A Digital Wall? A rapidly dating and ongoing expense wall is a better description

The Chartist Mural debate has evolved. People are now talking about what form a replacement memorial should take. But with a strong whiff of vested interest starting to permeate the air, we need to be VERY careful about what we choose, and need to think about what is best for the city, not for individuals.

The original Kenneth Budd mural had one big advantage. It required minimal maintenance. Once completed, it sat there for 35 years minding its own business and only requiring the occasional wipe over with a J Cloth. I jest about the cleaning technique, but you get my point.

However, amongst the suggestions for a replacement memorial we are hearing several voices calling for a 'Digital Wall'. The people doing the loudest calling happen to be multi-media types who clearly fancy their chances at being involved, but let's put that aside for a moment.

There are real problems with the concept of a Digital Wall, not least being ongoing cost - cost of renewing content, and cost of upgrading the technology.

Content Dates
Let's assume for a moment that we had built a Digital Wall back in the 80s. What form would the content have taken? Perhaps a soundtrack featuring Limahl and filmed on the (now substandard) video format of the day? For how long would that have remained valid? By the time the mood had changed in the mid-90s it would have been a civic embarrassment and would have needed to have been updated.

But what form would that update have taken? Perhaps some pumping tune by Chumbawumba and filmed on Betamax? Again, how long before that would have also needed updating?

And so the need to renew content would continue.

I have no doubt that the 'digital artists' calling for a Digital Wall would be able to produce some stunning content... for now. But there is no doubt that it would have a very short shelf life. So periodic updates would need to be incorporated into any thinking for a Digital Wall. And there will be a cost to that. Anyone offering free or cheap content really shouldn't be considered, or at least would need to do a VERY good job of convincing that what they produce would be good enough.

Technology Dates
This is where any idea of a Digital Wall starts to look VERY expensive going forward.

Technology changes and improves. Again, let's assume we had built a Digital Wall back in the 80s. What form would that have taken? We don't need to imagine because there are plenty of images to show us...

A 'Digital Wall' from the good/bad old days of 4:3 ratio CRT monitors

The 80s wall would have probably been built of CRT TVs/monitors, or would have used the emerging - and prohibitively expensive - large screen technology just starting to appear. Knowing Newport, it would have been the former. You remember CRT? - Old fashioned TVs that weighed a ton, had that funny aspect ratio, and a crap picture.

TV/monitor technology progressed, through widescreen CRT, to flatscreen, to HD, and the evolution will certainly continue progressing to... who knows what? Yes of course today's digital wall would probably use the latest in open-air display technology, which at this moment in time is LED able to be viewed in direct sunlight, but make no mistake, this technology will also date as new and improved display technologies emerge. The large screens used at LiveAid are nothing compared to the screens available today.

So there would be an ongoing need for VERY expensive technology upgrades. If we assume a wall today would cost £100,000 (figure plucked from the air, most likely very optimistic), we need to accept that in a decade or less we would need to spend even more to bring the wall up to the latest standards... and a decade afterwards... and the decade after. Alternatively, we live with what we first install and watch as it looks progressively naffer as years go by.

The REAL problem with a Digital Wall as a mural replacement
Council vandals aside, the Kenneth Budd mural could/would have lasted centuries or longer. The Capital Car Park it was installed on would clearly not have lasted, but assuming the mural had been put in a less inconvenient location, or had been moved to a permanent safe location, it is quite possible that a distant descendant of Tony 'Baldrick' Robinson would have been dusting the dirt off it with a toothbrush in a 1000 years time. Roman and Greek murals survive, so could have Kenneth Budd's.

And that is the real value of something like a mural - its longevity and potential to become a genuine relic. But a Digital Wall?

So let's think carefully about what we choose as a mural replacement. Let's choose something that is best for the city, and best for history. Not something that is best for a small group of interested parties looking to make a quick name for themselves or looking at a Digital Wall as a chance to show their art college final year film.