prisoners in the {{w|Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola|Louisiana_State_Penitentiary}} {{popup|hamstrung themselves|A group of prisoners, known in the media as the Heel String Gang, cut their Achilles' tendons.}} rather than submit to beating with the {{qq|bat}}, a particularly crude, {{popup|fourteen pound|6.35 kg}} leather strap which, according to Paul Oliver, {{qq|can break a brick at a single blow}}. Yet prison farms, like Angola, were preferable to the overcrowded, unhealthy, closed prisons. The prison system is, even by conservative judgements, totally inadequate and archaic and even where there have been Federal {{p|145}}{{w|Commissions|Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government|Independent agencies of the United States government}} the south has ignored them and their recommendations. Despite the horror, many negroes have testified that life in prison was less frightening than life outside: at least in prison the next meal was assured, the tyranny rarely varied and there was ''less'' chance of the casual cruelty which typified the lives of so many racial underdogs. The great folk singer {{w|Leadbelly|Lead_Belly|Lead Belly}} sang his way out of prison, but not all singers were so lucky—{{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}} did a term at {{w|Parchman Prison Farm|Mississippi_State_Penitentiary|Mississippi State Penitentiary}}, Mississippi, and so did Bukka White, who sang a fine blues about it. {{l|Hogman Maxey|https://www.discogs.com/artist/401200-Hogman-Maxey|Discogs: Hogman Maxey}} and {{w|Robert Pete Williams|Robert_Pete_Williams}} did time at Angola. More recently the great Chicago guitarist, {{w|Auburn {{qq|Pat}} Hare|Pat_Hare|Pat Hare}} got a ninety-nine year sentence for shooting his mistress{{s}} husband and a policeman who tried to arrest him.

{{tab}}Murder occurs frequently in blues, both as a threat and as an occurrence, an indication of the everyday violence of American negro life. Sonny Boy Williamson sang:

:: <font size="2">''I got the meanest woman, the meanest woman you most ever seen,''
:: ''She sleep with an {{w|ice pick|Ice_pick|Ice pick}} in her hand, man, fights all in her dreams,''
:: ''I{{d}} soomer be sleepin{{a}} with the devil, I{{d}} sooner be sleepin{{a}} with the devil {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Williamson died in 1948 on his way to hospital—his {{w|cranium|Skull|Skull}} split by an ice-pick—the victim of the casual violence of his own people, killed either by a jealous husband or young thugs after his money.

{{tab}}The blues quoted above is also indicative of the disintegrative effect the negro{{s}} position in society had on the stability of family life. Many singers have recorded blues about leaving women, or women leaving them; many have sung about their mothers, few about their fathers. The reason is not hard to find—in thousands of cases the mother was left to bring up children on her own, the father having left in frustration or in search of work. Not surprisingly jealousy also looms large:

:: <font size="2">''Lord, my hair is a-risin{{a}}, my flesh begin to crawl'' (repeat)
:: ''Had a dream last night, babe, {{a}}nother mule in my doggone stall''</font>

{{tab}}And so does seduction:

:: <font size="2">''I am a back door man'' (repeat)
:: ''Well the men don{{t}} know but the little girls understand''
:: ''When everybody tryin{{a}} to sleep, I{{m}} somewhere makin{{a}} my midnight creep.''
:: ''I{{m}} the mornin{{a}} when the rooster crow, somethin{{a}} tell me I gotta go. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}As an aid to sexual ability and attraction, charms were used—{{w|mojo|Mojo_(African-American_culture)|Mojo}} teeth, mojo hands, {{w|black cat bones|Black_cat_bone|Black cat bone}}, {{w|John the Conkeror|John_the_Conqueror|John the Conqueror}} {{w|roots|Ipomoea|Ipomoea}}. {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down Louisiana, baby, behin{{a}} the sun'' (repeat)
:: ''Well, you know, I just found out my troubles just begun''
:: ''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down in {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}—hmmm—get me a mojo hand'' (repeat)
:: ''I wan{{a}} show all you good lookin{{a}} women just how to treat your man.''</font>

{{tab}}Even today magazines, like ''{{popup|Rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} Blues|Rhythm and Blues (1952–1965), first edited by Marvin Shnayer}}'', read by working class negroes, carry advertisements for these strange fertility symbols and charms—produced in {{w|Louisiana voodoo|Louisiana_Voodoo|Louisiana Voodoo}} circles—along with patent devices for straightening hair, strange medicines and other necessities of {{p|146}}ghetto life.

{{tab}}For the most part however there was little relief and little assistance. The great {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}, another Delta singer, obviously haunted by the phantoms of a divided society and using imagery of considerable richness, sang:

:: <font size="2">''I gotta keep movin{{a}}, I gotta keep movin{{a}}''
:: ''Blues fallin{{a}} down like hail, blues fallin{{a}} down like hail'' (repeat)
:: ''I can{{t}} keep no money, {{w|hellhound on my trail|Hellhound_on_My_Trail|Hellhound on My Trail}},''
:: ''Hellhound on my trail, hellhound on my trail''</font>

and again:

:: <font size="2">''You may bury my body down by the highway side''
:: (Spoken: ''Babe, don{{t}} care where you bury my body when I{{m}} dead and gone'')
:: ''You can bury my old body down by the highway side''
:: ''Lord, my ole evil spirit can catch a {{w|greyhound bus|Greyhound_Lines|Greyhound Lines}} and ride.''</font>

{{tab}}Johnson{{s}} blues remain the most personal and frightening of negro folk music, with their sense of transient ecstasy and sorrow, heightened by an abiding torment and despair. In his work the blues lays its most serious claim to be considered an art form, and of all the great singers he is the most likely to chill and electrify the listener, to make the agony of his life real, and to communicate, from his intense, tortured private emotions, the situation and condition of his people. Johnson is frightening because he is a victim without realisation of the complete meaning of his victimisation. His songs are, in the social sense, inarticulate, and this gives them their peculiar eloquence. It was not only social conditions which affected Johnson: he was obviously chained by his own shyness and frustration. He is thought to have been poisoned by his {{w|common law|Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States|Common-law marriage in the United States}} wife or to have died from {{w|alcohol poisoning|Alcohol_intoxication|Alcohol intoxication}}; whichever way, he died young in 1938. Howling Wolf, who knew him vaguely, says he was about 25 at the time; Muddy Waters thinks he was about 30; he is generally thought to have been {{popup|about 19|He was 27.}}. Johnson must have had more money than most negroes of his age and he seems to have had some trouble with women:

:: <font size="2">''Got up this mornin{{a}} to fin{{a}} it was gone'' (repeat)
:: ''Got up this mornin{{a}}, all I had was gone''
:: ''Well, leavin{{a}} this mornin{{a}} if I have to, gon{{a}} ride the blinds''</font>

{{tab}}And in another of his blues he sang:

:: <font size="2">''Gonna stay roun{{a}} {{w|Jonesboro|Jonesboro}}, until my teeth {{w|crowned with gold|Gold_teeth|Gold teeth}}'' (repeat)
:: ''She got a {{w|mortgage|Mortgage|Mortgage}} on my body, got a {{w|lien|Lien|Lien}} on my soul.''</font>

{{tab}}In Johnson—the inheritor of a tradition which stretched from the itinerant timbermill worker Charlie Patton, a beautiful, heavy voiced singer, reputedly half-{{w|Puerto Rican|Puerto_Ricans|Puerto Ricans}}, who first recorded ''{{w|I Shall Not Be Moved|I_Shall_Not_Be_Moved}},'' Son House, Bukka White and Skip James, whose oddly {{w|oriental-sounding|Music_of_Asia|Music of Asia}} blues were amongst the strangest and most haunting noises to come from the Delta—the blues reached its peak. Despite a handful of superb singers since, it has never again reached such an emphatic state of artistic unity.

{{p|147}}{{tab}}Undoubtedly the finest of the early singers from outside Mississippi was a dirty, ugly, dissolute Texan—Blind Lemon Jefferson. Blind men have often made good blues singers—they are doubly oppressed, a minority within a minority. Jefferson was a harsh singer with enormous powers of expression and his guitar playing was amongst the best to be recorded. He is now best remembered for his moving ''{{w|See That My Grave is Kept Clean|See_That_My_Grave_Is_Kept_Clean|See That My Grave Is Kept Clean}}'':

:: <font size="2">''Well, there{{s}} one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''One kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''Oh Lord, one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you''
:: ''Please see that my grave is kept clean.''
:: ''It{{s}} a long lane got no end'' (three times)
:: ''An{{a}} it{{s}} a bad way that don{{a}} never change''
:: ''Lord, it{{s}} two white horses in a line'' (three times)
:: ''Gon{{a}} take me to my buryin{{a}} groun{{a}}''
:: ''Dig my grave with a silver spade'' (three times)
:: ''You may let me down with a golden chain''
:: ''Have you ever heard a coffin soun{{a}}?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} in the groun{{a}}''
:: ''Have you ever heard a church bell toll?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} dead an{{a}} gone.''</font>

{{tab}}Jefferson began recording in 1924 and was dead by 1930, frozen to death on a Chicago sidewalk during a snowstorm. His records sold well but they did not stop his life being as sad as any of his people{{s}}. Today, in a cemetary at {{w|Wortham|Wortham,_Texas|Wortham, Texas}}, Lemon{{s}} grave is almost lost under the grass and weeds.

{{tab}}The blues changed subtly over the years and as the {{w|radio networks|Broadcast_network|Broadcast network}} extended their influence, the various regional styles began to mingle. By the mid-{{a}}thirties it was increasingly difficult to recognise regional characteristics in blues vocals—the demonic intensity of Mississippi, the harsh but more introverted {{w|blues of Texas|Texas_blues|Texas blues}}, the jollier {{w|blues of Carolina|Piedmont_blues|Piedmont blues}}—though some were unmistakable. {{w|Leroy Carr|Leroy_Carr}}, who seemed to fuse various regional styles in his singing, had en enormous effect on the future of the blues, during his career in the late {{a}}twenties and early {{a}}thirties. Carr was more sophisticated than the rural singers and his singing, over the sensitive accompaniment of his piano and {{w|Scrapper Blackwell|Scrapper_Blackwell}}{{s}} guitar, emphasised melody rather more than emotion. His better recordings are marked by musical intelligence and an appealingly wistful quality and his ''{{w|How Long Blues|How_Long,_How_Long_Blues|How Long, How Long Blues}}'' is one of the few enduring, and widely recognised blues classics. Carr was easily imitated—even today there are Carr imitators like {{w|Bumble Bee Slim|Bumble_Bee_Slim}}—and the {{qq|style}} he invented was the dominating current in blues until the {{popup|war|The United States entered World War II on 11 December 1941}}. Carr was excellent but the blues trend he started was somewhat disastrous. The new blues were lighter, more swinging, but often depressingly insensitive. They were recorded, by this time, mainly in the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} Cities, for a city audience which demanded slickness and polish. With the more rigid discipline imposed by pianos, basses and drums, which greatly restricted the flexibility and individuality of singers, it was perhaps inevitable that, by 1940, the urban background, which was, broadly {{p|148}}speaking, {{qq|introduced}} by Carr, shoud have drastically affected the sound and content of blues. There were good records by the likeable Bill Broonzy, the irrepressible {{w|Memphis Minnie|Memphis_Minnie}}, the harshly intense Tommy McClennan, Sonny Boy Williamson, {{w|Arthur {{qq|Big Boy}} Crudup|Arthur_Crudup|Arthur Crudup}} and the great, rolling pianist {{w|Big Maceo Merriweather|Big_Maceo_Merriweather|Big Maceo Merriweather}}. There were a few {{qq|social blues}} like John Este{{s|r}} ''{{l|Working Man Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/817873-Sleepy-John-Estes-1929-1940|Discogs: Sleepy John Estes – 1929-1940}},'' which contained an invocation to the whites to break up trucks and tractors and work more mules and men, thus ensuring employment, and a few recordings in an older, country style, but the {{a}}forties was a lean period for blues which said anything.

{{tab}}During the war the negroes found themselves fighting for freedom against {{w|racialism|Racism|Racism}} and tyranny; the paradox didn{{t}} fail to strike any number of them and many have retained a lasting cynicism as a result. They either joined up cynically:

:: <font size="2">''I{{ve}} got my questionary and they need me in the war'' (repeat)
:: ''Now I feel like murder, won{{t}} have to break the county law''
:: ''All I want{{s}} a {{w|thirty-two-twenty|.32-20_Winchester|.32-20 Winchester}}, made on a'' {{w|.45|11_mm_caliber|11 mm caliber}} {{w|frame|Receiver_(firearms)|Receiver (firearms)}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Yes, and a red, white and blue {{w|flag|Flag_of_the_United_States|Flag of the United States}}, wavin{{a}} in my right hand.''</font>

{{tab}}Or pathetically eagerly:

:: <font size="2">''I want a {{w|machine gun|Machine_gun|Machine gun}}, wan{{a}} be hid way out in the wood'' (repeat)
:: ''I want to show ol{{a}} man {{w|Hitler|Adolf_Hitler|Adolf Hitler}} Sonny Boy don{{a}} mean him no good.''
:: ''I want to drop a bomb, and set the {{w|Japanese|Japan_during_World_War_II|Japan during World War II}} city {{w|on fire|Air_raids_on_Japan#Firebombing_attacks|Air raids on Japan: Firebombing attacks}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Now because they are so rotten, just love to see them die''</font>

{{tab}}The reality was different. {{w|Uncle Sam|Uncle_Sam}} wouldn{{t}} have dreamed of letting negroes operate a precious {{qq|{{w|thunderbolt|Republic_P-47_Thunderbolt|Republic P-47 Thunderbolt}}}}, though he was happy enough for them to fight—and die. The bitterness of the negro community was clearer after the Second World War than it had been after the first, but the lessons have been learnt incompletely or not at all, and there are still blues like {{w|Jimmy Rogers|Jimmy_Rogers}}{{s}} ''{{w|World is in a Tangle|Jimmy_Rogers_(album)|Jimmy Rogers (album)}}'' or {{w|Lightnin Slim|Lightnin'_Slim|Lightnin' Slim}}{{s}} (Otis Hicks) ''{{l|GI Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/614095-Lightnin-Slim-Rooster-Blues-G-I-Slim|Discogs: Lightnin' Slim – Rooster Blues / "G I" Slim}}'' which express, in terms nearly as militant as the blues quoted above, the desire to fight the {{w|Russians|Soviet_Union|Soviet Union}}. In this the singers reflect the tone of white society in a way that more isolated singers would have found impossible, even if they had felt it desirable. The institutions of state violence can now speak directly to the negro whereas there was little to convince older singers, like the previously quoted Jaydee Short, that they had anything to gain from the white{{s|r}} wars and their natural feelings certainly told them otherwise.

{{p|s2|n}}'''THE POST WAR BLUES'''

{{tab}}The decline of blues in the {{a}}forties was an indication not so much of integration ''into,'' as of imitation ''of'' white society: this coupled with the record companie{{s|r}} lack of discrimination and the ''comparative'' ease of ghetto life. But if the early {{a}}forties were lean years, the late {{a}}forties and early {{a}}fifties saw an increase in both the quantity and quality of {{p|149}}blues recording. ''{{w|Victor|RCA_Records|RCA Records}}, {{w|Decca|Decca_Records|Decca Records}}'' and ''{{w|Bluebird|Bluebird_Records|Bluebird Records}},'' before and during the war, had the money and organisation to ensure large scale distribution for their records but the post-war companies were much smaller, with fewer resources. It took a big hit to give them a reputation, and with it distribution, and in the search for success many hundreds of new singers were recorded, many of them performers in an older style. {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} recorded some archaic-sounding blues and singers like Muddy Waters, {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_II|Sonny Boy Williamson II}} (the second), Howling Wolf and {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin' Hopkins}}, all of them fresh from the country, were recording relatively simple rural-style blues. There were others, like {{w|John Brim|John_Brim}}, {{w|Harmonica Frank|Harmonica_Frank}}, {{w|Big Boy Spires|Arthur_%22Big_Boy%22_Spires|Arthur "Big Boy" Spires}}, {{w|Houston Boines|Houston_Boines}}, less well known but almost as good. The list of labels then and since seems unbelievable. There were ''{{w|Aristocrat|Aristocrat_Records|Aristocrat Records}}, {{w|Checker|Checker_Records|Checker Records}}, {{w|Chess|Chess_Records|Chess Records}}, {{w|JOB|J.O.B._Records|J.O.B. Records}}'' (Chicago), ''{{w|Gotham|Gotham_Records|Gotham Records}}, {{w|Savoy|Savoy_Records|Savoy Records}}'' (East Coast), ''{{w|Excello|Excello_Records|Excello Records}}, {{w|Gold Star|Gold_Star_Records|Gold Star Records}}, {{w|Sun|Sun_Records|Sun Records}}, {{w|Trumpet|Trumpet_Records|Trumpet Records}}'' (Southern States), ''{{w|Flair|Flair_Records|Flair Records}}, {{w|Modern|Modern_Records|Modern Records}}'' and ''{{w|RPM|RPM_Records_(United_States)|RPM Records}}'' (West Coast) and many, many more. They often disappeared after a few releases of exceptional quality, like the amazing ''{{l|Bloodstains on the Wall|https://www.discogs.com/master/1357429-Honeyboy-Bloodstains-On-The-Wall-My-Time-Aint-Long|Discogs: Honeyboy – Bloodstains on the Wall / My Time Ain't Long}}'' by a singer improbably named {{w|Honey Boy|David_%22Honeyboy%22_Edwards|David "Honeyboy" Edwards}} or Harmonica Frank{{s}} ''{{l|Howling Tom Cat|https://www.discogs.com/release/10057029-Various-The-Sun-Records-Story|Discogs: Various – The Sun Records Story}},'' which might as easily have been recorded in the South during the {{a}}twenties, as in Chicago by Chess during the {{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}From this profusion of new bluesmen there were a handful who became very big names and who still play a rôle close to that of the race-hero; others have sunk to the second rank, often playing as well as their {{qq|betters}}; still others—and they are the majority—have died or live on half-forgotten, their memories sustained only by a few worn {{w|78s|Phonograph_record#78_rpm_disc_developments|Phonograph record: 78 rpm disc developments}} in junk shops or collections. Of the post-war Chicago singers Muddy Waters takes pride of place. He first recorded, for Alan Lomax in the {{w|Delta|Mississippi_Delta|Mississippi Delta}}, in 1941, using his real name of McKinley Morganfield. By the late {{a}}forties he had moved to Chicago and was making an exciting series for ''Aristocrat.'' His guitar playing, in the old bottleneck tradition, retained much of the vigour of earlier Mississippi bluesmen and his voice was rich and thrilling. He was usually accompanied by the finest of all blues bassists, {{w|Big Crawford|Ernest_%22Big%22_Crawford|Ernest "Big" Crawford}}, and the harmonica player {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. Jacobs was, and is, a magnificent musician and in his hands the harmonica became a {{w|horn|Brass_instrument|Brass instrument}}-like instrument, with superb tone, range, flexibility and crispness; he blew long, flowing phrases of classical elegance and feeling, saying as much about the condition of the negro in his playing as most singers say in a lifetime of singing. He and Waters achieved a fine unity, exemplified by such tracks as ''{{l|Louisiana Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/1277043-Muddy-Waters-Louisiana-Blues-Evans-Shuffle|Discogs: Muddy Waters – Louisiana Blues / Evan's Shuffle}},'' where the guitar and harmonica fuse so that they sound almost like a single instrument. Waters continued his series for ''Chess'' when that company took over ''Aristocrat'' but there was a new mood about to hit Chicago and the {{qq|rural}} bluesmen—a mood that had its cause in both social and musical developments.

{{tab}}Migration figures are not an entirely accurate index of population movement since they neither give reasons for migration nor take into account temporary migration. Quite obviously the well-to-do white moves for widely different reasons than those which compel a socially {{p|150}}and economically harrassed negro. It is interesting, however, that the figures show negro population movement to be both more permanent and more frequent during the period 1940-1947 (14.1%). This period of increased migration roughly coincides with the beginning of the post-war {{w|revival|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Further point is added by the fact that in 1900 90% of the negro population lived in the south, and 74% in rural areas, whereas by 1960 only 60% lived in the south and just under 25% in the rural south. Of the 40% elsewhere, under 2% lived in rural areas. The American negro has become increasingly a northern city dweller rather than a southern country dweller and in the years immediately post-war this process speeded up. This would seem to show one major reason for the blue{{s|r}} new lease of life in the early {{a}}fifties and also why since the middle-{{a}}fifties there has been a marked decline in quality. The negro who left the south after the war was usually brought up in an environment where the blues was a part of daily life, fulfilling a function both as entertainment and as a psychological release, and there was a consequent demand from this migrant group for {{qq|down-home}} blues. The migrants moved all over the USA and new recording companies sprang up to meet their demands, often in places where no authentic blues tradition existed. The record companies, previously deeply committed to the urban blues market, centred on Chicago since the late {{a}}thirties, now found themselves with a new audience for country-style blues which many enthusiasts had considered dead. The country-style blues were able to survive this transplantation as long as singers and audiences kept their southern roots, but they began to lose their ''{{popup|raison d{{a}}être|reason for being}}'' as the southern audience grew older and gave way to a younger white pop-influenced negro record buyer who, far from wanting blues, found the constant reminder of southern servility deeply embarrassing.

{{tab}}The musical developments arose to some extent from the social developments. In 1954 a young white singer walked into the ''Sun'' studio in Memphis, Tennessee. ''Sun'' had issued good blues singers like {{w|Joe Hill Louis|Joe_Hill_Louis}}, {{w|Walter Horton|Big_Walter_Horton|Big Walter Horton}} and {{w|Doctor Ross|Doctor_Ross}} but their biggest hit was an old Crudup blues, ''{{w|That{{s}} All Right, Mama|That's_All_Right|That's All Right}},'' recorded after a number of attempts by the young {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. ''Victor'' bought up ''Sun{{s}}'' Presley contract in 1955 and {{w|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} music (a nice white name, invented by the {{w|disc jockey|Disc_jockey|Disc jockey}} {{w|Alan Freed|Alan_Freed}}, for what was basically negro {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}) flooded into a million white homes. For the first time the popular music of the two racial groups was broadly similar. Partly in sub-conscious self-defence and partly in emulation of white youth, the young urban negroes demanded a noisier, more aggressive blues, expressing their increasing confidence. There were singers like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley}} and {{w|Fats Domino|Fats_Domino}} (who sold more records than anyone except Presley during the {{qq|rock era}}), who were selling to both racial groups, but many of the older singers were forced to use screaming, over-amplified electric guitars and {{w|saxes|Saxophone|Saxophone}} to keep up. Some, like Howling Wolf, managed the change without too much difficulty, but most were less lucky. Wolf had a rough, rasping voice which came across the amplification with exciting power—he had made fine {{p|151}}records in the country style in the late {{a}}forties—but in Chicago he had a massive beat and his records for ''Chess'' have a raucous, jangling sense of guts and urgency which suited the new audiences. Muddy Waters, although he has retained to the present his reputation as {{qq|King of Chicago}}, was hit badly.

{{tab}}From the mid-{{a}}fifties his records became worse and worse, with poor accompaniment, trivial and repetitive words, and a badly strained singer: the only relief was afforded by one or two splendid blues shouts, like his ''{{w|Hoochie Coochie Man|Hoochie_Coochie_Man}};''

:: <font size="2">''I got a black cat bone,''
:: ''I got a mojo tooth,''
:: ''I got a John the Conker root,''
:: ''Gonna mess with you.''
:: ''Gonna make all you girls''
:: ''Lead me by the hand,''
:: ''Then the world will know''
:: ''I{{m}} a hoochie coochie man.''</font>

{{tab}}Waters is aware of his deterioration but he now fits the requirements of the new audience—an exciting stage act rather than interesting blues.

{{tab}}The other great post-war bluesman from the Mississippi, John Lee Hooker, began recording in the late {{a}}forties. At his best he has more than a little of the old Delta manner in his rich, sensual voice and dramatically rhythmic and flexible guitar style. He started his career recording imaginative, earthy blues in a most arresting style, accompanied only by his own guitar. His voice was strong and, occasionally, bitter and his guitar had a throbbing vigour and a magnificent drive rarely heard before. With its terse, intense and rhythmic phrasing it acted as a foil for the voice and gave his blues extraordinary tension, strengthened by his sharply stamping feet. The early tracks, particularly the slow, atmospherically sensual ones, take their place amongst the great blues. Hooker{{s}} versatility is a bit discomfiting but he can still be a magnificently haunting singer. Like his contemporary, Lightning Hopkins, Hooker entertains on the predominantly white folk circuit as well as the negro rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues circuit. He gives the white audiences folk-tinged blues and the negro audiences highly rhythmic {{w|boogie|Boogie|Boogie}}-type numbers. He rarely sings in the old style now, but his recent visit to {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} emphasised his position as one of the dozen finest post-war singers, with roots stretching far back into the Delta of his youth.

