[Cambridge-youths] GSM

[Luke Smith]

Dear all, 

I have been reading with interest all the recent discussion, and understand
and appreciate the viewpoints expressed by all.  To avoid the risk of
messing up my lines at the meeting, I'll give my (rambling!) views now.

It is clear that GSM bells are difficult to ring.  I would not dispute this,
but nevertheless (like others) I enjoy the challenge of difficult balls and
am willing to put the physical effort in.  However, there is a limit.  With
such an active ringing programme at GSM, you can find yourself ringing three
times on Sunday, perhaps more.  This can be hard work, especially round the
back.  I don't know whether others felt the same, but yesterday evening the
bells seemed to be going particularly badly.

There is no good reason for keeping the bells how they are, save historical
interest and personal sentimentality.  Restoring/replacing the ring can only
bring benefits - improved sound, reduced physical effort and higher quality
and more enjoyable ringing.  I am therefore fully in support of the proposal
by the working party.

>From a Guild perspective, during the three years I've been here, Guild
ringing at GSM has remained at a high standard.  I think this is due to two
factors:

1. A strong and keen undergraduate core.
2. Significant support from past students and current Youth's members.

On point 2, I would like to thank people for their support, and hope that
this will continue.  However, on point 1, I would hope that this will also
continue, but it is unreasonable to assume that this will always be the
case.  I would hate to see the situation where the bells deterred students
from ringing at GSM, and producing good ringing.  Many new undergraduates
will come to Cambridge with little experience of ringing on higher numbers,
and as Jennie has mentioned, the opportunities at Cambridge are amazing.  To
benefit from such opportunities there needs to be an element of personal
keenness, but also enjoyment of the experience and a prospect of
improvement.  The current bells hinder this, I feel.

As a (brief) detraction, I take as an example my home tower which has
recently undergone a rehang.  A large proportion of the band have rung there
since learners, for timescales of 30, 40, 50+ years.  There was obvious
attachment to the bells, for example the old lady who had been ringing the
4th for 50 years and rarely rang anything else but the 4th!  Nevertheless,
the bells were getting increasingly difficult to ring, greatly affected by
the weather.  Two bells, although 200 years old, were tonally inferior, one
being cracked.  We had sufficient money available.  We had enthusiasm to
improve things.  We therefore looked to improve the bells, not only for the
current band, but also to safeguard the future of ringing at the tower.  The
result was a far superior ring, with the two old bells being replaced thus
creating a more tonally uniform sound.

Back to GSM.  The situation is obviously different, but also similar.  We
have a strong band, with many members putting a large amount of effort into
improving things for the better.  The opportunity of university funding is
invaluable, and it would be irresponsible of us to ignore the opportunity.
I realise we also have a responsibility to history, but I do not agree with
preservation where it interferes with the current and future activities of a
band.

The Cambridge Youths have long history, one which will hopefully continue
for many centuries to come.  We are just a small part of that history, and
have a duty not only to improve thing for ourselves, but also to secure the
prospect of continued high quality ringing for future generations.

I look forward to tonight's meeting and hope that the current and future
needs of the band are at the heart of the discussion.

Best wishes,

Luke