Becoming a celebrity is like signing a contract with the public. The fine print at the bottom of the page states that in exchange for fame and fortune all traces of privacy are null and void. If a celebrity chooses to complain or fight back against the intrusiveness of the public, they aren’t fulfilling their part of the deal. Celebrity is not a new profession and the transformation of private matters to public is not a new development.
Keeping with the above theory, since all private matters are public, then the general population will have full access into a celebrity’s faults. These faults mold the public’s perception of the celebrity depending on the root of the problem. Many celebrities have seen their careers falter or disintegrate due to actions in their private lives. The line between private and personal life becomes blurred factoring in what made the celebrity famous in the first place. If it is a sports star, he or she became famous because of their athletic skill not their promise of monogamy. If they are an entertainer, their display of domestic violence did not make them famous, rather their singing and dancing skills.
This does not justify the actions of the celebrity, but rather compares how much we factor in what occurs behind closed doors when debating our opinions on them. Since these people are in the public eye and being a celebrity ensures their loss of privacy, they should be more careful and aware of what they are doing. On the other hand, private life is private life, and many acquaintances of the average person may have secrets in their private lives at the same levels as those of many celebrities. Our opinions of these people remain consistent because we are not given a look into their private lives. There is no TMZ or random paparazzi following the creepy neighbor every time he or she backs out of the driveway. It’s just not entertaining.
Part of the entertainment in our culture is watching the downfall of someone. Whether they deserve it or not, the downfall is celebrated by endless 20/20 specials and Diane Sawyer interviews. We watch their highlight clips on TV to be reminded of what “once was” or how “talented and gifted they were.” All of this is done without taking into account that this person is still in existence. The downfall is not a drug-laden overdose where the celebrity has become a shell of their former self. This downfall is nothing more than a mistake, although it maybe illegal and subject to legal repercussions, it is nothing that damages the being of the celebrity.
So why is it that we are so quick to discover the faults of a celebrity and throw them under the bus faster than the speed at which teenage girls who bought their merchandise? It is not a requirement to like a person due to their actions, but it is another thing to respect their talent. The destruction and “analysis” over the downfall does nothing but give bored journalists a topic to debate and discuss over the ensuing weeks. As new “evidence” and past actions that influenced said behavior pop up, random actions made by any person ever seen within 10 feet of said celebrity becomes linked to the problem. The entire persona of the celebrity switches from their occupation to their personal life, a transformation that doesn’t occur for the everyday person.
As said before, going into the public life as a celebrity, one needs to be extra cautious of how they act. On the other hand, no one is perfect and it is downright impossible to live without any mistakes. For those have a clean track record, it means nothing but that they are good at covering their imperfections. For the rest of the human population, the faults of a celebrity in his or her private life should not affect the judgment on the life broadcasted to the world: the public one. Whatever repercussions must be made to correct the wrongs in a legal sense should of course be completed, but for a livelihood, the talent still exists and should be respected.
No comments:
Post a Comment