Well, knighthood is hardly reserved for rock stars when it comes to bestowing them on celebrities. Lots of actors have been knights and dames. And Lawrence Olivier was given a lordship, for goodness sakes.

But I would also bet good money that men who have no distinguished military achievement have been receiving knighthoods for hundreds of years, based instead on the prominence of their families and other assistance provided to the monarch.

Not too get too far off track, but you’d be hard pressed to find a person who has done more noble and charitable contributions than Bono. He has lobbied for the poor in Africa, and raised millions of dollars on their behalf. He has also done numerous other very noble things, and I think it’s a little bit cynical to say he’s being knighted merely for his Music.

From my understanding people are knighted in Britain for noble work, public service, and significant contributions to the UK. Music, Theatre, Movies, Art, Literature and Sports are all part of culture and I would argue that people who make contributions to these areas (in Britain) should be eligible, and properly rewarded, for these contributions. If people who have had great contributions to culture and society, such as Shakespere, Thomas Lawrence, John Stevenson and Francis Bacon can be knighted then I find no reason why it would be inappropriate that Bono, Paul McCartney, Elton John and Sean Connery have also been knighted. They have all had an impact on the culture and thoughts of countless British people, and people around the world.

Many common folk who do just as Denny described also get awarded. Scientists, social workers, doctors, businessmen, inventors and many other people from all walks of life have received knighthood, but it goes unoticed by the media, and then by us. That doesn’t mean they don’t get the honour though. The British military long ago started giving out different awards for military service so that soldiers who commit brave acts also get rewarded as well.

So I say congrats to Bono, his honor is well-earned and I am eagerly anticipating viewing his arms if/when they are bestowed up him

Colin’s exactly right about how the system works.  I confess that I’m baffled by the objections expressed to this.  The Brits (and Danes, Norwegians, and some other monarchies) have done an amazingly good job of taking an ancient institution that was developed to reward the kind of achievements that the monarch required in the olden days and adapted it to reward the kinds of achievements that are valued in a modern society, including the arts.

There’s no confusion at all between military honors and the kind of civil honors like this.  As Colin says, military valor—what Denny calls "heroic sacrifice"—is rewarded by a separate series of decorations, while other significant military achievements (superb staff work) are primarily rewarded with the military division of the Order of the Bath (although also with other orders as well, sometimes).

Quote:

The Order of Merit is a British and Commonwealth Order bestowed by the Monarch. It was established in 1902 by King Edward VII (based on the Prussian Pour le Mérite) as a reward for distinguished service in the armed forces, science, art, literature, or for the promotion of culture.

Ton, I see this as exactly the sort of award these rockers and actors should be getting precisely because it deals with art and literature and the promotion of culture. To me anyway this is obviously the best way to go.

Colin,
Quote:

Not too get too far off track, but you’d be hard pressed to find a person who has done more noble and charitable contributions than Bono. He has lobbied for the poor in Africa, and raised millions of dollars on their behalf. He has also done numerous other very noble things, and I think it’s a little bit cynical to say he’s being knighted merely for his Music.

Your opinion not fact, but one that probably has a good measure of truth to it. However, there are countless thousands of people across the planet who make charitable endeavors their calling in life, where as Bono merely uses his ‘cause celebe’ as a means of delivering on that. That is a good thing mind you, I never said it wasn’t, but there is a difference between those who’ve truly devoted a lifetime to such endeavors as their only calling in life … simply because some popular man, or woman, does good things with their time and money does not make them all that; again there are countless thousands who do this every day as their only endeavor in life and they do not get recognized. Why not? They don’t have the ‘cause celeb’ that people like Bono have. So in truth it is their fame that gets them recognition for the work they do do, which is not their real life calling. Big difference Colin … big difference.

Quote:

From my understanding people are knighted in Britain for noble work, public service, and significant contributions to the UK. Music, Theatre, Movies, Art, Literature and Sports are all part of culture and I would argue that people who make contributions to these areas (in Britain) should be eligible, and properly rewarded, for these contributions.

