| Product: |
Kenilworth Castle |
| Date: |
18/04/01 (108 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Not bad attraction- if you live nearby
Disadvantages: Over-priced and over-exposed
My recent visit to Kenilworth Castle was a typically depressing Easter day out. Partly because of the horrible Bank Holiday weather but mainly because I wasn’t impressed with the castle itself. Having never read Marlowe’s Edward II or Sir Walker Scott’s Kenilworth the literary heritage of the castle was lost on me. But even so I’m not sure that Kenilworth Castle would have made that much of impression. The main problem is that after the Roundheads blew up the most of the castle during the Civil War there really isn’t a lot to see. What is left mainly now is the outside shell of the castle - the roof-less walls and a few battlements. So you can walk up and around them and get a good view of the local countryside. But that really doesn’t make a lot to investigate -Kenilworth can be easily explored in about a hour. Even worse it makes you totally exposed to the weather- there is no shelter whatsoever apart from the gift shop and visitor centre. This is especially noticeable and unpleasant on a typically cold and rainy day that I visited. Overall Kenilworth isn’t a bad place to visit. It’s an impressively aged stand-stone building (adorned with centuries of graffiti that’s a record of history in itself) and with the undeveloped countryside nearby you can stand on the walls and almost imagine what it was like in the olden days. When I visited there was a Civil War era display of shooting and people in period costumes to bring the castle to life and provide a welcome addition. It’s just that like a lot of English attractions: it’s over-priced for what it is. It now costs you £5 each to get in- which to spend less than an hour outside is not great value. And it certainly compares badly with the extensive splendours of Warwick Castle- which is just a short trip away. It wouldn’t be too bad if you actually got something for your money - but from the dreary, overpriced tea
shop to the broken visual displays in the Visitor Centre showing the castle’s history (I couldn’t find out what happened during the siege- very frustrating!) it’s obvious the profits haven’t been invested into the attraction. The only really good thing is they haven’t over-promoted the Shakespeare connection the way that nearby Stratford does to a really commercialised effect Kenilworth Castle is managed by English Heritage- who’s motto is "No one does more for England’s heritage". If they’d substituted "does" for "charges," I’d agree with them.
Summary:
|
Last comments:
|
- 06/11/03 I prefer Kenilworth in that Warwick, while more engaging (having displays and so on), isn't as interesting as Kenilworth. But you do get more for your money at Warwick. |
|
- 11/05/01 Warwick Castle costs about double o get in, but is exactly 74 times better value. A drive past Kenilworth on the way is all you need. |
|
- 25/04/01 A good op.
I'd agree that Kenilworth pales beside Warwick and £5 is poor value for money.
I wonder what the entry price is for Warwick these days???
M |
|