What grinds my gears...

[Stoopid]

On 4 November 2019 at 13:12, Footballwipe said:

It's 2019 so obviously it's time for a poppy moan.

• Poppies on lampposts, and those from neighbouring villages moaning because there are no poppies on their lampposts
• Every football club needing to do a minute's silence, no matter how far away from Remembrance Sunday it is.
• The forced poppy wearing on TV is an old one, so won't go into that. Safe to say it gets earlier and earlier

I guess this year's gripe really is the lamppost one. More and more Parish Council's plundering hundreds/thousands of pounds into putting plastic, non-recyclable poppies on every lamppost they can find in their area. Why? Why do we need to have these on show, it just feeds the weird outrage when those from neighbouring areas don't have them.

 

I'm only 30. Tell me, how disrespectful was everyone 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago over this period? You know, when there were no poppies on football shirts, optional choice on TV, no minute's silence at football grounds. Why has the fervour increased so rapidly over the last decade to the point everyone seems to want to "our remember" each other? It's almost embarrassing.

 

 

As someone who grew up in the 60s & 70s I can confirm that the whole poppy thing was far less prevalent then. 

My dad fought in WW11, and never wore one, wouldn't have dreamed of it, and none of his mates of that generation did either as far as I can remember, 

They needed no reminder of what they'd been through or what loss actually meant and roundly took the piss out of anyone 'coming the old soldier' as they put it.

The recent fetishisation of our military seems odd to me and seems also to grow stronger as time goes by and fewer of that generation are left. And its conflation with a kind of implied nationalism would horrify the old man and his oppoes who (lest we forget) voted in the most left-wing government this country's ever known as soon as they got demobbed...

[leicsmac]

28 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

As someone who grew up in the 60s & 70s I can confirm that the whole poppy thing was far less prevalent then. 

My dad fought in WW11, and never wore one, wouldn't have dreamed of it, and none of his mates of that generation did either as far as I can remember, 

They needed no reminder of what they'd been through or what loss actually meant and roundly took the piss out of anyone 'coming the old soldier' as they put it.

The recent fetishisation of our military seems odd to me and seems also to grow stronger as time goes by and fewer of that generation are left. And its conflation with a kind of implied nationalism would horrify the old man and his oppoes who (lest we forget) voted in the most left-wing government this country's ever known as soon as they got demobbed...

It's like humanity needs a consistent refresher course on just how horrible war is because for some reason we keep on forgetting.

[Stoopid]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's like humanity needs a consistent refresher course on just how horrible war is because for some reason we keep on forgetting.

Agreed, and I don't think the rise in 'poppyism' conjoined to the passing of the Second World War generation is coincidental.

My dad's generation always struck me as pretty anti-militaristic and certainly less willing to swallow orthodox opinion as many seem to be now.

WW2 was an existential struggle - no doubt. Doesn't mean the people who fought it particularly wanted to, or looked back fondly on it. 

And my generation grew up acutely aware that if we'd been born over the pond we'd have been called up to that monumental f**k up in Vietnam.

But yes, this convention of compulsory reverence for the military worries me somewhat...

[SpacedX]

On 04/11/2019 at 13:12, Footballwipe said:

It's 2019 so obviously it's time for a poppy moan.

• Poppies on lampposts, and those from neighbouring villages moaning because there are no poppies on their lampposts
• Every football club needing to do a minute's silence, no matter how far away from Remembrance Sunday it is.
• The forced poppy wearing on TV is an old one, so won't go into that. Safe to say it gets earlier and earlier

I guess this year's gripe really is the lamppost one. More and more Parish Council's plundering hundreds/thousands of pounds into putting plastic, non-recyclable poppies on every lamppost they can find in their area. Why? Why do we need to have these on show, it just feeds the weird outrage when those from neighbouring areas don't have them.

 

I'm only 30. Tell me, how disrespectful was everyone 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago over this period? You know, when there were no poppies on football shirts, optional choice on TV, no minute's silence at football grounds. Why has the fervour increased so rapidly over the last decade to the point everyone seems to want to "our remember" each other? It's almost embarrassing.

 

 

My 2017 response which I am bumped last year and again this year in respect of the "annual poppy moan"....

 

I wear a poppy because I want to, not because I am conditioned to do so. Also, I choose to wear one from late October because in an era in which we take so much for granted increasingly informed by social media revisionism I place great value of remembrance. It is my choice to do so and I don't think that the ubiquity of poppies or the decision to wear them in October in any way detracts from Armistice Day or in any way desensitises observance or devalues the cause. 

 

Wearing a poppy is not about blind faith or following without understanding; it means that we memorialise those people who fought and died so that we were conferred the freedoms and liberty that we experience today. It is important to understand the prominent place that the poppy has in British culture so that the choice of whether or not to wear it is informed.  It is up to the individual to engage with the wearing of poppies and participating in the silences, but most crucially to me - maintain this connection to our history, however bloody it may be, that it remains respectful, tasteful, tangible and poignant. The significance is the value that I and many others attach to it. The remembrance as a lasting memorial symbol to the fallen was first realised by the Canadian surgeon John McCrae in his poem In Flanders Fields. The poppy came to represent the untold sacrifice made by his comrades and quickly became a lasting memorial to those who died in World War One. Inspired by McCrae's poem, an American War Secretary, bought poppies to sell to her friends to raise money for Servicemen in need after the First World War. It was subsequently adopted by The Royal British Legion in as a symbol for the Poppy Appeal in aid of those serving in the British Armed Forces. The symbol of the poppy today represents remembrance of the past and hope for the future.

 

What's wrong with a two minute silence at a football ground?

 

Saying that, I do agree that the plastic component needs to be eradicated. 

Edited 5 November 2019 by Line-X

[Stoopid]

17 minutes ago, Line-X said:

My 2017 response which I am bumped last year and again this year in respect of the "annual poppy moan"....

 

I wear a poppy because I want to, not because I am conditioned to do so. Also, I choose to wear one from late October because in an era in which we take so much for granted increasingly informed by social media revisionism I place great value of remembrance. It is my choice to do so and I don't think that the ubiquity of poppies or the decision to wear them in October in any way detracts from Armistice Day or in any way desensitises observance or devalues the cause. 

 

Wearing a poppy is not about blind faith or following without understanding; it means that we memorialise those people who fought and died so that we were conferred the freedoms and liberty that we experience today. It is important to understand the prominent place that the poppy has in British culture so that the choice of whether or not to wear it is informed.  It is up to the individual to engage with the wearing of poppies and participating in the silences, but most crucially to me - maintain this connection to our history, however bloody it may be, that it remains respectful, tasteful, tangible and poignant. The significance is the value that I and many others attach to it. The remembrance as a lasting memorial symbol to the fallen was first realised by the Canadian surgeon John McCrae in his poem In Flanders Fields. The poppy came to represent the untold sacrifice made by his comrades and quickly became a lasting memorial to those who died in World War One. Inspired by McCrae's poem, an American War Secretary, bought poppies to sell to her friends to raise money for Servicemen in need after the First World War. It was subsequently adopted by The Royal British Legion in as a symbol for the Poppy Appeal in aid of those serving in the British Armed Forces. The symbol of the poppy today represents remembrance of the past and hope for the future.

 

What's wrong with a one minute silence at a football ground?

 

Saying that, I do agree that the plastic component needs to be eradicated. 

That's fine and your choice of course.  And I largely agree with the sentiment about sacrifice and freedom.

I just find it telling that so many of my father's generation - the ones who actually fought in the Second World War - rarely wore poppies or bought into the whole rembrance ceremonial.

They weren't 'heroes' or different to any other generation. They just found themselves born into a desperate time when they had to do a job and, by and large, did it...

They were fallible human beings with all the faults and drawbacks of any group of people. To my mind, that makes their experiences more real and remarkable - certainly not 'heroic'. Outside of TV drama or Hollywood, that's a pretty meaningless word, let's face it - 

They most certainly were not flag-wavers or nationalists. And it was their mates & families who died in the struggle against that mindset.