{{tab}}A number of singers have earned the reputation of being {{qq|{{w|Kennedy|John_F._Kennedy|John F. Kennedy}}-line}} singers. {{w|Bobo Jenkins|Bobo_Jenkins}} castigated those who voted {{w|Republican|Republican_Party_(United_States)|Republican Party}} in {{w|1952|1952_United_States_presidential_election|1952 United States presidential election}} (''{{l|Democrat Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/2137609-Bobo-Jenkins-Democrat-Blues-Bad-Luck-Trouble|Discogs: Bobo Jenkins – Democrat Blues / Bad Luck & Trouble}}''), {{w|Louisiana Red|Louisiana_Red}} sang about tugging {{w|Castro|Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro}}{{s}} beard and removing {{w|missile bases|Cuban_Missile_Crisis|Cuban Missile Crisis}} from {{w|Cuba}} in ''{{l|Red{{s}} Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}'' (though he demanded for himself and his soul-brothers, {{w|Ray Charles|Ray_Charles}}, {{w|Jimmy Reed|Jimmy_Reed}}, {{w|Big Maybelle|Big_Maybelle}} and Lightning Hopkins, a share in running the nation) and about Civil Rights in ''{{l|Ride on Red, Ride on|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}.'' {{w|J. B. Lenoir|J._B._Lenoir|J. B. Lenoir}} savaged {{w|Eisenhower|Dwight_D._Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower}} so mercilessly in one blues that the {{l|record|https://www.discogs.com/master/888269-J-B-Lenoir-Im-In-Korea-Eisenhower-Blues|Discogs: J. B. Lenoir – I'm in Korea / Eisenhower Blues}}, which had a more moderate indictment of the {{w|Korean War|Korean_War}} on the other side, was banned.

{{p|152}}{{tab}}Amongst these few singers with a marked sense of social justice is a tall lean Texan, who wears dark glasses perpetually and learned his blues as a child from his cousin, {{w|Texas Alexander|Alger_%22Texas%22_Alexander|Alger "Texas" Alexander}}, and his {{qq|master}}, Blind Lemon Jefferson. Sam {{qq|Lightning}} Hopkins sings in lines of uneven measure, his singing without normally accepted blues discipline. He plays incessant bass {{w|runs|Glossary_of_music_terminology#run|Run (music)}} and rhythms as he sings and then his guitar rings out sharp and clear in the lyric passages between lines and verses. His style is even more intense than Hooker{{s}}, the voice harsh, comparatively deep and with an almost unbearable sense of loneliness and desolation. Hopkins can be an ingratiating singer, particularly for white audiences, but on his earliest and best records he never bothered and the result is the purest body of country blues to be recorded post-war. Despite many miles of travelling and widely varied audiences, Hopkins is still oddly superstitious, with an abiding distrust of aeroplanes ({{qq|just can{{t}} be natural}}) and an intense hatred of wine—his feelings don{{t}} extend to whiskey! He is fiercely proud of his {{w|Houston}} roots, and is witheringly contemptuous of the Chicago singers—{{qq|They can{{t}} sing {{a}}bout nothin{{a}} but women}}. He has tended to protest where and when he sees injustice, natural or man-made, bothering less about cures.

{{tab}}In ''{{l|War Is Starting All Over Again|https://www.discogs.com/master/1940628-Lightning-Hopkins-And-His-Guitar-Got-Me-A-Louisiana-Woman|Discogs: Lightning Hopkins And His Guitar – Got Me A Louisiana Woman / War Is Starting Again}}'' he sings of his feelings about the Korean War:

:: <font size="2">''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yes, I feel they{{re}} thinking to start war again,''
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know this world is in a tangle now, baby,''
:: ''Yeah, I feel they{{re}} gonna start war again,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gon{{a}} be many mothers and fathers worry,''
:: ''Yes, there{{s}} gonna be as many girls that lose a frien{{a}}.''
:: ''Oooh, I got news this morning, right now they need a million men'' (repeat)
:: ''Woah, y{{a}}know I bin overseas, woman, poor Lightnin don{{a}} want to go there again.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know my girl frien{{s}} got a boy frien{{a}} in the army, the poor body goes to sea.''
:: ''Y{{a}}know I don{{t}} hate it so bad, boys, y{{a}}know there{{s}} a bit of a break for me.''
:: ''Ohhhhh, this world is in a tangle, about to have war again. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}He did a slightly altered version of the sung under the title ''{{l|Blues for Queen Elizabeth|https://www.discogs.com/master/694530-Sam-Lightnin-Hopkins-The-Rooster-Crowed-In-England|Discogs: Sam 'Lightnin' Hopkins – The Rooster Crowed In England}}.'' It must be the most horrific and least sycophantic work of art ever dedicated to a resident of {{w|Buckingham Palace|Buckingham_Palace}}:

:: <font size="2">''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in {{w|France}} they wade in blood knee deep,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know the soldiers in France, they was wadin{{a}} in blood knee deep,''
:: ''An{{a}} at that time whole lots of people wanderin{{a}} roun{{a}} hungry an{{a}} didn{{t}} have a bite to eat.''</font>

{{tab}}In ''{{l|Awful Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/346449-Lightnin-Hopkins-Mojo-Hand|Discogs: Lightnin' Hopkins – Mojo Hand}}'' he amplified his horror of war:

:: <font size="2">''Have y{{a}} ever looked over a mountain, one you ain{{t}} never seen?'' (repeat)
:: ''Have y{{a}} ever lay down in your bed and had one of them lonesome dreams?''
:: ''Sounds like the world was comin{{a}} to an end, somebody had passed and dropped a bomb,''
:: ''Y{{a}}know they tell me, this world is in a tangle now and them things is sure to come''
:: ''But I don{{t}} know, God know I don{{t}}, teach me, teach me, teach me that I{{m}} wrong.''</font>

{{p|153}}{{tab}}His sharp sense of pity for the afflicted comes through in a fine blues about a one-eyed woman:

:: <font size="2">''Yeah, the poor soul look so pitiful, cryin{{a}} out that ol{{a}} one eye. {{e}}''
:: ''{{e}} Yeah, y{{a}}know it{{s}} misery, it{{s}} misery, every time she cry it hurt poor me.''
:: ''She ain{{t}} got one eye to cry from when there{{s}} something in that good eye,''
:: ''It hurt me to know that she can{{t}} see.''</font>

{{tab}}Hopkins is probably the last great bluesman. When he, and the few other singers in this mould, have gone, the blues, the ''real,'' down-home, country blues, will finally be dead and with it will pass a dishonourable episode of American history.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues walking like a man}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:War and militarism]]
[[Category:Wealth and poverty]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/What have they done to the folk?

2021-10-01T20:43:26Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />What have they done to the folk?
| author = Kevin McGrath
| section =
| previous = [[../Blues in the Archway Road|Blues in the Archway Road]]
| next = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|133}}

<font size="5">'''What have they done<br />to the folk?'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Kevin McGrath|KEVIN McGRATH]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|One day you wake up}} and find that your {{w|minority cult|Subculture|Subculture}} has mushroomed. It may be your politics, or your anti{{h}}politics, it may be a place, it may be some activity, a sport, a music. Do you rejoice at the arrival of the {{w|millennium|Millenarianism|Millenarianism}}? No, the chances are you don{{t}}. More likely you feel resentment, perhaps you move on further out, trek into the wilderness and restore your minority cult—until the crowd follows on.<br />

{{tab}}There is an intrinsic selfishness in most enthusiasms—you may preach, spread the good word, but always there is a part of you that takes pleasure in the very condition of cliquishness. Thus, where a cult {{p|134}}suddenly ceases to be a cult and turns into something more like a crusade, there is resentment. It is partly a quite understandable and justifiable pleasure in having things on the human, personal scale. Pleasure in knowing what is going on, who is who—and also in forming part of a movement or group, in which there is only rudimentary development of organisational barriers—of barriers between audience and performer, between those whose tastes tend one way and those whose tastes tend the other.

{{tab}}As things get bigger, the barriers go up—there is an audience to be entertained, and entertainers to do the job. And the barriers get institutionalised; you get internal segregation developing, clashes of doctrine, almost amounting at times to holy war. Where once {{w|ethnik|Music_of_the_United_Kingdom#Folk_music|Music of the United Kingdom: Folk music}}, {{w|folknik|Folk_music|Folk music}}, {{w|popnik|Folk-pop|Folk-pop}} and {{w|r {{a}}n{{a}} b|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}} exponents could all go to the same {{w|club|Folk_club|Folk club}}, and be aware of what they have in common, now the differences come to the fore.

{{tab}}As the next stage of the boom comes along, the public at large starts to take note—{{w|Bob Dylan|Bob_Dylan}} is heard on {{w|Housewive{{s|r}} Choice|Housewives'_Choice}}—gets a profile in ''{{w|Melody Maker|Melody_Maker}}''—The ''{{w|Observer|The_Observer|The Observer}}'' starts trying to pontificate on the subject in its customary switched{{h}}on (though not plugged{{h}}in) manner. Research chemists in the laboratories of {{w|Ready Steady Go|Ready_Steady_Go!|Ready Steady Go!}} synthesize an ersatz Dylan. Folk programmes proliferate on TV ranging from the excruciating {{w|Hob Derry What{{h}}not|Meredydd_Evans||Derry Dando, 1965 BBC One variety series produced by Meredydd Evans
Wikipedia: Meredydd Evans}} (why don{{t}} the {{w|Welsh Nationalists|Welsh_nationalism|Welsh nationalism}} do something about it; like blowing up the studio) to the remarkably good {{w|Folk in Focus|W._Gordon_Smith||1965 BBC Two variety series produced by W. Gordon Smith
Wikipedia: W. Gordon Smith}}. It becomes possible to buy folk{{h}}records (some folk{{h}}records) in ordinary local record shops. If you are not running a club, you find that you cannot get in any more, and you could not afford to anyway.

{{tab}}The easy reaction is to reel away in horror, shouting {{qq|commercialism}}, and pointing to the mass of fake{{h}}singers who are jumping on the bandwagon, and the fake{{h}}folk that is being pushed, ''{{w|Catch the Wind|Catch_the_Wind}}'', or ''{{w|I{{ll}} Never Find Another You|I'll_Never_Find_Another_You}}''. ({{popup|N.B.|nota bene: take special note}} I say fake{{h}}folk, not because the songs are not traditional, but because they are not honest songs.)

{{tab}}And there is, of course, reason in this reaction—the big money is more likely to go, for the most part, to the sweetened, smoothed{{h}}up imitators, who are moving in now, rather than to the singers who have been around so long without the bait of big money. But though this is unfair, the fringe pickings that go to the people who built up the club scene are at any rate bigger than they were.

{{tab}}And actually of course, the present boom is very largely not a native thing at all, but an American import. It{{s}} the clubs, and the native scene, oddly enough, that are in a sense parasitic, profiting from the interest that spreads over from the imports. Similarly with television. That is the way it{{s}} been for a long time, in a less extreme form. I{{d}} hazard a guess that nine out of ten folk enthusiasts, even the most austere ethniks, had their taste for folk aroused in the first place by American songs (or by songs in American style—e.g. most {{w|CND|Campaign_for_Nuclear_Disarmament|Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament}} songs). And that includes many of those who hail from a still comparatively living {{p|135}}folk tradition. Many is the {{w|Scot|Scottish_people|Scottish people}} or the {{w|Irishman|Irish_people|Irish people}} who hardly thought of singing a {{w|Scots|Scots_language|Scots language}} or {{w|Irish|Irish_language|Irish language}} song until he came to {{w|England}} or {{w|America|United_States|United States}} and had his taste aroused by American material. And the folk scene as it has existed for the last few years was predominantly composed of ex{{h}}{{w|skifflers|Skiffle|Skiffle}}.

{{tab}}The danger with an enthusiasm is that it can blind you to waht lies outside its limits. You build walls round your garden, and the walls become the garden, and it is only a flower if ti grows within the walls. So a purist might listen to Bob Dylan, say {{qq|It{{s}} not Folk}}, and ignore the truth that perhaps it{{s}} better than much that is folk. Or he might listen to a folk{{h}}influenced {{w|pop|Pop_music|Pop music}}{{h}}record, and denounce it as a corruption, dismissing the truth that it may have its own special and distinct merits. Or he may cry {{qq|entertainer}} at, for example, {{w|Alex Campbell|Alex_Campbell_(singer)}}, as if this were an insult (and as if he were making a fortune out of it instead of a pittance).

{{tab}}The funny thing is that of all types of cultural activity, folk{{h}}music is perhaps the one least suited to this kind of cultism. An acceptable capsule definition might be {{qq|The popular music of another time and/<wbr>or place, together with songs, etc., written in imitation or under the influence of this}}. Even this is too narrow a definition if it is to include a number of songs rightly accepted in any club. But the point is the emphasis on other times and places is only relevant where your own contemporary tradition is dead. And this need not be so.

{{tab}}There are two distinct elements running like separate threads through the {{w|folk revival|British_folk_revival|British folk revival}}, since its earliest days (which I suppose one could say were some time in the 18th century—{{w|Bishop Percy|Thomas_Percy_(bishop_of_Dromore)|Thomas Percy}}, {{w|Robert Burns|Robert_Burns}}, etc.—revival is not perhaps the best word, but it is current). There is an {{w|antiquarian|Antiquarian|Antiquarian}} element, and a refugee element. Or, less elliptically, you may be interested primarily in preserving something that is in danger of being lost, or you may be a fugitive from some aspect of mainstream culture, finding in folk{{h}}song, or music, something that you are unable to find in the culture that you flee. And the culture you are fleeing may be high, low, pop, or the lot. And what you are after is a culture with a greater degree of relevance—and freedom; one which is not in itself clique{{h}}directed, but rather, at least in its origins, directed towards the community as a whole, not just the intellectuals or the fans; songs which are not restricted in subject, language or form in the way that pop songs are, and which are relevant, as mainstream poetry so rarely is.

{{tab}}The antiquarian aspect is of course important, but it is secondary. The reason it is important to preserve something is because what is preserved is in itself important, and in some way irreplaceable. And so far as the refugee aspect is concerned, what is most important about excursions into the culture of other times or places is what you bring back, and what you do with it. Otherwise it{{s}} just escapism, and essentially sterile. It{{s}} possible to take folk{{h}}song in this way, and much good may it do you; sing {{w|sea shanties|Sea_shanty|Sea shanty}} in order to feel tough and identify {{p|136}}with the men who made them, sing rebel songs and save yourself the trouble of rebelling, sing love songs and save yourself the effort of loving. Whereas the ''purpose'' of a shanty is to help you keep on working, a rebel song is to get you rebelling, and a love song is typically to get her (or him) feeling sorry for you, or help you feel better if that{{s}} no good. And the relevance of traditional songs to us is closely tied up with their original function. By which I am not trying to say that entertainment as such is out, which would obviously be absurd. But if you think primarily in terms of entertainment as a goal in itself (instead of an indication that the goal has been reached), then you{{re}} going to miss an awful lot.

{{tab}}So the most important thing about the folk-revival, at least so far as I am concerned, is what is produced in the way of new songs, new kinds of songs. For once you have access to the storehouse of images, themes techniques, etc., used in folk traditions (note the plural), you have a vastly increased potential for saying important things, expressing yourself in terms that enable real communication, such as become virtually impossible in mainstream culture, poetry or pop song. And it becomes possible to at least hope for a kind of culture that will sidestep arbitrary barriers of this kind (pop, intellectual, etc.) and replace them with a graduated spectrum with the merging divisions based on functional criteria—so that you would have songs for dancing, songs for explaining, songs for preaching, songs for exalting. In fact this kind of distinction one can (but need not) make within folk music in the wild.

{{tab}}However, it seems overwhelmingly probable that the current boom is likely to be relatively short lived, on the pop side, if only because pop music is essentially for dancing, and words are ultimately of secondary importance. But the collapse of the boom is not important, for the kind of change I{{m}} talking about is essentially a long-term one, and each turn of the wheel advances it. Skiffle died and left behind it the basis of a folk underground, and also the seeds of the beat groups and r {{a}}n{{a}} b. The present thing will leave a similar residue but at a higher level, and one which approaches more closely the kind of unified culture of which I am writing.

{{tab}}Already you have individuals who have made the bridge, though it is still fairly tenuous. In {{w|America|United_States|United States}} you have {{w|Bob Dylan|Bob_Dylan}} as a kind of cross between {{w|Yevtushenko|Yevgeny_Yevtushenko|Yevgeny Yevtushenko}} and {{w|Woody Guthrie|Woody_Guthrie}}, and {{w|Pete Seeger|Pete_Seeger}} as a one man personification of the {{w|folk revival, US style|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Here, the cult of personality is less obvious. There is of course {{w|Ewan MacColl|Ewan_MacColl}}, but though he may be the High Priest of British Folk, he is a bit short in the ecumenical spirit. He is so firmly rooted in history that he sometimes seems to be approaching the 20th century as an immigrant—as a kind of ethnic {{w|Dr. Who|The_Doctor_(Doctor_Who)|The Doctor (Doctor Who)}}. This is of course a gross over-simplification, I hasten to add, to save you the trouble of scrawling this in the margin. Whatever does develop in the way of neo-folk will owe a fantastic debt to MacColl, to his singing, his song writing, and particularly to his work in the {{w|radio-ballads|Radio_ballad|Radio ballad}}. It is largely due to him, directly or indirectly, that {{p|137}}traditional songs have escaped from the custody of the collections, and the {{w|English Folk Dance and Song Society|English_Folk_Dance_and_Song_Society}} (not that I{{m}} knocking the EFDSS which, with the help of {{w|Peter Kennedy|Peter_Kennedy_(folklorist)}}, among others, has undergone an internal revolution in the last few years). And it is again largely MacColl{{s}} direct and indirect influence that has saved the next generation of singers and song writers from being pale reflections of the Americans. There can scarcely be a singer in the country (within the relevant context) whose whole way of singing and attitude to material has not been deeply influenced by MacColl, and the influence stretches further—even a style that is on the face of it totally different, Bob Dylan{{s}} frequently shows traces of MacColl (e.g. ''{{w|North Country Blues|North_Country_Blues}}''). But for all that, listen to a song by Ewan MacColl such as ''The Gallant Colliers'' (on his {{w|LP|LP_record|LP record}} ''{{l|The Best of Ewan MacColl|https://www.discogs.com/Ewan-MacColl-The-Best-Of-Ewan-MacColl/release/4771909|Discogs: The Best of Ewan MacColl}}'') and I think you will see what I mean.

{{tab}}Closely related to MacColl in their approach, are singers like {{w|Lou Killen|Lou_Killen}}, {{w|Bob Davenport|Bob_Davenport_(singer)}}, {{l|Enoch Kent|https://www.discogs.com/artist/1547921-Enoch-Kent|Discogs: Enoch Kent}}, {{w|Matt McGinn|Matt_McGinn}} and {{w|Johnny Handle|The_High_Level_Ranters|The High Level Ranters}}. The last three, with Ewan MacColl himself, are perhaps the most important essentially traditional song writers of the present day. But though they have produced and are producing fine songs, I cannot help feeling that to follow directly in their paths is to run the risk of going up a {{w|cul-de-sac|Dead_end_(street)|Dead end}}.

{{tab}}Further away from MacColl are a large number of song writers. These range from those who are still in many ways very close to MacColl (such as perhaps {{w|Ian Campbell|Ian_Campbell_(folk_musician)}}) to a lone wolf like {{l|Leslie Haworth|https://www.discogs.com/artist/2666731-Leslie-Haworth|Discogs: Leslie Haworth}}. What these writers do tend to have in common is songs with a greater degree of accessibility. (Incidentally I only use the word {{qq|writers}} for lack of a convenient alternative. In this context it can be misleading, since it carries the implication that a song is made up on paper, whereas in many cases, and these perhaps the most important, the actual writing down of a song only comes at a late stage. Indeed there are many contemporary songs, even quite widely sung ones, that have probably never been written down—and I don{{t}} just mean the ones that would scorch the paper. Leslie Haworth is the obvious example.) By {{qq|a greater degree of accessibility}} I don{{t}} necessarily mean that the songs are simple. But even where they are difficult, they are related to the world outside. You do not need to undergo an apprenticeship in folk-song before you can see there is something in them that concerns you. They are not wearing fancy dress.

{{tab}}I picked out three essentially traditional song writers. To set against them, a suitable trio of the more accessible variety might be {{w|Fred Dallas|Karl_Dallas|Karl Dallas}}, {{w|Cyril Tawney|Cyril_Tawney}} and {{w|Sydney Carter|Sydney_Carter|Sydney Carter}}. All three are definitely rooted in the British tradition, but in addition they have obviously incorporated elements of other traditions as well and, paradoxically, the finished result, at least in my opinion, has a greater oneness in consequence. If you live in a diversified cultural milieu, then it is only when you allow the multitude of influences that are working upon you to mingle and breed and come out in your songs, that these songs can {{p|138}}truly express you as you are. It is no good trying to impose a kind of cultural {{w|apartheid|Apartheid|Apartheid}} on your mind.

{{tab}}So, in the writers I selected, you may have clear American influences, the trace of the {{w|chansonniers|Chansonnier_(singer)|Chansonnier (singer)}}, or the flavour of {{w|Brecht|Bertolt_Brecht|Bertolt Brecht}}. Cyril Tawney comes out with ''The Grey Flannel Line'' with its borrowings from {{w|Dink{{s}} Song|Dink's_Song|Dink's Song}}, Sydney Carter writes ''Port Mahon'' with a Greek tune and echoes of ''{{l|Venezuela|https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/burlives/venezuela.html|link: AZLyrics}}.''

{{tab}}This borrowing of what is needed, without worrying about its former context, is carried to a beneficial extreme by Bob Dylan, e.g. ''{{w|Hard Rains|A_Hard_Rain's_a-Gonna_Fall|A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall}}'' (''{{w|Lord Randall|Lord_Randall}}'' {{popup|inter alia|among others}}), ''{{w|Restless Farewell|Restless_Farewell}}'' (''{{w|The Parting Glass|The_Parting_Glass}}''), ''{{w|Bob Dylan{{s}} Dream|Bob_Dylan's_Dream|Bob Dylan's Dream}}'' (''{{w|Lord Franklin|Lady_Franklin's_Lament|Lady Franklin's Lament}}''), ''{{w|With God on Our Side|With_God_on_Our_Side_(song)}}'' (''{{w|The Patriot Game|The_Patriot_Game}}''). Not that there is anything in the least new or unusual in reworking old songs to fit new circumstances—but what is special, as with the Cyril Tawney example I quoted, is that the new contexts are, conventionally speaking, so utterly removed from the old. In some ways it resembles the cultural {{w|miscegenation|Miscegenation|Miscegenation}} that gave rise to {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}}—or for that matter, to the {{w|Renaissance|Renaissance}}.

{{tab}}Take away the barriers and you can get anything. And this is what the whole folk revival can do—except where it erects new barriers of its own.

{{tab}}This kind of borrowing and reworking can, and probably typically does, take place unconsciously—as indeed it does in a traditional folk culture in the wild. To give a personal example, on the 1963 {{w|Aldermaston|Aldermaston_Marches|Aldermaston Marches}}, while walking from {{w|Reading|Reading,_Berkshire}} {{w|RSG|Regional_seat_of_government|Regional seat of government}} {{w|shelter|Region_6_War_Room|Region 6 War Room}}, I made up a song. The tune sounded familiar, but I couldn{{t}} place it. The same for the words. Both of which presumably helped it catch on for the limited period of its topicality. It was not, so far as I recall, till the last day of the march that I read in the evening papers about marchers {{qq|singing their new marching song to the tune of ''{{l|I love a lassie|https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/realmckenzies/lassieroamininthegloamin.html|link: AZLyrics}}}}'', and remembered. Though I was more aware of it as ''I love a sausage.'' From which my subconscious folk-process had made ''I{{ve}} got a secret.''

{{tab}}You are likely to get the most audacious and successful transformations in contexts where there is a heightened emotion of some kind involved. It may be the kind of helpless rage that is aroused by the casual brutality of governments, by {{w|napalm|Napalm|Napalm}} {{w|raids|Close_air_support|Close air support}} on villages, by {{w|lynchings|Lynching|Lynching}}, by apathy, by the universal acceptance of the intolerable. It may be indignation at some comparatively minor injustice, or exultation at some token victory of justice. Or it may be more personal—perhaps you{{re}} in love. Whatever the reason, you are more interested in what you want to say than in how you say it. You are not after applause from an audience; rather you want to help them, her, or yourself, to feel in a particular way, or to understand a particular emotion.

{{tab}}So where does entertainment fit in? Is it just a coating of sugar on a bitter medicine—a ploy to entice the poor suckers in and then preach at them? Evidently, since I phrased the question in that way, I{{m}} going to answer {{qq|No}}. And to justify my answer I fall back on two {{p|139}}{{w|aphorisms|Aphorism|Aphorism}} which I won{{t}} elaborate at the moment:

: (a) The purpose of art is to help you appreciate life (and hence also to assist and encourage you in making life worth appreciating).
: (b) Entertainment is what you have when art is successful (the degree of success of course varies).

