Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2000-11-08, Page 5THE CITIZEN, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2000. PAGE 5. Other Views And your name would be ...? Ay, caramba, deadline looms and I cannot find the quote, but trust me on this one: once upon a time, Marshall MacLuhan, that Merlin of Canadian Consciousness pronounced something to the effect that: A person’s name is like a curse: a pronouncement that they will carry with them to the grave. Okay? That said, let us consider Bruce. And Arnold. Not to mention Ralph. In the 1950s (trust me — I was there) the most popular boys’ names to tag a newborn lad with were John, Robert, James, Michael, David, Stephen, William, Richard, Thomas and Mark. By the 70s, the preferences had morphed to include Matthew, Brian, Christopher, Jeffrey and Daniel. And in the nether reaches of the century we had descended to Duane, Todd, Stuart and Brad. But no one was going to bat for Lee. Harvey. Or Oswald. A Louisiana no-account ex-Marine, born in 1939 and adorned serendipitously with all three monikers, managed to marry a passing acquaintance with a mail-order rifle and a Presidential Cavalcade into an historical rendezvous. And in that marriage, managed to insure that no sentient North American neo-parent would, for the foreseeable future, think of encumbering his or her offspring with the names Lee, Harvey, or Oswald. You’ve got to be careful what you name your kid. It can come back to haunt you both. I’m sure that, prior to President Nixon’s disastrous reign, Richard was considered an excellent male moniker. Comparing Aborigines and Indians I could only watch so much of the Olympics in Australia before I started looking around for other things to examine in that country. It did not take long before I decided that it might be a good time to look at their native problem and see how similar it was to the one we have in Canada. It took only a little bit longer before I came to the conclusion that there were far more similarities than there were differences and I will leave it up to the reader to decide how right I was in this assessment. While Australia is about the same age as Canada as far as countries are concerned, the natives or aborigines as they are normally called came to the island about 50,000 years ago and not surprisingly were from southeast Asia. When the British arrived in the late 18th century, there may have been about a million of these natives, but by the beginning of the 20th century this number had dropped off to about 50,000. By the end of the century it had increased to almost 400,000 or about two per cent of the total population. For most of the past century the prevailing idea was to assist in this reduction by such things as taking mixed children from their aboriginal mothers and putting them in institutions. It was hoped that such actions would eventually breed “the colour out of them.” This policy continued until about the 1960s but even since then the Australian government has been slow to acknowledge aboriginal rights. Only in 1971 were they even included in any census. There has, however, been some definite progress in the field of land rights. Two court decisions in the 1990s were in favour of the aborigines and at the present time about 15 per cent of the total Australian land mass is owned and controlled by them. These decisions Arthur Black And have you noticed how few Canadian newborn boys carry the name Brian these days? But that could change. There was a time when Arnold was considered a wussy name. A monosyllabic Austrian with polysyllabic muscles who answered to the name Herr Schwarzenegger changed all that. When I was a kid, the name ‘Bruce’ was sniggered at — thought to be just a tad ‘fey’. Messrs Springsteen and Willis turned that around. And then there’s Ralph. What good words can you possibly say about the name Ralph? The most famous Ralph in the history of popular culture? Ralph Kramden, the sad sack, red-faced, overweight and usually idiotic bus driver portrayed by Jackie Gleason in The Honeymooners. Ralph — a name so sad that it has became a synonym for booze-induced nausea — “No kidding, Tiffaney, after three of those Margueritas, I was ralphing into the aspidistras.” Ralph. A tragically unfortunate name to lumber a child with. Until you think about it a bit. What about Ralph Lauren, the fashion thingy? Raymond Canon The International Scene resulted in a large number of native land claims, some of which overlap each other but the resolution of these claims has been excruciatingly slow. About a third of the aborigines live in their rural areas and attempt to maintain their traditional lifestyle. Another third live in a small towns and villages. The other third live in the cities and lead a life that is not much different from that of “non-native” Australians. However, when taken as a group, there is little comparison when it conies to lifestyle. Their-life expectancy is about 15 years lower than that of the average Australian, unemployment is four times higher while drink and drug problems are widespread. Housing standards are often quite poor while native children drop out of school at an earlier age than other children. Many of the natives get in trouble with the law and frequently end up in prison where they often stay until they die. In some areas no less l " ~ ~ 1 Final Thought When you steal from one author, it’s plagiarism; if you steal from many, it’s research. - Wilson Mizner And Ralph Fiennes, the Hollywood leading man? Has anyone noticed that there is a Ralph currently running for election to the Oval Office? To wit, Ralph Nader, the world’s most famous consumer advocate and perennial gadfly on the butt of the American body politic. And speaking of gadflies (or butts, your choice) — what about Canada’s own Ralph Klein? I think Ralph is coming back to claim its rightful place within the pantheon of righteous male names. But then that’s the thing about names. Even if you pick a good one, you can never be sure what the vagaries of history will do to it. Sometimes it doesn’t take the weight of history. Sometimes a well-turned phrase will do the trick. You don’t hear the name Chauncey much anymore do you? The reason for that might be an exchange that occurred between U.S. President William Howard Taft and one Senator Chauncey Depew about 90 years ago. President Taft was a dirigible of a man, so huge in girth he had to have a bathtub specially made to accommodate his girth. Senator Depew on the other hand was a man with substantial gonads — so much so that he dared to twit the president about his size. One time he had the temerity to ask the president if he ‘was expecting a boy or a girl’, and what he would name it. President Taft looked at the senator and intoned, “If it’s a boy, I’ll call it John. If it’s a girl, 1’11 call it Mary.” “But if, as I expect, it is just wind, I’ll call it Chauncey.” than seven out of 10 people in jail are aborigines, due mainly to the mandatory sentencing policies in effect in those areas. The Australian federal government has so far had little success in persuading the areas to modify these policies. Now and again there are some successes. An agreement was recently made with native landowners to allow a railroad to be built between Alice Springs and Darwin in the north' central part of the country. Other aborigines are being employed in the field of tourism where their knowledge of the land can be put to good use. In addition, a whole industry has grown up around native art and artifacts, both of which are selling well. This will give you some idea of what is gong on down under as far as the aborigines are concerned. Certainly Australia and Canada appear to have a long way to go before either country can say the task is well in hand. Letters Policy The Citizen welcomes letters to the editor. Letters must be signed and should include a daytime telephone number for the purpose of verification only. Letters that are not signed will not be printed. Submissions may be edited for length, clarity and content, using fair comment as our guideline. The Citizen reserves the right to refuse any letter on the basis of unfair bias, prejudice or inaccurate information. As well, letters can only be printed as space allows. Please keep your letters brief and concise. Bonnie Gropp The short of it The sour bit of ‘Oranges and Lemons’ And now for something a little light and fluffy. There was an old woman who lived in a shoe. She had so many children she didn’t know what to do. She gave them some broth without any bread, then whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed. Well, it should be light and fluffy. With the arrival each weekend of our music loving young grandson, Loreena McKennit, B.B. King and Green Day give way on the CD player to the bouncy strains of nursery rhymes. And after listening... and listening... and listening to them, I have become convinced that the person who decided these were for kids was the owner of, if not a demented mind, than at least a dark one. Forget Freddy Kreuger of Elm Street fame or the hockey masked Jason from the Friday the 13th saga. There are lines and characters in nursery rhymes and fables that are equally as terrifying. Not to mention socially unacceptable in our liberal society. The corporal-punishing mom from the aforementioned tale would, I’m sure, soon find her shoe a little less full in today’s world — that is, at least until she could take some parenting courses and counselling sessions to help her deal with her aggressions. But let’s look at the violence. There are those poor little blind mice whose tails are chopped off with a earring knife. And my personal favourite, Oranges and Lemons. This particular little rhyme with its incongruous soothing melody, lulls us right up to the last few lines— Here comes a candle to light you to bed. Here comes a chopper to chop off your head. Lifev ise we have the morbid. My daughter absolutely refuses to listen to or smg Rock-a- bye Baby. The thought of w hat happens to this poor little infant as the cradle plummets to the ground is a picture she’d rather not conjure up. Now, while I’ve never noticed a child who has sustained any particularly long-term damaging effects from our innocent introduction to the darker side of Mother Goose and company, I must admit revisiting these verses with my grandson has made me a little curious. Having heard long ago that nursery rhymes are actually political satires originally meant for adults, I went on the internet to see if I could find what is behind some of these gothic tales. One website offers two explanations for the mother of the poor living accommodations. The one that seems most likely is that the old woman is a metaphor for the British Parliament and the shoe is the British Isles. The children are the colonials and the whipping was the act of parliament appointing James I to the throne. With regards to others, the poor little rodents were apparently noblemen who upset Queen Mary I. Rather than cut them, however she had them burned at the stake. Also, according to the source I discovered, the son of King James II was the baby blown from his bough by the ill wind of William of Orange. My nonsensical little exercise was somewhat interesting, though unfortunately, I am still in the dark about the nasty little chopper. I don’t know how the evolution from political satire to children’s rhyme came, and certainly there are cute ones, but in the case of some, it was kind of a bizarre move to make.