Home Grown by MathildaLewis

Home Grown How Does the Grow Heathrow Protest Squat Challenge Contemporary Notions of Domesticity?

Mathilda Lewis History and Theory Studies Tutor: Georgios Eftaxiopoulos Ma Architecture 2020 Royal College of Art

Abstract

This research project was initiated by a visit to the Grow Heathrow protest squat in November 2019 and intends to explore how their “transient community”1 challenges our contemporary understanding of domestic inhabitation. The context for the primary research is based on extensive study into the history of enclosure of the commons, the resulting development of protest movements and the more recent evolution of squatting movements in England. This piece observes the camp through both the architectural and the sociological lens. The architectural perspective considers how the “Do it Yourself”2 (DIY) approach to the temporary domestic structures engenders a more environmentally sustainable, self sufficient and collaborative way of living. The sociological investigation analyses how communal living results in the division of reproductive labour, strong interpersonal relationships and the reinforcement of ecological responsibilities. The consolidation of the DIY and communal living allows for an internal domestic mode of production that enacts a return to the communal cohesion of peasant communities. The community simultaneously demonstrates characteristics of nomadic and agricultural societies. The nomadism is manifested through the simplistic ad-hoc architecture and alleged impermanence, whilst the settlement is indicated by the curation of allotments, territorialism and endurance of inhabitation. Although Grow Heathrow appears as a run-down site on the margins of society, the manifestation of their inhabitation takes precedent from historical architecture to demonstrate an alternative model of domestic inhabitation that responds to contemporary issues.

Key Words:

Protest, Squatting, DIY, Communal Living, Nomadic, Enclosure, Sub-culture, Occupy, Domesticity, Environment, & Domestic Mode of Production.

1 2

Anonymous resident, 2019. Grow Heathrow Site Visit. Cattaneo, C. and Martinez, M. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe.

Home Grown

Fig 1 Abstract

Large scale drawing collating different aspects of the Grow Heathrow Squat 3

Contents Page

6|9

10|13

14|17

18|21

22|25

26|33

34|39

40|41

42|47

48|51

Home Grown

Introduction

Ad Hoc Home

Chronicles of the Commons

Squatting (r)Evolution

Objective Occupation

Body Politic

Do-It-Yourself

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendice

Contents

Introduction How Does the Grow Heathrow Protest Squat Challenge Contemporary Notions of Domesticity?

This research piece examines how the protest squat Grow Heathrow challenges our contemporary understanding of domesticity through a “do it yourself”1 approach to the temporary architectural structures and the communalisation of the camp’s “Domestic mode of production”2.

Historical enclosure of the common landscape in the UK has contributed to the privatised commodification of land, increased social disparity, and the break down of collective forms of living. Analysis of enclosure and the responding waves of rebellion constructs the foundations for contemporary protest and squatting movements. I consider how squatting, as an act of protest, is a method of reclaiming the common land for autonomous living. Silvia Federici’s book Re-enchanting the World recognises that communal living is an act of feminism as it allows for reproductive labour, that was made invisible through enclosure and privatisation of property, to be re- socialised3. Recent precedents of ecological protest squats within the UK such as Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp (1981- 2000), Tywford Down ecological protest camp (1992), Claremont Road squat (1994), and Newbury Bypass (1996)4 provide a contextual basis for my interpretation of Grow Heathrow. The examination of cause, development, manifestation, duration of inhabitation and eventual dissolution serves to provide a comparative investigation into the diachronic development of a particular manifestation of rebellion. This analysis establishes the framework to investigate the contemporary protest squat, Grow Heathrow, that began occupation in 2010 and continues to function to this day.

Grow Heathrow is an environmentally motivated activist squat that began in opposition to the proposal of a third runway and is located on the periphery of Heathrow airport. The DIY approach to construction takes precedent from nomadic architectural structures through the simplistic forms and use of found materials. The ecological foundations of the inhabitation have instilled an environmentally conscious approach to waste that manifests itself through the ad-hoc composition of discarded materials and the makeshift waste composting systems. Their style of living proposes an alternative to our contemporary consumption driven culture. The Grow Heathrow site exhibits conflicting characteristics of nomadic communities, through the “alleged non permanence”5 of the occupancy, whilst simultaneously establishing itself as a self producing agricultural settlement. However, In contrast to nomadic communities the group are highly politicised and protective over the plot of land that they occupy. The reduction of private space and communalisation of labour recognises the invisible reproductive work that women have performed without acknowledgment for centuries in the domestic realm. The collective labour and co-living arrangement engenders strong social relationships within the camp but is at risk of becoming too insular and prejudiced due to a lack of external engagement. The initial environmental basis of the camp is reinforced by the communal living arrangements due to the social influence of residents.

1 Cattaneo, C. and Martinez, M. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe. 2 Wilson, A., 2014. Ambiguities of Space and Control: When Refugee Camp and Nomadic Encampment Meet. Nomadic Peoples, 18(1), pp.38-60. 3 Federici, S. and Linebaugh, P., n.d. Re-Enchanting The World. 4 Ramirez Blanco, j. (2019). Artistic Utopias of Revolt. [s.l.]: Palgrave Macmillan. 5 Wilson, A., 2014. Ambiguities of Space and Control: When Refugee Camp and Nomadic Encampment Meet. Nomadic Peoples, 18(1), pp.38-60. 6

Home Grown

Grow Heathrow Structure, 2019

Fig 2

Introduction

Figure 1

Makeshift compositions of objects 7

Fig 3 8

Home Grown

View of the external communal space at Grow Heathrow Introduction

Ad Hoc Home A portrayal of the Grow Heathrow encampment that is based on an experience of visiting the site on a wet November day.

Grow Heathrow is a transient squatting community that inhabit a neglected plot of land on the periphery of Heathrow airport. Their intervention began in 2010 as an ecological activist collective in opposition to the proposed third runway at Heathrow airport and has continued to function as a transitory home for a diverse range of occupants. Previously utilised as an â&#x20AC;&#x153;illegal scrapyardâ&#x20AC;?1, the activists made use of discarded materials on the site and have cleared away over 120 tonnes of rubbish throughout the duration of their inhabitation. Their operation has turned a previously overlooked space into a community garden and co-living settlement, whilst significantly reducing crime levels in the area by occupying the derelict premises.

The site is accessed through an unassuming and narrow path that is overgrown with wild planting. Adjacent to their dwelling is a patch of reclaimed land that now functions as a taxi company and is fenced off with an aggressive metal finned fence. The occupiers of this plot are hostile and appear weary of lost travellers that persistently stumble on to their land. The first signifier of the continued occupation of the Grow Heathrow community is proclaimed with a tall scaffolded structure that supports a series of solar panels and anarchic flags. Upon entrance you are confronted with an assortment of innovative constructions that demonstrate the DIY architectural language. From the simple wooden hut to the use of a large boat, each building has its own unique character and tells a story through the ad hoc repairs and expression of longevity through the varying states of decay.

The settlement is centred around four greenhouses that are overgrown with wild planting. Some sections still retain the original glass, some have been converted into poly tunnels, and the remaining structure provides a loose frame to hang interior shelters and playful objects. The communal base consists of a kitchen, a living room and a performance platform that is enclosed using a timber and polythene sheets. The polythene canopy creates a diffused lighting within the interior that would reflect the seasonal variation through the quality of illumination and canopy cover. The space itself is chaotic and scattered with a mismatch of grimy objects that have accumulated gradually over the years. The adjacent external area inverts internal to external and is intersected by a series of hanging nets and hammocks. This inhabitation of the air is also enacted through an array of timber treehouses that intersect the forest. In addition to the tropospheric occupation, a significant portion of the Grow Heathrow perimeter has been dug into a two metre deep trench that is rumoured to lead to an underground bunker. These simplistic architectural interventions act to subvert our contemporary understanding of domestic inhabitation through the inversion of familiar form and function.

1 Huck Magazine. (2020). Inside Grow Heathrow: the UKâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most famous protest camp. [online] Available at: https://www.huckmag.com/ perspectives/activism-2/grow-heathrow/

Home Grown

Fig 4

Ad Hoc Home

Composition of simplistic makeshift shelters and random collection of found objects 11

The community demonstrate environmental sustainability through their homegrown food production, the use of composting toilets and the operation of a worm farm to digest kitchen waste. The growth of food is carried out to avoid unnecessary capitalistic consumption and to internalise the domestic mode of production. Both of the waste systems are executed using inventive solutions; the worm farm makes use of two old bathtubs whilst the composting toilets are composed using a collection of found objects. These composting arrangements are used for the fertilisation of the shared allotments that are located within a series of poly tunnel structures1.

The squat is democratically run with no hierarchy in decision making, demonstrated by the collective performance of domestic labour. When I visited the residents were clearing and ordering the rubbish on the site, sharing the laborious tasks and collaboratively improving their living environment. The reduction of individuals private space to one room dwellings within this site challenges the traditional architectural layout of the home. The nature of the inhabitation sees the performance of private reproductive labour in the public domain. Questioning traditional notions of privacy that have been ingrained in our society and highlighting the isolation of invisible reproductive labour within traditional domestic architecture.

Grow Heathrow. (2019). [film] Directed by M. Lewis. Heathrow.

Home Grown

Fig 5

Ad Hoc Home

Tree house constructed between three tree branches in close proximity 13

Chronicles of the Commons The historical context of Enclosure of the Common land in England and the subsequent chronicle of Uprisings that followed.

The history of contemporary protest squats can be traced back to the enclosure of the common land and the diachronic development of uprisings that followed. Ancient rights of common granted freedom of access to the common land as a shared resource, in a system that was centred on the “refusal of privilege”1 and worked in opposition to social hierarchies. The common land entitled communities the right to pasturage, pannage, ester, turnery, piscary, rights in the soil, and animals ferae naturae2. In response to the social inequalities that enclosure and privatisation induced, anti-capitalist movements developed throughout English history with the land at the centre as both the site and subject of protest.