{{tab}}This, the range of art and entertainment, is as wide as you can go. And there is no conflict between different parts of it. A song may have no purpose beyond arousing laughter, or it may aim at arousing laughter for some purpose, or it may aim at doing a thousand different things to the listener. And it is all entertainment and itt is all art.

{{tab}}A good club session will in fact have songs from widely separate parts of the range. If it{{s}} all jolly chorus stuff, or all doom and soul, or all protest, it will lose much of its value and impact. It is liable to become entertainment in the narrow escapist sense, catering to people who know what they want, giving thenm a prepackaged commodity. You lose the sense that anything might happen, as it becomes nothing more than a pleasant way to spend the evening. Flexibility is gradually superseded by rigidity.

{{tab}}Undoubtedly this tendency is encouraged and emphasised in any folk boom. Singers also lose flexibility, and concentrate on supplying what is expected—{{w|Joan Baez|Joan_Baez}} tends to sing all kinds of songs in the same voice, and the same mood. For that matter, Ewan MacColl does exactly the same thing. You have, in fact, that tendency to self-fixation, even {{w|self-parody|Self-parody|Self-parody}}, that seems to be inextricably linked with success, whether it is on the scale of Bob Dylan and Pete Seeger, or of hundreds of amateurs in clubs everywhere who get themselves trapped within an image. And it is of course a universal human trait—call it ''{{popup|mauvaise foi|bad faith}}'' if you prefer pigeon holes.

{{tab}}But the very presence of a strong traditional foundation in folk-song, works against this trait. There is a certain analogy with a {{w|masked ball|Masquerade_ball|Masquerade ball}}, where by assuming a formal mask, you shed the one that you wear the rest of the time. The very element of tradition to which anyone who gets involved in folk-song to any real extent is going to get exposed, can nourish a kind of individualism which can then go on to grow, to integrate, to propagate—and to remove the mask.

{{tab}}So personally, I am optimistic. One may squirm to hear the {{w|Searchers|The_Searchers_(band)|The Searchers}} assassinating ''{{w|What Have They Done to the Rain|What_Have_They_Done_to_the_Rain}},'' and tremble for the future of those who get caught up in the glare of publicity (for all one knows, {{w|Donovan}} might have great potential—and we{{ll}} probably never find out now). But it{{s}} something when you can have ''{{w|Masters of War|Masters_of_War}}'' blasting out of a million transistors tuned to a {{w|pirate station|Pirate_radio_in_the_United_Kingdom|Pirate radio in the United Kingdom}}.

{{tab}}And when the present thing dies down, the ferment will still be working, and the new tradition growing and changing.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:What have they done to the folk}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-01T07:33:49Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />Blues walking like a man
| author = Charles Radcliffe
| section =
| previous = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| next = [[../"i gotta million friends"|{{qq|i gotta million friends}}]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|140}}

<font size="5">'''Blues walking<br />like a man'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Charles Radcliffe|CHARLES RADCLIFFE]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|It is impossible to say with any certainty}} when the {{w|blues|Blues|Blues}} became a complete musical form, recognisably different from its antecedents—the songs of the farms and {{w|levee|Levee|Levee}} camps, the {{w|work songs|Work_song|Work song}}, axe songs, {{l|arwhoolies|https://www.loc.gov/collections/songs-of-america/articles-and-essays/musical-styles/traditional-and-ethnic/traditional-work-songs/|link: Library of Congress article}}, {{w|hollers|Field_holler|Field holler}} and {{w|rags|Ragtime|Ragtime}}. It is equally difficult to ascertain in which of the {{w|southern states|Southern_United_States|Southern United States}} of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}} it originated. Many of the early singers were migratory labourers or {{w|blind men|Blind_musicians|Blind musicians}} who travelled widely to beg and earn money by singing, so it seems probable that it was a concurrent development over large areas of the {{w|Deep South|Deep_South}}. What is quite certain is that the blues was not a creation of any one man ({{w|W. C. Handy|W._C._Handy}}{{s}} self-inflating claim to be Father of the Blues has always seemed more than a little ludicrous to blues enthusiasts). Neither was it a product of city life. {{w|Bessie Smith|Bessie_Smith}}, for example, is frequently held to be the finest blues singer ever to record but she recorded {{w|''Classic'' city jazz-blues|Classic_female_blues|Classic female blues}}, which were a descendant, rather than a close relation, of the {{w|rural blues|Country_blues|Country blues}}, although they found their way onto record earlier. Her style is most often praised by {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}} critics, which correctly indicates her position as the creator of jazz-blues, rather than a blues singer ''per se.''<br />

{{tab}}Although the precise geographical, historical and musical origins of the blues are uncertain, the social conditions which produced it are well-recorded, not least of all in the blues itself. In the {{w|white supremacist|White_Supremacy#United_States|White Supremacy: United States}} society of the south the {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americans}} was in a situation of terrifying paradox: {{p|141}}isolated by race and colour, yet forced to conform to the ''mores'' of a society in which he was denied a voice and from which he was rigorously excluded. It is, incidentally, one of the most bitter ironies of the history of America{{s}} negroes that they should have practised their own form of {{w|racialism|Discrimination_based_on_skin_color|Discrimination based on skin color}}—that of distinction based on {{w|Creole|Creole_peoples|Creole peoples}} blood, {{qq|yellow-skins}}, {{qq|brown-skins}} and {{qq|black-skins}}. Despite these conditions being a primary factor in the creation and evolution of the blues, it is not usually a music of direct social protest and the few magnificent protest blues are far outnumbered by blues on women, men, cars, and rent, on the everyday life of an oppressed minority.

{{tab}}The blues has influenced jazz, {{qq|{{w|pop|Popular_music|Popular music}}}} music and even {{qq|serious}} music, yet its structure is extremely simple. In its {{w|developed form|Twelve-bar_blues|Twelve-bar blues}} it amounts to a three line {{w|stanza|Stanza|Stanza}}, with one line repeated and a third line, rhymed or unrhymed, in the form of {{w|call and response|Call_and_response_(music)|Call and response}}, a heritage from work songs. {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, one of the finest living rural singers, sings:

:: <font size="2">''Now I was sittin{{a}} in jail wi{{a}} my eyes all full of tears'' (repeat)
:: ''Y{{a}}know, I{{m}} glad didn{{t}} get lifetime, boys, that I {{a}}scaped th{{a}} {{a}}lectric chair''</font>

and {{w|Jaydee Short|J.D._Short|J.D. Short}} sang bitterly:

:: <font size="2">''So dark was the night now, people; cold, cold was the ground'' (repeat)
:: ''Me {{a}}n{{a}} my buddies in two {{w|foxholes|Defensive_fighting_position#Terminology|Defensive fighting position}}, had to keep our heads on down''</font>

{{tab}}Earlier singers drew more on the entire tradition of {{w|negro folk-song|African-American_music|African-American music}} and less on a still incomplete blues tradition, and there was less fixed form. {{w|Bukka White|Bukka_White}}, in a haunting blues, sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}}, believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die,''
:: ''I{{m}} lookin{{a}} far in min{{a}},''
:: ''I believe I{{m}} fixin{{a}} to die.''
:: ''I know I was born to die, but I hate to leave my chillen cryin{{a}}''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back, before they let me down,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''Mother, take my chillen back,''
:: ''{{a}}Fore they let me down,''
:: ''And don{{a}} leave them standin{{a}} and cryin{{a}} on the graveyar{{a}} groun{{a}}''</font>

{{tab}}Another early singer, {{w|Skip James|Skip_James}}, sings in two line verses:

:: <font size="2">''Hard time here, everywhere y{{a}} go''
:: ''Time{{s}} harder than they ever been before.''
:: ''If you certain y{{a}} had money, you better be sure,''
:: ''{{a}}Cause these hard times will drive y{{a}} from do{{a}} to do{{a}}.''</font>

{{tab}}Like {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, the {{w|doyen|Doyen|Doyen}} of the {{w|Delta|Delta_blues|Delta blues}} singers, and the superb {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}}, the {{qq|father}} of the {{w|Mississippi|Mississippi}} Blues, White and James were from Mississippi, and played their guitars in the peculiar regional {{qq|{{w|bottleneck|Slide_guitar|Slide guitar}}}} style. This involved the use of a knife, a steel ring or a smoothed down bottleneck which was usually placed on the thumb or little finger, and used as a {{w|drone|Drone_(music)|Drone (music)}} on the strings of the guitar. It gave their instruments a high-pitched whining sound which they were able to utilise for lyric passages, for simple rhythmic or melodic accompaniment or as a highly dramatic form of punctuation. Any blues looks rather bleak in print, because it is literally only half there. In the case of the {{p|142}}early Delta singers it gives a more than usually hollow effect.

{{tab}}Although Mississippi takes pride of place in any discussion of blues, there were fine singers from other areas. {{w|Jay Bird Coleman|Jaybird_Coleman|Jaybird Coleman}}, a superbly ferocious {{w|harmonica|Harmonica|Harmonica}} player came from {{w|Bessemer|Bessemer,_Alabama|Bessemer, Alabama}}, {{w|Alabama|Alabama}}, and was so successful that the local {{w|Ku Klux Klan|Ku_Klux_Klan}} took over his management. {{w|Blind Boy Fuller|Blind_Boy_Fuller}} came from {{w|Carolina|North_Carolina|North Carolina}}, {{w|Oscar Woods|Oscar_%22Buddy%22_Woods}} (The Lone Wolf) from {{w|Louisiana}}, {{w|Peg Leg Howell|Peg_Leg_Howell}} and {{w|Blind Willie McTell|Blind_Willie_McTell}} from {{w|Georgia|Georgia_(U.S._state)}}, {{w|Bill Broonzy|Big_Bill_Broonzy|Big Bill Broonzy}} from {{w|Arkansas}}, and {{w|Furry Lewis|Furry_Lewis}} from {{w|Tennessee|Tennessee}}. Also from Tennessee came the two great {{w|jug bands|Jug_band|Jug band}}—{{w|Gus Cannon|Gus_Cannon}}{{s}} Jug Stompers and the {{w|Memphis Jug Band|Memphis_Jug_Band}}. The other great jug band—the {{l|Birmingham Jug Band|https://www.bhamwiki.com/w/Birmingham_Jug_Band|Bhamwiki: Birmingham Jug Band}}—was from Alabama.

{{tab}}The early blues found its way onto record in the early {{a}}twenties, not through the devotion of {{w|ethnomusicologists|Ethnomusicology|Ethnomusicology}} but because record companies realised that it was a commercial proposition. Most of the early recordings were {{qq|field-recorded}} in rural centres like {{w|Memphis|Memphis,_Tennessee|Memphis, Tennessee}}, {{w|Dallas}} and {{w|Atlanta|Atlanta}}, in small halls and bars, wherever space could be found to set up equipment, and the records, by Skip James, {{w|Blind Lemon Jefferson|Blind_Lemon_Jefferson}}, Son House, Charlie Patton, Gus Cannon, {{l|Jed Davenport|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jed-davenport-mn0000238491/biography|Allmusic: Jed Davenport}} and later {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_I|Sonny Boy Williamson I}}, Bill Broonzy, {{w|Tommy McClennan|Tommy_McClennan|Tommy McClennan}}, Blind Boy Fuller and {{w|Cripple Clarence Lofton|Cripple_Clarence_Lofton}}, flooded through the mails and from the small-town stores into thousands of negro homes. The singers soon found themselves {{qq|race-heroes}} and the derisively labelled {{qq|{{w|race-record|Race_record|Race record}}}} market was a booming business. Fortunately men like {{w|Ralph Peer|Ralph_Peer}} of ''{{w|Victor|Victor_Talking_Machine_Company|Victor Talking Machine Company}}'' and {{w|Mayo Williams|J._Mayo_Williams|J. Mayo Williams}} of ''{{w|Paramount|Paramount_Records|Paramount Records}}'' had excellent taste and much of the early field recording was of great interest and superlative quality.

{{tab}}It requires enormous efforts of imagination to understand the conditions in the Deep South during the years in which the blues began. After the {{w|Civil War|American_Civil_War|American Civil War}}, when negroes had been given their {{qq|freedom}}, the {{w|white south|White_Southerners|White Southerners}}, with embittered ruthlessness, set about the re-enslavement of the negro population by {{qq|legal}} means. The negroes soon found themselves {{w|driven off|Black_land_loss_in_the_United_States|Black land loss in the United States}} their newly-gained land by former owners and the fast developing railroad companies. They were increasingly the victims of {{w|Jim Crow legislation|Jim_Crow_laws|Jim Crow laws}}, designed to keep them in their place regardless of the {{w|Fourteenth Amendment|Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution}}. They were forced to work on the railroads; to work the land as {{w|tenant|Tenant_farmer|Tenant farmer}} {{w|share-croppers|Sharecropping#United_States|Sharecropping: United States}}, which meant in effect reversion to slavery; to work on the levees, in the {{w|sawmills|Sawmill|Sawmill}} or {{w|turpentine camps|Knabb_Turpentine|Knabb Turpentine}}, which became symbols of racial subjugation. Wherever they went they were swindled and exploited with sophisticated savagery, designed, consciously or not, to demoralise as well as to enslave. Often they were charged more for food and lodging than they could possibly earn. It is a bitter commentary on the south that when {{w|Alan Lomax|Alan_Lomax}} issued his superb ''{{l|Blues in the Mississippi Night|https://www.discogs.com/Alan-Lomax-Blues-In-The-Mississippi-Night/master/720494|Discogs: Blues in the Mississippi Night}}'' recordings in 1957, he still felt it necessary to hide the real identities of the three singers whose reminiscences were contained on the record. The performers are listed simply as Sib, Natchez and Leroy but they were in fact the harmonica player Sonny Boy Williamson, the guitarist Bill Broonzy and the pianist {{w|Memphis Slim Chatman|Memphis_Slim|Memphis Slim}}. There was always the added risk of natural calamity. {{w|Texas}} is subject to floods and so is Mississippi: when {{p|143}}the {{w|levees burst in 1927|Great_Mississippi_Flood_of_1927|Great Mississippi Flood of 1927}}, it was the negroes, forced to live very close to the banks, who died in thousands. Segregation affected everything. Even hospitals refused to treat negroes, and although the Bessie Smith death-legend is largely apocryphal, many negroes died through lack of sufficient medical care.

{{tab}}In the search for better work and living conditions, thousands of negroes {{w|trekked north|Great_Migration_(African_American)|Great Migration}}, from the {{a}}twenties up to the present, in the sort of exodus which is a feature of the history of racially tormented minorities. They arrived in the north by road and rail. They had no right on either, but the rail usually gave them a better chance. They could either walk the long straight lines—always risking a fall between them, and with it death, induced by the tiring and hypnotic effect of doing so—or they could {{qq|{{w|jump|Freighthopping|Freighthopping}}}} a train. This was riskier, but quicker. The traveller stands on one of the few slow curves in the track and then, in {{w|Paul Oliver|Paul_Oliver}}{{s}} words:

{{tab}}{{qq|{{e|l}}breaks from cover and dashes towards the track taking advantage of the slowing of the train to make boarding possible, and of the bend to hide his movements. Crooked fingers clutch the {{w|couplings|Railway_coupling|Railway coupling}} and he swings perilously on the swaying truck before getting a firmer grip. He may make for the blinds if he can. These are the baggage cars next to the {{w|tender|Tender_(rail)|Tender (rail)}}, which are {{q|blind}} or, in other words, have no side door. Sitting on the step he is safe and out of reach of the {{w|brakeman{{s}} club|Brakeman's_cabin|Brakeman's cabin}}. {{e}} More dangerous, but out of sight and unapproachable, are the {{w|brake|Railway_brake|Railway brake}} rods that run beneath the freight cars. Risking his life he may try to worm his way across these, or if he is unusually adept he may carry a small board to throw across the rods and then precipitate himself upon it in the narrow gap between them and the underneath of the truck {{e}} in icy winds, in choking poisonous fumes of the railroad tunnels, he may freeze to numbness or succumb to exposure and drop to certain death{{e|r}}}}

{{tab}}There can be few worse condemnations of a society than that it should make this method of travel acceptable. Despite the risks the exodus continued, and women and children, as well as men, risked road and rail to go north:

:: <font size="2">''Oh, stop your train, let a poor boy ride.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, fare you well, never see you no more.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''
:: ''Oh, train I ride, smokestack shine like gold.''
:: ''Don{{t}} you hear me cryin{{a}}?''
:: ''Woo oo woo oo wooo {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}With them they took their blues, into railside {{w|hobo|Hobo|Hobo}} jungles where in hopeless poverty they could scratch a living, comparatively free from white interference, into the fast-developing northern ghettoes, into {{qq|New World}}. The blues proved remarkably resilient to city life at first. There were refinements which have continued up to the present: drums, basses and pianos were added to the more portable, and more {{p|144}}musically flexible instruments favoured by rural musicians, such as harmonicas (known as {{qq|harps}}, violins, guitars and {{w|jugs|Jug_(instrument)|Jug (instrument)}} which, when blown into, acted as bass resonators. However it was not until just before the {{w|last war|World_War_II|World War II}} that the blues altered dramatically and irrevocably, and even today there are traces of Mississippi in the blues of some {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} singers.

{{tab}}From the blues recordings we have a record of negro life, its joy and laughter—blues were primarily to entertain—as well as its bitterness and sorrow. We have stories of broken relationships, of {{w|rent parties|Rent_party|Rent party}}, of work in the fields of the south and the mills and factories of the north. Much of it is fine folk poetry, some of interest because of its subject, at its bext an index of the singer{{s}} feelings as well as a vivid picture of social conditions and the despair of the negro{{s}} brutalised life, a despair usually lightened only by the spiritual release of religion, the erotic release of sex or the physical release of violent pleasure. A much recorded blues begins:

:: <font size="2">''Rock me, mama, rock me all night long'' (repeat)
:: ''I want you to rock me, mama, till by back ain{{t}} got no bone.''</font>

and {{w|Chester Burnett|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin' Wolf}} (Howling Wolf) sings:

:: <font size="2">''Tell ole {{w|Pistol Pete|Frank_Eaton|Frank Eaton}}, everybody gonna meet,''
:: ''Tonight we need no rest, we really gonna throw a mess,''
:: ''We gonna break out all the windows, we gonna kick down all the doors,''
:: ''We gonna fix a {{w|Wang Dang Doodle|Wang_Dang_Doodle}}, all night long, all night long. {{e}}''
:: ''Tell {{w|Fats|Fats_Waller|Fats Waller}} and {{w|Washboard Sam|Washboard_Sam}}, that me {{a}}n{{a}} everybody gonna jam,''
:: ''Tell Shakey, Box Car Joe, we got sawdust on the floor,''
:: ''Tell Jennie Mae, till I die we gonna have a time,''
:: ''Well the fish scent fill the air, there{{s}} love juice everywhere.''
:: ''We gonna fix a Wang Dang Doodle. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Race records catered for various audiences and ranged from the harsh religious songs of {{w|Blind Willie Johnson|Blind_Willie_Johnson}}—once arrested for {{w|incitement|Incitement|Incitement}} outside a {{w|Customs House|Custom_house|Custom house}}, for singing his {{w|Samson|Samson}} song, ''{{w|If I Had My Way I{{d}} Tear This Building Down|Samson_and_Delilah_(song)|Samson and Delilah (song)}}''—to the lilting, leering blues of Blind Boy Fuller, which were often simply strings of sexual metaphores. Johnson and Fuller epitomised two main sources of relief for the negro—religion and sex. There were also songs on the catalogues about everything from {{w|cocaine|Cocaine|Cocaine}} sniffing to {{w|meningitis|Meningitis|Meningitis}}, and there were a large number of blues about {{w|prison|Race_in_the_United_States_criminal_justice_system|Race in the United States criminal justice system}}, suffered usually as a result of minor offences but frequently enough for more vicious crimes, and quite often for murder.

{{tab}}Prison was a daily feature in the lives of many families. It is some indication of the viciousness of the prisons and {{w|prison farms|Prison_farm|Prison farm}} that, as recently as 1951, fourteen prisoners in the {{w|Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola|Louisiana_State_Penitentiary}} {{popup|hamstrung themselves|A group of prisoners, known in the media as the Heel String Gang, cut their Achilles' tendons.}} rather than submit to beating with the {{qq|bat}}, a particularly crude, {{popup|fourteen pound|6.35 kg}} leather strap which, according to Paul Oliver, {{qq|can break a brick at a single blow}}. Yet prison farms, like Angola, were preferable to the overcrowded, unhealthy, closed prisons. The prison system is, even by conservative judgements, totally inadequate and archaic and even where there have been Federal {{p|145}}{{w|Commissions|Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government|Independent agencies of the United States government}} the south has ignored them and their recommendations. Despite the horror, many negroes have testified that life in prison was less frightening than life outside: at least in prison the next meal was assured, the tyranny rarely varied and there was ''less'' chance of the casual cruelty which typified the lives of so many racial underdogs. The great folk singer {{w|Leadbelly|Lead_Belly|Lead Belly}} sang his way out of prison, but not all singers were so lucky—{{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}} did a term at {{w|Parchman Prison Farm|Mississippi_State_Penitentiary|Mississippi State Penitentiary}}, Mississippi, and so did Bukka White, who sang a fine blues about it. {{l|Hogman Maxey|https://www.discogs.com/artist/401200-Hogman-Maxey|Discogs: Hogman Maxey}} and {{w|Robert Pete Williams|Robert_Pete_Williams}} did time at Angola. More recently the great Chicago guitarist, {{w|Auburn {{qq|Pat}} Hare|Pat_Hare|Pat Hare}} got a ninety-nine year sentence for shooting his mistress{{s}} husband and a policeman who tried to arrest him.

{{tab}}Murder occurs frequently in blues, both as a threat and as an occurrence, an indication of the everyday violence of American negro life. Sonny Boy Williamson sang:

:: <font size="2">''I got the meanest woman, the meanest woman you most ever seen,''
:: ''She sleep with an {{w|ice pick|Ice_pick|Ice pick}} in her hand, man, fights all in her dreams,''
:: ''I{{d}} soomer be sleepin{{a}} with the devil, I{{d}} sooner be sleepin{{a}} with the devil {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}Williamson died in 1948 on his way to hospital—his {{w|cranium|Skull|Skull}} split by an ice-pick—the victim of the casual violence of his own people, killed either by a jealous husband or young thugs after his money.

{{tab}}The blues quoted above is also indicative of the disintegrative effect the negro{{s}} position in society had on the stability of family life. Many singers have recorded blues about leaving women, or women leaving them; many have sung about their mothers, few about their fathers. The reason is not hard to find—in thousands of cases the mother was left to bring up children on her own, the father having left in frustration or in search of work. Not surprisingly jealousy also looms large:

:: <font size="2">''Lord, my hair is a-risin{{a}}, my flesh begin to crawl'' (repeat)
:: ''Had a dream last night, babe, {{a}}nother mule in my doggone stall''</font>

{{tab}}And so does seduction:

:: <font size="2">''I am a back door man'' (repeat)
:: ''Well the men don{{t}} know but the little girls understand''
:: ''When everybody tryin{{a}} to sleep, I{{m}} somewhere makin{{a}} my midnight creep.''
:: ''I{{m}} the mornin{{a}} when the rooster crow, somethin{{a}} tell me I gotta go. {{e}}''</font>

{{tab}}As an aid to sexual ability and attraction, charms were used—{{w|mojo|Mojo_(African-American_culture)|Mojo}} teeth, mojo hands, {{w|black cat bones|Black_cat_bone|Black cat bone}}, {{w|John the Conkeror|John_the_Conqueror|John the Conqueror}} {{w|roots|Ipomoea|Ipomoea}}. {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} sings:

:: <font size="2">''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down Louisiana, baby, behin{{a}} the sun'' (repeat)
:: ''Well, you know, I just found out my troubles just begun''
:: ''I{{m}} goin{{a}} down in {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}—hmmm—get me a mojo hand'' (repeat)
:: ''I wan{{a}} show all you good lookin{{a}} women just how to treat your man.''</font>

{{tab}}Even today magazines, like ''{{popup|Rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} Blues|Rhythm and Blues (1952–1965), first edited by Marvin Shnayer}}'', read by working class negroes, carry advertisements for these strange fertility symbols and charms—produced in {{w|Louisiana voodoo|Louisiana_Voodoo|Louisiana Voodoo}} circles—along with patent devices for straightening hair, strange medicines and other necessities of {{p|146}}ghetto life.

{{tab}}For the most part however there was little relief and little assistance. The great {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}, another Delta singer, obviously haunted by the phantoms of a divided society and using imagery of considerable richness, sang:

:: <font size="2">''I gotta keep movin{{a}}, I gotta keep movin{{a}}''
:: ''Blues fallin{{a}} down like hail, blues fallin{{a}} down like hail'' (repeat)
:: ''I can{{t}} keep no money, {{w|hellhound on my trail|Hellhound_on_My_Trail|Hellhound on My Trail}},''
:: ''Hellhound on my trail, hellhound on my trail''</font>

and again:

:: <font size="2">''You may bury my body down by the highway side''
:: (Spoken: ''Babe, don{{t}} care where you bury my body when I{{m}} dead and gone'')
:: ''You can bury my old body down by the highway side''
:: ''Lord, my ole evil spirit can catch a {{w|greyhound bus|Greyhound_Lines|Greyhound Lines}} and ride.''</font>

{{tab}}Johnson{{s}} blues remain the most personal and frightening of negro folk music, with their sense of transient ecstasy and sorrow, heightened by an abiding torment and despair. In his work the blues lays its most serious claim to be considered an art form, and of all the great singers he is the most likely to chill and electrify the listener, to make the agony of his life real, and to communicate, from his intense, tortured private emotions, the situation and condition of his people. Johnson is frightening because he is a victim without realisation of the complete meaning of his victimisation. His songs are, in the social sense, inarticulate, and this gives them their peculiar eloquence. It was not only social conditions which affected Johnson: he was obviously chained by his own shyness and frustration. He is thought to have been poisoned by his {{w|common law|Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States|Common-law marriage in the United States}} wife or to have died from {{w|alcohol poisoning|Alcohol_intoxication|Alcohol intoxication}}; whichever way, he died young in 1938. Howling Wolf, who knew him vaguely, says he was about 25 at the time; Muddy Waters thinks he was about 30; he is generally thought to have been {{popup|about 19|He was 27.}}. Johnson must have had more money than most negroes of his age and he seems to have had some trouble with women:

:: <font size="2">''Got up this mornin{{a}} to fin{{a}} it was gone'' (repeat)
:: ''Got up this mornin{{a}}, all I had was gone''
:: ''Well, leavin{{a}} this mornin{{a}} if I have to, gon{{a}} ride the blinds''</font>

{{tab}}And in another of his blues he sang:

:: <font size="2">''Gonna stay roun{{a}} {{w|Jonesboro|Jonesboro}}, until my teeth {{w|crowned with gold|Gold_teeth|Gold teeth}}'' (repeat)
:: ''She got a {{w|mortgage|Mortgage|Mortgage}} on my body, got a {{w|lien|Lien|Lien}} on my soul.''</font>

{{tab}}In Johnson—the inheritor of a tradition which stretched from the itinerant timbermill worker Charlie Patton, a beautiful, heavy voiced singer, reputedly half-{{w|Puerto Rican|Puerto_Ricans|Puerto Ricans}}, who first recorded ''{{w|I Shall Not Be Moved|I_Shall_Not_Be_Moved}},'' Son House, Bukka White and Skip James, whose oddly {{w|oriental-sounding|Music_of_Asia|Music of Asia}} blues were amongst the strangest and most haunting noises to come from the Delta—the blues reached its peak. Despite a handful of superb singers since, it has never again reached such an emphatic state of artistic unity.

{{p|147}}{{tab}}Undoubtedly the finest of the early singers from outside Mississippi was a dirty, ugly, dissolute Texan—Blind Lemon Jefferson. Blind men have often made good blues singers—they are doubly oppressed, a minority within a minority. Jefferson was a harsh singer with enormous powers of expression and his guitar playing was amongst the best to be recorded. He is now best remembered for his moving ''{{w|See That My Grave is Kept Clean|See_That_My_Grave_Is_Kept_Clean|See That My Grave Is Kept Clean}}'':

:: <font size="2">''Well, there{{s}} one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''One kin{{a}} favour I ask of you,''
:: ''Oh Lord, one kin{{a}} favour I ask of you''
:: ''Please see that my grave is kept clean.''
:: ''It{{s}} a long lane got no end'' (three times)
:: ''An{{a}} it{{s}} a bad way that don{{a}} never change''
:: ''Lord, it{{s}} two white horses in a line'' (three times)
:: ''Gon{{a}} take me to my buryin{{a}} groun{{a}}''
:: ''Dig my grave with a silver spade'' (three times)
:: ''You may let me down with a golden chain''
:: ''Have you ever heard a coffin soun{{a}}?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} in the groun{{a}}''
:: ''Have you ever heard a church bell toll?'' (three times)
:: ''Then you know the poor boy{{s}} dead an{{a}} gone.''</font>

{{tab}}Jefferson began recording in 1924 and was dead by 1930, frozen to death on a Chicago sidewalk during a snowstorm. His records sold well but they did not stop his life being as sad as any of his people{{s}}. Today, in a cemetary at {{w|Wortham|Wortham,_Texas|Wortham, Texas}}, Lemon{{s}} grave is almost lost under the grass and weeds.

{{tab}}The blues changed subtly over the years and as the {{w|radio networks|Broadcast_network|Broadcast network}} extended their influence, the various regional styles began to mingle. By the mid-{{a}}thirties it was increasingly difficult to recognise regional characteristics in blues vocals—the demonic intensity of Mississippi, the harsh but more introverted {{w|blues of Texas|Texas_blues|Texas blues}}, the jollier {{w|blues of Carolina|Piedmont_blues|Piedmont blues}}—though some were unmistakable. {{w|Leroy Carr|Leroy_Carr}}, who seemed to fuse various regional styles in his singing, had en enormous effect on the future of the blues, during his career in the late {{a}}twenties and early {{a}}thirties. Carr was more sophisticated than the rural singers and his singing, over the sensitive accompaniment of his piano and {{w|Scrapper Blackwell|Scrapper_Blackwell}}{{s}} guitar, emphasised melody rather more than emotion. His better recordings are marked by musical intelligence and an appealingly wistful quality and his ''{{w|How Long Blues|How_Long,_How_Long_Blues|How Long, How Long Blues}}'' is one of the few enduring, and widely recognised blues classics. Carr was easily imitated—even today there are Carr imitators like {{w|Bumble Bee Slim|Bumble_Bee_Slim}}—and the {{qq|style}} he invented was the dominating current in blues until the {{popup|war|The United States entered World War II on 11 December 1941}}. Carr was excellent but the blues trend he started was somewhat disastrous. The new blues were lighter, more swinging, but often depressingly insensitive. They were recorded, by this time, mainly in the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} Cities, for a city audience which demanded slickness and polish. With the more rigid discipline imposed by pianos, basses and drums, which greatly restricted the flexibility and individuality of singers, it was perhaps inevitable that, by 1940, the urban background, which was, broadly {{p|148}}speaking, {{qq|introduced}} by Carr, shoud have drastically affected the sound and content of blues. There were good records by the likeable Bill Broonzy, the irrepressible {{w|Memphis Minnie|Memphis_Minnie}}, the harshly intense Tommy McClennan, Sonny Boy Williamson, {{w|Arthur {{qq|Big Boy}} Crudup|Arthur_Crudup|Arthur Crudup}} and the great, rolling pianist {{w|Big Maceo Merriweather|Big_Maceo_Merriweather|Big Maceo Merriweather}}. There were a few {{qq|social blues}} like John Este{{s|r}} ''{{l|Working Man Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/817873-Sleepy-John-Estes-1929-1940|Discogs: Sleepy John Estes – 1929-1940}},'' which contained an invocation to the whites to break up trucks and tractors and work more mules and men, thus ensuring employment, and a few recordings in an older, country style, but the {{a}}forties was a lean period for blues which said anything.

{{tab}}During the war the negroes found themselves fighting for freedom against {{w|racialism|Racism|Racism}} and tyranny; the paradox didn{{t}} fail to strike any number of them and many have retained a lasting cynicism as a result. They either joined up cynically:

:: <font size="2">''I{{ve}} got my questionary and they need me in the war'' (repeat)
:: ''Now I feel like murder, won{{t}} have to break the county law''
:: ''All I want{{s}} a {{w|thirty-two-twenty|.32-20_Winchester|.32-20 Winchester}}, made on a'' {{w|.45|11_mm_caliber|11 mm caliber}} {{w|frame|Receiver_(firearms)|Receiver (firearms)}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Yes, and a red, white and blue {{w|flag|Flag_of_the_United_States|Flag of the United States}}, wavin{{a}} in my right hand.''</font>

{{tab}}Or pathetically eagerly:

:: <font size="2">''I want a {{w|machine gun|Machine_gun|Machine gun}}, wan{{a}} be hid way out in the wood'' (repeat)
:: ''I want to show ol{{a}} man {{w|Hitler|Adolf_Hitler|Adolf Hitler}} Sonny Boy don{{a}} mean him no good.''
:: ''I want to drop a bomb, and set the {{w|Japanese|Japan_during_World_War_II|Japan during World War II}} city {{w|on fire|Air_raids_on_Japan#Firebombing_attacks|Air raids on Japan: Firebombing attacks}}'' (repeat)
:: ''Now because they are so rotten, just love to see them die''</font>

{{tab}}The reality was different. {{w|Uncle Sam|Uncle_Sam}} wouldn{{t}} have dreamed of letting negroes operate a precious {{qq|{{w|thunderbolt|Republic_P-47_Thunderbolt|Republic P-47 Thunderbolt}}}}, though he was happy enough for them to fight—and die. The bitterness of the negro community was clearer after the Second World War than it had been after the first, but the lessons have been learnt incompletely or not at all, and there are still blues like {{w|Jimmy Rogers|Jimmy_Rogers}}{{s}} ''{{w|World is in a Tangle|Jimmy_Rogers_(album)|Jimmy Rogers (album)}}'' or {{w|Lightnin Slim|Lightnin'_Slim|Lightnin' Slim}}{{s}} (Otis Hicks) ''{{l|GI Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/614095-Lightnin-Slim-Rooster-Blues-G-I-Slim|Discogs: Lightnin' Slim – Rooster Blues / "G I" Slim}}'' which express, in terms nearly as militant as the blues quoted above, the desire to fight the {{w|Russians|Soviet_Union|Soviet Union}}. In this the singers reflect the tone of white society in a way that more isolated singers would have found impossible, even if they had felt it desirable. The institutions of state violence can now speak directly to the negro whereas there was little to convince older singers, like the previously quoted Jaydee Short, that they had anything to gain from the white{{s|r}} wars and their natural feelings certainly told them otherwise.

{{p|s2|n}}'''THE POST WAR BLUES'''

{{tab}}The decline of blues in the {{a}}forties was an indication not so much of integration ''into,'' as of imitation ''of'' white society: this coupled with the record companie{{s|r}} lack of discrimination and the ''comparative'' ease of ghetto life. But if the early {{a}}forties were lean years, the late {{a}}forties and early {{a}}fifties saw an increase in both the quantity and quality of {{p|149}}blues recording. ''{{w|Victor|RCA_Records|RCA Records}}, {{w|Decca|Decca_Records|Decca Records}}'' and ''{{w|Bluebird|Bluebird_Records|Bluebird Records}},'' before and during the war, had the money and organisation to ensure large scale distribution for their records but the post-war companies were much smaller, with fewer resources. It took a big hit to give them a reputation, and with it distribution, and in the search for success many hundreds of new singers were recorded, many of them performers in an older style. {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} recorded some archaic-sounding blues and singers like Muddy Waters, {{w|Sonny Boy Williamson|Sonny_Boy_Williamson_II|Sonny Boy Williamson II}} (the second), Howling Wolf and {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin' Hopkins}}, all of them fresh from the country, were recording relatively simple rural-style blues. There were others, like {{w|John Brim|John_Brim}}, {{w|Harmonica Frank|Harmonica_Frank}}, {{w|Big Boy Spires|Arthur_%22Big_Boy%22_Spires|Arthur "Big Boy" Spires}}, {{w|Houston Boines|Houston_Boines}}, less well known but almost as good. The list of labels then and since seems unbelievable. There were ''{{w|Aristocrat|Aristocrat_Records|Aristocrat Records}}, {{w|Checker|Checker_Records|Checker Records}}, {{w|Chess|Chess_Records|Chess Records}}, {{w|JOB|J.O.B._Records|J.O.B. Records}}'' (Chicago), ''{{w|Gotham|Gotham_Records|Gotham Records}}, {{w|Savoy|Savoy_Records|Savoy Records}}'' (East Coast), ''{{w|Excello|Excello_Records|Excello Records}}, {{w|Gold Star|Gold_Star_Records|Gold Star Records}}, {{w|Sun|Sun_Records|Sun Records}}, {{w|Trumpet|Trumpet_Records|Trumpet Records}}'' (Southern States), ''{{w|Flair|Flair_Records|Flair Records}}, {{w|Modern|Modern_Records|Modern Records}}'' and ''{{w|RPM|RPM_Records_(United_States)|RPM Records}}'' (West Coast) and many, many more. They often disappeared after a few releases of exceptional quality, like the amazing ''{{l|Bloodstains on the Wall|https://www.discogs.com/master/1357429-Honeyboy-Bloodstains-On-The-Wall-My-Time-Aint-Long|Discogs: Honeyboy – Bloodstains on the Wall / My Time Ain't Long}}'' by a singer improbably named {{w|Honey Boy|David_%22Honeyboy%22_Edwards|David "Honeyboy" Edwards}} or Harmonica Frank{{s}} ''{{l|Howling Tom Cat|https://www.discogs.com/release/10057029-Various-The-Sun-Records-Story|Discogs: Various – The Sun Records Story}},'' which might as easily have been recorded in the South during the {{a}}twenties, as in Chicago by Chess during the {{a}}fifties.

{{tab}}From this profusion of new bluesmen there were a handful who became very big names and who still play a rôle close to that of the race-hero; others have sunk to the second rank, often playing as well as their {{qq|betters}}; still others—and they are the majority—have died or live on half-forgotten, their memories sustained only by a few worn {{w|78s|Phonograph_record#78_rpm_disc_developments|Phonograph record: 78 rpm disc developments}} in junk shops or collections. Of the post-war Chicago singers Muddy Waters takes pride of place. He first recorded, for Alan Lomax in the {{w|Delta|Mississippi_Delta|Mississippi Delta}}, in 1941, using his real name of McKinley Morganfield. By the late {{a}}forties he had moved to Chicago and was making an exciting series for ''Aristocrat.'' His guitar playing, in the old bottleneck tradition, retained much of the vigour of earlier Mississippi bluesmen and his voice was rich and thrilling. He was usually accompanied by the finest of all blues bassists, {{w|Big Crawford|Ernest_%22Big%22_Crawford|Ernest "Big" Crawford}}, and the harmonica player {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. Jacobs was, and is, a magnificent musician and in his hands the harmonica became a {{w|horn|Brass_instrument|Brass instrument}}-like instrument, with superb tone, range, flexibility and crispness; he blew long, flowing phrases of classical elegance and feeling, saying as much about the condition of the negro in his playing as most singers say in a lifetime of singing. He and Waters achieved a fine unity, exemplified by such tracks as ''{{l|Louisiana Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/1277043-Muddy-Waters-Louisiana-Blues-Evans-Shuffle|Discogs: Muddy Waters – Louisiana Blues / Evan's Shuffle}},'' where the guitar and harmonica fuse so that they sound almost like a single instrument. Waters continued his series for ''Chess'' when that company took over ''Aristocrat'' but there was a new mood about to hit Chicago and the {{qq|rural}} bluesmen—a mood that had its cause in both social and musical developments.

{{tab}}Migration figures are not an entirely accurate index of population movement since they neither give reasons for migration nor take into account temporary migration. Quite obviously the well-to-do white moves for widely different reasons than those which compel a socially {{p|150}}and economically harrassed negro. It is interesting, however, that the figures show negro population movement to be both more permanent and more frequent during the period 1940-1947 (14.1%). This period of increased migration roughly coincides with the beginning of the post-war {{w|revival|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Further point is added by the fact that in 1900 90% of the negro population lived in the south, and 74% in rural areas, whereas by 1960 only 60% lived in the south and just under 25% in the rural south. Of the 40% elsewhere, under 2% lived in rural areas. The American negro has become increasingly a northern city dweller rather than a southern country dweller and in the years immediately post-war this process speeded up. This would seem to show one major reason for the blue{{s|r}} new lease of life in the early {{a}}fifties and also why since the middle-{{a}}fifties there has been a marked decline in quality. The negro who left the south after the war was usually brought up in an environment where the blues was a part of daily life, fulfilling a function both as entertainment and as a psychological release, and there was a consequent demand from this migrant group for {{qq|down-home}} blues. The migrants moved all over the USA and new recording companies sprang up to meet their demands, often in places where no authentic blues tradition existed. The record companies, previously deeply committed to the urban blues market, centred on Chicago since the late {{a}}thirties, now found themselves with a new audience for country-style blues which many enthusiasts had considered dead. The country-style blues were able to survive this transplantation as long as singers and audiences kept their southern roots, but they began to lose their ''{{popup|raison d{{a}}être|reason for being}}'' as the southern audience grew older and gave way to a younger white pop-influenced negro record buyer who, far from wanting blues, found the constant reminder of southern servility deeply embarrassing.

{{tab}}The musical developments arose to some extent from the social developments. In 1954 a young white singer walked into the ''Sun'' studio in Memphis, Tennessee. ''Sun'' had issued good blues singers like {{w|Joe Hill Louis|Joe_Hill_Louis}}, {{w|Walter Horton|Big_Walter_Horton|Big Walter Horton}} and {{w|Doctor Ross|Doctor_Ross}} but their biggest hit was an old Crudup blues, ''{{w|That{{s}} All Right, Mama|That's_All_Right|That's All Right}},'' recorded after a number of attempts by the young {{w|Elvis Presley|Elvis_Presley}}. ''Victor'' bought up ''Sun{{s}}'' Presley contract in 1955 and {{w|rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} music (a nice white name, invented by the {{w|disc jockey|Disc_jockey|Disc jockey}} {{w|Alan Freed|Alan_Freed}}, for what was basically negro {{w|rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}) flooded into a million white homes. For the first time the popular music of the two racial groups was broadly similar. Partly in sub-conscious self-defence and partly in emulation of white youth, the young urban negroes demanded a noisier, more aggressive blues, expressing their increasing confidence. There were singers like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley}} and {{w|Fats Domino|Fats_Domino}} (who sold more records than anyone except Presley during the {{qq|rock era}}), who were selling to both racial groups, but many of the older singers were forced to use screaming, over-amplified electric guitars and {{w|saxes|Saxophone|Saxophone}} to keep up. Some, like Howling Wolf, managed the change without too much difficulty, but most were less lucky. Wolf had a rough, rasping voice which came across the amplification with exciting power—he had made fine {{p|151}}records in the country style in the late {{a}}forties—but in Chicago he had a massive beat and his records for ''Chess'' have a raucous, jangling sense of guts and urgency which suited the new audiences. Muddy Waters, although he has retained to the present his reputation as {{qq|King of Chicago}}, was hit badly.

{{tab}}From the mid-{{a}}fifties his records became worse and worse, with poor accompaniment, trivial and repetitive words, and a badly strained singer: the only relief was afforded by one or two splendid blues shouts, like his ''{{w|Hoochie Coochie Man|Hoochie_Coochie_Man}};''

:: <font size="2">''I got a black cat bone,''
:: ''I got a mojo tooth,''
:: ''I got a John the Conker root,''
:: ''Gonna mess with you.''
:: ''Gonna make all you girls''
:: ''Lead me by the hand,''
:: ''Then the world will know''
:: ''I{{m}} a hoochie coochie man.''</font>

{{tab}}Waters is aware of his deterioration but he now fits the requirements of the new audience—an exciting stage act rather than interesting blues.

{{tab}}The other great post-war bluesman from the Mississippi, John Lee Hooker, began recording in the late {{a}}forties. At his best he has more than a little of the old Delta manner in his rich, sensual voice and dramatically rhythmic and flexible guitar style. He started his career recording imaginative, earthy blues in a most arresting style, accompanied only by his own guitar. His voice was strong and, occasionally, bitter and his guitar had a throbbing vigour and a magnificent drive rarely heard before. With its terse, intense and rhythmic phrasing it acted as a foil for the voice and gave his blues extraordinary tension, strengthened by his sharply stamping feet. The early tracks, particularly the slow, atmospherically sensual ones, take their place amongst the great blues. Hooker{{s}} versatility is a bit discomfiting but he can still be a magnificently haunting singer. Like his contemporary, Lightning Hopkins, Hooker entertains on the predominantly white folk circuit as well as the negro rhythm {{a}}n{{a}} blues circuit. He gives the white audiences folk-tinged blues and the negro audiences highly rhythmic {{w|boogie|Boogie|Boogie}}-type numbers. He rarely sings in the old style now, but his recent visit to {{w|Britain|Great_Britain|Great Britain}} emphasised his position as one of the dozen finest post-war singers, with roots stretching far back into the Delta of his youth.

{{tab}}A number of singers have earned the reputation of being {{qq|{{w|Kennedy|John_F._Kennedy|John F. Kennedy}}-line}} singers. {{w|Bobo Jenkins|Bobo_Jenkins}} castigated those who voted {{w|Republican|Republican_Party_(United_States)|Republican Party}} in {{w|1952|1952_United_States_presidential_election|1952 United States presidential election}} (''{{l|Democrat Blues|https://www.discogs.com/master/2137609-Bobo-Jenkins-Democrat-Blues-Bad-Luck-Trouble|Discogs: Bobo Jenkins – Democrat Blues / Bad Luck & Trouble}}''), {{w|Louisiana Red|Louisiana_Red}} sang about tugging {{w|Castro|Fidel_Castro|Fidel Castro}}{{s}} beard and removing {{w|missile bases|Cuban_Missile_Crisis|Cuban Missile Crisis}} from {{w|Cuba}} in ''{{l|Red{{s}} Dream|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}'' (though he demanded for himself and his soul-brothers, {{w|Ray Charles|Ray_Charles}}, {{w|Jimmy Reed|Jimmy_Reed}}, {{w|Big Maybelle|Big_Maybelle}} and Lightning Hopkins, a share in running the nation) and about Civil Rights in ''{{l|Ride on Red, Ride on|https://www.discogs.com/master/676213-Louisiana-Red-Reds-Dream-Ride-On-Red-Ride-On|Discogs: Louisiana Red – Red's Dream / Ride On Red, Ride On}}.'' {{w|J. B. Lenoir|J._B._Lenoir|J. B. Lenoir}} savaged {{w|Eisenhower|Dwight_D._Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower}} so mercilessly in one blues that the {{l|record|https://www.discogs.com/master/888269-J-B-Lenoir-Im-In-Korea-Eisenhower-Blues|Discogs: J. B. Lenoir – I'm in Korea / Eisenhower Blues}}, which had a more moderate indictment of the {{w|Korean War|Korean_War}} on the other side, was banned.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues walking like a man}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:Wealth and poverty]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-01T06:27:53Z

Ivanhoe:

Anarchy 51/What have they done to the folk?

2021-10-01T03:37:57Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br />What have they done to the folk?
| author = Kevin McGrath
| section =
| previous = [[../Blues in the Archway Road|Blues in the Archway Road]]
| next = [[../Art and Social Responsibility|Art and Social Responsibility]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|133}}

<font size="5">'''What have they done<br />to the folk?'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Kevin McGrath|KEVIN McGRATH]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|One day you wake up}} and find that your {{w|minority cult|Subculture|Subculture}} has mushroomed. It may be your politics, or your anti{{h}}politics, it may be a place, it may be some activity, a sport, a music. Do you rejoice at the arrival of the {{w|millennium|Millenarianism|Millenarianism}}? No, the chances are you don{{t}}. More likely you feel resentment, perhaps you move on further out, trek into the wilderness and restore your minority cult—until the crowd follows on.<br />

{{tab}}There is an intrinsic selfishness in most enthusiasms—you may preach, spread the good word, but always there is a part of you that takes pleasure in the very condition of cliquishness. Thus, where a cult {{p|134}}suddenly ceases to be a cult and turns into something more like a crusade, there is resentment. It is partly a quite understandable and justifiable pleasure in having things on the human, personal scale. Pleasure in knowing what is going on, who is who—and also in forming part of a movement or group, in which there is only rudimentary development of organisational barriers—of barriers between audience and performer, between those whose tastes tend one way and those whose tastes tend the other.

{{tab}}As things get bigger, the barriers go up—there is an audience to be entertained, and entertainers to do the job. And the barriers get institutionalised; you get internal segregation developing, clashes of doctrine, almost amounting at times to holy war. Where once {{w|ethnik|Music_of_the_United_Kingdom#Folk_music|Music of the United Kingdom: Folk music}}, {{w|folknik|Folk_music|Folk music}}, {{w|popnik|Folk-pop|Folk-pop}} and {{w|r {{a}}n{{a}} b|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}} exponents could all go to the same {{w|club|Folk_club|Folk club}}, and be aware of what they have in common, now the differences come to the fore.

{{tab}}As the next stage of the boom comes along, the public at large starts to take note—{{w|Bob Dylan|Bob_Dylan}} is heard on {{w|Housewive{{s|r}} Choice|Housewives'_Choice}}—gets a profile in ''{{w|Melody Maker|Melody_Maker}}''—The ''{{w|Observer|The_Observer|The Observer}}'' starts trying to pontificate on the subject in its customary switched{{h}}on (though not plugged{{h}}in) manner. Research chemists in the laboratories of {{w|Ready Steady Go|Ready_Steady_Go!|Ready Steady Go!}} synthesize an ersatz Dylan. Folk programmes proliferate on TV ranging from the excruciating {{w|Hob Derry What{{h}}not|Meredydd_Evans||Derry Dando, 1965 BBC One variety series produced by Meredydd Evans
Wikipedia: Meredydd Evans}} (why don{{t}} the {{w|Welsh Nationalists|Welsh_nationalism|Welsh nationalism}} do something about it; like blowing up the studio) to the remarkably good {{w|Folk in Focus|W._Gordon_Smith||1965 BBC Two variety series produced by W. Gordon Smith
Wikipedia: W. Gordon Smith}}. It becomes possible to buy folk{{h}}records (some folk{{h}}records) in ordinary local record shops. If you are not running a club, you find that you cannot get in any more, and you could not afford to anyway.

