Reality
I've been wrestling with Jade Goody. When I first learned of her death, yesterday morning, Mothers' Day as it to make the plight of the boys she left behind all the more poignant, I dashed off something harsh and at the same time sentimental to mark her passing. Jade has been on my mind a lot these past couple of months. I know there is something profound and wise to write about her untimely death from cancer, but I'm still not sure what it is. I suggested in the blog entry I knocked off yesterday morning that we are all implicated in her death. This is wrong. We are not, and your sometimes violent reactions against that broad charge were justified. Which is why I'm starting again.
I am implicated in her death, is what I really meant to say. I am implicated because I bought OK! to look at her wedding pictures. I wanted to see them not because I cared that much about the hastily convened nuptials of Jade Goody and Jack Tweed, but because I had a feeling this was a significant point in modern history, like it or not. This woman of 27, dying of cancer that began in her cervix and spread to her bowel, liver and groin, was turning into some kind of icon. It's an overused word, I know, but what better way to describe an ex-dental nurse from Essex who achieved substantial and lasting celebrity through sheer force of personality without exhibiting any tangible talent at any stage along the way? Even before her illness, she had become a symbol, a representation, a picture. Though her celebrity was based upon "reality" TV shows, she was not real. She was a photo spread in OK! or a pap shot in Heat, a press conference for her perfume or a press conference for her autobiography. The closest we ever got to the "real" Jade was when she let the mask slip and disgraced herself on Celebrity Big Brother 3, complicit in lazy but vicious racism with two other young white women. Shock, horror, she was not a Guardian reader.
In creating a Truman Show world around herself (without perhaps ever having seen The Truman Show), and in particular around her terminal cancer, she sealed her own fate: to be vilified by those who despised her already, and deified by a macabre, overstating tabloid press who must turn every soldier into a "hero" and every death into a martyrdom. She was called "the Essex princess" yesterday. I haven't seen the headlines this Monday morning, but I think I can guess them. Cancer gave her courage and meaning, in the eyes of a media that had once called her stupid and ugly and opportunistic. Even her decision to be filmed and photographed, via two exclusive deals, right to the end, was grudgingly accepted because she was doing it for her boys - the same boys she had turned into public property by featuring them in photo spreads and a cookery book and accompanying DVD. When Jade's mum called for "privacy" for the family yesterday morning, she probably saw no irony in that pathetic request. Perhaps, like her daughter thrown into the public eye from nowhere and given a public makeover, Jackiey Budden craves publicity, and would wither again without it?
So who killed Jade Goody? I know, in truth, a compromised immune system did it. She'd had a number of cancer scares during the last six years of her young life. Her body was being attacked from within. Meanwhile, the media kept prodding her to dance for them, and she complied. There is no way of specifying who has the whip hand when a Faustian pact of this kind is struck. Jade had become addicted to her own fame; addicted to Jade. The tabloids loved her and hated her in equal measure. She chose for herself, and for her family, a life in the open. The blanket coverage that did not destroy her, made her stronger. She even survived the racism row - something most politicians and sportspeople would find hard to come back from. She went into the Indian Big Brother house like Cardinal Ratzinger posing at Auschwitz - it was a genius bit of spin, suggesting that darker forces were at work behind the scenes of Jade Goody Enterprises.
I had no love for Jade Goody, but I followed her story with interest. I watched as she and her mother and her boyfriend were cast as performing monkeys by the producers of Celebrity Big Brother, perhaps the greatest ironists in the country, and the family from hell gave us our money's worth of poorly educated circus. But we didn't expect the daughter, so different now in her smart black bob and glasses from the blonde Essex stereotype who had entered that same house of games five years previously, to reveal so much venom, so much anger, so much ignorance. We gave her an inch and she took a mile. We condemned her.
