[Closed] Guy Gibson’s dog.

I've got very mixed views. Obviously wrong in the modern context, but not thought to be wrong at the time. Education and explanation may have been better than the change, but a dog is probably not the example for anyone to be making a stand on, given the wider issues.

Should have renamed the dog Buster.

It's not rewriting history though is it? IIRC there was a headstone with the offending name engraved upon it at the airbase. The public can access the site, I learned to swim there in the early 80s, and any BAME service folk would have seen it on a regular basis.

Removing the offending word is the right thing to do, its a shame that its taken sooo long for this to be addressed however.

Anyone who knows the story of the dambusters knows about the dog, and its only a small part of the story, hardly rewriting the history of the development of the bouncing bomb and it's deployment.

The rewriting history defence is the last rallying call of the people to afraid of understanding what was done in their name in the past and having to confront some uncomfortable truths about their green and pleasant land.

History has typically been written by the victors, it is vital that it is regularly challenged.  The name of the dog has had no place in British society for decades, and as said, it won't be erased from the past but become an unfortunate footnote.

History hadn’t been erased or rewritten. The RAF have removed something on their property that is outdated, the dog’s name still exist as does the history of the dambusters.

Well written TwistedPencil.

Well written TwistedPencil.

Yep. And at the end of the day, it was just a headstone for a dog.

some stuff, like Yeti not being able to call themselves a "tribe", I don't really get, but this, I do.

some stuff, like Yeti not being able to call themselves a “tribe”, I don’t really get

I’m fully in favour of Yeti owners being allowed to refer to themselves as a “tribe”, however they must agree to 99% of their number being slaughtered first and the rest have all their possessions and property taken 😀 suspect they wouldn’t regard that as particularly “cool” though 😂

Genius! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
And 2nd Kryton57, well said TwistedPencil.

Cultural appropriation innit

Well, I don't think so, as the word tribe has more than one meaning, ie. first google result: "The term tribe is used in many different contexts to refer to a category of human social group."
But I'm not particularly bothered, so not going to get into a discussion about it.

Well, I always took the meaning tribe to mean a group of people who have the same interest whether it be religious, ancestry, or cultural, and not just aimed at some indigenous Americans. After all, there are literally hundreds of tribes all over the world.

Cultural appropriation innit; trendy middle-aged white guys like to pick and choose certain aspects because they think they sound cool without giving the slightest thought to the bigger picture.

Must be an age thing, but I don't see any issue with this.

We've appropriated everything in our language and culture from those who came before us, so why get fussy about it now.

By the way, is anyone going to suggest that FuzzyWuzzy might need to change his username? 😉

Well, I always took the meaning tribe to mean a group of people who have the same interest

Must be an age thing

By the way, is anyone going to suggest that FuzzyWuzzy might need to change his username?

Ooh! Can we get the knives out and remove tribal tatts from hipsters?

Sorry I’m being silly (well, sillier than usual) now.

#blacklabsmatter

Like some others I have a slight unease about this, but the name of the dog clearly has serious connotations today and the action taken is reasonable, it was only a dog. I'd be more worried about it's name being airbrushed out of other historical sources (although a gravestone is a primary historical source) as it does shed some light on the mindset of the people involved and is an important bench mark for how things have changed.

As for your cultural appropriation, get in the sea, I thought one of the good things about multi culturalism was that cultures blended, cultural norms were adopted into other cultures and we all learnt to see things in a different light.

How you can relate to a dog called **** to the word tribe is beyond me. But I'm going out for a ride can I suggest you try taking your high horse for a ride to zilog6128 while the suns shining.

#blacklabsmatter

Bravo sir, bravo.

What’s the story with tribe being offensive then? I must have missed that one.

of course. Also, my new dog’s black so I’m going to call him ****. I can’t see anything wrong with that

Brilliant. One of the best posts on STW in my experience.

What’s the story with tribe being offensive then? I must have missed that one.

Well, Yeti voluntarily dropped the word, so I don't know whether they were pressured to or it came from within the company, but they have.
Still, I'm sure all the slaughtered native Americans will recover and have all their possessions and property returned now.

and we all learnt to see things in a different light.

Maybe it’s because I’m not American, but I never even thought that the word “tribe” would refer to indigenous North American people. I thought about native people in various other countries, but North America was the last country to spring to mind.

Tribe is an English word of Latin origin, apparently first used in 12th century.

