Am I the only person who doesn't need or want "celebrities" at Christmas? Every single TV programme seems to be dominated by them, and I haven't even heard of most of them. Let's hear it for ordinary, normal people for a change. As for the so called celebrities, I think we should bag them all up and send them into the Australain jungle for good. They can chew kangaroos' testicles and steep themselves in mealy worms and entertain each other, and we ordinary mortals can get on with our lives unimpeded.
There! I feel better now.
Showing posts with label celebrities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label celebrities. Show all posts
Sunday, 17 December 2017
Tuesday, 30 September 2014
How to be a celebrity...
...or Very Rich Person (VRP):
1. You must be in some kind of entertainment business. Singing, acting, sport etc. Your job is never essential to the wellbeing of mankind. For example, doctors, teachers etc need not apply.
2. (Women) you must get pregnant, not necessarily within wedlock, and your bump must be photographed, preferably uncovered, on a beach, with your nether regions just about covered by a tiny bikini bottom.
3. You must be photographed within days of the release of said bump, displaying a washboard flat stomach. Full makeup should be worn, and the new infant draped appealingly over a shoulder. It is essential to give this child a silly name. John, Susan, Jeremy etc need not apply. Friday or Arsenic would be good choices.
4. You must marry at some stage, so that the world can see how much you are able to spend on an obscenely extravagant wedding, preferably lasting about a week. All children of previous relationships welcome.
5. Divorce or separation are not obligatory, but they help. The more acrimonious the better.
6. You are encouraged to marry again (repeat stage 4).
7. Please feel free to share the interiors of your several amazing mansions. These need to be distributed about the globe (ideally, one should be situated in Hollywood). Gold bathtubs optional, but they do help.
8. Other desirable items include several Porsches, private jets, yachts etc, all with appropriate staff to operate them.
You get the idea. BUT to anyone televised sitting in a jungle eating kangaroo testicles and miscellaneous grubs: you've probably missed the boat. Time to get a day job.
1. You must be in some kind of entertainment business. Singing, acting, sport etc. Your job is never essential to the wellbeing of mankind. For example, doctors, teachers etc need not apply.
2. (Women) you must get pregnant, not necessarily within wedlock, and your bump must be photographed, preferably uncovered, on a beach, with your nether regions just about covered by a tiny bikini bottom.
3. You must be photographed within days of the release of said bump, displaying a washboard flat stomach. Full makeup should be worn, and the new infant draped appealingly over a shoulder. It is essential to give this child a silly name. John, Susan, Jeremy etc need not apply. Friday or Arsenic would be good choices.
4. You must marry at some stage, so that the world can see how much you are able to spend on an obscenely extravagant wedding, preferably lasting about a week. All children of previous relationships welcome.
5. Divorce or separation are not obligatory, but they help. The more acrimonious the better.
6. You are encouraged to marry again (repeat stage 4).
7. Please feel free to share the interiors of your several amazing mansions. These need to be distributed about the globe (ideally, one should be situated in Hollywood). Gold bathtubs optional, but they do help.
8. Other desirable items include several Porsches, private jets, yachts etc, all with appropriate staff to operate them.
You get the idea. BUT to anyone televised sitting in a jungle eating kangaroo testicles and miscellaneous grubs: you've probably missed the boat. Time to get a day job.
Friday, 5 July 2013
Am I jealous...?
I try not to be. I accept that there are thousands of writers much better than I am, and that's fair enough. I read many of their books, and thoroughly enjoy them. But...
We live in an age of celebrity. We, as writers, have to face it. And if we are not Names (eg Jeffrey Archer, Jilly Cooper, Wilbur Smith, Hilary Mantel; writers who have worked their way up in the past to well-deserved success), or "celebrities" (Jordan, Pippa Middlleton, Alan Titchmarsh), nowadays, we are in for a struggle.
Take Richard and Judy. Someone pointed out to me today that Judy Finnegan's debut novel is currently no. 430 in Amazon sales; Richard Madeley's is no. 10. These may well be excellent novels, but perhaps it doesn't matter so much if they are not. Richard has (to my knowledge) done two TV interviews about his novel, although probably he doesn't need to, while some of us are lucky if we get a five-minute slot on local radio. The odds are very much against us, whether we are brilliant or pretty poor. It's a fact.
I read a lot of new novels, and some are quite outstanding, like Clare Morrall's wonderful The Roundabout Man. , and yet that novel (for example) is currently at no. 141,000.
So while I enjoy rather than envy those who deserve success, I am sad for much of the publishing industry. Sad, that so many good novels seem to go unnoticed (and largely unread), and some terrible ones do well. It's something we as run-of-the-mill writers have to live with (here, I speak for writers like myself), and do the best we can. We write because we love writing, and accept with pleasure such rewards as may come our way. But it is hard to read a book that is badly written, and possibly even ghost-written, whose 'author' is flying high in the charts, while many of the rest of us just bump along near the bottom (and are very grateful to be published at all).
