This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I'm not particularly republican but how can we have a national anthem that doesn't even mention the nation (whether it be UK, GB or England), let alone extol it's virtues. We just have a dirge that goes on about giving gifts to our monarch (as if they aren't rich enough already)
My vote would be for Rule Britannia for UK (but may need to tweak the words to ensure Northern Ireland is included ) and Land of Hope and Glory for England (good job Elgar)
A minimum compromise would be to add extra verses to the existing Anthem (no worse than Germany removing verses from its national anthem)
My vote would be for Rule Britannia for UK (but may need to tweak the words to ensure Northern Ireland is included ) and Land of Hope and Glory for England (good job Elgar)
A minimum compromise would be to add extra verses to the existing Anthem (no worse than Germany removing verses from its national anthem)
1
3
2
In reply to kevin stephens:
Land of Hope and Glory is most certainly not just about England but about Britain.
Jerusalem is absolutely right for an English anthem, great for football matches etc, but I really hope we don't make too much of this. Our national anthem is still our national anthem, and there is far too much dangerous bollocks being talked already about England being a 'nation'. It's just not correct. It's 100 per cent incorrect, and really bad news, being a poisonous idea for our whole culture (and nation).
Land of Hope and Glory is most certainly not just about England but about Britain.
Jerusalem is absolutely right for an English anthem, great for football matches etc, but I really hope we don't make too much of this. Our national anthem is still our national anthem, and there is far too much dangerous bollocks being talked already about England being a 'nation'. It's just not correct. It's 100 per cent incorrect, and really bad news, being a poisonous idea for our whole culture (and nation).
7
2
In reply to kevin stephens:
I think we should have Oops Up-Side Your Head.
It won't offend anybody and its easy for footballers to sing so they don't have to pretend
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
pay attention now
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
now I want all you gappers, and finger snappers
you toe tappers and you love rappers
I think we should have Oops Up-Side Your Head.
It won't offend anybody and its easy for footballers to sing so they don't have to pretend
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
pay attention now
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
say oops upside your head say oops upside your head
now I want all you gappers, and finger snappers
you toe tappers and you love rappers
9
In reply to Kevin stephens Gordon Stainforth:
to add my 2d worth to this are we all familiar withe the full text,
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!
to add my 2d worth to this are we all familiar withe the full text,
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!
5
In reply to Babika:
Can we anglicise Les Marseillaise? It's a brilliant anthem if not a little violent.
> I like Jamacia's. Can we pinch it and just substitute England?
Can we anglicise Les Marseillaise? It's a brilliant anthem if not a little violent.
Post edited at 21:45
2
2
In reply to Name Changed 34:
I take it you have heard Flower of Scotland!
The entire song is about Robert the Bruce defeating the English army of Edward II.
I take it you have heard Flower of Scotland!
The entire song is about Robert the Bruce defeating the English army of Edward II.
Post edited at 21:55
In reply to Name Changed 34:
Are you sure that's the full text?
"On the opposing side, Jacobite beliefs were demonstrated in an alternative verse used during the same period:[43]
God bless the prince, I pray,
God bless the prince, I pray,
Charlie I mean;
That Scotland we may see
Freed from vile Presbyt'ry,
Both George and his Feckie,
Ever so, Amen."
The Wikipedia entry for this song makes it clear the "rebellious scots" verse is in no way official.
Bring on Jerusalem for English sports teams though.
Are you sure that's the full text?
"On the opposing side, Jacobite beliefs were demonstrated in an alternative verse used during the same period:[43]
God bless the prince, I pray,
God bless the prince, I pray,
Charlie I mean;
That Scotland we may see
Freed from vile Presbyt'ry,
Both George and his Feckie,
Ever so, Amen."
The Wikipedia entry for this song makes it clear the "rebellious scots" verse is in no way official.
Bring on Jerusalem for English sports teams though.
In reply to Dr.S at work:
>No,
To be honest its not something close to my soul but I have bean lead to understand when sung 'we' leave bits out
> Are you sure that's the full text?
>No,
To be honest its not something close to my soul but I have bean lead to understand when sung 'we' leave bits out
Post edited at 21:58
4
9
In reply to Name Changed 34:
We dont leave bits out - we don't add bits that have been made up.
Not something I especially care about, apart from the dishonest use of the unofficial verses to add to the cracks in the Union.
> To be honest its not something close to my soul but I have bean lead to understand when sung 'we' leave bits out
We dont leave bits out - we don't add bits that have been made up.
Not something I especially care about, apart from the dishonest use of the unofficial verses to add to the cracks in the Union.
1
In reply to The New NickB:
The back story to God Save The King is also an English army getting beaten in Scotland - by Bonny Prince Charlie hence the verse about Marshal Wade and references to enemies and knavish tricks in verse 2. The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the English army at Prestonpans before they were awake.
Nothing disingenuous about mentioning verse 4. God Save the King is an English nationalist song just as much as Flower of Scotland is a Scottish Nationalist one.
> I take it you have heard Flower of Scotland!
> The entire song is about Robert the Bruce defeating the English army of Edward II.
The back story to God Save The King is also an English army getting beaten in Scotland - by Bonny Prince Charlie hence the verse about Marshal Wade and references to enemies and knavish tricks in verse 2. The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the English army at Prestonpans before they were awake.
Nothing disingenuous about mentioning verse 4. God Save the King is an English nationalist song just as much as Flower of Scotland is a Scottish Nationalist one.
1
In reply to Dr.S at work:
There isnt an "official" version. there is just the traditional choice and even that has changed. Given the timing that verse may well have been included originally but then toned down slightly. As was then done later on dropping the second verse of the standard variant.
> Not something I especially care about, apart from the dishonest use of the unofficial verses to add to the cracks in the Union.
There isnt an "official" version. there is just the traditional choice and even that has changed. Given the timing that verse may well have been included originally but then toned down slightly. As was then done later on dropping the second verse of the standard variant.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
FTFY
> <part of>The back story to God Save The King is also a British army getting beaten in Scotland - by Bonny Prince Charlie hence the verse about Marshal Wade and references to enemies and knavish tricks in verse 2. The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the British army at Prestonpans before they were awake.
> Nothing disingenuous about mentioning verse 4. God Save the King is a British nationalist song just as much as Flower of Scotland is a Scottish Nationalist one.
FTFY
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
You have an extraordinary take on the 'success' of BPC
I must reassure you that the vast majority of English people (at least those who are interested in our history) accept that we had an Act of Union in 1707, and that that was a vast step forward for all of us in the new, united kingdom.
> The back story to God Save The King is also an English army getting beaten in Scotland - by Bonny Prince Charlie hence the verse about Marshal Wade and references to enemies and knavish tricks in verse 2. The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the English army at Prestonpans before they were awake.
You have an extraordinary take on the 'success' of BPC
> Nothing disingenuous about mentioning verse 4. God Save the King is an English nationalist song just as much as Flower of Scotland is a Scottish Nationalist one.
I must reassure you that the vast majority of English people (at least those who are interested in our history) accept that we had an Act of Union in 1707, and that that was a vast step forward for all of us in the new, united kingdom.
1
In reply to Dr.S at work:
>> The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the *British* army at Prestonpans before they were awake
ROFL
It was an English army fighting for a German Prince against a Scottish army fighting for the legitimate King (in as much as the whole concept of kings and royalty can be legitimate).
>> The knavish trick could be Prince Charlie getting up early and attacking the *British* army at Prestonpans before they were awake
ROFL
It was an English army fighting for a German Prince against a Scottish army fighting for the legitimate King (in as much as the whole concept of kings and royalty can be legitimate).
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Most English folks who've studied our history in any detail accept that BPC was an anachronistic embarrassment, very sadly several decades out of phase with his own time. The ongoing romanticisation of him being a continual embarrassment, quite frankly.
Most English folks who've studied our history in any detail accept that BPC was an anachronistic embarrassment, very sadly several decades out of phase with his own time. The ongoing romanticisation of him being a continual embarrassment, quite frankly.
3
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Go Save the King was written to show loyalty at a point when Bonny Prince Charlie was successful, the person writing the song didn't know he would be defeated.
> You have an extraordinary take on the 'success' of BPC
Go Save the King was written to show loyalty at a point when Bonny Prince Charlie was successful, the person writing the song didn't know he would be defeated.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
And they most likely have similar views about nationalist leaders in many other countries which England has colonised.
The strange thing is they don't consider the monarchy or House of Lords to be anachronistic embarrassments.
> Most English folks who've studied our history in any detail accept that BPC was an anachronistic embarrassment, very sadly several decades out of phase with his own time.
And they most likely have similar views about nationalist leaders in many other countries which England has colonised.
The strange thing is they don't consider the monarchy or House of Lords to be anachronistic embarrassments.
3
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Which is my point, let's not get precious about either. They are both terrible dirge though!
> Nothing disingenuous about mentioning verse 4. God Save the King is an English nationalist song just as much as Flower of Scotland is a Scottish Nationalist one.
Which is my point, let's not get precious about either. They are both terrible dirge though!
1
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
At least one of the Government regiments (47th foot) was raised in Scotland.
edit - pride of place must go to the 44th however! http://www.britishbattles.com/most-massacred.htm
At least one of the Government regiments (47th foot) was raised in Scotland.
edit - pride of place must go to the 44th however! http://www.britishbattles.com/most-massacred.htm
Post edited at 00:07
In reply to Skyfall:
What are you on about?
> With all the UKC egos on this thread I really don't dare comment.
What are you on about?
1
In reply to The New NickB:
'Flower of Scotland' is far, far, far superior to 'God Save the Queen'.
> Which is my point, let's not get precious about either. They are both terrible dirge though!
'Flower of Scotland' is far, far, far superior to 'God Save the Queen'.
3
2
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Gosh, you just threw that into the arg, didn't you? Just WHY can't many people understand just what our monarchy is now? It has NO political power, is fairly scrupulously UN-political. It is a figurehead for the whole country i.e. for all the people, and for our parliament. But instead of a flag or an icon we've wisely chosen to have a living person to act as a figurehead for our whole nation in a completely apolitical way. Nothing more, nothing less.
The House of Lords is a vital 'second chamber'. The only argument - and it's v difficult - is how do you appoint who to put into it? i'm not quite sure how we can improve much on our present system without it getting too political.
> The strange thing is they don't consider the monarchy or House of Lords to be anachronistic embarrassments.
Gosh, you just threw that into the arg, didn't you? Just WHY can't many people understand just what our monarchy is now? It has NO political power, is fairly scrupulously UN-political. It is a figurehead for the whole country i.e. for all the people, and for our parliament. But instead of a flag or an icon we've wisely chosen to have a living person to act as a figurehead for our whole nation in a completely apolitical way. Nothing more, nothing less.
The House of Lords is a vital 'second chamber'. The only argument - and it's v difficult - is how do you appoint who to put into it? i'm not quite sure how we can improve much on our present system without it getting too political.
3
5
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
'England has colonised' ??!! Your words not mine. I've no idea what you might be referring to.
> England has colonised.
'England has colonised' ??!! Your words not mine. I've no idea what you might be referring to.
2
In reply to DaveHK:
You are a couple of centuries out. Try to keep up.
I am certainly very glad to hear than England is a nation again. That's very reassuring. I thought it had been permanently divided into The Metropolis and The Sticks.
