Tuesday 30 June 2009

LIBERTARIAN SUS: Who’s wacko?

Susan Ryder reacts to the reaction to Michael Jackson’s death.

Hippocrates was reputedly a keen observer of humanity. If he was alive today, he’d be in his element right now. Or not.

I was never a Michael Jackson fan. I don’t own a single recording, unless you count his 1972 recording of “Ben” which featured on 20 Solid Gold Hits, Volume 5 (or so my sister reminded me). It was one of my first pop records and I played it to death – “Ben” included. But I was never into Thriller or Bad or anything else he did. It simply wasn’t my cup of tea. Nor was I ever interested in the details of his personal life. I was a libertarian before I even knew of the term.

But that doesn’t mean that I do not acknowledge his undoubted genius. He displayed astonishing talent as a child that continued right into adulthood. He was an American success story: a talented, beguiling little boy who grew into a talented, handsome young man. And I was saddened to hear of his untimely death last Friday morning (NZ time) at the age of 50.

I heard the news while driving on Auckland’s southern motorway. “Oh God,” I thought, “it’ll be Princess Diana all over again” and thus far it has been. Another massive media meltdown subject to all sorts of nonsense.

Mercifully, I was out and about for all of Friday and Sunday and chose to ignore it all at home on Saturday. But it’s almost impossible to be 100% media-proof and the bits I heard confirmed my suspicions.

On Friday evening, fill-in drive-time host on Newstalk ZB, Susan Wood, asked her Australian correspondent “I guess the death of Michael Jackson is a huge story in Australia, too?” No, Sue, only here. Only in New Zealand has hell broken loose …

Sheesh. But it got better. The “Hollywood correspondent” – one of life’s necessities, that – said that a recent rehearsal (of Jackson’s) was “recorded and might be released, making it a sort of comeback album for Michael, if … ”, she faltered, “er, he wasn’t dead.” Not much of a comeback, then.

Every man and his dog – and with Michael, you can’t dismiss anything – seemingly wanted their 2 cents worth of time. And within hours of his death, Real Groovy Records had reportedly sold out of its entire stock of Jackson merchandise.

Thousands of people in various stages of grief were milling around places such as Times Square in New York and outside Jackson’s Los Angeles home and the hospital where he died. “I can’t believe he’s dead; I don’t believe he’s dead!”, cried one woman, eerily echoing those from an earlier generation upon news of the death of Elvis.

“Michael Jackson made culture accept a person of colour!”, yelled a defiant man, oblivious, it would appear, to the success of Oprah Winfrey, Bill Cosby, Sidney Poitier and Sammy Davis Jnr. Not to mention the legions of black musical legends such as Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington and Muddy Waters, together with the many Tamla Motown talents of the last 50 years, just to start with. And then there is sport with Muhammad Ali and Arthur Ashe along with three of the biggest names in basketball: Johnson, Jordan and Abdul-Jabbar. That man should be reminded that entertainment and sport were among the first US industries to respect talent, irrespective of skin colour – not the last.

I realise that celebrity is the new religion in the west, vying only with environmentalism for the top spot. But what I don’t get is the necessity for a mass display of public grief for a public figure unknown to most of us, such as we saw for Princess Diana. Whatever happened to acknowledging the loss, should you feel it, quietly at home?

Remember the flowers outside Buckingham Palace? That first small gesture was enormously touching. But what was the point of everybody else spending a couple of quid on a bunch of cheap chrysanthemums from the local shop? You’d have been better off surprising your elderly neighbour with the gesture, than have it lost amid all the others. That one single floral tribute on its own signified so much more than the truckloads that eventually went off in the warmth.

I was never a Princess Diana admirer, either. Nor did I ever rush to buy a publication with her in it, either before or after she died. But I was very sad that a young woman was hounded to death at the age of 36 leaving behind two young sons. In the same vein, why would anyone rush out to buy a Michael Jackson CD just because he died? Surely if you liked his music, you’d already have it. It all screams of mass hysteria to me. And hysteria has never been synonymous with reason. In the months after Diana’s death, British health authorities announced a sharp drop in reported cases of depression and related mental illnesses. The decrease was linked to the affected people dealing with their personal issues via the loss of the princess. It was a literal transferral of grief.

