My reaction to Leicester
My reaction to Leicester
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see the newly refurbished statue of Richard before entering the gift shop (which took an eclectic approach, including everything from Shakespeare to Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but had no boar pins or any other worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III Center itself. In the center's defense, it does credit Philippa Langley with initiating the dig, but that's because the whole approach is to Richard the archaeological artifact rather than Richard the man or king. The model skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally with the wrong distance between the vertebrae and the broken shin bones next to the thigh bones, creating the false impression that Richard was unnaturally long in the torso and short in the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to match their modern decor!--the attendant said exactly what Annette said in her blog) does look like something out of "Star Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on plexiglass and look down at the site where Richard's skeleton was found, especially since if you look from a certain angle, you can see a fluorescent outline showing the (even more two-dimensional) placement of the bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a projection onto the wall of various characters in the historical drama (Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom speak about Richard from some imaginary perspective that is, at least, not Shakespearean but nevertheless more novelistic than historical, and Richard himself, who doesn't speak and is shown *from the back, naked to the waist,* as an eighteen-year-old youth with severe scoliosis. The immediate impression is of Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by the displays of "bones" and a note on scoliosis that fails to undo the impression that Richard was badly deformed and known to be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about his relationship with the North, nothing about his legislation, nothing that would make him seem admirable or memorable as a man or king, only the "interesting" detail that the King under the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center was reinforced when the cathedral "bell" (which must have been electric) got stuck and kept striking the same three notes, painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression. At least the guide, who was primarily interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing bad to say about Richard (and the weather that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel and another dinner at our own tables (we managed to mingle with two people who asked to sit at our table, probably because they didn't want to be alone, and another talk, this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice) as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage and a quote from TR about EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of mysterious and difficult to explain given inadequate and sometimes biased sources), did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most of the "crimes" attributed to him by Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial legislation. I hope his presentation undid some of the harm caused by the so-called RIII Center, at least for those newbies who were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy) was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth Center, which did have apparently authentic armor and a lovely location (probably a better site for a visitor center than the real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented for my taste. My sister pointed out that they would naturally emphasize the winner over the loser. That simple thought provided me with a new perspective. I had always thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's "victory." Just as at the NPG, English history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I suppose a Battle of Hastings center would present Harold the Saxon in much the same way as the loser of the battle, with the emphasis on William of Normandy as the Conqueror and founder of a new line of kings (however redirected both lines eventually became through lack of male heirs). Then on to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I wanted to go back to the coach) and then to Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a place called Stoke House--nothing to do with the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary on the way back about the possibility that Perkin Warbeck was the real Duke of York and the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was glad to hear even though it probably went over the heads of most of the (by now tired) audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to Leicester, it will be only to pay my respects to Richard and leave a white rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are boring, barely able to speak English, in contrast to that delightful institution, the London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for the length of this post.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
On Aug 19, 2014, at 4:23 PM, "justcarol67@... []" <> wrote:
My dear sister, who arranged the trip to England as a birthday present for me, and her kind and hard-working travel agent (my sister's friend and sometime traveling companion) booked a Richard III tour of Leicester and Bosworth as part of our itinerary.
My sister optimistically expected a roomful of Ricardian intellectuals and thought that I would be circulating among what she called my peers, discussing Richard to my heart's content. I expected something rather different, a group of people who had become
curious about the King under the Car Park or whose interest in Richard stemmed from having read "Daughter of Time" at some point in their lives. I was closer to the reality than my sister as far as I could tell, but we had very little time to mingle. The few
people I met were history teachers, battlefield buffs, or people whose spouses had read Tey and were trying to learn a bit about Richard to humor them.The first night's itinerary consisted of a formal dinner and a speech by Julian Somebody on the Wars of the
Roses the first night (the speaker seemed nervous and kept referring to people by the wrong name--Edward for George, Richard for Edward, and even Northumberland for Oxford--which must have added to the confusion of befuddled husbands (and sisters). The next
morning, we took a bus--er, coach--to Leicester "cathedral" (which at least didn't smell musty like most of the other small churches we saw), where we saw the old memorial plaque (the woman who told us about the church was standing on it!) and the plans for
the shoebox, I mean tomb, but we weren't allowed in that part of the church as it was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see the newly refurbished statue of Richard before entering the gift shop (which took an eclectic approach, including everything from Shakespeare to Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but had no boar pins or any other
worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III Center itself. In the center's defense, it does credit Philippa Langley with initiating the dig, but that's because the whole approach is to Richard the archaeological artifact rather than Richard the man or king.
The model skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally with the wrong distance between the vertebrae and the broken shin bones next to the thigh bones, creating the false impression that Richard was unnaturally long in the torso and short in the legs. The "medieval"
armor (white to match their modern decor!--the attendant said exactly what Annette said in her blog) does look like something out of "Star Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on plexiglass and look down at the site where Richard's skeleton was found,
especially since if you look from a certain angle, you can see a fluorescent outline showing the (even more two-dimensional) placement of the bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a projection onto the wall of various characters in the historical drama (Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom speak about Richard from some imaginary perspective that is, at least, not Shakespearean but
nevertheless more novelistic than historical, and Richard himself, who doesn't speak and is shown *from the back, naked to the waist,* as an eighteen-year-old youth with severe scoliosis. The immediate impression is of Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced
by the displays of "bones" and a note on scoliosis that fails to undo the impression that Richard was badly deformed and known to be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about his relationship with the North, nothing about his legislation, nothing that would
make him seem admirable or memorable as a man or king, only the "interesting" detail that the King under the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center was reinforced when the cathedral "bell" (which must have been electric) got stuck and kept striking the same three notes, painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression. At least the guide, who was primarily interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing bad to say about Richard (and the weather that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel
and another dinner at our own tables (we managed to mingle with two people who asked to sit at our table, probably because they didn't want to be alone, and another talk, this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man
vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice) as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage and a quote from TR about EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of mysterious
and difficult to explain given inadequate and sometimes biased sources), did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most of the "crimes" attributed to him by Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial legislation. I hope his
presentation undid some of the harm caused by the so-called RIII Center, at least for those newbies who were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy) was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth Center, which did have apparently authentic armor and a lovely location (probably a better site for a visitor center than the real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented
for my taste. My sister pointed out that they would naturally emphasize the winner over the loser. That simple thought provided me with a new perspective. I had always thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's "victory."
Just as at the NPG, English history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I suppose a Battle of Hastings center would present Harold the Saxon in much the same way as the loser of the battle, with the emphasis on William of Normandy as the Conqueror and founder
of a new line of kings (however redirected both lines eventually became through lack of male heirs). Then on to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I wanted to go back to the coach) and then to Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I think I had coffee)
and sandwiches at a place called Stoke House--nothing to do with the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary on the way back about the possibility that Perkin Warbeck was the real Duke of York and the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was glad to hear even though it probably went over the heads of most of the (by now tired)
audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to Leicester, it will be only to pay my respects to Richard and leave a white rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are boring, barely able to speak English, in contrast to that delightful institution, the London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for the length of this post.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
My reaction to Leicester
Hi, Carol –
Well, it’s a fun read if a bit distressing in its implications. I take it that your bottom line is that Annette Carson’s blog entry about the centre was dead on?? I am really surprised that they would be so careless. Did you get the chance to submit any comments while you were there, as we had discussed when Annette’s blog entry came up for discussion a while ago on this list?
Are you back in the USA now or still over in England? I hope you will give us a complete rundown on your whole tour! And please tell us what you enjoyed the most.
Anyway, lucky you (all things considered). You sure have a nice sister!
Johanne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanne L. Tournier
Email - jltournier60@...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 6:23 PM
To:
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
<snip>
. . . and the Richard III Center itself. In the center's defense, it does credit Philippa Langley with initiating the dig, but that's because the whole approach is to Richard the archaeological artifact rather than Richard the man or king. The model skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally with the wrong distance between the vertebrae and the broken shin bones next to the thigh bones, creating the false impression that Richard was unnaturally long in the torso and short in the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to match their modern decor!--the attendant said exactly what Annette said in her blog) does look like something out of "Star Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on plexiglass and look down at the site where Richard's skeleton was found, especially since if you look from a certain angle, you can see a fluorescent outline showing the (even more two-dimensional) placement of the bones when they were found.
Worse still , the first thing you see is a projection onto the wall of various characters in the historical drama (Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom speak about Richard from some imaginary perspective that is, at least, not Shakespearean but nevertheless more novelistic than historical, and Richard himself, who doesn't speak and is shown *from the back, naked to the waist,* as an eighteen-year-old youth with severe scoliosis. The immediate impression is of Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by the displays of "bones" and a note on scoliosis that fails to undo the impression that Richard was badly deformed and known to be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about his relationship with the North, nothing about his legislation, nothing that would make him seem admirable or memorable as a man or king, only the "interesting" detail that the King under the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center was reinforced when the cathedral "bell" (which must have been electric) got stuck and kept striking the same three notes, painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
<snip for brevity>
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Hi, Carol
"Well, it's a fun read if a bit distressing in its implications. I take it that your bottom line is that Annette Carson's blog entry about the centre was dead on?? I am really surprised that they would be so careless. Did you get the chance to submit any comments while you were there, as we had discussed when Annette's blog entry came up for discussion a while ago on this list?
"Are you back in the USA now or still over in England? I hope you will give us a complete rundown on your whole tour! And please tell us what you enjoyed the most.
"Anyway, lucky you (all things considered). You sure have a nice sister!"
Carol responds:
I hope this response posts. Yahoo keeps saying that I've exceeded my quota for this operation even though it's now "tomorrow" by my clock. I've been back in Arizona since Thursday night. I stayed the night at my sister's as I was too jet lagged to take a night shuttle and didn't want my grandson to have to pick me up at the shuttle station at 11:15 at night. I'm almost back on a normal sleep schedule now (I had to take Ambien to help me sleep in England since I can't sleep in hotels even in the States.
Regarding Annette's blog, I couldn't tell whether the text of Philippa's diary had been altered or not, but at least it was there and her contribution was acknowledged. I agree with Annette about the "Star Wars" armor and the "ghoulish display of a projected image of the king's remains lying in his grave," but far worse to me is something Annette didn't mention, the conspicuous display of a naked-to-the-waist, backward-facing "Richard" projected onto the wall as almost the first thing visitors see. Clearly, the people in charge think that the most interesting thing about Richard is his spine! I didn't like the replica bones, either, especially the layout, which ought to be upright and three-dimensional if shown at all, or the placement of the Wilkinson head where even a short adult would have to stoop to see it. (I'm five feet ten and had to crouch!) All in all, the center is a travesty, at best a tribute to an archaeological dig and at worst an insult to Richard.
