Talk:Anthony Chenevix-Trench

message: I've restored most of anonymous user User:84.64.95.105's edits on the grounds that that the reasons stated for his/her edits are invalid and unsourced.  The allegations made by Foot and others are referenced from reputable sources are.  The blanket deletion of sources and categories from the article is tantamount to vandalism. As previously written, the article was balanced and well-sourced. User:84.64.95.105's edits amount to hagiography, placed where they are, and though much new useful information has been provided it has been placed in a section which is not appropriate.  The change of "Child abuser" to another heading may be justified, but "Controversial schoolmaster" is not it. Emeraude 11:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have deleted the claim that he was, "the first headmaster for centuries who was not an Etonian himself". It is true that he was not an Etonian, but then neither were two of his recent predecessors, Cyril Alington and Robert Birley. Poshseagull (talk) 09:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Old Etonian

message: My uncle was under him at Eton, he lasted two to three  months then "removed" himself, and went somewhere else. I went to Fettes after he was there, but my seniors had been subject to him. There is no doubt that C-T was a beast of the most awful sort, the problem is, there is nothing verifiable. A creature of his time and pillar of society, it would not be correct to openly destroy him with scandal. (something he was clever at avoiding) However, dispassionately, one cannot call him a child abuser, as he was never brought before the bench and convicted, and the "evidence" today would be inadmissable. A case of 'grin through gritted teeth and bear it'! Brendandh 00:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to have an almost first-hand account. However,I think you are too kind. Read Paul Foot's articles from Private Eye at the time, which were certainly verifiable, or, better still, Richard Ingram's biography of Foot My Friend Footy  which makes it quite clear that these are not mere 'allegations'. Unfortunately, I don't have my copy to hand, so I am unable to quote, but will do so in a few weeks and edit appropriately. Emeraude 21:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Chenevix-Trench's career as a child abuser is explained here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jul/25/1 "Even by the standards of England's public schools, Anthony Chenevix-Trench, his housemaster at Shrewsbury, was a flagellomaniac. Foot recalled: 'He would offer his culprit an alternative: four strokes with the cane, which hurt; or six with the strap, with trousers down, which didn't. Sensible boys always chose the strap, despite the humiliation, and Trench, quite unable to control his glee, led the way to an upstairs room, which he locked, before hauling down the miscreant's trousers, lying him face down on a couch and lashing out with a belt.'  Naturally, Chenevix-Trench was promoted and became a headmaster, first of Eton and then of Fettes. Exposing him in Private Eye was one of Foot's happiest days in journalism. He received hundreds of congratulatory letters from the child abuser's old pupils, many of whom were now prominent in British life."2.28.151.161 (talk) 02:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Abuse

message: After I reverted an edit that appeared to me to be in breach of Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy, it has been suggested on my talk page that the article is unbalanced. I can see why this is a concern.
First, in theory ACT should be notable for his career as a whole, not just for that part of it that hit some smaller portion of the headlines well over a decade after he died. Thus this biography should deal with his career as a whole, not mostly be taken up with discussion of "corporal punishment" (which was common at the time anyway) as it is now.
Second, a topic on which I can't comment (I haven't yet read all the various "letters to the editor" etc involved) is that it's alleged that some of the material used to support the "media storm" in UK newspapers was in fact based on misrepresentations of what did or did not happen to a particular person.
Third, quite apart from whether the large quoted sections in the current article are appropriate (and how to properly summarise their material if they are not), there do seem to be some misrepresentations separate to that. So for example "Eventually, his fondness for beating boys and his drinking became so embarrassing that he was forced to resign" is not supported by the passage quoted, and is questioned elsewhere. Certainly a number of different factors were presumably involved, and even the Daily Mail review of the biography by Mark Peel suggests that corporal punishment was not central to it.
It has been pointed out that the biography of him by Mark Peel (listed on the article) would be an excellent resource for fleshing out the other aspects of the biography (and perhaps adding to the existing parts too). My local library's electronic booking system doesn't have it, and Google Books does not offer a preview of it from the UK. Amazon UK is offering it for one penny per copy, plus nearly three pounds in postage and packing, from a number of highly rated sellers. Does anyone feel like obtaining a copy? Be warned that one review describes it as a "slim" tome.
If you should order one, please confer here before adding anything further to the article. If there's enough material to expand the article 5x over its current length, it could be put on Wikipedia's Main Page - but only if it's all done within five days of when you start. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I intend to read it in due course, but it won't be very soon as I haven't time at present. -- Alarics (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Demiurge states "So for example "Eventually, his fondness for beating boys and his drinking became so embarrassing that he was forced to resign" is not supported by the passage quoted,". The source is the vice-provost of Eton, Tim Card, in his official history of the school, via The Independent: "Claims that he became too ready with the lash and too fond of the bottle will be published this month in Eton Renewed, an authorised history of the school by Tim Card, its vice-provost. Mr Card writes that staff at the school were embarrassed by Chevenix-Trench's drinking and that he 'regarded corporal punishment not as a last resort, but almost as the first'. He claims the head was forced to resign eventually and that the matter was hushed up." This is clearly sourced and linked in the article.Emeraude (talk) 10:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of the article - potential improvements 