It would be too sensational to say that the media killed Jade Goody, or that Jade Goody killed herself - there is no smoking gun here - but because everything she was, and everything she had, was tied into being public property, we must take some of the blame. And by "we", I really do mean any of us who read about her in a tabloid or gossip magazine, or watched her on television, or bought her book, or read about the fact that she had written a book. If you did none of these things, clearly, you may walk away without a thoughts, furiously scrubbing your hands of Jade Goody. You never cared about her then and don't care about her now. But if you turned on the TV or picked up a magazine in this century and raised an eyebrow about someone you had never met who had been photographed with someone else you had never met and, even for a fleeting second, cared enough to find out their name: surely you're all part of the culture that created Jade Goody.
She's not a princess. We did not know her. We only started caring about her when she became "brave Jade". But it's OK to feel sad at the death of a 27-year-old mother from a nasty disease. By feeling sorry for Jade it doesn't mean you don't feel sorry for the anonymous 27-year-old mother who probably also died of cancer on Mothers' Day, but whose face was not in the newspapers. Most people who die of cancer wouldn't wish their photograph to be in the newspapers anyway. Why would they?
I haven't got to the bottom of this subject yet, which is why I keep writing and rewriting my reaction to it. Something key has just happened. I don't really know what it is. But maybe it'll fall into place at some point.
It's not the end of the world, or the end of civilisation. But it's sad, in many different ways. And the OK! "tribute issue" survives as one of the most ghoulish pieces of publishing I've ever seen. I didn't buy it. A futile gesture of protest this late in the game.
posted by Andrew Collins @ 11:33 PM
43 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
43 Comments:
Thanks for that, Andrew.
I am a bit worried about Heaven's open door policy, though. Will St Peter let her back in after she's looked after her sons or will she have to wait for an 'appropriate break in the performance'?
The OK cover seems worse the more I think about it.
Yes I think this is about the best way of writing about her.
It's not an easy one, is it? I don't really know how to approach it. On one hand, she's been practically deified but yesterday, the BBC Have Your Say site was full of vitriol about what a non-entity she was.
I think, in truth, a 27 year old mother of two has died prematurely and whatever the circumstances, that's the tragedy that should be remembered.
That was an interesting read.
Jade Goody, real name Jane Goodie, first came into the public eye via the TV show 'Big Brother 3', she entered the BB house introducing herself as Mike and then throwing her drink over everyone. Jade believed that the BB was in fact Holloway women's prison. She was the first contestant to ever bring a Kebab into the house and she also gave PJ a BJ.
"I still have nightmares to this day, what you don't see on the footage is that she took her wig off to impress me" PJ
Jade was also known for her wit or lack of it, coming out with little nuggets like "Why does Davina keep telling me off for swearing?",
"What doe gay mean?" and the most famous "I think, therefor I am".
Once leaving the BB house Jade went on to have her picture taken and printed in magazines. She also was filmed and that was put onto television and when she spoke that would play on the radio. Jade was everywhere, she even made a dance video that over the course of time we could see less and less of her ugly body. The video was a flop because altho Jade was losing weight, she was still pug ugly. She still made lots of money and was able to afford to buy her mum a CD of the hit single "One hand in my pocket".
Jade went on to become the star of LivingTV in which Jade would open Business's and then they would fail. Jade was losing money and quick, the only thing she could do was go back to where it all began. After 18 failed attempts to crawl back into her mothers womb she went back to the BB house instead. There Jade learnt something that would change her life, she learnt racism.
"I didn't know what racizizium was at the time. My dads black and even he didn't know. I thought it was just abit of fun as the others girls I was doing it with, one was a model and they're all nice people, and the other is in S-Club and my sons love them"
After leaving the BB house Jade got cancer and all her past sins were washed away, expect PJ still has nightmares.
Just before her passing Jade told reporters that the movie 'Slumdog Richkid' was based on her life. Danny Boyle doesn't even know who Jade is but he said he would like to meet her and stab her in her stupid idiot heart.
I feel compelled to write even though I don't know what it is I want to say.
If she was so desperate to provide for her kids future, why did she let someone steal £500,000 of her money a few years ago? Too harsh?
I assumed the OK cover was some sort of Chris Morris or Charlie Brooker stunt. Although feeling immense sympathy for her family, I am pleased this unedifying media circus is over. JP, Notts
I know what you mean, Andrew. It's incredibly hard to know what to think and how to feel about all this. I don't think I feel much at all, and I wonder if I should. I certainly won't miss her, but obviously wouldn't have wished such a fate upon her.
I feel like the media (and the rest of us) has a lesson to learn here. I just have absolutely no idea what that lesson is...
Darren
We will learn nothing, Darren. We will continue to bestow a disproportionate amount of our attention on individuals the media decides are of interest, and whether we believe everything we read about them or not, we will continue to read about them. And some of them will fade away, and other ones will die. And we will be sad for the ones that die, even though we never met them.
I just bought the Sun, as I imagined it would be the most appropriate memorial to keep with my newspapers from the day after Diana's death and from the day after September 11, 2001. As time goes on, these artifacts become more and more historically and culturally interesting. Even if they do take up a lot of valuable space!
What a well-written piece, Andrew. I feel equally uncomfortable about Jade Goody. My own instinct, from the moment she became a talking point via BB, was to recoil from her. And the alternate celebration and denigration, by opposing corners of the media, of her gaucheness and ignorance depressed me beyond belief. 'Isn't she ghastly?' 'Isn't she great?' Jade was perfect; she could be championed with equal ferocity by both sides.
She seemed to me like the most sadly appropriate embodiment of an age when stupidity gets applauded, provided it can be channelled into a means for making money. I wanted to airily ignore Jade, but when her name started getting breathily mentioned to me in therapy sessions by despairing young women, I couldn't even do that. I got to know about her, whether I wanted to or not. I can't say I had 'feelings' for her though, as she was never more than a cypher to me.
It will be interesting to see whether the vacuum created by her death gets filled by some other perky hopeful, willing to sacrifice all privacy, and with a misguided belief that they can control the process. My feeling is, he (but probably she) is out there now. I don't think for a moment that the public appetite has been sated. Even if we're left feeling a bit queasy for a while.
Somebody died of a nasty thing. i have no view on this. I fail to see why this is newsworthy. I will not be manipulated.
I don't buy the magazines that churn this junk out, nor the newspapers. I can no longer watch any TV show where the key money-maker is viewers phoning in - that goes for talent(less) shows, reality stuff people trying to be famous for being on the telly and all the rest of it.
Pop ate itself a long time ago. TV is doing the same - but now it's eating the viewers too.
It's vacuous rubbish stuffed down our throats generating more idiots for an idiot generation. I will not subscribe.
What kind of world are we living in when talentless, illiterate dimwits are held as shining examples of success?
Don't buy the papers, don't ring the phone-ins and vote, don't pick up 'Hello' in the dentists. Just say 'so what?' They'll no longer have a market and we'll be rid of this sensationalist style of non-news for ever.
@jades: Unfortunately you are preaching to the converted minority. We can only hope that the global downturn means that advertisers are unwilling to pay for space in these godforsaken publications and that they subsequently go bust.
Jade Goody’s premature demise is tragic on a number of levels. Most immediately, two young boys have been deprived of their mother and this is obviously very sad. What is more tragic as a reflection of British society is the reaction of the press to her illness and death. Many people, including the Prime Minister have branded her as “courageous” and she has been praised for raising the awareness of cervical cancer. I will gladly eat my words if I’m wrong, but everything she has done since BB has been managed by her people to generate money, including the coverage of her disease. It is admirable that she wanted to provide for sons’ futures, but surely the “courage” of appearing in public and the increased awareness of cancer are a by-product of the media machine and weren’t. She was not courageous. She was unlucky. Jane Tomlinson, on the other hand, was a truly courageous and inspirational woman raising nearly £2 million for cancer charities, not her family, by pushing her failing body to the limit. She passed with barely a mention. What does that say about our society?
