I am sorry to see that the misguided plan to erect a statue to Jane Austen in Winchester Cathedral Close has been resurrected (Chronicle, November 30). 

Most of the objections that were raised to the previous plan apply equally to the new project. 

In these difficult times, are there not better claims on our money?

Jane Austen was not a Winchester person. She grew up in Steventon, did all her writing in Chawton, and only came to Winchester for the last few weeks of her tragically short life. Her best and most appropriate monument is her grave in Winchester Cathedral. There she can be remembered with respect.

She is known to have been a modest woman who shunned publicity. None of her books were published in her name until after her death, and few people knew she was a writer. She was far from the dominant character depicted in this statue.

I object to having any statue in the Close. This was the monastic precinct. Until quite recently it was a sanctuary of peace in the busy city. Even with all the cars there today it is still a place of wonder. This statue of Jane Austen is designed to attract yet more tourists here. The Close does not need more tourists.

If a statue is needed, why do we not have Robert Truscott’s delightful seated figure? This could be placed appropriately in the house in College Street where she died, and which I believe will soon be open to the public.

Elizabeth Proudman,
St John’s Street,

Send letters by email to newsdesk@hampshirechronicle.co.uk or by post to Editor, Hampshire Chronicle, 5 Upper Brook Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8AL.

All letters and e-mails must include full names and addresses (anonymous letters will not be published), although these details may be withheld from publication, on request.

Letters of 300 words or less will be given priority, although all are subject to editing for reasons of clarity, space, or legal requirements. We reserve the right to edit letters.