King Charles III's coronation

[steve09090]

I think Sir Jony Ive is one of the best designers ever. What an honour to design King Charles III's Coronation Emblem.

https://www.royal.uk/coronation-emblem

​

“It is such an honour to be able to contribute to this remarkable national occasion, and our team is so very proud of this work. The design was inspired by King Charles’ love of the planet, nature, and his deep concern for the natural world.​

​

“The emblem speaks to the happy optimism of spring and celebrates the beginning of this new Carolean era for the United Kingdom. The gentle modesty of these natural forms combine to define an emblem that acknowledges both the joyful and profound importance of this occasion.”​

The emblem pays tribute to The King’s love of the natural world, unifying the flora of the four nations of the United Kingdom; the rose of England, the thistle of Scotland, the daffodil of Wales, and the shamrock of Northern Ireland. Together, the flowers create the shape of St Edward’s Crown

Moderation Note
Also see the discussion in the News thread:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apples-former-design-chief-jony-ive-designs-emblem-for-coronation-of-king-charles-iii.2380628/

 

[tranceking26]

I have little interest in the royal family, but that is a nice emblem.

 

[steve09090]

I have little interest in the royal family, but that is a nice emblem.

It is.

I put it there because it was a cool logo, Jony Ive is still designing awesome things, and the King will be representing 2.63 Billion people in the Commonwealth over 54 countries, but I get the Royal Family doesn't mean much to a certain proportion.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Cool marketing for what is a fantastic event for our country .

 

[ucfgrad93]

I like it.

 

[sam_dean]

Looks interesting although I find the lack of fauna a bit unbalanced.

 

[steve09090]

Looks interesting although I find the lack of fauna a bit unbalanced.

You think it’d be better with a unicorn, dragon, a lion & a wee little rabbit (Hare)?

 

[sam_dean]

You think it’d be better with a unicorn, dragon, a lion & a wee little rabbit (Hare)?

He advocated for animals too... so I'd only keep the lion & rabbit.

 

[steve09090]

He advocated for animals too... so I'd only keep the lion & rabbit.

Lol. I think it has to represent all countries in the UK, so the unicorn and Dragon is a must! 😂

 

[sam_dean]

Lol. I think it has to represent all countries in the UK, so the unicorn and Dragon is a must! 😂

The emblem comes across as a logo for a gardening supply depot

 

[steve09090]

The emblem comes across as a logo for a gardening supply depot

The King has an amazing garden and is rarely seen on the grounds without secateurs. So…

Why King Charles is our most green-fingered monarch to date

Clare Foster explores how the gardens of Highgrove, Birkhall and Clarence House have been a labour of love for the new King

www.houseandgarden.co.uk

 

[velocityg4]

The King has an amazing garden and is rarely seen on the grounds without secateurs. So…

Why King Charles is our most green-fingered monarch to date

Clare Foster explores how the gardens of Highgrove, Birkhall and Clarence House have been a labour of love for the new King

www.houseandgarden.co.uk

While I know it is intentional. English gardens always look like they are in serious need of a weeding and trim. Give me an Italian Garden or French Garden. Although the French ones are a bit too ornate.

 

[Apple fanboy]

It is.

I put it there because it was a cool logo, Jony Ive is still designing awesome things, and the King will be representing 2.63 Billion people in the Commonwealth over 54 countries, but I get the Royal Family doesn't mean much to a certain proportion.

I’m from the UK. He won’t be representing me. I’d abolish the lot of them. I’d rather spend the money on more deserving causes.

 

[5105973]

The coronation emblem is really a nice bit of work. I was surprised and favorably impressed by it.

I wish all the best to the citizens and residents of the UK as they navigate through challenging times.

 

[Richard8655]

Not a fan of the royalty thing anymore. Just seems a bit too pompous, and an anachronism that's outlived its usefulness especially in these austere economic times.

But the emblem does look elegant and nicely designed.

 

[steve09090]

I’m from the UK. He won’t be representing me. I’d abolish the lot of them. I’d rather spend the money on more deserving causes.

