Apple design chief Jonathan Ive awarded knighthood

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/12/30/apple_design_chief_jonathan_ive_awarded_knighthood.html

by smoody • 15 years ago

225 111 15 years ago

appleinsider.com

bitops3• 15 years ago

That's "Sir" Johnathan Ive. He was knighted, you know.

SamReidHughes• 15 years ago

Not in America he isn't.

bitops3• 15 years ago

Usually I wouldn't say this, but...

Has everyone on HN lost their friggin' sense of humor?!

[EDIT: let me clarify by saying that my karma has gone up and down on the top comment. So some folks get it.]

techsupporter• 15 years ago

Yes, he is. The U.S. Constitution forbids U.S. citizens from receiving honors such as this, but, of course, does nothing to prohibit non-citizens from the same. It is a matter of courtesy to use someone's title, even in the United States. Even the U.S. government refers to people with their titles, such as The Right Honourable Stephen Harper when the Prime Minister of Canada visits the United States.

"Sir," especially in an instance such as this, is an earned title with which its owner is entitled to be addressed.

Jun8• 15 years ago

Hmm, this got me thinking: An interesting loop occurs when you want to announce that person X has been knighted (what is the verb for women, "damed"?), i.e. is now Sir X (SX). The thing is you can't say "SX has been knighted" because that is a tautology. But saying "X has been knighted" sounds wrong because, you know, he's no longer X.

ComputerGuru3• 15 years ago

>(what is the verb for women, "damed"?)

Spent a good ten minutes Googling this one. It would seem no separate word exists ('damed' is not a word), though one site suggested the use of 'daymed' (it's a pun. not very funny :)

I believe technically both men and women are knighted. One becomes a Sir, and the other a Dame. If you think it sounds funny, I supposed "made a dame" might be another way of phrasing it.

sliverstorm8• 15 years ago

You can always cheat by referring to him indirectly ("design chief has been knighted") or simply claim that you are addressing him informally. The Sir is formal, I do not believe you are required to use it in casual conversation?

Well, we could put this another way and say that his name has not changed, in the same way as you might address me as Mr. John Doe OR John Doe OR Mr. Doe. Mr, Mrs, Miss, are all (classically) forms of minor titles.

vacri4• 15 years ago

I think that the loss of the honorific is still entirely polite if it's ommitted from the sentence that describes the person gaining their honourific. You're not diminishing them in any way, so it's not impolite.

jonhendry• 15 years ago

I'm not sure if he's been knighted yet. The honors come out in a long list at New Years, but I think the ceremonies are done bit by bit over a longer span of time. The Queen would probably get tired waving that sword around for so long.

Terry Pratchett's knighthood was announced in the 2008 New Years' list, but it was a couple of months before it was made official at Buckingham Palace.

joshes• 15 years ago

>Interestingly enough, Jobs himself was also considered for knighthood by the Queen of the United Kingdom, but the proposal was blocked by a former Prime Minister because Jobs declined to speak at a Labour Party conference.

That's fascinating to me. As an American who has never paid much attention to British knighthood, I am not knowledgeable about the process for selecting whom becomes a British knight. Could someone with the requisite knowledge perhaps elucidate on whether or not ostensibly petty politics get in the way of these things with regularity?

It seems absolutely absurd that someone who is being considered for knighthood could be denied of that because of something as minuscule as declining to speak at a party conference.

fiesycal• 15 years ago

I'm fairly sure you have to either have British citizenship or citizenship in one of the Commonwealth nations to be knighted. Otherwise you receive an honorary knighthood. Also some Commonwealth nations don't allow their citizens to receive honours, for example Canada.

bitops3• 15 years ago

Yes, it's honorary for non-Brits. Bill Gates, for instance, is just below knight, though he still holds a high honor bestowed by the Queen.

bch2• 15 years ago

Regarding Canada, apparently that's not entirely true in practice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_v._Chr%C3%A9tien#Black.27...

