Homesick: Why I Live in a Shed

St Just Thursday Evening Reading Group 1st July 2021.

Homesick: Why I live in a shed. Catrina Davies.

Most readers found this a very powerful book, and it provoked a lot of debate (even without the opportunity of a face-to-face meeting). The author’s principal point, which is about the injustice of a system which denies proper housing to thousands of people who need it, was appreciated by everyone. “She highlights the unfairness of the housing stock in Cornwall where the rich are now driven by greed to make more money rather than have a social conscience and provide much needed housing for the local community”; “What a dreadful indictment on the housing situation in this county and the whole country”; and “The descriptions of "the system" relating to property, inequality, and homelessness turned the statistics into the lived reality, and the effect that the system has on actual, real-life people” were a few of the comments. One reader felt the author made a very good job of tying together the housing crisis with the issues of the minimum wage and zero contracts, mental health, and nature versus nurture, and several said they sympathised, very strongly, with her political views, her struggle for existence, and also her ability to look beyond Cornwall and her own experience to a wider picture of how Britain has arrived in a position where the younger generation is unable to thrive.

In addition to empathising with her arguments, several readers mentioned the author’s very readable style. One described it as ‘measured and eloquent’. There was also, this being a West Cornwall reading group, a lot of interest in both the shed itself, and the locality. Several people had driven past Catrina Davies’s home, and all of us were familiar with the area and enjoyed the descriptions of the landscape – one said “the love of place in this book shone through on every page”; and another thought the book recaptured the Cornwall of her own childhood, which hardly seems to exist any more. Along with this was the kind and helpful community that the author lived in, and which the readers have all experienced. She had help not only from her own family but from her neighbours and friends, especially the boatbuilder who partially reconstructed the shed, and all the people who stood by her after her property was damaged and broken into. Plus various employers who were kind to her, fed her, and helped her out.

An honest and moving account of one person’s experience, plus being a well-researched novel making important political points about an increasingly unequal society. However, although everyone did sympathise with the author and her position – and wished her well with her efforts to secure her shed as a legal permanent abode – there was another side to the story. Whilst agreeing that there are many ways for a person to live their life, and that our society is failing in its duty to look after people without much money, more than one reader pointed out that society wouldn’t really work very well if everyone did as the author has done. Planning law may have its shortcomings, but it is intended to create a housing situation in which all the properties have proper facilities and access to amenities – we can’t all set ourselves up in sheds and then make a bid for ownership. It was also noticed that the author had a Cambridge degree, and could, presumably, have found work if she had really wanted to, and found better accommodation in one of the usual ways. It was acknowledged that the point of the book was that she didn’t wish to do things that way, but this led to the issue of whether or why a particular group of people, viz, those who have creative talent, should be allowed to live rent-free while they pursue their art. Many creative people – artists, writers, and poets – who achieved world fame through their art, took paid employment doing something else until they could earn a living through their paintings or books or poetry.

The issue of property ownership also arose out of this book. Readers put forward the points that not all landlords are evil exploiters of those less well off; many are ordinary people renting decent property to people who need a home, and making sure that these properties are well kept and maintained and offered at a fair rent. Also it was felt that the book failed to distinguish between second home owners who use the property themselves, and those whose second homes have been converted for holiday lets – the latter category do not pay council tax on the properties and the owner may additionally claim for all costs in refurbishment and maintenance. A second home used only for family has no fiscal advantage and when it is sold the government take 25% of any profit between purchase and sale price.

One reader found the tone of the book slightly ‘preachy’, even though it was about worthy causes with which we all agreed. Another felt that the book allowed her to capitalise on her situation – something she resoundingly disapproved of in others – and that her shed became fodder for a text.

In the end it was more or less agreed that the book is primarily an indictment of the system which fails to allow sufficient decent housing for those who need it whilst encouraging greed and vast inequality. Obviously this book raised a number of highly interesting, and possibly divisive questions. Everyone, however, did admire the author’s determination and her hard work, sympathised with her position (and that of the many others involved), and wished her well.

This book was read during June 2021 and the continuing restrictions due to the Covid-19 virus, and so the discussion was not 'live' as usual, but took place via a Facebook group, email and telephone conversations.