I have written before about how I struggle to understand how people feel ‘pride’ in their country at, say, sporting events. For me, being proud of your country is a bit like being proud of this week’s lottery numbers or something. I just don’t get it.

For whatever reason though, patriotism undoubtedly exists and it can be a major vote winner. Politicians know this and they take every opportunity to associate themselves with some kind of patriotic cause.

The Olympics is one of the worst instances of politicians engaging in this kind of blatant demagoguery. For instance, Kelly Holmes was given a gong a few years ago because it was felt that her achievements in Athens in 2004 should be “recognised”. Much the same sort of thing will happen this year — it has already been confirmed by Chief Nationalist Demagogue, Gordon Brown.

Mike Power put it best on Twitter: “Surely the achievments of the British Olympic medallists have already been ‘recognised’ ? They got f**cking medals! Jeez.”

A couple of weeks back Mike Smithson wrote about how dangerous it is for politicians to claim credit for the achievements of athletes:

But it’s dangerous stuff trying to claim credit in this way. Firstly it appears to detract from the performances of the athletes in Beijing themselves and secondly it raises the question – where did the money come from that has made this happen?

Obviously the SNP haven’t read this otherwise they wouldn’t have come out with this sort of claptrap. It is just a week or so ago that Alex Salmond was acting as though Chris Hoy was the only person ever to win a gold medal.

Chris Hoy’s dad was pretty quick off the mark, pointing out that a Scottish Olympics team would die on its arse because Scotland doesn’t have the same world-class facilities and funding that Team GB has. Want to decrease the amount of medals Scots get at the Olympics? Simple: rip them out of the GB squad.

Before any nats start jumping up and down and start accusing me of belittling Scotland or somesuch nonsense, let me just close that argument down straight away. What we are talking about here is a simple concept: economies of scale.

First of all Scotland would have to build three velodromes at £50m a time to match UK facilities. Then there’s world-class performance funding (£4m a year). And it takes eight years to get a medal. Multiply that across all sports, and Scotland would be facing a huge sports bill.

You had to have a heart of stone not to let out an almighty guffaw when Chris Hoy himself yesterday stated that a separate Scottish Olympics team would be disastrous (as noticed by Bill Cameron:

We don’t have an international facility for cycling and we don’t have the coaching structures in place. In fact, we don’t have anything in place, so the whole idea is ridiculous. I’ve not lived in Scotland for nine years because there is nowhere for me to train. I’m a Scottish athlete but I’m proud to perform in a British team.

That was added to by one of Scotland’s other most successful Olympic athletes, the canoeist David Florence:

It’s a non-starter and he should consult athletes first before he comments. Scotland would have to build a new slalom course first and they would have to build a velodrome.

I am very proud to be Scottish, to have been born in Aberdeen and have Edinburgh as my home town. But I am also very proud to represent Great Britain and everything that stands for, which is not just Scotland.

I’m as proud to wear the union jack as I am the saltire. I don’t have a problem separating my pride in being a Scot from being British at the same time.

This gets to the heart of one of the things that most irritates me about the SNP. While I am not a nationalist of any kind, it strikes me that one of Scotland’s special strengths is its ability to have a distinct identity of its own, and indeed a sense of national pride, without having to completely dissociate itself from a larger political entity, the United Kingdom.

One can say he feels equally Scottish and British without any sense of contradiction. Indeed, whenever the ‘Moreno question‘ is asked, the results show that the vast majority of Scots can feel at once part Scottish and part British. Now this approach is something that I can feel proud of. It is one that Scotland’s Olympic athletes exhibit, and it is very admirable. Unfortunately the SNP cannot be so admirable because it would undermine their very raison d’être.

Mr Eugenides has got it spot on. Using Chris Hoy for their own petty political ends was always going to be a risky game for the SNP to play. They tried to capitalise on his gold medal haul by saying that Chris Hoy’s success shows why Scotland should have its own Olympic team. Then Hoy himself bit them on the bum by pointing out that “I wouldn’t have three gold medals hanging round my neck if I wasn’t part of the British team.”

There is another aspect of the SNP’s argument that appears to be fundamentally flawed. Like I’ve said, I don’t think people should feel proud for other people’s achievements. But conceding that some people do, are people more likely to be proud of the team representing them winning 19 gold medals or 3 gold medals (all won by the same person)?

I don’t even have to be a big fan of the idea of nationalities measuring their penis sizes through the medium of sport to find it hilarious that Great Britain finished ahead of Australia in the medals table. Scotland couldn’t have achieved that. Splitting Scotland’s medals apart, they would be ranked 20th-or-so. That is admirable enough. But as Chris Hoy and David Florence pointed out, Scottish athletes relied on UK-sized facilities to get their medals.

Like Mike Smithson said, it’s dangerous for politicians to attach themselves to athletic achievements. The irony is that neither Labour nor the SNP could ever take credit for a sporting success. If anyone can take credit for Great Britain’s performance in Beijing this year, it appears to be John Major for setting up the National Lottery. The results have come through at just the right time. The first injection of lottery money will have come just at the time when most of the current batch of athletes were beginning to mature in their sporting development.

Whether you think that is a good thing that so much public money is ploughed into sport is another matter. Alex Massie says yes, Fraser Nelson says no.

I definitely lean closer to Fraser Nelson’s point of view. I don’t think public money should be spent on the arts or sport full stop. Of course you would expect schools to provide PE lessons, though having said that if one thing put me off becoming an athlete it was PE lessons. Beyond that, the athletes should be by themselves as far as I am concerned.

I just don’t see what advantage it is for a country to have lots of sporting success. If it’s a “feel good” thing, lottery and government cash would be better spent on cute bunny rabbits to be sent to every household.

Well after the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony was deemed to be impressive (apparently), it was hard to escape the self-pitying among Brits. “You just know ours will be rubbish compared to this.”

Well it transpires that London 2012 will be okay after all. Just a day after it emerged that fireworks were faked for the television audience, it has been revealed that a pretty singer was actually miming. Apparently the girl who actually did sing munted a bit was not as flawless.

This is great news for the Brits! Because if there is one thing our media excels at (except for ridiculous hyperbole and a breathtaking disregard for privacy) it is fakery. All we need to do now is put Ant and Dec in charge of the fireworks and Liz Kershaw in charge of the music. Shoehorn in a premium rate phone-in competition somewhere and it will be brilliant.

This post includes some stuff that I might have written about in yesterday’s post if it wasn’t getting late. Plus, I had gone on and on for 1,000 words already which is quite enough for one post.

Chris Applegate said on Twitter:

One thing more tedious than the Olympics is people droning about how tedious the Olympics is. Turn your TV off and go out, you fucking bores

That is a sound principle and one that I agree with in general. The problem with the Olympics is that you can turn off the TV and go out all you want, but unless the place you go out to is an uninhabitable cave, the Olympics are impossible to avoid. Things like Big Brother or even US Presidential elections don’t get this bad.

Shane Richmond gets to the bottom of the problem with the Olympics:

What irritates me is that the media believes that we all subscribe to this fickle frenzy. So the Olympics breaks out of the sport pages and bulletins where it belongs and takes over the actual news too. I appreciate that the Games coincide neatly with silly season but is it really news that the opening ceremony (a) happened and (b) was spectacular? Both things were exactly what was supposed to happen, which probably makes them the precise of opposite of news.

What really gets me depressed is the fact that while this expensive shindig was going on in Beijing, two European countries were on the brink of war. And yet what was the top story in the news? This fucking stupid Stalinist fancy dress party. BBC News 24 had the two stories in split screen! I mean for fuck’s sake! Talk about priorities.

Several months ago I changed my default radio station to the BBC World Service precisely so that I could avoid the stupid “news” stories served up by Radio 5 Live and the other domestic stations. Yet the World Service has been banging on about the Olympics non-stop, 24/7, for the past three months — and that was before the games had even started! I am sick of it.

You see, my real problem with the Olympics is that it is a giant political event masquerading as sport. If it was sport I would probably quite like it. But it’s not sport at all. You can even see this in the BBC’s presentation of the opening ceremony. Who took charge of the broadcast? Sport journalists? Hell no, it was Huw Edwards and Carrie Gracie, two BBC News stalwarts. For me, that just says it all.

The only reason the Olympics opening ceremony should be a legitimate news story is to highlight how much money is wasted by governments on this pathetic political exercise. Do I care that 2008 drummers had fancy drums that lit up? Do I fuck!

This week there was a little stooshie in the media and the blogs about the “banning” of the Saltire during the Beijing Olympics. Jamie Hepburn noticed that the Olympic authorities in Beijing will be enforcing an age-old IOC rule which says that “flags of non-members of the Olympics” should not be displayed during the Olympics.

I suppose the reason why this is a particular issue now, as opposed to previous Olympic meetings, is the fact that the Beijing games enables the nationalists to piggy-back on the Free Tibet campaign (as you can see in the penultimate paragraph of the SNP’s press release). Is it just me who thinks this is particularly low?

It is not even as though Scotland is in anything like the same situation as Tibet. The reason Tibet is an issue is because freedom of speech and freedom to choose your own political beliefs is not an option in Tibet. Without these rights, the people of Tibet are left without a voice. That is the issue. The issue in Scotland is that we do have these rights. The problem for the SNP is that despite this great freedom to express a preference for independence, there is precious little clamour for it in Scotland.

Anyway, I agree with most — e.g. Scottish Unionist, Jeff Breslin, Malc in the Burgh — in that the IOC’s rule on flags is absolutely ridiculous. Stephen Glenn points out why the IOC’s strange rules are inappropriate for someone from his kind of background.

But I still think it is pathetic that the SNP even brought the subject up. As has been noted in some of the posts above, it is not even as though the rule is policed that strictly anyway. But as Political Dissuasion notes, all of Britain’s Olympic athletes agreed to take part as a member of Great Britain’s Olympic team so I hardly think it’s beyond the pale to expect them to stick to that commitment.

After all, could you imagine, for instance, a Scottish international footballer scoring a goal then taking his shirt off during the celebration to proudly reveal, say, a Celtic top underneath? Of course, he could be proud of being both a Scotland player and a Celtic player — but it’s just wrong to confuse the two notions.

As Political Dissuasion points out, this is just the sort of guff we have come to expect from nationalists. I don’t mind people expressing their opinion about this sort of thing, but this is blatant political point-scoring and for what? SNP people always come up with this stuff about the Saltire, whether it’s what flutters above Edinburgh Castle or what athletes fly at the Olympics. It’s just pathetic. Aren’t there, you know, important things to worry about?

It’s worth pointing out, too, that even if Scotland were to become independent this would still be an issue. Because while Scotland would enter an Olympic team, flags like this and this would still fall foul of the regulations. For some reason (*cough*oil*cough*) the SNP are quieter about these flags.

My attitude towards this is affected somewhat by the fact that I just don’t “get” flags in general. What on earth are they for? I certainly don’t know what the appeal is. Maybe it is because I’m not so insecure about myself and my identity that I don’t need to attach myself to these symbols. I might be a Scot, but I don’t go around the place grinning about it. First and foremost I am Duncan Stephen, and that’s what concerns me. I would still be Duncan Stephen no matter what nationality I was, so I just don’t see what flags are all about.

This is also one of the many reasons why I can’t stand the Olympics. The emphasis on the nation just gets me down so much. I have written before about why the notion that sportsmen represent their countries is just absolutely ridiculous. A follow-up post at the height of the media-driven rivalry between Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso subsequently became the most popular post on this blog (according to post ratings).

The Olympics is just the place that shows all the worst aspects of national sport teams. Gibbering, gormless housewives stare at the idiot-box for hours on end watching events such as “discus”, “ping pong”, “yngling” and all manner of other sports that they would otherwise not touch with a bargepole. Yes, it’s great that minority sports get coverage during the Olympics. But they should be getting coverage anyway. At least, if you genuinely did like minority sports you would think that. The fact that it takes the Olympics to get badminton on the television is nothing to be pleased about.

Then when a representative of their country wins a medal, the housewives declare themselves to be “so proud”. Proud of what? They didn’t win the medal — the athlete did! All they have done is sit on their fat arses watching people throwing sticks around. This kind of nationalism only promotes supreme mediocrity and laziness.

And don’t even get me started on the “non political” nature of the Olympics. My hairy arse hole! The fact is that the Olympic Games are the planet’s primary platform for pathetic political posturing. What is the Olympic Spirit? I think it has something to do with Cold War willy-waving.

Then there is all the drugs. I bet you if the Olympics never existed, we wouldn’t even think about drugs in sport. All those countries with dodgy Communist governments come along and drug their athletes to the brim so that they can go around the world feeling smug about themselves for being 13th in the medals table. Yes, the Olympic Games are so noble!

Ah, and don’t forget the great selling-out when they decided there was more money in dropping the requirement that Olympic athletes be amateur. Because of course the pros don’t have enough places to rake in the cash already!

Bleeargh. I’m with Mr Farty. The Olympics can take a running hop, skip and jump.

I first heard about the Buddha Machine from this post at Boing Boing. It certainly grabbed my attention, but at the time it was not so easy to get hold of. Then Boomkat began to sell them and their article was a highly interesting read, and I decided to get one.

If you’ve not heard of the Buddha Machine before, I’ll try and explain. It’s by a duo of experimental electronic musicians based in Beijing called FM3. The Buddha Machine is a music release of theirs — with a difference. In this age of the record industry collectively shitting itself about the internet, downloads and DRM and music fans wondering if the days of vinyl and CD are numbered in the face of more clinical MP3s, FM3 have taken the radical solution. This is not released as a shiny all-modern download, and it certainly is not a CD or a record. That is because the Buddha Machine simply would not work if it wasn’t inside this distinctive plastic box.

Inside the box are nine ambient pieces looping around for infinity. Switching it on is magical. You are greeted by a pleasant hum; the sort that you really wouldn’t mind hearing forever. You could leave this on all day and you wouldn’t be fed up with it. Like the best ambient music, it is very interesting to listen to but you could just as easily ignore it.

It comes housed in a nondescript cardboard box littered with bewildering Chinese notes. The only clue to the contents come courtesy of a sticker that’s been slapped on: “fm3 buddha machine”. Open the box and pull out the Buddha Machine — it looks like a cheap and crude piece of junk. But switch it on and you cannot help but be won over by the sheer beauty of the sounds it is making.

It has certainly caught the attention of many people. Often when you search Google for something you just get rubbish. But search for Buddha Machine and you find loads of interesting articles (even Pitchfork wrote quite a good article). Almost all of them also mention the fact that Brian Eno bought half a dozen as soon as he saw it. I’m not going to buck the trend, obviously.

Once you’re past the first impressions and the Brian Eno factor, there are two quite common things that people say about the Buddha Machine. Firstly, it is like an AM radio. That’s what my mother said when she saw me with it. The in-built speaker certainly gives that impression. The poor quality of the speaker makes it seem like the sort of tacky, junky, rip-off radio you might get for collective twelve Weetabix tokens. If you use headphones the quality of the sound is actually pretty good. But when the cheap speaker is combined with the sweet sounds being emitted from the Buddha Machine, it only adds to its charm, characteristically crackling away as though it’s humming along with the music.

Secondly, it is an anti-iPod. Well it certainly looks like it could have been a crude prototype of the iPod. It’s a similar idea — a little box plays music, plug in some headphones and slip it into your pocket. And I have used the Buddha Machine on journeys to replace my MP3 player.

The circular speaker also looks like it could almost be a cheeky nod to the iPod’s navigation wheel, acknowledging the similarity of the two boxes. It also comes in a range of different colours like the iPod Mini. They are shipped at random, so it adds a little bit of the kid-at-Christmas factor as you don’t know which colour you’re going to get. All I can say is I’m glad I got the blue one and not that disgusting earwaxy orange one!

Despite the obvious similarities between the Buddha Machine and the iPod, though, I think a more apt analogy would be something like a Tamagotchi. The iPod is a completely soulless machine. The only point of it (unless you’re shallow and using it as a fashion accessory) is to enable you to listen to music. The iPod is a cold middleman. It’s not your friend. You only want the music. With the Buddha Machine on the other hand, you turn it on specifically because you want the Buddha Machine. It’s not middleman; it is its purpose.

It’s a bit like a plant. At one point I forgot I owned it, and when I looked at it I felt myself smile. That’s the sort of function it serves. You can have it sitting there gently warbling away in the corner of your room — I’ve seen a few people compare it to an art installation. It has accompanied me when I’ve been having a rest, when I have been having a bath and even when I have been watching television. I bet it would be pretty good to study to as well (although I haven’t tried that yet… oops!). And if you’re bored of the loop (which you probably won’t be) or if it simply doesn’t match your mood, just flick the switch on the side of the box and it will play a different loop out of the nine housed inside. I love this unique little box.

But there is a danger. It could just be like a lava lamp or a fibre optic lamp — fascinating for about half a week, then forgotten about and stored away in the attic for the rest of eternity. Or it could be one of these passing fads — Pogs for ambient music fans. But the idea of the Buddha Machine is showing signs of maturing with the emergence of Buddha Boxing (scroll about two thirds of the way down). This little Flash thingy seems pretty close to the idea. What would be really cool is if a future Buddha Machine could emit generative music.

Meanwhile, my mother just didn’t understand it. She saw that it was like an iPod, but with the music already inside it — “What if you don’t like the music?”, she said. I think the best way to think about this is like a regular album (it’s the same price as an album) with a difference.

If you’re swithering and need convincing, have a listen to the mix that FM3 made for Boomkat (look in the sidebar on the left). The music in the mix (particularly ‘Zheng’ / track 2) got stuck in my head and I knew I had to buy the Buddha Machine.

Some other smart articles on the Buddha Machine

• Scotland on Sunday
• Almost Cool:
  

  Even if I play my iPod at loud volumes, other sounds inevitably seep into what I’m listening to, and depending on the degree to which they intrude upon my listening, I tend to find myself somewhat annoyed (which isn’t really a good thing in either starting or finishing the workday). As an experiment, I instead listened to The Buddha Machine several days while commuting and the difference in how I perceived outside noise was quite different. Instead of being annoyed, I found my brain slightly focusing on the loops themselves, but also listening to how the sounds of the outside environment filtered in over and alongside them.

• PopMatters:
  

  At its heart… the Buddha Machine is actually a counterargument to the onset of the downloading age. For one, the entire point of the release is to have the little box. Sure, you could theoretically download each of the drones (which are actually available in mp3 form on FM3’s website), push “repeat” in your media player of choice, and have something close to the original effect, but you lose much of the aura of the work that way — evaluating these drones purely on the basis of their musical merit is entirely different than evaluating them as an aspect of an odd little artifact.

• zang.org — when your mobile rings apparently it goes haywire and sounds more like Autechre than Eno!