|
 |
 | | | | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | You are in: Talking Point | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | | Monday, 15 October, 2001, 10:53 GMT 11:53 UK Land of hope and glory: Too jingoistic?  The words of Land of Hope and Glory have been altered for a major school music event in the UK. The original lyrics of the anthem were deemed "too jingoistic" in the current international climate. After a complaint from the National Union of Teachers, the organiser of the Schools Prom, Larry Westland, decided to rewrite part of the lyrics.
The anthem was dropped from the closing night of the annual Proms this year. The Conservative party also decided not to use it at their conference. Is Land of Hope and Glory too triumphalist in the current circumstances? Or is this an over-reaction? This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below. Your reaction
Tim, England Poppycock! The new lyrics are terrible and have no right to be sung. I feel great pride for my country whenever I sing it, and should be allowed to continue to do so. Isn't the UK supposed to be a democracy after all? Just further evidence of the existence of a nanny state. By the way, I am a teacher who doesn't go along with all these PC views (and I am sure there are thousands like me), so please stop blaming the teachers. We are dictated to by the Government, and therefore our hands are tied in many cases. I am British. I went to the BBC children's proms with my son last year because we are music lovers. I had always thought Land of Hope and Glory was patriotic, but inoffensive. I love Elgar, but why is his worst composition his best known? This time I realized that it was out of keeping with the concept of music as a universal art, to be enjoyed by all. In fact, I was accompanied by some very understanding and open-minded foreigners, but I found the song rather embarrassing, times have changed and I don't think at this level, we should be singing about our own country's might (and getting mightier) when we are trying to build a civilisation.
Patrick, England, UK Wow, I'm flabbergasted. It's a good song, an uplifting song showing pride in our country. Why do we have to feel guilty about that. I do wish that teachers would concentrate on their core task of teaching the curriculum and stop peddling their political opinions onto our children who have no choice but to listen. Unlike adults, they can't choose to walk out of a class or assembly if they don't agree with its message. That is not education, its indoctrination. Again, I've just been listening to a representative of the NUT. This nut suggested that some of their pupils are of the Muslim faith and may be offended. Does he think all Muslims are terrorist sympathisers? How insulting. As we keep hearing on a daily basis, this is not a war against Muslims but terrorists. Our armed forces are engaged in a fight for our freedoms. They are putting their lives on the line as I write and we won't even support them with a traditional song. Shame on us.
Peter Goff, UK Hmm, me thinks there are too many tabloid readers with an identity crisis of their own posting to this discussion. There's nothing smart about patriotism, it just means you blindly support your country no matter how much you disagree (or agree with it). I'm very glad the words have been changed. Just when I think the Guardian reading, guilt ridden & self-loathing left wing & liberal apologists in this country have reached their nadir then I'm shocked by another piece of misguided idiocy becoming public knowledge. When are we going stand up to them? They've also taken over our legal profession, local government, police & social services, what's next? However, reading through the comments on this page is encouraging as the majority of contributors here can see through this latest bit of stupidity for what it is. There's hope for us all. Orson Wells once said patriotism was the last refuge of the scoundrel. Whilst I had great admiration for the late filmmaker I couldn't disagree more with that comment. There's nothing wrong with a bit of patriotic pride and in times of national trauma & tragedy it's something that unites us & serves as a source of comfort.
Ross Johnson, UK When are we going to start taking pride in our country, which has defended democratic principals for over 200 years? The NUT have taken Political correctness to the point that it is an insult to our servicemen and women, and in a previous generation would have be called un-patriotic. Their view obviously of free speech is where people can only speak in bland terms in case it cases offence, which is not freedom of speech at all! I am sorry that at a time of national emergency, where we are under terrorist threat, this represents an act of virtual treason and they should be heartily ashamed of themselves! Which part of the song offends the NUT most? Is it the bit about hope? Or is glory not appropriate? Clearly, neither has any place in the NUT's agenda. Despair seems perfectly acceptable, of course, but then that can always be blamed on whichever government is standing in as the pantomime baddy of the day. I note sadly that even the phrase "mother of the free" was deemed offensive by your NUT thought police. I suppose they don't teach history anymore for fear of offending someone? If they did they would realize the undeniable accuracy of that statement. To our friends in the UK, sing it LOUD, in its original form! For those of you who are opposed, I suggest growing a spine.
