An unwanted history?

An unwanted

history?

Empire, slavery, memory and identity in contemporary Liverpool

William S. Vick University of Durham BA History Dissertation

An unwanted history? Empire, slavery, memory and identity in contemporary Liverpool TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents and Abbreviations Introduction: Memory and empire I: The visible heritage of imperialism Hidden displays of slavery Toponymy of empire ‘Dehistoricising’ space Memorialising slavery Conclusions II: The confinement of memory The Museum of Liverpool The International Slavery Museum Conclusions III: Identity and the ‘global city’ Liverpool’s place in the world The maritimisation of history Liverpool and modernity Conclusions Conclusions: An unwanted history Bibliography Primary sources: Institutional websites Primary sources: Galleries and display boards Primary sources: Journalistic and other Secondary sources: Books Secondary sources: Journal articles Secondary sources: Other

ABBREVIATIONS ISM MMM MoL NML

International Slavery Museum Merseyside Maritime Museum Museum of Liverpool National Museums Liverpool

[2]

2 3 9 9 11 12 13 15 16 18 20 23 24 25 27 28 30 31 35 35 36 36 38 39 40

INTRODUCTION Memory and empire How do societies deal with unwanted memories? Is it possible for a society or nation to ever fully come to terms with perpetrator guilt – from the Holocaust and genocide, to the treatment of Aboriginal peoples, to mass slavery – and incorporate it into a usable past? This question, while crucial to many if not most key debates in modern memory studies, seems to have as many different answers as there are societies to address; indeed, perhaps every nation has its own contentious memory that it has yet to fully put into place. In much of Europe it is a memory of participation in the crimes of the Second World War; in the United States, less directly affected by the turmoil of that war, it is the history of slavery and race relations that takes to the forefront of public debate. In Liverpool, the city which we will examine in this dissertation, and the United Kingdom as a whole, it is the memory of the British Empire – and with it the less palatable phenomena of slavery and complicity in the transatlantic slave trade, closely interlinked of course to the parallel debate in the USA – that remains to be placed within a usable past.

Indeed, even if we suggest that this question of how to fit the empire into national narratives was relatively under-addressed throughout much of the 20th century,1 a number of shifts have occurred in recent years (often coinciding with general trends in historiographical revisionism and in political context), culminating in the significant wave of celebrations that met the bicentenary of the abolition of the slave trade in 2007. As James Walvin has described, this in turn created new debates as the array of commemorative exhibitions and celebrations provoked further questions, both on what came before abolition, and on the remnant and legacy of slavery that followed it. And financial and political interests also incentivised promotion of the bicentenary beyond the level to which it might otherwise be recognised.2 At the same time, the success of Niall Ferguson’s best-selling Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World and its accompanying television series brought the wider issues surrounding Britain’s imperial past back into popular debate.3 And the British Empire has been increasingly used as a mirror to reflect the issues of today, from US ‘neo-imperialism’ (as in Ferguson’s work), to demographic movement, to modern-day slavery.

While of course many if not most of the facts surrounding abolition or the slave trade that were revealed to the public in 2007 were well known by historians long before that date, it has

1

P. J. Marshall, ‘Imperial Britain’, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 23 (1995).

James Walvin, ‘The Slave Trade, Abolition and Public Memory’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 19 (2009).

3 Niall Ferguson, Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (London, 2004). Also see Jon Wilson, ‘Niall Ferguson’s Imperial Passion’, History Workshop Journal, 56 (2003).

2

[3]

nonetheless coincided with and partially fuelled a resurgence in academic history of the British Empire. Recent historiography, encouraged by the entry of ‘academic interlopers’ such as anthropologists, gender theorists and literary critics into the imperial field,4 has proclaimed an ‘imperial turn’ or a ‘new imperial history’ of Britain focusing more on cultural and less on political and economic aspects of empire. Linked to this, it has attempted to shift the narrative schema of the British Empire from that of a relationship between metropole and colonies, to a ‘mutually constituted’ history built from all sides up.5 This development has subsequently inspired the genesis of transatlantic studies looking at ‘Black Atlantic’ history, restoring Britain’s (and Europe’s) role as an active player in the triangular slave trade rather than a passive imperial overlord and emphasising the bidirectional or multifaceted nature of cultural influence to and from the metropole.6 This in turn leads naturally on to the study of the collective and public memory of slavery from a British perspective or from that of individual cities such as Liverpool. As suggested above, this is, in the long run, a remarkably understudied field. Compared to equivalent contentious memories in Europe, Australia and the USA, slavery is strikingly lacking in its position in the British national psyche; even if recent events such as the bicentenary of abolition have brought it partly back into focus and numerous public attempts have been made to correct its neglect.7 The reasons for this are, of course, manifold. Perhaps this is in part because the concepts of public history and collective memory are less well entrenched in the UK versus the more restricted ideas of ‘heritage’ and tendency towards commodification of the past.8 Certainly the intellectual foundations of modern memory and public history studies were not laid in the UK. And since British slavery was by and large an exported product, there is little immediate visible remnant of it that requires heritagisation; there are few buildings that inherently demand an association with slavery, and even few obvious targets for campaign groups to turn into places of memorialisation. We can compare this situation with the USA where plantations and slave buildings have left a far more visible and demanding legacy. Only in the last year has a co-ordinated attempt been made to catalogue the standing heritage of slavery in

4

Dane Kennedy, ‘Imperial History and Post-Colonial Theory’, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 24 (1996), p. 345.

5 Richard Price, ‘One Big Thing: Britain, Its Empire, and Their Imperial Culture’, Journal of British Studies, 45 (2006), pp. 602-603 6 Mark Christian, ‘Christian on Walvin’. Review of Making the Black Atlantic: Britain and the African Diaspora,

by James Walvin, Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History, 1 (2000).

7 In 2014, for instance, films on the subject of slavery have been utilised in order to expand slavery’s position in public memory. See Jamie Doward, ‘British version of 12 Years A Slave to shed light on our role in Atlantic slave trade’, The Observer (12 January 2014); and Kele Okereke, ’12 Years a Slave shows US atrocities – but who will do the same for Britain?’, The Guardian (13 January 2014).

8 Jeffery K. Olick and Joyce Robbins, ‘Social Memory Studies: From “Collective Memory” to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices’, Annual Review of Sociology, 24 (1998), p. 125.

[4]

the UK – namely University College London’s online Legacies of British Slave Ownership project – and even here it has been restricted to an academic rather than public-historical context.9 Perhaps more immediately, Britain’s leading role in the abolition movement has largely allowed it to exonerate its previously significant role in driving the slave trade.10 This is evident, for instance, in the Wilberforce House Museum in Hull – the first UK museum dedicated entirely to slavery – which inevitably places a strong emphasis on the man himself and his abolition campaign.11 Where historical circumstances have allowed the abandonment of memory of slavery in such a way we can see that these have often been taken – both in Britain and in France, in which slavery simply forms one of a gamut of associations with the Ancien régime that the French people so strongly proclaim to disown.12 And the simple passage of time and generations has reduced the emotional demand for memorialisation from individuals and their families; a situation very different to that of, for instance, Germans remembering their losses from the Second World War, or members of pressure groups exhuming the bodies of Civil War victims in Spain.13 Direct descendants of slaves or slave traders in Britain are, quite simply, relatively few.

Hence expressions of memory of slavery have been generally limited in character and number. And – a point made by Paul Gilroy and strongly emphasised by Jacqueline Nassy Brown – there remains a tendency to view slavery as a ‘special property’ applicable only to blacks and alienable from white populations.14 When slavery is so often viewed through the lens of ‘black history’ or ‘AfricanAmerican studies’, it is little surprise that the study of its effect on whites might be marginalised.

Consequently, it is only very recently, along with the imperial turn in general British history, that the possibility of cultural effect of the imperial project upon the metropole has begun to be fully realised, here in the form of collective memory.

In this dissertation we will examine the position of slavery in the collective memory (or memories) of the city of Liverpool, and particularly how it has changed in the years since the 2007 bicentenary.

9

Legacies of British Slave Ownership (2014) [Website].

Walvin, ‘The Slave Trade, Abolition and Public Memory’, p. 141.

11 Hull City Council, ‘Slavery Collections’ (2008) [Website].

12 Christine Chivallon, ‘Bristol and the eruption of memory: Making the slave trade visible’, Social & Cultural Geography, 2 (2001), p. 350.

13 For Germany, see, for instance, Michael L. Hughes, ‘’Through No Fault of Our Own’: West Germans Remember Their War Losses’, German History, 18 (2000); for Spain, see Madeleine Davis, ‘Is Spain Recovering its Memory? Breaking the “Pacto de Olvido”’, Human Rights Quarterly, 27 (2005), and Helen Graham, ‘Coming to Terms with the Past: Spain’s Memory Wars’, History Today, 54/5 (2004).

14 Paul Gilroy, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (Cambridge, Mass., 1993), p. 49, and Jacqueline Nassy Brown, ‘Enslaving History: Narratives on Local Whiteness in a Black Atlantic Port’, American Ethnologist, 27 (2000), p. 341.

10

[5]

Liverpool provides in many ways a curious case study. On the one hand, recent scholarly works have aimed to incorporate it into the wider development of empire and, indeed, boost its significance as a leader in that development.15 But this competes with a strong tradition of ‘Liverpool exceptionalism’ that instead prefers to see the city more as socially and culturally separable from the rest of the UK.16 As the Sheryllynne Haggerty, Anthony Webster and Nicholas J. White – the editors of 2008’s seminal volume The empire in one city? Liverpool’s inconvenient imperial past – describe, ‘[a]cademic studies of the city’s history have … been preoccupied with this sense of Liverpool’s uniqueness. … Liverpool is contextualised as a port with global commercial links, especially with the Americas, an image which subtly aligns the city with notions of free trade and cosmopolitan liberality, rather than the aggression, protectionism and oppression of empire.’17 Hence Liverpool’s Atlantic identity – through what Jessica Moody describes as ‘maritimization’ – has (somewhat perversely) allowed it to escape strong association with the transatlantic slave trade that it pioneered.18 Whether this is unique to Liverpool or common to British slave cities is a debate which we will not examine here – Mary Kowaleski Wallace, for instance, has compared slavery commemorations in Liverpool and Bristol.19 But clearly the wider identity of the city is highly relevant to our discussion of even a limited aspect of its memory; not only does it directly influence the nature of this memory, it also guides the history and historiography that in turn inform the creation of new public memory.

When much of the recent historiography about slave commemorations has been undertaken on a local level by local academics,20 it is unsurprising that the lines between history, memory and identity are so blurred.

It is also important to establish here the framework of memory that will be used throughout this dissertation. It is near-impossible, of course, to discuss concepts of memory without mention of Pierre Nora’s lieux de mémoire, perhaps the dominant schema of memorialisation exported from

15

Most significantly and recently the compilation volume produced following a Liverpool conference on the subject in 2006: Sheryllynne Haggerty, Anthony Webster and Nicholas J. White (eds.), The empire in one city?

Liverpool’s inconvenient imperial past (Manchester, 2008).

16 John Belchem, Merseypride: Essays in Liverpool exceptionalism (Liverpool, 2006).

17 Sheryllynne Haggerty, Anthony Webster and Nicholas J. White, ‘Introduction: The empire in one city?’, in Haggerty, Webster and White (eds.), The empire in one city?, pp. 2-3.

18 Jessica Moody, ‘Liverpool’s Local Tints: Drowning Memory and “Maritimizing” Slavery in a Seaport City’, Little Britain’s Memory of Slavery 2013: Local Nuances of a ‘National Sin’ [Conference] (University College London, 13-14 September 2013). Quoted in Kate Donington, ‘Little Britain’s Memory of Slavery Conference’, Legacies of British Slave Ownership [Blog] (17 September 2013).

19 Mary Kowaleski Wallace, ‘Commemorating the Transatlantic Slave Trade in Liverpool and Bristol’, in Wallace, The British Slave Trade & Public Memory (New York, 2006).

