Skip to main content

Britain vs. Australia, not Canada

Observers of Olympic coverage today on the BBC and ITV would have noted that one of the main stories - the story in fact - was that Britain is in third place in the medals table (counted in terms of number of golds) - ahead of Australia, in fourth place. Canada, it should be noted, is only in 17th place, at last count. At one point, a news commentator said that "all that mattered" was that Britain be "ahead of Australia".

It is an undeniable truth that the British have several chief rivalries that keep them interested and on their toes: in sport, Australia (not least because of cricket, and rugby), in food and wine, France, and, in soft power, America (both nations vie for cultural-entertainment dominance, in such industries as publishing, film production, music, and the other arts). For Canadians, who are not included in these flattering, amicable and interesting tussles, much is lost.

I have long felt that the lack of a dynamic cultural conversation - let alone a rivalry - between Canada and the UK impoverishes both nations. It is particularly so, because it means that the poets of Canada and the UK are not as well known in each other's lands as might otherwise be the case (of course, our prose writers are much loved here in the UK).

At any rate, for the average British citizen, Australia looms far larger in the imagination, than Canada. Why this should be so is not clear, since it is much farther away - perhaps that is why, and because it is so warm there, and cluttered with curious beasts.

It might come as a surprise to many, in Great Britain, that Canada is, indeed, the far more imposing rival, in reality.

Australia has 20 million citizens; Canada over 33.

Australia's GDP is measured in the billions - but Canada's is over a trillion.

Australia's continental bulk is impressive, but Canada is the 2nd largest nation on the planet.

Australia is mineral rich, but Canada's petroleum reserves are reckoned to be next to Saudi Arabia's.

Australia's life expectancy is 80 - Canada's 81.

At any rate, Australia's prowess at summer sports is impressive (but less so is their skill at winter sports). They make a good Olympic rival for Team GB, if hardly a nemesis.

Canada, though, is also worth keeping in mind. After all, Canada is hot half the year.

Comments

Hannah Mardell said…
Interestingly, I blogged about the rivalry between the British and the Aussies today! Mine was far more biased and gloaty, though. I think the main reason we have this rivalry going with the Australians, having observed it first hand, is that the Australians have a big chip on their shoulder where the Brits are concerned. Something about us sending all our convicts there. Conversely, we couldn't possibly have rivalry of a similar ilk with Canada - mainly because, generally, we like them!!

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".