Organizing Occupy Wall Street Marisa

Holmes
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/organizing-occupy-wall-street-marisa-holmes/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Tea Party, Occupy Wall Street, and the Great

Recession 1st ed. Edition Nils C. Kumkar

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-tea-party-occupy-wall-street-
and-the-great-recession-1st-ed-edition-nils-c-kumkar/

Wall Street: A History Charles R Geisst

https://ebookmass.com/product/wall-street-a-history-charles-r-
geisst/

Gender on Wall Street 1st ed. Edition Laura Mattia

https://ebookmass.com/product/gender-on-wall-street-1st-ed-
edition-laura-mattia/

Big Bad Boss: Midnight (Werewolves of Wall Street Book

1) 1st Edition Renee Rose

https://ebookmass.com/product/big-bad-boss-midnight-werewolves-
of-wall-street-book-1-1st-edition-renee-rose/
The Fund: Ray Dalio, Bridgewater Associates and the
Unraveling of a Wall Street Legend Rob Copeland

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-fund-ray-dalio-bridgewater-
associates-and-the-unraveling-of-a-wall-street-legend-rob-
copeland/

Insulin - The Crooked Timber : A History from Thick

Brown Muck to Wall Street Gold Kersten T. Hall

https://ebookmass.com/product/insulin-the-crooked-timber-a-
history-from-thick-brown-muck-to-wall-street-gold-kersten-t-hall/

Aaron McDuffie Moore: An African American Physician,

Educator, and Founder of Durham's Black Wall Street
Blake Hill-Saya

https://ebookmass.com/product/aaron-mcduffie-moore-an-african-
american-physician-educator-and-founder-of-durhams-black-wall-
street-blake-hill-saya/

Gunner Gianni Holmes

https://ebookmass.com/product/gunner-gianni-holmes/

Gynecologic Pathology 2nd Edition Nucci Marisa R.

https://ebookmass.com/product/gynecologic-pathology-2nd-edition-
nucci-marisa-r/
ALTERNATIVES AND FUTURES:
CULTURES, PRACTICES, ACTIVISM AND UTOPIAS

Organizing Occupy
Wall Street
This is Just Practice

Marisa Holmes
Alternatives and Futures: Cultures, Practices,
Activism and Utopias

Series Editor
Anitra Nelson
Informal Urbanism Research Hub (InfUr-)
The University of Melbourne
Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Movements such as degrowth, Occupy, solidarity economies, permacul-
ture, low impact living and Via Campesina variously address key issues of
the contemporary era such as inequalities of wealth and income, environ-
mental crises, and achieving sustainable cities and production. This series
demonstrates the breadth, depth, significance and potential of ‘alterna-
tives’ in the construction of this century, focusing on the type of future
each movement advocates and their strategic agenda.
Alternatives and Futures is of interest to scholars and students across the
social sciences and humanities, especially those working in environmen-
tal sustainability, politics and policymaking, environmental justice, grass-
roots governance, heterodox economics and activism.
The series offers a forum for constructive critique and analytical reflec-
tion of movements’ directions, activism and activists, their assumptions,
drivers, aims, visions of alternative futures and actual performance and
influence.
 Marisa Holmes

Organizing Occupy
Wall Street
This is Just Practice
Marisa Holmes
Brooklyn, NY, USA

ISSN 2523-7063     ISSN 2523-7071 (electronic)

Alternatives and Futures: Cultures, Practices, Activism and Utopias

ISBN 978-981-19-8946-9    ISBN 978-981-19-8947-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8947-6

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore
Pte Ltd. 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
­transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore
Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
For David
 Foreword from the Series Editor

Organizing Occupy Wall Street: This is Just Practice might well have been
written especially for this series—Alternatives and Futures: Cultures,
Practices, Activism and Utopias. Books in this series delve into various
movements of the twenty-first century, investigating the imagined futures
held by movement advocates and their strategic agendas. They examine
and speculate on the significance and potential of specific socio-political,
cultural and environmental movements. The broad aim is to create a
forum for constructive critique and analytical reflection of various move-
ments’ directions, assumptions, drivers, goals, performance and influence.
Yet the proposal for Organizing Occupy Wall Street arrived at Palgrave
Macmillan innocent of these details of the series’ brief. It came ready-­­
formed as a penultimate draft on the recommendation of a member of
our editorial board, Marina Sitrin (author of the main Foreword). Like
Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and its slogan ‘We are the 99%’, it would
pop-up so appropriately, even organically, that it immediately attracted
our attention.
This book offers a lively personal testimony of a key activist co-­­
organising and co-creating media for the Occupy movement, the most
prominent actions of which centred on the financial sector of New York
City, Wall Street. It draws on a rich range of media sources as well as the
direct experiences of a film maker whose eye for drama is well-honed.

vii
viii Foreword from the Series Editor

And, in all this she is, to some extent at least, her own subject. It is an
insider’s account.
But Holmes’ account is neither raw nor naïvely fresh. Even as the story
unfolds, bearing the reader along in a chronological account, the narra-
tive benefits from the author’s mulled over and mature analysis, a decade
later, on the significance of the movement. She starts by placing the
actions, intents and outcomes of OWS in a global politico-economic
context, as seen from ‘below’. With personal testimonies of uprisings in
the Middle East, she weaves a rich tapestry of themes, connections, ways
of being, hopes and actions ultimately associated with the global occupy
movements.
Holmes plunges us into the ‘now’ of the ‘then’, but with a haunting
reminder of the future. ‘This is just a rehearsal’ is a leitmotif drumbeat in
the distance, sometimes rising, only to recede again. The real drivers and
unmet desires of the movement—the desire for substantive and direct
democracy, the desire for economic justice, the desire for peaceful co-­­
existence, a new way of living, a new philosophy of being—that situate
the significance of OWS as a signpost to genuine revolution emerge to
undergird and form the shape of the movement itself. Take, for instance,
the visual and audible language of the general assembly, which incorpo-
rates every member in an overwhelming presence through a modified
consensual process that becomes a democratic journey in and of itself. A
cultural, social and ultimately political ‘making’ to use the term of
E. P. Thompson, the twentieth century English historian of radical upris-
ings. As Holmes writes, ‘OWS was all day, all week, a break with the past,
and a rehearsal for the future.’
OWS has been analysed in a variety of ways, many dismissive. What
did OWS activists really want anyway? What has the occupy movement
achieved? The claim of lack of direction reveals a distinct failure of imagi-
nation, even understanding, on the part of certain leftist critics. A demand
is often simply just a demand, bounded and simplistic. This is espe-
cially the case in terms of what is needed in our world now, a world of
deep socio-political and economic injustices and numerous and various
ecological unsustainabilities with carbon emissions a simple symptom.
We need much more than a demand or set of demands.
 Foreword from the Series Editor ix

In contrast, ‘OCCUPY’, says it all. Even taken as the demand in and

of itself, ‘occupy’ goes way beyond a simple strike. ‘Occupy!’ suggests a
permanent claim that, if replicated throughout the world, would mean a
global, glocal, commons. Is there any more powerful strategy for action
in contemporary politics? We will occupy, with horizontal forms of poli-
tics that go beyond participatory politics and give power to the people to
decide, to act, to be. This is a plinth for a transformative revolution—
people, one and all, in control. Surely it is only the outdated left, institu-
tionalised in hierarchical organisations, that cannot see this promise in
the occupy approach and movement? Or, perhaps they are discomforted
by horizontal organisation as a threat to their own stale power?
This does not mean OWS cannot be criticised. Indeed Holmes analy-
ses in detail her own set of criticisms centring on organisational and
media issues, usefully addressing common questions and complaints
from activists, scholars and the wider public. As she writes in her prefa-
tory remarks: ‘Throughout this book I am consciously analyzing what we
were doing, why we were doing it, how different organizers acted in spe-
cific ways. I search for meanings of those actions in terms of their intent
and their meanings in terms of their context, of others around them.’
Organizing Occupy Wall Street: This is Just Practice is very much about
the nuts and bolts of holistic transformation based on horizontal change
using autonomist, feminist and anarchist approaches. The book firmly
establishes the ongoing significance not only of OWS but also the occupy
movement more generally as a force of great potential for a humanity
challenged to re-create relations between one another and our species’
relations with Earth.

Melbourne, VIC, Australia Anitra Nelson

10 October 2022
 Main Foreword

Something new is taking place. Since the 1990s millions of people around
the world have been rising up, and rather than seeking their liberation
through state power—‘from the bottom up’, they are moving, as the
Zapatistas suggest, ‘From below and to the left, where the heart resides.’
Power over hierarchy and representation are being rejected, ideologically
and by default, and in the rejection mass horizontal assemblies are open-
ing new landscapes with the horizon of autonomy and freedom.
Relationships to one another are the focus, not demands on institutions,
and, through changing our way of relating and being, we begin to find
ways to recuperate life.
The newer movements and moments, to which Occupy Wall Street is
an essential part, began in the highlands of Chiapas Mexico, with the
Zapatistas emergence in 1994. Declaring a resounding 'Ya Basta!'
(Enough!) and rather than making demands on institutional power, they
started creating dozens of autonomous communities, with forms of
directly democratic governance, on land they have taken back and
recuperated.
Then, in Argentina, in 2001 the popular rebellion sang, ‘Que Se Vayan
Todos! Que No Quede Ni Uno Solo!’ (Everyone Must Go! Not Even One
Should Remain!). As with the Zapatistas, the movements focused on cre-
ating horizontal assemblies, not asking power to change things, but creat-
ing that alternative in the present with new social relationships—taking
xi
xii Main Foreword

over and running workplaces by the hundreds, retaking land, creating

new collectives and cooperatives, from media to art, and breaking from
past hierarchical ways of relating—forming what they called a new sub-
jectivity and dignity.
In Cochabamba, Bolivia, in 2000, with the ‘Water Wars’, communi-
ties organized against the privatization of water by a Canadian corpora-
tion, and in the struggle. They were not only fighting against privatization,
but codifying the communalization of water in the Regantes, the local
communities.
In the streets of Oaxaca, Mexico, with the organizing of the people’s
commune with APPO (Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca) in
2006 there was an adoption of Zapatista practices. There continued to
be manifestations in the surrounding towns and villages with assem-
blies as they applied indigenous forms of governance. Onto the Minga,
with local self-governance and cooperative economics in Colombia, there
were new movements, and the list goes on and on.
2011 witnessed another massive wave of similar forms of movement
around the world—with millions refusing to remain passive in untenable
situations—and together pulling the emergency break. Shouting and
singing, Ya Basta! They Don’t Represent Us! and, They Can’t Even Imagine
Us! they took to the streets beginning in Tunisia and Egypt on to Spain,
Greece, Portugal, Bosnia and the USA (with many dozens more places
around the globe). In that space, in various towns, villages and cities, in
regions all over, people began creating new social relationships and ways
of being. In some places this is still taking the form of directly democratic
assemblies, searching for those things around which to organize. In oth-
ers the movements have evolved to take on questions of alternative forms
of production, agriculture, defense of the land, housing, health care and
education. That is to say, they have begun to recreate how we organize all
of those things most important to our survival. And doing so in ways that
are participatory and empowering. They have been collectively working
towards real democracy, as the movements sometimes refer, following the
Spanish precursor movement, Democracia Real Ya! (Real Democracy!).
Both before and since 2011, the communities and movements in
defense of the land, from India and Africa to Central, South and North
 Main Foreword xiii

America. They have been using direct action and assemblies as the central
form of protecting all that is sacred, our water, air and earth.
These forms of organizing are taking place in ways that are remarkably
similar—using face to face democracy, horizontal assemblies, self—orga-
nization, and at the core is a striving for new social relationships of care—
listening to one another and thinking/feeling together. There is a growing
global movement of refusal—refusing to not be heard, refusing the
destruction of the planet, refusing to be treated as objects and without
dignity. Simultaneously, in that refusal, is creation. Millions are shouting
‘No!’, while manifesting alternatives in its wake. What has been taking
place in disparate places around is without precedent with regard to con-
sistency of form, politics, scope and scale.
These new waves of movements, are just that, waves, they ebb and
flow. There have been moments in some places of massive uprisings where
it continues, and land is recuperated and autonomous forms of gover-
nance established, such as with the Zapatistas in Mexico, and the Cantons
in Rojava (N.E. Syria). There are many locations where we see fewer
people in the streets after occupying space or in public assemblies, and
yet, as many in the post 2011 movements in Spain remind us, these
forms of organizing are in our DNA, and they continue. It is all part of a
new, growing and deepening phenomenon of everyday revolutions. How
we reflect on our movements, especially in moments when our public
numbers are fewer, is crucial.
Occupy Wall Street (OWS), as a part of the Real Democracy
Movements, is an essential part of this growing global phenomenon.
Marisa Holmes has gifted us with a detailed account of the organizing of
OWS in New York City in 2011, the city that sparked the rest of the US
to follow in similar form—with more than 1000 towns, cities and villages
organizing an Occupy in their location within a month. Not only does
Marisa Holmes tell the real story of the organizing before, behind and
during Occupy, she shares the challenges the movement faced, both
internal and external, so that we, the readers, can reflect together and
learn from the challenges. This story is essential reading for everyone who
wants to change our world.
I do mean story. Our stories, the narratives told to us, about us, are
crucial. And are so often mistold. We know that it is generally the victor
xiv Main Foreword

that tells the story and/or those with power, from intuitional power to
structural power (class, race, gender, positionality, etc.). While we know
this, we still all too often forget it when we read or hear about the history
of a moment or movement. The opening sentences in the foreword are an
example of this. I imagine it gave many pause … are there really millions
of people organizing in this way? Where? When? We are asking these
questions because we are not taught to take historical moments and
movements together, as a part of a continuum and process. A central
argument in this book is that these movements are not looking to the
state to solve the multiple crises. All too often the story of horizontally
based movements is told through the lens of statecraft. For example, what
took place in Greece, ‘after’ the Squares Movement is told through the
lens of SYRIZA, or the Spanish Squares movement through the lens of
Podemos. The desire for state power is a story that dominates, when in
fact, the other story, the one from below and to the left, is often what
predominates. There are always many stories.
In the case of Occupy Wall Street, and its origins, those who facilitated
it, who were there day in and day out, who participated in the working
groups and assemblies, they/we are the ones to tell our story, especially
the how and why of the story. Marisa does this beautifully and with great
care and detail. If you have only heard the mainstream narrative of
Occupy, this book will open your mind and heart. If you participated
and now feel disheartened or disillusioned as the dominant story is not
what you experienced, this book is for you. Hopefully, this book will help
to be a reminder when you/we hear the next story, about another move-
ment, to listen to those on the ground, organizing from below. Ask your-
self: Are they seeking power, or moving to the left, where the heart resides?
The pages you hold gives us a very special and meticulous account into
the making of one of these many movements—where the goal is only to
change everything. Please, read with care and listen to the voices of orga-
nizers and participants, as told through one of the key facilitators and
organizers of a movement. Also please, listen to the history behind the
movement. Through following Marisa we can see the historical links and
processes that are always at play in movement building, yet are all too
often left out of historical accounts.
Again, this is about the story, whose story, and who is telling it.
 Main Foreword xv

In some ways we can see this document as a people’s mic of the move-
ment, sharing back to us with great attentiveness to detail, and with love,
what was said, done and why. It is up to us, to process these experiences
and think/feel together about the experiences, joys, celebrations, chal-
lenges and lessons, and continue to organize, build and reflect.

Vestal, NY Marina Sitrin

 Preface: All Day All Week

From the early planning process of Occupy Wall Street (OWS) in

New York, through the occupation, and long after, I was an organizer.
For several years I dedicated my life to building and stewarding OWS
forward. This took many forms, but most visibly I was a facilitator and
media-maker. Later on, as OWS became a faint memory, I took an active
role in maintaining the history and legacy. This included making a docu-
mentary feature film, and hosting events on the subject. However, I began
to feel that none of these approaches was enough to counter dominant
narratives of events.
There are a number of narratives about OWS that in one way or
another bury a more radical history. They ignore or distort the contribu-
tions that myself and others made. First, there’s the narrative that OWS
was stunted, and unsuccessful, because the anarchists and autonomists—
all those opposed to hierarchical organization and seizure of the state—
were disorganized and unwilling to confront power (Tufekci, 2017). This
narrative does not acknowledge that there was a rational basis for doing
direct actions, mutual aid or engaging in a directly democratic process. It
completely obfuscates the horizontal organization that did exist, at a scale
far exceeding previous movements, and connected across the globe.
Second, there is the drum beat of how OWS evolved from confusion,
chaos and disorder into a serious movement engaged in the real politics
of elections (Gerbaudo, 2017). Often this overlaps with discussion of
xvii
xviii Preface: All Day All Week

Podemos or SYRIZA in Europe or the Bernie Sanders campaign in the

United States (Levitin, 2021). There is an assertion that occupiers grew
up by moving beyond youthful idealism into the pragmatism of adult-
hood. This narrative, while certainly patronizing, also has no empirical
basis. OWS rejected political parties and did not even make demands of
existing institutions or parties, let alone seek to become them.
Third, there is a narrative that focuses on the overlaps of the extreme
right and fascism with OWS, especially, through social media (Reid-Ross,
2017). What this narrative does is contribute to the attempts at recupera-
tion by the right and criminalizes those who participated in OWS. This
is especially concerning in a context where the exact same narrative is
perpetuated by the Department of Homeland Security. To be absolutely
clear, OWS was part of the radical left, and the attempt at entryism was
a counter-revolutionary process.
During OWS, we told our own stories, counter to the dominant ones.
This work was tactical and made interventions in order to shift culture.
In this same vein I offer here a more honest, insider account of what hap-
pened. I am in dialogue with the work of other movement insiders, David
Graeber (2013), Marina Sitrin (2014), Mark Bray (2013) and Nathan
Schneider (2013), who all emphasize the horizontal, democratic, autono-
mous and anarchistic aspects of OWS, and other 2011 movements. I
build on their work, and, with a longer view, provide an updated analysis.

My Approach to Writing

During OWS, my own and the collective experience were intimately
linked, through an ever-evolving relationship. This was especially the case
given my facilitator and documentarian roles, which were primarily
about communication, and actively weaving the collective together.
Throughout this book I am consciously analysing what we were doing,
why we were doing it, how different organizers acted in specific ways. I
search for meanings of those actions in terms of their intent and their
meanings in terms of their context, of others around them. Probably any-
one reflecting on struggle this way can be referred to as some form of
participant observer, or as Uri Gordon describes himself ‘an observing
 Preface: All Day All Week xix

participant’(2007). Some might refer to this work as ‘critical auto-­­

ethnography’—I’m recounting my experience in a grainy reflective way,
acknowledging my own position (Holman-Jones, 2016). This draws on
standpoint theories developed by Dorothy Edith Smith, Sandra Harding,
Patricia Hill Collins and other engaged feminist scholars.
To capture how OWS and the squares were organized, I focus particu-
larly on the interactions and dialogues taking place in assemblies, spokes
councils and digital media. To track how practices developed over time I
use both in person and digital ethnography. I include detailed descrip-
tions of the New York City General Assembly (NYCGA) and Spokes
Council meetings, which were livestreamed, live tweeted, recorded by the
Minutes Working Group, and posted online for the public. I also draw
from video and audio recordings that I made or were produced by the
OWS Media Working Group. Some of these were made public, while
others remained in my own possession.
All recordings were made known to those appearing at the time. I use
direct quotes within the context of events as they unfolded and use the
names people chose to give, which at times are legal names and at times
pseudonyms. I make a point of including markers of race, ethnicity,
nationality and gender identity throughout the text in order to account
for differences in experiences among occupiers. When appropriate for
context or additional detail I cite other insiders in OWS who have their
own reflections on the experience. These come across in video footage,
personal communication and via their own writing.
In addition to written, video and audio documentation, I refer to col-
lective statements, structure and process proposals, training materials,
e-mail lists and reflections from within the movement. For instance, I cite
The Principles of Solidarity, The Declaration of the Occupation, and
Statement of Autonomy. I also include planning documents for 1 May
2012, the one-year anniversary, international collaborations and occupy
‘offshoots.’ By referring to all the above, I provide a look inside how
OWS was organized.
xx Preface: All Day All Week

Analysing with Movements

I consider the analysis here as inductive and organic, deriving from the
events themselves. This is an ethnographic account from below, walking
with and questioning those with whom I struggled. I am interested pri-
marily in how OWS was organized, how it changed over time, how it
gained momentum and how it was vulnerable to challenges.
In this book, I show how the practices of OWS were rooted in previous
movements that emphasized participatory democracy and creating new
societies. One can trace a movement genealogy from The New Left,
Women’s Liberation, Anti-Nuke, to the Global Justice Movement (GJM).
Throughout, practices were handed down, and adapted, to fit the
demands of new contexts. With each iteration, the practices became
more complex, involving formalized structures of working groups and
clusters, as well as nuanced ways of using consensus processes. There was
an intergenerational dialogue leading up to and throughout OWS, which
often involved individual organizers who were personally active across
movements and provided continuity. As a result, practices learned from
past movements were brought into the space of the square. This was espe-
cially the case with the GJM.
I show how OWS was part of a global uprising in 2011. From the very
inception OWS was internationalist and in solidarity with the Kasbah in
Tunis, Tahrir in Cairo, Puerta del Sol in Madrid, Syntagma Square in
Greece and all other squares seeking to build a new society. At first, this
solidarity was facilitated mainly through social media, especially Facebook
and Twitter. It was through screens, and seeing one another struggling in
real time, that a sense of affinity was created. However, there were also
important connections with organizers in person on the ground. Practices
from occupied squares were shared in real time, online and in person, and
informed the tactics and strategy of the occupation of Liberty Plaza.
I claim in this book that horizontal, democratic, autonomous and
anarchistic practices of OWS were what enabled it to grow. I detail how
tens of thousands of people participated in the occupation in NYC and
hundreds of thousands in other camps. They gained experience in demo-
cratic and direct ways of relating and making decisions. This allowed for
 Preface: All Day All Week xxi

the proliferation of working groups, affinity groups and individual rela-

tionships. Through consensus, people had their voices heard, and this
allowed for large-scale organization. Similar experiences played out in
other squares.
I claim that OWS faced a number of significant challenges that were
both internal and external. Internally, there were attempts to do actions
around race such as the early response to the murder of Troy Davis by the
state of Georgia. There was a great deal of work, especially coming from
the People of Colour (POC) Caucus, addressing white supremacy and
colour-blind racism. While there were attempts to bring an anti-racist
lens to OWS, and to connect struggles, these were not central enough.
There were attempts to address heteropatriarchy and sexism in the occu-
pation and after. The Safer Spaces Committee (SSC) brought an intersec-
tional approach and focused on addressing rape and sexual assault. This
work was also undervalued, and not central enough to the organizing.
Externally, there were threats of institutionalization, co-option, repres-
sion and counter-revolution. The process of forming institutions was
based around informal elites disguised as affinity groups who instituted
hierarchies. They were consistently against a more formal and democratic
structure, that would make them transparent and accountable to others.
Co-option by political parties happened only after the organization of
OWS, and the other squares, had scaled back or disbanded. Parties fed off
the corpses of movements, using the rhetoric and symbols as stand-ins.
Charges of domestic terrorism, surveillance and censorship criminalized
those most committed to movements, and prevented them from having
any audience or reach. In the wake of the 2011 movements, came
counter-­revolutionary fascist movements, which channelled the anger
against elites, but for the right.
The vision of OWS was practiced in the here and now, and the goal
was a total transformation of society. OWS was all day, all week, a break
with the past, and a rehearsal for the future. My hope is that this book is
useful for new generations of organizers, and we can learn and change
together. This is just practice.

Brooklyn, NY Marisa Holmes

xxii Preface: All Day All Week

References
Bray, M. (2013). Translating Anarchy: The Anarchism of Occupy Wall
Street. Zero Books.
Gerbaudo, P. (2017). The Mask and the Flag. Oxford University Press.
Gordon, U. (2007). Anarchy Alive! Anti-authoritarian Politics from Practice
to Theory. Pluto Press.
Graeber, D. (2013). The Democracy Project: A History, A Crisis, A
Movement. Random House.
Holman-Jones, S. (2016, March). Living Bodies of Thought: The
“Critical” in Critical Autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1077800415622509
Levitin, M. (2021). Generation Occupy: Reawakening American Democracy.
Counterpoint.
Reid-Ross, A. (2017, February 21). Against the Fascist Creep. AK Press.
Schneider, N. (2013). Thank you, Anarchy: Notes from the Occupy
Apocalypse. University of California Press.
Sitrin, M., & Azzelini, D. (2014). They Can’t Represent Us!: Reinventing
Democracy from Greece to Occupy. Verso Books.
Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of
Networked Protest. Yale University Press.
 Acknowledgements

I tried to make a list of all the people who came to Occupy Wall Street
(OWS). I easily came up with over a hundred names and had to stop.
What was truly remarkable about occupy was the ever-evolving set of
relationships. From every corner of the planet, people descended on the
occupation at Liberty Plaza, tucked away in the Financial District of
New York City. They brought their skills and talents, and most of all,
their hearts. They dared to dream together. Thank you to all the occupiers
who made new worlds possible!
This book was a long time in the making. I would like to thank all the
friends and collaborators who I’ve talked to about the ideas and approaches
presented. Thank you, of course, to those who read drafts of my manu-
scripts, such as Mark Bray, Nathan Schneider, Lisa Fithian, A.K. Thompson
and Rebecca Manski. Your insights were enormously helpful, and I know
the book is better for them. Thank you, especially, to Marina Sitrin, for
being such a consistent champion, and for writing the forward. Thank
you to Anitra Nelson, the series editor, who believed in this book, and
guided me towards finishing it.
While I completed this book outside of my formal academic work, I
would like to thank the School of Communication and Information at
Rutgers University in New Brunswick, and the faculty who gave their
time to talk with me and read early drafts. I felt challenged to answer key
questions, some of which are addressed here.
xxiii
xxiv Acknowledgements

I’d like to thank my family. My parents Tasha Allison-Holmes and

Doug Holmes have always been supportive of my creative and intellec-
tual projects. They also were the first ones to teach me about politics. I’m
an organizer today, in part, because of them. Most of all, I have to thank
my partner in life, and in struggle, Jez Bold, who I met during OWS. Ze
was unimaginably patient with me for years as I wrote this book. Thank
you, Jez! Neither OWS nor this book would have happened without you.
 Praise for Organizing Occupy Wall Street

“As an author, filmmaker, and organizer, no one is better positioned to unravel

the inner workings and historical significance of the Occupy Movement than
the indefatigable Marisa Holmes. She brings her firsthand experience traversing
the pathways of recent global movements–from Egypt to New York to Spain to
Charlottesville–to bear on her razor sharp analysis of struggle in this defini-
tive study.”
—Mark Bray, Assistant Professor of History, Rutgers University

“‘This is Just Practice’ is movement history at its best: meticulous, direct, and
expansive in revolutionary scope. Providing a crucial corrective to all too many
reductive Occupy narratives, Holmes emphasizes the movement’s context in
international struggles and centers it’s all-too-overlooked form as a horizontalist,
richly lived radical experiment. This is the Occupy we need to remember; these
are the practices we must carry forward.”
—Natasha Lennard, Author of “Being Numerous: Essays on Non-Fascist Life”

“More than a decade later, what happened at Occupy Wall Street still matters,
and Marisa Holmes explains why. Democracy was not in retreat in 2011 like it
so often is today, but advancing though courageous experiments in the streets.
That moment and its meaning have never been so vividly described as here.”
—Nathan Schneider, Assistant Professor of Media Studies, University of
Colorado Boulder
 Contents

1 I ntergenerational Dialogues  1

2 Th
 e Squares 17

3 The New York City General Assembly 33

4 D
 ay One 51

5 O
 ur Park 63

6 This Is What Democracy Looks Like 75

7 D
 irect Action 83

8 Media for the 99% 91

9 A
 llies 99

10 R
 ace in OWS111

11 G
 ender in OWS121

xxvii
xxviii Contents

12 S
 tructure129

13 Th
 e Eviction145

14 O
 ccupy Somewhere151

15 Money in the Movement163

16 All Our Grievances Are Connected173

17 All Roads Lead to Wall Street193

18 Occupy the World Social Forum205

19 I nformal Elites223

20 Th
 e Founders243

21 P
 ower and Leadership255

22 C
 o-option263

23 R
 epression283

24 N
 eo-Fascism295

25 Conclusion: Building the New Society311

G
 lossary323

I ndex327
 1
Intergenerational Dialogues

I came of age politically during the anti-war movement of the mid-2000s,

and the crash of 2008. This was also a period of reflection on the Global
Justice Movement (GJM). I found that many of the lessons from previ-
ous movements, about how to organize democratically and take direct
action, were applicable to the struggles of the moment.