FrankBooth4• 15 years ago

Considering the British honours system is _entirely_ political faffery, no, it's not at all surprising.

mhb• 15 years ago

You would think it would be as impervious to human frailty as the choice of the pope or the winner of the Nobel peace prize.

spitfire• 15 years ago

For a time you could simply buy your way to a knighthood. At least for the last 50 years they've been an almost entirely political construction, recommended by the government and rubber stamped by the queen.

The Victoria Cross and George cross however, are earnt on merit alone.

teamonkey• 15 years ago

> For a time you could simply buy your way to a knighthood.

You still can.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/new-year-hono...

zobzu• 15 years ago

I find it a little sad.

I'd prefer this to be earned by deserving people - ones who have shown courage, bravery, etc and/or bring pride to the nation.

Not ones who pay/have friends/are just well known. Nowadays, knighthood doesn't represent anything of importance.

peteretep• 15 years ago

When /did/ it represent anything of importance?

JonnieCache2• 15 years ago

It's not so much that these things are interfered with by petty politics, rather that they are defined by petty politics.

See the following clip from the sitcom-cum-documentary Yes Minister for a more complete elucidation of the issues: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmXzGI0XP7M

If you want to understand british politics, watch all of Yes Minister. Then watch all of its spiritual successor, The Thick Of It.

megablast2• 15 years ago

And if you want to know about US politics, watch the West Wing.

Sorry, could not resist, just kidding. WW is an idealised form of government.

betageek• 15 years ago

Couldn't agree more with this comment - even better the genii behind The Thick If It have a new HBO series which I imagine will have an interesting take on US politics: Veep http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veep_(TV_series)

ComputerGuru3• 15 years ago

Can you be knighted posthumously?

toyg5• 15 years ago

A lot of people have a say on the list of people to be honoured, but the Prime Minister is the most influential of the lot. Technically speaking the monarch could overrule any objection (afaik the process is not defined by any specific law or regulation, just built on convention), in practice it rarely ever happened with Elizabeth II. It will be interesting to see how this, like many other conventions established under her rule, will morph once we go back to having a male King who will be more popular than the political establishment, something that hasn't happened for a very long time.

epscylonb• 15 years ago

I would say the queen is more popular than the political establishment as it is.

toyg5• 15 years ago

She wasn't necessarily so when she "took office" and formed her views on what her role had to be. At various stages, up to the 80s, a large segment of the population would have happily done away with the monarchy, which is unthinkable today. In a way, her constitutional profile as a weak ruler was a way to sneak the institution past turbulent times.

The next ruler will probably find himself, from the very beginning, more popular than powerful. The temptation to wrestle back some power from an unpopular political class will be strong, and there are very little safeguards. This wouldn't necessary be a bad thing: the UK system values pragmatism over principles, maybe restoring some royal privileges could be useful to get us out of the current ideological rut.

non123• 15 years ago

Is there that much love for Charles?

rmc• 15 years ago

> Technically speaking the monarch could overrule any objection (afaik the process is not defined by any specific law or regulation, just built on convention)

The UK doesn't really have a constitution in the sense that the US, France, Germany, etc. have a constitution. Power changes all the time, and has gradually gotten more democratic over the last 200 years.

In theory, all power is from the Queen/King, which they give out to Parliament. In theory

In practice Parliament has the power, and if the Queen/King over steps their bounds it's either sorted out by war (Parliament vs. the Monarch (English Civil War in 1640s)), or Parliament kicks out the Monarch and gets someone else in (Glorious Revolution of 1688 when they got rid of the Catholic King and invited the Prodestant Willian of Orange in).

arctangent• 15 years ago

> I am not knowledgeable about the process for selecting whom becomes a British knight

Here is a description of how the British honours selection process works:

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/UKgo...

bch2• 15 years ago

Not knighthood, but we in Canada went through something similar not too long ago with Conrad Black, Jean Cretien, and Black receiving the "name, style and title of Baron Black of Crossharbour" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrad_Black#Peerage_controvers...). Cretiens move was legal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_v._Chr%C3%A9tien), but in the local media spun as very personal. C'est la vie.

mkramlich• 15 years ago

I hereby make you a Knight. waves holy artifact

This basically sums up the process.

olivercameron• 15 years ago

Incredibly well deserved. If we all learn one thing from Sir Jony Ive, it's that simplicity wins out every single time.

