Why I Love Heather Mallick
Ah, there are so many reasons. She's a socialist who is not afraid to shop. She uses words like "lickspittle" to describe our parliamentarians. She likes to read memoirs. She makes Michael Moore look conservative. And her column is in the biggest newspaper in Canada, where every week, we get to see her skewer right-wing politics and anything else she dislikes that day. Go Heather!
This particular column is great--HM goes after Linda Ronstadt and Martha Stewart for their supposed radicalism. Martha compared herself to Nelson Mandela this week? Wha? Give that woman another 5 months in prison. You're not a political heroine because you know how to match towels and oh yeah, aren't you serving a sentence for FRAUD? Somehow, I must have missed how it is that fraud and being in prison for leading an anti-apartheid group are in any way similar.
So Heather's point is that radicalism amongst the American glitterati isn't all that radical (she names some good exceptions). But I guess that the more interesting thing for me is that anything at all is expected of people in the entertainment industry. During the most radical moments of the 1960s in the United States, you didn't see too many celebrities saying anything about politics at all. The people who led the movements for civil rights, women's rights, disability rights, you name it -- were people who became celebrities because of what they wrote about and sang about. Except for a few key exceptions like Buffy Saint Marie (who was a singer before she was an activist for Native rights), celebrity was made in the context of the uprisings. Who would have heard of Gloria Steinem before that fantastic article about the Playboy clubs?
The idea that media celebrity itself carries a kind of moral freight is only a couple of decades old, and it's part of what Adorno and Horkheimer call "The Culture Industry," where big-business entertainment conglomerates seek to integrate the values of the entertainment industry into the world-views of the populace. I would have to agree with Heather M. that it's lamentable how few heroes and heroines for the left there are amongst celebrities, especially now in the United States. But really, what else can we expect? We should look elsewhere for models, and for intelligent spokespeople for things like human dignity and justice.
This particular column is great--HM goes after Linda Ronstadt and Martha Stewart for their supposed radicalism. Martha compared herself to Nelson Mandela this week? Wha? Give that woman another 5 months in prison. You're not a political heroine because you know how to match towels and oh yeah, aren't you serving a sentence for FRAUD? Somehow, I must have missed how it is that fraud and being in prison for leading an anti-apartheid group are in any way similar.
So Heather's point is that radicalism amongst the American glitterati isn't all that radical (she names some good exceptions). But I guess that the more interesting thing for me is that anything at all is expected of people in the entertainment industry. During the most radical moments of the 1960s in the United States, you didn't see too many celebrities saying anything about politics at all. The people who led the movements for civil rights, women's rights, disability rights, you name it -- were people who became celebrities because of what they wrote about and sang about. Except for a few key exceptions like Buffy Saint Marie (who was a singer before she was an activist for Native rights), celebrity was made in the context of the uprisings. Who would have heard of Gloria Steinem before that fantastic article about the Playboy clubs?
The idea that media celebrity itself carries a kind of moral freight is only a couple of decades old, and it's part of what Adorno and Horkheimer call "The Culture Industry," where big-business entertainment conglomerates seek to integrate the values of the entertainment industry into the world-views of the populace. I would have to agree with Heather M. that it's lamentable how few heroes and heroines for the left there are amongst celebrities, especially now in the United States. But really, what else can we expect? We should look elsewhere for models, and for intelligent spokespeople for things like human dignity and justice.
6 Comments:
Sounds like we need a heather Mallick here in Amerika - although there are some really good commentators on the political scene that still get printed.
Being that all things are relative, let's look at Martha Stuart. I agree she's no paragon of virtue. However she was a target because of her visibility and which party she supports. Any number of republican defrauders get off daily. This case was about making an example and pretending to be tough on cheaters while sending a message to the rich - who's your Daddy?
So Martha got screwed because of her identity, not necessarily her crime (W himself did worse in the 80's and got off because of his identity).
So martyr, NO, but unfairly railroaded, I'd say yes.
And yes, Ronstadt is no efty/socialist/peacenik - but she did speak out publicly, and was initially punished for it. The Dixie Chicks also got punished, for remarks they made in Europe - it cost them alot financially. The republican media machine can really hurt entertainers - and they do. So while those who do speak should not be treated as heroes, there is a sacrifice and they should not be ridiculed. Except for Britney Spears who basically said she doesn't understand anything but thinks the Prez should be believed and supported. Throw tomatoes at her.
As for your comment on the '60's - look at some of the films that were made because a big name actor cared. Lots of subversion. Or the lyrics of popular songs - who's to say no one was taking a stand? The difference is that the establishment didn't realize the influence of counterculture media. When Bobby Darin started singing peace songs, they took notice.....
I simplify too much here but so did you. For shame!
Now how can I read Mallick on a regular basis?
True enough, you got me! The protest song thing I forgot about. But what films are you referring to?
I'd say that you are right about why Martha got targetted. Also, her case is the first to go all the way through, right? The stuff with Enron and WorldCom is so much more complicated, so I don't think that any of those cases have even gone beyond the initial stages.
I'm still unhappy with her comments, though. Pretty arrogant. But one doesn't go to prison for that!
Hmmm...the best way to get your weekly dose of HM is to check her out on www.globeandmail.com. If that doesn't work, I'll send you pdfs! Some days she just rambles, but when is outraged by something it is quite a treat. Like when she got interviewed on Fox Network and they called her a traitor--she wrote a really great article about that!
I found the G&M site so I can keep up w/ monarchist canadian conspiracy (sic).
OK - Films - Bonnie and Clyde, The Candidate, Little Big Man (!), Butch Cassidy, The Graduate, Dr. Strangelove, Mouse that Roared, Spartacus (am I stretching?), Lawrence of Arabia, 2001- Space Odyssey, Midnight Cowboy, Easy Rider, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.
ETC.
Basically big budget w/ a subversive or liberal bent. Bad guys can be the good guys, race issues. LBM is one of the hardest-hitting anti-war films ever. I rented it last winter. I had remembered how funny it was but was glad I reviewed it first - one of those movies that my son is not quite ready for - yet.
Oops, forgot to mention the entire Gidget series, including the TV show w/ Sally Field (They really LIKE me!).
Hey C,
Why Patty Duke? Something I am missing?
Okay the 50s weren't quite what I thought! :-)
Patty Duke...a great role model!
Post a Comment
<< Home