Fab Foodie
Legendary Member
I was thinking ‘Land of Confusion’ by Genesis would be aposite….
Enhanced Britishness
- Thread starter cookiemonster
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Fab Foodie
Legendary Member
Land of Hope and Glory is Imperial and Colonial bollox and should be ditched.
Jerusalem has merits, but the link to Christian religion may no longer be appropriate for a modern forward-thinking nation.
Bromptonaut
Rohan Man
- Location
- Bugbrooke, Northants
The tune of I Vow to Thee My Country is suitably uplifting but it needs new non jingoistic words.
Pale Rider
Veteran
The lyrics look fairly innocuous to me, hardly worth making a fuss about one way or the other.
It's always interesting how those who profess to support freedom are all in favour of censorship when it's something they don't like.
My view is ripping pages from the history books is not to be encouraged, even if I don't approve of that part of the narrative.
Land of hope and glory
Mother of the free
How shall we extol thee
Who are born of thee
Wider still and wider
Shall thy bounds be set
God who made thee mighty
Make thee mightier
God who made thee mighty
Make thee mightier yet
Land of hope and glory
Mother of the free
How shall we extol thee
Who are born of thee
Wider still and wider
Shall thy bounds be set
God who made thee mighty
Make thee mightier yet
God who made thee mighty
Make thee mightier yet
Source: Musixmatch
Songwriters: Edward Elgar / Benson
Land of Hope and Glory lyrics © Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers Ltd
swansonj
Regular
Clearly this won't be to everyone's taste though
(by a gay Christian poet and priest called Jim Cotter)
Pale Rider
Veteran
Perhaps @Fab Foodie and @Bromptonaut could explain how the two songs are 'imperial and colonial bollox' and 'jingoistic', because I can't see it.
swansonj
Regular
Hi Pale Rider, please could you point me to the place in this thread where anyone has argued for censorship, as opposed to suggesting what their own preference is? Or were you not alluding to anyone on this thread, just to something in the world outside?
Pale Rider
Veteran
Fabbers said Land of Hope and Glory should be 'ditched'.
Brompton said I Though to Thee My Country needs 'new words'.
Both those actions deny the rest of us access to the original version in one way or another.
That is the definition of censorship.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Surely:
"Land of Hope and Glory is Imperial and Colonial bollox and should be ditched.
Jerusalem has merits, but the link to Christian religion may no longer be appropriate for a modern forward-thinking nation."
and
"The tune of I Vow to Thee My Country is suitably uplifting but it needs new non jingoistic words."
are advocating removing certain lyrics from public view, because some people find them disagreeable?
This may not exactly be a "British Board of Censorship" applying "U" and "X" certificates, but, to my mind, it is Censorship.
For the record, as I have said earlier, I am not in favour of flag waving, jingoism etc, but, I do like a bit of freedom.
mudsticks
Squire
Bromptonaut
Rohan Man
- Location
- Bugbrooke, Northants
Fabbers can speak for himself.
Where did I say that Sir Cecil Spring Rice's words should be banned? They're out there in millions of hymn books and umpteen recordings. If, you want it at your funeral, or the Vicar wants it on Sunday that's fine.
The tune, Thaxted by Holst, is also the main theme in Jupiter from his Planet's Suite; a good and rousing melody for a National Anthem.
Sir Cecil's words, fine in their time before WW1, seem dated and, yes, jingoistic.
I'm no poet and I'm not making any suggestions but I'm sure a national competition could come up with something.
Bromptonaut
Rohan Man
- Location
- Bugbrooke, Northants
As per my reply to @Pale Rider I'm simply suggesting using the tune for a new national anthem but with different words.
swansonj
Regular
Errr... sorry, but in my book, giving your opinion as to how public taste would beneficially change is not censorship. Censorship would be banning you from singing the original. Censorship would be pulping all copies of the original. Censorship would be penalising any website which kept the original words up. Censorship would be banning schools from using the original words in lessons. Arguing that you prefer one set of words over another and hoping that your view might in time come to prevail is not censorship and to call it thus sounds, IMO, a little desperate.
(since I typed this, other people have said the same thing, but I got sidetracked between typing and pressing send...)
(since I typed this, other people have said the same thing, but I got sidetracked between typing and pressing send...)
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
OK. Point taken. Apology tendered. I see no problem in using the tune and leaving existing version in circulation, for those who may want it. Not me as it happens, but, that is not the issue.
Pale Rider
Veteran
'Ditching' one song and rewriting the lyrics of another for public consumption is seeking to restric the access of the public to the originals.
It is a form of censorship, and possibly worse, an example of 'I know what's good for the rest of you', which is not an attitude I can agree with.
It is a form of censorship, and possibly worse, an example of 'I know what's good for the rest of you', which is not an attitude I can agree with.
