Should we change the national anthem?

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
freezeblade
Posts: 1254
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:11 pm UTC
Location: Oakland

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby freezeblade » Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:44 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:(especially WWII, but also in leading the War on Terror) is when our country really shines as a great beacon of hope for the rest of the world to watch and follow.


You and I clearly have a different perception of the "war on terror."

Personally, I respect when the anthem is sung to an extent. In my more rebellious teen days, I wouldn't stand up during assemblies, but now I will stand and stay quiet. I do not put my hat (if I am wearing one) over my heart, nor do I sing the lyrics (which I do know, however).

I actually perfer when it is played by a proper marching band (I'm biased, being a clarinet player), and not sung.
Belial wrote:I am not even in the same country code as "the mood for this shit."

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby azule » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:13 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:I always thought either of those were suitable replacements for our national anthem (I like the idea of our national anthem having the same tune but different words from the anthem of the country we rebelled against) - until I served in the army. During and since that time, the Star-Spangled Banner's wartime lyrics have become much more poignant to me, and I don't think it should be changed. Our country was forged in war, and our great history of war (especially WWII, but also in leading the War on Terror) is when our country really shines as a great beacon of hope for the rest of the world to watch and follow.
No disrespect intended here. I don't agree with the war loving aspect. I know that must be how every nation envisages their origins, forged in war, but it just sickens me. As a world full of science and art, freedoms of all sorts, even sports, why can't that be represented in our anthem? War, land, conquest, ugh.

In this world where we also go to space with the help of nations that could be considered enemies what's the point of this fawning over war? The modern era, with it's more advanced understanding of society, deserves an anthem that reflects what our nation should thrive for.

Sorry. War.
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
Whizbang
The Best Reporter
Posts: 2238
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:50 pm UTC
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Whizbang » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:15 pm UTC

azule wrote:
mathmannix wrote:I always thought either of those were suitable replacements for our national anthem (I like the idea of our national anthem having the same tune but different words from the anthem of the country we rebelled against) - until I served in the army. During and since that time, the Star-Spangled Banner's wartime lyrics have become much more poignant to me, and I don't think it should be changed. Our country was forged in war, and our great history of war (especially WWII, but also in leading the War on Terror) is when our country really shines as a great beacon of hope for the rest of the world to watch and follow.
No disrespect intended here. I don't agree with the war loving aspect. I know that must be how every nation envisages their origins, forged in war, but it just sickens me. As a world full of science and art, freedoms of all sorts, even sports, why can't that be represented in our anthem? War, land, conquest, ugh.

In this world where we also go to space with the help of nations that could be considered enemies what's the point of this fawning over war? The modern era, with it's more advanced understanding of society, deserves an anthem that reflects what our nation should thrive for.

Sorry. War.


I propose the new anthem be set to the theme tune of Star Trek.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby azule » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:19 pm UTC

That or the Prime Directive.
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

Puppyclaws
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:08 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Puppyclaws » Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:35 pm UTC

I generally find most of the complaints people make about the anthem silly/arbitrary. Why should it be easy to sing? I am pretty sure that is not a democracy issue. Anthems are generally dated and strange, and it's considerably more interesting (both in terms of content and the music) than most of the alternatives. (and honestly, how is "fruited plain" not 1000 times more antiquated than "spangled banner"). I never really think of it as having more than one verse (and the official anthem doesn't). In terms of the military portion, I don't understand the complaint; many national anthems talk about violent formation or pasts, or guarding the country (what do you think this means?) or other direct or veiled references to military action. We are, in the minds of many/most, defended by a military and reliant upon it for our continued existence as a nation.

mathmannix wrote:Our country was forged in war, and our great history of war (especially WWII, but also in leading the War on Terror) is when our country really shines as a great beacon of hope for the rest of the world to watch and follow.


OK now I believe the anthem should be changed.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby KnightExemplar » Sun Jan 25, 2015 11:48 pm UTC

The two national anthems I know of are:

1. American Anthem (The Star Spangled Banner)
2. Philipeno Anthem (Lupang Hinirang)

Of the two, Lupang Hinirang seems like the more difficult song.

So... yeah. I'm almost of the opinion that we need to replace our National Anthem with something with more flourishes so that we can keep up with the Philipeno one. Lol. In fact, many musicians are already adding in flourishes that don't exist in the original song.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby azule » Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:55 am UTC

Metallica's One. It's difficult to play (not sing) and it's sorta about war.
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby addams » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:01 am UTC

Yes.
The US should change its Anthem.

That nearly happened away long time ago.
In the 1970's.

This land is my land, was considered.
Too much of a Camp Song like Walking Matedla.

America the Beautiful was soo close to becoming The Anthem.
Then Petty Politics stepped in and the process Froze.

The Stars Spangled Banner is dumb.
It's dumb and getting dumber.

(ech) kind'a like the people.
On some level that fits.

edit: Just because a sixteen year old Philipeno girl can do
it does Not mean the rest of us should be compelled to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWr8-5ieKaQ

At this point in American History,
I'd change the Song and the Flag.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5419
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Lexington, MA
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby doogly » Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:01 pm UTC

addams wrote:This land is my land, was considered.
Too much of a Camp Song like Walking Matedla.

But there the neglected verse is full of glorious communism!
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Diadem » Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:14 pm UTC

You guys have it easy. In the Dutch national anthem we sing about how we are 'of German blood', and about honoring the King of Spain. Yeah.

The former is a case of 'language marches on'. Back in the 16th century there was no difference made between German and Dutch, and so the original word used (Dietsch) could refer to both Dutch and German. In fact that is how English ended up with the word 'Dutch' for people from The Netherlands. The original word 'Dietsch' becomes 'Duits' in modern Dutch, but that word can only refer to people from Germany.

The part about the king of Spain also makes sense in context. The song sings the story of William of Orange, our founder, who indeed started out as loyal to the king of Spain, and only later revolted. The song has 15 stanzas, and the first one sings about his initial loyalty to the king of Spain. The problem is that today we generally only sing the 1st stanza (sometimes the 1st and 6th), so the reference just stands out as weird.

Fun fact: The Dutch national anthem is the oldest on in the world.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby ahammel » Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:16 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Fun fact: The Dutch national anthem is the oldest on in the world.

It's also an acrostic, isn't it? That's pretty cool.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby addams » Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:29 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:
Diadem wrote:Fun fact: The Dutch national anthem is the oldest on in the world.

It's also an acrostic, isn't it? That's pretty cool.

Please leave a link of it well done.
And; what's a acrostic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrostic
"Details. Details."
"The Devil is in The Details."


We may not know if there is a God.
We may not know where that God might be.

We Know where The Devil is.
Or; So I thought.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Angua » Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:34 pm UTC

Ours was written in 1983.

Still has God in each verse protecting us from swords and spears. I am fond of it though.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Diadem » Mon Jan 26, 2015 3:44 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:
Diadem wrote:Fun fact: The Dutch national anthem is the oldest on in the world.

It's also an acrostic, isn't it? That's pretty cool.

Yup. The first letters of each stanza spell out William of Orange's name. Using contemporary spelling, of course, so "Willem van Nassov" ('Willem van Nassau' in modern Dutch). The song is sung from the perspective of William of Orange, and sings about his reasons for revolting. It also sings about god a lot. It used to be a marching song, which is kinda hard to imagine. I guess 16th century soldiers were all about piety and not being too judgmental about the leader of your enemies. Common people in the 16th century must also have gotten some pretty impressive education, given the vocabulary and imagery used.

(I realize now I'm actually not sure why the guy is called both "of Orange" and "of Nassau". I think the latter is his actual name, and the former his title).

Interesting fact I learned today: The Luxembourg's national anthem is actually based on the Dutch one. It was apparently composed on honor of one of our monarchs back when Luxembourg was part of The Netherlands.
Another interesting fact I learned today: One of the most popular Nazi songs ("Das Treuelied") was also based on our national anthem.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby bigglesworth » Mon Jan 26, 2015 6:38 pm UTC

Wikipedia says he was of house Orange-Nassau (founding it) but was born of the House Nassau. Both of those were titles of his - but Nassau is not in the Netherlands so might not be considered in strictly Dutch matters?
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

Derek
Posts: 2178
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Derek » Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:45 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Wikipedia says he was of house Orange-Nassau (founding it) but was born of the House Nassau. Both of those were titles of his - but Nassau is not in the Netherlands so might not be considered in strictly Dutch matters?

Nassau is in Germany and Orange is in France, but the House of Orange-Nassau rules the Netherlands. Late medieval European politics is fun.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7458
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Zamfir » Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:12 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:Wikipedia says he was of house Orange-Nassau (founding it) but was born of the House Nassau. Both of those were titles of his - but Nassau is not in the Netherlands so might not be considered in strictly Dutch matters?

