Category Archives: Equality, Diversity And Inclusion
The Friends Of St James’ Cemetery And Gardens, Liverpool
The Friends of St James’, who are restoring the historic cemetery and park next to Liverpool Cathedral, have achieved much in the few years of their formal existence. The inner city becomes, by the hard work of volunteer environmentalists and gardeners, joining with equally committed volunteer lobbyists, a place where green space can thrive to encourage the naturalist in us all.
The Friends of St James Cemetery And Gardens held its third AGM this evening. Reports from the Chair, local resident and sculptor Robin Riley, and the Vice-Chair, Prof. Tony Bradshaw, a noted emeritus researcher from the University of Liverpool, were incredibly encouraging – programmes of volunteer engagement, plans for children’s educational activities, accounts of excellent public engagement events during the past year … all warmed the heart and gave us hope for the future of this unique inner-city environmental resource.
St James’ is a space dug out by the masons of yesteryear (I suspect that blocks of its red stone comprise the wall at the back of my house), and situated right next to Liverpool’s Anglican Cathedral. It holds about eighty thousand graves, relating in their stony way the history of the city for many decades up to the 1930s.
The cemetery, now also a park or ‘gardens’, hosts the Huskisson Memorial and much other testimony to Liverpool’s history. Amongst the other very interesting things to be found in this hollow scooped from the innrer city are a natural well and many exciting nooks and crannies. But until recently it was a no-go area, somewhere that most of us were rather afraid to explore at any time of day.
Pulling together to reclaim the space
The opportunity to reclaim this large space arose at least in part from the Bishops’ Conference on Social Responsibility which was held at Liverpool Cathedral in 2001. The environmentally aware theme of this conference resonated with the ambitions of many of us at the Cathedral and in HOPES: The Hope Street Association to develop the St. James’ site (which runs along the southern part of Hope Street) as part of our long-awaited Hope Street Millennium Public Realm proposals. In this ambition we found sterling support from David Shreeve of the national organisation the Conservation Foundation, a keen environmentalist who was much involved with Liverpool Cathedral and in this conference.
David worked with HOPES and others to encourage the City Council to see the value of developing the historic site right on our doorstep, and so the Friends of St James was formed. Here is an example of how having someone beyond the local scene to act as a champion can work wonders. What is declared by influential people beyond the locality to be precious may well be similarly perceived also by local decision-makers before too long.
Building for the future
So now we have a very active organisation for St James’ which will soon be a registered charity, and we also have buy-in from the City Council and Liverpool Vision, as well as from many ‘ordinary’ citizens of the city.
We also have big plans, including the imaginative Bridge of Hope, a project for a glass bridge which is intended to take people on a walkway at street level, high above the cemetery, straight into the Cathedral – thereby at last realising a dream which has been part of the Hope Street ambition for many decades.
What prospects for green space in the city?
Liverpool has been very slow to treasure its parks and green space. Sefton Park, for instance, has been left quietly to ‘naturalise’ for many years until very recently; but the Friends of Sefton Park, like those of St James’, have campaigned long and hard to develop these parks a sensibly managed public space once more… And it’s happened, because citizens of the city living around and enjoying these green spaces, cared enough to make a fuss and involve other, generously helpful people.
Let’s hope the same success can now be achieved by people who are campaigning for improvements to Newsham Park and other superb parks and green spaces in Liverpool. Newsham Park, for instance, has hard-working Friends as well. They need support!
The critical thing is, unless people can enjoy green space for themselves, they probably won’t be able to value it as they could, indeed should. It’s become a generational thing. If you haven’t seen it, you probably won’t want it, whether its allotments, parks or simply somewhere nice to walk.
Inevitably we must accept that Liverpool’s parks and open spaces cannot all, and unreservedly, be ‘set in aspic’ (to use a naturalistic metaphor); but I applaud wholeheartedly those who fight to ensure that the children of today have the opportunity, by example of fellow local citizens, to become be the enthusiastic users, and indeed guardians, of inner-city green space in the future.
See also
Liverpool’s Two Cathedrals
Hope Street Quarter, Liverpool and
Camera & Calendar.
City Centres For Young People, Suburbs For Older People: Ageist Planning For Homes?
The city centres of England, we are told, are populated mainly by young singles; but at the same time there is an increase in the number of older people who have supported independent living. So how do these two facets of modern life fit together?
The ‘conveyor belt effect’ is a new one on me. Apparently it refers to the idea that city centres tend to be populated by single 18-34’s, who then move out to the suburbs.
A new report by the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) City People: City Centre Living in the UK
But where do older people live?
It’s an interesting contrast that, in the same Guardian reporting column (11 January 2006) that I read about the IPPR study, there’s a piece on independent living for older people.
Apparently there has been a rise in the proportion of older people in England who live independently at home, rather than in residential care (30.1% in 2003/4; 32% in 2004-5); but it’s uneven by region. The Health and Social Care Information Centre (report, PP 6 10) found wide regional variations, with 44.7% for inner London and only 27.7% in unitary authorities.
It would be interesting to know more about where these older, independently housed people live. Are some of them in the city centres too? Or are they on they periphery, having ‘moved out’ when they had their families? Or were housing patterns when they were young quite different anyway, with the ‘extended family’ arrangements reported for instance in London’s Bethnal Green, by Willmott and Young all those years ago?
Do housing plans actually meet need?
In an earlier piece I suggested that there’s a need to incorporate accommodation in small blocks in all sorts of housing areas. City centres must be made much more friendly for families and older people; and the suburbs (and that strange ‘donut’ around city centres) needs to have much more flexible and helpful housing units too. And this applies to towns and villages at least as much as it does to cities, as perhaps the NHS / HSCIC data indicate.
When there’s a real mix, there’s more chance of support for everyone, and a real community – and that’s where I’d love the planners and builders really to get a grip.
Read the discussion of this article which follows the book E-store….
Official: Community Engagement Can Stress You Out
The RENEW Northwest Intelligence Report just published (January 2006) on ‘Making a difference: Participation and wellbeing’ marks an important step forward in our notions of volunteering and its outcomes. Professor Carolyn Kagan suggests that community activists often find their ‘work’ stressful and unrewarding.
It is indeed time we re-examined the notion of ‘putting something back’; but we shouldn’t assume that only those who live in difficult circumstances can share common cause in regeneration and renewal. People with professional skills who themselves become involved as volunteers can also find the going very hard – as any regeneration professionals taking Prof. Kagan’s advice to ‘practise what they preach’ might well discover.
Given that work-related stress has long been known to be related to powerlessness and / or impossible demands, I’m surprised it’s taken so long… but now we have the official acknowledgement that community engagement by volunteers can be as stressful as it can be rewarding.
In her report Making a difference: Participation and wellbeing (Renew Northwest, 2006) Professor Carolyn Kagan from Manchester Metropolitan University suggests that, ‘far from being a source of wellbeing, participation can actually increase stress.’ Community activists, she has found, work ‘under unrelenting pressure: isolated, without supervision, coping with local conflict, without time off – and without pay.’
‘Consulting residents about a regeneration project,’ we are told, ‘is a top-down system which can often result in local needs being defined by the professionals, with little ‘ownership’ by residents.’ (This worries me a bit; isn’t it helpful that there be professionally experienced people genuinely embedded in all communities, so that issues wider than the parocial are also ‘stakeheld’ by all concerned?)
Who are the ‘community activists’?
Nonetheless, Prof. Kagan has a very valid point. You only have to become a little involved to see that the people who are most active in ‘communities’ are also often those who are least impressed by what is being achieved around them, and that despondency is often the name of the game.
And you can also fairly quickly see that the powers-that-be, probably without conscious intent, often play their own games in this, favouring some groups and individuals against others, hoovering up ideas and regurgitating them as ‘policy’ to be ‘explained’ to the hapless people who first thought of it, and generally bureaucratising whatever they touch. (Of course some degree of bureaucracy is essential; but some of it is also rather convenient in terms of how officialdom chooses to engage with the punter.)
But there is another question too: why should be assumed that ‘community activists’ are necessarily ‘tenants’ or ‘residents’ or always themselves live in a ‘community’ (whatever that means) which itself struggles? Sometimes this specific sort of engagement is the only legitimate way forward, but many other issues which need addressing are wider than that.
‘Activists’ come in all shapes and sizes
Is there no commonality between all the sorts of people who work voluntarily to gain benefit for different ‘communities’? Aren’t local political parties and, say, religious leaders and charitable organisations all run on the basis of very little financial reward for a lot of hard slog?
The people involved in these organisations may well be articulate, easily able to make their case and very committed to involving everyone – but they are often just as stressed by the response of officialdom as anyone else. In fact, it could be thought that they are even less well received by regeneration bureacrats than are those with fewer recognised and assets, precisely because they are seen by the powers-that-be as more of a challenge or ‘threat’.
Engagement by professionals is a difficult issue
The un-welcome which articulate and professionally qualified people sometimes experience when they try to work as volunteeers for the larger community interest is very significant. Prof. Kagan suggests that if regeneration professionals are serious about accepting and supporting the role of ‘community activists’, they should take on this role in their ‘own home and work communities’… or presumably anywhere where they feel there is – and here perhaps we get to the real underlying issue – legitimate common cause?
If my observations are anything to go by, the regeneration professionals are in for a shock if they actually follow Prof. Kagan’s advice. They could find that they are vulnerable on all fronts… the ‘community’ wonders what they’re up to, their co-professionals feel uncomfortable, and the powers-that-be actively resist their involvement.
It takes forward looking, positive and confident practitioners to accept their peers as ‘volunteer’ stakeholders with legitimate engagement in the regeneration and renewal process; and confident practitioners, happy and able to share, and comfortable in their skins, are sadly not exactly what’s to be found in some of these programmes.
Women, Ladies Or Girls? What’s In A Name?
The English language is rich in many respects; but it’s inadequate, perhaps for very important reasons, when it comes to naming and addressing mature female people. For the foreseeable future polite society will probably continue to constrain women by the words we may properly use here. Men can also be ‘Chaps’ and ‘Guys’, whilst for women until now there’s been no equivalent set of terms…. which may explain why younger people of both sexes, often themselves more consciously gender-equal, have begun to claim these names, Guys and Chaps, as inclusive terms for everyone.
Names meaning everything and nothing. The old adage about ‘sticks and stones’ but ‘names can hurt me never…’ has some truth, but it’s not the whole story.
So here’s a question: how does one properly address a group of mature female people whom one may not know well?
Women, Ladies of Girls?
Is there any other term than these which one can use for such a group as the one above?
* ‘Women’ is a strange form of spoken or formal address; the word refers to a type of person, but it’s not really a collective noun in the formal naming sense;
* ‘Ladies’ is a term which offends some because of its patriarchal and other class overtones (though the Concise Oxford notes it is a “courteous or formal synonym for ‘women'”); and
* ‘Girls’ is obviously not appropriate as a formal term for any group of female people over the age of about 16.
So what are we women to be addressed as? Frankly, I don’t know.
Forms of address for men
This is easier! Men can be ‘Gentlemen’ (formal); ‘Chaps’ (the friendly noun for a group of posibly more mature men), ‘Guys’ (friendly, for younger men, or for Chaps with a more modern outlook?) or even ‘Boys’ (though usually only as a form of gentle teasing between peers, or in families).
Rarely do we hear complaint about any of these collective nouns. There’s something for everyone – at least as long as you’re male. But then of course men don’t feel marginalised or at risk of being demeaned by terms of reference in the same way as some women may, not infrequently with reason.
The new Chaps ‘n’ Guys
Talking with younger women and men, there seems to be a move towards an understanding that Chaps and Guys can be male or female. ‘Okay you guys..’ is the start of a sentence which can be addressed to anyone (collectively) by anyone, male or female, in informal situations. And ‘Chaps’ has become a term which, again informally, refers to any group of people.
Perhaps this is the way forward. In formal situations there seems little option but to use the ‘polite’ forms ‘Ladies and Gentlemen…’; this doesn’t always sound good, but how else does one start? At least it’s equally constraining for both men and women.
Hermaphrodising the naming
Informally perhaps we women can move towards a more hermaphrodite nomenclature. We’re ‘Guys’ and ‘Chaps’ when it suts. This doesn’t, to me at least, feel like the awful legal precedent of announcing that ‘all references to ‘he’ shall also apply to ‘she’…’ and so on. That legal precedent was made by men. We, women, are choosing to be, and to call ourselves, ‘You Guys’ in a rather different way.
The ultimate test for person-to-person, face-to-face, naming has to be that person’s choice, and the type of context in which the choice is made. We can decide in the general sense to use what collective nouns we like, but respect for the individual and his / her ease should take prioity over our own preference when we address another.