I saw a massive bee in the garden shortly after hearing the news.
Coincidence? Or something more sinister?
I feel just basic human sorrow that we should feel at the demise through a brutal illness of someone so young.
I feel genuine vitriol at the reaction to it though, the overegging of her non-story. The coverage by the BBC News Channel yesterday morning - http://ruddmakesense.blogspot.com - was quite disturbingly overblown, to the detriment of the real news of the morning involving Tony McNulty. Poor Nicholas Owen must have wondered why he ever went into journalism.
Andrew, I wouldn't be concerned about rewriting your views. I think you've summed up the majority of people's feelings pretty well.
All fair points and thoughts. But I also stand by my previous comment that any 27 year old mum dying of cancer is incredibly sad, including (not excluding) Jade Goody.
I suspect she became "car crash" journalism fodder when she initially came out of the BB house and did a number of TV appearances where she not just continued to be fascinatingly uneducated and unaware, but mixed this with a truly happy, smiling, fun, kind and bubbly personality that, all mixed together, made her an addictive combination of both irritating and fun. I blame both the BB production staff and actually also Graham Norton/Ch4 who invited Jade for an intensive 2 weeks of affectionately taking the piss out of her on his daily show, straight after she came out of the BB house in a bit of a whirlwind. At that stage I don't believe she ever thought the world could turn against her and she thought that as long as she was making people laugh, which she clearly loved, and bonus, was making money, what could possibly go wrong.
She ran with it, and the rest is history, and what of it. Like I said every single human being on the planet makes mistakes or acts irrationally during periods of extreme emotion, and don't get crucified for it - they may even be forgiven if they are truly sorry. Not Jade. But if the people that hate her so much were to have sat in a room with her - I would bet good money that they would have found her really quite ordinary, and no monster.
I find the hatred unfair. Other "celebrities" get similar treatment (excessive attention, perfume brands etc.) for, similarly, absolutely no apparent reason whatsoever. To my mind Jade is an innocent victim (or player, if you want to call her that), within an situation in society which is totally not of her doing or responsibility.
I am very sad about her death, and don't care admitting it.
......oh god I'm off now....and I also wanted to say also that I personally refuse to be dragged into this thing whereby Jade must be judged by us, the general public. None of us should feel obliged by the media that we should have an opinion on her as a person. I wonder if some people are angry because they are being made to feel that they should feel either angry with her or sorry for her or in love with her, when all of us who don't know Jade Goody understandably have no real emotive opinion on the issue. Why should we feel this or that? I agree we are perfectly entitled to make that choice to feel sympathy about her death whilst not having to feel overly emotional, nor feel guilty because we would rather ignore the media pandamonium around the person.
I do have some hope. That we are in a transitional period. And that one day, people will suddenly realise that not a single person on earth is perfect with a perfect life, and when this realisation comes, inperfections and mistakes and bad behaviour might finally cease to become "interesting" and "newsworthy". Please god.
Nice piece as usual Andrew. I havent yet seen any TV newpaper or radio coverage yet and found out this morning when someone told me. I am not her biggest fan but dont really feel anything about it and even forgot to tell my wife (she found out at work). I suppose the point I am trying to make is if I had come across the 'courageous' media coverage of this I would be feeling anger towards the media overblowing this. Take the media out and its a young woman I didnt know dying. Sad but meh?
Nobody should question that a young women dying of a terrible disease at such an early age is a tragedy.
But I can't help thinking that the "raised awareness of cervical cancer" that the PM is today commending her for is purely incidental. It was a side effect of her own campaign to raise money for her kids, which of course in itself is entirely natural, rather than anything she set out to do. But if she had at least given her name and face to a fund / charity to fight cancer or help those affected by it then millions would have been raised yesterday and today and made a real difference to those outside of her immediate family. That would have been a worthwhile legacy to be praised. She had the whole media hanging on her every word and she didn't do it.
I'm with Pork Chops on this one.