William had a whole range of titles, for all the lands and possessions he had inherited. Of those, Prince of Orange and Count of Nassau were the most important titles, so they were his regular shortened name.

Count of Nassau was an old and powerful countship, that's really his family with an ancestral castle in Nassau, etc. Prince of Orange was a new title in the family, his cousin had inherited it through his mother when the male line of princes had died out. There were several lines of Nassaus, and "Orange-Nassau" becamse the name of this specific line.

Orange was in practice a less important holding than Nassau or his lands in the Netherlands, and too far away too hold in case of disputes. But through a quirk of history it was technically a sovereign Principality. So through this title William was a sovereign ruler, with somewhat more leeway to raise armies and to have disputes with a king than as a mere count.
Derek wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:Wikipedia says he was of house Orange-Nassau (founding it) but was born of the House Nassau. Both of those were titles of his - but Nassau is not in the Netherlands so might not be considered in strictly Dutch matters?

Nassau is in Germany and Orange is in France, but the House of Orange-Nassau rules the Netherlands. Late medieval European politics is fun.

Nope, not late medieval politics at all. The Orange-Nassaus became a royal family after the Napoleontic war, when the victors had developed an antipathy to royalty-free republics and wanted a reliable king in the Netherlands. That's also when they took away the last parts of Nassau still held on personal title by the family, and gave them to Prussia.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Lazar » Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:39 pm UTC

That seems reminiscent of the Kingdom of Prussia. It was really mostly a continuation of the Margraviate of Brandenburg, but by adopting the name of a territory outside the Holy Roman Empire, it was able to circumvent the prohibition on being a kingdom. And that's why, by 1870, the greater part of Germany had come to bear the name of a small, extinct Baltic tribe.
Exit the vampires' castle.

Derek
Posts: 2178
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Derek » Tue Jan 27, 2015 2:35 am UTC

Nope, not late medieval politics at all. The Orange-Nassaus became a royal family after the Napoleontic war, when the victors had developed an antipathy to royalty-free republics and wanted a reliable king in the Netherlands. That's also when they took away the last parts of Nassau still held on personal title by the family, and gave them to Prussia.

Yes, but the House of Orange-Nassau were the de factor rulers of the Netherlands long before that, starting really with William of Orange, the founder of Orange-Nassau. When it came time to turn the Netherlands into a monarchy, there was really no question who was going to get the crown.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7458
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:51 pm UTC

Spoiler:
That's the thing. The Orange-Nassaus were not the undisputed rulers of the Netherlands since Willem the Silent. Obviously, they liked (and like) to portray themselves as such, for propaganda purposes.

The Dutch Republic was most of the time controlled by the Estates of Holland and Zeeland, representatives from the elites of the important cities. The Orange-Nassau family acted at various times as rallying point for opposition against those people. From other provincial estates, rural nobility, from the military, commoners in Holland and Zeeland themselves, other religious groups, you name it.

Thos coalitions would then cal themselves Orangists, but the contents of that label varied from generation to generation. At various points in time the Orangists would break through and install a member from the family in a powerful position. Typical based on leadership of the land army in times of war.

2 sons of Willem I were powerful stadholders in the 1610s to 1630s. The latter son's grandson from 1672 to 1703. A distant cousin again in 1747, plus (the regent of) his son after him to 1795. That's the first point in time where the Oranges came close to being an accepted dynasty, but the anti-Orangists and the French army disposed the son. The Brits reinstalled the nwxt generation as king in 1815. Parliament took away royal power from the second king in 1848. The family has never regained power again.

So it's a spotty record, determined every time by a new domestic and international political situation. There have been various Oranges who were true ruler of the Netherlands, and some managed to pass that position on to their heir. But I don't think that any one of them was born as heir and also managed to pass the position to their heir in turn.

Autolykos
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 8:32 am UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Autolykos » Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:25 pm UTC

Eowiel wrote:I think a link to this comic is quite fitting here:

http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=2658
One thing the French got right. Their national anthem really scares the Bejeezus out of anyone who understands it.

User avatar
azule
Saved
Posts: 2132
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45 pm UTC
Location: The land of the Golden Puppies and Rainbows

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby azule » Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:23 pm UTC

Woah. I need to see the lyrics, now. Well, later, unless someone posts it earlier than later.
Image

If you read this sig, post about one arbitrary thing you did today.

