Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Sir Patrick Stewart 324

david.emery was one of a few folks who noted that Patrick Stewart can now be referred to as Sir Captain as he will be knighted by the Queen. This should bring balance to any future X-Men movies.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sir Patrick Stewart

Comments Filter:
  • by assemblerex ( 1275164 ) * on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:00AM (#30604700)
    "Make it so"
    Though we both know it's because he and the Queen both roll with the Earl Grey posse.
    • I went to catholic school, so give a man some slack.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jo42 ( 227475 )


      In English We spell it with a 'K', so "I now dub thee Knight" is correct (but We don't pronounce the "K" -- go figure).

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        In English We spell it with a 'K', so "I now dub thee Knight" is correct (but We don't pronounce the "K" -- go figure).

        Who are you to say what he was dubbed? Maybe he was dubbed "Night", it may be a new designation or rank. Obviously someone may be also dubbed "Day", but there also may be "Dawn" and "Dusk", as in: "His Grace, the Dawn of Westminster".

        I think this is a positive turn of events. Knights are getting old, and there are too many of them around. It's also no fun "dubbing" if the only thing you're ever realistically going to dub someone is "Knight".
        I congratulate Sir Patrick Stewart, Night!

    • ...and when I read that, I thought of the Borg queen... Humm... :)

  • Pedantic, but... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tomtomtom ( 580791 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:00AM (#30604702)
    The correct order to put the two in would be "Captain Sir", not "Sir Captain"
  • Abolishment? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stuart Gibson ( 544632 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:01AM (#30604724) Homepage

    And people ask what the point of having the monarchy around is.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
      I'm not sure what your point is, given that the queen just rubber stamps the honours list; it's prepared by the Prime Minister. As to the point of the monarch, I thought she was there to veto insane government legislation, but when she signed RIPA I realised that she was just a waste of taxpayers' money.
    • Re:Abolishment? (Score:5, Informative)

      by dkleinsc ( 563838 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:57AM (#30605188) Homepage

      Actually, a major reason the Brits keep the monarchy around is that it makes about as much in tourism as it costs them. It's not just silly tradition.

      That and you can give people cool titles, which by contrast the US Constitution strictly forbids.

      • ... than it costs. The monarchy is cheap when you think of the vast sums that are paid for such things as preparing for the Olympics.

        The world needs one last country that still does the pomp and ceremony of imperialism, and the UK is the one.

        I think the legislation that the Queen should have the right to veto is anything that affects the British constitution itself, such as modifications to the role of the Lords without their consent, or modifications to her own role. Like the US President, her job should

        • by Xaedalus ( 1192463 ) <Xaedalys@ya[ ].com ['hoo' in gap]> on Thursday December 31, 2009 @12:35PM (#30606324)

          The Queen is a lot more powerful than most people seem to believe. Yes, she is a ceremonial monarch, but her assent (correct me if I'm wrong) is required to convene Parliament in Canada, Australia, and the UK. She is the Defender of the Kingdom, the head of the Anglican Church, and all the UK, Canadian, and Australian armed forces ceremoniously answer to her. Also, she does possess that veto power, but I suspect that if she ever had to use it, there would not be a Constitutional reform movement because most likely the situation would have been so dire that her subjects would agree with her actions, and therefore guarantee no reprisal from any Parliament. She is the Queen of Canada, Australia, and the UK, and she holds the allegiance of millions. If the UK parliament were ever to screw up so badly that it loses the absolute faith of its constituents, then I could see how the monarchy could reassert itself as an applicable executive branch of government.

          Perhaps it's like Captain Carrot - a king should remain hidden in the background, coming forward only when needed. I can certainly imagine that if worst came to worst, the British Empire would reunite under Elizabeth's banner, or that of William (couldn't even begin to see that with Charles)

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            Perhaps it's like Captain Carrot - a king should remain hidden in the background

            That's Captain Ironfoundersson to you, Lance-Constable!

          • by fridaynightsmoke ( 1589903 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @01:31PM (#30607204) Homepage

            ... all the UK, Canadian, and Australian armed forces ceremoniously answer to her.

            Incidentally, I have been asking British troops (currently serving and former) now and then whether, in the event of conflicting orders, they would obey the orders of the Queen, or those from parliament/government/elected representatives.

            Every single time, without any of them hesitating at all, the answer comes back "The Queen".

            Of course, if that theory was ever really tested, I doubt that I'd want to be around to see the result...

          • by hitmark ( 640295 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @01:50PM (#30607510) Journal

            i think that the a monarchy allows for a sense of stability while politicians come and go. Especially if they are able to remain somewhat outside of the day to day politics. But then i'm norwegian, and our short times as a modern constitutional monarchy have shown such things as a king using public transport when there was a oil crisis, and the crown prince and princess going to public school.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by biglig2 ( 89374 )

          I always say to people who complain about how much the Queen costs, exactly how much do they think President Blair and his First Lady would cost?

    • Diplomacy (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @11:38AM (#30605648)

      The Queen is a first class diplomat, which is her function as Chief of State. Britain is like many nations in that the Chief of State and the Head of Government are not the same person, as they are in the US. There the Head of Government is the Prime Minister and that is where the executive power resides. The Chief of State is a seperate person, the monarch in this case, and is basically a figurehead. She meets with diplomats and gives them, literally, the royal treatment. Works rather well.

      Not saying there's anything wrong with the US system of unifying the Chief of State and Head of Government in to a single President, just that it isn't how the whole world does it. Britain is not the only country with the division.

      Also tradition has its place in human affairs. It is important to who we are as a people, and helps give us a sense of purpose, and something to look to in difficult times.

  • "I've just been paid a visit by Q. She wants to do something nice for me." Qpid.
  • by varn_ix ( 578598 )
    ...technically, OBE does not admit an individual into knighthood automatically, only KBE and GBE do.
  • X-men (Score:5, Insightful)

    by heffrey ( 229704 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:17AM (#30604838)

    I seriously doubt the knighthood was anything to do with the vacuous X-men/Trek work. Much more likely to be related to his work on the stage. I recently saw him in Waiting for Godot (alongside Sir Ian McKellen) and he was magnificent even though I've not got much time for that particular play.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      ... we all know it's for his outstanding work on American Dad.

    • "...I've not got much time for that particular play."

      Wait around until the end.. It's quite a surprise.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by MORB ( 793798 )

      Nope. I think he got knighted for his outstanding rendition of the facepalm.

    • by Rolgar ( 556636 )

      As the father of 2, I was going to guess it was for Bambi II. ;)

      What British born international celebrity of 20 years doesn't eventually get knighted?

    • by OpenGLFan ( 56206 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @11:27AM (#30605504) Homepage

      I know this will sound like hopeless fanboyism, but Stewart was no slouch in ST:TNG, and he didn't just phone it in. I can't think of many other actors who could have pulled off "There Are Four Lights", or the episode where he lived an entire life in another planet and learned to play the flute (can't remember the name.) After a few seasons, the writers realized just how good "that Shakespeare guy" was, and they wrote some demanding episodes for Stewart.

      Watch the first season, just watching Picard: it's a textbook example of how a talented actor can take a largely untried cast and some occasionally shaky writing and forge a solid character.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by bds1986 ( 1268378 )

        the episode where he lived an entire life in another planet and learned to play the flute (can't remember the name.)

        "The Inner Light" was the episode you're looking for. Wikipedia has a complete list in case you weren't already aware: []

        My personal favourite was "Darmok", the one where he's abducted and trapped on a planet with an alien he can't communicate with. I won't spoil it for you in case you haven't seen it, but it's a truly moving performance by Stewart IMHO.

  • So (Score:4, Funny)

    by Daimanta ( 1140543 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:34AM (#30604994) Journal

    does that mean he can now compete in jousting tournaments?

  • by hellfire ( 86129 ) <deviladv&gmail,com> on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:36AM (#30605024) Homepage

    Patrick will approach the queen during the ceremony, then suddenly have a fit as he sees the spotlights around him and scream "THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!!"

  • Only fitting after he knighted Robin Hood. "Kneel, Robin of Loxley. And arise, Sir Robin of Loxley."
  • Great actor (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Antiocheian ( 859870 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @10:53AM (#30605156) Journal

    I'm not a Star Trek fan (I've only watched a few episodes of the original and nothing else), but I really like Stewart's works. For example I enjoyed his "Christmas Carol" much more than any other Christmas Carol (and there are several out there) as well as Henry II in The Lion in Winter. Actually I have to watch that movie again now that I think about it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by rah1420 ( 234198 )

      Amen to A Christmas Carol. I had recorded it when it was on TNT originally in 1999, but set it aside and never watched it. About two weeks ago I picked it up and me and my family watched it. We loved it, even the four year old and the 2 year old. They rendered their opinion of Scrooge as "He's a grumpy old man who doesn't like Christmas."

      I liked it so much I ordered the DVD from Amazon so I wouldn't have to put up with the commercials. Of course, the kids found the "Muppet Christmas Carol" so now it's

  • by Sponge Bath ( 413667 ) on Thursday December 31, 2009 @11:17AM (#30605412)

    I always enjoyed it when he ran around to that funny music and Benny Hill slapped him on his bald head.

  • Peter Jackson was knighted too [] this days, in Middle Eart... i mean, New Zealand.
  • He is a spectacular stage actor.

    I had seen him long ago and remember how good his was then.

    His talent was opening door for him long before Star Trek. But TV series launched him as a very recognizable actor. I am sure he would have been noticed with out Star Trek but it did help is Career and maybe got him knight a few years early.

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.