Ringing Forums

As with all transactions, the deal depends on what each party wants and what each has to give. In these cases the TV company wants an 'interesting', photogenic story, while ringers (in general) want good publicity.
Money for incidentals (as in Birmingham) probably isn't an issue for the film company if they think it will help get a better story by oiling the wheels, so it's worth mentioning.
I doubt it would be possible to get anything like a 'performance fee' or for the church to get a 'venue hire' since in most cases the particular tower isn't unique. If you aren't keen they'll go somewhere else or drop the story.
All the talk about a shortage of ringers and needing more to Ring for the King probably hasn't helped either since it portrays us all as desperate for publicity. They may well think they are doing us a favour by offering us air time. .

while a motivated individual may be able to make his/her own opportunities, that can't be done in a vacuum, it relies on exploiting existing infrastructure, whether by finding a 'good tower' where progress can be made or collectively organised practices. However it needs to be regular. A society may have more resources than a branch, but it is also more remote so likely to involve more travelling, not just for the 'learner' but for everyone. That might be fine for occasional courses but progress requires regular practice, making local solutions more practical.

yes, I think there's an element of rationalising a preconception in some of the arguments that everyone should ting the standard way.
One interesting thing I've noticed when I ring opposite handed is the my hands occasionally collide with each othe on the rope. I think that's because the dominant hand has a orefetance for going farther (up and down) than the non dominant hand. That might just be habituation from normal ringing but it could equally well be inherent and/or acquired from everything else we do.

yes, ringing other handed is a useful exercise. So is ringing one handed. As well as enhancing general dexterity it gives confidence that you can carry on if one hand 'has to do something else'. It also enables you to keep ringing if you get an injury to one arm or hand.

I hadn't spotted the significance of it being mainly right hand, which could indeed suggest that she isn't using both hands effectively, with the right hand doing most of the work. But other things being equal I would expect gripping the thinner, harder tail end to cause more pain than the thicker, softer sally. However, there is more scope for an awkward grip at handstroke so obviously worth looking at.
Are there differences between the hands? One might expect the dominant hand to be used more for other things. Would that make it stronger and more resilient or is it already suffering strain from other causes that ringing, as an unfamiliar activity, exacerbates?

as Lucy says, a lot of ringers grip too hard, failing to relax their grip between strokes. I suggest explaining that during the period when the rope is slack between each stroke her grip should be completely relaxed, not gripping the rope at all but just cradling it gently. (It's the same action needed when raising, so the bell can pull more rope through the hands at the top of the stroke as needed.) You could demonstrate that by getting her to hold the rope loosely and then checking that you can pull it through her hands.
Many people also pull too hard, which increases the pressure they need when they do grip. You can assess that by holding a rope above her (stand on a box or chair if needed) and get her to reach up and apply the amount of pull she typically uses while ringing. Quite likely that will be far too much so get her to reduce it until it feels about right to you. Then move the rope up and down while she tries to follow it with no more force but not letting the rope go slack (is like when ringing).
Obviously if she is habitually gripping and/or pulling too hard/long it will need sustained effort to undo the habit.

Check will advance the Bong. ... Etc — PeterScott

It will but I'm not sure that's the best way to explain it. The degree to which the bell is checked, I've the extent to which it is allowed to rise, determines the energy in the bell, and hence its swing period, which affects not just one bong but the rate of all succeeding bongs.
I tell people that you control the bell primarily by how high you let it rise and that pulling is mainly to top up the energy.

am not quite sure what is technically correct. — Simon Linford

If you want to be inclusive you could refer to 'youth organisations'. I assume they would take that to include them.

and were all nodding their heads as you were pulling, in the hope that this energy somehow transferred to just-a-little-more pull :-) — PeterScott

Yes, and they like the person struggling are missing the point. People struggling to get up a (normal weight) bell are usually pulling like mad. If the pat were all they did the bell would shoot up. But in their eagerness to pull they start too soon. By applying force on the up stroke they stop the bell rising, and waste the effort put in on the previous stroke.
I see far more problems caused (not just when raising) by failure to let the bell rise than from lack of effort.
When raising I tell people to relax the grip completely on the up stroke so the rope, and only to grip and pull at the top of the stroke when they can feel the bell has stopped rising. And that they should expect the bell to take a little more rope through their hands each time if they are doing things correctly.

