Tuesday, 22 January 2019

Icons

At the moment there is a programme on television (BBC2) about Icons.   Each week there are four 'contenders' for the top spot in each category and the final week will pit these ' winners' against one another to find the 'top' 'most important' icon of the twentieth century - the person who has had the most profound and lasting effect on the world.

The programmes in themselves are interesting.   This week the legacies and achievements of Mahatma Gandhi, Helen Keller, Martin Luther King Jr, and Emmeline Pankhurst were assessed.
Which of them had had the most lasting effect upon the world?   How on earth is it possible to say?   Each one of them was a huge influence
 upon how people viewed events and how people viewed the 'underdogs' of this world - the people of India under the oppression of the British,  people with disabilities and their place in society, black people and their role in society and the rights of women.

Each section of the programme showed the good points in the campaigns - and the flaws - and each programme showed how far we have come in each area under the microscope.   But why try the impossible task of saying which one is most important.   Every generation has its icons - they are inspirational - let's just celebrate them all and be thankful for them all.   Let's also see the flaws in the ways the approached things.   But for goodness sake don't let's try to choose the 'best'.

18 comments:

Cathy said...

Wise words!

Shawn said...

How are they planning to decide the winner? Is it viewers' opinions?

Bonnie said...

I agree!

Heather said...

My thoughts exactly. How can anyone pick just one from so many worthy 'icons'.

Thickethouse.wordpress said...

I agree with you, completely! Each has had a huge effect upon civilization in various places, or perhaps every place. It is not possible to chose a "winner". And none of them could be losers.

Joanne Noragon said...

Yes, there is no best.

Tom Stephenson said...

Np best, no winners.

Sue said...

Agree with you completely.

Red said...

Amen! Picking one as a winner somehow takes all the glory even though the actual choice would b debatable. All of their efforts made huge benefits for people.

Cro Magnon said...

Methinks they do try too hard!

Rachel Phillips said...

It's a wonder they haven't included Laura Kuennsberg in it.

thelma said...

Think it is just the competitive era we live in, each made their mark, not looking for glory though.

Derek Faulkner said...

Laura K has hardly been around long enough to be classed as an icon, although I don't doubt that if she stays around long enough she'll be up there with some of the best political commentators.

Rachel Phillips said...

It was a joke Derek.

Derek Faulkner said...

My mistake Rachel, not used to you joking.
That aside, I've just been watching her prior to PMQ's and she does seem well informed.

Gwil W said...

I just want to say how much I enjoyed D's 'Little People in my Head' but I couldn't leave a comment. It's a real singalong isn't it!
You could change it to 'our heads' and maybe sing it with the ukeleles!

The Weaver of Grass said...

Yes Shawn - it is indeed viewers opinions.
Thanks Gwil, I will pass your message on.

Thanks to everyone for commenting.

Marie said...

I agree that it's impossible to choose which of the Icons being shown in the programmes has been the most influential in the world. They have all earned their place in different ways. There's a similar thing going on to choose a scientist to go on your £50 note. Currently it's Matthew Boulton and James Watt (Boulton and Watt steam engines which enabled the advancement of mechanisation of factories and mills). For the scientist I would have voted for a woman, Rosalind Franklin whose work on DNA led to the discovery of the DNA double helix. Her male colleagues used some of her work (apparently without her knowledge) and shared the Nobel Prize. She died of ovarian cancer in 1958 in London, four years before Watson, Crick, and Wilkins received the Nobel Prize. Who knows if she would have been included had she lived but being on the £50 note would be some sort of recognition for her.