Over the Hill
August 5, 2007
We all know the nursery rhyme, five little ducks. A song so old that the original author is now unknown and the tune dubbed “traditional” or something equally nondescript. To refresh your memory, the song begins:
“Five little ducks went out one day,
over the hill and far away.”
It is from this simple song that we have garnered the phrase “over the hill”. To discuss the impact of these three little words, we should look first to their literal meanings. To go over the hill means to ascend or move higher to the peak of a mount, and then to descend on the other side. At this point, another song comes to mind, the Scottish tale of Bonnie “Loch Lomond” which proclaims:
“Ye’ll take the high road
and I’ll take the low road,
and I’ll get to Scotland before ye”
From the correlation of these two phrases it is obvious to see that there is a direct relationship. To go “over the hill” is to go to Scotland, a nation in northwest Europe.
Now I can hear you laughing, “Sam, that’s ridiculous.” but bear with me. Let’s use another song to cross-reference.
“O danny boy,
the pipes, the pipes are calling,
from glen to glen and
down the mountain side
Not only another reference to the hill, but also to the age old national instrument of Scotland, the bagpipes.
the fact that this song is Irish is of NO importance, so shut up…leprechaun
Now that we have established the action ‘to go over the hill’ as being inextricably linked to the Scottish lands, we must return to the original nursery rhyme to see further what this tourist destination (and mecca of bagpipian* endeavours) does hold for us, the weary traveller.
The lines of the nursery rhyme are such:
Five little ducks went out one day,
over the hill and far away,
Mother Duck said ‘quack quack quack quack’
but only four little ducks came back.”
So, for our context, assuming that we are the ducks, that mother duck is the mother land of Australia and “quack quack quack quack” is our heroic Aussie Rock warcry, “I come from the land down under.” Reworded, the nursery rhyme is now:
“Five little mates went out one day,
Over to Scotland, far away,
John Howard said, “Do you speaka my language?”
and only five little mates came back.”
Ok so perhaps the meter isn’t exactly correct, but really, a country which uses the word ‘girt’ in its national anthem can’t really be complaining over lexicographical slips.
There is only one solution to what this nursery rhyme must be getting at. Scotland is a fierce, and bagpipe armed country, hellbent on destroying australia with horrendous music, constricting kilts and haggis. Don’t believe me? Some of us are already wearing kilts, and have you heard your local year 7 concert band?
There is no contest. Forget Iraq, forget Iran, forget Al Qaeda, forget the Sydney opera house being blown to smithereens because here in 2007, there’s a new target.
The question is, will you fight or will you wait, like sitting ducks, for the attack?
*ok i admit, not a real word - but it should be.
Your are a danger to the entire English language.
comment by AntiWebster — August 5, 2007 @ 11:40 am
I see that you removed my previous comment to your blog.
As a poet, who preclaims to be outspoken and challenge the concepts of the pre-established hegemony, and who in this very post speaks out about danger to our civil liberties, is encroaching on free speech truly the best way to achieve your aims?
Should you fear the open stage of the internet, and by all accounts the numerous readers of this blog, I would be happy to continue this via private email. The above adress is active and correct.
comment by AntiWebster — August 5, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
thanks for your input. your comment was not removed, it was just not approved (I have not been home today so it just hadn’t passed through the spam filter)
where did I claim to challenge the hegemony? Whether I do, and whether I say are two different things…
I do not fear the open stage of the internet with this so far, as I do not see how what was intended as a humourous post to highlight how even the most ridiculous of theories could be supported through cross-referencing, could possibly be a “danger to the entire English language” or spur forth the impetus to create an e-mail address personally attacking someone you do not or can not engage with in person. Particularly when the e-mail account will soon be shut down due to breaching terms of service agreements. Your IP address has also been logged if I really need to pursue the issue further.
The post was a joke, purely for entertainment value for the few that follow this blog. The best defence is a good offence in my opinion, so my advice to you is to write wonderful literature and save the English language that way, rather than flaming on a blog anonymously.
comment by sam webster — August 5, 2007 @ 11:26 pm