Famous for being famous: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Cleo Cooper (talk | contribs) Reverting edit(s) by 2409:4061:6E8F:5C43:0:0:F0CA:E611 (talk) to rev. 1203172842 by Vyvagaba: Spam website added (RW 16.1) |
||
| (37 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|Phrase to refer to someone who is famous for no particular reason}} |
|||
{{Use mdy dates|date=October 2023}} |
|||
| ⚫ | '''''Famous for being famous''''' is a term for someone who attains [[celebrity]] status for no clearly identifiable reason (as opposed to fame based on [[:wikt:achievement|achievement]], [[skill]], or [[aptitude|talent]]) and appears to generate their own fame, or someone who achieves fame through a family or relationship association with an existing celebrity.<ref name="Jenkins">{{cite book|last=Jenkins|first=Joe|title=Contemporary moral issues|publisher=Heinemann|year=2002|edition=4, illustrated|series=Examining Religions|pages=[https://archive.org/details/contemporarymora0000jenk/page/178 178]|isbn=978-0-435-30309-9|url=https://archive.org/details/contemporarymora0000jenk/page/178}}</ref> |
||
{{Lead too short|date=October 2021}} |
|||
| ⚫ | '''''Famous for being famous''''' is a term, usually used [[Pejorative|pejoratively]], for someone who attains [[celebrity]] status for no clearly identifiable reason (as opposed to fame based on [[:wikt:achievement|achievement]], [[skill]], or [[aptitude|talent]]) and appears to generate their own fame, or someone who achieves fame through a family or relationship association with an existing celebrity.<ref name="Jenkins">{{cite book|last=Jenkins|first=Joe|title=Contemporary moral issues|publisher=Heinemann|year=2002|edition=4, illustrated|series=Examining Religions|pages=[https://archive.org/details/contemporarymora0000jenk/page/178 178]|isbn=978-0-435-30309-9|url=https://archive.org/details/contemporarymora0000jenk/page/178}}</ref> |
||
==History== |
==History== |
||
| Line 7: | Line 9: | ||
The British journalist [[Malcolm Muggeridge]] may have been the first to use the actual phrase in the introduction to his book ''Muggeridge Through The Microphone'' (1967) in which he wrote:<blockquote>In the past if someone was famous or notorious, it was for something—as a writer or an actor or a criminal; for some talent or distinction or abomination. Today one is famous for being famous. People who come up to one in the street or in public places to claim recognition nearly always say: "I've seen you on the telly!"<ref>{{Cite book|title=Muggeridge Through The Microphone|last=Muggeridge|first=Malcolm|date=1967|page=7}}</ref></blockquote> |
The British journalist [[Malcolm Muggeridge]] may have been the first to use the actual phrase in the introduction to his book ''Muggeridge Through The Microphone'' (1967) in which he wrote:<blockquote>In the past if someone was famous or notorious, it was for something—as a writer or an actor or a criminal; for some talent or distinction or abomination. Today one is famous for being famous. People who come up to one in the street or in public places to claim recognition nearly always say: "I've seen you on the telly!"<ref>{{Cite book|title=Muggeridge Through The Microphone|last=Muggeridge|first=Malcolm|date=1967|page=7}}</ref></blockquote> |
||
[[Neal Gabler]] more recently refined the definition of celebrity to distinguish those who have gained recognition for having done virtually nothing of significance—a phenomenon he dubbed the "Zsa Zsa Factor" in honor of [[Zsa Zsa Gabor]], who parlayed her marriage to actor [[George Sanders]] into a brief movie career and the movie career into a much more enduring celebrity.<ref name="Gabler">{{cite journal|last=Gabler|first=Neal|title=Toward a New Definition of Celebrity |
[[Neal Gabler]] more recently refined the definition of celebrity to distinguish those who have gained recognition for having done virtually nothing of significance—a phenomenon he dubbed the "Zsa Zsa Factor" in honor of [[Zsa Zsa Gabor]], who parlayed her marriage to actor [[George Sanders]] into a brief movie career and the movie career into a much more enduring celebrity.<ref name="Gabler">{{cite journal |last=Gabler |first=Neal |title=Toward a New Definition of Celebrity |url=https://archive.learcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Gabler1.pdf |journal=The Norman Lear Center |publisher=[[USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism]]}}</ref> He goes on to define the celebrity as "human entertainment", by which he means a person who provides entertainment by the very process of living.<ref name="Gabler" /> |
