There is a small library in the centre of my town. Many children go there after school. They read books. They use the computers. The library is open every day except Sunday. My grandmother used to walk me to the library when I was six. She sat with me and helped me read. Now I go alone. The library is small but it is full. It is one of the best places in our town.
About three hundred people gathered outside the town hall in Brookford on Wednesday evening, in protest against the planned closure of the local primary school. The protest was peaceful. It began at six o'clock and lasted for about ninety minutes.
The school is more than a hundred years old. It has eighty pupils. The local council says it will close at the end of the school year, because there are not enough children in the village. The pupils will go to a school five kilometres away.
Maria Costa, who has two children at the school, organised the gathering. "We are not against the bigger school," she said. "We are against the way this decision was made — without us. The bus is not safe in winter. Children will leave home before seven in the morning."
The mayor said the council would meet again next week. The school is currently scheduled to close in five months.
About four hundred people gathered outside the town hall in Brookford on Wednesday evening, in protest against the planned closure of the local primary school. The gathering was peaceful. It began at six o'clock and lasted about ninety minutes.
The school is a hundred and twenty-six years old. It has eighty pupils. The local council voted last month to close it at the end of the school year, citing falling pupil numbers and rising maintenance costs. Pupils will move to a school five kilometres away.
Maria Costa, who has two children at the school, organised the gathering with seven other parents. "We are not against the bigger school," she said. "We are against the way this decision was made — without us, and at speed. The bus is not safe in winter. Children will leave home before seven in the morning." Three of the school's teachers stood with the parents. The head teacher, who works for the council, did not attend.
Mr Thomas Lim, who is seventy-eight and whose three children attended the school in the 1970s, came alone. "I have no grandchildren here," he said. "I came because I want this town to still be a town. A village without a school is a village waiting to be a graveyard."
The mayor said the council would meet again next week to consider a six-month delay. The school is currently scheduled to close in five months. Whether it will is not yet clear. What is clear is that Wednesday evening's gathering has produced a community that did not exist three weeks ago, and a record, in the regional paper, of a refusal that the council can no longer pretend it did not hear.
When approximately four hundred people gathered outside the town hall in Brookford on Wednesday evening, in protest against the planned closure of the local primary school, they did so in a form that has been used in this part of the country, with minor variations, since at least the early twentieth century. The gathering was peaceful. It began at six o'clock and lasted ninety minutes. Three speakers addressed the crowd from the steps of the hall. By half-past seven, most of those present had gone home. The decision the gathering was protesting has not, so far, been changed.
The decision was made by the local council last month, in a vote of seven to four. The school, which is a hundred and twenty-six years old and currently has eighty pupils, is to close at the end of the school year. The council's rationale, set out in a sixteen-page document, cited falling pupil numbers, rising maintenance costs, and the better facilities at the larger school five kilometres away. The document was careful and, on its own terms, internally consistent. It acknowledged most of the objections it would meet.
The gathering was organised in three weeks by a group of eight parents. Maria Costa, who has two children at the school, set up a phone-message group within hours of the council vote. By the day of the gathering, the group had three hundred and forty members. "It is not that we did not know how to do this," Maria said. "It is that we had not, until last month, needed to."
The composition of the crowd was wider than parents alone. Three former head teachers, all retired, came together. A group of grandparents brought small chairs. Mr Thomas Lim, who is seventy-eight and whose three children attended the school in the 1970s, came alone. "I have no grandchildren here," he said. "I came because I want this town to still be a town. A village without a school is a village waiting to be a graveyard."
The head teacher, who works for the council, did not attend. Three serving teachers stood in the crowd in their own time. The local councillor for the ward, who had voted against the closure, spoke first from the steps; she was brief and careful not to over-promise. The second speaker was a retired teacher of forty years, Mrs Sara Jenkins, who had taught two of the present councillors when they were eight. "You did your homework for me," she said. "I would like to think I left some impression. I would like the school to leave the same kind of impression on the children who are here now."
The regional newspaper photographed the school's main door, with three children's drawings stuck to the inside of the glass.
Whether the school will close on the planned date is unclear. What is already clear is that Wednesday evening's gathering has produced, in three weeks, a community of three hundred and forty households who knew of each other only loosely a month ago, and a record, in the regional paper, of a refusal that the council can no longer claim it did not see. Whether this changes anything in the council chamber is, in the end, separate from the fact that it has changed something else. That is also worth saying.
When approximately four hundred people gathered outside the town hall in Brookford on Wednesday evening, in protest against the planned closure of the local primary school, they did so in a form that has been used in this part of the country, with relatively minor variations, since at least the early twentieth century. The gathering was peaceful. It began at six o'clock and lasted ninety minutes. Three speakers addressed the crowd from the steps of the hall. By half-past seven, most of those present had gone home. The decision the gathering was protesting has not, so far, been changed.
The decision was made by the local council last month, in a vote of seven to four. The school, which is a hundred and twenty-six years old and currently has eighty pupils, is to close at the end of the school year. The council's rationale, set out in a sixteen-page document, cited falling pupil numbers, rising maintenance costs, and the better facilities at the larger school five kilometres away. The document was careful and, on its own terms, internally consistent. It acknowledged most of the objections it would meet. It is the kind of document that local councils have been producing, in roughly this register, for at least the last thirty years; the form has been refined by long experience of public protest, and it has, on the whole, learned to absorb the objections it anticipates without being moved by them.
