Head To Head
Log In
The Modern Antiquarian Forum »
Climbing on Standing Stones
Log In to post a reply

353 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
5293 posts

Re: Climbing on Standing Stones
Feb 25, 2012, 13:55
But surely people who engage their brains / actually give a monkeys don't need signs, because not clambering all over 4000 year old places is kind of obvious like not nicking daffodils from parks or running about in churches or not letting your children run riot and annoy everybody.

And people who do those things / let their children do them, don't care about signs.

Won't we have to put up with signs being everywhere, which somewhat detract from the ambience wouldn't you say.

I'm not so sure about the sign thing, though i don't know what the alternative is. But it seems like trying to reduce everythign down to the lowest common denominator. I feel like there's too much of that today as it is.

I mean I quite like things like this
for their retro value. But they're a bit distracting, plonked in a barrow. And they're a bit like a poster that says 'post no bills'. And I really don't know if they have any effect.

At the big sites like Stonehenge and Avebury, and Silbury for that matter, it would help if the media actually were consistent with what people are seen doing. Because when people climb there, they really properly climb. It's not really the same as parking your arse on a sarsen while you eat your sandwiches. Or is it? Surely that's not so bad, it is a stone after all. Is this whole thing partly to do with wanting less oikish behaviour so Civilised Visitors can enjoy the sites in peace? Is it the climbing aspect. What are people's feelings on sitting I wonder.
Topic Outline:

The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index