Over the past week or so a storm has raged over FIFA's decree that England players should not be allowed to wear embroidered poppies on their shirts during tonight’s friendly against Spain. Football’s governing body has stood firm despite criticism from leading politicians (including our Prime Minister) and a wave of outrage from many aggrieved members of the British public. FIFA have declared that having poppies on shirts breaks its rule that state national football shirts "should not carry political, religious or commercial messages". Many fans see the action as yet another example of Sep Blatter and his FIFA cronies indulging in their favourite pastime of England-bashing.
Whatever FIFA’s motive behind the decision, the furore raises a few interesting points about the poppy and what it represents. It’s now commonplace to see football shirts embroidered with poppies being worn by footballers in the top flight in the period around Remembrance Day, presumably on the say-so of the Premier League (I doubt that each player decides spontaneously to break out the needle and thread themselves). While the poppy has been a symbol of remembrance since 1920, the trend of its placement on Premier League football shirts is only a few seasons old. This strikes me as strange as it coincides with a period in English football where we have unprecedented numbers of foreign players plying their trade in the Premier League, many of whom come from countries that have no connection to "our" wars or those being remembered at all. This begs the questions; what is the point of these players wearing the poppy, and – assuming the players had the decision to wear the poppies made for them - has the notion of the poppy as an individual expression, made out of choice, been replaced by the idea of it representing something more homogenous and compulsory?
Similarly, if you watch television around Remembrance Day almost every presenter you see on any given show is wearing a poppy, which almost certainly suggests they are at the very least "asked" to wear one. Again this appears to be something quite new in relation to how long the poppy has been used as a symbol. Jon Snow sparked debate over the poppy last year when he was criticised for not wearing one whilst presenting Channel 4 News. In response he coined the phrase "poppy fascism" to describe the social pressure to wear the symbol if you’re in the public eye. The fact that Snow was criticised in the first place suggests that the poppy has shifted from a simple symbol of remembrance into an indicator of whether or not an individual is part of “something”, with an underlying "if you're not for us you're against us" attitude from a small but vocal number. The FIFA ban has given the exponents of this attitude fresh vigour and produced a new indicator in terms of who is part of this “something” and who isn’t: Anger. When it comes to this particular issue to be angry is to belong.
I don’t recall these kind of debates surrounding poppies in the past, which suggests that something significant has changed fairly recently. In fact the act of Remembrance itself appears to be going through some kind of metamorphosis in terms of what it represents culturally. The outrage over the FIFA decision to "ban the poppy" and indeed the FA's decision to put it on the shirt in the first place, combined with the prevalence of the poppy on television and other media suggest that feeling surrounding Remembrance Sunday is especially strong at this particular moment in time. Anyone who saw this evening’s game at Wembley could not have escaped the visual bombardment of images of the poppy, particularly from the electronic advertising boards around the pitch (companies eager to associate their brand with the image to let the English public know that it “belongs”?). There was even a poppy etched into the grass in England’s technical area! So why has Remembrance Day and the poppy suddenly become more "in your face"?
I believe there could be a couple of reasons. Firstly, we are still fighting an unpopular war in Afghanistan. What I think has been realised by those in power is that while many of the electorate question the cause, there is widespread support for the troops fighting, and dying for it. I am one of these people – while I oppose the war I support the soldiers who are doing their job for a criminally low wage considering they are constantly putting their lives on the line.
The conflicts with which Remembrance Day has become synonymous due to the sheer numbers of those lost - the Great War and World War 2 - are wars which received almost unanimous support from the people of our country. There are very few people who would’ve objected to a very real threat of invasion from an aggressive enemy such as the Nazis. Because the dead of Afghanistan are (quite rightly) “included” on Remembrance Day there is an opportunity, for those that want to (i.e. The Government), to make all “our” wars – popular and unpopular – appear ideologically amorphous, thus raising support for unpopular conflicts like Afghanistan by association. I believe that the way that more “overt” remembrance has been encouraged (through TV and football shirts for example), as opposed to the traditional dignified, subtle and quiet reflection, has served to manipulate the public towards this end. Therefore it’s important for me on Remembrance Day to maintain the line that is sometimes blurred between my support for the troops in Afghanistan and my objection to the ideology.
The other factor, I believe, could be about coming to terms with the fact that we are collectively forgetting those who died in the conflicts traditionally associated with Remembrance Day – the millions who died in the Great War and World war 2. By this I don’t mean forgetting what those who died did for us and their ultimate sacrifice, but who they were. Those who truly remember these people as individuals – their friends, families and loved ones – are getting fewer in number each year. What are those (now the majority of us) who never knew any of those who died personally – doing when we remember them? Probably thinking about their collective sacrifice in more general terms, which is fine, but still lacks the poignancy of mourning someone you actually knew. For example, I think that this Remembrance Day will be far more meaningful for anyone who knew and loved someone who was killed in Afghanistan, Iraq or the Falklands. The rest of us have no-one with whom we shared our lives to personally remember. How do we make up for this collective - dare I say it - guilt of forgetting? Possibly through these more overt displays of remembrance. And when these overt displays are challenged (by FIFA for example) these feelings of guilt are expressed in the far more palatable form (to ourselves) of anger.
I hope that however you mark Remembrance Day, quietly or ceremoniously, you do it that way because it reflects how you feel, not out of obligation. The people we are remembering died for us to have that choice, so the very fact it exists is in itself a celebration of their sacrifice. If you choose to wear your poppy, wear it with pride or whatever feeling it invokes in you. But whatever you do – please don’t wear it with guilt.
No comments:
Post a Comment