Categories: ecclesiastical-stuff, greenbelt, books
Date: 26 July 2010 11:37:16
The other day I blogged about, Other, the new book from Kester Brewin and the debate about TAZ which is brewing up from it. Today I start the first of a few thoughts I have coming out of it and in relation to the way Brewin talks about it in the book. I want to start by looking at the way Brewin uses it in relation to Greenbelt.
In the book Brewin equates Greenbelt with the canivalesque atmosphere that TAZ creates, and to some extent with the subversive element. In doing this he recognises the roots of TAZ within the anarchist movement and then seeks to remove these to reincorporate this theory within the church, particularly emerging church movement.
On one level I agree with Brewin that Greenbelt does contain elements common to TAZ and there is some room for the application of TAZ which may or maynot be utopian and naieve, (as Jonny Baker has argued in his review/ critique of the book). These are the very elements that I have in the past argued may well make Greenbelt a place of something akin to pilgrimage, but not pilgrimage. (See my post here on the nature of pilgrimage and here on how I think it relates to Greenbelt). I think this conclusion is the one I reach in relation to Greenbelt and TAZ for similar and overlapping reasons.
TAZ is related to resistance and a desire to see something more positive replace the existing. The temporary act is supposed to give a glimpse into the future and give space the planting of seeds to be realised in some more concrete way.
If we look at the key elements of the typology of pilgrimage we get from was Turner, V & Turner, E, Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Culture, (1978), Basil Blackwell, Oxford we can see an ideal type with the following being central:
1. Pilgrimage is not a static activity, rather the nature of the pilgrimage centre and the pilgrimage itself develops through time and is shaped by and indeed helps shape social and political history. Modern pilgrimage is seen in some ways as a reaction against the dominant secular ideas of the time. Within this pilgrimage is often seen as marginal and so can be endorsed or suppressed according to the time.
2. Within liminal pilgrimage there has to be an aspect of potentiality for change within the individual through undertaking the act of pilgrimage.
3. Pilgrimage is associated with miracle and revival of faith
4. Communitas, particularly focused around ritual is a key feature of pilgrimage.
5. Pilgrimage and the centres of pilgrimage are subject to a complex range of regulation (formal and informal) which develop as the pilgrimage becomes more established.
6. Whilst there are clear differences there are also clear links between pilgrimage and tourism, particularly as religion has become more individualised. Pilgrimage has a leisure element to it.
TAZ is also a non-static activity. Every action will differ and change over time, in part because of the changing tactics of the authorities trying to contain such actions.
TAZ involves liminality, that is every TAZ action is providing a potential for change to occur.
TAZ involves communitas. (Note for those wondering what communitas is – Turner, V & Turner E, (1978), pp250 – 251 define this concept of communitas and explain that it is, “spontaneous, immediate, concrete, not abstract”, “undifferentiated, egalitarian, direct, nonrational” and “strains toward universalism and openness, it is a spring of pure possibility.”)
Whilst seeking to be non-regulated TAZ actions, as with all anarchist actions, are actually quite highly regulated. There is much more informal regulation than formal, but hierarchies do exist and actions are taken on the understanding that they have specific purposes and will take certain forms.
TAZ through it's caniveralesque type features can be seen to have a tourist type element to it. Through their very nature then both TAZ events and pilgrimages have to be both communal and individualistic. Greenbelt through it's nature has these key elements, as do many of our festivals and conferences, (both secular and religious). In Other Brewin does not make this connection, which I feel is unfortunate because in failing to recognise the way that the same thing operates in many other settings beyond Greenbelt he seeks to give GB more unique significance than it infact has, if one looks at Glastonbury for example and the faith aspects that have and still to some extent occur there, particularly in the greenfields.
What is important with both pilgrimage and TAZ events is not what happens at the event itself but what the event then gives birth to, in both individual and community. The liminal element in conjunction with communitas is why both pilgrimage and TAZ are valid and important and are both reflected in Greenbelt. This I think Brewin picks up on.
What worries me though, and what I think Baker is picking up on his critique is how these can give unrealistic expectations and ultimately cause damage when dreams are left unrealised. I am increasingly aware alot of people who see another "world"/ "church" is possible at Greenbelt but then return home and find themselves further alienated because the "world" / "church" they are part of and have often been struggling with anyway further fails to understand them, or marginalises them because of their alternative ideas/ dreams. The potentiality of TAZ events can only be realised if the political/ community groups are in place to help them work in a range of ways, on individual and community levels, to achieve their dreams. Similarly the potentiality of Greenbelt can only be realised if people have communities to go back to help them build upon the specific actions of those few days.
TAZ events are subversive in nature seeking to create resistance. One of the key TAZ type happenings have been Guerilla Gardening events which have been linked to land reform and land use. What these events seek to do is to change space to provoke change. This is what Greenbelt does. However, TAZ events always have the potentiality for conflict to occur and for the crushing of dreams by force by those who oppose the reappropriation of land on either a permanent or temporary basis. One aspect of anarchist TAZ type things then is ensuring people are prepared for if those institutional forces seeking to oppose them turn up sooner than expected or seek to challenge individuals who have been involved. Those acting as co-ordinators will ensure that appropriate legal help and so forth are available and individuals are able to network with others they come into contact with. This preparation for the negative is not something Brewin has addressed in Other, and I would argue that Greenbelt has only slowly come to recognise (mainly through the sterling work of Jenny MacIntosh and the Spirited Exchanges team).
Another issue Brewin does not address is that Greenbelt is institutional and has always been so, because of its funding. Northup (2003) explains the original funding for Greenbelt came through the Deo Gloria Trust , which remained the sole sponsor for the first 10 years of the festivals life. As the festival developed the sources of funding changed and sponsorship started coming from other groups such as Christian Aid and through additional support from festival goers themselves through the Greenbelt Angels scheme. Recently Greenbelt has been sponsored by a range of groups including: Traidcraft , CMS , YMCA ,ICC , Ecclesiastical Insurance, Department for Development and Aid and most recently the Methodist Church. The funding for such projects means that Greenbelt is not/ cannot be a space for resistance in the way that TAZ's are. The funding mechansims involved mean that Greenbelt is different on a structural level to TAZ spaces. There are much stronger and more obvious power relations involved and at play. Ultimately Greenbelt is working within the confines of what the institution will allow. I think the fact it is the Methodist Church which has become arecent major sponsor is significant. The Methodist Church through various conference resolutions includes within its policies affirming and supporting members of the LGBT community. Therefore, the debates around the alleged "gayification" of GB are not problematic for this sponsor in the way they could have been for other potential sponsors. If no LGBT friendly sponsor could have been found I doubt that the festival would be taking the approach it has been to the issue. I don't doubt many of those involved want to be radical, alternative or inclusive but the financial realities of the situation and dependance upon "the insitution" for financial and organisational support be that explicit or implicit do impact on the programming and availability of speakers and other resources for the festival. TAZ events through their nature are freed from these concerns and are indeed seeking to challenge these ways of being. Only if GB were a free festival, working outside the confines of the 1995 Criminal Justice Act would it truly be able to take on the ethos of TAZ.