[Bell Historians] Great Malvern Priory

Chris Darvill manager at KAD6YhTgpkQM5e9JOAemNQrLjOHxgwdOQ6GeshOC-XKGYVMbidQi3Ga-E1vEpM5e7Kde887rr6FkqqyBRtTrL98.yahoo.invalid
Wed Mar 11 17:01:13 GMT 2009

At 16:31 11/03/2009, Alan Ellis wrote:
>Bells are hung to be rung and heard.   The frame is the means by 
>which they can be rung.  No frame, no bells.   Does the public see 
>or hear the frame?  No way.  So why this terrible concern for the 
>preservation of  almost-modern frames by EH makes no sense whatsoever.

I couldn't agree more. Page 15, para 57 states that "there is a 
strong presumption against alterations which adversely affect the 
character of a listed building". It's a pity that (as far as I can 
see) no one on the ringers' side of the debate pointed out that to 
the majority of the general public, the character of the building has 
more to do with the bells ringing out than what the bells sit in 
out-of-sight in the tower. An installation that no-one wants to ring 
will do more to change the character than any amount of concrete and steel.



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list