Controversial work a future attraction
PUBLISHED: 12:36 20 July 2006 | UPDATED: 11:53 04 May 2010
MRS Wilbraham (Letters, July 13, 2006) surely forfeited all claims to credibility as a result of her ridiculous arguments both for and against the recent football World Cup that appeared in the Ely Standard and the city s other newspaper. Can we expect a
MRS Wilbraham (Letters, July 13, 2006) surely forfeited all claims to credibility as a result of her ridiculous arguments both for and against the recent football World Cup that appeared in the Ely Standard and the city's other newspaper.
Can we expect a further letter from her in the near future offering wholehearted support for the closure of the lavatories by the Sacrist's Gate?
We might, perhaps, pay more attention to other contributions to last week's Ely Standard Letters page in support of SOB (Save Our Bladders) campaign.
However, Angela Cookson and John Piper show a remarkable lack of understanding about the administration of non-transferable funds.
They appear to believe that should the Ely riverside sculpture project be abandoned (heaven forbid!), £5000 of the savings might be employed to run the Sacrist's Gate lavatories for other causes that they may or may not declare to be 'worthwhile'.
The lavatories and the Sluice water sculpture are clearly quite separate issues. As we understand it, the latter will show, in real time, the condition of the River Great Ouse at Denver. Thus a truly innovative work of art in Ely - not to everyone's taste, but nor are those by Frink, Epstein, Hockney and Turner, for example - will be linked to the remarkable engineering structures at Denver that have considerable bearing on the well-being of many inhabitants of The Fens and East Anglia.
Once the various watery associations are appreciated, and certain prejudices are shed, Sluice may well become a popular Jubilee Gardens attraction.
PAULA and ELVIN WHITTLSEA