The
segment of the reading I found interesting this week concerned the distinction
between fame and celebrity. I had never
really thought to distinguish between someone who is famous, such as Bill
Gates, and a celebrity, like Madonna.
Being famous just means people know who you are, usually because of some
contribution you’ve made to society or some talent you have. Being a celebrity is independent of talent or
societal contributions. Some of the most
worthless people on the planet are celebrities; their comings and goings are
tracked by the tabloid press and mainstream media like astronauts track
dangerous asteroids. You don’t really
see the press reporting on Bill Gates’s preference for wheat grass enemas (this
is just me speculating here.)
The
distinction between celebrity and fame is critical in a social studies
classroom for a multitude of reasons.
First, it has real-life applications to the kids’ school and later work
interactions. There are always school ‘celebrities,’
i.e. the popular kids, and kids who are ‘famous’ around the school for being
talented, athletic, super-intelligent, etc.
Unlike in real life, however, in high school, those kids are often the
same people (well, maybe not the smart kids.)
Second, the study of celebrity is a phenomenon that gets at the core of
who we are as people. A society’s values
can be determined by the types of people who we worship (in our case, we’re
doomed.)
I’m
responding to Question 5 on the Prezi, which asks whether or not celebrity
events are fabricated stories based on the centralized geographical locations
in which celebrities are typically found.
I think, overall, the answer is yes.
Hollywood and L.A. are typically where you find most celebrities for a
reason – that’s where the entertainment hub of the United States is
located. However, because that is the
entertainment hub, you’re bound to find celebrities. It’s sort of a truism. And let’s not forget that papparazii (sp?)
follow celebrities around the globe! So
clearly celebrity extends beyond the bounds of these informal geographical
barriers, even if celebrities are ‘born’ in Hollywood and L.A.
Shawn,
ReplyDeleteThe difference between a "celebrity" and someone "famous" is quite interesting. I think a lot of it lies in the fact that people don't really care about people that live upstanding lives without much controversy, i.e. Bill Gates. Our society obsesses over celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton because they're "scandalous", and scandals are exciting and never boring. That's why so many little teeny boppers are walking around quoting these people. They think they're exciting and live lives void of boredom. I think another aspect of it is kind of sadistic. People love to see others suffering and struggling. Therefore, when Paris is in jail on her latest DUI, people take solace in it. People don't want to hear about some genious who's more successful and more intelligent than them. Instead, they want to see someone making mistakes and gossip about how "crazy" they are.
Totally agree with you, Shawn, about the societal values thing. And yes, Alanna, it is quite amazing that people take such joy in tearing people down who were once on a pedestal (e.g., LIndsay Lohan). Probably the celebrity I was always the most fascinated by since I was a kid was Jackie Kennedy, and I still think she's in a category all by herself although I'm still not exactly sure what that category is. American royalty, I guess. There was even a photographer who achieved fame by spending his entire career stalking only her.
ReplyDelete