Unlike many of the (mainly) students who campaigned to get the name of Colston Hall changed (Hall drops slave trader’s name after years of bitter debate in Bristol, 27 April), I am a Bristolian born and bred, and I am so incensed that the management has kowtowed to these so-called activists. I have to reluctantly agree for the first time with the former Bristol Conservative leader Richard Eddy that we cannot change history, and that place names give us a link with the past. Edward Colston gave the land on which the eponymous hall stands for the building of a school for orphaned and destitute boys. This is still thriving today, in a different part of the city. He also left money for almshouses for the poor, and with the residue of his fortune a girls’ school was founded (which, incidentally, one of the spokespeople for the anti-Colston name brigade attended, and presumably benefited from its excellent education).
Many cities and towns in Britain have monuments and buildings dedicated to people who were not 100% PC to our modern overtender sensibilities – leaders of industry in the north, who allowed children down mines, or forced them to crawl under looms. They did not all give part of their wealth to alleviate the lot of the poor of their cities as Colston did. Where does this nonsense end?
This is all about money. The management of Colston Hall is trying to attract sponsorship for its renovation and future preservation by offering corporate naming. So look out for the Tesco Hall or the McDonald’s Hall sometime soon. Silly, unnecessary, embarrassing to the city. I sincerely hope that Bristolians stop this in its tracks, keep the Colston name (while fully acknowledging the horrors of slavery) and leave history to the historians.
Jane Ghosh
Ex-pupil of Colston’s girls’ school, Bristol
David Olusoga’s presentation of Bristol as a city divided between defenders of the slave trader Edward Colston and those who wish to vilify him is overblown (Opinion, 28 April).
Those who want to keep Colston’s name on Bristol’s buildings want the same thing as those who want it removed. Yes, naming buildings after people is traditionally an accolade and not a way of recording the past, but airbrushing Colston’s name from the Colston Hall would consign his deeds to history rather than make the city permanently aware of the abhorrent reasons for its prosperity. The problem is that Colston’s name around the city retains its original purpose of memorialising a slave trader. This should of course be changed, but removing the name would not send as strong a response to this travesty as changing the significance of Colston’s presence on Bristol’s streets.
Messages that were originally commemorative can be altered without being removed. This was done in Bremen, Germany, where a large concrete elephant, originally meant to glorify colonialism, was changed to be an anti-colonial monument by the addition of a plaque. In Bristol’s case a plaque may not go far enough, but statues to honour the slaves and continuing education of Bristol’s children about the city’s tainted past would, in my view, do more to show how Bristolian attitudes have changed than wiping the visible trace of Colston from public view.
Regardless of which side of the argument we are on, no one wants to honour Edward Colston.
Gabriel Osborne
Bristol
In addition to the Colston Hall, Bristol has half a dozen streets, two schools, an almshouse, a high-rise office block and several pubs named after Edward Colston. I would be unhappy if these were also to be renamed. Many people in the city are unaware of Bristol’s links to the slave trade. Removing these visible reminders of Colston’s involvement will do nothing to address that unawareness and might well increase it. Far from removing them, I suggest adding to their visibility with the use of, for example, street information boards to promote awareness of Colston’s record as a slave trader.
Josh Brooman
Bristol
It is not only the issue of Colston and his historical role in slavery in Bristol that should be of concern. Sometime in the early part of this century, there was a large poster by the river, opposite the TSB building, listing the things that Bristol’s trade had been famous for – tobacco, coffee and sugar. Well, not exactly!
I wrote to the chief executive of the city council about the obvious absence of a reference to slavery. He wrote back telling me that he had passed my comment to the, I think, library and leisure department. They wrote back to let me know about Bristol’s trail about slavery. I replied to say thanks but the poster was still in place, and copied it to the chief executive. He then replied saying he was taking the matter up with the University of the West of England. They proved supportive of my point and subsequently the poster was altered to include a reference to the slave trade. It meant squashing up the lettering to accommodate all four aspects.
I am writing this to demonstrate that it is not only history that we need to challenge. Who initially devised and approved the poster, and how many people walked past it and either did not notice the omission or did nothing about changing it?
Jane Lane
Reading
David Olusoga writes that “the question facing Bristol” is whether it is willing “to fully confront the darkest chapter of its past”. At least Bristol has made a start in doing this. Twelve miles to the east of Bristol is a city which has largely kept its head down on the very same issue.
As a child growing up in Bath I used to gaze up at the elegant tower built by William Beckford. Years later I discovered that its construction had been made possible by profits derived from a Jamaican sugar plantation owned by the Beckford family.
Many people who made fortunes from the slave trade bought elegant houses in Georgian Bath. William Wilberforce – who did so much to abolish the slave trade – was a resident of the city. Visit the Holburne Museum in Bath and you will see paintings of proud Bath citizens whose wealth was based on the ownership of slave plantations. Hopefully Bath will soon be following Bristol’s lead.
Ivor Morgan
Lincoln
Now that the campaign to change the name of Colston Hall in Bristol has been crowned with success, might I suggest that the campaigners turn their attention to the US capital, named as it is after that notorious slave owner George Washington.
Michael Bell
London
Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com