Was out riding yesterday and was thinking, one of the big problems with the UK is an obsession with yesterday. Houses have to look like what has gone before rather than fulfilling current needs, there is an obsession with returning the natural environment to what it used to look like rather than allow natural regeneration and whatever results, an obsession with fighting wars as if the UK was still an imperial power. etc.

Just wondering if anyone agreed or disagreed?

I disagree.

if only they hadn’t razed all those ultra modern 60s tower blocks – we’d be in clover now

there is an obsession with returning the natural environment to what it used to look like rather than allow natural regeneration and whatever results

Because what usually results is a ecosystem of little conservation value, whilst others are destroyed to make way for development. Restoration ecology is a pretty important field of work in such a built up island

You’ve covered a lot of ground there mrmo! I love being able to muse away when out on a ride.

Houses – yes I agree. We are very conservative when choosing designs for housing, particularly cheap housing. I wish we’d take a leaf out of the German, Dutch and Danish books on the subject and produce buildings that satisfy more than simply schedules and price points. Takes courage though, something that our civic leaders seem to have left at the door.

The environment – things change. Nature is change. I think. Theres nothing I like more than seeing abandoned buildings with all kinds of flora pushing it’s way through. Sort of makes me feel comforted that a lot of the crappy things we do to the planet will be overcome.

History – yes we are obsessed. But actually if you look at the history of our island it is utterly incredible, utterly. Such a little place, so many inventions, events and people that have completely altered the world. Our obsession with controlling world events stems from protecting our own interests but also I think from a romantic notion (public, not people who actually know) that we are still central to the proection of liberty and freedom. The second world war was a massive part of our recent history. I suppose that for many it highlights a time when people pulled together and overcame their petty jealousies and squabbles. Also perhaps the last war we’ve fought in where we were clearly on the side of the just… From that perspective I can appreciate its central relevance for a lot of people.

Also perhaps the last war we’ve fought in where we were clearly on the side of the just

That’s an interesting point. We undoubtedly ended up in that position with regards to Europe but the soldiers from India and Africa that fought for us might have disagreed that there was anything inherently ‘just’ about us.
The other point it raises is that there is now a hindsight view of WWII that sees our involvement as being about good versus evil, democracy against totalitarianism. That’s not why we fought WWII, it was about attempting to prevent German hegemony in Europe ( as was our desire in WWI)and protect our considerable markets there – Europe was actually worth more to us than the empire was. If you consider our original motivation for declaring war on Germany, the protection of Poland then that motivation seems pretty vacuous and all the sacrifices worthless given that ultimately at Yalta we let Poland become part of Stalin’s empire rather than Hitler’s.

mrmo – Member
Was out riding yesterday and was thinking, one of the big problems with the UK is an obsession with yesterday. Houses have to look like what has gone before rather than fulfilling current needs, there is an obsession with returning the natural environment to what it used to look like rather than allow natural regeneration and whatever results, an obsession with fighting wars as if the UK was still an imperial power. etc.

Just wondering if anyone agreed or disagreed?

Blame the Victorians, they invented heritage. Have a read of this if you want to know more.

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo not LJS, spare them capt.john 😆

it’s true though

There is a british romantic attachment to things that have a history to them that isn’t really part of other cultures. I was having conversations with a uk based japanese artist about it – the idea that your old, well thumbed first edition copy of book is better that a shiny brand new one, or that a piece for furniture is better if it has a patina of age – this isn’t really part of japanese culture. In japan there is a value placed on authenticity but its more towards something new that has been authentically created, people don’t really keep old things.

Some of it is part of our relatively recent history though. The value of inheritance is quite key to the british upper classes – you inherit wealth, land, home, pink trousers, tweed jackets, long middle names, furniture and things. What few things you buy you buy to last with a view to passing them on. I’m always reminded of Alan Clarke’s snide put down of Micheal Hesteltine – “He bought his own furniture”, that is despite his wealth, success and him being at the heart of the establishment, he didn’t have breeding.

After the second world war things crumbled a bit for the upper classes, lots of estates declined and lots of furniture and belongings were auctioned off cheaply. These were hoovered up by the middle classes at the start of what became our love of antique collecting, partly becuase they were cheap and plentiful and partly because they allowed you create an invented heritage for yourself.

trailmonkey – Member
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo not LJS, spare them capt.john

it’s true though

The alternative was posting chapter 2 of my thesis, but i’m that arrogant (today).

I don’t think so. I’d say an obsession with criticising and complaining – not everyone though, there is optimism if you look hard enough.

The alternative was posting chapter 2 of my thesis

intrigued, does it relate ?

i kind of wish british people were more obsessed with history rather than tiny little parts of it that may relate to certain preconceptions of national character.

and while i can see where captj’s coming from it’s a view that also seems partial and anglocentric so i find myself more in accord with macruiskeen

there is an obsession with returning the natural environment to what it used to look like

Theres a bit of debate about this in scotland at the moment regard the replanting of forest. Much of the caledonian forest is gone, but the environment that has replaced it is pretty much unique to scotland. Recreating montane remove these unique environments replacing it with an environment that there is bucket loads of elsewhere/ The notion is that it would the restoration of something ancient, but those original forests had only existed for a few hundred years, a flash in the pan really.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHze0SqB5Zg[/video]

trailmonkey – Member

intrigued, does it relate ?

It was about the history of heritage, so yes. Just double checked the title: “Heritage: its history, evolution and uses”