I find no echo of their loss in the compulsory poppydom of the BBC etc and even less in the Whitehall processions...

But each to their own. 

As stated above, I just find the reverence for militarism totally at odds to blokes like my dad and his mates.

[Izzy]

Slightly off on a tangent from the poppy debate, when did all this "Thank you for your service" stuff come in?

 

Seems that if anyone introduces themselves as forces or ex-forces, the first thing you're supposed to say these days is "Thank you for your service"

 

Maybe it's an Americanism but I don't remember it being a thing 10/20/30 years ago. It's not like we say it to paramedics, nurses, doctors or other professions saving lives.

 

Anyway, to all those Foxes fans who serve here or abroad, thank you for your service.

[Guest MattP]

 

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, Stoopid said:

That's fine and your choice of course.  And I largely agree with the sentiment about sacrifice and freedom.

I just find it telling that so many of my father's generation - the ones who actually fought in the Second World War - rarely wore poppies or bought into the whole rembrance ceremonial.

They weren't 'heroes' or different to any other generation. They just found themselves born into a desperate time when they had to do a job and, by and large, did it...

They were fallible human beings with all the faults and drawbacks of any group of people. To my mind, that makes their experiences more real and remarkable - certainly not 'heroic'. Outside of TV drama or Hollywood, that's a pretty meaningless word, let's face it - 

They most certainly were not flag-wavers or nationalists. And it was their mates & families who died in the struggle against that mindset.

I find no echo of their loss in the compulsory poppydom of the BBC etc and even less in the Whitehall processions...

But each to their own. 

As stated above, I just find the reverence for militarism totally at odds to blokes like my dad and his mates.

As I explained, the poppy is not intended to signify a "reverence to militarism" - nonetheless. there are plenty of servicemen that would disagree with your anecdotal assertions regarding your 'Father's generation' and pointedly, your jaded view of the annual marching ceremony at the Cenotaph.  

 

To reiterate, I am firm in the conviction that it is important that future generations are reminded of the horrors of armed conflict and the sacrifice of war. 

[StanSP]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

That save the date bit as well  

[Stoopid]

5 minutes ago, Line-X said:

As I explained, the poppy is not intended to signify a "reverence to militarism" - nonetheless. there are plenty of servicemen that would disagree with your anecdotal assertions regarding your 'Father's generation' and pointedly, your jaded view of the annual marching ceremony at the Cenotaph.  

 

To reiterate, I am firm in the conviction that it is important that future generations are reminded of the horrors of armed conflict and the sacrifice of war. 

So am I. The point I'm trying to make is that the recent obsession with remembrance  - and recent it is; I can assure you that the the whole poppy phenomenon was much less marked when I was young, when the people who actually lived through the war were the vast majority - is actually reducing those people to something like ciphers or fictional characters ( The 'Glorious Dead') rather than they actual human people they really were. And rather than inspire the younger generation to avoid war in my opinion it has the opposite effect. By fictionalising the memory of those who served in it, by turning them into 'heroes' rather than the flesh & blood ordinary people they actually were they are becoming less real and more like fantasy figures and somehow glamorous - somehow to be emulated.

If anything this makes future war more likely, in my opinion.

We do the dead a disservice by deifying them. 

I find the recent emphasis on 'remembrance rather self-indulgent and very far from emphasising the squalor and hatred that war actually entails. And I repeat, the vast majority of blokes that I knew (and that was plenty) that actually fought in the Second World War never went anywhere near a poppy.

[Izzy]

@Stoopid

Some interesting points you’ve made and very eloquently put I must say.

[SpacedX]

9 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

The point I'm trying to make is that the recent obsession with remembrance  - and recent it is; I can assure you that the the whole poppy phenomenon was much less marked when I was young, when the people who actually lived through the war were the vast majority - is actually reducing those people to something like ciphers or fictional characters ( The 'Glorious Dead') rather than they actual human people they really were.

Disagree entirely. 

 

10 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

And rather than inspire the younger generation to avoid war in my opinion it has the opposite effect. By fictionalising the memory of those who served in it, by turning them into 'heroes' rather than the flesh & blood ordinary people they actually were they are becoming less real and more like fantasy figures and somehow glamorous - somehow to be emulated.

