Log in

No account? Create an account

clicky clicky

Virginia Hefferman steps through the looking glass, makes internet paparazzi photos almost seem highbrow. The winner is this quote, which must be one of the least self-aware of the century:
“I took several art history classes in school, and photography,” he said in a telephone interview. “When you pay attention, you see some things that somebody else might miss, so it behooves you to try and find that special thing in an image. Then your intepretation will stand out more.” [nyt]
You'll have to read the mind-bogglingly strange and not particularly great article to find out which master of MS Paint is putting his art history skills to work for fun and profit.


It IS kind of a confusing article. What I'm struck by, though, is the automatic assumption that people who are famous don't deserve privacy. I hear it over and over again, especially on TWoP. Even people who are not elected officials are not supposed to complain when others demand to know details about their private lives. Everyone uses the cover of "honesty" as if wanting privacy were, in and of itself, an excuse to be deceptive or sneaky. But privacy is also about the right to protect oneself from others--and the constant nitpicking over celebrities' appearance is beyond cruel. But as soon as you say that, people jump on you, Hey, they wanted to be famous, what did they expect?

I read the article yesterday and right now I can't remember if Heffernan even brings up that point. Just that the celebrity culture seems to be an excuse to be emotionally abusive to clueless girls. Certainly they're not admirable characters--but they're not criminals either. Just clueless, dumb, frivolous. They're our Marie Antoinettes. I think there's a lot of mysoginy implicit in the relentless criticism, too.