Is Communal Living Really Viable?

[Goodlife1970]

Whilst we were "off air" I was looking at a few Communal Living sites having always thought that it was a lovely idea. I had images of everyone living and working for a common cause,ect. From what I read of these communities it seemed that was far from the truth! Does anyone have any experience of Communes and was it the ideal or a horrible mistake?

[Shirley]

I've no experience of this... But I would love to give it a try. I'm going to visit Findhorn later this year - it's based up on the coast about an hour from here. There was a great programme on about it on discovery real time extra - it didn't look to be all sweetness and light, but then is that any different to our 'conventional' living.

Where there are two or three gathered (in anyone's name) there is bound to be occasional conflict

The place in Wales (that does Real Seeds) Brithdir Mawr looks very interesting.

Did you find either of those two on your travels??

[Muddypause]

I think it depends. Partly it depends upon the type of community and its ethos, and partly it depends upon you and what you expect and want. Most that I know of tend to avoid the word 'commune' these days, because it has all sorts of unrealistic connotations. 'Intentional Community' seems to be the prefered formal description now.

I've hung around the edges of a few communities without ever joining, and some seem to function better than others. There was a small one in Swindon that was a lovely place full of lovely people, but eventually they all found that they couldn't live with one another, and the thing collapsed, leaving a lot of people rather disillusioned.

Another, in Scotland, was established in the seventies (and still has a couple of the original residents there). It functions as well as any institution of 30 people (all ages) could expect to. Sometimes there are arguments, sometimes people rub each other up the wrong way, but by and large they all find a way to muddle along together.

Having been in existence for so long it has a history of evolving an ethos to what it is now. In former times it was a place of pooled resources and shared income. It even, for a while adopted a policy (in true 'commune' style) of free love and shared partners. These weren't as successful as the theory presupposed. But there was enough commitment for residents to work through these times to where they are now, which is, basically, individuals being responsible for themselves and their upkeep, whilst having areas of shared interest, and a common commitment to the community.

Communities generally do seem to have a fairly high turnover of members, as people try it out for a year or two. Most places have some sort of formal visiting arrangement, so that outsiders can get to see more of what it's like inside (maintenance weeks are popular), and many will take on longer term volunteers.

I also think it is helpful to consider whether you are interested in a community that has an ideological focus (eg Findhorn is a place of spiritual development) or whether you are looking for a more pragmatic solution to a housing problem (eg, a housing co-op), which will also afford the advantages of a better quality of life and more considered values.

Personally, I swing wildly between wanting to live on my own, and realising that I'm never going to be able to afford to do that, and that I may stand a chance of a better quality of life in a co-housing project of some sort.

The bible of intentional communities is Diggeres & Dreamers which someone else (Shirlz ?) pointed to the other day. Or order it from any good bookshop.

[Shirley]

Think it was our Tigz that posted the diggers and dreamers link!

[Goodlife1970]

It was the diggers and dreamers site that I was on and that gave two very different communities but each seemed to have the shared problem of the people finding it hard to live together,its difficult enough I guess to live with one person let alone a dozen or so. I think that I was under the illusion that there would be a group of people all working together,equally,for a comon cause.Human nature being what it is I suppose there are always certain members that are doing more than their share and others just kicking back and enjoying the view! A couple I know used to belong to a small community just a few miles away and experienced exactly that,both are highly skilled people and ended up doing most fo the work.They now have their own place and work for themselves. Im very happy with things the way they are for me but the idea of community living has always appealed to me,cant say the same for the OH,hes rather a hermit! (Free love and shared partners??? I think thats asking for trouble!)

[wulf]

One of the best components of my history degree was the term I spent on "Utopias". Partly that was because half of the course involved reading science fiction such as Ursula K LeGuin's The Dispossessed and getting to call it study

However, we also spent a lot of times looking at both historical musing on ideal societies and the numerous attempts to turn that dream into reality. It has to be said that by far the majority of them didn't last, either petering out, slowly degenerating or going out with a bang. Therefore, from a historical perspective, the odds aren't good of making it work forever.

Perhaps one approach that would help would be if the joining procedure weeded out those who were only looking for happiness or an easy life and just selected those who were looking to chip away at their selfishness and who hold forbearance as a virtue?

Wulf