This has to be the season of wacky award decisions. First, it was Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. Now it's former Prime Minister Jean Chretien's "Order of Merit".
To be quite frank, I really wasn't aware of the "Order of Merit", before I heard the news of Chretien's achievement. So I decided to look into it a bit. The Order of Merit, or "O.M.", as it is better known to those in the know, is the "Sovereign's personal gift" to "individuals of exceptional distinction in the arts, learning, sciences and other areas such as public service". (NO, Governor General Michaelle Jean, you cannot give these things out too!). Jean Chretien falls into the "other areas such as public service" category. Our former Prime Minister seemed very, very pleased that he received this gift. He noted that he was in the company of a very elite group of persons so honoured. It was indeed a great gift, much better I think than a DVD set of movie classics or an IPOD. I was impressed.
There are only 24 current members in the Order of Merit club. I wondered who they were. So I looked it up. I recognized a few of the names. For example, the Queen has given this gift to her husband, The Duke of Edinburgh ( not that he needs it - he already has about 15 other letters after his name), and to her son, The Prince of Wales. Fair enough - they are family after all. Other notables to me were Maggie Thatcher, Dame Joan Sutherland, Sir Anthony Caro, Sir David Attenborough, and Honorary Member Nelson Mandela. They were a few others whose names I recognized, but a bunch about whom I have no clue - Sir James Whyte Black, for example. This I guess is not too surprising as I am not all that up to date on the who's who of British society. Perhaps you will recognize them - check it out.
Like you I wondered why the Queen chose Jean, the little guy from Shawinigan. After all there are very few politicians on this list from Great Britain or anywhere else in the world. Granted, Chretien was a successful Canadian politician and Prime Minister, but "exceptional"? The Queen must like him, I mean really, really like him. And who am I to gainsay the Queen's gift giving decisions anyway.
I had a few other random thoughts about this choice. There must be two very, very angry people around today. Conrad Black, for example. Recall that Chretien blocked Conrad's peerage, a move which resulted in a law suit. If I were a fellow prisoner, I would avoid Conrad for a few days. And how about Brian Mulroney? He CANNOT be too happy about this.
Oh well, petty jealousies. And all over a gift.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Prof. Klar,
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Mr. Black, have you been following his appeal? I loved the Fifth Circuit opinion by our man Richard Posner. What a guy. Especially this part:
Three more issues need to be discussed. The first is whether an “ostrich” instruction should have been given. The reference of course is to the legend that ostriches when frightened bury their head in the sand. It is pure legend and a canard on a very distinguished bird. Zoological Society of San Diego, Birds: Ostrich, www.sandiegozoo.org/animalbytes/t-ostrich.html (visited June 12, 2008) (“When an ostrich senses danger and cannot run away, it flops to the ground and remains still, with its head and neck flat on the ground in front of it. Because the head and neck are lightly colored, they blend in with the color of the soil. From a distance, it just looks
like the ostrich has buried its head in the sand, because only the body is visible”). It is too late, however, to correct this injustice.
The appeal's headed to the SCOTUS, but it won't help Black-- they are only examining his fraud convictions, not the one for obstruction of justice, which is just as long and runs concurrently. So he's in for the duration. Note that My Man J.P. Stevens, J. is running the docket; he's a Chicagoan, and that's his Circuit. Also note that Black's being represented by world-class jerk Miguel Estrada, whose other clients include: Exxon in their Valdez damages challenge; John Yoo in his possible criminal/ethical violations for encouraging torture; and George W. Bush, in Bush v. Gore (in which M.M.J.P. Stevens, J. wrote a classic dissent).
So how do you see Black? As a schadenfreude/Martha Stewart thing, where he doesn't really deserve it? A heartening example of punishment well-deserved? A classic case of stretching a law (mail fraud) to cover activity the law was never intended to reach?
-Scott
Professor Klar:
ReplyDeleteSplendid use of the regrettably under-appreciated verb 'gainsay'.
Your ob't servant,
Sir Sedgewick
If you have read "Straight From the Heart", Chretien's 1986 bio during his wilderness years, there's a great pic of him subtitled "the Queen and I share a private joke during an official ceremony". At the time I thought he was aggrandizing. Now, perhaps not.
ReplyDeleteWilly Bangoman
I'd have to say that both Mulroney and Black deserve the OM more than Chretien.
ReplyDelete