They need to have a comment box so that people can react to their experience. But if they won't listen to Annette (or Philippa), I don't know whom they'd listen to. The Duke of Gloucester, maybe?
I think that anyone who can go should go so that you can see for yourselves what has been done and maybe someone can set up an online petition. I intend to comment on their website if they'll let me, but since I'm in the U.S., it may not show up.
I have no comment on the Leicester reburial, but the visitor center is a disgrace.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Perhaps you could summarise your visit in Word and make it a Group File?
From:
[mailto: ]
Sent: 20 August 2014 17:33
To:
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] My reaction to Leicester
Johanne wrote :
"Hi, Carol –
"Well, it’s a fun read if a bit distressing in its implications. I take it
that your bottom line is that Annette Carson’s blog entry about the centre was
dead on?? I am really surprised that they would be so careless. Did you get the
chance to submit any comments while you were there, as we had discussed when
Annette’s blog entry came up for discussion a while ago on this list?
"Are you back in the USA
now or still over in England ?
I hope you will give us a complete rundown on your whole tour! And please tell
us what you enjoyed the most.
"Anyway, lucky you (all things considered). You sure have a nice
sister!"
Carol responds:
I hope this response posts. Yahoo keeps saying that I've exceeded my quota for
this operation even though it's now "tomorrow" by my clock. I've been
back in Arizona
since Thursday night. I stayed the night at my sister's as I was too jet lagged
to take a night shuttle and didn't want my grandson to have to pick me up at
the shuttle station at 11:15 at night. I'm almost back on a normal sleep
schedule now (I had to take Ambien to help me sleep in
England since I
can't sleep in hotels even in the States.
Regarding Annette's blog, I couldn't tell whether the text of Philippa's diary
had been altered or not, but at least it was there and her contribution was
acknowledged. I agree with Annette about the "Star Wars" armor and
the "ghoulish display of a projected image of the king’s remains lying in
his grave," but far worse to me is something Annette didn't mention, the
conspicuous display of a naked-to-the-waist, backward-facing
"Richard" projected onto the wall as almost the first thing visitors
see. Clearly, the people in charge think that the most interesting thing about
Richard is his spine! I didn't like the replica bones, either, especially the
layout, which ought to be upright and three-dimensional if shown at all, or the
placement of the Wilkinson head where even a short adult would have to stoop to
see it. (I'm five feet ten and had to crouch!) All in all, the center is a
travesty, at best a tribute to an archaeological dig and at worst an insult to
Richard.
They need to have a comment box so that people can react to their experience.
But if they won't listen to Annette (or Philippa), I don't know whom they'd
listen to. The Duke of Gloucester, maybe?
I think that anyone who can go should go so that you can see for yourselves
what has been done and maybe someone can set up an online petition. I intend to
comment on their website if they'll let me, but since I'm in the
U.S. , it may not
show up.
I have no comment on the Leicester reburial,
but the visitor center is a disgrace.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Hi Carol, sorry you were less than impressed but I've always thought that inevitable. Leicester is an acquired taste; it's actually growing on me. Had you been able to go down to the park by the river where there's another, I think more beautiful church, you may have felt different. But if you don't like Birmingham you won't like Leicester. "Ricardians don't seem to go around in clumps, you tend to bump into them in the most unusual places. I was accosted on a train by a lady sitting opposite because she spotted I was reading the Eleanor book. She came from York, she said, and was a great Richard supporter of course. I met another one in Leicester at the Priory of the Holy Cross, she was doing the flower arranging there; and another who was a guest at a wedding reception. Perhaps we don't shout it out because of being ridiculed - yes that still happens. "How did you like York - the complete opposite to Leicester?"
Carol responds:
Hi, Hilary. It wasn't Leicester itself that I disliked; it was the visitor center (which is appalling--my subjective view, of course) and to some extent the "cathedral," which is small and badly in need of repair (at least they're working on the Richard wing). The little guide (who may have been sixty something but seemed older) seemed to be suffering from some disorder that made her weak and out of breath, and I was sorry for her, but I do wish she had shown more respect and not stood on the slab honoring Richard. And the electric chimes getting stuck (no doubt a fluke) reinforced my less than favorable impression.
The rest of Leicester (except the medieval part, which I saw on our walk and loved--the guide did mention Richard once without animosity--also showed us the outside of the church where the Duke of York and Henry VI were knighted together) seems cosmopolitan and modern without the color of London (the cabbies were Middle Easterners who barely spoke English, unlike the wonderful native Londoners who provide commentary as they drive). At least it lacked London's dangerous traffic.
On a side note, I noticed that American tourists were the only ones who dutifully waited on the curb for the red man to change to a green man. If London were to adopt the States' "Walk" and "Don't Walk" signs (funny how intimidating and commanding those last words look in red), maybe it would have fewer jaywalkers. (I meant to look up the number of car or bus pedestrian accidents in London per year but haven't yet done so. As for me, I'll stay on the curb until the light changes unless there's a crowd forcing me into the street!)
One good word for Leicester--at least when you push a button for a pedestrian crossing light, it turns green almost instantly. There's even a green bicycle light. Good thing, since we had to walk to the nearest restaurant, a McDonald's, since we had no dinner reservation at the Leicester Hilton.
Anyway, I much prefer York, but I'll save that for another message, assuming that Yahoo lets me post!
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Perhaps you could summarise your visit in Word and make it a Group File?
Carol responds:
Thank you for the suggestion, but did you mean the tour and all or just the visitor center? I've copied my original post on the topic to Word, but it will need considerable editing (depersonalizing) and condensing before it's suitable as a forum file.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Hi, Carol –
Your comments are always thoughtful and knowledgeable, and now that you have seen the Centre in person, I am sure that the negativity is justified! What a pity!
Are you a member of the RIII Society? They had a lengthy feature on the prospective Centre (prior to its opening), and it was laudatory. There were several artist’s concepts of the new entrance (which looks lovely), the courtyard with a glazed balcony overlooking, and the ground floor design emphasizing the Protectorship and Kingship, focusing on the three things which beset him (it says) – the “long shadow” of the disappearance of the Princes, the deaths of his wife and son, and the “table of achievements,” over which it says the “long shadow of the missing princes” is cast.
Anyway, I can’t help thinking that the Society is a good place for people who are members to start with comments/complaints, because they may be in a better position to exert influence than we as individuals are. Of course, if the Society bigwigs really think things are just hunky-dorey, or if they feel that they won’t be listened to, it will be necessary to go another route.
I agree with the idea of an online petition; however, the online petitions which have played a role on behalf of the Leicester and York campaigns are not available for non-UK residents. But there are other sites available on the Web, and I think there are some which people worldwide can sign.
I think there should be some communication with Annette Carson and/or Philippa Langley as well.
Thank you for your comments! (What the heck does Yahoo! mean that you have exceeded your quota?? HUH??!!)
Oh, if you comment on the Centre’s (I presume you’re referring to) website – please let us know.
TTFN J
Johanne
From: [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 1:33 PM
To:
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Johanne wrote :
"Hi, Carol –
"Well, it’s a fun read if a bit distressing in its implications. I take it that your bottom line is that Annette Carson’s blog entry about the centre was dead on?? I am really surprised that they would be so careless. Did you get the chance to submit any comments while you were there, as we had discussed when Annette’s blog entry came up for discussion a while ago on this list?
"Are you back in the USA now or still over in England? I hope you will give us a complete rundown on your whole tour! And please tell us what you enjoyed the most.
"Anyway, lucky you (all things considered). You sure have a nice sister!"
Carol responds:
I hope this response posts. Yahoo keeps saying that I've exceeded my quota for this operation even though it's now "tomorrow" by my clock. I've been back in Arizona since Thursday night. I stayed the night at my sister's as I was too jet lagged to take a night shuttle and didn't want my grandson to have to pick me up at the shuttle station at 11:15 at night. I'm almost back on a normal sleep schedule now (I had to take Ambien to help me sleep in England since I can't sleep in hotels even in the States.
Regarding Annette's blog, I couldn't tell whether the text of Philippa's diary had been altered or not, but at least it was there and her contribution was acknowledged. I agree with Annette about the "Star Wars" armor and the "ghoulish display of a projected image of the king’s remains lying in his grave," but far worse to me is something Annette didn't mention, the conspicuous display of a naked-to-the-waist, backward-facing "Richard" projected onto the wall as almost the first thing visitors see. Clearly, the people in charge think that the most interesting thing about Richard is his spine! I didn't like the replica bones, either, especially the layout, which ought to be upright and three-dimensional if shown at all, or the placement of the Wilkinson head where even a short adult would have to stoop to see it. (I'm five feet ten and had to crouch!) All in all, the center is a travesty, at best a tribute to an archaeological dig and at worst an insult to Richard.
They need to have a comment box so that people can react to their experience. But if they won't listen to Annette (or Philippa), I don't know whom they'd listen to. The Duke of Gloucester, maybe?
I think that anyone who can go should go so that you can see for yourselves what has been done and maybe someone can set up an online petition. I intend to comment on their website if they'll let me, but since I'm in the U.S., it may not show up.
I have no comment on the Leicester reburial, but the visitor center is a disgrace.
Carol
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanne L. Tournier
Email - jltournier60@...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Hi, Carol
Your comments are always thoughtful and knowledgeable, and now that you have seen the Centre in person, I am sure that the negativity is justified! What a pity!
"Are you a member of the RIII Society? They had a lengthy feature on the prospective Centre (prior to its opening), and it was laudatory. There were several artist's concepts of the new entrance (which looks lovely), the courtyard with a glazed balcony overlooking, and the ground floor design emphasizing the Protectorship and Kingship, focusing on the three things which beset him (it says) the long shadow of the disappearance of the Princes, the deaths of his wife and son, and the table of achievements, over which it says the long shadow of the missing princes is cast.[snip]"
Carol responds:
Hi, Johanne. Thanks for the compliment. I didn't see anything on Richard as Protector or King, but, admittedly, I was disconcerted (to put it mildly) by the emphasis on Richard's scoliosis (and the dig rather than the man), and I was with a tour group that had to get back to the bus (coach) by a certain time. Maybe if I'd been by myself, at my leisure, and in a better frame of mind, I would have looked to see if there was another level that I missed. But if Richard the King or Gloucester the Protector was there, they weren't on the floors or in the rooms I saw.
