|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge » Yobs allowed to climb on Stonehenge – yet again! |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
fitzcoraldo 2709 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 11:38
|
|
I guess there's some folks who.....perhaps... less said soonest mended love ya G |
|
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 11:58
|
|
On reflection I think I'm inclined to agree with you Fitz. Which is not to say I particularly like seeing people scrambling up the stones kicking off the lichen, I don't, because I think people who profess to have enough interest in Stonehenge to want to party there should have a bit more respect than to do it in the first place. And it irks me that a good few of the people there probably couldn't name another stone circle if their lives depended on it. Buuut it is a national icon isn't it, it's been a powerful symbol of something English? British? for a fair old while. And if you're going to have a celebration of the solstice (and whether you're a 'druid' or not, it's a good excuse for a knees up is it not) then where else would you ideally have such a thing. I don't like the mess I've seen people leave, I don't like the freeform digeridoo playing thing, I wouldn't like the crowds, I don't think I'll ever go myself. But if people can behave themselves a bit (by not spray painting their names on it) then it's only one day a year, what's the harm really? Does it matter if essentially a load of riffraff get off their faces there and / or mumble a load of druidic waffle about the sunrise (as would seem the stereotype). Isn't it theirs as much as anyone else's in this country? So long as they don't damage it, obviously. Poor stonehenge is the scapegoat for all prehistoric sites, i'm not sure it could ever be cured of being on the whistlestop tourist tour, or lose its hippy appeal. But if just a few people who go there at the solstice think 'wow' and it sparks an interest and love of the rest of our prehistoric heritage in them, isn't that a good thing? It must be the first site I went to when I was a kid, and I've pressed my nose up against the fence on numerous occasions since. And if I'm that bothered I can apply to get up close to the stones too, it's not difficult, and I don't have to go when 20,000 other people go. Suppose that could be controversial but at least there's two of us now Fitz. If we stand back-to-back we should be safe. |
|
|
A R Cane 30 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 13:59
|
|
Rhiannon wrote: On reflection I think I'm inclined to agree with you Fitz. Which is not to say I particularly like seeing people scrambling up the stones kicking off the lichen, I don't, because I think people who profess to have enough interest in Stonehenge to want to party there should have a bit more respect than to do it in the first place. And it irks me that a good few of the people there probably couldn't name another stone circle if their lives depended on it. Buuut it is a national icon isn't it, it's been a powerful symbol of something English? British? for a fair old while. And if you're going to have a celebration of the solstice (and whether you're a 'druid' or not, it's a good excuse for a knees up is it not) then where else would you ideally have such a thing. I don't like the mess I've seen people leave, I don't like the freeform digeridoo playing thing, I wouldn't like the crowds, I don't think I'll ever go myself. But if people can behave themselves a bit (by not spray painting their names on it) then it's only one day a year, what's the harm really? Does it matter if essentially a load of riffraff get off their faces there and / or mumble a load of druidic waffle about the sunrise (as would seem the stereotype). Isn't it theirs as much as anyone else's in this country? So long as they don't damage it, obviously. Poor stonehenge is the scapegoat for all prehistoric sites, i'm not sure it could ever be cured of being on the whistlestop tourist tour, or lose its hippy appeal. But if just a few people who go there at the solstice think 'wow' and it sparks an interest and love of the rest of our prehistoric heritage in them, isn't that a good thing? It must be the first site I went to when I was a kid, and I've pressed my nose up against the fence on numerous occasions since. And if I'm that bothered I can apply to get up close to the stones too, it's not difficult, and I don't have to go when 20,000 other people go. Suppose that could be controversial but at least there's two of us now Fitz. If we stand back-to-back we should be safe. Here, here! Make that 3. I remember making a drug-addled drive through the night back in 1984 when I was a student to catch the solstice at SH only to find it all cordoned off by the cops. Just as it came close to sunrise everyone crashed the barriers and proceeded to have a good time. Yes there was climbing on the stones, yes there was a hell of a mess afterwards and yes some people did behave like twats, but there was also a great feeling of benevolence in the air. It does only happen once a year and doesn't seem to leave too much lasting damage and when you consider the damage done to a lot of other sites, which have complete access all year round, I don't think we have real grounds for self-righteous indignation. I certainly don't condone this behaviour, but I can't bring myself to condemn it either, in fact I find it culturally quite interesting. |
|
Vicster 662 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 14:16
|
|
How refreshing to see a thread where there are 2 opposing views and yet no-one has seen fit to start a fight yet. Keep it up, one and all! xxxx p.s. - I'm with Fitz & Rhiannon on this one.... |
|
juamei 2013 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 15:09
|
|
Knees up, drink and drugs, music, debauchery, unlimited access (ish) all fine by me. Hell, if it wasnt for the fact Avebury is so much more chilled, I'd be doing all that at Stonehenge myself. Letting people climb on the stones, is a step too far as far as I am concerned. Can't be too much effort to have volunteers stopping people climbing on the stones. Bit of that, bit of a change in attitude towards more respect for the site itself, sorted. |
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 15:34
|
|
Aye, well said. There has to be a middle way. A free-for-all isn’t really the best way forward at such an iconic site – like The Sea Cat said above it’s disrespectful, and without respect everyone, and the site itself, loses out in the long run. No need to stop all access at solstice and equinox time but some restrictions/controls need to be in place - as they are at any major sports or concert event. |
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Edited Jun 22, 2011, 17:15
Jun 22, 2011, 16:09
|
|
fitzcoraldo wrote: Is it so bad to allow people to briefly take control of stonehenge at the solstice, especially as no lasting damage is done? Ok litter is dropped, stones are climbed and a hell of a lot of people have a really good time, Stonehenge can handle it for a day. The celebrations are hardly a free-for-all, heavy marshalling and policing esuring that everyone has a safe time and the site does not suffer anything other than superficial damage. The stones have witnessed destruction, rebuilding using heavy machinery, military manouvres, free festivals, police riot and all manner of abuses, the big old stones have not only survived but have thrived. Perhaps giving people a focus for their solstice partying takes the pressure away from many of our more vunerable sites and allows a lot of people to joyfully engage with the past on their own terms. f I held the same view as the above until quite recently - after the Battle of the Beanfield it seemed that opening up Stonehenge for Solstice celebrations was a just concession to what is the 'rights of the common people'. Have to say though that after seeing the photograph of someone shinning up between the trilithons and all the litter left behind afterwards that view has shifted considerably. Yesterday when I was searching for some Youtube footage I stumbled across a pagan Stonehenge website where 'climbing on the stones' was reported. Someone called 'Elf' commented that the party part of the celebration should be moved to Durrington Walls (as gathering together seemed to be what happened there in past times) with a more sombre procession up to Stonehenge just before daybreak. Why not separate the two aspects with the 'welcoming the sun' keeping a sense of awe, spirituality (or whatever people want to call it ) and the preceding party a few hundred metres away, elsewhere. PS: Good to see you here again Fitz! |
|
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 16:18
|
|
Yeah that twit shinning up between the trilithon, I really hope some people grew a spine and told him to get the fuck down, pelted him with some cider cans or something. Seeing him is what got my goat most from those photos grrr.
|
|
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 17:51
|
|
Rhiannon wrote: Yeah that twit shinning up between the trilithon, I really hope some people grew a spine and told him to get the fuck down, pelted him with some cider cans or something. Seeing him is what got my goat most from those photos grrr. Bump. |
|
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Jun 22, 2011, 18:12
|
|
Hmm. That's very disappointing. Really it is. I don't know how you can filter out riff raff scum. I mean a rifle would have done it in that situation, yes. But just because some people are riff raff scum does that mean that you have to say NO NONE OF YOU ARE ALLOWED IN EVER AGAIN EITHER, it just seems so draconian. Not everyone was climbing on the stones. I see people climbing on the stones at Avebury every time I'm there. In terms of climbs per stone per year I bet Avebury suffers much worse than stonehenge. It might well be the case that once a year Stonehenge is full of drunk drugged-up drum-playing riffraff. I think the stereotype of their appearance muddies the water a bit, because you know there'd be some gits climbing on the stones if the crowd were hooray henries with floppy fringes and rugby shirts brandishing bottles of champagne. And the people I've seen climbing on stones at Avebury usually look quite ordinary. I don't know the answer. Maybe it's a matter of grinning and bearing it, as it's just once a year. I still have to stick with Fitz. So what would be your solution LS? Assuming the rifle idea of mine is a bit extreme. |
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
