I suppose it's about time that I told you about 'Free: Adventures on the Margins of a Wasteful Society' by Katherine Hibbert.
When journalist Katherine Hibbert is made redundant following the 2008 financial crash, she decides to turn it into an opportunity and find out if it really is possible to live for free on the cast offs of our wasteful culture. Can she really squat, scavenge and hitchhike her way through life with little money and no job, or, as the media says and her family fears, is she joining an underclass of junkies and criminals? What better way to find out than to try?
It's taken me a while to get around to writing about 'Free' simply because I have such mixed feelings about it. On the one hand it's a nicely written and easy-to-read book, but there doesn't appear to be a core argument to give the work structure. The author proves her point - that it is possible to live on society's waste (in cities at least) and that's a bad thing - but having done that, I didn't get the sense that there was any fire in her belly to use what she'd learnt to change anything. As such, narratively, it felt like it had a beginning and a middle, but no end.
Since then, I've googled the author and she's used her experience to found a 'property guardian' company, where people live at a cheaper rate in disused buildings to protect them until they are redeveloped, helping those looking for homes, establishing better relationships with owners and keeping communities alive. Perhaps there's a second edition of this book that does include this enterprise, which would make it a more complete story.
'Free' did get me thinking. The sections on the history of squatting and it's use by poor families during housing crises of the 20th century were really interesting, as was the information about the related law in the UK and beyond. I couldn't help but be struck by the apparent contrast between the modern squatters she described (for whom it often seemed to be a lifestyle choice) though and those of previous years (who sought unused buildings out of poverty and necessity, e.g. after the Blitz). It's hard to ignore that this comes across as a very London-centric and middle class book.
Also, what counts as 'being wasteful'? For example, Ms Hibbert has a Philosophy degree from Cambridge, so couldn't it be argued she was wasting her education by not using it? Seems an awful shame to not get full advantage of such an opportunity and achievement.
Overall, I felt that this book was interesting, but repetitive and somehow unfinished. Being an easy read, however, I would say it's worth a look if it's themes are of interest to you. Perhaps, in the spirit of the subject, though, you should borrow it from the library.
Now, what next...