Yes, I'm a member of the Richard III Society (American Branch) and I'm in touch (or used to be) with Annette Carson. I intend to correspond with her about it, but at the moment, I'm playing catch-up on everything after having been away from home for eleven days.
If I can post on the center's website without revealing my identity, I will, but I don't like giving out my name online (another reason that I don't "do" Facebook except for very limited chats with my grandson--it was the only way I could keep in touch with him, and then only intermittently while I was gone. Ever tried to post to Facebook using a Kindle? But I digress.)
Anyway, I hope that someone (Hilary?) can go to the Leicester RIII Center to see if there were parts I overlooked. Maybe I skipped a room between the entrance and the restroom ("toilet," to use a Briticism I'm still not comfortable with). They listened to Annette about the pool of blood. Maybe they'll listen to her (or someone else with authority or determination, not to mention sufficient time and a British accent) about the half-naked, crook-backed Richard, who would not have looked that way to his contemporaries, not even, I think, to Anne or his squire. The depiction is too exaggerated and ignores the work his muscles would have done to hold the bones in place while he was alive. And even if it's accurate, it's tasteless and disrespectful to emphasize it at the expense of his undoubted intelligence and capabilities, both mental and physical.
Not sure what Yahoo means by telling me that I've exceeded my quota. It seems to be ignoring it' own restriction (knock on wood) as my other responses have all posted.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent, and the research and archaeology up there to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
My dear sister, who arranged the trip to England as a birthday present for me, and her kind and hard-working travel agent (my sister's friend and sometime traveling companion) booked a Richard III tour of Leicester and Bosworth as part of our itinerary. My sister optimistically expected a roomful of Ricardian intellectuals and thought that I would be circulating among what she called my peers, discussing Richard to my heart's content. I expected something rather different, a group of people who had become curious about the King under the Car Park or whose interest in Richard stemmed from having read "Daughter of Time" at some point in their lives. I was closer to the reality than my sister as far as I could tell, but we had very little time to mingle. The few people I met were history teachers, battlefield buffs, or people whose spouses had read Tey and were trying to learn a bit about Richard to humor them.The first
night's itinerary consisted of a formal dinner and a speech by Julian Somebody on the Wars of the Roses the first night (the speaker seemed nervous and kept referring to people by the wrong name--Edward for George, Richard for Edward, and even Northumberland for Oxford--which must have added to the confusion of befuddled husbands (and sisters). The next morning, we took a bus--er, coach--to Leicester "cathedral" (which at least didn't smell musty like most of the other small churches we saw), where we saw the old memorial plaque (the woman who told us about the church was standing on it!) and the plans for the shoebox, I mean tomb, but we weren't allowed in that part of the church as it was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see the newly refurbished statue of Richard before entering the gift shop (which took an eclectic approach, including everything from Shakespeare to
Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but had no boar pins or any other worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III Center itself. In the center's defense, it does credit Philippa Langley with initiating the dig, but that's because the whole approach is to Richard the archaeological artifact rather than Richard the man or king. The model skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally with the wrong distance between the vertebrae and the broken shin bones next to the thigh bones, creating the false impression that Richard was unnaturally long in the torso and short in the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to match their modern decor!--the attendant said exactly what Annette said in her blog) does look like something out of "Star Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on plexiglass and look down at the site where Richard's skeleton was found, especially since if you look from a certain angle, you can see a fluorescent
outline showing the (even more two-dimensional) placement of the bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a projection onto the wall of various characters in the historical drama (Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom speak about Richard from some imaginary perspective that is, at least, not Shakespearean but nevertheless more novelistic than historical, and Richard himself, who doesn't speak and is shown *from the back, naked to the waist,* as an eighteen-year-old youth with severe scoliosis. The immediate impression is of Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by the displays of "bones" and a note on scoliosis that fails to undo the impression that Richard was badly deformed and known to be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about his relationship with the North, nothing about his legislation, nothing that would make him seem admirable or memorable as a man or
king, only the "interesting" detail that the King under the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center was reinforced when the cathedral "bell" (which must have been electric) got stuck and kept striking the same three notes, painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression. At least the guide, who was primarily interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing bad to say about Richard (and the weather that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel and another dinner at our own tables (we managed to mingle with two people who asked to sit at our table, probably because they didn't want to be alone, and another talk, this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice) as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage and a quote from TR about EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of mysterious and difficult to explain given inadequate and sometimes biased sources), did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most of the "crimes" attributed to him by Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial legislation. I hope his presentation undid some of the harm caused by the so-called RIII Center, at least for those newbies who were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy) was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth Center, which did have apparently authentic armor and a lovely location (probably a better site for a visitor center than the real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented for my taste. My sister pointed out that they
would naturally emphasize the winner over the loser. That simple thought provided me with a new perspective. I had always thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's "victory." Just as at the NPG, English history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I suppose a Battle of Hastings center would present Harold the Saxon in much the same way as the loser of the battle, with the emphasis on William of Normandy as the Conqueror and founder of a new line of kings (however redirected both lines eventually became through lack of male heirs). Then on to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I wanted to go back to the coach) and then to Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a place called Stoke House--nothing to do with the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary on the way back about the possibility that Perkin Warbeck
was the real Duke of York and the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was glad to hear even though it probably went over the heads of most of the (by now tired) audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to Leicester, it will be only to pay my respects to Richard and leave a white rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are boring, barely able to speak English, in contrast to that delightful institution, the London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for the length of this post.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent, and the research and archaeology up there to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
My dear sister, who arranged the trip to England as a birthday present for me, and her kind and hard-working travel agent (my sister's friend and sometime traveling companion) booked a Richard III tour of Leicester and Bosworth as part of our itinerary. My sister optimistically expected a roomful of Ricardian intellectuals and thought that I would be circulating among what she called my peers, discussing Richard to my heart's content. I expected something rather different, a group of people who had become curious about the King under the Car Park or whose interest in Richard stemmed from having read "Daughter of Time" at some point in their lives. I was closer to the reality than my sister as far as I could tell, but we had very little time to mingle. The few people I met were history teachers, battlefield buffs, or people whose spouses had read Tey and were trying to learn a bit about Richard to humor them.The first
night's itinerary consisted of a formal dinner and a speech by Julian Somebody on the Wars of the Roses the first night (the speaker seemed nervous and kept referring to people by the wrong name--Edward for George, Richard for Edward, and even Northumberland for Oxford--which must have added to the confusion of befuddled husbands (and sisters). The next morning, we took a bus--er, coach--to Leicester "cathedral" (which at least didn't smell musty like most of the other small churches we saw), where we saw the old memorial plaque (the woman who told us about the church was standing on it!) and the plans for the shoebox, I mean tomb, but we weren't allowed in that part of the church as it was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see the newly refurbished statue of Richard before entering the gift shop (which took an eclectic approach, including everything from Shakespeare to
Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but had no boar pins or any other worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III Center itself. In the center's defense, it does credit Philippa Langley with initiating the dig, but that's because the whole approach is to Richard the archaeological artifact rather than Richard the man or king. The model skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally with the wrong distance between the vertebrae and the broken shin bones next to the thigh bones, creating the false impression that Richard was unnaturally long in the torso and short in the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to match their modern decor!--the attendant said exactly what Annette said in her blog) does look like something out of "Star Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on plexiglass and look down at the site where Richard's skeleton was found, especially since if you look from a certain angle, you can see a fluorescent
outline showing the (even more two-dimensional) placement of the bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a projection onto the wall of various characters in the historical drama (Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom speak about Richard from some imaginary perspective that is, at least, not Shakespearean but nevertheless more novelistic than historical, and Richard himself, who doesn't speak and is shown *from the back, naked to the waist,* as an eighteen-year-old youth with severe scoliosis. The immediate impression is of Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by the displays of "bones" and a note on scoliosis that fails to undo the impression that Richard was badly deformed and known to be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about his relationship with the North, nothing about his legislation, nothing that would make him seem admirable or memorable as a man or
king, only the "interesting" detail that the King under the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center was reinforced when the cathedral "bell" (which must have been electric) got stuck and kept striking the same three notes, painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression. At least the guide, who was primarily interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing bad to say about Richard (and the weather that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel and another dinner at our own tables (we managed to mingle with two people who asked to sit at our table, probably because they didn't want to be alone, and another talk, this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice) as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage and a quote from TR about EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of mysterious and difficult to explain given inadequate and sometimes biased sources), did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most of the "crimes" attributed to him by Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial legislation. I hope his presentation undid some of the harm caused by the so-called RIII Center, at least for those newbies who were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy) was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth Center, which did have apparently authentic armor and a lovely location (probably a better site for a visitor center than the real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented for my taste. My sister pointed out that they
would naturally emphasize the winner over the loser. That simple thought provided me with a new perspective. I had always thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's "victory." Just as at the NPG, English history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I suppose a Battle of Hastings center would present Harold the Saxon in much the same way as the loser of the battle, with the emphasis on William of Normandy as the Conqueror and founder of a new line of kings (however redirected both lines eventually became through lack of male heirs). Then on to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I wanted to go back to the coach) and then to Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a place called Stoke House--nothing to do with the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary on the way back about the possibility that Perkin Warbeck
was the real Duke of York and the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was glad to hear even though it probably went over the heads of most of the (by now tired) audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to Leicester, it will be only to pay my respects to Richard and leave a white rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are boring, barely able to speak English, in contrast to that delightful institution, the London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for the length of this post.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
The Centre itself is not at all bad these days, it's a shame they haven't moved the standards to their correct positions, which they hadn't done last autumn. Maybe they have now so much publicity has been given to the archaeological evidence of the battle location.
Paul
On 22/08/2014 11:13, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] wrote:
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the
Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by.
Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking
tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and
who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of
the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I
am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the
standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent,
and the research and archaeology up there to be really
cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
My dear sister, who arranged the trip to
England as a birthday present for me, and
her kind and hard-working travel agent (my
sister's friend and sometime traveling
companion) booked a Richard III tour of
Leicester and Bosworth as part of our
itinerary. My sister optimistically expected
a roomful of Ricardian intellectuals and
thought that I would be circulating among
what she called my peers, discussing Richard
to my heart's content. I expected something
rather different, a group of people who had
become curious about the King under the Car
Park or whose interest in Richard stemmed
from having read "Daughter of Time" at some
point in their lives. I was closer to the
reality than my sister as far as I could
tell, but we had very little time to mingle.