All the more reason to give them an award of merit as that is the main thrust for this award … read the above link from Ton or simply the part I quoted in my reply to Ton.

Quote:

If people who have had great contributions to culture and society, such as Shakespere, Thomas Lawrence, John Stevenson and Francis Bacon can be knighted then I find no reason why it would be inappropriate that Bono, Paul McCartney, Elton John and Sean Connery have also been knighted. They have all had an impact on the culture and thoughts of countless British people, and people around the world.

And were any of the former people mentioned above around when the Order of Merit was established just for people like them in 1902? I don’t think so, but I may be wrong. Today is an entirely different matter all together, as it is around.

Quote:

Many common folk who do just as Denny described also get awarded. Scientists, social workers, doctors, businessmen, inventors and many other people from all walks of life have received knighthood, but it goes unoticed by the media, and then by us. That doesn’t mean they don’t get the honour though.

Can you show us who these common folk are that get this sort of recognition? You know the common man who serves in the armed forces and looses a leg because he went to save his unit? Etc???

Quote:

The British military long ago started giving out different awards for military service so that soldiers who commit brave acts also get rewarded as well.

Really? What? If so, remove them from the equation, but that still leaves the teenage kid who saves a 2 year old from falling to his death here in the Grand Canyon, or the man who ran into a burning house twice while the fire department stayed outside to save two kids at a house here last year, or the woman who was shot and paralyzed for life when stopping a rape in progress here in Colorado about four or five years ago. And we all know there are countless similar cases in the nation that bestows such honors the UK.

These are the acts of someone worthy of the honor knight or dame; far more so than a man who uses his ‘cause celeb’ to garner support or money for one thing or another, which again is a great thing, but not in the same league.

Quote:

So I say congrats to Bono, his honor is well-earned and I am eagerly anticipating viewing his arms if/when they are bestowed up him

As I said already also, kudos to Bono, but that doesn’t change the facts of the matter none.

Donnchadh wrote:

Ton, I see this as exactly the sort of award these rockers and actors should be getting precisely because it deals with art and literature and the promotion of culture. To me anyway this is obviously the best way to go.

Denny, the OM is limited to 24 recipients. Not 24 a year, but 24 living at any one time. It is a very, very, very prestigious award, but not nearly sufficient to reward the entire range of socially useful achievement in a country of 50 million people.

Your responses to Colin indicate that you really don’t understand how the British system works.  I’m not criticizing, but you might want to explore the official website on the British system, http://www.honours.gov.uk/.  Among other things, see the link to the 2007 New Year honors list and you’ll see the range of endeavor that is rewarded by this system, including:

- lots of school principals (headteachers), in degrees ranging from knighthood down to lesser honors

- a professor of molecular medicine for services to public health (knight bachelor)

- a number of low ranking soldiers—I saw a couple of corporals (members of the Order of the British Empire—same honor given to Hugh Laurie, the actor who plays Dr. Greg House on TV)

- the head of a charity that serves people with learning disabilities (Dame Commander of the British Empire)

- the fire chief of Manchester County (Companion of the B.E.—same honor given to the CEO of Virgin Atlantic)

- the director of social services for one of the poorest areas of London (CBE)

- "George Bell, lately Milkman, Wiseman’s Dairy. For services to the community in Gullane, East Lothian." (MBE)

- "Miss Rosemary Bird. For services providing rural experience on Dartmoor and in the South West for Inner City Young People." (MBE)

- "Miss Pauline Davis, lately Switchboard Manager, National Assembly for Wales." (MBE)

- "Glynis Mary, Mrs. Farrell, Specialist Music Teacher, Holwell Primary School, Hertfordshire. For services to Education." (MBE)

- "Miss Zara Anne Elizabeth Phillips, Individual Three-Day Event World Champion. For services to Equestrianism." (MBE) (Note that this is the Queen’s granddaughter—she got the exact same award as the milkman.)

The very lengthy list is at http://www.gazette-online.co.uk/download.asp?docId=1119886

In response to Colin’s comment "The British military long ago started giving out different awards for military service so that soldiers who commit brave acts also get rewarded as well," Denny wrote:  "Really? What?"  Can you not have heard of the Victoria Cross?  Not to mention the Distinguished Service Cross, Military Cross, Conspicuous Gallantry Medal, etc., etc?  As to:

Quote:

but that still leaves the teenage kid who saves a 2 year old from falling to his death here in the Grand Canyon, or the man who ran into a burning house twice while the fire department stayed outside to save two kids at a house here last year, or the woman who was shot and paralyzed for life when stopping a rape in progress here in Colorado about four or five years ago.

The Brits actually honor these achievements far better than we do.  The second highest ranking decoration in the British system, after the Victoria Cross and ahead of every single knighthood, is the George Cross, which is awarded for "acts of bravery of the greatest heroism or of the most conspicuous courage in circumstances of extreme danger," other than in combat.  There’s also the George Medal "for gallantry of an extremely high order," the Queen’s Gallantry Medal, "for gallantry of a high order," and the Queen’s Commendation for Bravery, "for gallantry not up to the foregoing standards but entailing risk to life and meriting national recognition."  All of these are intended for civilians in private life, although occasionally a police officer or firefighter and very, very rarely a military member will receive one of them.  There are also separate national decorations for gallantry by police officers and firefighters, a concept we’ve only gotten around to in the last five years.

As for Bono, think whatever you like, but the French thought highly enough of him to give him the Legion of Honor, Time Magazine once made him Man of the Year, and he’s been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, so some people besides Tony Blair seem to value his efforts.

Joe,
Quote:

Colin’s exactly right about how the system works.

Then why have the Order of Merit whose entire reason for being, as laid out in the link provided, is to award these people of “art, literature and the promotion of culture"? It seems redundant to have one for that, but then to use knighthoods for the same reason. If that’s the way the system works it seems a broken system if not redundant.

Quote:

I confess that I’m baffled by the objections expressed to this.

Then you are not reading our objections clearly Joe, frankly. I’m baffled how you can so misunderstand what Andrew and I have said, as we wrote it in plain English in a way that there could be no misunderstanding due to alternative meanings. But, so be it.

Quote:

The Brits (and Danes, Norwegians, and some other monarchies) have done an amazingly good job of taking an ancient institution that was developed to reward the kind of achievements that the monarch required in the olden days and adapted it to reward the kinds of achievements that are valued in a modern society, including the arts.

Again, Joe, no one who has objected to ‘awarding those in the arts etc’, Andrew or myself, for their charitable work or industrial accomplishments. We simply question the wisdom of awarding such an honor for something that, while very nice and worthwhile, is not in the spirit of knighthood – especially whilst their is an award (Order of Merit) that was designed specifically for such people. So, please don’t think we don’t think these people should not be recognized … we just find the mode of recognition more than it should be given its alternative.

Quote:

There’s no confusion at all between military honors and the kind of civil honors like this. As Colin says, military valor—what Denny calls "heroic sacrifice"—is rewarded by a separate series of decorations, while other significant military achievements (superb staff work) are primarily rewarded with the military division of the Order of the Bath (although also with other orders as well, sometimes).

Fine Joe, as I said to Colin, remove the military men out of it then. What of the ‘heroic sacrifice’ – I don’t think ‘military valor’ applies to these common folk hence why I put heroic sacrifice to cover them both, but be that as it may – of the common man in the three cases I listed above in reply to Colin, which undoubtedly have their counterparts in the UK? Those are uncommon acts – heroic acts – far more so than speaking publicly on stage at a concert you’re making tens of thousands of dollars at or on the “Tonight Show” about issues here there and everywhere, which again is a very good thing, but not even close to the sort of act of these everyday people.

