 |
mark- enclosure
It would have been interesting to briefly contrast the English experience with the French, where the open field system, subsistence agriculture, and healthy small peasant land holdings persisted into the 20th century. Productivity of English farms was clearly far higher than in France post enclosure, but perhaps the French system allowed a relatively vital and diverse local artisanal agriculture to survive and develop in the countryside while the English rural economy became increasingly a mixture of manorial farms and playgrounds for the rich?
William Brown, on "Enclosures"
This was an excellent program, and a nicely balanced look at a sometimes very heated subject (even among academics). If I could greedily wish for more, it would have been to expand the subject outside of the period of Parliamentary Enclosures to discuss earlier enclosures, particularly as it has been estimated (by Professor Overton, and others) that just about as high a proportion of land in England was enclosed in the seventeenth century as in both the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. I, too, would like to know more about enclosure by agreement, and the structures by which they were confirmed and reinforced. Were the central courts, such as that of the Chancery or the Exchequer used?
Christopher Draper, "Enclosures"
As the author of, "Llandudno Before the Hotels" I think today's otherwise excellent discussion overlooked examples where Parliament promoted enclosure schemes designed to achieve the exact opposite of the scheme's professed rationale of increasing agricultural production. Llandudno's 1843 Enclosure Act, for exanple, was progressed through Parliament by Edward Mostyn Lloyd Mostyn M.P. whose family consequently acquired freehold rights over much of the old village of Llandudno. Smallholders were then evicted, their fields paved over and an ancient agricultural settlement transformed into a fashionable bathing resort. A century and a half later Mostyn Estates still own and control most of our town. Fortunately nowadays we can we can rely on our Parliament to never again enact the transfer of resources away from the poor to enrich better off members of society!
Peter Household - Enclosure Acts
I hoped Melvyn would press for a fuller reply to his question as to why Acts of Parliament were felt to be necessary in the 18th century. Rosemary Sweet explained that they were petitioned for by landowners, as legal authority was required. But why had this not been felt to be an issue with previous enclosures? I think Rosemary said that in earlier centuries enclosure was achieved by agreement with the peasantry, but this sounds implausible to me, therefore I fear I misheard. Can anyone shed light? And what about the dissolution of the monasteries? Did this not have a part to play in the story?
Jane - The Enclosures
George Bernard Shaw once said something on the lines of "reasonable people accept life the way it, unreasonable people do not accept life the way it is. Therefore all change is brought about by unreasonable people". There are two sides to the unreasonable sword. Our greatest thinkers are often considered unreasonable people in their anachronistic perspectives. Larger in number are those who dominate and distort life for others. The Enclosures was another story of the unreasonable use of power and 'creaming off the top' and although it wasn't totally disastrous in its effect it wasn't exactly great. Knowing what being human is about is a bit of a 'piece of string' situation and if we are evolving, the most important thing about history is that we learn from it.Our self-made history is one of domination and much suffering which has presently culminated in (amongst other things) a growingly capitalist world that continues to reduce and restrict the lives of most people. The counter argument simply won't do any more. Much of the media are hugely complicit in this and they're doing quite nicely out of it too. If we take an Emperor's New clothes perspective on capitalism, whose beginnings were mooted at this morning, surely we can see that it is a catastrophe for the majority of people. A few do well, granted, but not enough. Also,whatever sits on the back of capitalism is corrupted by it - look at our own country and it's evident at every turn. When our health care is about money more than people - the finest modalities are often at best overlooked and at worst deliberately overridden. (Post office, water, trains etc.) As humans we are born into a strange situation of inner and outer realities - both of which are incredibly tortuous as well as vivid in nature and both of which are, fundamentally, a complete mystery. All we can do is take up the situation and get on with it in our own way. I was brought up to be egalitarian in my outlook and it stays with me. On this earth I find the the unclear thinking with its consequences quite unbelievable but thinking is only part of our function. Recently, whilst pondering the nature of conditioning - (from atavism through to recent) and questioning good and cruel tendencies in myself I put on the second movement of Mozart's 23rd piano concerto and in my imagination conjured up pictures of grief and suffering in as many countries as I could think of (a bit like they do in films). My tears flowed readily and I found my compassion to be fundamentally present. I don't know unequivocally how we are to measure ourselves or how we can change things when globalization and centralization have disenfranchised us so profoundly and compassion is so often relegated to picking up the pieces which a wiser world would have avoided. Imagine, as well as you can, the entire planet at this minute sitting on it's little known but seemingly difficult history and maybe enjoy the fact that the programme we listened to this morning is like a beacon - a clue. Its power is of a different nature. Also, why is it that the rich are remembered for philanthropy but rarely for their wealth much as it is prized in the moment.Posterity is often, perhaps, another clue to a truer picture. So - to the 'In Our Time' team - thank you, once again, in our troubled times, for that beacon.
Christopher Hall - Enclosures
I fully expected this to be quoted:'The law locks up the man or womanWho steals the goose from off the common;But lets the greater villain looseWho steals the common from the goose.'
John Calton: enclosures
Excellent discussion of a very complex topic. Many thanks, not least for the wry(rye?) and, some might argue sly, apportioning of examples, ditching (Dissing?) of some iconic reputations and fielding of expertise.To take my immediate and local context, I am constantly fascinated by claims that the Finnish word 'kylä' bears only a tangential relationship to the word 'village', and the programme helped shed (oops, sorry) some light on that lexical anomaly. Will recommend the programme to students of British cultural studies with enthusiasm, and meanwhile go out and pick up more litter from the ditches with renewed interest and commitment. Happy Labour/May Day (in Finnish: 'Hauskaa Vappua!')Best wishes,John Caltonlecturer in EnglishUniversity of Helsinki
davidmurray-Bragg and class
Bragg mentioned E P Thompson's best-known work as 'The Making of the English Working Classes'- in fact it was 'The Making of the English Working Class'. Bragg may find it hard to conceive that someone taken seriously on his programme should advance any kind of marxist view, rather than a banal social-stratificationist one, but Thompson did, of a kind.
|
|