Fictionalising? - the intention is diametrically the opposite. 

 

12 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

 

We do the dead a disservice by deifying them. 

 

Again, that is a somewhat cynical and perverse viewpoint.

 

Our image of the First World War, after which the first Remembrance Day events started taking place, is in danger of losing its clarity. The Great War has all but dropped out of living memory, particularly with the passing of the last of our uniformed veterans, 110-year-old former WAF officer Florence Green, back in February 2012. With first-hand recollection all but gone, we risk that conflict fading, like a sun-bleached sepia images and replaced by your jaundiced perspective. It is more important than ever for us to share the realities of the Great War - not to glorify militarism as you suggest, or necessarily venerate the fallen, but to acknowledge the symbolism of Armistice Day, the solemn reality of war and the deliverance of peace. One of the key facets of Remembrance Day is showing gratitude, recognition and thanks for the service of those before us. Nothing whatsoever to do with hagiography or jingosim. 

 

24 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

 

I find the recent emphasis on 'remembrance rather self-indulgent and very far from emphasising the squalor and hatred that war actually entails. 

Then choose to forget. Your choice. 

 

25 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

And I repeat, the vast majority of blokes that I knew (and that was plenty) that actually fought in the Second World War never went anywhere near a poppy.

And I repeat, my experience very much differs to yours which is precisely the problem with subjective anecdotal assertions. 

[Stoopid]

3 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Disagree entirely. 

 

Fictionalising? - the intention is diametrically the opposite. 

 

Again, that is a somewhat cynical and perverse viewpoint.

 

Our image of the First World War, after which the first Remembrance Day events started taking place, is in danger of losing its clarity. The Great War has all but dropped out of living memory, particularly with the passing of the last of our uniformed veterans, 110-year-old former WAF officer Florence Green, back in February 2012. With first-hand recollection all but gone, we risk that conflict fading, like a sun-bleached sepia images and replaced by your jaundiced perspective. It is more important than ever for us to share the realities of the Great War - not to glorify militarism as you suggest, or necessarily venerate the fallen, but to acknowledge the symbolism of Armistice Day, the solemn reality of war and the deliverance of peace. One of the key facets of Remembrance Day is showing gratitude, recognition and thanks for the service of those before us. Nothing whatsoever to do with hagiography or jingosim. 

 

Then choose to forget. Your choice. 

 

And I repeat, my experience very much differs to yours which is precisely the problem with subjective anecdotal assertions. 

 I'm not going to enter into a slanging match with you mate.

But either you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said or you just don't get the points I'm making. Fair enough - either way to continue in this vein would be as tedious for me as it appears to be anathematic to you...

One question. How old are you? I only ask because I wonder if you remember how Armistice Day was marked in the 60s - when the majority of people had direct experience of the war?

It was a very different thing to those people to whom war was not an abstract construct. Perhaps their example - their very real experience of loss, hardship and sacrifice - means more than the rather self-conscious all-pervading fiction we've somehow managed to turn it into these days.

By the way, my uncle was killed in the war. By an American bomb. He was a prisoner on a Japenese ship (the Lisbon Maru) when that particular inglorious episode took place.

I often wonder which one of the poppies propped up on the Cenotaph represents him.

[SpacedX]

13 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

 I'm not going to enter into a slanging match with you mate.

 

I should hope not. That wouldn't be at all productive.

 

13 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

But either you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said or you just don't get the points I'm making.

I absolutely understand the points that you are making, doesn't mean that I am obliged to unconditionally agree with them.

 

14 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

 One question. How old are you? 

Younger than you.

 

15 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

  I only ask because I wonder if you remember how Armistice Day was marked in the 60s - when the majority of people had direct experience of the war?

 

Not the 60s, but the 70s. My parents were both evacuees and both my Grandfather's served as did my partner's. I have known plenty of veterans from WWII, The Falklands conflict and both Gulf wars. 

