1

Ethnography Project: Boat community on Regent's Canal

and the "place" of their heritage in relation to King's Cross development site

Introduction

In mid-April 2016, I embarked on another walk to the Regent's Canal with a camera phone, a sketchbook,

a pen and ethics forms (see Appendix). This time, unlike other weekly walks-of-escape from the hustle

and bustle of Bloomsbury, I was hoping to conduct an ethnographic research on the boat community.

The initial appeal of the boat community, upon reflection, was perhaps the familiar sight of people living

and working on the waters. These scenarios are endearing ones that remind me of trips to Scotland,

Holland, and east China. Yet, I remained determined to confine the research in the King's Cross area

due to its proximity and the limited time available for this ethnographic assignment. The initial question

of "where is the boat community" is still at large. On the one hand, the boat community moors along

the Regent's Canal, a section of the Grand Union Canal that connects the Thames with London, the

Midlands, and North England. Such an understanding of the geography of the canal suggests the boat

community's conception of "where they are" is a fluid and continuous one that depends on their "sense[s]

of place[s]" in relation to the canal (Schofield & Szymanski 2011). On the other hand, the boat

community also temporarily moors in King's Cross, an area defined by its "site specific development"

and which aspires to be known for its iconic urban designs (Radcliffe 2006: 26). Within the development

narrative, the canal generally serves to add a dynamic dimension to the modern architectural complexes

which would increase the marketing value of the site. Therefore, from the outset, I was expecting

2

tensions on two levels: firstly, between the physiognomy of Regent's Canal and King's Cross

development site; and secondly, between the boaters' lifestyle and the King's Cross development scheme.

As these tensions became prominent in the research process, the boaters nevertheless presented

ambivalent attitudes towards the development in King's Cross due to varied socio-economic interests

and life experiences. In fact, the "tensions" which I anticipated in the research design point to the more

serious issue of the loss of a boating "lifestyle": in other words, the loss of the boaters' "intangible

heritage". Thus, by illustrating the problematic spatial co-existence between the Regent's Canal boaters

and the King's Cross development site, I hope this ethnographic research would constitute an image of

alternative dwelling that is increasingly under threat from the rapid urban expansion in London.

Methodology

With the boat community as the targeted subjects of this research, and regarding myself as a first-time

ethnographer, I find Brewer's "ethnographic imagination" methodology a befitting and consoling one.

As the boat community is constituted of "ordinary people" living their every-day lives, "ethnographic

imagination" recognizes their day-to-day activities could have profound implications on "broader social

processes" (McIvor 2015; Brewer 2000: 53). This extrapolation of social relations based on mundane

acts performed by the boaters would be the methodological foundation upon which we understand their

lifestyle(s) as intangible heritage. Moreover, "ethnographic imagination" allows the ethnographer to use

the subjects' - as well as her own – positionalities to narrate and reflect on the fieldwork process (Brewer

2000: 53). The complex positionalities which the boaters and I occupy have been both limiting and

productive when it comes to requiring access and collecting data. Notably, my positionality as a young,

3

female, Chinese heritage student – which could be summed up as "tourist" for the sake of convenience

here – might have informed the group of subjects that accepted (and rejected) my approach and the

types of information generated from the interviews (Okely 1992: 14; MacCannell 2013). Apart from

the lack of concordance between me and the boaters on most ontological grounds (race, class origins,

age), my lack of experience with working or living on boats also characterizes me as an "outsider" to

the boat community. Thus, as some of the short interviews do not necessarily correspond with my

research intentions, I would also use mapping, drawing, photography, participant observation, and other

site visits (London Canal Museum and King's Cross visitor center) as means of collecting data. As the

diverse range of data would complement the diverse lifestyles within the boat community, the

perspective from which these data are collected is nonetheless "exoticiz[ing]" (Okely 1992: 2). This is

one of the main critiques which I would return to in the "Reflections & Conclusion" section.

King's Cross Development as "Master Narrative"

To understand the spatial imperative which problematizes the location of "where" the boat community

is, it is important to briefly consider the socio-economic agenda on which urban developments such as

King's Cross operates (Figure 1). Arguably, since the United Nations Decade for Cultural Development

(1988-1997), the phenomenon of "culturally appropriate development" has become commonplace in

expanding metropolises such as London (Radcliffe 2006: 2). Such development schemes tend to utilize

the historical and heritage values of a designated site to promote the socio-economic potentials of the

place in question. Therefore, it is crucial to critically analyze who is behind these development "master

narratives", on what grounds are positive claims being made, and for whom these plans are drafted.

4

Figure 1. King's Cross Master Plan. Note the canal blue belt cutting across the centre

of the designated development site. (From King's Cross "Landscape" brochure, p.4)

With regards to King's Cross, the development project is largely supported by a "top-down" power

system. Although a private initiative, it falls under the grander umbrella scheme titled "The London

Plan" initiated by the Mayor of London. The current plan, spanning from 2011 to 2036, emphasizes

themes such as "wealth creation", "social development", and "improvement of environment" ("The

London Plan": 0.4). These goals – which focus on socio-economic development – are echoed in King's

Cross' identification as "mixed use, urban regeneration project" (ULI 2014: 1). Flagging under master

developer, Argent King's Cross Limited Partnership, the development scheme has already implemented

its "exemplary place making practice" by introducing a new postcode "N1C" to the King's Cross area

(ULI 2014: 2). This symbolic branding of the area would eventually manifest in material terms as new

office and residential buildings springing up on historical sites. Namely, King's Cross alleged origin as

5

the Roman "foundation" of London and its pivotal role during the country's industrialization are

examples of the historic "riches" that render the site as a "culturally appropriate" place to be redeveloped

(King's Cross: "The Story So Far"). The excitement brought forth by the prospect of global

conglomerates (such as Google and Louis Vuitton) "moving-into-the-area" was evident as I toured with

a King’s Cross saleswoman on the site (Figure 2). The positive image is extended by the hope of increase

in employment opportunities and local revitalization. Both the site's alleged origin as the Roman

"foundation" of London and as a pivotal location of transportation during the country's industrialization

rendered King's Cross as a "culturally appropriate" place to be developed (Figure 3). Moreover, it is

believed that prostitution, crime, and "other anti-social activities" would be reduced with the

development, which would redeem King's Cross from its once unfavorable reputation (UCL 2014: 8).

What is not explicitly mentioned in either the promotional brochure nor during the site tour is the

ongoing cultural gentrification of the area which might tailor to particular social classes. As will be

discussed in detail in relation to the boat community, such gentrification will be exclusive both in terms

of affordability, and lifestyle.

6

Figure 2. The alleged UK headquarters of Google and Louis Vuitton

(among other companies) under construction in King's Cross. (Author)

Figure 3. Diagram on the King's Cross Viewing Platform (south of Regent's Canal) highlighting the preservation of facades

of industrial buildings, such as the Granary Building (now Central Saint Martins Art School) and the Fish & Coal Building

(being refurbished for a new Jamie Oliver's restaurant). (Author)

7

Henceforth, it is questionable whether the King's Cross development is "for the general public" as it

sets out to be (ULI 2014: 12). For our interest, such proclamation can be contested if we examine the

significance of the canal within the King's Cross development narrative, which is mainly twofold: as

"water" that adds spatial "dynamics" to the architectural complexes, and as "heritage" that would make

King's Cross a "tourist attraction" (ULI 2014: 12). The "tourist" aspect of the canal is in addition

supported by the so-called "The Blue Ribbon Network" plan, as part of "The London Plan" to

(re)establish London as a global "superpower" by reinvigorating its waterways (McIvor 2015: 58).

Where both characteristics deem the canal as pre-existing accessory in the landscape, neither

acknowledge the canal as living space. As a result, the Regent's Canal boat community, like the

industrial materiality of the canal itself, diminishes into the background of the development scheme of

King's Cross. The questions remain: "where is the canal?", "where is the boat community?"

