[Bell Historians] Re: Lichfield Cathedral
richard.offen at o...
Mon May 24 23:27:08 BST 2004
--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Wilby" <andrew at w...>
> This is written after dinner and a rather fine bottle of Claret.
> I think what has been achieved at Litchfield is extemporary. The
> superb, there's no argument about that.
> The go is now entirely ok with a reasonably competent band.
> Compared to the way Bow behave, and we were there yesterday,
Lichfield are a
> mere stroll in the park. Bow on the other hand are now one of the
> rings in the world so there can't be much that is impossible about
> All credit to those who have done the work at Lichfield...
> staying out of the kitchen....
> Now remind me Susie.... what was the problem?
My, the claret has taken effect!
Surely the problem at Bow is a rubber tower, whereas at Lichfield it
was a rubber bell frame!
Compared with what our predecessors had to put up with in terms of
the general go of most rings, I think we've become extremely soft,
tending to complain if we have to put more than an ounce of effort
into keeping our bell up. I often wonder what it must have been
like to be a ringer in the eighteenth century? Damned hard work is
probably the answer!
More information about the Bell-historians