ON THIS DAY: MODS & ROCKERS’ VENTNOR CARNIVAL ENTRY CAUSED CONTROVERSY 60 YEARS AGO

A proposal to include a mods and rockers competition at Ventnor Park during a meeting of Ventnor Carnival Association provoked heated debate in the seaside town. Isle of Wight Mercury reported on 26th June 1964 that this was likely to be one of the attractions of that year’s carnival, alongside the usual events such as a children’s fancy dress parade, a band display and comic sports. However, the proposal met a less than enthusiastic response from Ventnor townsfolk, one of whom wrote to the Mercury the following week, stating:

“Have those responsible for a Carnival mods and rockers ball gone quite mad? “So far Ventnor has been little troubled by these menaces. By all means have enjoyment, but should this ball be held in the Park as has been suggested? What price the flowers and the beauty therin, not to mention the nuisance caused to the residents of the Park Avenue area. “If a mods and rockers ball must be held, let it be on the beach, with fire hoses at the ready; this would soon put a stop to any trouble.”

In reply to the concerned resident, 5 members of Ventnor Carnival Association put their names to the following letter to the Mercury:

“Reference to a recent report in this newspaper stating that the Carnival Committee was including a Mods and Rockers competition, this was an incorrect statement. “The idea of Mods and Rockers was not for a moment contemplated, in fact during the course of the meeting members agreed it would be unwise to start up rival factions between young people. “This report only strengthens the fact that wrongly reported details can create more trouble, dissention and unpleasantness than enough, and makes one feel that reporters should only be allowed to print details of meetings, etc., after they have been submitted to the respective bodies concerned.”

The editor of the Isle of Wight Mercury responded:

“We must point out that the idea of Mods and Rockers was brought up and considered, which was all our report stated. Therefore, it was true and not a “wrongly reported detail’.”