Anarchy, or NambyPamby Liberalism, in the UK (WW2 time)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6166226.stm

mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 14:27 (nineteen years ago)

The government has unveiled its latest idea to tackle anti-social youths, but it is still a far cry from a utopian WWII experiment which placed them in their own self-governing community in Essex.

In the middle of World War II the authorities had a problem - what to do with those children who had been evacuated but who were too disturbed or delinquent for the average family to handle.

So when a group of earnest young conscientious objectors offered to take them off to rural Essex and "cure" their antisocial tendencies with a mixture of fresh air, unconditional love and radical democracy, nobody asked too many questions.

Q Camp was a utopian experiment which tried to get troubled boys to operate a self-governing community in the middle of the countryside. Not much was known about it until I uncovered newly released files at the Public Record Office.


Staff included university students
Its approach was radical and a far cry from the strict authority imposed at the reform schools and borstals where the boys would otherwise have gone. But while it was an extreme experiment, Q Camp anticipated many of today's ideas about treating children with behavioural problems.

Originally the camp had been set up in 1936 for adults, but was shut when the war started. It was opened again for the young boys in 1944 and came under the control of the Home Office - not that the authorities knew that much about what was going on.

According to the newly-discovered records, the Ministry of Health complained that the first it had heard of the camp was when it received a letter from a local fuel overseer saying he was astonished children were permitted to live in such conditions.

'Horror'

The Q stood for query or quest and the camp chief was a young man named Arthur Barron, known to everyone as Bunny. Said to be full of "ideas and ideals", his philosophy was that children could learn self-discipline through shared responsibility.

"The whole philosophy was that these kids were unliked, unloved, unwanted at home," says Edward Thomas, a pacifist conscientious objector who worked at the camp.

"The theory was that if you could form a relationship with them and show that you still cared for them, that they would become civilised youngsters."

We was allowed to do virtually what we liked

Daniel O'Keefe
Q Camp resident

The idea that the community was non-hierarchical and self-governing completely baffled the authorities.

Staff and boys lived in the most primitive conditions, in ramshackle wooden huts without windows or sanitation. A Probation Service inspector described the camp as "dirty and dismal" in one report. She said the sleeping huts filled her with "horror" and the beds "looked grimy".

Work was shared, but the youngsters weren't compelled to lift a finger. A camp council of staff and boys imposed what little discipline there was. There was also a school but attendance was voluntary and the school hut was set on fire on several occasions.


Unconditional love

It was Mr Barron's belief that the young boys should not be told what to do. Smashed windows remained unfixed and obscenities were left daubed on walls because he believed it was better to leave the jobs until the boys responsible agreed to do them. They rarely did.


Daniel O'Keefe was 12 when he was sent to Q Camp after getting into trouble. After a series of court appointments he was seen by a psychiatrist who thought he could benefit from the exciting new "therapeutic community".


Thousands of children were evacuated
"We was allowed to do virtually what we liked," he says. "We didn't have to bother with school or nothing."

The other principle the camp ran on was that, regardless of their behaviour, the children should be given unconditional love. The staff did their utmost to accommodate them.

One youngster who liked horses and made a speciality of stealing them was bought one in the end.

Records show the staff themselves were considered by the authorities to be just as troubled as the youngsters they were trying to help.

"They are not conventional people and one gained the impression that they themselves are maladjusted," wrote one visitor.

'Masters and slaves'

Concerns were raised by some of the families of the boys. Mr O'Keefe's father complained to the Home Office after one visit. He had tried to take his son out for a meal and was shocked that no decent trousers could be found for him to wear.

In the end it was health and safety concerns - and one too many fires - that caused the government to put an end to the experiment. The boys were removed and the camp deemed unfit for human habitation.

So was it a failure? The Q Camp probably only got away with it for so long because in the middle of a war, and a manpower shortage, the authorities were glad to find anyone prepared to take on difficult children.


The troubles were blamed on fathers away at war
But in its determination to move away from the authoritarian model of the approved schools, it anticipated many of the ideas on residential childcare that became common in later decades.

Many of those involved went on to become senior and influential in their field.

Mr Barron trained as a psychoanalyst with Anna Freud and became an eminent child psychotherapist. Mr Thomas became a director of social work in Scotland. He counts the Q camp a success. Another member of staff, Chris Beedell, became an academic and a guru in the world of children's social work.

But others say Q Camp failed because the children themselves didn't want to share the responsibility, but wanted to feel the adults were in charge.

So much so that they organised themselves into two groups, masters and slaves - the ones who wanted to control and the ones who wanted to be controlled.

"This was the exact antithesis of what the theorists wanted to achieve," says author Maurice Bridgeland, who knew Mr Barron. "It was the opposite of all their principles," .


The Q Camp is on Wednesday, 22 November at 1100 GMT on BBC Radio 4.

mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 14:28 (nineteen years ago)

Clearly William Golding heard about this...

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 17:35 (nineteen years ago)

I whole heartedly approve of this. In the best traditions of Ernest Thomson-Seaton and the free-school movement.

Ed (dali), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 18:01 (nineteen years ago)

yes! more of this sort of thing!

emsk ( emsk), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 20:50 (nineteen years ago)

Did either of you read through the article before replying? Schools being set on fire = less of this sort of thing, thanks.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 21:47 (nineteen years ago)

It was more "I now know why to live responsibly, for I have seen anarchy and it was rub", for me.

mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:34 (nineteen years ago)

it wasn't a school, it was a school HUT.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:35 (nineteen years ago)

But also, This was what I found fascinating:

But others say Q Camp failed because the children themselves didn't want to share the responsibility, but wanted to feel the adults were in charge.

So much so that they organised themselves into two groups, masters and slaves - the ones who wanted to control and the ones who wanted to be controlled.

"This was the exact antithesis of what the theorists wanted to achieve," says author Maurice Bridgeland, who knew Mr Barron. "It was the opposite of all their principles."

mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:36 (nineteen years ago)

it wasn't a school, it was a school HUT.

Oh, that's ok then?

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:47 (nineteen years ago)

totally different thing!

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:54 (nineteen years ago)

school had treated them like shit -> burn down school hut.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:57 (nineteen years ago)

sounds like eton.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 09:58 (nineteen years ago)

srsly.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:00 (nineteen years ago)

So what do you reckon the most flammable content in the school hut was?

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:22 (nineteen years ago)

creosote.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:23 (nineteen years ago)

wood? paper?

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:34 (nineteen years ago)

I'm thinking books.

Which is quite apart from "If you don't like something, you burn it down" being a shit lesson. You seem to be romanticising it by imagining a mob or plurality here, Emsk - the odds are it was one kid fucking things up for the others.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:34 (nineteen years ago)

i didn't think of there being books - sounds like it was totally non-trad. and having something fuck up your life and make you miserable != (and is bigger than) you don't like it.

if it was one kid fucking it up for the others and the others were pissed off, then it was up to them to discipline him - i like this idea. i like horizontal democracy.

schooling is done completely wrong in this country, and getting wronger.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:39 (nineteen years ago)

if it was one kid fucking it up for the others and the others were pissed off, then it was up to them to discipline him - i like this idea. i like horizontal democracy.

terrifying.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:42 (nineteen years ago)

Books don't burn that easily, in any case.

Forest Pines (ForestPines), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:43 (nineteen years ago)

why?? it's good! people learn like this! eh look, we're really not happy with what you've done there. if you do it again we'll XXX. he does it again, they XXX. maybe XXX was a bit too harsh, so next time they xxx. sorry, i'm not really engaging with this properly, i'm feeling more mischievous than argumentative.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:44 (nineteen years ago)

generally obv book-burning is bad, but i would love to burn every single copy ever printed of paulo coelho's 'the alchemist'. who's with me? if they don't burn that easily we'll pour petrol on the fuckers.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:45 (nineteen years ago)

I think you're vastly projecting here - where does it say that school fucked them up? - but then I probably am as well.

Horizontal democracy is mob rule at best, more likely reign of the big kids.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:47 (nineteen years ago)

xpost - don't fucking turn up tonight.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 10:47 (nineteen years ago)

VHorizontal democracy is mob rule at best,

bullshit! sorry dude, but that's complete bullshit. i've lived in a community where there was - up to a point (and yes, i realise that's a bigass caveat) - horizontal democracy, and it was brilliant. so there.

anyway school didn't fuck me up, i was really lucky with all my schools. i just look around at the way it's going and despair.

xpost - don't fucking turn up tonight.

which bit was that referring to, the coelho? ha ha ha! if you check your mail you'll find i emailed exactly one hour ago saying i'm not.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:35 (nineteen years ago)

there was a half-hour prog on this on r4 just now, which gave pretty fair coverage to the pros-cons-stating of the facts, and weighing them all up it sounds to me like the outcome came out (er, that's appalling, i'm in a rush tho) way heavily on the positive side rather than the negative.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:37 (nineteen years ago)

horizontal democracy could possibly work in a very limited situation, like this school, where resources are magically provided from without (even then...).

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:39 (nineteen years ago)

it works in other communities too. i have a book about it somewhere but have lent it to someone and am bad at remembering specific time-place examples.

emsk ( emsk), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:43 (nineteen years ago)

'horizontal democracy' is a picture, simplified, of international politics, isn't it?

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:44 (nineteen years ago)

you are part of at least one and have visited another twice in the last year.

Ed (dali), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:47 (nineteen years ago)

stalker.gif

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 11:54 (nineteen years ago)

ILX is not a horizontal democracy - we've created our own masters.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:02 (nineteen years ago)

and it's not exactly a model society anyway!!
if ilx were a school... i don't think i need to complete that sentence.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:05 (nineteen years ago)

xpost - Or they have been created for us - the entire site, until the recent change, exists explicitly at the whim of Shirtless Andrew, who provided the means of its existence in the first place.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:05 (nineteen years ago)

This board is the hut.

They have tried to burn it down...

mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:06 (nineteen years ago)

andrew is the one with the patch, right?

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:09 (nineteen years ago)

i've lived in a community where there was - up to a point (and yes, i realise that's a bigass caveat) - horizontal democracy, and it was brilliant.

Unless you're going to expand on the caveat, I'm not really going to do more than roll my eyes (and if it's the one I'm thinking of, you HAVE to be fucking joking - people selected from the exact opposite end of the interest-in-learning spectrum from the kids here).

which bit was that referring to, the coelho? ha ha ha!

My rule 1 is "don't burn books". Occasionally it's rule 2 behind "don't burn people", but that depends on the books and the people. It's not something I have much of a sense of humour about.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:10 (nineteen years ago)

BURN ANDREW FARRELL http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/170/emotcolbertwz3.gif

wordy rappaport (EstieButtez1), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:14 (nineteen years ago)

great gif, estie, you must use it more often.

benrique (Enrique), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:16 (nineteen years ago)

http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/4663/hatio0.gif

wordy rappaport (EstieButtez1), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 12:25 (nineteen years ago)

don't fucking turn up tonight

This is pretty astonishingly rude, even for me, and I'd like to publically apologise. This is one of the topics where the red mist rises immediately.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 22 November 2006 14:08 (nineteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.