I find 'Relax' is one of the most useful exhortations throughout all teaching of handling — Richard Pargeter

It's certainly one of the most important elements but doesn't seem to get enough attention.

You can start at any age and after mastering the basics you can join in beginners' orchestras and socialise with other budding musicians — J Martin Rushton

Yes, they need to believe there is a way in for them, but that's irrelevant unless they are motivated to want you be part of it. Socialising is a valuable part of most group activities, not unique to ringing. Compared to some activities ringing (and many other things like singing) is less social because you can't talk while doing it, only around the periphery. So to take up ringing (or any activity with a significant learning curve) you need some vision of the activity itself to inspire you to want to put in the time and effort to get there. If you just want socialising and 'taking part' don't take up ringing or playing an instrument, just join a social club.

I don't know whether this will help but it might. I encourage all ringers to relax their grip between strokes. Some people grip the rope the whole time but you don't need to between strokes when there's no tension in the rope,

maybe some ideas in here: https://jaharrison.me.uk/New/Articles/AspectsSummary.pdf or the longer original, see link.

Emphasising methods and having to learn them can be off-putting for beginners. If the film is aimed at encouraging people to start then perhaps it should follow the normal progression many towers and show learning to handle a bell, ringing in rounds and call change — J Martin Rushton

If we think people would be put off by what makes most of us tick, are they the people we want to attract?
If we wanted to inspire someone to play the violin would we show the a virtuoso playing beautiful music or show them a beginner trying to play scales?

poor old Fred might well have had a whole week of rehearsing his callchanges from the 3rd. — PeterScott

How on earth can he do that? Is he planning to call them?

That's an interesting question. My answer would be similar, that we would like their interest, and their help spreading information about ringing to a wider audience.
Re what you give to them, you might be interested in these four articles written specifically for musicians: https://jaharrison.me.uk/Ringing/Music/

that seems excessive. However I once saw it advertised online for more than the list price while it was still in print and on sale.
There was no PDF version when it was published, I delivered camera ready copy.

Do you think that most of the general population would consider a church/religious connection to be positive and something that attracts them to ringing? — Tristan Lockheart

No. A few would, and they are probably church goers. For the majority I suspect it would depend on what they thought the connection was. To use some analogies:
Our churchyard is maintained by volunteers, notably by 'The Friends of Al Saints Churchyard'. I don't know the numbers but I believe they include many who are not in the congregation but see the churchyard (which is quite large) as a community asset worth supporting.
Many music societies give concerts in churches (because they are suitable buildings) and many of their audiences are not Christians but are happy to go despite it being in a church.
Most of them are also quite happy to listen to religious music like requiems or masses in a concert without feeling they are endorsing the words being sung.
Millions of people listen to or watch the service of Nine Lessons & Carols on Christmas Eve, who would not otherwise attend a church service.
Many people will visit a historic church to admire the architecture, the stained glass or the flowers, in the same way they might visit a National Trust property.
In all these cases the participan't connection is with a cultural, artistic or historical artefact that happens to be associated with the church, not with religion itself, and not as an active participant in worship or as a declaration of faith.
Ringing can be seen in a similar light. Like music it is an artistic and cultural activity that can be appreciated in its own right as well as being used as an adjunct of the church.
Seen in that neutral light I suspect a majority would not rule out being associated with ringing just because most bells are in churches.

Contingency is intended to offset the risk of unknowns, so a responsible prone t manager will allocate contingency according to the risk. In fact I've heard the phrase costing risk in.
So the question is how much risk is in your project? How many things are known and costed, and how many things can't be known until 'we take it apart' or until 'we open it up'. How many of the processes used have a significant failure rate?
The contractors involved should have the experience to be able to answer those questions, and assuming they have given a fixed price bid will have costed them in. If a single contractor is responsible for all works (including any subcontractors) then you should be able to rely on the contract because the prime contractor will have built in the cost of the subcontractor risk. Of course if you employ several contractors to avoid the prime contractor overhead then you carry the risk of problems that fall between the contractors.

Evangelical churches which are growing in popularity range from indifferent to outright hostile towards bellringing — Tristan Lockheart

Like the Puritans 500 years ago maybe?