Read on Twitter
I missed this -the Telegraph complaining the @nationaltrust is ‘woke’ for identifying properties that benefitted from the slave trade historically.
“To question the historical reputation of properties in this way breaks faith with the families that donated them”
[thread] https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1309774504256823297
“To question the historical reputation of properties in this way breaks faith with the families that donated them”
[thread] https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1309774504256823297
The Telegraph seems to conflate temporary closures being made in the midst of a global pandemic with total closure, ignoring the complexity of staff needed to keep properties open during ever changing local lockdowns.
This sort of attack is odd when you consider how far the Trust bends backwards to permit ‘legal’ country sports associated with the gentry on its land, and it even looks after ancestral properties that the families still live in, like Antony, many bequeathed to reduce death duty.
The Trust is far from perfect, but why shouldn’t it look more closely at the histories behind its estates, warts and all? This is what ‘history’ is - including the horrible bits.
The Trust is having an identity crisis. It has to appeal to the Nation in the broadest sense as we, the British public, provide the footfall, visiting stately homes, countryside and coast that are now ‘ours’. At the same time, it still nods to the landed gentry that birthed it.
Access is an issue - we get excellent value from membership as we have lots of properties and coastal car parks within easy reach, but I appreciate this is meaningless to someone in a landlocked flat without transport. They still have a stake and the NT must be theirs too.
On balance, the @nationaltrust does an excellent job, despite its many flaws. As custodian of some our Nation’s finest buildings and countryside, it can’t just preserve the status quo for a minority. It should act on behalf of the wider public it serves - all of us.
