Discussion: Whenever I get into a discussion about religion, it can sometimes be difficult to express my views without being caught on one or another side of “the fence”.  It is generally assumed, for example, amongst atheists, that anyone who goes to church must firmly believe in God, Jesus as our saviour, heaven, and even creationism, whilst it is often assumed amongst theists that atheists will find no significance in religious thought, or that to be an atheist one must “believe” in the absence of a God as strongly, and with as little evidence, as any theist.

Whilst these claims may well be justified in certain cases, it’s not an approach to religious and philosophical thought that I am at all comfortable with. All discussion on this subject, I feel, should be balanced and understanding, rather than condemning.  And so it is that I end up defending the church, in those cases where atheists, and even sometimes theists, see it as a selfish, corrupt institution which provides no value to society.

I currently go to church because I sing in a church choir. I enjoy singing the music of the wonderful English choral tradition, and also have a fondness for some of the liturgy.  It gives one a sense of perspective when you think that these traditions have been going on for hundreds, sometimes even over a thousand, years. And another triumph of the church is its architecture.  These three elements make up the arts benefit of church – music, literature and architecture. So much of our cultural history has such close links with the church that you cannot deny the benefit that society has had from the church.  In fact, the separation of cultural arts from the church has, in many ways, caused a degradation of the quality of those arts on both sides. Secular music, driven by the profit motive, and without any moral compass, becomes hedonistic, vulgar and, to take advantage of economies of scale, automated.  Whilst church arts, no longer being expected to be a cultural art in its own right, serves only to support the liturgy, and is therefore bland and shallow. This, it seems to me, is in stark contrast with medieval arts and architecture, and traditional choral music, which is of such high cultural value, but needed a context to justify it, and that context was the church.

The other really significant benefit that the church provides to society is the community benefit.  In a world that is increasingly fragmented, the need for building strong communities is more pertinent than ever, and whilst I personally regret that such communities should come together based on the pretence of religious belief, rather than humanistic commonalities, I still feel that it is better that there should be a community at all rather than none. People coming together in an environment that does not have an ulterior motive (such as profit or political power) is a necessary part of a healthy society. People coming together to reinforce their commonalities is good. One benefit of forming such a community based on the values of the church is that it also becomes a force of those values, which, in many cases, are hugely beneficial to society.  The value of charity, for example, upheld by the church, makes it a powerful force for charitable fundraising and support.  The value of care for others, to take another example, means that the church becomes partially responsible for the well-being of its parishioners, a service which may not be able to be provided by any other body.

Whilst the above defence can be used to justify the church’s presence within modern society, it cannot be used to justify the significance of religion as a core basis for that society. Religion (by which I mean the belief in and worship of superhuman powers) is quite different in that, in itself, it provides no benefit to society (even if it does provide psychological comfort to the individual believer), and can even cause a blindness on the part of believers to damaging effects where the distraction of searching for religious truth disrupts a human’s natural compassion (see this TEDTalk by Sam Harris). Science, however, is always searching for a universal truth, and is quite willing to change its beliefs when new evidence becomes available, something that religion is unable to do.

Conclusion: The two benefit spheres of the church are, in my opinion, those of arts and community with religious belief being a detrimental effect of the church on society. However, I’m open to discussion, where arguments can be justified. Discussion on the subject of religion is best when it is balanced and understanding, rather than condemning, and both parties in the discussion must be prepared to adjust their standpoint, lest the discussion will degrade into a pointless argument.

I’m 26, and a recent masters graduate. Like many recent graduates, I haven’t got a full-time job, and the prospects of getting one, at least within my field of study (Architectural Engineering) remain dim, as even rapidly expanding companies seem to demand at least five years of relevant work experience. I’d be slightly more bothered about this fact, however, if a 9-5 graduate position in a consultant engineering firm was really going to fulfil my desires and ambitions for life. Whilst it would be great to have a regular income and the opportunity to develop my skills, I can’t bring myself to pine about my lack of formal employment, not whilst the reward for such effort would be the opportunity to join the consumer society, ravishing the Earth with each new gadget, branded item of clothing or trip abroad that I liked the look of.

Being underemployed has given me the great opportunity, which I have embraced wholeheartedly, to think about the effect that I have on the environment, on society, and on our economy. When you have to consider what each pound that comes into your care is going to be spent on, lest you fall short at the end of the month, you get to appreciate its effect.