Kay Roetman, The Netherlands I can't really believe that anyone can be as offended by the old words as I am by the new ones. It conjures up the image of a group of happy clappy anoraks in their 'Man at C & A' crimpolene trousers standing around a Hammond organ with a drum machine. Can you get any more offensive than that? I seems to me that the old lyrics highlight the values of hope, glory, and freedom, and that those values should have no boundary. I think these words are more appropriate now than any other time in history. I am British and live in America. I am proud of the hope, glory, and freedom in both countries.
Bill Kirk, USA As a Canadian, living in the USA, I still think Britannia rules the waves. Come on Brits, Lighten up and Praise your great country. God Bless England, Land of Hope and Glory! I am a teacher, I'm English and have lived in the United States for two years. I am absolutely outraged that the NUT have taken it upon themselves to change the words of Land of Hope And Glory! It's about time there was patriotism instead of political correctness. People here frequently fly their flags and my seven-year-old daughter pledges allegiance to the flag and sings a patriotic song every day at the start of school, as well as at the beginning of each Brownie meeting. Imagine doing that in good old multicultural England! Living here has opened my eyes to how frowned upon patriotism is at home and has actually made me more proud of my country. The Americans can certainly teach us English a thing or two and this country is a big melting pot of many different races and religions. Lastly, a plea to all those of you who are blaming teachers in general for this idiocy. Please don't tar us all with the same brush: we are not all left wing, politically correct puppets. There will, I'm sure, be many teachers who will be opposed to this move and as angry as I am about it.
America, a supposed 'melting pot' of multiculturalism, seems unabashed in its nationalism, and can be seen and heard singing its heart out at the drop of a photo opportunity, expectant and confident that all present will vigorously engage with like-minded zeal in strident self-affirmation. Meanwhile in the UK, we have relegated our comparatively innocuous tunes to the realms of unacceptability, or else, gerrymandered and "re-jingoed" into politically correct impotence. It is hard to imagine our troops whistling a number snatched from the current top 10 charts even if they could recall a 'tune', whereas, there is a good chance that someone stopped at random in the street could give a rendition of Land of Hope and Glory and probably a few of lyrics to boot. I think a song of this nature should be made the British national anthem. As a staunch anti-royalist I find it hard to sing the current anthem. Being part of a resounding choir is an exalting experience. It is achieved when almost everyone knows the tune and the words. One of the reasons for the decline in Church attendance is that clever choirmasters are forever changing the tunes and the words, so that the experience is completely lost.
Do you think they really mean 'bounds' as in boundaries? As it is, this reads as a celebration of what divides us. Perhaps they meant 'bonds'? If you're going to rewrite something, at least get someone literate to do it. Why do people compare decisions made in the past against what is tolerable today? The Empire may not have been perfect but consider the Monty Python phrase, "What have the Romans done for us?" In the case of the British Empire that would be: education, sanitation, transport, organised agriculture, defence, etc. What are we thinking of? What other country thinks of changing the words to its nationalist songs, and preventing people from waving the national flag? I think the Germans may have dropped a verse from their national anthem that was inappropriate following the Nazi era. Are we putting ourselves into the same category?
Ian King, USA In my view, Land of Hope and Glory or Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1, to give it its proper title, has always been jingoistic rubbish, especially as it is just a verse put onto someone else's tune. However, it is still seen by many as something that conveys national pride. I find it horrific that Doug McEvoy considers it inappropriate for Britons to show their pride in this way, when one has never seen the Americans prouder, considering it was they who were worst affected. If anything is inappropriate, it is the patronising attitude displayed by McEvoy and many others. I never thought I would be writing this note, or would ever need to do so. I am astounded to hear the report about changing the words of Land of Hope and Glory, and a possible ban, and that the NUT representatives think that we and our children should not be permitted to be patriotic, when our servicemen and women are defending our liberty in foreign lands. What an appalling example of muddled thinking. Mr McEvoy should be ashamed of setting this example to our children. Does being British mean nothing to him? Does the NUT wish us to apologise for being British? Are we not allowed to sing out, if we wish, as the Americans are? Mr McEvoy seems to have mixed up his lack of understanding of religious belief with patriotism. Perhaps the NUT doesn't go to the church, the synagogue or the mosque as often as previous generations of teachers. This display of mealy-mouthed ignorance and apologetic appeasement beggars belief. To think that this lack of leadership is put on public display at such a time and that this is the leader of NUT members, who has the responsibility for teaching rising generations of young Britons, is truly frightening. Surely this man does not truly represent the bulk of the profession of good teachers out there in the country, or does he? Mr McEvoy should remember that the terrorist atrocities in New York and Washington could so easily have been perpetrated here and similar events may still happen here in the near future. What price then his brand of courage and patriotism?
As an American, I feel that the people of the United Kingdom should take pride in their culture, their arts, their strength, and above all their willingness to stand up for what's right. I, for one, would like to see the 'bounds' of your honor and integrity be set 'wider and wider still.' You truly are the land of Hope and Glory. Teach your children to sing those words with pride. While I agree with the majority here that the song is great the way it is, I have to ask why did they choose to use this song, and then change the lyrics? Either you approve of it and keep it the same, or don't sing it at all. The changes make no sense - all they do is bring more attention to the original words and make a lot of people upset at yet another ludicrous intrusion of political correctness. This latest stunt is typical of the NUT. Throughout the 1980s my education was disrupted time and time again by their strikes and industrial action. It is largely due to them that teachers' status and credibility have fallen to such low levels today. Does it matter? I don't need the lyrics of a song or a pattern on a piece of cloth to remind me that I like my country. Childish arguments like "they don't do that for us" and petty obsessions with political correctness just make me like it a little less.
Mark, London, UK What the PC writers seem to have missed in their tepid new version is that the wish to "bring us closer together" in the world is being made possible for us today, in no small part by the achievements of Great Britain's Empire past. Oops...did I say a bad thing? Re: Gordon, UK - "Most of the comments on both sides are from men". Let's not make this even more politically correct by introducing male bashing as well! As to the change of lyrics, pointless, self-defeating and the new ones are awful! They sound like they were written for a boy band. This country may not be perfect, but it's a damn good place to live and its people have made a huge contribution to the world, that's something that should be celebrated. Surely 'Land of Hope and Glory' is more appropriate than 'God Save the Queen' which venerates a single person and insults the Scots or 'Jerusalem' which is pretty religion specific or is any patriotism now PC no-no? Interesting that so many adverse comments on this change have come from men. I agree with Vicki, that our bounds need not be wider and wider - and that at the moment there isn't much glory, just pain for the families of those who died in the World Trade Centre and Afghan civilians. Perhaps the audience at the schools prom should have been offered a vote on the choice of words? That way the issues would have been raised, but the apparent censorship would have been avoided.
Mark, United Kingdom We're the little liberals, Surely the first line 'Land Of Hope and Glory' isn't offensive and should have been kept? We do live in a strange country. A US citizen with his flag hanging from the window is assumed to be a patriot. An Englishman with the cross of St George hanging from his window would be assumed to be a racist bigot. And now this! Where did we go wrong?
Seth Black, UK I think that it was appropriate for the "Last Night of the Proms" to replace "Land of Hope and Glory" with the "Ode to Joy" last month, soon after the 11 September tragedy. It would have been responsible for the Schools Prom to follow this example, if they felt that there was something wrong with the words (I cannot see it myself). Rewriting them is just silly. It's the same kind of patronising attitude that led the Victorians to cover up bits of statues that offended them. I'd advise those attending to ignore this nonsense and just sing the proper words. The big problem is that these new words just aren't any good. The line "Sung by Everyone" is a waste, a repeat of the sentiment of line two. Whoever wrote it has just shoe-horned words to fit the tune. Good hymns work as poems too. There's another issue - it seems any mention of God is removed. ...and teachers wonder why we have such a low opinion of them. Yet another case of idiocy from the left-wing middle class apologists. The song is about freedom not war. It is about time we honoured our history instead of apologising and got on with moving forward.
Brian Naylor, England I have some New Words for the National Anthem;
John, France Change the teachers, not the words. Vicki of England is happy to sing 'Jerusalem'. I would have thought that a Western plot to steal the future Palestinian capital and rebuild it amongst 'dark satanic mills' (somewhere in the Midlands) would be inappropriate and even more offensive. Or maybe I'm taking the words much too seriously? Mahindra - the Germans haven't used the first verse of their national anthem since 1945. The "Deutschland, Deutschland uber alles" bit is deemed over the top. They always start with the second verse. I think it's too triumphalist under any circumstances, not just the present ones. I am proud to be English. I'm very happy to sing "Jerusalem" and I'm very happy to sing "God Save The Queen". But I never sing "Land of Hope and Glory", because the British Empire is dead and gone and this is an imperialist song. I'm glad someone has written new words to it, I don't want Britain's bounds to be set wider and wider, but I do want the world to come closer and closer. We don't have to lose our identity in the process. It's better than being annihilated in a nuclear war. Our children should be patriotic to the end. After all nobody has condemned Germany for their national Anthem, the first four words of which translate into "Germany Germany over all!" Let's get on with great sense of national pride in our country!
Tim Carding-Allen, UK How can anyone teach our children to become a good citizen, when they are so ashamed of this land; a land where the modern representative democracy, freedom and rule of law was born. How can those so-called educators teach our children what is right or wrong when they fear to offend the tyrants in this world? They are a disgrace of the democratic world and this act had insult all our forbearer and serviceman who gave their lives in the last war and all conflicts following to defend this land and her believes. It is time to stop apologising for bringing the rule of law, liberty and democracy to the rest of the world. More politically correct nonsense from the unions. You'd laugh if it wasn't so pathetic. If they spent half as much time looking after their members interests as they do dreaming up all this garbage Britain might be a far better place to work.
The leadership at NUT (I love that name) should try to remember that attempting to placate at every turn earns one nothing but contempt and invites further aggressive behavior. Humans admire the strong and will take advantage of the weak. You may not like it but it's human nature and unwise to ignore. Remember also that any good idea becomes dangerous if pushed too far. Try not to over-cogitate at every turn. Thank goodness the comments of the esteemed readership of the BBC website show that these Guardian-reading teachers with their (now even trumpeted by the Tories!) intolerance of intolerance are firmly in the minority. I find it offensive, however, that they are allowed to inflict their out of touch shoulder-chips on the youth of today. Talk of re-education!
Misbah, UK I'm sick and tired of being English, the ONLY race on the planet NOT ALLOWED to be patriotic or proud of our heritage. Political correctness has gone too far and needs to be stopped. It is a disgrace that such ignorant and intolerant attitudes are fed to our children. Shall we stop the teaching of British history as well as the singing of British songs? It is national identity and pride that binds people together, and such feeling does not immediately translate into hostility towards others. Only in the UK is this sort of nonsense allowed to happen. Why? Because the government is too scared of minority pressure groups to do anything about it. Tonight I'll be telling my family about the Battle of Waterloo!
Michael Entill, UK The teachers should be ashamed of themselves. They should be teaching the children to be proud of their country and it's traditions. Also not to allow terrorist murderers to force them not to display that pride. The Americans certainly haven't. One can only fear for the future with people like this and their attitudes teaching our children.
