Long life
Battle of the Brontes
Nigel Nicolson
The Brontë Society is the most energet- ic and successful of all our literary soci- eties. It owns Haworth Parsonage and a superlative collection of manuscripts and other memorabilia, publishes a scholarly journal and a newsy gazette, organises lec- tures and tours of the Bronta country and has attracted to the parsonage up to 200,000 visitors a year.
But the Society is in deep trouble. Its council is split on a single issue, the replacement of its museum, and now con- sists of two camps each determined to oust the other. Hostilities have escalated to the point that rival candidates for election to the council are aligned in open opposition, votes of censure are tabled and disallowed, chairmen resign or threaten resignation, chunks of the Society's funds are spent on lawyer's fees to outsmart the rebels and the staff are in permanent despair. The dispute will come to a head at the annual general meeting in Haworth on 6 June. It should be distressingly exciting.
Outsider-members like myself who live far from Yorkshire should not deride the contestants' irascibility. It had a reasonable origin. There is need for more museum space and better facilities for staff, lectures and the shop. Nobody disputes this. The quarrel arose about the form the new museum should take. The council at first proposed to demolish most of the existing museum (built in 1960) and replace it by another double the size and attached to the rear of the parsonage by a two-storey corri- dor. Although the plan was approved by the Yorkshire Museum Council, it aroused immediate protests from the SPAB (`the parsonage would become a mere annexe to its own extension'), the Georgian Group Ca classic case of how to kill the character of a building'), English Heritage, the Council for British Archaeology and a vocal section of the Society's council and its widespread membership. I entirely agreed with them. Emily's ghost would have looked out of her kitchen window into a brilliantly lit bou- tique. The 1960 extension was a mistake. This would be a bigger one.
So the revolt began. The rebels, however, put forward a scheme of their own which proved even less acceptable. Their museum was to be a bunker driven into the side of a hillock behind the parsonage, lit by a row of windows on one side and skylights visi- ble only by satellite. Bradford City Council supported the idea, but it was ridiculed by the opposition. There would be no proper circulation for visitors, they said, and the 'earth-protected' building (its sponsors don't like the term 'underground') and its delicate contents would fall sick from over- exposure to air-conditioning. It would be a monstrosity and a morgue.
The controversy soon developed into a raw struggle for power. The idea of a new museum in any form fell into temporary abeyance because the Society could not afford it, a potential benefactor having withdrawn his financial support owing to the row. You might think that the combat- ants would then bury their quarrel because there was nothing left to quarrel about. Not at all. So much mutual hostility has been generated that the rebels are hoping to obtain a majority on the council, and if successful they would be rebels no longer. On 6 June tlie membership will decide by their verbal and (if allowed) postal votes.
When the dust has settled, the museum dispute will undoubtedly arise again. The new council would be wise to discard both the bunker and the revised version of the extension, and acquire a building on the far side of the road, the Sunday school where Anne and Charlotte taught, which could be adapted and enlarged. A split site has its disadvantages, but it is better than a split council. I hope that Lord Briggs, the presi- dent of the Society, will advocate this solu- tion at the meeting and support the chairman, Professor Arthur Pollard, if he agrees with it too. There need by no losers in this argument if they can compromise on a proposal that neither side has seriously recommended before.
Previous page
