Post No.: 0780
Furrywisepuppy says:
Celebrity culture is a product of the desires and aspirations stirred up by capitalism. It’s like religion in many ways – from the worshipping of idols, fansite ‘churches’, fans bragging about or inventing personal relationships with their favourite stars, and the feverish ecstasy they feel whenever they meet them in carefully orchestrated events like premieres or awards ceremonies.
Being famous and adored affords many perks – many strangers have decided they like you before they’ve even met you, and some may say you’ve positively affected them and their life in some way through what you’ve done or are doing. You’ve genuinely inspired them or just brought them a little joy, and you mean so much to them.
It opens many doors. Children of famous parents benefit too because the media are more interested in the children of well-known figures than others, just because of the family connection. The media are also more interested in the new business ventures of already well-known people compared to even the long-standing businesses of lesser-known businesspeople in the same sectors, hence the former receive more mainstream publicity despite being less experienced.
Yet there’ll also be some folk who’ll express disdain for you for whatever reason (e.g. your face, your voice, your work, racism, homophobia, schadenfreude). So expect trolls, hate mail, even death threats and spurious claims (e.g. fans who claim to be related to you or even weirder fantasies). More than a signed photograph, people nowadays want a dialogue with their idols via online social media, and trolling might even garner them a response (which is why the, admittedly imperfect, general advice is to not respond to them but mute, block and/or report them to the social media platform).
We judge public figures as if we know them well – it’s not, “We only said a few words so not enough to form an opinion either way” but rather, “I met them and they were divine/stuck up their own sphincters!” Everything’s blown up and magnified, when it isn’t like that when judging non-celebrities, like regarding the comments they made when young coming back to haunt them. Many non-celebrities have also made the same kinds of comments at the same ages without consequences. It doesn’t make those comments right but famous people aren’t treated as the ordinary people they essentially are. I suppose it’s the flipside to the privilege of having their voices heard above others regardless of their expertise – if you become famous, you must understand that you’ll need to bear greater responsibilities for what you say and do because you automatically become a role model for those who follow you.
A celebrity’s PR will suggest that they’re all about their fans, and the provocative posted images and flirtiness may even suggest they’re sexually available to their fans – yet the celebrity will spend most days going out of their way to steer clear of them, like dressing in disguise or crossing the road to evade anyone who might’ve clocked who they are! They welcome their fans during coordinated events like book signings or conventions but if they were to try to physically get too close to them privately then it’ll feel creepy to them. So it’s ‘come over… but not that close’!
One’s fans are one group, and one’s real friends and family are another. Lines can blur in individual cases but, generally speaking, the former is about one’s professional life, and the latter is about one’s personal life. Yet the famous are constantly treated like public property – their private life is snooped upon as if automatically in the public interest. And when people adore them, it’s like the fans really adore the PR-propagated public persona of them (i.e. not the real them); yet when they receive negative comments, it’s like directed at the private and real them. Hardcore fans may claim that they love the true person behind the public persona, but for them it’s usually a substitute for an intimate (either sexual or ‘bestie’) encounter that’s unattainable, and they’re still ultimately basing their feelings on a crafted image. Many fans nurture strange fantasies about having a romantic chance with someone they follow, but in virtually all cases it’s a one-sided parasocial relationship. They don’t even know the particular fan by their name! So it’s, overall, a peculiar relationship with one’s fans or the public.
With anyone whom we emotionally invest in, we’re sensitive to our affection not being reciprocated. We also put celebrities on high pedestals yet expect them to stay authentic and grounded (there’s a unique disappointment experienced when our favourite artist sells out or ‘goes commercial’). We create, in our own minds, images of those we love, which can be disconnected from whom they really are and how they’re really like (although in the case of celebrities, their PR actively court this image). This sets us up for possible disappointment if we ever get to know them better.
But they’re just ordinary mortals themselves, including regarding their naïve past worldviews or being caught toking a joint – teenagers doing what many of their other contemporary peers have done. Their foibles aren’t uniquely their fault – it’s our fault for putting them on a pedestal. They make the same mistakes as everyone else, and we’d likely make the same mistakes as them if we had the same backgrounds and circumstances.
We might fail to empathise with a star who just wants to have their meal without interruption. (Like we might fail to empathise with a small business owner who doesn’t have the time or personnel to reply to dozens of unsolicited letters generically requesting jobs.) We can assume they’re being a jerk when they likely want you to have a pleasant experience with them meeting you, but don’t wish to draw a crowd. (Like with the small business owner, we assume our request is the only one they’ll receive and therefore all they have to do is respond to us, but that’s very egocentric of us.) And if we have enough empathy, we might again realise that we’d probably do the same thing if we were in their position.
Often when we meet a famous person, they’re not as tall as we imagined them to be, and they just seem like regular folk rather than bathed in a radiant Technicolor glow like in the movies! Paparazzi pictures and stories about them with baby drool on their shirts or no makeup on are supposed to ‘bring them down to Earth’ – but they were always just ordinary people.
…So is fame all it’s cracked up to be? It’s undoubtedly outstanding to strive to reach one’s maximum potential – but don’t do so for the approval of others. Not every public figure craves adulation – they just want to do their thing and fame is a side-effect.
Fame, like material wealth, is prone to hedonic adaptation too. If you’re the type to chase numbers like followers – once you get 100k, you’ll want 200k, then 500k, then 1M, etc.. So even as we earn more or become more successful, we start comparing to our new peers and how a little bit more rich or successful they are relative to us, and this repeats as we climb this ladder and compare ourselves to our new peers. (Based on the most popular searches, search engines frequently suggest queries like ‘x’s net worth’.)
Like when going on holiday – wherever you go and whatever you’ve got – you always bring you, which makes it less about the destination than your personality. So if you’re the type to be unhappy before you’re rich or famous (if you’ve got enough to avoid money troubles and aren’t lonely) then you’re the type to be eventually unhappy again even if you get rich or famous. If you’re grumpy or neurotic then you’re still going to be grumpy or neurotic.
It’s nice to be liked but it’s a fragile source of happiness because it depends upon what other people feel and give. Fame wanes over time, as rivals overtake you or you simply become forgotten. So, like trying to hold water in your paws, you must keep scooping for it – you must keep seeking the limelight. And you might experience bitterness towards those you feel don’t deserve their fame.
It’s often precisely the pursuit of naïve sources of happiness – like chasing riches, fame and vanity – that brings us anxiety. This is because you can never have enough compared to others unless you’re the wealthiest or most famous person in the world. (Even then, the richest or most famous person in the world isn’t the happiest person in the world.) So chasing happiness in misguided ways can make us quite stressed and unhappy.
Too much of anything is undesirable, including attention. Increased fame can bring additional practical concerns like your private life being a target for the media, and stresses like not getting caught doing anything that’ll harm your public image. Some people change for the worse once they become rich or famous. And suddenly old ‘friends’ might want to catch up with you and suddenly ‘care’ about you again!
Fame isn’t an absolute destination (e.g. someone who’s famous in the US might remain unknown elsewhere). There are affluent people who aren’t famous, and vice-versa. And frequently our desire to be affluent and/or famous is borne from trying to fulfil what other people expect of us or say is an image of ‘success’.
What makes us happy isn’t about what we have per se, like money – but what we don’t, like stress, pain, boredom or hunger. That’s why above a certain point of income we don’t become meaningfully any happier – our needs are already securely met. This also points to the wisdom that we need to eliminate frustrations in our lives and settle on a state of contentment. Endless material desire is a source of frustration – the constant wants. So we need to remove needless wishes. Don’t covet vast opulence. Don’t crave higher status. Don’t even chase happiness itself. The holy grail of happiness is desiring what you’ve already got. Woof!
So riches and fame are better treated as side-effects of doing what you love doing. All you can control anyway is developing your talent, working hard (in a healthy and sustainable manner), then getting out there with it. You can also control how nice you are to others and to work with, and your openness to opportunities. The rest is out of your furry paws even if your talent is prodigious and you self-promote at every chance.
This is because wealth acquisition and fame depend on market forces, which is something that’s outside of your sole control. We’re also at the mercy of what commercial adverts claim we ‘need’ to be happy, when we should think for ourselves and recognise that their interest isn’t us but their own bottom line. It doesn’t mean living an austere life but buying what fulfils our hobbies and interests – not what others say we must desire or possess to be happy or successful.
Even if you’re extremely famous, a ‘big shot’ or a winner of something today – so what? Time doesn’t care. In just maybe 10,000 years time (which is tantamount to nothing amid infinity), no one alive on that date will likely ever learn about you or care about your name. In other words, fame won’t make us immortal. (Know, likewise, that your haters will almost soon be dead and forgotten too so don’t worry about them!) Too many individuals think they’re big and important. Males with over-inflated egos in particular are competing to be ‘alphas’. But with a bit of logic, we’re nothing in the grand scheme of things. Even the biggest celebrity today will one day be forgotten. Humility is thus wisdom. (Post No.: 0745 examined the issue of our legacies.)
Woof! You might totally disagree with this view of fame. I’m not famous so you can share what you think through the Twitter comment button below?
Comment on this post by replying to this tweet:
