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 it's fine for The King and other members of the Royal Family to say the same when asked?

@GodessOfThunder
Penrhyn didn’t do this.
I'm sorry, I no longer regard you as an honest actor and so I'm not sure that I believe you.

Professional history practice isn’t concerned with passing moral judgement on the past - especially using today’s standards.
All I can say to that is, LOL. The book I referenced waaaaay back in the thread totally passed moral judgement. It was written by a professional historian employed at an elite university.

I'm still wondering what you regard as 'well educated' and why you thought it was okay to announce that those who disagree with you are 'borderline racists'.

Give me a man who has read one book...

@DatumTarum huh?

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.

There was some good academic scholarship. But most of it was just that: academic. Typical high street fare was rather modest in quantity and detail. There was only one book in the early 80s (by Peter Fryer), for instance, available in high street shops, that dealt with enslaved people who had been brought to Britain, which is one topic the NT have highlighted where relevant to a property.

In addition historical research is a never ending process. Over the past decade or so we’ve discovered lots of new insights into the scale and dynamics of slave ownership and its connections to current institutions. Just because you perceive something as a “scholarly fad” automatically make it less desirable, accurate or important. Take a look

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.

What did you learn and that is being currently missed out in your opinion?

GoT - The beef posters have had is not with linking NT properties to slavery where there is an important historical link, but seeking it out when it’s of relatively minor importance to the house in question (given most houses from the 18thC will presumably have some link) to the exclusion of other historical information. You will bore and alienate visitors if you serve up a homily on this subject at each and every visit. I’m sorry if that offends you, it is obviously close to your heart and why not if you are a POC (I assume you may be but I don’t recall you saying). I don’t know Penrhyn, the connection made may be fully justified (or most of the relevant “oppression” may actually have been be local slate miners) but posters have repeatedly accepted them in some cases focussing on slavery will be justified.

“Doesn’t automatically” that should read

How many times does it have to be said this is not all about slavery, albeit that is all you want to make it about, it was not the purpose of the OP of the thread.

GoT - The beef posters have had is not with linking NT properties to slavery where there is an important historical link,

That’s clearly not the case though, as of the two specific exhibitions they have mentioned as having “beef” with, one is Penrhyn where the link is “important”.

seeking it out when it’s of relatively minor importance to the house in question

In what way though? In a report? In an exhibition? Where has this actually happened and how? If there are no examples - which there aren’t on this thread - it’s a moot point.

given most houses from the 18thC will presumably have some link)

Not necessarily. The NT manages 500 properties and 93 have been to have links (inc colonialism)

serve up a homily on this subject at each and every visit

the only example anyone has stated is Penrhyn which is a temporary exhibition. So this concern seems like an imagined situation. It’s perfectly legitimate to have content visible on every visit though, on the origin of funding as that would be core to the house’s story. If people really feel uncomfortable with that then the NT should just accept there will be some attrition among that cohort. That’s fine. Its remit is to care for history which can be both pleasant and dark).

I don’t know Penrhyn, the connection made may be fully justified

The link is comprehensive and entirely justified. You can read for yourself at the attached link below. The broader story of the house has never been removed from the property so no need to worry a choice is being made.

it is obviously close to your heart and why not if you are a POC

one common misconception sometimes made (not necessarily by you personally) is that slavery links are a “POC concern” that have been “shoehorned” into NT properties post George Floyd/BLM/Critical Race Theory - take your pick. See the many posts complaining about this. The truth is though, that these links are very much all part of all of our history (white, black, working class, rich etc.). Slavery and colonialism changed what we wore, ate and drank; what we made; helped fund the Industrial Revolution; where people served in the army and navy; how we thought about the world and continue to do so, and much more. It’s everyone’s history in Britain. Many people don’t understand this and so feel a niche subject is being “forced upon them”. Exhibitions can help. That doesn’t mean people should feel
guilty of course.

Here’s the Penrhyn link I mentioned:

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/wales/penrhyn-castle-and-garden/penrhyn-castle-and-slave-trade-history#

I thought I gave an example of the NT's obsessiveness. Not about slavery, but about the illegality of homosexuality. It came up in every room as if they wanted to batter the point home.