||
This topic is also known in German-speaking countries. Terms like "Schickeria" or "Adabei" characterize the media, which on the one hand are also understood critically but on the other hand are an important editorial topic that electronic quality media do not want to do without today for commercial reasons. People's reporting is fundamentally an important area of journalism that functions according to its own rules, especially in the print medium, and according to journalist [[Norman Schenz]] is characterized as "We no longer just write about an event, we tell stories".<ref>„Society-Berichterstattung im Wandel. Wer berichtete denn noch über Promis?“, In: Wiener Zeitung, 28 June 2013.</ref><ref>Franz Kotteder „Schick, schick, Schickeria“ In: Süddeutsche Zeitung, 17 May 2010.</ref><ref>Matthias Heine „Nimmt Helmut Dietl die Schickeria mit ins Grab?“, In: Die Welt 31. March 2015.</ref> |
This topic is also known in German-speaking countries. Terms like "Schickeria" or "Adabei" characterize the media, which on the one hand are also understood critically but on the other hand are an important editorial topic that electronic quality media do not want to do without today for commercial reasons. People's reporting is fundamentally an important area of journalism that functions according to its own rules, especially in the print medium, and according to journalist [[Norman Schenz]] is characterized as "We no longer just write about an event, we tell stories".<ref>„Society-Berichterstattung im Wandel. Wer berichtete denn noch über Promis?“, In: Wiener Zeitung, 28 June 2013.</ref><ref>Franz Kotteder „Schick, schick, Schickeria“ In: Süddeutsche Zeitung, 17 May 2010.</ref><ref>Matthias Heine „Nimmt Helmut Dietl die Schickeria mit ins Grab?“, In: Die Welt 31. March 2015.</ref> |
||
| Line 33: | Line 35: | ||
{{Multiple image |
{{Multiple image |
||
| image1 = Paris Hilton Monaco 2019 (cropped).jpg |
| image1 = Paris Hilton Monaco 2019 (cropped).jpg |
||
| image2 = |
| image2 = Kim Kardashian West, Parramatta Westfield Sydney Australia.jpg |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| image4 = Lisa Edelstein recadré (cropped).jpg |
|||
| caption1 = [[Paris Hilton]] |
| caption1 = [[Paris Hilton]] |
||
| caption2 = [[ |
| caption2 = [[Kim Kardashian]] |
||
| caption3 = [[Nicole Richie]] |
|||
| ⚫ | |||
| |
| caption4 = [[Lisa Edelstein]] |
||
| total_width = 400 |
| total_width = 400 |
||
| direction = horizontal |
| direction = horizontal |
||
| Line 44: | Line 48: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
'''Celebutante''' is a [[portmanteau]] of the words "[[celebrity]]" and "[[debutante]]". The male equivalent is sometimes spelled '''celebutant'''. The term has been used to describe heiresses like [[Paris Hilton]] and [[Nicole Richie]] in [[Infotainment|entertainment journalism]].<ref name="llog">{{cite web |url=http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004066.html |title=Celeb-u-rama |first=Ben |last=Zimmer |publisher=[[Language Log]] |date=January 20, 2007 |access-date=2011-09-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111112182850/http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004066.html |archive-date=2011-11-12 |url-status=live }}</ref> |
'''Celebutante''' is a [[portmanteau]] of the words "[[celebrity]]" and "[[debutante]]". The male equivalent is sometimes spelled '''celebutant'''. The term has been used to describe heiresses like [[Paris Hilton]] and [[Nicole Richie]] in [[Infotainment|entertainment journalism]].<ref name="llog">{{cite web |url=http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004066.html |title=Celeb-u-rama |first=Ben |last=Zimmer |publisher=[[Language Log]] |date=January 20, 2007 |access-date=2011-09-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111112182850/http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004066.html |archive-date=2011-11-12 |url-status=live }}</ref> More recently, the term and descriptions similar to the term have been applied to the [[Kardashian family|Kardashian-Jenner family]]. During an interview in 2011 with some of the Kardashians, interviewer [[Barbara Walters]] said, ''"You are all often described as 'famous for being famous'. You don't really act, you don’t sing, you don’t dance. You don't have any - forgive me - any talent."''<ref>{{cite web |last=Ott |first=Veronica |date=November 26, 2020 |title=KUWTK: Barbara Walters' 'No Talent' Jab At Kardashians Goes Viral on Vine |url=https://screenrant.com/kuwtk-kardashians-respond-barbara-walters-no-talent-insult/ |archive-url= |archive-date= |access-date=2022-08-02 |publisher=[[Screen Rant]]}}</ref> Later in 2016, [[Time (magazine)|''Time'']] described the Kardashian-Jenner family as ubiquitous celebutantes for being the highest earning reality stars.<ref>{{ cite web |url=https://time.com/4573660/kardashians-jenners-forbes-highest-earning-reality-stars-2016/ |title=The Kardashian-Jenners Are Officially the Highest-Earning Reality Stars | first = Cady | last = Lang | publisher = [[Time (magazine)|Time]] | date = November 16, 2016 |access-date= 2022-08-02 |archive-url= |archive-date= }}</ref> |
||
The term has been traced back to a 1939 [[Walter Winchell]] society column in which he used the word to describe prominent society debutante [[Brenda Frazier]], who was a traditional "high-society" debutante from a noted family, but whose debut attracted an unprecedented wave of media attention.<ref name="llog" /><ref name="winchell">{{Cite news |
|||
| last = Winchell |
| last = Winchell |
||
| first = Walter |
| first = Walter |
||
| Line 72: | Line 78: | ||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Famous For Being Famous}} |
{{DEFAULTSORT:Famous For Being Famous}} |
||
[[Category:Popular culture language]] |
[[Category:Popular culture language]] |
||
[[Category:Celebrity |
[[Category:Celebrity]] |
||
[[Category:Popularity]] |
|||
[[Category:Popular psychology]] |
|||
[[Category:Socialites]] |
[[Category:Socialites]] |
||
[[Category:Social influence]] |
|||
[[Category:Social status]] |
|||
[[Category:Pejorative terms for people]] |
[[Category:Pejorative terms for people]] |
||
[[Category:Matthew effect]] |
[[Category:Matthew effect]] |
||
Revision as of 07:26, 29 April 2024
 |
Famous for being famous is a term, usually used pejoratively, for someone who attains celebrity status for no clearly identifiable reason (as opposed to fame based on achievement, skill, or talent) and appears to generate their own fame, or someone who achieves fame through a family or relationship association with an existing celebrity.[1]
History
The term originates from an analysis of the media-dominated world called The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-events in America (1961), by historian and social theorist Daniel J. Boorstin.[2] In it, he defined the celebrity as "a person who is known for his well-knownness".[3] He further argued that the graphic revolution in journalism and other forms of communication had severed fame from greatness, and that this severance hastened the decay of fame into mere notoriety. Over the years, the phrase has been glossed as "a celebrity is someone who is famous for being famous".[2]
The British journalist Malcolm Muggeridge may have been the first to use the actual phrase in the introduction to his book Muggeridge Through The Microphone (1967) in which he wrote:
In the past if someone was famous or notorious, it was for something—as a writer or an actor or a criminal; for some talent or distinction or abomination. Today one is famous for being famous. People who come up to one in the street or in public places to claim recognition nearly always say: "I've seen you on the telly!"[4]
Neal Gabler more recently refined the definition of celebrity to distinguish those who have gained recognition for having done virtually nothing of significance—a phenomenon he dubbed the "Zsa Zsa Factor" in honor of Zsa Zsa Gabor, who parlayed her marriage to actor George Sanders into a brief movie career and the movie career into a much more enduring celebrity.[5] He goes on to define the celebrity as "human entertainment", by which he means a person who provides entertainment by the very process of living.[5]
This topic is also known in German-speaking countries. Terms like "Schickeria" or "Adabei" characterize the media, which on the one hand are also understood critically but on the other hand are an important editorial topic that electronic quality media do not want to do without today for commercial reasons. People's reporting is fundamentally an important area of journalism that functions according to its own rules, especially in the print medium, and according to journalist Norman Schenz is characterized as "We no longer just write about an event, we tell stories".[6][7][8]
