This blog has now closed. Please visit my new blog, Stepreo.

Archive: brazil

The Senna film

19 June 2011 14:13

Senna film poster

If you follow Formula 1 online, it has been absolutely impossible to avoid the hype. Films about Formula 1 do not get made often. It is highly unusual for so much footage to have been prised out of Bernie Ecclestone. When you factor in that the film is about Ayrton Senna, a driver who has reached an almost legendary status, it was inevitable that this film would attract a lot of attention.

Moreover, the film has been met with near (although not quite) universal approval. Seasoned film critics and those with no interest in motorsport have lapped it up enthusiastically.

So it has been a painful wait. I was delighted to learn that it was being shown at my local cinema, so I took the first opportunity to watch it.

I found the film truly engrossing and hugely emotional. The story of Senna’s career — or at least one version of it — is very well told. Some of the footage, particularly of drivers’ briefings and the like, is absolutely astonishing.

Alain Prost

The film’s treatment of Alain Prost has come under a lot of scrutiny. It is said that Prost is cast as the villain of the film. I was relieved that his treatment was not as bad as I had feared.

I actually felt that Prost comes across quite well in the film — though this may be for ideological reasons, and that I already understand the Prost–Senna rivalry. It is easy to see why, in a film that celebrates Senna’s approach, others may feel that Prost’s alternative approach to racing does not come across so well.

In fairness to the filmmakers, I think it does illustrate that the frosty tensions between Senna and Prost had thawed in the final months of Senna’s life. We see Senna embracing Prost on the podium at the 1993 Australian Grand Prix, Prost’s reaction to Senna’s fatal crash from the TF1 commentary box and Prost as a pallbearer at Senna’s funeral. A caption at the film’s climax also displays the fact that Prost is a trustee of the Ayrton Senna Foundation.

Important details skipped

However, I do feel that the film does not get across just how controversial Ayrton Senna was. The only time it is really tackled is in a relatively brief clip of Jackie Stewart’s famous interrogation of Senna’s dangerous driving.

I was also disappointed in how little of Senna’s career is actually covered. The film skips straight from karting into F1, then practically fast-forwards to the Prost–Senna rivalry, which is clearly the meat of the film. Thereafter, the 1992 and 1993 seasons get the briefest look in. In the process, the championship victories of Nigel Mansell and Alain Prost are belittled, particularly through the skilful vilification of the Williams car.

After the film had finished, I felt like only a handful of incidents had been covered. I was left feeling that only a superficial account of Senna’s career had been presented.

I can fully understand why this is so. There is a limit to what Bernie Ecclestone will allow. So the filmmakers are left with the quandry of how to sum up an amazing driver’s entire career in the time it takes to complete just one grand prix.

Authentically inauthentic

I also found myself being annoyed by tiny details that I felt detracted from the authenticity of the film. For instance, almost all of the source footage must have been shot in 4:3, but the film is in a different aspect ratio, meaning that all of the footage is cropped. When much of the footage is blurry enough as it is, this doesn’t help.

A significant proportion of the film also contains a blurred-out Globo DOG, with a new one superimposed on top of it (presumably to meet the requirements of the Brazilian broadcaster). Then there are the mock TV captions that crop up throughout the film.

These are small details, but I found them irritating me. To me, they detract from the cinematic mood.

When I read about the edits that have been made to some of the footage, particularly the sound, my eyebrows were raised. “They managed to change it, so it’s very authentic,” says Manish Pandey. It reminds me of a line from the Pulp song Bad Cover Version: “Electronically reprocessed to give a more lifelike effect.”

Intense and emotional

Having said that, the film is no less gripping as a result of all these niggles. I felt the grin across my face as I watched Senna’s awesome driving in the Toleman and the Lotus. The events of the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix weekend are well-handled and emotional to watch.

However, here it does once again feel that certain events are rushed through. Rubens Barrichello and Roland Ratzenberger are both only briefly introduced before their crashes are shown. Not much time is reserved to dwell upon these events, even though Ratzenberger’s death was, for me, the most emotional part of the film to watch.

