CONFABULATE

To confabulate is to "hold a casual conversation." We hope that any and
all of you out there will weigh in with your opinions of the proposed
Glenrowan Interpretive Centre (aka the Ned Centre).

We would like to hear all opinions for and against the
centre and are open to civil discussion, please feel free to disagree if
you like. Residents of Glenrowan are especially encouraged to comment
here.

Who is behind this disaster idea?
I took my kids to Glenrowan and it is ok to me.
It does not need some big building where the Kelly Gang had their fight
with the cops. Leave it alone or I will stay away.

Please leave the town as it is....................

I like the look of the centre BUT I don't think Glenrowan needs it just yet.

Mary
Adelaide

Gidday Dave,

Have just caught up with the latest on your site, and the letter from Nicole
Jones.
It reminded me of my first thoughts when visiting Euroa on a " Kelly hunt"
many years ago.
What a crying shame that dear old Euroa ever allowed the powers that be to
wreck the bank and put a little plaque up instead!!!
I bet they wish they had the bank now, what an attraction.
Imagine Jerilderie without the Post and Telegraph Office.
The towns within the Kelly country ( and fringes) must be careful to
preserve what they have, and not to clutter the Kelly story with too many
fake and tacky imitations.
I am confident the wonderful people of Glenrowan have this firmly in mind so
that we can all enjoy The Greatest Adventure Story on Earth in a genuine
way.
Cheers
Don

Hey Dave,

I thought I would also throw my 2 cents into the ring as well. I
think Nicole has summed it up beautifully and I would have trouble adding to
that. What I have to say concerns everybody out there who will read this and
can presently go to Glenrowan, stand at the siege site, look towards the
station ( tastefully & beautifully restored ! and the overpass where the
crossing and gatehouse once stood . Close your eyes and imagine what Ned was
thinking, the first volley of shots, people screaming in the inn behind you,
the boys baiting and cursing the police, Hare screaming " I'm Hit ",
confusion and a massive pall of gunsmoke drifting over the scene. Now open
you eyes and what do you see...............A very modern building with a 26
meter high tower dominating the scene before you........think about it. I
could add another dimension onto this, do everything above at around 12.30am
in the middle of winter and make your own decision. Sure something needs to
be done but I think there are better alternatives.

Tim.

Dear Dave,

As we all know things will be happening at Glenrowan - the development of
the Siege site is listed in the Arts, Theatre and Cultural Heritage Strategy
2002 - 2006 and funds have already been received to implement Stage One of
the Master plan. The question is what to do for Stage Two? We all agree
that Glenrowan is a place of historical significance and that tourism is
essential for its survival. We must remember though, when considering what
to do, that it is home to those that live there and many peoples' livelihood
is dependent on the attractions and businesses already there. Like Lola, I
think the plan put forward by Bill Denheld and Penleigh Boyd looks
impressive, and may well meet many of the guidelines of the Sinclair Knight
Merz report, however I don't think the place for such a significant building
is Glenrowan. A 26 metre tower has no place in a country town even if the
reason put forward for having it is to represent each year of Ned's life.
And what happens to the current businesses and those that run them? Do they
just become another small business statistic? Sure they may not be as
sophisticated as what Denheld and Boyd put forward as part of the
Interpretive Centre but part of the attraction of Glenrowan is the snow
domes and tea towels - just ask my two young children!!!
Also like Lola, I think we need to keep in mind that people died at this
site - it should be a place of quiet contemplation where the memory of those
who lost their lives - including children - be respected. There is so much
that could be done that would allow the town to remain a quiet county hamlet
yet provide better facilities and interpretation of the site. I just hope
we don't lose sight of what actually happened there. Many well meaning
people have done things in the name of progress to have it backfire years
later - just look at Euroa. Let's preserve the site rather than develop it
so that in years to come people can still have a sense of what it was like
for the boys on that day in June.

Thanks

Nicole Jones

I have been a Kelly student for over 20 years and have been visiting Glenrowan @ least once a year since 1982 ( first visit as a know all 13 year old.) In this time, I have seen the "tourist precinct" develop and evolve slowly, usually for the better. By the same token, I have also witnessed the site of the Siege remain refreshingly uncluttered and gimmick free. (for the most part.) However, I have reached the conclusion (especially after a visit mid May 2004) that the town cannot sustain another "attraction", whether it be another eatery or museum. I believe the Gerretts Kates Cottage and Deans Cobb and Co. museum more than adequately convey the Kelly Saga in a sensitive and dramatic fashion. Whilst the proposed centre seems to be in sympathy with surroundings, I also agree that it is too large and possibly too intrusive for the Last Stand and Siege site. Joe, Dan and Steve died here. Lives were ruined. Subtle sensitive interpretive boards would be the way to go here and leave the site as peaceful as it has been since June 1880. The centre would undoubtedly contain a food outlet. Where would this leave Billy Tea Rooms (a piece of Glenrowan history now in itself) or Kellys Cookhouse, Neds Burger House? (McDonalds did enough damage to the town when they appeared on freeway nearby in early 90's.) I don't want to see these establishments hurt. I also am afraid that the town would end up with an empty, derelict "white Elephant" similar to the Eureka Centre in Ballarat. The best memorial would be to leave the site as it is with some sympathetic signage added. I 'll probably be bagged for this opinion but then again, I have been very close to Glenrowan for so many years, I feel protective in many ways. Let's not take the "hamlet" feel away with delusions of grandeur. I'm happy with how it is. It would be interesting to find out what new resident and Kelly student Mike Lawson thinks.......

What a great design this Centre looks, but do we really need it on the site
of the death of others, it is the site of Steve Harts ( My Grandmothers
Brother) and Dan Kellys last place on this earth, think about it would YOU
like something built like this on an area where your relatives came to
there end. This is only MY opinion., Lola Rowe.

I am writing to please comment on the proposed Ned Kelly
interpretive centre at Glenrowan. I couldn't agree with your comments
more. After reading about it and seeing the picture of what it would
look like, all I can say is that I really hope it does not get built. I think it
is great that people want to promote Glenrowan, but it all just looks out
of place. It looks awful and modern and I love Glenrowan the way it is.
It is old fashioned and lovely, and when standing up at the siege site it
is very easy to picture Ned, Joe, Dan & Steve there. I think this centre
would take a lot away from Glenrowan, instead of adding to it. If it did
get built, then it would be a lot better to have it over near where the
other shops are, as you said, they are all far enough away from the
siege site, which is great, they do not interfere with the site at all.
If this centre is built up there, it will spoil it all I think. I believe Glenrowan
is a place to be left as old fashioned as possible, as close to how it
was when Ned, Joe, Dan & Steve were there. It would be horrible if it
gets changed any more. I love visiting Glenrowan just the way it is.
I have to say that I am against the proposed centre, at least very much
against it being built at the siege site.