Historically in the UK the open field system dominated agricultural management, allowing individuals to cultivate plots during the growing season and provide a recreational communal resource for the rest of the seasons3. After the Norman invasion of 1066, the doomsday book saw the large scale documentation of property within England and Wales, securing ownership of land into the hands of a privileged minority. Enclosure of the common land began to manifest itself in the form of subdivision and fencing off of large areas4. In response to the increasing limitations of access to common land and deepening societal inequalities there ensued a number of uprisings.

The first significant uprising recorded in England in relation to the social disparity and economic unhappiness, that had manifested itself through the privatisation and enclosure of land, came in the form of the Peasants Revolt in 1381. Following this the Jack Cade’s rebellion in 1450, and the Kett’s rebellion in 1549, were also revolts for which the enclosure of the common land was a central point of contention5. Rebels involved in the Kett’s rebellion demonstrated their agency through the destruction of fences cordoning off the private property of the wealthy elite. These rebellions are important to consider as they represent the early forms of protest that set precedent for challenging the status quo and conventional hierarchal structures.

During the 1600’s the crown ordered the Fens to be drained for the curation of arable land, for their increased ownership and profit, causing a significant increase in guerrilla organisations. The Levellers and the Diggers were a collective of agrarian socialists that formed in opposition to the monarchy in 1642-1651 and fought for the communal ownership of land. The first historical precedent for protest squatting can be seen with the direct action of the Levellers in 1949. The True Levellers believed in the “common ownership”6 of all land and demonstrated their protest by occupying disused plots. The 1 Federici, S. and Linebaugh, P., n.d. Re-Enchanting The World. 2 GOV.UK. 2020. Managing Common Land. [online] Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/guidance/managing-common-land> 3 MARX, K. (2014). DAS KAPITAL. Chapter Twenty-Seven: Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land 4 MARX, K. (2014). DAS KAPITAL. Chapter Twenty-Seven: Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land 5 Medium. (2019). A History of British Rebellions. [online] Available at: https://medium. com/@johnlubbock/a-history-of-british-rebellions-2b5f289c525b 6 Spatialagency.net. (2019). Spatial Agency: Diggers / Levellers. [online] Available at: https:// www.spatialagency.net/database/diggers

Home Grown

Fig 6

Chronicles of the Commons

Open Field System 15

cultivation and levelling of fences and ditches of enclosed land were just some of the methods that they used. Although unsuccessful, their progressive ideas and hands on methods continue to influence contemporary squatting and protest movements.

Enclosure of the commons and expulsion of peasant communities lay the groundwork for capitalist growth from the 16th century onwards. Over a period of 100 years from 1750 parliament instigated the enclosure of around seven million acres. This period of extensive enclosures came to a halt in response to the curation of the Open Spaces Society in 1865 that was organised by the middle classes as they despaired at the diminishing recreational space1. Unfortunately the Cultural Capital, as defined by Pierre Bordieu, of an organisation has historically been an indicator of their success in challenging the dominant institutions2. The Tragedy of the Commons, published in 1968, was a political piece that stated â&#x20AC;&#x153;freedom in commons brings ruin to allâ&#x20AC;?3. This ideology was utilised by the right wing government to justify the implementation of Neoliberal policies that deregulated price controls and capital markets. Polarising political ideologies in the late 20th century led to an increasing number of ecological and anti-capitalist movements in opposition to the dominance of financial motivation over social or environmental concerns.

1 MARX, K. (2014). DAS KAPITAL. Chapter Twenty-Seven: Expropriation of the Agricultural Population from the Land 2 van de Werfhorst, H., 2010. Cultural capital: strengths, weaknesses and two advancements. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31(2), pp.157-169. 3 Garrett Hardin (1968). Tragedy of the Commons

Home Grown

Fig 7

Chronicles of the Commons

Levellers, 1649 17

Squatting (r)Evolution A history of the squatting movements that have developed in England over the las 80 years; from the post war family squatting movement to the contemporary squats that are politically motivated forms of protest.

Squatting, defined as to “Unlawfully occupy an uninhabited building or settle on a piece of land”1, has manifested itself through numerous distinct and interrelated waves over the last decades. From the communities of family squatters after world war two, to the ecological protest squats that began in the 1980s, squatting provides precedent for alternative ways of living that challenges contemporary notions of privacy within the domestic sphere. More than fulfilling the basic need for shelter, squatting is a political act and throughout history has provided a platform for change through the demonstration of alternative ways of living.

The “do it yourself” and “make do and mend”2 approach emerged from the rubble of WW2 alongside a wave of family based squatting due to the damage to properties, slum clearances from the 1930s and a lack of housing development during the war years. Prior to this the most notable documentation of a squatting movement was the 1649 True Levellers that demonstrated their agency in the form of inhabiting neglected land and cultivating it in the pursuit of communal ownership. Squatters from the post war period relied on the 1381 forcible entry act that granted the right to enter a property if carried out in a way that did not cause damage to the fabric of the building3. The DIY and Make do and mend revolutions were born from the shortages that arose from the war, however they have remained relevant for anti capitalist and ecological protest movements that are focussed on the reduction of consumption.