Obviously, it is very sad that someone has died, particularly at such a young age. Her family have my sympathy, and I really do hope they can get some privacy at last.
However, what I do object to is the constant use of the words "bravery" and "courage". And not just with Jade. Surely bravery is when you choose to do something dangerous, scary etc. for someone else's benefit. There's no element of choice in getting ill. It's just desperately sad and very very unfortunate.
The danger of calling people "brave" for "fighting" cancer is that the implication is that if they don't recover they have in some way failed. Or, that those that are badly affected by it, and show their fear, are by default cowards in some way.
But the reason I particularly object to the use of the term in Jade's case is that she was given the opportunity to get treatment when pre-cancerous anomolies were found. That could have saved her life, but she was too scared to follow it up. Whilst that's a perfectly understandable reaction, in that I'm sure there's a natural desire to put your head in the sand, it most definitely isn't brave.
Jane Tomlinson was truly brave. The thought of pushing your body so hard, when it is already so weakened, to raise money for charity is admirable.
I haven't lived in this country for that long, and I won't pretend i know enough to know about the significance of Jade Goody's death. The range of opinions in the papers and amongst friends and colleagues, though, bewilders me. Thanks for starting such an intelligent discussion.
Johann Hari has written a really interesting opinion piece on this in the Independent, that you can find on their website. He is on the positive side of neutral about Jade, and well on the negative side of neutral about most of us. It's very thought provoking. Well worth a look too.
The thing that allways made me uneasy about this whole affair is the strange presence of Jack Tweed. A strange spindly hanger-on who seemed all to eager to get married to Jade once her impending death was announced. A man who has shown none of the behaviour expected of any normal human in that situation (exposing his arse with his jokey mates to the paps and VIOLENTLY ASSAULTING a Taxi driver). There is something about him that makes me feel uneasy.
The OKs and HEATs of this world take vicarious pleasure in drawing literal big red circles around any Celeb who dares act or dress outside the norm. Yet where were the big red circles around this Jack character. When there is something genuinely odd going on the tabs and celeb mags arnt so keen to move off the prescribed story.
When I commented on the original piece yesterday it was because I couldn't understand what point you were trying to make. At least I can see now that you don't know either. But not knowing what to think, or thinking there's something you should be feeling but don't think you are feeling, is quite a common reaction to a death. As is feeling guilty(?) for something that really isn't your fault.
Jade's death is not a result of the way she chose to live her life. The sentimental nonsense that is spewing out from some quarters now is as baseless - and as much a product of media manipulation - as the vitriol spewing out of others. I don't know who the real Jade was or what she was like. I watched her first appearance on BB and that is all I ever saw of her. I didn't kill her and neither did anyone else. She wasn't "hounded to death." And she chose to make her death a public affair.
We have a whole media machine that is purpose-built to place non-stories about famous people in a context that makes them seem important. That makes the people who write those stories feel important. It makes the people who are in the stories feel important. And maybe it makes the people who read those stories feel like they're privy to something important; I don't know. It's as self-justifying as life itself. And it's a measure of how unimportant those people and those stories really are that it really doesn't matter whether the person involved in a story is really famous or not. (Really.) Because at the bottom of all those opulent wedding photos and first baby pictures, with all the suits and the fake tan, all there is is human interest. It's tittle-tattle. They're the stories people used to tell about the people who live down the road - the Elsie Tanners who are no better than they ought to be. Only now people don't know the people who live down their road. Maybe that is the end of civilisation, but this media circus is merely a laughable symptom.
Yesterday I mentioned NBC covering Jade's death on Today. They first covered the story when Jade was a British reality TV star dying in public. Then they covered the wedding of the dying British reality TV star. And yesterday it was the death of the British reality TV star. That's bizarre, isn't it? On the satellite feed you get to see some behind-the-scenes stuff (that's why I watch). During the rehearsal of the opening the presenter said, "We'll look back at her life and her legacy [pause, look around at the crew] her legacy(?!), coming up." That kind of summed it up.