Regent's Canal Boat Community & Its Contested Locality

The planning and construction of the Regent's Canal was after the widespread "Canal Mania" that once

defined Britain's industrialization in the eighteenth-century (Fathers 2012: 3). It was initially realized

by a commoner named Thomas Homer, whose sketches were adopted by the then "starchitect", John

Nash - a prophetic genesis story as London's urban landscape continues to be dominated by starchitect-

designs today (Fathers 2012: 8; King's Cross: "The History of the Regent's Canal"). The Regent's Canal

officially opened in 1820 and eventually became the transportation hub that connected London's trades

with the "industrial Midlands" and Liverpool (Fathers 2012: 8). It is with regards to its industrial

8

function as a system of trade and transportation that the "canal" became synonymous with ideas such

as "network" and "connectivity" (McIvor 2015: 6). Nevertheless, the canal's indispensable status was

challenged with the arrival of railway technologies, epitomized by the construction of King's Cross

station (King's Cross: "The History of Regent's Canal"). Eventually, following its general disuse and

abandonment over the first half of the twentieth century, the Regent's Canal was "closed to commercial

traffic" in 1969 (Fathers 2012: 9). These episodes that generally portray the canal and the boat

community as "dead" subjects of the industrial past are also present at the London Canal Museum. In

fact, by exhibiting every-day objects such as dishes, clothes, houseboats and screening black-and-white

films of "life afloat", the image of the boat community is historicized, musealized, and romanticized

(Figure 4, 5, 6). Moreover, it distances the very existence of the boat community from other urban

dwellers in the present. As will be discussed in further detail in the following section, this absence of a

living boat community in the minds of non-boaters might have significant impact on the boaters'

ontological self-identification processes.

9

Figure 4. Fashionable boater's dishes collected from across England in the London Canal Museum collection. (Author)

Figure 5. Mannequins dressed in "boaters" costumes in the London Canal Museum. (Author)

10

Figure 6. Short films on the canal and boat people (from the Huntley Film Archive)

screened inside the London Canal Museum. (Author)

It is therefore against such historicizing tendencies that I turn to an anthropological approach to the

Regent's Canal boat community. First of all, it is essential for this ethnography to establish the boat

community as – according to the 2009 Faro Convention – a "heritage community" whose cultural

heritage is "specific[ally]" linked to their lifestyle(s) on the canal (Faro Convention 2009: Article 2b).

This unique lifestyle also entrusts them with the authority to inform the ethnographer (me) with

knowledge unavailable through other channels (museum, development site, etc.). Secondly, we also

need to recognize the boat community as a socially "marginalized" group, whose lifestyle differentiates

them from the majority of urban dwellers living on land (McIvor 2015: 4). Last but not least, the boat

community represents an economic "alternative" of "city-center living" (Meikle & Maynard 2014). In

order to facilitate mooring spaces for existing and incoming boaters, the Canal and River Trust – a

nationalized-turned-charity organization – introduced a fourteen-day mooring policy (Canal & River

11

Trust). This meant that continuous cruisers have to move to a new mooring every fourteen days, which,

though appreciated by some boaters because they are encouraged to dwell in different landscapes, has

also proven a concern for others. We will return to these cultural, social, and economical issues and we

analyze and discuss the fieldwork in the upcoming section.

Boaters: From Tangible Heritage to Intangible Lifestyle

My account of the fieldwork starts properly when I began negotiating access to speak to boaters. This

initial stage arguably embodied the crescendo of tensions between different positionalities (that is, the

boaters' and my own). If we acknowledge that the canal is an "ordinary space" where boaters carry out

their "everyday activities", then my attempt to visit this space was to some extent a violation of their

day-to-day privacy (Yaeger 1996; Brewer 2000: 26). As such, there were two "frontiers" of negotiation:

the first is physically manifested in the towpath as semi-public space; the second exists in the forms of

community websites and forums in cyberspace (Yaeger 1996: 13). Both the success and failure of

negotiation on these frontiers could be read as insights into the reflexivity of the ethnographical process

through which participants were selected.

