10 Mar 2010
Canada recently dropped a proposal to change the country’s national anthem by making it more gender-inclusive (read the BBC report). This has inevitably prompted many Brits to ask if our national anthem should be changed, or even replaced.
Pretty much everyone is agreed that the current national anthem is a dirge – and no one seems to know the words past the first couple of lines anyway.
Surely the British national anthem should celebrate the British people and our fantastic achievements. But God Save the Queen is about glorifying inherited power rather than being proud of our country. (And it’s interesting to note that it doesn’t even mention Britain until the fifth verse.)
God Save the Queen doesn’t represent Britain’s 10 million republicans and it doesn’t represent atheists – or in fact people of any religion other than the established church.
The question is, what do we replace it with? And whose anthem is it? Is it the English anthem too? In which case, do the English need their own new anthem, just as the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish have theirs? Should a new anthem be the anthem of Britain or the UK? What sentiments should be expressed in an anthem, and do we need an anthem at all?
Are there any existing tunes or songs we could adopt, or do we need something completely new? What do you think?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 10th, 2010 at 9:21 am and is filed under General, National anthem. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Comments are now closed.
Facebook
Twitter
March 10th, 2010 at 9:33 am
We don’t actually have a national anthem. We have a horribly obseqious set of words set to a woefully horrible piece of music, but we don’t have an anthem that celebrates being British. With the number of talented musicians we have in this country, finding an alternative can’t be very difficult.
I was going to suggest a Saturday night TV contest to find a national anthem, but I really can’t see Andrew Llloyd-Webber as anything but a monarchist brown-nose, so don’t think that will fly. Especially on the BuckHouse Broadcasting Company.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:17 am
It’s not broken, so why ‘fix’ it?
The national anthem is a little dull, and not terribly rousing, but surely this is still more becoming than the proposed alternatives?
Rule Britannia, Land of Hope and Glory, Jerusalem? Even I Vow to Thee My Country seems a little bit out of sync with our current lack of empire. All of the proposed alternatives seem strange and bombastic – and shouldn’t we leave that sort of thing to the French?
March 10th, 2010 at 10:19 am
I think the national anthem should reflect the country’s aspirations and goal from a huamnitarian perspective, not an outdated imperalistic one.
National anthems should reflect commun purpose and unity across cultural, social and religious divides.
Run an national competition for the music and another one for the lyrics. Easy!
March 10th, 2010 at 10:19 am
Absolutely we need a new national anthem, the present one makes me cringe every time I hear it. Sadly, or is it happily, I only had to cringe once at the recent winter Olympics but we are I believe, the only nation in the world whose anthem sings about it’s monarch rather than the nation itself.
As Dave Godfrey said, it can’t be hard for our songwriters to come up with an new anthem.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Frankly, whenever our national teams line up for the anthems, I cringe. It’s a miserable, pompous ode to monarchy and imperialism, quite out of keeping with the values or aspirations of a modern nation.
I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t have an English anthem as proud as the Welsh and Scottish ones. However, Land of Hope and Glory – preferred by many – is another imperialist hymn, whose words and music are equally cloying. It’s time to stop aspiring to having our bounds set wider and to being mightier.
South Africa is a good example of a country which cast off a primitive and unjust tradition, and reinvented itself. It came up with a new anthem to reflect its hopes, progress and aspirations – as well as its pride in multiculturalism.
Surely it wouldn’t be difficult for some talented musicians and lyricists to come up with a modern anthem which genuinely reflects what we are proud of and what we aspire to as either Britons or English people?
Instead of droning on about some ridiculous old bat with a handbag.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:28 am
We need to scrap what is a very antiquated piece of royalist music! Says nothing at all about England, the Scots and Welsh have at least got their own which they play instead of god save the Queen. Shows how undemocratic this country is, no one will give a vote on the matter as it’s clear what the result would be and we don’t want to upset the Queen now do we!! Time for another Cromwell to get rid of this lot of inbreed Germans.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:36 am
I think it unlikely that the Welsh, Scots and Irish will allow their anthems to be dislodged. So we are talking about the English anthem. I agree it is awful and cringe inducing. I would go with Billy Connolly’s suggestion of the theme from The Archers – Barwick Green – with suitable lyrics that do not toady all over the monarch.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:44 am
I think Land of Hope and Glory is a magnificent piece of music. Yes, it’s not perfect – there are certainly parts of it that should be omitted – but it is inspirational music and actually celebrates the country. What does GSTQ do? It celebrates one woman; nothing to do with the nation. Surely, it is a prerequisite of a “national” anthem that it has something to do with the nation!