From August 2010, when I bought my car, to August 2011, when I sold it, I kept a record of all the journeys I had made, how much it was costing me, and what the journeys were for. This exercise alone taught me a lot, and gave me a new perspective on transportation, and on accommodation. Since I was living 16 miles out of Norwich, in a village with no public transport links whatsoever, the car was a necessity, but after thinking about it, was living 16 miles from Norwich a necessity? The answer – no. So now I live in Norwich, sans car, and paying approximately the same amount each month for the privilege, not to dirty oil companies, but to a dear friend and landlady, whose value, to me, is far greater than any international corporate conglomerate could ever be.

This move alone, though, does little to satisfy my thirst for peace of mind in terms of my impact on the world. I don’t just want to have a not-negative effect on the world (and no doubt I’m still nowhere near that, at least ecologically), I want to have a truly positive one! I want to see more than our society just coping with the challenges imposed by the economic system and ecological limits of this world: I want to see a transformation! I want to be part of that transformation, and I want our society to thrive! This cannot be done just by ditching the car and using a bike. It’s a much wider scope – a scope which Transition is the only movement/organisation that has the courage to look at in its entirety, and why I am proud to associate myself with it.

It was so inspiring, for me, to attend the discussion meeting after Nicole Foss’s talk on the financial crisis, where the challenges of our modern world were being faced from so many different angles. Our civil liberties being undermined in the name of international security, producerism being the driving force behind consumerism, government cuts skirting round the only sector which deems them necessary. And at the core of it all, being our own media with our own vision (rather than that given to us by “The Media”) as the only solution which can carry us through the challenges ahead.

 So, when I cut up my Natwest credit card, and transfer any remaining funds which I still hold with them away, I’m not just taking action because it’s what I want to do — in fact, by doing so, I lose out on £1000 worth of interest-free overdraft amongst other graduate “benefits” — I’m also making a statement to anyone who cares to listen – that investment in tar sands, arms trade and other destructive projects is wrong; that massive bailouts should not be coupled with increasing executive pay; that I want any savings I hold to be available as loans to small local businesses, rather than only to national or international chains with no interest beyond this quarter’s profits; that I stand in solidarity with the millions of people who agree that the99% of the people of this world pay the price for the extravagance of the 1%, and are protesting all over the world (including in Norwich) to bring about the changes required to correct this.

But in the end, I’m not the type of person who will just stand here shouting about what I want until someone else comes along and sorts it out for me. I’m a doer, and may every action I take transition to a world that is better – ecologically, socially and economically.

Images: my graduation; cycling in Norwich; Natwest credit card – cancelled.

The occupation of our towns and cities is a Movement, not just a protest, and as such, there are discussions, activities, working groups that come out of it.  Whilst not attending the occupations, many “99%ers” go back to their computers at home and share what they’ve discussed during the day.  Whilst the number of occupiers may be much lower than the initial protest on the 15th, the number of people tweeting and sharing their concerns over the internet has steadily risen. Even when they are not on the streets, they are still actively involved in the movement.  The function the occupation serves (that is, the campsites in the cities) is as a base of operations.  A place where those active in the movement can get together, discuss issues and consider action.

In my opinion, an open space for political discussion and rallying should be provided as standard by any democratic institution (as Romans had in the public space of the forum), but without an indoor public space for such activity, we have been using the only public realm we have – the streets.

I only speak for myself here, and I’m sure many of the movement would disagree, but I don’t see how a tent or other object left on the streets during an occupation is any different from at any time.  If there is someone there to defend their right to keep the object there, then it should be left.  If it has literally been dumped, then the police should have the power to remove it. In my opinion, any occupiers should be cooperative with the police in identifying materials left in our public realm that are in use (i.e. occupied tents, banners that are in the care of members of the occupy movement) and those which are not (i.e. unoccupied tents, banners that have been dumped by someone who can’t be bothered to take a bulky object like that home with them).  Such cooperation will give the occupation the credibility to last longer, and further strengthen its aims.

My family moved into our three-storey Georgian house in the country when I was four, and we all saw it as a great investment. What a wonderful place for the children to run around in, to play hide-and-seek and to keep out of each other’s way, and out of the trouble of a town street corner! We could create beautiful gardens, use the land productively and enjoy the serene country life! But naturally, at the time, energy was much cheaper than it is now, and energy efficiency wasn’t really a concern.