The Zapatistas
The Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) began as a Marxist-­
Leninist guerilla organization, in the 1980s, along the mountains and
villages of Chiapas, Mexico. Through building with the local Mayan
indigenous communities, they learned about the history of colonization
in the region and how to make change through other means. Instead of
seizing state power, they sought to build power from below (Holloway &
Pelaez, 1998). Women played an essential role in this strategy and became
core to the EZLN (Klein, 2015). By the time the Zapatistas went public
in 1994, they were committed to building autonomous, horizontal, dem-
ocratic territories.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 1
M. Holmes, Organizing Occupy Wall Street, Alternatives and Futures: Cultures,
Practices, Activism and Utopias, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8947-6_1
2 M. Holmes

On New Year’s Day 1994, the North American Fair Trade Agreement
went into effect. The Zapatistas understood that this would be devastat-
ing for small farmers who would be competing with large mono crop
farmers, so they decided to go public and declare war on the Mexican
government. The EZLN occupied San Cristobal as well as other towns in
Chiapas, using wooden guns when they lacked real ones (Conant, 2010).
The insurgency was comprised of one third guerilla women, some of
whom rose in the ranks to commanders, and they won (Klein, 2015).
The result was a brokered ceasefire, and the establishment of autonomous
territories.
Immediately after, they created an organizational structure from below
and to the left, with the EZLN in the service of newly liberated Zapatista
communities. On 20 January 1994, the Zapatistas maintained, “This
democratic space will be based upon three fundamental, historically
inseparable premises: democracy to define the dominant social proposal;
the freedom to endorse one proposal or another; and justice as a principle
which must be respected by all proposals.” (Holloway & Pelaez, 1998).
The Zapatistas created a horizontal space, where people could be heard
and make their own decisions. Councils addressed sharing land, develop-
ing co-ops, running schools, and maintaining social ties within the com-
munities. They understood that change happens through a genuinely
relational process. This is perhaps best exemplified in The Story of the
Question, in which Marcos writes, “‘Let’s walk,’ said the one who were
two. ‘How? Said the other. ‘Where?’ said the one,” (2004). This is how
the Zapatistas learned to walk by questioning.

 he World Trade Organization and Direct

T
Action Network
The GJM was inspired by organizing practices of the Zapatistas, as well
as The New Left, Women’s Liberation, and the Anti-nuke movements.
Writing during the period of the GJM, Francesca Polletta draws connec-
tions with earlier organizations. She notes that many participants had
previous experiences, whether in radical environmental groups, ACT-UP
(the direct action organization formed around the AIDS epidemic),
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 3

Reclaim the Streets and Critical Mass (which took over public space
through direct action), or other anarchist or anti-authoritarian collec-
tives. “What links these groups is their commitment to direct action and
a deliberative style that, with varying degrees of rigor, is nonhierarchical,”
Polletta (2004, p. 189) observes.
Building on previous organizational structures and processes is evident
in accounts of the shutdown of the World Trade Organization meeting in
Seattle in November, 1999. Lisa Fithian (2019), describes arriving in
Seattle as follows:

The convergence space was a hive of people creating an alternative world.

There were daily trainings: nonviolent direct action, legal, jail solidarity,
medic, communications, and media. There were educational events and art
workshops. Food Not Bombs and Seeds for Peace were providing hot meals
every day, and the comms team was setting up a system of tactical com-
munications with everything from central dispatch to on-the-ground
mobile systems. (p. 83)

The level of self-organization was incredible, even to her, who at that time
was already a seasoned organizer. Like the anti-nuclear movement, the
mobilization was both directly confrontational and building alternative
infrastructure. Fithian (2019) aided local organizers in action planning.
Affinity groups, small groups of like minded people, would take on dif-
ferent areas and intersections to ensure a creative and disruptive action.
This was all coordinated and decided on democratically. Fithian writes,
“During the nightly spokes council meetings, hundreds of people sat on
the floor, divided into affinity groups with their spokes-person in front
sitting in an inner circle. These meetings sometimes continued long into
the night” (2019, p. 83).
In the lead up to Seattle, or what was originally termed N30, the
Ruckus Society, a group of non-violent direct action trainers, held a
camp. This was typical for them before any large mobilization, and often
took place in a beautiful, remote location, where participants could prac-
tice a variety of skills whether banner drops, tree sits, or facilitation.
According to David Graeber (2008a, p. 290) it was at this camp in the
4 M. Holmes

summer of 1999 that the idea of the Direct Action Network (DAN) was
first tossed around. However, it didn’t take hold until the end of the
Seattle convergence, while many of the organizers were in jail.
Those still outside threw together a somewhat haphazard Interim
Body, charged to “spend the next three months working with their local
groups to develop a proposal for a future Continental DAN that would
operate under the principles of non-hierarchy, decentralization, local
autonomy, and direct democracy” wrote Graeber (2008b, p. 291). In the
following months, an informal regional spokes council developed over
conference calls, before some sort of founding statement could be con-
sented to. The Continental DAN Mission read;

We are a continental network committed to overcoming corporate global-

ization and all forms of oppression. We are part of a growing movement
united in common concern for justice, freedom, peace, and sustainability
of all life, and a commitment to take direct action to realize radical vision-
ary change. (Graeber 2008c, p. 291)

While DAN was continental, the NYC DAN provided a model, which
other chapters followed. There were general meetings that were open to
anyone who wanted to attend, as long as they abided by the principles.
Out of these meetings various working groups and collectives formed.
Decisions were made by a modified consensus process, with strong facili-
tation. This allowed for DAN to excel at planning for mass mobilizations,
such as shutting down summits, and in spreading a democratic process.
The later was what really intrigued Graeber, who was a participant in
the group. He wrote, “During my first year in DAN, I spent a lot of time
trying to understand what this ‘spirit of consensus’ was really all about. It
was clearly not just about decision making. It wasn’t even just about con-
duct during meetings. It was more an attempt—inspired by reflections
on the structure and flow of meetings—to begin to reimagine how people
can live together, to begin—however slowly, however painfully—to con-
struct a genuinely democratic way of life” (2008d, p. 297). The process of
consensus for Graeber was opening up new possibilities for those involved.
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 5

More important than everyone identifying as an anarchist, was the cul-

tural shift through the practice itself. He called this small-a-anarchism
(Graeber, 2002).
During the GJM, media also played an essential role. With the emer-
gence of the internet as a popular and consumer technology in the late
1990s, there was a new wave of media activism. Inspired by the Zapatistas,
networks formed and converged in Seattle (Wolfson, 2014a). Alongside
the convergence center, there was a physical independent media center
(IMC) and launch of indymedia.org. The first message on the site read:

Welcome to indymedia. The resistance is now global … trans-pacific col-

laboration has brought this website into existence…
The web dramatically alters the balance between multinational and
activist media. With just a bit of coding and some cheap equipment, we
can set up a live automated website that rivals the corporates. Prepare to be
swamped by a tide of activist media makers on the ground in Seattle and
around the world, telling the real story behind the World Trade Agreement.
(As cited in Wolfson, 2014, p. 71)

Over the course of the next few days, media activists would deploy into
the streets of Seattle, record whatever they could, and bring reports back
to the IMC for editing, and uploading to the site. Chris Robe (2017,
p. 215) describes how the IMC served as a hub for independent journal-
ists, videographers, and photographers. He credits the website’s open
publishing format that allowed participants to post their media and
expose police violence. This grassroots non-professional approach to
media making offered a counter narrative to the mainstream news media.
Like DAN, a global network grew in the aftermath of Seattle. The first
description of the Independent Media Center Network (IMCN) read:

The Independent Media Center Network (IMCN) is based upon princi-

ples of equality, decentralization, and local autonomy. The IMCN is not
derived from a centralized bureaucratic process, but from the self-­
organization of autonomous collectives that recognize the importance in
developing a union of networks. (As cited in Wolfson, 2014b, p. 131)
6 M. Holmes

Unfortunately, by the mid-2000s the GJM, including indymedia, receded

into the background due to its own trajectory of co-option and repres-
sion. Inability to navigate oppression, informal hierarchies, and difficulty
in distributing resources contributed to decline (Wolfson, 2014c).
However, the movement was most challenged by the changing context
after 9/11 (Graeber, May 16, 2009).

The New Students for a Democratic Society

After 9/11, the urgency around stopping the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
took over activist circles. A new anti-war movement emerged that was
organized along more vertical, top-down, structures imposed by Act Now
to Stop the War and End Racism (ANSWER), a front group for the
Revolutionary Communist Party (Conantz, February 9, 2012) and
United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ), which was heterogenous but trended
liberal (ISR, November–December, 2007) These groups were responsible
for mass demonstrations against the War in Afghanistan, War in Iraq,
and the more all-encompassing War on Terror. The anti-war movement
was effective in turning out millions of people, and these were some of
the largest demonstrations in history. However, they seemed to have little
impact in actually stopping the wars.
Watching this unfold, Pat Korte and Jessica Rapchik, two young white
student activists, felt it was time to have a more militant youth wing of
the anti-war movement and looked for inspiration in The New Left
(Phelps, April 2, 2007). Both were a bit bookish and had been reading
obsessively about the original Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) of
the 1960s. They issued a press release in January 2006, declaring the for-
mation of the new SDS, which would be in conversation with original
SDS members such as Al Haber and Paul Buhle. It was designed as an
intergenerational dialogue, and to integrate some of the lessons learned.
Movement for a Democratic Society would be a sort of parent organiza-
tion to the new SDS. They ended with the description:

SDS is an education and social action organization dedicated to increasing

democracy in all phases of our common life. It seeks to promote the active
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 7

participation of young people in the formation of a movement to build a

society free from poverty, ignorance, war, exploitation, racism and sexism.
(SDS, January 16, 2006)

There were already chapters in the works and plans to hold a national
convention in Chicago that summer. I happened to be a student in
Chicago at that time, and reached out to Korte, Rapchik, and some of the
early organizers.
At first, I saw my role primarily as a documentary filmmaker, bringing
my camera along for meetings and actions. For a while, I joined the
Chicago Independent Media Center (IMC), one of the last remaining
IMCs of the indymedia network. However, I didn’t want to merely record
events, and I quickly drifted into more of an organizing role. Over the
course of the next few years, I ended up on the road, crisscrossing the
country, and sleeping on coaches. I was struck, time and again, by how
serious everyone seemed to be, especially my peers. During one of our
conventions the slogan was optimistically, ‘a revolution in our lifetimes’
(Miller, August 5, 2008).
The structure of the new SDS was similar to the original, in that it was
chapter based and national in scope. However, there was no executive
committee. Like the Anti-nuke Movement and the GJM, there was a
working group structure. Anyone from the local chapters could partici-
pate in the working groups, and there were always new ones forming. I
joined the SDS Media Working Group (which included both creating
our own media and doing press work) as well as the SDS Chapter
Outreach Group.
SDS used a consensus process, in the working groups and during
national conventions. Furthermore, those in attendance for the conven-
tions did not have a final say. They were effectively only delegates or
spokes as all major proposals were sent back to the chapters to ratify
before adoption. It was truly bottom-up and directly democratic. Like
indymedia, SDS utilized websites, listservs, and chats to communicate.
There were regular conference calls regionally and nationally. The organi-
zation grew exponentially in its first year. There were over a hundred
chapters, from the District of Columbia to Ann Arbor, Michigan to
Olympia, Washington (Students for a Democratic Society, 2008).
8 M. Holmes

During this time, I learned how to facilitate meetings, map a spectrum

of allies, engage in strategic planning, and move in the streets. It was a
real crash course. Every young organizer should be so lucky. I met many
movement elders that took the time to talk with the new generation,
especially those from the GJM such as Lisa Fithian. One of my favorite
early memories of her is talking during a convention in Detroit. Some of
us young women in the organization felt we were being sidelined by men,
who were friends and made decisions behind our backs. We were also
tired of the constant devaluing of our work. Lisa took us aside and talked
us through some options, and we formed the SDS Women’s Caucus as a
result. Lisa and I kept in touch over the years, and she was one of the first
people I called during the planning process for Occupy Wall Street.

