The Talbots and Slavery

[Sam]

Not sure that's true to be honest. Slavery has played a major role in history, that doesn't mean it was essential!

Yeah, sorry, I was taking the piss.

The idea that we shouldn't try to "rewrite history" or correct the wrongs of the past is a fundamentally racist one, and it deliberately ignores the state-sanctioned violence that this institutionally racist country inflicts on black and brown people every day.

Jewish people in postwar Germany would not have tolerated statues of Hitler being retained on the basis that demolishing them "rewrote history".

 

[speedy]

Yeah, sorry, I was taking the ****.

The idea that we shouldn't try to "rewrite history" or correct the wrongs of the past is a fundamentally racist one, and it deliberately ignores the state-sanctioned violence that this institutionally racist country inflicts on black and brown people every day.

Jewish people in postwar Germany would not have tolerated statues of Hitler being retained on the basis that demolishing them "rewrote history".

Damn, I did wonder! And yes, I agree fully.

 

[pluk]

It has been optional on a national level since GCSEs were introduced. But perhaps some schools structure things so certain subjects have to be taken.

I never knew that, not optional at my school or local schools where mates were. Seems crazy to me that something so important culturally and that inevitably shapes your understanding of the world could be optional.

From memory the only choices we had were between music, drama, woodwork/metalwork, home economics and some languages (you had to see at least one language through), and even then you did the lot until the third year so still covered a lot of ground.

 

[Trooper]

Yeah, sorry, I was taking the ****.

The idea that we shouldn't try to "rewrite history" or correct the wrongs of the past is a fundamentally racist one, and it deliberately ignores the state-sanctioned violence that this institutionally racist country inflicts on black and brown people every day.

Jewish people in postwar Germany would not have tolerated statues of Hitler being retained on the basis that demolishing them "rewrote history".

That's an interesting point about where to draw the line because there is loads of nazi architecture, including the Olympic stadium, in Berlin that is still in use even though it is by design a reflection of the nazi ideology.

 

[Tim]

People are complex and we can't just see them as good or evil. A person could have been a slave trader but they could have also fought for women's rights. So does that mean they should not be honered for that?

Even Hitler, probably the closest example to a purely evil man we have did some good. His animal welfare legislation was ahead of most conventional thinking at the time. Does that mean it should of been abolished as soon as he was overthrown? Of course not, thats why it and much of the technology developed during WW2 have been used to make advancments we benefit from today.

This is why when it comes to tearing down statues and relics of the past we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world and do they deserve to be honoured for it?

 

[speedy]

That's an interesting point about where to draw the line because there is loads of nazi architecture, including the Olympic stadium, in Berlin that is still in use even though it is by design a reflection of the nazi ideology.

Of course there has to be some discretion. However for me at least there is a clear line between statues and place names which honour individuals, and buildings which serve a useful purpose.

@Tim I get your point, but would you want to keep a statue of Hitler with a plaque explaining his good and bad points? It's not something I'd want to look at all the time that's for sure

 

[RoyJess]

It's probably worth pointing out that the article has some inaccuracies in it specifically regarding Alton Towers.

The article is talking about Charles Chetwynd-Talbot, 2nd Earl Talbot, but he never owned Alton Towers. He was a contemporary of Charles and John Talbot, the Earls of Shrewsbury who were responsible for the construction of the Towers and Gardens.

There has been calls to wrongly remove several statues because people have not done their homework of the history. Robert Peel is one example (I believe he also once lived on the Drayton Manor estate).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-53005223#:~:text=More than 1,000 people have,we should not celebrate colonisers".

There are calls to remove the Britannia monument statue in Great Yarmouth, due to its link with Lord Nelson who never profit from slavery, actually he supported a proposition that West Indian plantation slaves should be replaced by free Chinese workers, and in 1799 personally intervened to secure the release of 30 north African slaves being held by the Portuguese.

Nelson is only being targeted because of one single letter that he wrote.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/norfol...d-amid-slave-trade-statues-campaign-1-6694712

These statures have been erected due to the positive contribution that these people have given to society. They are not celebrating their links directly or indirectly to slavery.

Should the Nelson Mandela statue in London be removed? This statue was put up because he is seen as an anti-apartheid hero, but he was also imprisonment for his role in terrorism bomb attacks on government targets. The point that I'm trying to make here, we should focus on all the good that these people have achieve and not to tarnish them all with the same brush for the mistakes or views that they held based on today's standard. There is good and bad in us all.

 

[jon81uk]

This is why when it comes to tearing down statues and relics of the past we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world and do they deserve to be honoured for it?

This. ^^

Thomas Guy, whom Guy's hospital was named after had shares in a company which did trade slaves, but he also made some of the largest charitable donations of the 18th century and his money did a lot of good. There isn't really much evidence he chose to invest in the slave trade, rather just investing into companies/bonds. In this case his legacy and the hospital he built is likely greater than the shareholding he had.

 

[Tim]

@Tim I get your point, but would you want to keep a statue of Hitler with a plaque explaining his good and bad points? It's not something I'd want to look at all the time that's for sure

Of course not. As I said in my last paragraph "we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world". Hitler was responsible for the suffering of millions. That clearly out ways any of his other actions. Other historical figures are less clear cut.
My choice of example was extreme but in response to Trooper, because there are plenty of things the Nazis built, but that doesn't mean the thing itself is bad. Going back to the original topic, Alton Towers could have been funded by people that profited from slavery, but the building itself is not a reflection of that. There is no evidence (to my knowledge) that slaves were bought and sold because the estate existed.

 

[speedy]

Of course not. As I said in my last paragraph "we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world". Hitler was responsible for the suffering of millions. That clearly out ways any of his other actions. Other historical figures are less clear cut.
My choice of example was extreme but in response to Trooper, because there are plenty of things the Nazis built, but that doesn't mean the thing itself is bad. Going back to the original topic, Alton Towers could have been funded by people that profited from slavery, but the building itself is not a reflection of that. There is no evidence (to my knowledge) that slaves were bought and sold because the estate existed.

And I don't think anyone's calling for actual buildings to be demolished. In the case of Alton Towers I don't believe there is anything named after the Talbot's (the only one I'd heard of was Talbot Street) so there's no issue. Statues on the other hand serve no purpose except honouring the individual. Putting slave traders aside, I don't think donating a load of money to something is worthy of a statue either. So taking them down doesn't bother me. The one in Bristol should have come down years ago.

 

[Squiggs]

And I don't think anyone's calling for actual buildings to be demolished. In the case of Alton Towers I don't believe there is anything named after the Talbot's (the only one I'd heard of was Talbot Street) so there's no issue.

But even then, it would be a moot point, because there's currently no indication that Alton Towers or the related Talbots have anything to do with slavery.

 

[jon81uk]

I don't think donating a load of money to something is worthy of a statue either. So taking them down doesn't bother me.

Depends on other factors in some way. Deciding to donate money in itself maybe isn't worthwhile of a statue, but putting it to a specific cause and personally pushing to make that happen is different. So just saying to someone "here have money" isn't great but "I want to build a hospital for the poor" probably is worthwhile.

 

[Matgo]

Of course not. As I said in my last paragraph "we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world". Hitler was responsible for the suffering of millions. That clearly out ways any of his other actions. Other historical figures are less clear cut.

You say that, but for black people the link between slavery and the racism they still face today IS clear cut. To say a Nazi's crimes clearly outweighs his other more positive attributes but then apply more leniency to a slave owner suggests a lack of understanding of the cultural impact slavery still has today.

 

[RoyJess]

And I don't think anyone's calling for actual buildings to be demolished.

Yes they are..

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/09/call...atues-buildings-memorials-across-uk-12826287/

..and it doesn't stop at just buildings

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/or...s-matter-activists-pyramids-george-floyd.html

where will this end, there is even calls to re-brand food packaging

Statues on the other hand serve no purpose except honouring the individual.

Do you feel the same about the Britannia memorial which has calls for it to be removed? It depicts a fictitious figure Brittannia. Roman goddess Minerva, whom Britannia was based upon. The name Britannia is derived from the Latin ‘Britannicae’ , which the Romans used in reference to the British Isles. This was in turn derived from the Greek form ‘Prettanike’ or ‘Brettaniai’ . The inhabitants were named ‘Britanni’ or ‘Britons’ . To this day ‘Prydain’ , from the Greek, is the Welsh translation of Britannia. Does this mean that be can no longer be called Brits and our island no longer be called Great Britain?

 

[Tim]

You say that, but for black people the link between slavery and the racism they still face today IS clear cut. To say a Nazi's crimes clearly outweighs his other more positive attributes but then apply more leniency to a slave owner suggests a lack of understanding of the cultural impact slavery still has today.

Except for that I didn't say that. I said "when it comes to tearing down statues and relics of the past we need to properly consider what the person's impact was on the world and do they deserve to be honoured for it?".
I didn't cast any judgment myself except for in the case of one individual. For every other person that has to be done on a case by case basis by the people who believe these people should or should not be honoured.
And it has to be a group decision. One person, in the heat of the moment, suddenly deciding they don't like a statue is not fixing a problem. In fact it makes it worse because the people that did want it there are going to be pissed off rather than convinced it was the right thing to do.

 

[speedy]

Yes they are..

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/09/call...atues-buildings-memorials-across-uk-12826287/

..and it doesn't stop at just buildings

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/or...s-matter-activists-pyramids-george-floyd.html

where will this end, there is even calls to re-brand food packaging



Do you feel the same about the Britannia memorial which has calls for it to be removed? It depicts a fictitious Roman goddess Minerva, whom Britannia was based upon. The name Britannia is derived from the Latin ‘Britannicae’ , which the Romans used in reference to the British Isles. This was in turn derived from the Greek form ‘Prettanike’ or ‘Brettaniai’ . The inhabitants were named ‘Britanni’ or ‘Britons’ . To this day ‘Prydain’ , from the Greek, is the Welsh translation of Britannia. Does this mean that be can no longer be called Brits and our island no longer be called Great Britain?

I think this part is important:
"Skeptics, meanwhile, suggested that the misconception was deliberately circulated to vilify the ongoing Black Lives Matter protests decrying racism and police brutality.

"The Egyptian Pyramids are now being used to discredit protests against racism, colonialism and slavery with the argument they have been built exploiting forced slave labor. They were not," Jens Notroff, a German archaeologist, counter-argued on his Twitter account. "

I barely look at Twitter now, it was getting me down. However when I did, I followed a lot of activists (disabled, black, LGBT, the issues overlapped with railways, public transport, disability issues which is what I usually follow people for) and not one of them suggested destroying monuments like the pyramids. I have however seen the pyramids brought up on this forum before in an attempt to defend the removal of statues.

Sorry if I've missed it, but reading over that Metro article, it doesn't even mention buildings in the article text despite what the title and images suggest. That's really misleading and poor journalism from the Metro.

Regarding the Britannia monument, I had never heard of this one so am not the best person to ask. But reading the linked Topple the Racists website,
"Admiral nelson was a vocal supporter of the slave trade and british imperialism. He attempted to use his influence to thwart the abolitionist movement. Writing in 1805 that while he had a tongue, he would, "launch my voice against the damnable and cursed doctrine of Wilberforce and his hypocritical allies"."

The name isn't an issue, according to the website. I'm not sure if the statue itself is an issue and if so it could be removed. Otherwise they could just dedicate the monument to something else? As I say I'm not familiar with it but I don't think anybody is seriously suggesting we can't be "British".

 

[BarryZola]

In the example of Horatio Nelson he has clearly been commemorated due to his brilliant naval victories to the advantage of our crown and country. His contribution to our country clearly outweighs his negative comments made at a time when slavery was accepted as a norm by a massive proportion of people.

The day when someone like Nelson's statue is brought down is when I'd lose all sympathy for the current movement.

But yeah, someone who was just a businessman and made money from slavery and then later in life started donating money to make themselves feel better and be better judged by god when they died, I have no problem at all when their statues come down.

 

[Rob]

Just a reminder that this thread was created to discuss any links that Alton Towers/the Talbot family had to slavery rather than the wider ranging issues that seem to be being discussed at present. And @Squiggs has made a great post making corrections to the original article.

So if we could try and stay on the topic of Alton Towers please! If people do want to discuss the wider issues then it's probably best that a thread in Corner Coffee is created.

Thanks!

 

[ChristmasPud]

As usual all the facts add new complexity that can't be easily boxed into one political "side" or the other. Maybe an honest mistake on the author's part, but Id be surprised to see it corrected.

Not that it's unrealistic a place like Alton has slavery connections, and we should be prepared to accept the things we don't want to hear in history like that (if it were true), but now we can see the author's motivations were perhaps more to fit an agenda than to educate people.

We can't "right the wrongs" of history, last I checked there was no way to go back in time, instead we can understand and learn from it, not just pick the things that suit our own agenda. Banning and controlling things according to the popular ideology of the day is no substitute for undoing history, a balanced education is.

Different to public monuments, which tend to ignore the controversial aspects of the things they're representing. But a theme park ride, like Splash Mountain, was never a historical representation and has such a tenuous link to anything controversial. Totally devalues the word "racist". You'd have to get rid of Pirates of the Caribbean too for ignoring the real horrors of pirates etc.... Let's not see that kind of reactionary stuff hit UK theme parks, leave Hex alone.

 

[Britford]

Think AT might genuinely get attacked by violent Antifa/BLM types?
That article does seem to make it a target and there is a lot of stuff they would blindly want destroyed... off the top of my head,

Hex - because Talbot.

ATH - colonial style theming...

SLH - depiction of idealistic black culture...because that's apparently racist?

House and Gardens - Because someone said its evil!

Katanga Canyon - because of the whole African mining thing.