I am writing this before I have read or listened to any accounts of the opening of the Commonwealth Games (which I dutifully sat through).Bearing in mind that it clashed with Spicks and Specks and Little Britain...the only "must see" television of the week...the question might be whether it was worth watching the ceremony instead of the programs of choice.
My answer is no! Apart from the inevitable boredom of watching hundreds of athletes doing nothing in particular other than walking, which was at least done at a mercifully hectic pace, there was so much of a clash of images and ideas as to designate a ramble rather than an "artistic masterpiece".
Some of my reservations are:
- Did I hear them say it cost $56 million to stage that particular event? Not the whole games, but just the opening ceremony. It seems an obscene amount when we are in the midst of a state election when we are talking about 3 million here for hospitals, 2 million there for teachers, a few million for roads and so on.
- I am sure in the mind of the powers who "are" there is some sense of showing off Melbourne to the world...but one can't imagine how dark pictures punctured with fireworks is an investment drawcard.
- Indeed, unlike the Sydney Olympics, the camera process often seemed poor and unhelpful in determining just what went on. (see for example the picture above).
- By contrast everything about Torino seemed perfectly framed.
- Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl.....but couldn't she smile or look vaguely interested. Do you think she wants us to become a republic and will be glad to get rid of us. She looked rather like an aged relative who has tired of her colonial relatives and just wishes she go back to Blackpool for a week's holiday.
- It was faintly bemusing to watch Dame Kiri sing "Happy Birthday" and then make the Queen have to stand up because she melded it into "Send her victorious" ...and the Queer old Dean...(well those of you who know Mr Spooner will understand)...looked faintly embarassed .
- I thought the Duck idea was brilliant...but frittered away. For a moment it seemed that Melbourne poeople may have understood that Michael Leunig's critique of Australian Society was the most distinctive and attractive thing about Melbourne...but alas no!!
8 comments:
Anonymous substantially concurs with SC's rhetoric on obscenities. But a still small voice continues to whisper sadly "Couldn't PP give a pittance more of his poorly paid hours to pasteurising disappointed prishners?
Who has an alliteration addiction? Who is PP?
louise
I (stephen)imagine that I am PP (the Parish Priest). "Anonymous" could be anyone not brave enough to use their own name...or anyone who thinks their alliteration is clever...but it's usually just boring (as in this case) and my advice is ignore it.
Since I have avowed to not remove commentary unless it is offensive, we unfortunately have to put up with drivel!!
What did you think of the opening Louise?
Stephen, I thought the opening resembled "anonymous" - confusing and rather boring. The fireworks were good. Maybe it was one of those times that "you just had to be there"?
Very apposite comments Louise, and good leading questions. And good reponses to Louise's questions Stephen. I recommend Louise that you pay assiduous attention to Stephen's dissertations, as I religiously try to do; albeit I occasionally wonder if he invariably does himself. Deus vobiscum!
YT,
Illit. Allit. Anon.
And so say all of us.
Ah, Anon. Obscurum per obscurius. Spero melior! Ad interim, Dominus vobiscum.
You are truly inspirational, Louise. Step aside Stephen. You have been unequivocally upstaged. As soon as I can figure out how to do it, I will forward my very true Tribute to You - Louise.
YT,
Illit. Allit. Anon.
Post a Comment