20 A phenomenon discussed in Walvin, ‘The Slave Trade, Abolition and Public Memory’, pp. 142-143.

[6]

France in the 1980s and widely adopted on an international level.21 Indeed, the principal objects of examination which we will discuss here – from the museums on the Liverpool waterfront, to the songs, films and even consumable goods which contribute to daily life there – fall essentially into the category of lieux de mémoire. However it is also worth taking into account the subsequent criticism of Nora’s work, particularly that it tends to emphasise territorial national communities over both sub- and supra-national ones. We might not go so far as to suggest, as Michael Rothberg does in proposing a new model of nœuds (knots) de mémoire, that ‘in all places and acts of memory are rhizomatic networks of temporality and cultural reference that exceed attempts at territorialisation … and identitarian reduction’ (italics added);22 it is surely not unrealistic to suggest that some objects of memory are more significant (if not exclusive) to some broadly-definable groups than others. But it is certainly useful for us to dismantle the territorial aspect of Nora’s work, particularly when dealing with the overlapping racial denominations that inhabit a cosmopolitan city such as Liverpool; and to recognise the possibility that any one lieu de mémoire is not exclusive to any one community and may, indeed, mean different things to different groups. There is no single Liverpool memory (or British memory, for that matter), and we must recognise that the identities the city promotes to the communities within it, as well as to the wider world, may overlap but differ. Particularly significant in this respect, as we shall see, is the black community, which evidently has a strong association with the memory of slavery and continues to play a significant role in its maintenance.

This dissertation will examine three major themes within Liverpudlian memory related to the above discussions. These hardly form a complete picture of Liverpool memory and identity, which of course encompass a far wider range of cultural and social factors. However they do focus on three key thematic developments which have taken place since the bicentenary. The first chapter analyses the visible heritage of imperialism and slavery within the city and how lieux de mémoire have been used, adapted, and left unused to present a particular identity. Spaces such as the Liverpool One area and Albert Dock have been radically transformed following the spate of public developments since 2008 – Liverpool’s year as the European Capital of Culture – so what has been the effect of this on impressions of slavery within the city?

The second chapter focuses in on the various museums spread around the city and how these portray Liverpool’s maritime and slaving history. The museological landscape of Liverpool has

21

Pierre Nora, Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past (Chichester, 1996). English edition edited by Lawrence D. Kritzman and translated by Arthur Goldhammer.

22 Michael Rothberg, ‘Introduction: Between Memory and Memory: From Lieux de mémoire to Nœuds de mémoire’, Yale French Studies, 118/119 (2010), p. 7.

[7]

changed radically in recent years, with the creation of the International Slavery Museum (ISM) adjacent to the existing Merseyside Maritime Museum (MMM) in August 2007, and the opening of the imposing Museum of Liverpool (MoL) on the city waterfront in July 2011. How these new museums fit slavery into narratives of Liverpool history, and what effect they have had on the overall state of memory in the city, are the questions we will attempt to answer here.

Finally, the third chapter will look at Liverpool’s outward projection of itself, looking at areas from tourism to the 2008 Capital of Culture bid and its accompanying events – particularly focusing on the representation of Liverpool as a global city (or ‘The World in One City’, to use the Capital of Culture bid tagline)23 that permeates much of Liverpudlian cultural life. Through a combination of these lenses we can reveal numerous general trends and themes within Liverpool’s memory and equally, expose its flaws: for instance a recurring theme of the spatial ‘confinement’ of memory, strategically limiting the audiences of memorial sites through spatial factors so as to avoid social conflict or controversy, will become evident. Ultimately this dissertation will, through drawing together these aspects of Liverpool’s history, memory, and identity, reveal the extent to which the memory of slavery and empire in Liverpool remains highly conflicted despite evidences on the surface to indicate otherwise.

23

Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’, p. 1.

[8]

CHAPTER I The visible heritage of imperialism As discussed in the introduction, surviving heritage from the British Empire tends to be rare and tenuous in its linkage to the processes of empire. The primary surviving artefacts of the wealth derived from the British trade until 1807 tend to be country houses owned by traders and country houses and, unlike plantations, clearly have no inherent obvious association with slavery. But other remnants from imperial wealth – often, of course, derived from the continuing practice of slavery in the Americas and elsewhere – are far more commonplace. Most striking in the case of Liverpool is the waterfront, dominated by the Three Graces – which Peter De Figueiredo describes precisely as ‘symbols of empire’24 – and the Albert Dock. But less grandiose symbols of slavery and imperialism permeate city life, from road and place names to souvenirs in tourist gift shops. This chapter will examine the use of these symbols in Liverpool’s collective memory (and memories) today and what they can tell us about the position of imperialism and slavery in narratives of the city’s past.

HIDDEN DISPLAYS OF SLAVERY

Fig. 1. The frieze on the Town Hall displaying elephants, llamas, cocoa pods and an African face.25

Fig. 2. The Nelson Monument in Exchange Flags.26

There is little denying that, for the historian such as De Figueiredo, the Three Graces and dock area are powerful reminders of Liverpool’s imperial past. For the black community too – the fieldwork of sociologist Jacqueline Nassy Brown in Liverpool in the 1990s found that they were strongly associated with slavery. To quote one member of the Liverpool black community and participant in

24

Peter De Figueiredo, ‘Symbols of Empire: The Buildings of the Liverpool Waterfront’, Architectural History, 46 (2003).

25 Photograph: BBC. Sourced from BBC, ‘Abolition gallery’ [Website].

26 Photograph: National Museums Liverpool. Sourced from MMM, ‘Prisoner sculpture from the monument to Lord Nelson’ [Website].

[9]

her research (in this case referring to the Albert Dock), ‘”These buildings were built on the blood of slaves”’;27 a sentiment which Nassy Brown suggests was echoed through many of her interviews.

Indeed not only the waterfront buildings are strongly associated with slavery; St. George’s Hall and the Cultural Quarter, the Town Hall, indeed any pre-war constructions in Liverpool are treated with the same brush. Black community narratives, therefore, suggest that, in effect, slavery is the source of all Liverpool’s wealth and the sole foundation of its modern history.

Regardless of the historicity of this claim (the extent to which Liverpool was dependent on slavery is a matter still open for debate, although recent historiography has tended to downplay its role),28 the association is thus very much alive within Liverpudlian communities. Moreover, it is visually evident.

African heads, for instance, are a recurring architectural theme within many Liverpudlian buildings: the Cunard Building’s façade displays the heads of Africans to represent the source of its wealth (Fig. 1 above), and the Town Hall arrays one alongside an elephant, rhinoceros, llama and cocoa pods to show some of the trade goods passing through Liverpool’s docks (Fig. 2). Moreover, the Nelson Monument (Fig. 3) is supported by four chained figures, ostensibly French prisoners but remarkably (as several writers have pointed out) reminiscent of slaves.29 These references to slavery are hardly hidden and are dotted around many of Liverpool’s nineteenth- and early twentieth-century artifices;30 but are easy to pass by on an everyday visit to Liverpool. For instance Exchange Flags, on which Nelson’s Monument is situated behind the Town Hall, has long dropped out of use as a main thoroughfare and busy public space.31 The present-day use of the Three Graces (including the Cunard Building) further presents an obstacle to its recognition as a site of imperialism and slavery; their deployment as office space gives them little worth as a site for casual visitors or tourists. In the case of the Liver Building, the highly modernised interior – described as ‘the interface of classic and contemporary’ – strips the building of its historicity for those who frequent its inside.32 Instead, the buildings are promoted not as individual destinations but as a package – ‘the Liverpool waterfront’ – best enjoyed as part of the entire Liverpool skyline.33 From the distance of the Mersey Ferry, then, details such as African faces

27

Nassy Brown, ‘Enslaving History’, pp. 333-334.

Sheryllynne Haggerty, ‘Liverpool, the slave trade and the British-Atlantic empire, c. 1750-75’, in Haggerty, Webster and White (eds.), The empire in one city?.

29 Caryl Phillips, The Atlantic Sound (London, 2000), p. 82; MMM, ‘Prisoner sculpture’.

30 See also Zoe Dawes, ‘Liverpool’s Hidden Slavery History’, Wandering Educators [Blog].

31 Phillips, The Atlantic Sound, p. 82.

32 Royal Liver Building [Website].

33 Liverpool Waterfront [Website].

28

[10]

are unrecognisable, and instead far greater emphasis is placed on the Liver Birds themselves as the only visible iconography.

And the symbolic power of the Liver Building, while significant, now has little to do with its origins.

The bird itself is presented as far more than a symbol of imperialism, most prominently as the logo of Liverpool F.C. Of course, the idea of the bird symbolising Liverpool long predates the existence of the Liver Building; perhaps in itself this distracts from the imperial significance of the building itself.

And, as if to bring the Liver Bird well into the 21st century, brightly-coloured ceramic replicas are (at present) widely available in city gift shops alongside that ubiquitous symbol of the Capital of Culture 2008, the ceramic Superlambanana.34 By presenting the Liver Bird alongside the Superlambanana as a motif of Liverpool’s modernity and vibrancy in this way, it is entirely removed from its historic significance and that of the building it adorns.

TOPONYMY OF EMPIRE Across a wider area, road names too are a common signifier of Liverpool’s slaving past. The Museum of Liverpool and International Slavery Museum both contain displays listing those streets in the city which are named after or have close links to slave traders; Penny Lane, Manesty’s Lane, Tarleton Street, Bold Street and Rodney Street, for just a few examples, are all named after prominent slavers and anti-abolitionists. However, as with the architectural symbology above, these are ‘hidden’ histories – without historical pointers for guidance, there is no reason for audiences to deduce any substantial historical meaning from the road names at all. Significantly, there are no plaques to mark any of these slave traders or where they lived; the only mention of slaving in any Liverpudlian plaque refers to the lionised abolitionist William Roscoe.35 Thus – Penny Lane, with its eponymous Beatles hit, being an ideal example – contemporary associations have largely overtaken historical ones. And, with the displays contained within the museums, only a limited number of enthusiasts who are already interested in the topic are likely to discover these historical connections; especially through the interactive screen in the ISM in which these road names are documented.

A 2006 proposal to rename these streets after abolitionists rather than anti-abolitionists – comparable to mass renamings in countries such as Spain36 – was rejected on the grounds that history should not be ‘”airbrushed”’. Indeed abolitionists such as Roscoe are already substantially

34

Super Lambanana: The Official Website, ‘Liverbird’.

OpenPlaques.org, ‘Liverpool’ [Website]. Roscoe has even been described as the ‘father of Liverpool culture’: David Alton, ‘The Life of William Roscoe – father of Liverpool Culture’, Davidalton.net [Blog].

36 Fernando Sánchez-Costa, ‘Los mapas de la memoria. Nombres de calles y políticas de memoria en Barcelona y Madrid’, Hispania Nova, 9 (2009).

35

[11]

and publically memorialised, in his case especially through a number of plaques and the Roscoe Memorial Gardens on Mount Pleasant. However the failure to adequately publicise the slaving origins of the above road names suggests that, rather than aiming to preserve the memory of slavery in Liverpool, the city council would rather let it slide into obscurity; a controversy over renaming would, above all, have brought the issues surrounding the memory of slavery back into public discussion. At present, only the Goree on the waterfront (labelled after the island off Senegal through which slaves were traded) retains a name that is distinct enough to suggest a foreign or African origin; all the others are passable as generic English street names and for this reason can hardly be said to present an active site of memorialisation.

‘DEHISTORICISING’ SPACE Perhaps most significantly on a large scale, the radical urban transformation of Liverpool in times since the heyday of empire have allowed the removal of large ‘historic’ areas and sites which would otherwise present opportunities for memorialisation. The obliteration of the Old Dock underneath what is now Liverpool ONE certainly removes a major memorial site as far as slavery is concerned; now only one wall of the dock is visible below Thomas Steers Way, accompanied by a somewhat biased information board describing the ‘great vision’ shown in making Liverpool one of the world’s ‘greatest’ ports.37 Likewise the developments on the waterfront, including the Museum of Liverpool itself and the Echo Arena, have led to the occupation of spaces which could be powerfully used for the memorialisation of Liverpool’s maritime past.