message: Can we obtain a free image?
If not, do we use this one; http://www.friendsreunited.co.uk/education-anthony-chenevix-trench-eton/Memory/7f679e20-643a-4a73-b62d-a00b01723cab ... or this one; ... http://lowres-picturecabinet.com.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/38/main/62/239571.jpg
--Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:42, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the Friends Reunited one of him in his study at Eton captures the man better. Also, if it of any interest, there is a 1967 documentary about Eton at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLxNg5nKCYQ which includes scenes of him in action. -- Alarics (talk) 10:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I used a slightly more traditional head-and-shoulders image under fair use, although I'm not totally satisfied with the result. The documentary was very interesting, and I may be able to cite a little from it (it mentions, inter alia, part of Chenevix-Trench's drive to improve academic standards at Eton being the abolition of a free period before lunch which boys mainly used to visit the sweet shop!) Incidentally, the part of the documentary with headmaster, prefect, and miscreant all standing formally while Chenevix-Trench muttered awkwardly about "you're old enough by now" was the same "formally witnessed ceremony" that he was later criticised for circumventing in other cases. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  image for the article 

message: Many thanks to Alarics, Emeraude and Hume for suggestions and resources in fixing and expanding this article. I've now expanded it based on Peel's book and a few other sources.
I've removed the neutrality check template as I presume it's no longer needed.
Some matters still needing attention:
# Lead needs fixing/expanding.
# Some redlinks may have valid targets if anyone can spend some time looking for them.
# Unit names for Chenevix-Trench's military service need fixing/clarifying; I'm waiting for further input here. Seems Peel had these basically correct; the regiment name is now a redlink and the battery name is a bluelink, with hidden comments added as to why. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 12:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article expanded; and neutrality template removed 

message: In addition to what's already under "Further Reading", there is;
* Philp, Robert (1998). A Keen Wind Blows. James & James. 
* Blackie, John (1976). Bradfield, 1850-1975.
* Oldham, James Basil (1952). A History of Shrewsbury School, 1552-1952.
* Morath, Adolf (1953). Portrait of Shrewsbury School.
* Cowburn, Philip (1964). A Salopian anthology: Some impressions of Shrewsbury School during four centuries.
* McDowell, David (2012). Carrying On: Fettes College, War and the World 1870-2010. 
--Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A Keen Wind Blows has an 11 page chapter about Chenevix-Trench and Fettes 1971-79 and includes some quotations. Robert Philp taught at Fettes and was a housemaster during this time. AlasdairW (talk) 23:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Alasdair. It would be great if you could add some information from Philp's book to the Fettes section. Or, if you prefer, you could mention here any potentially useful facts/statements/quotations from the book, and I'll then work them into the article. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books likely to mention Chenevix-Trench 

message: There is a reference to Ray Harrod. I have never heard of him but Roy Harrod was a famous tutor at Christ Church. Could this be a typo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobanian (talk • contribs) 
:Perfect, thank you - I've now fixed this in the article. I'm not sure if the typo was mine or Peel's - will check later. I've always liked that quote as it adds a bit of spice to the otherwise relatively unexciting "man offered job, takes different job instead" part of the storyline. (Though turning down a headmastership to become a housemaster is rather unusual too.) Peel includes Harrod's quite lengthy letter in full.
:Now we just need to identify John G. Barrington-Ward, "one of the best Latin prose scholars in Oxford", who edited the Times crossword three days a week. Or maybe that is the right name but there's just no Wikipedia article yet? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Harrod

message: 'Hume Shawcross... recollected that Caspar Fleming, son of Ian Fleming, "was in no way unfairly treated by Chenevix-Trench and held no antagonism towards him", and opined that claims to the contrary were part of a "mean-minded vendetta".
:Vendetta conducted by whom? Valetude (talk) 11:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: All of Shawcross' published comments refer to sometime staff members of Private Eye, in particular Paul Foot (who, like Shawcross, had been taught by Chenevix-Trench, but at Shrewsbury not Eton). The comment about a "vendetta" was in reply to Richard Ingrams, but I can't recall whether it suggested that Ingrams, Foot or both were engaged in a vendetta. I'll add a note here when I find the exact wording. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vendetta 

message: . . . whom Foot claimed mistreatment by . . .
Read: . . . whom Foot claims to have been mistreated by . . .Pamour (talk) 14:13, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  mistreatment of the language