The Colston Hall

There has been controversy in Bristol for years now over the name of one of our music venues.

The Colston Hall was named after Edward Colston, a slave trader who happened to also do good works around the city. He never built the Colston Hall, it was built years after his death, but people have been uneasy about having such a prominent building named after a man who made his fortune selling other humans.

The Colston Hall has now announced it will abandon the name in the next few years and its unleashed a storm of protest from people who think it's rewriting history and is PC gone mad.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-39718149

Should it be renamed?

I don't give a gooseberry fool. If there's an act there I want to see, I'll go. It could be called Hitler Hall for all I care.

Yes

I think that the push to rename places, remove statues, etc. because the subject contributed to our history in a negative way is a bit misguided. Rather than trying to forget our history, I think we should confront it. Why not put a big plaque outside the hall saying "so-and-so was a slave trader, and celebrated at the time, but we now understand he was a twat" and donate 2p from every ticket to some equality charity? This would actually address our history, educate people, and do a bit of good now to counteract the bad things this chap did in the past.

Saying that, obviously I'm not black and I might feel differently about seeing reminders of slavery around town if I were. So I can understand both perspectives and I wouldn't necessarily argue strongly with the people that want the hall renamed.

Karl wrote:I think that the push to rename places, remove statues, etc. because the subject contributed to our history in a negative way is a bit misguided. Rather than trying to forget our history, I think we should confront it. Why not put a big plaque outside the hall saying "so-and-so was a slave trader, and celebrated at the time, but we now understand he was a twat" and donate 2p from every ticket to some equality charity? This would actually address our history, educate people, and do a bit of good now to counteract the bad things this chap did in the past.

Saying that, obviously I'm not black and I might feel differently about seeing reminders of slavery around town if I were. So I can understand both perspectives and I wouldn't necessarily argue strongly with the people that want the hall renamed.

What are your thoughts on the Confederate flag?

Moggy wrote:There has been controversy in Bristol for years now over the name of one of our music venues.

The Colston Hall was named after Edward Colston, a slave trader who happened to also do good works around the city. He never built the Colston Hall, it was built years after his death, but people have been uneasy about having such a prominent building named after a man who made his fortune selling other humans.

The Colston Hall has now announced it will abandon the name in the next few years and its unleashed a storm of protest from people who think it's rewriting history and is PC gone mad.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-39718149

Should it be renamed?

Knoyleo wrote:What are your thoughts on the Confederate flag?

I think there's an interesting difference there which ultimately comes down to the power of symbols and how particular iconography can come to represent a celebration of some ideal. I feel the Confederate flag is much more troubling because it has become this kind of rallying icon for racists, in a way that the Colston Hall presumably hasn't. I think the continued active use of the Confederate flag as a symbol of white supremacy means that it should probably be removed from public display where possible. If Colston came to represent and symbolise a new wave of prejudice then I don't think I could sit here and say "we should use this as an opportunity to educate and reflect on our history," because the name would have become a semantically linked icon for a present danger that society in that scenario ought to be actively rejecting.

He might've treated his slaves well Karl, you don't know that! /sarcasm

Seriously though I like your idea of keeping it, but having a big plaque outside saying what kind of person he was and that we think it's wrong. Trying to hide all the bad things we've done would be terrible. It's important we remember the bad things about the past as to not repeat them.

Personally I don't think they are changing the name to be PC or altruistic, I think they want a sponsor and it will be harder to attract a decent paying company with a slavetrader name attached to it.

Still, I understand Karl's point but I also see the point about not continuing to honour a slavetrader. Would Dangerblade's "Hitler Hall" be ok if a plaque was put up outside to tell people what a naughty man Hitler was?

It is also a little pointless as (unless the council change it) the Hall will still be on Colston Street.

Moggy wrote:Should it be renamed?

Don't you live in Bristol, Moggy? Otherwise known as the city that lauds the slave trader?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... rd-colston

I think we need someone more impartial running this thread.

Went to my first ever gig at Colston Hall Had many a great evening there over the years, although the atmosphere changed when they massively expanded the place.

As for the name, it doesn't matter if they rename it, people will always call it Colston hall, so why bother? Is like the renaming of the millennium stadium - nobody calls it the principality stadium, although that is a sponsorship thing.

Also:

Lotus wrote:

Moggy wrote:Should it be renamed?

Don't you live in Bristol, Moggy? Otherwise known as the city that lauds the slave trader?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... rd-colston

I think we need someone more impartial running this thread.

That article shows how silly it is to be upset by the renaming of a building, Colston didn't build the hall after all and it didn't exist in his lifetime.

I wouldn't say this city lauds the slave trader, most people are unaware of it until stories like this crop up. Colston has a lot of stuff named after him (I had forgotten he's got a statue as well ), rarely do people think about what was behind the naming of Colston Tower or Colston Street.

Just wait until people find out we have a Whiteladies Road and a Blackboy Hill.

I'm a little bit torn in this one. I pretty much stand with Karl. The Colston Hall is probably the biggest landmark in Bristol which highlights where the city got a lot of its wealth. Erasing the name on the face of it seems like we are ending the honouring of a slave trader. However I would prefer the name to stay as a permanent mark on the city so that we cannot hide from the past. Colston was a complicated figure as along with the slave trading he also poured a lot of that wealth back into building the city from which so many have reaped the benefits of the slave trade. So it should stand as a permanent mark on the city so that we never forget in my opinion.

I think there is also a difference between a hall named after Hitler for example, as that would no doubt be used as a rallying point for neo Nazis, where as the issue of slavery is pretty much universally reviled and there is no serious call for it to return or any kind of concept like neo slavers.

On the other hand though I am tired of hearing about the issue as it crops up in Bristol every couple of months so my opinion is changing to just hurry up and rename it so we don't have to keep hearing about it. But unless the city really wants to atone and maybe set aside major funding towards the communities from where the slaves were taken, this will be largely an empty gesture.

captain red dog wrote:So it should stand as a permanent mark on the city so that we never forget in my opinion.

The issue with that is it is not a place where anybody goes to think about the sins of the past. It is literally a building where people go to have fun by watching a band or a comedian.

Somewhere like Colston Tower would be a better place to mark the dark history of the city, rather than the place where people drinking beer while watching Jimmy Carr.

Moggy wrote:

captain red dog wrote:So it should stand as a permanent mark on the city so that we never forget in my opinion.

The issue with that is it is not a place where anybody goes to think about the sins of the past. It is literally a building where people go to have fun by watching a band or a comedian.

Somewhere like Colston Tower would be a better place to mark the dark history of the city, rather than the place where people drinking beer while watching Jimmy Carr.

I'd argue it's a better place to educate people due to the larger footfall. Nobody goes to Colston Tower in comparison and a slavery museum would be well suited in the entrance of Colston Hall. Obviously they won't do that however as it isn't sponsor friendly, so it makes the name change a bit of a sham.

EDIT: In years to come that education will be vital as the links to Colston are slowly erased from the city. Don't get me wrong, I agree with the intent of the campaigners who are calling for this change, but I feel they are missing a huge opportunity to do so much more.

captain red dog wrote:EDIT: In years to come that education will be vital as the links to Colston are slowly erased from the city.

Is that not a good thing though? Should the name of Colston be remembered by having his name plastered over buildings and roads?

Nobody is suggesting that the past should be forgotten, just that slavetraders should not continue to be honoured by having their names live forever on the sides of buildings.

The history of the slave trade can be taught, without having to have monuments to the evil men that profited from it.

Dat interval bar service though

I think the name should remain. How about if a load of black people were enslaved and used as staff? Would probably attract more punters.

Moggy wrote:The history of the slave trade can be taught, without having to have monuments to the evil men that profited from it.

My experience is that the slave trade is woefully taught as it is, I'd rather have the name of a slave trader on a building to provoke discussion. I know when I was at school I found out about Colston through asking who he was after seeing the name of the building, it isn't taught in schools adequately in my opinion.

In terms of "evil" I'm not sure about that term, but thats kind of the issue that provokes the discussion that I feel is healthy from things like the naming of buildings and statues of controversial figures. There has to be an element of looking at these figures through the lens of their time, whilst also acknowledging how we feel about those issues today.

Removing names and statues of those figures I feel has an element of sanitising or airbrushing history. I'm not opposed to it really, but I'm very concerned that the trend seems to be focused solely on removing a name rather than producing anything productive in terms of historical education, community responsibility and memorial.

captain red dog wrote:My experience is that the slave trade is woefully taught as it is, I'd rather have the name of a slave trader on a building to provoke discussion. I know when I was at school I found out about Colston through asking who he was after seeing the name of the building, it isn't taught in schools adequately in my opinion.

That's a problem with schools though and not anything to do with building names.

In terms of "evil" I'm not sure about that term, but thats kind of the issue that provokes the discussion that I feel is healthy from things like the naming of buildings and statues of controversial figures. There has to be an element of looking at these figures through the lens of their time, whilst also acknowledging how we feel about those issues today.

I think when it comes to things like the slave trade or the holocaust that "evil" is a pretty fair description.

You can look at people through the lens of their time, but the fact remains they profited from stealing humans beings and selling them into a lifetime of brutality and hard labour.

Removing names and statues of those figures I feel has an element of sanitising or airbrushing history. I'm not opposed to it really, but I'm very concerned that the trend seems to be focused solely on removing a name rather than producing anything productive in terms of historical education, community responsibility and memorial.

Colston died in 1721.

The Colston Hall opened in 1867.

It's not airbrushing or sanitising history, the Hall was not even opened until 146 years after the man died. History is not being amended, it is simply removing the name of a slavetrader from a public building, the legacy of the slave trade can still be discussed.