"So just to check, Guy, you see no problem at all with a song originally sung by black slaves who were considered property to be bought and sold by European (including British) slave traders being adopted by am overwhelmingly white, wealthy, English fan base as an anthem to English dominance in sport?"
No, but I wouldn't call it an "anthem to English dominance in sport". I would call it a supporters song of encouragement. It is sung to lift the team. I don't see it makes a difference what race or economic status who sings it has.
"English sports fans must be the most polarised of all countries, they are either polite, self-effacing and good fun (most cricket fans and about half of rugby fans and a minority of football fans) or completely boorish, self-deluded and awful (the other half of rugby fans and most football fans) " I would say most can be both, depending on who they are with, where they are and what they have drunk. .
As a Welshman I have no particular fondness for the song but it would be a shame if it fell victim to the modern-day competitive culture of who can take the most offence at any given thing.
There have been a lot of black players for England. why not poll them and ask if they'd rather the song was not sung? surely they are the ones who matter most in this debate.
for those on this thread who find the song cringeworthy, do they also find the haka cringeworthy?
I know it's not the same. The haka is something the New Zealand players do rather than the crowd. But it doesn't seem logical to me that one is weird and the other is fine , just based on who does it (players or paying public)
And agreed Guy. To say the song is celebrating English dominance is a preposterous misunderstanding of the point of sporting songs. Like when Luton fans sing 'we're the greatest football team the world has ever seen'.
for those on this thread who find the song cringeworthy, do they also find the haka cringeworthy?
I know it's not the same. The haka is something the New Zealand players do rather than the crowd. But it doesn't seem logical to me that one is weird and the other is fine , just based on who does it (players or paying public)
I think the whole point of Christianity is that it was supposed to be spread far and wide and appropriated by as many people as possible, Cheesetoastie.
Mr Tanner-Ihm, who is from Chicago and is a Reverend Seminarian in the United States, applied for a role as a curate at a church in the south of England.
In response, he got an email saying: "We are not confident there is a sufficient 'match' between you and the particular requirements of that post.
"The demographic of the parish is monochrome white working class, where you might feel uncomfortable."
What an extraordinary letter from the church - manages to be both racist and classist . Did it not occur to them the best way to change attitudes in a “monochrome white working class” community might be to introduce some diversity?
Would have been a nailed on race discrimination claim of he had been British
It is the culture of New Zealand, and New Zealanders of all ethnicities do it because they believe aboriginal culture is important (in stark contrast to how aboriginal culture has been treated in Australia and the US).
Swing Low has got absolutely fuck all to do with England except for the fact that some of the slave traders and owners were English.
Lady P is clearly a descendant of the Witchfinder General, most latterly bred with a Muppet.
Despite admitting she knows nothing about rugby, hasn't been to a match or to Twickenham, she can breezily censoriously opine on what a 'normal' rugby fan is like.
Lady P you may attend rugby but the way you described Swing Low as anthem to domination of English sport suggests you don’t really understand rugby culture
They probably don't even know it's a Christian song, just like they don't even know it's a slave song, because they're a bunch of pig-ignorant braying donkeys.
They should have a crack at belting out Zadok the Priest. In the unlikely event that they could handle the range, it would sound fucking amazing if a few thousand people roared that out.
That would actually be good, but suspect it is way beyond the musical capabilities of most.
Zadok the Priest is a German song so we would need written permission from the Germans before we could use it. Maybe the queen could sign off on it tbh she's sort of German.
God Save the Queen is by far the most offensive thing sung at England Rugby matches - shit song, shit lyrics and not even England's national anthem, often a shared national anthem with their opponents.
I remember when we came on to the spirituals bit of the hymn or song book at school when I was about 9. They were so lovely to sing and the teacher told us all about the background. It was a good way to learn about slavery. If we try to remove the past people tend then not to learn from it.
0
0
"So just to check, Guy, you see no problem at all with a song originally sung by black slaves who were considered property to be bought and sold by European (including British) slave traders being adopted by am overwhelmingly white, wealthy, English fan base as an anthem to English dominance in sport?"
No, but I wouldn't call it an "anthem to English dominance in sport". I would call it a supporters song of encouragement. It is sung to lift the team. I don't see it makes a difference what race or economic status who sings it has.
0
0
Thats the spirit
0
0
"English sports fans must be the most polarised of all countries, they are either polite, self-effacing and good fun (most cricket fans and about half of rugby fans and a minority of football fans) or completely boorish, self-deluded and awful (the other half of rugby fans and most football fans) " I would say most can be both, depending on who they are with, where they are and what they have drunk. .
0
0
As a Welshman I have no particular fondness for the song but it would be a shame if it fell victim to the modern-day competitive culture of who can take the most offence at any given thing.
0
0
There have been a lot of black players for England. why not poll them and ask if they'd rather the song was not sung? surely they are the ones who matter most in this debate.
0
0
for those on this thread who find the song cringeworthy, do they also find the haka cringeworthy?
I know it's not the same. The haka is something the New Zealand players do rather than the crowd. But it doesn't seem logical to me that one is weird and the other is fine , just based on who does it (players or paying public)
0
0
And agreed Guy. To say the song is celebrating English dominance is a preposterous misunderstanding of the point of sporting songs. Like when Luton fans sing 'we're the greatest football team the world has ever seen'.
0
0
burnley, 'it's just like watching brazil'
0
0
Anna's trolling on this thread is epic.
Nice work.
0
0
diceman have you ever seen videos of the 60/70s NZ teams doing the haka? It’s brilliant, far cry from the modern era!
0
0
Absolute state of this.
0
0
no nb123, I haven't seen that. But I imagine the hakas were less well rehearsed/executed then
0
0
Why?
That's their own culture.
0
0
Martin Offiah's got the right idea:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/53096584
0
0
I think the whole point of Christianity is that it was supposed to be spread far and wide and appropriated by as many people as possible, Cheesetoastie.
0
0
I'm not sure everybody in the Church of England got that memo Anna.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-53064929
Mr Tanner-Ihm, who is from Chicago and is a Reverend Seminarian in the United States, applied for a role as a curate at a church in the south of England.
In response, he got an email saying: "We are not confident there is a sufficient 'match' between you and the particular requirements of that post.
"The demographic of the parish is monochrome white working class, where you might feel uncomfortable."
0
0
Yes well lots of people in the church don't exactly follow the teachings of Jesus, do they?
0
0
hahahaha a load of white blokes LARPING
0
0
What an extraordinary letter from the church - manages to be both racist and classist . Did it not occur to them the best way to change attitudes in a “monochrome white working class” community might be to introduce some diversity?
Would have been a nailed on race discrimination claim of he had been British
0
0
Lady Penelope ffs. The Haka is the culture of the white New Zealanders is it??!!
0
0
That letter's a shocker innit?
0
0
I suspect whoever wrote it won’t be in their current position much longer
0
0
It is the culture of New Zealand, and New Zealanders of all ethnicities do it because they believe aboriginal culture is important (in stark contrast to how aboriginal culture has been treated in Australia and the US).
Swing Low has got absolutely fuck all to do with England except for the fact that some of the slave traders and owners were English.
0
0
Lady P is clearly a descendant of the Witchfinder General, most latterly bred with a Muppet.
Despite admitting she knows nothing about rugby, hasn't been to a match or to Twickenham, she can breezily censoriously opine on what a 'normal' rugby fan is like.
0
0
Lady P is usually quite sensible but has taken a wrong turn on this thread
0
0
I've been to loads of rugby matches and I won Wellerz' 6 Nations competition last year you colossal toolbag.
0
0
Good. Get rid. Fucking awful dirge.
0
0
Lady P you may attend rugby but the way you described Swing Low as anthem to domination of English sport suggests you don’t really understand rugby culture
0
0
They probably don't even know it's a Christian song, just like they don't even know it's a slave song, because they're a bunch of pig-ignorant braying donkeys.
0
0
And going even wronger....
0
0
Literally every time I hear the England fans singing this I'm thinking "wtf why are you singing this get some proper songs of your own, you twats".
The lack of any non-embarrassing songs is one reason I could never support England.
0
0
God Save the Queen (not the pistols one) is a colonial type song too.
Maybe Billy Connolly was right and we should adopt the Archers theme as our national anthem.
0
0
Not to mention the fact that it's an awful dreary dirge.
0
0
That would actually be good, but suspect it is way beyond the musical capabilities of most.
0
0
Having read this thread, it's obvious that Lady Penelope's issue is more with the people singing than the song itself.
0
0
Duh. The problem is not the song but the fact that those people shouldn't be using it in that context and they should have a bit more awareness.
0
0
Although I thing Swing Low is terrible, you shouldn't take it too far.
Irish fans ended up with Ireland's Call to mollify different traditions. Believe me, you don't want that.
0
0
Zadok the Priest is a German song so we would need written permission from the Germans before we could use it. Maybe the queen could sign off on it tbh she's sort of German.
0
0
God Save the Queen is by far the most offensive thing sung at England Rugby matches - shit song, shit lyrics and not even England's national anthem, often a shared national anthem with their opponents.
0
0
I may be wrong but I bet someone like Maro Itoje would be entirely relaxed about fans singing swing lo.
0
0
Zadok is not German. GF Handel was born in Germany but became a naturalised Brit. He wrote the anthem for Our King George II.
It is a splendid example of positive immigration.
0
0
Zadok was written for George II who was from Hanover, Germany.
it was written by a German
it is about a Jewish holy man
its got nothing to do with England.
#cancelzadok
0
0
I don't think it would be right to ban it.
I remember when we came on to the spirituals bit of the hymn or song book at school when I was about 9. They were so lovely to sing and the teacher told us all about the background. It was a good way to learn about slavery. If we try to remove the past people tend then not to learn from it.
0
0
I don't think using it as a rugby anthem is teaching people anything about slavery, Lydia.
Join the discussion