I celebrate up to six arbitrary things before breakfast.
Time does drag on and on and contain spoilers. Be aware of memes.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6165
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Thesh » Tue Jan 27, 2015 7:54 pm UTC

English Translation:

Let's go children of the fatherland,
The day of glory has arrived!
Against us tyranny's
Bloody flag is raised! (repeat)
In the countryside, do you hear
The roaring of these fierce soldiers?
They come right to our arms
To slit the throats of our sons, our friends!

Refrain

Grab your weapons, citizens!
Form your batallions!
Let us march! Let us march!
May impure blood
Water our fields!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This horde of slaves, traitors, plotting kings,
What do they want?
For whom these vile shackles,
These long-prepared irons? (repeat)
Frenchmen, for us, oh! what an insult!
What emotions that must excite!
It is us that they dare to consider
Returning to ancient slavery!

What! These foreign troops
Would make laws in our home!
What! These mercenary phalanxes
Would bring down our proud warriors! (repeat)
Good Lord! By chained hands
Our brows would bend beneath the yoke!
Vile despots would become
The masters of our fate!

Tremble, tyrants! and you, traitors,
The disgrace of all groups,
Tremble! Your parricidal plans
Will finally pay the price! (repeat)
Everyone is a soldier to fight you,
If they fall, our young heros,
France will make more,
Ready to battle you!

Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors,
Bear or hold back your blows!
Spare these sad victims,
Regretfully arming against us. (repeat)
But not these bloodthirsty despots,
But not these accomplices of Bouillé,
All of these animals who, without pity,
Tear their mother's breast to pieces!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Sacred love of France,
Lead, support our avenging arms!
Liberty, beloved Liberty,
Fight with your defenders! (repeat)
Under our flags, let victory
Hasten to your manly tones!
May your dying enemies
See your triumph and our glory!

Refrain

We will enter the pit
When our elders are no longer there;
There, we will find their dust
And the traces of their virtues. (repeat)
Much less eager to outlive them
Than to share their casket,
We will have the sublime pride
Of avenging them or following them!

Refrain
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

project2051
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby project2051 » Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:50 am UTC

I say we switch back to "My country 'tis of thee", just to confuse things with the tune.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby addams » Wed Jan 28, 2015 4:20 am UTC

project2051 wrote:I say we switch back to "My country 'tis of thee", just to confuse things with the tune.

That tune fits.
Its like some of those aggressive Christian Hymns.

That is darned funny,
It might be pretty...but...

France has been through The Wars.
jeeze..It's so Viking.

Much less eager to outlive them
Than to share their casket,

We will have the sublime pride
Of avenging them or following them!



Did they have it written by a traveling minstrel?
Some guy that was in love with the Idea of Vikings?

That will not work as a replacement for The Star Spangled.

It does not fit the US personality.
We don't do anything for The Dead.

Not The Dead that lived before nor The Dead that are yet to live.
America the Beautiful is about our current holdings. Is it not?

Now I want This Land is Your Land; This Land is My Land.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnvCPQqQWds
At least it is an attainable goal. It's a folk song.

It's no worse than the French Viking Song.
It's easy for people to sing. A Song for Folks.

America the Beautiful is too much of a hymn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LINsNCaxZ5U

Honest to God.
I thought That was The Anthem for a very long time.

I was offend when I was told it is The Star Spangled.
I thought, 'They' whoever 'They' are, had changed it.

If it were changed to This Land, the TV Talking Heads would have a fit.
The rest of us would enjoy singing The Anthem for a darned change.

Of course, I think the US needs a New Flag, too.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby ahammel » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:48 am UTC

addams wrote:
project2051 wrote:I say we switch back to "My country 'tis of thee", just to confuse things with the tune.

That tune fits.
Its like some of those aggressive Christian Hymns.

Spoiler:
Or like God Save the Queen, which I believe was the joke.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Lazar » Mon Feb 02, 2015 10:14 am UTC

Some silly goose wrote:That seems reminiscent of the Kingdom of Prussia. It was really mostly a continuation of the Margraviate of Brandenburg, but by adopting the name of a territory outside the Holy Roman Empire, it was able to circumvent the prohibition on being a kingdom. And that's why, by 1870, the greater part of Germany had come to bear the name of a small, extinct Baltic tribe.

You know it just occurs to me, there's a neat analogy to be made with the Kingdom of Sardinia. Piedmont acquired Sardinia – a peripheral area speaking a non-Italian branch of Romance – and co-opted its name in order to gain the status of kingdom, much like Brandenburg did with Prussia. And in both cases, it was this oddly named kingdom that ended up unifying the broader country. There was a brief, wacky moment in late 1860 and early 1861 when the state occupying almost all of the Italian peninsula was officially called Sardinia.

