In Gjengangeren, we try to practice something we call the news roll. It may sound overly pretentious, but I still think it has something to it.
Simply explained, it’s about creating rhythm and variety in the sum of the articles we publish. Some articles should go in-depth and provide wisdom and understanding, others should provide a quick overview or a touch of sunshine and entertainment.
A bit of both, in other words. The seriousness of life and the play of life. Preferably at the same time, like a waltz. Heavy, light, light. Heavy, light, light.
Variety has its merits. Not only in journalism, but also in politics. The voters also seem to think so, at least they have concluded that the municipal council in Horten should consist of a total of nine parties.
This is not always effective, because even if the parties are small, they have strikingly long wish lists. It can occasionally be both annoying and time-consuming, but that’s just how democracy is.
And thank you for that.
Because even small lots can find their way into the roller. At times they contribute with light steps where the big ones take heavy steps, or heavy steps where the big ones are too light-footed. It doesn’t happen all the time, but it does happen occasionally.
Let me take the Industry and Business Party (INP) as an example.
The party has not exactly had a soft start to its municipal council term. First they failed Lillaå’s school, which they had promised to save in the budget. Then one of the party’s three elected representatives jumped the aisle and became an Ap member. It turned the balance between the blocs in the municipal council – the majority became a minority, the minority became a majority. The two remaining members then voted in different directions in the Lillås case. You can get dizzy from less.
But then, in all this untidy hallway, they came up with a proposal at the last municipal council meeting that made several of us nod approvingly.
The case concerned the sale of 13 municipal plots of land. The majority wanted to do as the majority usually do: sell the lots together to a large developer.
But INP wanted it differently. Don’t sell to one developer, sell to thirteen residents. That way, each individual family can build the home they really want. It is good for the individual and will provide far more variety in the architecture.
Not least the last one is probably an argument that strikes many of us. Large developments tend to give us residential areas with very little variation. It is certainly an effective way of developing new districts, but they are rarely particularly exciting.
Sometimes I think that such mass-produced architecture appears as the art of insulting people from afar.
It is of course an evil thought, and not entirely fair, but I still think there is certainly room for both improvement and variation.
Perhaps the municipal council’s politicians also thought the same way when they met a few days ago. In any case, several of them chose to meet the INP. In the chairmanship, only the Conservative Party and the FRP thought that the INP was onto something. In the municipal council the following week, the proposal was supported by both the Labor Party and a few others.
Now the administration in the municipality is required to assess whether the 13 plots can be sold separately.
Maybe it could be the start of something new. Something that gives new construction sites greater variety. Perhaps it can simply increase our awareness of what is needed to create living residential areas with more space for both the seriousness of life and the playfulness of life.
If that happens, we should all celebrate with a dance.
