I hold a First Class Honours Master of Engineering degree in Architectural Engineering (International)

More information about my degree can be found here, but that’s not really what this post is about.

The title of this post (a pun, of course, on a Gilbert and Sullivan song), refers to the fact that, although my “major” is in Architectural Engineering, I much more consider myself a Jack(son) Of All Trades, or, if you like, a “general majorer”! The number of different subjects that I can get truly engaged in knows pretty much no bounds.  At university, I spent a lot of extra-curricular time in clubs and societies, many of which had little to do with my degree, but in which I could just engage wholeheartedly. This is no different now – I read books on economics, go to lectures on politics and art, attend discussions on monetary reform and climate change, sing with choirs, write blog posts about resilient economics as well as keep my hand in with physical activities such as landscaping and building construction. This, by the way, is only a condensed list (see the rest of this website for insight into some of the others!)

Whilst recession continues to hit the UK, and more and more students leave university to face a sparse job market, it is us “general majorers” who suffer from the greatest competition (particularly from those who have more specific qualifications and experience in the field of each particular job on offer), but also benefit from the greatest adaptability, being able to do web design one week, and labouring the next, for example.

I hope that by keeping an eye out for opportunities wherever I go, I will make my way into career in community and built environment regeneration, but until that time if you need a website designing, a Sketchup model creating, labouring or anything else that I have experience of, do get in touch!

simeon [at] simeonjackson.co.uk (or comment below!)

For the past week I have, uncharacteristically, been racing through a book, not able to put it down.  That book is “Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking” by Susan Cain, who I first heard of from this TEDTalk, and just happened to notice the book on the shelf in a bookshop when I was passing through town.

As an introvert myself, I have always been acutely aware of the fact that our culture is built on the “Extrovert Ideal”, and all the effects that has had on my life. Despite introverted activities having as much value to society as extroverted ones, a higher value is consistently placed on extroverted activities both in the workplace and within schools.  You will be hard-pushed to find a job description that does not ask for “teamwork” and “communication” as essential skills, but are unlikely to find one that demands more introverted traits such as reserve and sensitivity, even when they would be advantageous to the role.

The first three chapters (Part One) explore this “Extrovert Ideal”, how it came about, and the effect it has had on individuals and on society as a whole, whilst the rest of the book looks at how introverts came to be the way they are, and what tools the introvert can use to understand themselves and extroverts better, and live happier and more fulfilling lives as a result.

The book, reminiscent of Tracy Chapman’s song “Talking about a revolution” (which insists that it “sounds like a whisper”), gives numerous examples of people who have changed the world, not despite, but often partly aided by, their quiet and sensitive nature. Such people include Gandhi, Eleanor Roosevelt (who stood up for the misrepresented when she was First Lady) and Rosa Parks (an African-American civil rights activist). By being quiet and reflective, we find, introverts are often much better at seeing the bigger picture, averse to high risk and better at activities that require a lot of solitary study and concentration.

Here are a few of the suggestions she gives for introverts:

Learn to be more vocal, but schedule in “restorative niches” too

Introverts can burn out if they try to go against their nature for too long (pseudo-extroversion), and although they may step out of their comfort zone for short periods and express themselves very well, they may need to recover by creating a “restorative niche”, where they can just “be themselves”.

Assume a soft leadership (where leadership is necessary)

Susan Cain suggests that introverts make good leaders when they preside over proactive people, whose strengths they can bring out, without stealing the lime-light, or stifling with top-down control.

Foster introverts’ creativity

Creativity is never produced by “groupthink”.  Original and creative ideas comes from a single mind, even when inspired by external events or other people’s less-developed theories. Situations where creativity will come out won’t be big parties or social get-togethers (however fun these may be), but quiet moments where ideas can float freely, leaving you with plenty of time to think around and develop your own ideas and solutions. (I consider this blog to be a great opportunity for me to get my creative juices flowing, to explore and express my ideas.)

There’s one little quote from the book which I want to leave you with, in support of blogging:

The same person who would never raise his hand in a lecture hall of two hundred people might blog to two thousand, or two million, without thinking twice.

If only my readership were quite at the two million mark!

An extra notes on political movements

Transition, I feel, is an introverted movement, in that its focus is not on simply communicating (like the Occupy movement), but is contemplative and about getting stuff done even when the movement is misunderstood or not accepted by society as a whole.  This, I feel, is a great character trait, because Transition doesn’t just pander to people for the sake of pleasing them (as governments do, most of the time), nor does it try to be controlling or aggressive.

However, along with the positive character traits, there are negative ones. The Transition movement, like introverts, has a small number of dedicated friends, but often gets lost in large crowds, and sometimes finds it difficult to make itself heard over the more assertive members of society, such as banks and corporations (the book suggests, indirectly, that the financial recessions of both the dot-com bubble and those more recently were caused, at least in part, by extroverts taking disproportionate risks whilst ignoring the warning by introverts (such as Warren Buffett), who, being risk-averse, had looked ahead, and saw financial crises in the making).

The Transition movement, therefore, and its members (particularly the more introverted ones), would do well to take a leaf or two out of this book

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 that made 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 the 99% 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!