The National Trust - is it losing ours?

The last time I was at a NT property there were more young couples and families than us over fifties so they can’t pander to one audiences anti ‘woke’ tastes
That is frankly ageist and just rude -basically just insulting anybody who doesn’t agree with you.
No wonder there is a growing Restore Trust movement.

dilly I agree with what you are saying.

As a large institution, the NT is perfectly entitled to ask its employees and volunteers to support its decisions, relating to the history of minorities throughout British history.

Many if those houses simply wouldn’t exists if it wasn’t for the slave trade, and the death and suffering of millions of fellow human beings. I think it is a very poor show if those members are not also willing to recognise that fact and support the NT in its endeavours.

Perhaps they should re-think their membership and leave it to the more progressive and humane.

Hardly ageist, I’m in my late 50’s. What I am saying is that NT from my own observation as a member over the years has gone from having an over 50’s audience to one that is more mixed in the age groups now. The NT must keep moving with the times to keep up and build its audience.

I also love going to the ballet and was worried for years that audience were all over 50’s and that they weren’t attracting a younger audience to ensure their survival. The royal ballet have really pushed their programs in the last 5-10 years and as a result have a more mixed audience.

I have really strong opinons about this. (Surprise surprise)

The property where my DH volunteered had no links to the slave trade. Know that for a fact. I suspect one of the final owners was gay, given their life story, but that is a guess. Does either of those impinge on the quality of the art and furniture that they collected? Does it make any difference to the gardens? No, it doesn't. Trying to shoehorn irrelevant details into art and history does a disservice to the true issues that we should be dealing with.

Alegrias1

I have really strong opinons about this. (Surprise surprise)

The property where my DH volunteered had no links to the slave trade. Know that for a fact. I suspect one of the final owners was gay, given their life story, but that is a guess. Does either of those impinge on the quality of the art and furniture that they collected? Does it make any difference to the gardens? No, it doesn't. Trying to shoehorn irrelevant details into art and history does a disservice to the true issues that we should be dealing with.

Nope you are wrong. The vast wealth that purchased those houses underpinned the industrial revolution that made those glorious artefacts, employed Capability Brown etc. was all accumulated on the backs of people torn from their homes, treated less than animals, bought and sold and killed in their millions.

You have no idea what house I'm talking about and what its history is. I'm not going to name it because I'll out myself. Someone upthread mentioned that the Trust looks after many properties, from grand houses to little cottages.

Some people rose from a working class background and decided to buy art to fill their modest properties. No slavery involved. Educate yourself, before telling people they are wrong.

Alegrias1

You have no idea what house I'm talking about and what its history is. I'm not going to name it because I'll out myself. Someone upthread mentioned that the Trust looks after many properties, from grand houses to little cottages.

Some people rose from a working class background and decided to buy art to fill their modest properties. No slavery involved. Educate yourself, before telling people they are wrong.

Shame about your last paragraph.

Thought we might have a good debate, but your remarks are unfortunate to say the least.

Really? Well, I guess we'll agree to differ.

Nope you are wrong. The vast wealth that purchased those houses underpinned the industrial revolution that made those glorious artefacts, employed Capability Brown etc. was all accumulated on the backs of people torn from their homes, treated less than animals, bought and sold and killed in their millions

Another sweeping generalisation which only illustrates much of what some of us are saying about an incomplete understanding of history

MawBe

^Nope you are wrong. The vast wealth that purchased those houses underpinned the industrial revolution that made those glorious artefacts, employed Capability Brown etc. was all accumulated on the backs of people torn from their homes, treated less than animals, bought and sold and killed in their millions^

Another sweeping generalisation which only illustrates much of what some of us are saying about an incomplete understanding of history

Then explain exactly how the vast wealth from the slave trade was used if not as insuggested

Grammaretto

I agree MawB it is unnecessary
I was about to drop my membership a few years ago when there were greatly reduced opening hours. The village of Culross in Fife was closed at Easter. Nothing to do with covid, our nearest pile was closed for years for moth removal. Seriously. I see it's open again from Wed - Sun, prebookable only. That's a bit better. I must find out if they've got rid of the moths!
www.nts.org.uk/visit/places/newhailes

I am lazy and pay by direct debit and I enjoyed Allan bank which is really family friendly.
www.nationaltrust.org.uk/allan-bank-and-grasmere

The daft woke thing is attention seeking.
I agree with Doodledog. It should not be compulsory.

I hope you received an apology theworriedwell that must have been dreadful.

So many places I want to visit are not NT and I have to pay all over again.

When I raised it at the time I certainly didn't get an apology, just lots of huffing and puffing. In a long mixed marriage it was quite the worst example of racism I've experienced. I would have made a formal complaint but as I said my husband is the real victim so I bowed to his wishes. Still annoys me though.

I agree with your sentiments Dilly but imo the facts don't correspond and the younger generation who are interested in history are, like us, not wanting glitzy bouncy castles either.
DD is a member and enjoys the peaceful walks in those fabulous grounds as well as showing her DC how people lived long ago.

But I do agree about the innovations of the Royal Ballet.
Stirling Castle is another of these places which is not NTS but Historic Scotland so you have to pay.
As for Pride month. I actually think it's insulting and patronising to gay people to wear face paint and glitter - for them
They are us. We are them. We are all one people.

Alegrias1

I have really strong opinons about this. (Surprise surprise)

The property where my DH volunteered had no links to the slave trade. Know that for a fact. I suspect one of the final owners was gay, given their life story, but that is a guess. Does either of those impinge on the quality of the art and furniture that they collected? Does it make any difference to the gardens? No, it doesn't. Trying to shoehorn irrelevant details into art and history does a disservice to the true issues that we should be dealing with.

Don't you think racism is a true issue we should be dealing with?

Not so sweeping- Capability Brown's green parks were very much linked to the Enclosures, as attached peasant villages looked ugly and were in the way. And then the ahah concept was invented, the parks filled with sheep, and the peasants sent to work for a pittance on the frames and looms- having to spend their pittance on renting said frames- and live in terrible slum conditions.

The history of the Enclosures is so cruel and so deliberate, to find slave labour for the growing industrialisation. Denying that is just nonsense.

Nope you are wrong. The vast wealth that purchased those houses underpinned the industrial revolution that made those glorious artefacts, employed Capability Brown etc. was all accumulated on the backs of people torn from their homes, treated less than animals, bought and sold and killed in their millions.
I agree, and would also agree with this being made known at the relevant properties.

I don't think that this is remotely the same as expecting volunteers to dress up or wear glittery body paint, though, which is the crux of the thread.

Showing visitors how much of the wealth of individuals in the UK was built on slavery is one thing, but compulsory fancy dress is quite another. I'm confused as to how the two things are being conflated on this thread.

Further, whereas Pride is clearly a fun, loud, glittery, camp event, not all gay people fit that stereotype, and some would (and do) argue that it is counter-productive, and long for the day when being gay doesn't carry those connotations.

I think you'll find that Ickworth House has a very significant ancestor from the 1700s who was openly bisexual.

So, much as we would expect them to highlight Black History month if they'd had a significant black character in their past, we should not cavil at them doing the same for Pride month.

Alegrias1 The National Trust is not putting up interpretation saying that properties without slavery links, have links to slavery. That is ridiculous. What they are doing is identifying which properties do have links to slavery and stating that at the individual properties.

Someone further up the thread questioned of what value does this info add for the audience of these objects and properties, I would say it adds great value. It puts them in their context and time. The national trust has also included histories about the enclosure acts too, which pushed ordinary families off common land in the 18th century which was then absorbed into aristocratic and crown land, further widening the gold between the aristocracy and ordinary people.

My amateur interest is the history of landscapes and gardening and I welcome the NT’s informative interpretation where I can learn more.

If you would rather just look at pretty things and learn nothing, don’t read the text panels!

*widening the golf. Dyslexia and autocorrect strikes again.

Many of our large cities were also built on the backs of enslaved folk as were some of our most important banks like HSBC and the Barclay Brothers, and of course The Bank of England.

The Church of England now recognises its complicity.

So whilst many properties and land run by the NT have no connection or a very tenuous connection to slavery, at least a third of their biggest and most important properties would not exist if not for the deaths of those millions.

Indeed- some things, like the dreadful realities of the Enclosures, or slavery, were not taught in schools in our day, and for very good reasons (very bad actually). But it is there for all to see, and the link to Capability Brown too. I am a massive admirer of English naturalised parks, they are the best in the world.

But denying the link to attached peasant villages, and the need for cheap labour for the newly developing industrialisation- is daft, sorry. It was so so so clever, and massively cruel too.

The villages were raised to the ground and burnt- to make sure peasants never returned- and the Capability called in to make it all so beautiful and grandiose, and 'natural' and he did - brilliantly so.

Whilst a third of all NT properties can be linked directly to human suffering, don’t overlook the fact that much of what you can see in the properties, whilst the fabric of the building preceded the 1600’s much within it, and major refurbishment, both to the property and gardens were done on the backs of millions of sufferers.

I do think we have to acknowledge that the importing of mahogany and exotic woods to make furniture was done alongside the import of human beings. I remember reading about Robert Gillows and being quite shocked how obvious the connections to slavery seemed.

Theworriedwell, that is awful re your husband

I think it is interesting that you and Mawbe object to dressing up Alegrias although I fully understand that some people don't want to do it and I do doubt if Mary Queen of Scots is appropriate I do think for some people having someone dressed as a character- maid, mother, witch etc does create more interest for people and using the first person is much more gripping and involves the listener more. I suppose if you are interested and know your history you might find it unnecessary but I would hope when I have done this sort of thing hat myresearch has unearthed a few things which are new to almost everybody. But it just shows -you can't please all of the people all of the time!

A little knowledge can indeed be a dangerous thing.
kali2 no villages were " raised" anywhere - razed possibly but I think you may be conflating the Highland Clearances where the cottages were indeed destroyed and the crofters left to starve or chance their futures in the New World, with the landscaping of Capability Brown and others - Brown was by no means the only landscape architect/ gardener, who for the most part relocated the hamlets of cottages- ridiculous really but not always to their inhabitants' detriment as they were too often tumbledown, earth-floored, shared with their animals and insanitary The whole question of the Enclosures is a political and indeed a shameful story - but more than just the story of a stately pile - and clearly nothing to do with slavery or gay pride either.
History is a complex subject and schools do not always teach it as well as they might, dare I say it, too often relying on oversimplification or the "politically correct" approaches which may be in vogue at the time. 30 years ago it was all about "empathy" ("Write a letter home to your girlfriend from your trench in the Great War" ) -admirable but how did it teach the causes, conduct or consequences of WWI?
I won't go on- to everybody's relief but retain my scepticism.that this is the right course of action for the NT

Razed of course. But no, I am not confusing what happened with Scotland. I studied the Enclosure Acts in England as one of my subjects at Uni- and chose it as one of my major subjects one year.

Wherever you see ridge and furrow- you know there was a peasant village attached to the Hall, and that it was later enclosed for sheep, the villages destroyed and the peasants sent to act as virtual slave labour in the new industrialised towns. The Midlands are ful of evidence of that.