The gathering was organised in three weeks by a group of eight parents. Maria Costa, who has two children at the school, set up a phone-message group within hours of the council vote. By the day of the gathering, the group had three hundred and forty members. "It is not that we did not know how to do this," Maria said. "It is that we had not, until last month, needed to. We will lose some of this energy after tonight. I am hoping we lose less than we expect to." The framing is mature, and worth registering as such. Most campaigns lose a substantial proportion of their initial energy after the first event; the campaigns that do not are usually those whose organisers have been honest about the fact in advance.
The composition of the crowd was wider than parents alone. Three former head teachers, all retired, came together. A group of grandparents brought small chairs. Mr Thomas Lim, who is seventy-eight and whose three children attended the school in the 1970s, came alone. "I have no grandchildren here," he said. "I came because I want this town to still be a town. A village without a school is a village waiting to be a graveyard." The breadth of the crowd is not, in itself, an argument; it is, however, a signal of a particular kind of public mood, and it is read by those who attend such gatherings in their professional capacity in those terms.
The head teacher, who works for the council, did not attend. Three serving teachers stood in the crowd in their own time. The local councillor for the ward, who had voted against the closure, spoke first from the steps. The second speaker was a retired teacher of forty years, Mrs Sara Jenkins, who had taught two of the present councillors when they were eight. Her speech was brief and refused the easy language of victory or defeat. "You did your homework for me," she said. "I would like to think I left some impression. I would like the school to leave the same kind of impression on the children who are here now. I am not certain we will save it. I am certain that the asking matters."
The regional newspaper photographed the school's main door, with three children's drawings stuck to the inside of the glass. The image is the kind of image that protest journalism has been arranging itself toward for at least the last forty years. The image, on inspection, is honest; the form into which it has been folded is one that the reader should be aware of.
Whether the school will close on the planned date is unclear. What is already clear is that Wednesday evening's gathering has produced, in three weeks, a community of three hundred and forty households who knew of each other only loosely a month ago, and a record, in the regional paper, of a refusal that the council can no longer claim it did not see. Whether this changes anything in the council chamber is, in the end, separate from the fact that it has changed something else. I am ending here, on what has happened rather than on what may, because to do otherwise would be to participate in the asymmetry the article has been describing — to fold the morning's work into the further question of whether it was answered. The morning is its own answer. That is what the article would prefer to register.
What I am still working out, after eleven years of writing about civic gatherings for a regional newspaper that has, over those years, made decreasingly hospitable space for them, is the relationship between the small piece I am about to file on Wednesday evening's protest outside the council offices in the town of Howden — three hundred and twenty residents, well-organised, peaceful, opposing the planned redevelopment of the public library — and the slow accumulation of pieces like it that my colleagues and I have produced in newspapers and weekly magazines since around the time the language of 'community engagement' began to do most of its current work in regional politics. The library has not yet closed. The redevelopment is still under consultation. The lead organiser, a retired secondary-school librarian named Catherine Yu who has lived in Howden for thirty-six years, has agreed to be quoted in a way that does not damage the formal consultation response her group is also preparing. I will not be naming the consultant whose firm produced the redevelopment proposal. The compromise we have arrived at is sufficient for both the protest and the paper; it is not, in either of our judgements, a piece of investigative reporting.
The form into which the piece will be placed has been refined over the last several decades to a remarkable degree of efficiency. There is a paragraph for the organiser, a paragraph for the council, a paragraph for the architectural rationale, a paragraph that names the building's history, and a closing image of a child looking through the window. I have produced versions of these paragraphs many times. I am producing one now, in a slightly different register, on a Thursday afternoon, in a small office in a town Catherine Yu has only visited once. The article will appear on Saturday morning, mostly online. It will be the only article most of its readers encounter this year about libraries and consultation. It will be in their picture of how this kind of decision is made for at least the next several months. This is a serious responsibility, and the form into which the article must fit is not, on balance, designed to honour it.
The convention of the kind of essay I am writing now would produce a paragraph in which I describe what I would do differently, having recognised the limits of the form. I have one drafted. I am declining to use it, not because the limits are not real but because the redemptive paragraph is itself a recognisable feature of essays in this register. It would do its work; the reader and I would feel briefly that the essay had earned its weight; Catherine Yu would still be Catherine Yu, with three more weeks until the consultation deadline, drafting a careful response that the council has, in considerable measure, anticipated.
What the essay can do, and what I am trying to do here, is something narrower. It can hold open a question that the underlying news piece does not hold open. The question is whether the cumulative effect of forty years of well-intentioned community-protest journalism has interacted with the cumulative effect of forty years of evolving consultation processes in a way that the journalism, on its own behalf, would prefer not to have to think about. I think it has. I think the journalism has, across thousands of well-meant pieces, helped to make local consultation feel like a series of contests with fair public hearings, rather than the carefully managed legitimation processes that, in the relevant literature, they have been described as for some time. I think the form has done its work, and that the work has not always been the work the writers thought they were doing.
A serious objection presents itself: that what I have just described is itself a sophisticated form of self-presentation, in which the writer claims credit for noticing the form's complicity while continuing, in subtly altered form, to do the form's work. I think the objection is correct. I think there is no version of this essay that escapes it. The most that can be said is that the essay that does not name the objection is doing the same work less honestly, and that the slight worsening of the writer's position relative to the reader, which the naming produces, is a price worth paying.
Catherine Yu's name is on a piece of paper on the desk. The piece I will file tonight will name her, with her permission, in the way she has asked. The piece this essay accompanies will not be read by her. I am ending here, not with a closing image, but with the small fact that the news piece and the essay about the news piece are travelling on different timescales toward different readers, and that this is, in the present arrangement of journalism and civic life, approximately as good as it gets.
How useful did you find this text? Leave a rating and a comment to help other teachers.