The 2007–2008 Crash

In September 2008, the stock market crashed. As is now well known,
there was a housing bubble which had been building for years and hit a
peak in 2007. This was propped up by predatory lending practices
whereby poor people, mainly of color, were given high interest loans that
they could not possibly pay back. These were re-packaged as mortgage
backed securities and sold to the highest bidder. Lehman Brothers, Bear
Sterns, and other financial heavy weights got in too deep, and started
folding. This sent shock waves through the financial sector and the larger
economy both in the US and internationally (Taylor, 2019).
In the last days of the Bush administration, the banks and financial
firms were deemed ‘too big to fail’ and bailed out to the tune of billions
of dollars in relief, as well as offered ongoing credit lines with the Federal
Reserve. There was no bailout for the people. Instead, the crisis was used
as an opportunity for cut-backs and lay-offs. According to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (2008), unemployment rates for the general population
hovered around 10% but were closer to 14 or 15% for young people.
Those who were lucky enough to have a job kept it, and no one was hiring.
Even then President Barrack Obama, who was elected on a platform of
hope and change, towed the line of Wall Street bankers. Discontent was
growing in schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods. It was increasingly
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 9

clear that there was simply no future in a capitalist system, and that poli-
ticians weren’t going to save us. I was the class of 2008. Like many in my
generation I had mountains of student debt and could not find a job. I
would send out hundreds of applications and hear nothing in return.
Thus, I decided to fight for a future worth living in.

Student Occupations
There was an emerging interest in occupations in SDS and throughout
the broader student movement. On 18 December 2008, The New School
SDS chapter, along with a coalition of other groups, occupied the univer-
sity in response to corporate policies and its lack of democracy. On the
first night, they were live blogging and issued the New School Occupation
Statement, which read:

We have come together to prevent our study spaces from being flattened by
corporate bulldozers, to have a say in who runs this school, to demand that
the money we spend on this institution be used to facilitate the creation of
a better society, not to build bigger buildings or invest in companies that
make war. We have come here not only to make demands, but also to live
them. Our presence makes it clear that this school is ours, and yours, if you
are with us. (New School in Exile, December 18, 2008)

The New School Occupation Committee declared itself “The New School
in Exile” in honor of the history of the school providing refuge for Jewish
intellectuals fleeing Nazis Germany. The name called the university to
live up to its founding mission. Immediate demands included the resig-
nation of Bob Kerry, then president, along with multiple other adminis-
trators. The occupation held out through the end of the semester but was
cleared without these demands being met. A follow-up occupation on 9
April 2009 targeted the president’s office but was immediately and vio-
lently repressed (Moynihan, April 10, 2009).
In the fall of 2009, the student networks in the University of California
(UC) system were gearing up for a fight over a massive 32% tuition hike,
threats of lay-offs, and other austerity measures (Lewin, November 20,
10 M. Holmes

2009). Occupations were organized at five different campuses, with the

largest and most high profile one at UC Berkeley. The night of 19
November a group of a dozen occupiers broke into Wheeler Hall and
began shutting down auditoriums and classrooms, before barricading
themselves in. By the morning they were public with the student news-
paper, The Daily Cal, live tweeting from inside. Throughout the after-
noon, hundreds of supporters gathered outside cheering them on, before
they were dragged out by security and arrested.
A few days later, on 22 November, the student organizing blog had a
new post: WE ARE THE CRISIS: The Student Movement and the
Coming Decade. They spoke of navigating a world in which there was no
longer any illusion of upward mobility, in which there were no jobs, and
crushing student debt. They spoke of the university, even a public one,
succumbing to private interests. They charted the future of the move-
ment and listed five features of what was already under way:

• coming-together without the illusion of unity

• direct action and occupation of space
• the organization of councils & assemblies to make decisions, the rejec-
tion of leadership models
• a broad vision & solidarity across traditional lines that divide
• joy and community as well as rage and protest. (We Are The Crisis,
November 22, 2009)

While I was not involved in any of these occupations, I watched them

from afar and helped however I could to disseminate news from inside
across the student movement. I saw parallels to the original SDS occupa-
tion of Columbia University in 1968. Occupation was what I had always
dreamt of, but seemed like another time, another moment. Now, it was
our moment.
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 11

Workplace Occupations
On 2 December 2008, Republic Windows and Doors based in Chicago
(Illinois) declared bankruptcy, and was put under control of its creditors,
Bank of America and J.P. Morgan Chase. The company began closing
down its warehouse on Goose Island, on Chicago’s near west side, and
informed 240 workers that they would be losing their jobs. Luckily, the
workers were represented by United Electrical Local 1110, a rank and file
union, which embraced a more democratic and bottom-up culture of
decision making. The leadership made the same wages as the average
worker and was accountable to the membership. Immediately, a rally was
held in the loop (the downtown area) calling on the banks to extend lines
of credit.
I was still living in Chicago at the time, and joined in the picket chant-
ing, “You got bailed out! We got sold out!” There were hundreds of us,
bundled up in winter scarves and mittens, and waving United Electrical
signs alongside Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) banners. The
local Food Not Bombs group was onsite offering hot drinks to workers
(Holmes, Dec. 3, 2008).
In the coming days it became clear that not only were workers losing
their jobs, but that the company was refusing to give them adequate
notice or holiday pay. This was in violation of the Worker Adjustment
and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. Close observation at the ware-
house revealed equipment was rapidly being moved out. Conversations
ensued on the factory floor and union offices about how to proceed. The
United Electrical News reported:

So at the end of their final workday on Friday, workers did not leave. People
from the other shifts came in and joined them. They refused to leave until
they had achieved some justice. In the words of Melvin Maclin, the local’s
vice president, “We hoped to get back some of our dignity”. (United
Electrical, Dec 5, 2008)
12 M. Holmes

On 6 December, after the sit-down strike commenced, a loose eviction

defense network came together among organizers across Chicago.
Community groups, churches, and collectives of all kinds joined in soli-
darity. There were phone trees for groups to coordinate factory shifts. The
Lichen Lending Library, an anarchist social center in Pilsen on the south-
west side, was one key base of operations. I was volunteering there at the
time and would support the occupation. This included everything from
preparing and delivering meals to attending emergency demos (Crane,
Summer 2009).
Within a few days the occupation became a national news story, and
garnered widespread political support. The well-known political activist
Jesse Jackson came by with a truck load of turkeys. The documentary
filmmaker, Michael Moore, gave stump speeches. Even president-elect
Obama made a statement. The workers became emblematic of the effects
of the crisis. By 10 December, less than a week into the occupation, the
workers had a settlement totaling US$1.75 million, which included:

• Eight weeks of pay they were owed under the federal WARN Act
• Two months of continued health coverage
• Pay for all accrued and unused vacation. (UE News, Dec 10, 2008)

Chase and Bank of America covered the cost, and a separate solidarity
fund was established for the workers to be paid directly. It was an incred-
ible victory, for it not only met their immediate demands, but also went
beyond them. Later on, the workers were able to establish their own
cooperative workplace. This served as an example of the effectiveness of
militant workplace organizing in the context of the crisis, and the power
of occupation.

Housing Occupations
When the housing bubble burst in 2007, it was increasingly impossible
for homeowners to keep up with payments. Within a few years over four
million homes had been foreclosed on, which affected at least ten million
people, largely people of color. Banks would call the police or hire their
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 13

own security to forcibly evict people from their homes. Laura Gottesdeiner
(2013) writes, “The collapse of the home—and home ownership—that
began surfacing in late 2007 has created not only an economic disaster
but a crisis in national identity. On the surface this catastrophe is about
the price of our houses. But more fundamentally, this ongoing crisis chal-
lenges the very foundation of American democracy,” (2013).
In this context, grassroots organizers across the country encouraged
people to resist evictions and stay in their homes or take over vacant
spaces. Take Back the Land was originally formed in 2006 in Miami
by houseless folks who seized a plot of public land for an encampment
called Umoja Village Shantytown. Miami was an early epicenter of the
housing bubble with rapid gentrification displacing black and brown
residents of the city. The camp drew attention to this and provided a hub
for organizing. While it only lasted a few months, it inspired organizers
around the country to do similar actions. Throughout 2007 and 2008,
with the expansion of the crisis, the Take Back the Land network grew
with dozens of chapters. Each one would engage locally around what was
needed and provide eviction defense for squatted buildings. Vacancy was
high, especially in urban centers, and it was only logical that vacant build-
ings be put to use (Rameau, 2008).
My own housing situation at the time became increasingly precarious.
In an attempt to save money, my then partner and I had moved into a
run down one-bedroom apartment in Pilsen on the Southwest Side of
Chicago. The building was old enough that it had survived The Great
Chicago Fire of 1871, and somehow managed to stay standing up to the
present. The stairs dipped, electrical boxes sparked, and the foundation
was revealed, upon exploration, to be pure mud. We figured there were at
least a dozen or so code violations. On top of it all, the landlord, one of
the largest in the neighborhood, was in foreclosure, but still collecting
rent payments, so we went on rent strike. It lasted six months or so,
before we were forced out of the building.
14 M. Holmes

Riding the Wave

My personal journey was connected to the political, economic, and social
context of the mid-2000s. I became aware of my place in society, and the
world, and committed myself to changing it. Through learning from pre-
vious generations and having my own organizing experiences, I became
an anarchist. I understood that the problem was dominant power (power-­
over) whoever wielded it, and to counter this required a counter power,
from below, built through coalitions of exploited and oppressed people. I
also had the unique combination of being both a media-maker and facili-
tator, two roles that would be essential in the next wave of struggle.

References
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008). Employment and Unemployment Among
Youth, Summer 2008. Retrieved August 22, 2022, from https://www.bls.gov/
opub/ted/2008/aug/wk4/art05.htm
Conant, J. (2010). A Poetics of Resistance: The Revolutionary Public Relations of
the Zapatista Insurgency. AK Press.
Conatz, J. (February 9, 2012). The Revolution We Really Really Don’t Need.
LibCom. https://libcom.org/article/revolution-­we-­really-­really-­dont-­need
Crane, S. (Summer 2009). Pilsen: Chicago’s Revolution of Everyday Life.
Retrieved from https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/silas-­crane-­pilsen-­
chicago-­s-­revolution-­of-­everyday-­life
Fithian, L. (2019). Shut it Down: Stories from a Fierce Loving Resistance (p. 83).
Chelsea Green.
Gottesdeiner, L. (2013). The Dream Foreclosed: Black America and the Fight for a
Place to Call Home (p. 6). Zuccotti Park Press.
Graeber, D. (2002). The New Anarchists. New Left Review.
Graeber, D. (2008a). Direct Action: An Ethnography (p. 290). AK Press.
Graeber, D. (2008b). Direct Action: An Ethnography (p. 291). AK Press.
Graeber, D. (2008c). Direct Action: An Ethnography. AK Press.
Graeber, D. (2008d). Direct Action: An Ethnography (p. 297). AK Press.
Graeber, D. (May 16, 2009). The Shock of Victory. Infoshop News. Retrieved
from https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-­graeber-­the-­shock-­of-­
victory
 1 Intergenerational Dialogues 15

Holloway, J., & Pelaez, E. (1998). Zapatista!: Reinventing Revolution in Mexico

(p. 131). Pluto Press.
Holmes, M. (December 3, 2008). Personal Video and Photo Collection.
Klein, H. (2015). Companeras: Zapatista Women’s Stories. Seven Stories Press.
Lewin, T. (November 20, 2009). Regents Raise College Tuition in California
by 32%. NY Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/education/
20tuition.html
Marcos, S. I., & Vicente, R. G. (2004). Ya Basta! Ten Years of the Zapatista
Uprising (Z. Vodvnik, Ed.). AK Press, p. 69.
Miller, A. (August 5, 2008). Revolution in Our Lifetime. Retrieved August 20,
2022, from https://aricmiller.wordpress.com/tag/sds/
Moynihan, C., & Chan, S. (April 10, 2009). Police Arrest 22 At New School
Building. NY Times. https://archive.nytimes.com/cityroom.blogs.nytimes.
com/2009/04/10/students-­occupy-­new-­school-­building-­again/
Phelps, C. (April 2, 2007). The New SDS: Can the New Students for a
Democratic Society Avoid the Internal Conflicts that Plagued the Original
Group? The Nation. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://www.thenation.
com/article/archive/new-­sds/
Polletta, F. (2004). Freedom is an Endless Meeting (p. 189). University of
Chicago Press.
Rameau, M. (2008). Take Back the Land: Land, Gentrification and the Umoja
Village Shantytown. AK Press.
Robe, C. (2017). Breaking the Spell: A History of Anarchist Filmmakers, Videotape
Guerrillas, and Digital Ninjas (p. 215). PM Press.
Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). (January 16, 2006). SDS Press
Release. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/
web/20070704023258/http://www.studentsforademocraticsociety.org/
michigan/pdfs/Students%20for%20a%20Democratic%20Society%20-
%20Original%20Press%20Release.pdf
Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). (December 18, 2008). An Open
Letter: Come Occupy a Building with Us … Now. New School in Exile. Retrieved
from https://www.e-­flux.com/announcements/38593/an-­open-­letter-­come-­
occupy-­a-­building-­with-­us-­now/
Taylor, K. Y. (2019). Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry
Undermined Black Homeownership. University of North Carolina Press.
Students for a Democratic Society (May 23, 2008). SDS National Convention
Bulletin 1. Retrieved August 22, 2022, from https://sdsconventionbulletin.
wordpress.com/2008/05/23/hello-­world/
16 M. Holmes

United Electrical. (December 5, 2008). They Took Control of Their Workplace—

And They Won. UE News. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://www.
ueunion.org/ue-­news-­feature/2018/republic-­windows-­and-­doors-­plant-­
occupation-­10th-­anniversary
United Electrical. (December 5, 2018). They Took Control of Their Workplace-­
And They Won. UE News. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://www.
ueunion.org/ue-­news-­feature/2018/republic-­windows-­and-­doors-­plant-­
occupation-­10th-­anniversary
WE ARE THE CRISIS. (November 22, 2009). WE ARE THE CRISIS: The
Student Movement and the Coming Decade. https://wearethecrisis.blogspot.
com/2009/11/we-­are-­crisis-­student-­movement-­and.html
Wolfson, T. (2014a). Digital Rebellion: The Birth of the Cyber Left. p. 39
Wolfson, T. (2014b). Digital Rebellion: The Birth of the Cyber Left. p. 70
Wolfson, T. (2014c). Digital Rebellion: The Birth of the Cyber Left. p. 131.
 2
The Squares

In They Can’t Represent Us!: Reinventing Democracy from Greece to Occupy,

Marina Sitrin and Dario Azzelini (2014) offer a transnational analysis of
2011. They state, “We believe we have entered another significant histori-
cal epoch. This one is marked by an ever-increasing global rejection of
representative democracy, and simultaneously, a massive coming together
of people who were not previously organized, using direct democratic
forms to begin to reinvent ways of being together” (2014, p. 6). Drawing
on accounts of the movements in Spain, Greece, and the United States,
they tell the story of a global democratic uprising. According to their
interviews and observations, the squares movements of 2011 varied
depending on each local context and organizing history. However, what
was shared was a rejection of representative democracy and an insistence
of real or direct democracy in its place.
I agree that Occupy Wall Street (OWS) was part of this global revolu-
tion already under way. People were taking space in order to challenge
liberal democracy. The square existed in the liberal imaginary as the stand
in for the public sphere. Taking it over created a space of confrontation as
well as experimentation with alternative democratic forms and processes.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 17
M. Holmes, Organizing Occupy Wall Street, Alternatives and Futures: Cultures,
Practices, Activism and Utopias, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8947-6_2
18 M. Holmes

What is also essential to add, is that direct connections were made across
different contexts, especially in Egypt and Spain. These informed how
OWS was organized.

Egyptians in New York City

Throughout winter and spring of 2011, I followed the uprisings in North
Africa and the Middle East from a distance on my computer. I watched as
Tunisians took over the Kasbah in the capital, Tunis, the first square, and
then as Egyptians occupied Tahrir. I spent hours skimming through
Facebook, and Twitter trying to make sense of different accounts, and shar-
ing whatever I could with the student and youth movement in the US. In
the process, I connected with some members of the April 6 Youth Movement,
who had mobilized people to go to Tahrir. Ahmed Maher, in particular, took
the time to talk with me. He also happened to be making his first visit to the
United States and coming to NYC in April, so we planned to meet.
I organized an event for Ahmed and his friend Waleed Rashed at the
Brecht Forum, a Marxist social center in the West Village on 26, April
2011 to discuss the revolutionary transition in Egypt (A. Maher, personal
communication, April 25, 2011). Ahmed was an unlikely revolutionary,
being well educated, part of the Egyptian middle class, and trained as a
civil engineer. He was not imposing, as a medium build man with glasses,
and spoke in an even and diplomatic tone. Waleed, in contrast, was tall,
with dark hair, and often added rhetorical flair. Ahmed and Waleed spoke
to the room about the mobilization for 25 Jan street battles with police
and taking Tahrir. Both of them were incredibly optimistic about the
chances of a revolution succeeding.
After the talk, we wandered through the village together chatting and
Priya Reddy joined us. She was a petite Indian woman previously involved
in indymedia and the Global Justice Movement (GJM). Since then, she
had kept making media, and we had met a few years prior in media activist
circles in NYC. We all agreed to sit down in Bryant Park, a central location
nearby where they were staying, for an interview (P. Reddy, personal com-
munication, April 30, 2011). When Priya and I arrived with our camera
gear, Ahmed and Waleed were ordering ice cream from a nearby truck to
celebrate the revolution and to try their first ever soft serve. They were very
 2 The Squares 19

confused, wondering why it had no flavor, and determined Egyptian ice

cream was much better. I laughed, and said they were probably right.
Waleed helped translate for Ahmed, who gave more background on
their organizing. Ahmed explained that, in the beginning, they were in
touch with older generations who were part of the opposition movement,
and they gave them some ideas of how to organize and talk with people.
He stressed that social media was important, but that there were other
ways they organized, too:

We can use Facebook and Twitter for some people like us in Egypt who are
using Facebook and this kind of technology. Fine. But 40 per cent of
Egyptians are living on the poverty line in Egypt. They don’t know what
Facebook means. What we did many times was come down into the streets
to explain to them and talk to them why you are silent. Yeah, yeah. It was
very very important to come down into the street … Our talking with
people was very dangerous against the regime.

Ahmed wanted to emphasize non-centralized organizational structures

and decision-making, which he saw as fundamental for their growth.
“First of all, to work as an organization and be in a lot of cities and places,
things like that, you must have non-central decisions. Non-centralized.
Yeah. And also, you need to have some specialization so if I know how to
deal with media, I will be in the media group … If I know how to be with
people in the streets, I will be with those people talking. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Everybody must work in a group according to his mentality, his studies,
his interests—something like that. That is number one.”
They did not have a hierarchical model based on coercion and disci-
pline, but a more horizontal one in which people were self-organizing to
meet their needs. Everyone had something to contribute, and they encour-
aged participation. He thought this prepared them well for the revolution:

Let’s talk about the revolution days, and how people were organizing them-
selves. Actually, what happened during the revolution days … was a­ ccording
to the character and mentality of the people. When people are coming
together in difficult times, they can organize themselves and help each
other. What I would like to say is that nobody controls them. Nobody tells
them what to do at what time or where to go in Tahrir Square. They know
already in these kinds of cases what you should do. You should make the
20 M. Holmes

full support, the full help, and be helpful to each other. It was according to
the nature of people. We knew once we were in Tahrir Square everybody
could organize themselves.

Priya asked them about the US support of Mubarak, and its larger role in
the region. Ahmed was very critical and clear saying:

I’d like to ask a question: Was Mubarak a friend or enemy of Obama and
his management? Of course, he was a best friend to them. He was the best
friend of U.S. management. So how come he was the best of friends of
them and they are saying now that they are supporting? I’d like to explain
to everybody that the revolution in Egypt happened because of Egyptians
only. Only Egyptians. Nobody supported them. Nobody supported
Egyptians. And we’re going to complete our revolution with Egyptians and
no one else.

Priya asked about Hillary Clinton visiting Egypt, which seemed to make
both Ahmed and Waleed even more upset. They were well aware of the
US military aid to Egypt and had seen the violence this inflicted first-
hand. This was their reasoning for declining to meet with Clinton.
Ahmed emphasized, “When Hillary Clinton was in Egypt one month
ago, she asked to be in a room in a meeting. We refused it simply because
the teargas was thrown against us, the protestors, and some of our col-
leagues in the movement were killed, and some of them lost their eyes.
This was Made in USA.” Ahmed and Waleed wanted Americans to know
what was happening in Egypt, and to cut through the dominant narra-
tives in the U.S. press. They wanted people to know that the future of
Egypt belonged to Egyptians, and that they were part of a broader move-
ment in the region. They wanted people to see for themselves and invited
us to come to Egypt (Holmes, April 30, 2011a).

Chasing the Revolution

I wanted badly to see first-hand what was happening in Egypt, but I was
broke. I had been trying as best I could to save money from working
freelance gigs in New York. It still wasn’t much—maybe $1000. But I did
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Mutta alusta alkaen oli hänen läheisyytensä painostanut Gilliania
— tyttö tunsi aina hänen läsnäolonsa. Luostarikasvatus oli tehnyt
Gillianista kovin herkän, ja vaistomaisesti hän tiesi, milloin Craven
tuli huoneeseen tai poistui sieltä. Miehet olivat hänelle tuntemattomia
suuruuksia; niitä harvoja, jotka hän oli kohdannut —
koulutovereittensa veljiä tai serkkuja — hän oli tarkkaillut kokonaan
toiselta näkökannalta. Ranskalaisen luostarin jäykät säännöt olivat
estäneet kaikkia tuttavuussuhteita kehittymästä ystävyydeksi — hän
oli ollut vain koulutyttö muiden tyttöjen joukossa, ja vain loitolta
hipaissut nuorimpia miespuolisia jäseniä niissä taloissa, joissa hän
oli vieraillut. Hän oli ollut valmistumaton joutuessaan jokapäiväiseen
kosketukseen Barry Cravenin kaltaisen miehen kanssa. Hän tarvitsi
aikaa sopeutuakseen siihen, perehtyäkseen jatkuvaan miesseuraan.

Veljenpoikansa huojennukseksi oli neiti Craven ottanut ujon,

kalpeakasvoisen tytön omituisen sydämensä lemmikiksi niin äkkiä ja
intomielisesti, että se oli kummastuttanut häntä itseäänkin.

Ja Gillianin umpimielisyys ja ylpeys eivät olleet jaksaneet

vastustaa tuulispään tavoin pyörähtelevää, pientä naisihmistä. Neiti
Cravenin persoonallisuus teki häneen väkevän vaikutuksen; hän
rakasti hänessä naista, ihaili taiteilijaa ja oppi hyvin pian pitämään
arvossa hiomattoman käytöksen ja oudolta kuulostavien puheiden
takana piileviä todellisia tunteita ja syvää hyväsydämisyyttä.

Hänellä oli hyvä arvostelukyky. Nyt hän silmäili ympärilleen

avarassa huoneessa. Kaikkialla oli merkkejä tuhlaavasta autiudesta,
jota hänelle vastalauseista välittämättä osoitettiin. Gillianin silmiin
kihosivat vähitellen kyyneleet. Tämä kaikki oli kuin satua, melkein
liian ihmeellistä ollakseen totta. Miksi hänelle oltiin niin hyviä —
miten hän koskaan kykenisi maksamaan hänelle tuhlattua
suopeutta? Hänen ajatuksensa katkaisi viimeinen lahja, joka nousi
kopastaan, haukotteli unisesti, venyttelihe rehevästi, tuli sitten hänen
luokseen, laski päänsä hänen polvilleen ja katseli häntä surullisilla,
ruskeilla silmillään. Hän oli aina pitänyt eläimistä, halunnut palavasti
koiraa, ja nyt hän huoahtaen syleili isoa, mustaa villakoiraa.

»Mouston, sinä hemmoteltu olento, oletko milloinkaan ollut

yksinäinen? Osaatko kuvitella, miltä tuntuu, kun taaskin kuuluu
jollekulle?» Hän hieroi poskeaan koiran silkinpehmoiseen päähän, ja
eläin värähteli hänen kosketuksestaan, sen jäsenet hytkähtelivät, ja
se päästeli kimeitä, puolittain tukahdutettuja vinkaisuja.
Ensimmäisen kerran hän nyt tunsi olevansa omistaja,
vastuunalainen elävästä olennosta, joka oli riippuvainen hänestä. Ja
todennäköisesti se vastuunalaisuus osoittautuisi vaivaloiseksi.
Otuksen uskollisuus oli vilpitön ja kiivas; neiti Cravenia se sieti
välinpitämättömänä, Cravenia se avoimesti epäili. Se seurasi
Gilliania varjon lailla, jörötteli hänen poissa ollessaan ja alistuvasti
totteli Joshiota, jonka hoidossa se aina silloin oli, mutta ei ketään
muuta talon ihmistä. Moustonin välityksellä olivat Gillian ja Joshio
tutustuneet toisiinsa.

Tänä iltana olivat Moustonin kiintymyksenilmaukset ylen kiihkeitä

ja vaarallisia helposti repeytyvälle silkki- ja pitsivaatteukselle. Gillian
suuteli sen päälakea, torjui juhlallisena itsepäisesti häntä tavoittavan
käpälän ja työnsi koiran syrjään. Sitten hän meni pukeutumispöydän
ääreen ja tarkasti arvostelevasti itseään laajasta kuvastimesta. Hän
katsoi vakavan huvitettuna. Oliko tuo Gillian Locke? Näyttiköhän
perhonen itsestään noin oudolta luotuaan kotelonsa? Hän oli
vuosikausia käyttänyt luostarikoulun oppilaan synkkää asua, muutos
oli vielä kyllin tuore ilahduttaakseen häntä, ja viehättävä, kaunis puku
tehosi hänessä piilevään luonnolliseen naiseen. Tumma
luostarivaatteus oli käynyt hänestä vastenmieliseksi; hän oli
kaivannut värejä melkein yhtä kiihkeästi kuin nälkiintynyt ihminen
ruokaa.

Pitkästä peilistä heijastuvan kuvan yleisvaikutus oli tyydyttävä,

mutta sen yksityiskohtainen tarkastus nostatti hänen mielessään
vakavia epäilyksiä. Hän ei ollut koskaan pannut merkille hennon
vartalonsa viehkeyttä, kalpeiden, soikeiden kasvojensa harvinaista
kauneutta — muut tyypit olivat tehonneet häneen enemmän,
toisenlainen ihonväritys miellyttänyt häntä. Usein hän oli arvostellut
kasvojaan moittivasti. Kerran tai pari hän oli mallin puutteessa
koettanut piirtää omia kasvojaan. Se oli tyyten epäonnistunut.
Muiden muotokuvat hän pystyi piirtämään tarkan osuvasti, mutta nyt
siitä ei tullut mitään. Hän ei pystynyt omaan kuvaansa saamaan sitä
miltei hämmästyttävää, luonnetta kuvaavaa ilmeikkyyttä, joka
tavallisesti näkyi hänen töissään. Hän itse oli ollut oman kykynsä
rajana. Tämä epäonnistuminen oli pannut hänet ymmälle, herättänyt
hänen mielessään tutkivia, sielullisia kysymyksiä. Hän ei itse tiennyt,
miten hänen lahjansa pukeutui muotoihin, työ valmistui hänen
käsissään ikäänkuin itsestään. Hän ei tuntenut saavansa
minkäänlaisia varmoja vaikutelmia, ei milloinkaan ollut yrittänyt
eritellä mallinsa sielua. Hämärästi hän otaksui mallin luonteen
jollakin hienolla, salaperäisellä tavalla vaikuttavan häneen. Usein
olikin hänen työnsä ollut parasta silloin, kun hän oli omistanut siihen
vähimmän huolta. Osoittiko se, ettei hän pystynyt maalaamaan
kankaalle eloisaa kuvaa omista kasvoistaan, sitä, ettei hänellä ollut
luonnetta — että hänen epäonnistumisensa johtui siitä, ettei ollut
mitään ilmituotavaa? Vai oliko syynä se, että hän koetti nähdä jotakin
epätodellista — saada esille vain synnynnäisen pyrkimyksen? Sitä
kysymystä hän ei ollut ratkaissut.
 Nyt hän silmäili kuvaansa tyytymättömästi kuten tavallisesti; suuret
ruskeat silmät katsoivat peilistä äreinä häneen; sitten hän liikautti
kättään, ikäänkuin pyyhkäisten jotakin pois, ja ravisti päätään.
Koskaan ennen hän ei ollut välittänyt ulkonäöstään, mutta nyt hän
niin hartaasti halusi miellyttää — olla hänelle osoitetun huomion
arvoinen, korvata hänen tähtensä kulutetut rahat ja ajan. Hänen
silmiinsä tuli kaihoisa ilme, kun hän kumartui lähemmäksi kuvaansa
nähdäkseen, oliko kasvoilla kieleviä kyynelten jälkiä; sitten hän äkkiä
alkoi tanssia ihastuksesta, otti ihojauhehuiskun ja taputti sillä
kasvojaan kokeeksi.

»Voi, Gillian Locke, mitähän luostarinjohtajatar sanoisi!» mutisi

hän nauraen.

Ikävystyneenä syrjässäoloon villakoira hypähti häneen vieressään

olevalle tuolille, laski käpälänsä pöydän lasilevylle, niin että harjat ja
pullot hajaantuivat. Yhä nauraen Gillian hieroi jauhetta sen
innokkaasti nuuhkivaan, kosteaan nenään, kunnes se aivastaen pani
moittivan vastalauseensa.

Tyttö hyväili sitä sovittavasti, jätti sen sotkemaan

pukeutumispöytää yhä pahemmin ja palasi ikkunalle. Hänen
alapuolellaan ulottui nurmikko laajalle pengermälle, jota reunustavan
kivisen rintanojan keskikohdalta veivät pitkät portaat säännöllisesti
järjestettyyn ruusutarhaan. Tarhaa suojasi korkea kuusiaita, ja sen
taustalla kasvoi pensaikko, jonka toisella puolen näkyivät
iltavalaistuksessa rajattomiin leviävän puiston paksut rungot.

Häntä kiehtoi avaruuden tuntu. Hän oli aina kaivannut esteettömiä

näköaloja, maaseudun hiljaisuutta. Lyhyeksi leikatulla nurmikolla
kohosi korkeita puita ikäänkuin talon ympärille sijoitettuina vahteina;
mielikuvituksessaan hän ajatteli niitä valppaiksi, eläviksi olennoiksi,
jotka olivat valvoneet paikallaan yhtä mittaa vuosisatoja — ja hymyili
lapsellisille kuvitteluilleen.

Näköala miellytti häntä yhä enemmän. Towersin kauneus oli jo

vallannut hänet, hän oli pitänyt siitä ensi hetkestä alkaen. Pitkällä
rautatiematkalla ja ajettaessa kahdeksan kilometrin päässä olevalta
asemalta tänne hän oli koko ajan kuvitellut sitä, ja todellisuus oli
voittanut hänen kuvitelmansa. Puiston kauneus ja laitumella olevat
kaurislaumat olivat riemastuttaneet häntä; nähdessään vanhan,
harmaan talon hän oli jäänyt seisomaan kuin lumottuna. Hän ei ollut
luullut sitä puoliksikaan niin viehättäväksi, niin vaikuttavan vankaksi.
Hän ei ollut nähnyt mitään, mikä olisi vetänyt vertoja sen hienoille
mittasuhteille, sen rakenteen upeudelle.

Se oli kokonaan toisenlainen kuin ne Ranskan linnat, joissa hän oli

käynyt; siellä pisti työ silmään, viinitarhat ja aaltoilevat viljapellot oli
siellä ahdettu ulottumaan ihan tilanomistajan asunnon muurien
juurelle, varakkuuden lähdettä näyteltiin peittelemättä; täällä oli
kaikki sentapainen karkoitettu loitolle; huolekkaasti hoidetut
lehtokujat, tasaisiksi leikatut nurmikot ja moitteettomat kukkapenkit
olivat todistuksina työstä, jonka tulokset hivelivät silmää, mutta olivat
aineellisesti hyödyttömät.

Ympäristön muodollinen uhkeus tehosi häneen. Hän ei ollut ihan

ventovieras, mietti hän, hymyillen omituisesti — myöhemmästä
rappiotilastaan huolimatta John Locke oli saanut alkunsa
samanlaisesta juuresta kuin tämän ihastuttavan talon omistaja.

Äkkiä hän säikähtäen tajusi myöhästyvänsä ja poistui ikkunalta,

kutsuen koiraa mukaansa. Hänen huoneistostaan päästiin pyöreälle
parvekkeelle, johon makuuhuoneiden ovet avautuivat ja joka kiersi
talon keskiosan ympäri. Sieltä näkyi avaraan, neliskulmaiseen saliin,
johon valoa tuli korkeasta, lasisesta kupukatosta. Itäänpäin ja
länteenpäin levisivät pitkät, laajat, epäsäännölliset kylkirakennukset
kerrosta korkeampina kuin talon ydinosa. Niiden katoilla oli
harjatornit, joista koko talo oli saanut nimensä.

Alhaalta kuului hiljaista miesäänten sorinaa. Gillian kumartui

kaiteen ylitse ja näki Cravenin ja hänen tilanhoitajansa
keskustelevan tyhjän takan edessä. Hänet valtasi äkillinen ujostelu;
hänen holhoojansa tuntui yhäti hänestä peloittavalta, ja Petersin hän
oli ensi kerran nähnyt muutamia tunteja sitten, kun mies oli ollut heitä
vastassa asemalla; hän oli lyhyt, leveäharteinen ja lihavahko, hänen
tukkansa oli tuuhea ja harmaa, suippoparta lyhyeksi leikattu. Hänen
oli kovin vaikea omasta aloitteestaan mennä alakertaan heidän
luokseen. Mutta hänen tuskaisesti empiessään joudutti Mouston
välttämätöntä ratkaisua syöksymällä portaita alas ja sitten suoraa
päätä karhuntaljaiselle uunimatolle, työntäen sitten kuononsa sen
sakeaan turkkiin ja nuuhkien rajusti. Vastuuntunne voitti arkailun, ja
Gillian riensi perässä, mutta Peters ennätti ennen häntä ja otti
vastustelevan koiran pään lujasti käsiensä väliin.

»Mitä ihmettä se on saanut kuonoonsa, neiti Locke?» tiedusti hän

kummastellen, mutta tuuheiden, harmaiden kulmakarvojen alitse
tyttöön suunnatut, terävät, siniset silmät tuikkivat hilpeästi, eikä
Gillianin ujous jaksanut vastustaa hänen ystävällisyyttään.

Tyttö polvistui ja pyyhki koiran kiusattua kuonoa pitsi- ja

harsopuseronsa liepeellä.

»Ihojauhetta», ilmoitti hän totisena.

»Te ette voi aavistaa», lisäsi hän, katsahtaen äkkiä heihin päin,
»kuinka hauskaa on panna ihojauhetta nenälleen, kun on kasvatettu
luostarissa. Nunnat pitivät sitä turmeluksen huippuna.» Hän
purskahti nauramaan; se oli tyttömäinen, kiirivä hilpeyden puuska,
jollaista Craven ei vielä ollut kuullut, ja hän katsahti tyttöön, joka oli
polvillaan matolla, tyynnytellen koiran loukattuja tunteita ja hymyillen
Petersille, joka tarjosi omaa, tehtävään paremmin sopivaa
nenäliinaansa. Se nauru paljasti Cravenille erään seikan —
itsehillinnästään ja umpimielisyydestään huolimatta Gillian oli
sittenkin vain tyttö, mutta hänen hiljaisen vakavuutensa tähden
Craven oli sen unohtanut.

Hänen nyt tarkkaillessaan tyttöä, nousi hänen kasvoilleen keveä

pilvi. Peters näkyi muutamissa tunneissa päässeen sen rajamuurin
sisälle, jonka ulkopuolella hän oli vielä kuukausien jälkeen. Hänen
seurassaan Gillian aina oli ujon äänetön. Niinä muutamina harvoina
kertoina, jolloin hän Pariisissa ja Lontoossa oli joutunut olemaan
kahden kesken tytön kanssa, oli tämä vetäytynyt kuoreensa eikä
ollut puhutellut häntä. Ja ärtyneenä hän oli aprikoinut, kuinka
suureksi osaksi se johtui luontaisesta kainostelusta ja kuinka
suureksi osaksi luostarikasvatuksesta. Mutta hän ei ollut
koettanutkaan ymmärtää tyttöä sen läheisemmin, sillä entisyys
väikkyi aina hänen silmäinsä edessä, valliten hänen taipumuksiaan
ja tunteitaan — yhtenään muistuttaen, ikäänkuin nykien hänen
kyynärpäätään. Joinakuina päivinä saattoi hän saada huojennusta
ainoastaan ruumiillisesta väsymyksestä ja katosi tuntikausiksi
kamppaillakseen pahojen henkiensä kanssa yksinäisyydessä.
Eikähän häntä missään nimessä kaivattu; hänen oli joka suhteessa
paras pysytellä syrjässä. Hänellä ei ollut mitään tekemistä — John
Locken harkitsemattoman välinpitämättömyyden johdosta ei
holhoustehtävään liittynyt raha-asiain hoitoa. Neiti Craven oli ottanut
Gillianin kokonaan haltuunsa, ja Craven eristäytyi yrittämättäkään
päästä läheisiin suhteihin holhottinsa kanssa. Mutta nyt — kuinka
ristiriitaista — häntä harmitti se, että Gillian niin helposti taipui
Petersiin. Hän tunsi olevansa hupsu — eihän se merkinnyt hänelle
rahtuakaan — Peters veti ihmisiä puoleensa, sehän oli sananparsi
— mutta järkeilystä huolimatta hänen kasvonsa pysyivät synkkinä.

Ikäänkuin tuntien hänen tarkastavan itseään Gillian kääntyi ja

kohtasi hänen tutkivan katseensa. Tytön poskille lehahti puna, hän
työnsi koiran luotaan ja nousi hätäisesti pystyyn. Taaskin sai ujous
vallan, ja hän oli hyvillään, kun neiti Craven saapui hengästyneenä ja
anteeksi pyydellen.

»Myöhästynyt kuten tavallisesti! Minä myöhästyn silloinkin, kun

tuomiopäivän pasuuna törähtää. Mutta tällä kertaa se ei tosiaankaan
ollut oma syyni. Rouva Appleyard tuli luokseni — vanha
taloudenhoitajattaremme — ja hänen kielensä lauloi runsaan tunnin.
Nyt olen perillä kaikesta, mitä Towersissa on tapahtunut sen jälkeen,
kun viimeksi olin täällä — kuumentaako korviasi, Peter? —
kuvaannollisesti hän kiskoi minua perässään ylisiltä kellareihin ja
sitten takaisin ylisille. Hän on liikuttavan mielissään siitä, että talo on
taaskin asuttuna.»

Puhellessaan hän asteli toisten edellä ruokasaliin. Se oli

tavattoman tilava huone; sen seinät olivat laudoitetut kuten talon
useimpien huoneiden; pöytä muistutti keidasta aavikkomaisella
persialaisella matolla, iso takka oli silmäänpistävä, ja seinillä oli
muutamia perheen arvokkaimpia muotokuvia. Saliin astuessaan neiti
Craven vaistomaisesti etsi katseellaan veljensä kuvaa, joka hänen
kuolemansa jälkeen — suvussa noudatetun tavan mukaisesti — oli
riippunut kohokuvin koristetun uunin reunuksen kohdalla. Mutta se
oli siirretty pois, ja sen sijalle oli pantu Barryn äidin kaunis maalaus.
Hän katkaisi äkkiä lauseensa kesken. »Uudistusko?» jupisi hän
veljenpojalleen älykkäät silmät suunnattuina Cravenin kasvoihin.

»Korjaus», vastasi Craven lyhyesti, mennen tuolinsa luokse. Ja

hänen sävynsä teki kaikki lisähuomautukset mahdottomiksi. Täti
istuutui mietteissään ja alkoi äänettömänä syödä keittoa
epämääräisesti levottomana siitä, että oli poikettu miespolvia
noudatetusta tavasta. Vaikka hän ei välittänytkään sovinnaisuuksista
ja oli perin uudenaikainen, piti hän kuitenkin kiinni suvun
perinnäistavoista, ja ikimuistoisista ajoista saakka oli Cravenien
viimeisen suvunpäämiehen muotokuva riippunut avaran ruokasalin
takan kohdalla siihen asti, kunnes se siirtyi seuraajansa tieltä. Se
kaikki tuntui liittyvän siihen peloittavaan muutokseen, joka Barryssä
oli näkynyt hänen palattuaan Jaappanista. Muutoksen oli täti yhä
varmemmin asettanut sen miehen yhteyteen, jonka kuva oli
ikäänkuin arvottomana poistettu kunniasi Jaltaan. Arvottomana
totisesti — mutta mistä saattoi Barry sen tietää? Mitä hän oli kuullut
siinä maassa, joka niin turmiokkaasti oli vetänyt hänen isäänsä
puoleensa? Vanha, häpeällinen tarina, jonka hän oli uskonut olevan
iäksi haudatun, näytti nousevan kammottavana aaveena
haudastaan, jossa se oli niin kauan virunut kätkettynä.

Häntä puistatti hieman, ja päättävästi hän karkoitti luotaan

mieleensä tunkeutuvat, tuskalliset ajatukset, antautuen vilkkaasti
keskustelemaan Petersin kanssa.

Tyytyväisenä siihen, ettei häntä huomattu, Gillian silmäili

ympärilleen arkailevan tarkkaavasti; tilava huone himmeine, varsin
muodollisine kalustoineen ja hienoine tauluineen miellytti häntä.
Kaikki oli järjestetty hyvin sopusointuisesti; räikeätä ja
silmäänpistävää oli vältetty; sähkövaloa oli huolekkaasti kartettu, ja
vain vahakynttelit paloivat paksuissa hopeajaloissaan pöydällä.

Iso talo muuttui joka hetki yhä kiehtovammaksi, pitäen häntä

ikäänkuin lumoissaan. Hän antautui siihen, sen herättämään,
omituiseen onnentunteeseen. Se tuntui hänestä kummallisen tutulta.
Hänet valtasi outo tunne — ikäänkuin hän olisi ollut matkoilla
lapsuudestaan saakka ja tullut nyt kotiin. Se oli järjetön ajatus, mutta
se ihastutti häntä.

Hänellä ei ollut koskaan ollut kotia, mutta kahden lähimmän

vuoden aikana hän saattaisi olla olevinaan ikäänkuin hänellä olisi
koti. Se olisi helppoa. Koko ikänsä hän oli elänyt unelmien
maailmassa, jossa asui hänen oman mielikuvituksensa luomia
haaveolentoja, nukkeja, jotka nöyrästi noudattaen hänen tahtoaan
kulkivat oletetuilla eksyttävillä poluilla — henkimaailmassa, jossa hän
liikkui hänen vapauttaan rajoittavien, ahtaiden muurien estämättä.
Hänen oli ollut helppo uneksimalla unohtaa todellisuus luostarissa —
kuinka paljoa helpommin se kävisikään täällä, missä unelmien linna
oli vankkaa todellisuutta ja hänen mielikuvituksensa kannustimena
oli ihmisten rakkaus, jota hänen sydämensä oli halannut. Se
rakkaus, joka siihen saakka oli tullut hänen osakseen, oli ollut
epätyydyttävää, liian persoonatonta, liian rajoitettua, liiaksi
kietoutunut mystilliseen hartauteen. Neiti Cravenin kiintymys oli
lujempaa, käytännöllisempää laatua. Ajattelemattoman
suorasukaisena ja vilpittömänä hän ei koettanutkaan salata
tunteitaan. Gillian oli häntä miellyttänyt, saavuttanut hänen
hyväksymisensä, ja vihdoin hän puolestaan oli ottanut tytön perheen
lisäjäseneksi. Ja lisäksi hän suuresti luotti omaan arvostelukykyynsä.
Ja osoittaakseen sen luottamuksen paikkansapitäväksi Gillian olisi
ollut valmis menemään vaikka tuleen.
 Hän katsahti kiitollisena pöydän alapäässä istuvaan pieneen,
tanakkaan olentoon, ja hilpeä välke karkoitti vakavuuden hänen
silmistään. Neiti Craven oli syventynyt kiivaasti väittelemään Petersin
kanssa, piirtäen selvitykseksi suolalusikalla taidokkaita kuvioita
sileään ruokaliinaan. Gillianin tarkatessa hän täydensi piirroksensa
komealla vetäisyllä ja nojautui voitonriemuisena taaksepäin
tuolissaan, pörröttäen tukkansa eriskummaisen näköiseksi. Mutta
perään antamatta ahdisti tilanhoitaja häntä, ja hetkisen kuluttua hän
oli uudelleen kallistunut eteenpäin, vakuutellen voimaperäisesti ja
naputtaen maltittomasti sormillaan pöytää naurusuin muuttaessaan
kuviotaan. He olivat mitä parhaita ystävyksiä ja kinastelivat
yhtenään. Gillianista se kaikki oli niin raikkaan uutta.

Sitten hänen huomionsa kääntyi toisaalle. Koko aterian ajan oli

Craven istunut äänettömänä. Kerran alettuaan sanasodan kiistelivät
täti ja Peters kaikessa ystävyydessä, kunnes asia perinpohjin oli
reposteltu, lainkaan muistamatta ympäristöään. Craven ei ollut
sekaantunut väittelyyn. Kuten aina oli Gillian nytkin liian kaino
puhutellakseen häntä omasta aloitteestaan, mutta tunsi voimakkaasti
hänen läsnäolonsa.

Tyttö moitti omaa käytöstään, mutta vaitiolo oli parempi kuin

jokapäiväiset kuluneet lauseet, ja muuta hän ei olisi osannut sanoa.
Hänen näköpiirinsä oli niin suppea, kun taas Cravenin, joka oli
matkustellut kaikkialla maailmassa, täytyi olla hyvin laaja. Yhtä alaa
lukuunottamatta olivat Gillianin tiedot mitättömät. Mutta Cravenkin oli
taiteilija — oli toivotonta yrittää ottaa sitä puheeksi, hän päätteli,
halveksien vähäisiä tietojaan; olisi julkeata mennä tyrkyttämään
luostarissa kasvaneen amatöörin mielipiteitä sellaiselle henkilölle,
joka oli opiskellut Pariisin kuuluisissa ateliereissä ja tutustunut
useiden maiden taiteeseen.
 Mutta kuitenkin hän oli varma, että hänen oli joskus murrettava
oman ujoutensa kohottama muuri; maalaistalon tuttavallisessa
elämässä olisi sellaisen olotilan jatkuminen sekä mahdoton että
naurettava. Harmissaan itselleen hän tunnusti, että heidän väliensä
kireys oli suureksi osaksi hänen syytänsä, ettei hän harjoituksen
puutteessa osannut menetellä toisin. Mutta hän ei voinut
loppumattomasti vedota sellaiseen pätemättömään puolustukseen.
Jos hänestä kerran oli mihinkään, täytyi hänen vapautua niistä
sovinnaistavoista, joihin hänet oli kasvatettu; hän oli irtautunut
ahtaasta entisyydestä; nyt hänen oli ajateltava laajanäköisesti,
luontevasti kaikista asioista — niinkin mitättömästä seikasta kuin
seurustelusta.

Pelastava huumorintajunta nostatti hänen kaulaansa naurun, joka

oli vähällä purskahtaa ilmoille. Sehän oli niin pieni asia, mutta hän oli
suurentanut sitä niin tavattomasti. Mitä se itse asiassa saattoi olla —
sellaisen koulutytön kömpelyyttä, jota hänen huoltajansa varsin
luonnollisesti ei ollut huomaavinaan, sillä eihän hänen seuransa
voinut olla muuta kuin ikävystyttävä. Tant pis! Hän saattoi ainakin
koettaa olla kohtelias.

Hän kääntyi, sankarillisesti aikoen murtaa jään ja aloittaa

keskustelun vaikkapa kuinkakin turhanpäiväisistä asioista. Mutta
hänen katseensa ei ennättänyt Cravenin kasvoihin, vaan juuttui
hänen käsiinsä, jotka lepäsivät valkealla pöytäliinalla pitkien,
voimakkaiden sormien pyöritellessä ja kieputellessa tyhjää viinilasia.
Käsillä oli Gillianiin tenhoisa vaikutus. Niistä ilmeni luonne, niistä näki
ihmisen henkilöllisiä ominaisuuksia. Hän oli herkkä tajuamaan niiden
merkkejä. Hän oli harrastanut käsitutkimuksia hänelle tarjona olleen
rajoitetun aineiston avulla — tarkkaillut nunnien käsiä, pappien käsiä,
eri henkilöiden käsiä niissä taloissa, joissa hän oli vieraillut, ja sen
miehen kättä, joka oli häntä opettanut. Siltä mieheltä hän oli oppinut
enemmän kuin taiteensa pelkät alkeet, hänen johdollaan oli
alkeellinen harrastus kehittynyt määrätietoiseksi opiskeluksi, ja kun
hän nyt silmäili Barry Cravenin käsiä, johtui hänen mieleensä muuan
lause opettajansa luennoista: »Joissakuissa käsissä, etenkin
miesten käsissä, on luonteenomaisia piirteitä, jotka ilmaisevat
intohimoja ja ominaisuuksia ja pistävät silmään yhtä selvästi kuin
kasvonilmeet.»

Syventyen tarkkailuunsa hän unohti alkuperäisen tarkoituksensa,

pannen merkille uuden tyypin silmäänpistäviä tunnuksia ja luetellen
yksityiskohtia, jotka yhdessä muodostivat kokonaisuuden. Voimakas
käsi, joka voimassaan saattoi olla armoton — saattoiko se
voimassaan olla myöskin säälivä? Tämä kummallinen ajatus heräsi
odottamatta hänen mieleensä hänen tarkkaillessaan ensin vinhasti,
sitten hitaammin pyörivän viinilasin ohutta kantaa, joka hiljaa
kilahtaen äkkiä katkesi, kun käsi puristui nyrkkiin, niin että päivettynyt
iho rystysten kohdalta vaaleni. Gillian vetäisi nopeasti henkeään.
Oliko vahinko hänen syytään — oliko hän tuijottanut
huomiotaherättävästi, niin että Craven oli suuttunut hänen
nenäkkyyteensä? Hänen kasvojaan poltti, ja surkean ujona hän
pakottautui katsomaan Cravenia kasvoihin. Hänen pahoittelunsa oli
aiheeton. Hänestä välittämättä Craven silmäili sormiensa vieressä
olevaa särkynyttä lasia kasvoillaan lievän kummastuksen ilme,
ikäänkuin olisi vahinko saanut hänen harhailevat ajatuksensa vain
puolittain palaamaan nykyisyyteen. Hetkisen hän tuijotti lasin
kappaleihin, pannen ne sitten välinpitämättömästi syrjään.

Gillian hillitsi hysteeristä naurunhaluaan. Craven välitti hänestä

niin äärettömän vähän, ettei edes tämä pikku tapaus ollut herättänyt
häntä huomaamaan toisen tarkastelua. Ajatuksiinsa vaipuneena hän
ihan ilmeisesti oli penikulmien päässä Craven Towersista ja
vaivaloisesta holhokista. Ja äkkiä se tuntui loukkaavalta. Hän oli
Cravenille ainoastaan kaino, kömpelö tyttö, jonka pelkkä
olemassaolo oli rasitus. Hänen niin uljaasti tekemänsä päätös särkyi
toisen kylmään eristymiseen. Puheleminen oli mahdottomampaa
kuin milloinkaan ennen.

Hän kohautti vähän olkapäitään huulet hieman lerpallaan. Ja

uskoen Cravenin olevan omissa aatoksissaan hän jatkoi
tarkasteluaan. Oliko kotiintulo tehnyt Cravenin silmien ilmeen
entistäkin murheellisemmaksi ja syventänyt juovia hänen suunsa
ympärillä — tekikö palvotun äidin muisto hänen kasvoillaan
väikkyvän kärsimyksen ilmeen vieläkin terävämmäksi? Vai liioitteliko
Gillianin ylenmäärin kiihtynyt mielikuvitus hänen näkemäänsä,
uskotellen pelkkää ikävystymistä syväksi suruksi? Hän mietti sitä ja
oli melkein johtunut sellaiseen päätelmään, että viimemainittu selitys
oli järkevämpi, kun hän — tarkkaillessaan — näki miehen kasvoilla
äkillisen, niin tuskaisen värähdyksen, että hän rajusti puraisi
huultaan tukahduttaakseen huudahduksen. Silmänräpäykseksi
välähtänyt ilme oli paljastanut hänelle kärsivän sielun. Hätäisesti hän
loi katseensa toisaalle, syvästi pahoitellen väärää arveluaan. Hän oli
löytänyt salaisen haavan. Hänen istuessaan jäykkänä valtasi hänet
pelko, että toisetkin mahdollisesti olivat sen nähneet. Vaivihkaa hän
vilkaisi heihin. Mutta väittely oli vielä ratkaisematta, heidän välillään
oli pöytäliina raavittu täyteen sekavia kuvioita. Hän huoahti
huojennuksesta. Vain hän oli sen huomannut, eikä hänestä ollut
väliä. Muutamia minuutteja hänen ajatuksensa risteilivät hurjasti,
kunnes hän seisautti ne, rypistäen otsaansa. Se ei ollut hänen
asiansa — hänellä ei ollut oikeutta edes mietiskellä Cravenin asioita.
 Äkäisenä itselleen hän haihduttaakseen ajatuksiaan kääntyi
katselemaan seinillä riippuvia kuvia — ne ainakaan eivät herättäisi
häiritseviä kysymyksiä. Mutta hänen päätöksensä pitää ajatuksensa
loitolla holhoojastaan kohtasi esteen jo heti alussa, sillä hän huomasi
tuijottavansa Barry Craveniin, mutta sellaisessa asussa, jollaisen
hän oli kuvitellut hänen ylleen silloin, kun he ensi kerran kohtasivat
toisensa — teräspukimissa.

