not just another “oh canada”
first of all, I watched the debut hockey game of the season and thought the Bare Naked Ladies’ rendition of O Canada just plain sucked. sure, they sang in both official languages–whoopee. That just meant I didn’t like it (officially) twice. Why can’t a group actually sing a version of it with a little pizazz? I’m thinking of Jimi Hendrix’ version of the American anthem at sunrise (yeah, right!) over Woodstock. Rise and shine, kiddies. Wake up, America. Now there is a rocker who made the anthem his own, who took control of it, and not just personalized it but veritably possessed it.
And we have the good ol’ Bare Naked ho-hum babies doing doodly-squat for the soul-and-zest of yours truly.
Enter McCain International Pizza commercial. When I first saw this I thought, oh god, another feel-good-to-be-Canadian diatribe. I mean, really, the people who put these things together have likely never even lived in another freakin’ country–so how the hell who do they know that Canada is such a great country? That just pisses me off to no end: it is buying what the government sells us without thinking critically for yourself. But appeals to our patriotic side are not in short-order these days (thanks to that other no-brainer country full of people who, um, repeat what their government tells them while claiming to be the independent scourge of the earth. Hmm…)
Anyhoo, I tried to find out who played the anthem on their guitar but I dunno. It is a fantastic take on Canada’s anthem and totally changed how I view this commerical. While the Asian bit cuts close to home for me, I block my eyes and just listen to the guitar. Why couldn’t the Ladies’ have done that, huh? Or anything remotely resembling musical, for that matter?
The funny thing is, while searching the net to locate the musician, I found someone who was outraged by the commercial. God, could there be a more divergent view than my own. I hate opinions sometimes- -okay, a lot of the time. Why can’t we all just agree that, um, everyone else ought to shut up?
Yeah. I like that idea.
Posted on October 27th, 2005 at 8:21 am. About 'not just another “oh canada”'.
Here’s a third perspective: I’ve even seen this commercial multiple times before.
I find the rendition of the national anthem moving, but its use in a commercial to be unacceptable. Not because a national anthem is sacred, just because it’s another example of the McDisneyfication of the known universe. It’s the same kind of thinking the gets ads printed on your shit tickets. Its commodifying things that have no business being commercial, like anthems (or doing one’s business in peace). To me it’s patently offensive for that reason. Unfortunate because the anthem was really nicely done.
To stave off your anti-corporate-knee-jerk retort, I don’t think it is unreasonable or rash to oppose across the board commercialization. Hmm, but seeing as I’ve delved deeply into the forbidden territory of the opinion, maybe I should just shut up at this point and look cute.
*looks cute* {@.@}
Posted on October 28th, 2005 at 4:13 am. About 'not just another “oh canada”'.
“knee-jerk retort”? When have I ever been anything but considered in my response to you? : )
I just think that view stems from a misguided patriarchal and pseudo-socialist platform that is widespread here in Canada: the image of “frater Canada” watching over us, taking care of all the good little sheep. The reality is, it is every man, woman, and child for his or her self. Put differently, what you advocate is really no different from parental-controls whereby the government is likened to the parent or, as I say, “father Canada”. At the same time, there is a welfare-mindset in our country that says government should do everything for us: otherwise, who would enforce this view?
In reality, it is up to the viewers to make these cautionary and discretionary decisions by themselves. I object to anyone “controlling” what can and cannot be used in advertising on the same grounds that I object to all parental controls on TV and computers: what gives you the right to censor other minds? I believe that most of what adults watch is perfectly suitable for children and it is ignorance to think otherwise. Profanity, sex, and violence is the steamier side of life. And while I want to shelter my child as long as possible too, I don’t believe the answer is in blinding his eyes. The answer lies in making children (in this case: the viewer) understand that there are people who wish to manipulate you and your only power over this is to recognize it (not ignore it by turning a blind eye to it); try to understand it and what motivates it (rather than pretending it doesn’t exist in a dog-eat-dog world); and finally by empowering them with the ability to make these choices for themselves (rather than making the choices for them).
Underlying all this is my general agreement with laissez-faire philosophy which, as you know, is really the rule of life whether or not we put regulations in place. Regulations are only temporary stop-gaps on the way to decisions and consensus that come in time anyway (such as prohibition). Regulating it postpones the leave-it-alone evolution but it does not prevent it.
My $0.02.
Later,
-Chris
Posted on October 28th, 2005 at 8:06 am. About 'not just another “oh canada”'.
Hehe you misunderstood what I said. Remember when you complained bitterly to me about Sabina and the tendency of MLISers to oppose anything corporate as a knee-jerk reaction? That’s what I was referring to. I was expecting you to say the same thing to me, based on my anti-corporate take on the matter.
I didn’t mean that you would be inconsiderate or talk before thinking. That’s not like you, and it’s one of the reasons you are great to talk with.
I am not sure how you make the jump from opposing the commodification of something in the public domain to government regulation and a “caretaker” state. I never suggested that any sort of regulations should oppose it. I didn’t even suggest that all people had to agree with me (and I imagine that the majority wouldn’t).
What I was commenting on in essence was the tendency to take everything that is in the public domain (be it libraries, water supply, culture, etc.) and make it into a commodity, getting people to pay for it, or using it as advertising to encourage people to buy. I am a firm believer that there should be both commercialized and public domains and that they should remain separate from each other. People need a certain amount of ideas and activities that don’t have to be downloaded for 99 cents each. Based on what I’ve been saying here, I would argue that national pride (and the accompanying anthem) is one of those vital public things, and shouldn’t be pressed into the service of selling pizza.
As a reflection on what you were saying about censorship and control - if people didn’t live, breathe, eat and sleep commodification, the increasing incorporation of aspects of the public domain into business wouldn’t even be an issue. I personally don’t believe that the tendency should be legislated against, but I do advocate calling it what it is and understanding the reasons why it happens. Personally, I oppose it happening because I understand the value of non-commercial space and I do not want to blindly commodify wherever I go.
However, lots of people do because it’s what they were taught to do and have never been exposed to an alternate point of view. Some legitimately agree with this tendency and promote it, despite being exposed to an alternative. What is most difficult about being a citizen of the world is watching other people “screw it up”, from your point of view, yet keeping in mind that you are only one ant in the anthill….