Dave,

I wish to put my 2 cents in on this confab about the Ned Centre if I
may. While I have never actually seen the "lay of the land" in Glenrowan
with my own eyes, I do trust the judgment of men like yourself and Dave
Brown who access that an interpretive centre of this size in that
particular location would dampen, dilute or diminish your "Glenrowan
experience." It does seem to be a rather large design for a town the
size of Glenrowan. It almost seems to figuratively and literally
overshadow the battleground. Surely some sort of non-commercial visitor
type centre/interpretive centre needs to be in Glenrowan, but one that
is sustainable financially over a long period of time and one that would
nicely dovetail and complement/blend in with what it is trying to
"interpret" would seem to be what is needed. All that said, I hope that
Bill Denheld and Penleigh Boyd do not feel that people are saying that
either of them are lacking in talent or ability or that their plans
are poorly executed or are rubbish! Far from it! It is obvious to anyone
that both of these men have put a great deal of thought, time and effort
into this project. In my estimation, the design is quite simply a
brilliant one. I like where they say it should be "timeless" and
"gimmick free" and that "The building should be serene-a place for
contemplation-yet stimulating to encourage interest." Also I like the
idea of "The building functions like a courthouse: here is all the
information - you, the visitor, weigh up the evidence." Obviously Bill
and Penleigh are men of vision. It just seems that this vision is a bit
too grand for Glenrowan. Such a centre would not be out of place in any
large city on your continent. But in a little country town, it does seem
to be a bit imposing. It almost seems that the centre itself would be
the attraction and destination! Most interpretive centres are suppose to
be the gateway to the experience, NOT the experience! Does that make
sense?
Also I am wondering if there are any competing designs out there for
the public to view? Is this the only one that has been submitted? Or is
it that no one else will take the time to do it on an initial
"voluntary" basis? I see where Bill's Ned Centre page says that "All
design and concept work has been done on a voluntary and goodwill basis"
and further down when speaking of the landscape model of the centre Bill
says it was done "voluntarily, with hope of eventual remuneration should
funding become available."
Is it that if the Denheld/Boyd design is rejected that
the whole idea of a Glenrowan Interpretive Centre is going to be put on
the backburner? And for how long? And what about the money the Government
has already pledged? Does that go forfeit and revert back to Canberra if
a Centre is not approved and built in a certain timeframe? I hope
someone with answers to all this will speak up here to enlighten us. I
surely cannot be the only one who has pondered on these questions!
Thanks for letting a non-Australian give her views. I hope to one
day visit Down Under and to see Glenrowan (must strike oil in my
backyard first!) and maybe by then there will be an interpretive centre
up and running. Will it be the Denheld/Boyd design? It surely remains to
be seen-only time will tell!

Sincerely,

Sharon Hollingsworth

I saw the Glenrowan project on your site, and in my option I don't really
think it's necessary. I reckon you can find out what you want with what is
already there. Furthermore, I don't really want the area of the site to
change too much with a big building beside it. For a 120 years Glenrowan
hasn't changed a lot and I don't really want to see that wrecked. So if
they do go ahead with it, I hope they don't put it where it actually took
place."

Another concern that I have with it is, will it take business away from what
is already established there? I'm very concerned that it might.

G'day Dave,

I have to agree with your opinion as far as a Ned Centre is concerned.
Much like you, I like Glenrowan just the way it is.
One of the things that struck me about the town is the fact that while
it has such an important place in our country's short history, it still
remains a little country town that as of yet has generally not bowed to
the almighty tourist dollar. I loved the fact that my wife Brenda and I
could walk around the siege site and we saw no one! I have nothing
against development for tourism in general since I myself have worked in
the tourism industry for many years. I have seen some very good things
happen here in WA but I have also seen some terrible developments that
cheapen the very things they are supposed to enhance. Glenrowan already
has a few little shops catering to tourists that want their snow domes
and t shirts etc. To build a large modern, alleged interpretive centre
so close to such an historic site, to me, could well be a huge mistake.
Firstly, even before a grain of dirt has been moved, the plans already
mention a restaurant. For a whole heap of reasons, I don't like that idea.
Glenrowan already has got a couple of places to buy food, and I think
the last thing they need is competition. I'm sure I read a newspaper
article on your site which said one of the little shops was closing down
because there was not enough trade. If they build a restaurant, no doubt
the tacky souvenir shops will have some space in there, too.
To stand on an observation deck looking out over the battle
area, surrounded by plastic Ned Kellys and souvenir spoons would not
impress me a fraction as much as being able to walk around the site and
see it the way I did with Brenda.
I also don't believe building the centre will attract more visitors in the
long term. Once the initial novelty of seeing the new interpretation centre
had worn off, I'm sure the number of tourists would return to the same
level they were before the thing was built.
Interpretation centres don't attract tourists but historic sites do. My
sister and brother-in-law went to Stonehenge in the UK and they said
that it is impossible to get anywhere near it because it is fenced off.
You are forced to see it from an "interpretation centre" viewing area
surrounded by plastic Stonehenges and coke machines etc..
Dave, these are only my thoughts, and I'm sure there are some good
intentions there and some not so good but I am glad to have seen
Glenrowan the way it is. This is a place of national importance and I
hope for our country's heritage that future Australians can be happy
with what we leave them.
In closing, I would like to reiterate that I'm not anti-development at all,
but we do need to be sure that we maintain Glenrowan the historic site
and not turn it into "Glenrowan the Theme Park."