2021-22 the Royals cost the U.K. £102.4m. They brought in £1.7bn a year. What worthy cause would you decimate if they were abolished?

 

[Apple fanboy]

2021-22 the Royals cost the U.K. £102.4m. They brought in £1.7bn a year. What worthy cause would you decimate if they were abolished?

I hear this argument a lot. You can not say the money they brought in would all stop if they were abolished. It’s an absurd statement. Turn the palaces into tourist attractions. You might bring in more.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I hear this argument a lot. You can not say the money they brought in would all stop if they were abolished. It’s an absurd statement. Turn the palaces into tourist attractions. You might bring in more.

I think it would be naive to think it’s just the residences that attract people. The association and living Royals are a major pull for this country and abolishing a family would make us as bland as so many other countries out there that murdered theirs centuries ago. We don’t have to follow them and be interested, but I’m astonished how many people aren’t aware of the economic importance they carry.

 

[steve09090]

I hear this argument a lot. You can not say the money they brought in would all stop if they were abolished. It’s an absurd statement. Turn the palaces into tourist attractions. You might bring in more.

Buckingham Palace is open for tours. And it has been since the early 90’s when Windsor Castle caught fire in 1992 as a result of a workman’s error (work light)

It was done to pay for the repairs and has remained open ever since bringing in millions of £’s each year.

Look, I get that there is an outlay and you’re not a royalist. Neither am I and I can’t wait until Australia becomes a republic. When the government spends money, it needs to ensure there is value in its return. I’m this, they get a return of not less than £10’s for every £ they spend.

 

[5105973]

I think it would be naive to think it’s just the residences that attract people. The association and living Royals are a major pull for this country and abolishing a family would make us as bland as so many other countries out there that murdered theirs centuries ago. We don’t have to follow them and be interested, but I’m astonished how many people aren’t aware of the economic importance they carry.

Speaking as an American who dearly hopes to visit someday, I honestly only cared about the late Queen. And she's gone now and there will never be one like her again, certainly not in my lifetime.

And once my generation is gone, dont count on the younger ones even knowing or caring there is a royal family still in existence, let alone who exactly they might be. A lot of people here generally believe the surviving members of the royal family are a scandal plagued mess and cant name individual members very easily.

My kids and their friends just barely know and admire Harry and Meghan, and that is because those two are over here now, and because they're an interracial royal couple and that representation does matter to many people.

Nobody their age that I know has any idea who William is at all. He and Kate are on magazine covers here but nobody under 50 pays attention to that.

Even my Sister in law, who is an enthusiastic Anglophile, couldn't remember Kate or Camilla by name. When I reminded her of Camilla, she shuddered and made a face. That scandal will never die.

King Charles has name recognition here but only because he's been around almost as long as his mother. There's a vague awareness he was an environmentalist before it was cool. After that, sadly he's mostly known as that guy who inexplicably ditched the beautiful and beloved Princess for...someone her polar opposite. I can't think of anyone excited about visiting Buckingham Palace because of him. His wife will likely be the reason many of my peers will stay away.

Prince Andrew has name recognition here. But it's not positive.

My friends who consider themselves Anglophiles barely acknowledge a royal family even exists and are frankly more interested in seeing the kinds of places that inspired Harry Potter and Downton Abbey and All Creatures Great and Small and so forth.

England and the UK have much more to offer than a scandal plagued family.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Speaking as an American who dearly hopes to visit someday, I honestly only cared about the late Queen. And she's gone now and there will never be one like her again, certainly not in my lifetime.

And once my generation is gone, dont count on the younger ones even knowing or caring there is a royal family still in existence, let alone who exactly they might be. A lot of people here generally believe the surviving members of the royal family are a scandal plagued mess and cant name individual members very easily.

My kids and their friends just barely know and admire Harry and Meghan, and that is because those two are over here now, and because they're an interracial royal couple and that representation does matter to many people.

Nobody their age that I know has any idea who William is at all. He and Kate are on magazine covers here but nobody under 50 pays attention to that.

Even my Sister in law, who is an enthusiastic Anglophile, couldn't remember Kate or Camilla by name. When I reminded her of Camilla, she shuddered and made a face. That scandal will never die.

King Charles has name recognition here but only because he's been around almost as long as his mother. There's a vague awareness he was an environmentalist before it was cool. After that, sadly he's mostly known as that guy who inexplicably ditched the beautiful and beloved Princess for...someone her polar opposite. I can't think of anyone excited about visiting Buckingham Palace because of him. His wife will likely be the reason many of my peers will stay away.

Prince Andrew has name recognition here. But it's not positive.

My friends who consider themselves Anglophiles barely acknowledge a royal family even exists and are frankly more interested in seeing the kinds of places that inspired Harry Potter and Downton Abbey and All Creatures Great and Small and so forth.

England and the UK have much more to offer than a scandal plagued family.

I wouldn't expect this topic to be popular amongst newer generations in America to be honest. A lot of American history and issues aren't exactly followed in the UK and when I was at school no American history was taught at all from what I remember. We are totally different cultures and very dissimilar and perhaps this sort of topic is unlikely to attract anything other than negativity, not just here but on most places online.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I think it would be naive to think it’s just the residences that attract people. The association and living Royals are a major pull for this country and abolishing a family would make us as bland as so many other countries out there that murdered theirs centuries ago. We don’t have to follow them and be interested, but I’m astonished how many people aren’t aware of the economic importance they carry.

Just as naive to say they bring in x and cost us y. Know one knows for sure.
But either way I’m not going to support a system that says you deserve to rule because of your parentage.

 

[decafjava]

I think it would be naive to think it’s just the residences that attract people. The association and living Royals are a major pull for this country and abolishing a family would make us as bland as so many other countries out there that murdered theirs centuries ago. We don’t have to follow them and be interested, but I’m astonished how many people aren’t aware of the economic importance they carry.

I wouldn't say France is bland at least IMHO. Versailles and other royal and noble chateaux bring in lots of visitors to France every year. Even in Russia which had an even bloodier revolution and civil war still keeps Peterhof (Versailles copy in St. Petersburg) as a tourist attraction though a lot fewer go now for obvious reasons.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

I wouldn't say France is bland at least IMHO. Versailles and other royal and noble chateaux bring in lots of visitors to France every year. Even in Russia which had an even bloodier revolution and civil war still keeps Peterhof (Versailles copy in St. Petersburg) as a tourist attraction though a lot fewer go now for obvious reasons.

It would be a bit hypocritical to abolish a family and then charge tourists to visit their homes to celebrate their existence in a nostalgic fashion though would it not? Perhaps if we abolish our Royals we could do some kind of Romanov execution rather than the humiliation of William and Kate getting a job in Sainsbury’s.

 

[5105973]

I wouldn't expect this topic to be popular amongst newer generations in America to be honest. A lot of American history and issues aren't exactly followed in the UK and when I was at school no American history was taught at all from what I remember. We are totally different cultures and very dissimilar and perhaps this sort of topic is unlikely to attract anything other than negativity, not just here but on most places online.

I'm just discussing it in terms of the royal family's impact on tourism among Americans since there's the discussion of their value in that regard. I'm not seeing the royal family as being any kind of tourist draw anymore. It did used to excite some people to visit Buckingham Palace especially if the Queen happened to be in residence there while they were visiting. But the Queen occupied a special place on history and had the opportunity to win hearts and minds as a very young ruling monarch that Charles didn't.

His marriage to Diana was a huge PR gift to him but he didn't want it and that became a personal disaster and liability to him all these years.

But he is King at long last and once again has the opportunity to refocus attention on himself in a positive way. It does help he has a long body of work to look back on and admire. He's definitely not been a lazy prince.

Whether or not that transforms him into a tourist draw remains to be seen. Maybe people will get a thrill to visit Buckingham Palace knowing he's working in there somewhere.