sarah hill wheeler

WELCOME TO MY WEBSITE

I am a writer, lawyer and mother, in an ever-shifting order of priority. And many more things besides. Read more about me .

Flash Fiction

by Leave a Comment

Recently, I’ve discovered Flash Fiction.

Or, perhaps, I mean rediscovered it.

(It seems like I’ve been scribbling fragments of stories on scraps of paper like forever. And, whilst I’m still trying to figure out what flash fiction actually is, this short form of fiction seems to work well with me. It seems to match where I am right now, i.e. idea rich, time short, and it gives me that all important sense of completion. But watch this space for a more technical exploration, possibly, in the weeks to come).

Three weeks ago, I discovered the Bath Flash Fiction Festival and Ad Hoc Publishing’s weekly flash fiction competition. The idea is to write a piece of flash fiction in 150 words or less based on the week’s prompt word (which must also be included in the text somewhere). The long listed ones are published the following week in an on-line ebook and then go to a public vote off. I’m hooked, mentally composing vignettes when I’m cleaning the henhouse or scouring plates.

My first entry, 11 April, Sage, owes as much to much to what was going on in the garden that week as the prompt word, Sage. (I’ve got to become more original in my titles!).

 

 

Wild Words Solstice Competition

by Leave a Comment

I was delighted to win the Wild Word’s Winter Solstice Competition with my piece (a snippet of Memoir) Fox.

It seems like a lifetime ago that I met Bridget Holding when she was facilitating a writers’ workshop at Lower Shaw Farm. (It was actually about eighteen months ago, as part of the 2016 Swindon Festival of Literature). Since then I’ve been working on making my work wilder, dipping into Bridget’s Online Course, fleshing out a framework for a larger work. (And all this whilst seeing off Avian Flu and a succession of Whiskery Gentlemen.)

I do feel we’d all be happier and more productive if we let a little more wildness into our lives. And next time I need a break from work, I’m going to try something different. Instead of reaching for the biscuit barrel, I’ll head outside, walk the hedgerows and search for the shadow of fox.

You can read more at Wild Words.

Challenging the billboards of unreality

by Leave a Comment

Perhaps it’s the lawyer in me, or maybe just the cynic, but whole swathes of social media have become too saccharine for my liking.

You know, the lovely people from OTT PR, the gushing social engagement/brand ambassadors that ask you to write, publish and promote, 500 words by the day-before-yesterday. Not for free, exactly. There’ll be lots of talk about reciprocity and how you’re a perfect match for their brand. (These guys are positively evangelical about the benefits of a little old-fashioned flattery). Most likely though, they’re not talking about Caribbean cruises, or even a selection box of botanical gins, but packets of breakfast cereal, wet wipes or an aerosol spray designed specifically to target toilet farts. Proffered gifts that can leave you feeling a bit deflated, that you’re on the wrong end of an unequal exchange.

Blogfest2016#
Blogfest2016#

On the other hand, I love the internet’s ability to democratise and subvert, the way it allows connections, the proliferation of experiences, the sharing of multiple perspectives, unfiltered by marketing departments, government agencies and spell-checker.

So, I am not a natural candidate for a well-orchestrated media campaign, but at #Blogfest2016, I broke the mould. It is, after all, the exception that often proves the rule. I listened to Dove talk about the Be Real Campaign.

Dove is supporting the Be Real Body Image Pledge, a national movement to change attitudes towards body image. The Be Real Body Image Pledge encourages organisations to promote the responsible portrayal of body image in advertising, media, fashion and music. Dove want bloggers to write about how they will support the pledge. And this (coupled with the chance to win a trip to Florida) got me thinking.

According to research carried out by Dove, 70% of women think the media and advertising sets an unrealistic standard of beauty that most women can never achieve. This can have a major impact on women and girls’ self-esteem. It can make them hold back on important life activities, going-out socially, attending job interviews and even having enough confidence to voice their own opinions.

Travelling back from Blogfest on the Underground, I was reminded of that nettlesome poster which asked commuters if they were beach body ready.

Larger than life, a hyper-toned, svelte-yet-curvy, woman dons a tiny, bright yellow, bikini. She thrusts her chest out and confronts you with her anatomically impossible, small waist, and your own insecurities.

Beach body ready?

