celebrity gossip, academic style

A small sampling of the Jon/Kate tabloid fever

Six weeks ago, I had never heard of Jon, Kate, or their Eight. But after receiving five (yes, FIVE) Us Weeklys emblazoned with their saga, I certainly know who they are now — and so does the rest of America, apparently, as the season premiere garnered over 10 million viewers — more than the season finale of Lost.

So what’s going on here? I still haven’t watched the show, but the handling of the couple — and popular reaction to it — seems to indicate a few things about our current culture of celebrity. So here are some initial observations/thoughts on the phenomena — feel free to contribute your own.

1.) It’s a dry gossip season.

Summer is filled with movies and premieres, but little else. Cannes is over, the television season is over, the Costume Gala is over. There’s also no major and/or interesting star developing star romances or pregnancies — I absolutely guarantee that if Brangelina or TomKat or Jennifer Aniston had any major (substantiated) rumors going on, they’d be on the cover. (Star and Life & Style have been trying to sell Brad and Angelina as over, but all of the photos from Cannes made them look ridiculous.) If this were the first time that Heidi and Spencer (of The Hills) were getting married, they’d have covered that.

Us Weekly breaks the story

2.) US Weekly loves a saga.

Sagas make for a sort of ‘serial gossip’ form — you’re pulled into the drama the same way that I’m pulled into, say, The Wire. (Nice comparison, I know.) Note that Us was the first to break the scandal on April 28th — People and the cheaper mags have followed suit, but have no doubt, this was carefully orchestrated — US knew that if they generated interest, they could keep feeding it with subsequent covers. They effectively created the demand — and have since exploited that demand in a way that People can only ape.

3.) There’s a strong chance that the entire story is fake.

It is NOT A COINCIDENCE that the stories broke in the weeks leading up to the season premiere. The Gosselins have certainly been paid to publicize what may or may not be authentic problems with their marriage. Each has had a tell-all cover with People — which probably paid anywhere between five and six figures.

These two may appear deranged or neurotic, but they’re obviously very savvy. They first parlayed their sextuplets into a reality show deal and massive make-overs for themselves and their homes. But they were firmly reality celebrity. Now, with the help of a scandal, they’ve become bona fide celebrities, and their worth — both to TLC and to the gossip mags — has gone up exponentially. The recent beach trip to North Carolina, with TLC cameras and paparazzi following along…not a coincidence.

4.) Jon and Kate = ‘idols of consumption.’

Many years ago, Leo Lowenthal, an old fogie Marxist critic and proto-star scholar, performed an analysis of all of the magazine stories/features between 1900 and 1940. Looking at the results, he theorized that America had transitioned from a society with ‘idols of production’ to ‘idols of consumption.’ From 1900 to 1920, magazine and newspaper profiles focused on ‘idols of production’ — men who made things, and succeeded at making them. The ‘robber barons’ (Carnegie, Vanderbilt, etc.), of course, but also self-made entrepreneurs/Horatio Alger stories like Henry Ford. Our culture idolized them for their ability to make things — be innovative, creative, industrious, etc. From 1920-1940, cultural fascination shifted to ‘idols of consumption’ — put bluntly, people who bought things and performed ‘conspicuous consumption.’ This move was epitomized by the early silent movie stars (Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, Gloria Swanson, Pola Negri) — whose profiles emphasized lifes of sheer excess (champagne, caviar, dripping jewels, 20 pools, etc. etc.) Even during the Depression, people wanted to see (and read about) their idols consuming the things that they couldn’t have.

Film stars continue this trend (especially in weddings and expensive purses), but consumption on the part of reality celebrities is a bit of a different situation. These men and women (Kate and Jon included) aren’t super beautiful or super talented — they just have some distinguishing factor (8 cute kids) that warrants a low budget cable reality television show. Their consumption, however, is the focal point of the show — and mentioned again and again in the articles detailing their lives. US breaks down ‘How much does it cost to be Kate?’

• Shoes: The mom sports $355 heels by designer Stuart Weitzman
• Cosmetic Procedures: Besides her free teeth whitening and tummy tuck (a $500 and $8000 value, respectively) a source says, she also had a boob job, which can cost $10,000.
• Tanning: Twenty tans at Closer to the Sun, where Kate is a regular, cost $95.
• Nails: She goes every week to Planet Nails and Tan for $30 manicures.

The article also highlights how she can “shop for free at Gymboree, which is featured on the show,” her monthly spa trips, and her 1.1 million home, which rests on 36 acres.

But as these expenses make clear, these idols practice relatively modern consumption. Their consumption patterns (the type of vacations they take, the clothes they wear, what they buy for their children) are ‘average’ — just mildly inflated. Many women go tanning, get their nails done, go to the spa, buy clothes for their children — but Kate gets to go every week, and she gets to buy all the clothes she wants. Which helps explain why….

5.) Women love to hate Kate.

There’s some complex psychology behind this. You only have to look at the titles of the numerous articles to get a jist of this:

• “Mom of 8 refuses to touch bleeding son during press event: fighting, name-calling, no-respect,”
• “INSIDE JON’S PRISON: $5 per day allowance from Kate; banned from seeing brothers after dad’s funeral; her taunts over hair loss and weight,”
• “Kate Gosselin: MOM TO MONSTER: Fired 40 staffers in 3 months; stayed out at dinner while son went to emergency room; sick obsession with money, freebies, and her appearance”
• “Kate Minus Jon: MOMMY, YOU ARE MEAN! Pulls kids from school for TV show vacation, investigated for child labor violations, ‘hissy fit’ at gym, ignores kids at pool.’

You don’t have to read the articles to see what’s going on here. The criticism against Kate centers on three factors: she’s a bad mother, she’s a bad wife, and the reason she’s both of these things is her obsession with fame. (When you think about it, it’s quite ironic that US Weekly is fueling her celebrity at the same time that it criticized what it does to her roles as mother and wife….but celebrity gossip often knows no irony.) As I mention above, the expenses and activities of Kate are not all that glamorous — just ‘ordinary’ luxuries pumped up a bit.

In this way, she becomes the perfect target for jealousy and anger. True stars — Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Aniston — are stars because they can reconcile the ordinary and the extraordinary. They’re ‘just like us’ and other-wordly — they wear jeans and eat hamburgers (just like us!) but those jeans are truly designer and that hamburger cost $50. Kate is no star — she’s a celebrity, and she’s ‘just like us’ without the extraordinariness.

In other words, she’s the woman down the street with a bit more money, more fame, and more impetus to show it off. Every woman knows who this woman is within their neighborhood, work, or friend group — and everyone loves to hate her. Kate represents that woman — and that’s why this story has sold like gangbusters. She may or may not be a bad mother or wife. Who knows. It doesn’t really matter. What matters, as always, is that she’s become a very convenient locus for the anger and jealousy that afflicts those in times of financial woe, when ‘everyday’ women are cutting back on their own luxuries in order to pay for mortgages, school clothes, etc.

I’d love to hear your own thoughts — comment away!