Perhaps the best example of mass-media madness was the furore surrounding the O.J. Simpson saga. I was living in Australia at the time and watched the frenzy in disbelief with reports of media breaking into scheduled programming all over the world to carry the vehicle pursuit live. Having lived in the US, I was aware of Simpson. He used to co-host Monday Night Football, having been a professional player himself. He also had a few minor film roles to his credit, but was largely unknown outside North America.

That didn’t stop the worldwide media from carrying the story all day, every day for months. A Tasmanian friend mentioned it one day in conversation. “Did you know who he was?” I asked. “No,” she said apologetically, “I’d never heard of him before,” as if that was a shortcoming. And yet there she was following the story, chapter and verse.

Why the hell should she have known who he was? Can you see NBC or CBS interrupt programming over there to breathlessly announce that Colin Meads had gone mad in the King Country? Or that Waka Nathan was terrorising Tauranga? Ah, but OJ was an American celebrity, so the world’s media was transfixed and the world along with it.

Rose Van Wylich might disagree. Sunday’s early TRN news carried the story of the young Christchurch woman who plans to set up a local Michael Jackson fan club so New Zealand fans can “come together. We are there for you and we understand that this is going to be a long mourning process,” she said. She went on to say that some fans were “blanking out completely” because they don’t want to acknowledge Jackson’s passing. I suspect those same individuals have been ‘blanked out’ for some time.

Rose, bless her, is busy. She’s planning to hold three memorial services in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch on the day of Jackson’s funeral in Los Angeles so local fans can farewell him. A quick internet search unearthed that Rose “has a passion for most everything creative, even if it is something I don’t want to pursue for myself.” Among her interests She lists “litterature” and “Ameture theatre group preformances” [sic, and sic, and sic again]. Let’s hope that Rose’s organisational skill is better than her spelling.

Perhaps the last word belongs to one of those cerebral giants of popular culture, the sports reporters. Doug Golightly said on Newstalk ZB that “all sportsmen will be lining up to pay tribute to him. I know Beckham is going to come out and make a statement right across the US .. I don’t know whether Tiger Woods will say anything .. he and Michael Jordan tend to stay away from that sort of thing .. neither of them came out and had a huge go for 9/11 .. it was a bit disappointing, really.”

Says whom? Good for Woods and Jordan for sticking to their knitting, I say. Beckham should stick to soccer and fashion and silly women, and Tiger Woods on 9/11 makes about as much sense as Winston Churchill on the subject of cheese.

Doug wasn’t finished unfortunately. “It’s times like these that you look to your iconic sportsmen to stand up and speak on behalf of sports fans”, he said. Hell, I hope he’s excluding the NRL from that, otherwise we are screwed! [Ed – “we”?]

Who knows what really went on in the life and mind of Michael Jackson. For all the fame, wealth and adulation I wouldn’t have traded our lives for a second. At least he won’t be witnessing the absurd mass grief that will have been forgotten five minutes after the funeral or hear the nasty jokes doing the current rounds. Or, even worse, watch the crocodile tears being shed by the same media-ocrities who were all too quick to take pot-shots when he was alive. R.I.P., Michael Jackson.

* * Read Susan Ryder’s column every Tuesday here at NOT PC * *

12 comments:

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Geez. I never thought about 'cheap' chrysanthemums. I took some to a friend last week. But I would never turn up with a cheap bottle of wine. I always like them because you get a mass of colour and they aren't too pricey next to other flowers that are not as bountiful. Now I feel like a total scrooge. I'll never buy them again. Aaaaaaggghhh.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

...I can't stop thinking about this now, Sus. This is one of the classiest friends I have too ...and I don't have that many! It's all Michael's fault. If he hadn't died I wouldn't have been exposed as the skinflint I am. Or at least not to myself. I could have continued on in ignorant cheapskate bliss...

Greig McGill said...

I've been berated by friends for taking the piss out of MJ. I don't see why. Half of them thought the same when he was alive! This "instant fan" syndrome troubles me too. It was the same with Johnny Cash (never liked him, either). As soon as the bugger popped his clogs, everyone was suddenly a fan. And worse still, had always been a fan. The former is excusable - discovering someone through the increased publicity after their death makes sense. The latter is creepy 1984-style alteration of reality just to seem like one of the cool kids, or the crowd, or something. To be honest, I am still not sure what the motivation is.

So in short, I'm as sorry as I am when any human being I didn't know, and didn't care for dies. Now I'd just like the media to get over it and move on.