On the anthem thing, though, I'm starting to reconsider my stance in favor of ATB. After giving it some thought, I realized that the second stanza – about pilgrim feet beating a thoroughfare of freedom through the wilderness – might be pretty hard to stomach if you were American Indian. And if ATB and TSSB both have annoying stuff in their later stanzas, then I think the rousing quality of the latter may put it in the lead, despite its problems with range and prosody. But I do think we'd be well served to take the German approach and designate only the first stanza as our official anthem. The rest of it is almost never sung anyway.
Exit the vampires' castle.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby ahammel » Mon Feb 02, 2015 5:23 pm UTC

Talking of national anthems that need changing: if Jerusalem was actually England's national anthem I think it would be my favourite example of the genre.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

Autolykos
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 8:32 am UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Autolykos » Tue Feb 03, 2015 12:40 pm UTC

But I do think we'd be well served to take the German approach and designate only the first stanza as our official anthem. The rest of it is almost never sung anyway.
Actually, we're only singing the third stanza. The first is the one that starts with "Deutschland, Deutschland über alles" and names somewhat, er, ambitious borders (including the better part of Benelux, a sizable chunk of France and pretty much all of Poland).

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby leady » Tue Feb 03, 2015 1:02 pm UTC

I'm pretty sure that stanza was removed post the war, Germany retaining an anthem implying an ongoing desire to annex former territory not really sitting well with folks :)

I do now have a modicum of respect for the French given the amusingly violent lyrics, but i think we'd all agree that its just posturing :p

User avatar
ilduri
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:59 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby ilduri » Wed Feb 04, 2015 2:42 am UTC

Heh, I'm Canadian and I know every word of the US anthem thanks to watching NHL games. :)

Spoilered for being slightly off-topic, but...
Spoiler:
Here in Canada, being an officially bilingual country, we have both an English anthem and a French one, set to the same tune. The English version is pretty ho-hum, mostly about how we're "strong and free" and "far and wide" and live up north with our "glowing hearts." The French version is way more badass. In translation it goes:

O Canada, land of our ancestors
Your brow is adorned with glorious florets
For your arm knows to carry the sword
As it knows to carry the Cross;
Your history is an epic
Of the most brilliant feats
And your valour, hardened by faith
Will protect our homes and our rights

So yeah, I guess there's just something about the French language when it comes to writing rousing patriotic stuff...
Last edited by ilduri on Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:09 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
"Butterflies and zebras and moonbeams and fairytales"
she/her

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5419
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Lexington, MA
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby doogly » Wed Feb 04, 2015 2:58 am UTC

leady wrote:I'm pretty sure that stanza was removed post the war, Germany retaining an anthem implying an ongoing desire to annex former territory not really sitting well with folks :)

Silesia will return to the fold one of these days.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby addams » Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:10 am UTC

I still have This Land as my favorite.

It is not a song of War.
It does not Threaten that we will Fart in their general direction.

It is simply a joyful song about sharing such Wonderful Land.
This Land is Great! From Sea to Shining Sea. Even up in Maine.

From up there in the Redwood Forests to down there by the Gulf Stream's Waters.
This is a Great Land. It's so much fun to Belt Out an Oldie but Goodie.

Almost every word in that song is True.
It might be nice to say something True;
For a fucking change.

The basic primise is false.
This land was Not made for you and me.

We can share it and sing about it being made for us.
It is most certinally Not True.

It was made by forces that were at work before Humans existed.
I don't mind if the Religious People think it was made for Humanity.

As long as when we are changing over to This Land at Ball Games and Funerals we don't change the words to,
"This Land was made for Fifth Generation White US Citizens and Not One Other Person!"

I'm not too worried about that little issue.
Those words will not fit the Tune.

But...For crying out loud!
The words that are in the Spangled don't fit the Tune, either.

That's why the Spangled is only sung Well by Professionals.
The Spangled is not fun. This Land is fun to sing and share.

I want This Land!
Spangled can go off to live at the Smithsonian.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5419
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Lexington, MA
Contact:

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby doogly » Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:04 pm UTC

Guthrie is a hero.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

Zinho
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:23 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Zinho » Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:50 pm UTC

I'll weigh in on this; I've got some strong opinions on the topic and some historical tidbits that haven't been mentioned yet. (I'm pro-status quo, btw; let's get that out of the way first)

So, the way I sing the song, I skip the objectionable third verse. Shortening the text considerably, the first two verses go: 1) Is the flag still there? (i.e. did the fort surrender?) 2) Yes, it is! Yay!

The natural follow-up question, is "what happened overnight?"

The story of that night needs some context, the tone of which will sound familiar to many people who have worked on large projects. When Fort McHenry was built, range for the guns was chosen by how far it would need to shoot in order to reach the shorelines it was protecting. It seemed a logical choice: once you can effectively fire to the opposite shore, what use do you have for longer range? The answer came on the night that F.S. Key was watching the fort get pounded by British warships whose gun budget was tuned for "hit the other guy before he can hit you on the open sea".

A second point of context was that the flag they were flying was possibly the largest U.S. flag ever flown - the flagpole it flew on was the tallest ship's mast available at the local shipyard, and the Army Corps of Engineers did some math to figure out what dimensions would give it a diagonal length equal to the mast's height above ground. When they hoisted the flag for the first time and discovered that fabric stretches on its bias, the flag was trimmed until it didn't drag on the ground. For the conditions, they literally couldn't make the stars and stripes more visible for the opposing forces. Since the British were firing the contemporary equivalent of flare rounds at a rate of one every 5 minutes, it's probable that the flag was easily visible for as long as the battle lasted.

So what happened overnight was that whenever the British ships came in range of the Fort's guns they were repelled; however, the Fort was getting pounded non-stop all night. When the Fort's guns fell silent it was impossible to tell whether they were out of ammunition or just conserving while they could. In point of fact, they were out; neither the British nor Key knew that, however. The ships in the harbor and their crews assumed that the Fort would signal surrender when they were our of ammo by lowering the flag.

My favorite historical tidbit from this story is that prior to the battle the garrison commander ordered the flag nailed to the flagpole. Short of a direct hit on the flagpole, that flag wasn't coming down that day. Out of cannon ammo, the garrison stood ready with rifles and bayonets to repel Marines if needed. If the British wanted the flag to come down they'd have to do it themselves, over the dead bodies of every last American in the Fort.


So, now we're on to the 4th verse:
Francis Scott Key wrote:O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation
Then conquer we must when our cause it is just
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!


Thus: this is how it should be.
Ever: throughout history, now, and forever in the future.

Do you really want to change the Anthem? Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, how about we start a tradition of singing just the 4th verse?

I find the entire 4th verse inspiring, the Atheists in the audience can mentally substitute "the strength of our arms" for "the power that hath made . . . us a nation" for all I care. I love that it reminds us of the real reasons to take up arms - our loved homes, and our just cause. Perhaps as a nation we'd be less likely to get into fights if we were reminded at each Baseball and Football game to consider whether our cause is just before picking up our guns. At the same time, we can remind the World what will happen when we do pick them up. 8-)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11206
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:57 pm UTC

Nah. Screw adding more diefic stuff.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 9967
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby addams » Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:37 am UTC

I'd like to Not pledge to go to War every-fucking-day.

History Majors are a Unique Set of Humans and deserve our compassion, if not our understanding.
Having compassion for a group does not mean they should get to Force a War Songs on us.

If you have passion for the passions of the 1700's,
Have a Ball.

You can dress up and go to Gettysburg, too.

I'd like a song that is UpLifting,
but, not lifted on Dead Bodies.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1554
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:35 pm UTC

leady wrote:I do now have a modicum of respect for the French given the amusingly violent lyrics, but i think we'd all agree that its just posturing :p
Umm.., you realize France was at war for 23 years straight after writing that? 6 million people died. The entire war the SSB was about was an offshoot of an offshoot of France's war.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
iChef
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:33 pm UTC
Location: About 5 cm. south of the ring finger, USA.

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby iChef » Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:04 pm UTC

I think if we had an open vote in the US "Born in the USA". Easy to sing everyone already knows the words and it's even easy to sing while absolutely smashed (useful at most American sporting events).
Those whom God loves, he must make beautiful, and a beautiful character must, in some way, suffer.
-Tailsteak author of the Webcomics 1/0 and Leftover Soup

Derek
Posts: 2178
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Should we change the national anthem?

Postby Derek » Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:05 am UTC

iChef wrote:I think if we had an open vote in the US "Born in the USA". Easy to sing everyone already knows the words and it's even easy to sing while absolutely smashed (useful at most American sporting events).

It's also an anti-patriotic song when you actually listen to the lyrics, despite what everyone thinks.

I'm not sure if this would be considered a plus or a minus.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests