Olympic Bullshit
- Thread starter faustus
- Start date
IdleRich
IdleRich
Probably true but the larger and more diverse the community the harder it gets to do - likewise the shorter the time and, also worth mentioning, the more diverse the people to whom you are representing it the more you have to go for simpler and broader brushstrokes. So I'd say with a country of sixty million people, with many diverse subgroups and only a couple of hours (or whatever it was) to represent them to the whole world, well some things are gonna fall down the cracks and the things which are chosen as part of the demo are going to be simplistically rendered so that as many viewers as possible can understand them. The situation isn't ideal basically.
rubberdingyrapids
Well-known member
closing ceremony nowhere near as good as the opening. just another boring big pop concert. should have been something like an old fashioned royal variety show or an old music hall revue. with ken dodd. the bhangra segment in always look on the bright side of life also another tragic multicultural-pride fail. though oddly i find i do like muse.
still annoyed at spending my evening watching it though.
still annoyed at spending my evening watching it though.
Sectionfive
bandwagon house
Really thought Goldie would make appearance.
Seems all the music was EMI
Seems all the music was EMI
rubberdingyrapids
Well-known member
the brazilian segment was better than all the previous evening (nothing good can come of a ceremony with ed sheeran in it). while i have enjoyed the joyousness of the past 2 weeks i am glad the olympics is over now so i can now get back to old fashioned british moaning.
i had hoped bruza would do get me.
also genuinely irritated that after the bowie slide show he wasnt there to perform. not that i blame him obv.
i had hoped bruza would do get me.
also genuinely irritated that after the bowie slide show he wasnt there to perform. not that i blame him obv.
Gregor XIII
Well-known member
They should have brought Gilberto Gil to sing Aquele Abraco, though.
But Pelé was cool as well.
But Pelé was cool as well.
crackerjack
Well-known member
Well last night was very, very shit, which must have delighted the Dissensus grumps.
This is the only good thing to come out of it.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...apologises-for-closing-ceremony-2012081337959
This is the only good thing to come out of it.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...apologises-for-closing-ceremony-2012081337959
Patrick Swayze
I'm trying to shut up
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
I thought the basketball was probably the best of all the sports I saw. USA-Australia in particular was spectacularly good.
The athletics seemed to divide into world-class events and very mediocre ones where performance was down on 20 years ago (men's long jump, pole vault etc). Yohan Blake's incredible turn for the third relay leg was the best bit.
Rowing, horseriding, water polo etc were mindbogglingly boring. Synchronised swimming was grippingly sinister.
Not sure what logic you're following here tbh. Why would anyone be happy that more money was spunked away, since that was one of the major valid criticisms levelled at the Olympics in the first place...?
The athletics seemed to divide into world-class events and very mediocre ones where performance was down on 20 years ago (men's long jump, pole vault etc). Yohan Blake's incredible turn for the third relay leg was the best bit.
Rowing, horseriding, water polo etc were mindbogglingly boring. Synchronised swimming was grippingly sinister.
Not sure what logic you're following here tbh. Why would anyone be happy that more money was spunked away, since that was one of the major valid criticisms levelled at the Olympics in the first place...?
crackerjack
Well-known member
Cos people like having their prejudices confirmed and this place has a prejudice against almost anything that smacks of mainstream entertainment, particularly if it has a vaguely patriotic or nationalist bent. Has this really escaped your attention?
And it wasn't more money, it was the same money announced some time ago.
you
Well-known member
I think the commentary on the beeb actually announced (referring to the rose tinted, nostalgic mainstream collective): "could we afford it? Probably not."
Also - the IOC pretty much forced us to spend more than we initially budgeted for on security. I'd've thought the military advisors and strategists cooped up beside the Thames would know a thing or three about how to defend their own capital city - but no - I guess some bloke from belgium and his european mates from a base in switzerland would have far better ideas...... namely, like, uh, spend mo, yeah!?
Crackerjack - do you particularly enjoy overtly patriotic/nationalist mainstream entertainment, because of its patriotism?
I think I'm pretty patriotic to curse the IOC and the bods that brought the Olympics here, rather than a Chinook stalking the Thames air I'd rather the closed libraries were opened again, rather than an Olympic Park being built I'd rather social housing in the Capital could afford other options than shipping people out to towns north of Birmingham and over a hundred miles from their family...... now call my cynical but...
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Without wishing to speak for cj...
I'm not sure it's a case of enjoying something because it is patriotic, but rather, of not deliberately not enjoying it just because it is patriotic. There's a big difference there.
Edit: You, I'm sure there isn't a single regular contributor here who doesn't agree that the money - even just some of it - could have been much better spent on any number of other things instead.
I'm not sure it's a case of enjoying something because it is patriotic, but rather, of not deliberately not enjoying it just because it is patriotic. There's a big difference there.
Edit: You, I'm sure there isn't a single regular contributor here who doesn't agree that the money - even just some of it - could have been much better spent on any number of other things instead.
Last edited:
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
Re mainstream entertainment, that has escaped my attention for the reason that it's not true. There is a great deal of mainstream entertainment discussed on these pages, as well you know.
Re patriotic/nationalist entertainment, you have a point*, although complaining about prejudice whilst extolling the virtues of nationalist entertainment does seem a bit daft, seeing as the whole concept of nation is based upon exclusion and prejudice.
* But personally I'm glad to be on a forum where a significant number of people view nationalism and patriotism with suspicion.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
This is in isolation a fair point, but the nationalist hysteria of the last few weeks (and not just in the UK, of course) has been scarily mental. There's a big difference also between mild nationalism of the kind that you'd see at any 'normal' sporting event, and the frothing insanity/lack of any alternative viewpoint that the press and media have subjected us to over the past few weeks.
I still have no idea why I'm meant to be 'proud' to be British, especially in its current state. Sure, sing a national anthem (though it would help if it wasn't obsequious and shit, which lets England down every time; can't the UK just sing a version of the Welsh one?), it's as good a way as any for dividing people up into teams for this kind of thing, but leave it at that.
Last edited:
you
Well-known member
I think the etymology of the word patriot is interesting:
1590s, "compatriot," from M.Fr. patriote (15c.), from L.L. patriota "fellow-countryman" (6c.), from Gk. patriotes "fellow countryman," from patrios "of one's fathers," patris "fatherland," from pater (gen. patros) "father," with -otes, suffix expressing state or condition.
The Games and The Jubilee were along way from celebrating fellow countrymen. There was this in pockets admittedly in some of the short films etc, but for the most part it was about celebrating, or striving to be part of, something that is innately otherly and outside - being british. On the one hand we have swathes of people willing a lone runner over the line in a most divisionistic fashion, (the chinese are good at, the jamaicans are good at, britain has hasn't it etc etc) - we have the singularity of colours, codes, uniforms and goals, quite militaristic, on the other hand we have this odd celebration of inclusion, lack of boarders, and acceptance. Sport, aggression, and militaristic public displays go together quite well - but the juxtaposition with the modern ideals we celebrate is a slightly less comfortable formation.
Team sports in particular are great at highlighting this vaguely tribal hang-over awaking in post modern arenas (we can leave aside the obvious comparisons to gladiatorial regressions of brute force and physical dominance, too easy) - recall the spain Vs france basketball match; not exactly a parade of modern european values as an emergence of ever present tribal, in/out groups aggression. I feel these emotions and whims are at the heart of some sports - is sport the petridish that contains this culture, a controlled blaze? Is it this aspect - when tied to such Nationalistic, and personally affecting economic/geographic implications that is difficult for some to accept - or approve?
1590s, "compatriot," from M.Fr. patriote (15c.), from L.L. patriota "fellow-countryman" (6c.), from Gk. patriotes "fellow countryman," from patrios "of one's fathers," patris "fatherland," from pater (gen. patros) "father," with -otes, suffix expressing state or condition.
The Games and The Jubilee were along way from celebrating fellow countrymen. There was this in pockets admittedly in some of the short films etc, but for the most part it was about celebrating, or striving to be part of, something that is innately otherly and outside - being british. On the one hand we have swathes of people willing a lone runner over the line in a most divisionistic fashion, (the chinese are good at, the jamaicans are good at, britain has hasn't it etc etc) - we have the singularity of colours, codes, uniforms and goals, quite militaristic, on the other hand we have this odd celebration of inclusion, lack of boarders, and acceptance. Sport, aggression, and militaristic public displays go together quite well - but the juxtaposition with the modern ideals we celebrate is a slightly less comfortable formation.
