Remember Diana

This is for your own works!!!
John the Shorts
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
Location: Wales

Post by John the Shorts » Sat Apr 05, 2003 8:03 pm

I'm sorry that I concentrated on the title - What have I unleashed?

John Lennon was my first love (musically at least) but, to my mind at least, he only discovered the peace movement at the time he discovered Yoko, and I believe that she was a massive (positive) influence on him, eventually.

The point I'm trying to make (I think) is that Lennon's Bed-In, and other similar protests, may have been in the name of peace but it was perhaps more about promoting a positive image of someone who was widely regarded as the reason for the Beatles splitting up.

Sting & Bono have, as far as I know, little or no background in peace work (other than Live-Aid where they were names rather than instigators)

So I will stick with my original line that these people were not interested in the issue that they were involved in, rather in developing a positive image.

JTS

PS Byron I think the problem I have with it (other than the title) is the last two lines of your post - are they part of the piece or are they you explaining the poem?
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25395
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh » Sun Apr 06, 2003 12:03 am

I'm wondering how it is that we assess negatively the motives of someone working for an unquestionably, positive cause? The timing of when they joined the cause may represent nothing more than the timing of their heartfelt decision to do so. We all come to our decisions with our own, perfect timing. Why would it invalidate their purposefulness in doing so?

I can easily see someone being a part of Live Aid and then becoming inspired by their new knowledge of the issues, the extent of the problem, the extent to which they actually can have an impact, etc. to motivate them to go further with it personally. Sometimes, people also come to the right decisions for the wrong reasons, but once there, everything else realigns itself and they then become consistent within themselves.
John the Shorts
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
Location: Wales

Post by John the Shorts » Sun Apr 06, 2003 12:17 pm

Having just posted on The worst ever covers thread I realise that there may some common thread running through my though my brain on this poem.

I will admit that I have been distracted by the title - in fact it may be that this has taken over my thought processes, albeit subconsciously.

Let me explain - Sting & Bono have come up with, what I regard, as two of the worst ever cover versions of LC songs.

Now I am well aware that Lennon never covered any LC (as far as I am aware and I have just about everything that he released) but just look at his name Len-non even my imperfect (self praise) understanding of the french language allows me to translate this, it is enough to upset any LC fan.

JTS (:lol: :lol: at myself)
User avatar
Byron
Posts: 3171
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 3:01 pm
Location: Mad House, Eating Tablets, Cereals, Jam, Marmalade and HONEY, with Albert

Post by Byron » Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:07 pm

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

I must point out that the purpose of this poem was to draw peoples' attention to the disembowelling of little children by unexploded ordnance.

This disembowelling takes place over a number of years and is often the result of many children finding discarded 'toys' which they pick up out of normal curiosity.

The current use, of these weapons of bodily shredding, by our coilition forces makes me want to bring their use to your attention.

There now, have I made that point clear to one and all?

The continuing discussion with regard to celebrity bandwagon gymnastics is of no interest to me whatsoever.

The maiming of little children, yet to be concieved, let alone born, is what I find particularly obnoxious about these weapons.

The apparent interest in the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family, is a side issue, which I find to be a waste of time and space, as I also find the aforementioned family to be. But that is a personal viewpoint which pales into insignificance when looking at the issue of cluster bombs, bomblets (how cuddly is that word?) and similar anti-personnel weapons.

May I suggest that any discussion other than that on 'cluster bombs etc.,' be taken to another topic/thread/solar system, because I find such matters do not help in our 'appreciation' of the abhorrent use of weapons which are designed to shred bodies into many bloody pieces.

The coilition will leave Iraq soon enough, but their lethal litter of war will not.
"Bipolar is a roller-coaster ride without a seat belt. One day you're flying with the fireworks; for the next month you're being scraped off the trolley" I said that.
David
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 12:24 am
Location: Chicago

Celebs

Post by David » Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:06 pm

I figure celebs have as much a right to their opinions as anyone else. Some of 'em know what they're talking about, some of 'em don't.

I long considered Bono a pretentious blowhard who happened to say things I usually agreed with. But over time it's become apparent to me that he actually reads books and does research on at least some of the issues he pontificates on. So I've come around to believing in his sincerity, as well as taking much of what he says seriously in terms of content as well as ideology.

Lennon was interesting, because his entire intellectual journey was laid out for all to see. He progressed through well-meaning but naive hippie-dippie love-and-peace idealism through a period of ill-thought-out knee-jerk Maoist rhetorical excess, into a more thoughtfully-realized and nuanced global vision [at least in my opinion]. I admired him for being bold enough to risk making a fool of himself (which he certainly did, on more than one occasion), and wise enough to temper and hone his views as he grew older.

As a U.S.er, I have no idea where to even begin thinking about the Royal Family. It seems to me (and Paula, please don't take this as an ethnocentric attack -- it's just the way it looks from a die-hard small-"d" democrat from across the pond) that most "celebrities," even misguided ones, have come to their public voices through achievement of some kind. Even if the music or art they make is lousy, at least they did SOMETHING to earn their place at the microphone. The Royal Family, on the other hand, are born famous and stay that way throughout their lives -- here in the U.S., we call that "being famous for being famous" [and some of our so-called "celebrities," such as Anna Nicole Smith, Zha Zha Gabor, and the stars of reality-TV shows, definitely meet that description as well].

All of which means, I guess, that a member of the Royal Family, in my opinon, is nothing less or nothing more than a person who happens to have been born into a lot of privilege. He or she may well have valid views on any given issue, but I don't quite see how his or her inherited "celebrity" status is something to be admired, or how it gives those views any more weight than anyone else's.
"Nothing is said that is not sung."
User avatar
tom.d.stiller
Posts: 1207
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:18 am
Location: ... between the lines ...
Contact:

Post by tom.d.stiller » Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:30 am

The celebrities really don't matter. They're in for a "good cause", thereby fighting their own cause, or not.

The land mines matter. The dead matter. The children losing arms and legs and life matter .

Byron, I liked the original version better, with just Diana in the first line. Her beauty (made-up or not) gave the right contrast in imagery. Bono's doesn't enhance it.

Tom
John the Shorts
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 4:22 pm
Location: Wales

Post by John the Shorts » Tue Apr 08, 2003 12:39 am

Byron

What can I say, forgive me.

Please post your poem again (possibly in a new thread?) with it's correct title - this has now become a diatribe against celebrities - a diatribe that I accept that I began.

Let your poem attract attention as poetry not as my rant against celebrities posing as concerned individuals in order to garner publicity.

JTS
User avatar
linmag
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 10:10 pm
Location: Gloucester, UK
Contact:

Post by linmag » Tue Apr 08, 2003 2:53 am

Don't be too hard on yourself, John. Once started, these threads tend to take on a life of their own, and it's not always possible to drag them in the direction you think they ought to be going.

Byron touched on a very serious subject, and as always treated it thoughtfully and sensitively. Could it be that there has been no rush to discuss the main topic because for once we are all in agreement?
Linda

1972: Leeds, 2008: Manchester, Lyon, London O2, 2009: Wet Weybridge, 2012: Hop Farm/Wembley Arena
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25395
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh » Tue Apr 08, 2003 5:34 am

John and Linmag ~

All of the points you have both made are excellent. I would love to see your poem, Byron, in stand-alone fashion, myself. It deserves it.

~ Elizabeth
User avatar
Jo
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2002 10:07 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

Post by Jo » Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:15 am

I've read what everyone's said about the 'celeb issue' - and I realise the point here is Byron's poem - but the poem is entitled 'Remembering Diana' and I would like to air some thoughts on her: I can think of no better place right now to do so - those of you who don't want to read further - by all means move on :lol:

Several months before Diana died I happened to see a documentary, aired on SATV, about her visit to an African country in order to bring attention to the unexploded landmines.
Never having been a 'Diana watcher' and thus not having seen much of her for some time, I was struck by several facts concerning her: She seemed to have lost the baby faced vapid young royal clothes-horse look - her face seemed to me to have acquired character and emotion. She appeared genuinely concerned about the people around her - I remember that AIDS was mentioned and I was particularly impressed by the way she sat down on a dirty old bench next to someone who's leg had been blown away and touched and held the person's hand firmly and without reservations - the way she carried herself and behaved with the villagers made me think that she was indeed very sincere in her concern for them - I'm willing to admit that, not having any royals lurking around SA and having politicians who really don't care a damn and don't bother to hide it, I may have been lacking the means of comparison and therefore a bit naive in my assessment of her sincerity. But I do remember thinking to myself "There's a woman who's worth watching - she's shaken off that silly royal family and come into her own". A few months later she was dead and I mourned the loss of so much promise - she had the potential to do a great deal of good and I didn't doubt her sincerity.
Jo
"... to make a pale imitation of reality with twenty-six juggled letters"
"... all words are lies because they can only represent one of many levels of being"
Sober noises of morning in a marginal land.
User avatar
lizzytysh
Posts: 25395
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Florida, U.S.A.

Post by lizzytysh » Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:26 am

Jo ~ I saw the same documentary you've just described here about Diana, and my reactions to her were identical to yours. I've seen a lot of various kinds of footage of her, where the character and love that shown in her face were unmistakable [at least from my reading of a person's face and demeanor]. I also mourned her death for the same reasons.
~ Lizzytysh
Post Reply

Return to “Writing, Music and Art by the Forum members”