The contemporary squatters movement established itself in the 60s and it was during this period that collectives formed to provide support networks for squatters. The Family Squatters Advisory Service formed in the 60s and the Advisory Service for Squatters began in 1975; renowned for the enduring publication of the Squatters Handbook4. These groups allowed Individuals to share knowledge and work collectively for a common goal. It was in this context that squatting communities began to recognise their collective capacity and urban squatting began to become more politicised. Squats provided melting pots for the reformative youth movement through providing a space for subculture organisations to grow. Progressive movements from the 1980s such as the The Gay Liberation Front, the Women’s Liberation Movement, and the Civil Rights movement flourished in squatting communities and collectively sought to generate critical changes5. The co-habitation of large groups challenged traditional conceptions of the private nuclear family in favour of communal living.

Alongside the political squatting that was centred on societal concerns, another wave of squatting manifested in the form of ecological protest squats. This wave of squatters

1 Weiner, E. and Simpson, J., 1989. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2 Cattaneo, C. and Martinez, M. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe. 3 Spatialagency.net. (2019). Spatial Agency: Diggers / Levellers. [online] Available at: http:// www.spatialagency.net/database/ diggers. 4 Squatter.org.uk. (2019). About ASS | Advisory Service for Squatters. [online] Available at: https://www.squatter.org.uk/about- ass/. 5 Steen, B., Katzeff, A. and Hoogenhuijze. (2014). L, The city is ours. Oakland: PM Press.

Home Grown

Fig 8

Squatting (r)Evolution

Make Do and Mend, 1917 19

can be linked directly to the methods employed by the Grow Heathrow residents as they used the physical inhabitation of space to prevent the destruction of nature. Though the transient nature of squatting means that the communities leave no physical trace in the form of monumental architecture, it is in the diachronic development of progressive politics and novel structures of domestic inhabitation that squatting has left its mark. The de-privatisation of domestic activities and collective access to the commons encourage reproduction that is centred on democracy and collective decisions.

Home Grown

Fig 9

Squatting (r)Evolution

Squatters Handbook, 1974 21

Objective Occupation Contemporary precedents for protest squats from the 1980s onwards.

A protest squat functions to disrupt and attempt to overturn circumstances that they perceive to be environmentally, ethically or politically damaging. The physical inhabitation of space and development of temporary communities to prevent the destruction of nature has been a progressive movement over recent years. The Greenham Common, Twyford Down, Newbury Bypass, and Claremont Road provide precedent for Grow Heathrow in terms of the tactics used and physical manifestations of their occupations1.

Greenham Common, 1981-2000, was one of the longest running protest squats in history and consisted of a community of women that co-habited in opposition to a nuclear weapons facility2. Photographs of the occupation show the execution of reproductive labour, like cooking and cleaning, in a public setting. Their communalisation of domestic tasks can be seen as a feminist act as it displays the previously isolated invisible labour performed in public.

The first ecological protests came in opposition to the introduction of new roads during the late 20th century. The Twyford Down protestors in 1991, calling themselves the “Dongas”3, set up teepees and tent structures occupying public space in opposition to the proposition of a new road. These protests are suggested to have influenced the successive British road protests that can be linked to anti-globalisation, climate crisis and anti-capitalist activist movements. Their way of living celebrated ancient conditions of domesticity, ritual and travel at a human scale. Newbury Bypass, similarly in opposition to planned motorways, saw the inhabitation of forests to prevent the removal from a proposed demolition site. Protestors occupied the land through the tactic of tree sitting, some erected simple wooden tree houses that were know at “twigloos”4, whilst others occupied ground level tents made from hazel branches and tarpaulin. These structures are reminiscent of nomadic architecture due to the simplicity of form, temporality of use and manipulation of locally sourced found materials.

In contrast to the occupation and protection of natural habitats, a group of individuals inhabited the street Claremont Road in 1993, to prevent demolition that would make way for a road. The occupants developed an art house, cafes, a performance area, bike workshop and experimented in alternative and more collaborative ways of living. They challenged concepts of private and public through the inversion of external space. The inhabitation of the road outside the houses as a communal living area was a manifestation of their slogan “homes not roads”5. A hole was cut through every single wall of the connected houses to create one shared communal asset for all of

1 Ramirez Blanco, j. (2019). Artistic Utopias of Revolt. [s.l.]: Palgrave Macmillan. 2 Ramirez Blanco, j. (2019). Artistic Utopias of Revolt. [s.l.]: Palgrave Macmillan. 3 Vidal, J. (2012). This article is more than 7 years old Twy- ford Down’s Dongas return 20 years after M3 protest. The Guardian. 4 Moran, J. (2010). On Roads. London: Profile. 5 Cattaneo, C. and Martinez, M. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe.

Home Grown

Twyford Down Protest Camp, 1992

Allercombe Camp, 1997

Objective Occupation

Figure 10

Greenham Common Protest Camp, 1982

Figure 11

Newbury Bypass Protest Camp, 1996

Figure 12

Figure 13

the inhabitants. Their scaffolded tower was visible from miles around and supported a series of nets that linked the area above the ground and would provide an escape route when confronted by the authoritative figures.

Although none of these protest camps were successful in achieving their goal of protecting nature, they have had their role in the construction of networks and ideas that continue to influence contemporary culture. The construction of the dwellings demonstrates a return to more simplistic prehistoric settlements and the hunter gatherer type temporary accommodation. They question traditional cultural perceptions of domesticity and the privatisation of land whilst they re-communalise reproductive labour.

Home Grown

Claremont Road, 1994

Objective Occupation

Figure 14

Claremont Road, 1994

Figure 15

Occupy London, 2011

Figure 16

Figure 17

Fig 18 26

Home Grown

Plan of the communal space at Grow Heathrow protest camp Body Politic

Body Politic How the Cooperative living that is enacted at Grow Heathrow demonstrates an alternative to the private domain and the nuclear family.

Grow Heathrow demonstrates the progressive potential of collaborative living structures through the reduction of the private realm to the bedroom, division of reproductive labour and a non-hierarchical democratic approach to organisation. The residents establish living arrangements that exhibit a return to the historical domestic arrangement of peasant communities before the gradual enclosure of the common land and concealment of reproductive labour. Silvia Federici’s book re-enchanting the world provides a foundation to explore how the re-communalisation of reproductive labour can be seen as a feminist act due to the acknowledgment of invisible domestic labour1. Analysis of the community from first hand research reveals the relevance of communal living in relation to contemporary issues such as environmental degradation, consumerism and social isolation. Investigation into the values in relation to democracy and environmental issues allow for speculation into the affect that communal living has on the cooperation, governance, and political views of the camp.

Grow Heathrow demonstrates contradictory notions of simultaneously presenting itself a nomadic community whilst also exhibiting attributes of a settled agricultural development. Nomadic communities live collectively and their dwellings generally consist of small and simplistically constructed temporary shelters. Protest camps, specifically Grow Heathrow, often use materials and architectural structures that are comparable to that of nomadic encampments owing to the “alleged non permanence”2 of the inhabitation. As Grow Heathrow has now been in existence for nine years, there is now a juxtaposition between the intended temporality of the site yet the sedentary reality of its existence. The Grow Heathrow site operates as if in a state of Sedentism; a previously nomadic community settling into a sedentary agricultural lifestyle3. The buildings on the Grow Heathrow site depict the non hierarchal layout and structural simplicity of nomadic settlements however the agricultural production and seasonal endurance on the site is that of a settled community.

In contrast to nomadic communities, that are typically a-political and non territorial, protest squats generally foster strong political ideologies and are defensive over their territory so as to protect their cause. The defensive approach to authoritative figures was demonstrated on my visit through a confrontation with a group of firemen who had come to assess the safety of the site. The inhabitants politely turned them away with the justification that this was a community that was based on collective decision making and that they would have to have a discussion with the whole group. The physical inhabitation of space as a political act and refusal of removal is a common trait in many ecological protest movements, often using scaffolding tripods or trees

1 Federici, S. and Linebaugh, P., n.d. Re-Enchanting The World. 2 Wilson, A., 2014. Ambiguities of Space and Control: When Refugee Camp and Nomadic Encampment Meet. Nomadic Peoples, 18(1), pp.38-60. 3 Wilson, A., 2014. Ambiguities of Space and Control: When Refugee Camp and Nomadic Encampment Meet. Nomadic Peoples, 18(1), pp.38-60.

Home Grown

Fig 19 Body Politic

Woman and child in the grow Heathrow site 29

to create precarious conditions. The highly politicised nature of the occupants was exhibited through the anti-capitalist (Slaves to Capitalism), anti-police (ACAB) and anarchist (A) graffiti that was sprawled on many of the communal areas. Similarly to the confrontation, the graffiti could be interpreted as a protective and primitive method of marking territory.

The reduction of the private realm to the bedroom within protest squats acts to recommeunalise the reproductive labour that has in recent history been largely carried out by women as invisible unpaid work. Silvia Federici’s book Re-enchanting the World articulates the impact that enclosure of the common land had on peasant communities and caused the isolation of women into domestic enslavement1. The all women Greenham Common protest camp that existed from 1981- 2000 re-communalised domestic labour through the performance of previously private everyday reproductive tasks in public alongside a community of women. The residents of Grow Heathrow rely almost entirely on the “domestic mode of production”2; which means that the daily reproduction of life is internalised and labour and resources are generally self produced. The occupants share the domestic tasks including the cooking and cleaning and similarly perform daily labours in a public setting, however the scale of the demonstration is smaller and the political significance is less profound as the majority of inhabitants currently male.

The socio spatial structures that are developed within co-living communities strengthen internal relationships and permit the enduring existence of the collective, however they are also constrained by the insularity of their existence. Many of the grow Heathrow residents share similar views regarding socialism, democracy, and environmental issues allowing them to effectively make collective decisions through a shared cultural understanding. The democratic approach to decision making is non hierarchical and true to their egalitarian aspirations, allowing the collective to function autonomously as a form of common. The site provides a context in which the sharing of ideas and tools is easily accessible engendering strong internal relations and providing the opportunity for learning. There are currently only 11 people living on the site without a great deal of external infiltration. The insularity of the development would suggest that the occupants may become restricted to a particular outlook and radicalised to a certain perception and political ideology as illustrated by the unified message of the graffiti.