March 10th, 2010 at 10:59 am
Whilst considering the adoption of a new national anthem, let’s look at the context in which the current national anthem “God Save the King/Queen*” came about.
The song was composed by Thomas Arne (who also composed “Rule Britannia”) and first performed at the time of the Jacobite invasion of England. Charles Stuart had raised a Scottish army with a view to restoring the Scottish dynasty and he advanced as far South as Derby before being pushed back into Scotland and eventual defeat at Culloden in 1746, one of the most violent and brutal parts of British history where “Butcher” Cumberland and his army killed thousands of Scots, many in cold blood.
So the sentiment of the words of all five current verses is very much contained within a real threat of a “regime change” as we would call it today. A sixth verse, urging English officer, Marshall Wade, to crush the rebellious Scots was later removed but this still leaves the anachronistic intent of the present day version.
So here we had another intra-family squabble between a narked would-be head of state and the incumbent within which everyone is expected to contribute under the feudal practice of the time and where the prognosis is always one of violent intercession.
And yet many people are still of the opinion that this low-point in Scottish and English history should be celebrated in our national song.
* – delete as appropriate
March 10th, 2010 at 11:11 am
Not too sure about this, but I always seethe when I hear the ‘National Anthem’ played at England matches, when Scotland, Ireland and Wales have their own anthems!
I also think about those who may be Republicans (Wayne Rooney, perhaps, as he didn’t sing along to it, when England played Egypt last week – or he may not have known the words!)
Maybe something that we can all identify with; something easy to learn, and catchy (Paul McCartney could be asked to write something, perhaps)
March 10th, 2010 at 11:19 am
I’d also be interested to hear how you think we could go about changing the anthem. God Save the Queen is not official, it’s just a convention.
So how can we start a new convention?
March 10th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Apart from being philosophically corrupt and archaic, the present national anthem is actually damaging for the national character, in that it mindlessly recites a sychophantic mantra to a personification echoing a system of social order of benevolent subjugation that is irrelevant to the modern lives of the citizens of this nation.
Blindly chanting such guff is ridiculous.
I have thought for some time now that an anthem based on the Land of Hope and Glory by Sir Edward Elgar would be immeasurably preferable.
March 10th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
The National Anthem is a cringe inducing dirge and a major embarrassment whenever it is played. Even worse is when one of the Windsor family are present. No self respecting person could allow this to be done to them and yet they stand there oozing smugness. Further, as a Scotsman I think they removed a verse about frustrating our knavish tricks which really upsets me in that they don’t have the courage of their convictions. The only worse thing is seeing Charles Windsor and sometimes even his dad poncing about in kilts.
The National Anthem is all about slavish admiration – “gracious”, I ask you? – for an unelected monarch and her family determined to hang on to influence and money and promote a class system that rots the core of democracy.
March 10th, 2010 at 12:34 pm
@ Broga
The bit about “knavish tricks” is still in the current version of the anthem. The “missing” sixth verse is….
“Lord, grant that Marshal Wade,
May by thy mighty aid,
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush and like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush,
God save the King.”
….and I think may be the lyric you are referring to! (see my note #9 above). No wonder that you Scots have acquired your own anthem “Flower of Scotland” which yearns for the days of Bannockburn, I believe, and retaliates against the sentiment of “God Save the [enter name here]“
March 10th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
I think we should have an uplifting tune with no lyrics. Lyrics seem to get outdated with time or hi-jacked by one group or another. Either that or we write it into law that the anthem should be revised every 25 years, so that people know to expect (even push for) it to always reflect the direction of the country.
One thing is for sure, our current national anthem is a joke. As an atheist republican Scot I’m not sure why they would expect me to spring to my feet to sing along to “God Save the Queen”.
I would also like to point out that Scotland has no official national anthem, and though many seem to think “Flower of Scotland” is our anthem it is not. “Flower of Scotland” is as petty and irrelevant as “God Save the Queen”.
I have already withdrawn my support for the Scottish team at the 2010 Commonwealth Games after they overwhelmingly voted for “Flower of Scotland” to represent them.