Incidentally, I don't think Jade was any less "brave" than Jane Tomlinson. Regardless of motive, to face up to death so publicly takes guts and it is certainly something you have to choose to do. If she could have raised more money for her kids by running marathons, perhaps she'd have given it a go. Or perhaps she selfishly just wanted to spend as much time as she could with them and to leave Max Clifford to get on with raking the cash in. You do what you do, don't you? It seems a bit churlish to judge.
[For someone who doesn't care very much that was quite long. Sorry.]
Thanks Mark - good article
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-jade-goody-showed-the-brutal-reality-of-britain-1651722.html
(Apologies - I don't know how to do those short link things)
"Somebody died of a nasty thing. i have no view on this. I fail to see why this is newsworthy. I will not be manipulated."
This is the best thing I have read on the subject. Why would anyone think otherwise?
That's pretty disingenuous, CaptainMarvell. Whether you like it or not, it simply is newsworthy. A public figure has died. That is the news story. Saying you have no view is a lie. By posting a message on a blog saying you have no view is to have a view. Sorry about that. To actually have no view would be not to post anything in the first place. It's perfectly fine to have a view, by the way. Having a view does not make you a bad person.
Dave, I really liked your long post. However, you confidently state: "Jade's death is not a result of the way she chose to live her life." It may be. She put herself under an unnatural amount of stress. That's precisely the sort of stress that can lay you open to diseases that attack the immune system. We all experience stress, but to put yourself into the public arena, as she knowingly did, and to suffer a marital breakup, with two kids, in public, as well as all the other pressures she put upon herself? Who knows. Jade's was not an ordinary life. (I'm not saying she brought cancer upon herself - that sounds like I blame her, which I don't - but she put herself under an awful lot of strain, that's all.)
I' just hoping that "as a mark of respect" Channel 4 will retire big brother for ever and think about making some television programmes instead...
Andrew Collins:
"I'm not saying she brought cancer upon herself"
No, but she did have the opportunity to get it treated before it became lethal, and failed to do so.
Now, the one positive thing to come out of all of this is summed up by the Chief Exec. of Macmillan Cancer Research:
"We have also had calls from parents asking about the benefits of their 12- or 13-year-old daughter having the cervical cancer jab at school that has been available since September," he said.
"They have started off being quite sceptical about the vaccine, yet Jade's fight with cervical cancer has made them think again.
"If vaccination rates increase as a result, that's also a consequential good."
Jade who?
I feel I should clarify something here, as you wrote, Andrew "That's precisely the sort of stress that can lay you open to diseases that attack the immune system."
It is true that stress weakens the immune system, leaving it open to viral and bacterial infection. However, you do not "catch" cancer, it has little to do with immune system. Whilst it could be said that stress may contribute to cancer in the long run, the few short years that Jade has been in the limelight are scarcely enough for such effects to take hold.
Sorry go all Ben Goldacre on your arse there, we all know how much you hate science ;)
I don't hate science, Darren, I hate people patronising other people and telling them they don't know enough about a science-related subject to comment upon it. I actually know a lot about cancer and I know you don't bloody "catch" it!
I also know that it's not a Lottery, as has been the popular view for many years, and can be prevented. "Lifestyle factors" are now commonly accepted in the mainstream media - something which was definitely not the case ten years ago (outside of smoking and lung cancer). So don't weigh in with your superior medical knowledge to make me look a dick. I never said she "caught" it. I said that stress contributes to the weakening of the immune system, with which you concur.
To say it has "little to do with the immune system" is a sweeping statement. Most cancers are caused by environmental and lifestyle factors. By avoiding carcinogens, eating a better diet and reducing stress, you can reduce your chances of developing (not "catching"!) cancer. Surely you don't disagree with that?
How can you say with such certainty that Jade's cancer wasn't lifestyle-related? She had a stressful childhood and, in a different way, a stressful adulthood. That's 20-odd years of stress.
Try and phrase your reply so that it doesn't erroneously sound like you think I am stupid.