Sus said...

But I *love* chrysanthemums, too, Lindsay! They were the first flowers that popped into my mind ... probably because Mum sold thousands of bunches to happy customers like your good self over the years in her shop! :)

1000 apologies for any distress this morning ... and if I ever have the pleasure of meeting you, I'll be sure to bring you some! ;)

Anonymous said...

“genius” no
Just a musician who has sold a few records .

Sam P said...

750 million is a few?

Good title. Captures the mood with the media and public going mad.

Anonymous said...

A Genius would not have sold 750 million records and be in debt up to his eye balls.
MJ had the right to stuff his body. His choice But it’s more of case of being a little thick then
being a genius.
He was a very good Musician , entertainer a court jester That’s is all.
As a person a total fruitcake.

Falafulu Fisi said...

Sus,

PC has pointed out in his economic discussions here that consumptions will give satisfactions to buyers/consumers (consumption investment), be it a MJ Thriller CD, a box of chocolate bars, or a box of lamb-flaps from Mad Butch (I love the stuff for reason of personal satisfactions even to the disgust of some of my Europeans friends when I cook it and I doubt that you would eat it yourself), so whatever our opinions about MJ, then blame consumptions, because in reality people will rush to buy something for their own satisfactions according to PC.

You said...
In the same vein, why would anyone rush out to buy a Michael Jackson CD just because he died?

I bought one at the weekend, which I intended to buy anyway, because his collection came out at the beginning of the year, but never got to buy one, so I suspect that most people bought copies at the weekend simply because his death reminded them. I think most didn't know the release of his collections, which wasn't promoted at all since it is not a new release, but I guess that as a result his death, people stumbled upon this MJ collection by chance.

You said...
It all screams of mass hysteria to me.

Yeah, I agree with you that it is a Western thing, but isn't it a good thing that western civilization developed in that way? Is this a sign of how advanced western civilization have developed over the last few 100 years? A sign of wealth & economic power. The only mass hysteria that occurred in non-western civilization are those that we see on TV from Islamic countries where the masses march down the street and shout Death to America, Death to the West and this sort of hysteria is self-destructive. I believe that Libertarianz economist Prof. George Reisman thinks that this mass hysteria and emotions of Western populations about the death of MJ will only drive consumptions in a specific sector and that will only be good for the record companies & retail shops.

You said...
And hysteria has never been synonymous with reason.

I think it is more of a job of socialogists to comment on that...

Finally, I love MJ's music because I can dance (pop/break dance), I was awesome when I was younger (head-spinning and all of that), but I've lost some of that magic as I am aging. I love funky music generally and MJ's music is top of my list of funky stuff, so this is why I listen to MJ's music, not much dancing these days but it gives me personal satisfactions.

Anonymous said...

Your mention that I hope her organisational skills are better than her spelling put a smile on my face!

Sus said...

Hi FF .. thanks for your note. But with respect, I think you've missed my point, and, seen criticism where there is none. Sam P put it well & Greig got it, too.

".. why would anyone rush out to buy a Michael Jackson CD just because he died?

I bought one at the weekend, which I intended to buy anyway, .."

Well then, you've answered your own question. I'm talking about the "me too-ism" which I find odd. "He's dead? OMG, I don't have any records!" and shoot off to the CD shop ...

Hysteria is, by definition, about as far removed from reason as you get. Who needs to be a sociologist? A dictionary can tell you that.

I'm not criticising Michael Jackson's music or his many genuine fans; how could I? People are entitled to enjoy his music. It's subjective.

I'm critical of the culture of celebrity for celebrity's sake. And the saturation coverage that goes with it, so often consisting of inanities as per those of which I made mention, coupled with the patterns of short-term public obsession as seen in the cases of Princess Di & OJ.

I believe any consumption that may occur is irrelevant to *this* argument ... but certainly a nice little earner for the suppliers concerned. :)

"There's nowt so queer as folk" as the old Yorkshire saying goes ...

Sus said...

Re above: Scratch "how could I?" .. of course I could.

I choose not to, though, because that wasn't the point of the piece.

Peter Cresswell said...

"Re above: Scratch "how could I?" .. of course I could.

I choose not to, though, because that wasn't the point of the piece.
"

:-)

Now that gave me by far the biggest laugh of the morning. :-)