Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
2011
Recommended Citation
Gamson, J. (2011). The unwatched life is not worth living: The elevation of the ordinary in celebrity culture. PMLA, 126(4),
1061-1069. doi:10.1632/pmla.2011.126.4.1061
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Arts and Sciences at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library |
Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sociology by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson
Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact repository@usfca.edu.
126.4 ]
theories and
methodologies
The Unwatched
Life Is Not Worth
Living: The Elevation
WHEN MY FIRST DAUGHTER WAS BORN A FEW YEARS AGO, I ENTERED A
CELEBRITY NEWS BLACKOUT, A SOMEWHAT DISCOMFITING CONDITION
of the Ordinary in
for a sociologist of celebrity. When she entered preschool, though, Celebrity Culture
I resubscribed to Us Weekly and devoured its morsels like a starv-
ing man at McDonald’s: Kim Kardashian and her then-boyfriend
ate at Chipotle on their irst date! Ashton Kutcher was mad about his joshua gamson
neighbor’s noisy construction! Lindsay Lohan is back in rehab! I felt
less disconnected from others, comforted by the familiar company,
a little dirtier and a little lighter.
I meandered through online celebrity culture, too, where things
were not quite as familiar, visiting mean Internet gossip sites like
Gawker and PerezHilton .com and listening to remixes of Christian
Bale’s foul-mouthed rant at a cameraman. I also watched an array
of YouTube celebrities, most of whom had been adopted by fans for
some quirk they’d exhibited intentionally or just by living their lives:
Tay Zonday, a tiny PhD candidate with a giant singing voice; the
jumbo Yosemite dweller whose awed response to a double rainbow
was viewed over twenty million times; and Antoine Dodson, whose
interview clip from a local news show (“hide your kids, hide your
wife, hide your husband, cause they raping everybody out here”) was
a YouTube sensation, leading to remixes on iTunes, a T-shirt line, a
ringtone, and Halloween costumes. Via Twitter, I could receive a bar-
rage of 140-character tidbits from celebrities, such as info about Tina
JOSHUA GAMSON, professor of sociol-
Fey’s lunch (Caramello bar), Demi Moore’s adoption rumor (false), ogy at the University of San Francisco,
and her daughter Rumer’s highway experience (“Two words: Traf- is the author of Claims to Fame: Celebrity
ic sucks”). If returning to celebrity culture was a bit like coming in Contemporary America (U of Califor-
home—I’d written a book on the subject, Claims to Fame, back in the nia P, 1994), Freaks Talk Back: Tabloid
1990s—that home also seemed to have been signiicantly remodeled. Talk Shows and Sexual Nonconformity
(U of Chicago P, 1998), and The Fabulous
his essay maps that perplexing architecture, considering how and
Sylvester: The Legend, the Music, the Sev-
with what signiicance twenty-irst-century American celebrity cul-
enties in San Francisco (Picador–H. Holt,
ture builds on and departs from earlier forms.1 In particular, I high- 2005). A recent Gug genheim fellow, he
light what is arguably the most prominent development in American is working on a book about unconven-
celebrity culture over the past two decades: the decisive turn toward the tional family creation.
ordinary. As opposed to earlier periods, when pacity to attract and mobilize attention, which
theories and methodologies
American celebrities were a class of people per- is then typically attached to other products
ceived as extraordinary and treated to extraor- (a television show, a magazine cover, a rec
dinary lives—a “powerless elite,” as Francesco ord album) or sold for cash directly to people
Alberoni once called them—celebrity culture is making those other products. In its most con
increasingly populated by unexceptional people ventional form, celebrity in the United States
who have become famous and by stars who have emerges from, and is managed by, a tightly
been made ordinary. What are the roots and controlled, wellresourced industry, linked
contours of this cultural transformation? What institutions centered mostly in Los Angeles
are we to make of the triumph of the ordinary and New York. From those centers, oten in a
celebrity, of what Graeme Turner has called the conlictridden negotiation between publicists
“demotic turn” in celebrity culture (82)? and journalists (Gamson, Claims, chs. 3–5),
The tension between the extraordinary the stories of celebrity arise: not just about fa
and the ordinary in American celebrity cul- mous people but about fame as well, about the
ture—and, relatedly, between merit and man- machinery of publicity, about what is and isn’t
ufacture, authenticity and fakery—is not new admirable, about distinguishing the real from
(Gamson, Claims, chs. 1–2; Braudy). Yet the the fake, the private self from the publicly pre
emergence of reality TV and of the Internet, sented one. Consumers of celebrity culture
especially Web 2.0 phenomena, has pushed then do all sorts of things with these stories,
ordinariness into the cultural forefront. In oten giving them new meanings. Some make
what follows, I document the propulsion of use of celebrity stories to fantasize a diferent
ordinary folks into stardom, the focus on life, to construct their identities, or to model
the ordinary lives of famous people, and themselves on people they admire or envy;
the rise of new celebrity types. Although it others use them as fodder for connecting so
is tempting to interpret these developments cially with one another, by gossiping with im
as uniformly democratizing, I argue that punity about the behavior and relationships
they are met also with pullbacks toward the of these commonly held igures; still others
centralized celebrity industry and may even use the stories to have conversations in which
reinforce the rarity and value of the “extraor- they attempt to distinguish the real person
dinary” celebrity. In the end, the signiicance from the massproduced commodity (Gam
of the ordinary in celebrity culture is found son, Claims, chs. 6–8; Turner, pt. 3).
not so much in what it reveals about how Within this cultural system, which re
fame is diferently produced as in its harmony mains very much intact, ordinariness has a
with the increased expectation, and everyday long, complex, and vexed history. Some critics
experience, of being watched. have argued that celebrity by deinition dis
connects exceptionality from fame; in what
is perhaps the foundational text of “celebrity
Twentieth-Century Celebrity Culture:
studies,” Daniel Boorstin argues that celebri
Ordinariness as a Persistent Theme
ties are “human pseudoevents,” people who
he analytic categories with which celebrity are “wellknown for their wellknownness”
is best apprehended remain useful even in the (67), as opposed to heroes, who were famous
midst of change: celebrity culture is at once for doing great things. As Leo Braudy has am
a commodity system, an industry, a set of ply demonstrated, fame never simply resulted
stories, and a participatory culture. he com from heroic action; yet one need only look
modity at stake is embodied attention; the as far as Paris Hilton, or her foremother Zsa
value of the celebrity inheres in his or her ca Zsa Gabor, to see that the modern celebrity
126.4 ] Joshua Gamson 1063
system has the wherewithal, incentives, and celebrity production was tightly controlled,
and hierarchical impulses have thus been pre- modities owned by the production company,
theories and methodologies
cursive environment. (Indeed, many of the dom, not its antithesis; the means of getting
and celebrity, are written outside the Holly- Crocker’s video blog about Britney Spears
theories and methodologies
the celebrity third person. “Some celebrities though the seeds were planted long ago, Web-
their muscles at the moment of discovery, but Andrejevic has called “the work of being
theories and methodologies
cyberstars tend to try to convert their online watched,” induced by heightened surveil-
celebrity into conventional Hollywood-ish lance. Expecting, as Couldry describes it,
currency. Moreover, the established enter- “any everyday activity legitimately to be put
tainment industry has been quick to absorb under surveillance and monitored for a huge
celebrities whose fame is generated outside its unknown audience” (91), we are “auto-spies”
quarters. In fact, the Internet takes much of who see ourselves through the constant “gaze
the guesswork out of discovery, reducing risks of the other” (Andrejevic, “Visceral Literacy”
and costs for major entertainment companies, 339). On Facebook and elsewhere, we design
since aspirants do the initial development and self-flattering profiles, post status updates,
marketing. At the discursive level, too, the ex- upload photos of ourselves and get tagged
isting celebrity system is adept at absorbing in others’ uploads, labor to choose the right
these changes. he emergence of a vast layer “25 random things about me,” which are, of
of semiknown people whose celebrity has a course, not random at all. Video cameras
“rapid rate of decay” can be mobilized to re- are marketed with a one-touch-upload-to-
inforce the value and distinction of those at YouTube function. It is not so much that ev-
the top of the celebrity hierarchy (Kurzman, eryone gets fifteen minutes of fame or that
Anderson, Key, Lee, Moloney, Silver, and Van anyone can be a star but that everyone al-
Ryn 354). It is probably not coincidental that ready is a star: we ordinary people are grow-
the elevation of ordinary celebrity has coin- ing accustomed to not just watching but also
cided with the popularizing of the notion of being constantly watched.
A-list and D-list celebrities (interestingly, one
rarely hears mention of the B and C grades).
The crowd of ordinaries—D-listers, wan-
nabes, microcelebrities, YouTube and reality
stars—oten take their place as evidence that NOTES
merited celebrity is rare, extraordinary, and 1. Although fame has a cultural history reaching back
justiiably more heavily rewarded (Palmer). many centuries (Braudy), the celebrity culture to which
I refer is by deinition contemporary, a phenomenon de-
There are pulls and counterpulls at pendent on media industries capable of producing and
work, toward and away from a more egalitar- disseminating images on a mass scale.
ian, popularly controlled celebrity system. 2. In a similar vein, Chris Rojek distinguishes be-
Rather than being evidence of a democra- tween “achieved celebrity,” which recognizes rare skills
or talents (16), and “attributed celebrity,” which arises
tized celebrity system, perhaps the ascent of
from the work of “cultural intermediaries” (18).
the ordinary is significant for the everyday 3. Lisa Nakamura notes the racial meanings carried
understandings of publicness that it both en- by Tequila’s “‘user generated’ as well as self-made” con-
courages and crystallizes. he ordinary turn struction of her own celebrity, which is “racialized as dia-
in celebrity culture is ultimately part of a sporic and polysexual” (1680).
———. “Visceral Literacy: Reality TV, Savvy Viewers, and Kurzman, Charles, Chelise Anderson, Clinton Key,