Locks Park Farm
Thanks for visiting my blog. All entries are presented in chronological order.
I have a small organic farm on the Culm grasslands near Hatherleigh in Devon, with sheep and beef cattle. I've been farming in the county for more than 30 years. I've set up this blog to share views on farming and the countryside - please do give your thoughts.
CPRE
The Campaign to Protect Rural England has helped set up this blog. We want farming to thrive in England, and believe that it is essential that people understand farming and farmers better in order for that to happen. Paula's views expressed here are her own and we won't necessarily share all of them, but we're happy to have helped give her a voice.
Find our more about CPRE and our views on food and farming at our website,
www.cpre.org.uk
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 10, 2008 at 10:47 am
mary
Thank you for getting the PDF Paula. My views (expressed earlier) about him still stand. I think the people who say they ‘like him’ are somewhat gullible. I notice in a video link posted earlier that ‘his most important interview’ was with Tony Benn, another phoney, who could have intervened, in his role as President of STWC, in getting Blair arraigned for taking the country to an illegal war but instead chickened out. Unbelievably he was campaigning for Blair at the 2005 election and I have a link to prove that!
His son Hilary doesn’t do much better at DEFRA with the shambles at Pirbright. I will shut up - I don’t really like sullying your lovely site with politics but I needed to say it. Elms can only sneer at what he sees as the ‘countryside’ which is where all of our roots are, and upon whose workers we will depend increasingly to stay alive.
April 10, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Richard
It seems that Mr Elms was writing to get a reaction, to cause discussion - and to that degree, he has been successful.
The main problem I see with his article is, however, that he has painted his picture of the English countryside with very broad strokes. He has some valid points around the concept of a ‘golden age’ of the English agrarian society which people hark back to (”…the chocolate-box
myth of the bucolic rural idyll…”). The theory is that each generation has it’s own perfect ideal of what ‘rural’ should be - and it is usually 100 or so years before their own view point. In reality, this perfect situation probably never existing - there have always been problems with rural society and the environment whatever period of history you look at.
However, he completely misses the point that what makes the English countryside so ‘English’ is its unique diversity…and it is the conservation (not preservation) of this diversity that is key. ‘Dreary uniformity’ seems such as misinformed viewpoint when referring to the English countryside.
I would also argue strongly that he is wrong in his opinion that people who live in the countryside are rejecting ‘noisy, creative glory…in favour of safe, samey conformity’. This is just plainly not true - wherever you go in the world, home or abroad, rural or urban - people vary as much as the landscape - it would be the same as claiming all urban dwellers clamor for the anonymity that city dwelling can bring…some do, some don’t.
Beneath all his bluster and postering, I have a feeling that Mr Elms feels threatened and uncomfortable by the ‘countryside’…I don’t know why. Maybe he is like a friend of mine who won’t buy ‘organic’ food as it sounds too pretentious for him….oh, well, there is nowt queer as folk.
April 10, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Lizzy
Having read the piece it is clear that Robert Elms is reacting to some of the less savoury aspects of the countryside that many people have encountered but that not many people talk about. For me this has resonance and therefore contributes to why I really like him.
What I find interesting and at the same time disturbing (because I don’t know what to do about it, or indeed if anything can be done), is the unwillingness on the part of some to hear the concerns of others. Does it have to be the town vs the countryside all the time? Does everyone who lives in the countryside have to think, behave and look the same? Do they all have to agree on everything?
Do we need a CPRE specifically? Is high-density housing in rural areas always to be opposed? What about low-density housing? Is the patchwork landscape something that needs to be preserved or just a phase we must through onto something else. We all know it wasn’t always like that.
The local people I know here in Devon, (I am referring to some of those that don’t live in splendid detached farmhouses set within acres of land), want more people to move in. They want their money and the opportunities an increase in population density brings.
I don’t know what the answer is - to those of you that prefer the countryside to be basically empty, essentially wild but edged in nostalgia and old gates, those who say some new fences are needed to protect the old and keep the animals in place, and those like me who just want it to be more welcoming. And if a few new people and some shiny new gates are going to help achieve that, bring it on.
April 10, 2008 at 6:58 pm
colouritgreen
the people I know here in Devon, (speaking from the perspective of someone living in the country.. but not in a ’splendid detached farmhouse’ )don’t want other people to move in at all. They want to be able to stay here themselves.. not be pushed out by the higher prices afforded by non locals.
Of course city life is more popular. Thats the whole point - cities and towns are where large proportions of the population gather.. by definition its more popular than the country - or the countryside would not *be* the countryside.. because it would be full!!
I’m not sure Mr Elms has to love the countryside - why is he expecting to find farming an attraction to visit? what makes him think its about him?and as for describing the countryside as all the same.. well.. makes me think he has not actually visited much of it.
But as Richard says.. Mr Elms is out for a reaction. Mine boils down to this: If he prefers the city.. thats fine.
April 10, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Lizzy
Robert Elms’ article is overflowing with witty observation, but others he has written suggest that he’d like to to enjoy the countryside more, but has been disappointed by various aspects of it. It isn’t all about him, he speaks for a large number of people.
The countryside belongs to all of us, not just some. Old buildings, listed or otherwise are expensive to renovate and you need an inheritance or a City salary to do it.
I should know.
http://hubpages.com/hub/My-House-Is-500-Years-Old
April 11, 2008 at 12:12 am
Another Fragmented Day « My Weblog
[...] a completely pointless conversation on Paula’s blog tonight. Well, it’s hardly a conversation as the people on the blog clearly aren’t [...]
April 12, 2008 at 8:10 am
LittleFfarm Dairy
So, Mr Elms’ view of the countryside is, that it isn’t interesting because all it has to offer, is
“….various forms of soil.”
So, in reply reference the brown stuff, I quote ad-lib from Rosie Boycott’s excellent book, ‘Our Farm’:
“….to most people, & indeed to me until recently, soil is just pretty boring stuff which clogs up the bottom of your wellingtons: it is indeed the dirt beneath your feet. Governments have spent a fortune exploring the potential for life on other planets, but exploring the soil is a fledgeling, under-funded & unglamorous industry. Yet the earth in our gardens, our fields, our forests, as well as the sediments at the bottom of every river & stream & marsh, harbour the most diverse life known in our universe. It is nothing short of magical. It it also critical to our survival. Without it, we literally have nothing & would be nothing….”
Pages 103-111 are a fascinating exploration of the complex nature of soil - & the curious nature of cities. I suggest Mr Elms reads it; it may make him feel just a little humbled in his off-hand dismissal of all things rural. After all (again quoting Rosie):
“What sets humankind apart from other creatures is our ability to grow food, & our ability to live in large groups which can in turn support great institutions. Cities are the heart of our global world & they need to be subsidised from the outside. That makes them vulnerable. A small town won’t possess a museum or a specialist neuro-surgeon, but its inhabitants live closer to sources of food. As cities get bigger so the brilliance of our civilisation becomes increasingly evident: opera houses, metro systems, grand monuments & stately buildings. But as they get bigger they become increasingly dependent on supply chains, electricity grids, water & food that is produced far away. We inhabit our concrete streets & take for granted how it all works but, like the planet we live on, walk a tightrope to survive.”
Personally I feel one of the great things about humanity, is its’ diversity: if we all wanted to live in the countryside there simply wouldn’t be any; conversely if we all wanted to live in cities humankind would disappear altogether, as there wouldn’t be any food - & there IS more to life than cultural nourishment, despite what Mr Elms may believe. So in some ways people like me (who love living in the countryside & abhor the city) & people like Mr Elms (quite the opposite), actually keep the balance about right!
My concern however is his for apparent disappointment that the countryside isn’t quite the pretty playground for urbanites that it should supposedly be; & this view of rural England is one which has been fostered & encouraged by the Government, who seem to have a faintly bizarre view that the countryside should be just another sort of leisure activity for city dwellers rather than what it actually is: an industry, which produces the food on our plates. Of course I’m sure everyone would rather all agricultural land, everywhere, was managed organically, with respect to wildlife, & diverse in rich natural habitat; but that simply cannot be the case so long as cities - ergo, the population - continues to expand at the alarming rate it does. Sad, I’m afraid; but true…..
April 12, 2008 at 8:46 am
Kate
I love big cities and I love the countryside, but find no appeal in suburbia or towns. Everyone is entitled to have their preference.
But although Mr Elms is perfectly entitled to prefer the city, his comments on there being nothing to do in the countryside, seem to stem from not having any real experience of it, in the same way some people in the countryside don’t like big cities, because they’ve simply not had much experience of them. Otherwise I’m assuming he would have said there’s lots to do it’s just not his bag.
After all surly a young child who loves the thrills and spills of roller coasters would equally love galloping a pony, surfing the waves or quad biking it’s just a case of never having done it. And can not the spectacle of Westminster’s fireworks be competed with by Ottery St. Mary’s Tar barrels or Westhampton’s festival of fire?
Undoubtedly there are things cities do better, museums, art galleries, night clubs, major events like the Olympics, pop concerts and most open minded people in the countryside know this and take advantage of these things both for themselves and their children, like many open minded people in the city take advantage of horse riding, rock climbing, rafting, surfing etc in the countryside.
Sometimes things just aren’t for you, but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing to do!
Also there are small minded people wherever you live, I’ve met my share of them in cities and the countryside, I’ve met them all over the world, dullards, awkward ba**ards who seem to exist to make life difficult, people who think they own the street, people who think you have to have lived somewhere for x generations to belong, people who think your door should be the same colour as thier door or fence, people who reserve thier parking spot with gas bottles etc, etc.
April 15, 2008 at 6:22 am
Mopsa
These resonances are being picked up elsewhere, eg Dulverton Diaries . This debate will and should run and run.