 sj |
||
|
||
Queen Mum's Funeral
|
|
|
Subject: Queen Mum's Funeral From: greg stephens Date: 09 Apr 02 - 07:21 AM This is more like it. King James' Bible, "Immortal Invisible" and "Guide me O thou Great Redeemer" And not an Elton John in sight. Well done the organisers. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 09:42 AM refresh |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: BanjoRay Date: 09 Apr 02 - 10:04 AM The pipes and drums were magnificent - my neck hair stood to respectful attention. Cheers |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: fat B****rd Date: 09 Apr 02 - 10:48 AM Oh, What the hell, I love a parade and we British do 'em better than anywhere else in the world (I know, I know, I haven't seen them everywhere else in the world !!)And I like the way the onlookers give the cortege a round of applause. This was just as moving when Stanley Matthews did his last lap of Stoke city's ground. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 11:04 AM What I have noticed you British do better than anyone else in the world is drag the dead bodies of your rulers through the streets for weeks, here and then there, and then there, and on and on. It is disgusting, really. Why in god's name does it take a nation 10 days (not to mention all that money from the Treasury to pay for it) to bury a dead person, no matter how royal they are? That is WAAAAAAY too long to be civilized, IMO. Remember, there are plenty of people in the world who consider it an abomination not to get the body in the ground within 24 hours. I tend to agree. Speedy burial is to our advantage--it gives the morticians that much less time to charge you obscene fees to do what is going to get done no matter how little or how much is paid to do it: dispose of the body. My dad, after going through the horrors of a Catholic burial with wake at the funeral home for my grandmother, gave us the following instructions: Bury me unembalmed in a garbage bag as quickly as possible. Let those who wish to gather to grieve or celebrate do it wherever they want, at their leisure. Or not. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Gervase Date: 09 Apr 02 - 12:00 PM Embalming doesn't necessarily have to be expensive! Anyway, it's traditional that VIPs are buried in sealed, lead-lined coffins (hence the need for eight squaddies to heft the box), so the old dear wouldn't have become too noisome over 10 chilly days in an English early spring. It seems we've come some way since William the Conquerer, who decomposed so violently that his casket burst open in Caen cathedral, rendering the congregation prostrate with the stench. Apropos the funeral, though, I thought it was nicely done. As a rabid republican, I've little time for the monarchy, but they put on a good show today and, as Greg said, it was good to see the King James version and the BCP in use - I'm also an atheist, but those words are part of the fabric of my culture and I'd hate to lose them. Musically it hit the right notes too - two of my favourite hymns and the wonderful sound of the pipes. Stirring stuff! Not a patch on Churchill's funeral, though - which I just about remember. Still, Churchill did a bloody sight more for this country in the war years than the Queen Mum (despite the drivel the press has been pouring out over the past 10 days) so he deserved a better send-off. Whatever - it was a good show and gave plenty for plenty to gawp at. Now it's back to normal - though it would be nice if the Army's legendary precision could be applied to the London Underground system. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Dave Bryant Date: 09 Apr 02 - 12:16 PM Have you ever tried to oraganise a funeral ? The family inertia is tremendous. You've often got people coming from the other end of the country (if not the world). If you just informed everyone that the dispatching was the day after tomorrow, you'd be on the family shit-list - mind you that could have it's advantages..., but don't try it if there's the possibility of a big legacy from Great-Aunt Flo. Mind you, I quite enjoy funerals, they're usually more fun than weddings and christenings etc. After all there is a tradition that you must cheer up and be merry afterwards so that life can go on, and the soul of the deceased can move on and not be "earthbound". I might be a sceptical about the latter - but I'll always be willing to down a few glasses - just to make sure ! One of my favourite pictures of the Queen Mum was one of her pulling a pint of Young's beer. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 12:25 PM Takes time to bury a Queen.. Security in this day and age has to be tight. God Bless The Queen (the old one and the new) |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 12:31 PM No, it isn't that difficult to dispose of a corpse in 24 hours--it is simply your cultural preference to take longer than that to do it. As I said, there are many places in the world where disposing of the corpse in short order is the norm, and the grieving/partying done after the fact, without the body. Much more civilized, IMO. As would be expected, mileage of many Brits may vary. North Americans too, for that matter, as the acorn never falls far from the tree. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Mrs.Duck Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:11 PM As yet I haven't seen any of the funeral. We do not have telexision at school and the online transmissions were not in the right format for our computers. I think its a poor show that in a country which claims to have a state monarchy we couldn't have managed a national day of mourning so that everyone was involved. She had afterall at one time been the Queen. As for the time taken to organise the event I can only say I'm surprised it was managed in such a short space of time. Cultural variations are more to do with climate differences - the hotter the country the faster the bodies get laid to rest!! |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:15 PM I think some of you are kidding yourself as to this planning thing. Her mumminess was over one hundred years old. I'm guessing the state and the royal family had probably begun to make a few plans before she expired. And let us not forget, most state funerals are done by painting in the numbers. There is protocol which determines where the body lies in state, which church is going to be used for the burial service, who will be allowed to take part in processions, in which order, etc. The royals do this for a living, after all. The suggestion that it would take this long because there were so many details to iron out is ludicrous. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:18 PM And I should say, I'm not trying to be argumentative or disrespectful. I am just honestly stating what I think about it all. So please understand there is no offense intended to the good folk of Britain. But as a norte americano, I really don't get the royal thing. I mean, I REALLY just don't get the loyalty/affection for monarchy AT ALL. I really do equate monarchy with tyranny, even after the monarchy has been declawed, as is the case nowadays in Europe. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:21 PM Dear Guest As A North American I live in country that is a constitutional Monarch...it is called Canada, the queen is on the money...she is head of state...in a ceremonial way. I get it.It has done us no harm and we are still a free and democratic country...and IN North America, thanks very much. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:27 PM Sorry to have offended all of Canada with my tongue in cheek use of the term "norte americano". It just so happens Guest 1:21, that I have legal family residences in both the US and Mexico, so the term is perfectly appropriate in my case. You might have heard neither of our countries have constitutional monarchies. We overthrew our colonial monarchs, choosing to go with a republican democracy instead. Nice try, though. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: gnu Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:27 PM Woulda been a tad difficult to file over a hundred thousand people past her casket in less than a day. Perhaps a quick (?) refresh of your arithmetic skills might be in order. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: MMario Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:33 PM The delay also allows for politicos of OTHER countries to gracefully arrange travel schedules etc. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:33 PM Yes, Guest I do realize that both countries are Republics, however you are not the only countries in North America. And Canada, although it is a Constitutional monarch is also a Parliamentary democracy. A country does not have to be a republic, as I am sure you are aware, in order to be democratic. I think there is a tendancy to equate republics with democracy, this is not always the case. A country can be a monarch and a democracy. Monarchy suits some nations as do Parliamentary systems. I am not suggesting one is better just that either can be a democracy. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:34 PM Three days is normal in Ireland - it's amazing how many people from all over can pull out all the stops and make it there in the time.
But I can't see where anyone anywhere has the right to try to tell a family to get a move on and bury their dead quicker than they feel like doing.
Is the GUEST at 09-Apr-02 - 11:04 AM who wrote "What I have noticed you British do better than anyone else in the world is drag the dead bodies of your rulers through the streets for weeks, here and then there, and then there, and on and on. It is disgusting, really" the same one as GUEST at 09-Apr-02 - 01:18 PM who says "I'm not trying to be argumentative or disrespectful...So please understand there is no offense..." If not, wouldn't it be better to use a pseudonym to avoid being taken for a hypocrite?
|
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:42 PM It seemed to me that you were (a tad self-righteously)taking offense over a US citizen referring to themselves as North Americans. Considering that, in this particular instance, with 2 out of 3 of the North American nations being republican democracies, it isn't really that out of line for a US citizen to refer to themselves as North American, now is it? I am, after all, a North American AND a US citizen, just as you are a North American AND a Canadian citizen. Seemed to me you were getting a tad touchy over something that was bit of a non-starter. McGrath--I did realize what I said would be construed as offensive to those people who feel this sort of funerary customs/arrangements, is A Good Thing For Britain, hence my qualification of my remarks. I hope that will suffice, and I'm sure for those for whom it won't, that they will let me know in due time. This is the internet, after all. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: John Gray Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:43 PM Never realised she was so popular. I hope they managed to set aside a bit of live tissue to send down to the good Italian doctor. Let's give the masses another Queen Mother I say. JG/FME. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 01:53 PM You appeared to speaking for North Americans . If I miscontrued your intent, I apologize. Monarchies are not always composed of tyrants, republics are not always paragons of democracy. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 02:09 PM Right you are guest. And all US citizens aren't presumptious and arrogant assholes vis a vis their position within the North American continent either. BTW, I have a number of Canadian acquaintances and friends who aren't terribly crazy about the monarchy thing. And more than a few Canadian Indians who aren't too crazy about the monarchy or the parliamentary so-called democracy either. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Greycap Date: 09 Apr 02 - 02:11 PM Is it over yet? Can I come out of hiding? |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 02:29 PM I agree that all Canadians are not fans of monarchies..however, many are. As for the Native Canadians and your odd remarks, I cannot presume to speak for them. All I can say is that Canada is a democracy, not perfect I agree but better than most. I think your remarks are ..well..baffling. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 02:37 PM My advice as to your finding my remarks baffling Guest, maybe you should lighten up a bit. I only ever intended my remarks be read as one person's opinion about the events surrounding the death of a British head of state, done with a bit of panache for entertainment sake. Maybe you are taking this all a bit too seriously? Or maybe I'm just posting to the wrong thread, and should be over in the English republican thread? I didn't realize this was a royalty worshippers thread. My bad. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST,Geordie Date: 09 Apr 02 - 02:56 PM There was no panache and precious little entertainment. I don't know why you feel that insulting other people or the nations in which they live is entertaining. There is no royalty worshipping here, just a clarifaction of one nations type of democracy.You are just sawing sawdust. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Herga Kitty Date: 09 Apr 02 - 03:06 PM Well of course it's logistics. State funerals at Westminster Abbey can't be arranged overnight. We had traffic chaos in Westminster for a week, with road closures and traffic diversions, while the traffic island in Victoria Street, and all the parking place markings outside Westminster Abbey and School,were removed so they wouldn't get in the way of the cortege or look unsightly on TV. Great fun for pedestrians though. Plus various eminences from the Commonwealth and Laura Bush had to rearrange their schedules. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 03:06 PM Yawn. Bye bye. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 03:11 PM There are six north american nations. The funeral was a dignified event. A woman who has lived so long and seen so much..she will be missed I am sure. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Apr 02 - 03:25 PM GUEST hates GUEST. GUEST apologises (sort of) for something, but doesn't explain which posts they are in a position to apologise for. And it's quite probably just the same bloke writing posts to himself anyway... |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 03:50 PM Herga Kitty says: "Plus various eminences from the Commonwealth and Laura Bush had to rearrange their schedules." Well, we all know how long it takes Bush administration officials to rearrange their schedules. Look how long it is taking Secretary Powell to get to Jerusalem! For the life of me, I don't know how the rest of us manage to fly home, bury the deceased, and get back to work within 24 hours time (common paid funeral leave in the US workforce--for those who have the luxury of such a benefit, that is) for non-related deaths, and 72 hours for family deaths. Going just by the last US state funeral I can recall, which would be the JFK funeral (because he died while in office), I seem to recall it was back to Washington the night he died, the autopsy, etc was done quickly enough for the body to be lying in state in around 24 hours, 3 days lying in state, and the funeral on the 4th day. Even if you give or take a day here and there, that is still under a week. Counting the day her mummsiness died, today is the 11th day. See what I'm getting at here? How long was the Diana funeral thing? |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Gareth Date: 09 Apr 02 - 04:12 PM I suspect conyingency planning for this funeral had gone on for years. It don't take a genius to read an actuaries table of mortality. That being said, and living well away from the tourist hotspots, anything which encourages tourists, and their money can't be a bad thing. Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 04:49 PM Try shutting down New York for two hours and see how much planning it takes |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 04:50 PM Well, you've got me on the tourist thing there Gareth. I'd forgotten how much money the royal worshippers will spend on commemorative/funeral trinkets. How much food they'll eat while standing in line waiting to see the ole gal, how brisk business will be for the pubs in the locality, that sort of thing. You are likely right--the reason for the long time laying in state, and moving the body around from here to there is to spread the wealth around. I've taken a tourist bus tour of the sites around there in summer, but hadn't remembered just how mobbed it was with tourists. Tourism must be it, then! So, is it any less resented with the mum than it was with Diana? No one seemed to have a mild opinion over her death and funeral, did they? |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Gareth Date: 09 Apr 02 - 06:34 PM As I said - I live a long way from the tourist hotspots - Thank the Lord ! Mark you, when I lived in the Holy City (Canterbury) on summer week ends you would see the signs go up "ENGLISH SPOKEN HERE". Gareth
Drinking Rum and Coca Cola, |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Apr 02 - 07:55 PM What's the hurry anyway? I mean I can understand people griping about it being a waste of time or money or whatever or getting too much attention - but fussing about them taking a few days getting the funeral set-up, what's that got to do with anything? Or indeed what's it got to do with anyone?
A lot of Gormenghast touches about it all though, weren't there - functionaries with ornate titles suddenly emerging to do something traditional that nobody had ever heard of and so forth. Gormenghast crossed with Iolanthe. Very entertaining.
And the Poet Laureate even came up with what seems quite a decent poem:
Think of the failing body now
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST Date: 09 Apr 02 - 07:58 PM Right, I'm off to the English republicans thread. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Hawker Date: 09 Apr 02 - 08:15 PM Greg, I agree with you, what a send off! I love a bit of pomp and ceremony every now and then! The pipers were magnificent! and 'I Know that my Redeemer liveth' as she was carried in was spine tingling. Royalist or not, the service was lovely. Cheers, Lucy |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Tattie Bogle Date: 09 Apr 02 - 08:22 PM Well I took the radio into work so we could hear the 2 minute silence ( "Shall I turn the volume up?") but then the commentator talked all over it. There we were all ready and waiting to be silent for 2 minutes: it was only in retrospect that we realised it must have been somewhere between the two "Dongs" of Big Ben. I can only think the commentator thought he had to keep talking in case people thought their radios were on the blink! At which point I shall be silent! Tattie B |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST,Just Amy Date: 09 Apr 02 - 08:28 PM I promise NEVER to sign on as Guest without some name thing. These guest versus guest threads are seriously the funniest bit of nonsense that I have ever seen. Kind of like the "Jane, you ignorant slut." things on Saturday Night Live. Can't take either of you seriously. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: GUEST,guest Date: 10 Apr 02 - 12:00 AM I have to agree - it was a great royal funeral. I'd like to see this repeated on a monthly basis till we've buried the lot. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Gervase Date: 10 Apr 02 - 05:30 AM Tattie, there used to be a failsafe system built into the BBC's transmission system which meant that any silence of more than 30 seconds would trip a back-upmusic tape so listeners wouldn't get zilch over the airwaves. It does make it difficult for cermonial events, though - which is why on Armistice day all those coughs and splutters in the crowd used to sound so loud - the mikes were aimed directly at them to give some background noise. And, of course, the BBC doesn't like silence anyway; it's the antithesis of breathless, up-to-the-minute radio news. I remember when Stephen Sackur was BBC TV's Jerusalem corr covering Rabin's funeral; the poor sod had to do a live link during the two minute silence at the interment. Red with embarrassment, he was hunched down in his seat, hands clasped around the mike, trying to explain in a hoarse whsiper to the Radio5 Live studio in London why he wasn't supposed to be talking, while various big knobs and VIPs glared furiously at him. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Skipper Jack Date: 10 Apr 02 - 07:05 AM Surely the Queen Mum's funeral was organised quite a time ago. They must have a procedure which they rehearse many times over for situations such as this? Where else in the world can you see such pageantry? I was lucky enough to witness Queen Elizabeth the Second's Coronation in London. What a magnificent spectacle that was! I was among the crowds in The Mall and the parade took 45 minutes to pass me!
|
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Apr 02 - 07:28 AM Haven't they made a CD of collected three minutes silences from Armistice Days over the years? (Not quite as daft as it sounds, since the silence normally gets broken by something, and that could be a random record of changing times.) |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Ringer Date: 10 Apr 02 - 07:42 AM Hope you all noticed the half-muffled bells. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: JennieG Date: 11 Apr 02 - 02:29 AM Of course the whole thing is rehearsed, and so are the "tributes" that appear on TV so quickly. Many moons ago I used to work for the ABC (the Oz one) and they used to have the occasional rehearsal even then for when Queen Mumsie shuffled off this mortal coil - and for other similar occurrences too. They have to keep their biographical details very up-to-the-minute. After all when it finally happens they don't want to be caught napping. Having said that, it was a good show! Cheers JennieG |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Linda Kelly Date: 11 Apr 02 - 03:27 AM It has now become evident why there was a delay in burying the Queen Mother - it was to allow The Queen Mother - a Musical Tribute CD to hit the shops the day of the funeral. |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: allie kiwi Date: 11 Apr 02 - 07:07 AM Uh, I guess I was about the only one irrationally peeved and anal about the fact the 4 candles placed around the coffin were not symetrically spaced on the black and white tiled floor? I thought it was a lovely service, and it was nice to see one of the female members walking behind the coffin. Allie |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: cyder_drinker Date: 11 Apr 02 - 12:41 PM Just a point that should be noted. The tolling bell was NOT Big Ben, it was the Tenor bell of Westminster Abbey. The half-muffled peal of 5,101 Stedman Caters afterwards was also executed with great precision, it sounded superb. Well, the parts I heard did, anyway! |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Tattie Bogle Date: 12 Apr 02 - 06:46 PM Cyder Drinker, I stand corrected: someone else also told me it was the Tenor Bell of WMA. (Cyder drinkers unite, by the way!) Mcgrath, are you not getting mixed up with John Cage's 4/33 (4 minutes 33 secs) which is silent throughout? Tattie B |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:27 PM No. I know I read about it somewhere. Of course it could have been a joke. (That goes for John Cage's as well.) |
|
Subject: RE: Queen Mum's Funeral From: Blackcatter Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:41 PM The UK isn't the only place with lengthy times between deaths and burials. Remember the death of Emperor Hirohito a decade or so ago? I'm not sure how many days past but it was probably a week and then the Shinto funeral lasted (I think) over 6 hours for the family and close friends. Dignitaries got off with just around 3 hours. U.S. Federaly elected officials who die in office usually lay in state for a week or so in the Capitol Rotunda before they are sent for burial. pax yall |
| Share Thread: |