I have a theory. Celebrity1 Culture is a system to undermine the power of artists2. Artists at all levels possess the power to evoke emotion, encourage communication, inspire curiosity, and motivate people to connect. It is the power to make people feel, to stir within them familiarity, disgust, safety, contrition, among other responses both known and yet to be named. Artists reflect their time and capture all aspect of its essence in their work.
Sensitive3, visionary storytellers and historians make people feel. Feel seen, curious, astonished, hopeful. Support belief in oneself, foster the desire to connect with and consider other people. Universal languages — art, food, music, dance, etc. — connect people and appeal to the warmest parts of us, to our souls. They drive the desire to be cooperative and spend time together, get to know one another.
Connection is a threat to authoritarian, ego driven power structures. If we are connected to who we are and one another, the power structure cannot maintain itself. It needs desperation and fear to run. If we respect one another’s humanity the desperation and fear supply plummets. What will the authoritarian ego do to limit understanding?
Create an Environment So Toxic
The power structure needs separation and dilution. Set up a social category of people with varying intentions. It’s trail mix with horse chestnuts and bitter almonds. Mix people seeking creation and expression with people seeking constant spotlight. Artists and publicity hounds featured across the same events, shows and publications. Existing in shared spaces makes them appear similar in intention and motivation.
What if the cult of celebrity was created to make listening to or earnestly considering the point of view of artists a laughable act? Take trivial or mundane life experiences and present them as “news” from “inside sources”. As if the essence of the experience is wildly different for them. We’re all doing the same things, your sister chopped and dyed her hair, a coworker cheated on his girlfriend, the dad next door wears New Balances, your aunt was finally able to divorce your good-for-nothing uncle.
Reporting on where celebrities live, who they date, and crassly commenting on their appearance, puts them on view in an exhibition. Something to critique, not someone to consider. Most coverage is inconsequential to their art. Life cycles are amplified, visibility is taken to an extreme. It’s no wonder celebrities are viewed as vapid, out of touch, and pampered. By default, well-known artists are labeled as such even when they don’t feed the media circus every facet of their personal lives.
Do You Even Have a Job?
Next, it’s time to trivialize their work. Many famous4 artists are performing artists, we often watch them work, live or recorded. Performing art tends to be classified as entertainment, synonymous with fun and leisure, which are viewed as treats. Or privileged luxuries when we enter theaters with plays, dance, the opera, and the symphony. Entertainment companies are praised for money earned from projects they fund. Meanwhile, the people who came together to create the projects are either underpaid or pushed into a microscopic spotlight.
The popularity of the artist’s work is good for the company but the work being popular5 and the artist becoming popular implies a lack of merit in entertainment. “Popcorn” movies are just nice sounds and bright colors. “Pop” music is frivolous and trendy. As if universal truths and themes of the human condition cannot be portrayed in a project the multitude enjoys. Presenting the same themes across mediums, and their various expressions, maximizes the reach. Individuals ingest information differently and a project’s purpose can vary. Sometimes the need is to teach, to show examples. Other times are for fun because a full life requires joy.
Is every popular piece of media intended to drive conversation, provoke curiosity, and bring us together as humans? No. But when the people connected to purpose are lumped in with people starving for applause to assuage their egos, we can miss the point.
Dying on a Hill
If the threat is not obvious yet, add in celebrity culture’s cursed child “stan” culture, name courtesy of Eminem’s “Stan” (2000). The spectrum now stretches from fans who interact with everything related to the artist to people who make an artist part of their personality and an extension of themselves.
As a card-carrying member of The Hive, it’s wild to witness reactions to Beyoncé. Someone could comment on a photo of her off stage during a tour, noting she appears a little tired and hope she’s getting rest and taking care of herself. Darth Hive appears aggressively refuting the statement saying she doesn’t look tired, she’s beautiful, perfect, and why are people always trying to tear her down? What kind of broke hater are you? *slow blink* She’s a person on a grueling monthslong event; to see that and hope she’s in good health is compassionate human behavior. There’s no need to insult someone showing concern, there is no weakness in an artist’s humanity.
The hypersensitive reactions and aggression are mind boggling and terrifying to witness. Descending on comment sections, taking up the proverbial cross, and turning on the artist when the next project isn’t on the stan’s timeline. Stan culture draws ire to the artist and ignores an artist’s message entirely, be it positive or dubious. It creates an inability for some fans to hold multiple truths or see where an artist may be erring, even when harm is not intended. Excessive stanning is a ploy to separate artists from their personhood and treat them as ‘other’.
Wake Up Outta Your Sleep
Famous artists are people. Human beings, flesh, blood, internal organs. Is every artist an innocent working to immunize themselves against the hype? No, they’re fallible. The power of control is seductive. People fall all over you, defend anything you do or say, and support you without question. People seek this power for any number of reasons. Lack in early life, a desire to be heard and understood, the need to call the shots to reclaim what was denied, or enjoyment in playing puppeteer. It’s sad to see truly talented people choose power and accumulation over careful stewardship of influence.
Some of these people wear the artist role as a mask. It’s a good cover for their need to fill their empty spaces with attention and praise. When discussing and understanding art is denigrated, as it is today, the pretenders do and say anything to maintain access and then their stans battle for them. These are the people who make creative mediums appear frivolous. They chose an art for high visibility, emotional manipulation, and astronomical earning potential. It’s easy to not starve when you’re willing to sell your influence to the highest bidder.
And What Is the Proposed Alternative?
The system does not fall on those within it to dismantle it alone. Defying Celebrity Culture means treating artists you enjoy as people. We are missing humanity in our interactions. No one is owed unlimited access to their family members or friends. Why would it be different for strangers? We don’t need the daily movements of well-known artists; that’s not the trade.
If anyone wants to share more of themselves, that’s fine, give it a neighborly approach. The magic of life is in the mundane. It’s where the themes in artistic work are born. Sharing information is voluntarily. Plenty of people make the rounds to present their work to the world and retreat to privacy when they’re done. Seems normal, do you report live after leaving your place of employment? You might. Social media has increased the problem; everyone does not need to or want to over share. If someone is doling out all their business unprompted and manipulating rage, that might be the sign of a pretender. One caveat, some artists start overly vulnerable as they learn to navigate their new visibility and need to learn that fans are not the same as friends.
When it comes to events, sharing information on who collaborated on a complete look is good. It highlights artists working in apparel and beauty. They create the armor or security blanket the public facing artist puts on to brave the eyes of the world. It’s a communal effort in a harsh sphere. An artist’s immunity is learning to use part of the sphere until the culture changes. Share the work, talk about its development and impact on you, what you learned and felt. Avoid the head high and remain rooted in yourself.
For the public, cultivate sense of self. Our identities cannot revolve around other people. A healthy sense of self always comes from within. Developed through spending time with oneself and identifying our own motivations and desires. We can draw inspiration and comfort from the stories, experiences, and work of other people. Connection is necessary for humans, and it requires boundaries for our mutual wellbeing.
Becoming well known for the work you do is not inherently bad. Art is connection, communication, and preservation. Artists should not be hidden away. Treating people as playthings or de facto receptacles for anger at authoritarian power is a problem. Being known and liked is not negative, there’s good power in making people feel with the potential for positive influence. If we drop the celebrity cult then maybe we can do a better job at recognizing a con artist.