If we want real communication, putting the other at ease is important; and if that includes using formal terms because these are the only ones we have, in my book, so be it. Convention, however inperfect, help us here.
Hallo people!
Nonetheless, the English language does leave us a bit high and dry, with ‘he’ and ‘she’ as the third person nouns, and no ungendered noun for individuals except for the words ‘person’ and ‘people’. Maybe we women willl have arrived when the formal way to address groups of either / mixed gender is to begin, ‘Good morning people…’.
But that may take a while, Guys.
Devolution, Regionalism, County Councils And Politics
Despite the reluctance of voters to accept that ‘the new localism’ also means significant change, English devolution is almost certainly upon us; but it’s unlikely to surface in the ways some imagine. Rather, the likelihood is that it will slowly become a part of the wider political landscape, as people seek ways to address specific problems.
Call it what you will – devolution, regionalism / decentralisation, ‘the new localism’, ‘the trend towards ‘city-regions’ or whatever – there is a strongly discernable move towards debate about empowering communities locally as such, and away from national ‘handed down’ political decision-making. Thus, for instance, we can expect the Lyons report on the future of local government cum the Summer.
This has been going on for quite a while now and is, we are told, the basis on which policy and delivery for schools, hospitals and many other organisations such as the intended children’s centres are to be determined. So far, so good…. but maybe, just maybe, we’re also learning a few wider political lessons along the way.
Voters want everything!
It’s interesting that at last modes of delivery are being examined before, not simply after, decisions about big changes are to be made.
According to this week’s New Start magazine there are now various warnings that speedy implementation of devolvement could produce perhaps as many problems as it ‘solves’. This is unsurprising to those of us who watched the orginal proposals for regional government go up in smoke for exactly the same reasons that the new localism will have to ease itself in.. the power and fears of county councils.
Voters may indeed want local powers (though there is always a danger that ‘power’ can mean ‘comfort zone’ if nobody is vigilant….) but many of them also like the established ways of doing things. They want: change without cost; no reduction in the structures already in place; less ‘red tape’; and a fully localised version of services and provision. In other words, they have hopelessly unrealistic expectations.
Sometimes, it can seem, politicians are perceived to be not only ‘power-mad’, and ‘in for what they can get’, but also miracle workers on behalf of their constituents.
Getting real
This is the fundamental dilemma of any politicians who seeks to bring about change. If it’s going to take a long time it won’t happen before they are up for re-election – with the risk of accusations of breaking promises – and if it will be a significant change it will upset people who may want ‘improvements’, but also like the status quo.
This is where responsible journalism (yes, yes) and proper, carefully thought out political education come in. Perhaps there’s a case for a sort-of Sim City game which requires young students of politics and government to make decisions as though a politician against a backdrop, not of physical regeneration and development, but of constant hypothetical re-election.
Such a ‘game’ might help us all to realise there’s no such thing as a free lunch, even in the singular role of voter. What’s the point of demanding the politically impossible, when the real question for voters should be, what is possible, and at what opportunity-cost?
Things happen
There again, perhaps much of the devolution which we are undoubtedly going to see will occur almost invisibly. Politicians may be unable to deliver as they wish – or may indeed be working actively to stop things happening – but often it’s ‘needs must’ which brings change about. There’s no non-collaborative way to secure plans and funding for a major piece of infrastucture, massive funding in a science park or research programme, or a strategy for foreign industrial investment.
As the members of the Northern Way, amongst others, have seen, only joint effort will achieve changes having any significant impact on an area. And it’s these incremental alliances, I suspect, which will in the end bring about the more difficult-to-deliver underlying devolutionary shifts in the political landscape.
Time scales are another problem
The judgement that overt English devolution will have to move fairly slowly if it is to be implemented effectively is probably sound. The only problem is… if a week is a long time in politics, however long in political terms is a decade? Suffice to say that the drive to devolution will need to be really well grounded if it is to survive and have impact on the extended time-scale (a decade or two?) now by some envisaged.
There are plenty of ideas which have taken centuries rather than decades to come to fruition; maybe with modern, technological ways of sharing ideas and cultural shifts we shan’t have to wait that long. But my bet is still that, whatever we see in the end, it won’t be exactly what we think we’re looking at now.
Liverpool, Capital Of Culture 2008? Or Of Chaos 2006?
Liverpool as a city is claiming much for the forthcoming celebratory years of 2007 and 2008, but concerns exist on many fronts about the present. There is more to serious development of cultural involvement than simply ‘community programmes’, admirable though that is. So what sorts of models of citizen and ‘stakeholder’ integration are being developed, building on the experience of other cities which have managed to engage people at all levels? And will these work?
Oh dear. We don’t seem to have got off to a very good start in Liverpool this year.
The end of 2005 saw the demise of several large-scale Liverpool projects, such as the trams project, and before that, in 2004, the embarrassment of the so-called ‘Fourth Grace’ (possibly a vainglorious misnomer? nobody I know thought there were even three ‘Graces’ until someone made that name up, not long ago). And in the Summer we had the debacle of the Mersey River Festival, only now being reported…
Then, to round off 2005, there was the extraordinary fuss over the shifts at the top of our political and administrative power base.
Capital of Culture 2008 now under scrutiny
And now questions are being asked about our preparations for Liverpool’s European Capital of Culture celebrations in 2008. These have been becoming more urgent over the past few weeks – there were concerns expressed when Liam Fogarty decided to raise the issue of an elected mayor once more – but since the New Year the story hasn’t really been off the front page.
Well, that there are questions is unsurprising, both for particular reasons and because there is always a period before these huge events, as far as I can see, when Questions Are Asked. What is more worrying, however, is the difficulty some actual citizens and ‘stakeholders’ have experienced in learning what’s happening and / or in getting answers.
Who takes day-to-day responsibilty for ‘stakeholders’?
I leave it to others to pursue the specifics of this alarming situation; my own concerns are quite complex, though I do have to say it would be helpful if they were being addressed at the practical day-to-day level… one problem seems to be identifying anyone who can take on issues of normal operational accountability. But there you go.
For me, and I suspect numbers of others, the real issue is, where do we go from here? As a long-time resident of Liverpool with strong roots in the city I know it’s really important that we make a big success of 2007 and 2008, the 800th anniversary of our City Charter, and then our European Capital of Culture Year.
What some people haven’t the foggiest inkling about, however, even after serious attempts to find out, is how they can bring their ideas to bear to help this to happen. And that perhaps has occured also in other European Capital of Culture locations, which begs a question about what models of social and artistic inclusion work best, and where.
The Tesco Effect And ‘Clone Town’ Britain
The ‘Tesco effect’ is a matter of serious concern for everyone, from the All-Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group to people on abandoned and insular housing estates. What is needed now is more thought for how the future could look, and what can best be done to serve the interests of consumers – and businesses and employees – across the board.
The MPs looking at supermarket dominance have, we gather, been quite clear that the future does not bode well. Leaks from the High Street Britain 2015 report suggest that food wholesalers and independent newsagents may soon be freezed out by supermarkets.
This debate is on-going, on this site and in many other places and is significant for us all – hence my returning to the theme yet again.
Contexts change over time
I do understand why people are concerned about supermarkets. There is a fear that supply chains will be / are being distorted, and that suppliers, especially small suppliers, will be squeezed out in favour of the big boys. Such concerns are both real and legitimate; though we must wait until the Office of Fair Trading reports back on its current enquiries before we come to clear conclusions about the current state of things.
And I’m sure, too, that the all-party parliamentary small shops group, which will issue its formal report on High Street Britain 2015 soon, is thinking hard about the future as well as the present and the past. Nonetheless, I am surprised at the apparent lack of debate (at least as reported in the press) in terms of some of the fundamentals of the issue.
Some basic questions for the future
Amongst the questions which come to my mind every time the ‘Tesco effect’ comes up as a topic are these:
1. Is it the role of local planning officers to offer ‘protection’ to small shop-keepers? And, if so, under what rationale, and do they have a framework in which to do it? (They may well have, but I’d be astonished if I’m the only person who doesn’t know what it is.)
2. Is it reasonable to suppose that supply chains are strengthened when suppliers, especially small ones, collaborate – in of course legal ways? What work has been undertaken to establish vulnerabilities and strengths here?
3. What do we know about the ways that local independent traders can work together to protect their patch, and to offer a quality, forward-looking employment experience to local people?
4. Are there ways in which the energy and other resources put into transporting and other handling of goods – especially foodstuffs? – can be shared more overtly with the customer, so that the purchaser can choose ‘environmentally friendly’ products, as they might well prefer to in local markets?