All across this pathetic little community of nations we could do with an update of national symbolism just as we could do with an update of constitutional arrangements. We need to at least advance our constitutional arrangement to the point where they satisfy the ambitions of some our finest minds of the late 18th century as well as David Lloyd George's century old ambition for a land fit for heroes to live in.
Then we'd have something to sing about.
> National anthems are so last century.
You are a couple of centuries out. Try to keep up.
I am certainly very glad to hear than England is a nation again. That's very reassuring. I thought it had been permanently divided into The Metropolis and The Sticks.
All across this pathetic little community of nations we could do with an update of national symbolism just as we could do with an update of constitutional arrangements. We need to at least advance our constitutional arrangement to the point where they satisfy the ambitions of some our finest minds of the late 18th century as well as David Lloyd George's century old ambition for a land fit for heroes to live in.
Then we'd have something to sing about.
2
In reply to kevin stephens:
Oh come on, this was sorted years ago!!
youtube.com/watch?v=i9nnnM-__JQ&
Oh come on, this was sorted years ago!!
youtube.com/watch?v=i9nnnM-__JQ&
1
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Bollocks. The monarchy is totally political and its politics are obvious: it is Conservative (in the sense of preserving established power), pro-landowner, pro-religion and Unionist (the Queen helped the No campaign in the independence vote). It has plenty of soft power in the form of political influence and patronage e.g. David Cameron getting a letter of recommendation from the palace to Conservative central office which didn't do his political career any harm. Prince Charles obviously never got the memo about not influencing politicians.
It would be pretty hard to choose a worse system for appointing a second chamber than we have now. The House of Lords is almost a chamber for London because the establishment figures who get appointed have nearly all made their career in London. Not to mention the Bishops, Law Lords and Aristocrats.
Pretty much every other country which has a federal system with regional governments uses its second chamber to allow the states/regions to limit the power of central government. Britain does the opposite: it fills its second chamber with appointed cronies of central government.
> Just WHY can't many people understand just what our monarchy is now? It has NO political power, is fairly scrupulously UN-political.
Bollocks. The monarchy is totally political and its politics are obvious: it is Conservative (in the sense of preserving established power), pro-landowner, pro-religion and Unionist (the Queen helped the No campaign in the independence vote). It has plenty of soft power in the form of political influence and patronage e.g. David Cameron getting a letter of recommendation from the palace to Conservative central office which didn't do his political career any harm. Prince Charles obviously never got the memo about not influencing politicians.
> The House of Lords is a vital 'second chamber'. The only argument - and it's v difficult - is how do you appoint who to put into it? i'm not quite sure how we can improve much on our present system without it getting too political.
It would be pretty hard to choose a worse system for appointing a second chamber than we have now. The House of Lords is almost a chamber for London because the establishment figures who get appointed have nearly all made their career in London. Not to mention the Bishops, Law Lords and Aristocrats.
Pretty much every other country which has a federal system with regional governments uses its second chamber to allow the states/regions to limit the power of central government. Britain does the opposite: it fills its second chamber with appointed cronies of central government.
13
In reply to Name Changed 34:
Or rather
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/NationalAnthem.aspx
"The words used today are those sung in 1745, substituting 'Queen' for 'King' where appropriate. On official occasions, only the first verse is usually sung."
How's your shoulder?
Or rather
http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/NationalAnthem.aspx
"The words used today are those sung in 1745, substituting 'Queen' for 'King' where appropriate. On official occasions, only the first verse is usually sung."
How's your shoulder?
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
We haven't 'wisely chosen' anything to do with the monarchy or the HoL. The monarchy upholds the principle of unelected, unearned and undeserved privilege, and has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. The monarchy makes it okay to say that some people are different and more privileged simply because of who their parents happen to be.
> Gosh, you just threw that into the arg, didn't you? Just WHY can't many people understand just what our monarchy is now? It has NO political power, is fairly scrupulously UN-political. It is a figurehead for the whole country i.e. for all the people, and for our parliament. But instead of a flag or an icon we've wisely chosen to have a living person to act as a figurehead for our whole nation in a completely apolitical way.