The ecological foundations of the Grow Heathrow protest squat have motivated environmentally sustainable practices in relation to their energy use, waste, food production and social responsibility within the community. The production of renewable energy on site provides enough electricity to power warm showers using a series of solar panels. During the winter however the clean energy is not sufficient and wood burning stoves are used as a supplement to heat individual dwellings, releasing co2 into the atmosphere. The sparse layout of the encampments leads to inefficient use of this polluting energy, however the modest size of the dwellings means that the heat can be focussed where it is needed. The size of the individual dwellings and the lack of

1 Federici, S. and Linebaugh, P., n.d. Re-Enchanting The World. 2 ARNOULD, E., 1991. The Household Economy: Reconsidering the Domestic Mode of Production. RICHARD R. WILK, ed. American Ethnologist, 18(2), pp.375-376.

Home Grown

Fig 20 Body Politic

Man performing reproductive tasks in public 31

heavy development allows for the remainder of the site to be used for planting whilst retaining the existing trees. The natural methods of waste recycling and home grown food production allow the collaborative to function self sufficiently off grid. The social influence of those cohabiting in a co-living community can have a positive effect in reinforcing ecological responsibility and a commitment to environmentally conscious practice. The site in theory provides an environment for ecologically conscious ideas to be infiltrated and perpetuated.

The cohabitation that endures at the Grow Heathrow site functions to confront contemporary issues of social isolation, sustainable living and the economic uncertainty that comes with consumer culture. The site exhibits characteristics of nomadic communities through the structural compositions, materiality and alleged temporality of the inhabitation. However the community appears to be in a state of agricultural sedentism that is indicated by the continued occupation throughout the nine years of occupancy, radical political views, territorial mindset, and the cultivation of agricultural plots. The reduction of the private realm to the bedroom and communalisation of reproductive labour can be seen as a feminist act as it is a liberation of the previously invisible work to which women have historically been enslaved. The domestic mode of production is almost entirely insular allowing occupants to work collectively reproduce themselves whilst developing strong social relationships. However the insularity of their existence provides a breeding ground to establish potentially unbalanced political perspectives. The environmental beginnings of the camp has engendered an approach to sustainability that is reinforced by the collective and manifested through innovate ecological solutions.

Home Grown

Fig 21 Body Politic

Inside Outside 33

Plan of dwelling constructed using branches, fabric and plastic membrane

Elevation of dwelling constructed using branches, fabric and plastic membrane

Plan of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Elevation of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Plan of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Elevation of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Fig 22 34

Plans and Elevations of private dwellings Home Grown

Plan of toilet constructed using timber, found objects and composting system

Elevation of toilet constructed using timber, found objects and composting system

Plan of dwelling constructed using bottles, mud, and a plastic membrane

Elevation of dwelling constructed using bottles, mud, and a plastic membrane

Plan of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Elevation of dwelling constructed using timber with plastic membrane roof

Fig 23

Do-It-Yourself

Plans and Elevations of private dwellings 35

Do-It-Yourself How the Do it Yourself culture of The Grow Heathrow site is influenced by historical precedents and demonstrates a sustainable living model that is facilitated by community cooperation.

The “Do it Yourself”1 (DIY) culture that has been established by the inhabitants of the Grow Heathrow protest squat demonstrates an approach to construction and repair that operates without the assistance from professionals. Researchers describe DIY as when “individuals engage raw and semi-raw materials and parts to produce, transform, or reconstruct material possessions, including those drawn from the natural environment”2. This practice has seen numerous waves throughout history in response to social movements. The DIY culture was first realised in the early 20th century, however it is rooted in ancient cultures that existed prior to professional specialisation. The DIY constructions on the Grow Heathrow site resemble nomadic structures due to the use of found materials, simplicity of form and makeshift assembly. Grow Heathrow demonstrate a sustainable and anti-consumerist attitude through the repurposing of discarded materials, growth of produce and DIY waste composting systems. The co-operative living arrangement facilitates the execution of the self build ventures.

The term DIY was first recognised in 1912 in reference to the practice of carrying out personal home renovation and maintenance projects and became popularised by the 1950s. The practice saw an increase during the war years alongside the popularisation of Make Do and Mend. Make Do and Mend began during World War One and was proliferated to housewives as a pamphlet that gave instructions on how to repair domestic or textile items in innovative ways. The intention of the publication was to encourage people to “reduce, reuse and recycle”3, an ethos which has become popularised again today due to contemporary environmental deterioration. DIY became synonymous with the Arts and Crafts movements and the punk and alternative rock scenes as it offered a way of living that was an escape from consumer culture and outside of conventional establishments.

The temporary nature of protest camp architecture and the DIY aesthetic that comes with it takes precedent from nomadic architectural structures. Nomadic dwellings are usually made using natural or found materials that are manipulated to construct simple shelters to provide space for the function of sleeping4. On the Grow Heathrow site there is a construction that uses entwined twigs and is insulated with layers of fabric reminiscent of the Somali nomadic Aqal hut, whilst another uses mud to create a dwelling that is evocative of Masai mud huts5. Although the constructions take precedent from these ancient nomadic structures, they are adapted to the local vernacular through the use of contemporary materials like bottles and old pieces of clothing. Since the introduction of agricultural settlements nomadic architecture has

1 Cattaneo, C. and Martinez, M. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe. 2 Google Arts & Culture. 2020. Do It Yourself - Google Arts & Culture. [online] Available at: <https://artsandculture.google.com/culturalinstitute/beta/entity/do-it-yourself/m017rcq?hl=en> 3 Bl.uk. 2020. Make Do And Mend. [online] Available at: <https://www.bl.uk/learning/timeline/ item106365.html> 4 Huhemanda and Jia, X., 2014. Modern Architecture under Nomadic Ecological View. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 638-640, pp.2226-2230. 5 Arens, W., 1985. : The Innocent Anthropologist: Notes from a Mud Hut . Nigel Barley. American Anthropologist, 87(1), pp.170-170.

Home Grown

Fig 24

Do-It-Yourself

Nomadic Architecture 37

declined and more permanent structures have predominantly become commonplace. However the transitory nature of squatting has seen a resurgence of this type of dwelling and a revival of the skills and knowledge needed to materialise these conceptions.

The DIY culture of Grow Heathrow is consistent with the environmental considerations that their protest camp is predicated on and is demonstrated through their approach to reusing discarded materials, recycling natural waste and sustainably growing food produce1. The camp rely minimally on external bodies and are self sufficient in regards to recycling food and processing human waste, using natural composting systems which they use in the growth of their own food. However the lack of electricity necessitates the camp members to rely on wood burning heaters during the colder months. The more ecologically concerned squatters use solar panels however the high cost of solar panels means that this is not a possibility for all of the residents. Squatting and a DIY approach to construction and maintenance circumvents the contemporary culture of consumerism that is so damaging to our environment. The DIY approach permits inhabitants to make alterations to their dwellings at little to no cost whilst making use of otherwise wasted materials.

The self organised, cooperative, and non hierarchal way in which the squat functions ensures a fairer division of labour and engenders the freedom to approach the construction in a playful and almost child like manner. Upon my visit to the site the occupants were in the process of collaboratively clearing unwanted materials and spoke of the way in which communal reproductive tasks and DIY ventures were generally divided equally. The home becomes a site of cooperation and collaboration. The communal nature of daily operations can also be linked to the reduction of private space to the bedroom. In place of the capitalistic structure which permits the hierarchical exploitation of labour. The camp allows for individuals to enter at free will and construct their own dwelling using found or bought materials. Due to this freedom and absence of planning control or hierarchical authority the individual dwellings are highly individualised and varied in their structure and use of materials. Often these dwellings have been passed on to the next generation of inhabitants, however the lack of maintenance of some of the properties means that many dwellings fall into disrepair when the temporary residents leave the site.

1 Huhemanda and Jia, X., 2014. Modern Architecture under Nomadic Ecological View. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 638-640, pp.2226-2230.

Home Grown

Fig 25

Do-It-Yourself

Treehouse 39

Conclusion How Does the Grow Heathrow Protest Squat Challenge Contemporary Notions of Domesticity?

This research into the domestic inhabitation of the Grow Heathrow protest squat examines how the “transient community”1 challenges contemporary ideas around domesticity. Through focussing on the significance of the Do it Yourself culture and the consequences of living communally I aimed to investigate how these approaches offer solutions to contemporary issues of isolation, environmental sustainability and financial insecurity.

The Grow Heathrow squat simultaneously evokes nomadic and agricultural settlements. The intended temporality of the inhabitation has meant that the simplistic structures, that make use of found materials, take precedent from the architectural conceptions of nomadic communities. In contrast to nomadic societies, the settlement has been in occupation for a number of years and has developed into a state of sedentism that is indicated by the agricultural production and sense of defensiveness over the land.

Grow Heathrow uses techniques that have similarly been seen in other ecological protest squats from the 1980s in terms of material use, makeshift construction methods, and inversion of private and public domains. The camp attempt to invert the conventional use of domestic space through the use of underground tunnels, tree houses and netting. These methods are similarly demonstrated by Claremont Road, Newbury Bypass and Twyford Down and serve to protect the occupants of the camp if under threat from the authorities. The inversion of outside and inside space is established through the inhabitation of the external communal areas in a domestic style and challenges contemporary notions of privacy within the domestic realm.

The DIY nature of the constructions affords a freedom to the residents to work playfully with their dwellings using found materials, circumventing consumer culture whilst setting precedent for environmentally conscious reuse of materials. The camp make use of discarded materials to build innovative solutions to recycling waste into compost for food production. The ecological foundations of the camp have engendered an environmentally sustainable approach to waste and consumption that is preserved and perpetuated through communal reinforcement.

The total internal domestic mode of production enacts a return to the communal nature of peasant communities whilst also exhibiting the “make do and mend” and “do it yourself” mantras of the war years. The inhabitation of the Grow Heathrow squat establishes a reversal of the disintegration of communal living and privatisation of domestic labour that was brought about by the enclosure of the common land and eventual dissolution of peasant communities. The adoption of the wartime DIY and make do and mend way of living allows for the camp to perform daily tasks without external input, allowing the camp to function autonomously.

