Discussion Forum

Wilsden Comparison

Posted by Peter Ford,
Monday, October 25, 2004

Whilst driving through the village of Wilsden on my way to Shipley I noticed that the Wilsden residents are lucky enough to have the use of a skate park just like ourselves in Hebden Bridge. However there was one glaring difference between the Wilsden skate park and that of our own town. The Wilsden skate park was almost free of graffiti.

Why do the kids of Hebden think it is their god given right to deface their skatepark when the kids of Wilsden it would appear do not have such destructive urges?

I would also guess that if someone wanted to cut down a few trees in Wilsden they would not have to put up with Swampy and his mates turning up and causing as much trouble as possible.

Hebden Bridge is a special place and there is no doubt I prefer to live here rather than Wilsden. However I raise the question, is the price to pay for the freedom of spirit and open mindedness of Hebden Bridge residents to be a loss of common sense and respect from certain quarters of the community?

Posted by Jim Leach,
Friday, October 29, 2004

The points you raise in your posting are interesting ones. Firstly on Graffiti. I haven't actually seen the Hebden skate park, so my views are limited. However, maybe it needs to be realised that the 2 cultures go hand in hand.

Having been a teenager in the 80's when Graffiti or "street art" was starting to become prolific in this country I can understand it as a potential art form and as a voice of youth culture. However having matured and lost some hair I can also see the importance of containing graffiti, and ensuring that it isn't allowed to deface important buildings and naturally beautiful places. So with this in mind I can only see it as a good thing that the graffiti artists in the area have mainly restricted their activities to the skate park.

A skate park is never going to be a beautiful place (aesthetically speaking). It is however going to be a place where people interested in skating can spend time and feel part of a movement. In stark contrast to your views I actually think that Graffiti should be legalised on the site with the aim of encouraging kids down there and using the space and getting involved in something that interests them.

If graffiti artists are given the time and space they are capable of producing fantastic imagery (as we have seen in the recent exhibition around town), the alternative is them producing quick "tags" all over the place which they can successfully do without getting caught. As I haven't seen the skate park I cant comment on the quality of the graffiti there, I would guess however if the kids are concerned about getting caught then it will be of the lower quality tagging kind. The school I studied at in the Leeds area actually provided an area and paid for materials for people to produce vibrant large scale pieces and given this opportunity it really did cut down on the number of illegally produced graffiti around the school (quite forward thinking for the 80's).

As to why the kids in Wilsdon haven't defaced there park I cant answer that one, but there could be a number of reasons. Does anyone know anyone from Wilsdon who could shed some light on the matter? Maybe they are just a little bit dull over there.

With regard to you swampy comment I suggest you read the background to this issue on this website then maybe we can have some intellectual dialogue, as at the moment you appear ill informed and dare I say a little stupid.

Posted by Peter Ford,
Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Mr Leach

Can I just inform you that I have read at length the background information available on the Greentops Millpond issue. Just because my views on the subject don't fall in line with your own does not make my point of view any less valid.

Your comments labeling me as "ill informed" and "stupid" come across as a childish insult.

Surely the whole point of discussion pages such as these is so that people with differing points of view can discuss matters in a sensible manner.If everyone was to reduce themselves to the level of using petty insults to state their case there would be little content worth reading.

Posted by Jim Leach,
Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Firstly with regard to using discussion pages for there true intention, as you can see I wrote at length about the subject of Graffiti on the skate park, which was the intended point of discussion of this thread, to which I await your response.

Secondly, I am pleased and re-assured that you have read at the length the background to the millpond issue, as everyone in Hebden should have done. Why then were the extents of your comments on the subject the following flippant statement:-

"I would also guess that if someone wanted to cut down a few trees in Wilsden they would not have to put up with Swampy and his mates turning up and causing as much trouble as possible."

I find the reference to swampy particularly humorous if a little out dated. And I wonder if this could be classified as a petty insult? Maybe somebody could mediate on that one?

It is possible that such a statement may have caused offence to the people who are fighting for what may be proved to have been illegal felling of tree's protected by a TPO. Something that nobody could possibly condone. The fact that this subject goes far deeper than the possible illegal felling of trees makes your statement appear a little shallow. Especially as it crops up in the middle of an apparently unrelated subject. So Mr Peters let us squabble no more and use this forum for its intended purpose. And I ask you what is your stance on the subject?

Posted by Jack Hughes,
Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Oh Peter, Peter, Peter. A couple of quick points;

1. My understanding is that the graffiti on the skatepark area (not, I hasten to add, the other graffiti in the park environs) was part of the original design and was "legitimate" i.e. the artists had permission. I could be wrong, but I'm sure you can put me right if this is not the case.

2. It is a bit rich of you to start accusing others of personal abuse when you dismissively describe the residents of the Windsor View area, and by extension anyone else opposed to or concerned about the proposed Mill Pond development, as "Swampy and his mates".

That's all.