Ange writes (concerning our ghastly PM's pathetic attempt to ensure his 'place in history' whilst defusing any progressive potential the republican moment might have engendered):
>ironically, it's our blurry monarchist Prime Minister who is wallowing
>in the fantasy of being the author of the nation. Out of the
>blue he announced that he was going to write a new preamble ...
>Australian republicans are way too busy going on about "the need to have an
>Australian head of state", endlessly spitting out the question: "do you
>really want a foreigner as the head of australia?"
Yeah, pretty pathetic - and it's nice to see (however republican my instincts might be) that no-one much gives a toss. Although that does imply Howard has achieved part B of his project - there is almost no progressive dimension left in this business. It's too late in western history, methinks, to define a coherent national sentiment. Constitutions aren't building blocks of nations any more (as I suspect it was in 1776). Which is fine my me. And Australia hasn't a clue who she is, anyway. Here too, that's fine by me. We used to care about this stuff (and nobody more than our left), but I don't think we do any more. Our national anthem is pretty ordinary, and nobody past primary school knows the words. Good. Our constitution is carefully designed to leave the emotions untroubled, and absolutely nobody knows a word of it. Good. Our flag is so much like that of New Zealand and a couple of other non-descript archipelagos, most can't distinguish 'em. Good. Million-dollar ads, professionally crafted to build dizzying patriotic excitement at the prospect of hosting a permanently besmirched Olympic charade, are moving very few of us. Terrific.
We don't care about stuff that should matter, but we're not alone there. At least we don't give a flying fuck about stuff that's not worth a flying fuck. So we're a step ahead of some there, eh?
And you didn't offend me, Kelley. Our 'culture industry' has spent a fortune and an age promoting the 'sheep, convicts, alcoholism, lamingtons' aesthetic to our foreign brothers and sisters. I don't know how you're supposed to think anything else! There's not much else, actually. And not that any more either.
What we are is easy to be around (as a culture anyway - as a nation, we can be a bit hard to take at times, but that's not really us, is it). And what a great virtue 'easy to be around' is. All my less-than-awe-inspiring patriotic sentiment revolves precisely around this.
And I've just the suggestion if we ever do chuck out our anthem/dirge - everyone loved it when it came out here - the best bit goes: '... we're pretty vacant ... AND WE DON'T CAARRRRE'.
Aah! It moves me even now ...
As for the defining moment of national self-authorship - according to our prime-bastard that was Gallipoli. A few thousand Australian boys joined lots of other thousands in attacking a beach in a country we'd never heard of at Winston Churchill's behest in 1915. We got our arses kicked off that beach a few months later, and we left the body parts of 9000 of our lads (and gawd-only-knows-how-many Turkish boys) on said beach. The birth of a nation, eh?
All 'coz we didn't get a chance bravely to slaughter phalanxes of regimented native warriors when we got here in 1788. Perhaps that's why we reserve so much contempt for Aboriginal Australians. They didn't have the numbers and the environment to fight us on the beaches like 'Boy's Own Annual' told us they were supposed to. So we had to give ourselves a bloody ersatz birth on someone else's beach 127 years later.
Cheers, Rob.