An awful anthem is the main problem

The New Zealand National Anthem that is always used now (as opposed to the first, foreign version) is a dirge with awful, inappropriate lyrics for a modern secular country.

Rattue is right (and that flag is a different problem).

Recent renditions of the anthem about something supposedly saving New Zealand have been awful in different ways. The mess-up mangle preceding the New Zealand-Great Britain league test in the weekend was given a lot of attention, but the sterile opera style versions at recent All Black-France tests have also been lacking in pride and passion.

The problem is that no political party or Government are likely to have the guts to get a decent anthem that we can sing and listen to with pride.

67 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  June 27, 2018

    Personally I don’t mind the anthem, although it’s now got a bit too long. Some countries’s anthems are shockers. The US one’s got an extra note in it that throws out the timing & it’s a real tedious dirge. I’ll bet there are a lot of shockers, especially when played by an Egyptian military band.

    Be a bloody hard job to write a better one & get it accepted by everyone. Look at the All Black Flag debacle.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  June 27, 2018

      I agree, I like the anthem, it’s ours and I’d like it to stay. If it’s sung so that it swings along at a reasonable pace, it sounds good. Leave it as it is.

      That American ‘singer’ made an appalling hash of it, but that was her fault, not the song’s.

      The French one has a good tune but celebrates a bloodbath and has very gory lyrics. ‘Qu’un sang impur/Abreuve nos sillons.’ Charming. It is meaningless now that the French Revolution is long gone.

      God Save the Queen is banal and hardly a wonderful piece of music. It says nothing about the UK, really, and the line ‘long to reign over us’ is not only a terrible rhyme for glorious and victorious, it has to be sung as ‘to-oo’ to make it scan.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  June 27, 2018

        ‘to-oo rei-eign over us’, really.

        • Gezza

           /  June 27, 2018

          Stretching out vowels or words of lyrics to fit the timing of songs is very common, perfectly acceptable, & a thoroughly normal feature of musical history & practice, Kitty.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  June 28, 2018

            It’s not ideal, though, and can sound strained and odd.

      • Corky

         /  June 27, 2018

        ”That American ‘singer’ made an appalling hash of it, but that was her fault, not the song’s.”

        Not according to her. She claims she lost sound in her ear piece, and even though she’d gone through before hand with officials as to what tempo she would sing our anthem, apparently they couldn’t give the backing Crystal wanted in time because of technical difficulties.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  June 28, 2018

          A bad workman blames his tools.

    • Corky

       /  June 27, 2018

      ‘The US one’s got an extra note in it that throws out the timing.”

      What note is that? I have a couple of arrangements in 3/4 time . No problem with timing…at least not using my G&L gat with a little distortion and delay added.

      http://starspangledmusic.org/spangled-mythconception-7-an-official-version-of-the-star-spangled-banner-exists/

      • Gezza

         /  June 27, 2018

        Actually it might be two notes. The rhythm is usually broken completely by it. I’ll have to listen & read the lyrics sometime & get back to you. Going to watch the excellent doco series on the SAS on Choice tv on now. Last week was all about how it got started in the Western Desert & basically ended up only surviving because of the LRDG.

  2. PartisanZ

     /  June 27, 2018

    For the moment, the main problem is musical arrangement. A ‘jazzed-up’, faster moving version kinda like ‘Swing Rock’ works quite well.

    Until we do the work required to construct a new Constitution and become a Republic – including Truth & Reconciliation work – at which time the best new Flag and Anthem will emerge from the milieu …

    That time is now fairly rapidly approaching … That time is before 2040.

    • Gezza

       /  June 27, 2018

      Here’s my pick. Just a short version though.

      • PartisanZ

         /  June 27, 2018

        The new anthem for our Constitutional Republic will of course be …. new …

        • Gezza

           /  June 27, 2018

          Possibly. Be a lot of squabbling still I bet.

  3. Zedd

     /  June 27, 2018

    I dont mind it.. BUT its a bit like the prayer at the start of parliament; not all kiwis are ‘Christians’ & yet the anthem & the prayer are painting us all in this light… a bit past its useby date perhaps ?

