I have been pondering the decision of the Survey of London not to get involved in the controversy surrounding the Whitechapel Bell Foundry, but, instead, to maintain a position of scholarly and academic neutrality. Its draft entry, due to be published in a two-volume publication in 2021, stops with its sale, not covering any of the recent controversy, in spite of it being so obviously relevant to current conservation politics.
There is a particular irony in this in that the Survey of London was set up 125 years ago by C.R. Ashbee to provide a better knowledge of historic buildings in order to save them. It was a campaigning organisation. It would be good if it can at the very least document the controversy for the historical record.
https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/survey-of-london/2016/12/09/whitechapel-bell-foundry/
the frustration must be enormous as none of the official bodies in the position do to the right thing are not so doing; and once lost, lost forever, and then regretted when too late. Not everything should be saved; there have been in my opinion overwrought campaigns eg the desolate undistinguished shuttered 18th century pub the existence of which derailed the Geffrye Museum’s redevelopment.
Dear Marina, Yes, I try to pick my battles. There’s a lot of buck passing. Ed must understand the conflict between Historic England being paid for their advice and then being required to be impartial. Charles