Similar terms
Famesque
.jpg)
The Washington Post writer Amy Argetsinger coined the term famesque to define actors, singers, or athletes whose fame is mostly (if not entirely) due to one's physical attractiveness and/or personal life, rather than actual talent and (if any) successful career accomplishments. Argetsinger argued, "The famesque of 2009 are descended from that dawn-of-TV creation, the Famous for Being Famous. Turn on a talk show or Hollywood Squares and there'd be Zsa Zsa Gabor, Joyce Brothers, Charles Nelson Reilly, so friendly and familiar and—what was it they did again?" She also used actress Sienna Miller as a modern-day example; "Miller became famesque by dating Jude Law . . . and then really famesque when he cheated on her with the nanny—to the point that she was the one who made Balthazar Getty famesque (even though he's the one with the hit TV series, Brothers & Sisters) when he reportedly ran off from his wife with her for a while."[9]
Celebutante
.jpg)
.jpg)
Celebutante is a portmanteau of the words "celebrity" and "debutante". The male equivalent is sometimes spelled celebutant. The term has been used to describe heiresses like Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie in entertainment journalism.[10] More recently, the term and descriptions similar to the term have been applied to the Kardashian-Jenner family. During an interview in 2011 with some of the Kardashians, interviewer Barbara Walters said, "You are all often described as 'famous for being famous'. You don't really act, you don’t sing, you don’t dance. You don't have any - forgive me - any talent."[11] Later in 2016, Time described the Kardashian-Jenner family as ubiquitous celebutantes for being the highest earning reality stars.[12]
The term has been traced back to a 1939 Walter Winchell society column in which he used the word to describe prominent society debutante Brenda Frazier, who was a traditional "high-society" debutante from a noted family, but whose debut attracted an unprecedented wave of media attention.[10][13] The word appeared again in a 1985 Newsweek article about New York City's clubland celebrities, focusing on the lifestyles of writer James St. James, Lisa Edelstein and Dianne Brill, who was crowned "Queen of the Night" by Andy Warhol.[10][14]
See also
- 15 minutes of fame
- Attention inequality
- It girl
- Keeping Up with the Kardashians
- Reality television
- Socialite
- Tarento
- Tautology (language)
References
- ^ Jenkins, Joe (2002). Contemporary moral issues. Examining Religions (4, illustrated ed.). Heinemann. pp. 178. ISBN 978-0-435-30309-9.
- ^ a b Richards, Jeffrey (2007). Sir Henry Irving: A Victorian Actor and His World. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 259. ISBN 978-1-85285-591-8.
- ^ Boorstin, Daniel Joseph (1961). The image: A guide to pseudo-events in America. New York: Vintage. ISBN 978-0-679-74180-0.
- ^ Muggeridge, Malcolm (1967). Muggeridge Through The Microphone. p. 7.
- ^ a b Gabler, Neal. "Toward a New Definition of Celebrity" (PDF). The Norman Lear Center. USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.
- ^ „Society-Berichterstattung im Wandel. Wer berichtete denn noch über Promis?“, In: Wiener Zeitung, 28 June 2013.
- ^ Franz Kotteder „Schick, schick, Schickeria“ In: Süddeutsche Zeitung, 17 May 2010.
- ^ Matthias Heine „Nimmt Helmut Dietl die Schickeria mit ins Grab?“, In: Die Welt 31. March 2015.
- ^ Argetsinger, Amy (August 10, 2009). "They Must Be Stars Because They Get So Much Press, but What Is It They Do Again?". Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 24, 2010. Retrieved August 15, 2009.
- ^ a b c Zimmer, Ben (January 20, 2007). "Celeb-u-rama". Language Log. Archived from the original on November 12, 2011. Retrieved September 24, 2011.
- ^ Ott, Veronica (November 26, 2020). "KUWTK: Barbara Walters' 'No Talent' Jab At Kardashians Goes Viral on Vine". Screen Rant. Retrieved August 2, 2022.
- ^ Lang, Cady (November 16, 2016). "The Kardashian-Jenners Are Officially the Highest-Earning Reality Stars". Time. Retrieved August 2, 2022.
- ^ Winchell, Walter (April 7, 1939). "On Broadway (syndicated column)". Daily Times-News.
- ^ "James St. James profile". Newsweek. June 3, 1985.