At what point do we get to pass of our character flaws as
the much more courageous sounding ‘battling of demons’? I sure would like to
know, as it can turn a seemingly embarrassing or shameful thing and turn it
into a somewhat admirable struggle; almost a sign of integrity, as if we are
truly a virtuous person being assailed by forces beyond our control, but
nevertheless susceptible to our attacks.
 |
| How can I battle this ‘I'm a slob’ demon all by myself? |
I am of course bringing this up because of the recent death
of Amy Winehouse*, that talented young woman who died at the curious age of 27, and yet despite the universal acclaim of her talent I can only
seem to recall one slightly telling song where she was urged to go to rehab,
but she said no, no, no.
I woke that day with my wife telling me Amy Winehouse had
died, and I didn’t really stop to think how; it was pretty much a foregone
conclusion. She must have died from some sort of drug related cause; as if
there were anything she was more famous for than her voice, it was her
addiction problems. This instant acceptance of such a death is something worth
lamenting enough as it is, because it almost takes away the tragedy of her life
and replaces it with an acceptable stereotype. It’s almost as if people don’t
care as much about the death of a drugged up star because that’s pretty much
what we all expect.
Lamentations aside, what truly bothers me about this affair
is the way that she is described in the media, and the all too common way that
in today’s society people with problems are often talked up in an attempt to
mollycoddle the public, which apparently have some vested interest in those
being in the spotlight retaining some form of integrity.
This is why we see drug addict footballers being referred to
simply as substance abusers, actors who beat up women are labelled as troubled,
racist or abusive sportsmen are actually just controversial, or other such
examples. In each and every case the problem with this person is turned around
to either be an external force working against them or worse; a problem with
how we perceive them, as opposed to how they are. The famous person who does
drugs can’t be held accountable for their actions, because they are famous for
a reason, and it’s almost as if people are so unwilling to believe that people
who are good in one respect (be it sports, or acting, or music)can also be so
deficient in another. We want everyone to be role models, even if they only
show an outward aptitude at one specific thing.
 |
| He is rather good at rugby, so surely it’s not his fault he pretended to have oral sex with a dog.... |
It seems to me that in the past, role models emerged out of
the fray, and were acknowledge simply because they were exceptional examples of
what one should strive to become. Before fame was such a simple commodity to
trade as it is today, word would only spread of a person’s overall virtue if it
were earned in the arena of society. Only then were such examples made clear to
the world. But then again I am basing this assertion on no real knowledge, just
a glimmer of a point.
I have many personal flaws which I am not proud of having,
and I try to work on them as best I can. But the thing is; I don’t talk about myself as if I am some
perfect human being, living in an imperfect shell. My personal flaws are my own
to work on, something which I hope can be overcome by my personal virtues
(whatever they may be). If I were to take the line of thinking that anything
which detracts from my character is a demon I have to battle with, well then what’s
the harm if I relapse at some point? I mean it can’t all be my fault now can it?
Because I was putting up a fight at least, and in this round, well the demons
simply won. And I might pick up the fight again, but perhaps after this nights
bender is over.....
And don’t get me started on the controversial label! When
a famous athlete caused a row in last year for racial slurs (alas I cant remember which one right now), they weren't being controversial in
any degree worth mentioning, as there is no controversy here that holds any
sway. Their views were just downright wrong in our society. If you hold that this
kind of thing is controversial, then it seems to me that there is more validity
added to the arguments opposing side, which in this case is a side that asserts
some form of race based value judgements. Last time I check, that wasn’t an
issue in Australia; it doesn’t divide the nation.
Now if you think that this kind of thing can be considered controversial
because it deals with issues of free speech and what is or is not polite to say,
then fine: but don’t be afraid to say so. Say the use of racial slurs as part
of free speech in this country causes controversy, but don’t for a minute
mistake this with the persons comments, or the person themselves, being controversial.
Rant complete....
---------------------
*This is a post I wrote back in July last year, right after the death
of Amy Winehouse. The basis of the rant still seems relevant, so I figured I
would chuck it up here.
---------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment