Lady Di(ed) Again
I don't really know anything about Anna Nicole Smith, but I heard on the news yesterday that she died.
Just so you know.
Okay, okay. I knew enough about her that I didn't think she held a candle to our own Pamela Lee Anderson.
Upstart American Trash.
Anyway, no matter how trashy she was in life, the good news is that she can never be as trashy in death as Lady Di. Remember that spectacle? Omigawd. All those flowers in plastic that had to be dealt with, the days of missed work by mourners (although, I suppose more'n a few of 'em were probably 4th generation dolers just missing several afternoons of Coronation Street), hastily re-written sad songs about candles and wind and blowing, Elton John still in full Drama Queen mode mourning Lady Di on top of Versace.
Aside from the money, it must suck to be famous. I mean, even as rewarding as it would have been to watch the Royal Family squirm at the awkwardness of the love pouring forth from your death, you're still dead. And you probably wouldn't be if you hadn't been so damned famous.
So... why do people pursue it? The spotlight, I mean. Especially if you already have the money.
Look at another prima donna in the news. He's not blond and a drug addict or even a Princess, but he may as well be, for all his self-awareness.
Of course, I'm talking about Conrad Black.
I mean, he was born into the money. And when you're born into the money, there's no excuse for being so stupid as to want the fame, too. You know, so everything you do is under the spotlight. The trips, the parties, the little woman's SHOES!
YOU ALREADY HAVE THE MONEY, STUPID! YOU DON'T NEED THE FAME!
Sure, it's one thing when you're buying the newspaper chain after a few ugly episodes of questionable financial wheeling and dealing that everybody is destined to forget as soon as you buy the newspaper chain and start spreading your hard right neo-con political world view with your little soldier/disciples lined up and ready to march out and do battle for you at highly inflated salaries (not that it stops you from monopolizing the entire op/ed section every once in a while for one of your own ponderous tomes on a favourite pet subject of history). It's quite another to draw attention to your private life while doing it and quite another all over again to swan about making a public spectacle of yourself when you're up on charges that could put you in the slammer for the rest of your life.
And, by the way, I'm not a REAL lawyer, but the first bit of advice I'd have given Lord Black would be, "Okay. I'm your lawyer. I do the talking. You do the shutting up."
I really don't think he's getting his money's worth at all.
But look around. All kinds of people are trying to become famous. I have no idea why. I mean, I'd like to be a writer, I'd like to make a living writing - but if I made it big? Whoo-ee. That'd be the last you'd hear of me. I'd go buy me a nice townhome in Perth or somesuch and... Aw crap. I'm doing it already. Letting the paparrazzi know where I'll be with all my money.
Okay. Scratch that. But I'm thinking about fame and anonymity because there has been so much bad press lately about the internet and its effect on us as individuals AND as a society, and who's doing all this blogging, and more importantly - WHY!
Well, I have a blog and I post comments in and around the internet, and I think I have an answer to the "WHY!" question/accusation: Because it's there.
That's really all there is to it. If the internet wasn't there, I wouldn't be blogging or posting comments on it. I know this to be true because the internet didn't used to be here. But as soon as it was - "BAM!" Or rather, to put it more precisely - several years after it was - "BAM!"
I was posting on it.
Now, the question that needs asking is, "Why do bloggers write for free?" Well, my guess is, most of us want to become known for our writing so that we can make a living at it. As in, fame ----> money. As opposed to, money ----> fame. But the internet is somewhat of a free-for-all, too. What are the odds? Does fame ever ----> money on the internet?
Hm. When it comes to writing, even fame doesn't always -----> money - even in real life.
Sure, the mainstream media pays a lot of attention to the blogging world. But has anybody been hired from it? Well, a few people have had paid media gigs that they got because they had a certain degree of success online. But nothing lasting very long, as far as I know. And does it happen very often? Or do you already have to be famous and have a media gig of one kind or another to be recognized on the internet as a voice worth reading?
More importantly, if you ARE already famous and have a media gig - WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING ON THE INTERNET?!
There should be Agents-at-Large to tell people who already have "outlets" to shut-up and stop doing for free what someone is paying them to do elsewhere. AND maybe even Agents-at-Large to tell people who are doing it ALL for free, "Okay, honey. Time to shut-up. If people want it bad enough, they'll have to pay you for it."
Not that I wouldn't miss the blogs that I read for free, that people do for the love of blogging. None of them political, by the way. Isn't it funny how you can end up doing something for free that you wouldn't pay someone else to do, that doesn't bring you fame OR money, but...
AHA! It's not enough anymore to say, "Writers write." Because writers who want to make money writing - need agents. It's so obvious. The internet needs agents.
That's all. Then people will stop considering it a... a... free-for-all.
Calling all agents! To the internet! STAT!