Really happy to see him get mainstream recognition, because he truly should be up there with all the other well-known genius Brit's like Branson and Dyson.

keithpeter• 15 years ago

Its worth pointing out that Sir Jonathan went to a Further Education College and then a Polytechnic, and then went on to start his own small design agency?

This is an excellent example to others including my own students some of whom are on design courses here in the UK.

wallflower• 15 years ago

If you have not seen Gary Hustwit's design documentary, "Objectified", I recommend it highly. Especially if you are not a professional designer (I am not a designer, and I know enough to appreciate good design, not produce it) [1].

In "Objectified", Dieter Rams (of iconic Braun fame) is asked if there is any company that really gets design today. He answers after a moment's pause: "Apple".[2]

[1] Ira Glass on the importance of having good taste before you can produce to the expectations of that taste

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI23U7U2aUY (EDIT: Fixed link)

[2] "Objectified: Dieter Rams commentary"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBF1rOxWsxg

http://objectifiedfilm.com

felipemnoa• 15 years ago

Your first link has no video.

culturestate• 15 years ago

Erik Spiekermann (famous type designer) says much the same about Apple in "Helvetica."

matthavener• 15 years ago

Its available on netflix instant http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Objectified/70114976

statictype• 15 years ago

Am I the only one who was under the impression that he was already knighted for his work on the iPod/iMac (even before the iPhone was announced)? I could have sworn I read something to that effect many years ago.

FrankBooth4• 15 years ago

He was a Commander, now he's a Knight Commander. Only now may he use the title "Sir".

zerostar072• 15 years ago

He has to refer to himself as 'Sir' too?

philwelch• 15 years ago

> The knighthood, which is for "services to design and enterprise," is a step up from his previous title of Commander of the British Empire, which was awarded in 2005.

grandalf12• 15 years ago

This is as absurd as if he'd been given an honorary title by the Church of Scientology...

Am I the only one who sees this as a pitiful attempt by a government to rub elbows with someone who truly has merit, and by doing so to create the notion that there is some form of equality between the two?

I think any self-respecting person would decline knighthood. Though I can see in this case how his corporate responsibilities would lead him to accept it in order not to offend British subjects, since doing so might hurt sales.

FrankBooth4• 15 years ago

The entire British government has no merit? Really?

grandalf12• 15 years ago

One could make the same argument about the Church of Scientology. The knighthood is via the figurehead, monarchic part of the government which serves no actual purpose.

EToS3• 15 years ago

Troll much?

grandalf12• 15 years ago

It's not a troll. Why do governmental institutions deserve an ounce more (or less) credibility than non-governmental ones like the Gates Foundation or the Church of Scientology.

We're all just in the habit of glorifying those who have power over us (or who once did) and treating nonsense like this as if it was a real honor. If you want to honor Ives, buy an Apple product.

comice• 15 years ago

the only comment here anywhere near representative of my own views (and yeah, I'm British, yawn) has been down voted :/

vonskippy• 15 years ago

Ever since the "Slay Dragon" requirement has been removed, the honour seems a bit shallow.

kghose• 15 years ago

There is much wit in this brevity.

cenuij• 15 years ago

Frankly, it's bullshit. If it takes the queen to Recognise and protect this level of art, then we are fucked Vs. US bullshit.

zerostar072• 15 years ago

Wait ... that means he 's with the Empire now?

richardburton• 15 years ago

Well-deserved.

moonlighter2• 15 years ago

I'm happy that Jony got awarded this honor. But when I read "Commander of the British Empire" I chuckled and thought to myself, it's 2012 and this really ought to say "Commander of the British Empire or what's left of it" ;)

tobylane2• 15 years ago

It's prestige without power, pointing out the lack of power lowers the prestige.

moonlighter2• 15 years ago

Pointing to something which doesn't exist anymore is usually bad thing. NPE's come to mind.

Apple design chief Jonathan Ive awarded knighthood

Related Stories