I think I will begin, as I might with other potential issues to be
discussed, with saying that: one must understand that the desire to succeed
with meeting the goals....as well as believing in there value and
importance; and also living within the stated ethical boundaries, is
essential to understanding and resolving the various chores and challenges
that are involved in (any?) worthwhile effort.
Let me say also (and this may explain a lot) that I am not
necessarily a person who likes to work together with others all of the time.
In fact, I am more of a solitary worker. And not only concerning "work", but
some of my other interests are rather solitary, such as reading and
writing.
It may come as a surprise to some that one of my interests in
communal/cooperative living is so that I can actually "afford" to work alone
if I want to and spend time alone if I want to. Now when I say "afford" I'm
rather sure you understand it's not about having money, but rather the
absence of needing very much money (and the degree of social
independence regarding one's "intimate" partner) that I see people being
able to "afford" to "follow their bliss" as they say and spend quite a bit
of time alone if they wish.
This is not to say I'm antisocial. Like almost everyone I certainly have my
limits of solitary pursuits. Like almost everyone, I prefer to share food,
for instance. And where there is flexibility and solidarity, I do enjoy the
comrade of doing some work together. And of course there are any number of
things that are pleasant to do with others, such as enjoying music and
dancing.
Okay, what about the nitty-gritty of privacy in a large 200 plus intentional
community? Again, giving this simple comparison might help. To me, and I
know some might not like this comparison, but I can think of others... to me
I think of a college campus, or summer camp as examples of what life would
be like in this proposed community. I like those examples because they are
often more isolated from cities and so are an example of what a rural
community might be like. There are sleeping quarters, most often shared with
one other; there is a cafeteria, the library, and various shared facilities.
If one doesn't like that example, certainly there are any number of
apartment complexes, condominiums and developments where the houses are
fairly close together and all one would have to imagine is a restaurant
close by, a library, place of work, and a "club" perhaps.
But of course, the issue isn't just having a bedroom to retreat to, to be by
oneself; there is the issue of noise. And this is a very important issue.
I've lived a great deal of my life so rural that I didn't even have a next
door neighbor to have this problem with. When I moved to Florida it was
quite an education to have next door neighbors, and I learned a lot. Clearly
rules and a design would need to be established to deal with this important
issue. Not only would rules and a design be essential but the technology
available today would also make this easier.
What I have imagined are housing units, say of around 40 people, with say 20
shared bedrooms. These housing units could be scattered about and isolated
enough from each other that they could house people of different
proclivities and stages of life. For instance, there could be housing units
for those who really really value quietness or silence. For these housing
units, people might not even talk very much when they are around or even in
them. I don't know about sound from room to room. That would depend on
construction techniques. But anyway, I think you get the idea. There could
be housing units for young couples who have children; a couple separated by
a room for their child and another couple on the other side so that the two
children could share a room. There could be housing units for those who love
to be where the action is and like to hear music, talking, laughing and so
on.
Rules equal freedom, any mature person knows that. And this would be no
different. And any adult knows that there are consequences for breaking the
rules.
The housing units could be far away enough from the community center and the
"cottage industry" area so there wasn't any sound from these. And the
community could decide where or when it wanted music. Of course for
musicians they would always be their music studios in the cottage industry
area. I believe that given the proper amount of space and the desire to see
everyone getting their needs met, solutions can be worked out that will
please everyone.
A note about high-tech solutions. What I have thought of here is the ease
and comfort of say "earbuds" or headphones for listening to music, lectures
or watching movies in one's bedroom room.
Another issue that of course comes up, is the issue of shared rooms. When I
share my thoughts about what is possible I try to be realistic. Some people
promise an awful lot and frankly I do not see how they are going to
"deliver". Whether they are trying to meet what they think are people's
tolerance levels or their own desires is not clear. I, on the other hand
would rather say what I think would work. Now, if the goal of low-cost and
only a couple of days work is necessary to meet the proposed goals (low
money costs as well) I would not resist; for the goals are the goals, and
consensus about them means just that.
As far as a couple sharing a room and meeting their need for complete
solitude, that really shouldn't be that hard to do. For instance, scheduling
or knowing the other's schedule and planning accordingly. Also, if one needs
a special studio or office space one could have that separate of one's
bedroom.
I asked a woman friend once if she thought Mormons slept in separate
bedrooms. Of course not she said. I just find it fascinating that
vegetarians and alternative types, feminists and so on have such an aversion
to the opposite sex. Frankly I don't think it should be catered to. I really
don't think a vital community can come into existence with men and women not
loving each other. Sexuality is a vital part of life. Now complete
abstinence or celibacy, that might be a special case that requires those
special needs being met. But even here as with all sleeping, when one thinks
about it, why does one need to be alone when one is sleeping? Maybe all
those who snore could sleep together, I'm trying to be a little humorous.
There may be issues that I haven't thought about. And like I say, I'm only
adamant about meeting the goals and not about housing per se. Though, I must
say I don't see the sense of what's going on at Twin Oaks, the very famous
egalitarian intentional community in Virginia. It seems like everyone has
their own room, and people "sleep around". I'm not a prude or judgmental
about people's sexual choices, but if one is going to have sexual relations
anyway, the cost of maintaining a separate bedroom is very high.
Personally, I'd like to even try living in a "long house". This would be
especially practical in a northern climate where heat is required. Given the
same principles about rules and design, and they're being different
longhouses for different lifestyles and proclivities, I suspect it would be
eminently doable and practical. I could see it working with heavy, rather
sound resistant partitions between couples sleeping areas; and a very heavy,
sound deadening curtain. An arrangement like this might only take one
woodstove filled with wood to keep 20, 40? people warm, instead of 20 wood
stoves filled with wood. An interesting degree of efficiency to contemplate.
Obviously, I wouldn't go so far as to say this must be given priority, like
I would, advocating two to a room. But it would be an interesting experiment
I think.