The few people I met were history teachers,
battlefield buffs, or people whose spouses
had read Tey and were trying to learn a bit
about Richard to humor them.The first
night's itinerary consisted of a formal
dinner and a speech by Julian Somebody on
the Wars of the Roses the first night (the
speaker seemed nervous and kept referring to
people by the wrong name--Edward for George,
Richard for Edward, and even Northumberland
for Oxford--which must have added to the
confusion of befuddled husbands (and
sisters). The next morning, we took a
bus--er, coach--to Leicester "cathedral"
(which at least didn't smell musty like most
of the other small churches we saw), where
we saw the old memorial plaque (the woman
who told us about the church was standing on
it!) and the plans for the shoebox, I mean
tomb, but we weren't allowed in that part of
the church as it was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see
the newly refurbished statue of Richard
before entering the gift shop (which took an
eclectic approach, including everything from
Shakespeare to Philippa Gregory to Annette
Carson but had no boar pins or any other
worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III
Center itself. In the center's defense, it
does credit Philippa Langley with initiating
the dig, but that's because the whole
approach is to Richard the archaeological
artifact rather than Richard the man or
king. The model skeleton is laid out
two-dimensionally with the wrong distance
between the vertebrae and the broken shin
bones next to the thigh bones, creating the
false impression that Richard was
unnaturally long in the torso and short in
the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to
match their modern decor!--the attendant
said exactly what Annette said in her blog)
does look like something out of "Star Wars."
Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on
plexiglass and look down at the site where
Richard's skeleton was found, especially
since if you look from a certain angle, you
can see a fluorescent outline showing the
(even more two-dimensional) placement of the
bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a
projection onto the wall of various
characters in the historical drama (Warwick,
Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom
speak about Richard from some imaginary
perspective that is, at least, not
Shakespearean but nevertheless more
novelistic than historical, and Richard
himself, who doesn't speak and is shown
*from the back, naked to the waist,* as an
eighteen-year-old youth with severe
scoliosis. The immediate impression is of
Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by
the displays of "bones" and a note on
scoliosis that fails to undo the impression
that Richard was badly deformed and known to
be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about
his relationship with the North, nothing
about his legislation, nothing that would
make him seem admirable or memorable as a
man or king, only the "interesting" detail
that the King under the Car Park had a
crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center
was reinforced when the cathedral "bell"
(which must have been electric) got stuck
and kept striking the same three notes,
painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially
eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression.
At least the guide, who was primarily
interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing
bad to say about Richard (and the weather
that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel
and another dinner at our own tables (we
managed to mingle with two people who asked
to sit at our table, probably because they
didn't want to be alone, and another talk,
this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar
with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man
vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice)
as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage
and a quote from TR about EW applied to
Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution
of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of
mysterious and difficult to explain given
inadequate and sometimes biased sources),
did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a
hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most
of the "crimes" attributed to him by
Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial
legislation. I hope his presentation undid
some of the harm caused by the so-called
RIII Center, at least for those newbies who
were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy)
was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth
Center, which did have apparently authentic
armor and a lovely location (probably a
better site for a visitor center than the
real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented
for my taste. My sister pointed out that
they would naturally emphasize the winner
over the loser. That simple thought provided
me with a new perspective. I had always
thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's
(and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's
"victory." Just as at the NPG, English
history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I
suppose a Battle of Hastings center would
present Harold the Saxon in much the same
way as the loser of the battle, with the
emphasis on William of Normandy as the
Conqueror and founder of a new line of kings
(however redirected both lines eventually
became through lack of male heirs). Then on
to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I
wanted to go back to the coach) and then to
Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I
think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a
place called Stoke House--nothing to do with
the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary
on the way back about the possibility that
Perkin Warbeck was the real Duke of York and
the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was
glad to hear even though it probably went
over the heads of most of the (by now tired)
audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to
Leicester, it will be only to pay my
respects to Richard and leave a white rose
at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are
boring, barely able to speak English, in
contrast to that delightful institution, the
London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for
the length of this post.
Carol
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
I think the land is still being farmed.
There was a 7-8 mile walk the day before, but we didn't do that because it was raining very heavily.
Jess From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []
Sent: 22/08/2014 16:42
To:
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
I imagine the tour was of the old site
rather than the actual one, as to walk there from the Battlefield
centre would take a very long time, as it is about 2 km away!
The Centre itself is not at all bad these days, it's a shame they
haven't moved the standards to their correct positions, which they
hadn't done last autumn. Maybe they have now so much publicity has
been given to the archaeological evidence of the battle location.
Paul
On 22/08/2014 11:13, Jessie Skinner janjovian@...
[] wrote:
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the
Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by.
Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking
tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and
who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of
the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I
am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the
standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent,
and the research and archaeology up there to be really
cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
My dear sister, who arranged the trip to
England as a birthday present for me, and
her kind and hard-working travel agent (my
sister's friend and sometime traveling
companion) booked a Richard III tour of
Leicester and Bosworth as part of our
itinerary. My sister optimistically expected
a roomful of Ricardian intellectuals and
thought that I would be circulating among
what she called my peers, discussing Richard
to my heart's content. I expected something
rather different, a group of people who had
become curious about the King under the Car
Park or whose interest in Richard stemmed
from having read "Daughter of Time" at some
point in their lives. I was closer to the
reality than my sister as far as I could
tell, but we had very little time to mingle.
The few people I met were history teachers,
battlefield buffs, or people whose spouses
had read Tey and were trying to learn a bit
about Richard to humor them.The first
night's itinerary consisted of a formal
dinner and a speech by Julian Somebody on
the Wars of the Roses the first night (the
speaker seemed nervous and kept referring to
people by the wrong name--Edward for George,
Richard for Edward, and even Northumberland
for Oxford--which must have added to the
confusion of befuddled husbands (and
sisters). The next morning, we took a
bus--er, coach--to Leicester "cathedral"
(which at least didn't smell musty like most
of the other small churches we saw), where
we saw the old memorial plaque (the woman
who told us about the church was standing on
it!) and the plans for the shoebox, I mean
tomb, but we weren't allowed in that part of
the church as it was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to see
the newly refurbished statue of Richard
before entering the gift shop (which took an
eclectic approach, including everything from
Shakespeare to Philippa Gregory to Annette
Carson but had no boar pins or any other
worthwhile memorabilia) and the Richard III
Center itself. In the center's defense, it
does credit Philippa Langley with initiating
the dig, but that's because the whole
approach is to Richard the archaeological
artifact rather than Richard the man or
king. The model skeleton is laid out
two-dimensionally with the wrong distance
between the vertebrae and the broken shin
bones next to the thigh bones, creating the
false impression that Richard was
unnaturally long in the torso and short in
the legs. The "medieval" armor (white to
match their modern decor!--the attendant
said exactly what Annette said in her blog)
does look like something out of "Star Wars."
Also, it's very disconcerting to stand on
plexiglass and look down at the site where
Richard's skeleton was found, especially
since if you look from a certain angle, you
can see a fluorescent outline showing the
(even more two-dimensional) placement of the
bones when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is a
projection onto the wall of various
characters in the historical drama (Warwick,
Edward, an armorer, and Anne, all of whom
speak about Richard from some imaginary
perspective that is, at least, not
Shakespearean but nevertheless more
novelistic than historical, and Richard
himself, who doesn't speak and is shown
*from the back, naked to the waist,* as an
eighteen-year-old youth with severe
scoliosis. The immediate impression is of
Crookback Dick, an impression reinforced by
the displays of "bones" and a note on
scoliosis that fails to undo the impression
that Richard was badly deformed and known to
be so by his contemporaries. Nothing about
his relationship with the North, nothing
about his legislation, nothing that would
make him seem admirable or memorable as a
man or king, only the "interesting" detail
that the King under the Car Park had a
crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester center
was reinforced when the cathedral "bell"
(which must have been electric) got stuck
and kept striking the same three notes,
painfully loudly, for two or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester partially
eased (but didn't erase) the bad impression.
At least the guide, who was primarily
interested in Simon de Montfort, had nothing
bad to say about Richard (and the weather
that day was lovely). Then back to the hotel
and another dinner at our own tables (we
managed to mingle with two people who asked
to sit at our table, probably because they
didn't want to be alone, and another talk,
this one by Mike Ingram (anyone familiar
with him?), who talked on "Richard III: Man
vs. Myth," Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset (twice)
as EW's *younger son* by her first marriage
and a quote from TR about EW applied to
Eleanor Butler), and a view of the execution
of Hastings as inexcusable (instead of
mysterious and difficult to explain given
inadequate and sometimes biased sources),
did mention that the scoliosis wasn't a
hunchback, did exonerate Richard from most
of the "crimes" attributed to him by
Shakespeare, and did cover his beneficial
legislation. I hope his presentation undid
some of the harm caused by the so-called
RIII Center, at least for those newbies who
were actually listening.
The next day (which started out very rainy)
was devoted to battlefields and the Bosworth
Center, which did have apparently authentic
armor and a lovely location (probably a
better site for a visitor center than the
real battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented
for my taste. My sister pointed out that
they would naturally emphasize the winner
over the loser. That simple thought provided
me with a new perspective. I had always
thought of Bosworth in terms of Richard's
(and England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's
"victory." Just as at the NPG, English
history seemed to begin with the Tudors. I
suppose a Battle of Hastings center would
present Harold the Saxon in much the same
way as the loser of the battle, with the
emphasis on William of Normandy as the
Conqueror and founder of a new line of kings
(however redirected both lines eventually
became through lack of male heirs). Then on
to the battlefield itself (it was cold and I
wanted to go back to the coach) and then to
Stoke (more of the same) and finally tea (I
think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a
place called Stoke House--nothing to do with
the battle.
And that was it except for some commentary
on the way back about the possibility that
Perkin Warbeck was the real Duke of York and
the Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was
glad to hear even though it probably went
over the heads of most of the (by now tired)
audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to
Leicester, it will be only to pay my
respects to Richard and leave a white rose
at his tomb. Even the cab drivers are
boring, barely able to speak English, in
contrast to that delightful institution, the
London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me for
the length of this post.