Summing up Senna

All-in-all, Senna is a brilliant, emotional film packed with extraorindary footage and with a well-constructed story. But the time constraint, and (let’s face it) the requirement to make a film that would be commercially successful, did leave me feeling as though only the tip of the iceberg was considered.

In fact, for me, the Top Gear feature from last year summed up exactly what Senna was all about in only 13 minutes. It outlines exactly what made Senna so different to other drivers, and was not afraid to investigate his controversial racing style while also underlining his parodoxical concern for safety.

The Senna film sets out to do something different. So in this respect I was slightly disappointed in the fact that the film is a celebration of Senna’s career, and not a thorough factual account of it. However, as a celebration of Senna’s career, it is difficult to imagine how this film could be improved, beyond being longer. I am eagerly anticipating the DVD release.

5 comments

Did Bernie Ecclestone condone racism?

10 November 2008 02:33

Categories: Opinion

I didn’t have the time to blog about it when the story originally blew up, but I have a few thoughts on the issue. Late last week Bernie Ecclestone gave an interview to BBC Radio 5 Live where he made comments that were interpreted by some as condoning racist behaviour in the grandstands at Formula 1 circuits.

I actually heard a little bit of that interview when it was originally broadcast, and I heard the controversial comments. I was initially surprised, because I saw how the comments would be interpreted by many. I was just surprised because I would have thought Bernie Ecclestone was savvy enough not to give an ambiguous answer to such a question. Sure enough, it became a bigger news story.

But while the comments were unfortunate, I don’t think they really deserved the reaction they got from some quarters. Ex-footballer Paul Elliot, speaking on behalf of Football Against Racism in Europe, even called on Ecclestone to resign.

This is a completely over-the-top reaction. I understood the nature of what Ecclestone was trying to say, even if he didn’t manage to articulate it very clearly on breakfast radio.

Formula 1 has only ever had one publicised incident of racial abuse, when a small clutch of Spanish spectators blacked up at a Barcelona test session before the 2008 season started. The pictures at were shocking, and I criticised the participants at the time.

However, in the discussions that ensued it became clear that many Spaniards were perplexed at the shocked reaction from Brits. I doubt that this is because Spain has a problem with racism. That was despite what some in the media tried to make out, without a hint of irony of course (read Richard Herring for a good take on this). It seems as though blacking up simply does not have the same connotations in Spain as it does in places like the UK and the USA. (And let us not forget, too, that it was only a few short decades ago that blacking up was totally acceptable in the UK.)

That is not to excuse the behaviour. We all must be sensitive to other cultures, and all decent people should take great care not to offend others’ sensibilities. Clearly, a widespread interpretation of the behaviour of those people at the Barcelona test was that it was racial abuse. Indeed, that was my interpretation of it, even if it was not the intention of them to cause offence.

The fact that it is not obvious that the people deliberately set out to cause offence is, I believe, the origin of Bernie Ecclestone’s comment that it was a “joke”. I noticed many Spaniards saying that it was something to do with a carnival which involves dressing up, and I saw at least one person saying it was intended as a friendly gesture towards Lewis Hamilton rather than a malicious one.

The wonderful thing about improved communications and increasing globalisation is that we can more easily learn about other cultures. In that regard, it is notable that there has not been a repeat performance of the behaviour from Spanish supporters. There were two grands prix in Spain this year which, as far as I am aware, went off without any hint of trouble.

There was some booing in Brazil which Anthony Hamilton criticised live on ITV. I did not spot Anthony Hamilton implying that the booing was of a racial nature, although he may have thought that. It was certainly the spin that some in the media attempted to apply to the booing. But I saw absolutely no evidence that the booing was of an abusive or racial nature, and most accept that. In sport, you will have a partisan crowd, and this is understandable and should not be criticised.

Following on from the reporting of Ecclestone’s comments, news bulletins spoke of Lewis Hamilton “hitting back” and “blasting” Ecclestone’s stance. Going by the reports, you would have thought Hamilton had been mortally offended. In fact, Hamilton’s comments were quite measured:

I didn’t see it as a joke. It’s something that happened but it is in the past.

What’s more important to me is that I had a lot of support, especially from UK fans. As long as I have my country behind me, it makes me very proud. I’m proud to see my fellow countrymen holding up the flag. All the other stuff I need to put behind me.

I don’t generally keep up with what’s being said and I haven’t read what Bernie said. I know Bernie and have a huge amount of respect for him. I can only assume he said positive things.

It is unfortunate that Britain’s excitable media has distorted the reporting of this issue so much that I know of at least one person who was under the impression that Hamilton was subject to a barrage of abuse across all three days of the Spanish Grand Prix, which is not the case at all. The fact is that a small group of people did a stupid thing which was a one-off incident at a test session. In fact, the very reason it was so shocking is because it was so unknown in Formula 1.

Formula 1 can be proud of the fact that racism is as small a problem as it is. That is certainly a lot more than can be said for certain other sports. Barely a month goes by without reports of racial abuse at a football match, sometimes even coming from the players themselves. In comparison to the world’s most popular sport, Formula 1 is highly civilised.

David Coulthard is absolutely right in his comments supporting Bernie Ecclestone:

It is trying to be built into something much bigger than it is. What happened in Spain because of those four guys, I’m sorry, but it hardly represents a nation of racists.

I’ve seen some people having a pop at Bernie for trying to play it down, but what would you expect him to do? He is the ringmaster, the guy that has created this amazing foundation of business success that enables all of us to earn our pennies.

We’re all talking about Lewis being the first billion dollar sportsman, well that is on the foundations of what Bernie has created. To turn round and try to get Bernie to offer an apology to Lewis is just ridiculous.

F1 may have many failings, but it does not come close to the racism you see in people’s first love, and that’s football.

Ecclestone’s claim that he pulled the South African Grand Prix in 1985 because of apartheid may be spurious. But it is worth remembering that Bernie Ecclestone played a pivotal role in Formula 1 having its first black driver.

No, not Lewis Hamilton as the media may sometimes have you believe, but Willy T. Ribbs. The then-Nascar driver was given a test at Ecclestone-owned Brabham. Ribbs became the first black person to drive an F1 car, and although it was only a test and not a race drive, it hardly represents the actions of someone who would condone racism. For that reason alone, the calls for Bernie Ecclestone to resign are wide of the mark.

The media seriously needs to calm itself down over the colour of Lewis Hamilton’s skin. The civil rights activist Martin Luther King dreamt of a time when people “will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.” I agree, and that is why I find the obsession surrounding Hamilton’s colour so distasteful.

It is true that Lewis Hamilton has achieved amazing things, and he has undoubtedly broken barriers by becoming the first black race driver in Formula 1. But time and again the media keeps on making comparisons with people like Tiger Woods and even Barack Obama. And while I am not in the best position to judge, in my view, that is just crass.

Lewis Hamilton is not “Lewis Hamilton black man”, “Lewis Hamilton mixed race man” or “Britain’s Lewis Hamilton”. He is “Lewis Hamilton racing driver”. My understanding is that Hamilton sees himself as a racing driver who happens to be black rather than a black racing driver. This report on the celebratory McLaren press conference very much suggests that:

Questions included his thoughts on Barack Obama’s victory in the US presidential election that very morning and how he feels about his position as a black role model. Hamilton shifted uneasily in his seat and swerved around the ‘race’ question as best he could. He just sees himself as a racing driver, nothing more, nothing less.

I very much think it’s time to get over Lewis Hamilton’s skin colour. That goes for anyone who may racially abuse him, but it also goes for the media which constantly makes his colour the story. His colour was notable at first, but now it is not the story. His driving is.

4 comments

Hamilton is Champion as Massa misses out by one sector

2 November 2008 21:30

Categories: News, Report

Even by the standards of Formula 1, the Brazilian Grand Prix was an incredibly strange affair. It proved Murray Walker’s old adage, “Anything can happen in grand prix racing — and it usually does.” And doesn’t it just.

The first unexpected event was a short, sharp downpour coming just minutes before the scheduled start. The start–finish straight was now soaking wet, leaving the drivers stranded on the wrong tyres. The start was delayed by ten minutes. The rain stopped as quickly as it started, and the sun shone.

It looked as though the track might have been drying enough. But the river of water was running down the Senna S, making the first complex of corners tricky throughout the race. Intermediates were the right tyre to go on at first, to the disadvantage of Robert Kubica who started on dry tyres, had to pit after the formation lap and was never in contention again.

For the leaders, the start didn’t shuffle things up too much. Hamilton appeared to get a poor start, but luckily Kovalainen was his only main challenger. The McLaren team mate gave Hamilton an easy time through turn 1 and Hamilton stayed in position 4.

As the track dried out on lap 10, Massa pitted for dry tyres. The following lap all the other front-runners followed suit. But by pitting earlier, Sebastian Vettel and Fernando Alonso brought themselves into contention. By this stage, Hamilton had found himself in 6th position, behind the Force India of Fisichella.

The Italian was soon dispensed with, not just by Hamilton but by several other cars. But with Hamilton needing to finish in 5th position, things were pretty tense. It was clear that Massa had the race under control and practically had the win in the bag. The Championship situation could hardly have been closer.

Vettel’s pitstop strategy was out of sequence with the other leaders, which threw another uncertainty into the mix. Overall, though, Vettel’s strategy meant that Hamilton’s “true” position was effectively a stable fourth, which would have secured Hamilton the Championship no bother. To tell the truth, the race was becoming rather bland.

Then the rain came back. It was another spell of rain that was difficult to read. Seemingly it was pretty heavy at one point in the pitlane, but only for a short period of time. The rest of the circuit didn’t seem to be affected as badly. The front-runners came in for dry tyres, but Timo Glock was the most notable person electing to stay on the dry tyres. This propelled the Toyota driver ahead of Hamilton, placing the Brit in 5th place, back on a knife-edge.

At first, it seemed as though Glock’s decision had paid off. The drivers running intermediates were not having as much of an advantage over the grooved tyres as may have been expected and Glock looked safe in 4th.

Meanwhile, Hamilton had his mirrors full of Vettel. McLaren are usually seen to have an advantage in damp conditions, but it has to be said that Toro Rosso have even more of an advantage. Vettel made life very difficult for Hamilton in the final few laps, and when the fancied German passed Hamilton it looked like it was game over for the Brit. Hamilton was now in 6th place, with Massa still easily on for the win.

As Massa came across the finish line, he was World Champion. If memory serves me correctly, at the start of the previous lap Glock still had at least a ten second advantage over Vettel, who in turn was a second or two ahead of Hamilton. Glock’s sector 1 time was slow, but not slow enough. But obviously the dry tyres caved in through the twisty sector two. If you’re struggling in the wet, that is where you will suffer the most — and boy did Glock suffer.

At the end of sector 2, on the last slow corner of the circuit, Vettel passed Glock, and Hamilton followed soon afterwards. In the most incredible of fashions, Hamilton had won the Championship in the final sector — indeed, in the final corner.

It didn’t take long for the conspiracy theorists to suggest that Glock backed off to let Hamilton past. But I see no explanation for why Glock would do this. It seems to me that the dry tyres simply gave up the ghost. His team mate Jarno Trulli, also on dry tyres, posted a near-identical lap time on the final lap, suggesting that intermediates were the right tyres to use on the final lap.

But so unexpected was Glock’s sudden drop in performance that personnel in the Ferrari garage were still celebrating several seconds after Hamilton had crossed the finish line in 5th position. The moment when a calmer head came across to the group and said “no, no” was broadcast on the FOM world feed. It was a painful moment as you saw the smirks drop off their faces.

Seemingly, Felipe Massa had already been told he was World Champion. You absolutely have to feel sorry for Massa today. He did everything he needed to do in Interlagos, and his World Championship was snatched away at the last possible moment.

But hats off to Felipe Massa who proved that he is a good loser. He approached the situation with absolute dignity. The podium ceremony was surreal, with the national anthems of Brazil and Italy blasting out in recognition of a Felipe Massa–Ferrari win. But Massa hadn’t won. He’d lost. His face said it all. But he approached the edge of the podium to greet his home crowd in a most dignified manner. He was philosophical and respectful during the press conference.

It was a partisan crowd in Interlagos, but you wouldn’t expect anything else. Some complained about the fans jeering, but as long as it is not malicious I see no harm. It is only to be expected that Brazilians would want to see a Brazilian be crowned World Champion in Brazil. I got the impression that it was a more playful, pantomime-style atmosphere and I am sure it would be similar if it were a bunch of British fans in the grandstand at a championship decider in Britain.

All-in-all, it was quite an incredible race — perhaps the most hair-raising end to a Championship I have ever seen. The circumstances were so bizarre that it seemed as though the post-race atmosphere was subdued. Spiritual atmosphere was matched by meteorological atmosphere as the heavens had opened in the most spectacular way and the podium ceremony was held more or less in complete darkness under heavy clouds. But I doubt Hamilton will let the atmosphere get in the way of his first World Drivers Championship.

4 comments

More bad luck for Räikkönen as Trulli triumphs

22 June 2008 21:09

Categories: Report

Magny-Cours was always set to be a boring race. The circuit is not known for its competitive racing, and it’s difficult to imagine a more favourable circuit for Ferrari. The red team did indeed pull off into the distance, but that didn’t stop it being a more interesting race than expected.

Kimi Räikkönen looked good for the win at the beginning of the race. But just when you think you’ve seen everything in F1, something new and unexpected happens — and once again Räikkönen was at the centre of it all for the third race in a row.

Kimi Räikkönen’s season is fast turning into a story of Mark Webber-esque bad luck. First there was his crash in Monaco which was partially his fault but which he had little control over. Then he got the surprise buttsecks treatment in Canada.

Now in France he has suffered from an odd exhaust failure. The component was flapping around in the air causing all sorts of damage to the right rear of his car — both in terms of physical knocks and the kind of heat the exhaust must have been giving off. Initially the problem was causing Räikkönen several seconds per lap but over time he managed to adapt to it. But the exhaust eventually flew off which leads me to wonder if it might have been safer for the stewards to order him to pit to have the exhaust removed before it flew off into the path of another driver.

Despite Räikkönen’s woes, he still managed to finish 2nd which rather underlines Ferrari’s dominance at this circuit. Felipe Massa, in an uneventful race for him, took the win and at the same time takes the lead of the Drivers Championship for the first time in his career. He is the first Brazilian to lead the world championship since Ayrton Senna.

Massa is in fact the fourth different leader of the championship in four races. The championship is very close at the moment — just ten points separate the top four drivers. It is doubtful, however, that either Kubica or Hamilton can prevent Ferrari from running away with it at this stage, with many of the up-coming circuits suiting Ferrari and some of McLaren’s best circuits having been visited already.

BMW in particular struggled badly this weekend. Kubica certainly was struggling with handling problems during practice. And notably, Heidfeld struggled to get through to Q2 during qualifying, setting three laps in a row that were only good enough for 18th on the grid. He did surpass that eventually, but lined up on the grid way back in 11th. His race ended in 13th. It was a far cry from his second place in Canada.

Meanwhile, plaudits have to go to Kubica for wrestling the car into 5th. He had some moments during the race where he looked quite fiery, but he had little potential today to make much of the race.

This underlines just how close Formula 1 is this year. Moving from one circuit to another results in sometimes dramatic changes in the order through the field, particularly from the third-best car down to the eighth-best.

Toyota, however, are showing consistent improvement. I wouldn’t have trusted Jarno Trulli to hold on to third place. At this very circuit in 2004 he managed to lose a position to Rubens Barrichello on the penultimate corner of the race, cementing his reputation as a poor race driver who lacks full concentration over a full race distance.

However, this year he managed to hold off a late charge from Heikki Kovalainen (and, at one point, Robert Kubica) to take third position. It’s Toyota’s first podium for over two years and it is fitting that it should come in the week that the team mourns the loss of its founder team principal, Ove Andersson.

As for Heikki Kovalainen, he had a fantastic race. Starting tenth on the grid following a 5-place grid penalty after impeding Mark Webber during qualifying, Kovalainen stormed his way through the field to take fourth. Just as it was beginning to look as though Kovalainen did not have what it takes, he has managed to salvage something from what was becoming a disastrous weekend for McLaren.

