« Thanks hereby rendered | Main | Move New Orleans »

Fame! I'm gonna live forever...

No you're not. (Via Instapundit.)

My opinion of the Cult of Diana has already been stated in this blog, so I won't go over it again. I could have been pithier -- "She made a lot of rubbish decisions in her life that caused her own problems" Andrew Ian Dodge says sensibly. The idea that many of my fellow females have made her some sort of heroine is dismaying to me, as are so many other things about contemporary women.

It's all part of a horrifying and disgusting trend that has infected society since... well, since the dawn of time, really. Sometimes the infection goes into partial or full remission (the Republic of Rome, France during the "Age of Reason," Britain during the War), but usually it holds all of humanity in its febrile grasp. The infection I am talking about is the "cheap sentimentality" that the writer of the first article I linked mentions; the glorification of the lowest and easiest feelings (kitties are cute! awww, widdle babies! dead pretty princesses, waaah!) about trivial situations. It's a truism, maybe, to say that while we fiddle about with the soft pleasures of mourning dead celebrities (by definition, people who are famous for stirring our shallower impulses) our infrastructure is burning, but every now and then a crumbled levee or a collapsed bridge jars us out of our pink and gold dreams.

And on a related note, one of those things we're not supposed to talk about is the fact that wherever women get the vote, governments get larger and more -- well, more mother-like. As in, mumsie will take care of everything, kiss every boo-boo with federal dollars and strict regulations, will make sure nobody goes outdoors without being bundled up and protected. The fact that we aren't supposed to talk about this is evident in the way even Kim Du Toit feels compelled to state (I paraphrase) "no one is talking about taking the vote away from women." I'll just go out on a limb here and say "why not?" What are women going to do, riot? Oooh, scary, the ladies will run through the streets hitting men with their purses. I really don't see that happening. Women just don't form torch-bearing mobs -- they don't have the natural ability to organized mayhem that men have. (Women organize, but they organize differently -- instinctively towards gathering in and and sorting.)

Anyway -- if by some unlikely chance we came to our collective senses and repealed the 19th amendment, women wouldn't riot -- but the whining and screaming and crying that they would do would probably be worse than any riot. Men have nothing on us when it comes to being Outraged! and Upset! So it won't happen.

What should happen is women should pull themselves out of the pink-goo-lined pit we have been wallowing in and harden and discipline ourselves so the votes we cast won't keep pushing our society further into the nursery room. In short, we need to grow up -- but as long as we continue to make people like the Peoples' Princess into our icons we won't.

Comments (2)

Annalucia [TypeKey Profile Page]:

OK, she was young and dumb, but what about Charles? He was canoodling with Camilla before, during and after their marriage and the Royals surely knew about it. I wonder if Diana was told up front that Camilla was going to make three? Or was she led to believe that Charles would forsake all others and behave the way most husbands are expected to behave?

Even young and dumb women don't deserve this kind of treatment from their in-laws. How much better if Diana had remained a junior kindergarten teacher a little longer and then married some nice nobody.

"What about Charles?" And Camilla...

I don't care. They're both ugly, so at least they look appropriate together. And really, I don't know that the in-laws are that much to blame. Nobody likes the Queen because she had to be badgered into squeezing out a tear for her son's ex-wife, but I think people should just have left her alone. I'm on the Queen's side in this. Diana must have been a headache and a half to deal with. She could have reacted to her treatment by Charles and Co. with icy dignity and really been a reason for people to look up to her -- instead she went the neurotic celebrity route, complete with divorce, trendy cause, and rich foreign boyfriend, and she dragged what was left of the royal family's dignity (not much, it must be admitted) down into the talk show mud.

That's worse than anything else she did. At least in the old days when an upper crust twit decided to be a scandal, they were a scandal. There was no ersatz tv therapy, no Oprah or Dr. Phil. Di's not really to blame for the destruction the Therapy Culture has done to Western civilization, but she sure did participate in it wholeheartedly. At least Mary, Queen of Scots didn't have a pile of teddy bears piled up in front of Fotheringhay Castle after she was beheaded.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Don't worry, he's just chopping broccoli.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on August 31, 2007 8:42 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Thanks hereby rendered.

The next post in this blog is Move New Orleans.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Powered by
Movable Type 3.33