Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Rhodes must fall Watch

    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    You need good reason to change it especially when you want to take down the of key reasons it was listed. It wouldn't get permission for "some people don't like it".

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's down to the building owners and the planning authorities (DCLG) - stating that "it can't happen because listed" is overstating the restrictions on altering listed buildings.

    The building itself was hated (even by the college that paid for it!) when it was first built: https://historicengland.org.uk/listi...-entry/1046662
    "Whatever the actual merits of the design, Champneys' intransigence ensured the building a frosty reception from his clients: already reviled on the drawing board, anticipated with foreboding whilst in progress, it was ridiculed on completion. The Oriel Record for March 1910, includes a frontispiece of the street façade and calls it a 'compromise', as did the college Treasurer, also in print; the Record of September 1911 comments that 'The New Buildings are now a fait accompli, and all that remains is to get accustomed to them'. Other critcisms followed, but Evelyn Waugh trumped them all in 1930, suggesting that 'a very small expenditure on dynamite should be enough to rid us forever of... the High Street front of Oriel..'"

    The listing itself refers to Rhodes controversial status in history - I wouldn't be surprised if a thoughtful application for some amendments (including the removal of his statue to a museum) would be approved. Grade II* listed alterations far beyond that and for far sillier reasons have been approved in the past.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chellecharity)
    I'm 100% certain that if Rhodes lived to this day, he wouldn't have expected the level of integration between races in society. Is it fair to say that the scholarship put in place to uphold and better a white Britain ?
    so he'd be 164
    but i'm pro as with out him there would be a lot less diamonds
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    I take it that the Egyptian pyramids should also be torn down?
    Well, the Middle East branch of the Remove the Statues Campaign has already made a start on such expressions of alien domination as churches, temples and government buildings in Palmyria, Mosul and elsewhere in Iraq and Syria (and also in Afghanistan). Once they extend their sway to Egypt I am quite sure that the pyramids will be re-purposed as hard core in new roads or the foundations of mosques, houses and offices.

    Presumably, they are in daily contact with their brothers-in-arms in the NUS.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farchitect)
    So you want to cleanse the country of any historical references you happen to disagree with, but only ones that people who you perceive to be less intelligent would understand? How patronising.
    Not at all - you've misread me. The word 'cleanse' doesn't capture what I was referring to: to sensitively remove the monument to a very despicably distinguished individual.

    In terms of what I happen to disagree with - many people died at the hands of Rhodes so it is quite a serious disagreement that many people share.

    You clearly haven't come across the word 'lay person' much before - originally it meant a non-religious person as opposed a religious person however today it can be used to distinguish any one who is less knowledgeable on a subject. I used it in reference to architecture to express the idea that certain buildings might not necessarily be symbols of colonialism for some individuals. It's really a matter of working knowledge rather than intelligence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    To destroy a statue is an attempt at "erasing all traces of a frightful past'. Where do we draw the line at what is considered artistic homage and destruction?
    If you'd read my last message you see that I recommended packed it away in a museum cellar - so no, not destroy. I'm sure the statue's very well done however having on public display sends some very damaging messages.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    That's down to the building owners and the planning authorities (DCLG) - stating that "it can't happen because listed" is overstating the restrictions on altering listed buildings.

    The building itself was hated (even by the college that paid for it!) when it was first built: https://historicengland.org.uk/listi...-entry/1046662
    "Whatever the actual merits of the design, Champneys' intransigence ensured the building a frosty reception from his clients: already reviled on the drawing board, anticipated with foreboding whilst in progress, it was ridiculed on completion. The Oriel Record for March 1910, includes a frontispiece of the street façade and calls it a 'compromise', as did the college Treasurer, also in print; the Record of September 1911 comments that 'The New Buildings are now a fait accompli, and all that remains is to get accustomed to them'. Other critcisms followed, but Evelyn Waugh trumped them all in 1930, suggesting that 'a very small expenditure on dynamite should be enough to rid us forever of... the High Street front of Oriel..'"

    The listing itself refers to Rhodes controversial status in history - I wouldn't be surprised if a thoughtful application for some amendments (including the removal of his statue to a museum) would be approved. Grade II* listed alterations far beyond that and for far sillier reasons have been approved in the past.
    You're being a bureaucratic busybody! It would be a disaster if people always confined themselves to the rules on things and stopped there - I'm sure an appeal could be made and that the situation would change greatly if more publicity were raised.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    I'm sure an appeal could be made and that the situation would change greatly if more publicity were raised.
    If there were more publicity over this matter you and your fellow-travellers would probably be lynched. The world doesn't share your desire to hide our history in a politically-correct cellar somewhere.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    If there were more publicity over this matter you and your fellow-travellers would probably be lynched. The world doesn't share your desire to hide our history in a politically-correct cellar somewhere.
    Rhodes was a monster. Many people think so. What a message to send to ongoing victims of his crimes that pass through there - no, it really is a great shame.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    Rhodes was a monster. Many people think so.
    Many people think Churchill was a monster, yet he was voted the greatest-ever Briton. Campaigning to remove the Rhodes statue while benefiting from his endowment, as some students are, is particularly hypocritical and, frankly, nasty.

    You iconoclasts should try and do something a bit more positive with your energies.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    You're being a bureaucratic busybody! It would be a disaster if people always confined themselves to the rules on things and stopped there - I'm sure an appeal could be made and that the situation would change greatly if more publicity were raised.
    You'd be hard pushed to find any support for this outside the people that already care.

    Most people support places like National Heritage so wouldn't be so willing to see parts of our history (especially one that is already protected) treated in such an awful manner as the way these people are suggesting
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Well, the Middle East branch of the Remove the Statues Campaign has already made a start on such expressions of alien domination as churches, temples and government buildings in Palmyria, Mosul and elsewhere in Iraq and Syria (and also in Afghanistan). Once they extend their sway to Egypt I am quite sure that the pyramids will be re-purposed as hard core in new roads or the foundations of mosques, houses and offices.

    Presumably, they are in daily contact with their brothers-in-arms in the NUS.
    PRSOM.
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    You're being a bureaucratic busybody!
    By pointing out that Grade II* listed status doesn't preclude alterations to a building and stating that it does is misrepresenting what listed building status involves?

    :indiff:
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    You'd be hard pushed to find any support for this outside the pople that already care.

    Most people support places like National Heritage so wouldn't be so willing to see parts of our history (especially one that is already protected) treated in such an awful manner as the way these people are suggesting
    How is putting a statue into a museum treating historic artifacts in an awful way?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Many people think Churchill was a monster, yet he was voted the greatest-ever Briton. Campaigning to remove the Rhodes statue while benefiting from his endowment, as some students are, is particularly hypocritical and, frankly, nasty.

    You iconoclasts should try and do something a bit more positive with your energies.
    There are degree though aren't there. I for one do not believe Churchill should have continued bombing after the War was clearly won however I have enough sense to see that he was not like Rhodes and holds a different place in people's sentiments. I would disagree and say it's not nasty: it's just hard to find educational funding in these times and the fact that some of the little of what's available comes from his endowment is just a sorry reflection of how history has run. Anyway, you could get into it more and ask questions about where and how his wealth was generated and claim that he was stealing it in the first place anyway!

    Ditto to you - try something more useful than defending Rhodes - why don't you go out and be another one and then one day someone might make a statue of you ?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    You'd be hard pushed to find any support for this outside the people that already care.

    Most people support places like National Heritage so wouldn't be so willing to see parts of our history (especially one that is already protected) treated in such an awful manner as the way these people are suggesting
    Globally I'm sure there would be support and we are inhabitating a globalised world so it's not that out of the question. Only experimenting could really determine how it would go...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    How is putting a statue into a museum treating historic artifacts in an awful way?
    Who has said put it in a museum?

    I've been following this closely and this is the first time I've seen this put as an option and what museum would it be put in

    But removing the statue would be destroying it's original context and location

    But as you know it's not just about this 1 statue

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...es-statue.html

    'demanding the removal of all statues and paintings and renaming of buildings named after colonialist figures.'
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    By pointing out that Grade II* listed status doesn't preclude alterations to a building and stating that it does is misrepresenting what listed building status involves?

    :indiff:
    More owing to the conclusions you draw from that fact.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    Globally I'm sure there would be support and we are inhabitating a globalised world so it's not that out of the question. Only experimenting could really determine how it would go...
    The rest of the world doesn't dictate what we do with our heritage.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    The rest of the world doesn't dictate what we do with our heritage.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I certainly in this case think that people in the old colonies should be able to have a say.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Des_Lumières)
    Globally I'm sure there would be support and we are inhabitating a globalised world so it's not that out of the question. Only experimenting could really determine how it would go...
    'Globally' this has little relevance to the National Heritage and how it protects this countries history.

    But even better you start a campaign of 'foreigners' to tell the people of this country what statues they are allowed to keep from their past as I see that going down really well with the UK public.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.