The mainstream media, the state of denial, and Ricky Gervais rant on celebrity culture
May 14th 2008 02:34
I'm going to post an image that I captured last week... I was looking for articles to write about, and I found this collection of images from the 60s on the Daily Mail.
It was an article about how celebrities in those days were so well-mannered and well-behaved, in sharp contract, of course, to the celebrities of today, who are always seen "falling out of nightclubs drunk or showing off a little too much leg or cleavage".
The image I captured was of Mick Jagger and Marianne Faithful arriving at a party, acting 'civilised', giving their jackets to a bow-tied attendant.
'How mahhhvelous!' we're meant to exclaim. 'Oooee! That's soooo posh!'
The paradox is that Jagger was one of rock's bad boys, exploring the marvelous darkness of drugs and alcohol, sleeping around and generally acting like a hooligan. Back in those days, that was scandalous enough, and I'm sure legions of parents around the world shook their heads at his antics.
By today's standards, of course, that's mild, apparently.
That's not the complaint I have with this article though. Here's the thing. The thing is, well, just see for yourself:
Look at the sidebar: A nonstop cascade of article about celebrities showing off too much. Natasha Richardson shows her panties. Mischa Barton shows too much cellulite. The Beckhams and the Cruises partying and forming a conga line?
Is the Daily Mail actively trying to be as hypocritical as possible? They lament about the 'golden age of showbiz', complaining about modern stars showing off too much, then provide infinite access to pictures and stories about such events. They're making money off it, and happily, too.
It's vile and indicative of the quality of media we have in the Western world.
There's a beautiful, mesmerizing moment during the final minutes of the Extras Christmas Special, where Andy Millman, locked in the Big Brother house, gives a powerful soliloquy to the camera. Here's that wonderful scene:
The most appropriate piece of dialogue:
Gervais' satirical series, Extras, is a scathing look at the entertainment industry, but instead of delving into straight satire, Gervais manages to bring a grim human touch, portraying Millman as this hapless loser that is capable enough, but too scared to deviate from the traditional route to fame.
The question of blame is a tricky one... do we blame the media, that saturates us with all this useless celebrity gossip, clouding the airwaves, obscuring the news that is considerably more important? Do we blame the celebrities, who hunger for fame and find increasingly desperate ways to hold our attention?
Or do we blame ourselves? After all, at the end of the day, we're the ones reaching for the terrible magazines, turning onto god-awful entertainment news, memorizing the names of FHM's top 10 most beautiful women.
Or, finally, is the situation completely absolved of blame?
It was an article about how celebrities in those days were so well-mannered and well-behaved, in sharp contract, of course, to the celebrities of today, who are always seen "falling out of nightclubs drunk or showing off a little too much leg or cleavage".
The image I captured was of Mick Jagger and Marianne Faithful arriving at a party, acting 'civilised', giving their jackets to a bow-tied attendant.
'How mahhhvelous!' we're meant to exclaim. 'Oooee! That's soooo posh!'
The paradox is that Jagger was one of rock's bad boys, exploring the marvelous darkness of drugs and alcohol, sleeping around and generally acting like a hooligan. Back in those days, that was scandalous enough, and I'm sure legions of parents around the world shook their heads at his antics.
By today's standards, of course, that's mild, apparently.
That's not the complaint I have with this article though. Here's the thing. The thing is, well, just see for yourself:
Look at the sidebar: A nonstop cascade of article about celebrities showing off too much. Natasha Richardson shows her panties. Mischa Barton shows too much cellulite. The Beckhams and the Cruises partying and forming a conga line?
Is the Daily Mail actively trying to be as hypocritical as possible? They lament about the 'golden age of showbiz', complaining about modern stars showing off too much, then provide infinite access to pictures and stories about such events. They're making money off it, and happily, too.
It's vile and indicative of the quality of media we have in the Western world.
There's a beautiful, mesmerizing moment during the final minutes of the Extras Christmas Special, where Andy Millman, locked in the Big Brother house, gives a powerful soliloquy to the camera. Here's that wonderful scene:
The most appropriate piece of dialogue:
"Andy: You open up a paper and there's a picture of Lindsay Lohan getting out of a car and the headline is 'Cover Up, Lindsay, We Can See Your Knickers!'-
-of course you can see her knickers! Your photographer is lying in the road, pointing his camera up her dress to see her knickers! You're literally the gutter-press..."
-of course you can see her knickers! Your photographer is lying in the road, pointing his camera up her dress to see her knickers! You're literally the gutter-press..."
Gervais' satirical series, Extras, is a scathing look at the entertainment industry, but instead of delving into straight satire, Gervais manages to bring a grim human touch, portraying Millman as this hapless loser that is capable enough, but too scared to deviate from the traditional route to fame.
The question of blame is a tricky one... do we blame the media, that saturates us with all this useless celebrity gossip, clouding the airwaves, obscuring the news that is considerably more important? Do we blame the celebrities, who hunger for fame and find increasingly desperate ways to hold our attention?
Or do we blame ourselves? After all, at the end of the day, we're the ones reaching for the terrible magazines, turning onto god-awful entertainment news, memorizing the names of FHM's top 10 most beautiful women.
Or, finally, is the situation completely absolved of blame?
| 52 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Daily Inspirations
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
Comment by Cibbuano
20/20 Filmsight
Science News
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Daily Inspirations
Relativity Watch
Padsoc