Nice to have known more about the lives of women, or the servants. But no. Not on their myopic agenda.

To be honest I have largely given up visiting NT properties as a day out. Bland cafes, uninteresting gift shops on top of their tendency to lecture. I don't oppose the acceptance of homosexuality and agree that slavery is a horror. I am interested in the background of a grand house, but would like to see policy focus on things that can be changed, whether helping the decendents of slavery have proper life opportunities, or combatting modern day slavery.

Can you let me know which specific property. It’s hard to respond otherwise.

I think it’s this kind of misrepresentation of the facts in support of a particular political viewpoint which posters object to.

Your post says this:

“The castle was built on the proceeds of sugar and the slavery. This isn’t peripheral, it was its entire funding.”

The National Trust website says this:

“Penrhyn Castle is the former home of the Pennant family. It was rebuilt between 1820 and 1837 for George Hay Dawkins Pennant on the proceeds of the North Wales slate industry and sugar plantations in Jamaica. “

In your post you have done exactly what posters on this thread have said they object to: to support your position, rather than presenting a fully accurate picture, you have ignored the local history of the property and claimed that plantations were the only source of income that contributed to the rebuild of the property; when in fact income from the labour of poorly treated workers in North Wales also contributed to the rebuild.

That’s fair in this instance. If I were writing the materials I would mention the full list of sources. If you were to scroll back I specifically mentioned mining, alongside other sources in at least two other posts.

And, as I mentioned he broader story of the house was not removed at Penrhyn at the actual property.

So, if you can’t identify a single example in an actual NT property where slavery has been cited as a sole source of funding erroneously this concern is moot. In fact, the very quote you’ve used from the NT website shows they are getting it right. So what’s the problem with the NT?

i would also add that the slate mining link has been part of the Penrhyn story in materials since the property was opened to the public 70-odd years ago. The links with slavery and colonialism were not as overt and were not mentioned at all for some time.

It’s fine for one of those sources of income - slavery - to take centre stage for a while in a temporary exhibition to redress the balance.

The CarpetRight mention upthread perfectly illustrates what I want to be able to find out about a house I am visiting. There is a direct line between the Gillow furniture makers and CarpetRight, due to the company rights being sold, making the latter a descendant of the former. Although Leighton Hall, home of the Gillow family, isn’t a NT property, that information is part of the tour (while sitting on Gillow chairs, no teasels or pinecones on seating there!).
Dunham Massey was filled with ‘informative’ boards about one particular family member, obscuring all the interesting paintings and objects I would have liked to know more about.
Housesteads had a garish ‘fort’ art installation that stuck out like a sore thumb.
Lindisfarne Castle has a simulated sound installation on the top floor - ugh. I would rather stand there and be able to listen to the real sounds of nature. Although Lindisfarne Castle itself as it is now has been preserved as a monument to what money could buy if you were rich enough.
Cragside was interesting because in modern parlance Armstrong was an arms dealer, but one who had a passion for clean energy, banned smoking and bequeathed other land to ordinary people to enjoy (once he’d finished with it). There is a statue on loan to another exhibition, where a board points out that the representation of a Black woman, while intended to be progressive at the time, is now problematic. That’s not ‘in your face’ or irrelevant imo.

I want to know who lived in the houses, where they made their money, their impact on the immediate surroundings and the wider world. If their treasures came from Colonialism theft and robbing foreign tombs I want to know that. If their money came from slavery I want to know that too. I agree about the information sheets and folders, they should be available. I’ll draw my own conclusions about how it was all acquired, if I have the basic information available to do so.

Sizergh Castle still use produce from their vegetable garden in the cafe btw, plus you might get to stroke Charlie, the Sizergh Cat. Just don’t let him in the greenhouses, even if he says he’s allowed.