March 10th, 2010 at 1:15 pm
I’m with your first respondent, Dave Godfrey, where he says the British “don’t actually have a national anthem.”
What they’ve got is a hymn to one Briton.
The two things could not be more different.
March 10th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
@ Martin G. Many thanks. And I thought they had removed it. Sad to say too many Scots do suck up to the Windsors. All this stuff about their visits to Crathie Church and their special pew and their sad (increasingly elderly) admirers lining up to watch them driving past. There is, however, a tougher, younger breed, many teachers amongst them, who take a more aggressive and republican stance. One of them told me, some years ago, that the lines of kids with their little flags, were organised to wait – in the cold sometimes – till the “Royal Party” went past. As he asked, “Where do you think these flags appear from, how do you think these kids appear – by magic?”
I experienced this myself some years ago when I was over the Border in Carlisle. I was stopped by a policeman getting to a shop because they were waiting for Princess Anne to drive past. So all traffic, shopping, freedom to move where we chose was stopped while we waited for Anne Windsor to swan past. She was on her way to meet with every freeloading local politician in area. No invitations for for the plebs; the saw the “event” of Border Television later and read about it in the local paper.
March 10th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
@ Liam
I agree LoH&G is rousing but some of it would have to be changed -
‘wider still and wider shall thy bounds be set’ seems too militaristic and
reminiscent of the Nazi wish for Lebensraum in Eastern Europe
@Broga
@Martin G
knavish tricks was changed in 1829 after the Catholic Emancipation Act. Before that it was papish tricks …..!
I personally think it is not just humiliating but silly to call on an illlusion to save an anachronism. It was good to see that everybody here so far has agreed. We need to foment a groundswell of opinion.
March 10th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
The National Anthem is not PC or inspiring in the least. It is a dirge, is tired and well past it’s sell by date a bit like the monarchy itself. I can’t think of anything better to demonstrate how totally out of touch the monarchy is, both belong to different age.
What is required is a new piece of uplifting music, that carries no baggage from earlier times.
March 10th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
We certainly need to get rid of asking god to save the queen. What a nonsense. I haven’t got time to give this a lot of thought, but I think we need an anthem. My support would not be withheld from ‘I vow to thee my country’. The music is fine; perhaps the lyrics need tweaking, but I like the notion of serving my country rather than an aggressive diatribe against all foreigners. I would oppose Land of Hope and Glory or Jerusalem. A competition for a totally new anthem would be fine, though I fear it would be taken over by the world of pop and we’d finish up with the usual brainless, tuneless, caterwauling. Perhaps I am getting old!
March 10th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
For England: Land of Hope and Glory is wonderful – and as long as it’s never used for the sovereign state of the UK, it can hardly be seriously described as imperialist, can it – but I personally prefer Jerusalem.
For the UK: I Vow to Thee my Country is fine by me – only problem is that the tune is used as the anthem of the Rugby World Cup.
March 10th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Britain’s National Anthum should be “Come Togther” by the Beatles! God Save the Queens isn’t very representative since not everyone on Britain approves of the queen or believes in God!
March 10th, 2010 at 7:44 pm
I can’t stand The Beatles
March 10th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
Perhaps something completely new should be composed,not necessarily by pop musicians/Lloyd Webber etc. What is wrong with some new talent ?. I have a feeling that a lot of entertainers are rather pro-monarchy,so we want a genuine republican and rounded approach. Words can be good to sing, but again, we should try new talent and be careful about the words used. We don’t want any poet laureates ,surely. ? They would be sycophants wouldn’t they ?
March 10th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
“I’d also be interested to hear how you think we could go about changing the anthem. God Save the Queen is not official, it’s just a convention.
So how can we start a new convention?”
There’ll always be an England is my fave! great song and it was written when we needed it most.
How do we change the anthem? A grass roots campaign to get it on the football terraces would be a great start! especially with a world cup coming up. If both the campaign and the team on the pitch do well, this would surely shorten the odds of making it possible!
You could also tap up the Barmy army and see if they’re willing to get in on the act.
http://www.barmyarmy.com/contact/
Don’t bother trying to get in with those brown noses at the FA. William Windsor is ambassador and they’re too pro-establishment anyway!
March 10th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
How about the ‘Message’ by Grandmaster Flash? Perfect for Credit Crunch Britain (and of course America):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4o8TeqKhgY
Seriously, I for one do not see the British national anthem as particularly uplifting, rousing or unifying, unless one sees uniting sycophants as such! It would make a funeral even more solemn and depressing!
Came across this a while ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRvVzaQ6i8A
Marvin Gaye sings the US national anthem as a soul song! Others may dissagree, but I thing he pulls it off! Could the British anthem ever be sung as sweetly?
Or how about the Soviet national anthem sung by Paul Robeson in English:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtU3vUOa2sw
Even if you don’t agree with the words (the bit about the Soviet Union living through the ages is surely ironic), you have to admit that the music is very stirring!
March 10th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
I tell you what, I’m a musician, I’ll write us a new national anthem, shall I?
We’ll use this blog as the drafting vehicle! What do we want to include in it??
@ iMatt
We’re not really helping dispel stereotypes of us as commies if we’re posting Soviet Union youtube clips!
La Marseillaise is still the best of the lot, bar the bloodthirsty lyrics.
March 10th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
Following the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II there will be a debate about changing the national anthem, that will be the right time for such a debate and i and many others (including those with power) would strongly oppose any change until that point.
However following the death i would support some form of change so England/UKs anthems are not the same. Of course the problem as always is what do we change it to, as people have different tastes.
Id also just like to say for those who are condemning the anthem as it doesnt represent atheists, i do not believe in god but i have no problem at all singing the anthem and im sure many others do not either. This is a Christian nation and we should remember our heritage and be proud of it.
New anthems could be made but i seriously doubt anything decent would be made by todays artists, not much would impress me and it would have to be something like Australia or Canadas. I would rather stick with traditional anthems. Land of Hope and Glory would be good for the British anthem, it should not be used for England. I wouldnt oppose Jerusalem for England, although that is religious too and would be strange when singing it against Israel at sports. God save the King would then just be played when the King or a senior royal is in attendance and after Land of Hope and Glory at major national events excluding sports.
so…
England: Jerusalem (or some modern song, but it would have to be damn good).
United Kingdom: Land of Hope and Glory.
Royal Anthem: God save the King.
March 10th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
Liam, sorry!
Mind you, I did say people may not agree with the words! And I did at least counter balance it with the US anthem! Yes, the French do have a good anthem too!
March 10th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Simon,
What leads you to believe there will be a debate on the anthem following the death of the queen?
I also dispute that this is or should be considered a ‘christian’ nation.
I wonder if you can tell me why exactly would we have any pride in the fact that christianity used to be rife among the population? Should we be proud of the slavery it promoted? Should we be proud of its repression of women? Should we take pride in the discrimination it promotes? Religion should fully and formally stripped from anywhere it still remains in our government and constitution.
March 10th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Darren Maxwell,
Because following the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II a debate on the continuation of the monarchy will take place, although i think we will keep it but that is the time to make some of the serious reforms people here want. I expect following her death most or all of Her Majesty’s other realms will become republics. Which means we can then easily change the line of succession to deal with the discrimination to women / catholics and make certain other major changes. Whilst i support the monarchy, i am not against reforms. I just do not think any change is needed or desirable whilst Queen Elizabeth II is on the throne.
I am not a fan of religion so i have sympathy for the position you take, however we should not forget our heritage and Christianity helped shape our country. At a time when many British people are concerned about the growing islamification of Europe now is not the time to undermine Christianity or the State religion.
March 10th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
Simon,
There is no downtime in our monarchy, the second brain activity ceases in the queen Charles is king. You can debate all you like, but he’s king regardless. Have you never heard the phrase “The king is dead, long live the king”? Lets discuss the issues now.
Religion may have shaped this country but not for the better! It should be remembered as a warning not as something to be proud of.
If you perhaps took time to look into it you’d find that the islams market share in this country is not increasing at any significant rate at all. Regardless your argument is no different to saying we should counter the threat of swine flu by spreading bird flu. It makes no sense at all!
In fact what better way to counter “islamification” than to say “We’re a secular society and we respect the rights and freedoms of all, we educate our population with reason and logic, and we’re not interested in your sky fairy’s opinion on this.”
March 10th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
The only thing I can say for certain is that I hate God save the queen. It’s a depressing, awful dirge. I have no particular favourite but Land of Hope and Glory with perhaps a few word changes could fit the bill.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Simon
It’s a bit hard to claim this is a christian nation when most people in it are not christians.