Now that we have lived with it for over twenty years, we have seen the weak spots, suffered many a freezing night and put up with howling draughts. We’ve progressively added insulation and draught-proofing measures over time, but the house still gets cold.

The thing is that the house is Grade II listed. This, in my opinion, is a good thing. It’s great that we have a way of protecting our heritage and respect the fine work of our forebears! The appearance of the house owes a lot to its oak-framed windows, and replacing them with UPVC double-glazed ones would look ugly and severely lessen our built heritage. However, listed building status does mean that even highly justifiable changes that some people can make “willy nilly” to their homes requires us to apply for special permissions.

But we’ve found a solution to the window problem!

Can you see it?

No, didn’t think so. When looked at from afar, this looks just like the single-glazed, oak-framed, leaded casement window as might have been present when it was first built (although the ones actually installed are much newer!). But there were problems. The steel frames around the casements have a tendency not to fit well against the wooden frame, and leave gaps where draughts get through. And then there’s the “waterfall effect” as my dad calls it. This is where convective circulation of air in the room is caused by the waterfall of air being cooled by the window and flowing over the sill to the floor.

To rectify these points, we firstly installed new seals. This reduced draughts and also helps to reduce “cold-bridging” (conductive heat transfer through solid elements) between the frame and the casements.

We also installed secondary glazing. This is NOT double-glazing. Secondary glazing is simply another layer of glass (or in our case, polycarbonate), separateto the window, which is attached to the inside of the window frame. Because the glass is on the outside edge of the window frame, this leaves an approx. 45mm gap of air as an insulating layer. However, the main thing it does is eliminate the waterfall effect because the layer of polycarbonate is not much cooler than the indoor air, and a convective cycle is not generated within the room.

Although we’ve only lived with these new measures during part of last winter, we’ve already felt the effect it has on the warmth of rooms and the reduction of draughts. I’m looking forward to seeing the effect it has over an entire winter season!

The polycarbonate is fixed using screws in oversized holes in the polycarbonate (to prevent concentrated stress in the polycarbonate and therefore cracking) with oversized washers to spread the load, into metal inserts (specially made) which have been installed into the window frames. Because the polycarbonate panels are screwed in place rather than glued or nailed, we can take them off easily for maintenance, opening of windows during summer and to show what the house may have been like more accurately in times gone by.

If anyone wants to replicate the measure, or just to find out more about it, I’d be happy to answer any queries on our methods via the comments box below, or by email – simeon [at] simeonjackson.co.uk.

Photos: The Georgian façade; Sitting room window; Corner of window with polycarbonate and a fixing point visible; Screw, washer and insert.

Discussion: There are several ways of looking at entertainment, only one of which the corporate world has been transfixed with for a long time – that with a producer and a consumer. The producer, often based in Hollywood, or some other such remote place to most of the world, will generate ideas for stories, comedy shows, films, characters and brands. They then film them, produce merchandise for them, create spin-offs.  And then they sell their ideas, via intermediaries (cinemas, TV stations, chain stores), to “the consumer”, that magical entity that always has money to burn and is oh so willing to burn it.

There are a great many alternatives to this model, in many of which the beneficiaries are not just passive “consumers”, but participants. They involve creativity, engagement and, to some extent, commitment.  The relationships  that one enjoys with a significant other, children, parents and friends, have all taken commitment and engagement. We enjoy activities such as gardening, music-making, art or computer programming because of the creativity that is involved and the beautiful result. But those are the more obvious ones. In many cases, work itself is entertainment.  The best salesmen see the process as a competitive game, where their motivation is not the commission, but the feeling when the sale has been “won”. For others, it is the more subtle problem-solving aspect of work that is entertaining – balancing the needs of the interested parties in a transaction, and the satisfaction when all come out with what they want.  It is not the type of entertainment that is laugh out loud funny, but quiet, often serious (even solemn) and contemplative.

The idea that entertainment only comes from TV sets and football stadiums is an illusion, enhanced by the media (the beneficiaries of such a model), and it is an illusion that is damaging, because it restricts the world’s richest resource – our ideas. When we ship our hard-earned cash overseas to international “entertainment producers”, we get very little of significance in return, and lose the time we spent in watching those shows, or travelling to that international pop concert. Not only do we lose the time for our minds to be occupied by our own creative ideas and thoughts during these times, they are occupied by someone else’s ideas, who then has the power to manipulate them, advertise to them, to change them. We are given opinions, rather than being allowed the opportunities to think them for ourselves. Further to these damaging properties, this model denies the consumer the opportunity to gain the intimate respect that one can have of the great talent they are witnessing.  Such an intimate respect can only be generated when talent is visible amongst our own acquaintances, some of whom may work very hard gaining, developing and then using their skills, but never be given the opportunity to show them.

So where does this lead us?  Should we reject TV and football as entertainments of a bygone era and start afresh?  No!  But it is essential to remain balanced, and not to just pass the time passively consuming entertainment when that same time could be used productively, enhancing the life satisfaction of both that person, and any others who are affected, a reward which will lead to a lot more overall improved well-being than the individual experiences of “being entertained” on the part of the consumers.

Conclusion: Embrace the idea that the best entertainment is participatory, and may involve intense thought, creativity, engagement and commitment. Do not deny the mind the opportunity to think and make decisions for itself, rather than consuming (and reinforcing) the opinions and ideas of the international entertainment producers.

The model itself is made in Google Sketchup, and is meticulously organised into layers, components and groups so that I can isolate any particular part of it, like the structure of the research centre, for example:

To give the the building a unique appearance, I included “fins” along the façade, made of timber (glulam).  This means that light is reflected into the space, rather than direct, which prevents distracting solar glare, and also reduces solar gain, and therefore overheating, in the summer.

I had to produce a whole array of A1 drawings of the finished building.  I used LayOut (part of Google Sketchup Pro) to produce these.  Here is the elevations drawing, as submitted.

There is a great deal more to the project than these few images, but that can be saved for another post, eh?

1. Ensuring that existing stock is actually what people want and possibly regenerating that so that buyers’ needs are catered for.
2. Building new developments that the local residents and councils want, which may be large housing estates, if there seems to be demand for it, but may be small developments that are sensitive and in balance with the current development of the area.
3. Redeveloping failing office developments (wherever I go I seem to pass innumerable “office to let” signs!) into apartments.
4. Projects that take derelict houses and redevelop them.
5. Building new developments and plans via the enquiry by design method, where communities feel involved in what’s going on and will therefore be willing to allow developments, even quite large changes, on certain conditions.

All of those, I would say, provide much better quality, cater to more of the community, and create a longer lasting satisfaction for the community than the ugly and dislocated housing developments of the current climate.

I’m with you, Mr Pickles!

Discussion: The great Arts & Crafts figure William Morris once said “Have nothing in your house that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.”

Why should the same not be true of print?

Within so much modern journalism, you end up “reading” a magazine or newspaper and finding that out of the 100 or more pages that you could possibly read, there might be two that are actually worth the time and effort.

But what if a magazine published only what you wanted to read? What if the articles, that once driveled on over three or four pages, were condensed to a single paragraph with just those details of information that were essential to understand the article’s point?  Or perhaps what is currently explained over several paragraphs could be more easily demonstrated by a diagram or illustration that gives an instant understanding of the concept?

And why would we pay £5 or more for an issue of a magazine where most of the pages are oppressive advertisments for products and services that you have no actual interest in purchasing?  Wouldn’t it be better if advertisements were informative and entertaining too?  Surely an advert should demonstrate to a potential customer the real benefit of the company’s services, rather than just latching onto buzz-words and leaping onto bandwagons. The advert should stop trying to proclaim how amazing that company thinks itself is and instead focus on what the customer could achieve, if partnered with their products or services?

Conclusion: Magazines should be cut down so that rather than 150-page monoliths, they are eight-page works of literary art and craftsmanship.

Webtools should, instead of bringing up however many million results, bring up one — The One — that is most relevant to what you are actually looking for.

Books should illustrate complete concepts without forcing you through the subject’s entire boring history.

Note: When I’m talking about publications in this instance, these are ones for a specific limited audience, not national newspapers or general distribution magazines.  I’m talking more along the lines of trade magazines and web search tools for specific functions.  You obviously cannot second guess what any member of the public is going to want to read!!

