|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
Christmas 2006 has come and gone, but somehow this one seemed different.
Regular posters will know that I am an agnostic tending to atheism, but I'm also deeply interested in history, tradition and language. Christmas is a Christian festival, and in the UK and other nominally Christian countries it is steeped in tradition. Some traditions are ancient (the celebration near the winter solstice adapts a tradition that is much older than Christianity itself) and some are relatively new (the bushy white bearded Santa Claus in his fur-trimmed red outfit originated in a Coca-Cola advertising campaign in the first half of the last century) but, collectively, they are all part of what we call 'Christmas'. Except that, if the politically correct have their way, we'll stop calling it Christmas in case we offend those of other faiths.
I've been through our haul of well over a hundred Christmas cards. There are humorous cards, abstract cards, robins, cute animals, Christmas Trees, holly, snow scenes and other 'Christmassy' illustrations, but apart from the odd church included in a snow scene, there is not a single card with a Christian theme. No stars, no wise men, no nativity scenes - not even a picture of a group of carol singers. Over a third of the cards made no mention of the word 'Christmas'. And, speaking of carol singers, for the first time I can recall, no carol-singers called at our door this year.
Local Councils are holding 'Winter Festivals', and in most locations Christian symbolism has been avoided in street decorations. Public address systems churn out Christmas hits from the last half-century, but carols are nowhere to be heard.
I am saddened to see our national traditions suppressed in this way, for what I regard as crassly stupid reasons. The concept of a multicultural society is fine - provided that 'multicultural' simply implies mutual tolerance and respect for each other's beliefs - but it should be a part of a policy of integration. Ghettos, such as the Muslim enclave at Beeston, in Leeds, are never going to bring different cultures together. The UK spends some £80m (about $157m) each year on translation of government literature and communications for immigrants, so it is never necessary for adult immigrants to learn English. Some have lived here for 25 years or more without becoming able to conduct the simplest conversation in English.
I am all for integration and mutual respect; I see it as the only sane way forward. But mutual respect means that each group respects each other group, and that must mean that all immigrant or non-Christian groups have an obligation to respect the traditions of British society. In practice, they do; I have several friends of other faiths, and all of them enjoy Christmas and have no problem with Christian symbolism. Many of them send me Christmas cards.
It is not those of other races and faiths who are attacking our customs and traditions; our enemies are the talking heads of political correctness, most of whom are white Anglo-Saxons.
Despite my personal agnosticism, I loved the 'spirit' of Christmas when I was a child. I loved carols, especially - when at Grammar School - the traditional service of nine lessons and carols. I loved the (Anglican/Episcopalian) Midnight Mass. And I still do. I don't have to be a believer to appreciate a wonderful story. My resolution for 2007 will be to campaign against the talking heads, to urge that our national traditions (which happen to be Christian) should be revived and preserved, and that the teaching of the basic elements of the Christmas story should be restored to the first school syllabus - subject, of course, to an opt-out provision for other faiths.
Sorry to ramble on so much, but I think that some of the pillars of our culture are under attack from within, and it worries me deeply. What do you think?
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apologies to all for using the Message Board for a private matter, but Cossie did you ever receive an email I sent you about 10 days or so ago? I was reminded because your post was apposite.
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still feel deeply sickened by People using the "Boxing Day" as an excuse to recover from hang-overs, eat cold Turkey Sarnies, and generally watch bad TV.
My understanding of Christian faith, back in Victorian times, was that "Boxing Day" was a day of re-wrapping presents to give to the poor in hospitals. Hence "Boxing Day" was a re-Box day for old presents that could be given to more needy people. I understand this was a Victorian practise tho? Can any-one correct me on this one?
Love to hear some thoughts,
Bon
xx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As usual, cossie, I agree with you and there is little I can add apart from my support.
It comes to something when the Scots have to send missionaries to us Anglo-Saxon Normans, to save us from the stupid people we have elected into power in our country.
Hugs
Nigel
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aussie
|
 |
Really getting into it |
Registered: August 2006
Messages: 475
|
|
|
Well said Cossie, as usual spot on.
During November I attended a seminar by one of your expatriates (Phillip Day)on 100 simple changes. He recommends we should all fight political correctness at every opportunity. I am sure you won't agree with everything he writes but here is an excerpt from his book.
http://campaignfortruth.com/Eclub/140806/CTE%20-%20attack%20political%20correctness.htm
Of course this is not a problem limited to your country because the same things are happening in OZ.