 

17 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

It was a very different thing to those people to whom war was not an abstract construct. Perhaps their example - their very real experience of loss, hardship and sacrifice - means more than the rather self-conscious all-pervading fiction we've somehow managed to turn it into these days.

This "rather self-conscious all pervading fiction"...seems to be more of your own creation to me. 

 

20 minutes ago, Stoopid said:

 By the way, my uncle was killed in the war. By an American bomb. He was a prisoner on a Japenese ship (the Lisbon Maru) when that particular inglorious episode took place.

I often wonder which one of the poppies propped up on the Cenotaph represents him.

All of them. 

[UniFox21]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It's like humanity needs a consistent refresher course on just how horrible war is because for some reason we keep on forgetting.

I think 'normal' people and those serving realise or at least understand how bad war was and how much we should avoid it at all costs. 

It seems those who orchestrate the wars via the board rooms and politics are the ones who need reminding. They seem to forget that the things they do actually effect real people, not just numbers.

[Stoopid]

27 minutes ago, Line-X said:

I should hope not. That wouldn't be at all productive.

 

I absolutely understand the points that you are making, doesn't mean that I am obliged to unconditionally agree with them.

 

Younger than you.

 

Not the 60s, but the 70s. My parents were both evacuees and both my Grandfather's served as did my partner's. I have known plenty of veterans from WWII, The Falklands conflict and both Gulf wars. 

 

This "rather self-conscious all pervading fiction"...seems to be more of your own creation to me. 

 

All of them. 

Yes - it is my creation, and a rather pleasing, felicitous one - even if I do say so myself (let's face it, you're not going to!)

Look, the point I'm making is that while war may be a cliché, the experience of it never is. But the platitudes that we dress our version of Remembrance in is danger of making them just that. And that in turn Disneyfies the whole thing - and makes it more about our attitude to it than it does the real, lived experience - this makes it more, not less, likely to recur.

i mention my uncle just because he wasn't a hero - just a daft lad who liked a drink and died because some Yank screwed up. And my old man would have been with him if he hadn't got pissed in Harwich & missed the boat to Singapore (lucky for me!)

Far from heroic, just real messy human life...

And the more we fill our ears with bugles and our lapels with poppies, the farther we stray from the poor bleeders who had to fight and die in the reality of it.

All this Poppy stuff has nothing to do with their lives and deaths. And I just find it slightly insulting to their memory - to say nothing of their intelligence - to suggest it does. 

I refuse to be defined by cliché (bit of a forlorn hope on this forum admittedly). And, on their behalf, so do they.

[E.Rose]

4 hours ago, Izzy said:

Slightly off on a tangent from the poppy debate, when did all this "Thank you for your service" stuff come in?

 

Seems that if anyone introduces themselves as forces or ex-forces, the first thing you're supposed to say these days is "Thank you for your service"

 

Maybe it's an Americanism but I don't remember it being a thing 10/20/30 years ago. It's not like we say it to paramedics, nurses, doctors or other professions saving lives.

 

Anyway, to all those Foxes fans who serve here or abroad, thank you for your service.

The only time I’ve ever heard anyone say thank you was about 8 years ago as me and a couple of others were stopping for a maccies breakfast. 
 

All the other occasions I’ve been in the public, especially this one time when I was in the town centre we seemed to attract all the weirdos who had too much time on their hands. They insisted in making a scene and slagging us serving personnel off  Charming.

 

I’m sure most people are grateful for the armed forces in this country (I’d hope so anyway) but as you said, saying thank you for your service is a bit ‘American’ and kinda cringe. 

 

 

[UniFox21]

The fact any issue during a match is now taken as a VAR fault. VAR has its faults; and it has a lot, but it's not the only thing that causes the issues in the game. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

When you visit a vegetarian restaurant, there are never any carnivore options.

[Corky]

45 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

The fact any issue during a match is now taken as a VAR fault. VAR has its faults; and it has a lot, but it's not the only thing that causes the issues in the game. 

Pundits moaning about it are the worst. Their programmes have for years scrutinised decisions so much that video reviews were brought in.