Kuva esitti nuorta miestä, joka oli puettu kuningatar Elisabetin

aikaisen kuosin mukaisesti, yllään keveä, siro rautapaita,
huolettomasti nojaamassa kiviseen rintanojaan, ranteellaan haukka,
jonka pää oli verhottu. Kuvattu nuorukainen muistutti Craven
Towersin omistajaa tavattoman läheisesti — ruumiinrakenne oli
sama, pään ylväs asento sama, piirteet ja ihonväri samat.
Ainoastaan suu oli maalatulla urholla toisenlainen, sillä huulet eivät
olleet jurosti yhteenpuristetut, vaan kaartuneet erittäin miellyttävään
hymyyn. Muotokuva oli äsken puhdistettu, ja värit olivat raikkaan
kirkkaat. Miehen ryhti oli omituisen sulava senaikaiseksi, sen ajan
sovinnaisesta maalausta vasta huolimatta huokui siitä tarmoa — jota
huoleton asento vain huonosti salasi — ikäänkuin taiteilija olisi
totellut traditsionia voimakkaampaa vaikutusta. Koko olento tuntui
uhkuvan elämää. Gillian katseli kuvaa lumottuna; vaistomaisesti
hänen katseensa suuntautui muotokuvan käsiin. Toinen, haukkaa
pitelevä, oli kirjaillun nahkahansikkaan peittämä, mutta toinen, jossa
oli haukan jalkahihnoja, oli paljas. Ja myöskin kädet olivat
samanlaiset, niiden piirteet tunnontarkasti kuvatut.

Petersin ääni sai Gillianin hätkähtämään. »Katselette ensimmäistä

Barry Cravenia, neiti Locke. Se on ihastuttava maalaus.
Yhdennäköisyys on tavaton, eikö totta?»
 Gillian kääntyi katsomaan pöydän toisella puolen istuvaa,
herttaisesti hymyilevää tilanhoitajaa.

»Se on — tavaton», virkkoi hän hitaasti. »Se saattaisi olla

entisaikojen asuun puetun herra Cravenin muotokuva, jollei taulun
maalaustapa niin suuresti poikkeaisi nykyisestä.»

Peters naurahti.

»Ammattimiehen silmä, neiti Locke. Mutta olen hyvilläni siitä, että

myönnätte sen olevan herra Cravenin näköisen. Olisin riidellyt
kanssanne hirveästi, jollette olisi sitä nähnyt. Kuvan esittämä nuori
mies», jatkoi hän, lämmeten puhumaan huomatessaan tytön
mielenkiinnon, »oli aikansa romanttisimpia henkilöitä. Hän eli
Elisabetin hallitusaikana ja oli runoilija, kuvanveistäjä ja säveltäjä —
kirjastossa on kaksi nidettä hänen runojaan, ja salissa oleva
marmorinen Hermes on hänen työtään. Seitsentoistavuotiaana hän
lähti Towersista mennäkseen hoviin. Meidän aikoihimme saakka
säilyneistä monista kirjeistä päättäen hänestä nähtävästi pidettiin
yleisesti. Hän oli sir Philip Sidneyn läheinen ystävä, kuului Spenserin
lukuisain suosijoiden joukkoon ja oli Elisabetin erikoinen suosikki —
kuningattaren suosio näyttääkin aiheuttaneen hänelle jonkun verran
harmia, kuten näkyy hänen päiväkirjansa merkinnöistä. Kuningatar
teki hänestä ritarin ilman minkäänlaista aihetta, mikäli on selvinnyt, ja
näyttääpä se hämmästyttäneen häntä itseäänkin, sillä hän mainitsee
siitä päiväkirjassaan:

— 'Tänä päivänä löi Gloriana minut ritariksi. Jumala tietää, mistä

ansiosta se tapahtui, mutta minä en.'

— Hän oli idealisti ja haaveilija, ja hänellä oli kyky pukea

ajatuksensa sanoiksi — hänen rakkausrunonsa ovat kauneimpia,
mitä olen milloinkaan lukenut, mutta ne ovat ihan persoonattomia.
Mikään ei osoita hänen koskaan antaneen rakkauttaan ainoallekaan
'kauniille naiselle'. Ainoankaan naisen nimeä ei milloinkaan mainittu
hänen nimensä yhteydessä, ja kun hän pysytti hellät tunteet loitolla
itsestään, sai hän haavemielisessä hovissa hyväilynimen L'amant
d'Amour.

— Oltuaan kymmenen vuotta kuningattaren hovissa hän ihan

äkkiä varusti retkikunnan Amerikkaan. Syytä hän ei ilmaissut.
Hovissa vallitsevan teennäisyyden herättämä vastenmielisyys, suru
hänen ystävänsä Sidneyn kuoleman johdosta — tai lukuisten
kauppiasseikkailijain kertomien tarinain lietsoma vaellushalu ovat
saattaneet aiheuttaa tämän yllättävän askeleen. Hänen päätöksensä
teki hänen ystävänsä alakuloisiksi, ja Elisabet puhkesi vimmaiseen
sanatulvaan, komentaen häntä jäämään luokseen. Mutta
kuningattaren vannotteluista ja hartaista pyynnöistä huolimatta —
edellisiä oli runsaammin kuin jälkimäisiä — hän purjehti Virginiaan
lähteäkseen sieltä maaretkelle. Seuraavien lähivuosien aikana
saapui häneltä kaksi kirjettä, mutta sitten — ei kuulunut mitään.
Hänen kohtalonsa on tuntematon. Hän oli ensimmäinen Craven, joka
katosi unholaan etsiessään uusia maita.

Petersin miellyttävän äänen sointu muuttui empiväksi,

hiljaisemmaksi, vakavammaksi. Ja Gillian joutui ymmälle
huomatessaan tilanhoitajan hymyilevistä silmistä äkkiä kuvastuvan
huolestumisen. Hän oli kuunnellut kiihkeän tarkkaavasti. Se oli
historiaa, likeistä ja eloisaa, koska se oli niin läheisesti tämän talon
yhteydessä. Unelmien linna oli vieläkin ihmeellisempi kuin hän oli
kuvitellut. Hän hymyili kiitokseksi Petersille ja hengähti syvään.
 »Minä pidän siitä», sanoi hän. »Rakkauden rakastaja!» kertasi hän
sitten, katsoen uudelleen kuvaa. »Se on hyvin kaunis ajatus.»

»Perin harmillinen jokaiselle naisparalle, joka on ehkä ollut kyllin

hupakko menettääkseen sydämensä hänelle.» Neiti Cravenin sävy
oli pureva. »Usein olen aprikoinut, onkohan joku neito 'riutunut,
kaihoisasti haaveillessaan' hänestä», lisäsi hän, nousten pöydästä.

»Jos hän olisi siitä tiennyt, olisi hänellä ollut kylliksi syytä lähteä
Virginiaan», virkkoi Craven, naurahtaen kalseasti. »Sukumme
traditsionit eivät ole koskaan hellineet heikomman sukupuolen
liiallista palvomista.»

»Barry, sinä olet kamala!»

»Kenties, rakas täti, mutta sanani ovat osuvat», vastasi Craven

kylmästi, mennen lattian poikki avaamaan ovea. »Myöskin Petersin,
joka tuntee sukumme historian kuin viisi sormeaan, täytyy myöntää
se.»

Hänen äänensä oli uhittelevan vetoava, mutta Peters ei

sekaantunut asiaan lausuen vain lempeän pistävästi: »Kiitos sanasta
'myöskin', Barry!»

Veljenpojan sanat olisivat aikaisemmin nostattaneet neiti Cravenin

harmistuneena panemaan jyrkän vastalauseensa, sillä ne osuivat
hänen hellään kohtaansa. Mutta nyt varoitti vaistomainen, sisäinen
näkemys häntä pysymään vaiti. Hän pisti kätensä Gillianin kainaloon
ja poistui huoneesta yrittämättäkään aloittaa kinaa.

Seurusteluhuoneessa hän istuutui pasianssipöytään, viritti

savukkeen, pörrötti tukkaansa ja levitti kortit pöydälle otsa rypyssä.
Nyt hän oli entistä varmempi siitä, että niiden kahden vuoden aikana,
jotka Barry oli ollut poissa kotoa, oli tapahtunut joku tuhoisa
onnettomuus. Miehen koko luonne tuntui muuttuneen. Hän oli ihan
toisenlainen kuin ennen. Entinen Barry ei ollut ollut kova eikä
kyynillinen, mutta tämä uusi Barry oli. Muutamien viime viikkojen
aikana oli tädillä ollut runsaasti tilaisuutta arvostella. Hän oivalsi, että
Barryä vaivasi joku pimeä varjo, synkistäen hänen kotiintuloaan —
hän oli kuvitellut sen niin toisenlaiseksi ja huokasi ajatellessaan,
kuinka pettäviä toiveet olivat. Veljenpojan onni oli hänestä niin kallis,
että häntä raivostutti, kun hän ei kyennyt auttamaan. Ennenkuin
Barry puhuisi, ei hän voisi tehdä mitään. Ja hän tiesi, ettei Barry
puhuisi koskaan. Iltainen puuha menetti tavallisen viehätyksensä,
joten hän hajamielisesti pyyhkäisi kortit kokoon ja aloitti uudelleen.

Gillian istui uunimatolla Moustonin pää sylissään. Hän nojasi neiti

Cravenin tuoliin, haaveksien kuten oli haaveillut vanhassa
luostarissa, kunnes koira nostamalla äkkiä päätään kiinnitti hänen
huomiotaan siihen, että Peters seisoi hänen vierellään. Tilanhoitaja
katseli jonkun aikaa ääneti kortteja, osoitti nikotiinin tahraamalla
sormellaan neiti Cravenilta huomaamatta jäänyttä siirtoa, meni sitten
huoneen toiseen päähän ja istahti pianon ääreen. Hetkisen hänen
kätensä hiljaa hipuivat koskettimia; sitten hän alkoi soittaa, ja hän
soitti erinomaisesti. Gillian kuunteli ihmeissään. Peters ja musiikki
olivat tuntuneet olevan hyvin etäällä toisistaan. Mies oli näyttänyt niin
läpikotoiselta urheilijalta; siitä kirjallisuuden tutkimisesta huolimatta,
johon hänen myötätuntoinen esityksensä Elisabetin aikaisesta Barry
Cravenista oli viitannut, oli Gillian kuvitellut hänen harrastuksiansa
karkeamman ruumiillisiksi. Hän oli silminnähtävästi ulko-ilmassa
liikkuva mies, pyssy näytti luonnollisemmalta välineeltä hänen
käsilleen kuin pianon herkät koskettimet; hänen paksujen,
jokseenkin kömpelönnäköisten sormiensa ei olisi mitenkään uskonut
taipuvan siihen vienoon näppäilyyn, joka nyt täytti huoneen ihanilla,
sopusointuisilla sävelillä. Se oli kolaus Gillianin mieliteorialle, minkä
hän vastahakoisesti tunnusti. Mutta hänen ihastuneena
kuunnellessaan häneltä unohtui teoretisoiminen.

»Miksi hän ei ole antautunut musiikkialalle», kuiskasi hän

jymisevien sävelien suojassa. Hymyillen neiti Craven katsahti hänen
intoa uhkuviin kasvoihinsa.

»Voitko kuvitella Petersiä sukoilemassa konserttien ohjaajille tai

ilmehtimässä kuulijakunnalle?» huomautti hän, pelastaen kuninkaan
hylättyjen korttien läjästä.

Hymyillen vastaukseksi Gillian vaipui entiseen asentoonsa.

Musiikki vaikutti häneen syvästi, ja Petersin soitto tehosi hänen
herkkään taiteilijatemperementtiinsa. Kappale oli venäläinen
kansanlaulu, valittava ja koruton, ja siinä oli omituinen, lyhyehkö,
kertautuva loppusävel, joka muistutti tuskaisen sydämen huokausta
— siinä oli villin suruista harmoniaa, johon sisältyvä tuska ahdisti
kurkkua. Gillianin mieleen tulvahti murhetta huokuvan soiton
nostattama pahojen enteiden aalto, outo, epämääräinen pelko, jolla
ei ollut muotoa, mutta joka painoi häntä kuin rusentava taakka.
Viimeisten viikkojen onnellisuus tuntui äkkiä hukkuvan maailmassa
rehoittavaan surkeuteen. Jos sydämen sisimmät sopukat tutkittaisiin,
niin kuka oli tosionnellinen? Sitten hänen ajatuksensa suuntautuivat
lähemmäksi häntä itseänsä, lensivät hänen oman tyttöikänsä
lohduttomiin päiviin ja hänen isänsä kovaosaiseen elämään.
Senjälkeen ne hypähtivät eteenpäin, siirtyen nykyisyyteen, ja hän
ajatteli surua, jonka hän oli nähnyt kuvastuvan Cravenin kasvoista
lyhyen hetkisen aikana päivällispöydässä. Oliko maailmassa
ainoastaan murhetta? Haaveksivat ruskeat silmät sumentuivat.