Carol
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Posted by: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...>
Reply via web post
"
Reply to sender
"
Reply to group
"
Start a New Topic
"
Messages in this topic
(16)
[The entire original message is not included.]
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Me too. It was so lovely it was a revelation.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: eileenbates147@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: RE: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Fri, Aug 22, 2014 5:42:09 PM
Ah Jess...that was the one we went on the 2 hour one,...I would have loved to have got closer. I was pleasantly surprised at how lovely the Leicestershire countryside was around about the battlefield site was. Eileen
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"You should have had a curry, Carol, eighty per cent of the population are from the Indian sub-continent, not the Middle East, but my guess is it was as much the Leicester accent which is quite different from the 'estuary English' of all but the posh Londoners. The cathedral disappoints me, not because it's small, but because it's architecturally unimpressive. My husband walked by it and hadn't even seen it. There are lots of gorgeous village churches which in my opinion would have been a lovely alternative but the problem is security and funds. If these churches smell musty it's because they lack funding for the basics, like water, heating, toilets and even electricity. Sempringham Abbey in Lincs has to hold services by candlelight and the toilets are in the village a good couple of miles away. "As for pedestrian protocol, well you must by now know that we British love to be disobedient; but my daughter did get run down by a bike in London which had jumped the lights. The Australians, like you, are very obedient, car drivers even stop in anticipation of someone crossing the road. We could never get used to that. "I fear I shan't be calling in at the Visitor Centre any time soon and I always have this dreadful urge to challenge ill-informed tourist guides. But I look forward to your views on York and its county, which despite all the tourists, I love. H"
Carol responds
Hi, Hilary. Can't eat curry--too spicy. The Leicester cabbie was definitely Middle Eastern, not Indian (I know the Indian accent from outsourced tech support and "junk" phone callers pretending to be from Microsoft), just like most New York City cab drivers these days. i did notice a large number of Indian waiters in London (not Leicester).
I contributed to one of the musty-smelling churches (the one at Sheriff Hutton). Our wonderful driver (specially hired for my sister and me by the travel agency) admitted that Edward of Middleham wasn't buried in the cenotaph but was certain that he was buried somewhere in that church and thinks that Richard should be buried there, too. I wanted to tell someone that they have the wrong picture for Edward V (it's clearly Edward VI--all they need to do is compare the one of E 6 to see that it's a variation of the same portrait), but there is no good contemporary portrait of EV, and I certainly don't want to see yet another coy of the Millais tableau, and besides, there was no one to mention it to, so I just mentioned it to the driver.
A woman at another musty little Yorkshire church (I forget whether I contributed to that one, too) said that it had been built in 1480 "during the reign of Henry VII." I couldn't help blurting "Edward IV" and she looked at me with surprise and then said I was right. For some reason, she also mentioned Richard III and said something like "Now don't believe the bad things Shakespeare said about him." I told her, "Don't worry; I don't. I'm a member of the American branch of the Richard III Society." I think (well, hope) that made her day.
There were no tourist guides, ill informed or otherwise, at the Leicester Visitor Center, only people collecting your money at the door (and trying to collect it again if you stepped out to revisit the statue of Richard) and running the gift shop. It was one of those people who said that the white "armor" matches their modern decor when I brought the subject up. I didn't dare mention the horrible film projection; I would have lost my temper if she had defended it.
Someone *should* talk to them about the problems with their exhibition. Maybe I'll write when I get the time, but I doubt they'll listen. Meanwhile, I suggest not recommending it to new Ricardians as it may destroy their budding interest in him.
Will post on York later, I promise, but I need to catch up on other things first.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Paul
On 22/08/2014 17:22, eileenbates147@... [] wrote:
When I last visited, a couple of years ago..you had a choice of two walks that were with guides (our one was excellent) The one which we chose ..which was quite far...took you so that you could view the new site in the distance,,the other second walk..very long took you much closer. I think at the time there was still an issue with the farmer who owned the actual land where the action took place which they were still trying to resolve. Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Paul
On 22/08/2014 18:21, Janjovian janjovian@... [] wrote:
The tour was about 2 to 3 miles and took a couple of hours. We didn't get right to the site where the cannon balls and the white boar pin were found but we were able to look out over the site.
I think the land is still being farmed.
There was a 7-8 mile walk the day before, but we didn't do that because it was raining very heavily.
Jess From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []
Sent: 22/08/2014 16:42
To:
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society Forum] My reaction to Leicester
I imagine the tour was of the old site rather than the actual one, as to walk there from the Battlefield centre would take a very long time, as it is about 2 km away!
The Centre itself is not at all bad these days, it's a shame they haven't moved the standards to their correct positions, which they hadn't done last autumn. Maybe they have now so much publicity has been given to the archaeological evidence of the battle location.
Paul
On 22/08/2014 11:13, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] wrote:
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the
Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed
by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the
walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a
Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members
of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time,
and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I
carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre
excellent, and the research and archaeology up there
to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
My dear sister, who arranged the trip
to England as a birthday present for me,
and her kind and hard-working travel
agent (my sister's friend and sometime
traveling companion) booked a Richard
III tour of Leicester and Bosworth as
part of our itinerary. My sister
optimistically expected a roomful of
Ricardian intellectuals and thought that
I would be circulating among what she
called my peers, discussing Richard to
my heart's content. I expected something
rather different, a group of people who
had become curious about the King under
the Car Park or whose interest in
Richard stemmed from having read
"Daughter of Time" at some point in
their lives. I was closer to the reality
than my sister as far as I could tell,
but we had very little time to mingle.
The few people I met were history
teachers, battlefield buffs, or people
whose spouses had read Tey and were
trying to learn a bit about Richard to
humor them.The first night's itinerary
consisted of a formal dinner and a
speech by Julian Somebody on the Wars of
the Roses the first night (the speaker
seemed nervous and kept referring to
people by the wrong name--Edward for
George, Richard for Edward, and even
Northumberland for Oxford--which must
have added to the confusion of befuddled
husbands (and sisters). The next
morning, we took a bus--er, coach--to
Leicester "cathedral" (which at least
didn't smell musty like most of the
other small churches we saw), where we
saw the old memorial plaque (the woman
who told us about the church was
standing on it!) and the plans for the
shoebox, I mean tomb, but we weren't
allowed in that part of the church as it
was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to
see the newly refurbished statue of
Richard before entering the gift shop
(which took an eclectic approach,
including everything from Shakespeare to
Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but
had no boar pins or any other worthwhile
memorabilia) and the Richard III Center
itself. In the center's defense, it does
credit Philippa Langley with initiating
the dig, but that's because the whole
approach is to Richard the
archaeological artifact rather than
Richard the man or king. The model
skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally
with the wrong distance between the
vertebrae and the broken shin bones next
to the thigh bones, creating the false
impression that Richard was unnaturally
long in the torso and short in the legs.
The "medieval" armor (white to match
their modern decor!--the attendant said
exactly what Annette said in her blog)
does look like something out of "Star
Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to
stand on plexiglass and look down at the
site where Richard's skeleton was found,
especially since if you look from a
certain angle, you can see a fluorescent
outline showing the (even more
two-dimensional) placement of the bones
when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is
a projection onto the wall of various
characters in the historical drama
(Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne,
all of whom speak about Richard from
some imaginary perspective that is, at
least, not Shakespearean but
nevertheless more novelistic than
historical, and Richard himself, who
doesn't speak and is shown *from the
back, naked to the waist,* as an
eighteen-year-old youth with severe
scoliosis. The immediate impression is
of Crookback Dick, an impression
reinforced by the displays of "bones"
and a note on scoliosis that fails to
undo the impression that Richard was
badly deformed and known to be so by his
contemporaries. Nothing about his
relationship with the North, nothing
about his legislation, nothing that
would make him seem admirable or
memorable as a man or king, only the
"interesting" detail that the King under
the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester
center was reinforced when the cathedral
"bell" (which must have been electric)
got stuck and kept striking the same
three notes, painfully loudly, for two
or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester
partially eased (but didn't erase) the
bad impression. At least the guide, who
was primarily interested in Simon de
Montfort, had nothing bad to say about
Richard (and the weather that day was
lovely). Then back to the hotel and
another dinner at our own tables (we
managed to mingle with two people who
asked to sit at our table, probably
because they didn't want to be alone,
and another talk, this one by Mike
Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who
talked on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth,"
Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset
(twice) as EW's *younger son* by her
first marriage and a quote from TR about
EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a
view of the execution of Hastings as
inexcusable (instead of mysterious and
difficult to explain given inadequate
and sometimes biased sources), did
mention that the scoliosis wasn't a
hunchback, did exonerate Richard from
most of the "crimes" attributed to him
by Shakespeare, and did cover his
beneficial legislation. I hope his
presentation undid some of the harm
caused by the so-called RIII Center, at
least for those newbies who were
actually listening.
The next day (which started out very
rainy) was devoted to battlefields and
the Bosworth Center, which did have
apparently authentic armor and a lovely
location (probably a better site for a
visitor center than the real
battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented
for my taste. My sister pointed out that
they would naturally emphasize the
winner over the loser. That simple
thought provided me with a new
perspective. I had always thought of
Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and
England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's
"victory." Just as at the NPG, English
history seemed to begin with the Tudors.
I suppose a Battle of Hastings center
would present Harold the Saxon in much
the same way as the loser of the battle,
with the emphasis on William of Normandy
as the Conqueror and founder of a new
line of kings (however redirected both
lines eventually became through lack of
male heirs). Then on to the battlefield
itself (it was cold and I wanted to go
back to the coach) and then to Stoke
(more of the same) and finally tea (I
think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a
place called Stoke House--nothing to do
with the battle.
And that was it except for some
commentary on the way back about the
possibility that Perkin Warbeck was the
real Duke of York and the
Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was
glad to hear even though it probably
went over the heads of most of the (by
now tired) audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to
Leicester, it will be only to pay my
respects to Richard and leave a white
rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers
are boring, barely able to speak
English, in contrast to that delightful
institution, the London cabbie.
Apologies to anyone who's still with me
for the length of this post.
Carol
--
Richard Liveth Yet! Posted by: Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (16)
[The entire original message is not included.]
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Our grandson is 7, and a budding historian already.
He loves knights in armour and watched the last Channel 4 programme with wrapt attention.
If we are able to go I will definitely try to visit the farmyard.
JessFrom: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []
Sent: 23/08/2014 10:49
To:
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
The land is indeed still farmland but
in the yard of the farm itself there is a bank of dirt on top of
which a sign and map have been placed looking out across the main
area towards the place of Richard's death. Very moving it is to,
and if you work it out you can actually walk into the field to the
place itself. I spent a half hour there last year close to tears.
Paul
On 22/08/2014 18:21, Janjovian janjovian@...
[] wrote:
The
tour was about 2 to 3 miles and took a couple of hours. We
didn't get right to the site where the cannon balls and the
white boar pin were found but we were able to look out over
the site.
I think the land is still being farmed.
There was a 7-8 mile walk the day before, but we didn't do
that because it was raining very heavily.
Jess
From: Paul
Trevor Bale paul.bale@... []
Sent: 22/08/2014 16:42
To:
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] My reaction to Leicester
I imagine the tour was of the old site rather than the actual one, as to walk there from the Battlefield centre would take a very long time, as it is about 2 km away!
The Centre itself is not at all bad these days, it's a shame they haven't moved the standards to their correct positions, which they hadn't done last autumn. Maybe they have now so much publicity has been given to the archaeological evidence of the battle location.
Paul
On 22/08/2014 11:13, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] wrote:
Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the
Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed
by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the
walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a
Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members
of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time,
and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I
carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre
excellent, and the research and archaeology up there
to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Tue, Aug 19, 2014 9:23:03 PM
[The entire original message is not included.]
My dear sister, who arranged the trip
to England as a birthday present for me,
and her kind and hard-working travel
agent (my sister's friend and sometime
traveling companion) booked a Richard
III tour of Leicester and Bosworth as
part of our itinerary. My sister
optimistically expected a roomful of
Ricardian intellectuals and thought that
I would be circulating among what she
called my peers, discussing Richard to
my heart's content. I expected something
rather different, a group of people who
had become curious about the King under
the Car Park or whose interest in
Richard stemmed from having read
"Daughter of Time" at some point in
their lives. I was closer to the reality
than my sister as far as I could tell,
but we had very little time to mingle.
The few people I met were history
teachers, battlefield buffs, or people
whose spouses had read Tey and were
trying to learn a bit about Richard to
humor them.The first night's itinerary
consisted of a formal dinner and a
speech by Julian Somebody on the Wars of
the Roses the first night (the speaker
seemed nervous and kept referring to
people by the wrong name--Edward for
George, Richard for Edward, and even
Northumberland for Oxford--which must
have added to the confusion of befuddled
husbands (and sisters). The next
morning, we took a bus--er, coach--to
Leicester "cathedral" (which at least
didn't smell musty like most of the
other small churches we saw), where we
saw the old memorial plaque (the woman
who told us about the church was
standing on it!) and the plans for the
shoebox, I mean tomb, but we weren't
allowed in that part of the church as it
was under construction.
Then (best part of the tour) we got to
see the newly refurbished statue of
Richard before entering the gift shop
(which took an eclectic approach,
including everything from Shakespeare to
Philippa Gregory to Annette Carson but
had no boar pins or any other worthwhile
memorabilia) and the Richard III Center
itself. In the center's defense, it does
credit Philippa Langley with initiating
the dig, but that's because the whole
approach is to Richard the
archaeological artifact rather than
Richard the man or king. The model
skeleton is laid out two-dimensionally
with the wrong distance between the
vertebrae and the broken shin bones next
to the thigh bones, creating the false
impression that Richard was unnaturally
long in the torso and short in the legs.
The "medieval" armor (white to match
their modern decor!--the attendant said
exactly what Annette said in her blog)
does look like something out of "Star
Wars." Also, it's very disconcerting to
stand on plexiglass and look down at the
site where Richard's skeleton was found,
especially since if you look from a
certain angle, you can see a fluorescent
outline showing the (even more
two-dimensional) placement of the bones
when they were found.
Worse still, the first thing you see is
a projection onto the wall of various
characters in the historical drama
(Warwick, Edward, an armorer, and Anne,
all of whom speak about Richard from
some imaginary perspective that is, at
least, not Shakespearean but
nevertheless more novelistic than
historical, and Richard himself, who
doesn't speak and is shown *from the
back, naked to the waist,* as an
eighteen-year-old youth with severe
scoliosis. The immediate impression is
of Crookback Dick, an impression
reinforced by the displays of "bones"
and a note on scoliosis that fails to
undo the impression that Richard was
badly deformed and known to be so by his
contemporaries. Nothing about his
relationship with the North, nothing
about his legislation, nothing that
would make him seem admirable or
memorable as a man or king, only the
"interesting" detail that the King under
the Car Park had a crooked spine.
My bad impression of the Leicester
center was reinforced when the cathedral
"bell" (which must have been electric)
got stuck and kept striking the same
three notes, painfully loudly, for two
or three hours.
A walk through medieval Leicester
partially eased (but didn't erase) the
bad impression. At least the guide, who
was primarily interested in Simon de
Montfort, had nothing bad to say about
Richard (and the weather that day was
lovely). Then back to the hotel and
another dinner at our own tables (we
managed to mingle with two people who
asked to sit at our table, probably
because they didn't want to be alone,
and another talk, this one by Mike
Ingram (anyone familiar with him?), who
talked on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth,"
Despite a few mistakes (such as
referring to the Marquess of Dorset
(twice) as EW's *younger son* by her
first marriage and a quote from TR about
EW applied to Eleanor Butler), and a
view of the execution of Hastings as
inexcusable (instead of mysterious and
difficult to explain given inadequate
and sometimes biased sources), did
mention that the scoliosis wasn't a
hunchback, did exonerate Richard from
most of the "crimes" attributed to him
by Shakespeare, and did cover his
beneficial legislation. I hope his
presentation undid some of the harm
caused by the so-called RIII Center, at
least for those newbies who were
actually listening.
The next day (which started out very
rainy) was devoted to battlefields and
the Bosworth Center, which did have
apparently authentic armor and a lovely
location (probably a better site for a
visitor center than the real
battlefield) but was too Tudor oriented
for my taste. My sister pointed out that
they would naturally emphasize the
winner over the loser. That simple
thought provided me with a new
perspective. I had always thought of
Bosworth in terms of Richard's (and
England's) loss, not Henry Tudor's
"victory." Just as at the NPG, English
history seemed to begin with the Tudors.
I suppose a Battle of Hastings center
would present Harold the Saxon in much
the same way as the loser of the battle,
with the emphasis on William of Normandy
as the Conqueror and founder of a new
line of kings (however redirected both
lines eventually became through lack of
male heirs). Then on to the battlefield
itself (it was cold and I wanted to go
back to the coach) and then to Stoke
(more of the same) and finally tea (I
think I had coffee) and sandwiches at a
place called Stoke House--nothing to do
with the battle.
And that was it except for some
commentary on the way back about the
possibility that Perkin Warbeck was the
real Duke of York and the
Tyrell-as-rescuer theory, which I was
glad to hear even though it probably
went over the heads of most of the (by
now tired) audience.
And that was it. If I ever return to
Leicester, it will be only to pay my
respects to Richard and leave a white
rose at his tomb. Even the cab drivers
are boring, barely able to speak
English, in contrast to t
Re: My reaction to Leicester
The whole idea of showing Richard shirtless to emphasize the curved spine while everyone else is dressed is what offends me. So, no, getting Dominic or anyone else to replace the current "Richard" would not solve the problem. And why not just show him dressed to begin with when they're introducing the "characters" in the "drama"? If they must have a display to show how Richard would have looked with and without a shirt and doublet, it should be with the bones. Showing the shirtless "Richard" at the very entrance of the exhibit places the "Crookback Dick" image in the viewer's mind as the most important aspect of Richard's life and character, not to be erased by anything else in the center, including the prominently displayed horizontal "bones" (Jo Appleby's arrangement). Imagine a display honoring Usain Bolt that emphasized his back rather than his accomplishments. Richard the man and king is lost amid overemphasized scoliosis.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent from my iPad
On 23 Aug 2014, at 15:12, "justcarol67@... []" <> wrote:
Doug wrote:Perhaps suggesting getting Dominic Smee (I believe
that's his surname) from the Channel 4 documantary to replace the current
"image" might be the way to go?Begin the display with a view of Mr. Smee from
behind, then "fade/morph" to him clothed in current style to demonstrate how
noticeable (or not!) such a condition would be *today,* and follow *that* image
with one using 15th century garb. I've always been told that when one isn't
satisfied with something and suggests a change that it helps if one has a
suggestion that could/would correct the situation.Couldn't hurt, anyway.Dougps: envy you your trip, sorry about the Center
being such a disappointment!Carol responds:
The whole idea of showing Richard shirtless to emphasize the curved spine while everyone else is dressed is what offends me. So, no, getting Dominic or anyone else to replace the current "Richard" would not solve the problem. And why not just show him dressed to begin with when they're introducing the "characters" in the "drama"? If they must have a display to show how Richard would have looked with and without a shirt and doublet, it should be with the bones. Showing the shirtless "Richard" at the very entrance of the exhibit places the "Crookback Dick" image in the viewer's mind as the most important aspect of Richard's life and character, not to be erased by anything else in the center, including the prominently displayed horizontal "bones" (Jo Appleby's arrangement). Imagine a display honoring Usain Bolt that emphasized his back rather than his accomplish
ments. Richard the man and king is lost amid overemphasized scoliosis.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent, and the research and archaeology up there to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much."
Carol responds:
We went to the Bosworth Center on an intermittently rainy day. The armor was certainly an improvement over the fake stuff at Leicester, and it was interesting to look through the slot of a helmet to see how limited the view was. I felt that we were hurried through, but then I really didn't want to listen to all the voices of "witnesses" and "participants" (the Stanleys, a little girl commenting on Richard's body--I heard that one without wanting to. I also didn't like turning the corner and encountering the whole Tudor family. It took my non-Ricardian sister to point out that for most people, Bosworth is Henry's victory, not Richard's loss. Sigh! It was *England's* loss. Why celebrate?
The site of the center is lovely and even though the battle wasn't actually fought there, I think the center should remain where it is with a few more notes explaining the mistake. Our guide (Mike Ingram, the same man who spoke on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth") didn't try to reenact the battle at the center site, and by the time we got to the real battlefield, the weather was cold and it was starting to rain again. He passed around some pictures encased in plastic, but I confess I don't remember what they were (only the Irish soldiers at Stoke Field later the same day). It was all too rushed, and I needed fellow Ricardians around me, not half-interested tourists who only wanted (as I did) to get back on the coach and be warm.
I don't think I'd want to go back even though the people at the Bosworth Center seem genuinely interested in history and not just out to make a few pounds. The whole idea of Bosworth and what should have been vs. what did happen is too depressing.
But don't feel bad about my visit! I love England and the English (though I do wish they knew what lemonade is--fresh-squeezed lemon juice mixed with sugar and water, not Sprite with a lemon slice or the various other manifestations I experienced before I gave up the attempt). I enjoyed London, including the uniformed porter at the hotel door and the delightful cabbies, and I love York, which I promise I'll post on separately.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Jonathan
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
From: justcarol67@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Sat, Aug 23, 2014 2:54:36 PM
Jess wrote :
"Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent, and the research and archaeology up there to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much."
Carol responds:
We went to the Bosworth Center on an intermittently rainy day. The armor was certainly an improvement over the fake stuff at Leicester, and it was interesting to look through the slot of a helmet to see how limited the view was. I felt that we were hurried through, but then I really didn't want to listen to all the voices of "witnesses" and "participants" (the Stanleys, a little girl commenting on Richard's body--I heard that one without wanting to. I also didn't like turning the corner and encountering the whole Tudor family. It took my non-Ricardian sister to point out that for most people, Bosworth is Henry's victory, not Richard's loss. Sigh! It was *England's* loss. Why celebrate?
The site of the center is lovely and even though the battle wasn't actually fought there, I think the center should remain where it is with a few more notes explaining the mistake. Our guide (Mike Ingram, the same man who spoke on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth") didn't try to reenact the battle at the center site, and by the time we got to the real battlefield, the weather was cold and it was starting to rain again. He passed around some pictures encased in plastic, but I confess I don't remember what they were (only the Irish soldiers at Stoke Field later the same day). It was all too rushed, and I needed fellow Ricardians around me, not half-interested tourists who only wanted (as I did) to get back on the coach and be warm.
I don't think I'd want to go back even though the people at the Bosworth Center seem genuinely interested in history and not just out to make a few pounds. The whole idea of Bosworth and what should have been vs. what did happen is too depressing.
But don't feel bad about my visit! I love England and the English (though I do wish they knew what lemonade is--fresh-squeezed lemon juice mixed with sugar and water, not Sprite with a lemon slice or the various other manifestations I experienced before I gave up the attempt). I enjoyed London, including the uniformed porter at the hotel door and the delightful cabbies, and I love York, which I promise I'll post on separately.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Been to Bosworth many times (most recently last weekend) and never had the feeling that it celebrates a Tudor victory. It just tells a story with as much impartiality as possible and, if anything, there's probably a stronger Ricardian bias, from the structure of the exhibition to the sympathy of the guides and even the contents of the shop.
Carol responds:
I'm glad you had a better experience than I did. Weather aside, I think it depends in part on whom you're traveling with and how much time you have. A coach tour on which you and your sister are the only Americans and half the people either don't know Richard III from Henry VIII or think he killed his nephews is less than ideal. Also, we had our own guide, so we didn't hear the perspective of the people at the center, and once we got to Bosworth itself, the weather was too cold and rainy for a proper lecture (and, I confess, I don't care about the movements of the troops. You probably have more interest in battles and late medieval warfare than I do). I asked Mike Ingram why he thought Northumberland didn't take part in the battle. I think he thought he couldn't because of his position, but to tell the truth, I don't remember his response clearly. I found the whole experience mind numbing. It was like having a group of doctors objectively discussing the symptoms of a newly deceased loved one in front of me. Richard's defeat and death are painful to me as is what came afterward. I care about his life and character, about the events of his reign, including his legislation, and try to uncover the truth about the Protectorate. Bosworth could have been a great victory. Instead, it was a tragic loss.
One good thing. At least, Mike Ingram made clear that Bosworth was not the end of the Wars of the Roses (for that reason, I'm glad we saw Stoke, though I'm quite sure that the majority of coach passengers had no idea who John, Earl of Lincoln was and couldn't distinguish a de la Pole from a Pole). And he seems to believe that Sir James Tyrell took the "princes" to Burgundy and that Perkin Warbeck ("demonized" by Henry VII just like Richard III, according to him) was who he said he was. Too bad he didn't have a better informed audience to ask him intelligent questions.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Jess From: Jonathan Evans jmcevans98@... []
Sent: 23/08/2014 17:18
To:
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Been to Bosworth many times (most recently last weekend) and never had the feeling that it celebrates a Tudor victory. It just tells a story with as much impartiality as possible and, if anything, there's probably a stronger Ricardian bias, from the structure of the exhibition to the sympathy of the guides and even the contents of the shop.
Jonathan
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
From:
justcarol67@... [] <>;
To:
<>;
Subject:
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent:
Sat, Aug 23, 2014 2:54:36 PM
Jess wrote :
"Carol, I have been following your posting's with great interest, and I do hope your trip to England was not too disappointing, and that Visitor Centre excepting you enjoyed your trip.
I was interested to see your point of view on the Bosworth Field Centre, which we were very impressed by. Mind you, we went on a nice day, and did the walking tour of the site, with a guide who was a Ricardian, and who wore the "white boar" badge.
He used flags and weapons in his talk, using members of the group to demonstrate his points. At one time, and I am sorry to say this, today of all days, I carried the standard, and was, "the Stanley's."
We also found the explanations in the centre excellent, and the research and archaeology up there to be really cutting edge.
I know just how much you were looking forward to your visit and hope we haven't let you down too much."
Carol responds:
We went to the Bosworth Center on an intermittently rainy day. The armor was certainly an improvement over the fake stuff at Leicester, and it was interesting to look through the slot of a helmet to see how limited the view was. I felt that we were hurried through, but then I really didn't want to listen to all the voices of "witnesses" and "participants" (the Stanleys, a little girl commenting on Richard's body--I heard that one without wanting to. I also didn't like turning the corner and encountering the whole Tudor family. It took my non-Ricardian sister to point out that for most people, Bosworth is Henry's victory, not Richard's loss. Sigh! It was *England's* loss. Why celebrate?
The site of the center is lovely and even though the battle wasn't actually fought there, I think the center should remain where it is with a few more notes explaining the mistake. Our guide (Mike Ingram, the same man who spoke on "Richard III: Man vs. Myth") didn't try to reenact the battle at the center site, and by the time we got to the real battlefield, the weather was cold and it was starting to rain again. He passed around some pictures encased in plastic, but I confess I don't remember what they were (only the Irish soldiers at Stoke Field later the same day). It was all too rushed, and I needed fellow Ricardians around me, not half-interested tourists who only wanted (as I did) to get back on the coach and be warm.
I don't think I'd want to go back even though the people at the Bosworth Center seem genuinely interested in history and not just out to make a few pounds. The whole idea of Bosworth and what should have been vs. what did happen is too depressing.
But don't feel bad about my visit! I love England and the English (though I do wish they knew what lemonade is--fresh-squeezed lemon juice mixed with sugar and water, not Sprite with a lemon slice or the various other manifestations I experienced before I gave up the attempt). I enjoyed London, including the uniformed porter at the hotel door and the delightful cabbies, and I love York, which I promise I'll post on separately.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Carol, I completely agree with you on this.......I would also add that there is no need for any images of his remains full stop...( images of ancient freak side shows spring to mind). There are plenty portraits of him and the reconstruction with which to identify the fact that a topic is about him...... I have had repeated discussions about this to no avail so I will not labour the point.
Best wishes
Kathryn x
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent from my iPad
On 23 Aug 2014, at 20:14, "maryfriend@... []" <> wrote:
In Michael K Jones' vesion of the Battle Northumberland is on the road to London and I have always wondered if he was told by Richard to guard the road to London at all costs. We know that Henry came through Atherstone and I can't see him turning off the road to London and going several miles east if there was nothing in his way. Just a theory.
Mary
Re: My reaction to Leicester
How would Betty Windsor like it if her father's skeleton went on show, or there was a display emphasising his speech impediment before anything else?
Wonder how much the cathedral will charge to go in once Richard is there?
Paul
On 23/08/2014 15:17, eileenbates147@... [] wrote:
Oh I just feel..all in all..I won't be visiting the centre...nothing I've read so far encourages me to do so...Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
I believe they have stated that entry to the cathedral will be free, but I wonder how long that will last?
If, as Carol tells us, the building is a little run down and in need of repair, they might not be able to resist making a charge in order to "keep the roof on," so to speak.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Sun, Aug 24, 2014 8:54:58 AM
I agree Eileen. At least we don't have the throne dripping with blood they originally were going to greet the public with!
How would Betty Windsor like it if her father's skeleton went on show, or there was a display emphasising his speech impediment before anything else?
Wonder how much the cathedral will charge to go in once Richard is there?
Paul
On 23/08/2014 15:17, eileenbates147@... [] wrote:
Oh I just feel..all in all..I won't be visiting the centre...nothing I've read so far encourages me to do so...Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Paul
On 24/08/2014 11:40, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] wrote:
I believe they have stated that entry to the cathedral
will be free, but I wonder how long that will last?
If, as Carol tells us, the building is a little run down
and in need of repair, they might not be able to resist
making a charge in order to "keep the roof on," so to
speak.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Sun, Aug 24, 2014 8:54:58 AM
I agree Eileen. At least we don't have the throne dripping with blood they originally were going to greet the public with!
How would Betty Windsor like it if her father's skeleton went on show, or there was a display emphasising his speech impediment before anything else?
Wonder how much the cathedral will charge to go in once Richard is there?
Paul
On 23/08/2014 15:17, eileenbates147@... [] wrote:
Oh I just feel..all in all..I won't be visiting the centre...nothing I've read so far encourages me to do so...Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Hey Paul, on my last visit to York Minster in 2010, they charged a fee for entrance and an additional fee to climb the Tower. We noticed during our visit to the UK in 2013, many historical sites offered entrance tickets that were good for 1 year. Very appealing for the locals I’m sure, but not much of a deal for the one-time tourist from overseas. And as you know you might never get back to the site again, you shell out the money and get on with it. I can thoroughly understand the need to charge entrance fees to historical sites to continue the upkeep and preservation, but tourists tend to think twice about buying something they won’t get the full benefit of.
When we arrived at Leeds Castle in 2013, we found it would have us £110 for 5 adults to tour the castle and grounds. As we dithered over the cost in the car park, a German family approached us and asked if we were willing to join their family so we could make up their numbers and all take advantage of the group rate, which was £11 per person (half price). The added bonus was I got to practice my university German for a bit.
Tracy
From: [mailto:]
Sent: August-24-14 9:21 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Westminster Abbey charges for people to visit the tombs of the monarchs, which for us Brits is a bit much. It is our history and our Abbey after all. No doubt Leicester will join in once they see the numbers, though it would be a lot more Christian to simply leave somewhere for people to appeal for donations, as York Minster does, rather than force money out of them.
Paul
On 24/08/2014 11:40, Jessie Skinner janjovian@... [] wrote:
I believe they have stated that entry to the cathedral will be free, but I wonder how long that will last?
If, as Carol tells us, the building is a little run down and in need of repair, they might not be able to resist making a charge in order to "keep the roof on," so to speak.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Sun, Aug 24, 2014 8:54:58 AM
I agree Eileen. At least we don't have the throne dripping with blood they originally were going to greet the public with!
How would Betty Windsor like it if her father's skeleton went on show, or there was a display emphasising his speech impediment before anything else?
Wonder how much the cathedral will charge to go in once Richard is there?
Paul
On 23/08/2014 15:17, eileenbates147@... [] wrote:
Oh I just feel..all in all..I won't be visiting the centre...nothing I've read so far encourages me to do so...Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Carol you would have got on well with my late father. His idea of lemonade was freshly squeezed lemons and sugar and water. Hot in the winter especially if you had a cold.Mary
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Carol,If you had Mike Ingram showing you around Bosworth well done you....he's very knowledgeable, has written a book on the subject and would call himself a Richardian . Wish I had been there...sorry the weather was so awful...it would have been more enjoyable with some sunshine .Best wishes Kathryn x
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
No he was Welsh.
From: mailto: Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:15 AM To: Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Exactly! Was he American, by any chance? Apologies for
top posting, but my computer turned itself off for no reason and won't turn back
on, so I've borrowed a laptop--Windows 8 no mouse, and all sorts of unfamiliar
features, so I'm minimizing effort!
Carol,---In ,
<maryfriend@...> wrote :
Carol you would have got on
well with my late father. His idea of lemonade was freshly squeezed lemons and
sugar and water. Hot in the winter especially if you had a cold.
Mary
Re: My reaction to Leicester
The best lemonade I ever had was freshly made on the premises, and was in Brown Thomas, (The Harrods of Ireland), in Grafton Street in Dublin.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: 'SandraMachin' sandramachin@... [] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Mon, Aug 25, 2014 10:29:27 AM
Definitely squeezed lemon juice etc. in Wales, I remember that. The fizzy lemonade was pop', and quite a different thing. And if anyone remembers the Enid Blyton Famous Five, they seemed to always be having squeezed-lemon lemonade at some farmhouse, served by the friendly, rose-cheeked wife of the farmer. Sandra =^..^= From: maryfriend@... [] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 11:16 AM To: Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
No he was Welsh.
From: mailto: Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:15 AM To: Subject: Re: My reaction to LeicesterExactly! Was he American, by any chance? Apologies for top posting, but my computer turned itself off for no reason and won't turn back on, so I've borrowed a laptop--Windows 8 no mouse, and all sorts of unfamiliar features, so I'm minimizing effort! Carol,---In , <maryfriend@...> wrote :
Carol you would have got on well with my late father. His idea of lemonade was freshly squeezed lemons and sugar and water. Hot in the winter especially if you had a cold. Mary
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Carol, I completely agree with you on this.......I would also add that there is no need for any images of his remains full stop...( images of ancient freak side shows spring to mind). There are plenty portraits of him and the reconstruction with which to identify the fact that a topic is about him...... I have had repeated discussions about this to no avail so I will not labour the point.
Best wishes
Kathryn x"
Carol responds:
Thanks, Kathryn. But it's not just images, it's a replica skeleton laid out to emphasize the curved spine and giving him very short legs (the broken shin bones are beside the thigh bones so he looks top heavy) and that awful film projected on the wall. Altogether, the impression is of 1) deformed Richard and 2) archaeological artifact Richard. Someone needs to do something. I just don't know who, what, or how.
Carol
Re: My reaction to Leicester
"Definitely squeezed lemon juice etc. in Wales, I remember that. The fizzy lemonade was pop', and quite a different thing. And if anyone remembers the Enid Blyton Famous Five, they seemed to always be having squeezed-lemon lemonade at some farmhouse, served by the friendly, rose-cheeked wife of the farmer."
Carol responds:
Maybe "American" lemonade was originally Welsh? Do lemon trees grow there (as they certainly do here in the warm American Southwest) or are the lemons imported because the climate is too cold or wet to grow them?
And "pop" for "soda" is also used in parts of the U.S. My mother (born and raised in California) used the term, and I only switched from "pop" to "soda" because my daughter and her friends used "soda" and I wanted to be understood! It would be interesting to trace the Welsh/English/Scottish/Irish roots of the various dialects, particularly in relation to genealogy. (I have ancestors from all over the British Isles, including some from York. I think they were Catholics who fled to Ireland and from there to the U.S. but have not had the chance to follow up. I like to think that their ancestors [and therefore mine] were supporters of Richard at one time.)
Carol, with apologies for diverting the discussion to non-Ricardian topics!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Hi Carol,
Hi Carol,
Sorry to hear the rest.....I don't think there is a need to show anything relating to his skeleton and not how it has been displayed. I cannot imagine any other Royal remains being treated like this. I don't agree with any human remains being kept or on display in museums, centres etc. I think Bosworth is surely more fitting or The Armouries( if they employed their own jousters etc once more..... cut backs...!) at Leeds to show how Richard and his Knights fought and charged. Indeed all Knights and their battles / jousts in situ .
Hope you get a chance to visit again sometime soon.
Very best wishes
Kathryn x
Re: My reaction to Leicester
I refuse to pay for the Abbey, and go in when a service is on, then slip round to the tombs when nobody is watching. Something one should do in all cathedrals. None of the religious houses seem to have learned from Jesus throwing out the moneylenders have they?
Leeds Castle is a bit different being a house, and because I think it is privately owned. Mind you the charge is outrageous!
Paul
On 24/08/2014 20:23, 'Tracy Bryce' tbryce@... [] wrote:
Hey Paul, on my last visit to York Minster in 2010, they charged a fee for entrance and an additional fee to climb the Tower. We noticed during our visit to the UK in 2013, many historical sites offered entrance tickets that were good for 1 year. Very appealing for the locals I’m sure, but not much of a deal for the one-time tourist from overseas. And as you know you might never get back to the site again, you shell out the money and get on with it. I can thoroughly understand the need to charge entrance fees to historical sites to continue the upkeep and preservation, but tourists tend to think twice about buying something they won’t get the full benefit of.
When we arrived at Leeds Castle in 2013, we found it would have us £110 for 5 adults to tour the castle and grounds. As we dithered over the cost in the car park, a German family approached us and asked if we were willing to join their family so we could make up their numbers and all take advantage of the group rate, which was £11 per person (half price). The added bonus was I got to practice my university German for a bit.
Tracy
From:
[mailto:]
Sent: August-24-14 9:21 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Re: My
reaction to Leicester
Westminster
Abbey charges for people to visit the tombs of the
monarchs, which for us Brits is a bit much. It is our
history and our Abbey after all. No doubt Leicester
will join in once they see the numbers, though it
would be a lot more Christian to simply leave
somewhere for people to appeal for donations, as York
Minster does, rather than force money out of them.
Paul
On 24/08/2014 11:40, Jessie Skinner janjovian@...
[] wrote:
I believe they have stated that entry to the
cathedral will be free, but I wonder how long
that will last?
If, as Carol tells us, the building is a
little run down and in need of repair, they
might not be able to resist making a charge in
order to "keep the roof on," so to speak.
Jess
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From: Paul Trevor Bale paul.bale@...
[] <>;
To: <>;
Subject: Re: [Richard III Society
Forum] Re: My reaction to Leicester
Sent: Sun, Aug 24, 2014 8:54:58 AM
I agree
Eileen. At least we don't have
the throne dripping with blood
they originally were going to
greet the public with!
How would Betty Windsor like it
if her father's skeleton went on
show, or there was a display
emphasising his speech
impediment before anything else?
Wonder how much the cathedral
will charge to go in once
Richard is there?
Paul
On 23/08/2014 15:17, eileenbates147@...
[] wrote:
Oh I just feel..all in all..I won't be visiting the centre...nothing I've read so far encourages me to do so...Eileen
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Re: My reaction to Leicester
I can't remember what the charge was now but it was around £15 /£17 each and was for a complete tour, including to the top of the dome and the whispering gallery.
I explained that I was physically unable to complete the tour and could I just come inside for a look around the ground floor.
I was told, "no, you have to pay the full price, even if you can't do the tour." There was no disabled rate.
My friend and I were appalled and did something else that day.
I think that was a disgrace..
Jess From: christineholmes651@... []
Sent: 26/08/2014 16:42
To:
Subject: Re: My reaction to Leicester
In total agreement with you about York Minster and it is well worth the payment but as Paul says you do not have to pay to go into a service so what is the problem with helping such a wonderful building survive. God Bless York Minster .Loyaulte me Lie.
Re: My reaction to Leicester
Paul
On 26/08/2014 17:15, Janjovian janjovian@... [] wrote:
Some cathedral charges can be astronomic. Before I had my tibia and knee rebuilt / replaced I used a walking aid and had difficulty climbing stairs. I went with a friend to St Paul's.
I can't remember what the charge was now but it was around £15 /£17 each and was for a complete tour, including to the top of the dome and the whispering gallery.
I explained that I was physically unable to complete the tour and could I just come inside for a look around the ground floor.
I was told, "no, you have to pay the full price, even if you can't do the tour." There was no disabled rate.
My friend and I were appalled and did something else that day.
I think that was a disgrace..
Jess From: christineholmes651@... []
Sent: 26/08/2014 16:42
To:
Subject: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: My reaction to Leicester
In total agreement with you about York Minster and it is well worth the payment but as Paul says you do not have to pay to go into a service so what is the problem with helping such a wonderful building survive. God Bless York Minster .Loyaulte me Lie.
--
Richard Liveth Yet!