{{tab}}The easy reaction is to reel away in horror, shouting {{qq|commercialism}}, and pointing to the mass of fake{{h}}singers who are jumping on the bandwagon, and the fake{{h}}folk that is being pushed, ''{{w|Catch the Wind|Catch_the_Wind}}'', or ''{{w|I{{ll}} Never Find Another You|I'll_Never_Find_Another_You}}''. ({{popup|N.B.|nota bene: take special note}} I say fake{{h}}folk, not because the songs are not traditional, but because they are not honest songs.)

{{tab}}And there is, of course, reason in this reaction—the big money is more likely to go, for the most part, to the sweetened, smoothed{{h}}up imitators, who are moving in now, rather than to the singers who have been around so long without the bait of big money. But though this is unfair, the fringe pickings that go to the people who built up the club scene are at any rate bigger than they were.

{{tab}}And actually of course, the present boom is very largely not a native thing at all, but an American import. It{{s}} the clubs, and the native scene, oddly enough, that are in a sense parasitic, profiting from the interest that spreads over from the imports. Similarly with television. That is the way it{{s}} been for a long time, in a less extreme form. I{{d}} hazard a guess that nine out of ten folk enthusiasts, even the most austere ethniks, had their taste for folk aroused in the first place by American songs (or by songs in American style—e.g. most {{w|CND|Campaign_for_Nuclear_Disarmament|Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament}} songs). And that includes many of those who hail from a still comparatively living {{p|135}}folk tradition. Many is the {{w|Scot|Scottish_people|Scottish people}} or the {{w|Irishman|Irish_people|Irish people}} who hardly thought of singing a {{w|Scots|Scots_language|Scots language}} or {{w|Irish|Irish_language|Irish language}} song until he came to {{w|England}} or {{w|America|United_States|United States}} and had his taste aroused by American material. And the folk scene as it has existed for the last few years was predominantly composed of ex{{h}}{{w|skifflers|Skiffle|Skiffle}}.

{{tab}}The danger with an enthusiasm is that it can blind you to waht lies outside its limits. You build walls round your garden, and the walls become the garden, and it is only a flower if ti grows within the walls. So a purist might listen to Bob Dylan, say {{qq|It{{s}} not Folk}}, and ignore the truth that perhaps it{{s}} better than much that is folk. Or he might listen to a folk{{h}}influenced {{w|pop|Pop_music|Pop music}}{{h}}record, and denounce it as a corruption, dismissing the truth that it may have its own special and distinct merits. Or he may cry {{qq|entertainer}} at, for example, {{w|Alex Campbell|Alex_Campbell_(singer)}}, as if this were an insult (and as if he were making a fortune out of it instead of a pittance).

{{tab}}The funny thing is that of all types of cultural activity, folk{{h}}music is perhaps the one least suited to this kind of cultism. An acceptable capsule definition might be {{qq|The popular music of another time and/<wbr>or place, together with songs, etc., written in imitation or under the influence of this}}. Even this is too narrow a definition if it is to include a number of songs rightly accepted in any club. But the point is the emphasis on other times and places is only relevant where your own contemporary tradition is dead. And this need not be so.

{{tab}}There are two distinct elements running like separate threads through the {{w|folk revival|British_folk_revival|British folk revival}}, since its earliest days (which I suppose one could say were some time in the 18th century—{{w|Bishop Percy|Thomas_Percy_(bishop_of_Dromore)|Thomas Percy}}, {{w|Robert Burns|Robert_Burns}}, etc.—revival is not perhaps the best word, but it is current). There is an {{w|antiquarian|Antiquarian|Antiquarian}} element, and a refugee element. Or, less elliptically, you may be interested primarily in preserving something that is in danger of being lost, or you may be a fugitive from some aspect of mainstream culture, finding in folk{{h}}song, or music, something that you are unable to find in the culture that you flee. And the culture you are fleeing may be high, low, pop, or the lot. And what you are after is a culture with a greater degree of relevance—and freedom; one which is not in itself clique{{h}}directed, but rather, at least in its origins, directed towards the community as a whole, not just the intellectuals or the fans; songs which are not restricted in subject, language or form in the way that pop songs are, and which are relevant, as mainstream poetry so rarely is.

{{tab}}The antiquarian aspect is of course important, but it is secondary. The reason it is important to preserve something is because what is preserved is in itself important, and in some way irreplaceable. And so far as the refugee aspect is concerned, what is most important about excursions into the culture of other times or places is what you bring back, and what you do with it. Otherwise it{{s}} just escapism, and essentially sterile. It{{s}} possible to take folk{{h}}song in this way, and much good may it do you; sing {{w|sea shanties|Sea_shanty|Sea shanty}} in order to feel tough and identify {{p|136}}with the men who made them, sing rebel songs and save yourself the trouble of rebelling, sing love songs and save yourself the effort of loving. Whereas the ''purpose'' of a shanty is to help you keep on working, a rebel song is to get you rebelling, and a love song is typically to get her (or him) feeling sorry for you, or help you feel better if that{{s}} no good. And the relevance of traditional songs to us is closely tied up with their original function. By which I am not trying to say that entertainment as such is out, which would obviously be absurd. But if you think primarily in terms of entertainment as a goal in itself (instead of an indication that the goal has been reached), then you{{re}} going to miss an awful lot.

{{tab}}So the most important thing about the folk-revival, at least so far as I am concerned, is what is produced in the way of new songs, new kinds of songs. For once you have access to the storehouse of images, themes techniques, etc., used in folk traditions (note the plural), you have a vastly increased potential for saying important things, expressing yourself in terms that enable real communication, such as become virtually impossible in mainstream culture, poetry or pop song. And it becomes possible to at least hope for a kind of culture that will sidestep arbitrary barriers of this kind (pop, intellectual, etc.) and replace them with a graduated spectrum with the merging divisions based on functional criteria—so that you would have songs for dancing, songs for explaining, songs for preaching, songs for exalting. In fact this kind of distinction one can (but need not) make within folk music in the wild.

{{tab}}However, it seems overwhelmingly probable that the current boom is likely to be relatively short lived, on the pop side, if only because pop music is essentially for dancing, and words are ultimately of secondary importance. But the collapse of the boom is not important, for the kind of change I{{m}} talking about is essentially a long-term one, and each turn of the wheel advances it. Skiffle died and left behind it the basis of a folk underground, and also the seeds of the beat groups and r {{a}}n{{a}} b. The present thing will leave a similar residue but at a higher level, and one which approaches more closely the kind of unified culture of which I am writing.

{{tab}}Already you have individuals who have made the bridge, though it is still fairly tenuous. In {{w|America|United_States|United States}} you have {{w|Bob Dylan|Bob_Dylan}} as a kind of cross between {{w|Yevtushenko|Yevgeny_Yevtushenko|Yevgeny Yevtushenko}} and {{w|Woody Guthrie|Woody_Guthrie}}, and {{w|Pete Seeger|Pete_Seeger}} as a one man personification of the {{w|folk revival, US style|American_folk_music_revival|American folk music revival}}. Here, the cult of personality is less obvious. There is of course {{w|Ewan MacColl|Ewan_MacColl}}, but though he may be the High Priest of British Folk, he is a bit short in the ecumenical spirit. He is so firmly rooted in history that he sometimes seems to be approaching the 20th century as an immigrant—as a kind of ethnic {{w|Dr. Who|The_Doctor_(Doctor_Who)|The Doctor (Doctor Who)}}. This is of course a gross over-simplification, I hasten to add, to save you the trouble of scrawling this in the margin. Whatever does develop in the way of neo-folk will owe a fantastic debt to MacColl, to his singing, his song writing, and particularly to his work in the {{w|radio-ballads|Radio_ballad|Radio ballad}}. It is largely due to him, directly or indirectly, that {{p|137}}traditional songs have escaped from the custody of the collections, and the {{w|English Folk Dance and Song Society|English_Folk_Dance_and_Song_Society}} (not that I{{m}} knocking the EFDSS which, with the help of {{w|Peter Kennedy|Peter_Kennedy_(folklorist)}}, among others, has undergone an internal revolution in the last few years). And it is again largely MacColl{{s}} direct and indirect influence that has saved the next generation of singers and song writers from being pale reflections of the Americans. There can scarcely be a singer in the country (within the relevant context) whose whole way of singing and attitude to material has not been deeply influenced by MacColl, and the influence stretches further—even a style that is on the face of it totally different, Bob Dylan{{s}} frequently shows traces of MacColl (e.g. ''{{w|North Country Blues|North_Country_Blues}}''). But for all that, listen to a song by Ewan MacColl such as ''The Gallant Colliers'' (on his {{w|LP|LP_record|LP record}} ''{{l|The Best of Ewan MacColl|https://www.discogs.com/Ewan-MacColl-The-Best-Of-Ewan-MacColl/release/4771909|Discogs: The Best of Ewan MacColl''}}) and I think you will see what I mean.

{{tab}}Closely related to MacColl in their approach, are singers like {{w|Lou Killen|Lou_Killen}}, {{w|Bob Davenport|Bob_Davenport_(singer)}}, {{l|Enoch Kent|https://www.discogs.com/artist/1547921-Enoch-Kent|Discogs: Enoch Kent}}, {{w|Matt McGinn|Matt_McGinn}} and {{w|Johnny Handle|The_High_Level_Ranters|The High Level Ranters}}. The last three, with Ewan MacColl himself, are perhaps the most important essentially traditional song writers of the present day. But though they have produced and are producing fine songs, I cannot help feeling that to follow directly in their paths is to run the risk of going up a {{w|cul-de-sac|Dead_end_(street)|Dead end}}.

{{tab}}Further away from MacColl are a large number of song writers. These range from those who are still in many ways very close to MacColl (such as perhaps {{w|Ian Campbell|Ian_Campbell_(folk_musician)}}) to a lone wolf like {{l|Leslie Haworth|https://www.discogs.com/artist/2666731-Leslie-Haworth|Discogs: Leslie Haworth}}. What these writers do tend to have in common is songs with a greater degree of accessibility. (Incidentally I only use the word {{qq|writers}} for lack of a convenient alternative. In this context it can be misleading, since it carries the implication that a song is made up on paper, whereas in many cases, and these perhaps the most important, the actual writing down of a song only comes at a late stage. Indeed there are many contemporary songs, even quite widely sung ones, that have probably never been written down—and I don{{t}} just mean the ones that would scorch the paper. Leslie Haworth is the obvious example.) By {{qq|a greater degree of accessibility}} I don{{t}} necessarily mean that the songs are simple. But even where they are difficult, they are related to the world outside. You do not need to undergo an apprenticeship in folk-song before you can see there is something in them that concerns you. They are not wearing fancy dress.

{{tab}}I picked out three essentially traditional song writers. To set against them, a suitable trio of the more accessible variety might be {{w|Fred Dallas|Karl_Dallas|Karl Dallas}}, {{w|Cyril Tawney|Cyril_Tawney}} and {{w|Sydney Carter|Sydney_Carter|Sydney Carter}}. All three are definitely rooted in the British tradition, but in addition they have obviously incorporated elements of other traditions as well and, paradoxically, the finished result, at least in my opinion, has a greater oneness in consequence. If you live in a diversified cultural milieu, then it is only when you allow the multitude of influences that are working upon you to mingle and breed and come out in your songs, that these songs can {{p|138}}truly express you as you are. It is no good trying to impose a kind of cultural {{w|apartheid|Apartheid|Apartheid}} on your mind.

{{tab}}So, in the writers I selected, you may have clear American influences, the trace of the {{w|chansonniers|Chansonnier_(singer)|Chansonnier (singer)}}, or the flavour of {{w|Brecht|Bertolt_Brecht|Bertolt Brecht}}. Cyril Tawney comes out with ''The Grey Flannel Line'' with its borrowings from {{w|Dink{{s}} Song|Dink's_Song|Dink's Song}}, Sydney Carter writes ''Port Mahon'' with a Greek tune and echoes of ''{{l|Venezuela|https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/burlives/venezuela.html|link: AZLyrics}}.''

{{tab}}This borrowing of what is needed, without worrying about its former context, is carried to a beneficial extreme by Bob Dylan, e.g. ''{{w|Hard Rains|A_Hard_Rain's_a-Gonna_Fall|A Hard Rain's a-Gonna Fall}}'' (''{{w|Lord Randall|Lord_Randall}}'' {{popup|inter alia|among others}}), ''{{w|Restless Farewell|Restless_Farewell}}'' (''{{w|The Parting Glass|The_Parting_Glass}}''), ''{{w|Bob Dylan{{s}} Dream|Bob_Dylan's_Dream|Bob Dylan's Dream}}'' (''{{w|Lord Franklin|Lady_Franklin's_Lament|Lady Franklin's Lament}}''), ''{{w|With God on Our Side|With_God_on_Our_Side_(song)}}'' (''{{w|The Patriot Game|The_Patriot_Game}}''). Not that there is anything in the least new or unusual in reworking old songs to fit new circumstances—but what is special, as with the Cyril Tawney example I quoted, is that the new contexts are, conventionally speaking, so utterly removed from the old. In some ways it resembles the cultural {{w|miscegenation|Miscegenation|Miscegenation}} that gave rise to {{w|jazz|Jazz|Jazz}}—or for that matter, to the {{w|Renaissance|Renaissance}}.

{{tab}}Take away the barriers and you can get anything. And this is what the whole folk revival can do—except where it erects new barriers of its own.

{{tab}}This kind of borrowing and reworking can, and probably typically does, take place unconsciously—as indeed it does in a traditional folk culture in the wild. To give a personal example, on the 1963 {{w|Aldermaston|Aldermaston_Marches|Aldermaston Marches}}, while walking from {{w|Reading|Reading,_Berkshire}} {{w|RSG|Regional_seat_of_government|Regional seat of government}} {{w|shelter|Region_6_War_Room|Region 6 War Room}}, I made up a song. The tune sounded familiar, but I couldn{{t}} place it. The same for the words. Both of which presumably helped it catch on for the limited period of its topicality. It was not, so far as I recall, till the last day of the march that I read in the evening papers about marchers {{qq|singing their new marching song to the tune of ''{{l|I love a lassie|https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/realmckenzies/lassieroamininthegloamin.html|link: AZLyrics}}}}'', and remembered. Though I was more aware of it as ''I love a sausage.'' From which my subconscious folk-process had made ''I{{ve}} got a secret.''

{{tab}}You are likely to get the most audacious and successful transformations in contexts where there is a heightened emotion of some kind involved. It may be the kind of helpless rage that is aroused by the casual brutality of governments, by {{w|napalm|Napalm|Napalm}} {{w|raids|Close_air_support|Close air support}} on villages, by {{w|lynchings|Lynching|Lynching}}, by apathy, by the universal acceptance of the intolerable. It may be indignation at some comparatively minor injustice, or exultation at some token victory of justice. Or it may be more personal—perhaps you{{re}} in love. Whatever the reason, you are more interested in what you want to say than in how you say it. You are not after applause from an audience; rather you want to help them, her, or yourself, to feel in a particular way, or to understand a particular emotion.

{{tab}}So where does entertainment fit in? Is it just a coating of sugar on a bitter medicine—a ploy to entice the poor suckers in and then preach at them? Evidently, since I phrased the question in that way, I{{m}} going to answer {{qq|No}}. And to justify my answer I fall back on two {{p|139}}{{w|aphorisms|Aphorism|Aphorism}} which I won{{t}} elaborate at the moment:

: (a) The purpose of art is to help you appreciate life (and hence also to assist and encourage you in making life worth appreciating).
: (b) Entertainment is what you have when art is successful (the degree of success of course varies).

{{tab}}This, the range of art and entertainment, is as wide as you can go. And there is no conflict between different parts of it. A song may have no purpose beyond arousing laughter, or it may aim at arousing laughter for some purpose, or it may aim at doing a thousand different things to the listener. And it is all entertainment and itt is all art.

{{tab}}A good club session will in fact have songs from widely separate parts of the range. If it{{s}} all jolly chorus stuff, or all doom and soul, or all protest, it will lose much of its value and impact. It is liable to become entertainment in the narrow escapist sense, catering to people who know what they want, giving thenm a prepackaged commodity. You lose the sense that anything might happen, as it becomes nothing more than a pleasant way to spend the evening. Flexibility is gradually superseded by rigidity.

{{tab}}Undoubtedly this tendency is encouraged and emphasised in any folk boom. Singers also lose flexibility, and concentrate on supplying what is expected—{{w|Joan Baez|Joan_Baez}} tends to sing all kinds of songs in the same voice, and the same mood. For that matter, Ewan MacColl does exactly the same thing. You have, in fact, that tendency to self-fixation, even {{w|self-parody|Self-parody|Self-parody}}, that seems to be inextricably linked with success, whether it is on the scale of Bob Dylan and Pete Seeger, or of hundreds of amateurs in clubs everywhere who get themselves trapped within an image. And it is of course a universal human trait—call it ''{{popup|mauvaise foi|bad faith}}'' if you prefer pigeon holes.

{{tab}}But the very presence of a strong traditional foundation in folk-song, works against this trait. There is a certain analogy with a {{w|masked ball|Masquerade_ball|Masquerade ball}}, where by assuming a formal mask, you shed the one that you wear the rest of the time. The very element of tradition to which anyone who gets involved in folk-song to any real extent is going to get exposed, can nourish a kind of individualism which can then go on to grow, to integrate, to propagate—and to remove the mask.

{{tab}}So personally, I am optimistic. One may squirm to hear the {{w|Searchers|The_Searchers_(band)|The Searchers}} assassinating ''{{w|What Have They Done to the Rain|What_Have_They_Done_to_the_Rain}},'' and tremble for the future of those who get caught up in the glare of publicity (for all one knows, {{w|Donovan}} might have great potential—and we{{ll}} probably never find out now). But it{{s}} something when you can have ''{{w|Masters of War|Masters_of_War}}'' blasting out of a million transistors tuned to a {{w|pirate station|Pirate_radio_in_the_United_Kingdom|Pirate radio in the United Kingdom}}.

{{tab}}And when the present thing dies down, the ferment will still be working, and the new tradition growing and changing.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:What have they done to the folk}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Template:P

2021-10-01T03:28:26Z

Ivanhoe: Undo revision 33411 by Ivanhoe (talk)

{{#if: {{{2|}}}
| {{#ifeq: {{{2|}}}
| n
| <span id="{{{1}}}"></span>
| <span id="{{{1}}}"><div style="float:left; position: absolute; margin-left: -50px;"><font size="1">{{{1}}}</font></div></span>
}}
| <span id="{{{1}}}"><div style="float:left; position: absolute; margin-left: -50px;"><font size="1">{{{1}}}</font></div></span>
}}

Template:P

2021-10-01T03:27:54Z

Ivanhoe:

{{#if: {{{2|}}}
| {{#ifeq: {{{2|}}}
| n
| <span id="{{{1}}}"></span>
| <span id="{{{1}}}"><div style="float:left; position: absolute; margin-left: -50px; margin-top: -10px;"><font size="1">{{{1}}}</font></div></span>
}}
| <span id="{{{1}}}"><div style="float:left; position: absolute; margin-left: -50px; margin-top: -10px;"><font size="1">{{{1}}}</font></div></span>
}}

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-01T03:25:21Z

Ivanhoe:

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-10-01T01:21:31Z

Ivanhoe:

Anarchy 51/Blues in the Archway Road

2021-09-30T23:51:34Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br>Blues in the Archway Road
| author = Ben Covington
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 51]]
| next = [[../What have they done to the folk?|What have they done to the folk?]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|129}}

<font size="5">'''Blues in the<br>Archway Road'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Ben Covington|BEN COVINGTON]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Looking at the posters that litter the side streets}} of central and suburban {{w|London}}, one might be forgiven for assuming that the {{w|Blues}} was created by a post{{h}}{{w|Aldermaston|Aldermaston_Marches|Aldermaston Marches}} generation of art students rather than by the afflicted {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americas}} population of the {{w|American|United_States|United States}} {{w|Deep South|Deep_South|Deep South}}. The posters advertise {{sc|authentic {{w|Rhythm ’n’ blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}}} by groups which play a variety of music—some {{w|Pop|Pop_music|Pop music}}{{h}}oriented, some {{w|Folk|Folk_music|Folk music}}{{h}}oriented, some {{w|Jazz}}{{h}}oriented but largely derived from the music of the more sensational {{w|coloured|Person_of_color|Person of color}} entertainers of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}}, like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry|Chuck Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley|Bo Diddley}}, {{w|James Brown|James_Brown|James Brown}} and {{w|T-Bone Walker|T-Bone_Walker|T-Bone Walker}}. Of the 2,000 or more groups working the multitude of large and small {{w|clubs|Nightclub|Nightclub}}, no more than two dozen are in any way original, even in pop{{h}}music terms, and even these are rootless shadows of the singers on whose material they draw. The difference between the blues of modern America and the {{qq|blues}} of modern {{w|Britain|United_Kingdom|United Kingdom}} is the difference between music which is an authentic racial expression and music which is an expression of no more than a liking for the authentic form.

{{tab}}The origins of {{w|British {{qq|blues}}|British_blues|British blues}} are far from clear. Their seminal genius may have been {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} who toured Britain in 1958 but it was not until March, 1962, when the harmonica player {{w|Cyril Davies|Cyril_Davies}} and the guitarist {{w|Alexis Korner|Alexis_Korner}} opened the first of the clubs—next door to the {{w|ABC Teashop|Aerated_Bread_Company|Aerated Bread Company}} off {{w|Ealing Broadway|Ealing|Ealing}}—that the {{qq|boom}} really had its beginnings. Korner and Davies played mainly {{popup|pre-war|The United States formally joined World War II in December 1941.}} blues of the negro night clubs of urban America. Once they had their own stage the {{qq|boom}} gathered in {{w|Central London|Central_London|Central London}}, attracting a young audience in reaction against a particularly enfeebled pop music—this was the hey{{h}}day of {{w|Cliff Richard|Cliff_Richard}}. The Band—known as {{w|Alexis Korner{{s}} Blues Incorporated|Alex_Korner's_Blues_Incorporated}}—had the now familiar line{{h}}up of harmonica, guitars and drums and if it was unexiting compared with its {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} parent it had, at least, a rhythmic earthiness and an emotional directness which had been completely absent from pop music since the demise of {{w|rock ’n’ roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} in the late ’50s.

