Feb 09 2009
Why Is It the Price of Fame?
Before doing anything else, you should got over to flit’s blog, flitting on fiction and read the short story she put up today. It is, in my opinion, one of the five finest short stories I’ve ever read. And I’m a connoisseur. I love the classics like O’Henry and Sake, and some gems written by people no one’s heard of. I can’t think of a short story that has impressed me more (or that makes me cry every time I read it). Seriously. Read it.Back to our regularly scheduled blog…Someone explain this drive for so many to idolize celebrity. Or, more precisely, assign character traits to someone based on entirely different characteristics. By the way, this is all my opinion, so just punctuate all the sentences with “in my opinion” as you read it.
I’ll give you an example. Think about the movie Amadeus. Here is this individual who maybe have been the greatest musical prodigy that ever lived, writing symphonies and operas while still a child. Yet, Salieri’s opinion of Mozart (not his work) is completely tainted when he finds out Mozart’s an immature self-absorbed, impractical ass. If Mozart had been a ditch-digger, no one would have cared if he were a jerk or had all kinds of personality flaws, but, since he produced such magnificent music, he should be some sort of paragon all the way through. My question is: why?If he had been a saint walking the earth, would his music have been any sweeter? (Is that possible?) If he had spent his off-hours playing Sweeney Todd to street urchins, would his music have been less brilliant? Why do we impose judgments on things that don’t have anything to do with us?
Why are so many compelled to impose unrelated virtues (or vices) on those who accomplish things? When someone becomes a fan, they seem to ascribe all kinds of virtues on athletes or singers or business moguls or whatever they admire. This is a double edged sword: on the one hand, these celebrities can be cast aside, often with extreme prejudice, if they have some sort of normal flaw that wouldn’t be given a second thought in a regular person - how dare they “betray” their public! On the other hand, sometimes the fans are so ardent, the celebrities are deified no matter what they do, as in the brouhaha supporting Paris Hilton when she had to face the consequences of her own actions.
But I’m completely confused by this. Why does a gold medalist owe me, a portion of the public, anything for having made an accomplishment through his or her own hard work? I didn’t put in the time and hours he or she did to accomplish what they accomplished. If I had, and had the talent, I might have won the medals. Why is it my business what they eat or who they sleep with or if they wear underwear? Why do they have to be nice guys? Who says that going in and skating fourteen hours on the rink makes you patient and keep your temper when facing photographers? Who says swimming 10 hours a day grants someone judgment? Who says being Most Valuable Player makes one a good husband? Short of cheating (like taking steroids), it has no effect on who the job they do, the same one they’re paid to do. In my opinion, they owe the public (if the public actually is owed anything) their performances and, truth told, they really only owe those performances to those that pay them for it. And, perhaps, themselves.
This applies to actors and singers and supermodels and scientists and people of accomplishment all over. It applies to novelists and explorers and movie directors and astronauts and software company CEOs.
You know what a celebrity owes you and me? Same thing we owe them. Nothing.
On the other hand, we ought to think long and hard about what we do admire, who we do become fans of and why. Becoming a fan of Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. because of how they lived their lives and what they stood for makes a lot of sense. Admiring Harriet Tubman or Helen Keller for overcoming incredible odds and setting a high standard for working for the betterment of others, there’s another example. Even pointing out the accomplishments of athletes and astronauts to our children and explaining how much time and sacrifice was needed to make those accomplishments is a fine thing - but we shouldn’t take that accomplishment and make judgments, good or bad, on what kind of people they are. In the end, we’re all people with failings and frailties and bits and pieces that are no one’s business but our own.
Just felt like it needed to be said.
If there is an exception to this rule, it includes those that we elect or appoint to public office, people we pay to represent our interests and serve the law. When they break it, when they betray our interests to their own, that’s as much a betrayal as an athlete on steroids. We should not sit still for it. We shouldn’t condone it. We should not sit quietly back. But then, we’re the ones paying for their performances. But even that should be limited to breaking the law and betraying our interests. Think about it.
Nope, I don’t understand it either. Never did. This whole business of making “role models” out of sports stars confuses me, too. It reminds me of the routine Bill Cosby used to do about football players making commercials; outside of their own area of expertise, they’re really not all that bright.
Well, you already know my take on it. I ranted about Michael Phelps’ current situation a few days ago. In my opinion, he nor any other celebrity, owes us (the general public) anything.
I’ll have to check out that short story.
Davida
I’d been going to answer the original question, but it ended up being long enough that it demanded its own post, so…. it’s over here.
Regarding the Disney thing–while I disagree with the overall message, I can see why people would consider boycotting the movies to be their best shot at expressing dissatisfaction with company policy. Lot of people can’t think of any better way to hit ‘em in the pocketbook, and where else can you hit them in this day and age?
I remember when I was a fundie, I ran into a similar attitude: they would put out “Christian business guides,” so you would (in theory) only patronize people of that faith. I remember telling my compadres that when I need brain surgery, I don’t care if the brain surgeon is a Christian or an atheist or a follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster — as long as he or she is the best, and has the skills to save my life.
I agree about celebrities too. I don’t even want to know about their families, what they drink, how they party, or anything. I suspect that it’s this obsession with their lives that drives so many of them nuts, always being under a microscope.
I might make a slight exception for a corporation, though. I could see boycotting them because they treat their employees unjustly. Kind of the same way I wouldn’t contribute to a politician’s campaign if he or she were advocating treating people I knew unjustly. (Especially one who gains a lot of votes by putting down a group of people and then demonstrates the same behaviour he/she claims to be bad in those people.)