19th century translators of Tacitus used "tribe" to describe the different peoples within Britain, Caledonia and Germania although Tacitus didn't. In his time tribe referred to a sub-group of the Romans themselves.

I'm not sure an English speaker can Cultural Appropriate a word that has been in the English language since the 12th century.

There’s a thread for the Yeti Tribe change now.

https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cancel-culture-or-legit-challange-yeti-content/

I’m not sure an English speaker can Cultural Appropriate a word that has been in the English language since the 12th century.

You're new here aren't you.

Read bbc article. Thought what a load of nonsense, assuming the dog would be called 'blackie' or something similar..

Then googled the name of the dog..wtf??

Can't say I have any issue with the removal after finding out what he was really called..

I know people see everything as a skirmish in the imaginary culture war but you'd think that for the WW2 was great, waving a flag to the Dambusters theme, they'd be quite happy for that detail to just go away. And it makes no difference whatsoever to the story.

It's sort of funny when people accuse others of "deleting history". Like, here, we are talking about deleting the name of a dog. On the other side of the exact same mission, triumphalists have often tried to delete the part where the military impact was pretty trivial and most of the people killed were prisoners of war.

I can guarantee 100%, that this is so much more of an issue for middle aged white people than it is for anyone else in the country.

History is written by the winners, not everyone on the winning side gets equal treatment in history though. I would rather the name stayed and highlighted how racism was just normal then. iirc when we discussed this a few years ago on this site, the majority feeling was that it wasn't racist to call a dog that then, so at least we have progressed to acknowledge the fact that racism was actually rife at that time.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7984436.stm

And it makes no difference whatsoever to the story.

It does though, it reflects the world as it then was, if we are to learn from history, no point painting over the reality with a false utopia.

Similar thing has happened at Coombe Abbey in Coventry. There was a pet headstone with the same name as Gibson's dog, that had died in 1902.

There was a complaint about it last year, and the council refused to remove it, based on it being on a listed property and how society had moved on, however it was reported in the local press a couple of weeks ago that it had disappeared recently.

Then googled the name of the dog..wtf??

Impossible as it’s been deleted from history.

Thanks for that link MSP, didn't know that 65% of the Free French Army at the end of WW2 were Senegalese / non white. Not altogether surprised that they were written out of history though.

Th etching with the oft repeated maxim 'representing the values of the time' is that it condemns everybody in history to having been a d**khead.

Representing the values of some of the people from that time or the views of those in power at that time would be more accurate.
'

Crikey,

Your guarantee is worthless as you've got to be selling something to offer a guarantee and no one is buying what you've got to offer.

#blacklabsmatter

One for the memoirs. Well played.

Should have renamed the dog Buster.

Balls like a pair of bouncing bombs?

*as you were

Doesn’t bother me one way or the other although I do think the removal is overdue. In case you didn’t know I think this story has only perpetuated so long because the dogs name was used as the radio codeword for a successful breach of the dams, so I think that detail is what has kept it seen as part of the story. Peter Jackson has been reputed to be remaking the film for some years now, with the screenplay written by Stephen Fry. Not sure how he will have dealt with it but I don’t know why people can’t just accept it being called ‘Digger’ instead and move on...

I would rather the name stayed and highlighted how racism was just normal then.

But then again you’re white and have no idea what it feels like to have the foulest of words representing misery, death and oppression of your ancestry and inequality of the like still happening today flaunted openly in your face every time you walk through the gate.

Crikey,

Your guarantee is worthless as you’ve got to be selling something to offer a guarantee and no one is buying what you’ve got to offer.

I'm guessing that this is an attempt at a clever reply...

I stand by my comment; this week I've worked with people from a number of different countries and I'm pretty sure that they don't really care a great deal about a name on a dog's grave. I think removing it is a good thing, but as above, the people who think it's really, really important are more likely to be white and middle aged.

Not sure how he will have dealt with it but I don’t know why people can’t just accept it being called ‘Digger’ instead and move on

I think it would depend on the context.
In a proper history book then retain the name. Unpleasant but then again much of history falls into that category.
Likewise with a documentary film.
In a movie switch to something else/garble it. Movies arent exactly known for bothering with historical accuracy so why is it needed in this case?
For the stone. When was it actually raised and would removing it actually blank out history. What is it adding? I would tend towards making sure the original was preserved in the RAF museum though.

Off to the national portrait gallery next ?. Tin of Humbrol censor paint and brush in hand.

dissonance
Subscriber

In a proper history book then retain the name. Unpleasant but then again much of history falls into that category.

TBF it's not even going to make it into a proper history book. Pop history, sure, it's a nice human touch.

MSP
Subscriber

no point painting over the reality with a false utopia.

"A false utopia"? Yep, forgetting the name of a dog will certainly turn world war 2 into a utopia.

Crikey, you seemed to have returned to the forum with several spikey comments across various threads but to give you the benefit of the doubt here;

At the risk of your post coming across ignorant you may be right that middle aged white folk might be nervous they they are the cause / perpetrators of something very offensive and so obviously in the public eye and now want to remove it. But let’s not take away from the fact that we must all learn that such content is not acceptable in our current society, and neither should such degradation have been acceptable in our past society.

We cannot change what went before, but we can certainly change what we do today.  We can remove a symbolic off oppression and offence to ensure all of our fellow human beings no matter what colour or creed are treated equally and feel comfortable no matter where they are.  It is right that the word is removed.  That Guy Gibson named his dog in such a way does not remove from a heroic* tale in a tragic time but perhaps reflects on Gibson himself and us as human beings in afterthought.

*also the feat of mechanics and science within dambusters is to be applauded I’m not sure how I feel about any bearer of death an destruction being expressed as heroic, but that’s another topic.

I would rather the name stayed and highlighted how racism was just normal then. iirc when we discussed this a few years ago on this site, the majority feeling was that it wasn’t racist to call a dog that then, so at least we have progressed to acknowledge the fact that racism was actually rife at that time.

I completely agree with this, but then I am not a racist ****wit. The other side of the same coin is that racism is still rife, it's just often more subtle (not really the right word but it's early and I can't think of a better one). We need to still do so much to stamp out racism and this is part of it maybe

Very thoughtful post Kryts well done. There are, of course, a few accounts that Gibson was a thoroughly unpleasant character, so maybe this was an extension of that, though I suspect most people at the time wouldn’t have batted an eyelid at the name.

Just had a conversation with my Black British wife. Her conclusion is that changing and taking statues/plaques away just creates a focal point of deniers and protesters. There has to be a conversation to show how things have moved on. If things are left standing alone they will just remain symbols. We finally came to a point where all controversial statues ought to be twined to show a journey. Next to N----r's memorial have a similar one recognising the service of black/empire/foreign airmen. Perhaps next to a restored Colston put up the protestors statue with information outlining how unacceptable the way he amassed his fortune but that some of it was used positively to create the university next to the black protester's one with some narrative to show that we shouldn't be complacent. Next to Churchill acknowledge his war leadership but voting against the creation of the NHS and discrimination against India by balancing with Atlee or Gandi etc. Basically add positivity and reflection to the conversation rather than ignoring or division.

I think you're missing my point Kryton, but meh...

Wingnuts, your post has me very confused.  Is it for example acknowledging slavery happened but thats OK because we've got some brilliant rums and nice Caribbean holidays out of it?

I need to think more about what you posted as I'm not sure I understand your sentiment, and I don't mean that in a negative way toward you.

AA/MSP, if there was a dogs gravestone or sign on your regular walk to work, home or whatever with the name/words (sorry for the swear but I need to get the sentiment across) "white ****" etched on it, would you feel not a tiny bit offended, and should it get removed, pleased and more comfortable?  Would you be more offended if BAME people then campaigned to have it restored and it was brought back and remained?  It doesn't compare the full depth of the "N" word at all, but its as offensive as I can think of at the moment to get my point across.

The actual dambusters raid is more offensive than what a dog was called in the 40's when it was a common name for dogs.

I don't see any issue removing the name from the base but if you were to remake the movie or write a book I would expect to see the dog called **** as that is its actual name. if you don't like it then down read or watch the movie.

if you don’t like it then (sic) down read or watch the movie.

Spoiler alert?

At the cinema. Curtains open. Projector begins. Cautionary message flickers onto the screen

*Please note that denigrating racial epithets are used in this movie. If you are a black person then please feel free to leave the cinema now if you are likely to be offended by the word ****. Please know that although it was offensive to blacks then as now - white British people of the time used the word as a sign of cuddly regard for the colour ‘brown’. Probably. *

*The movie is about to start in 2 minutes. Final warning. If you do feel the need to leave just remember that you are probably over-reacting, as good people were killed in the raid depicted in the film and you don’t see white people up in arms about that. They just watch the movie and behave themselves. And besides, since when was the word ‘****’ ever used to kill someone?*

Do you honestly think people wouldn't know before hand?