{{tab}}By the end of 1962 the {{w|Beatles|The_Beatles|The Beatles}} had had their first small hit, ''{{w|Love Me Do|Love_Me_Do}}'', featuring the magical combination of harmonica, guitars and drums, and the {{w|Rolling Stones|The_Rolling_Stones|The Rolling Stones}} were making their early public appearances at Ealing and elsewhere. In January, 1963 the Stones appeared for the first time at the ''{{w|Marquee|Marquee_Club|Marquee Club}}''. The {{w|bill|Billing_(performing_arts)|Billing}} was topped by {{p|130}}{{l|Brian Knight|https://www.theguardian.com/news/2001/dec/06/guardianobituaries|British guitarist, 1939–2001
link: obituary in The Guardian}}{{s}} Blues{{h}}by{{h}}six and the Stones earned £2 each as the fill{{h}}in group. By March the Stones had moved on—to the fringe of pop success—and their place was taken by another group from Ealing, the Mann-Hugg Blues Brothers, later to be re{{h}}named {{w|Manfred Mann|Manfred_Mann}}. By the time the Stones had their first small hit, ''{{w|Come On|Come_On_(Chuck_Berry_song)}}'', in the summer of 1963 (only enough to earn them 83rd position in the 1963 ''{{w|New Musical Express|NME|NME}}'' {{w|Points Table|Record_chart|Record chart}}, equal with {{w|Sammy Davis|Sammy_Davis_Jr.|Sammy Davis Jr.}}, {{w|Frank Sinatra|Frank_Sinatra}}, {{w|Ken Dodd|Ken_Dodd}} and Chuck Berry) r {{a}}n{{a}} b was freely tipped as the next pop craze.<br />

{{tab}}It seems to have happened for much the same reason as rock ’n’ roll ten years earlier: a teenage reaction to the sickly gutlessness of orthodox pop. Its success has led to extraordinary results. The Cliff Richard pop image of tidy, boy{{h}}next{{h}}door {{w|Christianity|Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom#Christianity|Religion in the United Kingdom: Christianity}}, has been replaced by a stylised image of rough{{h}}living—beards, long hair, defiant nonchalance and an incoherent, unarticulated curse against conformity. The new image may be as unreal as the old but it is a great deal more tolerable. It is a cliché to observe that pop music is a major field for the exploitation and manipulation of young people, generating respect for false values and poor standards, exploiting dissatisfaction to turn young people in on themselves rather than out on society, serving the function ascribed by {{w|Marx|Karl_Marx|Karl Marx}} to religion, that of an {{qq|opiate of the people}}. It would be unrealistic to claim that r ’n’ b has altered this deeply engrained pop{{h}}cultural pattern but it may have dented it. Since the success of the Beatles—recorded not because they might be made into stars but because they ''already were'' local stars—teenagers have shown a gradually increasing independence of the will of record companies. {{w|Merseybeat|Beat_music|Beat music}} and r ’n’ b—or at any rate the {{w|local variant|British_rhythm_and_blues|British rhythm and blues}} on the American theme—were created by teenagers for themselves and although the companies have exploited this music, they have had their urual role, that of ''creating'' stars, stolen from them by teenagers. This has been a tendency rather than a decisive trend but it may represent the first steps of teenagers to free themselves of the parasites who live off them and their enthusiasms. It is not just that the quality of the music is better, although I believe it is (compare the Beatle{{s|r}} ''{{w|I{{m}} a Loser|I'm_a_Loser}}'' or Manfred Mann{{s}} ''{{w|I{{m}} Your Kingpin|The_Five_Faces_of_Manfred_Mann|The Five Faces of Manfred Mann}}'' with {{w|Adam Faith|Adam_Faith}}{{s}} {{w|''What Do You Want''?|What_Do_You_Want?_(Adam_Faith_song)|What Do You Want?}} or Cliff Richard{{s}} ''{{w|The Young Ones|The_Young_Ones_(song)}}'') but that the relationships between stars and audiences have changed. The new stars are ''of'' their public, neither patronising nor stupid. They are irreverent, they smoke, they drink, they behave with a naturalness which would have earned them nothing but abuse ten years ago and they are articulate spokesmen for the teenage thing as well as for their music. The new stars are not held in awe except by the very young. The club{{h}}goer knows that records are poor imitations of club performances, that record success leads to nothing so much as the dilution of a group{{s}} {{qq|sound}} in an endeavour to court general popularity. It is, in short, doubtful whether the companies have ever held so little sway over the {{w|avant garde|Avant-garde|Avant-garde}} {{qq|popnik}}. Most young people listen to nothing but pop music and within this context the infusion of some blues{{h}}form into pop music is extremely welcome. Even in the hands of white singers it has introduced into a sadly ailing pop culture some elements of an infinitely richer ''folk'' culture {{p|131}}and some elements of a less corrupted ''pop'' culture—the music of Bo Diddley, Chuck Berry and James Brown still expresses something of the agony of negro life as well as the enormous surging vitality and new optimism of the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} {{w|ghettoes|American_ghettos|American ghettos}}. British blues is primarily a {{w|dance music|Dance_music|Dance music}} and if it is impure it has, at least, an enthusiasm which is positively damning to inhibition. In the clubs there is a new vigour.

{{tab}}Kenneth Rexroth once argued that jazz is a revolutionary music only insofar as it is conducive to eroticism in dancing. The same might apply to British r ’n’ b. Today{{s}} audiences are active and the groups, who still play for the critical club audiences rather than the easily pleased pop {{qq|concert}} audiences, must make people want to dance. The modern dances are not {{w|set pattern dances|Ballroom_dance|Ballroom dance}}. The {{w|Shake|The_Shake_(dance)|The Shake}}, the {{w|Dog|Frug_(dance)|Frug}}, the {{w|Jerk|Jerk_(dance)|Jerk}} are dances for crowded rooms, improvised round a basic pattern, and the groups must be able to improvise to provide variety. In the clubs, for example, Manfred Mann have played numbers like {{w|Cannonball Adderley|Cannonball_Adderley}}{{s}} ''{{w|Sack O{{a}} Woe|The_Cannonball_Adderley_Quintet_at_the_Lighthouse|The Cannonball Adderley Quintet at the Lighthouse}}'' and their original—naturally enough never recorded—''Packet of Three'', which involved violent climaxes and sudden cliff{{h}}hanging breaks in the rhythm. {{w|Graham Bond|Graham_Bond}} and {{w|Brian Auger|Brian_Auger}}, recruits from modern jazz, and {{w|Georgie Fame|Georgie_Fame}}, a recruit from rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll, play in much the same manner and now that instrumentation is veering away from harmonicas and guitars, to saxes, flutes, organs and pianos it is these latter groups who may really come into their own.

{{tab}}If the new music is different, so are the new stars. Many of them are strange pop idols. {{w|Keith Relf|Keith_Relf}}, leader of the {{w|Yardbirds|The_Yardbirds|The Yardbirds}}, was a {{w|Beat|Beatnik|Beatnik}} before he made a living by singing and so was {{w|Rod the Mod Stewart|Rod_Stewart|Rod Stewart}}, possibly the best vocalist to emerge from the {{qq|boom}}. (Rod Stewart was also an International Amateur {{w|footballer|Association_football|Association football}}.) Many groups ''look'' Beat; tired, worn and weary with the bum{{s}} slouching walk. Indeed the mythology of the r {{a}}n{{a}} b clubs is the mythology of the angry, dishevelled reject of orthodoxy, the protesting bum. The {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Things|Pretty Things}}, the most beat{{h}}looking of all, sing: {{qq|I{{m}} on my own, just wanna roam/<wbr>I{{ll}} tell you man, don{{t}} wanna home/<wbr>I wander roun{{a}} feet off the groun{{a}}/<wbr>Digging sounds from town to town/<wbr>I say I think this life is grand/<wbr>I say, I dig it man, don{{t}} bring me down, man/<wbr>{{w|Don{{t}} bring me down|Don't_Bring_Me_Down_(The_Pretty_Things_song)|Don{{a}}t Bring Me Down}} {{tab}}I met this chick the other day/<wbr>Then to me she said she{{ll}} stay/<wbr>I got this pad just like a cave/<wbr>And then we have a little rave/<wbr>And now I{{m}} lying on ground/<wbr>My head is spinning round, don{{t}} bring me down man/don{{t}} bring me down}}.

{{tab}}Other singers too have strange pasts. {{w|John Mayall|John_Mayall}}, leader of one of the most vigorous groups, the {{w|Bluesbreakers|John_Mayall_&_the_Bluesbreakers|John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers}}, lived in a {{w|tree top house|Tree_house|Tree house}}. {{w|Manfred Mann (singular)|Manfred_Mann_(musician)|Manfred Mann (musician)}} was {{w|classically trained|Classical_music|Classical music}} at {{w|Juilliard|Juilliard_School|Juilliard School}} in the USA and is, even now, more than a little odd by pop standards. The whole Mann group took one man{{s}} name but insist that they have no leader, that leadership is redundant and responsibility shared and equal. It may have something to do with the fact that their vocalist {{w|Paul Jones|Paul_Jones_(singer)}} was once a member of the {{w|Oxford|University_of_Oxford|University of Oxford}} {{w|Committee of 100|Committee_of_100_(United_Kingdom)}} and is, apparently, still a ''{{w|Tribune|Tribune_(magazine)|Tribune (magazine)}}'' contributor. The {{w|Animals|The_Animals|The Animals}}, probably the best pop{{h}}r {{a}}n{{a}} b group, emerged from the strange {{w|North East|North_East_England|North East England}} phenomenon of {{qq|animals}}, young people who spent the weekends away from their {{p|132}}bourgeois homes, on cheap transport, living {{qq|rough}}. (In the {{w|South|Southern_England|Southern England}} they might have earned the derisive epithet {{qq|weekend ravers}}.)

{{tab}}Most of the r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups who have had hits have done so with numbers which were not r {{a}}n{{a}} b numbers. The Stones made a brave attempt with the slow blues, ''{{w|Little Red Rooster|Little_Red_Rooster}}'', but most of their hits were white pop in origin—''{{w|Not Fade Away|Not_Fade_Away_(song)}}'', a {{w|Buddy Holly|Buddy_Holly}} number, ''{{w|It{{s}} All Over Now|It's_All_Over_Now}}'', originally recorded by the {{w|C & C Boys|Clarence_Carter|Clarence Carter}} in America, a {{w|country{{h}}and{{h}}western|Country_music|Country music}} type number, ''{{w|I Wanna Be Your Man|I_Wanna_Be_Your_Man}}'' was by {{w|Lennon|John_Lennon|John Lennon}} and {{w|McCartney|Paul_McCartney|Paul McCartney}} and ''{{w|The Last Time|The_Last_Time_(Rolling_Stones_song)}}'' was written by themselves although it is reminiscent of the {{w|Staple Singers|The_Staple_Singers|The Staple Singers}}{{a}} ''This May Be My Last Time''. Manfred Mann recorded pop numbers, {{w|nonsense songs|Nonsense_song|Nonsense song}} and a {{w|ballad|Sentimental_ballad|Sentimental ballad}}. Georgie Fame had a big hit with ''{{w|Yeh, Yeh|Yeh,_Yeh}}'', a sophisticated {{w|Lambert|Dave_Lambert_(American_jazz_vocalist)|Dave Lambert}}{{h}}{{w|Hendricks|Jon_Hendricks|Jon Hendricks}}{{h}}{{w|Bavan|Yolande_Bavan|Yolande Bavan}} {{w|{{qq|cool}} jazz|Cool_jazz|Cool jazz}} vocal with little blues content. (Significantly his follow up ''In the Meantime'', in the same vein, did not do so well, dashing the hopes of those who thought Fame represented some sort of commercial breakthrough for {{w|soul{{h}}jazz|Soul_jazz|Soul jazz}}.) The Animal{{s|r}} big hit, {{w|House of the Rising Sun|The_House_of_the_Rising_Sun|The House of the Rising Sun}}, was a folk song. Other groups have either recorded and wrecked blues classics or concentrated on monotonously contrived and unvaryingly dismal versions of Chuck Berry and Bo Diddley numbers, the staple diet of the uninventive. With their own material they are rarely convincing; authentic material they wreck by an apparent incomprehension of what they sing. In the clubs they are usually better and to hear British r {{a}}n{{a}} b, with all its undeniable excitement and all its undeniable, overall mediocrity, it is necessary to visit the clubs.

{{tab}}There are clubs all over the country. In London there is the ''{{w|Flamingo|The_Flamingo_Club|The Flamingo Club}}'', once ''the'' modern jazz centre, with its large, lively and critical audience, many of whom are {{w|West Indian|British_African-Caribbean_people|British African–Caribbean people}}; ''{{w|Klook{{s}} Kleek|Klooks_Kleek|Klooks Kleek}}'' in {{w|West Hampstead|West_Hampstead}} (the name a give{{h}}away of its modern jazz {{w|origins|Klook's_Clique|Klook{{s}} Clique}}); the ''{{w|Crawdaddys|Crawdaddy_Club|Crawdaddy Club}}'' at {{w|Richmond|Richmond,_London|Richmond, London}} and {{w|Croydon|Broad_Green,_London|Broad Green, London}}; ''Bluesville Harringay'' at {{w|Manor House|Manor_House,_London|Manor House, London}}; ''Club Noreik'' at {{w|Tottenham|Tottenham}} and many, many more. In {{w|Southampton|Southampton}} there is ''Club Concord'', in {{w|Manchester|Manchester}} the ''{{w|Twisted Wheel|Twisted_Wheel_Club|Twisted Wheel Club}}'', in {{w|Guildford|Guildford}} and {{w|Windsor|Windsor,_Berkshire|Windsor, Berkshire}} the ''{{w|Ricky Ticks|Ricky-Tick|Ricky-Tick}}''. The outlandishness of their names is only equalled by the names of the groups who play in them. Some take their names from song titles—the {{w|Rolling Stones|Rollin'_Stone|Rollin{{a}} Stone (song)}}, the {{w|Hoochie Coochie Men|Hoochie_Coochie_Man||1964–65 band with Long John Baldry, Rod Stewart, and Geoff Bradford
Wikipedia: Hoochie Coochie Man (song)}}, the {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Thing|Pretty Thing (song)}}, the {{w|Thunderbirds|Thunderbird_(Willis_Jackson_album)||1963–68 band with Chris Farlowe and Bob Taylor
Wikipedia: Thunderbird (song)}}, the {{w|Dissatisfieds|Down_and_Out_Blues||1964 band who played at the Marquee Club
Wikipedia: Dissatisfied (song)}}. Others borrow other singer{{s|r}} names—the {{w|T-Bones|T-Bone_Walker||1963–66 band with Gary Farr
Wikipedia: T-Bone Walker}}, the {{w|Bo Street Runners|The_Bo_Street_Runners|The Bo Street Runners}}. Some use names which seem to sound good—the {{l|Authentics|https://jppsessionman.jimdofree.com/john-williams/|1963–64 band with John Williams, Berne Williams, and Jimmy Page
link: Jimmy Page fan site}}, the {{l|Soul Agents|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/soul-agents-mn0000428542/biography|Allmusic: The Soul Agents}}, the {{w|Delta Five|Nick_Simper|Nick Simper}}, {{l|Hogsnort Rupert|https://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/ricky-tick/|Hogsnort Rupert and the Good Good Band, fronted by Bob McGrath
link: Collectors Weekly article}}, the {{l|Loose{{h}}ends|https://garagehangover.com/the-loose-ends/|1964–67 band with Alan Marshall, Rick Marshall, Roy Davies, Peter Kirtley, and Alan Whitehead
link: Garage Hangover}}, the {{w|Downliner{{s|r}} Sect|Downliners_Sect|Downliners Sect}}. The British blues has its acknowledged {{qq|originals}}, as does negro blues. The more hip fans talk as reverently of Alexis Korner, Cy Davies and even {{w|George Melly|George_Melly}}, as blues enthusiasts of {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}} or {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}. The leading star of this old elite is {{w|Long John Baldry|Long_John_Baldry}} who was a vocalist{{h}}tambourinist with Cyril Davie{{s|r}} {{w|All{{h}}Stars|All-Stars_(band)|All-Stars}} (formed, from {{w|Screaming Lord Sutch|Screaming_Lord_Sutch}}{{s}} former backing group, the {{w|Savages|Screaming_Lord_Sutch_and_the_Savages|Screaming Lord Sutch and the Savages}}, after Davie{{s|r}} break with Korner) and took over the band, changing its name to the Hoochie Coochie Men when Davies died, late in 1963. Baldry has an enviable reputation, earned partly because he is convinced of his own value and {{p|133}}partly because most groups are very poor, which has enabled him to break attendance records set by more apparently successful groups like the Rolling Stones. He is a passable singer, clever but unmoving. The sort of boredom he induces has often been thought a sign of authenticity.

{{tab}}Over the last eighteen months there has been a steady stream of real bluesmen to this country, among them {{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}}, {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin{{a}} Hopkins}}, {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} and the unquestioned genius of instrumental blues, the harmonicist {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. While it remains sadly true that local white singers are preferred to the {{qq|originals}}, it is almost entirely due to the propaganda efforts of the white musicians that we have been able to see the genuine article at all. People like {{w|Mick Jagger|Mick_Jagger}} of the Rolling Stones have been admirably unselfish in their fulsome praise of singers like Muddy Waters, James Brown and {{w|Howling Wolf|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin{{a}} Wolf}}, an unselfishness which clearly places them apart from most English {{w|revivalist|Revivalist_artist|Revivalist artist}} jazz band leaders.

{{tab}}It is tempting to end this account by arguing strongly that white singers and musicians should leave negro {{qq|folk}} music alone. The British singers argue, correctly I think, that no music is sacrosanct, that if they wish to play what they like and publicly champion, that is their affair. So it is. It is also the critic{{s}} right to assess their music, rather than their social significance, in terms of the negro tradition and find it wanting. When Rod Stewart made the memorable statement that it is as easy to have the blues in the {{w|Archway Road|A1_in_London#Haringey|A1 in London: Haringey}} as on a Deep South railroad he was, in a way, right. You can have the blues in the Archway Road—the blues is, in one sense, the immemorial music of sadness. But it is more than a sadness in the heart, more than the ache of hunger, more than the misery of the hobo. It is the vocal expression of a people, just as all ''real'' folk music is. Rod Stewart is only half right. It may be as easy to ''have'' the blues in the Archway Road. It just is not as easy to ''sing'' them.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues in the archway road}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues in the Archway Road

2021-09-30T23:49:37Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 51 (Vol 5 No 5) MAY 1965]]<br>Blues in the Archway Road
| author = Ben Covington
| section =
| previous = [[../|Contents of No. 51]]
| next = [[../What have they done to the folk?|What have they done to the folk?]]
| notes =
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|129}}

<font size="5">'''Blues in the<br>Archway Road'''</font>

<font size="4">'''[[Author:Ben Covington|BEN COVINGTON]]'''</font>

<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|Looking at the posters that litter the side streets}} of central and suburban {{w|London}}, one might be forgiven for assuming that the {{w|Blues}} was created by a post{{h}}{{w|Aldermaston|Aldermaston_Marches|Aldermaston Marches}} generation of art students rather than by the afflicted {{w|negro|African_Americans|African Americas}} population of the {{w|American|United_States|United States}} {{w|Deep South|Deep_South|Deep South}}. The posters advertise {{sc|authentic {{w|Rhythm ’n’ blues|Rhythm_and_blues|Rhythm and blues}}}} by groups which play a variety of music—some {{w|Pop|Pop_music|Pop music}}{{h}}oriented, some {{w|Folk|Folk_music|Folk music}}{{h}}oriented, some {{w|Jazz}}{{h}}oriented but largely derived from the music of the more sensational {{w|coloured|Person_of_color|Person of color}} entertainers of the {{w|USA|United_States|United States}}, like {{w|Chuck Berry|Chuck_Berry|Chuck Berry}}, {{w|Bo Diddley|Bo_Diddley|Bo Diddley}}, {{w|James Brown|James_Brown|James Brown}} and {{w|T-Bone Walker|T-Bone_Walker|T-Bone Walker}}. Of the 2,000 or more groups working the multitude of large and small {{w|clubs|Nightclub|Nightclub}}, no more than two dozen are in any way original, even in pop{{h}}music terms, and even these are rootless shadows of the singers on whose material they draw. The difference between the blues of modern America and the {{qq|blues}} of modern {{w|Britain|United_Kingdom|United Kingdom}} is the difference between music which is an authentic racial expression and music which is an expression of no more than a liking for the authentic form.

{{tab}}The origins of {{w|British {{qq|blues}}|British_blues|British blues}} are far from clear. Their seminal genius may have been {{w|Muddy Waters|Muddy_Waters}} who toured Britain in 1958 but it was not until March, 1962, when the harmonica player {{w|Cyril Davies|Cyril_Davies}} and the guitarist {{w|Alexis Korner|Alexis_Korner}} opened the first of the clubs—next door to the {{w|ABC Teashop|Aerated_Bread_Company|Aerated Bread Company}} off {{w|Ealing Broadway|Ealing|Ealing}}—that the {{qq|boom}} really had its beginnings. Korner and Davies played mainly {{popup|pre-war|The United States formally joined World War II in December 1941.}} blues of the negro night clubs of urban America. Once they had their own stage the {{qq|boom}} gathered in {{w|Central London|Central_London|Central London}}, attracting a young audience in reaction against a particularly enfeebled pop music—this was the hey{{h}}day of {{w|Cliff Richard|Cliff_Richard}}. The Band—known as {{w|Alexis Korner{{s}} Blues Incorporated|Alex_Korner's_Blues_Incorporated}}—had the now familiar line{{h}}up of harmonica, guitars and drums and if it was unexiting compared with its {{w|Chicago|Chicago_blues|Chicago blues}} parent it had, at least, a rhythmic earthiness and an emotional directness which had been completely absent from pop music since the demise of {{w|rock ’n’ roll|Rock_and_roll|Rock and roll}} in the late ’50s.

{{tab}}By the end of 1962 the {{w|Beatles|The_Beatles|The Beatles}} had had their first small hit, ''{{w|Love Me Do|Love_Me_Do}}'', featuring the magical combination of harmonica, guitars and drums, and the {{w|Rolling Stones|The_Rolling_Stones|The Rolling Stones}} were making their early public appearances at Ealing and elsewhere. In January, 1963 the Stones appeared for the first time at the ''{{w|Marquee|Marquee_Club|Marquee Club}}''. The {{w|bill|Billing_(performing_arts)|Billing}} was topped by {{p|130}}{{l|Brian Knight|https://www.theguardian.com/news/2001/dec/06/guardianobituaries|British guitarist, 1939–2001
link: obituary in The Guardian}}{{s}} Blues{{h}}by{{h}}six and the Stones earned £2 each as the fill{{h}}in group. By March the Stones had moved on—to the fringe of pop success—and their place was taken by another group from Ealing, the Mann-Hugg Blues Brothers, later to be re{{h}}named {{w|Manfred Mann|Manfred_Mann}}. By the time the Stones had their first small hit, ''{{w|Come On|Come_On_(Chuck_Berry_song)}}'', in the summer of 1963 (only enough to earn them 83rd position in the 1963 ''{{w|New Musical Express|NME|NME}}'' {{w|Points Table|Record_chart|Record chart}}, equal with {{w|Sammy Davis|Sammy_Davis_Jr.|Sammy Davis Jr.}}, {{w|Frank Sinatra|Frank_Sinatra}}, {{w|Ken Dodd|Ken_Dodd}} and Chuck Berry) r {{a}}n{{a}} b was freely tipped as the next pop craze.<br />

{{tab}}It seems to have happened for much the same reason as rock ’n’ roll ten years earlier: a teenage reaction to the sickly gutlessness of orthodox pop. Its success has led to extraordinary results. The Cliff Richard pop image of tidy, boy{{h}}next{{h}}door {{w|Christianity|Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom#Christianity|Religion in the United Kingdom: Christianity}}, has been replaced by a stylised image of rough{{h}}living—beards, long hair, defiant nonchalance and an incoherent, unarticulated curse against conformity. The new image may be as unreal as the old but it is a great deal more tolerable. It is a cliché to observe that pop music is a major field for the exploitation and manipulation of young people, generating respect for false values and poor standards, exploiting dissatisfaction to turn young people in on themselves rather than out on society, serving the function ascribed by {{w|Marx|Karl_Marx|Karl Marx}} to religion, that of an {{qq|opiate of the people}}. It would be unrealistic to claim that r ’n’ b has altered this deeply engrained pop{{h}}cultural pattern but it may have dented it. Since the success of the Beatles—recorded not because they might be made into stars but because they ''already were'' local stars—teenagers have shown a gradually increasing independence of the will of record companies. {{w|Merseybeat|Beat_music|Beat music}} and r ’n’ b—or at any rate the {{w|local variant|British_rhythm_and_blues|British rhythm and blues}} on the American theme—were created by teenagers for themselves and although the companies have exploited this music, they have had their urual role, that of ''creating'' stars, stolen from them by teenagers. This has been a tendency rather than a decisive trend but it may represent the first steps of teenagers to free themselves of the parasites who live off them and their enthusiasms. It is not just that the quality of the music is better, although I believe it is (compare the Beatle{{s|r}} ''{{w|I{{m}} a Loser|I'm_a_Loser}}'' or Manfred Mann{{s}} ''{{w|I{{m}} Your Kingpin|The_Five_Faces_of_Manfred_Mann|The Five Faces of Manfred Mann}}'' with {{w|Adam Faith|Adam_Faith}}{{s}} {{w|''What Do You Want''?|What_Do_You_Want?_(Adam_Faith_song)|What Do You Want?}} or Cliff Richard{{s}} ''{{w|The Young Ones|The_Young_Ones_(song)}}'') but that the relationships between stars and audiences have changed. The new stars are ''of'' their public, neither patronising nor stupid. They are irreverent, they smoke, they drink, they behave with a naturalness which would have earned them nothing but abuse ten years ago and they are articulate spokesmen for the teenage thing as well as for their music. The new stars are not held in awe except by the very young. The club{{h}}goer knows that records are poor imitations of club performances, that record success leads to nothing so much as the dilution of a group{{s}} {{qq|sound}} in an endeavour to court general popularity. It is, in short, doubtful whether the companies have ever held so little sway over the {{w|avant garde|Avant-garde|Avant-garde}} {{qq|popnik}}. Most young people listen to nothing but pop music and within this context the infusion of some blues{{h}}form into pop music is extremely welcome. Even in the hands of white singers it has introduced into a sadly ailing pop culture some elements of an infinitely richer ''folk'' culture {{p|131}}and some elements of a less corrupted ''pop'' culture—the music of Bo Diddley, Chuck Berry and James Brown still expresses something of the agony of negro life as well as the enormous surging vitality and new optimism of the {{w|Northern|Northern_United_States|Northern United States}} {{w|ghettoes|American_ghettos|American ghettos}}. British blues is primarily a {{w|dance music|Dance_music|Dance music}} and if it is impure it has, at least, an enthusiasm which is positively damning to inhibition. In the clubs there is a new vigour.