If not, she’ll supply the answer. And, guess what, it’s not a fleece-lined burkini or wet suit. (More viable options if, like us, you holiday in North Somerset rather than the Maldives).

Go, check out these weight loss products, she invites us.

Unfortunately, Dove’s competition rules prevent me from reproducing the image. Paragraph 6(a) says no profanity, and most of the offending posters have had Anglo Saxon expletives scrawled on them, or innovative suggestions on where the model can put her weight-loss pills.

As ad campaigns go, it misfired spectacularly. It provoked a media storm, 378 complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority and was nominated worst advert of the year. The Mayor for London, Sadiq Khan, and Transport for London banned it.

But the story doesn’t end there.

The Advertising Standards Agency did not find the advert irresponsible, which rather begs the question, What is?

The ASA said that it “understood the claim “Are you beach body ready?” invited readers to think about their figures,” but “did not consider the image of the model would shame women who had different body shapes into believing they needed to take a slimming supplement to feel confident wearing swimwear in public.”

Fair enough, as far as it goes. Judging by the wisecracks and parodies, many women weren’t fooled. For them, the offending product was about as appealing as the intestinal tapeworm diet.

However, the ASA’s conclusion ignores an important point. The insidious pictures of airbrushed perfection, the billboards of unreality, can leave even the most robust of us feeling a little bad about ourselves. We might not rush out and buy a slimming aid to put things right, but we may just think twice before wearing a swimming costume and joining our kids on the beach.

Organisations that sign up to the Be Real Body Pledge agree to promote positively different body shapes and sizes, people with and without disabilities, and all ages, genders and ethnicities. And that, I think, has got to be a good thing.

Dove want me to tell you how I’d like to make a difference.

I could say I’m more likely to buy products from companies which show real women, and real bodies, positively. The admission has more than a trace of solicitation and the saccharine about it, But, for once, that doesn’t make the aspiration any less true.

feet on the beach

Being my best me, rather than a pale imitation of some adman’s wet dream, shows my son you don’t have to be perfect. It’s an important lesson. Feeling the sand between your toes, and the sudden shock of cool water, the taste of salt on your tongue, the crystalline crust it leaves behind as your skin dries in the sun. These are all there, pleasures for the taking, whether you’re a size zero, or 20.

Of course, I’d still like to scale the billboards, and deface them with my subversive wit. But I’ve no head for heights, and besides the Law Society and CPS take a dim view of criminal damage and public order offences.

Just don’t ask me if I’m beach body ready, not unless you want sand kicked in your face.

 

I created this post as a competition entry in support of Dove and the Be Real Body Image Pledge

 

 

 

Blackberry pickers, the new criminals

by Leave a Comment

BlackberriesAnother dumb law?

It seems like another example of dumb law. Last week’s press was rife with a story about the latest assault on our ancient liberties.

Council proposes ban on blackberry picking, the Telegraph.

Foodies fear Council want to ban foraging for blackberries, apples or mushrooms in case it damages the local plants, the Mail.

David Ike was in the foray too, relaying top foragers‘ concerns. Everything from steaming crumbles to wild mushroom risottos are all under threat, his website warned.

Not to be outdone, even by a man who believes the moon is a giant radio, the Mail took the higher ground. Their experts declared the proposals would even lead to a ban on making daisy chains.

Bristol City Council and byelaws

The reality is more prosaic (although it does make you marvel at the creativity of the headline writers).

Bristol City Council are consulting on prospective changes to byelaws, which would affect over 200 parks and open spaces controlled by the Council.

Byelaws don’t often grab headlines in the Nationals. This is because they are mainly dull (but arguably necessary) pieces of secondary legislation. Most are made under powers conferred on local authorities, and are specific to an area.

Failure to comply with a byelaw is a punishable offence, if enforced. The Magistrates can impose a fine of up to £500. In Bristol’s case, it would also give the Council, or the police, power to remove the offender (Public Health Act 1875, s. 164).

A byelaw may determine whether you (or out-of-town commuters) can park on the grass verge outside your house. A byelaw may stop your child (or the local hoodies) from using the town municipal sculpture as an impromptu skateboard park.

Byelaws are made for the preservation of order and good conduct. Unfortunately, not everyone agrees on what is good.

Criminalising foraging

Bristol’s proposals are proving controversial for a plethora of reasons. However, it’s a byelaw aimed at protecting plants which has provoked the current outrage.

The wording, which follows the model scheme published by the Department for Communities and Local Government, provides that No person shall without reasonable excuse remove from or displace within the ground…any stone, soil or turf, or the whole or any part of any plant, shrub or tree.

In contrast,  a person who picks mushrooms growing wild…or who picks flowers, fruit or foliage from a plant growing wild is not guilty of theft, unless he does so for some commercial purpose (Theft Act 1968, s. 4(3)). As the law currently stands, that person won’t, generally, be committing any offence.

Hence claims that the proposed byelaw would outlaw blackberry picking, and criminalise foraging. Something our national law seemingly tolerates.

On a strict, literal, interpretation, the critics may have a point.

However, before writing the Council’s proposals off as another example of dumb law, consider the detail. And the context.

First, the Council has said that they do not intend to stop blackberrying, nor the responsible use of natural resources provided plants and their habitat are not damaged.  More formally, its Enforcement Policy stresses the need for targeted, risk-based, proportionate, enforcement. Any prosecution would need to be in the public interest.

(The CPS may have failed with Lord Janner, but do we really think they’re going to restore public confidence with a class action against Bristol’s daisy-pickers?)

Secondly, the byelaw does not apply to those who have a “reasonable excuse.” What amounts to a “reasonable excuse” is unclear. Most likely, it would include acting out of necessity or with the Council’s consent. But what about the person who relies upon a semi-official policy of turning a blind eye, or who claims a customary right to forage?

Nobody knows the answer. But it would be a brave, or fool-hardy, Council to argue the point with a citizen mushroomer before the Bench.

Thirdly, the ability to forage is more of an indulgence, a privilege, than a right.

In a minority of cases, there may be an established customary right. Conceivably, the land in question may be a common or village green, over which some inhabitants enjoy rights. For the most part, however, common sense and custom (in the loosest, non-legal, sense) are the only justifications.

We’ve always done it. Nobody minds. They’d only go to waste if we didn’t pick them….

Ethically, those argument may be sound. Legally, however, things are more complex.

In most cases, there is no positive right to forage. The express lack of criminal liability under the Theft Acts does not alter that. Rather, it reflects the consensus that picking berries, or wild mushrooms, for personal use (even if they are growing on another person’s land) isn’t the sort of activity that ordinarily merits a criminal sanction. It lacks the necessary public opprobrium.

Most likely, the land owner wouldn’t mind you foraging. Or, if he did, and you were aware, you’d stop. If you still persisted, he would be able to take action against you through the civil courts. It would be costly, and disproportionate. But, possible.

In practice though, it’s not a big issue. Or it wasn’t until now.

Why it may be time to change the law on foraging

Recently, foraging has experienced something of a resurgence. Popular opinion is split as to whether this is down to an influx of Eastern European migrants or Celebrity Chefs. And it’s no longer just a case of taking a few field mushrooms for breakfast, or a bag of sloes to macerate with your gin over the Winter.

In some areas, foraging is happening on an industrial scale. People are taking bin-bagfuls of produce, often to sell-on to high-end restaurants. Last year, the Royal Parks Police issued 80 warnings to mushroom foragers. In Epping and the New Forest, conservationists and park rangers have spoken of foraging gangs leaving a trail of destruction in their wake.

The food may be free to pick, but it still comes with a cost.

Arguments rage, but there is growing concern. Over-foraging, or irresponsible foraging, may damage the environment, and threaten biodiversity. Fewer plants are able to reproduce, and survive. In an ever-decreasing circle, habitats are damaged. There is less food for other species, which, in turn, decline.

The proposed byelaw would not remove anyone’s rights. However, it would provide a more punitive, arguably more effective, sanction to preserve a public asset for the greater good.

Of course, there’s a debate over what that greater good might be. That’s healthy in a democracy. But (unless you’re a Daily Mail journalist or David Ike) don’t get carried away with the hyperbolic headlines. Nobody’s banning blackberry pies or wild garlic fusilli anytime soon.

Child hands holding out bowl of blackberries
Ssshh….Don’t tell

 

You can read Bristol City’s Consultation here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CF Fund Raiser

Thermometer+Chart