Indeed, we can suggest that the transformation of the waterfront within the last two decades has had a radical effect on its memorial role. The addition of the MoL and other Mann Island developments has given it a newfound and substantial dose of modernity and ‘edginess’; by blending the old and new, the docks’ sense of historicity is somewhat reduced. While the official Liverpool tourist guide advises visitors to ‘drink in some of the history’ whilst walking around the docks,38 this is of course considerably more difficult when so many of the buildings are, simply, new.

Furthermore, the redevelopment of the Albert Dock into a high-end restaurant and clubbing scene, alongside the neighbouring Echo Arena and Big Wheel, has considerably changed its overall flavour from a potential site of reflection and memory to a hubbub of activity with little time for the former.

Regardless of the existence of the Merseyside Maritime Museum and International Slavery Museum within the dock’s buildings, this ‘dehistoricisation’ of the entire dock space and of its connotations

37 38

Grosvenor, ‘The Old Dock’ [Information board].

VisitLiverpool.com, ‘Liverpool: The Official Tourist Board Guide’, p. 5.

[12]

represents the loss of what could effectively be a walk-in slavery memorial site. Instead, this role is relegated to the small and neglected Canning Dock nearby, with its few slavery signposts operated by the Maritime Museum. The Albert Dock is promoted as a site of ‘Great Days Out’, not one of history, learning, or mourning.39 Ultimately, the complete transformations of Liverpool’s public space throughout the twentieth century have forced it to lose touch with its past to a certain extent; the redevelopments in the last decade, and especially following the Capital of Culture year, have only continued this trend.

However the creation of Liverpool ONE, an entirely ahistorical shopping and entertainment district, and the concomitant changes in the Albert Dock, have led to the creation of a city centre that is more or less devoid of history, with the possible (and well-hidden) exception of the Bluecoat Chambers. This shift in the city’s centre of gravity contributes to a more modern, commercialised, gentrified, and optimistic Liverpudlian identity; but it also distances it from its maritime and imperial past. Indeed Liverpool’s public memory is increasingly contained within its museums, a theme which will be discussed in the next chapter of this dissertation.

MONUMENTALISING SLAVERY Liverpool, like most slaving cities, has hardly been proactive in creating memorial sites for slavery.

There is some national and international precedent for the monumentalisation of slavery; the newlyrestored Lincoln statue in Manchester commemorates the role of the Lancashire textile cities in supporting the Union during the American Civil War, while statues of abolitionists are commonplace in their places of birth or work.40 Nantes in France has the most significant monument to abolition, consisting of a 400-metre walkway underneath the city’s quayside depicting ‘humanity’s long combat against slavery.’41 But these are monuments to abolition, not to slavery; this subtle difference allows the elimination of contentious and uncomfortable slaving memories in favour of a unifying anti-slaving narrative. Viewers to these monuments are addressed as the heritors of a tradition of abolition, one diametrically opposed to the existence of slavery. In this sense, monuments to abolition are in fact harmful to the complete remembrance of the process of slavery itself; ‘true’ remembrance, both here and for Germans dealing with the memory of the Holocaust, requires an acceptance of complicity.42

39

Albert Dock [Website].

English Heritage, ‘Commemorative Structures, Memorials and Statues: Abolition of Slavery’ [Website].

41 nantes.tourisme, ‘The Memorial to the Abolition of Slavery’ [Website].

42 Robert G. Moeller, ‘Germans as Victims?: Thoughts on a post-Cold War history of World War II’s Legacies’, History and Memory, 17 (2005).

40

[13]

Hence a handful of cities have constructed monuments to commemorate and mourn the slave trade itself. Amsterdam leads the way with its Slavernijmonument in the prominent Oosterpark, a tripartite sculpture encompassing both slavery itself and the abolition movement.43 Successful initiatives in the UK have generally been privately rather than publically funded: Lancaster, most prominently, has established a permanent slavery memorial entitled ‘Captured Africans’ on its quay.

A charity named Memorial 2007 similarly aims to set up a memorial artwork of national significance in Hyde Park, though has yet to raise the necessary funding.44 Of course there is currently no equivalent in Liverpool, nor any plans to create such a memorial in the city centre. However an upcoming regeneration of Toxteth promises the construction of an ‘African Garden of Remembrance’ in commemoration of the slaves buried in St. James’ Church.45 While this is evidently a significant step towards the remembrance of slavery in Liverpool as a whole, the location in Toxteth – also known as Liverpool 8, and the primary home of the Liverpudlian black and minority ethnic communities – suggests that its level of engagement with whites and tourists will be limited.

Indeed it suggests that the memorial’s primary target audience is the Toxteth black community. Of course it is the black community from which the strongest demands for slavery memorialisation have arisen – as we have seen in the work of Jacqueline Nassy Brown – but this separation of black memorial spaces from white ones implies that this new monument falls well short of the confrontation with the past that is necessary for whites to fully incorporate it into their narratives of the past. Lancaster and Nantes’s slavery memorials are located on their quays, the very sites of the history they recall, while Amsterdam’s is in a prominent location in a public park; the relegation of Liverpool’s to Toxteth clearly indicates its limited purpose in addressing the black community but not the white.

We might suggest that the International Slavery Museum is Liverpool’s more substantial answer to these memorials, given its prime central location, and the memory culture promoted through this museum will be analysed in the next chapter. But it goes without saying that a museum is not a monument. Effective monuments, with their generally commemorative and/or mourning purposes, bring a sense of personal connection and responsibility to the audience; a museum, on the other hand, presents histories as fixed and impersonal. A museum presents history behind a glass box. So in terms of emotional impact, it is difficult for the ISM to compete with, say, the Holocaust Memorial

43

I amsterdam, ‘Slavernijmonument (Slavery monument)’ [Website].

Memorial 2007 [Website].

45 Marc Waddington, ‘£45m Toxteth regeneration to include UK’s first slave trade victims memorial’, Liverpool Echo (13 March 2012).

44

[14]

in Berlin,46 or Auschwitz itself, precisely because of its historical, rather than memorial, emphasis. A sense of distance, between the present and ‘history’, rather than one of connection, is predominant.

CONCLUSIONS This chapter has suggested, then, how the casual visitor or resident of Liverpool with no particular interest in slavery would find it easy to miss the visible signs and remnants of it that are scattered around the city. While architectural and toponymic signifiers of slavery are omnipresent around the city, they are generally subtle enough not to demand attention from the passer-by, and can barely function as lieux de mémoire without the assistance of a tour guide, local historian, or museum interactive display. Moreover, redevelopment has destroyed vast swathes of historic space and revitalised Liverpool’s historic identity into a commercialised modern one. The failure to (as of yet) replace any of these obliterated memorial spaces has led to a containment effect in which the only signposted visible memory of slavery is enclosed within the city museums, or else that these memories are only signposted from within those museums. By association with the museum scenario, they are thus reduced to alienable figures of ‘history’ rather than sites of active memory to which people can relate.

And the Toxteth case provides a further example of the power of space in affecting memory cultures. Again we can suggest that the memory of slavery has been contained and parcelled off to the black community in Toxteth, and thus divorced from the ‘white’ historical narrative experienced by the majority of inhabitants and visitors to Liverpool city centre. Here, then, the Liverpool city council can claim to have created a slavery memorial to satisfy these demands, whilst avoiding the controversy of placing it in a site in which it will conflict with pre-existing memory cultures. This is comparable to the situation in France, where the national monument in the Jardin de Luxembourg is stripped of its power simply by being lost in a ‘sculpture-park hell’, outstripped by more famous monuments in the same gardens and thereby reduced to a forgettable secondary role.47 Neither of these succeeds in fully confronting the perpetrator audience as a result of spatial considerations separating them from mainstream narratives. This ‘confinement’ of memory, a recurring theme throughout this chapter, will be further discussed in the next within the context of the major museological developments in Liverpool.

46 47

Christian Saehrendt, ‘Holocaust Memorial. Berlin’, The Burlington Magazine, 147 (2005).

Alan Rice, ‘Monuments and memorials’, Revealing Histories: Remembering Slavery [Website].

[15]

CHAPTER II The confinement of memory The representation of slavery within Liverpool’s museums has expanded massively in the years since the bicentennial of abolition. Until 1991, there was little recognition of slavery as a subject worthy of stressing in its own right within any Liverpool museum; instead, it was only given limited coverage within the narrative of the city’s wider maritime history presented in the Merseyside Maritime Museum (MMM). This coverage was panned in the 1989 Gifford Report,48 and retrospectively described by the curator as ‘woefully inadequate’.49 Hence in 1991 the Peter Moores Foundation’s offer to fund a new Transatlantic Slavery gallery (notably, the initiating drive came from the Foundation rather than within the museum) was well received, and this gallery opened in December of that year. In 2007, the Transatlantic Slavery gallery was closed and replaced with the enlarged International Slavery Museum (ISM), though this retained its location on the third floor of the MMM and remains mostly unsignposted on the building itself (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. The front entrance of the Merseyside Maritime Museum and International Slavery Museum. The ISM is notably unmarked.50

Fig. 2. The Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Building, with the present ISM visible behind it on the right.51

With exhibition and museum spaces remaining in their current location, the ISM plans to extend its operations into the neighbouring Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Building (bought and renamed by the umbrella organisation National Museums Liverpool in 2012; previously the Dock Traffic Office

48

Lord Gifford, Wally Brown and Ruth Bundey, Loosen the Shackles: First Report of the Liverpool 8 Inquiry into Race Relations in Liverpool (London, 1989). Cited in Anthony Tibbles, ‘Against human dignity: the development of the Transatlantic Slave Gallery at Merseyside Maritime Museum’ (1996).

49 Tibbles, ‘Against human dignity’.

50 Author’s photo.

51 Author’s photo.

[16]

Building. Fig. 2 above) to create ‘education and community spaces; a theatre, a family history centre, research facilities and a collections centre.’52 These, along with the imposing new waterfront Museum of Liverpool (MoL. Fig. 3 below), form the trio of Liverpool history museums which we will examine here. The World Museum, by far Liverpool’s oldest museum opened in its current location in 1860, will not be included here due to its entirely extrospective focus – instead this chapter will focus particularly on the shifts in memory that these new museums represent, and on the roles they have played within the communities of modern Liverpool. In fact it will be argued here that the development of the MoL and ISM indicate far from a complete incorporation of the city’s slaving past into a coherent narrative – as, on the outset, the sheer existence of the ISM would appear to suggest – and instead reveal a continuation of the theme of spatial ‘confinement’ of memory as exposited in the previous chapter.

Fig. 4. The MoL’s central foyer space.54

Fig. 3. The Museum of Liverpool as viewed from the ISM, with the Liver Buildings visible in the background.53

In effect the memory of slavery has here, once again, been carefully positioned in a way that satisfies particular and sectional demands for memorialisation whilst largely avoiding the issue of how to place it in a larger usable narrative or cause substantial introspection into the city’s past. The opening of the International Slavery Museum (ISM) on 23 August 2007 took place on that year’s Slavery Remembrance Day as defined by UNESCO in 1998. As will be demonstrated here, this is exemplary of the strongly international outlook of the ISM that largely serves to conceal Liverpool’s driving role in the slave trade. The relationship between the subject matter and geographical remit of each museum is illuminating; while the Museum of Liverpool is able to flexibly represent any area

52

ISM, ‘Future Plans’. Dr Richard Benjamin, ‘Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Building’.

Author’s photo.

54 Photograph: Mills Media Limited. Sourced from Rowan Moore, ‘Museum of Liverpool – Review’, The Observer (24 July 2011).

53

[17]

or form of history in its narratives of the city’s past, the International Slavery Museum diverts attention from Liverpool’s own culpability by placing it in a global context. Furthermore, the existence of a slavery museum separate from the MoL has allowed the history (and horrors) of slavery to be largely divorced from the overall narrative of Liverpool’s past, or at least its role within it minimised. And the development of the ISM into a more generalised black history museum and centre for Liverpool’s black community has further isolated it from white or mainstream collective memory.

THE MUSEUM OF LIVERPOOL The Museum of Liverpool, with its imposing position on the city waterfront in the centre of the UNESCO World Heritage Site, is undoubtedly the intended centrepiece of Liverpudlian memory. Yet, as discussed in the first chapter of this dissertation, its façade is stunningly modern, particularly when contrasted with the Three Graces (including the Liver Buildings) and the docks that straddle it from either side. While there is a subtle reference to trading ships in the design of the building,55 it is hardly self-evident to the majority of visitors, and is mentioned in neither the museum website nor guidebook.56 Similarly the interior space is vast, white and minimalistic (Fig. 4 above). In terms of visual design and hence initial impression upon the visitor, the Museum of Liverpool looks forward far more than it looks towards the past. In this respect it is starkly different from the World Museum, with its neoclassical façade in the historic William Brown Street, and the Maritime Museum situated in the Albert Dock building. The MoL, along with the neighbouring Mann Island developments, forms a surprising island of modernity within the historic waterfront; hence the recent threat by UNESCO to revoke the docklands’ World Heritage status as a result of its construction.57 The other museums flow into their historic surroundings; the MoL sticks out from them.

On a similar theme, upon approaching the museum one is greeted not by ancient symbols or artefacts, but by a row of miniature Superlambananas (Fig. 5). The original Superlambanana was created by Japanese artist Taro Chiezo in 1998 and, although it had ostensibly become a ‘Liverpool icon’ before 2008, it was only with the Capital of Culture celebrations in that year that it became a city-wide phenomenon through the Go Superlambananas! Exhibition that saw 120 miniatures displayed across the Merseyside area.58 As with the design of the Museum of Liverpool, there is a

55

ArchDaily, ‘Museum of Liverpool / 3XN’ (18 July 2011) [Blog].

Museum of Liverpool [Website]. Museum of Liverpool, Guide to your visit [Booklet].

57 BBC News, ‘Liverpool’s heritage status ‘in danger’, Unesco warns’ (26 June 2012).

58 BBC, ‘Superlambanana’ [Video]. BBC, ‘Superlambananas on Parade’ [Video].

56

[18]

veiled reference to Liverpool’s history – namely its historic wool and banana trades59 – but this is overridden by the more prominent and poignant contemporary reference to the issue of genetically modified food. Furthermore, the miniature Superlambananas’ designs by local businesses and educational groups root them firmly in the present and future rather than the past.

Fig. 5. Superlambananas arrayed outside the entrance to the Museum of Liverpool.60 The museum itself is divided into six major exhibits over its three floors: ‘Global City’ and ‘The Great Port’ on the ground, ‘History Detectives’ and ‘Liverpool Overhead Railway’ on the first floor, and ‘The People’s Republic’ and ‘Wondrous Place’ on the second. There are also two large educational areas, a ‘Little Liverpool’ area for children, and a café and gift shop. Certainly the museum’s significant attempt at community engagement is evident here; also through the ‘City Soldiers’ exhibition that deals with the King’s Regiment and hence provides a bridge into the realm of family history. The other exhibits clearly reflect the ‘working-class underdog’ tradition in Liverpudlian identity;61 ‘The People’s Republic’ for instance includes a reconstruction of 1870s slum housing in the Scotland Road area and a display on the theme of unemployment in Merseyside, whilst ‘The Great Port’ includes sections on the ‘Dock People’ who worked there.62 Furthermore, perhaps linked to this, or due to a lack of surviving exhibit material, there is relatively little mention of any of Liverpool’s history before the industrial revolution, or indeed before 1807.

Hence Liverpool’s complicity in slavery is given relatively little space for manoeuvre. However, as reviewers pointed out soon after the museum’s opening,63 it is even neglected in those spaces where it played a crucial role, such as in ‘Global City’ where opportunities for its inclusion are 59

Super Lambanana: The Official Website, ‘History’. http://www.superlambanana.eu/history.html. Acc: 28 Feb 2014 60 Author’s photo.

61 Belchem, Merseypride.

62 MoL, Dock People – working on the waterfront [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

63 Moore, ‘Museum of Liverpool – Review’. Emma King, ‘Museum of Liverpool Review’, Emma King Consultancy [Blog].

[19]

evident. Indeed, the entire issue of slavery is only afforded one information panel tucked away from the gallery entrance, with a small box at the bottom telling visitors: ‘For more information about Liverpool’s involvement in transatlantic slavery and Africa visit the International Slavery Museum.’64 Elsewhere, references to the slave trade tend to be outweighed by the positive aspects of the development of the black community and of Liverpudlian culture. One panel states that ‘Liverpool’s role in [the slave] trade helped create an African American population that would contribute to every aspect of life in the USA’, and subsequently that ‘Black music, and rock ‘n’ roll, inspired Liverpool musicians like the Beatles’.65 Liverpool’s black community is celebrated along with a number of ‘Liverpool Firsts’, and pictures of this early community on interactive screens are notably not accompanied by pictures of slaves.66 It is, of course, unfair to decry this exhibit as brazen apologia for slavery – but it is certainly effective in minimising its atrocities and stressing the positive developments that are subtly, if not overtly, associated with it. Indeed the primary response of the Global City gallery towards transatlantic issues seems to be to avoid them: the vast majority of the gallery focuses instead on Liverpool’s relationship with China, various objects of Chinese origin, and again, the creative output of Liverpool’s Chinese community.

THE INTERNATIONAL SLAVERY MUSEUM In order to understand the International Slavery Museum, we must look back at the circumstances of its foundation. Even from the outset of the planning of the original Transatlantic Slavery gallery, the significance of the black community was recognised – an advisory committee was formed comprising members of the Peter Moores Foundation and National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside (the precursor to the modern umbrella organisation, National Museums Liverpool) along with members of the black community from Liverpool and elsewhere.67 Tony Tibbles, past Director of the MMM, describes that upon initial public consultations, ‘In general there was suspicion of an institution which was seen to have a poor record of addressing Black issues and Black concerns suddenly undertaking a project so central to the history of Black people.’68 Hence the ISM has always maintained a role as a key centre of Liverpool’s black community; significantly a community which defines itself as a diaspora and identifies strongly with black ‘homelands’ elsewhere. In this, of course, Britain’s black population differs significantly from that of the Americas and Africa, from

64

MoL, The Transatlantic Slave Trade [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, Atlantic Exchange [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

66 MoL, Dock People – working on the waterfront [Display board].

67 Tibbles, ‘Against human dignity’.

68 Tibbles, ‘Against human dignity’.

65

[20]

whom they consciously derive cultural influence.69 So it is little surprise that one of the Merseyside African Council’s prime criticisms of the Transatlantic Slavery gallery should be that it fails to adequately represent the output of African cultures untouched by European influence.

As a result, the first of the three galleries within the ISM – ‘Life in West Africa’ – does not really deal with slavery at all. Instead it provides a mish-mash of African objects assorted into cases such as ‘African music’, ‘African masks’ and ‘African sculpted figures’, along with a model African house. The inclusion of general African elements is justified as follows by the panel that introduces the gallery: ‘The story of transatlantic slavery is a fundamental and tragic human story that must be told and retold, and never be forgotten.

Africa and its peoples are central to this story.

This section of the museum explores some threads in the complex weave of Africa’s history.’70 On the wall opposite these there is an exhibition space, presently a display on the Toxteth riots of 1981; only the intervening divider in the centre of this room contains assorted quotes on the topic of slavery and extolling the virtues of freedom.

This is a recurrent theme also in the third gallery of the ISM on the subject of the ‘Legacy’ of slavery, which includes displays on racism and the Ku Klux Klan, and the ‘Black Achievers Wall’ featuring the faces of inspirational black people from all over the globe:71 the intensity of the demand for the museum to function as a community centre for Liverpool’s black population – a demand of course intensified by the growing trend within museology towards a communitarian outlook72 – has served to effectively commute it from a museum about slavery to one that exclusively serves the purposes of this black diaspora. For a museum that nominally aims to expose the issue of ‘International Slavery’ – of all kinds and in all places, not just the transatlantic kind – its remit is thus significantly limited and altered.

And by catering primarily to a black community audience, the power of the ISM to challenge and provoke a response from white audiences is significantly limited. Linked to the point raised by Paul Gilroy and discussed above in the introduction to this dissertation, this can only strengthen the idea

69

Paul Gilroy, There Ain’t no Black in the Union Jack (Abingdon, 2002), p. 154, cited in Wallace, The British Slave Trade & Public Memory, pp. 13-14.

70 ISM, Life in West Africa [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

71 ISM, ’List of Black Achievers’ [Website].

72 Bonnie Pitman, ‘Muses, Museums, and Memories’, Daedalus, 128 (1999), pp. 1-2.

[21]

of slavery as a uniquely black ‘property’; not only is the enslavement of other peoples across the world brushed over, but so is the part played by white Europeans in the transatlantic slave trade.

When so much of the text is written in the passive voice to draw emphasis to the suffering of slaves, the role of the perpetrators is inevitably underplayed.

It is to the museums credit that it does display the misery of slavery in considerable detail. Display cases show the circumstances in which transatlantic slaves worked alongside the chains and tools with which they were abused, and a graphic film provides an opportunity for visitors to learn about these in more depth. However what is strikingly absent is any detail of Liverpool’s role in this trade – the one panel entitled ‘Liverpool: capital of the transatlantic slave trade’ does little more than regurgitate the same information that is available in the Museum of Liverpool.73 Elsewhere reference is made only to ‘Europeans’, or else slaving crimes are described in the passive voice as described above;74 a prominent panel on the Scramble for Africa features a map highlighting a full range of implicated European countries (from which, curiously, at the moment, the British Isles seem to have been removed).75 The only place in which further information relating specifically to Liverpool’s role in the slave trade is several screens into one interactive panel, on which a number of slaving disasters across the globe are listed including the 1781 Zong massacre perpetrated by a Liverpool-based slaving syndicate.

Considering the well-established historiographical significance of the Zong case, it is remarkable that it doesn’t receive any great attention within the ISM, even as a case study of wide-scale abuses.76 Furthermore, the choice of UNESCO’s Slavery Remembrance Day as the opening date of the museum (a date that originated from the 1791 revolution in Haiti), the repeated celebration of this date on site,77 and the renaming of the new building after Martin Luther King Jr. further indicate the perennially international outlook of the ISM and a reluctance to contribute to any specifically Liverpudlian historical narrative.

In effect, then, the existence and nature of an International Slavery Museum allows Liverpool to avoid serious reflection on its own part in the atrocities of slavery through this medium. While the prioritisation of the Liverpudlian black community in the conception of the ISM has reduced its ostensibly ‘international’ remit to transatlantic slavery alone, it has not succeeded in turning the

73

ISM, Liverpool: capital of the transatlantic slave trade [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

74 For instance, ISM, Why Africans? and Why slavery? [Display boards]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

75 ISM, Scramble for Africa [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

76 Jeremy Krikler, ‘The Zong and the Lord Chief Justice’, History Workshop Journal, 64 (2007), p. 30.

77 ISM, ‘Slavery Remembrance Day’ [Website].

[22]

spotlight on Liverpool to any real degree. Moreover, the emphasis on black suffering has pushed any consideration of the perpetrators to the sidelines. Any visitor following the sign from the Museum of Liverpool, to ‘find out more’ about Liverpool’s role in the slave trade at the ISM, will inevitably be disappointed.