Anonymous resident, 2019. Grow Heathrow Site Visit.

Home Grown

The collective performance of reproductive tasks in the communal space and division of domestic labour can be seen as a feminist act due to the recognition of the work that has previously been done in isolation by women. The reduction of private space to the bedroom permits communal operation. Through this collective domestic labour inhabitants are able to build strong internal relationships, however the lack of external influence has the potential to engender strong one sided views. The expansion of the communal area and collaboration of residents exhibits the potential for a reduction of private space to resolve issues of isolation in contemporary domestic architecture.

Grow Heathrow presents itself online as a utopian vision of collaborative living that has transformed a neglected site into an agricultural community haven. The current reality of the inhabitation is a series of makeshift dwellings in various states of deterioration and vast amounts of discarded material amidst a small forest. However, the DIY approach to construction and communal collaboration allows the community determine an alternative way of living that is outside of the contemporary consumer culture.

Fig 26 Conclusion

Large scale drawing collating different aspects of the Grow Heathrow Squat 41

Bibliography Primary Research

Grow Heathrow. (2019). [film] Directed by M. Lewis. Heathrow.

Print References Bryan-Wilson, J. (n.d.). Fray.

C. G. (1949). Communist Manifesto: Socialist Landmark. International Affairs, 25(2), pp.229-229.

Flood, C. and Grindon, G. (2014). Disobedient objects. London: VA Publishing.

Head, J. and MacLea, L. (1989). Myth & meaning. Brantford, Ont.: W. Ross MacDonald School, Computer Braille Facility.

Kreitzman, L. and Foster, R. (2011). The Rhythms Of Life. London: Profile.

Lefebvre, H., Moore, J. and Elliott, G. (n.d.). Critique of everyday life.

Lemm, V. (2010). Critical theory and affirmative biopolitics: Nietzsche and the domination of nature in Adorno/Horkheimer. Journal of Power, 3(1), pp.75-95.

Meek, A. (2015). Biopolitical Media. Taylor and Francis.

Nagler, A. (2013). Source Book in Theatrical History. Dover Publications.

Napier, A. (2010). Masks, transformation, and paradox. Berkeley: University of Califormia Press.

Ovidius Naso, P., Humphries, R. and Reed, J. (n.d.). Metamorphoses.

Ramirez Blanco, j. (2019). Artistic Utopias of Revolt. [s.l.]: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sklair, L. (2015). Book review: Implosions/Explosions: Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization. Urban Studies, 52(8), pp.1547-1550.

Violent London. (2010). Palgrave Macmillan.

Ziegler, P. (1990). Enclosures. Den Haag: Shell.

Bey, H. (2004). T.A.Z.. New York: Autonomedia.

Debord, G. (2011). Comments on the society of the spectacle. London: Verso.

Federici, S. and Linebaugh, P. (n.d.). Re-enchanting the world.

Hardt, M. and Negri, A. (n.d.). Assembly.

Lefebvre, H., Moore, J. and Elliott, G. (n.d.). Critique of everyday life.

Shepheard, P. (1997). The cultivated wilderness, or, What is landscape?. Chicago, Ill.: Cambridge, Mass.

Aureli, Pier Vittorio. The Possibility of an Absolute Architecture. The MIT Press, 2011.

Awan, Nishat, et al. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture. Routledge, 2011.

Home Grown

Aymonino, Aldo, and Valerio Paolo. Mosco. Contemporary Public Space: Un-Volumetric Architecture. Skira, 2008.

Bar-Yosef, Ofer, and Thomas R. Rocek. Seasonality and Sedentism: Archaeological Perspectives from Old and New World Sites. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Harvard University, 1998.

Bennes, Crystal. “Where Does Architecture End and Marketing Begin?” Architectural Review, 20 Apr. 2015.

Beyes, Timon, et al. ParCITYpate: Art and Urban Space. Niggli, 2010.

Bryant, Chris, et al. New Modes: Redefining Practice. John Wiley & Sons, 2018.

Coke, David, and Alan Borg. Vauxhall Gardens a History. Yale Univ. Press, 2012.

Corfield, P. J. Vauxhall and the Invention of the Urban Pleasure Gardens. History & Social Actions, 2008.

Deamer, Peggy. Architecture and Capitalism 1845 to the Present. Routledge, 2014.

Duman, Alberto. “Beauty and the Beast: Capital Forces and Cultural Production.” Architectural Review, 2 Apr. 2014.

Finch , Paul. “Our Attitude to Towers Is Incoherent, to Put It Mildly.” Architects Journal, 24 Apr. 2014.

Finch, Paul. “Editorial: All Architecture Is about the Future – but about the Past Too.” Architectural Review , 20 Dec. 2017.

Finch, Paul. “Forget ‘Beautiful Buildings’ – the Government Should Create a Housing Delivery Authority Instead.” Architects Journal, 6 Nov. 2018.

Finch, Paul. “Housing for Everyone: Pipe Dream or Target?” Architectural Review, 26 Apr. 2016.

Glaeser, Edward. “The Only Way Is Up.” Architectural Review , 21 Sept. 2011.