It’s all very well designing new age things which look like they won’t stand up so that they look interesting and tug at our inner senses of insecurity and make us feel excited but, honestly… why?  Are we trying to continually unnerve the people of Britain and make them feel uncomfortable with the instability of their lives?  Are we trying to show to other nations how unstable we are and that it wouldn’t take much to make our entire country come tumbling down if you just know which bit to target?

Perhaps this kind of response is exactly what Anish Kapoor was aiming for in his target audience – a kind of confusion and awe.  I certainly think that the sculpture is truly awful, so, that covers the awe bit.  The thing is, even if he did expect this response… WHY?  What is the reason that such a desire to elicit this response is necessary?  Does that not also give you a bigger sense of dysfunction within society as a whole?  And if the only purpose of the sculpture is to elicit this response, then, well, its done.  The response is there!  I have just given it.  So now, cancel the construction. Your work is complete, just by doing such a retarded design. There is certainly no other reason for building the sculpture.  It’s not pretty, it does not gain attractiveness by being over 100 m tall rather than three inches on the page of my laptop computer.

WHY?

It’s a question little asked by clients of their “artists”.  As soon as they know it to be art, it suddenly doesn’t have to have any reason!  OK, I admit that art from the beginning of time wasn’t necessarily useful, but it certainly had a reason!  We’ve even got to the point where attractiveness isn’t considered as a reason for art (otherwise it would actually look good), education isn’t a reason (otherwise it would instinctively say something to anyone looking at it), it isn’t for historical record (because otherwise it would actually depict something of our culture, of ourselves).

So…

Why?

Oh… and who’s paying for this eyesore?

[UPDATE 28/11/11] I’m afraid this eyesore has now been built. I witnessed it from the train on my way to London.  Here’s proof of its profound beauty:

Eldon Terrace

The Shop

It seems that while I was in the USA, poring over textbooks and articles on HVAC and timber, someone had been busy putting the right-hand unit of Eldon Terrace back into use.  It is now a local convenience store, which takes advantage of the old fabric in terms of the concrete steps and shop-front frame.  I’m not going to lie, I think it’s pretty hideous.  The shop-front does not match the brick construction above and makes one uncomfortable.  The nature of the steps creates a bottleneck at the entrance/exit and creates a void underneath them which is wasted, and makes the steps look unnecessarily flimsy. Generally, the shop-front has no proportions and scale and just looks out of place.

However, I don’t want to be too harsh on the shop, since this was obviously inherited bad design from before the renovation, and an occupied shop is always better than one boarded up and disused.

The Café

At the left-hand unit, I saw no noticeable difference when I got back to Leeds in September, but when I passed the building in the past few days, I have noticed that a lot of work is being done to develop it.  The windows have been reinstated, steps cleaned up and a replacement door installed.  The quality of work so far appears to be good, and will surely enhance the building significantly.

I asked someone working on it what was happening to the building and he informed me that it was going to be an internet café. I think that the location of the building is perfect for university students and staff alike and that such a business has potential.

What I am concerned about is that a huge amount of investment obviously has and is going into the building to improve the quality.  Without a strategy to draw customers to that particular venue (over the many other cafés along that street), such work could be wasted.  However, I think that there are many ways that you could take advantage of the building in such a way as to make it a better venue than others.

Suggestions

An area of greenery should be planted outside the entrance to ensure that, with the new improvements, the building does not look even more bare than previously.  Small trees framing the unit would enhance the outdoor space, and if sensitively done, could create an transition space that does not feel too open to the main road.

It would be good to take advantage of the multiple spaces available – other cafés just have the one space and this can limit the intimacy that is possible. The upstairs rooms could be independent spaces that could be rented out, or just used by a small group who want to be in a private area. The downstairs area is also its own area that could be rented for small parties and events.

A possible alternative management structure would be to have a small members only club. The club would attract members through members-only promotions. For example, members would get two free coffees a day and would be able to book private rooms, get a private locker and use the in-house computing facilities. It could be a mini-conference centre or venue for small-scale events. An advantage of this model would be that you could get cash up front, which could then pay for the facilities that would be used by the members. If you created a membership structure that worked on the basis that the longer you took a membership for, the less you pay per month, you could get members paying for a full 9 months (an entire university year), or a year, up front, meaning that cashflow would be easier to manage.

In general, I’m optimistic that the outcome of this side of the house will be a much better place than what it as before, and better than its neighbour. I just hope that it’s sustainable!