Team sports in particular are great at highlighting this vaguely tribal hang-over awaking in post modern arenas (we can leave aside the obvious comparisons to gladiatorial regressions of brute force and physical dominance, too easy) - recall the spain Vs france basketball match; not exactly a parade of modern european values as an emergence of ever present tribal, in/out groups aggression. I feel these emotions and whims are at the heart of some sports - is sport the petridish that contains this culture, a controlled blaze? Is it this aspect - when tied to such Nationalistic, and personally affecting economic/geographic implications that is difficult for some to accept - or approve?
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
I don't think it's 'nationalistic' to support athletes who are representing your county during an event like this. It's patriotic, sure, but that's not the same thing. Patriotism, in the context of sporting events, means supporting your country's team because they are the team that represents your country - it's pretty much tautological, but I don't think that's a problem. It is such a terrible thing for British people to support British athletes when people from all the other countries involved are supporting their own teams? And has there ever been an Olympics in which the host country's government and establishment hasn't ostentatiously supported the home team?
Nationalism, on the other hand, is a xenophobic belief that one's country is objectively better than any other country. In the context of sport, that would lead someone to support their country's athletes because they see it as a fulfilment of national destiny or demonstration of inherent superiority over other countries. It's definitely something different from mere patriotism and is obviously far more sinister.
It's like the difference between loving your mum because duh, she's your mum, of course you love her - and believing she is objectively the best mum in the world and demonstrably superior to everyone else's mum.
Nationalism, on the other hand, is a xenophobic belief that one's country is objectively better than any other country. In the context of sport, that would lead someone to support their country's athletes because they see it as a fulfilment of national destiny or demonstration of inherent superiority over other countries. It's definitely something different from mere patriotism and is obviously far more sinister.
It's like the difference between loving your mum because duh, she's your mum, of course you love her - and believing she is objectively the best mum in the world and demonstrably superior to everyone else's mum.
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
Sorry. It's a compulsion.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Yeah yeah, I know. Even as I was writing it, I could feel it coming...just like your mum.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
The problem is the disconnect between the self-congratulatory bullshit (patriotic, nationalist, whatever you want to call it) about what Britain is, and the reality. Patriotism would be fine if it were merely supporting a sports team, but during the Olympics it blatantly morphed into something much more hysterical (same as happened during the wretched Jubilee weekend), where you hesitated to say anything negative for fear of being labelled a 'killjoy' or worse. And the one-eyed nature of the media coverage was frightening. Randomly from the Guardian today:
'Just over a fortnight later, London's Games ended bathed in sunshine as the country giddily rose to acclaim a host of new sporting heroes amid hopes that it would lead to a new sense of ourselves and — in the words of a Locog slogan that once seemed cloying but now feels appropriate — "inspire a generation".'
That's mad for a supposedly non-tabloid newspaper. 'A new sense of ourselves'? Ffs.
And I think Britain DOES trade on the concept that it's inherently superior to other countries in certain ways. The illusion that it's a post-race country, for example, as Luka commented in another thread on in the way Brits compare themselves favourably to those wretchedly racist Australians, while not seeing what's under their own noses.
Last edited:
Slothrop
Tight but Polite
Agree with that, although I think that's less to do with some sinister nationalist programme and more to do with business - the more you hype the olympics as being some vastly profound and life-changing event, the more people will buy your paper to read about the latest developments in the water polo. It's like sticking fruity girls on the front cover on A-level results day.
Having said that, I was annoyed shitless by the efforts to turn it into some national team thing rather than being about the individuals - I mean, I like to know how the brits are doing and probably care more if someone british is doing well in the mixed doubles roller-hockey than if it's someone from somewhere else, but the focus on WHERE WE ARE IN THE MEDALS TABLE and ANOTHER GOLD FOR TEAM GB to the exclusion of anything else was really bloody irritating. Again, it probably reflects what the public want to hear more than anything else, though.
And while I'm on a moaning tip, how many different people in the last couple of weeks have been described as "Britain's greatest ever olympian"?