Letters 219
St Mary Quite Contrary
Dear HIP,
Several years ago, there was a proposal to close the road behind the White Rock Theatre and extend the theatre backwards, with an opening onto the park. This would create a new arts centre which would include two high quality performance spaces. This seems to me a much better proposal than the one suggested for St Mary in the Castle and the castle itself. St Mary in the Castle is a beautiful building, but it is a cavernous space, not very well suited to theatrical performance. Most of the seating is in upstairs pews, a long way from the stage and very uncomfortable. It is hard to see how ticket sales could pay for the upkeep of the building. As for the castle, there is really not very much to see. It is of historic interest, but that doesn’t translate into tourist interest, and why would local people want to pay repeat visits? Tickets are very expensive and simply not worth the money. Isn’t it the same story as the pier, a lovely idea but not commercially viable? Can I also take issue with the idea that popular entertainment patronises working-class people? Presumably, the current White Rock programming reflects what people want to see as well as what fits in the space. Stand-up comedy, rock music and musical theatre are the most popular forms of live entertainment. Some shows are terrible but others are wonderful and uplifting. No genre is intrinsically bad, and what is really patronising is to imply that. I don’t know what the solution for St Mary in the Castle is. Perhaps an imaginative entrepreneur can come up with something. But my fear is that lots of money will again be thrown at an ambitious project which simply doesn’t work financially.
Jo Hillier.
Save the Rock
Dear HIP,
“Close the White Rock. Bulldoze it…” advocates theatre director, John Knowles (Shakespeare-on-Sea in HIP 218). A shamefully destructive suggestion, apparently made in a misconstrued attempt to appear radical. Quite apart from the 1920s building’s early art deco style aesthetic merits, this would ignore current Royal Institute of British Architects policy on sustainability, which puts the emphasis on refurbishing existing structures. Old buildings should be seen as “energy that needs to be used” and recycled, according to Simon Allford, president-elect. Every time a structure is demolished, embedded carbon is released into the atmosphere, and whatever replaced the White Rock would almost inevitably involve the use of concrete and thus even more carbon, worsening global warming. Of course, he may have been speaking figuratively…
Dave Young.
Retro Vision
Dear HIP,
We’ve recently read in connection with the proposed Hastings Borough Council budget that they are planning to cut the town adrift from 1066 Country. In the short term this may save a small amount of money. In the longer term it will take the town back decades, to when people did indeed spend short holidays or day trips on Hastings seafront. To attract people from the UK and abroad today, we have to offer a wide choice of experiences. This is exactly what has been successfully marketed for many years by our neighbours in 1066 Country in partnership with the all-important piece of the jigsaw – Hastings. HBC, please think very hard before taking this short-sighted step.
Pete and Marianne Smith.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply