{"id":32,"date":"2005-02-24T21:33:36","date_gmt":"2005-02-25T01:33:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/title-this\/"},"modified":"2006-07-24T09:48:00","modified_gmt":"2006-07-24T13:48:00","slug":"title-this","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/editorials\/title-this\/","title":{"rendered":"Title This!"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>Big-picture guys and the molls of the media have scanned Mr. Bush’s second inaugural speech, some faulting it for na\ufffdvet\ufffd and hubris, others finding in it Lincolnesque vision and cadences. Very well for them all. Now it’s time for the man in the street to take a little note, that we may long remember a certain contradiction between what was said and what was done on that day.<\/p>\n

The President’s first phrases (admirable in their delicate alliteration) were:
\n
\nOn this day, prescribed by law and marked by ceremony, we celebrate the durable wisdom of our Constitution, and recall the deep commitments that unite our country. I am grateful for the honor of this hour, mindful of the consequential times in which we live, and determined to fulfill the oath that I have sworn and you have witnessed.<\/p>\n

<\/em>Yes, we witnessed an oath administered by the gentleman introduced as \u201cThe Honorable William Rhenquist.\u201d Stop right there. Why call him \u201chonorable?\u201d Were his fellow citizens grumbling \u201cHe\u2019s a cad?\u201d No, \u201cHonorable\u201d is a title\u2014one that the Chief Justice and thousands of other Americans enjoy. Indeed, fully half the population of the presidential grandstand on that day was \u201cHonorable.\u201d What does the invoked \u201cwisdom of our Constitution\u201d say about that?<\/p>\n

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States \u2026<\/em>(Article Nine)<\/p>\n

Maybe the administrator of the oath loathes the title thrust upon him by the public address announcer. Maybe, in his mind, he retires to a farm, a contemporary Cincinnatus, noble on the inside, pooh-poohing the pomp of the capital. But there remain those stripes he had sewn on his sleeves to distinguish \u201cThe Chief\u201d from the Justices.<\/p>\n

Some would say \u201cHonorable\u201d just indicates his high office. Not quite, but let\u2019s cut some slack for him and his sleeves, especially since he is suffering from ill health. We wish him a full and speedy recovery. But what about those who are out of office, such as \u201cThe Honorable\u201d William Jefferson Clinton? The person in question doesn\u2019t matter. Advertising him or her as \u201chonorable\u201d is like a real estate agent asking you to visit the nice new homes in \u201cShady Grove at Gentle Hills.\u201d Pack your sunscreen and rappelling gear.<\/p>\n

And block your ears in shame when \u201cSenator\u201d Dole pitches his wares on TV or when \u201cCongressman\u201d Fill-In-The-Blank lobbies on behalf of chemicals or China. It\u2019s not a question of what they do, for Lord knows we\u2019re all trying to hustle a buck. It\u2019s what the thousands of ex-judges, ex-representatives, and ex-assistant secretaries expect to be called. Ah! Don\u2019t forget that each federal department\u2019s (former!) \u201cUnder Secretary\u201d and \u201cAssistant Secretary\u201d enjoy title creep. Like the recaptured slaves defending Spartacus, all will stand up and shout \u201cI am!\u201d when asked \u201cWhich one of you is Mr. Secretary?\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Webster, a title is a word \u2026 added to\u2026 somebody\u2019s name to indicate his or her rank, social status, or profession \u2026<\/em>But are they the title[s] of Nobility<\/em> forbidden by our Constitution? Once again, Websterian wisdom: \u201cnoble\u201d refers to a person, thing, or group believed to be superior to all others of the same kind.<\/em> Our title holders themselves are the true believers in their ascendancy. Decades ago did campaign contributor John Doe preside over three months of dinners in our Barbados embassy? Just try calling him \u201cMister Doe.\u201d The icy stare, the horrified assistant, the embossed business card\u2014they all scream, \u201cAmbassador Doe!\u201d Recognize him! Our man on the beachfront of freedom! Sympathize with him! He\u2019s no District of Columbia school administrator, shelling out a mere $600 to be called \u201cDoctor.\u201d John Doe\u2019s ticket into the American aristocracy cost him tens of thousands.<\/p>\n

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States …
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

Officials of the United States heap \u201cYour Honors\u201d upon one another, a bad enough affront to the Constitution. It\u2019s worse when we the people of the United States put up with it. When it serves them, our worthies describe themselves as \u201cpublic servants,\u201d a good term, but one that now sounds quaint. Let\u2019s change that. Let\u2019s take them at their word and address them like servants\u2014like the good, hard-working, honorable servants that they undoubtedly have been. Most Americans aren\u2019t used to dealing with servants. Should we call them \u201cBill?\u201d Very familiar. \u201cWilliam?\u201d Maybe paternalistic. How about an egalitarian \u201cMr.\u201d or \u201cMs.\u201d, as the case may be? How about a verbal vote for government \u201cby the people, for the people, and of the people?\u201d<\/p>\n

—Master<\/span> Daniel Q. Kelley<\/span>
\n(It cost me two years and a lot of money)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Big-picture guys and the molls of the media have scanned Mr. Bush’s second inaugural speech, some faulting it for na\ufffdvet\ufffd and hubris, others finding in it Lincolnesque vision and cadences. Very well for them all. Now it’s time for the man in the street to take a little note, that we may long remember a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":359,"featured_media":0,"parent":151,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-32","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/32","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/359"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/32\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/151"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/globalfund\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}