We haven't 'wisely chosen' anything to do with the monarchy or the HoL. The monarchy upholds the principle of unelected, unearned and undeserved privilege, and has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. The monarchy makes it okay to say that some people are different and more privileged simply because of who their parents happen to be.
13
In reply to kevin stephens:
I like the Chinese Crackers version.
> My vote would be for Rule Britannia for UK (but may need to tweak the words to ensure Northern Ireland is included ) and Land of Hope and Glory for England (good job Elgar)
I like the Chinese Crackers version.
In reply to kevin stephens:
Might I suggest "Charlie Mopps" as an anthem people could really get behind?
youtube.com/watch?v=mYFQ25ZxnVI&
Might I suggest "Charlie Mopps" as an anthem people could really get behind?
youtube.com/watch?v=mYFQ25ZxnVI&
In reply to kevin stephens:
I prefer the Imperial March from Star Wars. Everyone can enjoy the tune and there are no words to forget.
I prefer the Imperial March from Star Wars. Everyone can enjoy the tune and there are no words to forget.
5
In reply to Clarence:
Great suggestion. It definitely does have lyrics, though.
dum dum dum dum-dee-dum dum-dee-dah DUM DUM DUM DUM-DEE-DUM DUM-DEE-DAH
Great suggestion. It definitely does have lyrics, though.
dum dum dum dum-dee-dum dum-dee-dah DUM DUM DUM DUM-DEE-DUM DUM-DEE-DAH
1
In reply to kevin stephens:
I think we need something a bit more cheery ...
... the Funeral March, maybe.
I think we need something a bit more cheery ...
... the Funeral March, maybe.
In reply to kevin stephens:
This was sorted out yesterday.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/voodoo-ray-confirmed-...
Wally
This was sorted out yesterday.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/voodoo-ray-confirmed-...
Wally
2
In reply to The New NickB:
Slight whiff of whataboutery there Nick.
You do realise that flower of Scotland is only about 45 years old, an old Corries song. Fwiw I hate it with a passion. Burns' A man's a man for a' that would be a vastly superior anthem, though maybe we'd need to trot out Scotland the brave at rugby matches
> I take it you have heard Flower of Scotland!
Slight whiff of whataboutery there Nick.
You do realise that flower of Scotland is only about 45 years old, an old Corries song. Fwiw I hate it with a passion. Burns' A man's a man for a' that would be a vastly superior anthem, though maybe we'd need to trot out Scotland the brave at rugby matches
1
1
In reply to tony:
This.
> We haven't 'wisely chosen' anything to do with the monarchy or the HoL. The monarchy upholds the principle of unelected, unearned and undeserved privilege, and has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. The monarchy makes it okay to say that some people are different and more privileged simply because of who their parents happen to be.
This.
3
1
In reply to tony:
Well, what can I say? Parliament actually made a huge choice in 1688 at the time of the so-called 'Glorious Revolution' to have the monarchy back but with virtually no power. Parliament from then on was pretty much sovereign with the monarch reduced to a figurehead. One more whiff of trouble from the monarch and it would be 1649 all over again, that much was understood by practically everyone.
> We haven't 'wisely chosen' anything to do with the monarchy or the HoL. The monarchy upholds the principle of unelected, unearned and undeserved privilege, and has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. The monarchy makes it okay to say that some people are different and more privileged simply because of who their parents happen to be.
Well, what can I say? Parliament actually made a huge choice in 1688 at the time of the so-called 'Glorious Revolution' to have the monarchy back but with virtually no power. Parliament from then on was pretty much sovereign with the monarch reduced to a figurehead. One more whiff of trouble from the monarch and it would be 1649 all over again, that much was understood by practically everyone.