    Although I do think its definitely better than ‘God save the Queen/King’, which we can still apparently use ?? 😦

    • Zedd

       /  June 27, 2018

      It sounds like this has blown up, because of the ‘train-wreck way’, it was sung in USA (league game) ? :/ 😀

  4. MaureenW

     /  June 27, 2018

    gawd of nations …. Its goddam awful.

    A modified arrangement of Welcome Home would work for me. By modified I mean easier for the general populace to sing – love the original.

  5. Alan Wilkinson

     /  June 27, 2018

    Only Key had the guts to try to change a national symbol and even that was sabotaged by political opportunism. No chance anyone from this lot will risk that.

    • MaureenW

       /  June 27, 2018

      Funny, I’m not particular about the NZ flag one way or the other, but there was something about the process, methodology and timing that got up my nose. Seemed like a vanity project.

      • Gezza

         /  June 27, 2018

        Quite right Maureen. Bad enuf having Air LOTR then Air AllBlacks for an airline. We don’t need an All Blacks national bloody flag. There’s more to this country than the AB’s, even though I generally enjoy watching them play.

        Notwithstanding that Labour gets slammed for opposing the chosen headscarf & tablecloth design on politically partisan grounds, the process was a silly affair & the design unsuitable for our national rag. It was definitely a Key vanity project. He should be happy enuf just joining Sir Bob & Sir Mad Butcher with his knighthood.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  June 27, 2018

          The most popular flag was not popular enough. So we are stuck with a far worse one. And folk wonder why communism failed.

          • Gezza

             /  June 27, 2018

            No I don’t think Communism failed because of a flag change, although a dotty person might I suppose.

            The problem I think everyone except Key supporters spotted was that if that unsuitable All Blacks rag was adopted it would then be impossible to get rid of for God knows how long. If WInston decided to have another go at changing it & Jacinda went along with it as usual there’d be no difficulty organising another flag change before 2020 because Labour & NZF have absolutely no problems doing the complete opposite of whatever they said was their policy at any given time.

    • PartisanZ

       /  June 28, 2018

      Alan, incorrect wording on your part I believe … it should read –

      Only Key had the brazen cheek to try to change our national symbol to exactly the one he personally wanted … (and his cronies no doubt) … Thankfully his gall was held in check by political realism on the part of the citizenry …

      In that sense Flag Debacle was something of a milestone …

      I agree there seems no chance “this lot” will even attempt it, because to do so with appropriate gravitas requires the greater Constitutional conversation and consultation – and giving consideration to systems other than Westminster, eg Matike Mai – something Key showed only passing ‘Appointed Panel’ interest in …

      Each electoral term that passes without anything happening brings us closer to the deadline of 2040 …

      What failed in Key’s Flag Debacle was a perfect example of Inverted Totalitarianism or “managed democracy” … a blatant attempt to manipulate “free and fair elections” … there’s absolutely no correlation with ‘communism’ whatsoever, even in its most misinterpreted forms …

      • Gerrit

         /  June 28, 2018

        What is this 2040 deadline you are talking about?

        • PartisanZ

           /  June 28, 2018

          Did you know that Maori came within a hair’s breadth of NOT participating in the 1940 Centenary of ‘New Zealand’ … ?

          The Matike Mai Aotearoa report determined that Westminster not only won’t but can’t honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi … It’s not capable of doing so … not capable of true power sharing …

          Hence 2040 deadline … and if you’re gonna do something as important as writing a new Constitution and forming a Republic … or Republics … you need a few years or decades as lead-time …

          • Gerrit

             /  June 28, 2018

            So not really a deadline to do anything. Who cares what happened in 1940 in regards the Maori participation.

            I will put it to you that by 2040 there will be no constitution based on two republics. There will be no apartheid in regards governance.

            Go even further, there will be no treaty reference in any constitution in regards 50/50 power sharing between the 15/85 citizens racial split.

            I can almost see the treaty gone by 2040 in relevance to the people who vote. It simple is of no interest or concern to the majority.

            Best prepare for a constitution without the treaty, where one person has one equal vote to that of his neighbour. Irrespective of race.

            The non Maori tangata whenua will settle for no less.

            • PartisanZ

               /  June 28, 2018

              “I see your true colours shining through …”

              Actually … I care about 1940 … and 1840 … What’s that quote you Righties so often spout … “Those who don’t know their history are destined to repeat it” …?

              I did say “Republic … or Republics”. I’m not assuming bi-national but I believe our Constitution must be founded upon bicultural at very least.

              Bicultural does not exclude multicultural … as the Matike Mai report makes clear. The continued goodwill from Maori is nothing short of exemplary … Can it last forever?

              A Constitution can include the Treaty, indeed, have it as a principal foundation, and still specify “one person one vote” … Right Brigade paranoia about this is laughable …

              But I guess you’re Right … Pakeha discovered New Zealand … and Pakeha have the right to rule it as they please …

              There was no Law here before … Tikanga isn’t Law …

              You jest, surely? Your “non Maori tangata whenua” will have sold all their ‘land shares’ New ZeaL by 2040 at the rate they’re going …

            • PartisanZ

               /  June 28, 2018

              53% gone already I believe …

            • Griff

               /  June 28, 2018

              Pakeha have the right to rule it as they please …
              Why yes thats what ceding sovereignty means.
              Principals of the Treaty The goverment has the sole right to govern.

              The Matike Mai Aotearoa report is not in any way a representation of the majority of Maori yet alone the majority of the rest of us.
              It is the work of a small number of fringe separatist agitators.
              Margaret Mutu and Moana Jackson have no standing to direct the future of this country.

              We had a official constitutional review heavily loaded with Maori voices.
              It found that there was little support for the inclusion of the treaty into a written constitution.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 28, 2018

              It is a fundamental issue of democracy where majority based decision making is the goal, to deal with issues of multiculturalism and minority rights.
              It is not an easy problem to solve as any rights given to minorities will by definition impact on the majority in some manner.
              NZ has made some good steps in trying to address this issue with regards Maori, but there are many incompatibilities and tensions that need to be resolved when you move beyond the standard democratic tenet of creating a broad framework under which all races, religions and cultures can operate and thrive.
              Sharia is a good example of this, and Maori Based justice is another.

              All very well to call for “partnership” and other buzzwords, but the reality is far more complex and problematic.

            • Blazer

               /  June 28, 2018

              probably your best post in a long while…Duck.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  June 28, 2018

        Only Key? It was high on the Labour Party policy list as well. And Key tried to include them in the process, but they were too busy barking at every passing can back then.

        • PartisanZ

           /  June 28, 2018

          Yeah yeah … the Constitutionality can Key was kicking down the road!

          • High Flying Duck

             /  June 28, 2018

            Ignored the point I see – the flag change was a high priority for the vast majority of parliament. But when National put it in process (using exactly the same methodology Labour had suggested) Labour did a 108 turn and painted it as a vanity project.
            It was a disgrace, and it put back and chance for reform on flag, anthem or constitution for decades as it showed that partisanship trumps all.

            • Blazer

               /  June 28, 2018

              it was a high priority for a Key legacy.
              Unimportant matters like housing and homelessness were relegated so he could apply himself.

            • PartisanZ

               /  June 28, 2018

              The public recognized the ‘gravitas’ of changing the flag, that’s all, and such gravitas cannot be separated from Constitutionality …

              Nor can the Anthem for that matter.

              Indeed, it might be said we have an awful anthem because we have an awful Constitution … (if you can find it) …

              Flag Debacle was a great WIN for the people over corporate-capitalist-political elite “managed democracy”.

        • High Flying Duck

           /  June 28, 2018

          *car

        • Blazer

           /  June 28, 2018

          This ‘Labour did it too’ theme is quite tedious these days.
          PDB has even introduced ‘Labour WILL do it too’….a sure sign of…desperation.

          • PDB

             /  June 28, 2018

            From the guy who has more squirrels than the USA.

          • High Flying Duck

             /  June 28, 2018

            This is more a case of Labour definitely wanted to do it until National did, then suddenly it was the worst idea ever – although it remained Labour policy to do exactly what was being done.
            Your assertion, most surprisingly, is completely wrong.

            • Blazer

               /  June 28, 2018

              you may find it was the quality of the designs themselves that was lacking.
              Honky Tonks loading the panel to choose his preference didn’t help.Though the $600 a day to consider designs…helped a few loyalists.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 28, 2018

              Once again, for the slower amongst us: Labour had every opportunity to be part of the process, but preferred howling at the moon to being constructive.

            • Blazer

               /  June 28, 2018

              for those who pass obtuse genes on to their offspring…’you may find it was the quality of the designs themselves that was lacking’.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 28, 2018

              When you don’t get buy in to the process from all parties, the whole process suffers – this includes the designs.
              It is an impossible task though – Canadians hated the maple leaf design that has now become the iconic symbol of their country.
              The silver fern is an obvious symbol of NZ as it is used in place of the flag by basically any NZ enterprise going overseas, be it business, cultural or sporting, and yet you will still get people like Gezza calling it a corporate All Black logo.

            • Gezza

               /  June 28, 2018

              It was a crap design for our national flag. Get over it.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 28, 2018

              We weren’t really talking about the design that went to referendum. But thanks for the input Gezza.

            • Gezza

               /  June 28, 2018

              Don’t come the raw kumara with me HFD. You brought the design into it. IIRC the final – was it 5 – choices included four of the same bloody design with only the colours being different. The process was an abomination. And the final selection was a bloody joke. There wasn’t even a bloody flag designer on the damn panel. Who in their right mind would have wanted to buy in to THAT process?

            • High Flying Duck

               /  June 28, 2018

              My comment on the design:

              “When you don’t get buy in to the process from all parties, the whole process suffers – this includes the designs.”

              Does that suggest needing to get over it? Lift your game Gezza your projecting.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  June 28, 2018

        Communism is the mistaken belief in collective wisdom. Democracy is the hope that individual freedom and initiative can be sustained despite collective stupidity.

        • Blazer

           /  June 28, 2018

          give it up Al…you give democracy and Capitalism credit where its not…due.
          As for Communism…you appear to have no understanding of it…at all.

        • Gezza

           /  June 28, 2018

          You may be able to think more rationally if you have breakfast?

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  June 28, 2018

            Your idea of thinking rationally is to have a smoke instead of breakfast. You and B exemplify the basis of collective stupidity as did the flag debate. An individual would have quickly sorted it. The collective squabbles for months and achieves absolutely nothing.

            • Gezza

               /  June 28, 2018

              Drivel.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  June 28, 2018

              QED

            • Gezza

               /  June 28, 2018

              Irrational response. You do more thinking & posting in slogans now than you used to. You should just post to Blazer so you can swap slogans.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  June 28, 2018

              Sidetrack drivel.

  6. PartisanZ

     /  June 28, 2018

    Most pertinent to the discussion above between Gerrit and myself.

    This was written by Marama Broughton during [deleted, use proper names and nor derogatory terms – PG] ‘Constitutional Advisory Panel’ – he loved appointed panels – which managed 100 public meetings around the country and was inundated with “cloned submissions” from the Right Brigade (who then numbered maybe 20 people *sarc*) …

    This is therefore a precursor or parallel to the Matike Mai Aotearoa investigation on Constitutionality, which held 252 hui around Aotearoa to gauge Maori views on the subject –

    http://maorilawreview.co.nz/2013/06/a-constitution-includes-a-hapu-whanau-iwi-and-crown-relationship/

    Gerrit, Marama Broughton looks almost ‘White’ doesn’t she? Why would she say this kinda stuff? *sarc*

    • Griff

       /  June 28, 2018

      Of the approximately 4525 submissions to the constitutional review 2,874 supported one or more of these points
      STATEMENTS OF CONCERN
      1. There should be one law for all.
      2. As one nation we are all equal under the law. There should be no racial preference or
      discrimination.
      3. We do not need a new written constitution. Leave the constitution as it is.
      “If it isn’t broken don’t try to fix it!”
      4. Delete racial preference from legislation and any government policies.
      5. Parliament should remain the supreme law maker.
      6. The Treaty of Waitangi should not be part of our legislation. Any existing Treaty of Waitangi
      references in our legislation should be removed.
      7. Terminate the Treaty of Waitangi. No longer relevant and a focus for dissension.
      8. Abolish the Waitangi Tribunal and terminateTreaty claims.
      9.Abolish the Maori seats.
      10. There should be no designated Maori seats in local government. Treat Maori the same as anyone else.
      11. Any proposed constitutional change should be subject to a binding referendum.
      12.Special treatment for Maoriis institutional racism.
      13. The Treaty of Waitangi and its principles should not be incorporated into the constitution.
      14. All New Zealanders have the same rights and responsibilities.
      15.Oppose laws which establish or promote distinction or division.
      16.No race based legislation.
      17. Our democraticrights should be based on citizenship, not race.
      18. The past and present efforts of Maori grievance groups to obtain and retain political privilege and natural resources are creating anger and resentment among mainstream New Zealanders.
      19. Oppose separatism
      20. We need Direct Democracy to control the politicians.
      21.Most citizens did not know about the CAP meetings. Inadequate publicity. One writer quotes a research finding that only 33% of the voters knew about the Constitutional Review. Other writers say that they found out about it by accident or on Facebook.
      22.The CAP is biased towards Maori radical groups.
      23.The CAP seems to have its own political agenda. Some of the questions asked were loaded.
      24.The agenda of the CAP was structured to favour
      Maori.
      25.The composition of the CAP did not reflect the structure of the New Zealand community.
      26.This whole constitutional process has been poorly managed.

      https://www.nzcpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Analysis_of_Submissions_to_the_Constitutional_Advisory_Panel.pdf

    • Gerrit

       /  June 28, 2018

      Good to see hui’s held to gauge Maori view points. Any held to gauge all other non Maori tangata whenua view points?

      Naval gazing to hold hui’s for 15% of the people and not giving the other 85% a chance to have multiple view point that need to be listened to and taken into consideration.

      Hence why some people don’t give a fig about the treaty and a potential constitution.

      They are not included into any constitution discussion.

      • PartisanZ

         /  June 28, 2018

        Gerrit, The Constitutional Advisory Panel was supposed to gauge the whole community’s viewpoints … Did you participate?

        Like I said Griff, CAP was inundated with “cloned submissions” to the extent they felt it necessary to mention this in their Report …

        Can’t go through each of those points individually, but many of them are pure Pakeha Paranoia …

        For example: Almost all the Legislation we currently have is ‘race-based’ in favour of Pakeha.

        • Gerrit

           /  June 28, 2018

          You will note that the CAP reports states that

          “notes people need more information before considering whether there should be change, in particular information about the various kinds of constitution, written and otherwise, and their respective advantages and disadvantages”

          http://ndhadeliver.natlib.govt.nz/ArcAggregator/arcView/frameView/IE28514444/http://www.ourconstitution.org.nz/

          Yes I did make a submission and am waiting in anticipation to more information and options from the CAP.

          Unless the CAP addresses your so called “Pakeha Paranoia…” it wont get buy in for a constitution from those pesky paranoid pakeha’s. Never mind any Tauiwi.

          Race based legislation that is disfavouring Maori, Chinese, Indian, Pacific Islanders,etc.?

          What legislation would that be? Maori seats in parliament?

        • Griff

           /  June 28, 2018

          Most cloned submissions were a form letter from amnesty intentional.

          I made an individual written submission including.
          One man one vote .
          No race based laws or privilege .
          All New Zealanders have the same rights and responsibilities.

          A law that does not give Maori special privilege is not “race-based’ in favour of Pakeha”.

          I find dividing peploe upon groups based on their race to be racist.
          Hence I am a New Zealander not a pahkeha Maori or whatever other race you want to
          judge us by.

    • Gerrit

       /  June 28, 2018

      Who is Marama Broughton? Is she important? Does she speak for me?

      • PartisanZ

         /  June 28, 2018

        Politics isn’t only about “ME ME ME” Gerrit …. It is intrinsically also about “US” … about everyone.

        • Gerrit

           /  June 28, 2018

          So when will the the 85% of US get a voice at these hui’s?

          Sounds like it is all about Maori “ME ME ME” Not much about the remaining 85% of US.

          .

  7. High Flying Duck

     /  June 28, 2018

    The Irish and French set the standard in Anthems, Brazil has a good one – there are plenty of good rousing anthems out there. Even the Aussie one is pretty good if you ignore the fact it is Australian.
    The best anthems are rousing, positive and outward looking.
    Ours is slow, insular, inward looking, defensive and overly religious.

    • PartisanZ

       /  June 28, 2018

      “Ours is slow, insular, inward looking, defensive and overly religious.”

      Just like us ….. Constitutionally speaking …

      • High Flying Duck

         /  June 28, 2018

        There is some truth in that Parti. I would suggest we are more understated than insular as a people.