{{tab}}Kenneth Rexroth once argued that jazz is a revolutionary music only insofar as it is conducive to eroticism in dancing. The same might apply to British r ’n’ b. Today{{s}} audiences are active and the groups, who still play for the critical club audiences rather than the easily pleased pop {{qq|concert}} audiences, must make people want to dance. The modern dances are not {{w|set pattern dances|Ballroom_dance|Ballroom dance}}. The {{w|Shake|The_Shake_(dance)|The Shake}}, the {{w|Dog|Frug_(dance)|Frug}}, the {{w|Jerk|Jerk_(dance)|Jerk}} are dances for crowded rooms, improvised round a basic pattern, and the groups must be able to improvise to provide variety. In the clubs, for example, Manfred Mann have played numbers like {{w|Cannonball Adderley|Cannonball_Adderley}}{{s}} ''{{w|Sack O{{a}} Woe|The_Cannonball_Adderley_Quintet_at_the_Lighthouse|The Cannonball Adderley Quintet at the Lighthouse}}'' and their original—naturally enough never recorded—''Packet of Three'', which involved violent climaxes and sudden cliff{{h}}hanging breaks in the rhythm. {{w|Graham Bond|Graham_Bond}} and {{w|Brian Auger|Brian_Auger}}, recruits from modern jazz, and {{w|Georgie Fame|Georgie_Fame}}, a recruit from rock {{a}}n{{a}} roll, play in much the same manner and now that instrumentation is veering away from harmonicas and guitars, to saxes, flutes, organs and pianos it is these latter groups who may really come into their own.

{{tab}}If the new music is different, so are the new stars. Many of them are strange pop idols. {{w|Keith Relf|Keith_Relf}}, leader of the {{w|Yardbirds|The_Yardbirds|The Yardbirds}}, was a {{w|Beat|Beatnik|Beatnik}} before he made a living by singing and so was {{w|Rod the Mod Stewart|Rod_Stewart|Rod Stewart}}, possibly the best vocalist to emerge from the {{qq|boom}}. (Rod Stewart was also an International Amateur {{w|footballer|Association_football|Association football}}.) Many groups ''look'' Beat; tired, worn and weary with the bum{{s}} slouching walk. Indeed the mythology of the r {{a}}n{{a}} b clubs is the mythology of the angry, dishevelled reject of orthodoxy, the protesting bum. The {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Things|Pretty Things}}, the most beat{{h}}looking of all, sing: {{qq|I{{m}} on my own, just wanna roam/<wbr>I{{ll}} tell you man, don{{t}} wanna home/<wbr>I wander roun{{a}} feet off the groun{{a}}/<wbr>Digging sounds from town to town/<wbr>I say I think this life is grand/<wbr>I say, I dig it man, don{{t}} bring me down, man/<wbr>{{w|Don{{t}} bring me down|Don't_Bring_Me_Down_(The_Pretty_Things_song)|Don{{a}}t Bring Me Down}} {{tab}}I met this chick the other day/<wbr>Then to me she said she{{ll}} stay/<wbr>I got this pad just like a cave/<wbr>And then we have a little rave/<wbr>And now I{{m}} lying on ground/<wbr>My head is spinning round, don{{t}} bring me down man/don{{t}} bring me down}}.

{{tab}}Other singers too have strange pasts. {{w|John Mayall|John_Mayall}}, leader of one of the most vigorous groups, the {{w|Bluesbreakers|John_Mayall_&_the_Bluesbreakers|John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers}}, lived in a {{w|tree top house|Tree_house|Tree house}}. {{w|Manfred Mann (singular)|Manfred_Mann_(musician)|Manfred Mann (musician)}} was {{w|classically trained|Classical_music|Classical music}} at {{w|Juilliard|Juilliard_School|Juilliard School}} in the USA and is, even now, more than a little odd by pop standards. The whole Mann group took one man{{s}} name but insist that they have no leader, that leadership is redundant and responsibility shared and equal. It may have something to do with the fact that their vocalist {{w|Paul Jones|Paul_Jones_(singer)}} was once a member of the {{w|Oxford|University_of_Oxford|University of Oxford}} {{w|Committee of 100|Committee_of_100_(United_Kingdom)}} and is, apparently, still a ''{{w|Tribune|Tribune_(magazine)|Tribune (magazine)}}'' contributor. The {{w|Animals|The_Animals|The Animals}}, probably the best pop{{h}}r {{a}}n{{a}} b group, emerged from the strange {{w|North East|North_East_England|North East England}} phenomenon of {{qq|animals}}, young people who spent the weekends away from their bourgeois homes, on cheap transport, living {{qq|rough}}. (In the {{w|South|Southern_England|Southern England}} they might have earned the derisive epithet {{qq|weekend ravers}}.)

{{tab}}Most of the r {{a}}n{{a}} b groups who have had hits have done so with numbers which were not r {{a}}n{{a}} b numbers. The Stones made a brave attempt with the slow blues, ''{{w|Little Red Rooster|Little_Red_Rooster}}'', but most of their hits were white pop in origin—''{{w|Not Fade Away|Not_Fade_Away_(song)}}'', a {{w|Buddy Holly|Buddy_Holly}} number, ''{{w|It{{s}} All Over Now|It's_All_Over_Now}}'', originally recorded by the {{w|C & C Boys|Clarence_Carter|Clarence Carter}} in America, a {{w|country{{h}}and{{h}}western|Country_music|Country music}} type number, ''{{w|I Wanna Be Your Man|I_Wanna_Be_Your_Man}}'' was by {{w|Lennon|John_Lennon|John Lennon}} and {{w|McCartney|Paul_McCartney|Paul McCartney}} and ''{{w|The Last Time|The_Last_Time_(Rolling_Stones_song)}}'' was written by themselves although it is reminiscent of the {{w|Staple Singers|The_Staple_Singers|The Staple Singers}}{{a}} ''This May Be My Last Time''. Manfred Mann recorded pop numbers, {{w|nonsense songs|Nonsense_song|Nonsense song}} and a {{w|ballad|Sentimental_ballad|Sentimental ballad}}. Georgie Fame had a big hit with ''{{w|Yeh, Yeh|Yeh,_Yeh}}'', a sophisticated {{w|Lambert|Dave_Lambert_(American_jazz_vocalist)|Dave Lambert}}{{h}}{{w|Hendricks|Jon_Hendricks|Jon Hendricks}}{{h}}{{w|Bavan|Yolande_Bavan|Yolande Bavan}} {{w|{{qq|cool}} jazz|Cool_jazz|Cool jazz}} vocal with little blues content. (Significantly his follow up ''In the Meantime'', in the same vein, did not do so well, dashing the hopes of those who thought Fame represented some sort of commercial breakthrough for {{w|soul{{h}}jazz|Soul_jazz|Soul jazz}}.) The Animal{{s|r}} big hit, {{w|House of the Rising Sun|The_House_of_the_Rising_Sun|The House of the Rising Sun}}, was a folk song. Other groups have either recorded and wrecked blues classics or concentrated on monotonously contrived and unvaryingly dismal versions of Chuck Berry and Bo Diddley numbers, the staple diet of the uninventive. With their own material they are rarely convincing; authentic material they wreck by an apparent incomprehension of what they sing. In the clubs they are usually better and to hear British r {{a}}n{{a}} b, with all its undeniable excitement and all its undeniable, overall mediocrity, it is necessary to visit the clubs.

{{tab}}There are clubs all over the country. In London there is the ''{{w|Flamingo|The_Flamingo_Club|The Flamingo Club}}'', once ''the'' modern jazz centre, with its large, lively and critical audience, many of whom are {{w|West Indian|British_African-Caribbean_people|British African–Caribbean people}}; ''{{w|Klook{{s}} Kleek|Klooks_Kleek|Klooks Kleek}}'' in {{w|West Hampstead|West_Hampstead}} (the name a give{{h}}away of its modern jazz {{w|origins|Klook's_Clique|Klook{{s}} Clique}}); the ''{{w|Crawdaddys|Crawdaddy_Club|Crawdaddy Club}}'' at {{w|Richmond|Richmond,_London|Richmond, London}} and {{w|Croydon|Broad_Green,_London|Broad Green, London}}; ''Bluesville Harringay'' at {{w|Manor House|Manor_House,_London|Manor House, London}}; ''Club Noreik'' at {{w|Tottenham|Tottenham}} and many, many more. In {{w|Southampton|Southampton}} there is ''Club Concord'', in {{w|Manchester|Manchester}} the ''{{w|Twisted Wheel|Twisted_Wheel_Club|Twisted Wheel Club}}'', in {{w|Guildford|Guildford}} and {{w|Windsor|Windsor,_Berkshire|Windsor, Berkshire}} the ''{{w|Ricky Ticks|Ricky-Tick|Ricky-Tick}}''. The outlandishness of their names is only equalled by the names of the groups who play in them. Some take their names from song titles—the {{w|Rolling Stones|Rollin'_Stone|Rollin{{a}} Stone (song)}}, the {{w|Hoochie Coochie Men|Hoochie_Coochie_Man||1964–65 band with Long John Baldry, Rod Stewart, and Geoff Bradford
Wikipedia: Hoochie Coochie Man (song)}}, the {{w|Pretty Things|Pretty_Thing|Pretty Thing (song)}}, the {{w|Thunderbirds|Thunderbird_(Willis_Jackson_album)||1963–68 band with Chris Farlowe and Bob Taylor
Wikipedia: Thunderbird (song)}}, the {{w|Dissatisfieds|Down_and_Out_Blues||1964 band who played at the Marquee Club
Wikipedia: Dissatisfied (song)}}. Others borrow other singer{{s|r}} names—the {{w|T-Bones|T-Bone_Walker||1963–66 band with Gary Farr
Wikipedia: T-Bone Walker}}, the {{w|Bo Street Runners|The_Bo_Street_Runners|The Bo Street Runners}}. Some use names which seem to sound good—the {{l|Authentics|https://jppsessionman.jimdofree.com/john-williams/|1963–64 band with John Williams, Berne Williams, and Jimmy Page
link: Jimmy Page fan site}}, the {{l|Soul Agents|https://www.allmusic.com/artist/soul-agents-mn0000428542/biography|Allmusic: The Soul Agents}}, the {{w|Delta Five|Nick_Simper|Nick Simper}}, {{l|Hogsnort Rupert|https://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/ricky-tick/|Hogsnort Rupert and the Good Good Band, fronted by Bob McGrath
link: Collectors Weekly article}}, the {{l|Loose{{h}}ends|https://garagehangover.com/the-loose-ends/|1964–67 band with Alan Marshall, Rick Marshall, Roy Davies, Peter Kirtley, and Alan Whitehead
link: Garage Hangover}}, the {{w|Downliner{{s|r}} Sect|Downliners_Sect|Downliners Sect}}. The British blues has its acknowledged {{qq|originals}}, as does negro blues. The more hip fans talk as reverently of Alexis Korner, Cy Davies and even {{w|George Melly|George_Melly}}, as blues enthusiasts of {{w|Son House|Son_House}}, {{w|Charlie Patton|Charley_Patton|Charley Patton}} or {{w|Robert Johnson|Robert_Johnson}}. The leading star of this old elite is {{w|Long John Baldry|Long_John_Baldry}} who was a vocalist{{h}}tambourinist with Cyril Davie{{s|r}} {{w|All{{h}}Stars|All-Stars_(band)|All-Stars}} (formed, from {{w|Screaming Lord Sutch|Screaming_Lord_Sutch}}{{s}} former backing group, the {{w|Savages|Screaming_Lord_Sutch_and_the_Savages|Screaming Lord Sutch and the Savages}}, after Davie{{s|r}} break with Korner) and took over the band, changing its name to the Hoochie Coochie Men when Davies died, late in 1963. Baldry has an enviable reputation, earned partly because he is convinced of his own value and {{p|133}}partly because most groups are very poor, which has enabled him to break attendance records set by more apparently successful groups like the Rolling Stones. He is a passable singer, clever but unmoving. The sort of boredom he induces has often been thought a sign of authenticity.

{{tab}}Over the last eighteen months there has been a steady stream of real bluesmen to this country, among them {{w|Big Joe Williams|Big_Joe_Williams}}, {{w|Sleepy John Estes|Sleepy_John_Estes}}, {{w|Lightning Hopkins|Lightnin'_Hopkins|Lightnin{{a}} Hopkins}}, {{w|John Lee Hooker|John_Lee_Hooker}} and the unquestioned genius of instrumental blues, the harmonicist {{w|Little Walter Jacobs|Little_Walter|Little Walter}}. While it remains sadly true that local white singers are preferred to the {{qq|originals}}, it is almost entirely due to the propaganda efforts of the white musicians that we have been able to see the genuine article at all. People like {{w|Mick Jagger|Mick_Jagger}} of the Rolling Stones have been admirably unselfish in their fulsome praise of singers like Muddy Waters, James Brown and {{w|Howling Wolf|Howlin'_Wolf|Howlin{{a}} Wolf}}, an unselfishness which clearly places them apart from most English {{w|revivalist|Revivalist_artist|Revivalist artist}} jazz band leaders.

{{tab}}It is tempting to end this account by arguing strongly that white singers and musicians should leave negro {{qq|folk}} music alone. The British singers argue, correctly I think, that no music is sacrosanct, that if they wish to play what they like and publicly champion, that is their affair. So it is. It is also the critic{{s}} right to assess their music, rather than their social significance, in terms of the negro tradition and find it wanting. When Rod Stewart made the memorable statement that it is as easy to have the blues in the {{w|Archway Road|A1_in_London#Haringey|A1 in London: Haringey}} as on a Deep South railroad he was, in a way, right. You can have the blues in the Archway Road—the blues is, in one sense, the immemorial music of sadness. But it is more than a sadness in the heart, more than the ache of hunger, more than the misery of the hobo. It is the vocal expression of a people, just as all ''real'' folk music is. Rod Stewart is only half right. It may be as easy to ''have'' the blues in the Archway Road. It just is not as easy to ''sing'' them.
</div></div>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Blues in the archway road}}
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Race]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-09-30T23:44:14Z

Ivanhoe:

Anarchy 51/Blues walking like a man

2021-09-30T21:36:51Z

Ivanhoe:

Anarchy 31/Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems

2021-09-30T20:16:29Z

Ivanhoe:

{{header
| title = [[../|ANARCHY 31 (Vol 3 No 9) SEPTEMBER 1963]]<br>Anarchism and the cybernetics of self-organising systems
| author = John D. McEwan
| section =
| previous = [[../Randolph Bourne vs. the State|Randolph Bourne vs. the State]]
| next = [[../Beatnik as anarchist?|Beatnik as anarchist?]]
| notes = ''JOHN D. McEWAN was born in'' 1938 ''and after a somewhat erratic career in both Science and Arts Faculties at the {{w|University of St. Andrews|University_of_St_Andrews}}, emerged with a degree in mathematics. He is now working on diagnostic programming for an electronic computer.''
}}

<div style="max-width:500px; margin:auto;">{{p|270}}

{| width="100%"
|-
| colspan="2" |<font size="5">'''Anarchism and the'''</font>
|-
| colspan="2" |<font size="5">'''cybernetics of self-organising'''</font><br>
|-
| <font size="5">'''systems'''</font>
| align="right" valign="top" | <font size="4">'''[[Author:John D. McEwan|JOHN D. McEWAN]]'''</font>
|}

{{p|s1|n}}<div style="text-align:justify;">{{sc|The intention of this article}} is to suggest that some of the concepts used by {{w|cyberneticians|Cybernetics|Cybernetics}} studying evolving self-organising systems may be relevant to anarchist theory, and that some of the conclusions drawn from this study tend to favour libertarian models of social organisation. Much of the specifically cybernetic material is drawn from lectures given by {{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}} and {{w|Stafford Beer|Stafford_Beer}} at {{w|Salford College of Advanced Technology|University_of_Salford|University of Salford}}. They are not, of course, responsible for any conclusions drawn, except where explicitly stated.

{{tab}}Firstly, what do we mean by a self-organising system? One definition is simply {{q|a system in which the ''order'' increases as time passes}}, that is, in which the ratio of the ''{{w|variety|Variety_(cybernetics)|Variety (cybernetics)}}'' exhibited to the maximum possible variety decreases; variety being a measure of the complexity of the system as it appears to an observer, the uncertainty for the observer regarding its behaviour. A system with large variety will have a larger number of possible states than one with smaller variety. Thus such a system may start by exhibiting very varied behaviour, ''e.g.'' a large number of different responses to a given stimulus may appear equally likely, but over a period of time the behaviour becomes less erratic, more predictable—fewer and fewer distinct responses to a given stimulus are possible (or, better, have a significantly high probability.)

{{tab}}This definition is, however, in some ways restrictive. The best such a system can do is to reach some sort of optimum state and stay there. Also, if we regard the system as a {{w|control system|Control_system|Control system}} attempting to maintain stability in a fluctuating environment, the types of disturbance with which it can deal are limited by the fixed maximum variety of the system. This point will be dealt with later. The essential thing is that unpredictable disturbances are liable to prove too much for the system.

{{tab}}Such considerations suggest that it would be more fruitful to incorporate in the definition the idea that the maximum possible variety might also differ at different times. Thus Pask restricts the term to situations where the history of {{q|the system}} can best be represented as a series S₀ S₁ … S''ₙ'' each term a system with fixed maximum variety, and each self-organising in the first sense. With this definition we are {{p|271}}able to deal with control systems of the type found in living organisms. Indeed, with a few limited exceptions, biological and social organisation are, up to now, the only fields in which such control systems can be found. Some of the exceptions, in the shape of artificially constructed systems, despite their crude and elementary nature in comparison with living organisms, do however exhibit remarkably advanced behaviour, at least in comparison with conventional controllers.

{{tab}}For an example of self-organising behaviour in this sense, we may consider a human being learning to solve certain types of problem, as his behaviour appears to an observer. Over an interval the behaviour may appear self-organising in the first sense. When, however, the learner adopts a new concept or method, there will be a discontinuity in the development of the behaviour, after which it will again be self-organising in the first sense, for a time, but now incorporating new possibilities, and so on.

{{tab}}In many discussions of control situations the concept of {{q|Hierarchy}} appears very quickly. This may tend to make the anarchist recoil, but should not do so, since the usage is a technical one and does not coincide with the use of the term in anarchist criticisms of political organisation.

{{tab}}Firstly, the cybernetician makes a very important distinction between two types of hierarchy, the ''anatomical'' and the ''functional'', to use the terminology adopted by Pask. The former is the type exemplified in part by hierarchical social organisation in the normal sense (''e.g.'' {{q|tree of command}} structure in industry), that is: there are two (if two levels) actual distinguishable concrete entities involved. The latter refers to the case where there may be only one entity, but there are two or more levels of information structure operating in the system—as for example in some types of {{w|neuron networks|Biological_neural_network|Biological neural network}}. A comparable concept is {{w|Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}{{s}} {{q|disalienated decision procedure}}.<ref>See {{w|Seymour Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}: '''Decision-Making and Productivity''' (Blackwell, 1958).</ref> This idea might, I think, be suggestive to anarchists.

{{tab}}Secondly, even in the case of {{q|anatomical hierarchy}}, the term only means that parts of the system can be distinguished dealing with different levels of decision making and learning, ''e.g.'' some parts may deal directly with the environment, while other parts relate to activity of these first parts, or some parts learn about individual occurrences, while others learn about sequences of individual occurrences, and others again about classes of sequences.

{{tab}}Even in the anatomical sense, then, the term need have none of the connotations of coercive sanctions in a ruler-ruled relationship which are common in other usages.

{{tab}}An important phenomenon in self-organising systems is interaction between the information flowing in the system and the structure of the system. In a complex system this leads to ''Redundancy of Potential Command''—it is ''impossible to pick out the critical decision-making element,'' since this will change from one time to another, and depend on the information in the system. It will be evident that this implies that the idea of a hierarchy can have only limited application in such a system.

{{p|272}}{{tab}}I will now attempt to give a brief sketch of a partly artificial self-organising system, involving the interaction between human beings and a machine. This provides examples of the concepts introduced, and also, I feel, suggests important general conclusions about the characteristics of self-organising groups—characteristics which may sound familiar to libertarians. The machine in question is a group teaching machine developed by Gordon Pask.<ref>{{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}}: {{qq|Interaction between a Group of Subjects and an Adaptive Automaton to produce a Self-Organising System for Decision-Making}} in the symposium '''Self-Organising Systems, 1962,''' ed. {{popup|Jovits|Marshall C. Yovits (born 1923), American computer scientist}}, {{popup|Jacobi|George T. Jacobi, Armour Research Foundation}} and {{popup|Goldstein|Gordon David Goldstein (1917-1989), American computer scientist}} (Spartan Books).</ref>

{{tab}}Prior to this Pask had developed individual teaching machines which were important advances in the growth of applied cybernetics.<ref>See {{w|Stafford Beer|Stafford_Beer}}: '''Cybernetics and Management''' (English Universities Press, 1959) pp.123-127, and {{w|Gordon Pask|Gordon_Pask}}: '''An Approach to Cybernetics''' (Hutchinson, 1961).</ref> However, on considering the problem of group teaching (for skills where some calculable measure of the pupil{{s|r}} performance, the rate of change of which will serve as a suitable indication of learning, exists), he did not simply combine individual machines.

{{tab}}The important insight he had was that a group of human beings, in a learning situation, is itself an evolutionary system, which suggested the idea of the machine as a catalyst, ''modifying the communication channels in the group,'' and thus producing different group structures.

{{tab}}In the development of the individual teaching machines, the possibility of the pupil dominating the machine had already arisen. This Pask now extended by introducing the idea of a quality {{q|money}} allocated to each member of the group, and used by each of them to {{q|buy}} for himself control over the communication structure of the group and over the partial specification of the solution provided by the machine. Now, in the individual machine, the degree to which the pupil was helped was coupled to change of his degree of success. If he was becoming more successful then the help given was decreased. In the group machine, the allocation of {{q|money}} is coupled to ''two'' conditions—increasing success ''and'' increasing variety in the group structure. This second condition is the key to the novelty of the system.

{{tab}}The system, then, has changing dominance and exhibits redundancy of potential command.

{{tab}}In practice, each pupil sits in a little cubicle provided with buttons and indicators for communication, and a computer is used for control, calculating the various measures, etc. The operator is provided with some way of seeing what is going on, and can deliberately make things difficult for the group, by introducing false information into the channels, etc., seeing how the group copes with it.

{{tab}}The problems which Pask, at the time, had used in these group experiments had been formulated as conveying information about the position of a point in some space, with noise in the communication channels. The group had been asked to imagine that they are air traffic controllers, given co-ordinates specifying the position of an aircraft at a certain time, for example.

{{tab}}He suggests, however, that problems of agreeing on a choice of policy on a basis of agreed facts is not, in principle, very different from the case in which {{q|the facts}} are in dispute, and there is no question of adopting any future policy—except of course the policy to adopt in order to ascertain the true facts and communicate them; this being the problem which the group solves for itself. It is in this sense that {{p|273}}the group may be regarded as a decision maker.

{{tab}}It will be noted that the state of the system when in equilibrium ''is'' the solution to the problem. Also that this solution changes with time. This is also the case in the first example from purely human organisation which occurred to me—a jazz band (an example also suggested by Pask).

{{tab}}Pask emphasised that he had not then had the opportunity to obtain sufficient data to make any far-reaching well substantiated generalisations from these experiments. The results he had obtained, however, were very interesting and, I think, give considerable insight into the characteristics of self-organising systems, and their advantages over other types of decision-makers.

{{tab}}Some groups, after an initial stage while they were gaining familiarity with the machine, began assigning specific roles to their members and introducing standard procedures. This led to a drop in efficiency and inability to handle new factors introduced by spurious information, etc. The learning curve rises, flattens, then drops sharply whenever some new element is introduced. The system is now no longer self-organising.

{{tab}}Necessary characteristics for a group to constituted self-organising system, Pask suggests, are avoidance of fixed role-assignments and stereotyped procedures. This is of course tied up with redundancy of potential command.

{{tab}}I think we might sum up {{q|fixed role assignment and stereotyped procedures}} in one word—institutionalisation.

{{tab}}Note that these characteristics are ''necessary,'' not ''sufficient''—at the very least the group must first of all constitute a system in a meaningful sense; there must be communication between the members, a sufficient structure of information channels and feedback loops.

{{tab}}The role of the computer in Pask{{s}} system may be worrying some. Is this not an analogue of an authoritarian {{q|guiding hand}}? The answer is, I think, no. It must be remembered that this is an artificial exercise the group is performing. A problem is set by the operator. There is therefore no real situation in actuality for the group to affect and observe the result of their efforts. It is this function of determining and feeding back success/<wbr>failure information which the machine fulfils.

{{tab}}The other important aspect of the machine as a catalyst in the learning process, we have already mentioned. There is a rough analogy here with the role of {{q|influence leader}} in the Hauser{{s|r}} sense,<ref>See {{popup|Richard|Richard Hauser, Austrian sociologist}} and {{w|Hephzibah Hauser|Hephzibah_Menuhin|Hephzibah Menuhin}}: '''The Fraternal Society''' (Bodley Head, 1962).</ref> rather than any authoritarian {{q|overseer}}. I will return to this question of the role of the machine shortly.

{{tab}}Regarding the group as a decision maker, Pask suggests that this is perhaps the only sense in which {{q|two heads are better than one}} is true—if the {{q|two heads}} constitute a self-organising system. The clue as to why a number of heads, ''e.g.'', notoriously, in committees, often turn out to be much worse than one, is, he suggests, this business of role assignment and stereotyped procedure. He has not, however, suggested why this should arise.

