Friday, July 25, 2008

The Perils of Kite Flying in London

In Mary Poppins one of the characters, Mr Banks is rather uptight. There are various reasons for this, not least of which is his grey, colourless working existence in which the poor man never approaches job satisfaction. Eventually through a series of unfortunate events, the inhibited Mr Banks learns to go fly a kite with his children, and all is well.

The proposition to go fly a kite is put simply:

With tuppence for paper and strings,
you can have your own set of wings.
With your feet on the ground,
you're a bird in flight!
With your fist holding tight,
to the string of your kite!

Let's go fly a kite
Up to the highest height
Let's go fly a kite
And send it soaring
Up through the atmosphere
Up where the air is clear
Oh, let's go fly a kite!
Written by Robert B. Sherman
It looks so easy. And I guess the obtaining of the kite and flying thereof may be easy. I have no practical knowledge of nor interest in the subject.

But it occurred to me on our recent visit to London that finding the place to fly a kite may be problematic. Can one flit through the grounds of the Houses of Parliament, kite string in hand? No, security would be fairly strict about high spirits in such a formidable place. The park is an obvious place to go.

But going to the park is not as easy as it sounds.

We walked through a fairly small park. Around the size of a block of land (by Australian standards). It was littered with copper looking statues, gorgeous full bodied roses, luscious green grass and shady trees: an idyllic setting in the warm summer sunshine.

At the entrance to this small paradise this set of By-Laws was posted.

I did not shrink the copy. That is how small it reads in real life.

I still don't know whether we did the right thing walking past the sign. I don't know whether we were even allowed in the park. I don't know whether we did anything in the park that was not allowed. I don't know whether we didn't do something in the park that we were obliged to do. I don't know whether I am even allowed to comment on the By-Laws in this manner. I don't know because I can't read them.

It's disconcerting. I am used to striving to be a good citizen, and laws are a good way of knowing whether you are achieving this goal or not.

So you can see how I would be sympathetic to Mr Banks. With all the will in the world, he may wish to fly a kite and discard his inhibitions, but is it allowed? Are there certain conditions under which it is forbidden? How would he ever know? The uncertaintly can't be good for anyone's health and well-being.

Above the By-Laws was posted the opening hours sign. This too is slightly perplexing. You will notice that the Gardens are open daily from 7:30am. All is well. (Unless, of course, you are one of those sprightly bodies who bounce out of bed at 5am; you would then need to wait around for two and a half hours before you could set your kite (and inner child) free to embrace the skies).

But the closing time is more complex. The park closes at a different time depending on what date it is. I am used to some variation in closing outdoor places of activity: usually there is a summer/winter difference.

However, if you look closely at this sign you'll notice that it isn't enough to know what season it is, it isn't even enough to know what month it is. The beginning of August has a different closing time to the end of August. And not only that, for some of the dates you need to know whether British Summer Time has started or not.

On top of that, you will notice that at the bottom of the sign is a statement that the gates can close 'approximately 20 minutes earlier than the time stated'.

One can see a perplexed Mr Banks, having worked out the date, decided whether it is or is not British Summer Time, retrieved the kite, discarded his inhibitions, trying to work out whether he has any time left to fly his kite in the park. Or will he misread the time and be locked in the Park overnight? This is almost certainly committing an offense against which the By-Laws warn, and may result in a fine or prison sentence.

For that matter, is he even allowed to fly a kite in the Park - or have the By-Laws Committee been stacked by the local Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Pigeons and Other Small Birds and specifically outlawed the flying of kites as causing damage to the self-esteem of those birds unable to soar to the heights a kite can reach? These are not questions of slight importance. There are consequences.

It's a complicated business, having fun in London. There are laws not only to be obeyed, but to be deciphered. There are times and dates to be carefully calculated. The matter is not to be undertaken lightly. Care-free kite flying is something that only exists in fairy tales.

It's probably a lot less stressful to work in a bank than fly a kite in London. JMB

3 comments:

Anthony Douglas said...

Interesting. I surmise with all those closing times, what they're really trying to say is, this park shuts about the same time as the sun goes down, and a bit earlier if it's too cloudy.

And some of the byelaws (I couldn't resist) are tragically damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't. You get fined twenty pounds if you're caught in the park after closing time. And twenty pounds for trying to climb the wall to get out. Or twenty pounds for camping out overnight until the gates open again. Or, if you bring a dog, it must be under your control, but you're not allowed to train it. I guess you have to hope it guesses what you want...

A lovely illustration of the perils of legalism.

As for whether you infringed - well, I hope you didn't speak (rule 24 seems to frown on this). I think you're good for everything else - unless you stood there too long taking the photos; you could be construed then as having erected a photographic apparatus, namely yourself.

If it's any consolation, I'm pretty sure whoever erected the sign has infringed number 27 countless times!

Baddelim said...

Hey, that is so impressive! You deciphered the sign. Your excellent technological skills combined with your determination - we are amazed.

We followed your exampled and double-clicked on the sign (and could read it, how about that), and were amazed all over again. Why, unless it were an issue at some point, would you need a rule against cleaning carpets in the park? (Like the rule that states you cannot do your driving test in a vehicle that is currently carrying cattle in Australia). Which means someone must have tried it...

Thank you for your comments. We laughed out loud at the photographic apparatus.

But on the whole, I think it was less scary when we couldn't read them.

Anonymous said...

A simple web search reveals the full Open Spaces Act 1906 (c.25) on which the byelaws are premised:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1906/cukpga_19060025_en_1

15. Byelaws
(1)A local authority may, with reference to any open space or burial ground in or over which they have acquired any estate, interest, or control under this Act, [F1 [F2or in the case of the Greater London Council in relation to any other public park, heath, common, recreation ground, pleasure ground, garden, walk, ornamental enclosure or disused burial ground under the control and management of the said Council]] make byelaws for the regulation thereof, and of the days and times of admission thereto, and for the preservation of order and prevention of nuisances therein, and may by such byelaws impose penalties recoverable summarily for the infringement thereof, and provide for the removal of any person infringing any byelaw by any officer of the local authority or police constable.