'Husbanding', 'husbandry' - old-fashioned terms maybe in modern tech-e life, and possibly considered 'old hat' by some. The Chambers dictionary definition of a 'husbanding' person include 'a thrifty manager', 'a conserver' and 'one who manages with economy' , the longer-term nature of which may help to explain the role's decline in today's 'borrow now - have now' super-consumer mainstream culture. Some, though, it would appear, are concerned with longer-term possible realities, taking the 'husbanding' stance, whilst quite a few seem to be pretty busy 'super-consuming', giving presumably quite a schizophrenic element in society. Short-term profit hunting also seems to have had a fairly widespread modern business focus, then by default maybe taking emphasis and attention away from valid longer-term considerations, such as 'husbanding resources'.
A 'good ol'-boy' Dorset farmer was urged by many to give up his now old-fashioned breed of cattle, his 'gorgeous gals', as he called them, to make more money from 'them girt ganglin' black and white hatstands', as again he so delicately put it. They didn't win, though, he was more than a match for them.
'No doubt i could mek a bit more money if i changed (to the modern 'milk factory' Holstein breed of cattle), but why should I give up me 'gorgeous gals'?
And why indeed - it'd taken him many years to breed and rear such a quality herd, and he knew better than to give up the love of his life. And for what? More money, but relatively meaingless to him; not only already did he have quite a bit of that, certanly plenty enough, but was also leading the life he loved.
'Husband-men' wanted - ?
The 'husbandry' term is though still in modern use: 'animal husbandry' and 'crop husbandry' are for instance areas of study for budding agriculturalists, although a common farming term 'to husband the land' meaning to farm it looking after its longer-term health and productivity , whilst taking short-term harvests, could have become more dated, particularly maybe due to the effect of shorter-term farming with chemical fertilisers and sprays.
As energy costs rise, which seems pretty likely, maybe longer-term, husbandry-based farming and growing will make a come-back - and 'husband-men' will once again be 'in fashion'? To a minority extent they already are, in that organic farmers have to farm in a longer-term more 'rotational' way, with an eye on future soil health and fertility, having generally less recourse to shorter-term chemical 'fixes'.
The 'husband' in the formal relationship of marriage used to be seen as the 'provider', so presumably it was prudent and in his interest and that of his family, to think further than just the short-term. The nature of relationships of course changed over time, with women getting more domestic emancipation and egalitarian rights. Interesting, though, to speculate whether in practice this has contributed to a sort of 'standardisation' effect in mainstream culture which could have then worked to negate any 'vive la difference' feeling. It is , though, rumoured that men and women are biologically different, and if so, could then presumably be to some extent 'biologically geared' to carry out different (but complementary-?) functions. Maybe such a view might not sit over well with strict 'egalitarians', but no doubt to others it could just be 'common sense' - a 'natural' function.
'Natural redundancy----?'
According to an interesting current TV series, though, the ideas of 'naturalness' and 'natural balances' are no longer valid. Apparently, it was held that the planet earth was run by an eco-system that maintained a relatively fixed-positioned balance of nature, and that man's job was to work to maintain this 'stable' position. More recently this view has been challenged in the light of scientific evidence, which appears to suggest the opposite: i.e. that each occurrence of natural phenomena leads to a new position rather than back to the 'old' fixed stability position. Could, though, the original 'fixed natural balance' have been a limited interpretation? Another interpretation, surely no stranger to country people living 'close to nature's wavelength', is that 'natural balance' is a dynamic phenomena, a force or mechanism that happens in response to an occurence, to then head back towards a 'balanced' situation , which is anyway not necessarily likely to be exactly the same as before. So, for example, in the case of 'natural degeneration', say a forest fire, the 'natural balance' force is then the opposite, i.e. regeneration, new growth.
It's then presumably a possibility that such a dynamic, intuitive 'natural balancing' force is innate in man, part of the intuitive make-up package, which, though, as some might argue, may have been somewhat 'decommissioned' through urban and 'shorter-term' living. Take 'husbanding' again for instance, it's raison d'etre can be seen to connect to 'balance' - the short-term needs need to be kept in a balance with the longer-term needs - too much taken out of the soil now, for instance, will put longer-term productivity at risk, for instance. A measure of 'delayed gratification' is then the order of the day, not maximising short-term gains in order to preserve reasonable longer-term productivity.
Husbanding, of course, is also more than that, it's also the prudent managing of resources and enterprises which in practice, also involves working towards balances. If the land has been worked quite hard and is running towards 'sourness' (too acid, potentially negatively affecting productivity), then the effective husbandman acts now to restore the (healthy) balance, by applying lime to the land, to protect results in the future. Similarly, if, say, the dairy cattle's fat deposits have run down due, say, to inadequate grass to eat, then the effective husbandman acts, and spends now (reducing short-term profitability), by increasing their energy feed, to protect output in the future.
For virtually anyone running enterprises over the longer-run, working in and with such balances may be inevitable, and knowing their constituents could be an essential element of long-term success. Agricultural 'husbandmen' display this trait - studies have illustrated that the older and more experienced and knowledgable they get, they then operate within a complex mix of varied and multi-dimensional lifestyle goals and objectives, for which the establishment of 'situational balance' is then necessary (and which in practice appears to change over time), whereas younger operatives establishing their enterprises tend to operate on a more single-dimensioned pattern of financial objectives. It could be that achieving effective balance amongst varied objectives and potentially conflicting areas, taking skill and experience, needs someone who is effectively 'tuned in' to the 'natural balance' wavelength - ?
'Caring' can pay-----?
The human component involved in such 'husbanding' could be said to be 'care', which perhaps in short-term profit focus times has become less prominent.
One pair of 'freerangers', V and Q, ran a very successful largish rural business, based on a goodsize farm but now also incorporating many diversification enterprises such as milk retailing, farm visitors, a bakery, a craftshop, an animal supplies outlet and a nursery combined with wood garden products. V, the overall 'managing director' was a big, bluff, friendly character who had a natural trait to hit it off with people, and to whom people responded positively. As a consequence the whole business seemed to run relatively happily and smoothly, with remarkably few layers of management, the staff seeming to greatly enjoy and respond to V and Q's relaxed style of management.
Trouble struck though, when V was involved in a car smash abroad and was hospitalised, Q then also having to spend time away from the business. Q's father stepped into the admin breach, helped invaluably by the two regular office staff. The rest of the staff just 'got on with it', as they pretty much normally did, and to some extent in their own interests, but now also keen to ensure V and Q's future, as they liked and respected them as people. For those few months the business ran like clockwork and V and Q returned to a thriving concern, quite probably as a result of their own investment in terms of the trust, faith and respect (longer-term husbanding-?) they had for their staff.
Maybe 'care''s not only valuable and important in human value terms, but also, as in this instance, as a valuable risk-reducing business asset - ?
Comments
0 responses