I will gladly own up to watching Britney and Kevin: Chaotic last nite on UPN. It was some wild stuff. I guess. Well. Not really....
Mostly it amounted to her jerking around a video camera badly, and being obnoxious. Also, Kevin - my man - he needs to take a shower. He's looking *skeezey.*
This show is sad on so many levels...
First, there's the level of celebrity worship. I mean, its just fucked up that people want to see this. I don't think it's the doom of society - I think human beings have loved famous people for a long time. It's just not our best moment .... [Note: My interest was wholly ironic and all about cultural critique. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.]
Second, there's something sad about Britney wanting to use this medium to tell the "true" story and get her image "straight;" in that sense, it's a response to bad press. Only it doesn't work. Failure is never fun.
But really, the saddest level is just... well, it's Britney. Kevin, I'm sorry, is just a terrible person. He's clearly a gold digger, after money and celebrity, and he left his girlfirend and child - on a whim! Yuck. I don't want to pretend that because Britney Spears is beautiful, lucky, rich, hard working, and at least somewhat talented (I mean, she can carry a tune better than me and she dances her ass off) that she is somehow a "victim." But I'm willing to bet she's lived a fairly sheltered life. She's lived like this - i.e., as a celebrity - since she was a young girl, sort of skewing her perspective on life [to be fair: this was my *colleague's* observation - also: what does it mean that a bunch of graduate students love to watch trashy TV more than talk serious talk?
]. She's lonely, she's horny, and she wants a companion. So, she found this putz, who is certainly playing her, only she doesn't (seem to) know any better. Her career is in the toliet; the inevitable flop comeback album, self-referential ironic TV appearnces, and Playboy spread are just around the corner. She's going to have this baby, which might just freak her out. I'm not sure I should feel bad for her ... but I have *empathy* for her.
I think that's important - to emphatize even with those who are very different, and who are victims of their own mistakes. I don't know why .... it's not some philosophical construct I've thought through, it's a complete gut, affective response. It could be more philosophical of cousre - all about interdependence and recognizing the humanity of others as the basis of " being" or some such [in fact, such a capacity to see beyond the self, I would argue is important theortically *and* politically; my unease is not normative, but rather a question of how such attachments arise]. But, really - I'm just a softie. It makes you wonder: much like partisanship shapes our evaluation of real world political events, how does our own personal disposition effect our ethical commitments? In other words: are we persuaded to philosophical traditions, or are our personalities already tuend to one (via personal experience, innate tendencies or whatever) and we just muck around till we find it? How rational are we? (Do I *ever* move beyond this question?
)
Big Surprise: I think we can be persuaded - but I do not think it's as clear as all that. Those prior artificats of our "upbrining" do not just disappear. Essentially: While you may be persuaded to become Kantian, no matter how Kantian you are - you can still be a prick at the grocery store.
In other important news - The Gilmore Girls took my breath away last nite. For real. Will Rory go back to Yale? Will Luke accept Lorelai's proposal? Why are Emily and Richard such fucking pains in the asses? Holy jeez.....
Tonite: Lost! (And something better fucking finally happen....)
God, I'll be glad when TV is done for the summer.
Mostly it amounted to her jerking around a video camera badly, and being obnoxious. Also, Kevin - my man - he needs to take a shower. He's looking *skeezey.*
This show is sad on so many levels...
First, there's the level of celebrity worship. I mean, its just fucked up that people want to see this. I don't think it's the doom of society - I think human beings have loved famous people for a long time. It's just not our best moment .... [Note: My interest was wholly ironic and all about cultural critique. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.]
Second, there's something sad about Britney wanting to use this medium to tell the "true" story and get her image "straight;" in that sense, it's a response to bad press. Only it doesn't work. Failure is never fun.
But really, the saddest level is just... well, it's Britney. Kevin, I'm sorry, is just a terrible person. He's clearly a gold digger, after money and celebrity, and he left his girlfirend and child - on a whim! Yuck. I don't want to pretend that because Britney Spears is beautiful, lucky, rich, hard working, and at least somewhat talented (I mean, she can carry a tune better than me and she dances her ass off) that she is somehow a "victim." But I'm willing to bet she's lived a fairly sheltered life. She's lived like this - i.e., as a celebrity - since she was a young girl, sort of skewing her perspective on life [to be fair: this was my *colleague's* observation - also: what does it mean that a bunch of graduate students love to watch trashy TV more than talk serious talk?
]. She's lonely, she's horny, and she wants a companion. So, she found this putz, who is certainly playing her, only she doesn't (seem to) know any better. Her career is in the toliet; the inevitable flop comeback album, self-referential ironic TV appearnces, and Playboy spread are just around the corner. She's going to have this baby, which might just freak her out. I'm not sure I should feel bad for her ... but I have *empathy* for her.
I think that's important - to emphatize even with those who are very different, and who are victims of their own mistakes. I don't know why .... it's not some philosophical construct I've thought through, it's a complete gut, affective response. It could be more philosophical of cousre - all about interdependence and recognizing the humanity of others as the basis of " being" or some such [in fact, such a capacity to see beyond the self, I would argue is important theortically *and* politically; my unease is not normative, but rather a question of how such attachments arise]. But, really - I'm just a softie. It makes you wonder: much like partisanship shapes our evaluation of real world political events, how does our own personal disposition effect our ethical commitments? In other words: are we persuaded to philosophical traditions, or are our personalities already tuend to one (via personal experience, innate tendencies or whatever) and we just muck around till we find it? How rational are we? (Do I *ever* move beyond this question?
)
Big Surprise: I think we can be persuaded - but I do not think it's as clear as all that. Those prior artificats of our "upbrining" do not just disappear. Essentially: While you may be persuaded to become Kantian, no matter how Kantian you are - you can still be a prick at the grocery store.
In other important news - The Gilmore Girls took my breath away last nite. For real. Will Rory go back to Yale? Will Luke accept Lorelai's proposal? Why are Emily and Richard such fucking pains in the asses? Holy jeez.....
Tonite: Lost! (And something better fucking finally happen....)
God, I'll be glad when TV is done for the summer.
VIEW 8 of 8 COMMENTS
Thanks for the compliments on the pics.
I think I know what you mean by empathizing with her. I tend to encounter peopole whom assume that once someone makes a certain amount of money that they deserve none. That's hogwash; did we all forget the clich that money doesn't buy happiness?
I have to be honest: I liked Arete's last set better.