2008 Woodie Awards
Will There Ever Be A Time For American Heroes?
Mike Sangregorio
Issue date: 2/2/05 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Will there ever be a time for American heroes?
Gossip, be it on a local or global scale, has always been the basis for friendships. Other peoples' hardships just seem to bring people together. We have an unnatural desire to know the about the things going on around us, even if they are "not our business." The discussions concerning the latest going-on around our neighborhood with a good friend or acquaintance result out of boredom and a genuine curiosity to know what is happening in the lives of those we know.
What then is the reasoning for our need to feed off the actions of those we have termed famous? America is a nation devoid of natural kings and queens and is still considered an adolescent when compared to the rich histories of older nations. These histories have given way to the narratives that so many cultures arise from. Here, in the good old U, S of A, we have Hollywood. The people who portray our heroes and villains are the ones that receive are admiration.
This allows us the luxury of more easily placing ourselves amongst the lavish lifestyles of the rich and famous. Celebrity, in its most often used definition, is granted when a person becomes the subject of our mass media. The more a person is seen across billboards, television and the Internet, the greater their cultural presence. We have made "stars" out of film actors, scandalous politicians and even those who already have wealth but want in the limelight. In many ways we can see ourselves as these individuals and trace a path through the social hierarchy from where we are and where they reign. This over-exaggerated sense of kinship made a spectacle of itself a few weeks ago when acclaimed thespians Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston announced an end to their marriage.
Nationally syndicated magazines, including People, In Touch, and Us Weekly pushed up their deadlines by several days in an attempt to explain to the public what had happened to their idols. There is a real market when it comes to the lives of celebrities, but is it because the public wants to know what is happening or the reverse? Is the market for celebrity gossip created in an attempt to fan the flames of popularity these people already enjoy? Few are cynical enough to accuse "Bradiffer" (If a combined name was good enough for the two from Gigli...) of creating a spectacle out of their private lives in an attempt to stay in the public eye, but from their careers have sprung crops of jobs. These are staffed with publicists and reporters eager to remind the people how much they love Tyler Durden and that girl from Friends.
Gossip, be it on a local or global scale, has always been the basis for friendships. Other peoples' hardships just seem to bring people together. We have an unnatural desire to know the about the things going on around us, even if they are "not our business." The discussions concerning the latest going-on around our neighborhood with a good friend or acquaintance result out of boredom and a genuine curiosity to know what is happening in the lives of those we know.
What then is the reasoning for our need to feed off the actions of those we have termed famous? America is a nation devoid of natural kings and queens and is still considered an adolescent when compared to the rich histories of older nations. These histories have given way to the narratives that so many cultures arise from. Here, in the good old U, S of A, we have Hollywood. The people who portray our heroes and villains are the ones that receive are admiration.
This allows us the luxury of more easily placing ourselves amongst the lavish lifestyles of the rich and famous. Celebrity, in its most often used definition, is granted when a person becomes the subject of our mass media. The more a person is seen across billboards, television and the Internet, the greater their cultural presence. We have made "stars" out of film actors, scandalous politicians and even those who already have wealth but want in the limelight. In many ways we can see ourselves as these individuals and trace a path through the social hierarchy from where we are and where they reign. This over-exaggerated sense of kinship made a spectacle of itself a few weeks ago when acclaimed thespians Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston announced an end to their marriage.
Nationally syndicated magazines, including People, In Touch, and Us Weekly pushed up their deadlines by several days in an attempt to explain to the public what had happened to their idols. There is a real market when it comes to the lives of celebrities, but is it because the public wants to know what is happening or the reverse? Is the market for celebrity gossip created in an attempt to fan the flames of popularity these people already enjoy? Few are cynical enough to accuse "Bradiffer" (If a combined name was good enough for the two from Gigli...) of creating a spectacle out of their private lives in an attempt to stay in the public eye, but from their careers have sprung crops of jobs. These are staffed with publicists and reporters eager to remind the people how much they love Tyler Durden and that girl from Friends.