To add to Andrews defence (not that I need to - well said Mr C!), cervical cancer is in fact caused by a virus Darren. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it ;-)
http://www.cancerhelp.org.uk/help/default.asp?page=2755#common
Andrew,
I think you should also point out to Darren that you can, in fact, catch certain cancers that are caused by the introduction of viral-oncogenes into seemingly normal cells. It so happens that this is the case with cervical cancer hence the vaccinations mentioned by Tristan.
Firstly, apologies, as my comment seems to have come across in a way which it completely was not intended (which can be nobody's fault but my own).
The "hating science" remark was a sarcastic joke - designed to make fun of the people who have labelled you that way before. I'm sorry it wasn't picked up on - my fault again - but it was not a serious point. Herring himself does so jokingly, and I was merely continuing in the tradition. I'm aware that you most definitely do not "hate science".
Secondly - I have had my own "superior medical knowledge" (of which there is little) trumped by Tina here. I have no problem admitting ignorance where it exists, and I did not know that cervical cancer was caused by a virus! So consider most of my original post retracted anyway. I would however say that most cancers are not virus related and do indeed have little to do with the immume system. A "good lifestyle" will limit carcinogens, and it will also keep a strong immune system, but the two aren't linked. A poor immune system should not lead to cancer (apart from virus-related types as discussed). However as this bears no relation to the Jade situation, it feels like I'm justifying an irrelevant point.
My intention was not to make you look stupid or look like a dick, Andrew, and again I am sorry. If I thought you were either of those things I would not regularly read and enjoy your blog. I think my comment has been taken out of the spirit in which it was meant.
Maybe I need teachin' how to write more better.
Sorry again,
Darren
Accepted, Darren. You can see why I might be a little jumpy on this issue, but I apologise for that in the general spirit of the blog.
Cancer has plenty to do with the immune system, though, I will restate that for the record.
Darren,
Read down the link I gave you. It states in black and white that a poor immune system increases the chance of cervical cancer.
Want to rephrase your half hearted "I'm wrong but I'm right" apology again?
PS I promise to shut up now ;-)
"That's pretty disingenuous, CaptainMarvell. Whether you like it or not, it simply is newsworthy. A public figure has died. That is the news story."
It's not disingenuous. The whole non-issue is simply not worthy of the level of news it has generated.
"Saying you have no view is a lie. By posting a message on a blog saying you have no view is to have a view."
Why is it? I have no view on Jade Goody's death because I had no interest in her life. I posted a message on the blog to make a point about the ridiculousness of people rubbernecking at the car crash lives of reality programme contestants who for some unfathomable reason have been elevated to the status of 'role models'.
"I am implicated because I bought OK! to look at her wedding pictures."
Why on earth would you do that?
"I wanted to see them not because I cared that much about the hastily convened nuptials of Jade Goody and Jack Tweed, but because I had a feeling this was a significant point in modern history, like it or not."
It wasn't. Unless we have already slid into an idiocracy and history will be written by staffers on TV Quick.
CaptainM: "The whole non-issue is simply not worthy of the level of news it has generated."
You may have a point there. However, it is a view, and it is your view. So it is disingenuous to say you have no view. Your view is that the news generated by Jade Goody's death is disproportionate. I'm not trying to win a game of word tennis - but I actually think it's showing off to say you have no view, that's all. We all have views on everything.
"I have no view on Jade Goody's death because I had no interest in her life."
Fine. So your view on her death is that you are not interested in it. That's still a view!
"I posted a message on the blog to make a point about the ridiculousness of people rubbernecking at the car crash lives of reality programme contestants who for some unfathomable reason have been elevated to the status of 'role models'."
I haven't read anybody here saying Jade is/was a role model. There was a point about her public cancer raising awareness of the potential dangers of cervical cancer, but I don't think the suggestion was that she was a role model - rather, that in not getting it "seen to" earlier, she was the opposite, but that her death may have raised awareness among young women.