His team mate Lewis Hamilton certainly did not storm through the field. He needed to take pole position for his strategy to work, but it backfired as he qualified third — which meant starting 13th on the grid. On soft tyres and a light fuel load, Hamilton was aggressive at the start and overtook many cars.

However, his first overtaking manoeuvre raised eyebrows. It was a brave move on Sebastian Vettel, but it was a touch too brave and Hamilton ended up cutting the chicane slightly. At that point Hamilton should have let Vettel pass again because Hamilton clearly gained an advantage by cutting the corner. Ron Dennis protests that Hamilton had clearly passed Vettel by that stage, but I have to disagree. Hamilton would never have made that move stick if he took the chicane correctly and the stewards were right to give him a drive-through penalty.

I think Red Bull can be reasonably pleased with their performance today. Mark Webber took another points-scoring position in 6th while David Coulthard was perfectly positioned to take advantage of any front-running retirements in 9th. This was arguably the team’s best result all season.

Renault are also looking like they have more speed in their car now. I think Alonso had the pace today, but his race was seriously compromised by yet another dodgy strategy from Renault. Alonso was very light at the beginning, and was the first to stop after just 15 laps. The team then switched him to a two-stop strategy, meaning that Alonso had to deal with a heavier car and spend longer on the (sub-optimal) soft tyres.

Alonso’s race of unfulfilled potential was underlined by the fact that his much-maligned team mate Nelsinho Piquet overtook him very close to the end after a traffic-related confusion. Piquet certainly looks as though he has turned a corner now. He was on the pace much more consistently all weekend, and did not make any silly mistakes during the race. This could be the turning point of Piquet’s career and he can now point to the fact that he has beaten the most successful active F1 driver in equal equipment.

I have no idea what happened to Toro Rosso during the race. Sebastian Vettel in particular looked great earlier on in the weekend, but it just didn’t come together for him during the race.

I am starting to wonder about Sébastien Bourdais. After a great start to his season in Australia, Bourdais has been anonymous at best and his middling performances are beginning to make him look as though he is not F1 material. Today he finished 17th, ahead only of the Force Indias, and as far as I could see he had no problems. What was that all about?

Williams must also be desperately frustrated with their performance today. Nakajima and Rosberg finished in 15th and 16th, way off the pace. For a team that was touted as the third-fastest in winter testing, this is just not good enough. This season was supposed to be so much better for Williams.

Honda also had a dire race. Jenson Button was the only retirement after he was involved in an accident while Barrichello could only manage 14th. Just as things were looking up to Honda, they suddenly find themselves firmly at the rear of the grid again.

The British Grand Prix is next. I reckon Ferrari will storm away with that one as well. Let’s see. We’ve been treated to some good races recently. Even the French Grand Prix had more drama than anticipated — even if the predicted rain came to nothing.

3 comments

Flag burning is dull

29 June 2006 02:13

Categories: Current affairs, Politics, Scotland, Sport

Flags seem to be in the news a bit at the moment, particularly over that pond. Is there nothing more interesting going on? Obviously not, because I can’t think of anything else to blog about at the moment. Anyway, the World Cup has enough of an excuse for flags to be discussed in the blogosphere anyway!

Anyway, flags. What a load of horse dung. I don’t mean that. I quite like flags themselves, as in the designs of them and so on. While we’re at it, I’ve been reminded of this website about flags that MatGB linked to a while ago. I didn’t link to it at the time because I don’t actually agree with a lot of it. Surely the Brazilian flag is one of the world’s coolest?

But what I really cannot stand about flags is the intense symbolism that surrounds them. Some people act like a flag is the most important thing in the world. I have been led to believe that in some parts of the USA a child could be swimming in his own shit outside a house, yet a passer-by would be more shocked by a tatty stars and stripes. That would probably happen in parts of Britain aswell, come to think of it.

I am one of these people who couldn’t really give two hoots about nationality. Sure, I like good aspects of Scotland / Britain / whatever, but that’s only because I was brought up here, and all of my memories are here. If I was born in Slovakia I would probably quite like Slovakia. Even if I was born in Scotland then moved to England when I was two years old I would probably feel more English than Scottish. Nationality is a load of old pish really. I am sorry if this makes me a wet old hippy. So be it.

So I think it would be kind of pointless to go around waving a Saltire. And I am not one of those people who thinks that it’s some kind of choice between the Saltire and the Union Flag and something else. I’m not a particular fan of either flag. The Union Flag is quite cleverly designed, but it looks like a complete mess.

Meanwhile the light blue used in the the “traditional” Saltire (to the right) just makes it look washed out, as though it’s been left out in the sun for too long (surely an impossibility in Scotland?!).

For what it’s worth, I quite prefer the design of England’s flag. Red and white is such a simple idea, and it works brilliantly. The English flag is bold, minimalist, and a dream for remixers to boot. So says Chris Applegate at least:

There is an important design element to it; many of the St Georgeâ€™s Crosses flying out there have been modified in many different ways. Corporate logos can be added to promote a brand, lions have been placed in the corners (alluding to the England teamâ€™s crest), or worst of all, â€œENGLANDâ€ is splashed across it (a big no-no in vexillology).

Defacing a flag like this is probably actually a hangable offence, but being a callous flag-hater I actually quite like the fact that people are claiming their flag in this way by adapting it to their own tastes (no matter how tasteless). I like this comment over at Qwghlm:

I think it shows a healthy lack of deference towards our prime patriotic symbol. The George Cross – unlike the Uion Flag – seems to have emerged as something to be enjoyed, not something to be revered. Thatâ€™s about as healthy an approach to national identity as it gets, I say!

Davo the Bawbag is more a fan of Angola’s flag, so much so that he has adopted it as the header for his blog!

They also have possibly the most terrifying flag in the modern world – black and red with a fucking machete on it. That flag surely makes a statement. That statement being – “Fuck off or lose your legs. Your choice.”
They chose for their flag the colours of fear and blood, then stuck a fuck off big knife right in the middle of it.

Genius.

Anyway, on to the crux of my post. Given my indifference towards flags, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that I find flag burning one of the most bizarre activities in the world. I don’t blame the flag burners themselves. They want to cause a fuss and get a big reaction, and setting fire to a particular piece of cloth certainly gets them that with the minimum of effort.

And therein lies the problem. People who act as though burning a flag is an act of war or something! In the USA flag burning is so awful that they are always planning on making it illegal (even though they never seem to have a problem with starting actual wars where people die and stuff). Apparently the American flag is such a strong symbol of freedom of speech that they need to curb freedom of speech in order to protect this symbol of freedom of speech, otherwise freedom of speech will be eroded and the terrorists have won!

Here is Longrider:

Iâ€™ve always viewed the behaviour of angry flag burning mobs as little more than playground temper tantrums that never quite made it to the adult world. Libertine views the matter similarly to the burning of books and I guess he has a point. There is something repugnant about it, which is why people do it. The desecration of a national symbol is deeply insulting and it is intended to express maximum displeasure. The counter to this, surely, is to ignore it; refuse to rise to the obloquy.

And via Longrider, in the Times Online News Log (dead tree, geddit?):

Speaking for the protection of Old Glory, the Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist said: â€œCountless men and women have died defending that flag. It is but a small humble act for us to defend it.â€

A load of rubbish. I think if anybody died for the sake of a flag then they must have been a bit thick. As Longrider points out:

Surely they died defending what it represented and in passing this amendment to the constitution, it would no longer represent that, would it?

And, via Guardian Unlimited’s Newslog, Jonathan Alter:

For dad – and me – any member of Congress who supports amending the Bill of Rights for the first time in the history of this country for a nonproblem like flag burning is showing serious disrespect for our Constitution and for the values for which brave Americans gave their lives. Such disrespect is a much more serious threat than the random idiots who once every decade or so try (often unsuccessfully) to burn a flag.

Some people obviously care very much about what a flag represents but at the end of the day I say it is just a piece of cloth. And if people didn’t get so worked up about it, flag burners probably wouldn’t burn flags.

7 comments

doctorvee