I know this is old news, but since we're coming up on April 15th I couldn't
resist offering my thoughts about these items, and what they represent.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=473191&in_page_id=1770
Now, I'm quite aware that the marketing of relics tied to historical
events or
people has been a staple business since the dawn of time. I'm also aware
that
this sort of thing is entirely within the spirit of that which spawned
Titanic
(and the other superliners of the era) in the first place: commercial
gain.
Materialism. Good, old-fa****oned profit. There is nothing inherently wrong
with
these things.
But.
Whenever I think about this particular subject, I often have arguments
with
myself: the Historical Significance Lobe versus the Horrific Disaster
Lobe. And,
invariably, the conversation goes like this:
H.S.L.: But wouldn't it be the most amazing thing to have that on your
wrist?
Metal from the actual ****p! Coal from her boilers! Right there in front of
you.
You would be directly tied to a major event in world history.
H.D.L.: Look.
As much as I'd like to make someone filthy rich by ponying up 4,500 pounds
to
have one of those, there are several things that prevent me from doing so,
and
the fact that I don't have 4,500 pounds isn't one of them.
Sure, 96 years have passed since that horrible night. A bit of distance,
if you
will, has been placed between us and the events of that time, an era now
so
distant in human terms that my own grandmother wasn't even born until 15
years
later. There is no longer any living memory of the sinking. Everyone who
built
Titanic is dead, and (save for two infants, if I remember correctly)
everyone
who sailed aboard her is dead. We should look at it in perspective, right?
We
should stop treating it like it happened four days ago, right?
No. I can't think that way, especially after watching two of the tallest
buildings in the world crash to the ground on live television and reduce
nearly
3,000 humans to powder. Not long afterwards, people were striking coins
made out
of their girders for sale. I can't accept Titanic Wristwatches any more
than I
can accept World Trade Center Medallions.
I can't think that way. The 1997 movie didn't do it justice. You don't
understand. None of us can understand. Can you even imagine it? A massive
floating hotel is totally destroyed in two hours and forty minutes in the
middle
of the NIGHT, in the middle of the second largest ocean in the WORLD with
no
idea whether ANYONE would ever be able to find them, hundreds and hundreds
of
miles from the nearest shore.
They were plunged into-- you can't really call it "into the water". At
-2C, it
is no longer "water": it is an evil, toxic substance that sucks the life
out of
anyone who falls into it, and fast. I once walked into an industrial
freezer
that held whole frozen tunas at a temperature of -40C; I was in intense
pain,
all over my body, in under 60 seconds. And exposure to extremely cold air
is not
even the same thing. Those people were thrown violently into an
environment so
*lethal*, the water might as well been boiling. There, does that make it
sound a
bit more urgent to you? This wasn't "Euh! The water's kewld!" This was
water
that "stabbed you like a thousand knives", in the words of Jack Thayer.
Try to
imagine lobsters being lowered into the pot, and maybe you'll get a better
idea
of how one thousand five hundred people died in AGONY.
But now, for less than five thousand quid, you can look into this black
abyss
and know when it's time for a spot of tea.
No. I can't appreciate that.
--
The 2-Belo [the2beloATmsdDOTbiglobeDOTneDOTjp]
|
