Clothesline liberty

National Post ^ | 2008-01-24 | (editorial page)

[Clive]

Spokesmen for all three of Ontario's major political parties have come out in support of Energy Minister Gerry Phillips' plan for clothesline liberation. Talk to homeowners about the subject, though, and you find nothing like such unanimity. In fact, it can arouse some surprisingly strong feelings. It seems that almost no one is neutral on the core issue; you're either clothesline-friendly, or you're not.

For starters, the debate over clotheslines puts two strong and deep-seated notions of liberty in conflict. Supporters of Mr. Phillips' measure have on their side the simple proposition that an owner of property should have the broadest possible freedom to use it. The ancient entitlement held sacred under the common law is "quiet enjoyment" of our land, and it is hard to think of many things quieter than a clothesline.

But buyers and sellers have the freedom to negotiate contracts, too, and many of the anti-clothesline regulations now under threat were incorporated into permanent covenants at the time that houses and subdivisions were built. What looks like a blow against the freedom to put up a clothesline will really be, in many cases, a state expropriation of an asset that home buyers have already paid for up front -- the right to live in a clothesline-free neighbourhood.

The clash is just not between rival concepts of freedom, but among core ideas of what a home is and what the right way of life might be. Many homeowners regard the view from their backyard as a hard-won symbol of financial success, and wish for it to remain unsullied. In a few cases, a considerable portion of the value of a house may really be at stake. Some are simply squeamish about the prospect of seeing what used to be call "unmentionables" flown like a flag, while some are obviously influenced by class considerations dating back to the time when electric dryers were a luxury. But for others the clothesline is actually a sign of social trust -- no one puts out wet garments if they think they might be stolen -- and a potential occasion for what is otherwise increasingly scarce in urban life: conversation over the back fence.

But there is another reason the clothesline issue has come up: green ethics. As Mr. Phillips and his supporters note, dryers are major power consumers. Covenants against clothesline use therefore stand in the way of conservation.

In most places, the clothesline was destined to disappear as long as it was merely a matter of paying for the BTUs. Why strive to save $80 a year on the power bill when your monthly mortgage might be $1,300? But now, as socially conscious consumers vie to establish their Earth-friendly credentials, what was once a defining feature of tenements and trailer parks may reappear in the 21st century as an unanticipated status symbol. Just as some trendy rich folk drive hybrid Toyota Priuses that are smaller and less powerful than the sedans and SUVs owned by their servants, the comeback of the clothesline signals yet another example of the traditional relationship between wealth and consumerism being stood on its head (at least, in outward terms) thanks to the environmental movement.

It is a phenomenon that Canadians will see on display every time they pass a mansion and see, fluttering in its backyard, Armani and Hugo Boss clothing pegged to a humble clothesline.

[Clive]

-

[tgusa]

Slow news day, eh?

[fanfan]

[marktwain]

Solar clothes dryer.

[Sudetenland]

Solar clothes dryer, EH? Please respect the language of our Northern neighbors, eh?

[marktwain]

Northern neighbors? That was just standard english, eh, where I grew up! (Northern Wisconsin)