 

Plus a decent amount seemed to think that a bloke looking at a screen would solve everything and we wouldn't have subjective decisions anymore and now seem perplexed that it isn't some super robot getting everything as they want it.

[UniFox21]

1 minute ago, Corky said:

Pundits moaning about it are the worst. Their programmes have for years scrutinised decisions so much that video reviews were brought in.

 

Plus a decent amount seemed to think that a bloke looking at a screen would solve everything and we wouldn't have subjective decisions anymore and now seem perplexed that it isn't some super robot getting everything as they want it.

It's fair enough criticising things that are going wrong, that's fine. But like you said, a fair few are blaming any error on VAR. 

 

It does need sorting to remove some of the subjective errors. I'm guilty myself of assuming it would fix all issues, but in practise that wont happen. 

[ajthefox]

11 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

When you visit a vegetarian restaurant, there are never any carnivore options.

Not sure what your point is here really, Trav..

[ozleicester]

1 hour ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

When you visit a vegetarian restaurant, there are never any carnivore options.

 this is a fair point.

Veggie restaurants should provide one dish of the most disgusting, easily produced, meat based product in the same style as veggies are catered for. 

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, Line-X said:

Disagree entirely. 

 

Can you elaborate on this here? I would say the idealising of those soldiers and downplaying of the horrors of war that they were involved in is pretty self-evident.

 

5 hours ago, Line-X said:

 

Fictionalising? - the intention is diametrically the opposite. 

 

I'm sure that it is, but that is not stopping certain folks from taking it and running with it, as evidenced earlier in this thread.

 

I'm certainly with you in that people need to be consistently reminded of the horrors of war and (more importantly) why humans shouldn't get involved in them, but I'm genuinely unsure of how much that is happening as time goes by. Yeah, this is all anecdotal, but that's all me or you or anyone has to go on with the topic, really.

 

3 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

I think 'normal' people and those serving realise or at least understand how bad war was and how much we should avoid it at all costs. 

It seems those who orchestrate the wars via the board rooms and politics are the ones who need reminding. They seem to forget that the things they do actually effect real people, not just numbers.

The 'normal' people elect those politicians, though - however it is true that people can be manipulated by the powerful to want war, there's numerous examples of that.

 

And yes, there are far too many people who view war as a spectator sport, either from their armchair or as pieces on a board.

[SpacedX]

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

Yes - it is my creation, and a rather pleasing, felicitous one - even if I do say so myself (let's face it, you're not going to!)

 

Sounds somewhat self-congratulatory to me. 

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

Look, the point I'm making is that while war may be a cliché, the experience of it never is. But the platitudes that we dress our version of Remembrance in is danger of making them just that. And that in turn Disneyfies the whole thing - and makes it more about our attitude to it than it does the real, lived experience - this makes it more, not less, likely to recur.

By wearing a poppy on a pin?

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

i mention my uncle just because he wasn't a hero - just a daft lad who liked a drink and died because some Yank screwed up. And my old man would have been with him if he hadn't got pissed in Harwich & missed the boat to Singapore (lucky for me!)

Far from heroic, just real messy human life...

 

War is messy. War is a disease - it doesn't discriminate other than often consigning those less fortunate in life to the front line or punitively penalising those that are unable to escape its path. There are many misfits and miscreants that were caught up in the chaos of conflict and many noble souls too, either victims of circumstance who lost their lives in an inglorious way, or died as gallant heroes on the battlefield. 

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

And the more we fill our ears with bugles

You mean the last post on a Sunday morning? 

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

...and our lapels with poppies, the farther we stray from the poor bleeders who had to fight and die in the reality of it.

 

 I would contend the opposite.

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

All this Poppy stuff has nothing to do with their lives and deaths.

I think that you'll find that it does.

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

. And I just find it slightly insulting to their memory - to say nothing of their intelligence - to suggest it does. 

Without remembrance - there is no memory.

 

10 hours ago, Stoopid said:

I refuse to be defined by cliché 

Cliché is inescapable - we all become unwitting parodies of ourselves. Definition is by nature...definitive, a subjective view of meaning and symbolism is not. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 6 November 2019 by Line-X