This is a tremendously important issue for all but the most
gregarious (perhaps) and social of human beings, or so one might think. It might
be pointed out however, that at the two ends of the extremes, between those
who feel they must always be around others, and those who shun all
social situations, one might say that happiness, and what is most
desirable, lies in a balance between the two. And, that it is good both
for our maturity and happiness to be capable of both; as in relationship
being the mirror to see ourselves as we are, and solitude, the chance to
reflect.
There are some aspects of wanting
to be so alone, that appear
to be possibly hiding, or maintaining of some activity of
escape. It might be drinking too much, eating too much, watching too
much TV, putting all one's affections on a pet and so on. It is quite
true, I believe, in an intentional community maintaining one's
"escapes", compulsions, excesses will be more difficult. I view this as
a positive however. I view this as an opportunity for growth and for
greater happiness. Of course, if one resisted this growth, it might look
as an imposition and restriction of freedom. I do not however believe
that living in an intentional community means we must be "perfect", or
that change will be instantaneous. I believe personal growth can be slow
and comfortable; that individuality, personal proclivities, and even
imperfections can be comfortably tolerated. And, that we should not
necessarily expect all to change equally, or to any particular standard;
apart from sharing the basic ethics, goals and a few basic rules to
ensure
mutual consideration, and respect. As I have said before, I believe
intentional community can work despite ourselves, that community can
survive the minor imperfections we may have.
Addressing the issue of privacy and quiet I would say this, and
before I begin, I might add, this is a personal interest to mine because
of my interests and proclivities, I like quiet and some of my major
interests involve being alone. I feel that we generally aren't being
honest with ourselves, or looking at the "big picture" when we think
about wanting to "be alone". What I mean by this is, unless one is
fabulously wealthy, well maybe not necessarily fabulously wealthy, but
quite well off; well enough off so that one doesn't have to go off to
work, one is most likely going to be around people all day long. Whether
it's the commute to work, or the job itself. Then there is the issue of
where we live. Most live in suburbia are more urban areas, so obviously
one is surrounded by people in those areas as well.
It is true that what I'm proposing, communal eating, is the one area
that is truly different from the way we generally live. And while it's true
we like to eat out occasionally, or even more than occasionally. We
still, most of us, eat in small groups or by ourselves, most of the time. I honestly can't
say for sure that what I'm proposing "will work" or that it is "the
solution". I think it is, for a number of reasons. I think it would
be a wonderful way to live. But it must, obviously, be tried in order
to be truly proven one-way or the other.
What are the advantages of eating communally? I believe they are
many. And I personally believe that a large community is much better
than a small one in this respect. And when I say large, I mean 200 to
400 people. What I see in those numbers is more flexibility and freedom
for us as individuals. In other words, just as in any cafeteria
situation, the individual would be free to "join a group" and eat
together, or merely pick up one's food and go off in some corner, read a
book, and eat one's food; in a large cafeteria or dining hall, this would
not seem so strange, at least from this vantage point it doesn't. Also, one could pick up
one's food, put it in an insulated container and bring it back to one's
room, if one really wanted to be alone.
I think sometimes we want to be alone eating, to be able to read a
book or whatever. But generally, I believe most of us see it as a time
to socialize and to enjoy one another's company. The thing to keep in
mind is: would one like to have perhaps, up to one half of one's life
to do other creative and interesting things besides thinking about,
procuring and preparing food? And eat the best quality,
freshly raised, picked and prepared organic and whole foods at virtually
the cost of labor for procurement? And that labor because of
cooperation would only be a day or two a week. (I say a day or
two not knowing exactly and because part of that two day labor
estimation involves providing for housing and heat as well.) And
eating together will help enormously towards eating correctly, I
believe.
There is another huge advantage I believe in eating this way,
communally. Well actually it's three advantages. One is that I believe
it will free up an enormous amount of
time to do other things besides shop for food, think about food and
prepare food. To me, those possibilities are quite exciting. Number two
is, and in this case it is one of the primary ethics that need to be
shared, the diet will be much better than we could create for ourselves.
It is just too expensive and time-consuming to eat as well as we need to
be eating by ourselves. And number three is, a certain amount of peer
pressure to eat correctly and in the proper quantities.
This number three, to eat correctly and in the proper quantities is
an interesting one. I believe there is going to be no escaping a certain
degree of peer pressure to eat correctly and in the proper quantities.
Now, if this is looked at as an imposition to one's freedom, of course,
this will not be looked at as a desirable feature. I however, look upon
it as a positive. I think we're all only human, and food can be used as
the most readily available and comment of escapes. And so in conclusion,
I look upon this peer pressure again as a positive feature of eating
communally.
