Preston Corn Exchange: The wrong statue?

11th, August 2009 by

The statue in front of the Corn Exchange reflects the Preston worker's riot in the 19th centuryIt’s easy to dislike the statue in front of the corn exchange (what is now The Assembly pub). The sculpture uses a lumpen style which provokes people to like or dislike it. The statue cannot be easily dismissed for its artistic merit – or lack of  – per se, however. The sculptor, for example, clearly knew their Goya and their Manet.

The scene that the statue depicts, however, is arguably wrong. The statue appears to show people pleading for mercy, cowering, begging to be allowed to live. We see an execution squad, as in the Goya and Manet paintings.

Plug Plot Riots

The statue commemorates the Plug Plot Riots in 1842, a key moment in British history – when the workers were beginning to stand up for themselves. The workers were striking; they were angry. Whilst the statue may, symbolically, be showing the people’s reactions to the deaths, it is clear that at no point during the event did the people cower or beg in front of an execution squad. More than that: they were doing the exact opposite of begging. The people were saying that they had had enough of being supplicant.

Newspaper account

Here’s a newspaper account, written less than seven hours after the event:

“Immense bodies of stones were now thrown at the police and soldiers, many of the former being much hurt, and a party of the mob having gone up Fox-street, they then had the advantage of stoning the military from both sides. Under these circumstances, orders were given to fire, and immediately obeyed, and several of the mob fell. This did not appear to have much effect.”(1)

The artistic references are articulate but the resulting statue perhaps does not go far enough in referencing Goya. The Goya painting depicts the Madrid uprising against the Napoleonic forces who were invading Spain. The focal point of the painting is a figure bathed in light, with arms opens wide, a Jesus-like figure showing us the horrified but defiant spirit of Madrid and Spain as the country is being conquered. This is a very patriotic painting. We know which side Goya is on and it definitely isn’t France.

In the Preston statue, on the other hand, the central figure cowers in the most supplicant posture possible: crouching and covering his genitals.

The statue should show Prestonians demanding their rights, standing defiantly and proudly in the face of the authorities’ power. It should remind Prestonians that we fought for our rights and that we have power.

Conspiracy theorists might argue that, even today, the authorities don’t actually want a statue showing something like that.

(1) Dreadful Riot – Rioters Shot. From Preston Pilot 13 Aug 1842.

Image credit to Tony Worrall

  • http://tek.org.uk tek

    The Goya painting does indeed depict a person bathed in light but that might be due to the lantern in front of him and doesn’t in the slighest IMHO denote a “Jesus like figure”.

    I’m sorry but I really don’t agree about the central figure, if you knew about the injuries sustained by the 7 people people shot; you know what the central figure was possibly doing. He was presumably M.Namara, about 21, shot through the bowels and likely to die (as reported when he was taken to the House of recovery).

    The person depicted with hands above his head could be a man named William Lancaster, aged 23, who came from Blackburn, who stepped out in front of the mob with a huge rock above his head was shot
    when the 72nd fired, and he fell.

    Who knows about the third, maybe it’s a depiction of horror at people being shot.

    The real reason it’s a famous situation is that is was the first time the Riot Act was read in the UK and that is what makes it so historic.

    Also, if you’re going to quote the Preston Pilot, please quote it in full; it’s just if you’re going to write about my home town (and yours) at least gather and show the facts rather than embelish it with the bits that suit your stance on the subject at hand. You might also want to know it made the Illustrated London News with a picture depicting a male and female rioter knocked to the ground as they clash with armed soldiers, with the caption “PRESTON – ATTACK ON THE MILITARY. – TWO RIOTERS SHOT.”

    On a more interesting note, the statue is facing the wrong way, which was a real issue at the time of its unveiling :o )

    As for Conspiracy theories, you might very well be right! My own experiences with the Council in the mid 90′s really enlightened me to how bent they can be when it suits them.

  • Pauline Brunton

    The statue is also facing the wrong way, if you want to be a complete anorak about it. I have always disliked the statue but it does have one thing going for it, in that it is there at all.

  • Simon

    Hi,
    Great to get some reaction to the article!

    I mentioned the source of the article, as great as it is I couldn’t quote the whole thing – but I highly recommend it, great journalism. whilst yes, I’ve chosen the bit that backed my argument, no part of the article refers to an excecution squad, or to the people cowering. That people died and were injured is clear.

    Well, you’re perhaps right about who could be who, but if the statue is being historic, why miss out the person who died on the spot? The strange symbolism of the statue is still the same.

    Hmm, Goya isn’t subtle with his symbolism, a martry with arms in a vaguely cross-like position bathed in light – who could that be? Perhaps Goya should have included a cross :-)

    Whatever the ins and outs, I’ve always found the statue a little patronising, especially due to the inscription beginning “Remember remember…” I might come up with dodgy arguments but I’m not 7 years old!

  • Pauline Brunton

    The Riot Act came into force in 1715, and had been read a few times before, including during the Peterloo riots 23 years before. As for the people who died, the 2 figures could represent them or not. The horror when the shooting began was in part due to a rumour that the guns were not loaded (according to the newspaper reports) The four who died were George Sowerbuts, weaver Chandler Street ,14th August 1842 Aged 19 years
    Bernard McNamara, cotton stripper 6 Birk Street 15th August 1842
    Aged 17 years
    John Mercer, power loom weaver Ribbleton Avenue 16th August 1842
    Aged 27 years
    William Lancaster, unemployed Address not known Friday 19th August 1842
    Aged 23 years (His address was quoted as Nugent Street but according to the census reports of the time, there was no Nugent street in Preston or Blackburn. Macnamara died at home, and according to some of the reports was not a rioter, just wrong place wrong time. The wounded were James Roberts, shot in the hand, Lawrence Pilling, leg amputated and Bryan Hodgson, a shoe maker who was shot in the back. They were not prosecuted for rioting as it was deemed they had suffered enough. Anyway, it was Guild year and who wanted to remember such unpleasantness?

  • Simon

    Thanks for that clarification, Pauline. The event is certainly endlessly fascinating. As you say, that there is a statue at all is a good thing, and these things should be remembered.

  • http://www.houseoftheorangemonkey.co.uk Rik Shepherd

    Regarding the absence of the man who died on the spot – the People’s History Museum in Manchester (Pump House as was) have a maquette for this statue, which is interestingly different to the real thing.

    The workers in the maquette look a lot more human (I’m sorry, but when I first saw the statue in situ I wondered why the workers were dressed as gorillas) – and there’s a fourth rioter lying face down between the falling rioters and the troops. It might have been that when the maquette was scaled up, someone realised that there wouldn’t be enough room on the plinth for all the figures.

    The troops look broadly the same, apart from not having metal guns on the maquette.