As far as Christmas goes this one was the first time in decades we didn't get a replay of Carols from Kings.
I also checked our Christmas cards and couldn't find many with a religious theme either although I do remember sending some out.
Perhaps you could join forces with Phillip Day, I am sure he would welcome someone as articulate and knowlegable as you and you would certainly be heard.
Aussie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cossie, I think that the only point in your post that I can agree with is that traditional religious scenes are much rarer on Christmas cards than they used to be. I'm not at all sure that this is due to a fear of offending non-Christians - I think it probable that a number of other factors are at work:
- people avoiding overtly Christian scenes because they don't wish to be mis-identified as sympathetic to the "Christian" extremists who seem to have seized the public and media perception of being a Christian. This is definitely mainly my own reason, for example.
- the age shift: many of the overtly religious cards had sicky-sweet images best kept for chocolate boxes, which appealed to my grandparents generation. Purchasers of this type of card have largely died out, and the under-30s often like something a little more contemporary - these can be semi-abstract holly, ivy, trees, stars etc, (wild generalisation only valid in gross).
- an increased awareness of the pagan origins of the mid-winter celebration and an ill-thought-through desire to "return" to a "pre-christian tradition". There's an element of that in my own card sending, I think.
Now for carol-singers ...
My feeling is that the door-to-door carol singers have nearly died out in my area. But I don't think this is due to religious sensitivities, I think they've died out for the same reason as "penny for the guy" has died out in the past couple of decades - the fact that both these have been subsumed into the "Trick or Treat" of Halloween, which has greatly increased in importance. Once a year is enough for the punters to cough up to random groups of roaming kids! Organised carol-singing in town-centre spaces has, if anything, got more common, at least in the areas I frequent.
And winterval comes next ...
You said "Local Councils are holding 'Winter Festivals'"Do you have any specific references to PRIMARY sources that can support this assertion? Most of the stuff I've seen suggests that this is becoming an Urban Legend - there is an excellent article on this at http://www.guardian.co.uk/christmas2006/story/0,,1967367,00.html (yes, a liberal/lefty source if ever there was one - what do you expect from me!).
Now come the bit I was disappointed in. While I STRONGLY agree that ghettoisation should be avoided (and discouraged by all means possible), I don't accept that it is a bad idea to spend money translating official information. There are a small number of long-standing immigrants who do not speak good english - often these may be secluded women for example, but people who have been here a while speak usually functional english. Those who have recently entered the UK - quite legally under the "free movement of labour" within the European Union - such as Poles - often have a more restricted command of our language: those who come from the Indian subcontinent often have spoken English as a first or second or third language from birth. Whatever the reason for poor skills in this area, a lot of vulnerable people miss out on the benefits they are entitled to, and any reduction in the translations can only increase this!
After all of which, I'm glad to agree that the Christian traditions (in a broad and inclusive fashion) should be taught at primary level. Indeed, I think that the major celebrations of each major religion should be taught on an appropriate seasonal basis ... as was the case in my niece's primary school, a "Church of England" primary school in rural Suffolk, where as it happened the kids came from families that were formally Christian or non-religious.
Now to stick my own neck on the block.
I'm personally glad that our conception of how to celebrate Christmas continues to evolve. I don't think that the traditions which came into place around the beginning of the last century (the whole "Dickens and Christmas Tree" thing) have any great claim to be appropriate to the new millennium. In particular, the emphasis on family re-unions and groupings becomes less easy to accomplish with the increasing number of families involving divorced parents, step-siblings, and geographical mobility and separation.
My suspicion is that "traditional Christmasses" reflect just the span of family memory. I may be unusual in having been able to talk as a small child to my great-grandmother about her memories of Christmasses in the 1870s and 1880s, when things were very different, so perhaps I am more at home with the evolution of our celebration. I do feel that the time has come to increase, not decrease, the separation between the secular midwinter gift-giving, and the formal religious celebrations ... and I say this as an (albeit eccentric and unconventional) Christian. Although perhaps the ideal solution would be to move the religious celebration to another date (which can hardly be less related to the actual date of the birth of Jesus than the present one!), I don't see the major Christian sects being able to agree on that, somehow.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... but I'm still catching up with a backlog. I'll be replying soon!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
NW wrote: "Cossie, I think that the only point in your post that I can agree with is that traditional religious scenes are much rarer on Christmas cards than they used to be. I'm not at all sure that this is due to a fear of offending non-Christians - I think it probable that a number of other factors are at work:
- people avoiding overtly Christian scenes because they don't wish to be mis-identified as sympathetic to the "Christian" extremists who seem to have seized the public and media perception of being a Christian. This is definitely mainly my own reason, for example.
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Oh, come on, NW; this is the UK, not the USA. Practising Christians are very much a minority here, but the vast majority of the 'native' population retain an affection for the concept of Christianity. Conversely, 'extremist' Christians are regarded as odd, if not outright mad.
--------------------------------------------------
(NW)
- the age shift: many of the overtly religious cards had sickly-sweet images best kept for chocolate boxes, which appealed to my grandparents’ generation. Purchasers of this type of card have largely died out, and the under-30s often like something a little more contemporary - these can be semi-abstract holly, ivy, trees, stars etc, (wild generalisation only valid in gross).
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Of course fashions change, and I'm not at all nostalgic for the 'Madonna and Child' type of card. But that wasn't what I meant, and I think that's pretty evident from my original post. I've seen lots of 'contemporary' or 'semi-abstract' designs based upon Christian symbols such as the Three Kings, or the Star of Bethlehem - but they don't seem to be around this year. And their disappearance has happened far too quickly for demographic changes to be a valid explanation.
--------------------------------------------------
(NW)
- an increased awareness of the pagan origins of the mid-winter celebration and an ill-thought-through desire to "return" to a "pre-Christian tradition". There's an element of that in my own card sending, I think.
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Bah! Humbug! I honestly do not believe that across the population as a whole there has been any increased awareness that Christmas was an adaptation of the pagan midwinter festival - Yuletide, to use the modern English term. And even if the numbers showing such awareness had doubled, they would still represent a tiny proportion of the UK population.
--------------------------------------------------
(NW)
Now for carol-singers ...
My feeling is that the door-to-door carol singers have nearly died out in my area. But I don't think this is due to religious sensitivities, I think they've died out for the same reason as "penny for the guy" has died out in the past couple of decades - the fact that both these have been subsumed into the "Trick or Treat" of Halloween, which has greatly increased in importance. Once a year is enough for the punters to cough up to random groups of roaming kids! Organised carol-singing in town-centre spaces has, if anything, got more common, at least in the areas I frequent.
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
You may have a point insofar as the Americanisation/Commercialisation of Hallowe'en has destroyed much of the UK tradition associated with that celebration - which is of course another pre-Christian festival absorbed into Christian calendar; 'Hallowe'en' is the eve of All Saints' (or All Hallows') Day. But I'd argue that 'Penny for the Guy' is a casualty of the increasing, council-imposed move to civic bonfires, as opposed to the backyard or neighbourhood events of past years. I'd also suggest that the disappearance of carol singers is attributable to the fact that - in most areas - carols are no longer taught to schoolchildren. Whether you contribute to carol singers rather depends upon your relative affinity to Bob Cratchit or Ebenezer Scrooge!
--------------------------------------------------
(NW)
And winterval comes next ...
You said "Local Councils are holding 'Winter Festivals'". Do you have any specific references to PRIMARY sources that can support this assertion? Most of the stuff I've seen suggests that this is becoming an Urban Legend - there is an excellent article on this at http://www.guardian.co.uk/christmas2006/story/0,,1967367,00.html (yes, a liberal/lefty source if ever there was one - what do you expect from me!).
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Certainly, Sir! A good starting place would be http://www.newcastlegateshead.com/whatson.php?
And despite being culled from the Guardian, your linked article seems to be a bog-standard example of debunking, and thus just as likely to be subjective as the stories it seeks to debunk.
---------------------------------------------------
(NW)
Now comes the bit I was disappointed in. While I STRONGLY agree that ghettoisation should be avoided (and discouraged by all means possible), I don't accept that it is a bad idea to spend money translating official information. There are a small number of long-standing immigrants who do not speak good English - often these may be secluded women for example, but people who have been here a while speak usually functional English. Those who have recently entered the UK - quite legally under the "free movement of labour" within the European Union - such as Poles - often have a more restricted command of our language: those who come from the Indian subcontinent often have spoken English as a first or second or third language from birth. Whatever the reason for poor skills in this area, a lot of vulnerable people miss out on the benefits they are entitled to, and any reduction in the translations can only increase this!
---------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Mmm. I think you are reacting to something I didn't actually say. My point was that the 'multicultural' lobby favours the creation of a ghetto mentality precisely because it does not campaign for integration. And, in a ghetto situation, the incentive to learn English is removed, which adds to the translation burden. I do not for a moment suggest that translation of documents relevant to recent immigrants is anything other than an absolute logical necessity. Nor do I lose sight of the fact that a significant part of the translation budget is spent on translating documents and correspondence into Welsh for those who are perfectly well able to communicate in English but refuse to do so as an expression of nationalism. Now that really DOES piss me off!
---------------------------------------------------
(NW)
After all of which, I'm glad to agree that the Christian traditions (in a broad and inclusive fashion) should be taught at primary level. Indeed, I think that the major celebrations of each major religion should be taught on an appropriate seasonal basis ... as was the case in my niece's primary school, a "Church of England" primary school in rural Suffolk, where as it happened the kids came from families that were formally Christian or non-religious.
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Yippee! A point of agreement at last! But I don't subscribe to the need to give equal prominence to all faiths. As I said when beginning my original post, I'm pretty much an atheist, but I genuinely believe that it is right to give priority to Christian traditions simply because they are the traditions of our nation. That is not, of course, to say that the teaching should be in any way evangelical, nor that other faiths should be ignored.
--------------------------------------------------
(NW)
Now to stick my own neck on the block.
I'm personally glad that our conception of how to celebrate Christmas continues to evolve. I don't think that the traditions which came into place around the beginning of the last century (the whole "Dickens and Christmas Tree" thing) have any great claim to be appropriate to the new millennium. In particular, the emphasis on family re-unions and groupings becomes less easy to accomplish with the increasing number of families involving divorced parents, step-siblings, and geographical mobility and separation.
My suspicion is that "traditional Christmasses" reflect just the span of family memory. I may be unusual in having been able to talk as a small child to my great-grandmother about her memories of Christmasses in the 1870s and 1880s, when things were very different, so perhaps I am more at home with the evolution of our celebration. I do feel that the time has come to increase, not decrease, the separation between the secular midwinter gift-giving, and the formal religious celebrations ... and I say this as an (albeit eccentric and unconventional) Christian. Although perhaps the ideal solution would be to move the religious celebration to another date (which can hardly be less related to the actual date of the birth of Jesus than the present one!), I don't see the major Christian sects being able to agree on that, somehow.
--------------------------------------------------
(Cossie)
Would you mind keeping your head on the block just a little while longer? In a country without capital punishment, it's damn' difficult to find a fully-qualified executioner!
I mentioned in my original post that I have an interest in history and tradition. That's the whole motivation for my post. And, of course, because of that interest I am aware that traditions evolve. Evolution almost always involves grafting a new idea to an existing stem. So it was with the absorption of Yuletide into Christmas. So it was with carols, a tradition dating from the late medieval period. And with Christmas Trees, popularised in Britain by Queen Victoria's consort, Prince Albert, who brought the custom from his German homeland. And with Christmas Cards, a commercial innovation later in the nineteenth century. Snow scenes, at least in the UK, probably stem from folk-memory of the 'mini ice-age' when temperatures dropped for several decades, the Thames froze solid and Frost Fairs were held on the ice. The common feature of all of the above is that new ideas were added to the celebration; nothing was taken away. That's how traditions evolve. What is happening now in not evolution, but manipulation - and I am completely opposed to such politically correct gerrymandering. If the majority of the population wishes to abandon a tradition, it will wither and die. We do not need self-styled and self-important gurus to interfere with the process of natural development.
Oh, and I am completely unable to see any justification for the argument that something which brings family members together, whether physically or in spirit, can be other than beneficial. In social terms, the lowest common denominator has little to offer.
NW, as happens so often when we argue, I feel the need to emphasise that I am fighting against your arguments - indeed, hopefully blowing them out of the water – but not against you. I know you already understand this, but I have the highest regard for you as a person, and I need to be sure that you know that my regard is in no way diminished by the fact that I disagree with you!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie wrote:
> Oh, come on, NW; this is the UK, not the USA. Practising Christians are very much a minority here, but the vast majority of the 'native' population retain an affection for the concept of Christianity. Conversely, 'extremist' Christians are regarded as odd, if not outright mad.
We move in rather different circles, I think. I have found it more difficult to be "out" about being a Christian than I have found it to be "out" about being gay. I have certainly found far more people regard it with suspicion and hostility. This may reflect the predominantly urban (and slightly younger: many of my friends are late 20s to early 40s) people that I know. People may indeed have a vague "affection for the concept of Christianity", but only if it is locked safely away in an institution that they never visit!
Cossie, I profoundly disagree with your vision of Christmas. For the religious elements of Christmas to be claimed by the Nostalgia / Heritage industry means rendering them safe, emasculating them. And that makes them irrelevant ... just another pageant like the Changing of the Guard, or the House of Lords. And I don't see that many practising Christians - of whatever denomination - would willingly lend themselves to this process. Any religious, ethical or moral system which aims to get to grips with meaningful questions simply cannot be "warm and fuzzy": human life is far too complex and challenging for such a Disneyfied approach.
I'm all in favour of teaching a religion in depth - in this country, Christianity by default. A great deal of our shared (Western European) culture needs an understanding of Christian symbols and approaches to be properly understood. Indeed, a reasonable understanding of any one religion can help in understanding many others. For this reason, I've never had any problem exchanging cards ... I send cards to celebrate Christmas to my Muslim, Hindu, and other friends and colleagues. Many send me cards back, or an equivalent at a time that is significant to them (sharing sweets at Diwali, for example).
As regards the "Winter Festival" - I would be horrified if the period from early November to early January were to be seem as "Christmas"! Just because it is commercially desirable to start advertising and selling for Christmas as soon as the "Back to School" season is over doesn't mean that it's appropriate to see the whole period as Christmas. I note that within the "Winter Festival" you quote, there are specific "Christmas" events on 16th and 23rd December, and I think this is entirely appropriate (although neither of them actually strike me as very "Christian" events - a day at the racecourse, and a ceilidh ?). I would have a problem if anyone disallowed mention of Christmas whilst allowing Eid and Diwali, but I really do think that this is very rare.
In short, I'm all in favour of keeping the celebrations we currently have at Christmas, and I like the idea of extending them to include the midwinter celebrations of other religions where this can conveniently be done. But I'm not at all keen on promoting the intentional degradation of specifically Christian symbols as a vaguely traditional expression of fuzzy goodwill!
-------------------
On the specific issue of family togetherness at Christmas, I absolutely agree about the desirability of family togetherness. But I am concerned that this is being promoted in a way which excludes many who are not within "traditional family structures". And, of course, families where more than one faith is represented. I am, in this instance, being "PC", and suggesting that we as a society need to find ways of making secular Christmas more inclusive, or perhaps less excvlusive of those who do not conform to some fictional ideal.
sorry if this is (even) more rambling than normal - I've been in bed with a cold / headache / blocked sinuses / pounding headache for the past two days, and am rather aware that my brain is not working as well as it usually does!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... that this underlines what I've said so often - in the UK, you gotta move North to find civilisation!
Where I live (the best bit of England, 'cos it's next to Scotland), what you say simply doesn't apply. No-one is looked down upon for being a churchgoer, until or unless they attempt to claim the moral high ground - and, in general, that doesn't happen. In fact, in many rural communities, the (Anglican) Church is the focus of activity, and it does not reject those who are not regular churchgoers. And lots of non-churchgoers (including myself) are made welcome at Carol Services and other special celebrations.
I don't for a moment accept your concept of 'emasculation'. There are other forces at work, but - on purely traditional grounds - I think that it is better that Christian symbolism should be represented, even if in a slightly diluted form. It is part of our national heritage, just as much as the Changing of the Guard or the House of Lords - and I mean our national heritage, not just our Christian heritage.
I'm sorry that you would be horrified to think of a 'Christmas' festival stretching from early November to January. You must have had a secluded childhood. But, until a couple of years ago, that's precisely what we had. The 'Christmas Celebrations' began when the street decorations were switched on on the second Saturday in November, and continued until 'Twelfth Night' (6 January).
As regards the concept of 'Family Togetherness' at Christmas, I support it unequivocally. I appreciate that the decline in family values may exclude some parents - but I am no believer in the adoption of the lowest common denominator!
I am all for the concept of making Christmas inclusive - but, let's face it, there is nothing about it that is exclusive. Giving gifts to celebrate a 'Winter Festival' is, in my view, crass in the extreme. The gift-giving is actually an incidental part of Christmas - it's really associated with St. Nicholas ('Santa Claus'), whose feast-day is 6 December - on which day several European countries celebrate (or did, until recently, celebrate) the giving and receiving of gifts.
I don't think that I could, in all honesty, defend the Christian ethic against the pagan ethic which preceded it - but both ethics are part of my heritage, and that - to me - is very important.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
