|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury updates |
This topic is locked
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 05:05
|
||
|
I'm not getting involved in anything as radical as Father Ted! Whether a demo would be a damp squib I don't know but (a.) I doubt it would bring about "accurate and up-to-the-minute progress reports" (just a hunch!) and (b.) I personally would guess that the Time Capsule idea won't go ahead. Not in Silbury anyway... As for "a simple non-intrusive ceremony open to all and culminating in the sealing of Silbury once and for all" people are welcome to do what they want but personally I'd rather chew my leg off than go to one of those. Judging by the pictures from the opening event I don't think I have a natural affinity with either of the groups represented - http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/search/zoom.php?imid=514612 http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/zoom.php?imid=514611 That's the trouble though isn't it? The third group is never invited.
|
|||
|
VenerableBottyBurp 675 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 09:37
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: taxpayers. I thought we lived in a worker's collective" (Michael Palin and Terry Jones I think). I think EH are soundly demonstrating why they should not be in sole charge of presenting history at any site anywhere in the country, and particularly at Stonehenge. They insist on doing everything in-house then get the story horribly wrong and leave lots of important details out. What I have seen at Silbury is a complete let-down, and as pointed out above, the presentation on the web has lost of shortcomings. EH have perhaps noticed they have been shown up by an unofficial site who has no special access - an amateur who is not amateurish showing professionals what the public want. VBB
|
|||
moss 2897 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 10:34
|
||
Ssssh everyone.... 14th to 15th July; Silbury Hill Acoustics .. replica prehistoric instruments to be played ON the hill ;) National Archaeology Week, and if you don't like that how about free lessons in dowsing at the Rollright Stones.... not forgetting Portable Antiquities Roadshow in your area in the same week... ducks quickly ;)
|
|||
Pete G 3506 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 11:56
|
||
well the later group even made it onto Have I got New for You 2 weeks ago as the butt of a building joke.
|
|||
|
Pete G 3506 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 12:20
|
||
|
"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you! I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!"
|
|||
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 08, 2007, 13:04
|
||
|
They insist on doing everything in-house then get the story horribly wrong and leave lots of important details out. You mean like the Olympic logo ;-) Bungling incompetence all round - and here's another example. Heard this morning that quite young children (10-13 year-olds) have been vandalising the Richard Jefferies House at Coate Water (breaking the 180 year old windows). The Richard Jefferies Society and Jefferies Land Conservation Trust are saying they would like the council to put a tenant in part of the house but the council are saying they are constrained by the... (wait for it)... Right to Buy legislation." Grrr... the kids need a clip round the ear, and the bureaucrats a kick up the backside :-)
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jun 09, 2007, 08:14
|
||
|
and the bureaucrats a kick up the backside..... In truth though, a kick up the backside isn't the precise answer when it comes to heritage bureaucracy. VBB has put his finger on it when he says EH shouldn't be "in sole charge". Or at least, I would suggest, should be much more open to public participation in their decisions. Two recent examples of things that would have gone better if they'd simply made the public party to discussions rather than adopting a "we alone must decide" attitude : First, how on earth, at a minute to midnight in the Silbury project have they STILL not decided whether to put a marker in the fill or not? Could this not have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction years ago? Second, we have on the 5 March "To put your minds at rest, there are certainly no plans to deposit anything inside Silbury Hill" and then on 1 June we have "We are not placing offerings inside the Hill, other than the 'time capsule' being designed by the children of Avebury school." Its all self-inflicted embarrassment IMO. Its good to talk.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 09, 2007, 09:46
|
||
|
Yes, but that ignores the satisfaction factor that a clip round the ear and a kick up the backside would give ;-) As for deciding whether or not to put a marker in the fill boggles the mind. I've said elsewhere that it's virtually impossible to introduce an infill of this size without it being detectable (and if English Heritage don't know that they should). Even if the composition of the fill is absolutely the same as the original (and that's highly unlikely as there are bound to be minor differences in composition) the way the fill is packed into the tunnel is never going to be exactly the same as the original. It's just unprofessional bol*ocks. Something similar happened when the beautiful British Museum Atrium was built a few years ago. Can't remember the exact details now but for one of the new doorways they used Portland Stone from France, instead of Portland Stone sourced in this country. The French stone looks the same as the English stone now but unfortunately ages differently. Estimates are that in about 60 years the French stone will look completely different to the original English stone. Sigh... didn't someone check that? Or was it just a question of, 'get the cheapest and get it in quick'?
|
|||
|
slumpystones 769 posts |
Jun 09, 2007, 17:28
|
||
|
I remember the British Museum fiasco well. Unfortunately, the screw-up was not noticed until the majority of building work had been completed, and rather than stop it, apportion blame, and get it changed, it was a case of "Oh well, it's a bit late to mess about with it now" and the project continued. A bit of digging unearthed some of the Evening Standard articles that exposed the farce, this being reasonably typical: "The British Museum was the victim of a scam over a crucial part of the £97 million millennium project to open up its great courtyard, an Evening Standard investigation has revealed. English Heritage, Lord Foster's architect practice and several experts were taken in by a flamboyant Dorset stonemason who put in a cheap tender to build the south portico. The Queen is to open the new courtyard in December, and the museum and stone experts are frantically trying to correct the portico's mis-matched colour and texture. The museum believed the portico was being built in Portland stone, to match the original material of Sir Robert Smirke's Great Court of 150 years ago. But Easton Masonry, the company which won the contract, mixed samples of Portland stone with a cheaper French limestone to get approval - and then secretly went ahead with building in the French stone. The result has appalled experts. The portico is dazzling white and stands out from the Portland stone that surrounds it. "We were mugged," said the museum's managing director Suzanna Taverne. Today, a crisis meeting between the museum, English Heritage and Camden council - which must give the ultimate planning approval for the Grade 1 listed building - is being held to try to solve the problem. When the museum confronted Easton Masonry's owner, Geoff Smith, he denied using foreign stone. Then, after a series of scientific tests he admitted the switch that had the potential to save him tens of thousands of pounds. The museum, English Heritage, Foster and Partners decided not to reveal the deception, which has been known about by insiders for more than a year. But inquiries by the Standard uncovered the scam. Ultimately Camden could order the portico to be pulled down and rebuilt. Easton Masonry refused to comment." http://www.museum-security.org/00/142.html#3 And was it pulled down and rebuilt? Three guesses...
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Jun 09, 2007, 20:53
|
||
|
Unfortunately, the screw-up was not noticed until the majority of building work had been completed, and rather than stop it, apportion blame, and get it changed, it was a case of "Oh well, it's a bit late to mess about with it now" and the project continued. Aye, slumpy, usual (and oh too familiar) stuff. Remember the cash for peerages fiasco just a few weeks ago? Gone very quiet hasn't it? Usual cover up crap. Meanwhile we get (at last) the first film clip* (with a friendly Julian Richards voice over) from English Heritage after... what is it, six weeks on site? First quarter of the clip is taken up with exciting shots of porta cabins being hauled into place and helicopters zooming over like a safari documentary zooming over a heard of elephants! Come off it English Heritage, stop patronising the public with this sort of crap and give us an accurate video report of your activities inside Silbury and answers to the very real concerns expressed here and elsewhere. * http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.17512
|
| Pages: 67 – [ Previous | 1 … 11 12 13 14 15 16 | Next ] | This topic is locked |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