Quote:

Denny, the OM is limited to 24 recipients. Not 24 a year, but 24 living at any one time.

I did read that in the URL that Ton provided. However, I also read that they give it out to more than the “24” on an honorary basis and those people are entitled to the postnomials (sp?) OM etc. So, it isn’t like there isn’t more than “24” at one time in total if we are to include the honorary OMs.

Quote:

It is a very, very, very prestigious award, but not nearly sufficient to reward the entire range of socially useful achievement.

Then why is it written it is in recognition for those who made significant contributions to the arts, literature, or for the promotion of culture? Why would it be created for this purpose but not be sufficient for the purpose?

Quote:

You might want to explore the official website on the British system, http://www.honours.gov.uk/.

Good idea and thank you.

Quote:

You’ll see that the Order of the British Empire "was instituted by George V [in 1917] to recognise all levels of service to the country during the first ‘total’ war. It has evolved to embrace service and achievement in all fields. The Order has a military division and a civil division."

OK, again, remove the military men from the equation. You still have heroic sacrifice from the every day man in horrible circumstances acting in an extraordinarily heroic way. Their actions are far more deserving of high honors than publicly speaking about this issue or that, which again is a good thing. People of power and influence should do right by society and those that do should be recognized for it ... it is just the mode of recognition I find at fault.

Of course I am not a Brit, so my opinion really doesn’t matter.

Here’s a link to BBC news for an explination of how Awards are handed out…

Here’s a story about people who have been knighted. It obviously focuses on the more famous people you have been critical of, but also mentions a shoeshiner, teaching assistant, a milkman, a turkey farmer, a paramedic who had the idea to respond to 999 calls(I am assuming the equivalent of 911) by bike. So it seems it’s quite common for normal civilians to get recognized as well. Also of interest is that any citizen of Britain can nominate any other person for these awards.

One more site explains the awarding of knighthood. The criteria is fairly open to interpretation by saying "Meritous service within or connected with any other part or parts of the Commonweath". (not sure exactly how credible this website is, but it is a Governemtnt of New Zealand Website so i’d imagine it is fairly credible).

If you guys are opposed to the way knighthood is handed out, that’s fine with me. But by the rules that they are handed out by definantly apply to all of the knights I have seen.

Donnchadh wrote:

Joe,

Then why have the Order of Merit whose entire reason for being, as laid out in the link provided, is to award these people of “art, literature and the promotion of culture"? It seems redundant to have one for that, but then to use knighthoods for the same reason. If that’s the way the system works it seems a broken system if not redundant.

The current stated purpose is a bit broader than this:  "such persons, being subjects of our Crown, as may have rendered exceptionally meritorious service in Our Crown Services, or towards the advancement of the Arts, Learning, Literature and Science or such other exceptional service as We see fit to recognise."  But the point is that having an honor for a particular purpose doesn’t mean you don’t have other honors for lesser achievement in the same field.  We have the Medal of Honor for valor, but we also have the DSC and the Silver Star; we have the Presidential Medal of Freedom, but we also have the Presidential Citizens Medal, the National Medal of Science, etc.

Quote:

Again, Joe, no one who has objected to ‘awarding those in the arts etc’, Andrew or myself, for their charitable work or industrial accomplishments. We simply question the wisdom of awarding such an honor for something that, while very nice and worthwhile, is not in the spirit of knighthood – especially whilst their is an award (Order of Merit) that was designed specifically for such people. So, please don’t think we don’t think these people should not be recognized … we just find the mode of recognition more than it should be given its alternative.

I guess you and Andrew just have a different idea of what the spirit of knighthood should be than the one held by Colin and me (and by Queen Elizabeth, and the President of France, and the Queen of Denmark, and the King of Norway, and the King of Spain, and the King of the Belgians, and the President of Italy—all of whom award knighthoods for these kinds of achievements).

