Rusticus : $b or, The future of the countrysideBriggs, Martin S. (Martin Shaw)
History
Rusticus : $b or, The future of the countryside
Briggs, Martin S. (Martin Shaw)
Country life -- Great Britain; Great Britain -- Economic conditions; Land use, Rural -- Great Britain
Another characteristic of this singular movement was its utter
disregard of what we now call “town-planning.” When Ruskin advised his
audience to treat railway-stations as “the miserable things that they
are,”[2] because he disliked railways, he seems to have been voicing
the spirit of his day, which was quite content to speculate on the
symbolism of a piece of carving in a remote foreign city while men
continued to build the most appalling slums. No town was “planned” in
those days: it “just growed.” Occasionally a manufacturer like Sir
Titus Salt coquetted with the idea of a rational lay-out for a town,
but no scheme got very far until the idealist founders of Bournville
and Port Sunlight inaugurated a new school of thought, proving
effectually that good housing was not necessarily bad business.
At the present time, when authorities on town-planning have long made
it clear that orderly development is both desirable and practicable,
the haphazard growth of suburbs into the country is a deplorable
and even a painful sight to every intelligent person. English
individualism, sometimes an asset, becomes almost a curse when it
interferes, as it still does, with nearly everything that can be
done to save the English countryside from complete uglification.
Consideration of the possibilities of town-planning in this direction
must be deferred to our last chapter; for the moment let us consider
one or two characteristics of nineteenth-century town growth.
Almost without exception, any man could buy a plot of land anywhere,
and build on it anything he wanted. Tripe-dressing, sausage-skin
making, and one or two other “noxious” trades might be prohibited
in a few favoured localities; the obscure and often absurd law of
“Ancient Lights” occasionally restrained his ardour. Otherwise, so long
as his building was strong enough to remain standing, and provided
with adequate means of drainage, he was as free as air. Building was
essentially a commercial business; the rights or needs of the community
did not enter into the question. Each man built for his day and
generation: the future was left to take care of itself. Yet even from
a financial point of view this was a short-sighted policy. When Wren’s
plan for rebuilding London was upset by vested interests, a chance was
lost of making wide streets that are now urgently necessary but cannot
be formed except by payments of incredible sums for compensation. A
more modern instance is to be seen in the Euston Road, which was a
residential thoroughfare looking over fields when my grandfather knew
it a century ago. Then shops came to be built over the front gardens as
the old residents fled from the invading streets: and now these shops
have to be swept away with heavy payments for compensation to allow
the road to be converted into the great artery that any intelligent
person could have foreseen when it was first built. This phenomenon
is not peculiar to towns: it applies with equal force to the country
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account