[Bell Historians] Re: Olympic bell

[Douglas Davis]

Dickon:

'For those of us who marvel at the fact it has been made at all and is
going to feature tomorrow, it is a special time. The bell will speak for
itself (and I am pretty sure the bell will have a cockney accent and not a
cloggy one) and I for one look forward to it.'

Couldn't agree more - I would expect the majority don't care where the bell
has come from, we should just be pleased to see bells and ringing in
general playing a major part in historic events in this country - surely it
can only be a good thing for the art!

Doug.

On 26 July 2012 10:18, Dickon <dickon at a4eJZZvvrs0xQBGx3EyT0iQlREieMrpHsPUmECH9PDdvlEmRkfPcad7iPd_xONwjkvwsSFNnpm1qHoI.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Alan:
>
> > What I actually said was "LOCOG and the contractors should be ashamed of
> themselves".
>
> LOCOG yes, but why Whitechapel?
>
>
> > Firstly, a lot of people are under the impression that LOCOG required
> the bell to be made in the UK
>
> If that were true, Whitechapel would be in breach, which they are not.
> LOCOG appears to have said something different to Taylors, and we are told
> that they have apologised.
>
> > and that Danny Boyle (amongst others) wished the bell to have an East
> end connection.
>
> His prerogative. He is not bound by Government supply rules. Let's face
> it, he could have decided he wanted a Russian bell, or a Romanian one.
>
>
> > Whitechapel quite clearly haven't explored all possible alternatives in
> the UK-remember, part of the request from LOCOG was a UK bell, which
> Whitechapel quite clearly could not supply by casting "in house".
>
> But it wasn't a requirement!
>
>
> > The big question is why didn't Whitechapel ensure this bell WAS made in
> the UK?
>
> Why should they?
>
>
> > Why didn't Whitechapel liase with other UK companies to make this bell
> an excellent advert for buying large bells from the UK?
>
> But the bell WAS bought from the UK - it just had parts of the process
> subcontracted abroad.
>
>
> > There is much anger/frustration-call it what you will, by members of the
> general public on many forums and newspaper websites regarding this bell
> being made in Holland.
>
> Stoked by the sort of misinformation you have given above, but which has
> subsided once the true story comes out.
>
>
> > UK bell founding needs all the business it can get-the days of lots of
> new large rings and even new rings being installed is long gone.
>
> So what proportion of the market share is giant bells? Very small I'd
> contend.
>
>
> > Sometimes, there is more to business than wanting a bigger gross profit.
>
> And sometimes bell foundries go into liquidation.
>
> At the end of the day, Richard Grimmett at Taylors has been very dignified
> about the whole thing in the RW. Taylors were understandably upset at the
> contracting process, which appears to have been justified with an apology
> from LOCOG. Taylors also confirms that they have no beef with Whitechapel
> and the two companies continue to have a good relationship. However your
> outburst suggesting that Whitechapel should be ashamed of themselves in
> accepting the contract comes over as sour grapes.
>
> For those of us who marvel at the fact it has been made at all and is
> going to feature tomorrow, it is a special time. The bell will speak for
> itself (and I am pretty sure the bell will have a cockney accent and not a
> cloggy one) and I for one look forward to it.
>
> DrL
>
>  
>
           
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20120726/d3ec8ece/attachment.html>