Reader Letter: War memorial is not in a disgusting state
PUBLISHED: 11:27 19 June 2018 | UPDATED: 19:04 19 June 2018
ARCHANT EASTERN DAILY PRESS (01603) 772434
One reader disagrees with reports of the Norwich memorial being in a bad way. What do you think?
I pass the war memorial most days and cannot agree with the verdict expressed in the paper.
The gilded lettering, laurel wreath and civic coat of arms are still as beautiful as they were after the restoration of 2009-11 and the stonework at the back is also in good condition.
What has happened is that the stonework facing City Hall has again become dirty through the effects of air pollution in the city centre. My garden furniture also suffers in this way and has to be constantly cleaned!
The fact that the memorial was commissioned from the foremost architect of the day, Edward Lutyens, and that the most expensive material, Portland Stone was used to build it is sufficient testimony to the city’s wish to honour and remember the men of Norwich who gave their lives in the 1914-18 conflict, and, sadly, just a generation later to those who died in the Second World War.
But, also sadly, Portland Stone is not a forgiving material, as many buildings in London also show, and when the memorial was built the sort of motor traffic the city centre now experiences would have been unimaginable.
Whilst it would be lovely to have the memorial looking as wonderful as it did in 2011, for Remembrance Day this year we may just have to accept that the stonework cannot be kept pristine unless someone can devise a suitable and regular cleaning regime for it.
Do you agree with our reader? Let us know in the comments below or write to us at firstname.lastname@example.org