5. Why is there so little debate about the socio-economic contexts of supermarkets? One size may well not fit all, despite the strength of e.g. the ‘Clone Town’ arguments coming from the new economics foundation and others. In run-down places supermarkets may well be the only employer in the whole area which is big enough to provide stable employment and proper training. In wealthier localtions there may be many other employers who can provide training and career routes for everyone who seeks these. Surely this context makes a difference to ‘value-added’ in terms of supermarkets? So what do we know about the ‘career progressions’ of supermarket workers in various contexts?
6. And finally, who is thinking about the appalling service provision gaps in housing estates throughout the country? In terms of supermarkets they may well be ‘food deserts’, but aren’t there niches here for (social?) enterprises such as farmers’ shops, local bread shops and all sorts? These are not necessarily day-dreams, they could with the right support (and security measures) actually happen; and they could also offer training in trades and retail to local people. So, again, what research has been done to test feasibility, and what work has been done to encourage such efforts?
The questions continue…
We could ask a lot more questions like this. There are indeed many issues about which we need to know more as the ‘Tesco effect’ is debated; but it would be good if such questions could be asked in the context of changes for the future, and of small trader / supplier empowerment, rather than sometimes simply because of nostalgia or of fear of the big supermarkets, whatever.
Renaming The Pensions Debate As The ‘Right To Work’ Debate
All the evidence is that most people in the U.K. are living longer and more healthily. They often take up new activities and lead self-sufficient lives into their 80s and even 90s. Why then are some commentators viewing The Turner Report’s proposals to increase the retirement age through the perspective of the past, not the future?
It’s amazing how many very elderly people one sees during social visits over the festive season. Just in the course of the last few days I’ve in some way encountered half a dozen or more close family and friends who are over 85, and some of them over 90 – and all still holding their own nicely, thank you very much.
Looking back, I’m sure that years ago meeting anyone much over the age of 80 was really quite the exception – and it turns out this isn’t just my memory playing tricks. The Guardian leader of 27 December tells us that average life expectancy has increased by two years in every decade for the past two centuries.
And then I read today that women even more than men use the internet to keep in touch – and men more than women use it to find out new things. But the most striking thing of all is that (in the U.S.A. at least) two thirds of both men and women are internet users…. and we all know that silver surfers – internet users aged 50+ – are increasing in numbers all the time, so that over a third of people aged up to 64 are now on-line, and many of these find it invaluable.
The future will be techno, but will it be work?
What are we to make of this? There seems to be ample evidence that age is not now necessarily an obstacle to learning to do things one wants to do, at least as long as the resources are there to do it. It’s patently obvious that age itself is no longer the sole determinant of what people can do.
All of which leads me to ponder, along with many others, why there’s so much fuss in some quarters about raising the retirement age as a general policy. (Always assuming that people who for some reason are unwell or whatever will, as before, be able to retire earlier.)
Judging the future by the standards of the past
If people want to carry on linking in with others, or learning and trying new things, why can’t they do this at work as well as in their leisure time? Those who decry the new thinking on work and pensionable age (The Turner Report) are judging the future by the standards of the past.
Looking forward, many of us will be able to choose to maintain our health and activity for much longer than, say, most of our grandparents. And if part of this activity is earning money to maintain ourselves in the style to which older people are now becoming accustomed, that looks fair enough too.
33 Things To Do Before You Turn 10 (or 110)
Kids’ play is in one way serious stuff, but that’s no reason why fun shouldn’t also be far less than serious for them and for the grown-ups too. Here are some ideas to try which came from a survey of children earlier in the year, plus a few suggestions for the adults as well… Go for it, and enjoy!