{{tab}}Drawing on knowledge of behaviour of a self-organising nature {{p|274}}exhibited in other groups, ''e.g.'' informal shop-floor organisation, the adaptability and efficiency exhibited in instances of collective contract working, and similar phenomena,<ref>See, for example, the paper by {{w|Trist|Eric_Trist|Eric Trist}} on collective contract working in the {{w|Durham|County_Durham}} coalfield quoted by {{w|H. Clegg|Hugh_Clegg_(industrial_relations)|Hugh Clegg}} in '''A New Approach to Industrial Democracy''' (Blackwell, 1960) and the discussion of this book by [[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|Geoffrey Ostergaard]] in [[Anarchy 2/Approaches to industrial democracy|ANARCHY 2]]. Note the appearance of new elements of job rotation.<br>{{tab}}Despite his emphasis on the formal aspects of worker organisation, {{w|Melman|Seymour_Melman|Seymour Melman}}{{s}} analysis (see Note 1) of the worker decision process at {{w|Standard{{s}}|Standard_Motor_Company|Standard Motor Company}} brings out many of the caracteristics of a self-organising system: the evolving nature of the process; the difficulty of determining where a particular decision was made; changing dominance; the way in which the cumulative experience of the group changes the frame of reference against which subsequent problems are set for solution. A better idea of the gang system from which this derives can, however, be obtained from [[Author:Reg Wright|Reg Wright]]{{s}} articles in [[Anarchy 2/The gang system in Coventry|ANARCHY 2]] & [[Anarchy 8/Erosion inside capitalism|8]].</ref> we may perhaps offer some suggestions as to how institutionalisation may arise in certain types of circumstances.

{{tab}}Imagine a workshop of reasonable size, in which a number of connected processes are going on, and where there is some variation in the factors affecting the work to be taken into account. There is considerable evidence that the workers in such a shop, working as a co-operating group, are able to organise themselves without outside interference, in such a way as to cope efficiently with the job, and show remarkable facility in coping with unforeseeable difficulties and disruptions of normal procedure.

{{tab}}There are two levels of task here:

:#The complex of actual production tasks.
:#The task of solving the problem of how the group should be organised to perform these first level tasks, and how information about them should be dealt with by the group.

{{tab}}In situations of the kind I am imagining, the organisation of the group is largely determined by the needs of the job, which are fairly obvious to all concerned. There is continual feed-back of information from the job to the group. Any unusual occurrence will force itself on their notice and will be dealt with according to their resources at that time.

{{tab}}Purely for the purpose of illustration, let us now consider the situation of the same type of shop, only this time assuming that it is organised by a committee from outside the shop. The situation in which the committee finds itself is completely different from that of the work group. There are now three levels of problem:

:#The problems solved by the individual workers, ''i.e.'' their jobs.
:#The problem of the organisation of the work group.
:#The problem of the organisation of the committee itself.

{{tab}}The determining success/<wbr>failure information for all these has still to come from (or at least is supposed to come from), the net result of the solution of the first level problems, ''i.e.'' the state of production in the shop.

{{tab}}The committee is denied the continuous feed-back which the group had. While working on its solution to the second level problem, it will have no information about the success of its alternatives, only previous findings, coded, in practice, in an inadequate way. The degree of success will only be observable after a trial period after they have decided on a solution. (Also unusual circumstances can only be dealt with as ''types'' of occurrence, since they cannot enumerate all possibilities. This is important in determining the relative efficiency of the two methods of organisation, but is of less importance in our immediate problem.)

{{p|275}}{{tab}}It follows that the committee cannot solve the third problem by a method analogous to that used by the original work group in solving the second level problem; while working on the second level problem the committee has no comparable information available to determine the solution of the third level problem. But they must adopt some procedure, some organisation at a given time. How then is it to be determined?

{{tab}}In theory, such a controller could still remain an adoptive self-organising system, learning the structure to adopt in particular circumstances over a longer period of time, though it would still suffer from imperfect information.

{{tab}}In practice, however, the committee promptly convene a meeting, assign specific functions and decide on standard procedures. The actual determining information is probably a mixture of personality factors (including externally deprived status) and the existing ideas on organisation theory (including local precedent) possessed by the members. Once decided they will shelve the third level problem unless disaster, or a new superior, strikes, when a similar, but more cumbersome, procedure will be necessary to re-organise the committee along the same general lines.

{{tab}}In other words, within the closed system of the committee and work group, there is no, or virtually no, coupling between the success of the actual undertaking, ''i.e.'' the production job, and the decision procedure solving the third level problem. Worse, the factors influencing the solution of this problem, far from increasing the possible variety of the committee, lead to rigidity and low variety. Owing to this structure it will generally prove less efficient than a single imaginative person.

{{tab}}We might suggest, then, that it is this isolation from the process in terms of which the success of their own activity is defined, which is generally typical of the committee situation, which leads to their common failure to exhibit self-organising characteristics, and frequent inadequacy as decision makers.

{{tab}}Consider the first case of the self-organising work group again. Here it is the ''job itself'' which provides the analogue of Pask{{s}} machine, as far as feedback of success/<wbr>failure information is concerned. Also, it has frequently been pointed out that in a {{q|face-to-face}} group in this kind of situation (''i.e.'' where the need for the situation demanding collective action are fairly obvious, and where some common criteria of success exist), that group leadership tends to be granted to the member or members best suited to the particular circumstances obtaining,{{ref|aster|*}} and to change as these circumstances change. In other words, changing dominance, determined by the needs of the situation. Here again, the job, acting through the group psychology of the face-to-face group performs a function analogous to Pask{{s}} machine, allocating temporary dominance in accordance with success.

{{p|276}}{{tab}}I now wish to turn from this question of small group organisation to that of larger systems, and consider some criticisms of conventional industrial organisation developed, in particular, by Stafford Beer. He maintains that conventional ideas of control in complex situations, such as an industrial company, or the economy of a country, are crude and inadequate. {{qq|The fact is,}} he says, {{qq|that our whole concept of control is naive, primitive, and ridden with an almost retributive idea of causality. Control to most people (and what a reflection this is upon a sophisticated society!) is a crude process of coercion.}}<ref>{{w|Beer|Stafford_Beer|Stafford Beer}} [[#cite_note-2|'''{{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}''']] p.21.</ref>

{{tab}}In the lecture referred to earlier, his main thesis was the impossibility of truly efficient control of a complex undertaking by the type of rigid hierarchic organisation with which we are at present familiar. That such systems manage to survive, and work in some sort of manner, as they obviously do, is, he suggested, due to the fact that they are not entirely what they are supposed to be—that there are unofficial self-organising systems and tendencies in the organisation which are essential to its survival.

{{tab}}Beer is unusually perceptive, and frank, in emphasising the prevalence and importance of unofficial initiatives at all levels, ''e.g.'' (of shop-floor workers). {{qq|They arrange things which would horrify management, if they ever found out}}, (of charge-hands, etc.) {{qq|If ''they'' did not talk things over and come to mutual agreements, the whole business would collapse.}}

{{tab}}The main keystones in Beer{{s}} argument are {{w|Ashby|W._Ross_Ashby|W. Ross Ashby}}{{s}} {{q|{{w|Principle of Requisite Variety|Variety_(cybernetics)#The_Law_of_Requisite_Variety|The Law of Requisite Variety}}}} from the theory of {{w|homeostats|Homeostat|Homeostat}}, and information-theoretic requirements for adequate channel capacity in a multi-level system.

{{tab}}The principle of requisite variety states that, if stability is to be attained, the variety of the controlling system must be at least as great as the variety of the system to be controlled. We have already had an instance of this, for this was really the trouble with our hypothetical committee: due to its rigid structure and the need to issue instructions in terms of standard procedures to be adopted, it could not possibly be efficient in a situation of any complexity. If we made the further assumption that there was no organisation of the work group other than that imposed by the committee, chaos would be unavoidable. Approximations to this occur in {{q|{{w|working to rule|Work-to-rule|Work-to-rule}}}}. In normal working, the initiatives of the shop-floor workers would serve as an additional source of variety, this enabling the principle of requisite variety to be satisfied, at least as far as normal variations in the factors affecting the production situation were concerned.

{{tab}}The relevance of the requirements of channel capacity is to the inadequate, attenuated information available at the top of the hierarchy—this is inevitable, for, in practice, the channel capacity could never be made adequate in the sort of pyramidical structures we have—and also to the inadequacy of the formal channels between subsystems (''e.g.'' departments) which require to co-ordinate their activities.

{{tab}}To emphasise how far conventional managerial ideas of organisation are from satisfying the principle of requisite variety, Beer used an {{p|277}}amusing parable concerning a Martian visitor to Earth, who examines the activities at the lower levels of some large undertaking, the brains of the workers concerned, and the organisational chart purporting to show how the undertaking is controlled. The visitor is most impressed, and deduces that the creatures at the top of the hierarchy must have heads yards wide.

{{tab}}In discussing the attempts of an inadequate control system to control a system of greater variety, Beer pointed to the accumulation of unassimilable information likely to occur as the control vainly struggles to keep track of the situation.

{{tab}}A comparable converse phenomenon was pointed out by {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}} in 1851, in what must rank as one of the most prophetic statements about the development of social organisation ever written: {{qq|(The government) must make as many laws as it finds interests, and, as interests are innumerable, ''relations arising from one another multiply to infinity,'' and antagonism is endless, lawmaking must go on without stopping. Laws, decrees, ordinances, resolutions, will fall like hail upon the unfortunate people. After a time the political ground will be covered by a layer of paper, which the geologists will put down among the vicissitudes of the earth as the ''papyraceous formation''.}}<ref>{{w|P.-J. Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}: '''{{l|The General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century|http://fair-use.org/p-j-proudhon/general-idea-of-the-revolution/|Full text at the Fair Use Repository}}''' (Freedom Press, 1923).</ref> (The first italics are mine.)

{{tab}}This is also an early, and lucid, statement of the complexity of the control situation in social organisation.

{{tab}}Beer has some suggestive ideas on the question of centralisation ''vs.'' decentralisation in industry. (That is, centralisation of control. The question of centralisation of ''plant'' is a different, if related, problem.) He puts the dilemma thus:

{{hang|Centralise: insufficient channel capacity, etc.—cannot work efficiently.}}

{{hang|Decentralise: completely autonomous units—no cohesion, probably ceases to be a system at all.}}

{{tab}}The point, he suggests is that neither alternative corresponds to what we find in really efficient systems, ''i.e.'' complex living organisms. What we do find are a number of different, interlocking control systems. Beer also draws attention to the prevalence, and importance, of redundancy of potential command in self-organising systems, and points out that it is completely alien to the sort of theory of organisation found in industry and in similar undertakings.

{{tab}}The type of organisation at which we should aim is, he suggests, an organic one, involving interlocking control systems, intermeshing at all levels, utilising the principle of evolving self-organising systems, with the channel capacity and flow of information kept as high as possible.<ref>Compare also the concluding section of {{w|Pask|Gordon_Pask|Gordon Pask}}{{s}} '''An Approach to Cybernetics,''' in particular the discussion of a {{q|biologically organised}} factory.</ref>

{{tab}}He mentioned in this connection an American businessman who claimed that his business was, in part, organised along somewhat similar lines and seemed to work very well. The idea was that anybody at all, no matter how {{q|junior}} (I do not know whether this was actually restricted to what are termed {{q|staff}} or not), could call a conference at short notice, to discuss anything they wanted, whether connected with {{p|278}}their work or not. Such a meeting could call in the president of the company himself, or anyone they thought they needed.

{{tab}}In context of interlocking control structures, we may note, as a fairly crude example, the {{w|syndicalist|Syndicalism|Syndicalism}} attempt to co-ordinate the activity of their basic units, the factory unions, through an interlocking two-fold structure of industrial and territorial federation.

{{tab}}Let us now contrast two models of decision making and control. First we have the model current among management theorists in industry, with its counterpart in conventional thinking about government in society as a whole. This is the model of a rigid pyramidal hierarchy, with lines of {{q|communication and command}} running from the top to the bottom of the pyramid. There is fixed delineation of responsibility, each element has a specified role, and the procedures to be followed at any level are determined within fairly narrow limits, and may only be changed by decisions of elements higher in the hierarchy. The role of the top group of the hierarchy is sometimes supposed to be comparable to the {{q|brain}} of the system.

{{tab}}The other model is from the cybernetics of evolving self-organising systems. Here we have a system of large variety, sufficient to cope with a complex unpredictable environment. Its characteristics are changing structure, modifying itself under continual feedback from the environment, exhibiting redundancy of potential command, and involving complex interlocking control structures. Learning and decision-making are distributed throughout the system, denser perhaps in some areas than others.

{{tab}}Has any social thinker thought of social organisation, actual or possible, in terms comparable with this model? I think so. Compare [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]] on that society which {{qq|seeks the fullest development of free association in all its aspects, in all possible degrees, for all conceivable purposes: an ever-changing association bearing in itself the elements of its own duration, and taking on the forms which at any moment best correspond to the manifold endeavours of all.}}<ref>[[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Peter Kropotkin]]: '''{{l|Anarchism, its Philosophy and Ideal|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchism-its-philosophy-and-ideal|Full text at the Anarchist Library}}''' (Freedom Press, 1895).</ref>

{{tab}}Further, {{qq|A society to which pre-established forms crystallised by law, are repugnant, which looks for harmony in an ever-changing and fugitive equilibrium between a multitude of varied forces and influences of every kind, following their own course.}}

{{tab}}The language is perhaps somewhat vague and ambiguous, but for a brief description in non-technical terms, of a society conceived as a complex evolving self-organising system, it could hardly be bettered. Certainly not in 1896.

{{tab}}The tragedy is not that so-called progressive thinkers today think that anarchist ideas of society and social organisation are inadequate. (This is excusable, and indicates failure on the part of anarchist propagandists to develop and spread their ideas.) It is that they think the other model ''is'' adequate. Also that they are incapable of thinking in any other terms.

{{tab}}Hence such thinkers are surprised when they cannot find the great efficient decision makers they expect in control of our institutions. The {{p|279}}{{q|solutions}} they propose to the muddle they do find, would require supermen-gods to work—even if the supermen could obtain adequate information to determine their decisions. This, from the nature of the structure, they can never do.

{{tab}}Again, when existing systems break down, as in industrial disputes, the tendency for the leaders on both sides is to attempt to remedy the situation by measures which increase the inadequacy of the system. That is, they attempt, by reorganisation and contractual measures, to increase the rigidity of the system by defining roles and responsibilities more closely, and try to confine the activities of human beings, who are themselves evolving self-organising systems, within a predetermined contractual framework. An interesting example of this will be found in ''{{l|Wildcat Strike|https://libcom.org/files/gouldner-alvin--wildcat-strike-a-study-in-worker-management-relationships.pdf|Full text at libcom.org (PDF)}}'' by {{w|A. W. Gouldner|Alvin_Ward_Gouldner|Alvin Ward Gouldner}}.

{{tab}}To return to the conventional picture of government and the supposed control by the governed in democratic theory:

{{tab}}Firstly, does what I have said about the inefficiency and crudity of the governmental model as a control mechanism conflict with [[Author:W. Grey Walter|Grey Walter]]{{s}} analysis in his article {{qq|[[Anarchy 25/The development and significance of cybernetics|The Development and Significance of Cybernetics]]}} in [[Anarchy 25|{{sc|Anarchy 25}}]], in which he claimed that Western democratic systems were remarkably sophisticated from the cybernetic point of view?

{{tab}}I do not think so. The point is that what I am claiming is that they are inadequate for controlling the economy, say, or providing the greatest compatible satisfactions for the governed, as Proudhon pointed out. I would also claim that they are inadequate as mechanisms for maintaining order in society, unless society is conceived as largely self-regulating without the governmental institutions. Given this, I do not deny that the government-electorate system has proved an efficient ''machine for maintaining itself,'' although I might be inclined to give a little more importance to unofficial, informal elements in the system in this context than Grey Walter does in his article.

{{tab}}I agree that the system is well adapted to this task. Also, various psychological factors outside the scope of cybernetics help in the self-perpetuation of a system of this nature.

{{tab}}If the model of effective control by the government is inadequate, the naive democratic theory of control of the government by the people is much more so. This theory puts great stress on the importance of elections as the means by which the governed control their rulers and on the results of the elections, and hence, derivatively, on the constitution and behaviour of the government, as expressions of {{q|the will of the people}}.

{{tab}}If we consider the indiviudal, in a two party system, he is allowed one binary choice every five years or so, in which to reflect all the complex, dimly understood, effects of government actions, intended and unintended. The model seems to allow of no structured subsystem to be identified as {{q|the people}}—there is only an aggregate of individual choices.

{{tab}}It seems to me significant that this theory of self-government of the people, by the people, through universal, or at least wide, suffrage, {{p|280}}developed in the 18th and 19th centuries along with the growth of the {{q|rabble hypothesis}} of society (''i.e.'' society as an unstructured aggregate of individual social atoms, pursuing their own egocentric interests, held together only by authority and coercion). Sociologists and social psychologists now find this picture of society completely inadequate.<ref>See, for example {{w|J. A. C. Brown|James_A._C._Brown|James A. C. Brown}}: '''{{popup|The Social Psychology of Industry|The Social Psychology of Industry: Human Relations in the Factory}}''' (Penguin, 1954), Ch. 2.</ref>

{{tab}}This is not to deny the genius of some of the thinkers who worked within the limitations of this model of democracy, for they were able to see the difficulties in practice, and devised most complicated systems of checks and balances to render their systems practicable, (''e.g.'' the architects of the American constitution, as Grey Walter points out). However, they could not be expected to overcome the fundamental inadequacies of their model of government of the people, by the people, for the people, no matter how successful they were in developing the skeletons of viable self-perpetuating systems.

{{tab}}In contrast to the {{q|rabble hypothesis}}, we find that libertarian socialist thought, especially in Kropotkin and [[Author:Gustav Landauer|Landauer]], showed an early grasp of the complex group structure of society; society as a complex network of changing relationships, involving many structures of correlated activity and mutual aid, independent of authoritarian coercion. It was against this background that they developed their theories of social organisation.

{{tab}}Neither am I convinced by the more sophisticated pressure group theory of democracy, introduced in an attempt to avoid the obvious inadequacy of the naive theory. As a descriptive theory of the actual situation it does seem reasonably adequate, but as a means by which the individual obtains a voice in decisions affecting him, it is just as inadequate as the naive theory. This in fact is generally admitted by its adherents, who have largely dropped the idea of democracy as self-government.<ref>See {{w|Clegg|Hugh_Clegg_(industrial_relations)|Hugh Clegg}}: '''A New Approach to Industrial Democracy''' and [[Author:Geoffrey Ostergaard|G. Ostergaard]]{{s}} discussion in [[Anarchy 2/Approaches to industrial democracy|ANARCHY 2]].</ref>

{{tab}}In the case where a group, of a self-organising type, freely organises itself to tackle some situation, the resulting structure adopted by the group might be taken to exhibit {{q|the will of the group}}. More generally, groups of this nature are capable of genuine group decisions. Such expressions as {{q|the will of the group (people)}} are, I suggest, acceptable, and only as a rather dangerous shorthand, solely in cases of this sort.

{{tab}}In direct application, this is, of course, limited to fairly small groups, since, beyond a certain size, an unstructured aggregate of human beings is unable to act as a group, because there is too much information to be handled. The channel capacity is probably inadequate, and, even if the individual member could be presented with sufficient information, he would be unable to deal with it.

{{tab}}In certain work situations where the job effectively constrains the system, and only part of the behaviour needs to be correlated, we might expect larger aggregates to be capable of behaviour as a group. This is borne out by experience. In a situation where complex activity has to be correlated and there are few prior constraints, ''e.g.'' collective improvisation in a jazz band, most research groups, discussion groups, a maximum of the order of ten seems to be imposed; in manual jobs {{p|281}}of certain types, and in the groups of the gang system at Coventry, much larger aggregates are found capable of coherent behaviour—groups of the order of a hundred or even a thousand members. Some of the very large groups, ''e.g.'' in the motor industry, may, however, be examples of more complex organisation.

{{tab}}We have said that only small aggregates of human beings, if regarded initially as unstructured, can exhibit genuine group behaviour. There is no reason, however, why large aggregates, if ''sufficiently structured,'' should not maintain coherent behaviour, while retaining genuine self-organising characteristics enabling them to deal with unpredictable disturbances in their environment (including in {{q|environment}} their own {{q|substance}}, ''i.e.'' the human being constituting the aggregate) without developing a hierarchic structure in the authoritarian sense.

{{tab}}This is not to say that there will be no hierarchy in the ''logical'' sense. There will certainly be functional hierarchy in the sense of multi-level information flow, ''i.e.'' problem solving at the level of group environment, internal activity of subgroup, relations between subgroups, and so on. We have seen that this need not ''necessarily'' mean different isolatable physical parts handling the different levels. In a situation of great complexity, however, we would expect to find anatomical hierarchies, in as far as there would be identifiable subgroups, of varying degrees of permanence of form and constitution, dealing with different levels of activity.

{{tab}}The essential points are that the existence of redundancy of potential command, with changing dominance, means that any analysis of part of the system at any time in terms of a hierarchic model must be regarded with caution, and that, where such anatomical hierarchy is distinguishable, it need not be a question of the higher levels controlling the lower by coercive sanctions, but rather of feeding back information to bias the autonomous activity of the other subgroup. In short, a very different sort of hierarchy from that of managerial theory.

{{tab}}There certainly need not be any isolatable {{q|control unit}} controlling the rest.

{{tab}}I am using {{q|structured}} here in a sense comparable to [[Author:Martin Buber|Buber]], ''i.e.'' possessing a structure of connected subgroups, groupings or subgroups, etc., of a functional nature, but I would place relatively less emphasis on formal federation of subgroups, even in multiple federation, than Buber,<ref>See [[Author:Martin Buber|Martin Buber]]: '''{{l|Paths in Utopia|http://www.ditext.com/buber/utopia.html|Full text at Digital Text International}}''' (Routledge, 1949).</ref> and more on more complex forms of connection. Also I am counting as subgroups both localised and more diffuse structures, formal and informal. One form of connection which seems to be of importance, is the case of diffuse substructures {{q|penetrating}} into more localised ones, ''e.g.'' certain members of a particular subgrouping being members of some more widespread grouping, some sort of interest association, say, and thus serving as a means by which information about special forms of activity, passing in the more widespread structures, can pass into the localised structure, and play a part in determining its subsequent behaviour.

{{p|282}}{{tab}}I hope I have shown that ideas derived from cybernetics and information theory are suggestive of fruitful lines of approach in considering social organisation, especially to the libertarian. I would not, however, expect too much in the way of rigorous direct application of cybernetic technique to social situations, for two reasons. Firstly there is the difficulty of specifying adequate and generally acceptable models of complex social situations, where the bias of the observer is notoriously effective in determining the picture he adopts. Secondly, the information theoretic concept of {{q|information}} is an abstract one which emphasises only the selective characteristic on information. There are situations in which this is not entirely adequate.

{{tab}}This, however, is no excuse for remaining bound by a primitive and inadequate model of decision-making and control procedures. The basic premise of the governmentalist—namely, that any society must incorporate some mechanism for overall control—is certainly true, if we use {{q|control}} in the sense of {{q|maintain a large number of critical variables within limits of toleration.}} Indeed, the statement is virtually a tautology, since if such a situation did not exist, the aggregate would not possess sufficient stability to merit the designation {{q|a society}}.

{{tab}}The error of the governmentalist is to think that {{q|incorporate some mechanism for control}} is always equivalent to {{q|include a fixed isolatable control unit to which the rest, ''i.e.'' the majority, of the system is subservient}}. This may be an adequate interpretation in the case of a model railway system, but not for a human society.

{{tab}}The alternative model is complex, and changing in its search for stability in the face of unpredictable disturbances—and much less easy to describe. Indeed, we are perhaps just beginning to develop an adequate language to describe such situations, despite the prophetic insights of a few men in the past.

{{tab}}A quotation from Proudhon makes a fitting conclusion—and starting point—{{qq|People like simple ideas and are right to like them. Unfortunately, the simplicity they seek is only to be found in elementary things; and the world, society, and man are made up of insoluble problems, contrary principles, and conflicting forces. Organism means complication, and multiplicity means contradiction, opposition, independence.}}<ref>{{w|P.-J. Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon}}: The Theory of Taxation (1861) quoted in [[Author:Martin Buber|Buber]] [[#cite_note-11|'''{{popup|op. cit.|opere citato: cited above}}''']]</ref>

-----

<font size="2">{{hang|{{note|aster|*}} {{q|best suited}} that is from the point of view of the group.}}

-----

<references /></font>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Anarchism and the cybernetics of self organising systems}}
[[Category:Anarchist philosophy]]
[[Category:Cybernetics]]
[[Category:Labour and industry]]
[[Category:Articles]]

Template:P

2021-09-30T20:14:58Z

Ivanhoe: