Red Ted writes about how we remember our history:
Posted by DeLong at August 16, 2004 12:53 PM | TrackBack | | Other weblogs commenting on this postRed Ted Keeps a Diary: Something I forgot to point out last Olympics entry. During the opening ceremonies, one of the most effective moments whas when a runner carrying the Olympic flag circled the track, breaking paper banners along the way. Each banner represented a set of games, and as he burst the tape the announcer told the city and year.
About a quarter of the way, the runner tripped and fell forward, landing prone and looking stunned for a moment. All gasped, including us at home, and then the announcer said "1916, World War One," and we understood what had happened as the runner stood and continued.
After a few more tapes, the runner paused, deliberately knelt on one knee, dipping the flag before him in salute. The announcer said "The Second World War" and there was a pause, and then he continued.
I was struck by the difference in the two representations. The first was a sudden stumble, a shocking collapse from what had been a triumphant progress. The second was an homage to the dead, an act of conscious remembrance. We live in the world that we remember, and I was struck by the very different ways of remembering the first and second acts of the 20th century's three act tragedy.
A very effective moment of remembrance. I saw it on Canadian TV: the commentators were politely silent for that run.
And evidently NBC's commentators blabbed through the whole tribute (I'd made a bet they'd do that before it was shown here in the US [Canadian coverage = live] and sadly won).
Please, someone tell NBC it is impolite and disrespectful to talk through ceremonial tributes /music unless you have a profound contribution to make. "As you know Bob, the UK and Germany fought in WWI..." or whatever inanities they uttered is not profound.
Posted by: kathryn from Sunnyvale on August 16, 2004 11:11 PMDidn't World War I start in 1914?
Remembering history can be tough, I guess....
Posted by: Brian on August 17, 2004 06:14 PMGrumpy,
Traditionally, the Cold War is treated as the 3rd act in the tragedy. The phrase really dates from before 1989, for it implied that a future shooting war between Russia and the United States would finish the play.
Brian,
Olympics are on the 4-year cycle, so the first game after 1912 was 1916. If the Schliefflen plan had worked, the 1916 games would probably have been held as scheduled. But that opens a HUGE discussion of alternate history, and lets not go there in a comments thread.