Nathan, UK 'N.U.T.' - a very appropriate name. If they had their way we would all live in a land of 'cotton wool' and call each other 'comrade'. I don't really get it at all. The Scots sing about sending the English home and God Save the Queen talks about crushing the Scots. As rightly stated by others, the Americans have songs about America, and why shouldn't we? They certainly never stopped singing it during the world wars, and if they had, would the British have made it through them? Times have changed. This bombastic nonsense is no longer appropriate. The British Empire is no more, and to suggest setting its bounds wider is nonsense. And incidentally, since the German national anthem has been mentioned in this column, let me point out that the verse beginning with "Deutschland, Deutschland �ber alles" has been removed from it. So the British are not alone in adapting their patriotic songs to the exigencies of the age.
James, UK Oh dear, more of the daft hand-wringing, self-loathing, bleeding heart tendencies of the liberal elite. Afraid to offend in the wishy-washy climate of shuffling, unctuous, inclusiveness. Give us a break. So it's going to be a crime to be British next? The political correctness and nannying to all rears its ugly head once more. The song is not about war aggression, nor border expansion, but is derived from a quote by Othello which is celebrating a return to freedom and all of its benefits. Of course, since it not PC to study Shakespeare any longer, few will realise this. Changing the words is just another way of eroding a British identity. Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance March No 1: grand tune! Land of Hope and Glory: very silly words and fourth rate poetry. Mind you the new Schools Proms text is even naffer. Elgar didn't really like the usual words himself. Yes, as a Promenader for over 30 years I think they are inappropriate.
Robert Collett, England Ah! Now I understand. All these years "Land of Hope and Glory" was really just a work in progress. Well, thank God the National Union of Teachers has finally finished it! Now perhaps they will tackle other great-unfinished works - Blake's "Jerusalem", perhaps, or "Rule Britannia". Yes, it is jingoistic and rightly so. We are at war with people completely opposed to our way of life. They use any psychological mechanism at their disposal to unify others under a banner of terror. We have to ensure that we use any means at our disposal to unify ourselves in the face of this aggression. Get a life! It's a harmless ditty! Who even knows the words? Mahindra Balasubramanian, to be exact, the first sentence of the German national anthem USED TO BE "Deutschland, Deutschland, �ber alles in der Welt". This stanza was banned after WWII and now the official anthem begins with "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit" (Unity, justice and freedom). Anyway, the Russian national anthem has been changed twice, so I do not see anything wrong with changing the lyrics. Coming from a former British colony and have to say that the lyrics of "Rule Britainnia" and "Land of Hope and Glory" do not appeal to me. Britain no longer has an empire, and it does not help to cling on to a vision of the glorified past with tinted spectacles. Far more positive is to work to build a better future for ourselves.
Anthony, UK This is typical of the unpatriotic left wing petty posturing that we have come to expect from the National Union of Teachers. What gives them the right to censor and impose their views on the children they are supposed to be educating? This is typical of the trendy, politically correct thinking that has robbed this country of it heritage, traditions and pride. When are we going to stand up to these people? Time and time again we are told we might upset someone. Sing it and sing it again along with our national anthem. I don't recollect the people of the US rewriting the words of "God bless America".
Kevin Flatman, UK In a time where all such conferences are being drowned out of public attention by events, there's no better a way to foster publicity than by attacking something perceived as dear to us British, and doing it in such a tooth-grindingly, politically correct manner is bound to stir the media. Pathetic thinking and predictable reactions all round. I'm getting a little bit tired of this "emotional correctness".
