'Bantham 2014' is the first piece for the project 'Land'.
Brief introduction to Bantham Beach and Village ...
Bantham beach and village was put up for sale by the Evans Estate this year, the family who have owned the village and beach for nearly 100 years, bought by Lieutenant Commander Charles Evans in 1922. Gillian Goddard, his granddaughter, was going to leave her share of the estate to the local people, however she changed her mind due to the 'fierce reaction of the locals' when she let an 'environmentally friendly burger van' to set up on the beach daily. A death within the family brought on the sale of the estate.
The two main bidders for the estate were Nicholas Johnston and National Trust. Nicholas Johnston won the bidding war for the village and beach with a £11.5 million bid. He has stated he would run the estate in the same manor as the Evans family, and similar to the estate he already owns in Oxfordshire.
The Project ...
With the same research articles myself and the collaborators formed an opinion on the ownership of Bantham. Along with our opinion, me and Gemma Carson have made pieces of work highlighting our individual views. From this we have created a Photobook, which is available on issuu.com as an online publication (link is at the end of the post).
This is where the blog comes into the project as a platform for the other collaborators opinions and for the wider public views and ideas.
Below are the opinions of myself, Gemma Carson and anonymous collaborators of Bantham 2014 piece.
'Bantham village seems to be a tiny hamlet situated on the mouth of the River Avon; home to countryside dwellers whom which take pride and admiration to their little safe haven. The fact that the village was up for sale, making it into a real life version of a play town those children would spend their time toying with. It gives me an uneasy feeling, because if I lived there I would be anxious and like the villagers were, hoping and praying that a nice and understanding (not to mention disgustingly rich) somebody would be buying their peace and tranquillity. The fact the National Trust bid and did not win is another matter in itself. However from reading the articles a trendy David Cameron pal, Nicholas Johnston, bought it for £11.5 million. this almost doesn't surprise me and it does seem to have a happy ending. it's like a village buying episode of Eastenders.' Gemma Carson.
'I have always had an open mind when it comes to land ownership, but
predominately my view is land should be free to the entire public, as I feel it
is the right of the people within the nation. I can, however, understand that
there are some restraints due to environmental factors, and how the land needs
to be managed and protected.
While reading the articles I have learnt that some of the community are
happy to be part of an ‘Estate’. The new owner, Nicholas Johnston, has reported
that he will not change the way the estate is run. With this in mind though,
the previous owners changed the rights of surfers using the beach due to the
interest from the surfing community and the estate needed to generate more
revenue. From this and the set-up of a burger van on the beach the villagers were
unhappy and this was one of the reasons the estate was sold.
Nicholas Johnston has said he would keep the estate as it is. However
he is able, as the last owners did, to change aspects which could upset either
the balance the village and/or the public relationship with the land.
Therefore the land is not truly open to the village community or the
public. Would this be different if the National Trust had won the bid on the
estate?' Amie Townshend
'In my opinion, the very fact that this amount of land can be considered one man's property is preposterous. This land has nurtured and provided for its inhabitants since the dawn of time, every man, woman, child and beast has equal right to it, to my mind the whole concept is a great evil, an out-of-control capitalist ideal born of human arrogance. Is it really fair that children can be born today with their basic freedoms automatically stripped away, unable to run through the woods, swim in the streams, even breathe the air they are entitled to. There's a quote I really love; "We do not not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from out children". I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly don't remember selling off my share of Bantham to Mr Nicholas Johnston.' Anonymous collaborator 1
'One family having so much control over so much of the village can surely only be detrimental, It calls to question whether they actually do meet the needs required in the village? Despite the fact that the sellers have said it is not about the money, the residents have not been put at ease which is very worrying considering that their entire way of life has been put at risk. This whole situation does not seem fair for the villagers at all, people have enough stresses in day to day life without having to worry about losing their homes (which many people will have lived in for years) just because the new owners might want the place as a 'play thing'.
On the other hand, not allowing second homes or holiday homes does solve an issue many seaside towns and villages have. Many are left pretty much deserted during winter making it very hard for businesses to survive in other villages. However, this would only remain to be an upside if the new owners do not change the way the town is managed, which is yet to be seen. Many residents still have the fear that everything could chaneg and the village may be left empty in the winter as a result.
My main concern with this sale is the fact the fact the residents have been left somewhat in the dark because there seems to be very little trust in the outcome of the sale. Additionally, with a bid from the National Trust being turned down, the sale can't have just been about preserving the Evans family's ideals for the village.' Anonymous collaborator 2
'Put simply, the fact that anybody can
claim to own vast swathes of the British isles, towns and villages, is a
concept perpetuated by the principal of something called ‘Primogeniture’. In
general this principal has existed in England since the Norman Conquest. Land
grants to his knights and other favoured individuals by William the Conqueror
have been kept intact by the right of the first born male to inherit down the
centuries - thus preventing any significant sharing of these land titles for
generations. This concept was adopted by the Normans to prevent the dilution
and redistribution of land ownership and hence the political domination of the
country. Apparently Bantham Beach has changed hands but it would seem only
within the confines of this landed elite.
In the United Kingdom this principal
has worked succinctly as the government of the country, in the shape of, first
the monarchy then the House of Lords, a governing system of inherited power and
peerage based on divine right and land ownership that could not be altered by
any power except that of the Crown.
Leaving aside numerous invasion
attempts and two world wars, the system of Primogeniture dominating land
ownership has only been threatened, in any real sense, by two great upheavals.
The first was Oliver Cromwell’s revolutionary ‘Commonwealth’ government, a name
that is self-explanatory that was deliberately re-used, and in a quite
different context, after the restoration of Charles 2nd and the adoption of the
House of Commons. The second great challenge to the old way came with the
advent of progressive taxation in the twentieth century that came close to
toppling the old vested interests forever.
At the beginning of the twenty first
century, however, we now see the principal of progressive taxation under attack
by a powerful new elite, which is probably made up of much of the old one.
These are the large corporations and a new international banking establishment
with very old ideas about power and how to maintain it - a metamorphosis of old
power into new.
All this means that many places like
Bantham Beach will probably remain part of a private estate for the foreseeable
future. It is arguable that any well intentioned socialist redistribution of
land, like that in France of 1787, would not bring about any real bettering of
situation for the inhabitants of places like Bantham and history tells us that
any seeding of land rights are always heavily contested and sometimes result
in, or are the result of, physical violence.' Anonymous collaborator 3
I have created a Photo Book which showcases the work myself and Gemma Carson have created for the project in response to Bantham beach and village ownership.
https://issuu.com/amietownshend
