Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Bruce Forsyth and the honours list.
73 Answers
http://www.express.co...our-for-Bruce-Forsyth
Like him or loath him, agree or disagree on who should receive honours.
But the question I wish to put is, 'Why hasn't Bruce Forsyth ever been made a Sir?
Like him or loath him, agree or disagree on who should receive honours.
But the question I wish to put is, 'Why hasn't Bruce Forsyth ever been made a Sir?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I am sure you are right LoftyLottie.
For me the Stones were one of the earliest bands to complete the requisite criteria for lifelong adoration - I thought they were one of the most exciting things i had ever seen or heard (still do!) and my dad thought they alll needed a haircut and National Service!
(and yes, I know Bill Wyman did his NS - but the others escaped.)
For me the Stones were one of the earliest bands to complete the requisite criteria for lifelong adoration - I thought they were one of the most exciting things i had ever seen or heard (still do!) and my dad thought they alll needed a haircut and National Service!
(and yes, I know Bill Wyman did his NS - but the others escaped.)
If the honours system was existed exclusively to honour those who'd served their country or who had quietly done a lot for charity, people would very quickly get bird with them.
Part of the thrill of the honours list is hearing that someone you like or admire has got an award. The vast, vast, vast majority of knighthoods, KCBEs, MBEs, CBEs and OBEs DO go to those we've never heard of - but they don't sell papers.
Yes, it's great to hear about a lollipop lady getting an MBE, but it's also nice to see someone you like getting a gong.
Part of the thrill of the honours list is hearing that someone you like or admire has got an award. The vast, vast, vast majority of knighthoods, KCBEs, MBEs, CBEs and OBEs DO go to those we've never heard of - but they don't sell papers.
Yes, it's great to hear about a lollipop lady getting an MBE, but it's also nice to see someone you like getting a gong.
Being a good musician does not give him the right to be honoured and adored, it's the man himself that disgusts me.
His numerous marriages and affairs, which produced numerous children.
The fact that he accepted his knighthood, which seemed to contradict his previous anti-establishment stance.
Unlike other knighted rock musicians, he has no "known record of charitable work or public services."
He failed to preform at the Queen's Golden Jubilee pop concert rock concert.
His relationship with Marianne Faithful.
And don't get me started on Keith Richards
Perhaps all you 'music fans' think Garry Glitter is fantastic also?
His numerous marriages and affairs, which produced numerous children.
The fact that he accepted his knighthood, which seemed to contradict his previous anti-establishment stance.
Unlike other knighted rock musicians, he has no "known record of charitable work or public services."
He failed to preform at the Queen's Golden Jubilee pop concert rock concert.
His relationship with Marianne Faithful.
And don't get me started on Keith Richards
Perhaps all you 'music fans' think Garry Glitter is fantastic also?
AOG
I really think comparing Mick Jagger and Keith Richards who are eminent musicians to a trashy paediophile with no talent is ridiculous and I am insulted that you think we should like him because we are Stones fans.
It shows your complete lack of musicality. What Richards and Jagger have done in their private life has had no impact on society and is of no consequence whatsoever to whether or not Jagger deserved a knighthood. And how many wives, girlfriends or children he has had has got nothing to do with anything. He is respected as a musician and rightly so.
What do you know of the personal affairs of other people you respect and think deserve knighthoods? I think you might be very surprised.
I really think comparing Mick Jagger and Keith Richards who are eminent musicians to a trashy paediophile with no talent is ridiculous and I am insulted that you think we should like him because we are Stones fans.
It shows your complete lack of musicality. What Richards and Jagger have done in their private life has had no impact on society and is of no consequence whatsoever to whether or not Jagger deserved a knighthood. And how many wives, girlfriends or children he has had has got nothing to do with anything. He is respected as a musician and rightly so.
What do you know of the personal affairs of other people you respect and think deserve knighthoods? I think you might be very surprised.
Gary Glitter makes my skin crawl.
However, whenever (and that's with increasing infrequency) I do hear the 'thump, thump, thump' of one of his hits, it transports me back to the time I was a child and had no reason NOT to enjoy his music...........
It is an inconvenient dilemma that I find myself in.
However, whenever (and that's with increasing infrequency) I do hear the 'thump, thump, thump' of one of his hits, it transports me back to the time I was a child and had no reason NOT to enjoy his music...........
It is an inconvenient dilemma that I find myself in.
AOG - I wouldn't call two marriages numerous - and his relationships are really his own business.
Jagger's 'anti-establishment stance' was, and is nothing of the kind. if you check back, you will find that Mick Jagger has always enjoyed friendships and business relationships with the great and the good of this country, and others. He has played along with the artfully contrived 'rebel' personna created by the band's first manager Andrew Loog Oldham, but has always remained firmly entrenched in his middle class roots and uppper class aspirations. Again, if you check back, you will find that it was the 'establishment' who conducted a witch hunt against Jagger and The Stones.
His failure to place his charitable donations on public record does not negate their existence.
His failure to perform at the Jubilee Concert was probably far more the responsibility of keith Richards, an avowed establishment hater, and genuine rebel personna. No Keith - no Stones - no azppearence.
His relationship with Marianne Faithfull - please expand?
OK, I won;t start with Keith Richards.
And I am a music fan without the quote marks - and a music writer with work published in fifty-eight titles over thirty years, so I do know a considerable amount about the form.
As for Gary Glitter - you need to be able to seperate the art from the individual.
As a perfomer and poop star, Gary Glitter was wonderful, highly successful, and creative. As a person, he is an odious reptile who's continued existence as a free man is an affront to common humanity.
But separating the artist from the individual ie essentail - otherwise you will have to start shouting down Wagner - a peerless composer, but also an avowed anti-Semite.
Jagger's 'anti-establishment stance' was, and is nothing of the kind. if you check back, you will find that Mick Jagger has always enjoyed friendships and business relationships with the great and the good of this country, and others. He has played along with the artfully contrived 'rebel' personna created by the band's first manager Andrew Loog Oldham, but has always remained firmly entrenched in his middle class roots and uppper class aspirations. Again, if you check back, you will find that it was the 'establishment' who conducted a witch hunt against Jagger and The Stones.
His failure to place his charitable donations on public record does not negate their existence.
His failure to perform at the Jubilee Concert was probably far more the responsibility of keith Richards, an avowed establishment hater, and genuine rebel personna. No Keith - no Stones - no azppearence.
His relationship with Marianne Faithfull - please expand?
OK, I won;t start with Keith Richards.
And I am a music fan without the quote marks - and a music writer with work published in fifty-eight titles over thirty years, so I do know a considerable amount about the form.
As for Gary Glitter - you need to be able to seperate the art from the individual.
As a perfomer and poop star, Gary Glitter was wonderful, highly successful, and creative. As a person, he is an odious reptile who's continued existence as a free man is an affront to common humanity.
But separating the artist from the individual ie essentail - otherwise you will have to start shouting down Wagner - a peerless composer, but also an avowed anti-Semite.
Latest Posts
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Should There Be Age Limits In Politics?
News13 mins ago
Politics18 mins ago
Film, Media & TV19 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.