What’s so difficult about looking for a new anthem for the whole Union (and another for England) that genuinely represents the country as it is today?
I think a number of stirring tunes have been mentioned, but as some have pointed out most would need some new words.
What about the idea of having an anthem with no words? That could potentially widen the scope for a new tune.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:30 pm
Oh, and apologies for the blog pages looking a bit of a mess… getting ready for releasing the revamped website on Friday. A new and improved service will be available soon.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
@ Graham,
I’m astounded to find that for once, I agree with Simon here even though you might not like it!
Constitutionally, we ARE indeed a Christian nation. You forget that the Head of State is also the head of the established church. The House of Lords cannot even sit unless there is a bishop present. As Louis v14.0 of France once said: “L’etat, c’est moi”
On these very pages some time ago, there was a comparison between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Great Britain….. the result was that Great Britain is more of a Christian nation than Iran is an Islamic Republic. And who’d have thought that?!
As a Christian myself, I do not advocate an established church. The church would do much better if it were able to challenge the state on social issues such as poverty, corruption and education.
A secular state allows all religions, beliefs and creeds breathing space. Therefore, becoming a secular republic would clearly necessitate the introduction of a new national anthem.
Or should we be totally different and not have an anthem at all? Imagine athletes receiving their 2012 gold medals after a respectful silence! Maybe not, perhaps!
March 11th, 2010 at 9:49 am
@Martin G
You’re describing a Christian state, not a Christian country. And even that Christian state has been, to some extent, diluted to the point of irrelevance. The Bishops in the Lords and the monarch’s position as head of the state church do not have an overriding influence on the nature of the British state as they may have done.
Anyway, I’m in danger here of breaking my own rules by going off topic.
March 11th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Alternative national anthem: I vow to thee my country (tune: Thaxted, by Gustav Holst)
Favourite national anthem: Mazourek Dabrovskiego (Poland). It stirs up the blood!! “March, March Dabrovski!!”
March 11th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
A revised versions of God Save the King/Queen or Rule Britannia would be a good idea.
March 11th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I do not think there is any harm in showing a clip of the stirring Russian national anthem.Unfortunately it was used by a dictatorial regime that was the perversion of true Socialism. There is no doubt that it represented many powerful uniting forces . The music is still used today in Russia. This is due to its power. Showing an appreciation of a good anthem like this does not associate us with Communism. There is also a stirring Methodist hymn called “Christ the Victorious” which was originally composed by a Russian called Lvov. This music was used as an old Tsarist anthem. Very stirring and inspiring it is too.
March 11th, 2010 at 6:44 pm
So, Kanaris, are you prepared to take up the challenge of explaining exactly why you continue to support the monarchy despite your belief that the British constitution is in dire need of an overhaul, or have you in fact gone republican on the QT?
March 11th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
Rule Brittannia? You may as well have said Greensleaves only with the Royal harpist and the kings singers
March 12th, 2010 at 12:31 am
@Ash Walsh
I just like it for the melody. It’s very British to me (or at least more British than God Save the King/Queen).
March 12th, 2010 at 8:49 am
Darren
Sorry for the late reply, of course following the Queens death we will have a King, but during that kings reign is the time to debate the issue of the monarchy, the British people are overwhelmingly in support of our current monarch and there for no action is needed. This country has huge problems that need urgently addressing, messing around with our constitutional monarchy is not a good idea.
Whilst i am not religious it sometimes can help to have the moderate Christian religion and i would rather we not undermine Christians right now as it will simply allow the Islamists to grow stronger. You say the Islamic population has not been growing, i would love to see evidence of that. Sadly we have to wait until the 2011 census to find out the damage done by New Labour who over the past 10 years have engaged in mass importing labour voters. Over 1 million people have been issued British citizenship in those 10 years, quite a few of them are muslim.
I partly agree with you on countering them with a secular society, the trouble is many seculars are left wingers and they are too afriad to take on the islam. Like those in the liberal democrats for example.
Graham Smith
If a decent new anthem was possible then i wouldn’t object, the trouble is i can not imagine there being much agreement about what should be included and the type of anthem. For instance for the UK one i would want it to take into account our glorious imperial past, yet others would oppose that because its not “politically correct”.
