Wednesday, 25 October 2006

Hospitality in the neighbourhood (2)

As a short sequel to my recent note about hospitality in the neighbourhood - it happens that there's a bloke from the next street along, laying some kitchen flooring in my house right now. (Does it seem like I'm always having jobs done and can't do stuff meself? On the first point, it's just coincidence, OK? And on the second, I'm old. Plus I got a truly awkward report to write, OK? And I'm rubbish at DIY).

This is not a coffee-with-three-sugars workman, oh no. But he was sufficiently appreciative of the bowl of warming winter stew to accept a second serving. He judiciously declined the wine, for the time being anyway.

25 Oct 2006 20:13:40

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Young people and anti-social behaviour again: against structure Suddenly it's yoof crime and violence again. The youth justice system, as if we didn't know it, is 'in crisis.' Elsewhere in government there is a creative and positive approach to issues to do with arson and young people. Never thought about it much? Nor me, in spite of a clear recollection of the power of Peter Shaffer's Equus which I saw back in the seventies... According to this press release, children and young people on the lowest incomes are sixteen times more likely to die in a house fire and 31 times more likely to suffer from an arson attack. So one hopes the DCLG's proactive initiative, acknowledging the link between youth crime and arson, has a chance of making a difference. And while I'm writing this, having been unable to get there, ippr are having a gig at the House of Commons to pump some momentum into youth policy, launching their report Freedom’s orphans: raising youth in a changing world. The press release unpromisingly introduces the word ‘paedophobia’ in its title (which helps explain why I missed it first time round) but we learn that 'British adults are less likely than those in other European countries to intervene to stop teenagers committing anti social behaviour.' Right, we're on familiar territory. The inclination to intervene and the fear of retaliation were the key themes of the seminar I organised back in January which sparked the chapters by Jacqueline Barnes and Liz Richardson in Respect in the neighbourhood, which will be published next month. The book is really about informal social control at local level. There have been a few surveys (including I recall this one by a certain security company, with slightly unconvincing methodology) but we can expect the ippr work to be authoritative. The press release offers enticing sample statistics about readiness to intervene. I hope when I see the report I'll find some exploration of the possibility that what young people themselves tend to fear most on the streets is not adults, it's other young people. It seems important, and overdue, for someone influential to at last come out and show clearly that there are social shifts to explain changes in the relationships between young people and those around them, for which young people are not necessarily to blame. But had I been there, I might have raised a point, which was put to me most clearly by our publisher Geoffrey Mann (who's been working in this field far longer than I and long enough to remember Equus I'm sure), to ask who is challenging the policy insistence on structured activities? Not ippr: their report claims 'that participation in structured youth activities is better for young people than unstructured youth clubs,' and recommends 'that every secondary school pupil (from 11-16 years old) should participate in at least two hours a week of structured and purposeful extracurricular activities.' Most youth workers and others providing various types of informal education are not against structured activities, far from it. It's...
PREVIOUS POST
Treat please Here's a curious little piece by Robert Vandervelde in the Globe and Mail raking over changes in the social experience of Hallowe'en. It's called 'The neighbourhood or the mall?' with the writer reflecting a bit glumly on the decline in the number of kids in his neighbourhood who come to the door to scrounge, sorry, earn candy. Last year he claims that Hallowe'en "gave me a chance to feel a part of my new neighbourhood. After going months without introducing myself to some of my neighbours, I could instead demonstrate my generous spirit through liberal distribution of candy to their children." The turnout was poor. Apparently the kids took the soft option, missing out on the notion of scariness in the dark and getting their pickings at the mall. I, however, lament that our kids are off the streets. Will they still skirt the dark recesses of their minds by taking candy from a Gap cashier? Will they experience the same community experience when Halloween treats are given to attract consumers instead of out of a sense of neighbourly generosity? It can't be the same - the fear and magic you feel when the wind blows through the trees on a dark night can't be recreated in a mall. The wild excitement of Halloween night seems tamed when you walk down a mall looking for corporate handouts. Thanks to David Sillito for the link.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments