THE ANGRY PEBBLES OF THE VICTIM ERA
Politicians and stars sing a song of woe and the Stans join the chorus
When I was a kid I listened to talk radio. Hosts would introduce a topic, often from the news or based on a new book or study. They’d have a reporter, author, or “expert” on as a guest. Then they’d open the phone lines and all manner of contrarian or nut job would call in. Aside from the entertainment value of hearing grown folks yell at each other, there was a consistent stream of conspiracy theories from callers and even the hosts. It didn’t matter whether the topic was the War in Vietnam, the City Hall budget, or the pop charts, people seemed consumed with the idea that “hidden forces” were conspiring against them or someone they loved or admired.
In that era the voices came and went, transmitted and then evaporated, little pebbles of anger lost in the ether of radio waves. Not so in the digital age, where there is no host to cut you off or move the conversation to the next topic. People now join others in common cause against perceived “elites” in long threads of ill repute and disdain. When Twitter first took off I remember thinking, “We are entering a time of mythology,” where fear of “the man behind the curtain” would overwhelm reason, where emotion would top analysis, where nuance would disappear.
Well, that’s clearly happened. What I didn’t anticipate was how this manner of thinking would penetrate the popular consciousness in such a way that winners would seek validity via victimhood. The examples are numerous in every sphere of public discourse, but the situation is always the same: a famous, wealthy or relatively well off person complains that their money, career or personal life has been stunted, hampered or inconvenienced by “the studio,” “the academy,” “the liberal elite,” “the MAGA extremists,” “the mainstream media,” or plain old “them” or “they.”
For example, when nominees for any award are announced, social media is rife within seconds with lists of and praise for those snubbed. In fact there’s more passion for the “snubbed,” than praise for the nominated. There’s an intense identification with those not nominated, which is often seen as an attempt to invalidate the artist and their audience. “They” don’t want us to win. “They” are withholding accolades our favorites deserve for their work and that we would share in for our good taste. It’s Stan culture at its crudest. Because we now live in a fragmented popular culture, where music, film, politics etc are consumed in narrow silos, we have no idea about the relative merits of others except that they can’t be as good or important as what we champion.
Watching multi-millionaires complain about being victims of unfair mainstream media (in mainstream media) or grouse about award shows (while getting an award) is comical. So much attention. So much entitlement. What’s tragic is seeing their talking points parroted by folks on social media, who identify too intently with the “wronged.” We are now living in a landscape of warring tribes, where every election or awards show is a battle, not of ideas or aesthetics, but of identity. I love these icons and those icons are unassailable. Therefore only the machinations of “they” and “them” deny “we” and “us” our rightful respect. “They got a name for the winners in the world,” Steely Dan once sang. “I want a name when I lose.” Unfortunately, it is not a name as cool as Deacon Blues.
It’s victim.
Wow love this! Such vitriol in the world. What I took from last night's awards show was that I dearly miss artists like Tracy Chapman and Stevie Wonder. (Although I never stopped listening to them).