Intentional Community

[ragani]

I really want to create/participate in an intentional community. It has been one of my dreams for years, and one that I still want to see as a reality. Especially when(if) I become a parent. This would be such a great environment to be raised as a child.

My mom sent me a link to Dragonvale, an intentional community being developed in Main. We could so do something like this here is we could find the land (and in the bay area, that is a big if).

This concept of an intentional community has a lot of appeal, although it is not the reason I want to be part of one, and I am not sure that it is the kind I would want to develop myself.

What do you think, guys, can you imagine our very own sustainable community with a Renaissance Faire built in? And if so, what should we call it?

Comments

[terpsichoros.livejournal.com]

My comment got so long, I made it an entry on my g-blog rather than answering here. Suffice it to say here that I'm rather skeptical of combining "intentional community" and Faire Folk.

[ragani.livejournal.com]

There are way too many points that I want to address, but I will give some of them a try.

While I'm not interested in "intentional community" in general, I don't really mind if other people want to try something like that.

I have done a fair amount of research into co-housing and other types of intentional community, and, although I realize that there are many way in which things can go wrong (some of which you mention), I have also seen it work well and in a way that I am very interested in participating. I am sorry that your personal experiences with similar things was disappointing, and I hope I don't end up feeling that way myself once I do get involved.

I was born in a commune, but I actually have no interest in living in a commune situation. What I am interested in is creating a self sustaining living home where everyone has their own space, as well as sharing some community space.

But Faire people? I think it would be hard to assemble a collection of less-responsible people who would want to make the attempt.

Not that I don't know what (or who) you mean by this, but that is a rather large generalization. We shall see how the new reincarnation of the Northern California Renaissance Faire turns out this year, but it is an example of Faire people organizing without a corporation behind them pushing things.

Religious motivations can be pretty powerful, and almost all of the successful living cooperatives (as opposed to buyers' or sellers' cooperatives) I've heard of have in the US have been Christian. But I don't think that fluffy-bunny, consequence-free neo-paganism is capable of generating enough shame or fear to keep people from free-riding.

It seems your biggest concern is free-loaders, which I can appreciate is a concern, especially if the gates were open for just anyone who wants to join. In the intentional communities I have been a part of I have found that all members of the group tend to monitor each other in more of a peer pressure model, giving ourselves a stricter set of rules because of it.

I have heard of many successful, non-religious based co-housing communities, so that does not really seem like a necessary factor to me.
And speaking of organized religion, as someone who has family that was part of a well organized religious community (The Children on God), the shame and fear thing just does not appeal (seeing how screwed-up everyone who was involved is, especially about shame and fear). I can appreciate the community that a church provides, but not telling people they are "bad" for living lifestyles that do not fit-in with centuries-old morals.

OK, I need to get back to work, so perhaps we should just agree to not talk about religion and politics. You would not be the first friend who I have had agree to disagree on one or both of these subjects and to not engage each other in further tedious discussions about issues we know the other does not see eye-to-eye on.

[terpsichoros.livejournal.com]

Some random, semi-connected points, since I don't have time to put them together into a coherent answer:

I may have made some worst-case assumptions about who would live in such a community; but the sorts of people who would staff a live-in RenFair and the number of people needed don't strike me as compatible with the sort of community you'd hope to create.

The New Northern Faire is a cooperative of booth owners mostly, not of Faire participants in general. Booth owners have a much larger financial stake in running things responsibly than do average participants. If the New Northern fails, most of the participants are out a place to have fun, and maybe a place to make some supplemental income. The booth owners will be out some significant cash.

At what point does "co-housing" become "intentional community"? There's a spectrum starting with condominiums, through full-equity co-ops (rare outside New York City), and ending with communes. If all the responsibilities which the residents have to each other are to keep the organization properly funded to deal with complex-wide issues, it's really easy. If people are all working for each others' living, the free-rider problem is huge. My impression of "co-housing" is that it's closer to a condominium with architectural features designed to encourage socializing with one's fellow dwellers, and some voluntary exchange of labor; which puts it closer to condominium than commune.

The sense of community that religious groups can provide can also provide motivation to do things which are not self-rewarding; the primary motivators for this are shame and/or fear, though not necessarily in a sexual context, which is where most religions really screw people up.

[ragani.livejournal.com]

Perhaps we are working on different definitions here. Let me outline quickly what the basis of what I want to be part of:

A community where a group of people intentionally live in a co-housing situation that operates with a mission to create a self-sustaining environment.

To help you better understand what I understand co-housing to mean, please check out The Cohousing Association of the United States, The CoHousing Company, and the description on the Cohousing Resources site. To quote that last site "Cohousing is NOT... There is no shared income in cohousing. Employment and business endeavors are privately organized. Common ideologies and charismatic leaders are generally not a part of cohousing. And of course, cohousing is not like a commune."

Sure, there are plenty of flakes and nuts attracted to places like Ren faire, but as satyrlovesong commented to your post:

"As to "fluffy-bunny, consequence-free neo-paganism", I haven't seen all that much of it. There are consequences within the pagan community as well. The consequences may not have a direct impact on things that motivate you, but I've seen several free loaders run out of communities (granted, generally over a period of weeks or months). One of these days, ask Ms. Prop about Duff. Or about Aaron. I don't know if she would also know about that chick that Lisa was with for a while. . . anyway, I've seen very effective policing methods within the pagan community."

[terpsichoros.livejournal.com]

Reading the descriptions over at the Co-housing site you linked to, I'd consider something like that, though I'm not sure my temperament is terribly well suited for it. It sounds like I thought it might (above), and I don't see any inherent problems with it.

The descriptions of Dragonvale make my skin crawl, though some of that is a matter of taste. I predict that if it is successful, it will remain a fairly small core group of residents - essentially a small, "intentional family"-run Faire and SCA venue. If the residential/communal group gets much larger, I suspect they'll either become much less communal, or they'll fail. There's a strong element of overplanning - they've got 14 guilds figured out even though they've only got six members? And check out the description of the "Wenches Guild".