Head a matter for locals only Swimmers keep up dad’s legacy

I MUST express my thanks to Lindsay Porter for his very interesting snippets of Shrovetide history.

Stephen Liverman made some interesting, perhaps controversial points, regarding the events of last summer and what should happen next with the Black’s Head statue. Fair to say he and I are probably at opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue, and that is good for a healthy debate.

I feel the council have got it right when calling for a public consultation within the town. What happened in America and continues to happen is appalling. However, that does not justify mass hysterical reaction to that event: witness not just the genuine protests, but the looting, etc that accompanied it. Equally, an online petition which probably failed to point out both sides of the argument, hardly constitutes a fair and equitable consultation. This is an issue for Ashbourne residents to determine, if indeed they are so interested.

Therefore, I feel the council have taken the right approach. I also hope that if this happens, everyone will respect the outcome.

Do the various stories around the reasons why the head was situated where it was matter? Of course. This is a part of the town’s history.

Does it matter that there isn’t a definitive answer? No, it doesn’t. That’s what makes history so fascinating.

Reading the history of Derbyshire, there are more compelling issues regarding black lives with direct and proven links to the slave trade that are conveniently ignored, when there are no proven links to the head being racist, from what I have read.

Mr Liverman suggests the head, if replaced, might adversely impact on the town’s tourist industry. I would suggest that it might have the opposite effect, particularly those who want to understand the history of the town. We are a country that thrives on controversial issues!

Regrettably, though, I suspect that even if the majority of the town wanted the head replaced, it would be fraught with danger, given the extreme and uninformed views of many, which might lead to some trying to destroy the head.

If this seems harsh, consider the reaction of a large number to the Covid-19 pandemic, who see no issue with the virus and are happy to put other people’s lives at risk.

This would also seem to suggest that the placing of a replica head on the structure (suggested by Jean and Ken Irvin) would carry similar risks.

The conundrum over planning (ANT, February 3) is an interesting one, and the author is quite correct.

As a Listed structure, it is illegal to have removed the head without the necessary consents, although for the reasons already mentioned, it was understandable.

So where does this leave us? I go back to last summer and the suggestion by many that the head needs to be on display, and the history explained, so people can make up their own mind about it.

Perhaps also, an information board on the wall by the structure with a similar explanation which will complement the other areas of historical interest within the town.

Perhaps not the best outcome, but there is always a need to compromise.

Ian Cawthra Ashbourne

I WOULD like to congratulate Vicky Scotcher and Ian Duckmanton on their efforts to keep Ashbourne Swimming Club thriving during the pandemic. My father, Charles Mckenzie (known as Mac) would be very pleased to see his legacy living on so strongly.

A dedicated swimmer all his life, he grew up in Aberdeen and swam in the North Sea every day of the year. In the early sixties as secretary of Queen Elizabeth’s Grammar School PTA, he spearheaded the district campaign to raise money to build an indoor pool in Ashbourne. He became one of the founder members and coaches of Ashbourne Swimming Club and later became its first president.

I know that he would be very proud and happy to see all the hard work that is still being done to maintain the success of the club.

Rhona Hunt Ashbourne