[Stones] Longman of Wilmington Abuse

[David Swindlehurst]

a) If damage is being (potentially) caused at Stonehenge or any other 
"preserved" site, it should be stopped, not used as an excuse for damage 
elsewhere.

b) The use of the word "stunt" says it all - encapsulated brilliantly.

DMS

Andy Norfolk wrote:
> David Swindlehurst wrote:
>>  I'm a bit surprised by AN's lack of conviction. If a site is worth
>>  preserving it's worth preserving - no ifs, buts, maybes. It should be
>>  treated with respect. In a similar vein, this clown from South Wales
>>  does 120mph on a 60mph limited public road, driving a powerful car
>>  which he can't handle, puts an innocent victim into a wheelchair for
>>  life, and the school governors say he was an excellent headmaster and
>>  his job is safe when he comes out of prison! What message is that
>>  giving to the children at that school - that if you can do sums, it's
>>  ok to break the law and hurt other people? Can I go to WLM and
>>  commit potentially-damaging  acts just for laughs and feel clever?
>>  Perhaps I should go to Stonehenge with a lump hammer and knock chunks
>>  off, as happened in the 1800's. Not convinced it would do any harm.
> If we can take a step back a moment...
>
> From what I know of what happened and was planned to happen a bunch of 
> women were going to walk over the monument and lie down on it in lines 
> to indicate the outline of breast and pigtails etc. The photo I've 
> seen of the rehearsal showed that apparently relatively few people 
> would be involved. The proposed very temporary change in appearance 
> does not seem to have involved any direct physical intervention or 
> damage to the site itself and it was approved by the archaeological 
> trust that owns and manages the site. Many people do walk over and 
> around this monument each year apparently without causing harm.
>
> So just why have people got upset about this? I think it's because a 
> pair of bumptious tv personalities have been involved and it's become 
> perceived as being somehow disrespectful to the site. I reckon it's 
> the apparent disrespect that's really got people annoyed rather than 
> any actual or potential damage to the site. This is why I asked 
> whether people would have got upset if it had been done by radical 
> feminists wanting to reclaim the Long Man as the Long Goddess (though 
> I didn't put it quite like that).
>
> Since Dave mentioned Stonehenge - what about the real damage being 
> caused by the people who go there for summer solstice each year?
>
> I am utterly opposed to any unnecessary damage to ancient sites, but I 
> really don't see why there's been so much fuss about this stunt.
>
> Andy N