Quote:

Fine Joe, as I said to Colin, remove the military men out of it then. What of the ‘heroic sacrifice’ – I don’t think ‘military valor’ applies to these common folk hence why I put heroic sacrifice to cover them both, but be that as it may – of the common man in the three cases I listed above in reply to Colin
Quote:

See mention of George Cross, George Medal, QGM, and QCB in my last post.  They are expressly designed to honor such heroism.

Quote:

I did read that in the URL that Ton provided. However, I also read that they give it out to more than the “24” on an honorary basis and those people are entitled to the postnomials (sp?) OM etc. So, it isn’t like there isn’t more than “24” at one time in total if we are to include the honorary OMs.

Honorary membership is for foreigners (i.e., people not subjects of QEII), same as other British honors.  Any Brit, Canadian, Australian, New Zealander, Bahamian, etc., counts against the 24 limit.

Quote:

Then why is it written it is in recognition for those who made significant contributions to the arts, literature, or for the promotion of culture? Why would it be created for this purpose but not be sufficient for the purpose?

Do you think there are only 24 living Brits, Canadians, etc., at one time who are deserving of some kind of recognition in these areas?

Perhaps I’m being a little too narrow minded and short sighted with this.  When I think of a knight, I think of a professional soldier who’s devoted his (her) life to the military in defense/protection of the kingdom/crown.

I know that this view is very outdated, but bear in mind that my main focus of history is medieval/Elizabethan!:D

If Her Majesty wishes to bestow this honor on musicians or industrial moguls, far be it from me to question her motives or reasonings.

A little more by way of explanation.

Think of the Order of Merit as the pinnacle recognition for a life of achievement in the arts, sciences, or public life.  This can be seen if you look at the other honors received by the current crop of members.  By my count, there are currently 21 members (not counting honoraries, of whom there is only one living).  Two of the 21 are Prince Philip and Prince Charles.  Another two are former Prime Minister Thatcher and Lady Boothroyd, former Speaker of the House of Commons.  Of the other 17, four are winners of the Nobel Prize, one winner of the Fields Medal (the Nobel equivalent for mathematics), and one winner of the Pritzker Prize (Nobel equivalent for architecture).  Twelve of the 17 were previously awarded knighthoods before being named to the OM.

So the OM shouldn’t be seen as the only recognition given by the UK for science, arts, letters, etc., but rather as the highest recognition in those fields.

a few quick thoughts as i gotta run to see Clarissa despite our snow ... which i wish you all could share in the suffering from ... four storms in four weeks is ridiculous ... we already have more snow now than we did all last winter YUK!! ... anyway ...

1, Colin please rephrase your assertions. i am not criticizing these knights. nor their accomplishments, rather, i have said they deserve recognition of some kind. i just don’t see Bono’s, or anyone like him, good works as more meritorious than the types of people i mentioned already. so, please quit implying i am criticizing them ... thank you.

2, Joe, i have no idea if there are more than 24 people deserving of that award. i don’t live there. but, i wouldn’t bet that there couldn’t be.

3, Joe, Bono is not a subject of the queen. he is, as last i remember, a citizen of the republic of Ireland now. as such, he would clearly be entitled to the ‘honor’ of the OM as a foreigner.

4, Andrew, i see it like you. i think of knights and i think of more than merely men of power, social status, and financial means who do nice things. i see courage, sacrifice, etc. but, i guess i am old and old fashioned in such matters. of course for me Bono means more than simply spouting off talking points in an effort to get your movement/cause recognized and money flowing to it, which as i already said (Colin) is a good thing and to be rewarded. it is just not the same as what others do period.

now if others think that these ‘cause celeb’ are all that and if they do good works they should be treated with the same awe and esteem as say those brave men and women who went up the Twin Towers for the sake of others despite what it meant to themselves and those sorts of people then so be it. i see knightly honor as deserving of something far more above the simple doing of good deeds when one has the means to do so, which again (Colin) is a good thing and more of them should do.

and again i am so not worried about this, as i will never posses one of those things and i am not a citizen, err i mean subject, of a queen, so what do i know?

i can tell you that i am a huge Bono and U2 fan, as i am of Elton John and Paul McCartney, but if i had a choice to hang out with one of them, or even a more local ‘cause celeb’ for me John Elway for a night or say one of the NY firemen who ran up the buildings, well, my choice is clear ... i’ll take the real hero thank you very much ... but then i’m not hung up on social status and media power et al and i prefer salt of the earth kind of people.

Donnchadh wrote:

3, Joe, Bono is not a subject of the queen. he is, as last i remember, a citizen of the republic of Ireland now. as such, he would clearly be entitled to the ‘honor’ of the OM as a foreigner.

No, he’s not remotely entitled to the honor of an OM, foreigner or not.  Not because of the numerical limits, but because his accomplishments are not even in the general neighborhood of what is expected for the OM, especially for a foreigner.  In over 100 years there have been only 11 foreign recipients of the OM.  We’re talking people like Nelson Mandela, Albert Schweitzer, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and General Eisenhower.  You yourself have said that his contributions amount basically to leveraging his celebrity to call attention to various causes; not quite the same as living your life directly ministering to the poor and sick, or leading your people to freedom, or commanding the Western armies in the destruction of Nazi Germany.

Why do you want the UK to have only one award for artistic and scientific distinction?  Do you think the US should have only one decoration for military valor?  (Rhetorical question)

But Joe I thought you said previously and the above articles also said that there were more than the 24 recipients and that these honorary recipients were mostly foreigners? As such, I think Bono would fall into that category … not of the original 24 category. Sorry I mis-spoke that if I did.

And yes a person who lives their calling to do these things has more weight IMHO than those who use their social position to bring notice to such things, which is also a good thing, just not the same.

I know it was a rhetorical question, but I really don’t care what the queen or her parliament decide to do for people per se. It is just that in general I see knightly actions (one’s deserving the honor of knighthood) as different and more narrowly defined than I guess you and most people today who have no problem with knighthoods being given out for just about anything these days. And I mean that with all due respect to you and even the queen and her parliament. I’m just old fashioned when it comes to seeing what knighthood is and is not.

But, again, I am not the king, nor an advisor to the queen, nor even a Brit, so my opinion really, really doesn’t matter one way or another.

Donnchadh wrote:

But Joe I thought you said previously and the above articles also said that there were more than the 24 recipients and that these honorary recipients were mostly foreigners?

Not to beat a dead horse but merely to clarify:

- The Order of Merit is limited to 24 full-fledged members at any one time.  Only subjects of the Queen are eligible for full membership.

- It is permissible to have additional honorary foreign members, over and above the 24.  There is no limit to the number of honorary members, but as a matter of fact there have only been 11 appointed in the entire history of the order, and only one of those is alive today.

- Bono is eligible to be an honorary member of the Order of Merit.  Heck, most of us are eligible to be honorary members (except for those who are subjects of the Queen, and they’re eligible to be full members).  All it would take would be for the Queen to appoint us.  But no one is entitled to membership, and very, very few people are plausibly qualified.  Moreover, in practical terms the standard of qualification is higher for honorary than for full membership.  After all, if you add up the population pool from which full members can be drawn, you get what?  125 million give or take?  24 members out of 125 million is .0002%.  But the honorary members are drawn from the entire rest of the world population, or about 6.4 billion people.  And there’s typically only one honorary member at a time.  So that’s less than .00000002%.

So the Queen could, if she wanted to, make Bono or you or me honorary members of the OM, but if she did so she’d be seriously lowering the traditional standard of membership.  So how does she (or actually, in the case of the KBE that Bono got, Tony Blair) encourage people with show-biz notoriety to use their celebrity to promote good causes?  She (he) give Bono an honorary knighthood.  It only costs the couple of hundred quid to produce the insignia and pay the scribe to fill out the letters patent, and the potential payoff in terms of good works done by other rock stars supporting charitable causes is in the millions.  Sounds like a sensible investment to me.