I agree that just having the tune or changing some of the words to a traditional tune may be suitable. Like changing some of the words to Land of Hope and glory to get rid of the God bit. It would be easier just to use the old traditional songs though, in the way England switched from GSTQ to Hope and Glory at Commonwealth Games.
March 12th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Our” glorious “imperial past would not be opposed on the grounds that it was politically incorrect,but because it just was not so “glorious” after all. We were not the only country guilty of interefering with other countries on a grand scale,of course, but nobody can justify our past behaviour in some instances.We meshed in very well with India because we were riddled with a class system not far removed from their own “caste” system. What have we actually done for India ?
March 12th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
Barry:
What have we actually done for India?
I think we should give credit where credit’s due here. The basic framework of parliamentary democracy and the rule of law, the railways, the now booming economy, cricket, do spring to mind!
March 12th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
I’m not that sure I’d be bigging up our work with India, Matt!
March 12th, 2010 at 11:03 pm
I think this is one of those topics best continued by email, Liam! Have to wait until late tomorrow afternoon though.
March 13th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Dear Matt, Thanks. You are right of course.There are some good things . However I was thinking more of the negative side such as poverty,lack of sanitation etc . Does the booming economy actually help most of the population.?
March 13th, 2010 at 11:22 pm
What have we actually done for India?
Didn’t Gandhi’s famous quote sum up what Britain had done for India?
When asked about what he though of Western civilisation, he answered succintly:-
“I think it would be a good idea”
March 14th, 2010 at 2:00 am
Barry:
Fair point, although one must ask how much worse that would be without the British infrastructure; and when you consider the sheer size of India, it becomes clear that despite all the poverty and corruption, the country is much better governed than most other developing countries.
The one big problem I have is that the Indian government sees fit to spend money on nuclear weapons, lunar probes and aid to other countries – money which it could and arguably should spend on alleviating poverty in their own counry – yet we still see fit to give them aid. We should pull no punches in getting the message across that this has got to stop.
March 14th, 2010 at 9:57 am
How did we get onto a discussion about India? On that topic, on paper their democracy seems fairly sound (from what I know of it). Their biggest problems seem to stem from various cultural and political problems which exacerbate their economic woes.
March 14th, 2010 at 10:59 am
Sorry Graham. Barry asked, in the context of imperial glorification, what we’ve done for India, so – mindful of the need to keep the debate fair – I pointed out that we did leave something of a positive legacy there.
I would sure like to know if Kanaris is going to make good his/her promise to reveal the fullness of his/her views on the monarchy v republic debate any time soon…
March 14th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
Dear Matt. Thanks. Good points. Yes, I can see that there have been good and bad things about some of our occupations in the past. I rather concentrated for some reason ,in the back of my brain,upon the rather negative aspects of some of our “glorious heritage” which have been extolled by one “Simon”. Perhaps I should kick the Simon/Reaction habit once and for all !
Dear Graham, Sorry ! My fault for going off the point re India
March 14th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Simon
I disagree. Deciding the future of our country is something which should always be done in the present, not the future. The future is always tomorrow!
I also disagree with your views on religion, for the same reasons I stated before and to which you have yet to respond.
March 14th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
the latest cutting edge debate on GStQ on Radio 4 – it is played as the last item at 0100h after the weather forecast and Sailing By. This topic was featured on Friday’s Feedback on Friday. One correspondent wanted to know if we were all meant to leap out of bed and stand to attention…….! Others though complained that it was there at all. One BBC type said people liked it as it was traditional and he didn’t want to remove it. There is a repeat of this discussion on Feedback at 8pm this evening. Anyway we can still write to Feedback and complain about the BBC attitude for next Friday’s programme.
@ Liam – I remember you were shocked to hear that GStQ used to be played in cinemas – did you realise it closed the Radio 4 evening still? I knew it was on and always avoid it but I think this is a good opportunity to complain bitterly.
March 14th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
Yes, gstq was always played in cinemas when I was growing up in the fifties. I can vaguely remember there were a few people who insisted on standing until the horrid interminable dirge had finished, and who scowled and tutted at the likes of me pushing past to escape, but most of the cinema-goers, even in those more deferential times, just traipsed out onto the street.
March 18th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
Change it to good save Icesave. But in all seriousness remove all reference to royalty soon as possible (but it us up to you to find out what you will change it too) I personally thing Royalty is wrong anywhere you find it.