CONCLUSIONS The planned expansion of the ISM may, of course, radically change these perceptions – however, the emphasis on community engagement within the expansion plans suggests otherwise if they continue on the same trajectory as described above. Of course we must insert the important caveat that the ISM does represent a massive step towards reconciliation over slavery relative to anything that has come before. It is the first museum in the UK to focus (at least ostensibly) on pre-abolition slavery; Hull’s Wilberforce House Museum, as mentioned above, focuses primarily on abolition, whilst abolition does not significantly feature in the ISM. Plus the museum is undeniably popular, with an annual visitor count of around 450 000 (clearly a respectable figure considering the museum’s relative under-promotion and when compared to the MoL’s average of 810 000 and the World Museum’s average of 721 000 in the last three years).78 As with the celebrations surrounding the 2007 bicentenary, we can assume that the ISM will engender debate and reflection at a higher rate than before, and it is this didactic process on which other reviews have tended to focus.79 But, as suggested above, the displays in the present MoL and ISM do not address Liverpool’s history of slavery to any substantial degree, and are thus indicative of the issues and conflicts that continue to surround public representations of this contentious memory.

78

NML, ‘Visitors to our venues’ [Website].

For instance, Rachael Gore, ‘The International Slavery Museum, National Museums Liverpool’, Journal of Museum Ethnography, 22 (2009); and Nikki Spalding, ‘Learning to Remember Slavery at the Museum: School Field-Trips, Difficult Histories and Shifting Historical Consciousness’, [PhD Thesis] (Newcastle University, 2012).Mary Kowaleski Wallace, ‘Commemorating the Transatlantic Slave Trade in Liverpool and Bristol’, in Wallace, The British Slave Trade & Public Memory (New York, 2006), deals with the Transatlantic Slavery gallery in a similar manner .

79

[23]

CHAPTER III Identity and the ‘global city’ ‘Global city’, ‘the world in one city’, ‘world city’, ‘maritime mercantile city’, ‘the city that rocked the world’ – all phrases that have been used, in various contexts, to describe the city of Liverpool within the last few years.80 A wide range of organisations have sought to emphasise Liverpool’s diversity, global connections, and international nature, to the extent that this now constitutes a large part of the city’s identity, especially against other British cities such as Manchester and Birmingham and ‘Englishness’ in general.81 As we have seen, the first gallery which the visitor to the Museum of Liverpool is drawn to visit is that of the ‘Global City’, one which emphasises the variety of Liverpool’s ethnic communities and the strength of its ties to distant cities. And far more than historic ties are emphasised here. One display features a range of objects exchanged between high schools in Liverpool and Shanghai, from a Xiangqi board to a CD copy of Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon;82 hence the capacity of both port cities as nodes of cultural transmission is reaffirmed, not just in the present but also, by the means of children, for the future. The Superlambanana itself – as its tagline describes, ‘Conceived in Japan, Made in England’ – is a further powerful symbol of how global connections, particularly with the Far East, have been used as a marker of a vibrant and ‘edgy’ future for Liverpool.83 As writers such as John Belchem have suggested, the advent of globalism of this sort on a large scale in Liverpool is a recent (largely 21st century) phenomenon and coincides with the period of economic growth and optimism, in contrast with the greater racial tensions of the 1980s and early 1990s.84 The creation of the Toxteth 1981 display within the International Slavery Museum – as we have seen, the only section of the museum to substantially relate to Liverpool directly – is indicative of Liverpudlians’ enthusiasm to put this period of history behind them.85 The supportive public response to the murder of Huyton teenager Anthony Walker in 2005 may also be an early marker for this trend.86 Certainly civic rhetoric, such as the bid for the 2008 Capital of Culture which we will examine below, leaves little indication of the cultural scars that characterise Liverpool’s history and

80

Respectively in Liverpool City Council, ‘Our Vision and Aims’ [Website]; Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’, p. 1; John Belchem, ‘Liverpool: World City’, History Today, 57 (2007); UNESCO, ‘Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City’ [Website]; and Peter Guy, ‘The City that Rocked the World: Philharmonic Hall, Liverpool’, Getintothis (2 August 2013) [Blog].

81 John Belchem, Merseypride: Essays in Liverpool exceptionalism (Liverpool, 2006), pp. xxx-xxxi.

82 MoL, Life at Bile High School in Luwan District, Shanghai [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

83 Super Lambanana: The Official Website.

84 Belchem, Merseypride, pp. xxviii-xxix.

85 ISM, Toxteth 1981 [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

86 Jermaine Haughton, ‘Anthony Walker: A Life that Left a Legacy’, The Voice (30 July 2013).

[24]

instead presents a far more harmonious cosmopolitan picture of the city.87 However, as we shall see, examination of Liverpool’s memory cultures also reveals the patchy and opportunistic nature of the deployment of memory in affirming international connections, and presents a more multifaceted impression of Liverpool’s identity on the global stage.

LIVERPOOL’S PLACE IN THE WORLD The globalistic nature of the Capital of Culture bid and celebrations of 2008 can, of course, be in part attributed to necessity; in order to win a bid that requires its entrants to demonstrate ‘the role they have played in European culture, their links with Europe, their European identity’, a city must inevitably present itself as such regardless of the reality on the ground.88 While Liverpool’s links with Europe are perhaps a weaker aspect of its historical narrative – which is reflected in the fact that, as we shall see, relatively few of the 2008 events were directly related to European culture or history – it also uses its global ambitions to compare itself to Europe as a whole in a wider context.89 The capital of culture bid, indeed, describes Liverpool as a ‘microcosm’ of Europe, ‘built on the foundations of imperialism, economic migration and the Industrial Revolution and looking to survive, thrive and transform in a new international context.’90 The extent to which the bid report fails to draw more substantial links with Europe is indicative, in fact, of how strongly Liverpool’s ambitions lie elsewhere. The one well-established link on which the report is able to draw is its twin city status with Cologne, yet no events related to Cologne took place in 2008 and the 60th anniversary of the twinning agreement in 2012 went almost entirely unnoticed in Liverpool itself.91 Otherwise, it reflects only on the parallel of ‘regeneration’ between Liverpool, the new EU member states, and Europe as a whole. Far greater emphasis is laid on the concept of ‘the World in One City’, derived from Liverpool’s Irish, Chinese and African communities.

What links with Europe were made in 2008 were hinged far more on the future than on the past. La Machine, the visual centrepiece of the 2008 celebrations and, as Lyn Gardner suggests, ‘which for many Liverpudlians will be their only exposure to the Capital of Culture programme’, is, as the name suggests, distinctly French – yet there is absolutely no reference to the past in this mechanical display and accompanying light show. Tellingly, the 2012 ‘sequel’, ‘Sea Odyssey: Giant Spectacular’,

87

Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’.

European Commission, ‘European Capital of Culture, Selection Criteria’ (2013) [Website].

89 Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’.

90 Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’, p. 101.

91 Marc Waddington, ‘Liverpool to celebrate 60 years of friendship with Cologne with series of events’, Liverpool Echo (4 January 2012).

88

[25]

whilst again deploying a French company, focused its narrative instead on the sinking of the Titanic and the tale of a Merseyside family who were affected: evidently an Atlantic, not European, tale.92

Fig. 1. La Machine.93 Indeed, the claiming of the memory of the Titanic for Liverpool is a phenomenon evident in the museums, with the Maritime Museum’s major exhibition demonstrating Liverpool’s ‘central role’ in the affair.94 The on-going conversion of the former White Star Line headquarters into a Titanicthemed hotel indicates how this memory has been both co-opted by Liverpool and commercialised despite tenuous historical links.95 Indeed, the Titanic episode fits strongly into Liverpudlian historical narratives in a number of ways: through emphasising maritime and transatlantic connections, and the common trope of Liverpudlian self-pity, as well as through the sheer commercial and touristic power of the 1997 blockbuster film.

Even on a global scale, the connections which Liverpool chooses to represent are revealing. The Titanic, with its associations of New York Gilded Age opulence,96 is acceptable or encouraged; but notably bridges with the American south are largely burned. While memories of the Confederate States of America (and particularly its symbology, such as the Dixie flag) are still highly contested in the USA and even retain an element of international ‘chic’,97 there is little remnant of them in Liverpool despite the city’s extensive southern connections. For instance, the ‘Confederate Embassy’ in Rumford Place is almost entirely forgotten except by a limited number of local history enthusiasts;

92

Lyn Gardner, ‘Sea Odyssey – review’, The Guardian (22 April 2012).

Photograph: Christopher Thormond. Sourced from Lyn Gardner, ‘La machine’, The Guardian (8 September 2008).

94 MMM, ‘Titanic and Liverpool: the untold story’ [Website].

95 BBC News, ‘Restored Titanic headquarters opens in Liverpool’ (1 March 2014).

96 Stephen Brown, Pierre McDonagh and Clifford J. Shultz II, ‘Titanic: Consuming the Myths and Meanings of an Ambiguous Brand’, Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (2013).

97 See, for instance, Jonathan I. Leib, Gerald R. Webster and Roberta H. Webster, ‘Rebel with a cause?

Iconography and public memory in the Southern United States’, GeoJournal, 52 (2000); Matthew Yglesias, ‘Confederate chic’, The Atlantic (2 August 2007); Eliott C. McLaughlin, ‘Kanye West co-ops Confederate flag: Publicity stunt or way to prompt debate?’, CNN (6 November 2013).

93

[26]

the buildings are named after CSA-related figures but otherwise there is little suggestion of this site’s historical importance.98 Liverpool’s role in the Civil War is at present only kept alive through the ‘Liverpool in the American Civil War’ gallery at the Merseyside Maritime Museum, which is noticeably reluctant to divulge which side Liverpool in fact supported.99 As we can see, then, Liverpool’s portrayal of itself as a global city is far from monotone. Instead it would be reasonable to suggest that the city – or, at least, the civic government – stresses primarily those historic communities with which it has economic interest in emphasising ties and common memories. In the museums, this is most evident through the Global City display on Shanghai; also through the various festivals and activities of 2008 that highlight historic ties to Ireland, the USA, and the growing power of Latin America.100 Yet the Somali and Yemeni communities – two of the oldest in Liverpool which are used as exemplary in the 2008 bid report – remain entirely unrepresented in the series of events and have no mention whatsoever in the Museum of Liverpool.

THE MARITIMISATION OF HISTORY We can equally, however, tie this subtle selection of nationalities to Liverpool’s wider identity, particularly its sense of itself as a maritime power. The Global City gallery strongly links the seafaring aspects of Liverpudlian and Shanghainese life, prominently featuring a model Shantung Trader Junk in the centre room to illustrate this.101 Maritime events – most notably the Tall Ships, which return to Liverpool every few years with a particularly large celebration in 2008102 – form a significant part of the Liverpudlian public calendar. The 2013 Mersey River Festival, comprising ships from a range of European countries and accompanied by a World Music Stage, was especially effective in linking maritime culture and global heritage.103 So we can link Liverpool’s global connections with the phenomenon of ‘maritimisation’ described by Jessica Moody and discussed above in the introduction. Liverpool evidently has a strongly maritime identity, but the particular international maritime associations which it emphasises are crucial in defining the exact nature of this identity. Land connections – indeed, most of Europe – are irrelevant

98

BBC, ‘Confederates and their Liverpool connections’ (August 2002); MMM, ‘Liverpool and the American Civil War’ [Website].

100 Through the Norfolkline Liverpool Irish Festival and Irish Heritage Walking Tour, the Cornerstone Festival linking Liverpool and New York, and the Fiesta Latina respectively. See Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season in Art’, ‘A Season in Music’, ‘A Season on the Stage’, ‘A Season of Conversations and Literature’, and ‘A Season in Streets’ [Brochures].

101 MoL, Shantung Trader Junk [Display board].

102 BBC, ‘Tall Ships’ [Website].

103 Peter Guy, ‘Liverpool River Festival: Tall Ships to sail into Mersey as Pier Head gears up for waterfront spectacle’, Liverpool Echo (5 June 2013).

99

[27]

in Liverpudlian identity, a city which sees itself as ‘exceptional’ and effectively independent from its Lancashire surroundings.104 Instead, the connection with the United States transfers stereotypically American values onto Liverpool: particularly relevant, in this case, are liberalism and free trade. The link with New York, similarly, puts Liverpool on a par with this vibrant, dynamic and wealthy city; and, more subtly, aligns it away from the slave trade omnipresent in the southern United States. The widespread promotion of the episode of the Titanic is revealing: it chronologically identifies Liverpool’s transatlantic prominence with the 1910s, a period least associated with the atrocities of slavery and empire and instead a time of booming capitalism and rapidly-shifting modernity. With this icon of Liverpudlian maritime history, along with the Lusitania which takes up another substantial portion of the Merseyside Maritime Museum,105 so dominant, other contenders to shift the imagery to an earlier, more difficult period of history – such as the slave ship Zong – are brushed aside.

Similarly, Liverpool’s promotion of a relationship with Latin America, through the assorted festivals that have taken place since 2008 (most recently the Brazilica carnival in 2013),106 ties it to the predominant cultural stereotypes of that continent – we might suggest perhaps its passion, energy and sense of fun. And through association with China, Liverpool also presents itself as a city with a powerful future. Through its ethnic and international associations and unique colouring of its ‘maritime’ status, then, Liverpool secures its position in the past, present and future. Communities which cannot provide this, such as the Somalis and Yemenis, are left out.

LIVERPOOL AND MODERNITY But remarkably, for a city with over 800 years of history, there is little mention of Liverpool’s history in general in Liverpudlian tourism material. The front page of Visitliverpool.com, for instance, provides a snapshot. In the site’s tagline, for instance – ‘With its world class attractions, spectacular events, world class sport and unrivalled musical heritage, Liverpool is the ideal destination to visit and explore.’ – there is no mention of Liverpool’s history or even its UNESCO World Heritage site status.107 Instead, visitors to Liverpool are pointed towards the Hockney and Turner exhibitions at the city’s galleries; ‘Keywords’, an exhibition about the ‘vocabulary of culture and society’ in 1980s Britain; and to the 2014 Grand National. The ‘Things to do’ section heavily features the Liverpool One and Metquarter shopping areas, as well as the cathedral and the Beatles Story exhibition; the

104

Belchem, Merseypride, p. xi.

MMM, ‘Titanic, Lusitania, and the Forgotten Empress gallery’ [Website].

106 Brazilica Festival [Website].

107 VisitLiverpool.com [Website].

105

[28]

museums, for instance, are nowhere to be seen. A ‘What’s on’ calendar at the bottom of the page reinforces the focus on events rather than sites and destinations – a feature it has in common with industrial cities such as Manchester and Leeds but not with, for example, York and London108 – and thereby strengthens Liverpool’s image as a vibrant, up-to-date city rather than a historic, retrospective one. The only substantial mention of Liverpool’s history at the time of writing is in reference to the upcoming large-scale public commemoration of the First World War – Memories of August 1914 – that aims to symbolically connect that date with the present.109 Even in the ‘Things to Do’ section, one must read through several paragraphs before reaching any mention of the museums or city’s heritage. They are included, of course, but it is evident that in this medium heritage is far from the core of Liverpool’s self-image or the image it aims to promote.

The official printed tourism booklet is somewhat more encompassing of Liverpool’s past; its opening line, ‘The very name conjures up images of a world-beating musical heritage, two of the Premiership’s biggest football teams, a glorious maritime history and not one, but two majestically different Cathedrals’, demonstrates an immediate contrast with the website in which ‘maritime history’ is omitted.110 Perhaps this simply reflects its targeting at an older demographic who have a closer personal connection to the city’s history and, concomitantly, are less likely to rely on the Internet for information. However, linked to the above discussions on the de-historicisation of the Liverpool waterfront, this is only referred to for its view – described as ‘awe-inspiring’. On a similar note, the brochure recommends the guided tours of the Liverpool city centre led not by historians, but by the Royal Institute of British Architects; a clear indication of the subordination of espousing a narrative of Liverpudlian history versus the more pressing concern of expositing architectural values for the present day.

The position of football and the Beatles within Liverpudlian identity are also relevant here, since they too help to indicate Liverpool’s position with regards to the present and the past. A football identity is one that renews itself constantly through interaction with the fan base and surrounding community; hence it is a community eternally focused on the present and on the next football season.111 Thus, while ‘historic’ events such as Hillsborough no doubt have a solidifying effect on this community, they are not necessary in its formation. Instead, the success or fame of a football team is often measured in statistics of trophies or tournaments won rather than historical prestige, and

108

See Visit Manchester, Visit Leeds, VisitBirmingham, VisitYork, VisitLondon.com [Websites].

Memories of August 1914 [Website].

110 VisitLiverpool.com, ‘Liverpool: The Official Tourist Board Guide’, p. 3.

111 Adam Brown, Tim Crabbe and Gavin Mellor, ‘English Professional Football and its Communities’, International Review of Modern Sociology, 32 (2006).

109

[29]

these are timeless.112 So the significance of football in Liverpudlian identity can only serve to distract from the questions of history and heritage that we are dealing with here.

The Beatles are evidently a historical phenomenon – the Beatles Story, for instance, is described as an ‘unforgettable trip down memory lane’ by one tour operator113 – and they are deployed as a powerful symbol of 1960s Liverpool, their ‘life and times’.114 Indeed, the Beatles narrative fits in many ways into Liverpool’s identity as a working-class, ‘underdog’ city, as the Beatles Story website suggests in its opening text: ‘Be transported on an incredible journey and see how four young lads from Liverpool were propelled to the dizzy heights of fame and fortune from their humble childhood beginnings.’115 Hence Liverpool of the 1960s is equated with ‘humble lads’, a clear signifier of working-class identity. It is important to state here, as John Belchem has suggested, that it is unclear whether this working-class foundation will survive the rapid changes taking place in Liverpool’s identity as the city’s confidence and economic power increase.116 But whether Liverpool’s identity ultimately takes the form of an underdog city or a booming one starting its history afresh, there is clearly little room afforded here for the period before ‘the People’s Republic’ or even the idea of Liverpool even being powerful or successful in the past.

CONCLUSIONS The diverse evidences presented in this chapter of the dissertation illustrate above all the complexity of Liverpool’s historical identity and the ways in which this manifests itself in the Liverpool of today.

The first two sub-chapters have established how subtle associations within Liverpool’s ritual and ceremonial processes, amongst other faces of Liverpudlian memory, have contextualised what we mean by ‘maritime’ and allowed a specific set of emphases within Liverpool’s past to emerge that facilitate the omission of the city’s questionable past. And the third sub-chapter has demonstrated how tourism materials help to present a modern, ‘edgy’ image of Liverpool that reduces its dependence on the more distant past for cultural and touristic reasons even despite the UNESCO World Heritage Site status. Indeed, the fact that the city has been willing to threaten this status for the sake of constructing stunningly ‘modern’ constructions along the Waterfront further confirms how little, in the overall schema of ‘identity’, history means for Liverpool.

112

VisitLiverpool.com, ‘Liverpool: The Official Tourist Board Guide’, pp. 12-13.

Discover Travel and Tours, ‘Visit Beatles’ [Website].

114 The Beatles Story [Website]. See also Stephen Daniels, ‘Suburban pastoral: Strawberry Fields forever and Sixties memory’, Cultural Geography, 13 (2006).

115 The Beatles Story [Website].

116 Belchem, Merseypride, pp. xxviii-xxix.

113

[30]

CONCLUSIONS An unwanted history This dissertation has demonstrated, then, a range of phenomena within Liverpool’s collective memory cultures. While visual reminders of slavery are commonplace across the city, they are rarely prominent enough to demand attention; and they remain unsignposted, thus allowing them to mostly pass as ahistorical. The modernisation of spaces such as Liverpool ONE and the waterfront has significantly impacted their sense of ‘historicity’ and thereby also reduced their potential as effective memory sites. The creation of both the International Slavery Museum and the African Garden of Remembrance in Toxteth reflect the increasing demand for recognition of slavery and are, of course, welcome developments in this respect; however they too are effectively marginal forms of memory, in terms of space and in terms of racial community. There is little sign of a truly effective and challenging form of memorial for slavery in Liverpool being conceived in the near future, despite precedents set in Berlin, Amsterdam, and even neighbouring Lancaster. Paul Gilroy’s association of slavery as blacks’ ‘special property’, discussed above in the introduction, is clearly alive and thriving here.

At the same time, wider-scale trends and shifts in Liverpudlian identity and outlook have further deemphasised the role of slavery in its past. Subtle notions of what it means to be ‘maritime’ in Liverpool’s case have stressed the transatlantic values of freedom and free trade and thereby obscured the evidently ‘un-free’ phenomenon of slavery. Furthermore, a new stress on Liverpool’s relationship with China, as befitting the city’s newfound confidence and economic growth, rather than its American partners, can only lead to further neglect of the transatlantic slave trade.

Above all, a Liverpudlian identity strongly rooted in modernity or cultural ‘edginess’ naturally tends to obliterate ancient historical phenomena of all sorts, including the memory of empire. Workingclass narratives of the ‘People’s Republic’, that place Liverpool’s identity in its poverty, necessitate omission of imperial opulence and certainly of slave-trading oppression. Indeed, like the ‘People’s Republic’ gallery in the MoL, these might draw a path from the slums in Victorian Scottie Road, via ‘working-class’ cultural output such as the Beatles, to an eventual birth or rebirth from the 1990s to today. Liverpool’s imperial glory must be relegated to an ‘othered’, ‘historic’ rather than ‘memorial’ space, emotionally disconnected from the present. The Liverpool waterfront is reduced to a neutral architectural backdrop, a ‘view’, in front of which the city’s working-class identity – perhaps represented here in the iconic Gerry Marsden song, ‘Ferry Cross the Mersey’ – is played out.

The existence of the International Slavery Museum can be accredited primarily to the demands of the black community and the personal interests of individual investors, particularly Peter Moores.

[31]

The Gifford Report provided a public voice for Liverpool blacks at the same time as Nassy Brown brought their difficulties, and their intense emphasis on the memory of slavery as an essential cause of their present problems, into the awareness of academia. But the output of this process, so far the International Slavery Museum, and soon the Toxteth African Garden of Remembrance, has, as we have seen, either taken place only within already-defined black community space (in the latter case), or created a new black community space (in the former). Hence through the confinement of these memorial spaces, and the effective annihilation of those memorials pre-existing within ‘white’ space, the white community of Liverpool is barely induced to reflect upon its own past to any substantial degree. The ISM instead historicises and alienates Liverpool’s slaving past. We could even suggest that, by stressing as the ISM does that all Western maritime societies engaged in slavery, it draws attention away from the leading role that Liverpool played in its process, and the strength of opposition that the city presented to abolition; in this way, slavery is also normalised.

Of course the International Slavery Museum represents an unprecedented willingness on the part of local and national government to engage with demands for the commemoration and memorialisation of slavery, alongside the 2007 bicentennial programme in general. And it is likely that the ISM will encourage some elements of the white population to reconsider the role of slavery within their histories and, perhaps eventually engender a greater acceptance of slavery’s historical value within the mainstream Liverpool’s population. But for now, the set-up and nature of the Museum of Liverpool and International Slavery Museum strongly suggest that this has not (yet) been achieved.

It must be remembered that the failure to remember slavery is not necessarily due entirely to the unpalatability of that phenomenon alone. Most of the changes in Liverpool’s identity documented in chapter three of this dissertation have occurred due to economic factors and economic interests – including, for instance, the growing stress on relations with China – not due to the need to avoid slavery. Representations of Liverpool as a city reborn during its new period of economic growth are not intended in themselves to obliterate slavery, but they can only have a distancing effect. Indeed Liverpool’s several ‘rebirths’ – its newfound poverty after the First World War, regeneration after the Second, the era of Beatlemania, and so on – conceive the city’s imperial past as further and further from the realities of the present. As discussed above, the simple passage of time means that the transatlantic slave trade, unlike for instance the Holocaust, is rarely a pressing personal matter; rather a mythologised collective one.

