Monday, April 10, 2006

An interesting and I think even partially valid point

If you know me then you know how little respect I have for Hollywood or the celebrity culture, and I think it does us great harm that the impression the rest of the world has of America is overwhelmingly really an impression of Hollywood. But in an old column about Liza Manelli's fourth wedding, Mark Steyn pointed out something about our celebrity machine: the kind of person who wants to be an American Idol exists in every culture, and there will always be those willing to go to extraordinarily unhealthy lengths to satisfy their cravings. Our way of isolating them as sort of volunteer exhibits in a nationwide freak zoo is perhaps as good a way of minimizing their destructiveness, of channelling their self-destruction into patterns that are relatively less damaging to their saner fellow-citizens, as any that are easily imagined. I'm not sure Steyn's right but he at least could be. Money quote (Democrats please forgive Steyn's sideswipe at Clinton):

One of the great advantages of a celebrity culture is the way it siphons off so many of the narcissistic and dysfunctional into areas where they can do the least societal damage. Occasionally, the system goes awry and one of them winds up in a serious job (William Jefferson Clinton), but generally things work pretty well. One cannot say the same of Saudi Arabia, whose 7,000 princes are en masse at least as risible and in many cases more tastelessly accessorized than Liza's guests. But the crucial difference is that their subjects are obliged to pretend they're useful and intelligent: If they laugh at them, they'll wind up laughing their heads off. Likewise, Iraq, where the only celebrity author and musical-comedy star is Saddam himself: his romantic allegorical novel, Zabibah and the King, got great reviews -- there's a surprise -- and has been turned into a lavish stage production, which is doing sell-out business -- there's another surprise. The tragedy of Iraq is that in order to make it big in showbiz Saddam had to make it big in mass murder first. Under the American system, his book would have been picked by Oprah, he'd have sold the Broadway rights to Liza's husband, and they'd have signed Petula Clark and Mickey Rooney for the title roles. No matter how you look at it, that's a massively superior system.

New York will forget Liza's latest wedding soon enough, so will Liza. But we should remember to savour this ersatz Royal wedding precisely because it's ersatz; and those who defend America needn't do it despite its "celebrity culture" but because of it. Better a fan than a vassal.

2 Comments:

At 11:36 PM, Blogger Solomon Grundy said...

Well, I am pretty sure Steyn's wrong.

[celebrity culture] siphons off so many of the narcissistic and dysfunctional into areas where they can do the least societal damage.

Uh, really? Britney Spears and Paris Hilton would have done more societal damage as non-celebs? Somehow I doubt that.

Also, the gratuitous and wrongheaded comparisons to the Arab world are, in a word, stupid.

In fact, some people might even call them scary. ;)

 
At 10:14 AM, Blogger Ken Pierce said...

[grinning] Touche.

By the way, Solomon, do you by chance know any of the more recent Arab-leader jokes? My own sources have been in the States long enough that they are falling behind...

I doubt that you and I disagree about how much we like various individual Arabs (I sent my wife to Tunisia for two weeks to attend my friend Najmeddine's wedding, a decision about which I had second thoughts the first time we went over to the new couple's apartment for dinner and Naj pulled out the wedding videos, plural). I would imagine I have a much more pessimistic view of the societal dynamics in the Arab world at the macro level than you seem to have, and on that we are unlikely to agree anytime soon, unfortunately. But please feel free to add any corrective information you think is necessary when I post on Middle Eastern politics/society.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home