I finally get to comment on something political since it concerns a song - namely our national anthem.
Should
in all thy sons command be changed to satisfy the politically correct.
You betcha.
Prime Minister Harper tossed out the idea in the recent throne speech and then quickly backtracked, first stating that his government didn’t necessarily support the move, it was just seeking opinion; and then outright withdrawing it after he was apparently overwhelmed with negative responses.
I betcha most of those negative responses came from folks who are not excluded by the sentence.
Fact is, we live in a world that is evolving and language should evolve right along with it.
One hundred years ago women couldn’t even vote in a federal or a provincial election.
Now they stand on guard – and, sadly, die - for Canada in places like Afghanistan.
In Canada we pride ourselves on equality for women, notwithstanding that the practice hasn't quite caught up to the principle.
In places like Afghanistan, however, girls have been attacked by misogynist extremists for having the audacity to leave their home to attend elementary school. That’s just not right.
Equality is a ‘core’ Canadian value, be it women’s or minority rights.
And it should be reflected right in our anthem.
Put yourself in the shoes of, say, a 12-year-old girl, setting foot in Canada for the first time with her family, hoping to start a new life here, and being exposed to the national anthem for the first time. What is she supposed to make of the line, “in all thy sons command?”
There are other compelling reasons.
One is that language evolves. Think of all the words that had to be added in the last century, alone, such as IPod, ITunes, website, internet, MP3 - even automobile and airplane.
And many words have gone out of use, including some particularly onerous ones referring to disadvantaged and abused minorities who have gained full status in our society, although, again, as with women’s rights, the principle is still ahead of the practice.
And some words have changed.
Alderman is now councillor.
Fireman is now firefighter.
Policeman is now police officer.
Fisherman is now ... er, angler?
Anyway, it wasn’t without kicking and screaming. But we made it out the other side, and we all survived.
Two, it’s not like the words of O Canada are sacrosanct in the first place. In fact apparently the very line in question had already been previously altered from ...
Thou dost in us command.
So apparently we could go back to that non-sexist line and not even, technically, have changed the wording. But that line is far too archaic for me, and the best suggestion I’ve seen, so far, is
in all of us command.Three, some of the right wing media types have had a field day with the issue being raised during the biggest recession since the Great Depression, likening it to the proverbial Nero fiddling while Rome burns.
That’s not just a red herring. It’s a red whale.
We’re not talking about the Manhattan Project, the Moon in 10 Years, or a Great Mobilization, here. We’re talking about changing one word (‘sons’ to ‘us’) of our national anthem to reflect our country’s daughters serving - and dying - alongside our country’s sons.
I’m sure we can all pull ourselves away from our ubiquitous blackberries, computer monitors or television screens long enough to meditate a minute or two on the issue - without putting our economic recovery in peril.