Liverpool is far from unique in its willingness to distance itself from slavery. Only a handful of cities have recognised any role in it other than abolition, some through permanent memorials [32]

(Amsterdam, Lancaster) and some through public apologies. Indeed, Liverpool’s own public apology in 1999 was the first such event (London and the Church of England followed suit in 2006-7 and in Bristol there has been intense debate over doing so),117 although the irony that this apology was issued from a Town Hall adorned with carved African heads did not go unnoticed.118 Since no effort was made to memorialise slavery in any other way at the time (the development of the ISM only took place eight years later), we can perhaps suggest that accusations of ‘lipservice’ were not entirely unfounded.119 And if apologising for slavery was intended to draw a line under the issue it evidently failed; the vehemence with which Liverpool’s black community has taken slavery to heart as the cause of all their problems suggests that the only way slavery will be ever fully removed from Liverpool’s political agenda will be if it is both adequately commemorated and memorialised and if the plethora of social and economic problems surrounding the black community are resolved.

We might best characterise perpetratorhood in slavery as a history that no-one wants to claim; an unwanted history. It is no longer forgotten – this is the significant change caused in recent years as a result of various and especially black community demands – but it is depersonalised, spatially isolated, alienated, and normalised. The placement of the ISM in Liverpool, while as we have seen clearly fuelled by the particularly sharp racial divide in that city, may have a further isolating effect, by placing the UK’s primary slave trade history site somewhat off the beaten track. It is clearly not a national museum; and it would now be difficult to create another major slavery museum in a more central location such as London. And the separation of the ISM from Liverpool’s own history museum represents a further subtle passing of the buck. The most powerful criticism of the ISM, then, is that it fails to substantially address Liverpool’s own role in the slave trade; a chapter of history that remains, as of yet, entirely unmemorialised.

All of this is, evidently, in a state of flux; Liverpool’s re-emergence onto the world stage, growing economic power and continuous redevelopment will further alter its memory cultures just as its identity, both local and global, is rapidly shifting. Gradually improving conditions for Liverpool’s black community may soften the intensity of its transfixion on the legacy of slavery, and thereby reduce the demand for memorialisation; on the other hand, growing reflexion on the part of the city’s whole population, in part encouraged by the bicentenary commemorations and the permanent fixture of the ISM, may engender a greater acceptance and incorporation of slavery into their ideas of the city’s past. Changes in Liverpool’s identity and conception of itself, as a cultural, edgy and

117

Amelia Hill, ‘City agonises over slavery apology’, The Observer (7 May 2006).

Paul Coslett, ‘Liverpool’s slavery apology’, BBC [Website].

119 Coslett, ‘Liverpool’s slavery apology’.

118

[33]

forward-looking city, are unlikely to drive it further towards revitalising its distant past; unlike, say, York or Bath, it does not need to rely on its history in order to drive its future. It undoubtedly could market itself as an imperial city; but, for the discomfort in memory that this would cause, it is hardly worth its while.

This dissertation, then, has aimed to reveal some of the complexities surrounding Liverpool’s memory conflict over its slaving past that has taken form along racial lines, and explain in terms of Liverpool’s wider identity why and how this conflict has become manifest. Perhaps in the future the city will be able to reconcile the opposing forces that aim to either incorporate, or alienate and forget, Liverpool’s unwanted past – but as we have seen, the evidence in the city at present suggests that this perhaps idealised goal is far from being achieved.

[34]

BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES: INSTITUTIONAL WEBSITES Albert Dock. Available at: http://www.albertdock.com/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Beatles Story, The. Available at: http://www.beatlesstory.com/ [Accessed: 17 March 2014].

Brazilica Festival. Available at: http://www.brazilicafestival.co.uk/ [Accessed: 14 March 2014].

Discover Travel and Tours, ‘Visit Beatles’. Available at: http://www.visitbeatles.com/ [Accessed: 17 March 2014].

European Commission, ‘European Capital of Culture, Selection Criteria’ (2013). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/culture/our-programmes-and-actions/capitals/selectioncriteria_en.htm [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

Hull City Council, ‘Slavery Collections’ (2008). Available at: http://www.hullcc.gov.uk/museumcollections/collections/subtheme.php?irn=444 [Accessed: 24 February 2014].

I amsterdam, ‘Slavernijmonument (Slavery monument)’. Available at: http://www.iamsterdam.com/en-GB/Ndtrc/Slavernijmonument [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

ISM (2013). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/ [Accessed: 19 December 2013].

ISM, ‘Future Plans’ (2014). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/about/future-plans.aspx [Accessed: 22 January 2014].

ISM, ’List of Black Achievers’ (2014). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/collections/legacies/blackachieverswall/names.a spx [Accessed: 8 March 2014].

ISM, ‘Slavery Remembrance Day’. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/srd/ [Accessed: 20 March 2014].

Liverpool ‘08, ‘Executive Summary’. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/tcm21-32519_tcm79-56880_tcm146-122188.pdf [Accessed: 19 January 2014].

Liverpool City Council, ‘Our Vision and Aims’. Available at: http://liverpool.gov.uk/council/our-aims/ [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

Liverpool Waterfront. Available at: http://www.liverpoolwaterfront.org/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Memorial 2007. Available at: http://www.memorial2007.org.uk/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Memories of August 1914. Available at: http://www.giantspectacular.com/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

MMM, ‘Liverpool and the American Civil War’ [Website]. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/maritime/collections/americancivilwar/index.aspx [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

MMM, ‘Prisoner sculpture from the monument to Lord Nelson’. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/maritime/exhibitions/nelsonmonument/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

MMM, ‘Titanic and Liverpool: the untold story’. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/maritime/exhibitions/titanic/ [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

MMM, ‘Titanic, Lusitania, and the Forgotten Empress gallery’. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/maritime/visit/floor-plan/liners/ [Accessed: 14 March 2014].

MoL (2013). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/mol/ [Accessed: 19 December 2013]. nantes.tourisme, ‘The Memorial to the Abolition of Slavery’. Available at: http://en.nantestourisme.com/activity/memorial-to-abolition-slavery-2832.html [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

[35]

NML, ‘Visitors to our venues’. Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/about/corporate/visitor-information/index.aspx [Accessed: 20 March 2014].

OpenPlaques.org, ‘Liverpool’. Available at: http://openplaques.org/places/gb/areas/liverpool?page=1 [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Royal Liver Building. Available at: http://www.royalliverbuilding.com/default.aspx [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Super Lambanana: The Official Website. Available at: http://www.superlambanana.eu/ [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

Super Lambanana: The Official Website, ‘History’. Available at: http://www.superlambanana.eu/history.html [Accessed: 28 February 2014].

Super Lambanana: The Official Website, ‘Liverbird’. Available at: http://shop.superlambanana.eu/liverbird-16-c.asp [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

UNESCO, ‘Liverpool – Maritime Mercantile City’. Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1150 [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

VisitBirmingham. Available at: http://visitbirmingham.com/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

Visit Leeds. Available at: http://www.visitleeds.co.uk/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

VisitLiverpool.com. Available at: http://www.visitliverpool.com/ [Accessed: 19 December 2013].

VisitLiverpool.com, ‘Liverpool Football Club’. Available at: http://www.visitliverpool.com/things-todo/attractions/search/liverpool-football-club-p7766 [Accessed: 14 March 2014].

VisitLondon.com. Available at: http://www.visitlondon.com/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

VisitManchester. Available at: http://www.visitmanchester.com/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

VisitYork. Available at: http://www.visityork.org/ [Accessed: 16 March 2014].

PRIMARY SOURCES: GALLERIES AND DISPLAY BOARDS Grosvenor, ‘The Old Dock’ [Information board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Life in West Africa [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Liverpool: capital of the transatlantic slave trade [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Scramble for Africa [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Toxteth 1981 [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Why Africans? [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

ISM, Why slavery? [Display boards]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, Atlantic Exchange [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, Dock People – working on the waterfront [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, Life at Bile High School in Luwan District, Shanghai [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, Shantung Trader Junk [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

MoL, The Transatlantic Slave Trade [Display board]. Observed in Liverpool, 4 January 2014.

PRIMARY SOURCES: JOURNALISTIC AND OTHER Alton, David, ‘The Life of William Roscoe – father of Liverpool Culture’, Davidalton.net [Blog].

Available at: http://davidalton.net/2010/12/23/the-life-of-william-roscoe-father-ofliverpool-culture/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

ArchDaily, ‘Museum of Liverpool / 3XN’ [Blog] (18 July 2011). Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/151034/museum-of-liverpool-3xn/ [Accessed: 1 March 2014].

[36]

BBC, ‘Abolition gallery’, BBC [Website]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/content/image_galleries/slavery_liverpool_gallery.shtml [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

BBC, ‘Confederates and their Liverpool connections’, BBC (August 2002) [Website]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/localhistory/journey/american_connection/alabama/bulloc h_liverpool.shtml [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

BBC, ‘Superlambanana’ (2008) [Video]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool08/video/06/superlamb.shtml [Accessed: 4 March 2014].

BBC, ‘Superlambananas on Parade’ (16 June 2008) [Video]. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7458008.stm [Accessed: 4 March 2014].

BBC, ‘Tall Ships’ [Website]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/tall_ships/ [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

BBC News, ‘Liverpool’s heritage status ‘in danger’, Unesco warns’ (26 June 2012). Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-18592334 [Accessed: 19 March 2014].

BBC News, ‘Restored Titanic headquarters opens in Liverpool’ (1 March 2014). Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-26383815 [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

Benjamin, Dr Richard, ‘Dr Martin Luther King, Jr. Building’ [Blog]. Available at: http://blog.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/2013/09/dr-martin-luther-king-jr-building/ [Accessed: 22 January 2014].

Coslett, Paul, ‘Liverpool’s slavery apology’, BBC [Website]. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/content/articles/2007/02/15/abolition_liverpool_apology_f eature.shtml [Accessed: 20 March 2014].

Dawes, Zoe, ‘Liverpool’s Hidden Slavery History’, Wandering Educators [Blog]. Available at: http://www.wanderingeducators.com/language/stories/liverpools-hidden-slaveryhistory.html [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Doward, Jamie, ‘British version of 12 Years A Slave to shed light on our role in Atlantic slave trade’, The Observer (12 January 2014). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/12/belle-film-british-slave-trade/ [Accessed: 14 January 2014].

Economist, The, ‘Here comes the yuan’ (3 September 2011). Available at: http://www.economist.com/node/21528312 [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

Gardner, Lyn, ‘Sea Odyssey – review’, The Guardian (22 April 2012). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2012/apr/22/sea-odyssey-liverpool-review [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

Gardner, Lyn, ‘La machine’, The Guardian (8 September 2008). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/stage/2008/sep/08/theatre.europeancapitalofculture2008 [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

Gifford, Lord, Wally Brown and Ruth Bundey, Loosen the Shackles: First Report of the Liverpool 8 Inquiry into Race Relations in Liverpool (London, 1989).

Guy, Peter, ‘The City that Rocked the World: Philharmonic Hall, Liverpool’, Getintothis (2 August 2013) [Blog]. Available at: http://www.peterguy.merseyblogs.co.uk/2013/08/the-city-thatrocked-the-world.html [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

Guy, Peter, ‘Liverpool River Festival: Tall Ships to sail into Mersey as Pier Head gears up for waterfront spectacle’, Liverpool Echo (5 June 2013). Available at: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-river-festival-tall-ships4053558 [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Haughton, Jermaine, ‘Anthony Walker: A Life that Left a Legacy’, The Voice (30 July 2013). Available at: http://www.voice-online.co.uk/article/anthony-walker-life-left-legacy [Accessed: 11 March 2014].

[37]

Hill, Amelia, ‘City agonises over slavery apology’, The Observer (7 May 2006). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/may/07/ameliahill.theobserver [Accessed: 20 March 2014].

King, Emma, ‘Museum of Liverpool Review’, Emma King Consultancy [Blog] (17 December 2011).

Available at: http://emmakingconsultancy.co.uk/blog/museum-of-liverpool-review.php [Accessed: 5 March 2014].

Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season in Art’ [Brochure]. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/Art_tcm146-122794.pdf [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season in Music’ [Brochure]. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/Music_tcm146-122788.pdf [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season in Streets’ [Brochure]. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/Streets_and_Sport_tcm146-122790.pdf [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season of Conversations and Literature’ [Brochure]. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/Conversations_tcm146-122792.pdf [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Liverpool ’08, ‘A Season on the Stage’ [Brochure]. Available at: http://www.liverpool08.com/Images/Stage_tcm146-122789.pdf [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

McLaughlin, Eliott C., ‘Kanye West co-ops Confederate flag: Publicity stunt or way to prompt debate?’, CNN (6 November 2013). Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/04/us/kanye-west-confederate-flag/ [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

Merseyside Maritime Museum and International Slavery Museum, Official guide [Booklet].

Moore, Rowan, ‘Museum of Liverpool – Review’, The Observer (24 July 2011). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/jul/24/museum-of-liverpool-review [Accessed: 3 March 2014].

Museum of Liverpool, Guide to your visit [Booklet].

Okereke, Kele, ’12 Years a Slave shows US atrocities – but who will do the same for Britain?’, The Guardian (13 January 2014). Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/12-years-a-slave-us-atrocitiesbritain/ [Accessed: 14 January 2014].

Tibbles, Anthony, ‘Against human dignity: the development of the Transatlantic Slave Gallery at Merseyside Maritime Museum’ (1996). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ism/resources/against_human_dignity.aspx [Accessed: 22 January 2014].

VisitLiverpool.com, ‘Liverpool: The Official Tourist Board Guide to the Liverpool City Region’.

Available at: http://www.visitliverpool.com/dbimgs/Winter Visitor Guide (low res).pdf [Accessed: 17 March 2014].

Waddington, Marc, ‘£45m Toxteth regeneration to include UK’s first slave trade victims memorial’, Liverpool Echo (13 March 2012). Available at: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/45m-toxteth-regeneration-includeuks-3349810 [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Waddington, Marc, ‘Liverpool to celebrate 60 years of friendship with Cologne with series of events’, Liverpool Echo (4 January 2012). Available at: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/liverpool-celebrate-60-yearsfriendship-3354296 [Accessed: 12 March 2014].

Yglesias, Matthew, ‘Confederate chic’, The Atlantic (2 August 2007). Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2007/08/confederate-chic/45441/ [Accessed: 13 March 2014].

[38]

SECONDARY SOURCES: BOOKS Belchem, John, Merseypride: Essays in Liverpool exceptionalism (Liverpool, 2006).

Ferguson, Niall, Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World (London, 2004).

Gilroy, Paul, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness (Cambridge, Mass., 1993).

Gilroy, Paul, There Ain’t no Black in the Union Jack (Abingdon, 2002).

Haggerty, Sheryllynne, ‘Liverpool, the slave trade and the British-Atlantic empire, c. 1750-75’, in Haggerty, Webster and White (eds.), The empire in one city?, pp. 17-34.

Haggerty, Sheryllynne, Anthony Webster and Nicholas J. White (eds.), The empire in one city?

Liverpool’s inconvenient imperial past (Manchester, 2008).

Haggerty, Sheryllynne, Anthony Webster and Nicholas J. White, ‘Introduction: The empire in one city?’, in Haggerty, Webster and White (eds.), The empire in one city?, pp. 1-16.

Nora, Pierre, Realms of Memory: Rethinking the French Past (Chichester, 1996). English edition edited by Lawrence D. Kritzman and translated by Arthur Goldhammer.

Phillips, Caryl, The Atlantic Sound (London, 2000).

Wallace, Elizabeth Kowaleski, The British Slave Trade & Public Memory (New York, 2006).

Wilks-Herg, Stuart, ‘From World City to Pariah City? Liverpool and the Global Economy, 1750-2000’, in Ronaldo Munck (ed.), Reinventing the City? Liverpool in Comparative Perspective (Liverpool, 2003).

SECONDARY SOURCES: JOURNAL ARTICLES Belchem, John, ‘Liverpool: World City’, History Today, 57 (2007). Available at: http://www.historytoday.com/john-belchem/liverpool-world-city [Accessed 11 March 2014].

Brown, Adam, Tim Crabbe and Gavin Mellor, ‘English Professional Football and its Communities’, International Review of Modern Sociology, 32 (2006), pp. 159-179.

Brown, Jacqueline Nassy, ‘Enslaving History: Narratives on Local Whiteness in a Black Atlantic Port’, American Ethnologist, 27 (2000), pp. 340-370.

Brown, Jacqueline Nassy, ‘Black Liverpool, Black America, and the Gendering of Diasporic Space’, Cultural Anthropology, 13 (1998), pp. 291-325.

Brown, Stephen, Pierre McDonagh and Clifford J. Shultz II, ‘Titanic: Consuming the Myths and Meanings of an Ambiguous Brand’, Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (2013), pp. 595-614.

Carpo, Mario, ‘The Postmodern Cult of Monuments’, Future Anterior: Journal of Historic Preservation, History, Theory, and Criticism, 4 (2007), pp. 50-60.

Chivallon, Christine, ‘Bristol and the eruption of memory: Making the slave trade visible’, Social & Cultural Geography, 2 (2001), pp. 347-363.

Christian, Mark, ‘Christian on Walvin’. Review of Making the Black Atlantic: Britain and the African Diaspora, by James Walvin.. Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History, 1 (2000) [Online].

Available at: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_colonialism_and_colonial_history/v001/1.2christia n.html [Accessed: 31 December 2013].

Couch, Chris and Sarah-Jane Farr, ‘Museums, Galleries, Tourism and Regeneration: Some Experiences from Liverpool’, Built Environment, 26 (2000), pp. 152-163.

Crane, Susan, ‘Memory, Distortion, and History in the Museum’, History and Theory, 36 (1997), pp.

44-63.

Daniels, Stephen, ‘Suburban pastoral: Strawberry Fields forever and Sixties memory’, Cultural Geographies, 13 (2006), pp. 28-54.

Davis, Madeleine, ‘Is Spain Recovering its Memory? Breaking the “Pacto de Olvido”’, Human Rights Quarterly, 27 (2005), pp. 858-880.

[39]

De Figueiredo, Peter, ‘Symbols of Empire: The Buildings of the Liverpool Waterfront’, Architectural History, 46 (2003), pp. 229-254.

Garoian, Charles, ‘Performing the Museum’, Studies in Art Education, 42 (2001), pp. 234-248.

Graham, Helen, ‘Coming to Terms with the Past: Spain’s Memory Wars’, History Today, 54/5 (2004), pp. 29-31.

Hubbard, Phil and Keith Lilley, ‘Selling the Past: Heritage-tourism and Place Identity in Stratfordupon-Avon’, Geography, 85 (2000), pp. 221-232.

Hughes, Michael L., ‘’Through No Fault of Our Own’: West Germans Remember Their War Losses’, German History, 18 (2000), pp. 193-213.

Kennedy, Dane, ‘Imperial History and Post-Colonial Theory’, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 24 (1996), pp. 345-363.

Krikler, Jeremy, ‘The Zong and the Lord Chief Justice’, History Workshop Journal, 64 (2007), pp. 2947.

Leffler, Phyllis, ‘Peopling the Portholes: National Identity and Maritime Museums in the U.S. and U.K.’, The Public Historian, 26 (2004), pp. 23-48.

Leib, Jonathan I., Gerald R. Webster and Roberta H. Webster, ‘Rebel with a cause? Iconography and public memory in the Southern United States’, GeoJournal, 52 (2000), pp. 303-310.

Malvern, Sue, ‘War, Memory and Museums: Art and Artefact in the Imperial War Museum’, History Workshop Journal, 49 (2000), pp. 177-203.

Marshall, P. J., ‘Imperial Britain’, The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 23 (1995), pp.

379-394.

McCarthy, Thomas, ‘Coming to Terms with Our Past, Part II: On the Morality and Politics of Reparations for Slavery’, Political Theory, 32 (2004), pp. 750-772.

McCarthy, Thomas, ‘Vergangenheitsbewältigung in the USA: On the Politics of the Memory of Slavery’, Political Theory, 30 (2002), pp. 623-648.

Moeller, Robert G., ‘Germans as Victims?: Thoughts on a post-Cold War history of World War II’s Legacies’, History and Memory, 17 (2005), pp. 145-194.

Pitman, Bonnie, ‘Muses, Museums, and Memories’, Daedalus, 128 (1999), pp. 1-31.

Price, Richard, ‘One Big Thing: Britain, Its Empire, and Their Imperial Culture’, Journal of British Studies, 45 (2006), pp. 602-627.

Olick, Jeffery K., and Joyce Robbins, ‘Social Memory Studies: From “Collective Memory” to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices’, Annual Review of Sociology, 24 (1998), pp. 105140.

Rothberg, Michael, ‘Introduction: Between Memory and Memory: From Lieux de mémoire to Noeuds de mémoire’, Yale French Studies, 118/119 (2010), pp. 3-12.

Saehrendt, Christian, ‘Holocaust Memorial. Berlin’, The Burlington Magazine, 147 (2005), pp. 844845.

Sánchez-Costa, Fernando, ‘Los mapas de la memoria. Nombres de calles y políticas de memoria en Barcelona y Madrid’, Hispania Nova, 9 (2009), pp. 192-218.

Starn, Randolph, ‘A Historian’s Brief Guide to New Museum Studies’, The American Historical Review, 110 (2005), pp. 68-98.

Walvin, James, ‘The Slave Trade, Abolition and Public Memory’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 19 (2009), pp. 139-149.

Wilson, Jon, ‘Niall Ferguson’s Imperial Passion’, History Workshop Journal, 56 (2003), pp. 175-183.

SECONDARY SOURCES: OTHERS Christian, Mark, ‘The Age of Slave Apologies: the case of Liverpool, England’, National Museums Liverpool [Podcast] (2007). Available at: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/podcasts/liverpool_slavery_apology.aspx [Accessed: 31 December 2013].

[40]

Donington, Kate, ‘Little Britain’s Memory of Slavery Conference’, Legacies of British Slave Ownership [Blog] (17 September 2013). Available at: http://lbsatucl.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/little-britains-memory-of-slavery-conference/ [Accessed: 14 January 2014].

English Heritage, ‘Commemorative Structures, Memorials and Statues: Abolition of Slavery’ [Website]. Available at: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/showcase/abolition-of-the-slave-trade/commemorative-structures-memorials-statues/ [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Legacies of British Slave Ownership (2014). Available at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs/ [Accessed: 14 January 2014].

Moody, Jessica, ‘Liverpool’s Local Tints: Drowning Memory and “Maritimizing” Slavery in a Seaport City’, Little Britain’s Memory of Slavery 2013: Local Nuances of a ‘National Sin’ [Conference] (University College London, 13-14 September 2013).

Rice, Alan, ‘Monuments and memorials’, Revealing Histories: Remembering Slavery. Available at: http://revealinghistories.org.uk/legacies-commemorating-thebicentenary-of-british-abolition/articles/monuments-and-memorials.html [Accessed: 18 March 2014].

Spalding, Nikki, ‘Learning to Remember Slavery at the Museum: School Field-Trips, Difficult Histories and Shifting Historical Consciousness’, [PhD Thesis] (Newcastle University, 2012).

Available at: http://theses.ncl.ac.uk/dspace/handle/10443/1540/ [Accessed: 19 December 2013].

[41]