Down the towpath

In order to spot participants, I spent three days walking up and down the Regent's Canal towpath

between the entrance of Islington Tunnel and St Pancras Lock (Figure 7). On one of those drizzly,

gloomy days, a young Polish woman (noted U) offered me shelter in her boat. As the rain stopped,

12

I returned to the towpath and walked towards King's Cross, where an elderly man from Lancaster

(noted V) caught me peeping into his roofless boat. Then, having crossed the bridge, I encountered

two young English men (noted W and X). That being a fulfilling day of fieldwork, I returned to

the towpath the day after and chanced upon my third participant who is an elderly Jamaican woman

(noted Y). Altogether, the participants I have met on the towpath are from a diverse range of

cultural and social backgrounds, a factor which might have enabled open conversations to take

place.

Figure 7. My own map used as I walked along the canal. (Author)

Off cyberspace, back to towpath

The experience of approaching the boat community in cyberspace was not as pleasant as the above.

13

After a prolonged wait to be administered into the London-based boaters forums, I was accepted

into a worldwide boaters online community forum called "CanalWorld". After briefly describing

the ethnography project, a couple of users asked me to change the academic language into

something more comprehensible; which I did. Nevertheless, the sort of "Londonspeke" and

"professionalspeke" which I might have represented then became a point of mockery which

generated a thread of comments, including one saying "she learned her English from sociology

textbook". As much as this was an unpleasant experience, it reminded me to avoid bringing heritage

jargonism into the field. The local boaters community which I did succeed in establishing contact

with was the Residents of Boats Association (ROBA), and it was through this organization that I

found my final participant, a middle-age Croatian woman (noted Z) whom I eventually met in her

houseboat.

Thus, having discussed how the participants are identified and who they are, I will include selected

dialogues and observations that correspond with themes on tangible heritage, intangible heritage, and

"sense of place". These vignettes are arranged thematically and will be complemented by multisensory

accounts of the environment to hopefully capture the immaterial lifestyle of the boat community

(Schofield & Szymanski 2011: 2).

[With ethical considerations, I am inclined to disassociate boaters from their boats and mooring

locations in the following narratives. This has proven a difficult obligation, a point which I will return

to in the "Reflections & Conclusion" section.]

14

The boat as tangible heritage

As previously discussed, a prominent aspect of my positionality as ethnographer and observer from

outside the boat community is akin to "tourist". This was proven by my ignorance of different types of

boats compared to the boaters themselves:

"This boat is from Norfolk...it's not a traditional narrow boat."

"This isn't a narrow boat. This is called a Joey butty...a 'butty' is a boat that used to be tied to the

narrow boat to carry cargoes, like coal..." (Figure 8)

Figure 8. Inside the "Joey butty". (Author)

Despite the fact that boats are no longer being used to transport goods and have been transformed into

15

living spaces, their typologies are nonetheless inextricably linked to their industrial heritage origins.

Notably, there is also the case of "custom-built" boats apart from readymade ones:

"I designed it myself and then found a builder...fifteen years ago, August 2000. It wasn't easy to

find a builder because they wouldn't custom-build. Now I see many custom-built boats..."

The distinctiveness of individual canal boats finally dawned on me as I sat beneath the so-called

"Gasholder 8" on King's Cross development site and drew a picture of the residential boats in St Pancras

Lock (Figure 9, 10). Each boat differs in typology, dimension, color and name (Figure 11). The rich

characteristic in a row of eight boats already outshines that of the high-rise buildings where the

apartment cells are grimly uniform from floor to floor.

Figure 9. Gasholder No.8, an industrial structure which is integrated

into the King's Cross development plans. (Author)

16

Figure 10. Sketch of boats on St Pancras Lock near King's Cross development site. (Author)

Figure 11. Boats in St Pancras Lock. Not the railway from St Pancras International

behind the row of boats. (Author)

17

Boat names

The different names of boats was another feature that distinguished the boat community's lifestyle from

non-boaters. The names are often encoded within personal experiences and poetic symbolism. For

instance:

"It's called 'Marilynn', after his late mother..."