We live in an age of celebrity. We, as writers, have to face it. And if we are not Names (eg Jeffrey Archer, Jilly Cooper, Wilbur Smith, Hilary Mantel; writers who have worked their way up in the past to well-deserved success), or "celebrities" (Jordan, Pippa Middlleton, Alan Titchmarsh), nowadays, we are in for a struggle.
Take Richard and Judy. Someone pointed out to me today that Judy Finnegan's debut novel is currently no. 430 in Amazon sales; Richard Madeley's is no. 10. These may well be excellent novels, but perhaps it doesn't matter so much if they are not. Richard has (to my knowledge) done two TV interviews about his novel, although probably he doesn't need to, while some of us are lucky if we get a five-minute slot on local radio. The odds are very much against us, whether we are brilliant or pretty poor. It's a fact.
I read a lot of new novels, and some are quite outstanding, like Clare Morrall's wonderful The Roundabout Man. , and yet that novel (for example) is currently at no. 141,000.
So while I enjoy rather than envy those who deserve success, I am sad for much of the publishing industry. Sad, that so many good novels seem to go unnoticed (and largely unread), and some terrible ones do well. It's something we as run-of-the-mill writers have to live with (here, I speak for writers like myself), and do the best we can. We write because we love writing, and accept with pleasure such rewards as may come our way. But it is hard to read a book that is badly written, and possibly even ghost-written, whose 'author' is flying high in the charts, while many of the rest of us just bump along near the bottom (and are very grateful to be published at all).
Tuesday, 12 July 2011
Public interest?
The News of the World thing is of course only the tip of the iceberg; more and more things are now coming to light, and it seems that other tabloids are implicated.
There's a world of difference between what is in the public interests (MPs's expenses; after all, it's our money they're spending), and what the public are interested in (horrific diseases and accidents, horrible things happening to famous people etc). That the second appears to be more entertaining (in a nasty, salacious kind of way) than the former is not the point; we don't NEED to know whether or not Kate's grandfather was a window cleaner.
And then there's the bit in between; things we don't need to know, but in a way are entitled to know, because the people involved have, as it were, invited us into their lives. There are many "celebrities" who do just that. They court public attention when they want it, and while it doesn't exactly bring out the best in the public when the press revel in the marital break-ups or the perceived cellulite of these people, they have more or less asked for it. And if you're going to call your poor wretched child Harper Seven, people are bound to, well, notice, aren't they? Complaining about press interest in these cases would be like inviting people round to your house, and then slamming the door in their faces. You either want publicity, or you don't. Presumably you have to take the rough with the smooth.
On the other hand, there are people like the Browns (Gordon and Sarah) and the Dowlers, who have been visited by tragedy, and never invited the press in, but they barged their way in anyway. This is absolutely unforgiveable.
Lastly, there are people like (for example) J K Rowling and Judi Dench; people at the top of their game, who could presumably have made millions by inviting Ok or Hello into their homes, but have always opted to remain private individuals. They deserve to have that privacy respected, because they never sought to exploit their celebrity status. They leave that to others. And, let's face it. There are plenty of those.
There's a world of difference between what is in the public interests (MPs's expenses; after all, it's our money they're spending), and what the public are interested in (horrific diseases and accidents, horrible things happening to famous people etc). That the second appears to be more entertaining (in a nasty, salacious kind of way) than the former is not the point; we don't NEED to know whether or not Kate's grandfather was a window cleaner.
And then there's the bit in between; things we don't need to know, but in a way are entitled to know, because the people involved have, as it were, invited us into their lives. There are many "celebrities" who do just that. They court public attention when they want it, and while it doesn't exactly bring out the best in the public when the press revel in the marital break-ups or the perceived cellulite of these people, they have more or less asked for it. And if you're going to call your poor wretched child Harper Seven, people are bound to, well, notice, aren't they? Complaining about press interest in these cases would be like inviting people round to your house, and then slamming the door in their faces. You either want publicity, or you don't. Presumably you have to take the rough with the smooth.
On the other hand, there are people like the Browns (Gordon and Sarah) and the Dowlers, who have been visited by tragedy, and never invited the press in, but they barged their way in anyway. This is absolutely unforgiveable.
Lastly, there are people like (for example) J K Rowling and Judi Dench; people at the top of their game, who could presumably have made millions by inviting Ok or Hello into their homes, but have always opted to remain private individuals. They deserve to have that privacy respected, because they never sought to exploit their celebrity status. They leave that to others. And, let's face it. There are plenty of those.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