I’ve mainly been an observer on this thread as my interest was in the thread title ie the AGM, and that discussion was quickly derailed. Quick summary:

• This thread started with a question about whether anyone on here knew whether any of the people standing for election as trustees had a position on trans issues;

• it was quickly derailed (within three posts I think someone said) onto claims about an alleged “Tufton St” campaign to take over the national trust in order to then censor / misrepresent / whatever the history of NT properties;

• posters talked about people getting fed up with individuals in the heritage / culture sector with a particular viewpoint they wish to promote (especially where political theories or social justice theories from the US are being adopted wholesale) presenting a narrow or incomplete view of the property / artworks/ exhibition/whatever, overlooking local information as a result was specifically mentioned;

• We then had multiple denigrating comments over many pages about people who aren’t interested in history and about posters on here;

• we had examples of inaccurate claims being made in support of a political point or personal viewpoint (eg cotton tapestries);

• Much was made about accuracy, and about not ignoring parts of a property’s history just because some people aren’t interested in it or want to suppress it.

Towards the end of the thread (only two pages to go now), one of the posters who (iirc) made claims about the importance of historical accuracy, typed up and pressed send on a post which included an inaccurate and incomplete assertion about an NT property, and did exactly the thing that posters on here had said was the thing they had objections to - ie omitted local information about the property - in order to support the political position they had been pursuing over the course of the thread.

My post was focused on pointing out that action by the poster as others may have missed it.

I am still waiting for a response to the questions I asked in good faith on pg 2 and pg 3. I am happy to answer questions about the AGM as that’s my interest in the thread. I won’t be responding to attempts to divert attention away from what my post was about which was a misrepresentation of the information in the first para of the NT website’s summary of how the rebuild of Penrhyn Castle was funded.

edited for formatting but can’t fix it.

You missed out the bit where your own quote from the NT website for Penrhyn proved the NT was telling a ‘balanced’ story about the property, thereby demonstrating concerns that they weren’t invalid.

I’m not sure whether it was your intention or not, but have a like from me!

It was in my earlier (9.24am) post. Kingston Lacey.

"My last visit was to Kingston Lacey in Dorset. Lovely house and grounds, so met my criteria of an interesting day out. But in every room we heard about the ancestor who was gay and who repeatedly got into trouble because of his interest in young men to the extent he had to flee to Italy. Part of the House's history and an interesting example of how societal attitudes have changed. But did I need to hear this in every room, with elderly female volunteers doing the female "poor man" thing. No consideration of whether his behaviour might have tipped into modern "me too" behaviour even though there were indications of significant power imbalance in his relationships. But far more irritating was the failure to convey anything abut the life of the sister who he left behind to run the house. She was largely invisible in her support-the-man's-vision role, despite she was in charge for decades."

It was every bloody room. I can't remember if the guides had rainbow lanyards, but they did not half lay it on thick. By the time I was half way round I did ask about the sister, but it seems as if we are not supposed to be interested in her. This is repeated in the NTs description of the House.

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/dorset/kingston-lacy/the-history-of-kingston-lacy

Curiously in another context he might be criticised for raiding historic artefacts from other countries and depositing them in Dorset....but no. He is the hero and no room for other contributions nor for critical judgement.

Blimey 👀

Thank you to the posters who helped Godess with her reading comprehension

For the avoidance of doubt, godessofthunder , as you’ve specifically @‘d me to check, the purpose of my post was to point out that, in pursuit of the political position you’ve been seeking to promote across the thread, whist simultaneously adopting a high moral tone about historical accuracy, you misrepresented what the NT website says about how the Penrhyn Castle rebuild was funded.

I was not making a point about how the NT presents historical information.

I haven’t been participating in the ‘how NT presents history’ discussion as I don’t have a particular contribution to make on that topic (feel free to get me started on the gardens and cafes though); however, your misrepresentation coming after your many posts on historical accuracy prompted me to post.

I hope that provides the clarification you were seeking.

“ I no longer regard you as an honest actor”

Why?

But you did highlight the NT was getting it right.

If it took an error (which I hadn’t made in several other posts) to have someone help me out in making that point, I’m cool with that.

Thanks again for your efforts!