"[The boat] is called 'Pea-green'. It's from the first line of The Owl and the Pussycat." (Figure 12)

Figure 12. "Pea-green". (Author)

The significance of this poem by Edward Lear as a symbol of the free-flowing, nomadic lifestyle would

later become clear (to my surprise) as my other participant V casually recited the same poem in its

entirety (Appendix 4). Likewise, it is common for the name of the boat to be directly inspired from

features directly or indirectly related to the canal:

18

"It's called 'Uzezena'. It means 'light', 'being on fire', 'aflame'…'uze' on its own means 'rope'."

It is implied that the "rope" here is the same one that ties the boat to its mooring, suggesting a sense of

"harbour" and "home". However, there is also the case where the boats are not named by their current

owners:

"The name is 'Alisma'. It's a type of water flower...It is unlucky to change the name of the boat...You

can change it when you take the boat out of the water...it's a superstition." (Figure 13)

Figure 13. "Alisma" mooring near the Granary Building

and ongoing construction sites in King's Cross. (Author)

This alleged ritual of renaming boats is yet another unexpected piece of information that contributes to

the understanding of the boat community and their lifestyle. This symbiotic relationship between the

19

boaters and their boats demonstrates their understanding of boats as a vessel that carries its own - as

well as the boater's – cultural identities.

Art and alternative lifestyle

The idea of lifestyle on the canal as creative process is another theme that runs throughout the fieldwork

experience. Take for instance, U, whose origami works are inspired by the animals and plants inhabiting

the canal such as swans and water lilies. As U sells her origami works (along with coffee) on the canal,

Y follows a similar business pattern:

Y: "I'm a ceramic artist and I thought I might sell some pottery from my boat, but also incorporating

teas and coffees. Art is very difficult to sell."

Ironically, there was a ceramics art fair hosted by the Central Saint Martin's Art School not so far away

from where we spoke. As I looked over my shoulder to catch sight of the Granary Building (now

occupied by the art school), a loud whiz came from the other side of the canal. There it was, the

construction site of a building that would soon become the UK headquarters of Louis Vuitton. It seems

King's Cross is welcoming gentrified, luxury brands which leaves Y and her Japanese-inspired Jamaican

pottery little market potential (Figure 14). Surrounded by noises and crowds, it is tempting to make an

escape from the area:

Y: "The attraction would be to give up and not do the business at all. It's so much work and so little

20

gain..."

Figure 14. Y's Japanese "raku" style pottery, in Jamaican tradition as tea container. (Author)

As Y still resides in an apartment, it is possible that doing business and cruising on a boat are rather

means of "leisure" that outweigh the need for successful marketing. This contentment with possessing

"the bare necessities" of material goods is captured in V's recital of The Owl and the Pussycat (Meikle

& Maynard 2014; The Poetry Foundation):

V: "The Owl and the Pussy-cat went to sea/ In a beautiful pea-green boat, They took some honey,

and plenty of money/ Wrapped up in a five pound note..."

The fire in the Norwegian stove cooker crackled (Figure 15). Highland music played on the radio. And

21

V recited away. Then, satisfied with his performance, he raised his top hat and smiled. Similarly, the

material world had very little appeal for Z, who had been living on the Regent's Canal for about twenty

years:

Z: "The lifestyle has so many non-intangible elements to it...the flickering light of the canal in the

evening...It's a very natural way of living. A swan would come to my window and knock on the

door and ask for food."

Figure 15. Fire crackling in V's Norwegian stove cooker. The stainless steel pan on the stove contained homemade popcorn,

which V generously served me in a bowl as an afternoon snack. (Author)

In stark contrast to this somewhat "old-fashioned", intangible lifestyle is the middle-class structures that

continue to be built in King's Cross (Meikle & Maynard 2014):

22

Z: "King's Cross...everything is modern...everything is square glass and metal...totally inhuman

environment which seems to be fun, but it's not real."

