After London: dreaming Wild England

39 thoughts on “After London: dreaming Wild England”

  1. Thank you – really enjoying your posts. I’m fascinated by the codes that emerge in any ‘movement’ like this. I think I was really motivated by the sense of an esoteric cult, suggesting there are types of engagement with the natural world which are more ‘valid’ than others.

  2. Great post on a subject dear to me – so many things to respond to here I will have to come back to it! I have just been rereading After London, but would never have imagined there had been a play done of it – amazing!

    1. The play was actually an improvisation – the programme says the students took a month of their summer holidays and worked on a script which was then rehearsed. There are notes about Shakespeare’s England – contrasting the flowering of arts in Elizabeth’s reign with suffering in everyday life, and how ‘in every year of Shakespeare’s lifetime, England was at war’, with 1585 as the year of Halley’s Comet, a harbinger of evil, linking that to Civil War, Plague and Great Fire. They used Jefferies’ apocalyptic flood to imagine a society regressed to its primitive state, with the Morris quote. Sounds quite a heady brew! I remember being really drawn to the title ‘After London: Wild England’, and talk of Kate Bush’s Lionheart too (hence the cover illustration I suppose). I only remember the scene with the mouse, but I found the book a few years later determined to follow it all up!

  3. So much delight! The Nuts in May reference had me laughing. I think you are right there is a cyclical quality. The wild of Country Living is at odds with the real tooth and claw of wilderness. Perhaps this conflict is part of the recent resurgence in writing as we fumble towards a more considered place? Great stuff!

    1. Thanks, great you enjoyed it. I was worried it might come across as purely curmudgeonly! It’s just good that there are all these perspectives. We could do with valuing all parts of the natural world when even the humble cultivated garden is under threat…

  4. Absolutely *wonderful* post… A many-faceted gem, filled with so much that strikes chords. I’ve read it several times now, over a period of some days, setting my cogs whirring, gearing myself up to finding the words to capture my response. Concentration lately has been difficult – lots happening!

    Love all the memory reflections on otters and B.B., Robin Hood, King Arthur, Richard Jefferies, Jack Hargreaves (I have fond memories of ‘Out of Town’)… Love too the warm memories of Edith Holden’s country diary. My own copy is dear to my heart – it was from its pages that I learnt all the names of the wildflowers I was discovering on walks with my dog when I was a kid…

    It seems like both a new development, and never-ending cycle, of relationship to ‘the countryside’ that we have now. It’s a strange one for me because I love nature writing – and its long, long age-old tradition. How can we humans not write about nature after all. We are nature. And nature is our world. But, despite my love of writing by Robert Macfarlane and Co., I find myself feeling perplexed and slightly alienated by the fashionable tide that has ridden a perception of ‘new nature writing.’ What’s new about it, I ask myself. I remember feeling slightly alarmed, when in Waterstones, I saw a sign that read ‘Nature Writing – the new Rock and Roll!’ It’s fabulous that so many people are seeking it out – but I grew up reading Richard Mabey, Chris Ferris and other very naturalist-based writers in the early 80s – and it sometimes feels as if their hard-won wisdoms no longer count. Sometimes it seems as if it’s all psychogeography and deep topography now. I can’t help it – I don’t like such jargon. But that’s just me; I never have liked terminology taking over from real-world expression (never liked it in my literary criticism studies either). To me, it seems to ring fence something – to put what should be central to all at a distance, and claim it for a certain group of people…

    But it’s all so complex; always, as ever, so much to consider and explore… positives bound up with the negatives. The ever shifting authenticity of ‘now’. And what’s new also essentially tapped into what’s always been, and will ever be – as well as what’s lost. Loved the journey of thought your beautiful exploration of this issue’s heartlands and hinterlands took us on…

    1. Thanks so much for the thoughts on this – I was thinking I might be a little bit of a Webster-ish malcontent here, so really appreciate the picking up and following of the threads (as ever!)

  5. It’s a freshly pressed party! 🙂 🙂

    So lovely that we’ve both been freshly pressed – almost simultaneously!! Congratulations! This is such a wonderful post; so great that so many more people will get the chance to discover and enjoy ‘dreaming Wild England’ and all the other fabulous Whistles in the Wind brews…

    I’ve got the champagne on ice – special blog celebration vintage!

  6. Loved this piece.
    I’ve not read the book but I’ll have to keep my eye out for it.
    Having lived in a sprawl of a city these past years your writing made me yearn to go somewhere where I can smell fresh air and see untouched countryside again. Even more than I usually do!

  7. Your post makes me think of George Monbiot’s latest book Feral, which got an absolute slating in the Guardian. However, if you read Monbiot’s replies in the comments, you see that the book is much more interesting than the reviewer lets on: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/may/24/feral-searching-enchantment-monbiot-review. It’s on my reading list for sure. The first paragraph is all about London before human habitation.
    On a slightly unrelated point, there is some debate as to whether William Rufus was murdered. He wasn’t popular with the Norman nobles of the time because he wasn’t a rough and tough warlike maniac, as his father had been.

      1. I agree with you entirely about the unfounded criticism of Monbiot. To argue that his opinions are ‘bourgeois’ is to attack the speaker, not the argument, which to me implies that the argument itself is strong enough to repel cheap attacks.

  8. For a homesick blogger living in the antipodes, this was meat and drink …
    And though i live in wild places here in NZ, my memories of Dorset during the war, and Yorkshire in the fifties, Warwickshire and Monmouthshire in the sixties, are so lavishlyly peopled – or should I say animaled with so much wild life and so much flora, which are hard to find in so many other places that I’ve lived in elsewhere in the world.
    The plastic world you describe is unknown to me, and it sounds very sad…
    I console myself with Larkrise at Candleford, Gilbert White at Selborne, so much of Hardy, and good friend Ronald Lockley’s books , whose research into rabbits Richard Adams pillaged for Watership Down…
    Thank you, a lovely lovely post, filled with snippets of history and literary references – fascinating and so satisfying, with so many layers of meaning…

    1. It’s wonderful to read feedback like this and to know the post connected in this way… interestingly, I’ve heard lots about Yorkshire in the 50s from my parents and I also lived in Warwickshire. There are of course many, many beautiful places around, so don’t be sad! And as I say, our particular remembered visions are always the ones we want to see, it doesn’t mean everything’s ruined. And we’ll always have Thomas’s Wessex.

  9. I remember someone coming round to our house once and seeing my mother, then in her eighties, chopping kindling, and asking, ‘Does she know what she’s doing?’ Its weird in some ways, that a skill you are brought up with, should seem so esoteric to others.

  10. Very insightful post. I love the connections to Robin Hood and King Arthur, two characters of legend that have always fascinated me, as well as the many historical connections. I think much of the reason we romanticize these past times and stories is because we live in the “plastic world” you describe and part of us longs for what was before.

    Thanks for sharing!

    ~Aspen

    1. That’s interesting – the dislike of a ‘plastic world’ is probably much more deep-rooted than just a feel for how things look, it’s also knowing the materials around us can’t just return to earth in a natural way, like seeing the swathes of polished plastic swept up on shores.

      And yet most legends have an element of regeneration in them too, even if the utopia in them (Arthur’s round table, as an example) is elusive or doomed.

      1. That’s very true. Regeneration is a very common topic in legend and story…and it goes back for centuries.

        ~Aspen

  11. I don’t live in england and yet so much of what you talked about was somehow familiar. I have visited and I guess Australia was under the thumb, so to speak, for a long time and in fact for some it still is. So much of what australia is, has some of its roots in england. The ‘natural world’ here is so different and yet our perceptions of the relationships between nature and ourselves might be surprisingly similar. I really loved the picture from a year of antidotes. It spoke to me. Loved your post thank you : )) trees

Leave a comment