National Trust AGM

[PRAMtran]

I’ve received an email from the National Trust inviting me and all other members to vote in their AGM. Does anyone know if there are any things a woman’s rights advocate should vote for or against. Eg TWAW by stealth.

So you welcome country estates that were paid for with the lives and Labour of enslaved people, being described as such?

“It's possible to think that and also not think that slavery is funny.”

That’s a direct quote from a post on this thread made in the past 24 hours. So we have someone who sees the possibility of “funniness” in slavery. I’m at a loss at to what that might be.

So you welcome country estates that were paid for with the lives and Labour of enslaved people, being described as such? I said upthread that I thought that entirely justified, so long as it wasn't to the exclusion of other, equally relevant, information.

When you visit most NT country houses, there is the square root of fuck all about the agricultural economy that funded them (either alongside income from slavery and trade, or on its own), and the rural communities that supplied the workforce. I've not been to Holkham and would hope that would be an exception.

@DatumTarum Only read the first 16 pages so apologies if you've become less obsessed in the last 16 pages but your family connection to the slave trade seems to blind you to all reason. My family were not slave traders so I dont feel the same guilt you obviously do.

The origins of wealth in Britain go back beyond the slave trade - have the forgotten the wool trade or was that omitted from your study of history? What about coal mining? The history of the commonwealth is not all about old white men. You wish to present a frankly blinkered view of history, focused entirely on a couple of narrow area.

If the National Trust wants to describe the wealth on which a house was built it may have to go back to William the Conqueror and his followers acquiring land here. The narrow focus on one part of a family's exploitation is just that - narrow. Does Penhryn Castle mention mention slate mining? Wasnt the wife's money used on the sugar plantations partly from copper mining and railway investment?

Why on earth would I feel guilty about events centuries before my birth?

Why did you quote this post, it has zero to do what you've said? You haven't addressed or even referred obliquely to one thing in it.

I have no problem with new research, that's not what is being described. As people have said multiple times in the thread already.

I've not been to Holkham and would hope that would be an exception

Edith, Holkham is still owned by the Coke family so hopefully the history of the estate and family is free of NT scolding.

The post to which you refer was by @PencilsInSpace at 10pm last night.
It read,
I agree the lack of a sense of humour from the patronising scolds is very sad and I don't think it can be good for their mental health.

It's possible to think that and also not think that slavery is funny. And also to think that the misrepresentation of that post is quite shocking and revealing.

I read that as saying, some posters on this thread have come over as entirely lacking in humour. There is space for quips about NT tearooms, for example. It's possible to make tangential comments about the illegibility of some signage in a humorous way. Whatever. Can be done. Similar is done on many, many serious threads on this site, including by erudite posters.

And it is also possible to think that some posters have shown zero sense of humour AND to think that slavery isn't funny. You're not being asked to joke about slavery, FFS. It's just been observed that your whole tone is weighty, scolding, austere and puritanical.

I'm still wondering what counts as 'well educated' according to you, since you were so willing to sling out a lack of education as an explanation for people on this thread disagreeing with you.

Huh, I did not know that.
Thank you.

Here's the context of that line you keep repeating @GodessOfThunder

You seem to be having difficulty in parsing what Pencils is saying here so let me help you:

She's saying that being a patronising scold on the internet is probably not very good for mental health. And that there is nothing funny about slavery. And it is possible to hold both these beliefs at the same time.

HTH

We have posters coming on and insulting people, smearing us on other boards, and then complaining at our 'tone' when we respond in a way they find disagreeable.

Odd way to engage.

So you welcome country estates that were paid for with the lives and Labour of enslaved people, being described as such?

I didn't say i object to any mention at all. You seem to be labouring under a huge misconception. Hope that clears it up for you!

Why are people so upset by hearing about history?

People are not upset by hearing about history, people are upset about only one aspect of history being pushed to the exclusion of all else and pushed in a manner to shame and vilify not only the many generations dead previous owners but also the current audience who have fuck all responsibility for that history.

People are upset about made up scenarios regarding the possible sexual inclination of a long dead owner of a property, particularly when there is zero evidence, and the presentation of it in a salacious tabloid style that the old News of The World would be proud of. Why is it deemed necessary to do this? What business is it of anyone's?

People are upset by the narrow view of the current flavour of the month ideology of Gender, the wholesale acceptance of it without question and the pushing of it. The OP did not want to vote for those NT members who are in thrall to it, that was the purpose of this thread.

Why on earth would I feel guilty about events centuries before my birth?

How odd. I must have misunderstood large chunks of this thread.

So @DatumTarum won't be joining these families who are making some reparations? Because I can't remember precisely what was posted, and I'm not going to search the entire thread to find it, but Datum gave the impression that at some point their family had made a lot of money via slavery. Probably it's all gone now but is a little guilt too much to ask?

http://digitaleditions.telegraph.co.uk/data/1453/reader/reader.html?social#!preferred/0/package/1453/pub/1453/page/4/article/NaN

Was it this post you were recalling?

Yes it was. I can see that a plantation bearing the family name doesn't necessarily translate into great wealth down your particular line of the family. But still....🤔

I was wanting to ask more about this because it is an interesting topic but I was concerned Datum may find it outing.

Apologies @narniabusiness I missed that you quoted Datum and thought the response was from the poster in person. Thanks.

Yes, my family was involved.

No, I have no idea if a lot of money was made. If it was, it certainly did not come down my line.

I think there is a moral case for reparations but the practicalities are complex.

And no, I do not feel guilty and nor has any history or interpretation of the history of the Atlantic slave trade that I have seen made me feel guilty or I think, sought to make me feel guilty.

I think we should acknowledge and understand the immense impact of what happened both due to the need for historical accuracy and, out of respect for the people whose lives it still effects. That is not guilt.

Hey all,

Any thoughts on this exhibition?

If you aren’t comfortable with it, how come and what aspects would you change?

If everyone is good with it we can cut the quibbling and call it a day.

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/wales/penrhyn-castle-and-garden/what-a-world-exhibition-at-penrhyn-castle?awc=3795_1694345155_c50b545d576f25e7b28b8e77039676d2&campid=Affiliates_Central_Mem_AWIN_Standard&aff=78888

I suspect everyone alive hs connections of some kind to both slave owners and slaves. Not necessarily the Atlantic slave trade, but worldwide.

My own family situation is somewhat interesting. My Irish, previously serf, ancestors later became very wealthy and had a direct economic stake in the trade in fish that fed plantation workers in a particular part of the Caribbean. My DP's ancestors were enslaved African plantation workers in that part of the Caribbean. He finds this quite funny. Possibly that makes him a bad person.

I continue to find the idea that there was no good scholarship or information about the economic history of slavery, or homosexuality, available before the current set of scholarly fads quite difficult to take seriously. As in, it's obviously complete bollocks. I find the education most young people today get on these topics is so shallow they tend to have a very distorted understanding about them compared to even what I learned in my early teen years in school. And it's shallow because it's too much about a particular interpretation or theoretical lens (albeit a poorly constructed one) , and so seems to neglect including much actual information.

Probably it's all gone now but is a little guilt too much to ask?
Actually, I think it is. Datum bears no responsibility for what her forebears did. None at all.

Just as the descendants of those who killed members of my family, referenced upthread, bear no guilt for those events.

This is something I've thought about pretty hard over the years.

Actually I totally agree with you @EdithStourton
I was being a little sarcastic at Datum not least because it's one thing to say that on an anonymous forum but I wonder if they'd be so keen to stand up and say it in person in certain situations. Why shouldn't the King or Princess Anne say that when the topic is raised in interviews?

I have done.

It's a simple fact that it happened. Not going to hide it.

But no one has produced a single example of
”only one aspect of history being pushed to the exclusion of all else”. Penrhyn didn’t do this.

“to shame and vilify not only the many generations dead previous owners
but also the current audience who have fuck all responsibility for that history.”
This is a figment of your imagination. No NT exhibition has been designed with this goal. Professional history practice isn’t concerned with passing moral judgement on the past - especially using today’s standards. That would be anachronism. It’s about understanding. For various reasons (which I listed upthread) the history of slavery has been played down or remained undiscovered in terms of some of its important details (yes, I know some of you heard of the “Triangular trade” a while ago). These exhibitions augment our understanding of the past.

No one (at the NT at least) is saying the “current audience” bear any personal responsibility for events in the past. Please share if you have seen otherwise. Some visitors may come away with a better understanding of the historical roots of inequalities that persist today. But that is not the same thing.