[Bell Historians] Perspectives
markregan at 0zHYBl7yGeO77_3i28WId2rNUfobkkTpuGMilEq4xwVFXFpCcNgV4Sa2Thfi1GpTgP8hPksfkWlQDq0.yahoo.invalid
Tue Sep 18 21:21:20 BST 2007
The key thing is to put the customer first and not your own views; and
offering other 'perspectives' may help get a balanced and practical
result. It's up to the PCC/ringers to decide what they want, and the DAC
to help, and the Chancellor to rule.
There's plenty of evidence to prove that new bells create new ringers.
However, the old concept of a 'Sunday service band' is very much out of
date. Many ringers have more than one home tower, many bells are rung
occasionally and not every Sunday - however they are being rung, and
increased social mobility has changed how ringing works. The constructs
of Diocesan or County units is outdated. Structures created in the
nineteenth century have little relevance to the future of ringing in
Back to work.
22 Sebright Avenue
From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Aspland
Sent: 18 September 2007 21:09
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] Perspectives
Mark, thank you for your definitions. On reflection I hope I have
always given advice and not opinion! It seems to be that a broad base
of knowledge and experience is required - would that be one of your
qualifications for a DAC bell advisor?
However sometimes one has to ask the questions that may not have been
considered - "Who is going to ring the bells?" is a valid question - but
the answer does not have to be a local band practising and performing on
a weekly basis - that is not true of all our existing towers
(Westminster Abbey and Windsor Castle for a start!).
Is it opinion to have a presumption against rehanging full-circle bells
for chiming only? The (perceived) needs of PCC may be just that but is
that the end of the story?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bell-historians