SCBWI's Blueboard - A Message & Chat Board

Writing, Illustrating & Publishing => Book Talk => Topic started by: thunderingelephants on September 14, 2011, 01:29 AM

Title: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: thunderingelephants on September 14, 2011, 01:29 AM
Guys, I am putting this in here 'cos I am not sure where sure it would and it is a topic of discussion in British television and quite a few newspapers.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14896735

Would you think it is important to preserve such buildings where writers are known to create their greatest work?  Or would you see that it would be a waste of time and money to spend cash on a garden shed?
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: jeffman on September 14, 2011, 06:17 AM
Kinda like asking if it's worth it to remake the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory film. If enough people think it's worth it, it's worth it. In the case of Roald Dahl, I personally wouldn't contribute, but that's maybe not relevant.
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: olmue on September 14, 2011, 06:21 AM
I think Roald Dahl has just such a far-reaching influence in kids' literature, even over here. I think it should definitely be preserved!
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: Cpm on September 14, 2011, 06:45 AM
 :werd totally agree with Olmue!
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: JennaWren on September 14, 2011, 06:49 AM
I agree, though I do see the point raised in the article about the family contributing most of the money.  (Unless someone else is getting his royalties, which I'm sure are considerable....)

I'm guessing, though, that there will be enough help from fans who agree that the building should be preserved.  It's a great project, IMHO.
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: thunderingelephants on September 14, 2011, 08:57 AM
I think the family of Roald Dahl had an argument that he is seen as a national treasure, which for many, he is, and as such, why shouldn't the british public contribute.  But the argument was also put forward that the Dahl already have made their money from his work, so it is up to them to preserve all of his work.
It does beg the question, however, if you think about it...what would happen to our little writing havens if any of us unpublished writers had our published?  In my case, I write in a coffee shop where the seat I usually occupy has ripped arm rests and I notice crumbs down the sides.
It's still more comfy than listening the rattling water pipes at home.  But that's another thing my ratty landlord won't fix!
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: jeffman on September 14, 2011, 10:17 AM
It's worth keeping in mind that

1. The modern British have a tradition of nationalizing important buildings, castles, and similar stuff for the public good. I don't know if a shed counts, but the Brits do more of this stuff than we yanks; our standards may not apply

2. Depending on the way the Dahl estate is structured, the family may not actually get that much, taxes in England being so high. OTOH, for all I know, it's all socked away offshore, and that would make a huge difference.
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: Franzilla on September 14, 2011, 10:57 AM
From what I read, it doesn't sound as though the estate gets that much each year. The cost of preserving the shed would wipe out two years worth of estate profit (this is based on the figures I read). I would be reticent to shell out all that cash so that the British public could enjoy it because, after all, Dahl wrote books, that was his job and, rightly, when those books sell his estate still gets money from it. Why should they spend it on preserving his shed, unless THEY want his shed preserved?

I think what irked people was the idea that they should dig into their own pockets to preserve it - that the estate managers had asked for help. I'd bet that if they'd just said, "Oh we're going to knock the shed down," everyone would have rallied, but people don't like to be asked for charity, they prefer to think of it themselves, and offer it up without having to be asked. It feels a lot nicer that way!
Title: Re: Roald Dahl Shed.
Post by: JennaWren on September 14, 2011, 11:33 AM

I think what irked people was the idea that they should dig into their own pockets to preserve it - that the estate managers had asked for help. I'd bet that if they'd just said, "Oh we're going to knock the shed down," everyone would have rallied, but people don't like to be asked for charity, they prefer to think of it themselves, and offer it up without having to be asked. It feels a lot nicer that way!

A very good point.  Also, excellent new avatar!