<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><!-- Network content -->
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm not sure we shouldn't give this sort of
"restoration" a chance - and do it in a way that is intended to succeed (rather
than set up to fail). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>But it does need to be at the right tower -
somewhere where the bells, frame and fittings <STRONG><EM>really</EM></STRONG>
are significant enought to merit the full conservation treatment and where the
local people (parishioners and ringers) are willing and informed participants on
what will of necessity be an experimental venture. Moreover, there ought be
be some compromise on conservation (e.g. necessary work on crown staples,
quarter turning, and even things like the fitting of ball bearings concealed
within old-fashioned covers) to make it work properly and secure a reasonable
term of useful life for the restored installation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I was at the official try-outs at Staunton Harold
pre and post-restoration, and I'm well aware of the difficulties there. But
let's not condemn the approach because of one bad job. I think the inflexibility
of the client at Staunton Harold (insistence on like-for-like replacement of
parts with no allowance for improvement) coupled with their expectations of the
levels of future use (very limited occasional ringing) make it a poor case to
regard as "the norm" for this type of restoration. Swaffham Prior (much
criticised in the RW at the time but fundamentally from a strong
anti-conservation standpoint) is another place where the approach has been tried
and with - I believe - a reasonable degree of success.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In a case like Charlton Adam (if the heritage value
merits such an approach) a conservationist restoration should not merely enable
the bells to be rung - but should leave a job on which "ordinary ringers" can
ring regularly without undue physical effort and achieve a reasonable standard
of striking. AND, there should be enough of the original fabric left intact for
the conservationist approach to have been worthwhile. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think I'm optimistic enough to believe that with
the right technical input and the right mind-set this could be achieved in some
cases. But it involves more than simplistic like-for-like replacement (the
conservationist baseline approach) because installations that didn't work
well in the first place - and many "village carpenter" jobs spectacularly
didn't! - won't magically work well now after simple repair. Bells
hung by regular bellhangers of past centuries might, on the other hand, be
expected to perform tolerably well after sympathetic restoration.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Problematic, maybe, but possibly worth a try with -
to stress again - local assent, with a few of the fairly small number of genuine
eighteenth and early nineteenth century installations that remain largely
intact. People other than ringers assume that there must be some merit in
performing on genuine period instruments and find it strange that this is
something that doesn't seem to interest us. Having been naughty enough in my
youth to have rung on a fair number of old-style installations, I would say that
there is some fun to be had here that we're in danger of denying to future
generations of ringers if we eradicate the "old stock" completely. Ringing on
period instruments may require slightly different skills - sally ticklers, stay
away please! - but what's wrong with a bit of a challenge, something outside the
norm?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Entrenchment on both sides of the conservation
debate is a significant part of the problem at the moment. Let's not reject out
of hand ideas that could - even if only in a limited number of very special
cases - lead to compromise solutions that would broadly satisfy all
sides.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Written more to provoke thought than out of deep
conviction.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>CP</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="COLOR: white"></SPAN> <!--End group email --></DIV></BODY></HTML>