P, UK How pathetic it is to attempt to change these lyrics! Your military is in harm's way, and there are people afraid to celebrate their patriotism? Here in NYC, not only do we see American flags flying- but just yesterday, I saw a home flying a British Union flag. So sure the words are a bit jingoistic - they were written a 100 years ago. The UK has shown itself to be America's truest friend - celebrate that. I am appalled by this sickening act of political correctness. There is not enough patriotism in this country and there is certainly nothing jingoistic about this great song. Nowadays, if you wave the flag you're more likely to be branded a BNP party member than someone who believes in his country. Perhaps, instead of meddling with traditional songs, the NUT should concentrate on getting a grip on reality. They clearly don't seem to be on the same planet as the rest of the population. To feel pride for our nations achievements in the past, and to display strong patriotic feelings doesn't make a person a racist. To wave our flag is not a bad thing to do under any circumstances, and it doesn't make a person intolerant of other cultures. To sing the original lyrics in a climate where British service men and women are putting their lives on the line is not triumphalist, it shows unity and support for them. Unity is a word the NUT has not been too familiar with in the last few years.
Gwion Williams, I think the NUT should probably look to other ways in which they can help the youth of today learn about peace amongst nations without acting in such an unnecessary politically correct manner - are we trying to teach that spin is the right way? I am outraged that they believe the words to be offensive. Where is their loyalty? It's appalling that a country cannot sing its own praises - where has our sense of spirit and unity gone? American sings its songs to unite its people - we have the right to do that too - it is not up to the NUT or a teacher to decide the fate of this country's sovereignty. The song is more appropriate now than it ever was. As a matter of fact, it was not appropriate when Mrs. Thatcher rode roughshod over poll tax protesters and the trade unions. Today we can be proud to be able to enjoy civil liberties which were denied us in the past, and are still denied others in many parts of the world. The new lyrics sound like they were written by a Labour spin doctor. Of course it is not too jingoistic! We as a nation should be proud that we are bombing the world's poorest country forward to the stone age. Why are we so afraid of offending other cultures? They make no such allowances for us. We should follow the US example and sing all our patriotic songs from the roof tops. Ignore these politically correct luvvies who use society provided by heroes they despise to hate us from within. You don't find the Muslims changing their traditions just because someone might find them offensive. This is so sad. Should the Americans stop singing 'The Star Spangled Banner'? The worst part is that such a left-wing, politically correct organisation as the NUT is teaching our children. Pop music is far more aggressive and offensive than this harmless ditty. It appears that the politically correct tolerate offensive behaviour in contemporary music and actions, but anything old that makes the hair on the back of your neck stand up with pride is a politically correct "no-no". I'm looking forward to the backlash against the politically correct.
Mark, UK Rubbish. Another example of Political Correctness gone wrong. It makes me sick to live amongst such PC people. I cannot wait for the backlash against such idiotic people. In the modern world there is little place for this type of jingoistic rubbish. Far ahead of his time, Samuel Johnson said in 1775 that "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel". Isn't there a contradiction in trying to make songs less imperialist while waging war on Afghanistan? I bet most of the world would rather we kept singing but stopped bombing. It's a great song, even the Americans use it. It does not mention empire. Patriostism is different from Jingoism. Keep the lovely old version. The new words are even worse than the old. Elgar himself hated the words (he walked out of the performance) and they are quite awful. But to stop people singing them? If they want to sing them why stop them, isn't it a free country?
James, UK I cannot believe this! You can not change another artists work no matter what you feel it portrays. How can these teachers educate the children on the value of art, tradition and english culture if they keep changing everything? I wager no one would have been bothered by the lyrics if they simply kept them the same. But now it's a fine example of Political Correctness censorship - drawing far more attention to the anthem than ever would have happened before. Perhaps the best way to deal with this kind of rubish is to ensure that everyone with the oportunity sings the "real" words in an attempt to drown out the politicaly correct minority! Surely no one realistically thinks that when we sing the lyrics we are saying 'let's go out and enslave the world'. What possible objection there could be to the phrase 'mother of the free', or for that matter 'land of hope and glory'- Britain invented modern democracy, and being a nation full of hope and a desire for glorious achievement is a great aim. The idea that singing is an act that can unite everyone is foolish- the way to bring people together is to help them understand one another, not bombard them with platitudes.
Dean Welsh, Canada | | See also:  Other Talking Points: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|  Links to more Talking Point stories |
 | | ^^ Back to top News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © MMIII|News Sources|Privacy  |
