2005 Sovereigns

[Emperor Oli]

Found on Lawrence Chard's website:

We discovered in October 2004, that the new 2005 design will be a re-worked and stylised* version of the traditional St George & Dragon design which has been used on sovereigns, with a few breaks, since 1817. The silver crown issued in 1935 for the Silver Jubilee of George V featured a stylised deco version of St. George and the dragon, which is sometimes called the "rocking horse crown". Although we were not around when it was issued, we can guess that it was not universally popular when it was issued, and opinion is still divided about its artistic and aesthetic merits. The Isle of Man also produce sovereigns with a St. George and dragon design, or a Viking and dragon, these seem to be popular.

*oh dear God no. The last time I heard stylised was with the 2003 Coronation anniversary £5

[Chris Perkins]

The Isle of Man St George is Pap, but I really quite like the 1935 Art Deco St George, it was very much the style of the time.

[Emperor Oli]

I agree, but my cited example of the coronation anniversary seems to be the style of our time, at least in the Mint's eyes. I just hope they don't do anything akin to that ever again.

[Geoff T]

I saw this on the Chard site too, but let's not get too pessimistic. While I'm no great fan of the 2003 crown, I think a rethink of George and the dragon could prove as elegant as some of the images of Britannia on the eponymous coins. And, like Chris, I have a soft spot for the rocking horse crowns.

I've promised myself a 2005 proof sovereign as a golden jubilee present to myself next year anyway, so it looks as if I'll have to get to like whatever the reverse turns out to be

G

[Emperor Oli]

Are you sure you still want one, Geoff?

[Sylvester]

I've held my tongue so far about that, lets just say my comments have been censored.

[Master Jmd]

*eww...eww...eww...*

To put it fairly ...as with Sylvester, i'm also censoring my comments

Looks too much like a token to me, i prefer coins with writing in the legend (or atleast with a legend)

Edited December 10, 2004 by Master Jmd

[Chris Perkins]

JMD, the writing is the legend.

[cosmicdebris]

This is disgusting. I was hoping for Wyon's St George.

[Sylvester]

Well well well, hiya Comicdebris, i didn't know you were here too!

[Emperor Oli]

Wyon's is beautiful, the 2005 one looks computer rendered.

[Master Jmd]

JMD, the writing is the legend.

hmm...oh well

---

I still dont like it...

Edited December 11, 2004 by Master Jmd

[Geoff T]

Are you sure you still want one, Geoff?

To be honest, any sense of disappointment is at the design not being bold enough in speaking of the early 21st century. Much as I like the Pistrucci and proposed Wyon designs, I don't see why we have to value them purely for being older/more traditional. The way this one tries to be up to date without completely letting go of the hand of tradition reminds me of those "modern" hymns in the 60s which did the same and ended up beling bland and falling between two stools, or all those pseudo-oldy-worldy modern buildings which Prince Charles raves about.

So it's the blandness, the not having the courage of its convictions to be truly contemporary which somewhat annoys me. Perhaps we should have grasped the nettle and replaced St. George with something completely different.

There now, that's set a few cats among the pigeons!

[Geordie582]

Surely the point is that, no matter what they choose for the coin, it seems "to be Modern" is to lack the attention to detail an pure workmanship of the Wyon model. I keep saying, come back Marie Theresa dollar, all is forgiven!

[Sylvester]

I think we should just go back to the Victorian shield reverse. Or something gothic. You know like a relief of the Houses of Parliament, plenty of spikes and gargoyles and other such niceties. Pity they don't build buildings like that any more, i also like the classical style architecture of the late 18th century with the columns and stuff...

[Emperor Oli]

i also like the classical style architecture of the late 18th century with the columns and stuff...

Me too, I especially like composite columns.

[Unknown]

I think we should just go back to the Victorian shield reverse. Or something gothic. You know like a relief of the Houses of Parliament, plenty of spikes and gargoyles and other such niceties. Pity they don't build buildings like that any more, i also like the classical style architecture of the late 18th century with the columns and stuff...

I could not agree with you more!

Modern architecture is not something that 300 years from now is going to be there anymore, while what today are old buildings (houses of parliament, for example) will still be preserved and care for, as it is too expensive to make them anymore!

[Master Jmd]

And the government is trying to modernise britain with these newer styles of architecture. But who exactly are they modernising it for? I agree that older architecture was far better, as with old coinage

[Geoff T]

Revisting this discussion after an interval of a few weeks, I'm surprised to see such backward looking attitudes among those so young.

Condemning modern buildings is fashionable and no doubt always has been. True, there are a lot of nondescript ones about, but then again, there always have been. I suspect too that a lot of people think of older buildings as merely "old", regardless of period. I'm reminded of the person who fulminated in my presence against two innocent 60s maisonettes set back from the road in Elm Hill, one of the pretty, touristy "old" streets in Norwich. They spoiled the unity of the street, she claimed, oblivious to the fact that on the opposite side buildings from the 15th to the 19th century jostled side by side. Unity?

In the same city, I'm sure that the citizens of the 15th century were aghast at the "modern" vault clapped on their "old" 12th century cathedral, or by the "modern" 15th century windows pierced in its "old" walls and filled with "modern" stained glass. To the unthinking of today, who couldn't tell a transom from a transept, it's all just "old" and therefore "lovely" and by implication sacrosanct. Presumably they'd feel the same about the "modern" dome Wren was proposing to replace the tower of old St. Pauls with (approved by Charles II only days before the fire), or the early 17th century facades Inigo Jones had already added to the medieval fabric.

As for the Victorians - what's so fascinating about them is that they believed implicitly in technological progress yet maintained a romantic attachment to their past. The result was often a blunt and contraductory fusion of the two. This is an age which built hundreds of railway stations in celebration of its technological modernity, but thought nothing of the anachronism of disguising them as tudor cottages, gothic cathedrals or classical temples. Today we build pseudo-Georgian office blocks but make sure they have modern lighting, heating and sanitation. Plus ca change.

The past left us many, many great buildings. Our challenge is to leave our successors equally great ones which speak of our own time. We can ape a past which few really understand from a cultural standpoint, but our mindset is that of our own age.

There, that's my riposte wearing my architectural historian's hat. End of rant - now back to work

G

[Geordie582]

As one of the 'young' (at 75 ) I must say that, in general, the current idea of "modern" appears to be an excuse for palid imitations of works of art in all fields. You can be modern, but please, make it something to make people stop and say "what a wonderful thing", not "what a load of junk", (vis the response to the continued garbage from the Turner prize.

[william]

Are you sure you still want one, Geoff?

That's a disgusting coin... imagine what the new coins will be like in 2500... what will be modern then?!

Edited January 5, 2005 by william

[Emperor Oli]

We won't have coins in 2500, everything will be done on plastic!

[Master Jmd]

I don't have much doubt bout it...

Like counters from tiddlywinks(sp)

[Sylvester]

With regards to myself Geoff, my motto was always "older is better", this applies to most things (although not all!)

[Geordie582]

Your women??