Blogging Up The Works

Sunday, February 03, 2013

Distortion

The older one gets, the more confusing modern life becomes. Not from the point of view of new technology, which I can handle pretty well, but more in the way of relating to modern society. The adoration of celebrity, the need to change perfectly useable words for something different, either just for the sake of it or to make it simpler to understand and I guess a general detachment from the main body of society. I guess it is a case of life as you get older regressing. I don't think it is anything new to feel that when one gets very old you are regressing back into childhood by needing to be looked after. Maybe I am in the reverse teenage years, feeling as though the world doesn't understand me.

There was a story this week in the papers that typifies this feeling.

Jeremy Kyle, tv presenter, has had cancer. The media could just report it if they really feel they must but as normal it had to be done in such a dramatic way.

Apparently Jeremy suffered a "toxic" tumour. Toxic? Do they mean malignant? Is that just to make a celebrity different from the rest of us? But then there are other references to toxic tumours. So are toxic tumours a dumbing down of malignant tumours? Why if they are the same do we have to change the name? Then, having had his treatment, he has "an agonising wait" to see if he was clear. Compared to what? To mere mortals who just have a slightly uncomfortable wait? A laissez faire attitude to their results?

The media whips up a sense that Jeremy, and I am sure by no means his idea, has suffered more than anyone else. That a celebrity suffers greater and is thus worthy of our sympathy because he is a "celebrity". No doubt a case not so much of "if you prick us do we not bleed" as "if you gouge us do we not hemorrage".

And indeed the media did it's job correctly. I have a friend, (of a friend), who is what might be considered a typical Sun reader and indeed she felt a great wave of sympathy for him. More than she would have for a general member of the public.

Why do our "heroes" have to be celebrities? Why do celebrities have to be nonentities? Why change words that have been perfectly fine for years just for the sake of it.

Anyway, am I just old or is there someting in it?

2 Comments:

  • Sorry Dave. Twice now I have tried to leave a comment here, giving my take on your post.

    Both times, I have deleted it because I'm finding it too difficult to make my point sound... not callous.

    But basically: you're not old, I agree with you. Society nowadays places too much significance on so-called 'celebrity' status.

    By Blogger Masher, At 11:02 PM  

  • Oh dear, another 'celebrity' that I have never heard of. I suppose I should go and look him up - nah, can't be bothered.

    I'm with you on the messing up of the language though. Two words that are irritating me currently - tasked and gifted (as in given). I ask you!

    By Blogger Toffeeapple, At 6:59 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



<< Home