Published: March 5, 2011
The Meta-Joke
On “The Late Late Show,” the host, Craig Ferguson, rather than simply not make jokes at Charlie Sheen’s expense, announced his decision to not make jokes at Mr. Sheen’s expense (and inadvertently got a laugh in the process).
There was a mental hospital in London, it’s been there for a very long time. It started as a priory in I think the 12th or 13th century. Anyway, it’s called Bedlam. And what happened was, in the 18th century, people used to go along and pay money — they would pay a penny — and they would look through the peepholes of the cells. And they would look at the lunatics and they would laugh at them. ...
So I’m looking at the Charlie Sheen thing unfold, and I’m thinking “Aw, man!” [Applause, laughter] No, no, no, no, no.
The Meta-Theory
Jacob Weisberg explained in Slate that he is not particularly interested in celebrities like Mr. Sheen — but that he is “extremely interested in why other people are so interested in them.” He entertained several different theories of celebrity fascination.
Finally, celebrity obsession may simply be economically rational activity in the sense that everyone involved in the value chain — celebrities, agents, producers, paparazzi, publishers, etc. — makes more money than they would otherwise. Celebrity “journalism” is not only diabolically popular but cheap to produce, which explains why People is America’s most profitable magazine. ... Charlie Sheen may not get $10 million for his memoirs, but they’re worth more than they were this time last year. It does not seem impossible that his “breakdown” has been entirely calculated.
The Meta-Hand-Wringing
On New York magazine’s Vulture blog, Willa Paskin posted “The Argument You’re Having With Yourself About Charlie Sheen,” a mock monologue that purports to “trace the Möbius strip of what happens in the human brain when it really thinks about Charlie Sheen.”
Ha, Charlie Sheen is so crazy! Look at him, talking about warlocks and tiger blood and octagons! ...
But when people are on drugs, or having mental-health problems, they are good at saying crazy things. ...
If he’s going to talk to basically anyone with a pulse and a recording device in such a highly entertaining fashion, what’s the harm in being entertained? ...
But what’s really entertaining us? ... Face it, this is a guy who could die. Just look at him!
You’re taking this way too seriously. He’s not going to die. I totally have him in my celebrity death pool just in case, though.
But don’t you see how cynical that is?
What is wrong with being cynical about Charlie Sheen? ...
I’m sorry, but aren’t you starting to maybe like him a little?
No. No. I’m laughing at him. Well, I’m pretty sure I’m just laughing at him.
The Meta-Media
On the New York Times Magazine’s blog, Adam Sternbergh weighed in on the media cycle of weighing in on Mr. Sheen.
If you’ve been following the Charlie Sheen Self-Immolation World Tour 2011 ... you’ve noticed that we are now in Defcon Three of Celebrity Scandal: The “Whither Society” portion of the meltdown. Defcon Five is the scandal itself. Defcon Four is the all-of-us-watching-with-mouths-agape phase. With Defcon Three comes the clothes-rending: Are we enablers? Should we be egging him on? Is this actually news? And most worrying of all: why do we care?...(READ MORE...)
No comments:
Post a Comment