Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ] |
| Subject: England! Where the Sacred flame/Burns before the inmost shrine.... | |
Author: Nick (UK) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 16:08:09 11/05/04 Fri In reply to: Ed Harris (Venezia) 's message, "And..." on 15:54:27 11/05/04 Fri What you are illuminating here is exactly one of the problems our 'British' identity has - the English insist on going on about England all the time - often when they mean Britain, or even the Empire. It leaves everyone else out. It p*sses them off. It encourages them to sing about flowers of Scotland and killin gthe English for their arrogance. It is not very helpful. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Exactly! | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:30:21 11/05/04 Fri And I mean "exactly" towards both Dave and Nick's comments. It is one of the problems but its origin is in age. England as one unitary, homogenous political, cultural and economic entity is 1300 years old. Scotland too, although I think that the evolution of a central government in Edinburgh came later... say, at most a mere 900 years ago. Difficult to overturn that overnight. But it is irritating when people say "England" to mean Britain... it makes me froth at the mouth, and I live in England! Foreigners are the worst at this, and in some cases it is not their fault: the Italians, for example, don't have a word for "British" except for "Britannico", which really refers to the ancient Britons as a tribe, not the modern sense of an adjective meaning "pertaining or refering to the United Kingdom"; so they just say "inglese". The Americans, though, have no excuse, and only the other day some Republican senator was talking about rebuilding the Atlantic alliance, and he said, "What's the point? In our future missions we'll be looking for the support of countries with military reach and experience, which doesn't mean France or Germany, it means England." Bit rude, considering that the chaps helping out the Yanks in the Triangle of Death this week are all Scots! And this sort of mistake doesn't help. Still, no-one can answer for anyone but himself; in which context, I can state that it is not a mistake that I ever make, and I am proud to call myself British. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: annoyance | |
|
Author: Owain (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:33:23 11/05/04 Fri Ed and Nick, you are both right about the annoyance of having my country reffered to as England. I get so mad about it (one time I got so mad about it on the paradox forum that they band me, which was the first time). Its such an insult towards me and the rest of Wales, plus Scotland and Northern Ireland. This is one of the reasons I wnat to see a united British sports teams, that way people will get used to saying Britain rather than Wales, England or Scotland. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Flower of Scotland vs God Save the Queen | |
|
Author: Deira Bernicia [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:58:08 11/05/04 Fri "It encourages them to sing about flowers of Scotland and killin gthe English for their arrogance." As opposed to God Save the Queen which had a verse about killing the Scots? [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Had, and only the rebellious ones | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:59:46 11/05/04 Fri GSTQ HAD a verse about killing Scots, and only the rebellious ones.:-) [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: It's still offensive | |
|
Author: Deira Bernicia [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:03:22 11/05/04 Fri You can't complain about one, without complainign about the other. Which do you want, an anti-English one reminding us of past atrocities or an anti-Scottish one reminding us of past atrocities? [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: But... | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:08:35 11/05/04 Fri But that verse is no longer part of GSTQ, and hasn't been for a long time. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Offensive anthems | |
|
Author: Deira Bernicia [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:11:09 11/05/04 Fri "But that verse is no longer part of GSTQ, and hasn't been for a long time." It's part of the original song. Perhaps forcing people to sing about religion and a foreign queen is offensive too. Even Jerusalem would be a better choice. Or land of hope and glory. They have better tunes. But still mention religion... what the hey..> The good news is that more and more Scots recognise GSTQ for what it is. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: 'Rebellious Scots to crush' wasn't part of the original song - it was inserted during the Jacobite rebellion, then erased. | |
|
Author: Nick (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 12:53:10 11/08/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: It still annoys many Scots though. I think GSTQ is an unsuitable anthem anyway nt | |
|
Author: Random Jock [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:11:19 11/08/04 Mon -- [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: not entirely true | |
|
Author: Owain (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:30:54 11/05/04 Fri Well as it happens there is no official version of GSTQ so you could argue that killing the scots is still part of it if you like. The Monarchy has has always refused to make any version pernament, thus allowing it to change with the times. Aslo note that at the time it was first written the jacobite rebellion was on everyones mind. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Anthems, teams etc | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 19:05:37 11/06/04 Sat “Perhaps forcing people to sing about religion and a foreign queen is offensive too” Please explain why the Queen is a foreigner? “Even Jerusalem would be a better choice. Or land of hope and glory” Jerusalem would make a good anthem for England, but I have always regarded Land of Hope and Glory to be a British, rather than an English song. I admit that I get quite annoyed when England sports teams sing the anthem of the United Kingdom. However, there is nothing to stop the Scottish teams singing it also. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening, and we will continue to sing Roy Williamson’s dirge of hatred for the foreseeable future. I’m with Owain here - unite the sports teams, and the problem is solved. It would be a fair deal - Scotland would participate in the best Rugby and Football teams in the world, and England would share in Curling glory! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Combined Team | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 19:27:26 11/06/04 Sat I would support a combined UK team in all sports apart from Rugby Union. If that happened the internation game would be destroyed! The Six Nation would become the 4 nations, with a weaker Ireland because Ulster players would be playing for the UK rather than an all-Ireland team. The Four Nations champion would simply be decided by whoever won the test between the UK and France. What would happen to the near sacred British and Irish Lions? Although they could still go on it would be less. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: We would have a better five nations... | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 19:34:20 11/06/04 Sat We would instead have a new five nations of the UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and France. This would be a much better tournament, where the winner would not be a foregone conclusion every year. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: too far to travel for each round - keep the teams as they are | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:20:16 11/06/04 Sat [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: 5 nations | |
|
Author: Ben.M(UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 21:10:37 11/06/04 Sat It would simply spoil the world cup. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Speaking of which... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:49:54 11/06/04 Sat Has anyone given any thought to a proposed FC anthem? I suppose that there ought to be one, as well as a flag and all that malarkey. Since Canada, NZ and Australia have stopped using 'God Save the Queen', it now has, I fear, the connotation of representing HM's subjects in the UK only, and as such would probably not be acceptable to the former dominions. Thoughts, anyone? [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Anthem | |
|
Author: David (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:15:04 11/07/04 Sun A recent poll in Australia had support for "God Save the Queen" as Australian anthem at 1%. I think we will need to find a new completely unbiased anthem. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Anthems | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Shropshire) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:51:49 11/09/04 Tue Bloke suggested to me an old Pan-Britannic hymn as an anthem. He seemed to think that it was written at the time of the New Imperialism, around 1890, but I rather fancy that the words were written during the 'Old' New Imperialism after 1759 and the music was written before 1870. Still, for what it's worth... Hills of the North, rejoice; River and mountain spring, Hark to the advent voice; Valley and lowland, sing; Though absent long, your Lord is nigh; He judgment brings and victory. Isles of the southern seas, Deep in your coral caves Pent be each warring breeze, Lulled be your restless waves: He comes to reign with boundless sway, And makes your wastes His great highway. Lands of the East, awake, Soon shall your sons be free; The sleep of ages break, And rise to liberty. On your far hills, long cold and gray, Has dawned the everlasting day. Shores of the utmost West, Ye that have waited long, Unvisited, unblest, Break forth to swelling song; High raise the note, that Jesus died, Yet lives and reigns, the Crucified. Shout, while ye journey home; Songs be in every mouth; Lo, from the North we come, From East, and West, and South. City of God, the bond are free, We come to live and reign in thee! It's fairly obvious, reading between the lines, that a lot of this is about the British Empire, especially the last verse: people from all parts of the globe, all races of the human family, 'coming home' to Jesus etc., cunningly worded in imperial cliches ('palm and pine' stuff) so that it can also mean the British administrators and soldiers coming home from all over the world to Blighty. I imagine that this hymn inspired Kipling's "The Flag of England", which in turn inspired the US Marine's battle hymn, which contains almost identical references to the non-geographical nature of their reach and influence - appropriate for the FC, whose concept of nationality is not geographical. Perhaps not appropriate for the US marines, though, who have difficulty subduing a small town occupied by a few hairy ne'er-do-wells armed with water pistols. Anyway, whatever you think of the words, I like the melody! Try and find a midi-file of it on the internet. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: if only we could take out the "Jesus" references ... | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:28:57 11/10/04 Wed [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Absolutely | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:45:06 11/10/04 Wed I quite agree. But, of course, we needn't remove the vague references to 'god', since people of whatever religion have some kind of god... except for the Buddhists, I suppose, but then we could hardly have a reference to Sidhartha Gautama and karmic oneness in the anthem: it would be a bit New Age for me. But, as Disraeli said, there should be some state acknowledgement of god, not just because he wanted to suggest that the function of the state had a spiritual as well as a material dimension, but also to acknowledge "our belief in morality and hope for the future of humanity". (A touch of Enoch Powell here, perhaps? "I never think of religion, but I believe that there should be an established Church and that the Queen shouldbe the head of it"...) That's why I think that the U.S.A.'s oath of allegiance and all that "in God we trust" stuff works so well: it doesn't say which god! But, to summarise: yes, enough with the Jesus bit already, but that doesn't mean that the anthem needs to be entirely secular. I accept that, even though, if I were pressed for a religious opinion, I would have to call myself an agnostic at best, and an atheist at worst. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Poll | |
|
Author: Roberdin [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:03:35 11/08/04 Mon Pffff, glad I'm far away from there. ;-) Could you provide a link to the aforesaid poll? And I suppose that 'Rule, Britannia!' is out of the question? :-P [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: God Save The Queen is still Canada's Royal Anthem | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:45:13 11/08/04 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |