Apparently, you are in a rather small minority. A lot of money is made upon the certainty that a huge number of people are interested in celebrities, royal and common. I used to decry this myself. But I have come to believe that there is a deep-seated need in humans to elevate the status of some of their kind, and then to use them as a source of fascination. Rather like a human zoo, these symbols are placed on permanent display. Fortunately we have evolved to the point where these people no longer have the power of life and death over us, merely privileges and wealth that most of us will never experience.
Humans need stories. Every culture and society from the beginning of time had a favored form: drama, novels, film. I think celebrity is a creature of the electronic communication age--a form of storytelling that is expressed through tabloid media. Cheer the heroes, hiss the villains. We enjoy the lives we might have lived through vicarious pleasure.
I love celebrities, just not celebrities who are famous for being the decedents of someone who actually accomplished something.
Here are some quick examples of people of people named Steve who I admire for their accomplishments: Stephen William Hawking, Steven Paul Jobs, and Stephen Jay Gould. I don?t care about their offspring.
Here are some examples of offspring of wealthy and successful industrialists/engineers who accomplished something for themselves: Howard Robard Hughes, Jr., William Randolph Hearst, and Anthony Edward Stark .
Comments
I put them in the same category as Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton and other American famous-for-being-famous celebrities.
Her Majesty has done a lot more than Kim K, Paris Hilton or any other American instant celebrity.
Apparently, you are in a rather small minority. A lot of money is made upon the certainty that a huge number of people are interested in celebrities, royal and common. I used to decry this myself. But I have come to believe that there is a deep-seated need in humans to elevate the status of some of their kind, and then to use them as a source of fascination. Rather like a human zoo, these symbols are placed on permanent display. Fortunately we have evolved to the point where these people no longer have the power of life and death over us, merely privileges and wealth that most of us will never experience.
Humans need stories. Every culture and society from the beginning of time had a favored form: drama, novels, film. I think celebrity is a creature of the electronic communication age--a form of storytelling that is expressed through tabloid media. Cheer the heroes, hiss the villains. We enjoy the lives we might have lived through vicarious pleasure.
I love celebrities, just not celebrities who are famous for being the decedents of someone who actually accomplished something.
Here are some quick examples of people of people named Steve who I admire for their accomplishments: Stephen William Hawking, Steven Paul Jobs, and Stephen Jay Gould. I don?t care about their offspring.
Here are some examples of offspring of wealthy and successful industrialists/engineers who accomplished something for themselves: Howard Robard Hughes, Jr., William Randolph Hearst, and Anthony Edward Stark .
I love celebrities, just not celebrities who are famous for being the decedents of someone who actually accomplished something.
"decedents"? People who have died? Maybe"descendents"?