How do you class Titanic Irish British or American

[Inger Sheil]

I know where you're coming from and quite agree - I find the English stereotypes in the modern film industry irritating at the very least. The anti-English (but not British - the Welsh, Scots and Northern Irish were okay!) sentiment was - IMHO - quite blatant. I feel uncomfortable watching Gallipoli these days because of a scene where the audience is told that, while ANZACS are getting blown apart, the British are sitting on the beach drinking cups of tea. Having since encountered a lot of accounts about how the British landed that day and what they were doing, I feel distinctly uncomfortable with that characterisation.

Did you ever see that great sketch they had on one of the comedy sketch shows? It was on 'British Villains'...an Arnie type action hero is pitted against Jeremy Irons and Alan Rickman, both dripping the elegant, sneering and slightly effeminate malice of the stereotypical English villain, when Brian Blessed comes crashing through a wall to make it a trio.

 

[181218]

Yup. It seems to be fashionable to bash the British and no one else seems to like to bash the British more than ourselves. For example If something goes wrong in an African country, which got independence, they always say it’s our fault !! Every country in Africa seems to has gone to seed one by one and there is war and corruption. Of course they say this is all our fault. I know we robbed them and treated them badly but really they were running around naked killing and eating each other before we even got there. They just reverted back to what they were before we arrived. Only now they have guns to do it with.

I feel a bit sorry for the Germans also as for the past 2/3 years the History Channel have been plugging the awful things the nazi’s did — yet we are meant to be focusing on becoming a more “united Europe” and although we should not forget the atrocities that happened, this continuos going on about something that happened 60 years ago to such a huge extent is hardly going to help. The Germans have pretty much behaved themselves since then and there is a generation now which had nothing to do with this.

My father recons there are a lot of Jewish people in show biz hence why there is so much of these documentaries. The H for History channel should stand for H for Hitler channel more like.
But I think they just need a subject to fill there viewing Schedule and there is a never ending supply of stuff on the Second World War.

,

 

[Wesley Burton]

They were designed and built by the irish. So I would say they were irish.

 

[Inger Sheil]

We call it the 'WWII' channel down here as well as the 'Hitler Channel'. However, I don't buy into the idea of it being any sort of semitic conspiracy - I think it has far more to do with visuals. A lot of History Channel docos play to the lowest common denominator and in order to sell them to the audience you need footage. Visuals - or lack of them - often determines the newsworthiness of an item...you can have 100,000 people killed in an earthquake, but unless you have good footage, it will get scant coverage. On the otherhand, footage of a single man being chased around a tree by a gunman firing at him will get played on almost continuous loop, far out of proportion to its actual importance. The same applies to docos for a mass market. This isn't easy pre-20th Century, as you have to resort to reinactment footage or stills. With WWII, however, you start to get some very powerful footage. (Note - this is not to say that there aren't some amazing docos done with still images - Ken Burn's use of period photos and landscape footage, audio recreations and sound effects, but not a single bit of reinactment footage in his 'Civil War' series is innovative and powerful).

Wesley, the definitions of 'Irish' were a bit more complex in Belfast in the period we're talking about! Many of those who built and designed her were Anglo-Irish, with a sense of being 'British' (not 'English'). There are complex shadings to this question, and not a particularly easy answer unless you apply a narrow set of specific criteria.

 

[monica e. hall]

A patriot rants!

Well, not quite. I've never written 'English' for nationality, always 'British'. But the last decade or so I have been feeling rather unfairly put upon, being English. I just don't know what we've done to deserve all the opprobrium.

Much of it has been fanned by our nationalistic neighbours, the Scots and Welsh, who have successfully got their own Parliament / Assembly respectively by insisting they've been oppressed by the English for centuries (we don't have our own Parliament - serves us right, I suppose they'd think). But that's simply daft.

Barely an English person (whatever that is since we are such a mongrel bunch) has sat on the throne since the Norman conquest. The Tudors were Welsh, the Stuarts Scots, the Hanovarians German (against whom the US fought the War of Independence), plus the odd Dutchman. We had a couple of hundred years of Plantagets, but that ended in 1483, and in any case they were mostly Normans. Since 1900 there have been many non-English Prime Ministers (mostly Scots, but also Welsh and Jewish) and the present Government is simply stuffed with Scots.

Moreover much of the British Empire built by Scots, being rather talented explorers and engineers. Scotland has also managed to get itself far more MPs than its population would suggest it should have. The Welsh are always carrying on about being oppressed Celts, but they are short and dark, and believed to be immigrants from the Portuguese region, and were pushed into Wales by other Mediterranean invaders (the Romans).

As for Northern Ireland, well, the Protestant population mostly has Scottish roots. As an 'English' person who can actually trace her roots back to at least four different nationalities, I think this nationalism business is a load of junk, but I do object to others blaming me for attitudes or actions they are more 'guilty' of than I am (if one can possibly be guilty of anything your forebears did).

As for the British Empire, well, someone always has to have one it seems, and I don't think ours was so very bad. We got a lot out of it of course, but we put a lot into it in terms of infrastructure and administration. That seems a fairer deal than having just an economic empire, built on giant corporations, media domination, gene-patenting etc., where you get the loot but you don't have to run the joint. By the way, Miles, I don't think the Africans are actually eating each other, are they? And I don't think many of them ever did, though I admit they have always gone in for some very strange and exotic rulers.

As for the Titanic - she was simply British, with her builders and crew coming from all over the UK, and some from Eire. American money had no input to any of that.

 

[181218]

Titanic were def. British ship more than anything. If this was not so then why call her Mail Royal Mail Steamship, She left from British ports, had Liverpool written on the stern, had to comply with British law ( board of trade ), most of the crew were british, in times of war the british government would be able to call up "there" ships and both Olympic and Britannic were called up, along with other British ships like Aquitania. I understand that with Cunard this was where they got the money to build her. Did the British government not give to Cunard on the condition that in times of war they would be able to call her up for use. Anyway Britannic was called up and became HMS and Olympic was a troop ship. I would agree with Inger about the Anglo Irish side also. Even now Northern Ireland ( not the whole of Ireland )is dare I say it part of england, and I imagine in those days people were more proud about certain things like this. Very much so as Britain was still a big empire.

I could go on and say the owner was British etc, but I won't.

Its sounds like I am very pataiotic about England but really I am not. But I do like a few things about the UK 1) So many of the great Liners like Titanic, Aquitania, Mauretania, Queen Mary were british and 2) The Beatles and the fact that so much great pop has been produced by british bands since the 60's. Maybe the only reason why the UK along with the U.S has been so successful in this way is because 'english' is the most common language throughout the world ( the french will get there nickers in a twist about that) therefore has been able to reach a lot more people - or maybe it's just good music ! But I am sure there is just as much talent in other countries but maybe they have not had as much success because there language does not reach as many people.

And I agree with the amount of World War 2 doumentarys not being any sort of semitic conspiracy because of the large amount of jewish people in showbiz. That was a silly remark by my dad which I am sure he did not mean. If this were the case why don't we get the same about of films/documentaries about gay people on T.V as there are probably more gay people in show biz than Jewish.

 

[181218]

Hello Monica,

I agree with what you said. Yes I know they were not exactly eating each other etc. It was naughty of me to put that in to my post. However there was a lot of tribal war fair going on before the British arrived. As soon as we left this is what they went back to - killing each other only they now have guns. They often blame the british and this is all to easy and I think un-fair. Every country in Africa ( almost ) has gone into decline since the British, French or whoever has left. The corruption and war they blame us for. But they were killing each other before we were there and when we left they went back to it, only this time round they had guns - I would not like to go to a lot of countries in West Africa for a holiday

But you are right to say they were eating each other was a bit over the top, however Monkey or bush meat as they call it is a great delicacy all over West Africa.

.

 

[monica e. hall]

"If this were the case why don't we get the same about of films/documentaries about gay people on T.V as there are probably more gay people in show biz than Jewish."
LOL Miles! I think this might be a bit of a limited topic. For 95% of the time, gays are doing exactly the same as the rest of us. What would one show, I wonder? Gays shopping, gays arguing about whose turn it is to clean the bathroom? Not quite the same as making progs about the whole world fighting. Though I must say, I surely must have seen them all by now - please? Mind you, the recently released colour footage raised the interest levels up again, as it made it seem less long ago. And Hitler was revealed to have terrible taste in jackets.

 

[181218]

Hello Monica,

I find all the films about the 2nd World War interesting and also found the colour footage of World War 2 very interesting.

I did not understand what you meant with:

*by what would one show, I wonder*

Are you wondering what these programmes would be about and making a joke by implying stuff about them being about shopping or arguing & who's turn it is to clean the bath room ? No it would not be about that.

*LOL* *I think it might be a limited topic*

No it is not a limited topic. This is something I know a lot about. Gay people have been discriminated against since the year dot. There would be plenty of subject matter for them to make documentaries about. The subjects are vast for interesting topic’s and it is by no means limited, whether you are talking about, gay marriage rights, abuse, the fact it was illegal in Russia to be gay just over a decade ago or well known figures like Oscar Wild. It is a bit above whose turn it is to clean the bathroom, although I agree most of us do the same sort of things as heterosexual people. If you want to talk about gays doing things like ordinary people and wonder what the subject be about — well how about a Gay Blind Date? So yup they could also put ordinary things on T.V and dating is one.. But I doubt a Gay Blind Date will happen in the near future.

Anyway I don’t think there is any conspiracy I was saying if there were then why don’t the large amount of gay people in show business world
do the same.

Talking about nazi programmes on t.v and referring back to you saying/implying you thought gay topics might be a limited subject - there could be a whole documentary about how they discriminated and experimented on gays during the Second World War along with Jewish people and the mentally handicapped.


.

 

[181218]

*For 95% of the time, gays are doing exactly the same as the rest of us.*

And 95% of the time Jewish people are doing same things as the rest of us. But both gays and Jews have been discriminated against, and both could use the media to thier advantage. But as I said before I don't think this is the case.
.

 

[monica e. hall]

Hello Miles,
I wasn't trying to diminish you or anyone else, quite the reverse really. I only meant I don't see any real difference between you and the rest of us. I'm sorry if I put it clumsily, it's just that your sentence conjured up an irresistible idea (along the idea of Jews making WW2 films) of gays in showbiz making progs about themselves, and I did wonder if the subject wouldn't run out fairly rapidly. I know they've been discriminated against, and still are in parts of the world, but I don't think it'd fill a whole channel. I don't think WW2 should either, come to that, not if it's called the History Channel. Mind you, having said that, now I come to think about it I see no reason why there shouldn't be a Gay Channel, if there were a demand for it, but that'd be a bit different. It'd be topics of especial interest to gays, rather than programs about them. But are your general interests really very different from other people's? I'd be surprised if they were. Anyway, sorry if I sounded frivolous or dismissive, I didn't mean to.
Monica

 

[Alicia Coors]

"And Hitler was revealed to have terrible taste in jackets."

LOL! I can see it now: Queer Eye for the Fuehrer Guy.

 

[Jan C. Nielsen]

Maybe this will muddy the water a little more . . . In the U.S. Supreme Court's so-called "Titanic" opinion, as I recall, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes decreed that American law applied to the circumstances of the Titanic disaster --- so that Oceanic Steamship Navigation Company had a sort of a limitation on liability, i.e., liability was limited to the value of the ship's assets, like lifeboats and such, unless there were proof that OSNC was directly involved in causing the disaster --- something like that. I haven't read the opinion in a long time. Anyway, as a result, OSNC was able to settle its American lawsuits for a pittance --- as opposed to Great Britian, where negligence was found, and there were some substantial payouts. So, I think the ship was American, or British, depending on where you are with your lawsuit. Speaking of "Hilter's taste," is Tony Blair going to resign, or what? Just curious . . .

 

[Jesse D O'Neill]

I consider the Titanic to be a British Ship, Irish Built, Financed by Americans. As for British Oppression of Irish, Well thats still going on.

 

[181218]

That’s ok Monica. I find it hard to take offence about things. I do agree that the idea that we get so many films about WW2 being because there are large numbers of Jewish people in show business is absolutely ridiculous. It was a remark made by my dad after a glass or 2 of wine and I don’t for one second think he meant or believed it. I never said gay issues would fill a whole channel though. In-fact most of the stuff on WW2 are repeats or dishing up the same stuff so in truth that subject does not fill a whole channel ether. I have mixed thoughts on the idea of a “gay channel” although I understand why some people might think this is a good thing. But in reality it would be separating gay people - when you said we are like everyone else. I’d rather see gay people integrated more into all forms of everyday t.v and then people will be more excepting of them. Having said that this is slowly happening. But like I said it will be some years before we get a Gay Blind Date.

I have heard of Queer Eye for Straight Guy. Only because Kylie Minogue was on it. It’s an American show isn’t it ? She’s having success there at last and it’s about time. Here in the UK and the rest of the world - to say you don’t know who Kylie is like saying you have never heard of Madonna. She looked good in Queer Eye I thought, but her neck is going a bit turkey at just 35 - Such a shame. I really don't know what a plastic surgeon can do about that. it's not the flabby skin that you get but rather neck roots - so the more you stretch the skin the more the roots will show.

How well known is Kylie now in America ? 'Fever' went to No. 3 on billboard main chart. Her bottom is considered a national treasure in the UK
.