Another racist statue

[Tessa K]

There's a campaign to get rid of the Black Boy statue in Stroud, Glos. It's a horrible thing that was renovated with public money as recently as 2004, in many ways worse than the Colston statue.

This is a thread that explains its history and impact and there's a link to a public consultation survey you can fill in (takes about five minutes).

https://twitter.com/danglefree/status/1 ... 2614177795

[lpm]

1) It's a privately owned listed building.

2) It's a rare 1774 type of clock that needs to be preserved.

3) It's tiny, hardly visible from the nearby road:
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.7439072 ... 312!8i6656

4) The petition person must surely be a false-flag, it'll be a Telegraph right winger aiming to whip up something new to win the culture wars and guarantee this extreme right wing government another 300,000 years in power.

[Bird on a Fire]

Well as long as it's a small, privately-owned racist statue that's only barely visible from the road that's fine. If anything more taxpayers' money should go to renovating racist clock ornaments.

[Tessa K]

It been covered a lot in local press and has sparked local debate/division which, if nothing else, will make the non-rabid section of the locals more aware of the issues.

The fact it's a private building (called Black Boy House) is irrelevant in the same way that a private individual wearing a golly*** badge or someone hanging a swastika from their window is irrelevant.

The clock can be preserved in a museum.

The person who is researching/campaigning about the statue is a POC and wrote

Over the last year I’ve been working on a project exploring historical Black presences in my hometown of Stroud, and as part of it I’ve been researching an object in the town called the Black Boy Clock.

He's an artist and writer and this is his website https://danguthrie.net/

So it's unlikely he's a Telegraph right-winger.

[Gfamily]

My response to the survey was that it's a historic piece of the town environment and a reminder that slavery wasn't just something that happened 'over there', but had significant effects here too.
I also said that as to whether it should be retained or not, as a white person who doesn't live in the area, my opinion isn't really significant.

It would be interesting to hear the views of POC and of people like David Olusoga who may be able to bring a wider historical and cultural point of view.

Certainly, to me the statue didn't seem to be demeaning or mocking, and clocks with statues of white men and women performing actions are not uncommon, so it seems unbalanced to say that because its subject is a POC the statue should be taken down.

But what I think is not really the issue, as I don't have any 'skin in the game' as they say.

[Fishnut]

Certainly, to me the statue didn't seem to be demeaning or mocking

I'm surprised by this comment. To me it seemed to be a clear caricature of an "uncivilised" black person, with the fat bright red lips, the lack of clothing beyond a feathered belt, and a club. It may not be the most egregious example around but it's still playing up all the stereotypes. And, while I suspect it was done because it was the most convenient place to attach a support, putting a wire support around the neck is in pretty poor taste.

[Tessa K]

My response to the survey was that it's a historic piece of the town environment and a reminder that slavery wasn't just something that happened 'over there', but had significant effects here too.
I also said that as to whether it should be retained or not, as a white person who doesn't live in the area, my opinion isn't really significant.

It would be interesting to hear the views of POC and of people like David Olusoga who may be able to bring a wider historical and cultural point of view.

Certainly, to me the statue didn't seem to be demeaning or mocking, and clocks with statues of white men and women performing actions are not uncommon, so it seems unbalanced to say that because its subject is a POC the statue should be taken down.

But what I think is not really the issue, as I don't have any 'skin in the game' as they say.

It is very demeaning and stereotyped. You also have to consider the historical context and the relationship between the person portrayed and the people who put the statue there - ie, slavery and colonial exploitation. White people putting up statues of white people, even if they don't represent a particular person, are not doing it with any sense of superiority.

You don't need to have skin in the game to be concerned. After all, men can be concerned about women's rights and straight people about LGBT rights. If we left campaigning and ethical/moral decisions to just the people affected, very little would change. It's not up to POC to take on all the responsibility for the past. White people can say 'not in my name'.

[Gfamily]

You don't need to have skin in the game to be concerned. After all, men can be concerned about women's rights and straight people about LGBT rights. If we left campaigning and ethical/moral decisions to just the people affected, very little would change. It's not up to POC to take on all the responsibility for the past. White people can say 'not in my name'.

I agree on principle, but as a man it's not my place to say with any authority on what is and what isn't important regarding women's rights and LGBT rights.

After all, we have too many cases of 'glinners' going on about their views of women's rights where it's not helpful.

However, reading the local MP's thoughts on the matter has persuaded me of the case for removing the statue and putting it in a place where it can be given a proper context.
(This is not what the local MP thinks by the way).

[Tessa K]

You don't need to have skin in the game to be concerned. After all, men can be concerned about women's rights and straight people about LGBT rights. If we left campaigning and ethical/moral decisions to just the people affected, very little would change. It's not up to POC to take on all the responsibility for the past. White people can say 'not in my name'.

I agree on principle, but as a man it's not my place to say with any authority on what is and what isn't important regarding women's rights and LGBT rights.

After all, we have too many cases of 'glinners' going on about their views of women's rights where it's not helpful.

However, reading the local MP's thoughts on the matter has persuaded me of the case for removing the statue and putting it in a place where it can be given a proper context.
(This is not what the local MP thinks by the way).

True, no one needs someone with a white knight complex. The best thing to do is to listen to people who are affected and support them. And we can debate with people who clearly have their facts wrong as well as educating others about those facts.

[lpm]

The word "affected" is what gets us laughed out of court. It's a cruel planet in many real and painful ways, with genuine suffering around all of us. Humans shouldn't be "affected" by a tiny statue high up on a building. You literally need a telescope to be able to see something to be offended about.

It's OK to sometimes tell people to toughen the f.ck up.

[Tessa K]

The word "affected" is what gets us laughed out of court. It's a cruel planet in many real and painful ways, with genuine suffering around all of us. Humans shouldn't be "affected" by a tiny statue high up on a building. You literally need a telescope to be able to see something to be offended about.

It's OK to sometimes tell people to toughen the f.ck up.

But we are affected by small things if only by a process of attrition, all the small things adding up. If it was just one statue and there was no other racism, then yes, ignore it. Just because life is tough doesn't mean we shouldn't do whatever we can to make it better for ourselves and others. It's about being humane, empathetic and ethical human beings.

Telling people to toughen up is easy when you're speaking from a position of privilege. And what is your definition of 'genuine' suffering? Is it a competition where only the worst suffering is worthy of attention?

[Opti]

The word "affected" is what gets us laughed out of court. It's a cruel planet in many real and painful ways, with genuine suffering around all of us. Humans shouldn't be "affected" by a tiny statue high up on a building. You literally need a telescope to be able to see something to be offended about.

It's OK to sometimes tell people to toughen the f.ck up.

For 20+ years Stroud was my nearest big town.
The statue isn't that hard to spot.
OTOH, we're talking about Stroud. We're talking Glastonbury or Totnes but with added smack.

[tenchboy]

Certainly, to me the statue didn't seem to be demeaning or mocking

I'm surprised by this comment. To me it seemed to be a clear caricature of an "uncivilised" black person, with the fat bright red lips, the lack of clothing beyond a feathered belt, and a club. It may not be the most egregious example around but it's still playing up all the stereotypes. And, while I suspect it was done because it was the most convenient place to attach a support, putting a wire support around the neck is in pretty poor taste.

Re the bolded bit.
I know nothing about this statue nor have I ever seen it but rather than that being a support wire around the neck, given that the head seems to be a separate part from the torso in the same way that the arm is and given also that the wire - or rod - goes through the wall rather than being fixed to it as an anchor point might be, I would have said myself - with nothing more to go on than that picture - that that was an operating rod, part of a mechanism to move the head in the same way that the arm must move when appearing to strike/striking the bell*.
So whilst it would be a sound point if it is a wire around the neck, I would hesitate before putting to much faith in this point and would look first to finding some footage of it in action.

*Ther's one at Abinger Hammer near Dorking but I don't know if the bell you see is the bell you hear or not.

Isn't Stroud Laurie Lee/ Cider with Rosie country?

Eta 2nd *

[Fishnut]

It looks like you might be right about the wire around/from the head being to move it.

From P. H. Fisher’s ‘Notes and Recollections of Stroud’ (1871) screen-shotted here,

But, on the erection of the National School at hte entrance of Castle-street, in the year 1844, the clock and Black Boy, with his club and bell, were bought by subscription, and set up against that building. There teh Boy has stood ever since, doing the duty of turning his head, lifting his club, and striking the hours of day and night as often as they come round; and there, it is hoped, he will for many years continue to perform his automatic exercises, to the wonder of strangers passing by, as he did to the admiration of boys and girls of old. [my emphasis]

[dyqik]

I guess you could split the difference between leaving it and removing it, and repaint it white without the lips...

Exactly what that would achieve, I leave as an exercise for other posters.