Do you remember the Persil ads of last Summer? They were all on the theme of children playing, with the subtext, ‘never mind the dirt, have fun‘…. a rather useful notion, if you happen to sell washing powder, since there were thirty three of these ideas:
33 things kids should do before they’re 10 – the official list
1. Roll on your side down a grassy bank
2. Make a mud pie
3. Make your own modelling dough mixture
4. Collect frogspawn
5. Make perfume from flower petals
6. Grow cress on a windowsill
7. Make a papier mache mask
8. Build a sandcastle
9. Climb a tree
10. Make a den in the garden
11. Make a painting using your hands and feet
12. Organise your own teddy bears picnic
13. Have your face painted
14. Play with a friend in the sand
15. Make some bread
16. Make snow angels
17. Create a clay sculpture
18. Take part in a scavenger hunt
19. Camp out in the garden
20. Bake a cake
21. Feed a farm animal
22. Pick some strawberries
23. Play pooh sticks
24. Recognise five different bird species
25. Find some worms
26. Ride a bike through a muddy puddle
27. Make and fly a kite
28. Plant a tree
29. Build a nest out of grass and twigs
30. Find ten different leaves in the park
31. Grow vegetables
32. Make breakfast in bed for your parents
33. Make a mini assault course in your garden
Not all fun things need be grubby
We might also want to say that you don’t have to get grubby to enjoy yourself, even as a child; but there may be a useful idea or two in the message, especially as we reach that part of the Festive Season when for some (holiday guests, if not perhaps rushed-off-their-feet festive host/s) the main question is, ‘What shall we do next?’
The Guardian reports that what kids enjoy and apparently want to do before they reach the age of ten does not always meet with adult approval in our sanitised society, and there are concerns that children themseves are now sometimes reluctant to enjoy things which their parents expected to do without chastisement. Certainly, I for one as a child much enjoyed almost all the activities on the list – though I fear that face painting and scavenger hunts must have arrived after my time – and, although there were in those days no ‘to do’ lists of fun activities, we were keen also to ensure that our own family tried the current Persil ideas too. So maybe these things are perennial, and none the worse for that.
You don’t have to be a child to have fun!
And, since it’s holiday time right now, let’s add to these suggestions with more ideas I’ve heard for the grown-ups: Try acting out a little play / panto with the kids, make some music, tell / read a story, or simply enjoy a good walk somewhere refreshing. (By all means try to spot lots of different birds and plants on the way.) But I don’t have to elaborate this list, everyone has their own – though it’s always interesting to know what the best and simplest ideas are.
Plus, if we do get the predicted post-Christmas snow, maybe we should all try the Persil suggestion which most of us probably hadn’t heard of as children – the Snow Angel. All you have to do is lie on your back in the snow (very briefly, but thereby already providing loss of dignity and thus huge amusement for the Juniors present) and ‘wave’ your arms above your head. When you get up, you’re promised an imprint in the white stuff of an angel.
So now we can all be angelic during the Festive Season, for very little effort; and we’ll have the sparkly image in the snow to prove it.
Have you read….?
Things To Do When You’re 11 – 15
Things To Do When You’re 19 – 21
Things To Do When You’re 22 – 25
Things To Do When You’re 26 – 30
Things To Do When You’re 31 – 40
What To Do At Any Age – Be Happy
* Life is not a rehearsal
* Smile when you can
* Do acts of random kindness
* Try no-TV days
* Be cautious sometimes, cynical never
* Use your pedometer
* Treat yourself daily to a ‘Went Right’ list
A Bach Christmas For Us All!
The BBC Radio 3 Bach experience has been an extraordinary experiment; but sharing something like this with people all over the world as Christmas approaches surely has a particular meaning for many.
Anyone who enjoys classical music will be aware that the BBC has just offered us ten days of uninterrupted Bach. This has to be the tour de force to beat ’em all.
I’d be less than candid if I didn’t admit there have been times when I decided enough was enough – and turned to Dinah Washington, the Walker Brothers or other entirely ‘off site’ artists for a bit of contrast… or when I chose instead to listen to my usual fare of the wonderful chamber music of the past two centuries.
Nonetheless, in this season of good cheer, perhaps it’s worth just thinking how amazing it is that the BBC can arrange for us to listen to all, everything, J.S. Bach has left us, from three hundred or so years ago.
A global legacy shared
My guess is that people all over the world have been ‘tuning in’ on their broadband computers and hearing Bach in the morning, Bach at lunchtime and Bach in the evening [postscript, 27 Dec: 2.5 million hits were recorded!].
Maybe Bach is not everyone’s cup of tea, but here we have something really quite extraordinary – a community of ‘People on Earth’ who, without knowing each other, are sharing a legacy of three hundred years which has been the basis for much of our contemporary music, popular, ‘classical’ and even cutting edge.
Just as we can share the hoped-for goodwill of Christmas without necessarily the religious aspects, so through music and very ‘new’ technologies we can share a heritage which means something, whatever our own contemporary musical preferences.
Dreaming Realist 