Today at lunch, the narrow topic of Britney Spears and her "federletus" (stole that from Gawker) and the general topic of gossip was discussed. I explained that in 2004, I made a New Year's resolution not to gossip about people I personally know, although I'm sure I've been unsuccessful at certain points. In order to sustain this "no gossip" rule, I turned heavily to celebrity gossip.
I don't feel bad talking trash about celebrities - they are way richer than I could ever hope to be and frankly, if Britney Spears knew what I said about her, I don't think she'd care. And if she did, she could buy my condominium complex and boot me out, so clearly she's got the last laugh. And as fellow law slave Melanie pointed out, mocking celebrities makes us plebians feel better about our lot in life.
That being said, I am mildly alarmed by my fascination with the election of a successor to the papacy. It might be partially because I read Angels & Demons last year and I'm hoping for a little cloak and dagger conclave action with Robert Langdon bursting in to save the day. But really, it's just that a horse race is exciting. According to this, the German cardinal Ratzinger may get 40 to 50 votes. Ratzinger, whose nickname is "God's Rottweiler," is running into opposition from the former Archbishop of Milan. But then this morning, NPR was talking about how it may be really vital for the Church to pick a Latin American pope. Jeez, Megs! This ain't the Kentucky Derby (which, by the way, is coming up in about three weeks, so break out your seersucker and your giant hats - I'll bring the mint juleps). Perhaps I ought to go back to plain old celebrity gossip - aside from handicapping the papacy, MSNBC is keepin' it real by trying to figure out who the next celebrity pregnancy will be. Sigh. I am a part of the cycle, even as I ridicule it.
For those of you unfamiliar with the conclave process, I recommend reading about it - there's lots of Latin and it's very interesting.
Megan, it's so hilarious that we have diametrically opposed views on the relative worth of celebrity vs. personal gossip.
ReplyDeleteI think there's nothing wrong with talking about people you know, provided you're not wantonly cruel, you tell the truth, and you'd be willing (more or less) to say it to their face.
I think that as people, we care about the people that are around us. This sympathy makes a lot of sense and is one of our more endearing features.
By contrast, celebrity gossip seems just plain petty. What relation do we have to these people? I don't know Britney Spears. Why should I care about the size of her ass/whether she's pregnant/her virginity etc.? This seems like a waste of precious, limited brain power and just an excercise of what's truly bad about gossip.
Now let me give you a contrasting example. I have a co-worker who's obese, perhaps morbidly obese. He's probably at least 60 pounds overweight. We take lunch together every day (it's a company thing). Now he's totally drank the Atkins Kool-Aid. Every single day he has a low carb (3-cheese) bacon cheeseburger with a side "salad" with bleu cheese dressing and crumbled cheese on top. I'm not making this up. This is what he eats every day.
Now I also happen to know that he has a wife and two kids at home. And I really want to say something to one or two of my other coworkers. Because I think this guy is making himself a very likely candidate to have a massive heart attack one day (soon) and just die. He's 38 years old and I really get the feeling if he doesn't change some stuff, he might not see 50.
Anyway, if I brought this up with some of my other co-workers ("dude, Randy pro'ly shouldn't have the bacon cheeseburger every day"), I'm pretty sure that would count as gossip. But it would also be a sort of act of love towards my fellow man.
I fail to see how anything similarly benign could come out of celebrity gossip.
~ Chuck
I don't see how it's an act of love to talk about your friend in a negative way when he's not around. It serves no purpose. If you are concerned for him, why don't you just tell him?
ReplyDeleteMegan,
ReplyDeleteOkay, I'm a little bit reticent to tell someone who is my boss and a grown man what he is and is not allowed to eat at lunch. It seems like it might be awkward and inappropriate.
On the other hand, if nothing is done, it is possible that he could do significant additional damage to his health.
Personal gossip is often- not always- an outgrowth of real concern for people you know. ("She shouldn't be with him. That relationship has totally fucked up her personality.")
By contrast, what in the world good is celebrity gossip?
--Chuq
P.S. - In my real-life example, talking to co-workers might lead to the best strategy for an intervention.
If you feel uncomfortable talking to your boss about it, what makes you think that your co-workers are going to feel right about it? And how does talking about his weight issues with them really help him at all? I personally don't think it does. There are also more tactful ways to tell a friend that you think they are unhealthy. You might want to consider that.
ReplyDeleteAs for celebrity gossip? It's fun. There is no purpose to it. And there's nothing wrong with that.
If you feel uncomfortable talking to your boss about it, what makes you think that your co-workers are going to feel right about it?
ReplyDeleteStrength in numbers? Several heads are better than one?
And how does talking about his weight issues with them really help him at all?
If it led to a way to bring up the issue without needlessly hurting his feelings, it would be invaluable.
There are also more tactful ways to tell a friend that you think they are unhealthy. You might want to consider that.
I'm open to suggestions.
As for celebrity gossip? It's fun.
Hmmm, well people have different tastes. To me, speculation of any sort is the most fun when you have the most information to work with and when you are more personally effected.
Again, so long as it's not malicious or inappropriate, I think "personal" is better.
But I guess we'll agree to disagree!
--tchuk