Rankist Generosity

Written by Finkleman
Published January 13, 2005

As the aftermath of the tsunami continues to play out, Stalin's famous quote about a million deaths being a statistic while a single death is a tragedy couldn't be more true. The over-riding sentiment that seems to be attached to most stories is the rankist element that is part of any comment on individual or government sponsored contributions to the relief effort. There are also the accompanying desperate efforts to conjure up language that will express the feelings of shared grief but they just seem to...fall a bit flat.

What is tangible are the insinuations and outright scolding heaped on various nations and entertainment and sports superstars who haven't ponied up what is perceived to be an adequate amount. Those assertions crackle, are real, are something we can really associate with.

The one-upsmanship from various governments around the world can't help but be beneficial as the real amount of aid continues to increase. A closer look reveals that many strings are attached to various pledges. These dazzling promises and high figures may in part be based on low-interest loans and might well not materialize in full.

Donations made by various stars and duly advertised may also have ulterior motives, including an enhanced public image. Again, if the end result is more assistance, then it's great to see every overpaid thespian and steroid bloated pro athlete run scurrying to make a donation prior to their next interview so they can let the true figure roll off their tongue in a nonchalant way and appear genuinely moved.

Woe is the fool like Paradorn Srichiphan, a wealthy Thai tennis star, who made such a pathetically sniveling donation (10, 000 baht , about 250 US dollars) in comparison to his earnings, that he will most certainly pay for it in a real monetary way. The 10, 000 dollars US he could have easily given will be eclipsed by the income loss he is sure to suffer as a result of this huge PR disaster.

Argue the rightness or wrongness of goading wealthy individuals into coughing up, but the fact is that failing to see in advance that this expectation was developing, means that a fool like Paradorn is ill-equipped to deal with all aspects of celebrity status. Such stars occupy an unreal position, are paid unreal amounts and thus are expected to demonstrate unreal and exaggerated displays of generosity. These individuals are given a great deal of leeway by most of the adoring and sycophantic public and an image of benevolence will solidify their standing. Come across as an ungrateful cunt and the public will happily join in as the media hammers them into remorse and humiliation.

Part of the whole post-disaster posturing is a sociological study in group-think. Is it a spontaneous outpouring and world-wide reaction or can people be routed into pre-existing emotional gatherings that they can latch onto? Is "the media" a sentient force that dictates our reactions or simply a reflection of our collective feelings?

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Rankist Generosity
Published: January 13, 2005
Type:
Section: Politics
Writer: Finkleman
Finkleman's BC Writer page
Finkleman's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Finkleman
All Politics Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — January 13, 2005 @ 09:23AM — Eric Olsen

other than the intemperate lauding of the Guardian and the equivocation of Iraq (a war) and the tsunami disaster (an apolitical act of nature) at the end, super and perceptive job of analyzing the sociology of the post-disaster mentality and the exigencies of expectation - thanks Finkleman!

#2 — January 13, 2005 @ 09:36AM — Dave Nalle [URL]

LOL. You said something nice about The Guardian. So much for any credibility you had..

As for the whining about who is giving what for disaster relief, how about the monumental ingratitude of the Indonesians who are insisting that US soldiers there to help out their citizens and deliver aid not carry weapons when going into rebel-infested territories like Ache, and force their women to wear head scarves while handing out food. What kind of government makes head scarves a priority over the welfare of its disaster-stricken people?

Dave

#3 — January 13, 2005 @ 09:46AM — Eric Olsen

I think there are plenty of nice things that can be reasonably said about the Guardian, but naming it the top online paper certainly reveals a certain predisposition

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/24193)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments