My opinion on this project needs a couple qualifiers:
1: I am not British (American)
2: I do not live in the Salisbury area (#1 made that clear, but you never know)
3: in general, one must not necessarily allow a historical precedent to mitigate or cancel the alteration of a historical site if it will provide the greater good.
That being said:
What the ACTUAL *£¥{!.*<£¥%#+€@@&:$@!,’!!
This is not the destruction of an unbelievably ancient site and a bending over to the powers of “development.” It’s much worse than that. It is the willful ignorance of a government to its basic responsibilities, i.e. the preservation of its own history in order to inform the continuation of its society and memory. Stonehenge has survived a number of projects already; in the 19th and early 20th centuries, multiple plans were put forward to essentially demolish the site. The fact that it weathered these attempts, through the selfless efforts of numerous individuals, makes it even more precious.
This is not just a question of preserving British or English history. The age of the monument makes it an element and monument of human history, much like the cave cities of the Anasazi or the temple of Angkor Wat.
I hope this proposal will die in parliament (is that a phrase? Die in congress or litigation or debate are phrases here in the US). If not, please direct me to where I can show support for the effort to keep this site undisturbed.
End of rant.
My opinion on this project needs a couple qualifiers:
1: I am not British (American)
2: I do not live in the Salisbury area (#1 made that clear, but you never know)
3: in general, one must not necessarily allow a historical precedent to mitigate or cancel the alteration of a historical site if it will provide the greater good.
That being said:
What the ACTUAL *£¥{!.*<£¥%#+€@@&:$@!,’!!
This is not the destruction of an unbelievably ancient site and a bending over to the powers of “development.” It’s much worse than that. It is the willful ignorance of a government to its basic responsibilities, i.e. the preservation of its own history in order to inform the continuation of its society and memory. Stonehenge has survived a number of projects already; in the 19th and early 20th centuries, multiple plans were put forward to essentially demolish the site. The fact that it weathered these attempts, through the selfless efforts of numerous individuals, makes it even more precious.
This is not just a question of preserving British or English history. The age of the monument makes it an element and monument of human history, much like the cave cities of the Anasazi or the temple of Angkor Wat.
I hope this proposal will die in parliament (is that a phrase? Die in congress or litigation or debate are phrases here in the US). If not, please direct me to where I can show support for the effort to keep this site undisturbed.
End of rant.