"Why on earth would you do that?"
Why on earth would I buy OK! to look at the wedding pictures? To see what all the fuss was about, and because I don't spent every minute of every waking day reading books with long words and no pictures in about Lenin and the history of Israel. I am interested in many different aspects of the media. I find the media a very interesting subject.
I wrote that I suspected the death of Jade Goody was a significant point in modern history. You replied:
"It wasn't."
Such confidence. I argue that it was, in that a lot of people have a lot to say about it, and even if you think she was a talentless pig, the fact that she died at 27 having become famous for being famous, and generated acres of press coverage is significant. It hasn't happened before. Something has changed in our culture that Jade's illness and death could capture the public imagination so strongly.
"Unless we have already slid into an idiocracy and history will be written by staffers on TV Quick."
Pure snobbery, surely? People who work on a listings magazine represent - what? - illiteracy? I'm all for discussing the idiocracy, though. There's no doubt that Jade Goody was not a highly educated woman. She was not articulate. She was not clever in the academic sense. She had a lot of trouble forming words in her mouth, even copying them when someone else said them (there was a bit in the Living documentary where the person off camera helped her pronounce "testosterone" and Jade simply couldn't repeat it, no matter how hard she tried). But does that make me an idiot for feeling sad that she has died? I sincerely hope not.
Lots to talk about here. Impossible not to have a view.
Loving your stance Andrew! There is alot of snobbery around this issue and I think the Independant newspaper article mentioned previously deals with this well.
I didn't buy the O.K magazine featuring her wedding, mainly because it felt too sad (in an upset way, not a loser way) but I don't look down on people who did buy it. I also like to read a variety of papers, magazines and yes,even a book on Stalin but you wouldn't believe the number of people who have an opinion on the fact that I enjoy publications such as The Mirror. They don't tend to comment however when they see me reading a broadsheet - I can read both and still form my own views!
Anyway, enough of a rant, I've obviously been storing that one up for ages!
Claire
Firstly Andrew, what you say about Jade's cancer possibly having been a result of her life choices is true. But my point was that what was "special" about Jade - the famous for being famous thing - was not the cause of her death. There are lots of people caught up in that circus. And it's quite possible that not being ideally suited to the stresses of that life is what makes them perfect fodder for it. But they don't all die from it. You can argue that "we" put Jade in there but I don't think you can really say that by doing so we made ourselves somehow all culpable for her death. Not in an Orient Express kind of a way anyway. (Sorry: SPOILER.)
Having re-read what I posted - though I know no one else cares - I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not critical of those who follow the "real life" soap opera of OK and Heat et al. Any more than I'm critical of those who follow actual soap operas, or a football team, or similarly pointless stuff. We all have something unimportant that we really care about. It's horses for courses. (For jockeys at least; for other people it's probably something else. Sorry.)
As for this "idiocracy" thing: that bugs me. Jade wasn't running the country. She wasn't worshipped. She wasn't even widely admired, other than for her ability to make money without any discernable talent. But people were interested in her. She had a story to tell. Always. She had a brash personality. She found a market for those and she made lots of money from them. As I indicated before, it's not important why you're famous. All that matters is that people (think they) know who you are - that there's a back-story they can hang the latest bit of gossip on. Most of the people in that "celebrity" world are more famous for their exploits in that world than they are for whatever made them famous in the first place. They're not in OK (or whatever) because they're actors (or whatever); they're there because people know who they are. And people know who they are because they're in OK all the time.
Having a degree, a career, and a happy home life probably isn't going to open up the doors of that world to you. If that really doesn't bother you - and it shouldn't - then just ignore it and carry on with your life. Only if it does bother you are you going to call it an "idiocracy", and gibber on about "z-list" celebrities. By doing that, people are acknowledging that the very thing they're so dismissive of is important, and that they care about it.
[Sorry again. I still haven't cried yet but I'm typing a lot. It hits all of us differently, I suppose.]
Post a Comment
<< Home