Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Peaches Geldof is dead, age 25

I think the last sentence is the important bit.

However I don't think everyone is as well-adjusted as you. I think that many people experience their feelings for celebrities as entirely comparable to their feelings for real people. Not necessarily of the same intensity, but as a feeling of the same nature. That's a serious ethical problem, right?.

Nope, I don't believe it is. I don't think that the general public have comparable grief over famous people as real people. For someone you didn't know, its a different kind of grief that encompasses many things, like a strong compassionate feeling for that person's family. Or bewilderment as to their 'secret life,' the bizarre events that led to their death, and so forth. This has a far more distant poignancy than feelings for someone you knew, but it does affect you.
 
Last edited:
Logical proof I have. The word "meidda" means "to beg." Now, who is likely to be doing the begging: the conquerors or the conquered?
I have logical proof too.

These days, "mither" has a connotation of persistently complaining and grumbling about the same thing while doing very little to change the situation - who is more likely to be hearing that?
 
It depends what you mean by "upset."

Naturally such deaths are a matter of regret. But I think that anyone whose emotions on hearing of the death of a celebrity are in any way comparable to those they would feel on hearing of the death of a loved one is a psychopath (and that's not a term I use lightly).

These people who claim to be upset to the point of crying real tears over the death of someone who's never even heard of them - How are they going to cope when their goldfish dies?

Tell you what though - On this thread
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...mpire-gets-off-possessing-52g-of-coke.185921/

someone's mother dies through drugs but unlike with Pickles the urban consensus seems to be that tetrabird doesn't deserve sympathy coz she was rich through inherited wealth. I'm struggling to see the difference, me.
 
These people who claim to be upset to the point of crying real tears over the death of someone who's never even heard of them - How are they going to cope when their goldfish dies?

Tell you what though - On this thread
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...mpire-gets-off-possessing-52g-of-coke.185921/

someone's mother dies through drugs but unlike with Pickles the urban consensus seems to be that tetrabird doesn't deserve sympathy coz she was rich through inherited wealth. I'm struggling to see the difference, me.

That's a really revealing thread to post in this context, thanks for doing so.
 
Nope, I don't believe it is. I don't think that the general public have comparable grief over famous people as real people. For someone you didn't know, its a different kind of grief that encompasses many things, like a strong compassionate feeling for that person's family. Or bewilderment as to their 'secret life,' the bizarre events that led to their death, and so forth. This has a far more distant poignancy than feelings for someone you knew, but it does affect you.

Actually, as the thread Frances just linked to reminds us, I think many people feel more empathy for celebrities than they do for people who don't appear on telly.

You refer to a "different kind of grief." I'd say it was so different as to be another thing altogether.

Basically, I think that false, media-induced, pseudo-sympathy for celebrities attacks and kills the capacity to feel real sympathy for real people. And I think this is a very serious, very widespread social problem that is rapidly getting worse.
 
Oh I see what you mean now. All I can say is that if posting something provocative (as opposed to something one does not believe) makes one a troll, then pretty much everyone here is one.

Yeah, I'm sure that many urbanites have posted a provocative post in their time, but it strikes me as pretty shabby to argue that folks' emotions are being manipulated by the capitalist media, (to which no-one is immune), and then characterise their sincerely perceived feelings as "hypocritical pretence", "insincere expostulations", "crazy", "psychopath(ic)", rendering them "incapable of forming any emotional attachment to a real human being", "have lost sight of the difference between fact and fantasy", and "prefer artificial emotion to the genuine article".

Ugly stuff.:(
 
Yeah, I'm sure that many urbanites have posted a provocative post in their time, but it strikes me as pretty shabby to argue that folks' emotions are being manipulated by the capitalist media, (to which no-one is immune), and then characterise their sincerely perceived feelings as "hypocritical pretence", "insincere expostulations", "crazy", "psychopath(ic)", rendering them "incapable of forming any emotional attachment to a real human being", "have lost sight of the difference between fact and fantasy", and "prefer artificial emotion to the genuine article".

Really? Then you're a far less astute reader than I took you for. Because it strikes me, very clearly, as absolutely 100% accurate. Indeed if anything these seem rather lenient ways of describing the death of the human soul--which is after all what we're discussing here.

And I say that with the more emphasis--a thousand times more emphasis--for the fact that I'm not immune.
 
Do you mean empathy for 'real' people who have died or empathy for people in general with regards to their lot in life, such as the affects of benefit cuts?

I mean empathy for real people. Read the thread Frances just posted. Read the way the likes of Belboid and the truly vile and disgusting Louis MacNeice speak about the dead on that thread.

That's the lack of empathy. Right there, that's the end of empathy, if you're smart enough to see it.
 
I mean empathy for real people. Read the thread Frances just posted. Read the way the likes of Belboid and the truly vile and disgusting Louis MacNeice speak about the dead on that thread.

That's the lack of empathy. Right there, that's the end of empathy, if you're smart enough to see it.

Yeah I'd agree that's grim gloating on that thread but I don't think you can say empathy is over because of what a couple of posters said on a thread two years ago.

I do agree with you that there is less empathy in society but that's been declining for decades and it's not exactly surprising. I don't think it's particularly to do with the media whipping up faux sympathy for dead celebrities. That does of course happen but I think it's just one part of a huge propaganda system that constantly pumps out the message 'worry about yourself and fuck everyone else.' I'd in fact go as far to say that in some cases people feel such empathy for celebrities because it's an outlet for the natural emotion of empathy, if that empathy's been beaten out of people's heads it needs to find an outlet and celebrities dying is a perfect outlet. However, I don't really think empathy's been whipped up in the case of Peaches Geldof I think the media have merely reported the fact she's died. Some people, as already discussed, react strongly to it because it makes them think of people they've lost, makes them think about death and the fact that a young person has died and that's always sad. I certainly don't think these people are any of the things brogdale pulled you up on though.
 
Yeah I'd agree that's grim gloating on that thread but I don't think you can say empathy is over because of what a couple of posters said on a thread two years ago.

I do agree with you that there is less empathy in society but that's been declining for decades and it's not exactly surprising. I don't think it's particularly to do with the media whipping up faux sympathy for dead celebrities. That does of course happen but I think it's just one part of a huge propaganda system that constantly pumps out the message 'worry about yourself and fuck everyone else.' I'd in fact go as far to say that in some cases people feel such empathy for celebrities because it's an outlet for the natural emotion of empathy, if that empathy's been beaten out of people's heads it needs to find an outlet and celebrities dying is a perfect outlet. However, I don't really think empathy's been whipped up in the case of Peaches Geldof I think the media have merely reported the fact she's died. Some people, as already discussed, react strongly to it because it makes them think of people they've lost, makes them think about death and the fact that a young person has died and that's always sad. I certainly don't think these people are any of the things brogdale pulled you up on though.

I agree with all of this except the last sentence--and, once again, I'm certainly not immune to this process. But it seems to me that the rise of false empathy directed towards celebrities and the decline of true empathy directed towards one's nearest-and-dearest are two sides of the same coin. The one determines the other, in dialectical fashion. Actually I think you make precisely the same point here:

I'd in fact go as far to say that in some cases people feel such empathy for celebrities because it's an outlet for the natural emotion of empathy, if that empathy's been beaten out of people's heads it needs to find an outlet and celebrities dying is a perfect outlet.

That's pretty much what I've been saying, or trying to say, throughout.
 
Actually, as the thread Frances just linked to reminds us, I think many people feel more empathy for celebrities than they do for people who don't appear on telly.

You refer to a "different kind of grief." I'd say it was so different as to be another thing altogether.

Basically, I think that false, media-induced, pseudo-sympathy for celebrities attacks and kills the capacity to feel real sympathy for real people. And I think this is a very serious, very widespread social problem that is rapidly getting worse.

I could be wrong because I haven't checked but I find it highly unlikely that any of the people expressing joy at the death of the Tetra Pak heiress were the same people as those who claimed to have expressed grief at Peaches' death. I think there's also been a bit of confusion between people who said 'oh, that's a bit sad isn't it' about Peaches' death on Urban and other people who may have expressed stronger feelings elsewhere. There were admittedly one or two slightly over the top expressions of sadness here but I really think that those posters in particular would have found laughing at Ms Tetra Pak's death distasteful.

So while I agree with you about the cult of celebrity to an extent your argument here doesn't really hold up.
 
Why is it a false empathy just because it's directed at celebrities? I remember reading a story about a young woman dying suddenly on the same day as Peaches. I felt empathy for that woman as well as Peaches. Neither of them I knew personally so are you saying my empathy for both these people I didn't know, one famous and one not, is false? I don't think people's empathy for their nearest and dearest has declined in the way you're suggesting. The way you're putting is making it sound like people care more about a celebrity dying than, say, if a mate died or even someone you knew reasonably well but not too close died. I don't think that's true. What I do think is true is the increasing lack of empathy for people going through atos tests, the unemployed, migrant workers and so on.
 
Why is it a false empathy just because it's directed at celebrities? I remember reading a story about a young woman dying suddenly on the same day as Peaches. I felt empathy for that woman as well as Peaches. Neither of them I knew personally so are you saying my empathy for both these people I didn't know, one famous and one not, is false?

No, I distinguish between empathy for celebrities and empathy for strangers.

Why? Because there is a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to making us feel empathy for celebrities. I believe that this industry has very bad motives, and very evil plans, and I want nothing to do with its products, its manipulations or its psychological effects. Nor should you. Nor should anyone.
 
What I do think is true is the increasing lack of empathy for people going through atos tests, the unemployed, migrant workers and so on.

Here we agree. Where we differ is over my opinion that the lack of empathy you describe here is the direct result of the pseudo-empathy created and packaged by the media and sold back to us in the guise of emotional reactions to the lives of celebrities.

It's this causal link that's important.
 
I personally haven't seen any whipping up of sympathy I've simply just read the Peaches Geldof died and how she died. I just don't agree that no one should give a fuck about a celebrity dying, who are still human beings afterall, simply because there's a multi billion dollar blood sucking industry attached to them.
 
Really? Then you're a far less astute reader than I took you for. Because it strikes me, very clearly, as absolutely 100% accurate. Indeed if anything these seem rather lenient ways of describing the death of the human soul--which is after all what we're discussing here.

And I say that with the more emphasis--a thousand times more emphasis--for the fact that I'm not immune.

In your mind you might have been describing what you regard as "the death of the human soul", but you were actually offering very judgemental views of other posters' expressed emotions. You and I might agree that capitalist media is, in part, responsible for the development of those feelings, but to describe the expressions of people who may have been subject to such manipulation as "crazy", "hypocritical" or "insincere" or "psychopathic" looks to me like blaming the victims of capitalism.

As I said, ugly stuff indeed.
 
So while I agree with you about the cult of celebrity to an extent your argument here doesn't really hold up.

Well I'm describing a general tendency here. I don't expect it to hold absolutely true in every case.

I am convinced however that empathy for celebrities, being induced from outside by the forces of capital, is not merely different from but actually the antithesis of real, human empathy.
 
Here we agree. Where we differ is over my opinion that the lack of empathy you describe here is the direct result of the pseudo-empathy created and packaged by the media and sold back to us in the guise of emotional reactions to the lives of celebrities.

It's this causal link that's important.

No I agree that's the case I just think you're wildly overstating the causality. I think it only forms a very small part of it. I think the daily bilge from the media about the people I've listed has a far greater affect, bilge that's very obvious and out in the open.
 
In your mind you might have been describing what you regard as "the death of the human soul", but you were actually offering very judgemental views of other posters' expressed emotions. You and I might agree that capitalist media is, in part, responsible for the development of those feelings, but to describe the expressions of people who may have been subject to such manipulation as "crazy", "hypocritical" or "insincere" or "psychopathic" looks to me like blaming the victims of capitalism.

Well we're going round in circles now and should probably take a break.

Yes I suppose you could say I'm blaming the victims, but I believe the fact that I acknowledge myself to be prominent among them gives me licence to do so.

This isn't a trivial issue. It's not something that should be discussed wearing kid gloves. It's worth getting angry about.
 
No I agree that's the case I just think you're wildly overstating the causality.

We'll probably have to agree to differ at this stage.

All I would say to you is this. Watch people who express empathy for celebrities very closely. Watch how they treat the people in their real lives. Keep an eye on their political and social opinions too. And for God's sake don't trust them.
 
Here we agree. Where we differ is over my opinion that the lack of empathy you describe here is the direct result of the pseudo-empathy created and packaged by the media and sold back to us in the guise of emotional reactions to the lives of celebrities.

It's this causal link that's important.
Don't buy your thesis at all. And don't agree even that the thing it attempts to explain has happened. People can show a marked lack of empathy for those they do not identify with as fellow human beings. That thread fl linked to is an example of that. But that's no more true now than it was in the past, and if anything most people can probably identify with more other people now than at times in the past.
 
Well we're going round in circles now and should probably take a break.

Yes I suppose you could say I'm blaming the victims, but I believe the fact that I acknowledge myself to be prominent among them gives me licence to do so.

This isn't a trivial issue. It's not something that should be discussed wearing kid gloves. It's worth getting angry about.

I see no circles at all. That "I'm a victim too, so that gives me licence to blame other victims" line is utter bull; we've all seen how the capitalists and their shills have used that trope to divide the working class..."I've had a pay cut, so should those feckless skivers.."

Ugly, reactionary shite.
 
Going back to the thread topic....I'm quite shocked the verdict is an overdose. A tragic accident. And while she was obviously crazy to take gear when she has kids, I won't condemn her...at the end of the day, a young woman has died, leaving many loved ones behind her. :(
 
Back
Top Bottom