| |
|
Channel 4, 9.00 Sunday 11. Just watched this, and it was...interesting, to say the least. I'd assumed that it was intended to be a vaguely amusing look at (their words) "celebrity wastes of space", and indeed, there was a fair-to-middling moron quotient, the highlight being [some bloke who once impregnated a soap actress whose name I can't now remember] explaining using only the words "and" "she" "I" "like" and "who're you" exactly why he was so affronted by Rebecca Loos not knowing for what he was famous*. And taking ten minutes to do so.
However,about a quarter of the way through, it struck me that something was fundamentally wrong with the argument that was being put forth, in that Piers "Cunt" Morgan was putting great emphasis on the supposed terrible moral bankruptcy of a society that allows people to be famous for doing nothing and having no talent**. This argument was expanded upon by
1) Self-congratulatory comment from "real celebrities" such as Michael Gambon and Anne Robinson, who spent a good deal of time overusing the words "worthless" and "cretin" and explaining how in their day, one had to have proper dedication, work hard, and wrestle a savage anteater before being allowed "into the limelight".
2) A talent competition (judged by the above "real celebrities" to which only three people turned up, and were subsequently mocked for their efforts. Which makes you wonder, really; If the whole point of the programme is (ostensibly) to insist that "Z-list celebrities" are "wastes of space" and that to pay them attention is a moral crime somewhere on the level of running over nuns, then why devote a section of said programme to a supposed objective analysis of their talents that is in fact yet another sordid excuse to parade people with no shame*** about in front of the viewer to no-one's benefit.
Furthermore, at no point did the programme cover the fact that British society no longer has**** an "upper class" with its own tightly-defined social scene and scandals to be turned over in the newspapers. It could certainly be argued that to be famous for being a) very rich, and b) descended from murdering aristocrat bastards***** is just as tenuous a justification for fame as having slept with David Beckham. Also, although the Royal Family were included in the results of the "Pointless Celebrity" poll, their presence was glossed over, with only Prince Harry's inclusion being justified. Which seems to me to suggest that there are some pretty dodgy ideas of "legitimacy" being aired. The montage (commented on by the Gibb brothers, no less) of performances by Queen and other "great acts of the past", intended to demonstrate that wheras modern acts are processed, manufactured, etc, previously the "music business" was all about "the songwriters" and "the love of the music". This was conclusively proven by a clip of the Cheeky Girls. no mention was made of the Bay City Rollers, the Monkees, or Bananarama.
My argument being that the premise and execution of the programme were simply flawed, stemming from an unexamined concept of "Legitimacy" (How, exactly, is Anne Robinson any more "deserving" of fame than any of the young television presenters interviewed? What do the Royal Family *do*, exactly?), and resulting in a self-congratulatory mess of medal-buffing by Gambon et al, and lots of Piers Morgan existing (Which is always a bad thing.).
Also, the kept using "celebrity" as a noun rather than an adjective.
Having typed that, I bet no-one's watched the fucker now.
So, do people think that there *are* "justifications for celebrity", and if so, should there be? Should we****** be so fascinated by the lives of people who were "once on, like, Big Brother"?******* What's the status of "celebrity" anyway?
* Sorry. I was about to finish a sentence with a preposition there, something I never do.
** Yes, this was in fact the premise of the programme. In my defence, it was my gf who was watching it initially.
***Not that this is necessarily a bad thing.
****Yes, I know.
*****Oh go on, let me get away with a bit of hyperbole/polemic once in a while.
****** Meaning "the general public".
******* This is a quote. I have no idea of the general intellectual or grammatical capacity of any ex-Big-Brother-Contestants other than those featured in the programme. Objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear. |
|
|