The place of the boat community and Regent's Canal

As endearing as my general experience with the boat community has been, it is unfortunate, however,

that certain public groups do not share such positive impressions. There are forces of marginalization

that keep their community space a realm of contestation, which are represented by public policy as well

as acts of vandalism. First of all, as public campaigns and government policies push for the increased

"accessibility" and "security" of the canal, non-boaters also want their voices to be heard. Such incidents

might prove baffling for the boaters (AINA):

U: "You see that 'NO MOORING' sign on the towpath over there? It is there because of this old

lady who lives in the neighborhood," she pointed at the modern apartment buildings on a nearby

hill above the canal, "she complained to the local council saying that she didn't want boats on the

canal in front of her building. Now we can't moor over there anymore." (Figure 16)

23

Figure 16. "NO MOORING" sign on the towpath close to U's boat. (Author)

At times where mooring space is already limited and the canal is overcrowding, such incidents can

sound particularly frustrating. On April 16th, hundreds of boaters marched towards the House of

Parliament, urging more moorings to be made along the canal. According to a Canal and River Trust

staff who I met on the towpath, opting for boat life is becoming the prime solution against the "spiraling

housing prices" in London. In fact, W and X have both recently moved down to London from Yorkshire,

hoping to find job opportunities. In addition to the issue of basic living conditions, acts of vandalism

inflicted by non-boaters also marginalize the boat community:

Z: "When I started living on a boat...the kids from the estate...they were throwing stones at us...we

were painting the boat on the footpath, and people literally step into your painting tray..."

U: "Youngsters...they think it's funny to untie your boat or jump on the roof of your boat in the

middle of the night, which is not funny because I have two children."

24

Arguably, negative experiences like these does help make the boaters a more cohesive community:

U: "Waterways bring people together...It's a good feeling because [boaters] recognize you (I want

to cry now)."

However, the social dynamics within the boat community itself is also changing:

Z: "Nobody spoke. I don't know people...People around me are changing...it is just temporary

satisfaction - 'Oh, I'm living on a canal!'"

There is a sense of solidarity among boaters whose lifestyle depends on the conditions of the canal. U,

Y, and Z all raise the point that the boat community "takes care" of the canal by picking up litters on the

canal surface. The lifestyle may sound romantic and bohemian, but the hardship is ever-present.

W: "I'm sorry," he quickly looked up at the eastern sky and began hasting away, "I've got to tie the

boat before the rain comes in!" (Figure 17)

25

Figure 17. Dark clouds was coming and wind was rising as I was speaking to W. (Author)

Reflexity & Conclusion

The fieldwork ended as abruptly as it began. Yet, during the short period of contact with the boaters,

my own positionality had also undergone discursive transformations. Having walked into the field as a

“tourist" and "outsider", I also helped a few participants with basic chores once a comfortable stage of

communication was reached and became their friend. Towards the end of the interviews, I find it

difficult to extract myself from the position of a sympathizer. This emotional input into the boat

community's wellbeing and lifestyle might have resulted in the somewhat "activist" tone that penetrates

through this ethnographic report. Nevertheless, it is arguable whether a study of the lifestyle of a group

of ordinary people can be complete without the ethnographer immersing herself in the daily activities

26

and emotions of her subjects. I suggest that the study of the Regent's Canal boat community could

benefit from the allowance of a longer time period, so that the ethnographer can gain further insight into

the boaters' behaviors and activities. Moreover, time would also enable the ethnographer to observe the

urban transformation on King's Cross development site in closer proximity. Last but not least, changing

the ethical restriction from fully anonymized to partially anonymized would allow a more transparent

narrative for the examination of the interconnections between the boaters and their boats. For now, I

hope this ethnography will serve as an example to our understanding of the relationship between

marginalized heritage groups and modern urban developments.