[r-t] Changes to decisions again

Don Morrison dfm at mv.com
Sun Jan 22 02:39:49 UTC 2006

On Jan 21, 2006, at 8:27 PM, Graham John wrote:
> For example, his proposals could permit jump change
> methods, which I believe go beyond change-ringing as we know it

What do you propose be done about such things instead, then? Based on 
how darn much fun it is to ring treble jump methods, it seems perfectly 
possible that performances of 5040 minor and whatever, incorporating 
such methods, will be rung by more than one band in coming years. I 
suspect many more would have been rung already, except that many folks 
view the Council automatically including it in their analysis as the 
upper boundary of how unusual a thing it is they will spend, and induce 
others to spend with them, three hours doing. It appears that you are 
arguing that performances including treble jump methods are not change 
ringing performances, and should not be recorded and described by those 
laboring on our behalf on the Central Council.

What is it, then, that folks ringing such methods would be doing 
instead of change ringing? And who should be describing and recording 
their performances of 5040 or longer? Should they go and establish the 
Central Council of Jump Change Ringers, and start a periodical called 
The Jumping World (which presumably would only come out once a 

I think the problem Philip is trying to solve (and trust he will 
correct me if I am mistaken) is that the current decisions *only* cover 
"change-ringing as we know it", or really "as we knew it" a while ago. 
But change-ringing is a living activity, changing and growing itself, 
and we need decisions to cover not just what it was, but what 
unexpected things it becomes with the march of time. When people or 
activities stop changing, it's usually because they've died!

Of course the current decisions don't even completely cover 
change-ringing as it has been. For example, Dixon's is not exactly 
new-fangled! But I do think even more important than not prohibiting 
things that have been rung in the past, is not impeding folks wanting 
to go in new directions.

Looked at another way, I think it is important that we not confuse our 
judgment of what we personally might or might not want to ring with 
recording the efforts and choices of others. For example, I am unlikely 
to ever ring a peal of minimus. It's just too much hard work! But it is 
apparent that there are others who are keen to ring them, and I 
certainly don't want to stop them. And I believe that they should 
receive the same level of support, or at least at a bare minimum a 
level commensurate with their relative numbers, from the Council as 
those doing the things I do personally enjoy.

Don Morrison <dfm at mv.com>
"We are well aware from the history of science that ideas
universally believed are not necessarily true."
                     -- Jane Jacobs, _The Economy of Cities_

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list