1
In reply to Removed User:
What , replace it with a naff ditty? Do you not remember the 1990 grand slam game? Flower of Scotland was spine tingling (it still is when taken at a digified slow speed and without sharpening the third last note). Fantastic anthem. The England team looked visibly shaken before the game even started.
> Slight whiff of whataboutery there Nick.
> You do realise that flower of Scotland is only about 45 years old, an old Corries song. Fwiw I hate it with a passion. Burns' A man's a man for a' that would be a vastly superior anthem, though maybe we'd need to trot out Scotland the brave at rugby matches
What , replace it with a naff ditty? Do you not remember the 1990 grand slam game? Flower of Scotland was spine tingling (it still is when taken at a digified slow speed and without sharpening the third last note). Fantastic anthem. The England team looked visibly shaken before the game even started.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Do you not remember the 1990 grand slam game? Flower of Scotland was spine tingling (it still is when taken at a digified slow speed and without sharpening the third last note). Fantastic anthem.
Here it is: youtube.com/watch?v=XA6cnXFiE6I&
Not bad and certainly better than 'God Save the Queen', but compared to the Welsh one? I think not...
youtube.com/watch?v=SMI5wpwXTCY&
Do you not remember the 1990 grand slam game? Flower of Scotland was spine tingling (it still is when taken at a digified slow speed and without sharpening the third last note). Fantastic anthem.
Here it is: youtube.com/watch?v=XA6cnXFiE6I&
Not bad and certainly better than 'God Save the Queen', but compared to the Welsh one? I think not...
youtube.com/watch?v=SMI5wpwXTCY&
In reply to Removed User:
I don't like either, but it seems odd to moralise about unused verses of God Save Queen referring to hammering the Scots, when virtually all of Flower of Scotland is about defeating the English.
> Slight whiff of whataboutery there Nick.
I don't like either, but it seems odd to moralise about unused verses of God Save Queen referring to hammering the Scots, when virtually all of Flower of Scotland is about defeating the English.
In reply to The New NickB:
Defeating an invading army, protecting your own...
Dominating another group of people, expanding your empire....
'nuff said, as they say down south
> I don't like either, but it seems odd to moralise about unused verses of God Save Queen referring to hammering the Scots, when virtually all of Flower of Scotland is about defeating the English.
Defeating an invading army, protecting your own...
Dominating another group of people, expanding your empire....
'nuff said, as they say down south
1
2
In reply to kevin stephens:
You're right. Time for a new national anthem. Here's a possible verse 1 [it's addressed to the "royal" family, like the current anthem]:
Goodbye, you bunch of t*ssers,
Get out, and don't come back,
Please hoover your palaces,
On the way out.
> I'm not particularly republican but how can we have a national anthem that doesn't even mention the nation.....
You're right. Time for a new national anthem. Here's a possible verse 1 [it's addressed to the "royal" family, like the current anthem]:
Goodbye, you bunch of t*ssers,
Get out, and don't come back,
Please hoover your palaces,
On the way out.
Post edited at 12:25
2
In reply to Donald82:
fair enough for flower of scotland
What the Jacobites were doing, surely? and so not accurately applied to GSTQ/K
> Defeating an invading army, protecting your own...
fair enough for flower of scotland
> Dominating another group of people, expanding your empire....
What the Jacobites were doing, surely? and so not accurately applied to GSTQ/K
In reply to Dr.S at work:
good point but i think the dominating still applies accurately, i guess not the expanding
whatever the historical context the sentiments of flower of scotland are bit nicer than god save the queen
good point but i think the dominating still applies accurately, i guess not the expanding
whatever the historical context the sentiments of flower of scotland are bit nicer than god save the queen
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Meanwhile, nearly 330 years later ...
> Well, what can I say? Parliament actually made a huge choice in 1688 at the time of the so-called 'Glorious Revolution' to have the monarchy back but with virtually no power.
Meanwhile, nearly 330 years later ...
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...