Dambuster was actually on tv a few weeks ago and it did say it contained language some viewers may find racially offensive but it also stated it was factually accurate at the time.

Do you honestly think people wouldn’t know before hand?

Yes as not everyone knows everything.

Yes as not everyone knows everything.

Come on Drac you should know better than most on here, some think they know everything, whether its right or wrong.

AA/MSP, if there was a dogs gravestone or sign on your regular walk to work, home or whatever with the name/words (sorry for the swear but I need to get the sentiment across) “white ****” etched on it, would you feel not a tiny bit offended, and should it get removed, pleased and more comfortable? Would you be more offended if BAME people then campaigned to have it restored and it was brought back and remained? It doesn’t compare the full depth of the “N” word at all, but its as offensive as I can think of at the moment to get my point across.

I probably wouldn't notice and if I did I doubt it would bother me, but then I haven't been subject to racism in my life so it's not really relevant.

My point was that in an ideal world keeping these statues and having education about what they represent and info alongside them would be best. But we don't live in an ideal world and my fear is racists can't be educated out of racism and nor do they want to be, so maybe removal is best, but then the racists get a lightening rod and get all upity. I don't know the answer.

the majority feeling was that it wasn’t racist to call a dog that then

Then the majority (as in many things) are ignorant (not in the pejorative sense) There were aircrew drawn form all over the world to serve in 617sqn, and several of them found the name pretty bloody offensive and said so at the time.

Kryton - Perhaps I was lazy and tired in the way I expressed things this morning and I'm still knackered from clearing the garage so will probably do no better now. So here is a breakdown of the points me and the Mrs discussed.
Racism is never acceptable but we can't rewrite history however much we would like to.
If we pull things down or obscure them it will distort learning for the future and antagonise those looking for a cause.
We need to encourage a sense of how far ideas have travelled and that they aren't at the expense of any group.
By erecting new positive things we keep acknowledging change isn't always damaging to pride and identity.
It's always going to be easy to find an example that will play havoc with the principle but we need to find actions that generally don't enflame but show recognition, reflection and a way forward that isn't antagonistic.
I'm as white liberal middle class as you could imagine and come from a mesmerisingly stable family. Mrs W comes from a immigrant, fractured illiterate family and as driven herself to be a national recognised figure in her field as a social worker/educator. We both see everyday racism personally and institutionally,and with unintentional bias. What we don't see is people trying to get beyond tokenism and offence. At a course some blue rinse, who no doubt trying her best asked Mrs W what she wanted to drink - "Black please" to be told "We don't say that, its coffee or coffee with milk" Mrs W almost pissed herself and pointed out she didn't ever associate herself with a hot beverage.
What we were trying to get to was yes it wasn't ok but it was the past, here are positive examples we can use as a way to move forward.
Bet that's no less confusing is it.

Bet that’s no less confusing is it.

No. Yes. 😉. FWIW I reckon that’s ^ the best comment I’ve yet read regarding the matter.

Nicely worded. 🙂

Yes as not everyone knows everything.

well that would be tuff then if they couldn't handle it.

bloody obvious to me. Cultural appropriation innit; trendy middle-aged white guys like to pick and choose certain aspects because they think they sound cool without giving the slightest thought to the bigger picture. I’m fully in favour of Yeti owners being allowed to refer to themselves as a “tribe”, however they must agree to 99% of their number being slaughtered first and the rest have all their possessions and property taken 😀 suspect they wouldn’t regard that as particularly “cool” though 😂

Really? So perhaps you could explain the cultural connection between Native North American Indian tribes and a mythical creature said to inhabit the mountain ranges of the Himalayas, about five or six thousand miles away on a different continent.
‘Cos I’m not seeing it.
Now, if it was Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Urayuli, Dewayyo or the Wendigo, then the point might be valid, but Yeti? That displays wilful ignorance on the part of those whining about the use of the word ‘tribe’ in connection with Yeti.

No. Yes. 😉. FWIW I reckon that’s ^ the best comment I’ve yet read regarding the matter.

And I wholeheartedly agree with that, returning to the original point of the thread. I read the book about the Dambusters many years ago, and even then I felt discomfort at the use of the name, but as someone once said, ‘the past is a foreign country, they do things differently there.’

Not having N*****'s name on the stone in no way demeans or denies his canine existence, those desperate to find out what he waa called can still do so. What's the problem?

BTW, I say that as a massive 617 fanboi.