#1 in a conceivably ongoing series entitled, "I Find It Disturbing."
The song (and popular roller-rink choreography) "The Hokey Pokey" is called "The Hokey Pokey" in Australia (including New Zealand), Ireland, and America (including Canada). That should be good enough for anyone, right? Wrong. It's called "The Hokey Cokey" in the U.K.
This deplorable act of arbitrary and whimsical linguistic unilateralism makes me sick. Yet another instance of the British! Don't get me wrong, I've been willing to put up with their bedamned and bedizened Britishisms, at least in so far as the rest of the English-speaking world goes along with them. Because if America is the only one in the right, then so be it #1: that's our job, innit? And so be it #2: I magnanimously decree such barbarous usages of other countries dipping their daughter-tongues at the common font acceptable. Because what does America stand for, if not Democracy? Albeit - can somebody tally up the total populations involved? We may be due a recount. Leave that aside for now; due process will prevail. The immediate point is: generally when the Britzers go out on a limb with some wrong-looking but technically-traditionally-acceptable spelling or bizarro variant on a word or term, much of the Commonwealth does go along with them. Thus "backing them up." But where the hell do these UK-ers get off going off on their own calling it "The Hokey Cokey"?
There's no sense to it.
I was originally going to call this post "I Find It Disturbing #1: The Hokey-Cokey", because the thrust of my objection is after all all about this misnomnymic abomination of songmenclature. But as soon as I was about to, I realized A. "Hokey-Cokey? No one is going to know what the fuck that is," and B., the Hokey-Pokey is in itself disturbing enough to justify its headliner status.
More on that in a part 2, perhaps.
The song (and popular roller-rink choreography) "The Hokey Pokey" is called "The Hokey Pokey" in Australia (including New Zealand), Ireland, and America (including Canada). That should be good enough for anyone, right? Wrong. It's called "The Hokey Cokey" in the U.K.
This deplorable act of arbitrary and whimsical linguistic unilateralism makes me sick. Yet another instance of the British! Don't get me wrong, I've been willing to put up with their bedamned and bedizened Britishisms, at least in so far as the rest of the English-speaking world goes along with them. Because if America is the only one in the right, then so be it #1: that's our job, innit? And so be it #2: I magnanimously decree such barbarous usages of other countries dipping their daughter-tongues at the common font acceptable. Because what does America stand for, if not Democracy? Albeit - can somebody tally up the total populations involved? We may be due a recount. Leave that aside for now; due process will prevail. The immediate point is: generally when the Britzers go out on a limb with some wrong-looking but technically-traditionally-acceptable spelling or bizarro variant on a word or term, much of the Commonwealth does go along with them. Thus "backing them up." But where the hell do these UK-ers get off going off on their own calling it "The Hokey Cokey"?
There's no sense to it.
I was originally going to call this post "I Find It Disturbing #1: The Hokey-Cokey", because the thrust of my objection is after all all about this misnomnymic abomination of songmenclature. But as soon as I was about to, I realized A. "Hokey-Cokey? No one is going to know what the fuck that is," and B., the Hokey-Pokey is in itself disturbing enough to justify its headliner status.
More on that in a part 2, perhaps.
Comments
PS Maybe Brits are just into hard drugs?
If you ask me, we should just leave the Hokey out of it.
To be honest, "pokey" to me always seemed to be a reference to a certain body part or at least, bodily act.