Read on Twitter
What is the government's position on Contested History?
'Retain and Explain'
The Culture Secretary wrote to Heritage bodies in September - for "contextualising and reinterpreting" "however challenging". "Educate about all aspects of Britain's complex past, both good and bad"
'Retain and Explain'
The Culture Secretary wrote to Heritage bodies in September - for "contextualising and reinterpreting" "however challenging". "Educate about all aspects of Britain's complex past, both good and bad"
Now The Telegraph has him sending another letter.
Similar policy (Retain and Explain). But the opposite tone
He is against an "overly simplistic version, in which we damn the faults of previous generations whilst forgetting their many achievements".
Similar policy (Retain and Explain). But the opposite tone
He is against an "overly simplistic version, in which we damn the faults of previous generations whilst forgetting their many achievements".
Whether he is *also* against an overly simplistic version, which lauds achievements but regard flaws as too uncomfortable or complex for the public, is unclear.
Having been in for contextualisation, however complex, he is now in favour of briefing about "defending history"
Having been in for contextualisation, however complex, he is now in favour of briefing about "defending history"
Re-linking this thread up https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1360870205707157504
Retain and Explain has a lot to commend it as a starting point (though most would see a few highly egregious cases, as exceptions, with debate & proper process: eg Colston). But this doesn't work if "Don't Remove, Please Contextualise" turns into "Don't Contextualise Either"
